http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7466301.html

Corbyn ensuring the deeply unpopular Tory party will win by a landslide in 2020.

Reading the article what I found baffling was the Indy's stance that this is an "anti-establishment" position.

The whole raft of ideas is simply replacing one establishment (private) with another, the state.

See this is the problem I have with Corbyn's leadership that has nothing to do with the "media twisting things". A perfectly admirable and worthwhile policy that I may agree with after some thought.

But how on earth does spending considerable time and effort on this policy, help persuade "Derrick" in Newcastle who drives his van to work everyday, that he should vote for Jeramy Corbyn?

It's all policies for friends of the earth and student union activists.

Its actually a very reasonable idea that has a great many potential benefits. It is already been seriously considered in many other countries.

Its a shame some people will write it off as 'bonkers' because it is Corbyn saying it.

The soundbite is nonsense of course. No one is suggesting we take away dave's white van. What it actually is a gradual phasing out of the selling of brand new petrol cars within a decade and as time goes on the rolling stock of today will be slowly replaced with non-polluting models.

It's a policy I can get behind. Now if he just promises to ban breeding children - I'll vote for him

The could have used the headline: Corbyn to save public hundreds of pounds on energy bills.

After all, that is what the article states:
There is also a proposal for a new system to turbo-charge the upgrading of British homes to make them more energy-efficient, saving people hundreds of pounds on energy bills.

Also 300,000 new jobs created.

With the launch of his energy and environment manifesto, Mr Corbyn also pledged to “drive the expansion of the green industries”, creating some 300,000 jobs along the way.

Shocking policies!

Better to stick with the fracking Tory job destroyers.

You vote for a candidate in your constituency to be your MP, not for one of the parties leaders at the general election unless he/she's your local MP.

This aint America.

Sounds an excellent policy for Islington where there are 24 hour tubes, buses and taxis!

Only the out of touch north London elite who run the party now could think it would work elsewhere.

It seems very sensible IMO to consider these types of policy to see if they are feasible, so fair play to Corbyn in this respect. It should also be noted that it is not a policy announcement, just a consideration at this point.

I do like the way 'considering radical plans' according to un-named 'separate sources' or 'concepts Labour is exploring' become the 'latest policy announcement'! when translated into thread titles on DS.

And yet only yesterday Doctors were asking for a ban on vehicles with diesel engines be banned from London, it was suggested that the majority of vehicles in London have diesel engines

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-38274792

It will happen at some point - one day people will see air pollution from cars the same way we now see 2nd hand smoke from cigarettes.

The second we threaten this to the car industry they'll suddenly realize that the petrol gig is up and start work on mass producing electric cars at reasonable costs.

I'd like to know where they plan to get the electricity from. Presumably imports from somewhere else.

It's inevitable that it will happen

The Tories and most of the media would attack the policy until after the general election when they steal it and the media would claim it was a sensible policy.

Otherwise known as the Miliband Effect.

Assuming he ever had the money to privatise power production, and build the extra nuclear plant , and charging stations to make it work.

its interesting ,because its the view of someone who cycles around London, rarely goes outside Islington and Westminster, and doesn't drive......... You couldn't be much more in a socialist, champagne drinking, cycling, Islington set..

meanwhile 60 miles from the nearest charging station , and not wanting to go everywhere at 50mph , folk are thinking who else to vote for.

Not till costs are equal, electric cars can do 100, drive for more longer, and someone puts in cheap, very local, charging facilities nationwide , that don't take longer than the journey to charge.

Tory speak = ban petrol cars
Normal speak = looking at ways to reduce air pollution and save hundreds of thousands of lives

More hipster, stay green policies for his barmy student union activists to lap up and proclaim Jeremy is Anti-Establishment !

What next ban people eating meat for the student union vegans!? That's fashionable right now innit!? Or electric only properties!?

This is Jeremy's problem he doesn't appeal to the blue collar workng class of this country. Good ideas in theory but the world isn't like that the real world when you don't have a massive student loan. The JAMs are no longer going to support labour with Corbyn as leaders.

If he ever got into power he wouldn't be able to do half of what he says as its just not practical

Oh dear there you go again.

It is not the Tories saying its a ban on petrol cares its the Independent - that failed newspaper. The Tories in the guise of the then London Mayor, Boris Johnson, fully signed up to the congestion charge introduced by Ken Livingstone with the aim of reducing car travel in London

I think Corbyn is sensible to consider if progress can be made on this but it will not be quick. Today we had the Deputy London Mayor for Transport explaining why we can not ban diesel cars (and vans etc) in London in the short term so that's another legacy from Gordon Brown, for it was him who oversaw the massive increase in diesel vehicles with his tax incentives, that blights us. Oh and the Mayor has an old diesel so is conflicted on the issue as he has admitted

I can't remember the comedian (maybe Doug Stanthorpe) who speaks about less kids being better for the environment than restricting what people who are already alive do. I only need to watch a film like Age of Stupid where someone featured bemoans emissions yet has a large family, contributing to the worlds problems more than a single person with a big engined car.

But you fail to notice that the OP is twisting things by saying something that Corbyn has not said, and then go on to add your own little twist about 'Dave' the van man,

This is exactly how this 'idea' will be portrayed in the Tory media, and by the 'if Corbyn is supposed to have said it in exactly the way it is being reported/posted then I will fall over myself to believe it" mob,

the link,
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7466301.html

the headline.

reads slightly differently to the thread title which is...

"latest policy announcement" some people would call that a bare faced lie and if they did I would probably agree with them.

this part is of course ignored.

other parts ignored by the OP,


OH the outrage, imagine that people able to use methods to make their own electricity and to sell the surplus to their neighbours, I bet the multi millionaire keepers of the keys to power generation will love that idea.


NO!!! just who the HELL does he think he is? wanting to save people money on their energy bills? think about the poor millionaires how are they going to be able to exploit people in the manner they have become accustomed to? I am certain their Tory chums will make damned certain that this dangerous idea is stopped in it's tracks.



You can't do that you fool, don't you know that the Tories depend on huge number of people out of work in order to give people someone too look down on and to keep others compliant with the threat of joining them forever hanging over their heads, don't you go and start caring about people that would never do.

It's a mad idea anyway, I mean if it was sensible other countries would be proposing similar things right?


OH,


After actually, ya know 'reading' the article I see absolutely nothing wrong with these proposals and ideas,

To be honest I can see some sensible policies there, or at least the core. You could for example ban new cars unless they are low emission.

But to really reduce our reliance upon petrol cars there needs to be extensive investment in charging points. Frankly with the introduction of car clubs and increasingly urbanised population people might not need to even own a car. When later those cars are autonomous even less so - just call up a car and it comes to the door.

But such changes are going to take a decade or more.

Good point, perhaps worth remembering this thread for future reference in order to see how many of those having a good old sneer because it's Corbyn, suddenly have a change of mind and think it's wonderful when the Tories propose it, certainly wouldn't be the first time.

Glad you see the sense of it, and it does say that these ideas and proposals are for a time in the future and would take over a decade to be fully implemented AFTER it ever becomes law.