Blah Blah

That crane is to the left of Nunhead green, next to the new community centre. Saw the bits arriving for it as I left my house nearby this morning.

I agree Rendell. I increasingly cycle everywhere and make regular use of the cycle lanes both at Elephant and Vauxhall. Never see other cyclists anywhere but in them too. I also agree with your earlier comments about shared use of bus lanes with motorcyclists. Have never had any problem with that. Cars turning left accross me and buses rushing to overtake and pull into the bus stop ahead of me still continue to be the only menace I encounter.

Are there no official sites in Southwark any more for travellers?

It's an interesting concept regarding pedestrians and crossings. When I have my two kids with me, I always use a pedestrian crossing on busy and main roads - always. But when it is just me, I will cross anywhere if I think it's reasonably safe to do so. Why do we follow a guaranteed level of safety for our children, but not for ourselves? Also, if pedestrians ALWAYS used designated crossings, how might that affect the complacency of a driver?

I wouldn't read too much into delegate interactions to be fair. I also don't expect Andrew Neil to be anything but lukewarm. He will be the same with the Tory conference speeches. Both parties are in the sh*t right now, albeit for different reasons. The Tories are going to fight over grammar schools as much as they are brexit.

I blame the shoes.

I agree ???? and there was a lot to like in what he said. I just wonder though if it was lacking in a bold headline making knd of way. Teresa May has a way of making you feel like she's a safe pair of hands even if the stuff coming out of her mouth is rubbish. Corbyn hasn't got that.

Completely agree Otta. And she stood alongside many people who are now activists for Corbyn as well.

Kendall is too centrist for me (and for those Labour heartlands), but is a hard working MP all the same who has been unfairly attacked, just like any MP who dares to talk about the reality of winning a GE. My problem with the new left within the party is not so much their idealism, or even their optimism over fact, but their tendancy to see things in a bubble. The centrist MPs they attack, are a reflection of the centist constituencies they represent. There seems to be no acknowledgement of the part the character of a candidate plays in getting elected, especially within marginals. They are calling for deselection of people whose CLPs would never deselect them. I have this argument with them all the time.

There is no evidence that non voters can be pursuaded to start voting again, and I think it's risky to assume they would vote labour if they did anyway. When talking about young people, we are referring to 18-24 yr olds, not everyone under 35, but I take your point about the EU referendum. 64% of 18-24 yr olds voted, but 90% of the over 65's voted. A referendum where every vote counts is different than a GE though. Many non voters may not vote because their vote would make no difference in the constituency they live in. And swinging marginals, still remains the most effective way of winning an election. Scotland is not as simple to explain either. The SNP benifitted from a referendum bounce. The same will happen for UKIP, if May calls an early election. Corbyn's problem is in thinking a pacifist left movement will appeal to an electorate that has/ is swinging towards nationalism. I think even those on the left don't want to see Militant return (although Hatton is trying to rejoin the party). I think you make a good point about wanting change but being conservative with it. That is why radical political agendas never transform into electoral success in the UK. The electorate are broadly Conservative with a small C, and that's why the centre ground swing vote decides elections. Any idea that the failings of 30 years can be fixed overnight is hoping for too much and this I think is the faith many hard Corbynistas put in Jeremy. Sadly, they are going to be disappointed. Labour's best hope of forming government is probably in coalition with the SNP, and then everything will become about consensus. For all the things Jeremy might say, consensus is not one of his strong points.

Yes I went Loz, and yes it was incredibly dull. Momentum were putting on a far more interesting programme of events, so much so, that I popped over to check some out. Horrified to say that I quite enjoyed myself there :D

It's not just the Tories who are against PR Sue, but some areas of Labour too. Caroline Lucas tried to get a bill adopted for PR in July. It was defeated by 81-74. SEVEN Labour MPs voted against, including Dennis Skinner! So it never got further than a first reading. That was an improvement on the attempt to raise a bill in 2015, but even if the bill gets through a first motion, it would be unlikely to make it into law and as you say, especially while there is a Tory majority. It's almost a catch 22 situation. Only PR can break the urban rural split, but it will take the Tories to lose an election to make it happen, which contradicts why it is needed in the first place. There is no doubt that Corbyn has enthused a whole raft of people into the party. But that is still a far cry from winning an election. 80% of the population never join a party, or attend a rally, or go on a demonstration. Their only reference point often, is the media and party campaign materials. That's also why door to door canvassing is important too.

There is a pewter society who might be able to help. Pewter definitely points to age - circa 1600 to 1800 perhaps. It could have seen the Great Fire! Fascinating if nothing else.

