Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)

It also sums up how Jeremy doesn't have the ability, personnel or desire to get the media on his side. Such an obvious gaffe - why is he on a mid-morning London to Newcastle train instead of an actually busy service?
indeed - his top team cant even figure out which train will be busy enough to get their point over - yet they think they can re-nationalise and successfully run the industry :wenger: (despite the lessons from British Rail... which anybody old enough to remember was an interchangeable name with British Fail)
 
It's sad that we are at a point where this, from The Telegraph, doesn't seem completely unbelievable:


Party is finished. Split now and work towards the next GE, is in the best interest of everyone
 
cos I've been on trains with empty seats and had to stand, its a feckin joke

I really despise transport in the uk its just rubbish

Sorry Stan but that makes no sense whatsoever. It's not rocket science mate. IF the seat is reserved but the person has not taken it...sit in it. If the seat is not reserved and empty....sit in it.
 








Party clearly needs to split. Plenty of Labour MPs happy to take a private rail company's PR department's version of events at face value rather than stand up for rail nationalisation.

Anyone that doesn't think the first tweet is true, is very naive.
 
Party clearly needs to split. Plenty of Labour MPs happy to take a private rail company's PR department's version of events at face value rather than stand up for rail nationalisation.

But since when did this become a binary choice? I really don't like this logic of 'you are either with Corbyn or against him'.

I completely accept that some of the criticism and critics (Reed, Dancszuk, Bradshaw spring to mind) have made ridiculous and persistent heckles from the sidelines, but the problem with your point is that it too easily can encompass those of us who are unsure about a Corbyn-led party and make criticisms of his style, his actions, his policies and his electability.

In other words, it is far too easy to state that 'criticism of Corbyn = standing with the enemy/Blairites/capitalists etc'. That criticism (and I have heard it and been subject to it, although not here, I should add) is really unhelpful and overly tribalist, and I have huge problems with its logic.

Also, on 'nationalisation' - Network Rail is already publicly owned, and a huge number of the problems with the railways relate to the infrastructure, which the Government can (and should) do something about, not just the TOCs. Nationalisation of the TOCs does not already the underlying problems with the infrastructure, and is not a panacea.

It's sad that we are at a point where this, from The Telegraph, doesn't seem completely unbelievable:



It was three MPs, which is statistically a small proportion (under 2%), and I could probably hazard a guess as to who they are. Also, this kind of thing does happen more often than is thought: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/09/labour-tory-mps-talk

And Virgin probably breached data protection legislation by publishing the CCTV images

Maybe not. They could have justified it through fair use. It probably explains why they took a week to disclose it.
 
McClusky v McNicol Round 3000

The leader of the Unite union, Len McCluskey, has said Labour’s conference may not go ahead if the row over its security is not resolved, and said the blame would be shouldered by the party’s general secretary, Iain McNicol.

Labour is still no closer to resolving the security issue for its annual conference in Liverpool next month after the national executive committee voted to boycott longstanding provider G4S.

Though other security firms were approached, Showsec was the only company to bid for the contract. Showsec is in dispute with the GMB over its refusal to sign a union recognition agreement, and talks between the union and the company have broken down.

Last week, GMB’s general secretary, Tim Roache, implied in a leaked letter that McCluskey was interfering in the dispute, and said his union would picket the conference were Showsec to win the contract, forcing most Labour MPs and members either to cross a picket line or not attend
Now McCluskey, in a letter to Roache seen by the Guardian, said it was clear the conference would not go ahead following a GMB boycott.

“It is the responsibility of the general secretary of the Labour party, Iain McNicol, to implement decisions or to deal with any problems that may arise,” McCluskey wrote. “I am astonished that we are only four to five weeks to conference and that he has not done so.

“It is quite evident that in the event of a GMB boycott of conference, it simply won’t proceed and the blame would lay squarely at the feet of Iain McNicol.”

In a further sign of the deteriorating relationship between the two unions, McCluskey denied Unite had attempted to interfere in the dispute. Unite has backed the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, in the leadership election while the GMB supports his rival, Owen Smith.

In the letter from Roache to McCluskey, leaked to PoliticsHome last week, the GMB boss said: “As you know, we are the dominant union in the security sector, and we will not tolerate any attempt by other unions to find a solution by dreaming up an inferior recognition agreement.

