Knockagh wrote: I'm giving up. I've learnt several things today. Mostly how little the English care about the union and how shamefully uneducated many of them can be about their neighbours. It's very sad. As someone who loves England, Wales, Scotland and NI and views our collective nations as a family I've found the hatred poured on my country and its people today on social media depressing beyond words.
Spin and GIFs on social media are what people consider education and knowledge on a people's history. This plays directly into the hands of the history rewriters.
Eh. Ever was it thus. I'm personally finding a degree of joy in the growing realisation by the rest of the UK that yes, Northern Ireland still exists. Oh, and they have politicians who might now hold the balance of power in the UK. And that many of these politicians are CRAZY.
To which the next question is going to be "have these guys always been this crazy?" to which we get to reply "No, they've calmed down a fair bit recently"
Enjoy the realisation that the UK is considerably more than one country, folks
(Also - good to seem more Northern Ireland location tags popping up in the UK politics section)
r_squared wrote: What's interested me is that we've just had a run of commentary on here that suggested that Brexit is a terrible idea, and instead of defending it, it's supporters have basically said it's a done deal that we can't get out of rather than defending it's integrity as a good idea.
How interesting.
I would vote for Brexit again tomorrow. I have no regrets. Just because the Tories can't organise a funeral in a graveyard, doesn't mean that leaving the EU is a bad idea...
Just because you'll vote for it again, doesn't mean it's a good idea either.
That's true, but we are were we are. The DUP supported Leave, so I think Brexit will continue on its merry way.
You're also forgetting that Corbyn has been anti-EEC/EU for decades, something a lot of his supporters seem to have overlooked.
I've remembered that, and to be fair, his other policies outweighed my concerns, you cant have everything after all. Like I mentioned, I'm as happy as a pig in gak. The tories will reap the whirlwind of Brexit, Labour will sort themselves out, finally, and the next general election has a whole new generation active and charged and politically motivated.
It's going to be great.
Knockagh wrote: I'm giving up. I've learnt several things today. Mostly how little the English care about the union and how shamefully uneducated many of them can be about their neighbours. It's very sad. As someone who loves England, Wales, Scotland and NI and views our collective nations as a family I've found the hatred poured on my country and its people today on social media depressing beyond words.
Spin and GIFs on social media are what people consider education and knowledge on a people's history. This plays directly into the hands of the history rewriters.
Eh. Ever was it thus. I'm personally finding a degree of joy in the growing realisation by the rest of the UK that yes, Northern Ireland still exists. Oh, and they have politicians who might now hold the balance of power in the UK. And that many of these politicians are CRAZY.
To which the next question is going to be "have these guys always been this crazy?" to which we get to reply "No, they've calmed down a fair bit recently"
Enjoy the realisation that the UK is considerably more than one country, folks
(Also - good to seem more Northern Ireland location tags popping up in the UK politics section)
I disagree. In the last 100 years, the Conservatives have been in power for what, 80% of the time? And many of their supporters and MPs would have been university educated.
That's different - University was for the elites for a large period of time, so it was entrenched elitism that favoured the Tories. It's now open to the 'masses'. All surveys point to that when applied to population as a whole, that the higher the education level the more likely you are to vote towards the left.
I think it is more a matter of now the process has started it has to be finished, should the public want to think again after that, well then it is up to the ruling party to make the call
Yeah don't worry the day after we leave the EU I'm sure there will be a parliamentary petition to join the EU. This issue isn't going away for a long time regardless of how fed up some people are with it!
Well last seat has been called. Kensington has swung to Labour by 20 votes. The Daily Fail now has a Labour MP.
Least one thing ... We may learn about NI political systems and parties...
Like I thought DUP where not as turned out, a new even more conservative breed of the conservative party that makes them look positively liberal in places.
Shin fein just .. Do what exactly of any note in parlinent.
Others... Guess Irish politics now has a big interest in London's normal English centric/scot, Welsh parties.
I disagree. In the last 100 years, the Conservatives have been in power for what, 80% of the time? And many of their supporters and MPs would have been university educated.
That's different - University was for the elites for a large period of time, so it was entrenched elitism that favoured the Tories. It's now open to the 'masses'. All surveys point to that when applied to population as a whole, that the higher the education level the more likely you are to vote towards the left.
I think it is more a matter of now the process has started it has to be finished, should the public want to think again after that, well then it is up to the ruling party to make the call
Yeah don't worry the day after we leave the EU I'm sure there will be a parliamentary petition to join the EU. This issue isn't going away for a long time regardless of how fed up some people are with it!
Well last seat has been called. Kensington has swung to Labour by 20 votes. The Daily Fail now has a Labour MP.
Labour MP makes sign of cross as they come into sight of the towering headquarters of there greatest foe and dark lord sauron?
Knockagh wrote: I'm giving up. I've learnt several things today. Mostly how little the English care about the union and how shamefully uneducated many of them can be about their neighbours. It's very sad. As someone who loves England, Wales, Scotland and NI and views our collective nations as a family I've found the hatred poured on my country and its people today on social media depressing beyond words.
Spin and GIFs on social media are what people consider education and knowledge on a people's history. This plays directly into the hands of the history rewriters.
People in Britain really do have no clue about our politics or even that we exist I remember one of my friends from Uni who lives in England but came to Queens his friends thought they needed euros to come over and didn't realise we had real cities
Personally I think the shock and anger that has been outpoured towards the DUP is pretty understandable, even if you take away the terrorist links and support (which does exist ) there homophobic beliefs and general bible bashing attitude is going to shock people who haven't been exposed to it before as I really think even those like myself who are completely opposed to them have become numb to their beliefs slightly. I'd say if before yesterday you had told a random passer by in the streets of England the DUP's 'greatest hits' they'd have thought it was quotes from a Trump rally or something.
I wouldn't call it re-writing I think its more due to social media we're seeing everyone's side of the stories is being seen and heard. This really is living history and I wonder if this is the end of the victor writing history and everyone knowing what really happened.
I think the DUP= terror supporter that's going around is more a response to the absolute bollocks being pushed that Corbyn was in love with the IRA, and now the shoe's on the other foot there is not a word.
Knockagh wrote: I'm giving up. I've learnt several things today. Mostly how little the English care about the union and how shamefully uneducated many of them can be about their neighbours. It's very sad. As someone who loves England, Wales, Scotland and NI and views our collective nations as a family I've found the hatred poured on my country and its people today on social media depressing beyond words.
Spin and GIFs on social media are what people consider education and knowledge on a people's history. This plays directly into the hands of the history rewriters.
People in Britain really do have no clue about our politics or even that we exist I remember one of my friends from Uni who lives in England but came to Queens his friends thought they needed euros to come over and didn't realise we had real cities
Personally I think the shock and anger that has been outpoured towards the DUP is pretty understandable, even if you take away the terrorist links and support (which does exist ) there homophobic beliefs and general bible bashing attitude is going to shock people who haven't been exposed to it before as I really think even those like myself who are completely opposed to them have become numb to their beliefs slightly. I'd say if before yesterday you had told a random passer by in the streets of England the DUP's 'greatest hits' they'd have thought it was quotes from a Trump rally or something.
I wouldn't call it re-writing I think its more due to social media we're seeing everyone's side of the stories is being seen and heard. This really is living history and I wonder if this is the end of the victor writing history and everyone knowing what really happened.
I think that in Part NI is almost self contained with own parties, own systems of government, the other 3 nations all stand candidates from the big parties. NI os different in many ways the the politics we know.
Knockagh wrote: I'm giving up. I've learnt several things today. Mostly how little the English care about the union and how shamefully uneducated many of them can be about their neighbours. It's very sad. As someone who loves England, Wales, Scotland and NI and views our collective nations as a family I've found the hatred poured on my country and its people today on social media depressing beyond words.
Spin and GIFs on social media are what people consider education and knowledge on a people's history. This plays directly into the hands of the history rewriters.
Eh. Ever was it thus. I'm personally finding a degree of joy in the growing realisation by the rest of the UK that yes, Northern Ireland still exists. Oh, and they have politicians who might now hold the balance of power in the UK. And that many of these politicians are CRAZY.
To which the next question is going to be "have these guys always been this crazy?" to which we get to reply "No, they've calmed down a fair bit recently"
Enjoy the realisation that the UK is considerably more than one country, folks
(Also - good to seem more Northern Ireland location tags popping up in the UK politics section)
Nary a truer word was spoken.
Unionism was only ever a two way street when it suited Westminster. Even your darling Churchill campaigned hard for Irish home rule, and it was very nearly enacted! Don't think for a second TM and her Conservative (and Unionist when it suits them) give a feth about how Brexit effects NI.
Its already evident in the polling results. Its practically confirming to Nationalist voters that there is zero point in having an SDLP representative in Westminster because Westminster don't want anything to do with a European Ireland, so SF are picking up lots of support and abstaining all the way. The more support SF get the more the Unionist voters feel they have to consolidate their support behind the DUP to stay on top.
Its pushing voters to support two parties that are demonstrably incapable of governing effectively. And so we're left with a bunch insurgents bent of wresting power form the government and a bunch of cronies exploiting their authority to line their pockets.
I understand why one might despair of NI politics but ignoring us only perpetuates the problem where supporting less ideologically entrenched parties who show a spark of initiative and enthusiasm for change might go a long way to breaking the stalemate that we are so used to seeing in Stormont.
So, not sure if it's been posted here yet, but according to Frank Cottrell-Boyce on twitter, Sinn Fein are saying the Tory/DUP alliance is in contravention of the terms of the Good Friday Agreement.
Robin5t wrote: So, not sure if it's been posted here yet, but according to Frank Cottrell-Boyce on twitter, Sinn Fein are saying the Tory/DUP alliance is in contravention of the terms of the Good Friday Agreement.
Not seen anything flash up on news yet about that yet.
Graphite wrote: There is going to be a degree of... re-education about Northern Irish politics.
Oh yes. Yes there will.
Seems like playing with a live grenade if you ask me. May must be desperate.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
feeder wrote: I think the DUP= terror supporter that's going around is more a response to the absolute bollocks being pushed that Corbyn was in love with the IRA, and now the shoe's on the other foot there is not a word.
I'd be surprised if there were no orange order members in DUF.
Young people voting is obviously a good thing, but let's not forget that young get jobs and houses, get old, and tend to drift to the right.
The problem is we don't really know this because there's an added complication that hasn't been there before. It's called education; generally this makes them more socially aware and higher educations usually relates to more left wing votes. We could be on the cusp of changing politics as the 90's and millennials have significantly better education and that might trump the age = conservative. We'll probably know over the next 15-20 years. If education trumps age then we will see a slow push of elderly voters moving towards left wing policies over time. Perhaps it is already happening, Tory supporter (as in those that have joined the party) base is already aging rapidly.
That's what I think too.
Older people are more right wing because the world they grew up in was more right wing, not because ageing causes right-wing-ness.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
r_squared wrote: What's interested me is that we've just had a run of commentary on here that suggested that Brexit is a terrible idea, and instead of defending it, it's supporters have basically said it's a done deal that we can't get out of rather than defending it's integrity as a good idea.
How interesting.
No-one has ever come up with a convincing argument on the economic benefits of Brexit. The best people can say is that by hard work we can find stuff to replace what we're going to lose. E.g. if the Germans don't want to sell us cars we can buy Korean ones. If we reduce our exports to Europe we can try to make deals to increase our exports to Canada and India.
The "genuine" "benefits" are to do with "sovereignty". This is a far woolier and more emotional area. It has some clear downsides, too, such as arbitrary immigration restrictions damaging the education and research sector's ability to attract international professors, students and collaboration.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Interestingly, the Scottish Conservative's leader has publicly raised concerns about May teaming up with the DUP. The Scottish Conservatives have 13 seats at Westminster, so May will need to tread carefully.
I have been very impressed with Ruth Davidson since watching her performance in the Referendum debates last year.
Young people voting is obviously a good thing, but let's not forget that young get jobs and houses, get old, and tend to drift to the right.
The problem is we don't really know this because there's an added complication that hasn't been there before. It's called education; generally this makes them more socially aware and higher educations usually relates to more left wing votes. We could be on the cusp of changing politics as the 90's and millennials have significantly better education and that might trump the age = conservative. We'll probably know over the next 15-20 years. If education trumps age then we will see a slow push of elderly voters moving towards left wing policies over time. Perhaps it is already happening, Tory supporter (as in those that have joined the party) base is already aging rapidly.
That's what I think too.
Older people are more right wing because the world they grew up in was more right wing, not because ageing causes right-wing-ness.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
r_squared wrote: What's interested me is that we've just had a run of commentary on here that suggested that Brexit is a terrible idea, and instead of defending it, it's supporters have basically said it's a done deal that we can't get out of rather than defending it's integrity as a good idea.
How interesting.
No-one has ever come up with a convincing argument on the economic benefits of Brexit. The best people can say is that by hard work we can find stuff to replace what we're going to lose. E.g. if the Germans don't want to sell us cars we can buy Korean ones. If we reduce our exports to Europe we can try to make deals to increase our exports to Canada and India.
The "genuine" "benefits" are to do with "sovereignty". This is a far woolier and more emotional area. It has some clear downsides, too, such as arbitrary immigration restrictions damaging the education and research sector's ability to attract international professors, students and collaboration.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Interestingly, the Scottish Conservative's leader has publicly raised concerns about May teaming up with the DUP. The Scottish Conservatives have 13 seats at Westminster, so May will need to tread carefully.
I have been very impressed with Ruth Davidson since watching her performance in the Referendum debates last year.
Hmmm maybe partly stem from she is gay, and DUP are not most openly friendly party to those of a different sexual orientation.
Even politics people have gut feelings and they do somewhat clash here.
There is certainly evidence that as one gains in life in terms of wealth and property, one naturally becomes more conservative to protect the gains of your hard work.
But, millennial and the slightly older (I just turned 37)....well generally, we ain't got much beyond debt, crap paying jobs and a lifetime of renting property. That's not what our parents enjoyed.
So in short, we've not got a whole lot to defend or to scaremonger.
I mean, it's hard to break out the 'but what of my house price, WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF MY HOUSE PRICE' when property ownership is either a distant pipe dream, or a serious millstone round the neck.
And where does much of that and similar sentiment stem from? The gutter press. They're the ones regularly banging on and on about property prices, oh noes immigrants, 'everyone gets something for free buy you' etc etc. But the younger you are, the less likely you are to be a regular consumer of such bigoted nonsense - we tend to get our news and views from social media. And having grown up with it (well ok, I didn't have the Internet until I was 18!), we're more likely as a demograph to fact check what we're being told.
It's a generation that's being roundly ignored except when it was time for yet another political shafting. And it's quite an angry generation because of that. We've had to watch the generations before us pull away the ladders and rig the market solely in its own favour with nothing but help and encouragement from the political powers.
So whilst conservatism does naturally occur later in life, I have to question just how much that generation is going to shift that way.
I'm willing to bet nowhere near our parents extent.
The "genuine" "benefits" are to do with "sovereignty". This is a far woolier and more emotional area.
I can't comment on the economic side of Brexit with any authority, but the issue of sovereignty is nowhere near as nebulous and intangible as you seem to bee suggesting. It's a very real matter of legal rules and legal authority with ramifications just as important as the economy.
Jordan Peterson actually makes some pretty good points on this. The main aspects being:
1) The EU formed too quickly, hard to design as opposed to the natural formation of the States
2) Countries were included that simply weren't compatible on a lower level of governance (Greek corruption and widespread refusal to pay income tax being a big one)
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jordan+peterson+eu[/youtube]
It has some clear downsides, too, such as arbitrary immigration restrictions damaging the education and research sector's ability to attract international professors, students and collaboration.
Numerous method to obtain exemptions to this limit exist. Through sponsorship and grounds specifically set aside for those areas, limiting your overall immigration doesn't actually limit the number of smart, gifted foreign folk that will benefit the country.
That's not me arguing for increased immigration restrictions, I'm just pointing out generally professionals don't lose out to untrained immigrant applicants.
The "genuine" "benefits" are to do with "sovereignty". This is a far woolier and more emotional area.
I can't comment on the economic side of Brexit with any authority, but the issue of sovereignty is nowhere near as nebulous and intangible as you seem to bee suggesting. It's a very real matter of legal rules and legal authority with ramifications just as important as the economy.
Jordan Peterson actually makes some pretty good points on this. The main aspects being:
1) The EU formed too quickly, hard to design as opposed to the natural formation of the States
2) Countries were included that simply weren't compatible on a lower level of governance (Greek corruption and widespread refusal to pay income tax being a big one)
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jordan+peterson+eu[/youtube]
It has some clear downsides, too, such as arbitrary immigration restrictions damaging the education and research sector's ability to attract international professors, students and collaboration.
Numerous method to obtain exemptions to this limit exist. Through sponsorship and grounds specifically set aside for those areas, limiting your overall immigration doesn't actually limit the number of smart, gifted foreign folk that will benefit the country.
That's not me arguing for increased immigration restrictions, I'm just pointing out generally professionals don't lose out to untrained immigrant applicants.
Yeah...
Central Europe was fine...
Problems came when the Greeks where let in despite corruption, then the economically different eastern Europe.
It put tension on the system at points when it grew so quickly from some 7 to 27 nations.
Lastly the idea of Turkey joining. The battles caused by EU meddling in Ukraine.
There's lots of small issues biting at the EU even if its big enough to ignore them.
Robin5t wrote: Yeah, he's the only source as it stands, so take with a pinch of salt.
Whether it is a breach or not, the fact they think it is could be a big problem.
Requiring the suppprt of the DUP to prop up the government is a terrible idea. They're going to demand money, the whole of the UK will be hoping for money to replace that the EU once guaranteed, but Northern Ireland will be first in the queue with a big bowl. All the extremely conservative policies will be untouchable. Any progress on gay marriage is impossible, abortion will remain illegal with women covertly travelling to the UK for operations. Their ranks include creationists and climate deniers, so will obstruct legislation linked to these in industry and education. There are women in Northern Ireland facing prison for getting abortions. Think Westminster will even lift a finger for their cases now? The backward politics of Northern Ireland shame us, yet May rushes into a deal in a matter of hours desperate to claw onto power.
Funny how much criticism Tim Farron got over whether he thought gay sex was a sin. Shall we hold our breath to see if the right wing rags pursue this questioning of May's new chums?
What has been very interesting is the significant decline in print media in favour of social media. The print press has halved circulation to around 2 million, in total for all publications over the last 10 years, they're in serious trouble. I rarely see a paper at work these days, and I clearly remember there being loads before.
