Jeremy Corbyn

Binners - time for a check

1. Are you a typical voter - if no, stop posting and go away, if yes proceed
2. Are you a real person - if no, stop posting and go away, if yes procees
3. Are you prepared to give unwavering support to cult led by someone not fit-for-purpose - if no, go back to (1), if yes proceed

You are free to keep commenting, but you are being monitored closely, so watch it....

Some tried. Have you read the accounts of ex-shadow cab members? Are they all lying? Really? What if they're telling the truth and he's not up to the job? Is that a possibility?

John, we stopped being serious on page 15. But nice point.

Binners - time for a check

1. Are you a typical voter - if no, stop posting and go away, if yes proceed
2. Are you a real person - if no, stop posting and go away, if yes procees
3. Are you prepared to give unwavering support to cult led by someone not fit-for-purpose - if no, go back to (1), if yes proceed

You are free to keep commenting, but you are being monitored closely, so watch it....

All irrelevant, I'm afraid. He went to a posh school, almost Eton, so he's clearly traitorous nazi scum. Etc.

If Wykehamists are in the middle of the nest, surely there's room for binners?

Anyway, to the cultist telling pragmatists to bog off, we may lose the vote, and the result may deal this party a grave blow. It may not be possible to prevent it, but there are some of us, I think many of us, who will not accept that this blow need be mortal: who will not believe that such an end is inevitable. There are some of us who will fight, and fight, and fight again, to save the party we love. We will fight, and fight, and fight again, to bring back sanity and honesty and dignity, so that our party – with its great past – may retain its glory and its greatness.

I think if I was sitting alone at a table & 4 seats on a train and Corbyn and his crew came looking for a seat I think my answer might be "Sorry mate, somebody's sitting here".

😀

Anyway, to the cultist telling pragmatists to bog off, we may lose the vote, and the result may deal this party a grave blow. It may not be possible to prevent it, but there are some of us, I think many of us, who will not accept that this blow need be mortal: who will not believe that such an end is inevitable. There are some of us who will fight, and fight, and fight again, to save the party we love. We will fight, and fight, and fight again, to bring back sanity and honesty and dignity, so that our party – with its great past – may retain its glory and its greatness.

CaptainFlashheart - Member

He went to a posh school, almost Eton

You could be onto something there Flashheart. Our working-class hero's hatred of the Left is only matched by his hatred of the middle-classes. On this thread :

binners - Member

It's no wonder they've come out against Corbyn. He's as terrifying and alien to them as someone northern, working class, or scottish. They like to stay in their nice, comfortable, upper middle class, bollocks-talking, London-centric metropolitan bubble

binners - Member

Because they're awful middle class lefties, who will stand by and moan about equal rights for one-armed, free range, organic hermaphrodite marriage, while the Tory party take a torch to workers rights
They are the very worst human beings on the planet

Perhaps this deep hatred for what he is himself causes an inner turmoil for which the only release is unrestrained ranting and rage ?

@5thElement - not milibd. Bit earlier.

Perhaps like lots of typical Labour Party voters he is dismayed at how things have turned out with Jezza in charge (or not in charge, to be more precise)

Wild shot I know......

@5thElement - not milibd. Bit earlier

@5thElement - not milibd. Bit earlier.

Indeed - best PM we never had?

edit:

Never heard of that fella.

:shocked:

Though I suppose this wider lack of knowledge of LP history (that people like me who grew up with shop steward for a dad maybe take for granted) may reveal why Corbyn has such a following amongst the Yoof.

Fantastic blast from the past here:

Dear Nicola must be counting her lucky stars - all this Corbyn nonsense means she escapes too much focus on the GERS data. She is one lucky lady.....

3) Work towards effectively removing a leader

That went well, didn't it. Unfortunately your 3) would always result in my 2).

Anyway Binners, what policies would you like to see from the Labour party?

What policies of Corbyn's don't you like?

What makes you think wassisface who's challenging Corbyn is more electable?

Do you not think the drop in polls is at least in part due to the PLP's narcissistic and myopic infighting?

If Corbyn wins, and it's likely he will, will you then want the PLP to in good faith rally behind the leader who would then have been democratically elected twice, or would you prefer the infighting continue until the Lib Dems are more popular than Labour?

Competency, zokes, competency - stay focused on the issue at hand. He will compromise on policies like they all do - so focus on the things that matter - is he up to the job?

in good faith rally behind the leader

Yep, rallying behind the leader, that's the Corbyn way!

is he up to the job?