“If Showsec do not sign our standard agreement, GMB will be forced to boycott and picket conference and many friends and colleagues will find themselves unable to cross our picket line.”

Roache said he hoped McCluskey would either allow urgent discussions with G4S or make it clear he would “support a Labour party conference staffed by a union-busting firm”.

The letter says despite the long hours, stressful working environment and little job security, party staff “remain completely loyal to the party and to their employers, and the least they are entitled to expect is some loyalty and respect in return … To hear members of the Labour party attack their own employees is depressing; to hear talk about ‘clearing them out’ is unacceptable; to hear such statements from the most senior level is intolerable”.

Corbyn has since written to staff to address their concerns, saying they “must not be used as a political football by anybody within the party … I hope you all feel that if you are put in difficult or unacceptable circumstances, you can raise the issue with your line manager, other senior member of staff, or your trade union representatives.”

Labour has insisted the conference security issue will be resolved, but said it would not comment on commercial matters.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...uld-be-cancelled-over-security-row-says-unite
 
Seriously who cares. Corbyn was silly for the way he highlighted a genuine problem. But to call it Traingate and blow it way out of propotion shows news must be slow.
 
Also, on 'nationalisation' - Network Rail is already publicly owned, and a huge number of the problems with the railways relate to the infrastructure, which the Government can (and should) do something about, not just the TOCs. Nationalisation of the TOCs does not already the underlying problems with the infrastructure, and is not a panacea.

.
Devils advocate here - but realistically what beyond the existing CP5 frameworks (and the planned workbank on CP6) could actually be done currently to improve the infrastructure keeping in mind budgets, workforce capabilities and having to keep a functioning service?

Factor in HS2 etc and the draw that takes from the sector?... I mean I work in this industry and honestly we would love to know what we are missing
 
Devils advocate here - but realistically what beyond the existing CP5 frameworks (and the planned workbank on CP6) could actually be done currently to improve the infrastructure keeping in mind budgets, workforce capabilities and having to keep a functioning service?

Factor in HS2 etc and the draw that takes from the sector?... I mean I work in this industry and honestly we would love to know what we are missing

Forgive me if I sounded trite or patronising - reading my comments back I realise that I have slipped into hyperbole, which is not what I intended (it reads worse than it was meant to).

So, to extrapolate - the point I wanted to make is that nationalisation is not a panacea. As poor as the TOCs can be, the trains have to operate on infrastructure which is, yes, having record investment, but started from a low base following decades of underinvestment in my view. Also, I am not familiar with CP6 (and to be honest not very well with CP5), so you will have to correct my ignorance.

But, to provide an example - the London-Brighton line is four-track to Balcombe, and two-track from Balcombe-Preston. Even with the signalling and diversionary operations which can occur, such a set-up on a busy line means that any late running trains or accidents/incidents/break-downs will have a massive knock-on effect. The East Coast Main Line also has twin-track sections.

Now, not to shift blame from the TOCs by any means for their errors, but the fact that busy tracks have twin-track sections mean that delays/issues will always occur even if the TOCs are nationalised. Just nationalising the TOCs will not solve anything without the accompanying investment, or building new track (which has its own budgetary / practical constraints). I have heard from too many people in meetings that nationalisation is the answer, ignoring the issues of investment and passenger growth, which will still be respectively needed and intended post-nationalisation.
 
Devils advocate here - but realistically what beyond the existing CP5 frameworks (and the planned workbank on CP6) could actually be done currently to improve the infrastructure keeping in mind budgets, workforce capabilities and having to keep a functioning service?

I am only speaking from what I know from speaking to people researching in the area too. Have you seen the Southampton research on ballast?

http://track21.org.uk/wp-content/bl...150722-NR-The-Quadrant-22-July-2015-final.pdf

http://t2f.org.uk/

That could massively reduce the repair/maintenance bill for Network Rail, allowing for more money to go into both upgrades and new tracks.
 
It's the perfect story to sum up Corbyn's leadership really. If it were a normal politician it would be a complete nothing story. The facts of the story are still in the air - Virgin's photos show at most 1 or 2 empty seats, which if he wanted to sit with his wife, it is not unreasonable to walk past and then find they had been filled by other passengers. Branson's tweet shows a carriage with empty but reserved seats, yet his caption claims Corbyn is walking past unreserved empty seats. But that lie has been happily regurgitated across the media. And we are at the point where significant numbers of MPs and members of Corbyn's own party will happily credulously swallow Virgin's PR presentation of events (a press release which actively lobbies for fare deregulation) because it helps them criticise him.

