Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2022 12:46:45 GMT
On another subject, I think it's become clear that allowing party members to choose leaders is a terrible idea. Firstly, leaders need the support of MPs, and (an extreme example) a candidate who gets 90% of MPs votes but loses the membership vote was clearly better placed to lead the party. Secondly, prospective leaders need to win the support of the country as a whole, especially the middle-ground swing voters who inevitably decide elections, and very few of that category are members of any political party by virtue of the fact they are swing voters!
IMO MPs choosing their leader is the best system of an imperfect bunch and at least ensures a (probably) united party going forward. What we have currently is likely to become a bit of a mess when these policies get to the Commons.
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,378
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Oct 1, 2022 12:47:49 GMT
In these difficult times this made me laugh
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,634
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Oct 1, 2022 12:55:20 GMT
 Looking forward to key note speeches at Tory conference. |
|
|
|
Post by lefthanging on Oct 1, 2022 12:55:54 GMT
But the point is that over 4 years of economic growth failed to help the Tories at the 1997 election. Why is 18 months of such growth - if it materialises - likely to benefit them next year and in 2024? The main difference I can see is that Black Wednesday arguably acted as an admission that the government's policy on the ERM had been totally wrong - whereas today the narrative is basically "the Government is right and others are wrong, so the gamble will pay off" Basically, while the the 92-97 recovery was obviously welcomed, it was ultimately seen as clearing up a self-inflicted mistake - whereas, if the economy improves this time round, the Government will attempt to claim they'd been right all along, with the recovery acting as vindication of the Government's economic policy. Although if anybody actually buys that I've got a nice bridge I can sell them... |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Oct 1, 2022 12:58:47 GMT
graham In respect of the 2010 election there were insufficient non Tory and dup mps to form a majority, I wish that hadn't been so but we don't get to have our own facts.That doesn't excuse the coalition. In 2017 the electoral mathematics were even more clear cut. Potentially the period between 2017-19 with dozens of Tory mps no longer taking the whip could have seen a national government,but it didn't happen. What alternatives had you in mind.
In 2010 the numbers were there for a minority Labour Government backed by an assortment of smaller parties - ie LibDem + SDLP + SNP + Plaid + Green + Alliance would have produced a further 71 MPs to prop up 258 Labour MPs. 329 MPs would have been sufficient given that SF did not take up their seats. The key figure,therefore, was 323. It was a possibility which the LDs rejected - and to be fair some senior Labour MPs had reservations. In 2017 the DUP was pivotal. Unlike the UUP the DUP have never been natural Tory bedfellows - right wing on social issues but quite left wing in terms of economic policy. Had Labour's leader then been Starmer - or indeed Ed Milliband - the DUP might have ousted Theresa May and the Tories.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2022 13:26:31 GMT
So essentially the problem is that, in this 1990 equivalent, the Tories have elected Sir Rhodes Boyson instead of John Major as leader.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2022 13:31:04 GMT
So essentially the problem is that, in this 1990 equivalent, the Tories have elected Sir Rhodes Boyson instead of John Major as leader. Oh no - it’s worse than that. One of the girls from St Trinians. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Oct 1, 2022 13:33:24 GMT
"Getting Britain Moving"
Certainly got my bowels moving, watching my pension burn.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,634
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Oct 1, 2022 13:36:12 GMT
graham In order to achieve that it would have required all party agreement to achieve across the board support including the SNP to achieve a notional majority of around 3. There couldn't have been a working majority based on lib dems and Labour alone, the seats weren't there. You could just as easily blame Labour for not winning enough seats. The DUP have always been right-wing .
