|
|
Post by robbiealive on May 14, 2022 11:27:06 GMT
@robbie 1. Not necessarily as a punishment device, but to try and indicate the folly Same thing. You're quibbling. If they welcomed a harf Brexit they are wacky. They needed a drastic re-education programme. They got it. 2. You don’t have to make your mind up if you find it’s too complex and too many variables and unknowns. You may just not vote, rather than guessing/flipping a coin. In terms of voting for parties, quite often people don’t get what they were sold anyway. Many complained after voting for the Lib Dems. Others weren’t expecting what Blair did, even Johnson has disappointed quite a few of the right. And how often is one vote going to make much difference. Other forms of influence may have more clout. People under 45 not voting is what gives us Tory governments. Here you are encouraging them! Indecision is a disease. If you can't decide what you want how are you going to persuade other people! 3. Sure. But if the alternative still pulls the ladder up but slower, people may still hold out for something that they think is much better, reverses the trend. Like how some didn’t accept soft Brexit, and risked a hard Brexit by trying for Remain Good point. 2017-19 a mess & now Frost & the other loonies welcome a trade war with EU. Problem when you put the State in the hands of nutters like the ERG. But how could Lab & Lib Dems have allied with say May and moderate Tories to get a Customs Union.
4. It isn’t necessarily about changing minds here. For example, you can swap ideas to help each other with campaigning etc., or just informing some of us who are interested in the pros as well as the cons. I don’t see why it should just be the cons. In the end, if a Labour activist, why would you mostly just talk negatives about Corbyn? Why wouldn’t you talk positives and explain some of the policies as well? Canvassing in 2017 that is exactly what I did. I didnt canvass in 2019 & people I know who did so were abused on the famous doorstep. The unreasonable hostility to Corbyn was not exaggerated. Crossbat & others may disagree or have the details. |
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on May 14, 2022 11:32:43 GMT
PJW1961: "the bedrock of any such alliance would have to be the introduction of proportional representation and unfortunately the dinosaurs in the PLP and Trade Union movement are still blocking it. They are happy to swap decades of opposition for the chance of supreme unfettered power on the odd occasion when the stars align for a Labour government."
That seems to have been the case thus far. But I wonder if the logjam might collapse if the result of GE '24 is something like: Lab 290 Con 250, SNP 50, LD 40, Others 20. The price of support for a minority Lab government from the LDs would surely be a nailed-on commitment to PR ("won't get fooled again"), while the SNP would presumably demand a commitment to IndyRef2.
That would actually constitute quite an exciting menu of constitutional change, and would for me be the optimal outcome of the election, following the current period of chaos, confusion, disillusionment and downward drift. We desperately need radical change in how we govern ourselves, I think. Others may disagree!
|
|
|
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 14, 2022 11:43:19 GMT
robbiealive1. Well, I didn’t want to misrepresent 2. I have pointed out that I don’t say others shouldn’t vote. I am just giving reasons why some may not vote and may decide other methods of influence might be preferable. I’m not saying that this necessarily means you shouldn’t vote. (And I have one or two additional reasons of my own) 4. I can believe the hostility on the doorstep to Corbyn. I think the media had quite an effect. Same as ramping up hostility to immigratants around the time of EU Ref.
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on May 14, 2022 11:53:17 GMT
PS Of course Labour members have a right to argue for a much lefter Labour party: but their "Blair was just another Tory" is rubbish Blair was well to the Right of pre-Thatcher Tory PMs since World War2. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on May 14, 2022 12:00:16 GMT
I can't believe you wrote that mercian . Have you forgotten the bloody civil war in the Tory party over Brexit that led to the purging of 21 vastly experienced centre right MPs and ex minister pluls numerous defections and which has been continued in the mad Brexit Cabinet chosen by Johnson. And that civil war was going on all through the Blair government years when the Tories were out of power. Also how many competitive cabals existed and continue to exist amongst MPs. Northern Recovery Group, ERG, CRG etc. Oh that some could see ourselves as other see us! The point I was making was that Tory civil wars tend to happen when they're in power - as evidenced by the examples you give. Yes of course there were always different groups even when they were in opposition, and perhaps my memory is faulty but I don't remember such public fallings-out then amongst the Tories as there are now within Labour. If there were then perhaps that was a factor in them losing 3 in a row. To me, this is a factor in losing elections. A divided main opposition party doesn't enthuse the electorate. Forget the bit about Tories and Labour behaving differently and just accept that point. |
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on May 14, 2022 12:10:40 GMT
Carfrew: "Not necessarily as a punishment device, but to try and indicate the folly"
RobbieAlive: "Same thing. You're quibbling. If they welcomed a harf Brexit they are wacky. They needed a drastic re-education programme. They got it."