I wonder how long it'll be before Murdoch and the Barclay brothers catch on to this and start infiltrating online social media. I know it's a stretch, but a right wing owned "FaceChat" may look very different to what we see now. Obviously there's challenges, but Breitbart proves that right wing interests can adapt and prove successful. Luckily Guido Fawkes is still a pretty small, albeit toxic, presence.
I signed up to all sorts of political feeds online in the run up to the election, and the silence from the conservatives and UKIP was deafening. They were clearly ignoring the possibilities online, which raises some concerns about whether they truly understand, or are prepared to lead, a modern 21st century state.
People have criticised Corby for 1970s solutions for 21st century Britain, but he has embraced the younger generations by actually giving a gak, and ensuring his message is accessible in ways we all now use, without name calling. The right in the UK are the ones who seem to be living in the 70s when it comes to dealing with modern Britain.
I don't even give a monkeys now what the Sun, Express or Mail print, they've been relegated, the sub 40 yo generation are resistant to their propoganda, and have rejected it. That is one solid positive for me out of all this. An educated, politically aware, propoganda resistant youth that are ready and willing to actually contribute.
The "genuine" "benefits" are to do with "sovereignty". This is a far woolier and more emotional area.
I can't comment on the economic side of Brexit with any authority, but the issue of sovereignty is nowhere near as nebulous and intangible as you seem to bee suggesting. It's a very real matter of legal rules and legal authority with ramifications just as important as the economy.
Jordan Peterson actually makes some pretty good points on this. The main aspects being:
1) The EU formed too quickly, hard to design as opposed to the natural formation of the States
I've never understood this one, it's not like Europe hasn't had it's share of nation states (formed from multiple, often highly somewhat contentious, constituent states) literally declared into existence in very short order...
The "genuine" "benefits" are to do with "sovereignty". This is a far woolier and more emotional area.
I can't comment on the economic side of Brexit with any authority, but the issue of sovereignty is nowhere near as nebulous and intangible as you seem to bee suggesting. It's a very real matter of legal rules and legal authority with ramifications just as important as the economy.
Jordan Peterson actually makes some pretty good points on this. The main aspects being:
1) The EU formed too quickly, hard to design as opposed to the natural formation of the States
I've never understood this one, it's not like Europe hasn't had it's share of nation states (formed from multiple, often highly somewhat contentious, constituent states) literally declared into existence in very short order...
The UK is a great example.
Like I said, these concepts are wooly and emotional.
Oh goody an Authoritarian Tory pm with a dislike of human rights teams up with the Irish Taliban(No Gays, No women, No Religon but ours and the sky fairy made the eath) this is going to end badly.
SeanDrake wrote: Oh goody an Authoritarian Tory pm with a dislike of human rights teams up with the Irish Taliban(No Gays, No women, No Religon but ours and the sky fairy made the eath) this is going to end badly.
Pathetic comments. Gay marriage only became legal in England a short time ago. We do have civil partnerships. No women? The DUP party leader is a woman along with many others. One of the MPs at Westminster is a woman. They have the second highest number of female representatives in the NI assembly. No religion but ours? Have you even looked at the rest of the political parties in Northern Ireland? And as far as the sky fairy comments go, if your so full of hate you can't stand people of faith about you then that says more about you than them.
And before you run away with yourself and start nonsense about abortion, we do have abortion in NI, we just don't allow it on social grounds. It's perfectly legal and on health issues. That is a view commonly held across the world. One that is shared by all the main political parties in Northern Ireland. There could be a vote in the Northern Ireland assembly tomorrow on it and if the DUP didn't show up it would still fail. Alliance and greens are the only ones who want this to change.
On the supposed terrorist claims, which has everyone over here, bar SF supporters scratching their heads. Just so you know. None of the 10 MPs have ever been charged, convicted of or made statements in support of terrorist groups. However 3 of them have had family members killed by terrorists. One of them served in the British Army defending the citizens of Northern Ireland alongside soldiers from across the UK. And the female leader you don't acknowledge had had her father shot by terrorists as a child while she was feet away. Terrorists also placed a bomb on her school bus when she was a child. Nearly killing her and her classmates.
A little more study would go along way.
SeanDrake wrote: Oh goody an Authoritarian Tory pm with a dislike of human rights teams up with the Irish Taliban(No Gays, No women, No Religon but ours and the sky fairy made the eath) this is going to end badly.
Pathetic comments. Gay marriage only became legal in England a short time ago. We do have civil partnerships. No women? The DUP party leader is a woman along with many others. One of the MPs at Westminster is a woman. They have the second highest number of female representatives in the NI assembly. No religion but ours? Have you even looked at the rest of the political parties in Northern Ireland? And as far as the sky fairy comments go, if your so full of hate you can't stand people of faith about you then that says more about you than them.
And before you run away with yourself and start nonsense about abortion, we do have abortion in NI, we just don't allow it on social grounds. It's perfectly legal and on health issues. That is a view commonly held across the world. One that is shared by all the main political parties in Northern Ireland. There could be a vote in the Northern Ireland assembly tomorrow on it and if the DUP didn't show up it would still fail. Alliance and greens are the only ones who want this to change.
On the supposed terrorist claims, which has everyone over here, bar SF supporters scratching their heads. Just so you know. None of the 10 MPs have ever been charged, convicted of or made statements in support of terrorist groups. However 3 of them have had family members killed by terrorists. One of them served in the British Army defending the citizens of Northern Ireland alongside soldiers from across the UK. And the female leader you don't acknowledge had had her father shot by terrorists as a child while she was feet away. Terrorists also placed a bomb on her school bus when she was a child. Nearly killing her and her classmates.
A little more study would go along way.
Screw it, I'll weigh in.
I love the Ulstermen, they saved the UK from collapse before and they're saving it now.
And screw Corbyn, he's a buffoon, and screw Theresa 'Incompetent' May for making Corbyn look like a valid option.
SeanDrake wrote: Oh goody an Authoritarian Tory pm with a dislike of human rights teams up with the Irish Taliban(No Gays, No women, No Religon but ours and the sky fairy made the eath) this is going to end badly.
Pathetic comments. Gay marriage only became legal in England a short time ago. We do have civil partnerships. No women? The DUP party leader is a woman along with many others. One of the MPs at Westminster is a woman. They have the second highest number of female representatives in the NI assembly. No religion but ours? Have you even looked at the rest of the political parties in Northern Ireland? And as far as the sky fairy comments go, if your so full of hate you can't stand people of faith about you then that says more about you than them.
And before you run away with yourself and start nonsense about abortion, we do have abortion in NI, we just don't allow it on social grounds. It's perfectly legal and on health issues. That is a view commonly held across the world. One that is shared by all the main political parties in Northern Ireland. There could be a vote in the Northern Ireland assembly tomorrow on it and if the DUP didn't show up it would still fail. Alliance and greens are the only ones who want this to change.
On the supposed terrorist claims, which has everyone over here, bar SF supporters scratching their heads. Just so you know. None of the 10 MPs have ever been charged, convicted of or made statements in support of terrorist groups. However 3 of them have had family members killed by terrorists. One of them served in the British Army defending the citizens of Northern Ireland alongside soldiers from across the UK. And the female leader you don't acknowledge had had her father shot by terrorists as a child while she was feet away. Terrorists also placed a bomb on her school bus when she was a child. Nearly killing her and her classmates.
A little more study would go along way.
Screw it, I'll weigh in.
I love the Ulstermen, they saved the UK from collapse before and they're saving it now.
And screw Corbyn, he's a buffoon, and screw Theresa 'Incompetent' May for making Corbyn look like a valid option.
Blimey support, i wasn't expecting that! Thanks. I love you too!
How insightful, I'd never considered that argument before, you've completely swung me on the debate.
I know, it's hardly the greatest political statement of the 21st century, I was just expressing my own views in as concise a manner as possible. You support whoever you want, I just think it of him is all.
theCrowe wrote: Well therein lies a big part of the issue. For better or worse Northern Ireland is part of the UK and our politics is your politics. The welfare and stability of our province is certainly your responsibility much as you wish it otherwise.
Absolutely true. The problem is that no mainland media outlet takes any interest in NI whatsoever so the only people who have any exposure to it in any real numbers are folks in the west of Scotland, and they only experience it through the prism of football sectarianism. There is literally a fraction of a percent of the mainland population who care at all what happens in Northern Ireland beyond 'it'd be nice if the peace process lasted'. There are even less who could name a Northern Irish politician other than Gerry Adams or Ian Paisley.
I've no idea how you fix that situation. One thing is for certain, a bright light being cast on the DUP will make it worse.
SeanDrake wrote: Oh goody an Authoritarian Tory pm with a dislike of human rights teams up with the Irish Taliban(No Gays, No women, No Religon but ours and the sky fairy made the eath) this is going to end badly.
And before you run away with yourself and start nonsense about abortion, we do have abortion in NI, we just don't allow it on social grounds. It's perfectly legal and on health issues.
Those 'health issues' only cover serious risk to the life of the mother. Rape and incest, or foetal abnormalities are presumably those unaccepted 'social' reasons you mention.
Knockagh wrote: And before you run away with yourself and start nonsense about abortion, we do have abortion in NI, we just don't allow it on social grounds. It's perfectly legal and on health issues. That is a view commonly held across the world. One that is shared by all the main political parties in Northern Ireland. There could be a vote in the Northern Ireland assembly tomorrow on it and if the DUP didn't show up it would still fail. Alliance and greens are the only ones who want this to change.
You keep saying that the rest of the UK needs to educate itself on the politics of NI. If there's going to be a loose coalition between Tories and DUP then that's going to thrust NI politics into the foreground from where they have been ignored, and when the rest of the world starts to recognise how retrograde NI politics is you're going to wish we hadn't payed any attention. NI needs to educate itself and catch up with the politics of the rest of the UK.
(I say this as someone who has lived for a good length of time in Antrim)
Well I took the time to read the DUP manifesto. All looks pretty normal to be honest.
The only thing radical I could see was replacement of the tv license for a subscription based service.
They are opposed to any cuts to the winter fuel allowance, so you an bet that will not change.
Captyn_Bob wrote: Well I took the time to read the DUP manifesto. All looks pretty normal to be honest.
The only thing radical I could see was replacement of the tv license for a subscription based service.
They are opposed to any cuts to the winter fuel allowance, so you an bet that will not change.
m
Well done captain bob for actually reading something and not basing your thoughts on memes, gifs, lily Allen, you tube wannabe superstars etc. Some will be surprised you didn't find the bible with bin collections after all.
I have great faith in the British public to look beyond media hype and find the truth, which is always way more complicated than a cursory glance suggests.
Automatically Appended Next Post: If anyone want to check out some material to get to know the politicians you could do worse than reading this article in the local paper from a few years ago when Arlene took over as leader of the DUP
May is doing everything she can to shore up her position. She is too weak for a proper cabinet reshuffle and has had to sack her two main advisers, allegedly as the price of avoiding an immediate leadership challenge. However her position in Parliament will be very difficult, a razor thin majority balanced on the support of the DUP and any Pro-EU Tory rebels. Even with the DUP support and the absence of the Sinn Fein members, May's working majority is only three votes.
It will be like John Major again, though to be fair, he managed to hold it together for several years.
I doubt that May will survive the party conference in early October.
Well done captain bob for actually reading something and not basing your thoughts on memes, gifs, lily Allen, you tube wannabe superstars etc. Some will be surprised you didn't find the bible with bin collections after all.
I have great faith in the British public to look beyond media hype and find the truth, which is always way more complicated than a cursory glance suggests.
Manifestos are one thing. How did the DUP actually run their campaign? Genuine questions, as I too haven't been keeping that up to date with politics back home (since I can't, y'know, vote there)
You keep saying that the rest of the UK needs to educate itself on the politics of NI. If there's going to be a loose coalition between Tories and DUP then that's going to thrust NI politics into the foreground from where they have been ignored, and when the rest of the world starts to recognise how retrograde NI politics is you're going to wish we hadn't payed any attention. NI needs to educate itself and catch up with the politics of the rest of the UK.
(I say this as someone who has lived for a good length of time in Antrim)
No, I'd say that most people in Norn Iron would be pretty happy with the rest of the UK paying attention for once for reasons other than "Are the natives still shooting each other, I hope they don't come over here with their bombs". And I'd also say that most folk from N.I. would be pretty up to date with UK politics rather than having to educate themselves on what's happening on the mainland. Due to having the BBC and most of the rest of UK media pretty much on tap. When I was a kid I'd say I knew more about UK politics than local politics.
May is doing everything she can to shore up her position. She is too weak for a proper cabinet reshuffle and has had to sack her two main advisers, allegedly as the price of avoiding an immediate leadership challenge. However her position in Parliament will be very difficult, a razor thin majority balanced on the support of the DUP and any Pro-EU Tory rebels. Even with the DUP support and the absence of the Sinn Fein members, May's working majority is only three votes.
It will be like John Major again, though to be fair, he managed to hold it together for several years.
I doubt that May will survive the party conference in early October.
May is a zombie PM. In office, but not in power. That's a pretty accurate description from the newspapers. She's finished, and once again, because the Tories put party before country, the UK is in a mess ahead of crucial talks.
Do people on Dakka see now why I've been against the Tories all my life? They are a threat, risk, to the UK's safety. Cutting police numbers and now sabotaging the UK ahead of talks that will define this nation for decades.
And people still vote for them. I will never understand why
Captyn_Bob wrote: Well I took the time to read the DUP manifesto. All looks pretty normal to be honest.
The only thing radical I could see was replacement of the tv license for a subscription based service.
They are opposed to any cuts to the winter fuel allowance, so you an bet that will not change.
m
Well done captain bob for actually reading something and not basing your thoughts on memes, gifs, lily Allen, you tube wannabe superstars etc. Some will be surprised you didn't find the bible with bin collections after all.
I have great faith in the British public to look beyond media hype and find the truth, which is always way more complicated than a cursory glance suggests.
Automatically Appended Next Post: If anyone want to check out some material to get to know the politicians you could do worse than reading this article in the local paper from a few years ago when Arlene took over as leader of the DUP
No disrespect to you, but I think you need to read up on the rest of the UK. The UK still hasn't gotten over World War 2, distrusts the Germans, and thinks Merkel is trying to take over Europe. They have long memories.
So when these same people look at Northern Ireland, they see only Ian Paisley and Gerry Adams. They remember the bombs and the murders of the 1980s.
Even if the DUP had the cure for cancer, they would still be faced with deep mistrust. And for that reason, I think you're wasting your time if you think those people will put aside their decades long prejuduce against Northern Ireland.
@graphite Campaign was largely run off the back of the recent assembly elections and the belief that Sinn Fein had collapsed the assembly and local government for tactical reasons. Mostly as their vote amongst die hard republicans had been falling, also their vote in the republic has started to slip. Collapsing government gave them a huge boost so much so they had started to demand a border poll. Which under the terms of the good Friday agreement would put us into a cycle of border polls every 7 years which most Unionists felt would pretty much institutionalise everything that's wrong with our wee country. SF are desperate to get a border poll to kick off the 7 year cycle. Scottish Indy ref on speed. The DUP encouraged people to use the election as a border poll to send a message that the union should be maintained and we need to get back to governing ourselves under the institution and the St. Andrews agreement. Hence the manifesto was geared toward providing an attractive and workable local assembly.
Another little aside that has people scratching over here is the storm over the letter endorsing the DUP (and other unionists) from loyalist paramilitaries. The group representing them who sent the letter was established by none other than Labours own Jonathan Powell! With the purpose of helping to move loyalist groups from violence into engaging in the political arena. So they did exactly what Powell and Labour asked and now their getting slaughtered for it! Crazy stuff
Automatically Appended Next Post: And if you all want a real laugh to get you smiling this Sunday morning read this.
Captyn_Bob wrote: Well I took the time to read the DUP manifesto. All looks pretty normal to be honest.
The only thing radical I could see was replacement of the tv license for a subscription based service.
They are opposed to any cuts to the winter fuel allowance, so you an bet that will not change.
The problem is that you don't put something in the manifesto unless you want to change it. That the manifesto doesn't include improvement in LGBT rights, the rights of women to act as they see fit (resulting in them secretly having to go to the rest of the UK for abortions) and so on is more telling because they aren't included. They won't also tell you that they will try and push "the world is 6000 years old" tripe or climate change isn't real - they just come afterwards.
The DUP social agenda in this regard is something more akin to the 1600s rather the 21st century.
This is before we take into account the RHI scandal which either comes down to gross incompetence, gross mismanagement or, if as some accusations have been suggested, state funding of the DUP supporters - and this being just the person the leads the DUP. Of course the DUP are now going to have face the full force of the British press now, rather than the limited exposure they have currently. Given this is I fully expect that other not so sound decisions will come to light in the next year. Still it might do the SF, alliance and other parties some good in the long term. We all saw what happened to the LDs when they power shared.
As for May she is doing her best to hold on to power. Removing her aides means that the she is losing people she trusts, although reading some of the reports it seems they pretty much bullied everyone to tow the line. Question is though whether May employed because of the way they acted. It's also going to be difficult to keep reiterating that she wants new laws protecting "British values" when she appears to be so keen to get in bed with people that the majority of the British populace probably wouldn't see that way. I can imagine what will be the end of May will be trying to leave the ECHR and ECJ as the principled line she has spouted has disappeared in a last ditch attempt to hold onto power.
Of course the rumours are that Boris the Clown wants to make another leadership bid. I'm not sure which would be worse to be honest...
Captyn_Bob wrote: Well I took the time to read the DUP manifesto. All looks pretty normal to be honest.
The only thing radical I could see was replacement of the tv license for a subscription based service.
They are opposed to any cuts to the winter fuel allowance, so you an bet that will not change.
The problem is that you don't put something in the manifesto unless you want to change it. That the manifesto doesn't include improvement in LGBT rights, the rights of women to act as they see fit (resulting in them secretly having to go to the rest of the UK for abortions) and so on is more telling because they aren't included. They won't also tell you that they will try and push "the world is 6000 years old" tripe or climate change isn't real - they just come afterwards.
The DUP social agenda in this regard is something more akin to the 1600s rather the 21st century.
This is before we take into account the RHI scandal which either comes down to gross incompetence, gross mismanagement or, if as some accusations have been suggested, state funding of the DUP supporters - and this being just the person the leads the DUP. Of course the DUP are now going to have face the full force of the British press now, rather than the limited exposure they have currently. Given this is I fully expect that other not so sound decisions will come to light in the next year. Still it might do the SF, alliance and other parties some good in the long term. We all saw what happened to the LDs when they power shared.