If that's the bar then I think we'd better hand the reigns back to good Queen Bess...

There are some of us who will fight, and fight, and fight again, to save the party we love. We will fight, and fight, and fight again, to bring back sanity and honesty and dignity, so that our party – with its great past – may retain its glory and its greatness.

Shall we take that as an "obviously not"?

Yep its anyone but PLP in this leadership contest for me 😉

Yep, rallying behind the leader, that's the Corbyn way!

The PLP has made this mess into a complete shitstorm and still want to blame Corbyn. No one made them act with coordinated disloyalty in a always doomed to fail coup

They cannot win the allot
They cannot accept th democratic will of the party
Clearly its not their fault as you know they know best

Well, given that you still have a bank to work at, and wouldn't have if you'd not been bailed out by the taxpayer, it seems fairly obvious to me that the worst combination is still better for you than the government not stepping in at all.

Zokes I am sure I have told you this before. The Bank I worked for from 2001-2012 wasn't bailed out and have not worked for a bank since 2012. Banking bailouts helped me no more than they helped anyone else. As for shooting fish in a barrell that's just what the Tories and Lib Dems are looking forward to at the GE 2020 with Corbyn in charge.

Just watched JC loosing his rag at Sky journalist for asking him about #traingate rather than the NHS. Just how naive is he, of course he's going to be asked about a blatant misrepresentation / lie he made just the day before - as binners says he shot himself in the foot. He's disrupted his own campaign over an issue which is supposed to be one of his main policy strengths.

All this could have been avoided if the PLP put up a decent candidate in the first leadership contest. Corbyn was the best option- FACT!

If Corbyn hadn't been selected Labour would have muddled along to the next election and lost it. At least this is a bit more interesting.

a blatant misrepresentation

Junkyard the PLP is absolutely certain how a Corbyn lead Labour Party is going to do in a General Election. That's primarily why they want him gone.

The membership was absolutely certain that Burnham, Kendal or Cooper would lose a G.E etc

{J'bas, I am still trying to work out the state-controlled bank for 9 months. send me a hint?]

The membership was absolutely certain that Burnham, Kendal or Cooper would lose a G.E etc

Leaves them in a bit of pickle then, doesnt it?

THM"Leaves them in a bit of pickle then, doesnt it? "

Gambled with Corbyn unfortunately the PLP have nobbled our runner...

so we're taking our ball home 😆

[quote=jambalaya ]Junkyard the PLP is absolutely certain how a Corbyn lead Labour Party is going to do in a General Election. That's primarily why they want him gone.

If only they had some sort of popular support within the party to achieve this goal

This version of the labour party they have made is going to do far worse than one where he won and they tried.They party has spoken they need to respect this as this outcome is worse.

They do not have the authority to "veto" the leader.

teamhurtmore - Member
Shall we take that as an "obviously not"?

If you also want to take it that Major, Blair, Brown, and Cameron weren't up to the job too, then I'll happily concede the point.

Zokes I am sure I have told you this before.

Possibly, but as most things you type are blatant fiction, I'd probably not paid it any attention.

As for shooting fish in a (sic) barrell...

So you don't dispute me proving every one of those points you made as false then?

blatant misrepresentation / lie

Like the Leave campaign, you mean? Still glad to see you're focussing on the important things like whether or not a particular train was full, rather than the tiresome issue of whether Branson in is cheerleading has broken the data protection act and privacy laws.

Didn't three of your list manage to win an election? And major against the odds when Labour were "all right, we're all right....err, no you not"

We shall see if that is a differentiating factor or not - but the public gave them the thumbs up

but the public gave them the thumbs up

The public gave Brexit the thumbs up

And just because most of those PMs were voted in doesn't mean they did a good job:

1) I can't even think what Major did or didn't do beyond reversing the witch's Poll tax
2) Binners can sulk all he likes, but Blairs achievements pale into insignificance when you take into account fabricating evidence to facilitate an illegal war that has claimed thousands of lives and destabilised a large proportion of the Middle East
3) Brown had a bit of an issue with dealing with a financial crisis that he tried to blame on the last Chancellor, which was, er, him
4) Cameron follows a failed policy of austerity, then for a reason no sane person can comprehend decided to make a referendum on a topic the public does not understand an election promise in order to quieten a minority in his party. If you think Labour has the tail wagging the dog at present, then Cameron's capitulation to the Euroskeptic nutters is something off the scale.

