“Bitter division within the PLP talking about different parties can only be made worse by very angry statements about Iraq,”
So who is talking about different parties? So much of the PLP messaging happens in secret or through journalists that it is hard to work out who is who. If the message is something like give up or we will split then it would be only fair to know who they are.
Something for proper journalists to tell us, or maybe just for tweet speculation. Often turns out to be more illuminating. Nothing today from the crowd sourced trip to Liverpool. Maybe there are only reports once a week and otherwise mostly from Westminster.
The relevance for this blog is that once the coup is over there can be attention for what Jeremy Corbyn is saying about Europe. I would also like to go back and look at the Lib Dem contribution. At the moment I don't remember much if anything. Tim Farron has been critical of Corbyn and it seems likely that the heckler widely reported at a recent Corbyn meeting was a LibDem not a lapsed Momentum supporter as supposed by the BBC reporting. As with the heckler that tweets have suggested is linked to Portland Communications, there has been no mainstream reporting to either confirm or deny the online views.
As it is suggested that future Corbyn leadership could allow for a wider range of roles and opinion, it would be interesting to know more about how the various events during the EU referendum were organised. Corbyn was not the only speaker. Did Alan Johnson influence the decision as to how Lord Darling shared a platform with George Osborne? Is ther any poll evidence on how George Brown was perceived? Maybe Tim Farron has some info on this sort of thing or would like to comment. If it is only Jeremy Corbyn he is prepared to comment about, has he already spoken about who would like to join the Liberals? Only asking the question. Honest info about the heckler would contribute to trust.
Reading the Telegraph on a Monday is still essential but I fear the column this week may fall apart faster than last week. All critics are in the same sort of mob, chanting slogans outside his window. No sort of defence or apology for his remaining fans who expected more conventional leadership as in a visit to parliament. The absence of a Brexit plan is something to blame on HMG before the result. Current public mood is "hysteria". Looping back in this blog will consider "hysteria" as an explanation of how the vote went.
Just as interesting is Ben Wallace on Gove. Apparently he tends to gossip, often after a drink. Could this be a contributing factor in working out that Gove may be the source for a Sun story about the Queen, published soon after Gove dined with Rupert Murdoch? Someone should ask Ben Wallace if he would hazard a guess. Loops back in blog with background on IPSO, Leveson phase two and soforth.
Times claims UKIP plot to back Leadsom. Shares Sun story about tax issues that may be more fully reported. It seems the Murdoch preference for Gove rather than Boris, ( widely suggested in tweets and not much denied in print ) is shared by the Times and the Sun. Gove may be a traitor for Boris fans and even a bit of a gossip, but he may also be the only Brexit candidate without a tax issue. Please follow for yourselves during the week. Sun and Times are behind paywalls and I don't plan to buy one every day just to check this out.
Still part of the Boris story really, or how Tory MPs mix leadership plans with newspaper backing. Going back on the story will add to understanding of how it ends. Sun says "if Leadsom had been in the Cabinet her earlier remarks against Brexit would not have emerged until yesterday."
If she were not standing against Gove, then in some newspapers they may not have emerged ever. Just a thought.