It's basically another one of those stories where if you can't stand Corbyn you gobble it up, but if you don't mind Corbyn and actually use trains you'll understand the important point that was made by the sitting, whether it was a stunt of not.

Stop talking sense!
 
Forgive me if I sounded trite or patronising - reading my comments back I realise that I have slipped into hyperbole, which is not what I intended (it reads worse than it was meant to).

So, to extrapolate - the point I wanted to make is that nationalisation is not a panacea. As poor as the TOCs can be, the trains have to operate on infrastructure which is, yes, having record investment, but started from a low base following decades of underinvestment in my view. Also, I am not familiar with CP6 (and to be honest not very well with CP5), so you will have to correct my ignorance.

But, to provide an example - the London-Brighton line is four-track to Balcombe, and two-track from Balcombe-Preston. Even with the signalling and diversionary operations which can occur, such a set-up on a busy line means that any late running trains or accidents/incidents/break-downs will have a massive knock-on effect. The East Coast Main Line also has twin-track sections.

Now, not to shift blame from the TOCs by any means for their errors, but the fact that busy tracks have twin-track sections mean that delays/issues will always occur even if the TOCs are nationalised. Just nationalising the TOCs will not solve anything without the accompanying investment, or building new track (which has its own budgetary / practical constraints). I have heard from too many people in meetings that nationalisation is the answer, ignoring the issues of investment and passenger growth, which will still be respectively needed and intended post-nationalisation.

Nationalisation is certainly not the answer - i will 100% back you on that... dual tracks - its getting land consents - its finding long enough windows to do the work (typically only a few hours at a weekend) - its getting permission to set up haul roads through peoples gardens for 5-6 years to do the earth moving packages you require - getting electricity companies to build new substations - even upgrade lines / plant outputs to cope with increased demand... the biggest problem is we have a network that is largley based on old designs without sufficient capacity to expand - eg 2 lines that goes under a main road / motorway probably means 2-3 years of slow running or reduced lanes to widen the cuttings.

CP5 and CP6 (control periods) relate to the spending on infrastructure upgrades and we already dont have the skills to achieve whats needed - and HS2 will be starting taking a lot of the skills away (thats certainly where we will be focusing) - the network is basically heald together with plasters and bits of string and we need to shut lots of it down to upgrade it properly to modern standards and make it easier to do ongoing improvements - but we dont have the money or manpower and people wont accept being told we need to half the number of trains running for a decade whilst we sort it

people with no clue about how this stuff actually works (eg corbyn) suggesting more trains is the answer simply dont understand that we cant safely do that... not particularly aimed at you but I get in a bit of a mood when people talk about rail without understanding just what a nightmare it is to work on
 
Last edited:
Anyone that doesn't think the first tweet is true, is very naive.

Yeah I don't actually have a problem with Phillips' tweet beyond the fact that "Straight talking honest politics" is actually not terrible slogan and the party could have got behind it instead of tearing itself apart, revealing it for the inane slogan it is.
 
if corbyn goes that route he will look like a right twunt... yeah i lied and was trying to spin a situation... but they are the baddies for proving it

No. It's an interesting side story though.

But since when did this become a binary choice? I really don't like this logic of 'you are either with Corbyn or against him'.

It's not. But I feel some of those tweets are representative of an atmosphere in which the MPs will not return to supporting Corbyn in a few weeks time. And I certainly don't want to make it a binary choice. I have numerous criticisms of Corbyn's leadership. I can't believe Milne is still in his job. Etc. I was pretty sure I was going to vote for Smith 4 or 5 weeks ago

I completely accept that some of the criticism and critics (Reed, Dancszuk, Bradshaw spring to mind) have made ridiculous and persistent heckles from the sidelines, but the problem with your point is that it too easily can encompass those of us who are unsure about a Corbyn-led party and make criticisms of his style, his actions, his policies and his electability.

In other words, it is far too easy to state that 'criticism of Corbyn = standing with the enemy/Blairites/capitalists etc'. That criticism (and I have heard it and been subject to it, although not here, I should add) is really unhelpful and overly tribalist, and I have huge problems with its logic.

Yep. The tone of the debate on both sides has become so horribly toxic. But that's partly why I feel a post leadership election reunion is unlikely.