Yes and it is a big enough slice of the membership to think that a better candidate might get there. I really would like to see Clive Lewis stand. He won't go up against Jeremy, but if Labour lose the next GE (likely right now), then I would like to see him stand. I think short term, Labour are screwed, but Jeremy will never get to lead for long enough to change the party forever.

But that electorate still aren't voting and even in Labour's own elections for the youth NEC candidate, turnout was something like just 18%. The other thing to note is the location of that untapped youth electorate. Most of it is found in dense urban areas, not in marginal rural areas they can not afford to live in, and where there is no work for them. Many of them will be students in cities that are already Labour strongholds. This is why we have seen voting share go up in Labour strongholds, but NO movement in marginals. It's all very depressing and a move to PR may be the only chance Labour will ever have of getting to power under a left manifesto.

Indeed Otta. And that 40% can not be ignored. There is one key difference though. Corbyn this time won in all three areas, membership, affiliates registered supporters. Last time, he failed to get to 51% amongst the membership. Completely agree re: joining the Labour party though. Momentum only has 18,000 members, but they are ALL activists. It should be easy for Labour First to match that. It won;t be enough to just join the party though. Members need to go to their branch meetings and get involved with their CLPs. This is what Momentum is now seeking to exploit.

There is some truth on that Dave and to touch on what Bob said about changes to Clive Lewis's speech. This is exactly why the shadow cabinet resigned. Corbyn thinks it perfectly ok to change what is agreed at the last minute without discussion with the cabinet minister involved. He did a similar thing to the former transport minister at a press conference ffs. So much for the words about changing how he runs his office. Seamus Milne is a problem - there is no question of that. Clive Lewis is who I would like to see lead the party. I think he is everything the public would like. I told him that at conference over the weekend as well. It's also worth pointing out that even the conference hall wasn't well attended at the weekend either and the market area, usually full of stalls from party sponsors, is half empty as well - a clear sign that party donations have slipped away too.

Then why focus on Trident Bob (we are never going to actually use it anyway)? How about some of the things John McDonell has said on economics instead? Because I don't hear anything meaningful from the Tories about increasingly pay, improving working conditions, resolving housing issues and addressing inequality - nothing at all. I do however hear plenty coming from this Labour leadership.

That would be the sensible option Rupert. But sense is often missing when an oppportunity to fine motorists offers itself instead.

I think some of the response here rahrah illustrates perfectly why the media get away with the lies they do. It doesn't matter how many times you point out the truth, people only want to see what they want to see.

Energy deregulation has not worked well though Jeremy. The big six have essentially price fixed and we are now buying gas we original sold to France at a higher price than we sold it for. And in spite of their profits, we still have to heavily subsidise the building of new power stations.

Starbucks isn't going to close its stores though, Amazon it's warehouses etc.

Indeed rahrah. It's choice between putting all the wealth in the hands of the employer, or in the hands of the employee. When employees are paid better, they spend on local services, products, housing etc - the money stays within the economy and in turn drives growth. When the corporation takes all the profit, it gets squirrelled offshore, not only avoiding paying tax, but taking money out of the economy. This is what McDonnell seeks to address. Yes there's a fine line between incentive and disincentive, when it comes to corporate and busness tax etc, but at the same time, companies like Amazon, Google, Starbucks etc are not going to pull out of any country just because they will make less profit. The corporate mentality is to dominate every market. This is why Starbucks was quite to agree a tax payment deal once called out on it.

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The 'our government will...' bit is crap. JC and > JMcD are proper old school Marxist socialists - > they don't believe in entrepreneurs, or really in > the private sector at all. If you think that has > changed you're deluded. But that is also saying that a person can not shift their perspective over a lifetime. Do you still think the way you did, and believe in everything you believed in 20 years ago Dave? (I am assuming on your age but you know what mean). I know I don't. Peter Hitchens was a marxist and trotskyist in his student years. Look at him now!!! I've met John McDonnell a few times. In person, he is very charming and very bright. But I also know there is a raging bull in there too. Pure socialism relies on the state to own and provide everything. Do you really believe that is what John and Jeremy want to turn the eocnomy into? Because I think that is an equally deluded idea too. Our economy is a partnership between state and private business, just as it always has been and always will be. All Jeremy and John are seeking to do, is redress the balance between the two - because that is the ONLY way to generate wealth for the economy outside of income tax. It is also the only way to close equality and pay gaps and all the other things that keep most people struggling to make ends meet. So the pronciple at least is right. We may disagree though on how to achieve it. The one thing I do know for sure though, is that the Tories care nothing for any of that.