Sign in to follow this  
John Drake

Jeremy Corbyn & the Labour Party

Recommended Posts

He doesn't have to kiss the Queen's hand; he has to meet her.  She's already reported as saying he doesn't need to kiss her hand.  He chose to go for a walk in Scotland rather than take seriously the historic ritual that is a symbol of political trust in the sharing of sensitive security information.  That a fuss hasn't been made previously will be down to the fact that no previous leader has had such clear and well known connections with known terrorist organisations nor have they been such overt republicans.  I think the attention given to Corbyn in this respect is thoroughly justified.  Personally I don't want him anywhere near our security briefings.  I find him and his sidekick McDonnell repugnant in the company they have kept (and possibly continue to keep for all we know), and their mutual buddy Watson doesn't come across as any better although for different reasons.

I am not sure you get my point. I wouldn't grant Corbyn, McDonnell or any other politicians (incl the PM) access to any materials above the security classification of OFFICIAL if they hadn't been vetted. They could kiss the Queen's a**e for all I care but they still wouldn't get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I need to report this ?

For what? Your spelling and grammar are appalling. If I were reviewing your cv it would get nowhere. And yet you see yourself fit to pass judgment on others employability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what? Your spelling and grammar are appalling. If I were reviewing your cv it would get nowhere. And yet you see yourself fit to pass judgment on others employability.

Then I apologise

Because on my reading its perfect

Must be some setting I have to set

Is that correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then I apologise

Because on my reading its perfect

Must be some setting I have to set

Is that correct?

 

Good try, but 0 out of 1. It should be apostrophe 's' (to be correct it's is the contracted form of 'it is')

Another one for the bin. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a Privy Council members means you can be trusted to hear the most secret information relevant to your position, it's not a blanket approval to know everything.  For example, the heads of state of most Commonwealth countries are PC members yet they wouldn't get access to 1000th of the information that Cameron has access to, same with the Leader of the Opposition, they get enough information, but no more, to lead an effective Opposition and be able to take on the role of Prime Minister in the event of a sudden change of government.

 

So why isn't Corbyn trustworthy? He's been democratically elected after all.  Isn't the old kissing the Queen's hand an act of allegiance, albeit an anachronistic one?

 

Or maybe that is the actual issue, he doesn't have an allegiance to this country, and won't until it becomes what he desires it to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think ckn is saying that at all. He is suggesting people like Corbyn if going through the normal security vetting procedures wouldn't get anywhere near any sensitive, let alone secret material. So why should kissing the Queen's hand allow him access? I tend to agree.

 

Before you rip into me, I am not a Republican.

 

Why wouldn't Corbyn clear vetting?  He's an elected leader of HM Opposition and no doubt his DBS record is clean.

 

If we didn't have Her Maj to decide on who sees what, just how would we keep these damn Republicans under control??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on topic now please.

There's no shortage of material.

Thanks.

 

You're right about that :tongue:

 

How long can Tom and Jerry stay at in the job until there is an insurgency of the moderates to depose them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't Corbyn clear vetting?  He's an elected leader of HM Opposition and no doubt his DBS record is clean.

 

If we didn't have Her Maj to decide on who sees what, just how would we keep these damn Republicans under control??

A spotless enhanced DBS record proves nothing, all that means is that you haven't been caught yet.  I've yet to find why people put so much faith in them beyond bum covering themselves.  To get access to some moderately serious details you have to go through developed vetting which includes credit checks, medical history, family history, close contacts and interviews for anyone that they're not sure about on your list of close family members.  If you have a big or strained credit record (not talking even defaults or CCJs) then that may be seen as an opportunity for someone to put financial pressure on you.  If you've had certain sensitive health conditions then that again could exclude you.  Forgot to tell them about a speeding ticket from 20 years ago then the assumption is that you're hiding something and the heavy duty rubber gloves come out rather than the normal ones.  If they get a hint that you're hiding something but they can't find it then they can fail you just for that.

 

When I did my first DV clearance I was quizzed extensively about my granddad's connections in Yugoslavia, my cousin who was in jail for a serious crime and why I'd missed a couple of payments on bills (I happened to have been on extended field operations and it was way before the days of internet banking).