What if they're telling the truth and he's not up to the job? Is that a possibility?

Not up to the job? A man who thinks it's a great idea to attempt some supporting spin that ends up so ludicrously failed on every level, so obviously rigged, so open to demolition, so lacking in the slightest bit of convincing image and argument?

Not up to the job?

How very dare you! 😆

4) Cameron follows a failed policy of austerity

No he didn't - look at the data. Ok, he pretended he did, but the reality was quite different.

look at the data

Which data? It's far from clear cut. Jobs may be up, but the reality is many of them are very poorly paid and on zero hour contracts. The economy may theoretically be growing by oddly despite austerity, so too is national debt. Building has stagnated, lending to SMEs is down. It's hardly all roses.

Or...

No he didn't

Are you saying that he lied and grossly misrepresented his policy and in fact he wasn't pursing austerity at all. Because if that's the case he was both a liar and incompetent. Which, if we accept your arguments about Corbyn, leaves him on a par with Cameron.

Not that stuff - [b]austerity[/b] - one of the reasons why the UK has performed 'relatively' well is that austerity was quietly abandoned some time ago. Plus they have stolen money off savers to bail out the over-indebted.

So Dave cannot be accused of a failed policy of austerity. He can be accused of other things though....

edit for edit - well he cant be an liar and incompetent, since the economy has recovered. So how about a liar and lucky/competent. And he did form a cabinet including people who didn't like him. So on balance, old Dave has it.....[in fact there isnt even a debate]

But as i said before, his (Dave's) comments on debt merely illustrated that he didnt fully understand the type of recession we were in. The joy of not being tied to any party is that you dont have to cover up their failings 😉

It's hardly all roses.

Out of curiosity which country got it right?

The utopian paradise that is Venezuela, comrade!

I thought The Beardy One had favoured Bolivia as what we were aiming for? A country whos economy is based on flogging nose candy to decadent capitalist pigs!

I look forward to this new re-balanced economy!

Did he mention anything about hookers? 😀

Both Dave and Jez did a stupid transport related stunt aswell.

Super Green Dave on his bike with a car behind and Jez pretending there were no empty seats on the train.

Out of curiosity which country got it right?

The one I call home these days for starters.... Oz. No recession for 25+ years. When the crisis hit, instead of cutting, Rudd provided stimulus, which oddly enough, stimulated things, like the economy.

And Binners, stop being the child you happily decry on others' posts that disagree with your right-wing agenda and instead post something relevant and useful. You coudl start by answering my previous questions about what policies of Corbyn's / Labour's that you like / dislike, and how wassisface Smith(?) would win an election and implement them.

@THM:

well he cant be an liar and incompetent

That really [i]is[/i]delusional. Gambling the entire country's economic future on a referendum to pacify some minority nutjobs in his own party has to be the most incompetent thing and PM has done for a very long time. Even more so given how close he came to losing the stunt that was indyref.

The one I call home these days for starters.... Oz. No recession for 25+ years. When the crisis hit, instead of cutting, Rudd provided stimulus, which oddly enough, stimulated things, like the economy.

Didn't they run a surplus prior to the crash?

Gambling the entire country's economic future on a referendum to pacify some [s]minority[/s] [b]majority[/b] nutjobs

Didn't they run a surplus prior to the crash?

Yes, and rather than keeping a surplus and suffering a recession, they used it to prevent one.

The stupid politics in oz at present fails to recognise that said surplus would have been much bigger but for the very generous middle- and upper-class welfare rolled out to buy Howard votes. Instead, the profits of the boom were frittered away though pork-barrelling, and oddly enough, cutting said middle-class welfare is proving somewhat difficult now there's no longer a boom or a surplus but there are elections to be won.

In any case, unless you''re going to invest a surplus in some sort of sovereign wealth fund like the Norwegians have, it's a pretty daft policy to sit on money you could use to grow the economy through the provision of important infrastructure etc.

Fixed for you.

Not really. The referendum was called to pacify the minority nutjobs in his own party. His greatest showing of incompetence was his inability to read the general public's disdain of politics as a whole, and how easily they could be manipulated by lies about the NHS and immigration.

Not really. The referendum was called to pacify the minority nutjobs in his own party

It was an attempt to derail UKIP

So still a minority then - 1 MP vs how many Tories before the last GE?