As for May she is doing her best to hold on to power. Removing her aides means that the she is losing people she trusts, although reading some of the reports it seems they pretty much bullied everyone to tow the line. Question is though whether May employed because of the way they acted. It's also going to be difficult to keep reiterating that she wants new laws protecting "British values" when she appears to be so keen to get in bed with people that the majority of the British populace probably wouldn't see that way. I can imagine what will be the end of May will be trying to leave the ECHR and ECJ as the principled line she has spouted has disappeared in a last ditch attempt to hold onto power.
Of course the rumours are that Boris the Clown wants to make another leadership bid. I'm not sure which would be worse to be honest...
People seem to keep under estimating him too though.
However he had survived a very long time in some pretty shark infested waters, ran a good olympics, he no fool and had his momements too yes that where a tad unwise.
However all round, he might be seen as andit of a bafoon, he also os a pretty smart one. Adapts quickly on the fly far better than May and some others.
When you talk about the DUPs abortion policy you do all realise that the SDLP who had 3 MPs up until a few days ago and have taken the Labour whip for 30 years have exactly the same position on abortion.
Boris didn't run the Olympics, he had the luck to become Mayor of London at the time that other people were running a good Olympics. If you look at his genuine record of achievement as Mayor, the cupboard is pretty bare.
In fact, his genuine record of achievement at everything that matters apart from self-promotion is pretty bare.
Knockagh wrote: When you talk about the DUPs abortion policy you do all realise that the SDLP who had 3 MPs up until a few days ago and have taken the Labour whip for 30 years have exactly the same position on abortion.
That maybe so, but the SDLP or indeed any other NI party are not about to be the Lynch pin of British policy.
Besides, there will be no change on abortion outside of the province, that would be political suicide.
Your not understanding modern unionism. Abortion is a devolved matter. To involve themselves in that would be against the very principles of the union itself.
Knockagh wrote: When you talk about the DUPs abortion policy you do all realise that the SDLP who had 3 MPs up until a few days ago and have taken the Labour whip for 30 years have exactly the same position on abortion.
A coalition with pretty much any NI party other than maybe Alliance would get a hammering in the British press. Saying the DUP are backwards shouldn't be read as an indication that everyone else is hunkydory.
If Boris has a punt, I think it would be as a stalking horse rather than as a serious candidate.
... which would result in -- another -- hung parliament.
... still least things cannot get any more unbelievab....
Spoiler:
... still least we can relax , safe in the knowledge that no one would elect a bumbling fat oaf with ridiculous hair and a penchant for adultery to high office......
To be fair to the English, Northern Ireland is a surprisingly distant place. If you live in the south-east -- and 23 million of us do -- it's easier to get to France or Holland than to NI. That doesn't excuse peoples' ignorance, of course.
I think it's a good thing to bring what are often called "the provinces" by Londoners closer to the centre of the national stage. A lot of our current problems have been created by media and political concentration on what's good for the City and the Westminster bubble.
Kilkrazy wrote: To be fair to the English, Northern Ireland is a surprisingly distant place. If you live in the south-east -- and 23 million of us do -- it's easier to get to France or Holland than to NI. That doesn't excuse peoples' ignorance, of course.
I think it's a good thing to bring what are often called "the provinces" by Londoners closer to the centre of the national stage. A lot of our current problems have been created by media and political concentration on what's good for the City and the Westminster bubble.
I lived in England for a number of years, and the idea that Home Counties Conservatives will accommodate the party of Ian Paisley is risible nonsense. It is doomed to failure. As a neutral follower of the Conservative Home website, I know from the comments there that your average Home Counties Tory is aghast at the idea at getting into bed with the DUP.
Corbyn is right to prepare for another election, as this unholy alliance will not last.
May is finished. For once, George Osborne got it right - she's a dead woman walking.
... which would result in -- another -- hung parliament.
... still least things cannot get any more unbelievab....
Spoiler:
... still least we can relax , safe in the knowledge that no one would elect a bumbling fat oaf with ridiculous hair and a penchant for adultery to high office......
....
... oh bugger.
I don't know about you, but when I woke up this morning, I thanked the Gods for waking up in a strong and stable Britain.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I lived in England for a number of years, and the idea that Home Counties Conservatives will accommodate the party of Ian Paisley is risible nonsense. It is doomed to failure. As a neutral follower of the Conservative Home website, I know from the comments there that your average Home Counties Tory is aghast at the idea at getting into bed with the DUP.
Yep. I don't think there's been sufficient acknowledgement from people on either side of the water that when the average swing voter who (traditionally) decides elections gets a load of the DUP they will be aghast. Which isn't going to help anyone. Northern Irish politics, after rightfully getting some attention paid to it, will be treated even more like a parochial backwater, whilst Westminster will be the shakiest of shaky parliaments where the ravines that separate the hard right of the Tory party and its modernisers will get even wider.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I lived in England for a number of years, and the idea that Home Counties Conservatives will accommodate the party of Ian Paisley is risible nonsense. It is doomed to failure. As a neutral follower of the Conservative Home website, I know from the comments there that your average Home Counties Tory is aghast at the idea at getting into bed with the DUP.
Yep. I don't think there's been sufficient acknowledgement from people on either side of the water that when the average swing voter who (traditionally) decides elections gets a load of the DUP they will be aghast. Which isn't going to help anyone. Northern Irish politics, after rightfully getting some attention paid to it, will be treated even more like a parochial backwater, whilst Westminster will be the shakiest of shaky parliaments where the ravines the separate the hard right of the Tory party and it's modernisers will get even wider.
It'd be relentlessly funny on TV.
Nigel Farage is threatening a comeback, Bojo is being touted as a potential PM Brexit talks are upon us, The Prime Minister is in office but has no power, and there will probably be another election within months.
I used to think American politics was interesting, but they have zero on the UK. This is where the action is.
The problem is we don't really know this because there's an added complication that hasn't been there before. It's called education; generally this makes them more socially aware and higher educations usually relates to more left wing votes. We could be on the cusp of changing politics as the 90's and millennials have significantly better education and that might trump the age = conservative. We'll probably know over the next 15-20 years. If education trumps age then we will see a slow push of elderly voters moving towards left wing policies over time. Perhaps it is already happening, Tory supporter (as in those that have joined the party) base is already aging rapidly.
Curious. In finland higher education usually lead toward right side rather than left.
Let's be 100% neutral here and take a clear look at the DUP,
Ignore anything about climate change,abortion, or anything about The Troubles.
There are two major problems for the Conservatives:
1. The renewable scandal, which will be used by Labour to damage the DUP, and the Tories will be guilty by association.
2. The collapse of power sharing in Northern Ireland. How can the Tory government be an honest broker when they are reliant on the DUP to prop them up.
I cannot see how the Tories can get around these two issues. Add zombie May to the mix, and another General Election is inevitable.
Somebody proposed a flippant idea that May had called the election deliberately to lose so that Labour carry the can for Brexit negotiations then come steaming back in when it's all done.
Why couldn't Labour do the same now? Brexit is less than two years away. Labour can play nice until then, just about keep government from collapsing while putting the Tories through the wringer. Then when Brexit has proven to be the monumental balls up that pretty much everyone is expecting it to be they can really start hammering the nails in. It gives them time to get their MPs in line as well, now that Corbyn has shown he has can lead the party to an electoral victory and all the fall out from Brexit gets lumped on the Tories.
Ignore anything about climate change,abortion, or anything about The Troubles.
You can't ignore these issues, though. You can largely ignore the Troubles, because most people in Britain are woefully clueless about the issues beyond being able to essentially map the main players onto nationalist/Catholic/unionist/Protestant, but being a creationist, a homophobe, a climate-change denier, or being anti-abortion, (and being proud of it, as opposed to downplaying something you said years ago) are all career-enders for politicians in Britain. Hell, the only question Tim Farron was asked for months was 'do you believe homosexuality is a sin?'. The Tories are going to be skewered on a daily basis as bigots by association.
It's a totally untenable relationship. Of course, they can't call another election because they'd get annihilated. Seeing the Tories in this much of a state is an absolute joy. It's as much fun as the selfcombustion of Labour through the first decade of this millennium. I love apolitical car-crash.
You are absolutely right on the farce of attempting to act as a neutral negotiator in Stormont whilst being propped up by one of the parties you're attempting to mediate between. Total nonsense.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CREEEEEEEEED wrote: I've found the same in the Home Counties at least. The poorer vote Labour, the richer, and better educated, vote Tory.
Tribal voting with parties doesn't quite map onto right/left. Most academic studies on the issue do tend to support a correlation between education and progressively further left views, at least in the UK and US.
Henry wrote: Somebody proposed a flippant idea that May had called the election deliberately to lose so that Labour carry the can for Brexit negotiations then come steaming back in when it's all done.
Why couldn't Labour do the same now? Brexit is less than two years away. Labour can play nice until then, just about keep government from collapsing while putting the Tories through the wringer. Then when Brexit has proven to be the monumental balls up that pretty much everyone is expecting it to be they can really start hammering the nails in. It gives them time to get their MPs in line as well, now that Corbyn has shown he has can lead the party to an electoral victory and all the fall out from Brexit gets lumped on the Tories.
Well, the main problem with that plan is it involves selling out the entire UK for the foreseeable future in order to make temporary gains for your political party.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around what May has done. She had a small majority, enough to work with, and after a lot of stalling we were finally about to start the Brexit negotiations. Then she called this fething pointless election and ruined absolutely everything. Now we have a seriously weakened hand going forward and that impending disaster Corbyn is within a hair's grasp of Downing Street.
Maybe she planned this all along, being a Remainer and everything. Sabotage the feth out of Brexit to kill it dead. I could believe it if she wasn't so stupid.
Henry wrote: Somebody proposed a flippant idea that May had called the election deliberately to lose so that Labour carry the can for Brexit negotiations then come steaming back in when it's all done.
Why couldn't Labour do the same now? Brexit is less than two years away. Labour can play nice until then, just about keep government from collapsing while putting the Tories through the wringer. Then when Brexit has proven to be the monumental balls up that pretty much everyone is expecting it to be they can really start hammering the nails in. It gives them time to get their MPs in line as well, now that Corbyn has shown he has can lead the party to an electoral victory and all the fall out from Brexit gets lumped on the Tories.
Well, the main problem with that plan is it involves selling out the entire UK for the foreseeable future in order to make temporary gains for your political party.
It's the Conservative party. They've been doing it since the days of King George I
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Future War Cultist wrote: I'm still trying to wrap my head around what May has done. She had a small majority, enough to work with, and after a lot of stalling we were finally about to start the Brexit negotiations. Then she called this fething pointless election and ruined absolutely everything. Now we have a seriously weakened hand going forward and that impending disaster Corbyn is within a hair's grasp of Downing Street.
Maybe she planned this all along, being a Remainer and everything. Sabotage the feth out of Brexit to kill it dead. I could believe it if she wasn't so stupid.
You're crediting May with political skill and scheming which would make Bismarck and Machiavelli look like complete amateurs. This was pure incompetence from May.
And why did they do it? I've been saying it for years: The Conservatives always put party before country, and yet, people still vote for them...
Ignore anything about climate change,abortion, or anything about The Troubles.
You can't ignore these issues, though. You can largely ignore the Troubles, because most people in Britain are woefully clueless about the issues beyond being able to essentially map the main players onto nationalist/Catholic/unionist/Protestant, but being a creationist, a homophobe, a climate-change denier, or being anti-abortion, (and being proud of it, as opposed to downplaying something you said years ago) are all career-enders for politicians in Britain. Hell, the only question Tim Farron was asked for months was 'do you believe homosexuality is a sin?'. The Tories are going to be skewered on a daily basis as bigots by association.
It's a totally untenable relationship. Of course, they can't call another election because they'd get annihilated. Seeing the Tories in this much of a state is an absolute joy. It's as much fun as the selfcombustion of Labour through the first decade of this millennium. I love apolitical car-crash.
You are absolutely right on the farce of attempting to act as a neutral negotiator in Stormont whilst being propped up by one of the parties you're attempting to mediate between. Total nonsense.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CREEEEEEEEED wrote: I've found the same in the Home Counties at least. The poorer vote Labour, the richer, and better educated, vote Tory.
Tribal voting with parties doesn't quite map onto right/left. Most academic studies on the issue do tend to support a correlation between education and progressively further left views, at least in the UK and US.
Well I did say that I could believe it if May wasn't so stupid.
She ran a negative campaign that focused more on criticizing the other side rather than offering anything remotely positive, and those don't work. And she didn't help matters by attacking her own voting base with that Dementia Tax. Corbyn to his credit at least had the sense to energize his with things like free tuition.
She ran a negative campaign that focused more on criticizing the other side rather than offering anything remotely positive, and those don't work. And she didn't help matters by attacking her own voting base with that Dementia Tax. Corbyn to his credit at least had the sense to energize his with things like free tuition.
Yeah, he did persuade the young to turn up and vote for him. Bloody students!
And people still vote for them. I will never understand why
Because until recently with Corbyn we had no real alternative. Labour was no better, and the toxic legacy of NEw LAbour and in particular Tony Blair has not yet been forgotten.
I still loathe the Labour party for the Iraq War, but Corbyn is doing a good job of reforming the party and taking it back from the Blairites and its getting to the point where I can actually consider voting for Labour as a party now. (In fact I did, but for Phil Wilson as an individual MP. I'm still on the fence about the Labour party).
Peter Hitchens comments on the state of the Tory party, I think he's spot on. The Conservative party needs to die so a genuine conservative party can take its place, much like how genuine Socialists have taken back the Labour party.
Spoiler:
The laughable failure of Mrs Theresa May’s empty, tremulous campaign was in fact predictable. I suspected it would happen. But I mostly kept quiet about it here for the past few weeks.
This was not because I have any time for Mrs May and her feeble, politically correct government, but because I did not much want to help Jeremy Corbyn either. And at election time, there’s no room for neutrality.
There’s one good outcome. This farcical unwanted Election must surely have shown everyone a key fact – we now live in a country where the supposed natural party of government can no longer really command a majority.
That’s like having a fridge that doesn’t keep your food fresh, or a bicycle with no wheels. If we had any sense (do we?) we’d dump this dead, rotting faction in the nearest skip or landfill, and find a new one to replace it. The Tories failed on Thursday because they have long believed in nothing and are interested only in being in office.
They won in 2015 only because of a grotesque splurge of millionaire donations, and ultra-expensive black magic techniques, which partly made up for the collapse of their once-majestic membership and the machine it supported.
They are, in effect, a zombie party, lurching and shuffling along in a procession of the undead, thanks to transfusions of money and the BBC’s ancient broadcasting rules, which guarantee them air time.
What happened next must be one of the strangest chapters in our history. Labour (which had itself become a zombie party under Blairite control) changed its leadership election rules, and accidentally made it possible for a real socialist to win. You’d never get a real conservative coming to the top of the Tory Party, which has elaborate mechanisms in place to stop that happening.
Odder still, the man who won, Jeremy Corbyn, was astonishingly old-fashioned, a country-bred grammar school boy brought up by parents who had taken part in the great political struggles of the 1930s.
He is out of his time, which is no bad thing. To see him address a rally in modern Britain (as I have done) is a bit like going to the station to catch your regular commuter service, and finding a steam train waiting at the platform – surprising, nostalgic, wheezy and ancient, more or less certain to break down, but wonderfully picturesque.
It struck me as I watched him that he was far more dangerous than the Tories thought he was. His absolute courtesy and refusal to make personal attacks appealed to many in my generation who remember a different and in some ways better Britain.
His realisation that George Osborne’s supposed economic miracle was a sham, and that many have lost hope of getting steady, well-paid jobs or secure homes, appealed to the young. He may not have any actual answers to these questions, but he at least knew they were being asked. His absolute opposition to the repeated stupid wars of recent years also has a wide appeal, in many cases to conservative-minded people and Service families sick of the waste of good lives.
A genuinely patriotic, socially conservative party might have had a proper response to these things. But the Tory Party is not that. It is just a cold machine which runs on gallons of expensive snake oil. So it decided to attack Mr Corbyn personally.
This bounced off him. In fact, the long Tory assault on Mr Corbyn was his greatest asset. When the campaign began, and people had a chance to see what he was really like, especially his dogged politeness under fire, they did that rather moving thing that British people do when they see a lone individual besieged by foes. They sided with him against his tormentors.
It was no good raving about Mr Corbyn’s Sinn Fein connections, when the Tories have themselves compelled the Queen to have the grisly IRA gangster Martin McGuinness to dinner at Windsor.
It’s not much good attacking his defence policy when the Tories have cut the Army to ribbons and the decrepit remnants of the Navy sit motionless by the dockside, thanks to Tory cheeseparing. And now there’s an even bigger problem.
The young, who used not to bother, have begun to vote in large numbers, and Jeremy Corbyn has persuaded them to do it. Labour’s 40 per cent of the vote, almost 13 million ballots, reflects this.
The Tories cannot rely forever on the fact that older voters turn out more reliably. This is the last warning conservative-minded people in this country are likely to get.
Unless they can find their own Corbyn, a principled and genuinely patriotic leadership, no amount of money, and no amount of slick technique can save them from a revived and newly confident Left.
They failed to win this Election. There’s a strong chance they will actually lose the next one.
Theresa May has been warned that she should hand Nigel Farage a peerage and a government job on her Brexit negotiating team or face a relaunch of Ukip that will leach votes from the Tories at the next election.
Arron Banks, formerly Ukip’s biggest donor, held discussions with Farage on Friday about whether to launch a new Eurosceptic movement, backed up by his millions — or whether to seize control of Ukip again and give the party a makeover.
A source familiar with the discussion said senior figures in the Democratic Unionist Party, which is in coalition talks with May but has close links to Farage, would press for him to be involved in the Brexit negotiations. “They hold a few cards,” the source said. “They want Farage as a lord or a role in government or he and Arron will put something together that will cause trouble for May.”
Donald Trump has told Theresa May in a phone call he does not want to go ahead with a state visit to Britain until the British public supports him coming.
On the supposed terrorist claims, which has everyone over here, bar SF supporters scratching their heads. Just so you know. None of the 10 MPs have ever been charged, convicted of or made statements in support of terrorist groups. However 3 of them have had family members killed by terrorists. One of them served in the British Army defending the citizens of Northern Ireland alongside soldiers from across the UK. And the female leader you don't acknowledge had had her father shot by terrorists as a child while she was feet away. Terrorists also placed a bomb on her school bus when she was a child. Nearly killing her and her classmates.
A little more study would go along way.
And neither do the 7 SFMP's elected as far as I'm so you should probably stop referring to them as terrorists now too?
You keep ignoring the facts that the DUP are linked with the UDA and had their support in this election campaign with Arlene Foster being in talks with them just days after the killed a man in front of his 3 year old son in a car park.