 

Just read back the pages of this and the predecessor thread for 100 different reasons why Corbyn would not be able to get clearance to access information that is middling in security levels, never mind ministerial level.  Look at the last few Prime Ministers as well, I can fairly guarantee that they'd struggle to get past a DV clearance now given their "consultancies" and links to other countries yet they still have Privy Council memberships.  I couldn't care less that someone's managed to persuade the electorate to vote for them, that should not give them an exemption from proper security checks regardless of whether they turned up and doffed their cap to the Queen or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't Corbyn clear vetting? He's an elected leader of HM Opposition and no doubt his DBS record is clean.

If we didn't have Her Maj to decide on who sees what, just how would we keep these damn Republicans under control??

Maybe we should just hand power back to gods anointed rep on earth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right about that :tongue:

 

How long can Tom and Jerry stay at in the job until there is an insurgency of the moderates to depose them?

I agree. It's time Cameron and Osborne (to say nothing of IDS) were gone.  Cameron's conference speech sounded moderate.  But it's deeds not words that matter. Cameron and co are extreme by any definition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. It's time Cameron and Osborne (to say nothing of IDS) were gone.  Cameron's conference speech sounded moderate.  But it's deeds not words that matter. Cameron and co are extreme by any definition.

Cameron is extreme?  Really?  Good grief. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cameron is extreme?  Really?  Good grief. 

Ask those who are having their tax credits cut, ask those who are waiting for hospital appointments.  Ask those people who are disabled but can;t get disability allowance.  Cameron is if anything more Thatcherite than Thatcher.  He talks the liberal talk, but unfortunately he doesn't walk the liberal walk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask those who are having their tax credits cut, ask those who are waiting for hospital appointments.  Ask those people who are disabled but can;t get disability allowance.  Cameron is if anything more Thatcherite than Thatcher.  He talks the liberal talk, but unfortunately he doesn't walk the liberal walk.

 

He's just the "cuddly" front man (or puppet, depending on your point of view). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A spotless enhanced DBS record proves nothing, all that means is that you haven't been caught yet.  I've yet to find why people put so much faith in them beyond bum covering themselves.  To get access to some moderately serious details you have to go through developed vetting which includes credit checks, medical history, family history, close contacts and interviews for anyone that they're not sure about on your list of close family members.  If you have a big or strained credit record (not talking even defaults or CCJs) then that may be seen as an opportunity for someone to put financial pressure on you.  If you've had certain sensitive health conditions then that again could exclude you.  Forgot to tell them about a speeding ticket from 20 years ago then the assumption is that you're hiding something and the heavy duty rubber gloves come out rather than the normal ones.  If they get a hint that you're hiding something but they can't find it then they can fail you just for that.

 

When I did my first DV clearance I was quizzed extensively about my granddad's connections in Yugoslavia, my cousin who was in jail for a serious crime and why I'd missed a couple of payments on bills (I happened to have been on extended field operations and it was way before the days of internet banking).

 

Just read back the pages of this and the predecessor thread for 100 different reasons why Corbyn would not be able to get clearance to access information that is middling in security levels, never mind ministerial level.  Look at the last few Prime Ministers as well, I can fairly guarantee that they'd struggle to get past a DV clearance now given their "consultancies" and links to other countries yet they still have Privy Council memberships.  I couldn't care less that someone's managed to persuade the electorate to vote for them, that should not give them an exemption from proper security checks regardless of whether they turned up and doffed their cap to the Queen or not.

 

So when Cameron says Corbyn is a threat to national security, you would pretty much agree.

 

Exactly how would this change in a people's Republic of Grand Bretagne?  What would you replace an oath of allegiance to the Crown with?  How would Corbyn, democratic credibility and all, be considered fit to be in on state level stuff?  What if he were elected prime minister, who would oversee what he got access to?

 

It's fine knocking the system we have to push the Republican cause, but unless you have a workable alternative, why make the change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask those who are having their tax credits cut, ask those who are waiting for hospital appointments.  Ask those people who are disabled but can;t get disability allowance.  Cameron is if anything more Thatcherite than Thatcher.  He talks the liberal talk, but unfortunately he doesn't walk the liberal walk.

 

The same people having their tax credits cut would be the same the Labour party took the 10p rate of tax away from?

 

Those having their tax credits cut are enjoying the highest personal tax allowances ever seen, and the highest earnings threshold to wean them off the teat of the state.  The very same state system designed by the Labour party to maintain the status quo and keep them down where they belong.

