So no hope from Jeremy either?

Corbyn gave a dire performance as per usual.
All amendments defeated so far.

Grandad

Neither side can claim the higher ground so using the words disgusting and laughing stock are in the eye of the beholder,

Theresa May was generous with the amount of back bench interventions she took , from all parties and from both factions of the Brexit debate. Corbyn as usual took interventions mostly only from his own side and those who he knows back him.

I have just found out why Corbyn probably continually refused to take an intervention from Labour back bencher Angela Smith which was as plain as a pikestaff.

She is an advocate for a ' Peoples Vote '

Corbyn certainly showed his thought on that matter if actions speak more than words.

Annie - I'm feeling defeated! never mind Coopers amendment. I feel like lying down in a darkened room till its all over.

Coopers amendment Defeated

I don't agree with eazybee's suggestion that all MPs should have been educated to age 18 and passed some GCSE's and A levels. That would exclude some determined, successful business people who weren't academic, failed at school but went on to build successful business models.
I don't see Angela Raynor as either "ignorant" nor "uneducated". She became pregnant when still at school, came from a family were academic success wan't prioritised. She represents a constituency with many families like her own. When I've heard her interviewed I haven't found her to be 'ignorant' on the subject under discussion. I'd like to see more young women and men entering parliament from diverse backgrounds.

Corbyn’s amendment defeated

Blackford’s amendment defeated

Voting now on Yvette Cooper’s ammendment

“POGS” I watched it , Corbyn always reads his notes even in PMQ . He ignored Angela Smith and only gave way to one Tory and that was the PM.

Yes POGS and the behaviour on the Tory benches was disgusting so I am told. The world is watching what is going on here in Britain as this debacle unfolds, and very many Tory MPs made us a laughing stock I believe.

Today in Parliament Corbyn was dire and could not shift from his written notes.

Why did he ' continually ' ignore his own back bencher Labour MP Angela Smith I wonder. It was blatent if you didn't manage to view Parliament live earlier.

He must be counting his blessings every day that he is not the current Prime Minister, as should the rest of us.

I am full of admiration for Angela Rayner and think we need more like her, with a bit more life experience, in parliament.

No different POGS to the many allegations you try to hide in your posts, except I am quite open and do not pretend to be some sort of reasonable poster who is beset by antagonism. For instance who would you regard as a "class warrior"and why do the proposals have anything to do with class? The prospective MP might even work as a banker!
It's all about preconceptions you see. Not what I actually post.

trisher

" Ah I see no ideas just criticisms. "
--
I ' politely ' answered your question and I am concentrating on the information provided by Grandad.

By questioning the proposal if that is criticism then yes I admit to that because it is a totally flawed concept and I have posted why I believe that to be so.

I do not have to provide ' ideas ' as it is a Labour policy proposal and that will be the ' ideas ' of the Labour Executive et al.

You are trying to bait me into an argument as usual by being personal, something you often say you are incapable of doing, do not do yet here you go ' again ' by opening your post with a confrontational attitude .

Angela Rayner was actually a care worker who left school because she was pregnant but later studied at Stockport FE college courses in British Sign Language and care work. So perhaps not as ignorant or uneducated as eazybee claims. Isn't it funny how women seem prepared to attack other women for their failings.

Ah I see no ideas just criticisms. And actually it is a problem for anyone who votes. There is evidence that many see Westminster as out of touch regardless of which party you support. Looking for a way to widen the candidates standing as MPs might help with this. We could play a very silly game identifying the backgrounds of different MPs which is what you seem to want to do. Instead I choose to look at the wider problem, the proportion of "career" MPs has increased from 3% to over 20% and it looks as if the rise will continue. Do you not consider this a problem?

Well said POGS it seems class war is back

trisher

"What would you suggest as a good way to ensure MPs are not just from the Westminster elite"
-

I would suggest nothing as I don't particularly have a passion to categorise who or what background our MP's come from. I am not a class warrior nor of the opinion they are all useless tools as some seem to think.

Example . I do not hold that just because Labour MP Alan Johnson was a postman he is a better candidate than Labour MP Hilary Benn .

Example. I do not hold sway Conservative MP Jacob Rees Mogg is a better candidate than Conservative MP Patrick McLoughlin because he was a coal miner.

It is not a question for me to answer as it isn't a problem for me. It is a ' possible ' policy for Labour/Momentum and that is where my questioning is being aimed.

I didn’t know that eazybee, looked her up, see she was yet another union official.

I would suggest it becomes mandatory that all aspiring politicians have completed full time education, that is to age eighteen, and have taken and passed some GCSES and A levels. That would bar MPs such as the ignorant and uneducated Angela Rayner being appointed as Shadow Minister for Education. Nothing to stop her studying part time to fill in the gaps in her education; she could have done it years ago.

POGS there are of course excellent MPs who wouldn't be able to take up their posts. However good as they may be would they be worse, or in fact even better, if they had more experience of the world? Undoubtedly though there are also career politicians (not good ones) who would benefit from time living in the real world. And yes if Seb Corbyn hadn't the right experience he shouldn't be selected.
What would you suggest as a good way to ensure MPs are not just from the Westminster elite

Grandad

Thank you for responding to my question but the Brexit case you put forward does not chime with me and is too simplistic a view to blame it all on 'career politicians ' , I think that is what you were implying.?