What about John Finucane's dad Pat he was murdered by the UDA for being a human rights lawyer. This was all done in collusion with the British government and the regiment that Knockagh refers to as defending civilians.
Donald Trump has told Theresa May in a phone call he does not want to go ahead with a state visit to Britain until the British public supports him coming.
Probably the smartest thing he's ever said. Maybe the only smart thing he's ever said... It'll certainly make the Governments life a lot easier too, never having to do one.
And people still vote for them. I will never understand why
Because until recently with Corbyn we had no real alternative. Labour was no better, and the toxic legacy of NEw LAbour and in particular Tony Blair has not yet been forgotten.
I still loathe the Labour party for the Iraq War, but Corbyn is doing a good job of reforming the party and taking it back from the Blairites and its getting to the point where I can actually consider voting for Labour as a party now. (In fact I did
Peter Hitchens comments on the state of the Tory party, I think he's spot on. The Conservative party needs to die so a genuine conservative party can take its place, much like how genuine Socialists have taken back the Labour party.
Spoiler:
The laughable failure of Mrs Theresa May’s empty, tremulous campaign was in fact predictable. I suspected it would happen. But I mostly kept quiet about it here for the past few weeks.
This was not because I have any time for Mrs May and her feeble, politically correct government, but because I did not much want to help Jeremy Corbyn either. And at election time, there’s no room for neutrality.
There’s one good outcome. This farcical unwanted Election must surely have shown everyone a key fact – we now live in a country where the supposed natural party of government can no longer really command a majority.
That’s like having a fridge that doesn’t keep your food fresh, or a bicycle with no wheels. If we had any sense (do we?) we’d dump this dead, rotting faction in the nearest skip or landfill, and find a new one to replace it. The Tories failed on Thursday because they have long believed in nothing and are interested only in being in office.
They won in 2015 only because of a grotesque splurge of millionaire donations, and ultra-expensive black magic techniques, which partly made up for the collapse of their once-majestic membership and the machine it supported.
They are, in effect, a zombie party, lurching and shuffling along in a procession of the undead, thanks to transfusions of money and the BBC’s ancient broadcasting rules, which guarantee them air time.
What happened next must be one of the strangest chapters in our history. Labour (which had itself become a zombie party under Blairite control) changed its leadership election rules, and accidentally made it possible for a real socialist to win. You’d never get a real conservative coming to the top of the Tory Party, which has elaborate mechanisms in place to stop that happening.
Odder still, the man who won, Jeremy Corbyn, was astonishingly old-fashioned, a country-bred grammar school boy brought up by parents who had taken part in the great political struggles of the 1930s.
He is out of his time, which is no bad thing. To see him address a rally in modern Britain (as I have done) is a bit like going to the station to catch your regular commuter service, and finding a steam train waiting at the platform – surprising, nostalgic, wheezy and ancient, more or less certain to break down, but wonderfully picturesque.
It struck me as I watched him that he was far more dangerous than the Tories thought he was. His absolute courtesy and refusal to make personal attacks appealed to many in my generation who remember a different and in some ways better Britain.
His realisation that George Osborne’s supposed economic miracle was a sham, and that many have lost hope of getting steady, well-paid jobs or secure homes, appealed to the young. He may not have any actual answers to these questions, but he at least knew they were being asked. His absolute opposition to the repeated stupid wars of recent years also has a wide appeal, in many cases to conservative-minded people and Service families sick of the waste of good lives.
A genuinely patriotic, socially conservative party might have had a proper response to these things. But the Tory Party is not that. It is just a cold machine which runs on gallons of expensive snake oil. So it decided to attack Mr Corbyn personally.
This bounced off him. In fact, the long Tory assault on Mr Corbyn was his greatest asset. When the campaign began, and people had a chance to see what he was really like, especially his dogged politeness under fire, they did that rather moving thing that British people do when they see a lone individual besieged by foes. They sided with him against his tormentors.
It was no good raving about Mr Corbyn’s Sinn Fein connections, when the Tories have themselves compelled the Queen to have the grisly IRA gangster Martin McGuinness to dinner at Windsor.
It’s not much good attacking his defence policy when the Tories have cut the Army to ribbons and the decrepit remnants of the Navy sit motionless by the dockside, thanks to Tory cheeseparing. And now there’s an even bigger problem.
The young, who used not to bother, have begun to vote in large numbers, and Jeremy Corbyn has persuaded them to do it. Labour’s 40 per cent of the vote, almost 13 million ballots, reflects this.
The Tories cannot rely forever on the fact that older voters turn out more reliably. This is the last warning conservative-minded people in this country are likely to get.
Unless they can find their own Corbyn, a principled and genuinely patriotic leadership, no amount of money, and no amount of slick technique can save them from a revived and newly confident Left.
They failed to win this Election. There’s a strong chance they will actually lose the next one.
Hitchens is spot on.
I'm also worried about Brexit. The Remainers are taking advantage of a weak May, and it could see us ending up with a weasel deal with the EU, which is EU membership in all but name.
What Hitchen's means by 'a real Conservative' would be utterly unelectable in Britain. I'd quite like the Tories to install one, to be fair. It'd be some laugh.
nfe wrote: What Hitchen's means by 'a real Conservative' would be utterly unelectable in Britain. I'd quite like the Tories to install one, to be fair. It'd be some laugh.
Executions for cannabis possession. Woohoo!
For years, the Blairites were saying that a proper socialist would lead Labour to disaster, but that was blown out of the water. Who's to say that a proper Conservative, and not a blue Blairite, couldn't do the same for the Tories?
nfe wrote: What Hitchen's means by 'a real Conservative' would be utterly unelectable in Britain. I'd quite like the Tories to install one, to be fair. It'd be some laugh.
Executions for cannabis possession. Woohoo!
For years, the Blairites were saying that a proper socialist would lead Labour to disaster, but that was blown out of the water. Who's to say that a proper Conservative, and not a blue Blairite, couldn't do the same for the Tories?
Blue Blairite
People like socialist policies. Always have. Leftist policies are always head and shoulders above those of the right in party-blind polling.
The country is simply far too liberal for what Hitchens percieves 'real conservatism' to be. He's not a particularly hard right economist, it's all aboute moralism. Not many people fancy prosecution for breaking the sabbath (barring some maniacs on the islands), repealing equal marriage, reintroducing corporal punishment amd stressing compulsory Christian worship in schools, bringing back capital punishment, or following Saudieasque drugs policy, for instance.
I'm not saying a more conservative Conserative party couldn't be successful, I'm saying one that satisfies Hitchens' interpretation of the term has no chance.
Theresa May has been warned that she should hand Nigel Farage a peerage and a government job on her Brexit negotiating team or face a relaunch of Ukip that will leach votes from the Tories at the next election.
Arron Banks, formerly Ukip’s biggest donor, held discussions with Farage on Friday about whether to launch a new Eurosceptic movement, backed up by his millions — or whether to seize control of Ukip again and give the party a makeover.
A source familiar with the discussion said senior figures in the Democratic Unionist Party, which is in coalition talks with May but has close links to Farage, would press for him to be involved in the Brexit negotiations. “They hold a few cards,” the source said. “They want Farage as a lord or a role in government or he and Arron will put something together that will cause trouble for May.”
This personality cult around Farage totally baffles me.
The problem is we don't really know this because there's an added complication that hasn't been there before. It's called education; generally this makes them more socially aware and higher educations usually relates to more left wing votes. We could be on the cusp of changing politics as the 90's and millennials have significantly better education and that might trump the age = conservative. We'll probably know over the next 15-20 years. If education trumps age then we will see a slow push of elderly voters moving towards left wing policies over time. Perhaps it is already happening, Tory supporter (as in those that have joined the party) base is already aging rapidly.
Curious. In finland higher education usually lead toward right side rather than left.
I don't really know enough about Finland's education policy to know. Very boradly 50 years ago the UK would have been the same though. The majority of university students were from wealthy backgrounds and hence there was intrinsic bias to keeping the status quo and the wealth with those that already had it (hence more right wing leanings). However in the last 20 years or so university education has been opened up to pretty much everyone (though at cost) and hence there does seem to be growing direction of left wing ideals in the student population. I'm not sure how that compares?
Ignore anything about climate change,abortion, or anything about The Troubles.
You can't ignore these issues, though. You can largely ignore the Troubles, because most people in Britain are woefully clueless about the issues beyond being able to essentially map the main players onto nationalist/Catholic/unionist/Protestant, but being a creationist, a homophobe, a climate-change denier, or being anti-abortion, (and being proud of it, as opposed to downplaying something you said years ago) are all career-enders for politicians in Britain. Hell, the only question Tim Farron was asked for months was 'do you believe homosexuality is a sin?'. The Tories are going to be skewered on a daily basis as bigots by association.
Yeah they it's going to be very hard for them now to hurl these sorts of attacks on other parties when they are getting into bed with similar sort of people.
Here's some more fun stuff that DUP have got up to that the Tories are joining at the hip with
The problem May is going to have is that every time they say something that most of the UK vehemently opposes someone is going to ask whether she supports it. And like with Trump she is going to squirm badly. Much like the way Fallon did
I'm also worried about Brexit. The Remainers are taking advantage of a weak May, and it could see us ending up with a weasel deal with the EU, which is EU membership in all but name.
Soft Brexit is making a comeback.
Damn May
Wrexit is only a short term thing even if it goes through. The majority of the younger populace/educated populace don't want it. Even if does get through then I would say it is 10-15 years before we go back in as the populace dynamic shifts. Soft Brexit may make things easier in this regard.
For years, the Blairites were saying that a proper socialist would lead Labour to disaster, but that was blown out of the water. Who's to say that a proper Conservative, and not a blue Blairite, couldn't do the same for the Tories?
I think the difference is that they weren't expecting a Tory government to go hard right. A centrist Tory government probably wouldn't have been hit so hard especially why you have a FPTP system that favours them.
I think you can blame Cameron as well. He only called a Wrexit referendum on the basis that it would shut up a small proportion of the anti-EUMPs. It was a political proposal without really considering the consequences if we voted unexpectedly. He pretty much knew it was all going to end in tears when he resigned and walked away whistling.
Donald Trump has told Theresa May in a phone call he does not want to go ahead with a state visit to Britain until the British public supports him coming.
.. are you gonna tell him or can I ?
According to Huffington Post he doesn't want to come along whilst there is a risk of large scale protests (or he doesn't want to see that a significant fraction of the UK are opposed to him). Allegedly he won't come to the UK until that risk subsides.
Donald Trump has told Theresa May in a phone call he does not want to go ahead with a state visit to Britain until the British public supports him coming.
.. are you gonna tell him or can I ?
According to Huffington Post he doesn't want to come along whilst there is a risk of large scale protests (or he doesn't want to see that a significant fraction of the UK are opposed to him). Allegedly he won't come to the UK until that risk subsides.
It's a wonder he ever thought it would be otherwise. The last time he was here people turned out en masse in the middle of the Scottish coutryside to throw golf balls printed like Nazi flags at him whilst a brass orchestra played jazz/polka versions of the Imperial March and Another Brick in the Wall.
Visiting a major city was going to see colossal (and probably delightfully whimsical) protests.
You're making the classic mistake of thinking that just because people supported X when they were 18, doesn't mean to say they will still support X when they are 45.
As I sit here, balding, and middle aged, I'm sorry to say that the young don't stay young for ever...
Attitudes and views change. It may surprise you to know that in my youth, I was a Labour voter and broadly supportive of the EEC/EU.
Nowadays, I'm none of those things.
We can't go back into the EU for the simple reason that going cap in hand to Brussels will see us getting a worse deal, with probably adopting the Euro as part of that agreement. The British public would never accept that.
Also, Brexit has to happen, otherwise in 2019, we're in the farcical situation of electing British MEPs
Attitudes and views change. It may surprise you to know that in my youth, I was a Labour voter and broadly supportive of the EEC/EU.
Nowadays, I'm none of those things.
It's probably more likely that might have generally been supportive of leaving the EU will actually be more inclined to be supportive on this basis simply because there are more of them. We can not definitively say one way or another, all we can compare is to current events and opinions. The youth of 20/30 years ago is not the youth of today. They have access to many more things, than we use to have, whether that is free movement and work in the EU to teach skiing, more exposure to people from across the world and so on.
We can't go back into the EU for the simple reason that going cap in hand to Brussels will see us getting a worse deal, with probably adopting the Euro as part of that agreement. The British public would never accept that.
Well if we've trashed the pound and the economy is floundering/stagnating then we may want to join the Euro to give some surety over the value of our currency.
Also, Brexit has to happen, otherwise in 2019, we're in the farcical situation of electing British MEPs
Well you never know we might go and vote for useful MEPs rather than ones that want to deliberately sabotage the EU. That might change the dynamics (and influence in the EU) as well. Never say never!
You're making the classic mistake of thinking that just because people supported X when they were 18, doesn't mean to say they will still support X when they are 45.
As I sit here, balding, and middle aged, I'm sorry to say that the young don't stay young for ever...
Attitudes and views change. It may surprise you to know that in my youth, I was a Labour voter and broadly supportive of the EEC/EU.
Nowadays, I'm none of those things.
Sure, people change. When I was 18 I was vaguely social democratic. Twelve years later I'm a communist.
Young people don't support Labour just because they're young and youths have some intrinsic leftward lean. Labour had such a crushing lead among young people because Labour through Corbyn have put forth policies that appeal to young people's material circumstances.
That puts DUP even more in the driving seat as another election could see Tories completely losing completely and putting Labour in the clear majority.
To be honest I still can't quite believe what has happened - 12 months ago it looked like Labour were in a complete mess, now it's the Tories and basically doing things that just help the opposition.
Theresa May has been warned that she should hand Nigel Farage a peerage and a government job on her Brexit negotiating team or face a relaunch of Ukip that will leach votes from the Tories at the next election.
Arron Banks, formerly Ukip’s biggest donor, held discussions with Farage on Friday about whether to launch a new Eurosceptic movement, backed up by his millions — or whether to seize control of Ukip again and give the party a makeover.
A source familiar with the discussion said senior figures in the Democratic Unionist Party, which is in coalition talks with May but has close links to Farage, would press for him to be involved in the Brexit negotiations. “They hold a few cards,” the source said. “They want Farage as a lord or a role in government or he and Arron will put something together that will cause trouble for May.”
This personality cult around Farage totally baffles me.
On reflection, and having been pretty anti-UKIP in the past, I have now decided that we absolutely need UKIP, or equivalent, and someone like Farage. Primarily because it splits the right wing vote. The Tories have been desperate to crush UKIP for this very reason, but I think it's quite likely that there maybe a new right wing party in the offing. The conservatives are struggling to represent the variety of right wing opinion and ideas, and this makes them vulnerable to pandering to minority parts of their party.
But interestingly most conservative supporters that I know are in deep denial about what's just happened. One chap is convinced that if May appeared more "compassionate" then she'd have had it in the bag, despite her manifesto. Another one blames left wing memes, and maintains that people are too stupid to realise what they've done. Both were vehement leave advocates.
It's fething delicious.
That puts DUP even more in the driving seat as another election could see Tories completely losing completely and putting Labour in the clear majority.
To be honest I still can't quite believe what has happened - 12 months ago it looked like Labour were in a complete mess, now it's the Tories and basically doing things that just help the opposition.
I think the election was perfect for Corbyn. He is very much at home campaigning. He loves going to rallies and talking to people and he is good at it. Which he should be with the amount of experience he has with it. Before now we hadn't really seen this side of him and the narrative was dominated by the idiotic MP rebellions against him and the aftermath.
That puts DUP even more in the driving seat as another election could see Tories completely losing completely and putting Labour in the clear majority.
To be honest I still can't quite believe what has happened - 12 months ago it looked like Labour were in a complete mess, now it's the Tories and basically doing things that just help the opposition.
I think the election was perfect for Corbyn. He is very much at home campaigning. He loves going to rallies and talking to people and he is good at it. Which he should be with the amount of experience he has with it. Before now we hadn't really seen this side of him and the narrative was dominated by the idiotic MP rebellions against him and the aftermath.
I have never really liked JC but Ill give him his due, against someone as stilted and awkward as May he was pretty damn successful. He does engage really well with people. Ultimately I could see him winning an election if one was to come around soon.
Politics hasn't changed much though. Style over substance may have gotten Labour some more seats. It's interesting how Labour are now defining the battle lines regarding young vs old, Seems New Labour Spin isnt as dead as I thought.
A Town Called Malus wrote: I think the election was perfect for Corbyn. He is very much at home campaigning. He loves going to rallies and talking to people and he is good at it. Which he should be with the amount of experience he has with it. Before now we hadn't really seen this side of him and the narrative was dominated by the idiotic MP rebellions against him and the aftermath.
Got to agree, the man's a natural at addressing audiences. He was accused of only appealing to those that were going to vote for him anyway, but I think his good showing in interviews against an antagonistically biased press, coupled with May's disastrous lack of appeal, worked perfectly for him. It's the same argument for why Sanders maybe should have been the Democratic choice over Clinton.
Both May and Clinton are policy wonks with limited popular appeal. They might be fine at whatever it is they are doing but sadly being a politician also involves being a personality and making the electorate want to vote for you. Corbyn has that talent.
A Town Called Malus wrote: I think the election was perfect for Corbyn. He is very much at home campaigning. He loves going to rallies and talking to people and he is good at it. Which he should be with the amount of experience he has with it. Before now we hadn't really seen this side of him and the narrative was dominated by the idiotic MP rebellions against him and the aftermath.
Got to agree, the man's a natural at addressing audiences. He was accused of only appealing to those that were going to vote for him anyway, but I think his good showing in interviews against an antagonistically biased press, coupled with May's disastrous lack of appeal, worked perfectly for him. It's the same argument for why Sanders maybe should have been the Democratic choice over Clinton.
Both May and Clinton are policy wonks with limited popular appeal. They might be fine at whatever it is they are doing but sadly being a politician also involves being a personality and making the electorate want to vote for you. Corbyn has that talent.
Not that it really bothered me, but his easy rapport vanished when questioned on past support for the IRA and groups like Hamas. He became more 'political'. I'm not certain that if in power we wouldn't see more of that Corbyn than the one people were voting for.
Obviously the media are out to get him and trip him up but he really isn't a breath of fresh political air.
He's probably still better than what remains of the Blairites.
I'm no Corbyn fan, but to give the man credit, he is good on the stump, but you need more than that to become a good PM.
I still haven't forgotten the Trident debacle of months ago, and McDonnell in charge of the money, and Abbott in charge of law and order, is a receipe for disaster.
