So the boundary changes have been revealed with the reduction in MPs from 650 - 600
Jezza’s seat will disappear altogether. Any Labour centrists going to vote this through - bet the “no confidence” brigade do
Haven’t they put that on hold, purely for party reasons?
Steady up fella. Has to get through Parliament first, and it would have had difficulty passing before May squandered her majority.
Hoping it’ll mean BoJo ain’t my MP anymore
Why? In your position I’d spent every waking moment doing Robin Cooper Timewaster’s Letters to him, complaining about topical issues such as why postboxes wear the niqab.
My original post was probably a bit brief.
Both the Ruislip seats have been, traditionally, amongst the safest Tory seats in the country. BoJo’s majority did take something of a hit last year, but is still around 5k.
I’d never seen any political campaigning at all until I was 21 and living in Leeds, as it was such a fruitless endeavour, and the resources were better allocated elsewhere. I’m hoping the changes will help making it more viable for campaigning in the area to actually unseat him.
Having done a bit of reading yday, which I hadn’t before, it looks as though this may be the case. So yeah, my new neighbours may soon get sick of seeing some prat with an unruly mop of blonde hair trying to get rid of another prat with an unruly mop of blonde hair.
Very dangerous move? I predict the shouty brigade will takeover from more moderate members
A slight edit, i think
More power to constituents is a good thing.
Represent or be sacked, what could be better?
I’m all for the changes, and your arse notwithstanding, these are a more democratic set of reforms.
I’d certainly take issue with the description of those replacing incumbents as “the shouty brigade”. If anything, it has been the so-called moderate wing of the party that has spent the past three years shouting, smearing and making demands.
If these people have the support their words implicitly conjure, they should have no problem winning a selection contest.
Of course, the problem for all of them is that they’ve been a rag-tag cavalcade of chancers, using their well-paid positions to undermine the political movement their members want them to serve.
The only thing that’ll keep the actual shouty brigade in situ is a snap general election.
Change on 33% trigger?
Why not make it 10%, no? How about 5%
As I said democracy my arse.
Er no, that’d be a selection contest on 33%. Which the incumbent could still win.
Let’s not forget that conference just voted to make the 33% trigger ballot threshold a reality, which is democratic, and that any selection contest is also going to be a democratic contest where people vote.
However democratic your arse is, I don’t think it’s comparable.
This is a good one
So basically, I leave my job, take a fucking great loan out on my house and set up a business. And against all probabilities it turns into a really successful enterprise, then I will be expected to hand over 10% of that gratis
Can’t wait - the warm fuzzy feeling of giving free money away to those who didn’t risk it all must be amazing
Share purchase schemes are a standard practice with decent firms that want their staff to feel a sense of ownership.
What’s your issue with this one?
I can’t see the problem myself. Seems to be a half decent way of addressing the fact that employees are always exploited for their labour (again, not a revolutionary statement; it’s the way capitalism tends to work).
To be fair to McDonnell, if what he said on the Today programme this morning is taken at face value, it would only apply to FTSE listed companies and would be a gradual introduction leading to maximum cap. The principle isn’t a bad one either - there is nothing wrong with a workforce having a vested interest in how companies perform.
He was also quite sensible about enterprise and the need to promote it, unlike Corbyn, who is a vindictive bastard and wants to tax the arse off anyone who earns what he considers to be “too much” - he appears to not want to govern, more like penalise.
Given the shift over the past 40 or so years, and the enormous increase in the gulf between Top Level Execs and their employees - a vindictive redistribution sounds pretty good to me.
“Too much” is bringing the highest rate threshold down from £150K to 85K.
Sure, Corbyn is going to anger those that earn between that amount. They’ll have to pay 45% on any income over £85K, as opposed to the 40% they’re paying now.
So that’s the few people that earn over 85K, pissed off at paying 5% extra.
That’s not going to be a decisive constituency.