So still a minority then

you are conflating - the unexpected outcome of the result and the reasons that led to the referendum being held.I assume its deliberate side stepping of his point because its just true

Dave gambled on a referendum to assuage Tory UKIPers and for no other reason

That he lost is a different debate from why he did it.
IMHO he also expected to be unable to do it by coalition partners

Was this an act of political genius or a total **** up and why we are better off with principled politicians is also another debate

Personally I dont favour the win at all costs mentality....its not good for the country 😉

Nope. Not side stepping anything. There was an unstoppable juggernaut that Dave tried to stop. Had he not tried it would have continued to gain momentum and caused more and more problems (for both parties).

You may not have noticed, but Dave won a majority of 12. That's as tight as it gets. And he clearly didn't even expect that himself. He only promised a referendum to:

a) derail UKIP
b) pacify his own more foaming at the mouth backbenchers

If he hadn't promised what he never ever imagined he'd have to deliver, would he have got a majority? Probably not. So it worked. Then it didn't. Oops! Oh well... off to the boardrooms and banks to make millions. Every cloud.....

But never in their wildest dreams could the inheritors of Dave's reckless gamble - Theresa, and even Boris (who'd have thunk it?) have believed their luck.

The Labour Party (accidentally) replaces an uninspiring leader, who only just lost (on the centre ground) with a 70's style leftie, who turns out to be absolutely utterly and completely hopeless. Laughably naive and incompetent. Except it's not even funny. Unless you're a Tory party press officer. In which case it's manna from heaven.

Not only that, but despite losing the confidence of pretty much all his MP's, (see above clueless naive incompetence) decides to cling to power, recruit every stuck-in-the-80's lefty nut job and Militant head case in the country to his cause, and March the Labour Party off into the electoral wilderness for a generation, possibly destroying the party completely in the process, and handing the tories an unopposed hegemony.

ker-****ing-ching!!

Funny old world innit? The law of unintended consequences and all that?

Nationalise the railways!!? Does no one remember British Rail??

There was an unstoppable juggernaut that Dave [s]tried to stop[/s] started

There wasn't an unstoppable juggernaut until the referendum was called and the lies started flowing.

There's a whole other thread on just how stupid and unlikely the Leave claims were, but some of the main reasons for people voting leave were:
1) Sovereignty, while not understanding how the EU works
2) Fear of immigration and foreigners in general (otherwise known as xenophobia), despite most of the people Leavers would like to go not having come from the EU
3) The economy, while not understanding how international trade and economics work.
4) Seeing the opportunity to strike back at the 'establishment' while not being able to separate a disliking for politicians from the basic facts of how the country actually works

The only thing that was on the increase prior to Dave's decision to go with the referendum was an increase in xenophobia and racism, caused not least by his policies and his and his cheerleaders in the press' dehumanising and scaremongering language.

Binners, you've still not come up with a single policy.

Let me know when you pass your GCSEs and perhaps you'll be able to debate politics with us 6th-formers...

Comrade - despite being branded a Tory/traitor/Blairite/like....whatevs, I'd go with the last labour manifesto, moved slightly to the left. Which The Beardy massing has done in the fact that a lot of things are back on the agenda.

I'd go for being far less timid, and bringing in more regulation to temper the wilder excesses of 'The Market' and bring the banks, cabals and private monopolies in check, and make them pay their bloody tax!

But when you start banging on about unilateral nuclear disarmament, nationalising stuff (how much is that going to cost then?), uncosted policies involving a magic money tree, etc, everyone just thinks... 1978. Not a good look. It's just not credible. And despite what you and a lot of lefties dismissively think... people aren't stupid.

As I've stated repeatedly in this thread, my problem with Corbyn isnt policy. A lot of which I agree with. But Corbyn is a joke. Laughably politically clueless. A gift to the tories. And his followers in Momentum are the icing on the electorally unpaletable, brick through the window cake. As the whole sat on the floor nonsense demonstrates. As if we needed another reminder why he spent 30 years invisable on the backbenches

That ok hon?

As I've stated repeatedly in this thread, my problem with Corbyn isnt policy.

He says a few pages after denouncing "mad leftie nonsense".

[i]ffs[/i]

There was an unstoppable juggernaut that Dave tried to stop.

despite what you and a lot of lefties dismissively think... people aren't stupid.

The EU Referendum was called as

1) Dave believes in democracy, he held referendums on our voting system, Scottish Independence, EU - 3 in 5 years and there have only ever been 3 national referendums and Cameron called 2 of them. A true democrat.
2) As a carrot to vote Tory, Referendum was based on winning an overall majority and in that regard it was a stunning success

Nationalise the railways!!? Does no one remember British Rail??

