Jeremy Corbyn new Labour leader Lol

[WF10]

[Flat Capper]

Tory Friends,

As I pointed out previously, neither side wants to fully commit to anything significant on this subject because of the potential ramifications.

When pressed, all those representing the Tories have refused to give a figure on what they are aiming for because they know it will fail. On the subject of control, how will the Tories measure their control techniques? How will casual farm labour be 'controlled'?

As I see it, we have the most honest position from Labour who recognise immigration is vital for the British economy but does require some refining. If we do introduce a system that works towards only letting those in we require, this will inevitably lead to peaks and troughs as people come and go. And don't forget, thousands of UK citizens work abroad in the EU as well so freedom of movement for them is still needed.

This country has relied on immigration since the time of the Romans who had to bring in their own experts for things like construction (roads, homes, bath houses, irrigation), taxes, 'policing', many of the things we pride ourselves on today.

[CasRus]

Tory Friends,

As I pointed out previously, neither side wants to fully commit to anything significant on this subject because of the potential ramifications.

When pressed, all those representing the Tories have refused to give a figure on what they are aiming for because they know it will fail. On the subject of control, how will the Tories measure their control techniques? How will casual farm labour be 'controlled'?

As I see it, we have the most honest position from Labour who recognise immigration is vital for the British economy but does require some refining. If we do introduce a system that works towards only letting those in we require, this will inevitably lead to peaks and troughs as people come and go. And don't forget, thousands of UK citizens work abroad in the EU as well so freedom of movement for them is still needed.

This country has relied on immigration since the time of the Romans who had to bring in their own experts for things like construction (roads, homes, bath houses, irrigation), taxes, 'policing', many of the things we pride ourselves on today.

Hi Flatcapper, as I see it, there has to be a certain criteria to conform to which the Tories are now alluding to which will hopefully work as it does quite successfully in Australia (on a points based system and with the layout of qualifying to claim NHS/Social payments as defined). Yes there will inevitably be peaks and troughs which will always be supply and demand based and yes we do and it is recognised we need immigration coming but needs to be controlled to suit our needs and not where everybody and his dog are allowed to come in which is practically what we have now and is causing major stresses on our services in the NHS/Schools/etc etc.

Please note there is no Party wishing to make life abysmal for its population and things are very challenging just now and we can argue till the cows come home as to the reasons why and I do take on board some policies that old Jezza has tabled as being good to expand on as has the Tories and its a question of getting these policies discussed as a group of MPs in the Commons to hopefully let some of these fly irrespective of being a Labour or Tory idea.

Boris is, as you will have noticed, starting to listen to the electorate's concerns and his suspension of lowering Corporation Tax saving 6 Billion and channelling into the NHS (as part of "where all the money is coming from" question) so its a start and is a "lean over branch" to some of the labour people's concerns in supporting the electorate on NHS health issues.

There really shouldn't be a Tory v Labour fight as both should work closely with each other, it is getting us nowhere fast but someone has to give a direction and I just don't see voting for labour or Lib Dem will presently get us this and will lead to another hung stymied parliament like we have had for the past 3 years. That is why I keep on saying that the Tories are the only game in town as having a direction and a destination and listening to BJ, his vision sounds good to me if he can deliver it - Jezza is carrying a lot of baggage I'm afraid as to be trusted to lead the country and that's not me saying it, it's your 30 year Labour MPs and they should be in the know more than any of us ! He won't commit to Trident, he won't commit to Brexit, he has no commitment on immigration (don't forget he get's a massive vote share from the immigrants here and makes no wonder he wants freedom of movement to continue along with Dianne Abbott).

I'm trying to take a reasonable overview of all this and whether you agree or not is entirely up to you and your Labour colleagues on this forum and maybe I am not always correct (nobody is) however I provide my opinions as food for thought and not really point scoring - hence my lengthy posts whereas I seem to get back 1 or 2 liners from the likes of dogs/ for example who just cannot string anything constructive to discuss or say but just wants to and has a go which I do respond back to this in an aggressive way at times (which you may have noticed and try to take the p.ss) !...LOL !! I don't mean it really - all part of the p.ss-take/banter game sometimes !! You never know I might be siding with Labour next time if Boris stuffs up !!

[Flat Capper]

I accept you take the view that BJ and crew are the only ones who will provide direction but I just cannot trust a man who changes his mind more often that Theresa May or May Not. The corporation tax statement being yet another example.

You may not like what JC & Co are proposing but for me it is clear. There is a clear choice of for the many or for the few?

[CasRus]

I accept you take the view that BJ and crew are the only ones who will provide direction but I just cannot trust a man who changes his mind more often that Theresa May or May Not. The corporation tax statement being yet another example.

You may not like what JC & Co are proposing but for me it is clear. There is a clear choice of for the many or for the few?