One other point though: Corbyn's history as a rebel is often brought up. And it is entirely fair to point out that he cannot expect absolute loyalty when he himself wouldn't offer it. HOWEVER: 1. Corbyn's most rebellious years came under the huge Blair majorities and 2. He was never offered a continual platform for stories against the Blair leadership by media outlets in the way the current anti-Corbyn MPs are. He was never given the opportunity to sow discord to a similar degree. He was just a rather quaint leftist relic that no one paid much attention to.

Also, on 'nationalisation' - Network Rail is already publicly owned, and a huge number of the problems with the railways relate to the infrastructure, which the Government can (and should) do something about, not just the TOCs. Nationalisation of the TOCs does not already the underlying problems with the infrastructure, and is not a panacea.

Great time to advocate for serious investment in the infrastructure though, as the government is currently capable of borrowing at negative interest rates.

It was three MPs, which is statistically a small proportion (under 2%), and I could probably hazard a guess as to who they are. Also, this kind of thing does happen more often than is thought: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/09/labour-tory-mps-talk

It is a very small proportion. Sometimes when I say split I really mean that there are some bad apples who are never going to be able to be brought back into the fold when Corbyn wins again. I think the only solution to prevent these continual negative stories sourced from Labour MPs is to remove the whip from a small number.

Maybe not. They could have justified it through fair use. It probably explains why they took a week to disclose it.

Probably not worth going into the legal issues. ICO is looking into it. It's just another side story.
 
Musical chairs at each stop, no thanks
train departs from london - next stop is york 2 and a half hours away
so as soon as the train departs london just sit in one of the apparently many seats that are now available for the trip - you would have thought somebody who wants to be pm could figure that out?
Though as I say three+ hours on the train to Newcastle - I think he should have upgraded to first class cracked out the laptop and done some work considering we pay his wages as an MP - cant imagine my bosses being too pleased if i had three hours on a train and did fek all for the sake of a few quid upgrade
 
Musical chairs at each stop, no thanks

Stop being a poor WUM :lol: The empty seat will have a ticket on it or a message on the electronic sign above it saying where the seat is reserved from and to.... for example on leaving London if it says reserved from London to York (first stop!) and it is empty you can happily sit there. If it's empty and says reserved from York to Newcastle you can happily sit there all the way to York and possible further. If it's empty and unreserved you can happily sit there.

You do realise if you or Comrade Corbyn had the sense to book a seat it is yours, all yours don't you?
 
I wonder if we shouldn't be trying to reduce demand for the railways, as opposed to entirely focusing our policy making on the question of supply. I am sure that more could be done by businesses when it comes to teleworking and flexible hours, particularly with the technology at our disposal these days.
 
Last edited:
Stop being a poor WUM :lol: The empty seat will have a ticket on it or a message on the electronic sign above it saying where the seat is reserved from and to.... for example on leaving London if it says reserved from London to York (first stop!) and it is empty you can happily sit there. If it's empty and says reserved from York to Newcastle you can happily sit there all the way to York and possible further. If it's empty and unreserved you can happily sit there.

You do realise if you or Comrade Corbyn had the sense to book a seat it is yours, all yours don't you?

So I just asked the mrs who has experienced crap transport in the uk and she thinks the system of reserving seats is stupid

Why don't they just get more trains she said, now there's an idea
 
It's not. This developed into a thread about trains and seats. the last journey i did was bath to woking and sat on the floor all the way.

Used to do haarlem to the hague or amsterdam during rush hour and always got a seat. On the rare occasion i felt the train was too busy or too short i'd catch the next one 10 mins later
 
As someone left-wing/liberal enough to have voted Green at the last GE this whole situation is depressing. For whatever reasons, his fault or not, Corbyn is completely failing to pull the Labour party and by extension national politics to the left and I expect in return it will end up going the other way. It's really, really depressing.
 
So I just asked the mrs who has experienced crap transport in the uk and she thinks the system of reserving seats is stupid

Why don't they just get more trains she said, now there's an idea

:lol: You're as bad as Corbyn for missing things....65 new trains added in the next couple of years added to the East Coast line...that's 500 more carriages.
 
