A Labour Government.

I saw a section of the audience laugh not the audience ,

At least Corbyn didn't have to do last night what he did on Woman's Hour this morning. On being asked the costs of the child care proposals in the manifesto - the one which has all been costed - he had to search on his iPad for the answer . Even Abbott hasn't done that .

Corbyn tended to be evasive st times last night but was more relaxed. May does have dignity though , I think she is rather a shy woman , more comfortable behind a desk that with crowds. Corbyn has had years of practice addressing crowds, all those protests

Yes, I did watch the debates, and although the Conservative and undecided voters gave courteous hearings to both candidates, a few of the Labour side were anything but courteous.This does not mean that Labour will win the GE.If they don't do, it will mean that not enough voters, Labour or otherwise trust him.He would surely not hang on for another five years hoping that would ever change?
This is not a point scoring question durhamjen I genuinely wonder what Labour voters think should happen if Labour loses.

speye.wordpress.com/2017/05/30/theresa-may-her-police-record-means-a-bad-brexit-deal-is-inevitable/

Fewer police, May said.
More police, Corbyn said.

Which do you want?

I guess you didn't watch the 'debate' last night, did you?
Did you see the audience laughing at May?

If they don't win this GE then the only thing that will be helping them to lose is Corbyn himself.
Therefore the only way they could win in another five years time would be to have another Leader, surely?

Really? Given the Labour manifesto which is a massive give away and sure to be popular, why wouldn't Labour win? And if it doesn't, will Corbyn resign? After all, what more could Labour possibly offer in the future that they are not offering now?

roses considering that the conservatives were 24 points ahead when the election was called, it would be a minor miracle if labour won; not winning from that far behind is not failure, on the contrary, if they can sizeably reduce the gap they have done a really good job and that augurs very well for the next GE.

GracesGran, is that just fraud, because the official figures conflate fraud with departmental error.

A question: if Labour lose this GE, when Corbyn has put forward such a people pleasing manifesto, and the Conservatives have hardly led a sparkling campaign plus have not put forward a people pleasing manifesto ( anything but!) then what does this say about the Labour Party in it's present form?
What happens then?

So Ll9 disabled people should not have computers because they are receiving disability allowances, presumably including allowances for our injured veterans and those seriously injured by accidents or a disability at birth, Thousands of disabled people fought for their Country, yet are also presumably benefit scrounges in the minds of individuals like Luckylegs9, or how does she do distinguish between the wide ranges of disabilities? I often wonder why such individual like LL9'so often believe the distorted stories in so many tabloids.

Decent Conservatives must be cringing when they read comments "I am voting Tory because of benefit scrounges ( 0.3% )." I wonder if every high earner is squeaky clean and no strain on our economy, even when useing tax avoidance schemes and as we know often blatent tax evasion. Costing £ Billions.

I am sure someone who uses phrases like "weeding out" has done her research and knew the real figures before she talked about people like that - you have to be pretty angry about the huge savings that could be made to say such a thing, after all.

Just for people like me who didn't know the actual percentages without looking them up (but had some idea), rather than 41% going to the unemployed it's actually 3%. Similarly, that figure of 27% people thought was claimed fraudulently it is actually 0.7%.

My thoughts, I don't know if you would agree, is that while each fraud must be tracked down and prosecuted this figure hardly warrants language like "weeding out" nor, to be honest, with people starving and children soon to go uneducated and our old people uncared for would I have this concern at the top of my list - but that's just me (with the facts to help form my opinion).

The government's going to need a very big compost heap, if it's going to weed out all these people!

Oh yes! It certainly would worry me. Thankfully, I know different.

What about weeding out people with learning disabilities to 'ensure' they can't vote?

theconversation.com/voters-with-learning-disabilities-are-being-excluded-from-this-election-77689

More than one million in the UK.

I was just reading an article which said that people think that 41 per cent of the welfare budget goes on benefits to the unemployed. I wondered if that was what LL thought - you can understand her concerns if she does. 'People' apparently also feel that 27 per cent of the welfare budget is claimed fraudulently. Now that would worry you if you thought that wouldn't it.

I'm sure she'll help me out on it DD. I just wonder how it compares to the rest on the Social Services spending.

Please Miss GracesGran! (hand up) I know the answer, but I'll leave luckylegs to find out the answer for herself.

I agree dj. Totally offensive.

We need a government that can weed out the people who don't work as opposed to those that won't

I can see you are very concerned by this LuckyLegs. I think we should all concentrate on it if it is a really big problem. Could I ask what percentage of our Social Security benefits are spent on Job Seekers Allowance, which is going to be the benefit these people will be getting.

www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news/2017/may/dwp-deny-work-capability-assessments-disabled-students

As offensive as this.

By the way luckylegs, what did you mean by "We need a government that can weed out the people who don't work as opposed to those that won't"?

What exactly do you intend to do with the "weeded out" people?

For personal reasons, I find this comment deeply offensive.

Luckylegs

Please could you explain "look at how much time claimants spend on their computers, they couldn't do that if they were not capable"?

The unemployed are expected to spend 35 hours a week looking for work, much of which will be spent on online job searches via the government's website or other sites with with vacancies. A log has to be sent to the JobCentre every two weeks and proof has to be kept of letters and CVs sent, etc.

The unemployed are expected to spend their time on computers. I don't understand what you think they're incapable of doing.

If you're suggesting that the disabled can't use computers, I think you should think again. It only takes one hand to use a computer (even less if you have voice recognition technology). It doesn't matter that you might have no legs, are deaf, terminally ill, in constant pain or have any other condition.

PS. The state pension is a benefit, paid out of National Insurance Contributions, just as contributory JSA and ESA are.

Are you suggesting that pensions shouldn't be paid to those pensioners who don't need it?

True, calling a cat a dog doesn't make it a dog. Calling Corbyn a man of principle doesn't make him a man of principle.

Do we no longer condemn what thatcher did to the miners and move on?

And is Blair still not condemned ?

Blair was in charge of two Iraq wars, Desert Fox in 1998.
I didn't vote for him after that. He ordered British troops into war more times than any other PM.

POGS
"What I don't understand is the persistent barbed comments to
Anniebach because she is saying she does not support the Labour Leader , as you and others happily lay claim to have done in the past."

Perhaps it is because when we (at least me) didn't support the Labour leader and very much opposed the war in Iraq (and it was Blair who lied to cabinet and misled the Labour Party Smileless2012) we simply stated our beliefs and voted for another party. We stated clearly our reasons for doing this and then left it alone. We didn't keep undermining the Labour Party or protesting that we were really Labour supporters whilst making insulting comments about Blair and labelling anyone who supported him warmongers. Annie can't seem to move on and accept what has happened but keeps posting the same comments and accusing many of us of being 'trots' or 'Corbynites"
Constantly calling a cat a dog, doesn't make it one it, remains a cat