I think Carfrew has a point. It's surely legitimate to think that if the folly of brexit is to be demonstrated and hopefully reversed, then a short sharp shock is preferable to the boiling frog approach.
That is not to advocate some sort of twisted schadenfreude-based punishment beating, but rather to take the view that the sooner people appreciate the damage that is being done, the sooner they will want it mitigated or reversed, so that the overall negative consequences are minimised.
(I think we're actually more likely to go down the boiling frog route, with a long process of progressive relative decline that goes largely unappreciated and unaddressed. I've cited Argentina before as a country that was in the early 20th century regarded as something like a southern-hemisphere Canada in terms of resources and political and economic development and potential. Now, thanks to inept government, economic isolation and lack of a local EU-equivalent, it's an also-ran).
|
|
|
|
Post by JohnC on May 14, 2022 12:16:56 GMT
John C, ''Weeding out the 'real shits' seems to be what Starmer, according to jimJam, is trying to do,'' An interesting reading of my comments, I would rather see it wanting the cream to emerge but interpretation is in the gift of the reader so will respect yours, :-) I probably should have added a  to my comment. |
|
|
|
Post by JohnC on May 14, 2022 12:30:17 GMT
For those interested and those who may have forgotten here are eight Labour Party Policies announced at its 2021 conference in Brighton in September. A lot more to come this year. For those not interested or already aware of these scroll on.... Climate Pledge to spend £28b each year until 2030 on investment in green infrastructure and jobs. Economy Scrap “unfair” business rates and eventually replace them with a system designed to come down harder on online giants – rather than squeezing high street businesses. Labour would launch a new Office for Value for Money to monitor how taxpayer money is being spent. Housing Cap the amount of property overseas investors can purchase in new developments – giving first-time local buyers priority. Change the rules around how large developers contribute towards affordable housing and give councils more powers to buy land for building homes. Education Remove the charitable status from private schools – which allows them to pay less tax than other business. With the money raised he would fund educational reform in state schools. Labour would boost arts and digital funding and offer better careers guidance to children – making work experience compulsory and teaching students about pensions, mortgages and contracts. Health Labour would double the current funding for dementia research and would seek to “build a national care service” in the image of the NHS. Crime A state-run pro bono service to compel firms to offer a certain amount of free legal advice to those who need it and are not eligible for legal aid. The shadow justice secretary also reiterated Labour’s previous commitments to speed up rape and sexual assault cases, toughen up on street harassment and misogyny. Restore neighbourhood policing through new police hubs and fight of anti-social behaviour. Foreign A £35m fund to help British veterans and Afghan interpreters – to provide mental health support services and support. Place extra controls on the use of British troops and police to train their counterparts abroad to ensure the UK is not offering support to countries abusing human rights. Devolution Boost devolution to give local councils greater control over the investment and infrastructure their areas. I'll try to memorise that list for the next time I meet up with a friend. It's a shame though there is such widespread ignorance of Labour policies that the right can get away with claiming the party does not have any. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2022 12:55:34 GMT
The problem that FPTP, two party hegemonies throws up is that deciding which to go for is not the same as being asked to choose a holiday, out of two options.
If one is Afghanistan and the other Pakistan then the option to stay at home, ta very much, might very well be sensible. But with a Tory/Labour choice, whilst you certainly can stay at home - as some nobly do - you will still end up with one of the options anyway.
And I find it incomprehensible that someone who actually thinks about these things can’t decide which of the two they dislike most. (It seems self evident that with such a limited choice that neither can possibly fit in with everything that you would personally want to see.)