|
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Oct 1, 2022 13:42:14 GMT
So essentially the problem is that, in this 1990 equivalent, the Tories have elected Sir Rhodes Boyson instead of John Major as leader. Despite Sir Rhodes Boyson's many trenchant views, he was a jovial chap who was very comfortable amongst people, even those who strongly opposed his perspective on things; and also never hid in the shadows. |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Oct 1, 2022 13:43:02 GMT
On another subject, I think it's become clear that allowing party members to choose leaders is a terrible idea. Firstly, leaders need the support of MPs, and (an extreme example) a candidate who gets 90% of MPs votes but loses the membership vote was clearly better placed to lead the party. Secondly, prospective leaders need to win the support of the country as a whole, especially the middle-ground swing voters who inevitably decide elections, and very few of that category are members of any political party by virtue of the fact they are swing voters! IMO MPs choosing their leader is the best system of an imperfect bunch and at least ensures a (probably) united party going forward. What we have currently is likely to become a bit of a mess when these policies get to the Commons. David Dimbleby was saying exactly the same on Newscast last night. www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001cl47/newscast-series-3-29092022The difficulty is that when you have extended the electorate from the Party's MPs to the members, it is hard to limit it again, even when it is objectively the right thing to do. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Oct 1, 2022 13:43:58 GMT
Ukraine has taken Lyman, apparently.
That is presumably a part of Russia, according to Putin.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2022 13:47:45 GMT
Ukraine has taken Lyman, apparently. That is presumably a part of Russia, according to Putin. Maybe he’ll issue them with call-up papers.  |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on Oct 1, 2022 13:48:21 GMT
So essentially the problem is that, in this 1990 equivalent, the Tories have elected Sir Rhodes Boyson instead of John Major as leader. Oh no - it’s worse than that. One of the girls from St Trinians. I noticed that Elon Musk has announced he has a humanoid robot that can talk and wave but still needs a lot of work to refine it. "Musk said currently humanoid robots were “missing a brain”, saying they don’t have the intelligence to navigate the world". It it possible that our PM is a prototype? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2022 13:50:19 GMT
alec. Any advice as to where one gets the most recent updates for Ukraine? I find the BBC etc very erratic
|
|
|
|
Post by bardin1 on Oct 1, 2022 13:55:19 GMT
alec . Any advice as to where one gets the most recent updates for Ukraine? I find the BBC etc very erratic For up to date information from the front I find this twitter account the most reliable twitter.com/WarMonitor3For the overall balanced (or fairly balanced from the western side) strategic and political update i find the ISW the best - they publish once a day assessment of the previous day, so a little behind but very comprehensive www.understandingwar.org/ |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Oct 1, 2022 14:00:30 GMT
The main difference I can see is that Black Wednesday arguably acted as an admission that the government's policy on the ERM had been totally wrong - whereas today the narrative is basically "the Government is right and others are wrong, so the gamble will pay off" Actually, I think that Black Wednesday was the realisation that the markets were stronger than any one country (the USA is probably the only exception in the West). Effectively the ERM was going back to the old fixed exchange rates of the 1960s and earlier and ignoring all the lessons that had been learned then. As the EU learned from the Euro crisis, economic shocks are often asymmetrical, affecting some countries much more than others, and so you need the power to move significant sums of money from the well-off states to the less well-off states. This didn't work too well for Greece (who should not have been allowed into the Euro in the first place) as almost all the EU money then went back to French and German banks who had invested there, while Greece got a bad case of austerity. Gordon Brown stopping the UK joining the Euro was the second-best thing he ever did (after making the Bank of England independent). |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Oct 1, 2022 14:00:51 GMT
graham In order to achieve that it would have required all party agreement to achieve across the board support including the SNP to achieve a notional majority of around 3. There couldn't have been a working majority based on lib dems and Labour alone, the seats weren't there. You could just as easily blame Labour for not winning enough seats. The DUP have always been right-wing . It would have been an effective majority of 12 with the combined parties I listed . I am not suggesting it would have been stable but the balance initially would have been 329 v 317. Lady Hermon - sitting as an Independent - might well have supported Labour too.