As someone left-wing/liberal enough to have voted Green at the last GE this whole situation is depressing. For whatever reasons, his fault or not, Corbyn is completely failing to pull the Labour party and by extension national politics to the left and I expect in return it will end up going the other way. It's really, really depressing.
No, you see, Owen Smith is just a left leaning as...oh I can't even bring myself to finish that. Saying that, I am being won over by his campaign. This guise of the Labour party is as good as doomed regardless of the result, but Owen's PMQs would be hilarious. Between a bunch of MPs sitting on the backbenches and abstaining from abstaining or them actually having to try and sell Owen Smith to the wider electorate, even forgetting his comments on Brexit, the latter is something I'd really like to see.
 
As someone left-wing/liberal enough to have voted Green at the last GE this whole situation is depressing. For whatever reasons, his fault or not, Corbyn is completely failing to pull the Labour party and by extension national politics to the left and I expect in return it will end up going the other way. It's really, really depressing.
The general public don't get hear so much about the bias in MSM. Understandably.
 
Can I just clarify something here. He says he wanted 2 seats together so he could sit next to his wife. Yet, in the video, he's sitting on the floor on his own. Where's the wife then? Standing up?
Dunno... she must be very small though as you cant see her on the later pics either
_90893720_mediaitem90893718.jpg
 
It's not. But I feel some of those tweets are representative of an atmosphere in which the MPs will not return to supporting Corbyn in a few weeks time. And I certainly don't want to make it a binary choice. I have numerous criticisms of Corbyn's leadership. I can't believe Milne is still in his job. Etc. I was pretty sure I was going to vote for Smith 4 or 5 weeks ago

...

Yep. The tone of the debate on both sides has become so horribly toxic. But that's partly why I feel a post leadership election reunion is unlikely.

One other point though: Corbyn's history as a rebel is often brought up. And it is entirely fair to point out that he cannot expect absolute loyalty when he himself wouldn't offer it. HOWEVER: 1. Corbyn's most rebellious years came under the huge Blair majorities and 2. He was never offered a continual platform for stories against the Blair leadership by media outlets in the way the current anti-Corbyn MPs are. He was never given the opportunity to sow discord to a similar degree. He was just a rather quaint leftist relic that no one paid much attention to.

...

It is a very small proportion. Sometimes when I say split I really mean that there are some bad apples who are never going to be able to be brought back into the fold when Corbyn wins again. I think the only solution to prevent these continual negative stories sourced from Labour MPs is to remove the whip from a small number.

Good points, and my apologies if I am coming across as combative - I think it is more a general frustration at the state of the party. I have no problems with the suspension of Danczuk, for instance, and even there, I would have little complaint if the local CLP did not reselect him for 2020 given his conduct (which there is enough to question his effectiveness as an MP, quite apart from his politics).

What I would say about Corbyn and a lack of a media platform - you are right to say that the anti-Corbyn MPs have been given much more of a platform than Corbyn himself. But what struck me in the Vice documentary especially was the man's disdain for the media, and the general lack of media strategy / outreach. I am not denying that the politics of journalists are likely to play a part here, but I do wonder whether the lack of a platform is (at least in some way) a self-inflicted wound. If you do not engage with the media (even the ones you know hate you), you basically offer a vacuum to be filled by other voices.

On a side note, given that the talk went on to possible defections, I had a search to see how often they have happened (even excluding Carswell and Reckless), and it was more often than I remember (from the last decade or so):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6241928.stm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...fection-due-to-doubts-about-Gordon-Brown.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4178309.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4484043.stm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1489584/Former-Blair-babe-defects-to-Tories.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-89171/Labour-MP-defects-Lib-Dems.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_politicians_who_have_crossed_the_floor
 
On a side note, given that the talk went on to possible defections, I had a search to see how often they have happened (even excluding Carswell and Reckless), and it was more often than I remember (from the last decade or so):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_politicians_who_have_crossed_the_floor

that list does put into perspective what a momentus occasion it could (will?) be when the majority of he MP's who had no confidence in comrade clusterfek split off - biggest mass defection ever probably - and by a long way even including the 1886 liberal unionist split
 
Seriously who cares. Corbyn was silly for the way he highlighted a genuine problem. But to call it Traingate and blow it way out of propotion shows news must be slow.

It's a huge error from him and his team and therefore big news. The only thing he's highlighted is that this man whose ticket is founded on being some saviour of honest and authentic politics is in fact just another devious and untrustworthy spin freak.

He's an absolute car crash of a politician.