I support taking the trains back, and so on, but it doesn't exactly set the world on fire, and it's miles away from the grand plan 21st century Britain needs.
And on another note, I've noticed that 80% of MPs were elected on manifesto promises of taking the UK out of the single market.
A lot of Corbyn voters are also leave voters, so he'll have to tread carefully.
I'm also completely puzzled at the right wing groups on FB not grasping why this was a victory for Corbyn?
I think partially it is a psychology thing. Our traits in some way can be quite predictable. A football team that is about to get relegated will see fans leaving by the droves before a game finishes or maybe just not even turn up for those not completely dedicated to the cause. As a species we don't like losing...
On the other hand a team that is winning enjoys increasing popularity, fills stands with supporters and more and more people rally behind them.
As such supporters try and defend the losing team because by not doing so a drift away from their team becomes a rout, because you are admitting that you are unfit for 'the game' whereas the opposition is.
Corbyn/Labour did win because he is in the best possible position. May somehow has to get on with Wrexit but with a tiny majority with a party that's split about 70:30 towards pro-EU. Yet she is trying to hold onto the hard Brexit crowd that left UKIP (whilst remainers/soft Wrexit supporters left for Labour). This is at the same time that she has to compromise with a group of NI politicians whose views are historical in their relevance and most of the rest of the UK find unpalatable. If there is a push to harden peoples rights (like abortion) then there will be uproar both publicly and in her own party. Corbyn can keep adding amendments to the legislation in line with his manifesto. Those that go through he will be able to claim are his, whilst criticising those that the Tories get wrong. At the same time with an inability to negotiate effectively with the EU it's likely to lead to an economical nightmare for the country as companies decide they've had enough and leave for more stable EU locations, and throughout this May is going to have to negotiate permanently with her own MPs to stop the conservative party conference/meetings turning into the back alleys of Commoragh.
Corbyn just has to wait and poke the Tories. They will lose credibility that they are the party of stability and financial security and the next election could go very badly, especially if the youth movement gathers more momentum and engagement.
It turns out that, in Scotland, charges related to anti-Catholic hate crimes up 28%.
I'm sure this is totally unconnected to Scottish Tories doing everything they can to whip up unionist rhetoric and will in no way be further exacerbated by giving Westminster prominence the to NI unionists that Scottish bigots wish they could vote for.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Yet he still won a victory, as he stripped away May's majority, leaving her a lame duck.
May be so, but I think we can all blame ourselves for the current political mess. 1) If May didn't call and election this result would never have happened, 2) If those that could have but didn't vote bothered to get up we might have had a stronger result, 3) If we had all voted in favour of one party substantially more stronger than the other we would have a solid government. As it stands too many people defected from the Torries yet too few bothered to vote Labour. Corbyn is the luckiest loser in modern politics, he did no better than the last election, but I give him credit for pulling through all the hell thrown at him as he struggled to be party leader. If May had maintained a solid majority Corbyn would have been thrown to the wolves. So you could argue May ruined the government with the election just as much as Corbyn has ruined our political strength by weakening the Conservatives and still losing, just in time to start Brexit talks. Lovely.
That puts DUP even more in the driving seat as another election could see Tories completely losing completely and putting Labour in the clear majority.
To be honest I still can't quite believe what has happened - 12 months ago it looked like Labour were in a complete mess, now it's the Tories and basically doing things that just help the opposition.
The modern system of choosing whom to vote for based on the personality appeal of the leader played into Corbyn's hands once he upped his game. Once Corbyn found his mojo, he only got better. He has an unassailable morale advantage over May now. She is going to be humiliated weekly at PM Question Time and it's difficult to see who is going to get picked for next Conservative leader. My money would be on Hammond or Davidson, but for anyone it is now a poisoned chalice. I am led to think it might be best for the Tories to call another election, lose it badly and let Labour take the rap for the post-Brexit crash. The danger is that if Labour got a great, soft Brexit deal, there wouldn't be a crash, they would be the heroes of the nation and could end up winning the next two elections.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Yet he still won a victory, as he stripped away May's majority, leaving her a lame duck.
May be so, but I think we can all blame ourselves for the current political mess. 1) If May didn't call and election this result would never have happened, 2) If those that could have but didn't vote bothered to get up we might have had a stronger result, 3) If we had all voted in favour of one party substantially more stronger than the other we would have a solid government. As it stands too many people defected from the Torries yet too few bothered to vote Labour. Corbyn is the luckiest loser in modern politics, he did no better than the last election, but I give him credit for pulling through all the hell thrown at him as he struggled to be party leader. If May had maintained a solid majority Corbyn would have been thrown to the wolves. So you could argue May ruined the government with the election just as much as Corbyn has ruined our political strength by weakening the Conservatives and still losing, just in time to start Brexit talks. Lovely.
Not sure you can lay any of this blame at Corbyn's feet though?
May called the election out of opportunism, seeing the chance to bury the Labour Party and force through her vision of Brexit.
Labour naturally came out fighting, closed the 20 point gap to 3, and May pissed her majority up the wall - Labour gained seats for the first time since the landslide win of 1997. And not only that, but in the face of one of the most vile campaigns ever carried out by our gutter press, repeatedly printing outright lies about Jeremy Corbyn in a childish attempt to smear him.
This. All of this. Is on Theresa May and her party. They fought a disastrous campaign with a frankly idiotic 'eff everyone' manifesto of sheer stupidity.
And worse for May? She's now got into bed with a fringe lunatic party with close ties to Irish terrorism. That was the one thing, the only thing, that her media attack dogs had on Corbyn once suitably distorted (after all, the Irish troubles did end up round the negotiation table, something Corbyn was trying to facilitate, and continues to correctly support). So if/when this government collapses and we head back to the polls, they've got absolutely nothing on Jeremy Corbyn or his politics - politics which are clearly proving very popular with an electorate still suffering from a financial collapse that happened 10 years ago, whilst those truly responsible continue much the same.
Corbyn hasn't ruined our political strength. May sacrificed it for the promise of power.
However, it has strengthened our democracy. For the first time in a long time, we have a choice between Right and Left wing. The days of Tory or Diet Tory seem over. And having that choice forces both parties back toward the middle ground as the Labour manifesto proved. It was fully costed, and all the suggestions and pledges were to improve things for everyone, not just the already wealthy and powerful.
kathryn johnston @kathrynjohnston
For all the many political difficulties I have with @Duponline, they are NOT terrorist sympathisers, contrary to British media demonisation.
But English people who only heard of them 2 days ago and have done extensive googling know better!
Knockagh wrote: Secretary of Labour Party NI just tweeted on DUP
kathryn johnston @kathrynjohnston
For all the many political difficulties I have with @Duponline, they are NOT terrorist sympathisers, contrary to British media demonisation.
But they were formed by people who had been members of Ulster Resistance, right? That used to get up to hijinks like smuggling RPGs into Britain?
That's a lot closer than Corbyn, who was relentlessly monstered by the press, so they've heehaw chance of being taken seriously, I'm afraid.
Not sure you can lay any of this blame at Corbyn's feet though?
May called the election out of opportunism, seeing the chance to bury the Labour Party and force through her vision of Brexit.
Labour naturally came out fighting, closed the 20 point gap to 3, and May pissed her majority up the wall - Labour gained seats for the first time since the landslide win of 1997. And not only that, but in the face of one of the most vile campaigns ever carried out by our gutter press, repeatedly printing outright lies about Jeremy Corbyn in a childish attempt to smear him.
This. All of this. Is on Theresa May and her party. They fought a disastrous campaign with a frankly idiotic 'eff everyone' manifesto of sheer stupidity.
And worse for May? She's now got into bed with a fringe lunatic party with close ties to Irish terrorism. That was the one thing, the only thing, that her media attack dogs had on Corbyn once suitably distorted (after all, the Irish troubles did end up round the negotiation table, something Corbyn was trying to facilitate, and continues to correctly support). So if/when this government collapses and we head back to the polls, they've got absolutely nothing on Jeremy Corbyn or his politics - politics which are clearly proving very popular with an electorate still suffering from a financial collapse that happened 10 years ago, whilst those truly responsible continue much the same.
Corbyn hasn't ruined our political strength. May sacrificed it for the promise of power.
However, it has strengthened our democracy. For the first time in a long time, we have a choice between Right and Left wing. The days of Tory or Diet Tory seem over. And having that choice forces both parties back toward the middle ground as the Labour manifesto proved. It was fully costed, and all the suggestions and pledges were to improve things for everyone, not just the already wealthy and powerful.
Ok, I admit Corbyn isn't the number 1 reason for this mess, but for all his greatness his party failed to gain enough ground to win. Corbyn is now no.1 antagonist to the conversatives. He can now spue out as much or as little as he likes basking in media success. This makes him and his party a big political force that could now influence the Brexit deal and that makes me slightly concerned. I don't want to see a watered down Brexit deal. I agree with you that there is at last a surge in interest in politics and we are now getting a much better and clearer democratic choice. Don't get me wrong I do like a lot of what Corbyn's Labour is proposing. I also agree with you that the Conservative manifesto was a PR disaster! What were they thinking? I don't agree with you about 'the fringe lunatic party'. This stupid media scare and smear campaign shouldn't be believed. There is nothing wrong with the DUP and they are a popular party in northern Ireland. In comparison never forget that Sinn Fein is gaelic for IRA, who won less seats.
Sentinel1 wrote: There is nothing wrong with the DUP and they are a popular party in northern Ireland.
There's plenty wrong with them, depending on your perspective. Being popular, or not being alone in their positions, doesn't change their opposition to equal rights for homosexuals, or make irrelevant that they include many climate change deniers and members of the Orange Order. If you aren't rather conservative, then the likelihood is that you're going to find them frequently repulsive.
Sentinel1 wrote: There is nothing wrong with the DUP and they are a popular party in northern Ireland.
There's plenty wrong with them, depending on your perspective. Being popular, or not being alone in their positions, doesn't change their opposition to equal rights for homosexuals, or make irrelevant that they include many climate change deniers and members of the Orange Order. If you aren't rather conservative, then the likelihood is that you're going to find them frequently repulsive.
You can be conservative and find the DUP odious as well.
Sentinel1 wrote: There is nothing wrong with the DUP and they are a popular party in northern Ireland.
There's plenty wrong with them, depending on your perspective. Being popular, or not being alone in their positions, doesn't change their opposition to equal rights for homosexuals, or make irrelevant that they include many climate change deniers and members of the Orange Order. If you aren't rather conservative, then the likelihood is that you're going to find them frequently repulsive.
You can be conservative and find the DUP odious as well.
Certainly. And that's why allying with them is going to really hurt the Tories. Paternalistic, largely-centrist-but-right-leaning swing voters are going to be appalled when they actually become familiar with them.
It might be worth stressing that vast numbers of people in Britain really have absolutely no knowledge of NI politics or culture whatsoever. So writing the DUP's increased proiminence off because they're just a perfectly normal part of NI politics is really missing the point of how paradigm shifting their appearance in the spotlight could be. I teach in a university and every year loads of new British students from pretty much anywhere bar the west of Scotland are totally bewlidered by Orange marches. They have no idea what they are and are almost always utterly appalled once they've gone and googled it. There's regularly an unsettling superiority in British politics and it's perception of anything alien that tends towards the condescending at best, and the outright hubristic at worst, and for many British voters, NI really might as well be Mars.
Knockagh wrote: Secretary of Labour Party NI just tweeted on DUP
kathryn johnston @kathrynjohnston
For all the many political difficulties I have with @Duponline, they are NOT terrorist sympathisers, contrary to British media demonisation.
But they were formed by people who had been members of Ulster Resistance, right? That used to get up to hijinks like smuggling RPGs into Britain?
That's a lot closer than Corbyn, who was relentlessly monstered by the press, so they've heehaw chance of being taken seriously, I'm afraid.
Ulster Resistance were a legal organisation that only lasted a very short time. The UVF and UDA infiltrated UR to see if there was any potential in the organisation. They discovered a few hardcore activists and they were involved in bringing in arms. At this point the DUP ran a mile. They left UR and condemned it completely. So much so loyalists have to this day nicknamed them 'the grand old duke of york' as they walked away at the top of the hill, leaving them as they saw it to finish the business and take the war to the IRA.
This hatred between the DUP and the loyalists still is pretty potent. The Progressive Unionist Party who are actually the political wing of loyalist paramilitaries spit venom over the DUP and their failure to support them during the conflict, the DUP worked against loyalist prisoners welfare groups and stated their prisoner should not be released after any agreement.
It's only in recent years that some politicians have decided to try and bring loyalists in from the cold and try to make them more politically aware to help them move beyond the conflict. This is what they are taking flak for. Talking to people they despised since 1969 and trying to improve the lot for working class loyalist communities. The endorsement for mainstream political parties was supposed to be a big move in the right direction for them which has obviously backfired big time. Due solely to ignorance
Sentinel1 wrote: There is nothing wrong with the DUP and they are a popular party in northern Ireland.
There's plenty wrong with them, depending on your perspective. Being popular, or not being alone in their positions, doesn't change their opposition to equal rights for homosexuals, or make irrelevant that they include many climate change deniers and members of the Orange Order. If you aren't rather conservative, then the likelihood is that you're going to find them frequently repulsive.
You can be conservative and find the DUP odious as well.
Certainly. And that's why allying with them is going to really hurt the Tories. Paternalistic, largely-centrist-but-right-leaning swing voters are going to be appalled when they actually become familiar with them.
It might be worth stressing that vast numbers of people in Britain really have absolutely no knowledge of NI politics or culture whatsoever. So writing the DUP's increased proiminence off because they're just a perfectly normal part of NI politics is really missing the point of how paradigm shifting their appearance in the spotlight could be. I teach in a university and every year loads of new British students from pretty much anywhere bar the west of Scotland are totally bewlidered by Orange marches. They have no idea what they are and are almost always utterly appalled once they've gone and googled it. There's regularly an unsettling superiority in British politics and it's perception of anything alien that tends towards the condescending at best, and the outright hubristic at worst, and for many British voters, NI really might as well be Mars.
The NI situation bas been off UK radar as such for years. People had to even ask what DUP was etc.
Its never been of needed intrest for the mainland in detail for a while so no one ever asked the questions.
Its what 20-30 some MP's of 650, a one 20th they could choose to ignore for then, but now have to look afresh.
Knockagh wrote: Secretary of Labour Party NI just tweeted on DUP
kathryn johnston @kathrynjohnston
For all the many political difficulties I have with @Duponline, they are NOT terrorist sympathisers, contrary to British media demonisation.
But they were formed by people who had been members of Ulster Resistance, right? That used to get up to hijinks like smuggling RPGs into Britain?
That's a lot closer than Corbyn, who was relentlessly monstered by the press, so they've heehaw chance of being taken seriously, I'm afraid.
I don't think there is much point replying to Knockagh, he seems to be content just ignoring facts that are laid out in front of him or else just doesn't want to reply to them. I don't think this conversation is helped by the fact I doubt he believes the loyalist paramilitaries to be real terrorists.
I've layed out layer after layer of facts that no one has disputed and I haven't said anyone should be ignored. I'm well aware you are a republican or nationalist and I'm not telling people to ignore you. The false narrative suits you.
The line saying that the DUP were against violence is also simply not true many of their members have been at and supported loyalist paramilitary rallies, serving in the UDR or else threatened violence if there was a united Ireland.
I never claimed that you told people to ignore? So I'm not sure where tat has come from, and I'm not sure what my false narrative is as everything that I've said about the DUP can be backed up by facts.
You're wrong Mad Doc, we don't have a choice between left and right. We have a choice between left and a weird hodgepodge of all the worst bits of the centre and all the worst bits of the right, as far as I can see. I just wish the tories would get their act together, boot out May, find someone competent, and make a proper, right wing, socially liberal (to an extent) and fiscally conservative party out of themselves.
Not gonna happen whilst they're beholden to the gutter press.
Secret meetings with Murdoch? Daily Mail editor invited to Downing Street? Clear input into policy?
The Tories need a good political kicking if they're ever going to change. And right now, that might very well be on the cards.
But that still doesn't get them out the grip of Dacre, Murdoch and co. And until that happens, our democracy is at the mercy of off-shore billionaires purely out for themselves.
The line saying that the DUP were against violence is also simply not true many of their members have been at and supported loyalist paramilitary rallies, serving in the UDR or else threatened violence if there was a united Ireland.
I never claimed that you told people to ignore? So I'm not sure where tat has come from, and I'm not sure what my false narrative is as everything that I've said about the DUP can be backed up by facts.
Anyone who knows anything about loyalist paramilitaries knows they hated the DUP for years. There are a multitude of works out there to back it up. I personally knew David Ervine who led the UVFs political wing and he spat venom daily about them. Here's a guardian article says as much
The UDR were a regiment in the British Army until they merged with the Royal Irish Regiment. The UDR received a standing ovation at the yearly commeration ceremony in London in the Albert Hall, the Queen herself in attendance. The only regiment to do so. The entire regiment was awarded the Conspicuous Gallantry Cross after they merged with the Royal Irish in recognition of their services.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Voting Leave didn't and doesn't equate to leaving the single market though.
Look back at their campaign. Even Farage said so.
But when your position is absolute no to free movement which in turn is absolute requirement for access to single market it effectively means it.
No free movement, no single market. How many leave voters were willing to have free movement after brexit? Seems more like no free movement was whole point of leave vote. Which in turn means voting leave meant leaving single market.
The line saying that the DUP were against violence is also simply not true many of their members have been at and supported loyalist paramilitary rallies, serving in the UDR or else threatened violence if there was a united Ireland.
I never claimed that you told people to ignore? So I'm not sure where tat has come from, and I'm not sure what my false narrative is as everything that I've said about the DUP can be backed up by facts.
Anyone who knows anything about loyalist paramilitaries knows they hated the DUP for years. There are a multitude of works out there to back it up. I personally knew David Ervine who led the UVFs political wing and he spat venom daily about them. Here's a guardian article says as much
The UDR were a regiment in the British Army until they merged with the Royal Irish Regiment. The UDR received a standing ovation at the yearly commeration ceremony in London in the Albert Hall, the Queen herself in attendance. The only regiment to do so. The entire regiment was awarded the Conspicuous Gallantry Cross after they merged with the Royal Irish in recognition of their services.
That doesn't take away from the fact here and now the DUP and UDA are very chummy with the UDA for gods sake Foster was meeting with them days after they killed a man and in the past the weren't exactly sworn enemies were they? 1., 2., 3.
While I'm sure you're right about Ervine not liking the DUP they were in different political so not much of a surprise. I can find no mention of them in that article and even if the UVF didn't agree with them it doesn't mean they aren't linked to the UDA, the IRSP aren't too fond of SF, doesn't mean that SF weren't linked with the IRA.