Flatcapper, when emergencies arise as in the case of the NHS, priorities change - It can be construed that a leader willing to make a change as and when necessary can hold the nation at heart to solve pressing issues, so as in this case, BJ has demonstrated his willingness to adapt and change his mind when common sense prevails.

Don't forget he is talking of supporting the Northern Powerhouse as is Jezza and BJ can only be judged on his performance when he's given the chance to show what he will do as Leader. Also, don't forget they said he would never be able to get the EU to re-open the deal and that has proven to be wrong and that was his stance on leaving on Oct 31st and sticking to it throughout which panicked the EU and was not helped by the commons jellyfish remainers which included your party veto'ing no deal so he was up against it and came through that in very testing circumstances to succeed, so for me he is showing himself to be a strong leader.

[Flat Capper]

He also said he'd rather die in a ditch than extend Date Brexit.

And, according to David Cameron, he change his mind during the referendum.

I'm sure there's quite a few more I could find if I could be bothered to check but whatever we think about his (lack of) decisiveness, he just strikes me as a bumbling buffoon.

[CasRus]

He also said he'd rather die in a ditch than extend Date Brexit.

And, according to David Cameron, he change his mind during the referendum.

I'm sure there's quite a few more I could find if I could be bothered to check but whatever we think about his (lack of) decisiveness, he just strikes me as a bumbling buffoon.

Now come on Flatcapper, you can't be that naïve !!

BJ's game was to worry the EU into opening up the Deal again and that was part of his game to look as if he intended to carry out leaving ! Now you tell me where Corbyn would have or even will get if he wins) trying to negotiate with his No Deal off the table because I for one would laugh him out of the negotiating room and sit tight with no further concession if I was the EU ! Like it or not, he has cornered himself to remain as being the best option if he accepts single market and customs union may I suggest !

Yes BJ does strike everybody as a Bumbling Buffoon (and he has a coloured and chequered private life like so many might I add) but has he got a deal from the EU and had the Commons approved it in principle ? - Yes to Both ! and that was under severe pressure from all who cynically opposed him in trying to block his progress at every corner - Now that strikes me as a Strong Leader who fronts up adversity and wants to get things done ! Don't be fooled by his Buffoonery as he can be a wolf in sheep's clothing !

Now let's look at Jezza and calculate who is the REAL Bumbling Buffoon shall we based on the following which will be tabled in the TV debate tonight and where he has bumbled his way through for many a month with no clear strategy:-

He will challenge Jezza on the following questions :-

Jezza is proposing a second referendum on EU membership. In that referendum, would he recommend the UK should remain or leave?

Jezza's previous manifesto promised to end freedom of movement, but following his conference it is now Labour Party policy to "maintain and extend" free movement. Would he maintain or extend free movement, and would immigration be higher or lower under Jezza's Labour?

Asked on Sunday if he was prepared to continue to pay into the EU budget on an ongoing basis, Jezza replied "clearly if you want access to a market there are costs involved". How much would he be willing to pay into the EU budget in return for "access to markets"?

All 635 Conservative candidates standing at this election have pledged to BJ that, if elected, they will vote in parliament to pass his Brexit deal. Can Jezza guarantee that every Labour candidate supports his Brexit policy?

BJ will conclude: "Without satisfactory answers to these questions, the public will have no choice but to conclude that Jezza's Labour, propped up by the SNP, will mean dither, delay, and uncertainty with two more chaotic referendums next year.

The TV debate tonight will be very interesting to see whether Jezza answers these questions and what questions Jezza has back to BJ, however based on the above it is presently obvious to me who is the Bumbling Buffoon to date and who cannot make his mind up one way or the other and practically nobody definitively knows what his policies are !!

There are only 2 parties that have a clear policy and intention (Lib Dems and Tories) - Let's hope Jezza has the nuts to answer these questions so you Labour supporters actually know what you are voting for. Or, are you Labour voters going to wing it again with a blindfold on, stood on one leg and ready to have it kicked from under you not knowing or for that fact anybody knowing what the Labour policy is ??

[Flat Capper]

I did say he changed his mind during the referendum campaign and you haven't addressed that.

He changes his mind to meet his own end (Tory Leadership) and not for the benefit of the country.

As for JC, he cannot answer the questions at this stage but one thing is clear, the Labour party do not support the May/BJ deal as it stands as it clearly isn't supportive of a good future trade deal. They intend to re-negotiate the deal to one that they feel will meet the result of the referendum but not cripple out economy and then put that back to the public to see if they support it. Why are the Tories scared of asking the public what they think about this 'glorious' Tory deal?

The Tories also claim they want immigration down but won't tell us by how much. Why won't BJ answer that question? If he's promising to lower it, he needs to know what his target is? The Labour position is clear, 'slashing' immigration is tantamount to cutting your nose off to spite your face.

