Jeremy Corbyn's conference speech

[Bozza]

Dig away.

Heller offered this speech to EVERY Labour leader from Kinnock onwards, and is delighted that Corbyn used extracts from it. He offered it to Corbyn, and its use was NOT unauthorised.

Don't believe me? Well, read what Heller says himself.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/29/jeremy-corbyn-labour-leader-conference-speech

Where did I say it was unauthorised?

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Where did I say it was unauthorised?

Well, if it was authorised, where is there a problem with it?

 

[Hastings gull]

Corbyn is making a hell of a lot of column inches. Also a fair few pages on NSC.
Regardless of how negative the press is and how old hat the speeches and policies are considered to be, it is his policies which are being discussed and not the Tories.


Your lot will need to change tactics soon. Just call me Dave isn't going to be there in 2020. Whoever takes over will be playing catch up in the public awareness stakes.

Isn't this always the case during Conference week? Corbyn may or may not be ahead in the public awareness stakes by 2020, as you write, but this does not mean at all that he will be ahead in the public popularity stakes. As the ITV chap said on the news tonight -new people but old ideas. Nationalising the railways will appeal to those for whom dogma is all-important, but does anyone really think that this will provide a better service. Was the old British Rail a shining example of a well-run, efficient service?

 

[Simster]

Where did I say it was unauthorised?

So it was authorised, offered and used.

Sorry, where's the funny or newsworthy bit?

 

[Bozza]

Well, if it was authorised, where is there a problem with it?

I didn't say there was a problem with it.

i said it was brilliant. It is.

"Breath of fresh air politics" etc etc

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Isn't this always the case during Conference week? Corbyn may or may not be ahead in the public awareness stakes by 2020, as you write, but this does not mean at all that he will be ahead in the public popularity stakes. As the ITV chap said on the news tonight -new people but old ideas. Nationalising the railways will appeal to those for whom dogma is all-important, but does anyone really think that this will provide a better service. Was the old British Rail a shining example of a well-run, efficient service?

Corbyn has been the main political story for some time now. his agenda is to get alternative policies in the public domain. I would say he is achieving that aim.
I hear what everyone is saying about the old ideas. However I'm not sure what the Tories have got that is so appealing, new or effective, either. They sold off RBS and the post office cheaply, that's about it isn't it?

They have won two elections by blaming the Brown government for a global crisis, and overstating the success of their economic policies. Sooner or later they will be measured against the success of their administration and not the failings of the opposition.
They need to come up with something a bit more compelling than they have to date. IMHO

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I didn't say there was a problem with it.

i said it was brilliant. It is.

"Breath of fresh air politics" etc etc

Yes, brilliant.

You didn't say that there was a problem, but your implication was clear.

By the way, the reason that digging back to find out what I contributed to the pre-election threads would be a waste of time is that I barely contributed. Labour, as they were, did not inspire me at all, and I considered them the lesser of two evils.

But Corbyn? Yes, a breath of fresh air.

 

[Tarpon]

I didn't say there was a problem with it.

i said it was brilliant. It is.

"Breath of fresh air politics" etc etc

the world of spin is alive and well on NSC...

 

[drew]

So is this what politicians do, normally. Do they make their speeches, and then list all those who contributed towards them? A bit like the Acknowledgements page in books.

I can't remember seeing that happen before.

I think if you use a large portion of a previous text then yes, you should acknowledge the source. Is it any different from PMQs and coming out with Emily from Ealing sent me this question and Barry from Basildon sent me another! You know full well it is not like listing acknowledgements at the end of a book.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Yep your right at £1250 a head

And you're wrong.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

To do that - and then not credit or reference the source - kind of blows a hole in the "Straight talking. Honest politics." stance.

Wow. There's desperation, and then there's really clutching at straws

 

[Bry Nylon]

Wow. There's desperation, and then there's really clutching at straws

Really? I think it is a farce that the Leader's keynote speech was simply him reading out loud from text written by a blogger 5 years ago. What we heard today wasn't the fresh view of Jeremy Corbyn but instead the views of somebody he agrees with. I expected a bit more effort than that.

Any politician doing that in a keynote speech should expect to be criticised. He should have taken themes and developed them. He's been poorly advised there.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

What we heard today wasn't the view of Jeremy Corbyn but instead the views of somebody he agrees with.

Ergo they were the views of Jeremy Corbyn

 

[Buzzer]

Well, if it was authorised, where is there a problem with it?

I think the point is that many Corbynistas are waxing lyrical about it being a different kind of speech, a refreshing change etc etc etc and it turns out it's the same old, same old that has been offered to 5 (yes - FIVE) previous Labour leaders and they rejected it. It's all a bit Emperor's New Clothes to claim that Corbyn's speech offers something new when it turns out the words are years old and not specific to him at all, just standard template stuff.

As for spin...you might want to take a look at the twitter account of Sam Coates, the Times deputy political editor. When the story first broke that this inspirational speech that has broken the mould of British political debate was a re-hash, Team Corbyn denied it. In Coates words...

[tweet]648900314729463808[/tweet]

(so much for wanting politics to be nicer)

and then this retraction...

[tweet]648902557755174912[/tweet]

Personally, I think Corbyn did better than I expected but he wan't brilliant by a long chalk and he didn't mention the deficit, which was a mistake.

 

[Kevlar]

Always remember the government cannot decide if 'the country is living within its means'
That is decided by billions of monetary transactions the world over.
It is not the government sector balance it is the external sector balance.
Currently about 5% of GDP.The government needs to decide it is going to help out the private sector.
Will it spend more into the accounts of households and firms than it removes in taxation.
The strategy of the government balancing the books will drive the private sector into deficit.
The private sector does not make all its payments via the BOE it is not the currency issuer.
A firm or a household cannot run deficits 9 years in 10 for 400 years without going bankrupt.
Jeremy's speech was good but his commitment to balance even the current account will ultimately
be unable to guarenteeing prosperity.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Really? I think it is a farce that the Leader's keynote speech was simply him reading out loud from text written by a blogger 5 years ago. What we heard today wasn't the fresh view of Jeremy Corbyn but instead the views of somebody he agrees with. I expected a bit more effort than that.

Any politician doing that in a keynote speech should expect to be criticised. He should have taken themes and developed them. He's been poorly advised there.

On a theme I've suggested before; if this is the biggest issue with his speech he's done well.

 

[pastafarian]

To do that - and then not credit or reference the source - kind of blows a hole in the "Straight talking. Honest politics." stance.

I was surprised also to hear him implying Trident would take up 25/% of the defence budget annually over its lifetime, the reality is in some years it may cost that but in many more other years the % of total defence spending is no where near as high as that.

Nice to see spin and half truths back on the political agenda so soon from the straight talking honest messiah.

 

[Buzzer]

On a theme I've suggested before; if this is the biggest issue with his speech he's done well.

You'd have a point there IF it was the biggest issue but it wasn't. Well, not according to left-leaning professional pundits.

[tweet]648859040223756288[/tweet]

[tweet]648865667844808704[/tweet]

[tweet]648864153684328448[/tweet]

[tweet]648856372310896640[/tweet]

[tweet]648851343038369792[/tweet]

I dare someone, I double-dare them to accuse any of these pundits of being Tory stooges. And I forget which senior Labour person said it but they said that the speech was aimed for internal audience rather than the world at large. So that will be why you liked it so much but much of the rest of the country are less enamoured with it.

 

[Moshe Gariani]

New Labour stooges. If you keep repeating the "fact" that only an irrelevant minority will ever like Corbyn and his ideas does that make it true...?

 

[Bold Seagull]

Blimey someone had a slow day scanning the Twitter feeds...