Jeremy Corbyn's conference speech

[Moshe Gariani]

Yes that's right, just like that same vast majority of the voting public would love to stand up and sing 'The Red Flag ''.
Like f--k!

You underestimate the British people.

It suits today the weak and base,
Whose minds are fixed on pelf and place
To cringe before the rich man's frown,
And haul the sacred emblem down.

 

[MattBackHome]

I thought it was good. Whatever you think of his politics it's refreshing to see someone totally eschewing all the bollocks and standing up for what he believes in.

 

[pb21]

Yes, I've explained fully that I agree with you, but I see you do continue to struggle with straight forward English.

Oh sorry, you saying:

People on a "modest" £55k a year shouldn't be taxed anywhere near 50% of their total salary, as is the case now.

led me to think you thought the case, as is now, was that people earning 55K were being taxed near to 50% of their total salary.

Apologies for the confusion, its incredibly stupid of me to, to misread your post its so obvious really, I cant believe myself sometimes.

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

Not so sure it has unified the rank and file, actually. I was at the conference this afternoon talking at a fringe event, and while the speech was on, although the hall itself was full of cheering supporters, the bars and spillover rooms were full of sour-looking Blairites watching it on screen and making bitter sarcastic comments.
I thought it was a pretty good speech though personally.

I don't think Blairites are 'rank and file'. That speech is not going to appeal to those who voted elsewhere who need to vote Labour in 2020

 

[Simster]

Oh sorry, you saying:



led me to think you thought the case, as is now, was that people earning 55K were being taxed near to 50% of their total salary.

Apologies for the confusion, its incredibly stupid of me to, to misread your post its so obvious really, I cant believe myself sometimes.

Rather than clarify my pov, you responded with a glib one liner and a link to the HMRC tax page. I take your point - that is quite stupid.

Mind you, I do admit I wasn't very clear, so apologies for that.

 

[drew]

Just remind me who was in Government back in 2008 and might have had something to say about how the Banking System was being regulated?

You underestimate the British people.

It suits today the weak and base,
Whose minds are fixed on pelf and place
To cringe before the rich man's frown,
And haul the sacred emblem down.

I think you overestimate the British public. To change anything you need to be in government and to get into government you need to win over the middle ground. In this country, a lot of the middle ground are home owners with mortgages, and they will vote for what they see protects them. They did it this year and will do it again if the alternative to the existing government is too risky.

 

[BLOCK F]

You underestimate the British people.

It suits today the weak and base,
Whose minds are fixed on pelf and place
To cringe before the rich man's frown,
And haul the sacred emblem down.

I don't underestimate the British people; afterall, they had the good sense to reject a pretty left wing agenda and inadequate candidate for PM, in Ed Miliband and if they are presented with even more of the same, but in super size, they will do so again.

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

I like Corbyn but it was a technically poor speech even if you agree with the sentiments.

 

[La` Cucaracha¤]

I like Corbyn but it was a technically poor speech even if you agree with the sentiments.

Revealed: ‘unspun’ Jeremy Corbyn used a four-year old reject speech for Miliband.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/09/much-of-jeremy-corbyns-speech-today-was-written-for-ed-miliband-in-2011/

 

[Uh_huh_him]

I don't think Blairites are 'rank and file'. That speech is not going to appeal to those who voted elsewhere who need to vote Labour in 2020

Firstly Labour need to recover the scottish vote to stand any chance of forming a government.
Labour have lost a great deal of this core vote because they tried to demonstrate they were electable to the floating voters.
They thought they needed to be seen as not too dissimilar to the Tories.
It didn't work. It wasn't the right strategy. And it damaged the parliamentary party dramatically.
Therefore it is no surprise taht the party has to focus on an anti-Austerity platform.

A lot of the UKIP/Lib Dem/SNP voters wanted something different from the politicians served up for the last 20 years.
Not all of them will chose Labour in 2020, but Labour need to have policies that are clearly different from what the government are offering.
They then need to win the debates on these policies.

If the tories are still banging on about Austerity in 2020, then I suspect the electorate might start to question government policy a bit more than they are at present.

Corbyn's strategy seems to be to open up a genuine debate on policy and not run scared of being portrayed as unelectable.
It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Corbyn does seem to offer a different way as a thick simpleton I just hope he can deliver when if in power it gets much harder then anyway I am veering towards Tim Fallon and the LDS I couldn't vote for Osborne hideous man Boris though ?

 

[The Birdman]

100,000 new Council Houses and Housing Association homes every year until the housing crisis is solved.

Quite simple and quite a good idea.

not enough bricks ! The price of bricks has quadrupled.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Here you go [MENTION=3887]Uncle Spielberg[/MENTION]:

All fairly low level since the late 80s I would say. But that most recent spike is on the watch of the coalition.

More information here:
http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/recent_spending

When I first saw it, it made me think that New Labour or Tory really wasn't much of a choice. I don't think national spending is anything like high enough.

Fair play Simster I think the truth is somewhere in the middle no one will convince me Labour last time were good for the economy

 

[Surf's Up]

I think you overestimate the British public. To change anything you need to be in government and to get into government you need to win over the middle ground. In this country, a lot of the middle ground are home owners with mortgages, and they will vote for what they see protects them. They did it this year and will do it again if the alternative to the existing government is too risky.