Regarding the UDR I was simply saying for people who hate violence they had a lot of people who were in the army. The UDR weren't exactly all flowers and picnics either they were pretty tied in with loyalist paramilitaries like the Glenanne Gang.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Voting Leave didn't and doesn't equate to leaving the single market though.
Look back at their campaign. Even Farage said so.
But when your position is absolute no to free movement which in turn is absolute requirement for access to single market it effectively means it.
No free movement, no single market. How many leave voters were willing to have free movement after brexit? Seems more like no free movement was whole point of leave vote. Which in turn means voting leave meant leaving single market.
There's been several discussions on this. The problem with this is this that it implies an anti immigration stance which falls on the soft side of bigotry. The arguments being it depresses wages (research shows no statistical difference), places greater pressure on the nhs (not significantly as most Europe migrants are young and use it much less than our aging population) and takes school places (more an issue that education funding has been cut relatively, we still have less children in the system than we is in the 70s). It is probably better to say there is a significant minority that are both vocal and anti immigration that the tories have tried to persuade to leave ukip and join them for ultra hard Wrexit. The problem being is that we need immigration to keep our economy strong and support the older generation (that ironically make up most of the ukip crowd). Without immigration the number of nurses, farm workers and so on is significantly less and in the long term is likely to have significant impacts and result in major cuts to what we have today (like the nhs).
As environment secretary which beggars believe, more like "Get rid of the environment secretary". Also can imagine this is the only way May can prevent him from stabbing her in the back.
Ok folks I'm sorry to have to be the one to lay out the history lesson lesson here but it looks like its sorely needed.
I'll try and keep it to the broad strokes.
Imagine if you can a political climate where Class wasn't the most significant dividing line between ideologies. In Ireland, yes there was Class distinction but it was also accompanied by cultural/religious division.
So while labour movements in mainland UK flourished, the same wasnt so in the divided working class in Ireland.
The Upper class were all the more able to keep wages and conditions poor with the threat of giving the jobs to the other side. Working class folks did band together though, not so much as workers unions but more along cultural lines.
This we have the Order of Hibernians and the Orange order. (Take a look at the banners and trappings of Orange marches and compare to those of major English workers Unions and you'll notice the similarity)
Now long story short, World War, Irish war of Independence, partition of Ireland, Second World War, Civil Rights movements, Troubles, negotiations, troubles, cease fire, troubles, ceasefire, negotiations, peace process, power sharing, falling out, suspended assembly, on, off, on, off.
Now through it all Labour movements have come and gone and started and faltered and tried and failed through lack of support largely due to the same division. But that said there have been significant contributions along the way from those willing to court both sides (always an unpopular position but sorely necessary) whose efforts have led to any progress there ever has been but honestly whose names are likely not to be remembered by most today who seem intent on supporting the two most ideologically entrenched parties lest the vote swing too much in favour of the other side. (sound familiar?)
So while we do have legitimately progressive political options in Northern Ireland their support is sadly being stripped away to the DUP and SF neither of whom have proven able to actually keep the Assembly in operation to properly govern the country.
Sounds very similar to the overwhelming support for the Tories and Labour that has led to this train wreck of a government only the ideology dividing political opinion isn't class its culture. And a deeply conservative (small c) set of cultures at that, whose religious beliefs have been maintained through a century of dogged clinging on amidst fear and bloodshed while the rest of the UK progressed a more liberal social agenda.
That's why NI is the way it is. At least as far as I understand it.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Voting Leave didn't and doesn't equate to leaving the single market though.
Look back at their campaign. Even Farage said so.
But when your position is absolute no to free movement which in turn is absolute requirement for access to single market it effectively means it.
No free movement, no single market. How many leave voters were willing to have free movement after brexit? Seems more like no free movement was whole point of leave vote. Which in turn means voting leave meant leaving single market.
There's been several discussions on this. The problem with this is this that it implies an anti immigration stance which falls on the soft side of bigotry. The arguments being it depresses wages (research shows no statistical difference), places greater pressure on the nhs (not significantly as most Europe migrants are young and use it much less than our aging population) and takes school places (more an issue that education funding has been cut relatively, we still have less children in the system than we is in the 70s). It is probably better to say there is a significant minority that are both vocal and anti immigration that the tories have tried to persuade to leave ukip and join them for ultra hard Wrexit. The problem being is that we need immigration to keep our economy strong and support the older generation (that ironically make up most of the ukip crowd). Without immigration the number of nurses, farm workers and so on is significantly less and in the long term is likely to have significant impacts and result in major cuts to what we have today (like the nhs).
As environment secretary which beggars believe, more like "Get rid of the environment secretary". Also can imagine this is the only way May can prevent him from stabbing her in the back.
I sew they hired a necromancer to help build the government.
Unconfirmed reports of activity around Thatchers grave.
I really can't see how anyone can claim Corbs won.
He went against an opponent who shot themselves in both feet, accidentally cut off their head whilst shaving and generally suffered more abuse than OJ Simpson did during the 3 naked gun movies.
He had social media on his side, whilst the Tories managed to make enemies of both old and young people at the same time.
This was Mike Tyson in his peak squaring off against Stephen Hawkin.
And he still lost by 50 seats.
Sometimes I think the plan was for the Tories to mess up so badly that we'd have to witness labour stumble through the Brexit talks and have them come in post Brexit to save the day.
This is the best interpretation of events I've read yet.
Clive in Hemel Hempstead on BBC Radio 5 Live wrote:
So the Conservatives won, but lost...
Labour lost, but won...
The SNP won and lost in Scotland
but still won
and the Conservatives won in Scotland
but lost...
UKIP lost but because of Brexit they've
already won...
the winner, Mrs May, is being told to resign
because she didn't win
and she won't
because she won
even though she lost...
So, in summary, it's safe to say, in my view, everyone on every side should get off of their high horses already.
I'd vote for Thatcher. If she weren't dead and I was of voting age. Now there was a real conservative party worthy of leading the country. Before she went a little overconfident in the end and thought she could do anything.
CREEEEEEEEED wrote: I'd vote for Thatcher. If she weren't dead I was of voting age. Now there was a real conservative party worthy of leading the country. Before she went a little overconfident in the end and thought she could do anything.
Right now id probably consider Bojo over May.
She messed up hugely, she only in office still because they cannot get rid of her for a few months and need to keep things looking like they working.
Maybe not a full Thatcher. But the Tory party definitely needs to look back at previous times, leaders and such and carefully study what they need to learn from going forward.
CREEEEEEEEED wrote: I'd vote for Thatcher. If she weren't dead I was of voting age. Now there was a real conservative party worthy of leading the country. Before she went a little overconfident in the end and thought she could do anything.
CREEEEEEEEED wrote: I'd vote for Thatcher. If she weren't dead I was of voting age. Now there was a real conservative party worthy of leading the country. Before she went a little overconfident in the end and thought she could do anything.
What exactly is it that she and her government did which you think was good for the country?
CREEEEEEEEED wrote: I'd vote for Thatcher. If she weren't dead I was of voting age. Now there was a real conservative party worthy of leading the country. Before she went a little overconfident in the end and thought she could do anything.
May took one year to get to that point.
Know any necromancers?
Least undead Thatcher might scare junker and co at negotiations by eating macrons soul to fuel her existence. Just hope they not change venue to a church or holy place...
Kilkrazy wrote: . I am led to think it might be best for the Tories to call another election, lose it badly and let Labour take the rap for the post-Brexit crash. The danger is that if Labour got a great, soft Brexit deal, there wouldn't be a crash, they would be the heroes of the nation and could end up winning the next two elections.
It's not that unlikely that Labour would be able to negotiate a better deal. They still part of on the major alliances in the European parliament which can provide better insights in the positions of other governments and a platform for unofficial talks. In addition a post Brexit UK given form by Labour with decent worker protection would be less troublesome than the low wage, free market, tax haven the Tories dream off. I imagine many EU countries would also like to see the Tory party pay for the whole mess, while Labour would have a clean slate, or even receive sympathy from other governments for having to sort out the mess Cameron made.
Antario wrote: It's not that unlikely that Labour would be able to negotiate a better deal. They still part of on the major alliances in the European parliament which can provide better insights in the positions of other governments and a platform for unofficial talks. In addition a post Brexit UK given form by Labour with decent worker protection would be less troublesome than the low wage, free market, tax haven the Tories dream off. I imagine many EU countries would also like to see the Tory party pay for the whole mess, while Labour would have a clean slate, or even receive sympathy from other governments for having to sort out the mess Cameron made.
I'm conflicted, because I know that in order for Brexit to succeed, Britain needs to be an attractive to business, and Corbyn's brand of socialism is likely to drive business away. But get too friendly with business and we end up in the situation that we're in now, with low wages and companies using so many loopholes to dodge tax the Exchequer ends up owning them money. There's got to be a happy middle ground.
welshhoppo wrote: I really can't see how anyone can claim Corbs won...
That's because you fail to understand what has happened, or are refusing to acknowledge it, much like many of my conservative friends. Long game, this is a victory for Labour and Corbyn.
welshhoppo wrote: I really can't see how anyone can claim Corbs won...
That's because you fail to understand what has happened, or are refusing to acknowledge it, much like many of my conservative friends. Long game, this is a victory for Labour and Corbyn.
Exactly, people were saying Corbyn and Labour would be finished, not only did that not happen, they actually did way better than many expected. They ended up better off after the election, whereas the Tories ended up worse off. They might have won more votes, but this election embarrassed them, May gambled their majority away for nothing, now she has to get into bed with the DUP as she doesn't have the numbers by herself. As a Labour voter I'm feeling pretty optimistic about the result, Labour gained and it sent a message. It's a 'win' because it's a step in the right direction, I think a lot of Tories who get fixated on the literal wording are just being obtuse to the deeper meaning behind all this, it worries them so they downplay it's significance. Corbyn and his supporters should feel optimistic, May should be worried.
What exactly is it that she and her government did which you think was good for the country?
I dunno, break the unions hold over the country so life could continue as normal, and stop subsidising their uncompetitive business, because that's not what governments exist to do. And she increased GDP by 23%.
Corbyn didn't win but May certainly lost. Last week was the first time Labour made gains in an election since 1997. They've been loosing ground ever since that since that first Blair win, until last Thursday. It's not a literal win, but you can't always turn the tide in one go, it is a victory in a longer process.
CREEEEEEEEED wrote: You're wrong Mad Doc, we don't have a choice between left and right. We have a choice between left and a weird hodgepodge of all the worst bits of the centre and all the worst bits of the right, as far as I can see. I just wish the tories would get their act together, boot out May, find someone competent, and make a proper, right wing, socially liberal (to an extent) and fiscally conservative party out of themselves.
Well, your turn, I guess. Even moderate leftists had no one to vote for for decades other than tiny parties that recieve a fraction of a percent of the vote.
You have parties that suit you. They're just not the Tories.
CREEEEEEEEED wrote: I'd vote for Thatcher. If she weren't dead and I was of voting age. Now there was a real conservative party worthy of leading the country. Before she went a little overconfident in the end and thought she could do anything.
The current regime better reflects your desires in a Tory party than Thatcher's one did. Well, competency aside.
What exactly is it that she and her government did which you think was good for the country?
I dunno, break the unions hold over the country so life could continue as normal, and stop subsidising their uncompetitive business, because that's not what governments exist to do. And she increased GDP by 23%.
Rail subsidies in the UK. Despite being privatised for 20 years, and now owned by foreign nation states, the tax payer still subsidies the rail companies.
Plus, I was there, as a teenager, and I can state categorically that she was a terrible prime minister for the country. I remember sky high interest rates, record unemployment, and the start of rocketing house prices.
She may have broken the unions, but she also destroyed lives and communities in the process with absolutely no plan, or even consideration, of how to mitigate or repair the damage. She unbalanced the economy of the country in favour of spivs and speculators and that has lead to the financial chaos we see now.
The line saying that the DUP were against violence is also simply not true many of their members have been at and supported loyalist paramilitary rallies, serving in the UDR or else threatened violence if there was a united Ireland.
I never claimed that you told people to ignore? So I'm not sure where tat has come from, and I'm not sure what my false narrative is as everything that I've said about the DUP can be backed up by facts.
Anyone who knows anything about loyalist paramilitaries knows they hated the DUP for years. There are a multitude of works out there to back it up. I personally knew David Ervine who led the UVFs political wing and he spat venom daily about them. Here's a guardian article says as much
The UDR were a regiment in the British Army until they merged with the Royal Irish Regiment. The UDR received a standing ovation at the yearly commeration ceremony in London in the Albert Hall, the Queen herself in attendance. The only regiment to do so. The entire regiment was awarded the Conspicuous Gallantry Cross after they merged with the Royal Irish in recognition of their services.
That doesn't take away from the fact here and now the DUP and UDA are very chummy with the UDA for gods sake Foster was meeting with them days after they killed a man and in the past the weren't exactly sworn enemies were they? 1., 2., 3.
While I'm sure you're right about Ervine not liking the DUP they were in different political so not much of a surprise. I can find no mention of them in that article and even if the UVF didn't agree with them it doesn't mean they aren't linked to the UDA, the IRSP aren't too fond of SF, doesn't mean that SF weren't linked with the IRA.
Regarding the UDR I was simply saying for people who hate violence they had a lot of people who were in the army. The UDR weren't exactly all flowers and picnics either they were pretty tied in with loyalist paramilitaries like the Glenanne Gang.
I don't think you read the article it states
"He was equally disappointed that over the last few years the unionist-loyalist electorate haf voted in record numbers for the one party he despised more than any others: the Rev Ian Paisley's Democratic Unionists." Good idea to read before commenting.
Foster hasn't met SEA UDA as far a as I know. She met some mainstream UDA leaders after Colin Horner was shot. Colin was shot by the breakaway South East Antrim UDA who have been a law unto themselves for years now as they formally withdrew from the main UDA in 2006. Saying she met with SEA is like meeting the UDA is like saying she met the INLA when it was the IRA. Facts.
When Peter Robinson made that video the UDA were a legal organisation.
Rail shouldn't be privatized, it should be government run, but only because on a single line there can't be competition, so private business can get away with being crap in a way they can't in the rest of the market. And no, I didn't live through it, but I know people who did and their view of it is rather different. As regards the guardian statistics, it looks like a mixed bag, as regards the ad bits I obviously can't argue with hard facts but I'd like to see the actual axis, that might just be a mobile problem. I take it you're more left wing than Blair, what exactly was it that was so terrible about him? I hear a lot of complaining but I don't actually know of any faliures other than the 2008 cra... yeah I guess that makes sense.
2008 crash wasn't Government policy. It was idiot bankers.
Main idiocy was US style NINJA loans. NINJA standing for No Income No Job - all on the basis house prices could only rise.
I do wish people would stop blaming Labour for what was a global crisis with dozens of factors involved (here in the UK, it's entirely possible that had the gutter press not freaked out over Northern Rock, directly leading to a run on the bank, things may not have been so bad)
The line saying that the DUP were against violence is also simply not true many of their members have been at and supported loyalist paramilitary rallies, serving in the UDR or else threatened violence if there was a united Ireland.
I never claimed that you told people to ignore? So I'm not sure where tat has come from, and I'm not sure what my false narrative is as everything that I've said about the DUP can be backed up by facts.
Anyone who knows anything about loyalist paramilitaries knows they hated the DUP for years. There are a multitude of works out there to back it up. I personally knew David Ervine who led the UVFs political wing and he spat venom daily about them. Here's a guardian article says as much
The UDR were a regiment in the British Army until they merged with the Royal Irish Regiment. The UDR received a standing ovation at the yearly commeration ceremony in London in the Albert Hall, the Queen herself in attendance. The only regiment to do so. The entire regiment was awarded the Conspicuous Gallantry Cross after they merged with the Royal Irish in recognition of their services.
That doesn't take away from the fact here and now the DUP and UDA are very chummy with the UDA for gods sake Foster was meeting with them days after they killed a man and in the past the weren't exactly sworn enemies were they? 1., 2., 3.
While I'm sure you're right about Ervine not liking the DUP they were in different political so not much of a surprise. I can find no mention of them in that article and even if the UVF didn't agree with them it doesn't mean they aren't linked to the UDA, the IRSP aren't too fond of SF, doesn't mean that SF weren't linked with the IRA.
Regarding the UDR I was simply saying for people who hate violence they had a lot of people who were in the army. The UDR weren't exactly all flowers and picnics either they were pretty tied in with loyalist paramilitaries like the Glenanne Gang.
I don't think you read the article it states
"He was equally disappointed that over the last few years the unionist-loyalist electorate haf voted in record numbers for the one party he despised more than any others: the Rev Ian Paisley's Democratic Unionists." Good idea to read before commenting.
Foster hasn't met SEA UDA as far a as I know. She met some mainstream UDA leaders after Colin Horner was shot. Colin was shot by the breakaway South East Antrim UDA who have been a law unto themselves for years now as they formally withdrew from the main UDA in 2006. Saying she met with SEA is like meeting the UDA is like saying she met the INLA when it was the IRA. Facts.
When Peter Robinson made that video the UDA were a legal organisation.
Ok fair enough I missed that David Ervine didn't like the DUP but then again I said it was probably true as they were political opponents and from a different paramilitary group and loyalists are pretty well known for their feuds.
So she is still meeting with the UDA? Yes they may be a different faction of it but they still use the title of UDA, SF always seem to get a hard time when he dissidents do something so surely it should be replicated onto the DUP. DUP members also appeared on stage with Billy Wright endorsing him as well as Foster defending her relationship with Dee Stitt leader of the North Down UDA.
They may have been legal but they at time were committing murders all over the North which is eluded to in the video and he still stood by them.
This has all stemmed from me saying the DUP have links to loyalist paramilitaries which you have said don't exist and that the hate violence, which simply isn't the case you can argue the details of it but you yourself admitted she's had meetings with the UDA and as far as hating violence they march every year to celebrate beating Catholics at the Battle of the Boyne so they could continue hundreds of years of Protestant dominance.
One wonders how the result might affect the Scottish vote in the next General Election - be that in the next few months, in five years time or anything in between.
See, Scotland is traditionally seen as a good deal more left than the rest of the UK - hence still holding on to Nice Things, like free prescriptions, Uni etc.
With Labour having shown some impressive teeth, and Corbyn not being a fan of independence, it could be the perception that the Tories are the only ones to stand in the way of the SNP is less certain than before.
If Scottish Labour can get their heads out their rear ends and get behind Corbyn (who if nothing else totally silenced his critics) we could see Labour regain traditional Scottish heartlands.