The DUP has always been rightwing re- social policy but not in terms of economic policy. Its voter base comes largely from the Protestant working class. The Ulster Unionists have been the reliable Tory allies - albeit now much weaker with no MPs at all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2022 14:01:43 GMT
So essentially the problem is that, in this 1990 equivalent, the Tories have elected Sir Rhodes Boyson instead of John Major as leader. Despite Sir Rhodes Boyson's many trenchant views, he was a jovial chap who was very comfortable amongst people, even those who strongly opposed his perspective on things; and also never hid in the shadows. Most probably. I was trying to find the worst possible MP from the time but was lazy and stopped searching after 'B'. I'm sure there are other candidates! |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Oct 1, 2022 14:03:24 GMT
On another subject, I think it's become clear that allowing party members to choose leaders is a terrible idea. Firstly, leaders need the support of MPs, and (an extreme example) a candidate who gets 90% of MPs votes but loses the membership vote was clearly better placed to lead the party. Secondly, prospective leaders need to win the support of the country as a whole, especially the middle-ground swing voters who inevitably decide elections, and very few of that category are members of any political party by virtue of the fact they are swing voters! IMO MPs choosing their leader is the best system of an imperfect bunch and at least ensures a (probably) united party going forward. What we have currently is likely to become a bit of a mess when these policies get to the Commons. It used to be considered a good thing for a party to have a large, active membership base. I think the last few years have shown that the more power members have the less appealing a party is likely to be to the wider public. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on Oct 1, 2022 14:16:04 GMT
In 2010 the numbers were there for a minority Labour Government backed by an assortment of smaller parties - ie LibDem + SDLP + SNP + Plaid + Green + Alliance would have produced a further 71 MPs to prop up 258 Labour MPs. 329 MPs would have been sufficient given that SF did not take up their seats. The key figure,therefore, was 323. It was a possibility which the LDs rejected - and to be fair some senior Labour MPs had reservations. In 2017 the DUP was pivotal. Unlike the UUP the DUP have never been natural Tory bedfellows - right wing on social issues but quite left wing in terms of economic policy. Had Labour's leader then been Starmer - or indeed Ed Milliband - the DUP might have ousted Theresa May and the Tories.
A point about 2010 is that Labour had been in power for 13 years and had just been rejected at the polls (their UK vote share was around 29%, down fro 35.2% in 2005). For a somewhat unlikely combination of minority parties to have propped them up would have been highly controversial and the Conservative opposition would have a field day about it and likely have won the GE that would have followed in a couple of years with a good majority. None of which excuses Clegg's idiocy in agreeing to a formal coalition and selling himself cheap in the process. He should have gone confidence and supply with the Tories and agreed measures on a case by case basis only. I doubt Osborne could have imposed the same level of brutal 'austerity' in that scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Oct 1, 2022 14:31:03 GMT
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,634
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Oct 1, 2022 14:37:21 GMT
 Indian tonight. |
|
|
|
Post by bardin1 on Oct 1, 2022 14:44:32 GMT
I use most of these Alec but thanks for the Philip O'Brien link, which I hadn't seen before and looks useful There are many youtube analysts giving their views on the situation. Most are not worthwhile but i find this chap, who styles himself the Tippling Philosopher, gives a very sensible sit rep every day. his vlogs are lengthy but supported by good map analysis, for those who are interested in the military situation and I find it particularly helpful with regard to small towns and villages as he homes in on them on the map. He also seems to be pretty good at explaining the strategic aspects. No idea of his background, but I enjoy his uploads www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiImMQtgn30 |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,378
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Oct 1, 2022 14:57:18 GMT
neilj I assumed the claim was bollocks , but you would have thought he might have come up with something more plausible. Perhaps he was also mugged on the three other occasions he made disparaging comments about Birmingham... 😉 He's also a bigot |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,634
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Oct 1, 2022 15:09:29 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2022 15:11:40 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on Oct 1, 2022 15:32:47 GMT
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Oct 1, 2022 15:37:46 GMT
The great motivation for brexit was pensioners hankering for the glory days of their youth. So here it is, back to the 60s and 70s. Do we subsidise critical industries or let them fold? In the 80s con decided- fold. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Oct 1, 2022 15:42:07 GMT
re the Teesport dredging-up of damaging toxic pollutants: I wonder if the announcement in our latest CEH weekly news, of a fairly hefty cash injection this week to improve our testing of pollutants in fresh water and sea water is perhaps related. but the environment agency new the material wax polluted and agreed to dumping anyway! |
|