I think this is key. Corbyn has to somehow convince Middle Englanders to vote against their economic interests in favour of the greater good. If he can do this it will be no mean feat. I thought his conference speech was refreshingly low key, pleasingly lacking in spin, high on sincerity and integrity but lacking in any meaningful specifics. It was delivered, haltingly at times, to the deleriously converted (well apart from the majority of the PLP that is!!) and his rapturous reception provides no reliable yardstick with regard to how he will be received by the wider public. I can see how his evangelical idealism might begin to win friends and influence people but he will be reliant to some extent on the Tories moving more and more to the right over the next couple of years, a course they would be well advised to avoid taking. Buy hey! arrogant and greedy Tories in power confronted by what they see as a bumbling socialista throwback and a Labour party divided and in turmoil!! They wouldn't be so stupid ....would they

 

[lawros left foot]

I was looking at that and thought I've seen that outfit before then I remembered.

If you want to vote in a Prime Minister on just their physical attraction and dress sense, then Kelly Brook and David Beckham are a shoo in, me, I'll wait and see what their a other attributes are before I give them my vote

 

[studio150]

I don't think you read what I wrote. I simply meant that I object to anything above 50% of total income being subject to income tax (and NI). People on a "modest" £55k a year shouldn't be taxed anywhere near 50% of their total salary, as is the case now.

What you wrote and what you meant are two entirely different things. Writing that the government should be able to let people keep half of their earned income gives a clear impression of a minimum of 50% taxation.

Not to worry next time I will place my mind reading hat on so I can understand.

 

[Simster]

What you wrote and what you meant are two entirely different things. Writing that the government should be able to let people keep half of their earned income gives a clear impression of a minimum of 50% taxation.

Not to worry next time I will place my mind reading hat on so I can understand.

I don't think you're right. I wrote "It ought to be possible for the government of the day to allow people to keep a minimum of half their earned income...". The only inference from that is that there are people who are taxed more than 50% of their total earnings and really shouldn't be.

 

[GingerBeerMan]

If you want to vote in a Prime Minister on just their physical attraction and dress sense, then Kelly Brook and David Beckham are a shoo in, me, I'll wait and see what their a other attributes are before I give them my vote

Just like when Paxman called Milliband a North London geek. What is that supposed to achieve? Who cares if he was a geek, all that matters is if he would be able to run the country successfully. Image is far too much a part of politics when you consider what we actually need them to be good at.

 

[LamieRobertson]

I think this is key. Corbyn has to somehow convince Middle Englanders to vote against their economic interests in favour of the greater good. If he can do this it will be no mean feat. I thought his conference speech was refreshingly low key, pleasingly lacking in spin, high on sincerity and integrity but lacking in any meaningful specifics. It was delivered, haltingly at times, to the deleriously converted (well apart from the majority of the PLP that is!!) and his rapturous reception provides no reliable yardstick with regard to how he will be received by the wider public. I can see how his evangelical idealism might begin to win friends and influence people but he will be reliant to some extent on the Tories moving more and more to the right over the next couple of years, a course they would be well advised to avoid taking. Buy hey! arrogant and greedy Tories in power confronted by what they see as a bumbling socialista throwback and a Labour party divided and in turmoil!! They wouldn't be so stupid ....would they

Interesting comments ..I would add though that his return to power also relies on there ability to deal with the Scottish Nationalists ..still another 4 and half years or so to find out.

I did find one political commentators view amusing when he referred to the speech and subsequent reaction as the equivalent of a 'group hug' and he wasn't being disparaging ..i imagine the wider public have yet to be convinced ..but there's plenty of time ..and of course for the conservatives to cock it up.
I'll add I am not a supporter of any political party currently

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

Firstly Labour need to recover the scottish vote to stand any chance of forming a government.
Labour have lost a great deal of this core vote because they tried to demonstrate they were electable to the floating voters.
They thought they needed to be seen as not too dissimilar to the Tories.
It didn't work. It wasn't the right strategy. And it damaged the parliamentary party dramatically.
Therefore it is no surprise taht the party has to focus on an anti-Austerity platform.

A lot of the UKIP/Lib Dem/SNP voters wanted something different from the politicians served up for the last 20 years.
Not all of them will chose Labour in 2020, but Labour need to have policies that are clearly different from what the government are offering.
They then need to win the debates on these policies.

If the tories are still banging on about Austerity in 2020, then I suspect the electorate might start to question government policy a bit more than they are at present.

Corbyn's strategy seems to be to open up a genuine debate on policy and not run scared of being portrayed as unelectable.
It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

I tend to agree with this. At the election Labour tried and tried to make them appear a credible party on the economy. It meant that they didn't put out policy that would break some of the rules. The tories exploited this. They seemed to give away more and were still seen as the party with better grip on the economy.

Corbyn either has to go "fu*k it" lets spend loads and accept the higher debt or spend loads and try get it back in tax. Corbyn and McDonnell have suggested that they'll be going after the second route, but appear to be suggesting that the burden will fall on big business rather than the individual.

It would be interesting to see what new measures they propose.