So I understand why people who don’t think about politics much and/or “can’t be bothered” don’t vote and I understand why someone thoughtful might instead vote UKIP, Green, LD etc. in the hope of influencing policy options from the outside. But, as with Corbyn’s famous 7/10 comment, I don’t see how anyone is UNable to choose between such two starkly different choices as Johnson’s Tories or Corbyn’s Labour Party.
Especially if they can’t even choose a minor party as an alternative to both of the above.
Right…..back to Bach.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2022 12:57:39 GMT
John C, ''Weeding out the 'real shits' seems to be what Starmer, according to jimJam, is trying to do,'' An interesting reading of my comments, I would rather see it wanting the cream to emerge but interpretation is in the gift of the reader so will respect yours, :-) I probably should have added a  to my comment. Always add a smilie to your comments  . |
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 14, 2022 12:58:07 GMT
Re-Labour policy.
That Labour's policy aims need to be posted on a board that consists entirely of people who follow politics closely says a lot in itself.
Let's take one Labour policy where they have got the communication right - in regard to dealing with the cost of living crisis - a one off windfall tax on the energy companies, to be redistributed to those most in need.
Yes, it's a short term policy but, IMO a very good one.
More to the point, anyone that is paying the slightest bit of attention knows what it is.
The meat and bones of the policy hasn't been announced (exactly how much will this indfall tax be, in what manner will it be taxed, does one-off mean on one occasion, or is it a short term policy of, say 2 years), nor does it need to be this far from an election - that is what a manifesto is for, but, the general policy and policy aim is announced and everyone knows what it is.
So, the question becomes, why is it that the public know THIS policy/policy aim, but not others? It is there that Labour needs to step up.
|
|
|
|
Post by mercian on May 14, 2022 13:26:35 GMT
I do think online counts. But this site is a means of wasting time for weirdos. It has what 150 members & 400 followers. When it has 500,000, or even 50,000, I'll campaign. When has anyone on here changed their political allegiance or in yr case adopted one.Xxx. You say that, but I have noticed on a few occasions that a well-made argument or particularly good but little-known point discussed here has cropped up in a debate in HoC or PMQs within a day or two. I'm not saying that loads of MPs follow this site but it's not impossible that one or two of their researchers look in from time to time. After all, this is one of the few sites that doesn't (very often) descend into people just hurling abuse at each other. 🙂 |
|
|
|
Post by johntel on May 14, 2022 13:37:50 GMT
Re-Labour policy. That Labour's policy aims need to be posted on a board that consists entirely of people who follow politics closely says a lot in itself. Let's take one Labour policy where they have got the communication right - in regard to dealing with the cost of living crisis - a one off windfall tax on the energy companies, to be redistributed to those most in need. Yes, it's a short term policy but, IMO a very good one. More to the point, anyone that is paying the slightest bit of attention knows what it is. The meat and bones of the policy hasn't been announced (exactly how much will this indfall tax be, in what manner will it be taxed, does one-off mean on one occasion, or is it a short term policy of, say 2 years), nor does it need to be this far from an election - that is what a manifesto is for, but, the general policy and policy aim is announced and everyone knows what it is. So, the question becomes, why is it that the public know THIS policy/policy aim, but not others? It is there that Labour needs to step up. I'm pretty sure the Tories will announce some sort of windfall tax on energy companies before too long, though no doubt they'll dress it up in difference language |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on May 14, 2022 13:44:20 GMT
Re-Labour policy. That Labour's policy aims need to be posted on a board that consists entirely of people who follow politics closely says a lot in itself. Let's take one Labour policy where they have got the communication right - in regard to dealing with the cost of living crisis - a one off windfall tax on the energy companies, to be redistributed to those most in need. Yes, it's a short term policy but, IMO a very good one. ... I'm pretty sure the Tories will announce some sort of windfall tax on energy companies before too long, though no doubt they'll dress it up in difference language Yes of course that's the danger of an opposition party making their policies obvious before an election - the government will nick them if they're any good. But by not publicising policies you risk the public thinking that you don't stand for anything. I suppose it boils down to: If you want your policies enacted, publicise them so that the government does them anyway. If power is more important to you than policies, keep schtum. At the moment it seems that Labour are leaning towards the second option. |
|
|
|
Post by davwel on May 14, 2022 15:46:32 GMT
I am dismayed by the latest populist ruse that Johnson is trying - cutting the numbers of civil servants by a fifth over 3 years. And by the lack of grumbling here and from Labour. I read that the SNP have attacked the plan hard, fearing that it will be disproportionately applied to Scotland.