How's the tax cutting going anyway? Oh that's right, finally realised you can't wipe the harris' of the rich and pay for the promises you've forgotten to cost sensibly for.

[CasRus]

I did say he changed his mind during the referendum campaign and you haven't addressed that.

He changes his mind to meet his own end (Tory Leadership) and not for the benefit of the country.

As for JC, he cannot answer the questions at this stage but one thing is clear, the Labour party do not support the May/BJ deal as it stands as it clearly isn't supportive of a good future trade deal. They intend to re-negotiate the deal to one that they feel will meet the result of the referendum but not cripple out economy and then put that back to the public to see if they support it. Why are the Tories scared of asking the public what they think about this 'glorious' Tory deal?

The Tories also claim they want immigration down but won't tell us by how much. Why won't BJ answer that question? If he's promising to lower it, he needs to know what his target is? The Labour position is clear, 'slashing' immigration is tantamount to cutting your nose off to spite your face.

How's the tax cutting going anyway? Oh that's right, finally realised you can't wipe the harris' of the rich and pay for the promises you've forgotten to cost sensibly for.

Thanks for your response Flatcapper which is a constructive response.

On his changing his mind during the referendum, if you remember there was talk of him writing up 2 position outcomes, one being for Remain and one for Leave. Now, he may have sided with remain originally, which Cameron was referring to, however it is only looking at positives and negatives with extra thought (and don't we all do this on major decisions before finally making a decision which by the way is not always the right one as nobody has a crystal ball !) and he finally came down on the position to leave. This is exactly what he did and what I would have done.

Also, for his Tory leadership own end you refer to, every ambitious person would look to work at best ability to rise up the ladder like most people do every day in life but I would go to say that if it wasn't for the benefit of the country, he would be soon found out as every one has the power and the vote to get rid of him if he wasn't benefitting the country so its my opinion that this cannot be determined as such until he's given the chance to lead the country over a period of time to summise as to whether he has or has not benefitted the country - Sorry to repeat myself, but the same applies to whoever leads the country including Jezza, so that, I believe, is a fair assumption as nobody cannot predict whether any person has or has not benefitted the country until they have the chance to prove either way ! I'm sure I am right on this. point but you can interpret it whichever way you want.

Yes the Tories do want immigration down, don't we all ! However I personally don't believe this can be a carte blanche statement as much as Jezza saying he wants to extend. They are both wrong.

If the economy booms, we may need more immigration to fill more jobs created and if it declines we may need less and don't forget jobs may disappear with the advent of AI and Robotics now coming in a much bigger way. This is not a precise outcome whichever way you look at it, however having the controlling power to allow sufficient immigration and of the right calibre to be allowed in and is something that any efficient country would adopt to ensure that, the stupidity of immigrants just coming here to have a free lunch on us taxpayers and having nothing to offer, is removed. Systems efficiency of any country is a paramount requisite to creating wealth to fund the services such as the NHS, Schools etc rather than see tax money being squandered away on handouts which freedom of movement creates. Why do you think immigrants are targeting this country to flock to and coming through and bypassing France for example and those froggies turning a blind eye to all those illegals risking their lives in the English Channel - they aren't picking up the bill if they can help it are they but they expect us to do !!

On taxation of the rich, 5% of the rich pay 27% of the tax collection. It's a constant balancing act to ensure the rich investors and business is not frightened away so it really is a very fine line to tread and don't forget other countries would entice investors with lower tax rates so we could lose out altogether if we go after these people. Investment creates jobs and in turn creates wealth and money to spend on those vital services that are needed.

I do think there is a big need though to go after the businesses that are not paying their taxes correctly here and also individuals who are profiting inside from their business dealings within the UK while hiding in other locations (tax dodging like Starbucks did for many a year). It's not all the Reece Moggs by the way as there is many a Labour supporter also and don't forget that the black tax dodging economy here in the UK is also rife (Plumbers/electricians etc) which is harder to control. Setting of tax rules, levels of tax etc is not as straightforward as you believe and has to be looked at from a common sense standpoint and where it does not effect economic growth.

I am a firm believer that the super rich over a certain level should be super taxed where it is deemed that they couldn't spend it all in their lifetime on what they already have and should donate their excess to people projects for the poorer end of society (some already do give huge amounts to charities, others like Branson and Musk fund space projects to the benefit of mankind).

Let's see what tonight brings on the Leader debate - will be very interesting !!

[alftupper]

Well as far as I can see Labour have everything to gain and the Tories have every thing to lose tonight, a typically brave move from Boris to agree to this albeit his opposition is hardly taxing... pardon the pun. Will Jezza working his magic have a positive effect on the next lot of polls? We will see!

Popcorn at the ready.

[alftupper]

any idea where Jezza stands on Brexit?