I have to say it does not answer my point .

Yes you answered the question re the example I gave of Jeremy Corbyns son Seb Corbyn who you seem to be saying would not be an appropriate candidate for the Labour Party.

You do not answer the point I make regarding :-

What about those candidates who are too young to have had 10 years experience in the afore mentioned?

Who will decide what jobs a candidate must have held for 10 years to be classed as having a ' profession ' ?

The description of ' ten years of employment in a trade, profession, service industry or manufacturing ' includes/excludes who?

The scope of employment that could be interpreted under such a wide open description is of no use what so ever but it is telling me that the unemployed , those who have not secured 10 years employment, those who are perhaps disabled and not held full employment ' NEED NOT APPLY
-----

I will add :-

Women/men who raised their family but may not have 10 years employment.

Women/men who chose to continue with further academic skills for years .

I will give another example :-

Mhairi Black SNP .

She was elected as a Member of Parliament in the 2015 GE and she was in her final year as an undergraduate at the University of Glasgow.

She would not be a viable candidate presumably.

What about the likes of Hilary Benn who are the 'career politicians' that Labour no longer wants? Would they be automatically ' Deselected ' , if not why not if it is passed.

I remain of the opinion the points you have raised previously are a). designed to make 'Deselections ' easier and I cannot fail to see the 10 year proposal description is a form of class warfare ''''' in the making '''''' whilst ironically 'Excluding ' many of those who Labour, indeed any party should welcome .

I wouldn't mind betting there would be some hypocritical move to allow candidates from outside the description for potential candidates if and when it suits Labour / Momentum and it will be interesting to come back to this ' IF' and ' WHEN ' it is passed to see how religiously they stick to script.

POGS, as I stated earlier in another thread, I believe the Brexit crisis has demonstrated that our present political and parliamentary system is totally unfit for purpose in a modern and very changed world. In that, many MPs of all parties seem to have little idea of how to combat the largest crisis facing Britain in over seventy years and in that seem completely lost and only wishing to "keep their heads down" in the hope someone else can solve the problems.

The above I believe is what comes about when persons with little or no experience of any real working life outside of politics form a large percentage of MPs in the House of Commons. Only being familiar with the adversary "yah-boo" two-party, first past the post system which is our parliament, they have little idea of what to do, or how to act when a real crisis faces the country.

I hope POGs along with other forum members we can agree on one thing, that being, something desperately needs to change. In that, I believe the Jenney Formby outline proposals for a minimum period having to be spent in employment outside of politics before any person can be considered as a candidate for MP is basically sound and very worth the consultation that is now beginning to take place in the Labour movement.

As I stated in my earlier post, there will be many problems to be thought through and situations to overcome before this policy can become anywhere near fruition. However, if a policy can be brought forward that eventually that ends the situation where a person can finish higher education and then become an intern to an MP before being selected as a candidate for a constituency seat, then that I feel will be of real benefit to the governance of this country.

After all, many that have worked in a commercial environment for a period of time know only to well how very real problems can come about on an almost daily basis and in that they learn how to solve them often on a team basis and gain real-life experience in doing so.

We do not wish to see I feel our MPs shouting across the commons chamber at each other every week like kids in a school playground, for that has made this country the laughing stock of the world in this crisis. What is required are mature persons as our MPs who have real experience outside politics and therefore know how to behave, work together and act in situations such as this country faces now.

Grandad

I still think it's purpose is for easier ' deselection ' as has been suspected since Corbyn for Leader / Momentum took control of the Labour Party.

It will indeed be interesting and do you any thought on the points I raised over the 10 year rule:-

" Take Seb Corbyn as another example.

He is 25 so unless he started work at the age of 15 and fulfilled the category he would not under Labours 10 year rule be considered a suitable candidate , EXCLUDED.

Seb Corbyn is John McDonnells Chief of Staff and he was rumoured to be heading as a candidate to the safe Labour seat of Liverpool Walton , although that was denied by Labour ."
---

What about those candidates who are too young to have had 10 years experience in the afore mentioned?

Who will decide what jobs a candidate must have held for 10 years to be classed as having a ' profession ' ?

The description of ' ten years of employment in a trade, profession, service industry or manufacturing ' includes/excludes who?

It definitely is designed to 'EXCLUDE ' is it not? My guess is it is an attempt to ' EXCLUDE ' on a class basis but I don't understand how. If it not on a class warfare basis what IS behind it?

The scope of employment that could be interpreted under such a wide open description is of no use what so ever but it is telling me that the unemployed , those who have not secured 10 years employment, those who are perhaps disabled and not held full employment ' NEED NOT APPLY '!

And close to 50 - 50 for a second referendum varian

The latest weekly survey of readers of "Labour List", which attracted 7,224 responses, was split about equally between those wanting Corbyn to support a second vote and those who did not, but what was most striking was the signficant majority in favour of cancelling brexit and remaining in the EU.