This is the age....of the train!

That ok hon?

It's certainly a start, darling. But perhaps if you were less free with the branding and insults yourself, you'd find fewer coming back your way.

But when you start banging on about unilateral nuclear disarmament, nationalising stuff (how much is that going to cost then?), uncosted policies involving a magic money tree,

Well, re-nationalising the railways needn't cost a penny as the plan AIUI is to simply not renew franchises as they come to an end and thus the routes come back into public ownership. Undoubtedly there will be more to it than that, but if the current companies make a healthy profit from running trains up and down lines, there's no reason why the exchequer won't either.

We argued the unilateral disarmament point to death a few pages ago. I'm still to be convinced as to WTF trident is actually for, who we're deterring, and if nuclear weapons are so great at deterring conflict, why have the UK armed forces been in one theatre of war or another for a very very long time. But, one thing you cannot deny is that if we don't spend 150 billion on Trident then we can spend it on something else - I give you the money tree (or at least a few branches of one).

And back to getting the policies you would like into law, how is that going to happen? Do you honestly think wassisface (whose name I honestly cannot remember - Smith???) will win the next GE on those policies? Why did Millibean not get elected on those policies? Hearing Kinnock, a man who lost two GEs (one to Major FFS) come out and say Corbyn is unelectable is as funny as it is hypocritical.

Dave believes in democracy

That's got to be one of the funniest things you've said yet.

His referenda speak more about his lack of faith in his ability to get things through parliament. Last time I looked, the UK was a parliamentary democracy - we elect MPs, who then debate and pass laws. The EU referendum still has no more legal standing than a vote on who bakes the best buns on the BBC - an act of parliament is still needed before A50 can be enacted.

Anyway, if he was such a democrat, and believed so much in the voice of the people, why didn't he immediately call a GE then resign, and let the public choose its PM? It seems Dave's only a democrat when it suits him.

That really isdelusional. Gambling the entire country's economic future on a referendum to pacify some minority nutjobs in his own party has to be the most incompetent thing and PM has done for a very long time.

True. And that defines his legacy. But as the old saying goes - "all political careers end in failure" - or words to that effect.

And panicking about the rogue indy poll was a folly too. But why ask me to defend Cameron on these issues?

But we don't need lessons from Aus in economic (mis-) management - spare us from that one.

[b][i]"For the first time in 14 years we have the leader of the Labour Party unequivocally committing the party to reversing the legislation which has created in England a broken down, market-based healthcare system"[/i][/b]

- August 24th 2016, Lord David Owen - founding member of the right-wing breakaway party the SDP.

[url= http://www.lorddavidowen.co.uk/for-the-first-time-in-14-years-we-have-the-leader-of-the-labour-party-unequivocally-committing-the-party-to-reversing-the-legislation-which-has-created-in-england-a-broken-down-market-based-healthc/ ]Lord Owen official website[/url]

Lord Owen......not noted for being a hard-left militant trot.

Well, re-nationalising the railways needn't cost a penny as the plan AIUI is to simply not renew franchises as they come to an end and thus the routes come back into public ownership. Undoubtedly there will be more to it than that, but if the current companies make a healthy profit from running trains up and down lines, there's no reason why the exchequer won't either.

Let's start, shall we?

Rebranding? Well, that's just going to have to happen, isn't it? No one wants to sit on a seat saying Virgin (Assuming there are any!) when it's a SocialistUtopiaTrain. The public sector does love a bit of brand engagement. Oh, and they're brilliant at both procurement and managing budgets on projects, aren't they? Not going to cost a penny?

Also, as others have pointed out, a national railway belongs to us, the taxpayer, meaning that us, the taxpayer, will expect reductions in fares combined with improvements in service. After all, why do it otherwise? Not going to cost a penny?

Etc.

To say that it wouldn't cost a penny is ludicrous. At best. Regardless of whether it's the right or wrong thing to do, doing it would cost quite a lot more than a penny.

Was he drunk when he wrote it?

So we now have:

(1) a market-based healthcare system in the UK (Lord hiccup Owen)

Or

(2) We have no NHS, since the Tories have run it into the ground (Jezza)

Odd that neither seem to be true. Wouldn't surprise me if the good lord carried on with some guff about Scotland being a model for the NHS without any private sector involvement. Double ports all round....