[CasRus]

I thought Jezza had a more polished performance tonight than BJ but it was more or less obvious where they both stand and that was just reinforcement of what we already know about both positions.

[daytona]

Not sure we learnt anything new after the ITV debate. I found the presenter infuriating though, asking a question and then butting in after about ten seconds of either leaders reply. Think it was a win for Boris though as he actually answered more questions direct where old Jezza with his wonky glasses on seemed to not want to answer the difficult questions regarding Brexit and keeping the Union together. I think it’s pretty clear he’s in bed with Sturgeon. (What a nasty image I now have in my head)!

[alftupper]

I thought Jezza had a more polished performance tonight than BJ

Certainly it wasn’t as bad as it could have been for Jezza but definitely nowhere near as good as it needed to be. Bojo answered more questions directly whereas Steptoe drew audible laughter from the audience with his continual evasion of the Brexit and Union questions. Slight victory for Boris I think.

[WF10]

Corbyn's position on Brexit?

He leads a democratic party. It's that party position that matters. That's politics and it's the difference between that and having a chat in a pub. It's not 606 and ring in tell us your view. It's which party forms the next government and what the strategy of that party is.

Unfortunately, the UK's broadcasters want to turn the future of the country into a reality TV show, with Boris Johnson in the role of the Etonian Jade Goody.

Might as well ask them what they had for their tea and who they want to win Knobheads in the Jungle.

[CasRus]

Guys,

Not a great advert for both leaders merits I think.

The over-riding factor about all this is whichever method of running the country you like be it Tory or Labour, these 2 parties can talk a good game plan till the cows come home however the deep hole we are in on Brexit will not allow any of all these promises until we dig ourselves out of this hole !

Let us all face these facts and whether you put Country before Party:-

If Labour get in Just (which it would be just) - we have another period of months/years of renegotiation/referendums and the country continues to stagnate.

If a hung parliament again ore of the same torture

If Tory win with a workable majority Brexit has the very best chance of being completed given the agreement on a deal with the EU and initially passed now by parliament.

If Article 50 is cancelled and we remain. half the country will never ever trust a vote again and democracy is forever damaged in this country.

So, those are the permutations as Brexit needs addressing before the rest can be worked on be it Tory or Labour.

Like I have said before, the Tories are the only game in town to get the country through this mess as no other party can get us through Brexit without another torture period and the fact of the matter is the delay costing Billions just now !

Once completed. the next election is where Labour could have it's day in the sun but common sense should prevail here just now for the sake of the country. If Labour were the party with a definitve plan ready to go, it might be a different proposition here but they just haven't !

[CasRus]

Are anyone having trouble getting all their posts in complete form as the first paragraphs of my last posts are not transferring as complete ??

[alftupper]

Corbyn's position on Brexit?

He leads a democratic party. It's that party position that matters. That's politics and it's the difference between that and having a chat in a pub. It's not 606 and ring in tell us your view. It's which party forms the next government and what the strategy of that party is.

Off course it is of importance that we know what our future PM’s views are, that has been the problem over the last two years having a remainer in charge of Brexit.

[WF10]

Corbyn's position on Brexit?

He leads a democratic party. It's that party position that matters. That's politics and it's the difference between that and having a chat in a pub. It's not 606 and ring in tell us your view. It's which party forms the next government and what the strategy of that party is.

Off course it is of importance that we know what our future PM’s views are, that has been the problem over the last two years having a remainer in charge of Brexit.

Why?

He only gets 1 vote, the same as me or you.

Let's have it right - he'll lose votes (& the chance of being PM) if he explicitly says his preference now. AND it's impossible to say with certainty without knowing 100% what deal he'll come back with.

IF he becomes PM he'll go to the EU, negotiate an, admittedly, 'soft' Brexit & put his soft Brexit deal to the people.

Leave: here's the benefits; here's the drawbacks.

Remain: here's the benefits; here's the drawbacks.

Now choose.

Has to be be better than last time - 'Leave or Remain' - which I've already said - was the type of stuff that belongs in a 6th form common room. AND was massively mis-leading (such as the £350m per week to the NHS - which was withdrawn the very next day!) among others, from both sides.

In this scenario, I personally think Corbyn would go for a Leave option. But all facts would be transparent & everyone will get their say - so what he thinks doesn't really matter.

[alftupper]

Corbyn's position on Brexit?

He leads a democratic party. It's that party position that matters. That's politics and it's the difference between that and having a chat in a pub. It's not 606 and ring in tell us your view. It's which party forms the next government and what the strategy of that party is.

Off course it is of importance that we know what our future PM’s views are, that has been the problem over the last two years having a remainer in charge of Brexit.

Why?

How about for clarity, openness and not least of all his own election chances. Evading the direct question 9 times did him no favours, he also wasn’t at all definitive when asked about the Union.