The assiduous Chris Hope, Whitehall editor of the Daily Telegraph, has finally got to the bottom of how much Gordon Brown’s decision to sell off part of Britain’s gold reserves actually cost the country - a staggering £4.7bn.
According to today’s report, Brown sanctioned the sale of 395 tonnes of the UK’s gold between 1999 and 2002. Hope wrote:
The total proceeds from the sales was around $3.5bn. According to a parliamentary answer, if the gold was sold last month, on Dec 15, it would have fetched $10.5bn. The difference $7bn - would be worth £4.7bn if the proceeds were converted into sterling yesterday.
Phillip Hammond, the shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, said: "Gold traders confirm that it was because the government announced in advance that it was planning to sell such a large quantity of gold that the markets became depressed. The low price Gordon Brown got for selling our gold wasn’t caused by bad luck. It was a staggering display of economic incompetence."
because changes in society’s trajectory don’t happen in the course of a 4yr term. Unfortunately with the flip-flopping between parties at the polls every year it’s very difficult for a bipartisan agreement on some issues with require unanimous and urgent action by all politicians.
Politics has become a very dirty, mud-slinging business these days. I am old enough to remember when politicians ran on a platform of what they WOULD do, not slandering their opponent with their shortcomings.
you’ve got quite an edge lately, please understand that I don’t comment with knives out?
I think Starmer and Labour have got it wrong in deselecting Corbyn. Starmer is such a hypocrite. I really can’t stand him. He is created divisions amongst the Labour voters, regardless of their right or left leanings. I have voted Labour since the I was eligible to vote as a teenager. I feel disgusted in the way they have handled this situation. Just leave Corbyn alone. Its been 3 years since he resigned the leadership.
Corbyn has been an MP for 40 years in Islington North and he is very popular with the locals. The way he has been vilified by the UK press is disgraceful.
But he is toxic everywhere else. That’s the problem. He is an albatross round the Party’s neck, and as unfair as that is, he has to be moved on. The sensible thing for all parties would have been to stand aside (he is 73) but by digging in his heels he really isn’t giving Starmer an option.
I do agree with you on that. It will take more than one election cycle to undo the damage of the last 13 years.
Mind you there is lots Labour can, and will, do in a first term, if they get it. Ending Non-Dom status to create the means for a pay deal for public sector workers will help immediately, for example.
But ultimately Labour need to spend some time in their first term unrigging the game that the Tories have been rigging for 13 years.
I think he is a humble, honest and empathetic person who cares for the local communities and justice. He is not your average scheming politican. As a member of the general public, I can relate to Corbyn more than that Starmer.
Getting rid of Corbyn is creating more divisions. Labour needs to show they are a united party. I can tell you right now, I would love it if (no when) Corbyn wins his seat as an Independent. I am not happy the way Labour has conducted themselves.
Two independent reports have confirmed there were serious issues around antisemitism within the party while Corbyn was leader. He still continues to claim that it was overstated for political reasons. That is a big factor as to why he is now an independent and why he is no longer able to represent Labour at the next election.
Given Corbyn’s supporters have been pretty vocal against Starmer since before he took on the leadership, I don’t see how Corbyn remaining in the party would lead to the party appearing anymore united than without him.