There have been the obvious comments that damage will result and the public get angry, when the issuing of driving licences or passports is delayed. But even JRM is not daft enough to attack those civil servants first.
It will be the jobs that are quietly done that the public doesn`t know about or understand. Like checking that farmers and estates are delivering on their wildlife commitments in receiving grants and subsidies; planning flood protection schemes, deciding on the routes of promised transport links.
I can see the long-promised dual carriageway from Aberdeen to Inverness being even further delayed, or only a few short sections of the 110 miles going ahead for now.
DEFRA top admin staff are warning of problems and having to choose what sectors to cut back or stop. Of course the rogue farmers and estates will rejoice that "red tape" is being cut back, and they can proceed with "improvements" that will add to their profiteering whilst continuing to get the subsidies for combining production with conservation. And the government will save on flood-prevention schemes not being started, while the "few" likely to be hurt will be ignored.
This is skilful government - win votes by populist policies and rely on a friendly media to ignore the problems. Only a few live in NE Scotland and hardly anybody has to struggle to drive through Elgin or Nairn. And what is the betting that conservation doesn`t suffer a regular cut-back like 5% a year, since most of their staffs are doing luxury jobs like sitting watching ants` nests [the rubbish far-Right tabloids did`nt say this this was to conserve the large blue].
|
|
|
|
Post by mercian on May 14, 2022 16:01:50 GMT
davwel I thought I'd heard that they were getting rid of extra staff who'd been taken on because of Covid. At first anyway. Rolling numbers back to 2016, so I suppose that'd be extra Brexit staff too.
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on May 14, 2022 16:22:36 GMT
@davwell - "I am dismayed by the latest populist ruse that Johnson is trying - cutting the numbers of civil servants by a fifth over 3 years. And by the lack of grumbling here and from Labour. I read that the SNP have attacked the plan hard, fearing that it will be disproportionately applied to Scotland."
Being reported as saving £3.75bn, at something like £40K per post, which if designed to help with the cost of living crisis is next door to Pointless Manor, Misguided Avenue, Worthless.
Divide that by 20m households and you get around £180 per household, without taking into account how much redundancy pay you'll need to shell out in year one. My heating oil bill for one fill has gone from £365 to £1050, and I need to do that twice a year.
I'd rather have 90,000 civil servants enabling the government to function than a pointless gesture.
|
|
|
|
Post by davwel on May 14, 2022 16:30:08 GMT
@ mercian
If it was just extra Cv staff, then it would be just a few departments. But EVERY department has been asked to make cuts.
Also some staff were taken on to deal with the work that used to be done by the EU for us before Brexit. But that wasn`t included the "savings" painted on the side of a bus.
|
|
|
|
Post by EmCat on May 14, 2022 17:07:37 GMT
Being reported as saving £3.75bn, at something like £40K per post, which if designed to help with the cost of living crisis is next door to Pointless Manor, Misguided Avenue, Worthless. And of course the pliant media will jump on that figure and claim how overpaid those civil servants are. Except that that figure represents the capitation rate, of which the salary is only around a half. The rest is the employer's NI contributions, as well as a notional future pension provision (I think there are other aspects to the capitation rate, but it is a few years since I had to deal with its intricacies) Hence, it looks as though the figure will be around the UK median salary, indicating that the cuts will be across the board from lowest paid to highest. |
|
|
|
Post by jib on May 14, 2022 17:09:20 GMT
@davwell - "I am dismayed by the latest populist ruse that Johnson is trying - cutting the numbers of civil servants by a fifth over 3 years. And by the lack of grumbling here and from Labour. I read that the SNP have attacked the plan hard, fearing that it will be disproportionately applied to Scotland." Being reported as saving £3.75bn, at something like £40K per post, which if designed to help with the cost of living crisis is next door to Pointless Manor, Misguided Avenue, Worthless. Divide that by 20m households and you get around £180 per household, without taking into account how much redundancy pay you'll need to shell out in year one. My heating oil bill for one fill has gone from £365 to £1050, and I need to do that twice a year. I'd rather have 90,000 civil servants enabling the government to function than a pointless gesture. Given the Tories may well be thrown out in 24 months' time, that leaves them only 1 more fiscal settlement to implement this. Running out of road, running out of ideas. I've said before, this Government looks more and more like the tired shambles of 1995-97. |
|
|
|
Post by jib on May 14, 2022 18:23:14 GMT
The Guardian quotes an Ukrainian General;
"War in Ukraine will be over by end of year, head of military intelligence predicts
The war against Russia will reach a turning point by mid-August and be over by the end of the year, Ukraine’s head of military intelligence has told Sky News.