As for the SNP? I've lived in England since 1991 when my folks moved here with my Dad's job, so I don't really have an opinion on them politically. But Sturgeon could do with hushing up for a while.
The is a conversation of the blind. So I'm stopping.
But just to say the Battle of the Boyne was nothing to do with Protestant or Unionist dominance it was the culmination of the Glorious Revolution or ironically as its called in some parts the Bloodless Revolution. This was probably the most defining constitutional moment of the modern United Kingdom. It established parliament as we know it the monarchy as we know it and a promise of civil and religious liberty for all citizens of the UK.
And before you start yes we still have a long way to go before this is realised, definitely more so in NI but it established a goal we should all be aiming for.
One wonders how the result might affect the Scottish vote in the next General Election - be that in the next few months, in five years time or anything in between.
Depends on a few things, I reckon:
1) The new coalition of chaos. The longer any Tory-DUP alliance remains (if it ever starts!) the more apparent Scottish Tory links to bigotry will become. Whatever your opinionon NI politics or the DUP, the vast majority of Scots that associate themselves with NI unionism do so because of either Rangers or hating Catholics. Usually both. The councillors who belong to lodges, the MSP who loves to tweet about the Queen's 11 etc have managed to only really attract attention from the leftist independent media, but they're going to start getting put on the front of papers. Every week that goes by where the Tories are explicitly connected to the DUP will reduce Tory support in Scotland. By orders of magnitude around Glasgow.
2) SNP positions on independence. If they kick it into the long grass, then the Scottish Tories disintegrate overnight. Their vote is entirely due to opposition to independence. If it's no longer on the near horizon, the Scottish Tories have no reason whatsoever to exist. It's the only thing Ruth Davidson talks about and it's the only thing that appears in their election campaign material. I recieved about 8 or 9 Tory maildrops in the last three months concerning two distinct elections and none of them mentioned anything except independence. They tend not to even use 'Conservtive' anywhere bar in the logo. It's all 'Vote for Ruth Davidson to Stop an Another Divisive Independence Referendum'. If Scottish Tories falter, Labour will hoover up their votes by default because their voters are crossing the No Independence box, not the Scottish Conservative and Unionist box.
3) Kezia Dugdale. If she goes and is replaced by someone who didn't spend two years kicking Corbyn in the shin then Scottish Labour's chances will significantly improve. That's going to be put to her everytime she tries to claim some influence on Scottish Labour gains and she's going to make a mess of responding to it because that's what she does. They need a new learer pronto. Doesn't even need to be a good one. Just one that doesn't have a history of opposing everything that has just gained them ground. A nobody that just parroted 'I endorse whatever Jeremy has most recently said' would do better at this point.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Prognostication!
See, Scotland is traditionally seen as a good deal more left than the rest of the UK - hence still holding on to Nice Things, like free prescriptions, Uni etc.
They hold onto those nice things by being subsidised by English taxpayers. Scotland on it's own would go into austerity far worse than UK austerity over the last 5 years if it left.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Prognostication!
See, Scotland is traditionally seen as a good deal more left than the rest of the UK - hence still holding on to Nice Things, like free prescriptions, Uni etc.
They hold onto those nice things by being subsidised by English taxpayers. Scotland on it's own would go into austerity far worse than UK austerity over the last 5 years if it left.
I'd be careful about confidently opening that particular can of worms with flat statements of subsidy. The UK oil industry was a significant contributor to the treasury for decades, and it can be argued that that makes up for current perceived imbalances.
However, what's important to remember is that the devolved Scottish government has a budget to stick to, and it chooses these benefits for its population, just as we could do too, if we wanted to.
The money can always be found from somewhere, it's just down to your ideology and beliefs about what you think is important and what should be cut. England, and Wales "chose", by voting Tory, triple lock pensions, high tax bands and low corporation tax, rather than health and education spending.
Knockagh wrote: The is a conversation of the blind. So I'm stopping.
But just to say the Battle of the Boyne was nothing to do with Protestant or Unionist dominance it was the culmination of the Glorious Revolution or ironically as its called in some parts the Bloodless Revolution. This was probably the most defining constitutional moment of the modern United Kingdom. It established parliament as we know it the monarchy as we know it and a promise of civil and religious liberty for all citizens of the UK.
And before you start yes we still have a long way to go before this is realised, definitely more so in NI but it established a goal we should all be aiming for.
The End
Oh come on James was literally in Ireland to try and regain the throne he lost mainly due to being catholic and this causing him to lose the favour of his court, and if its one of the most important moments for the UK why s it barely celebrated anywhere else? In recent times (when all current DUP members have been involved) it is little more than a hate fest and an attempt to show dominance, marching through nationalist areas, burning effigies of the pope along with rival political posters and kids running around with KAT/I written everywhere (Kill All Taigs/Irish).
However, as you say the DUP talk is going no where I doubt ill be able to convince you their anything other than saints despite the evidence and you'll not be able to convince me they aren't bigots mainly due to their actions directly contradicting it.
A 96% drop in EU nurse applications. I'm not seeing an increase in applications from non-EU or domestic increases to make up for this.
This is what I can't understand about the anti immigrant crowd many of those coming over ''taking our jobs'' are fulfilling roles that we by ourselves can't do. Due to the proposed cuts on grants to student nurses the situations only going to get worse as less and less people see it as a viable option for them.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Prognostication!
See, Scotland is traditionally seen as a good deal more left than the rest of the UK - hence still holding on to Nice Things, like free prescriptions, Uni etc.
They hold onto those nice things by being subsidised by English taxpayers. Scotland on it's own would go into austerity far worse than UK austerity over the last 5 years if it left.
You could have nice things if you voted for them, too.
It was on the radio today that, if the UK's exports to the EU should drop by 5%, the UK would need to increase exports to the rest of the world by 28% to make up the lost money.
Another item was a big survey of small to medium businesses by Harvard Business School, unsurprisingly revealing they don't like Brexit one bit.
Knockagh wrote: But just to say the Battle of the Boyne was nothing to do with Protestant or Unionist dominance it was the culmination of the Glorious Revolution or ironically as its called in some parts the Bloodless Revolution.
Oh come on James was literally in Ireland to try and regain the throne he lost mainly due to being catholic and this causing him to lose the favour of his court, and if its one of the most important moments for the UK why s it barely celebrated anywhere else?
To suggest that the Boyne, and by extension the whole of the Glorious Revolution, was not connected to a protestant movement against catholicism is revisionism on par with the US deep south claiming the ACW was only about "state's rights".
The Glorious Revolution is one of the most significant events in UK history (for one it was the last time it England was conquered by foreigners) and is one of the most fascinating periods in our history. It isn't remembered anywhere else in the UK and sadly I don't recall being taught a single thing to do with it in GCSEs at school as everything was WW2 dialed up to eleven.
And I didn't mean to suggest the GR wasn't connected to a Protestant movement I said it wasn't an attempt at Protestant dominance. I perhaps could have phrased it better, but I get fed up with the William hated Catholics and just wanted to kill them attitude at times. William 3rd was probably one of the most liberal monarchs we have ever had. He brought in early civil rights acts and for his day extended religious liberties far beyond anything seen in the western world. It was a wonderful historical movement that has largely been forgotten in England due to the almost universal support for replacing James and his hasty flight. It's remembered in Ireland due to the fact that the battles were fought here. The legacy it has left us runs right through the core of British and American society. It's a fascinating subject worthy of more than a dakka discussion. An excellent book on the subject is; King William III: Prince of Orange, the First European by Bryan Bevan. An eye opener in many ways....
At school, broadly speaking we folded the Glorious Revolution into the Jacobite Rebellion module in history, I'd never heard of the"Glorious Revolution" phrase until I moved to England
And, broadly speaking, when I was learning history at school, in a time before the SNP got any real power and at a time before an Australian became the rallying symbol of hatred against the English, the Jacobite Rebellion was taught as not being a Scotland versus English thing but primarily as a symptom of changing religious beliefs and behaviours in the United Kingdom and was not treated as a Scotland / England thing at all. Indeed I remember it being pointed out that there were lowlanders in notable numbers siding against James.
I've always believed that there's enough money out there to fund things like training bursaries. It just that a lot of it is either wasted or not collected. If the big multinationals would pay their share we'd be in a much better place. This is why we need to change the system so that taxes are collected on sales rather than territory. Say a multinational conducts 12% of its business in the U.K. It should pay UK tax on 12% of its profits. It's fair and you can't escape this with loopholes. The only way around it would be decreasing the amount of business you do in the country and what company in their right mind would do that?
Kilkrazy wrote: Recruitment of native nurse student candidates is down by half since withdrawal of the training bursary.
We also have a crisis in midwifery, and a growing crisis in general practice.
It takes about 10 years to train a GP.
So what you're saying is that investing in education is the best value for money option the government ever had because investing in people is investing in the country and the returns you get are manifold, a better health service being but one of the many benefits.
And that failure to invest in education (in the favour of propping up banks and securing tax haven Britain for big corporations who don't invest in the country) in the last 10 years (or more) is leaving a telling impact on todays NHS.
Sorry, just though that (most sensible) comment needed expounded upon. But thank goodness for those who have stepped in to the gap and kept our services running!
While there may be further deeper reasons to the 12th those have been forgotten 300 years in the past and is now solely a hate fest and that is where the negativity of it stems from, burning pictures of people who have been murdered and the spiritual leader of an other religion doesn't exactly scream of tolerance and liberal beliefs.
In many ways it's a sign of the state of the NHS, not only is the funding for bursaries been taken away but once they do qualify what do they have to look forward too? Long tough hours with very little recognition. This has resulted in less people applying for it and many of those who have are quite a bit older than your average student (perhaps due to funding issue?) which only worsens the problem as a new nurse is required to replace them in a shorter period of time.
gianlucafiorentini123 wrote: While there may be further deeper reasons to the 12th those have been forgotten 300 years in the past and is now solely a hate fest and that is where the negativity of it stems from, burning pictures of people who have been murdered and the spiritual leader of an other religion doesn't exactly scream of tolerance and liberal beliefs.
In many ways it's a sign of the state of the NHS, not only is the funding for bursaries been taken away but once they do qualify what do they have to look forward too? Long tough hours with very little recognition. This has resulted in less people applying for it and many of those who have are quite a bit older than your average student (perhaps due to funding issue?) which only worsens the problem as a new nurse is required to replace them in a shorter period of time.
That plus the PFI deals for the hospitals, they are too expensive for the trusts to run, cost huge amounts in maintaining contracts there locked into and more.
Hospitals that cost several times that original costs over life times.
Its stupid, we have hospitals on rather expensive mortgages.
gianlucafiorentini123 wrote: While there may be further deeper reasons to the 12th those have been forgotten 300 years in the past and is now solely a hate fest and that is where the negativity of it stems from, burning pictures of people who have been murdered and the spiritual leader of an other religion doesn't exactly scream of tolerance and liberal beliefs.
Hard to hide the I hate prods attitude. Burning symbols, photos are wrong but they happen on both sides. They are symptoms of a society emerging and still influenced by conflict.
gianlucafiorentini123 wrote: While there may be further deeper reasons to the 12th those have been forgotten 300 years in the past and is now solely a hate fest and that is where the negativity of it stems from, burning pictures of people who have been murdered and the spiritual leader of an other religion doesn't exactly scream of tolerance and liberal beliefs.
Hard to hide the I hate prods attitude. Burning symbols, photos are wrong but they happen on both sides. They are symptoms of a society emerging and still influenced by conflict.
I assume you're trying to say I hate Protestants? I can honestly say I have nothing against protestants, I'll admit I strongly disagree with unionism and of course due to the past of the country it can be heated. It's the fact that you were denying the 12th was religiously motivated, which it has tuned into and that honestly cat be denied.
I'm also against the nationalist bonfires in August, genuinely think they're just as stupid and I think that marches would be ok if they were done in quite in each sides own area.
When it comes to sectarianism I'm not the one who called a paramilitary the 'greatest assassin in history' one who was a well known sectarian murderer?
Brexit is still on. I've been listening to the mood music coming out of the parties all morning, and it's still on. Can't see how they get around it. The French, by all accounts, being French, are determined to see the UK go. The Germans have accepted it.
What's that got to do with anything? Different thread different context! The Jackel is credited with the most assisinations in our country's history. The thread was about mass murderers, so adding local context to a thread is to be expected! I doubt their are too many pleasant characters in that thread from years ago.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Brexit is still on. I've been listening to the mood music coming out of the parties all morning, and it's still on. Can't see how they get around it. The French, by all accounts, being French, are determined to see the UK go. The Germans have accepted it.
I personally believe quiet arrangements have been made and agreed on rough terms already
Not on a fill political level but civil service and Brussels civil services.
Both have agreed to some degree on things and the wider issues are for political side.
Like a few basic groundworks have been laid very quietly.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Brexit is still on. I've been listening to the mood music coming out of the parties all morning, and it's still on. Can't see how they get around it. The French, by all accounts, being French, are determined to see the UK go. The Germans have accepted it.
I personally believe quiet arrangements have been made and agreed on rough terms already
Not on a fill political level but civil service and Brussels civil services.
Both have agreed to some degree on things and the wider issues are for political side.
Like a few basic groundworks have been laid very quietly.
The groundwork starts this week. I believe various civil servants were in Brussels today meeting with their opposite numbers. It could be nothing more than booking hotels but you have to start somewhere.
Knockagh wrote: What's that got to do with anything? Different thread different context! The Jackel is credited with the most assisinations in our country's history. The thread was about mass murderers, so adding local context to a thread is to be expected! I doubt their are too many pleasant characters in that thread from years ago.
Desperate attempt to divert!
Desperate attempt to divert earlier in this thread you ignored outright evidence of the DUP support paramilitaries and just kept denying and changing the topic. the man was a serial killer who is linked with the no warning bombings in Dublin and Monaghan, I'm pretty sure if someone called the low life who committed the Manchester attack a great assassin you'd take offence and accuse them of being supportive of them.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Brexit is still on. I've been listening to the mood music coming out of the parties all morning, and it's still on. Can't see how they get around it. The French, by all accounts, being French, are determined to see the UK go. The Germans have accepted it.
I personally believe quiet arrangements have been made and agreed on rough terms already
Not on a fill political level but civil service and Brussels civil services.
Both have agreed to some degree on things and the wider issues are for political side.
Like a few basic groundworks have been laid very quietly.
The groundwork starts this week. I believe various civil servants were in Brussels today meeting with their opposite numbers. It could be nothing more than booking hotels but you have to start somewhere.
They sure have, it just turns out that May's gambit gone wrong throws a rather large spanner to the works.
Hidden in this piece you can find the following nuggets:
An EU source disclosed that Brussels had also been secretly briefing Downing Street on the 27 member states’ negotiating position for months, well ahead of it being public, to allow the government to shape its response.
“They have had everything, sometimes before senior people here have seen the positions”, the source said. “May has known about the sequencing of talks since last September. None of this has been a surprise to her.”
So it's clear that behind the posturing the negotiating teams have been at it.
Nurses don't get paid enough, just like teaching and police. The government seem to rely a hell of a lot on people treating it as a vocation, meaning they willingly accept the long hours in return for poor pay, unrealistic demands and constant criticism. And when people working in these sectors dare to strike because the bs gets too much they stir up the right wing press against their own public services, because we must be in the wrong.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Brexit is still on. I've been listening to the mood music coming out of the parties all morning, and it's still on. Can't see how they get around it. The French, by all accounts, being French, are determined to see the UK go. The Germans have accepted it.
Oh, I don't deny that. But it would be nice for people to maybe acknowledge that not all the objections posed prior to the referendum were "project fear".
The French and Germans have also realised that they are likely to be better off, politically, without our constant obstruction and irritation, which is sad tbh. However, it's not even started to get going yet, there's more to come. I hope people are ready for the gak storm.
Knockagh wrote: What's that got to do with anything? Different thread different context! The Jackel is credited with the most assisinations in our country's history. The thread was about mass murderers, so adding local context to a thread is to be expected! I doubt their are too many pleasant characters in that thread from years ago.
Desperate attempt to divert!
Desperate attempt to divert earlier in this thread you ignored outright evidence of the DUP support paramilitaries and just kept denying and changing the topic. the man was a serial killer who is linked with the no warning bombings in Dublin and Monaghan, I'm pretty sure if someone called the low life who committed the Manchester attack a great assassin you'd take offence and accuse them of being supportive of them.
I challenged your so called evidence at every turn. I voted DUP for the first time in 22 years of voting due to this kind of crap.
No i wouldn't have an issue. My reason for nominating Robin were his kill figure and that he survived to die in old age. Sorry if that's cold but it was a debate on assassins and their success. And that signals a success. Martin McGuniess was another successful assassin if you want, as was Dessie the fox. All nasty characters but successful in their field of expertise.
Howard A Treesong wrote: Nurses don't get paid enough, just like teaching and police. The government seem to rely a hell of a lot on people treating it as a vocation, meaning they willingly accept the long hours in return for poor pay, unrealistic demands and constant criticism. And when people working in these sectors dare to strike because the bs gets too much they stir up the right wing press against their own public services, because we must be in the wrong.
Agreed. Someone that can train as a nurse and all that entails can train for much better jobs and be paid more. If the support collapses for such a career in the UK then you simply aren't going to have an effective NHS. And the EU nurses should be even more worrying (and for the government terrifying). We run the risk of rapidly reducing staff numbers whilst at the same time we have an aging population and we need more of such people. Those that are left will hence then be able to go and work for consultancies and charge a fortune for their services. The anti-freedom of movement (that really won the Brexit vote overall) is really going to come home to roost on this one and we'll all suffer because of it.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Knockagh
@gianlucafiorentini
Do you mind if you take this discussion to another thread as it's gone a bit far beyond the UK politics overall...
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Brexit is still on. I've been listening to the mood music coming out of the parties all morning, and it's still on. Can't see how they get around it. The French, by all accounts, being French, are determined to see the UK go. The Germans have accepted it.
Oh, I don't deny that. But it would be nice for people to maybe acknowledge that not all the objections posed prior to the referendum were "project fear".
The French and Germans have also realised that they are likely to be better off, politically, without our constant obstruction and irritation, which is sad tbh. However, it's not even started to get going yet, there's more to come. I hope people are ready for the gak storm.
I've been saying from the start that I expected some short-term pain, but ultimately, I believe the long term benefits would be worth it. A once in a 200 year opportunity to take a long hard look at Britain and plan for the future.