 

No one who is entitled to disability living allowance is being denied it.  Remember, it was your beloved Labour party who brought in ATOS to check all claimants.

 

Waiting for a hospital appointment?  Well, that's just ridiculous isn't it.  Everyone should have their own doctor on tap 24/7, with unfettered access to whatever they want whenever they want it.

 

Familiarity has bred contempt as far as the NHS goes.  It's a precious resource and should not be taken for granted.  Sadly that's yet another Labour party trait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John McDonnell - just how embarrassing was he in the chamber yesterday?

 

Instead of claiming he wasn't going to walk into a cunningly laid Osborne trap, one that he doesn't seem to spotted until very recently, why not put forward a coherent, plausible set of alternative policies?

 

I really feel for genuine Labour supporters, their team is bottom of the table and facing relegation to Lib Dem territory unless they sack the manager and his entire backroom staff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. It's time Cameron and Osborne (to say nothing of IDS) were gone. Cameron's conference speech sounded moderate. But it's deeds not words that matter. Cameron and co are extreme by any definition.

I don't think £9 minimum wage and some of Tue highest levels of tax credit spending in the world, much higher than Blair's first two terms are particularly extreme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I don't want to see people on tax credits becoming worse off, but it niggles slighlty that the likes of Amazon benefit by paying people minimum wage, the staff getting a top up from the government and the likes of Amazon paying diddly squat tax themselves.

 

Much rather see an abolishment of the tax credit system and an increase in the minimum wage, at least then the companies have to foot the bill, it won't see mass job losses, although it will see plenty of headlines about potential mass job losses.

 

Watched PMQ's yesterday and thought Corbyn's refined approach of saving a few questions for follow ups worked much better.  The atmosphere felt flat though, and the wider reaches of the front benches looked like pathetic squabling school children, amplihied by the otherwise sudued atmosphere, I thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Much rather see an abolishment of the tax credit system and an increase in the minimum wage, at least then the companies have to foot the bill, it won't see mass job losses, although it will see plenty of headlines about potential mass job losses.

 

 

I broadly agree with you. I think there should be a gradual movement from away tax credits through increases in a National Minimum Wage until a National Living Wage is reached whilst maintaining import income safeguards for families with children.  This should be run in tandem with a process of gradual reduction in private sector rents through strict rent controls. This would result in a reduction of Housing Benefit (nearly the same as the tax credit bill) and the effective subsidy we pay as a nation to rip off landlords.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about an unemployment rate of 5.4% Isn't that a bit extreme?   Anyway back on track, Jezza has missed a trick last night over the Charter for Budget Responsibility

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John McDonnell - just how embarrassing was he in the chamber yesterday?

 

Instead of claiming he wasn't going to walk into a cunningly laid Osborne trap, one that he doesn't seem to spotted until very recently, why not put forward a coherent, plausible set of alternative policies?

 

I really feel for genuine Labour supporters, their team is bottom of the table and facing relegation to Lib Dem territory unless they sack the manager and his entire backroom staff.

If I say something then realise I've made a daft decision then publicly say so, changing my mind, I'm treated as being reasonable.  If I realise I've made a daft decision and stick with it anyway then I look like an idiot.

 

If a politician says something then realises he's made a daft decision and publicly changes his mind he's treated as an idiot.  If he realises he's made a daft decision and sticks with it then he's treated as a conviction politician.

 

Just think of the idiot policy of Osborne's.  Firstly, it goes against a century old rule of not unduly tying the hands of future governments.  Secondly, it essentially stops any major investment.  Any time you need a nice new hospital, school or anything else then the rules will mean that there has to be an amazingly high surplus to be able to afford it.  Oh, hang on, those lovely PFI things can be used, making lots of money for private companies, wrecking local public budgets paying back the debt but suiting the private sector quite well.  (Oh, and to save you the effort, yes I know the Labour lot under Blair used them extensively)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 (Oh, and to save you the effort, yes I know the Labour lot under Blair used them extensively)

they did, and were condemned for doing so by Osborne,l that of course hasn't stopped this government from doing exactly the same

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


League Express - Online Now

League Express - Every Monday



Rugby League World - Online 28 Jun - July 2018

Rugby League World - July 2018 - Out Fri 29 Jun

Rugby League Books On Sale Here