Major general Kyrylo Budanov said:
The breaking point will be in the second part of August.
Most of the active combat actions will have finished by the end of this year.
As a result, we will renew Ukrainian power in all our territories that we have lost including Donbas and the Crimea."
I am pleased they have their eyes on Crimea.
|
|
|
|
Post by johntel on May 14, 2022 18:46:53 GMT
The Guardian quotes an Ukrainian General; "War in Ukraine will be over by end of year, head of military intelligence predicts The war against Russia will reach a turning point by mid-August and be over by the end of the year, Ukraine’s head of military intelligence has told Sky News. Major general Kyrylo Budanov said: The breaking point will be in the second part of August. Most of the active combat actions will have finished by the end of this year. As a result, we will renew Ukrainian power in all our territories that we have lost including Donbas and the Crimea." I am pleased they have their eyes on Crimea. There isn't a snowball's chance in hell of Ukraine re-taking Crimea. It would just unite public opinion in Russia and the local population would fight back. Like Kyiv and Kharkiv but in reverse. I'm sure Zelensky understands this, so he wouldn't be so foolish as to try. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,136
|
Post by domjg on May 14, 2022 19:10:14 GMT
Landtag (state parliament) election in the German state of Nordrhein-Westfalen tomorrow. It’s the most populous German state with nearly 18 million people which is larger than the population of the Netherlands. A bellwether for national political sentiment, It’s finely balanced at the moment with a CDU led incumbent coalition that sneaked it in ‘17 and polls that had been very close between the SPD and the CDU but are most recently showing the CDU edging ahead.
After the state election in Saarland in March where the SPD won with a greatly increased vote share this had been considered a shoe in for them but recent discord in the national coalition and the CDU far exceeding expectations in Schleswig Holstein last week will probably see the later hanging on to the state.
Another great democratic contest is of course taking part tonight though. Eurovision! Ukraine tipped to win understandably I guess but apparently even before the war started they were considered one of the favourites. Haven’t heard it yet so can’t offer an opinion. Beer and crisps at the ready!
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on May 14, 2022 19:10:56 GMT
Alas, poor Chelsea.
Roman knew them well.
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on May 14, 2022 19:16:14 GMT
Internationally is a great Freudian slip, is it not? Intentionally is, I assume, what the tweeter meant!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2022 19:21:26 GMT
Alas, poor Chelsea. Roman knew them well. I come to bury Chelski, not to praise ‘em. The evil that teams do lives after them… ………….the fukkers. (No offence to Chelsea fans of course.) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2022 19:22:57 GMT
Internationally is a great Freudian slip, is it not? Intentionally is, I assume, what the tweeter meant!  Well, if they were only drunk in the UK surely that’s alight, isn’t it? |
|
|
|
Post by alec on May 14, 2022 19:32:02 GMT
Developing theory that it's actually covid that is the prime mover in children's liver disease, with adenovirus as the secondary factor -
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on May 14, 2022 20:04:24 GMT
Just watched the Spanish Eurovision entry. Chanel I think was the singer.
Gets my vote. I didn't need the sound. Just the vision.
😜😁👍
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,136
|
Post by domjg on May 14, 2022 20:22:27 GMT
Just watched the Spanish Eurovision entry. Chanel I think was the singer. Gets my vote. I didn't need the sound. Just the vision. 😜😁👍 Shocking.. she can certainly dance. I actually think Ukraine's was probably the best so far, possibly the Netherlands. France, oh dear.. |
|
to my comment.
to my comment.
.