Straight, principled, unspun....you didn't hear it here first

Ernie... comrade ..... I've just given you specific examples of mad leftie nonsense.

I thought when Corbyn was elected as the leader of the opposition, he'd realise how different that position was to the one he'd held previously... mad leftie backbencher, and temper his more electorally unpalatable ideas accordingly.

No chance. He's too politically naive/clueless for that

Unfortunately a serious amount of this countries population share my opinion (rightly or wrongly) on what constitutes 'mad lefty nonsense'. Far too many for Corbyn ever to be electable.

Far from toning it down, he's ratcheted it up. How do you think that's playing out in marginal seats? Going well? Winning a lot of people over to the idea of radical socialism?

recruit every stuck-in-the-80's lefty nut job and Militant head case in the country

300,000 new members. I just don't believe that there are/were that many lefty nut-jobs in this country. If there are then the loony left are doing much better than I ever thought they were. Unless the socialist workers have been running a secret programme of sleeper cells in every town and village 🙂

Is it not just possible that these new members, instead of being lefty nut-jobs, are people who have been inspired by the policies and the approach of a man who is the opposite of pretty much every political leader presented to them for the past 30 years? It's a crazy thought, but considering what's going on elsewhere in Europe and the US, I'm not sure this anti-establishment movement can be so easily dismissed.

@ninfan, blast from the past ? that seems like yesterday ! 30 mins well spent, you really could just replace Militant with Momentum and wind the clock forward 30 years. Now where is my Delorean

Rebranding

Yep, that's very expensive I'll grant you. So expensive you never see private companies doing it with tho goal of increasing profits. Nope, not ever.

Well, re-nationalising the railways needn't cost a penny as the plan AIUI is to simply not renew franchises as they come to an end and thus the routes come back into public ownership.

The cuckoos obviously rely on people believing this stuff. Remarkable...

@daz imo its a mix of youngster voters who have no memories of the 70's and 80's and entryists from other parties/organisations (most from the left but some from the right who are being deliberately disruptive)

I've just given you specific examples of mad leftie nonsense.

Yeah so don't come out with this bollocks : [i]"my problem with Corbyn isnt policy"[/i]. Try to have some integrity ffs.

No recession for 25+ years.

Wasn't that due to large scale mineral exploitation rather than fiscal skill?

Binners - I'd like to agree with you but your debating tone makes that really difficult! However glad zokes went to the effort of getting some actual good points from you 🙂

Ernie, JY and Zokes.... did you read the [url= https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/24/labour-complains-tories-govern ]Rafeal Behr[/url] article in today's Guardian?

I'm genuinely interested in your thoughts on this. To me it perfectly summarises the difference in perception from the committed left, and the general voter.

What do you think?

Railways. Corbyn thinks investment is too low, working conditions too onerous, wages too low and fares too high. So he would spend more to fix the first three whilst reducing prices. Net net a nationalised railway would cost the taxpayer much more money. No he wouldn't pay for the franchise (but there is an implicit loss as the govt would not receive a franchsie fee) and then he'd spend spend spend.

@jamby a mix of younger people and entryists. What % split do you reckon?

ernie_lynch - Member

[b]"For the first time in 14 years we have the leader of the Labour Party unequivocally committing the party to reversing the legislation which has created in England a broken down, market-based healthcare system"[/b]

- August 24th 2016, Lord David Owen - founding member of the right-wing breakaway party the SDP.

[url= http://www.lorddavidowen.co.uk/for-the-first-time-in-14-years-we-have-the-leader-of-the-labour-party-unequivocally-committing-the-party-to-reversing-the-legislation-which-has-created-in-england-a-broken-down-market-based-healthc/ ]Lord Owen official website[/url]

Lord Owen......not noted for being a hard-left militant trot.

teamhurtmore - Member

Was he drunk when he wrote it?

🙄

Aus's very own Steve Keen

For the last 25 years, Australian politicians of both Liberal and Labor hue have been able to brag that, under their stewardship, Australia has avoided a recession. [b]Those bragging rights are about to come to an end. [/b]During the life of the next Parliament — and probably by 2017 — Australia will fall into a prolonged recession.

and he's not exactly a neo-liberal

the emoji was his face- drunk more than I thought? odd that a few months ago he still thought we had a NHS. He was claiming that leaving the EU would destroy it. Must be a strong tipple....

Do you have a poster of him too Ernie?