Sadly, I didn't count on two things happening:
1. The Tories would be so fething incompetent
2. The absence of any grand plan, and I'm talking about a new industrial revolution here. Nobody is even close. The main parties are miles away. Taking back the trains is fine, I agree with it, but it's hardly setting the world on fire.
Oh, I don't deny that. But it would be nice for people to maybe acknowledge that not all the objections posed prior to the referendum were "project fear".
The French and Germans have also realised that they are likely to be better off, politically, without our constant obstruction and irritation, which is sad tbh. However, it's not even started to get going yet, there's more to come. I hope people are ready for the shitstorm.
The French and Germans can only gain from this. The was plenty of statements saying the EU was going to collapse after a few years, but if anything Brexit is making them stronger. Compare this to the UK which was noted as could go from strength to strength with access to the world. What do we think the world thinks of us at the moment? If you were a business would you prefer the stability of the EU or the mess that the UK has got itself into which in the end has arisen because of several Tories making political moves and not doing anything in the interest of the country for now and the long term. May still is unable to acknowledge what she is doing wrong, that the populace are turning against her and her policies of being hard right and instead is desperately grasping at straws to retain power and hence joining a coalition with an even more right wing view of the world.
Looks like Boris is at it again... Opens mouth and states something stupid like the Tories winning a seat when they didn't.
Knockagh wrote: What's that got to do with anything? Different thread different context! The Jackel is credited with the most assisinations in our country's history. The thread was about mass murderers, so adding local context to a thread is to be expected! I doubt their are too many pleasant characters in that thread from years ago.
Desperate attempt to divert!
Desperate attempt to divert earlier in this thread you ignored outright evidence of the DUP support paramilitaries and just kept denying and changing the topic. the man was a serial killer who is linked with the no warning bombings in Dublin and Monaghan, I'm pretty sure if someone called the low life who committed the Manchester attack a great assassin you'd take offence and accuse them of being supportive of them.
I challenged your so called evidence at every turn. I voted DUP for the first time in 22 years of voting due to this kind of crap.
No i wouldn't have an issue. My reason for nominating Robin were his kill figure and that he survived to die in old age. Sorry if that's cold but it was a debate on assassins and their success. And that signals a success. Martin McGuniess was another successful assassin if you want, as was Dessie the fox. All nasty characters but successful in their field of expertise.
Well you did for some and even then some was dubious such as they're talking to a different UDA, but for the bits you couldn't you ignored. Such as the DUP standing with and endorsing Billy Wright and me countering your DUP can't be related to terrorists as none of their MP's have been arrested with either have SF's and speaking of Pat Finucane.
Ok I retract what I said about the assassination I read and took it in quite a different way than that.
@DINLT
Unfortunately I think you maybe underestimating the extent of the short term pain. I personally think it's going to hit is pretty hard, and last a good long while, probably decades. I was hopeful that maybe sensible compromises maybe met, but May's extremist rhetoric, and incompetence, plus the mind boggling self interest of the Conservative party seems determined to crash the UK into the worst possible place.
I hope that at the very least this result may have blunted their arrogance and forced them to take a step back and rethink their approach.
Just seen Whirlwinds post I'll leave it at that in this thread it has gotten quite off the current topic. For people wondering why NI is so messed up this is an example of how it all escalates so fast
@ whirlwind I will gladly just stop thanks. I can't imagine anything worse than continuing this any longer. I'm off to put the girls to bed and relax. Might paint some minis tonight the wife's out.
2. The absence of any grand plan, and I'm talking about a new industrial revolution here. Nobody is even close. The main parties are miles away. Taking back the trains is fine, I agree with it, but it's hardly setting the world on fire.
This is why we need the EU. They offset our ability to lobotomise ourselves when we "take back control"
Back on topic, the 1922 committee meeting was today and, apparently it went pretty well, all things considered for Theresa May.
There was apparently an acknowledgement of mistakes made during the campaign and on the manifesto, and, in return, an understanding that, even though the right solutions weren't in there, the issues are still needing to be addressed.
Also a confirmation there will be no watering down of the Equalities Act as a result of the DUP support.
2. The absence of any grand plan, and I'm talking about a new industrial revolution here. Nobody is even close. The main parties are miles away. Taking back the trains is fine, I agree with it, but it's hardly setting the world on fire.
This is why we need the EU. They offset our ability to lobotomise ourselves when we "take back control"
Whenever you find yourself on the same side of the argument as big banks and multi-nationals, you need to step back and ask what the feth is going on.
The banks and the multi-nationals love the EU. That in itself is reason enough for me to run a mile from it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
r_squared wrote: @DINLT
Unfortunately I think you maybe underestimating the extent of the short term pain. I personally think it's going to hit is pretty hard, and last a good long while, probably decades. I was hopeful that maybe sensible compromises maybe met, but May's extremist rhetoric, and incompetence, plus the mind boggling self interest of the Conservative party seems determined to crash the UK into the worst possible place.
I hope that at the very least this result may have blunted their arrogance and forced them to take a step back and rethink their approach.
But would it be any better under Labour? Given that Corbyn's anti-EEC/EU stance has been known for decades, would you accept Corbyn as PM, knowing full well how he feels about the EU?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Compel wrote: Back on topic, the 1922 committee meeting was today and, apparently it went pretty well, all things considered for Theresa May.
There was apparently an acknowledgement of mistakes made during the campaign and on the manifesto, and, in return, an understanding that, even though the right solutions weren't in there, the issues are still needing to be addressed.
Also a confirmation there will be no watering down of the Equalities Act as a result of the DUP support.
The 1922 meeting was a smokescreen from start to finish. Talk of replacing May in the short term is nonsense, and the Tory party knows it. If they indulged in a 3 month leadership contest, then the nation would never forgive them for sabotaging the Brexit talks. May is safe until at least the New Year IMO.
The French and Germans can only gain from this. The was plenty of statements saying the EU was going to collapse after a few years, but if anything Brexit is making them stronger. Compare this to the UK which was noted as could go from strength to strength with access to the world. What do we think the world thinks of us at the moment? If you were a business would you prefer the stability of the EU or the mess that the UK has got itself into which in the end has arisen because of several Tories making political moves and not doing anything in the interest of the country for now and the long term. May still is unable to acknowledge what she is doing wrong, that the populace are turning against her and her policies of being hard right and instead is desperately grasping at straws to retain power and hence joining a coalition with an even more right wing view of the world.
Looks like Boris is at it again... Opens mouth and states something stupid like the Tories winning a seat when they didn't.
Absolute Rubbish. The EU cannot gain from having a country leave even if said country still pays something back. (This of course I am dead against and will be very annoyed if Brexit becomes a wishy washy soft deal that changes very little). Businesses will still flock to this country and Brexit could offer advantages over old world Europe. I hate to say it but we could become another offshore tax haven if we wanted to. This country will bounce back after the silly jitters the stock market and media create. May's error was to apply hard right to home policies when it really wasn't needed. She should have stayed centre ground in home affairs to keep things quiet and just pursue a strong national stance for Brexit.
The 1922 meeting was a smokescreen from start to finish. Talk of replacing May in the short term is nonsense, and the Tory party knows it. If they indulged in a 3 month leadership contest, then the nation would never forgive them for sabotaging the Brexit talks. May is safe until at least the New Year IMO.
Pretty much, being PM at the minute is a toxic seat, I think unless May herself gives in she will stay and endure. No sane Tory would want to usurp her and then face the flak of poor planning and jufgement for Brexit. I imagine if Labour had won Corbyn might have lost face straight away by not having himself or his party ready for running Brexit outside of hypothetical speeches in the election. Even with a slightly ruptured Conservative party I have faith they have the strongest plan and the most preparation for the commencing talks.
The French and Germans can only gain from this. The was plenty of statements saying the EU was going to collapse after a few years, but if anything Brexit is making them stronger. Compare this to the UK which was noted as could go from strength to strength with access to the world. What do we think the world thinks of us at the moment? If you were a business would you prefer the stability of the EU or the mess that the UK has got itself into which in the end has arisen because of several Tories making political moves and not doing anything in the interest of the country for now and the long term. May still is unable to acknowledge what she is doing wrong, that the populace are turning against her and her policies of being hard right and instead is desperately grasping at straws to retain power and hence joining a coalition with an even more right wing view of the world.
Looks like Boris is at it again... Opens mouth and states something stupid like the Tories winning a seat when they didn't.
Absolute Rubbish. The EU cannot gain from having a country leave even if said country still pays something back. (This of course I am dead against and will be very annoyed if Brexit becomes a wishy washy soft deal that changes very little). Businesses will still flock to this country and Brexit could offer advantages over old world Europe. I hate to say it but we could become another offshore tax haven if we wanted to. This country will bounce back after the silly jitters the stock market and media create. May's error was to apply hard right to home policies when it really wasn't needed. She should have stayed centre ground in home affairs to keep things quiet and just pursue a strong national stance for Brexit.
The 1922 meeting was a smokescreen from start to finish. Talk of replacing May in the short term is nonsense, and the Tory party knows it. If they indulged in a 3 month leadership contest, then the nation would never forgive them for sabotaging the Brexit talks. May is safe until at least the New Year IMO.
Pretty much, being PM at the minute is a toxic seat, I think unless May herself gives in she will stay and endure. No sane Tory would want to usurp her and then face the flak of poor planning and jufgement for Brexit. I imagine if Labour had won Corbyn might have lost face straight away by not having himself or his party ready for running Brexit outside of hypothetical speeches in the election. Even with a slightly ruptured Conservative party I have faith they have the strongest plan and the most preparation for the commencing talks.
Never underestimate the Tory party's thirst for power. They won't throw it all away, not unless it's forced upon them. They'll limp along for as long as they can get away with it.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Brexit is still on. I've been listening to the mood music coming out of the parties all morning, and it's still on. Can't see how they get around it. The French, by all accounts, being French, are determined to see the UK go. The Germans have accepted it.
Oh, I don't deny that. But it would be nice for people to maybe acknowledge that not all the objections posed prior to the referendum were "project fear".
The French and Germans have also realised that they are likely to be better off, politically, without our constant obstruction and irritation, which is sad tbh. However, it's not even started to get going yet, there's more to come. I hope people are ready for the shitstorm.
I've been saying from the start that I expected some short-term pain, but ultimately, I believe the long term benefits would be worth it. A once in a 200 year opportunity to take a long hard look at Britain and plan for the future.
Sadly, I didn't count on two things happening:
1. The Tories would be so fething incompetent
2. The absence of any grand plan, and I'm talking about a new industrial revolution here. Nobody is even close. The main parties are miles away. Taking back the trains is fine, I agree with it, but it's hardly setting the world on fire.
To be fair...given the kind of rhetoric surrounding the campaign, the government's position before the referrendum, the total lack of any sort of "leave" victory plan before the referrendum (particularly when coupled with the high level of interconnectivity between the UK and the EU in almost every sense but especially the single market), the razor thin "Leave" margin, and the government's subsequent push to invoke article 50 seemingly as fast as it possibly could after the referrendum, it is difficult to see where Brexit was ever going to be a once-in-a-200 year opportunity for any hard looks or future planning, given that such was clearly absent from the entire endeavor from the genesis of the campaign.
From an outsiders perspective, from start to now, it's basically come off as a Leroy Jenkins special affair
In other news the Labour party is being sucked up in its own fakenews on twitter. Currently they stand at about 25,000 new members not 150,000 people in 3 days to a total of 800,000 as had been touted. Just thought Id let you all know.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Brexit is still on. I've been listening to the mood music coming out of the parties all morning, and it's still on. Can't see how they get around it. The French, by all accounts, being French, are determined to see the UK go. The Germans have accepted it.
Oh, I don't deny that. But it would be nice for people to maybe acknowledge that not all the objections posed prior to the referendum were "project fear".
The French and Germans have also realised that they are likely to be better off, politically, without our constant obstruction and irritation, which is sad tbh. However, it's not even started to get going yet, there's more to come. I hope people are ready for the shitstorm.
I've been saying from the start that I expected some short-term pain, but ultimately, I believe the long term benefits would be worth it. A once in a 200 year opportunity to take a long hard look at Britain and plan for the future.
Sadly, I didn't count on two things happening:
1. The Tories would be so fething incompetent
2. The absence of any grand plan, and I'm talking about a new industrial revolution here. Nobody is even close. The main parties are miles away. Taking back the trains is fine, I agree with it, but it's hardly setting the world on fire.
To be fair...given the kind of rhetoric surrounding the campaign, the government's position before the referrendum, the total lack of any sort of "leave" victory plan before the referrendum (particularly when coupled with the high level of interconnectivity between the UK and the EU in almost every sense but especially the single market), the razor thin "Leave" margin, and the government's subsequent push to invoke article 50 seemingly as fast as it possibly could after the referrendum, it is difficult to see where Brexit was ever going to be a once-in-a-200 year opportunity for any hard looks or future planning, given that such was clearly absent from the entire endeavor from the genesis of the campaign.
From an outsiders perspective, from start to now, it's basically come off as a Leroy Jenkins special affair
Say what you want about Trump, but you guys in America are a beacon of stability compared to the mess we're in.
A lame duck Prime Minister propped up by evangelical Christians, France and Germany ready to kick our butts in Brexit negotiations, an economy going downhill faster than an elephant on rollerskates, and Nigel Farage threatening to come out of retirement.
We're fethed
I can see another Winter of Discontent in a few months time...
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Brexit is still on. I've been listening to the mood music coming out of the parties all morning, and it's still on. Can't see how they get around it. The French, by all accounts, being French, are determined to see the UK go. The Germans have accepted it.
Oh, I don't deny that. But it would be nice for people to maybe acknowledge that not all the objections posed prior to the referendum were "project fear". The French and Germans have also realised that they are likely to be better off, politically, without our constant obstruction and irritation, which is sad tbh. However, it's not even started to get going yet, there's more to come. I hope people are ready for the shitstorm.
I've been saying from the start that I expected some short-term pain, but ultimately, I believe the long term benefits would be worth it. A once in a 200 year opportunity to take a long hard look at Britain and plan for the future.
Sadly, I didn't count on two things happening:
1. The Tories would be so fething incompetent
2. The absence of any grand plan, and I'm talking about a new industrial revolution here. Nobody is even close. The main parties are miles away. Taking back the trains is fine, I agree with it, but it's hardly setting the world on fire.
To be fair...given the kind of rhetoric surrounding the campaign, the government's position before the referrendum, the total lack of any sort of "leave" victory plan before the referrendum (particularly when coupled with the high level of interconnectivity between the UK and the EU in almost every sense but especially the single market), the razor thin "Leave" margin, and the government's subsequent push to invoke article 50 seemingly as fast as it possibly could after the referrendum, it is difficult to see where Brexit was ever going to be a once-in-a-200 year opportunity for any hard looks or future planning, given that such was clearly absent from the entire endeavor from the genesis of the campaign.
From an outsiders perspective, from start to now, it's basically come off as a Leroy Jenkins special affair
Say what you want about Trump, but you guys in America are a beacon of stability compared to the mess we're in.
A lame duck Prime Minister propped up by evangelical Christians, France and Germany ready to kick our butts in Brexit negotiations, an economy going downhill faster than an elephant on rollerskates, and Nigel Farage threatening to come out of retirement.
We're fethed
I can see another Winter of Discontent in a few months time...
Dunno about that man... we have our own chaos here in the states.
But, hey... Pueto Ricoans just voted overwhelmingly to join as the 51st state.
Maybe ya'll need to vote as well to be the 52nd state! (or, how would that hypothetically work? A vote for each countries (England, Scotland, Wales, NI, etc...???)
I just found out (from watching police interceptors) that the cost of fighting the illegal drugs trade is 10 billion. How much of that is cannabis? It's pointless trying to fight it. Legalise it and tax it. And I say that as somebody who's ever touched the stuff.
See like I was saying earlier, the money is there. You just have to go look for it.
Future War Cultist wrote: I just found out (from watching police interceptors) that the cost of fighting the illegal drugs trade is 10 billion. How much of that is cannabis? It's pointless trying to fight it. Legalise it and tax it. And I say that as somebody who's ever touched the stuff.
See like I was saying earlier, the money is there. You just have to go look for it.
Sentinel1 wrote: In other news the Labour party is being sucked up in its own fakenews on twitter. Currently they stand at about 25,000 new members not 150,000 people in 3 days to a total of 800,000 as had been touted. Just thought Id let you all know.
That's not much of a story, seems a little desperate, grasping at straws to smear Labour with?
I also noticed a Facebook campaign earlier, being shared amongst my more militant Tory friends about the electoral commission reminding students that they can register to vote in their home town, and university constituency. It also reminded them that it is an offence to vote twice in a general election and can lead to a £5000 fine, but that's not stopped the frothing and righteous indignation.
Kilkrazy wrote: My next-door neighbour at lunch yesterday was convince that Labour only "won" by "cheating" by "being better" at "social media."
I know, it great at the moment. Most of the Facebook threads I have read recently are chock full of some right lovely people frothing at "bloody students being bribed" or "too stupid to know what's good for them".
A few I noticed were quite forthright in their opinions about the youth not voting in the EU referendum, and how they "should have made the effort to vote".
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Brexit is still on. I've been listening to the mood music coming out of the parties all morning, and it's still on. Can't see how they get around it. The French, by all accounts, being French, are determined to see the UK go. The Germans have accepted it.
Oh, I don't deny that. But it would be nice for people to maybe acknowledge that not all the objections posed prior to the referendum were "project fear".
The French and Germans have also realised that they are likely to be better off, politically, without our constant obstruction and irritation, which is sad tbh. However, it's not even started to get going yet, there's more to come. I hope people are ready for the shitstorm.
I've been saying from the start that I expected some short-term pain, but ultimately, I believe the long term benefits would be worth it. A once in a 200 year opportunity to take a long hard look at Britain and plan for the future.
Sadly, I didn't count on two things happening:
1. The Tories would be so fething incompetent
2. The absence of any grand plan, and I'm talking about a new industrial revolution here. Nobody is even close. The main parties are miles away. Taking back the trains is fine, I agree with it, but it's hardly setting the world on fire.
To be fair...given the kind of rhetoric surrounding the campaign, the government's position before the referrendum, the total lack of any sort of "leave" victory plan before the referrendum (particularly when coupled with the high level of interconnectivity between the UK and the EU in almost every sense but especially the single market), the razor thin "Leave" margin, and the government's subsequent push to invoke article 50 seemingly as fast as it possibly could after the referrendum, it is difficult to see where Brexit was ever going to be a once-in-a-200 year opportunity for any hard looks or future planning, given that such was clearly absent from the entire endeavor from the genesis of the campaign.
From an outsiders perspective, from start to now, it's basically come off as a Leroy Jenkins special affair
Say what you want about Trump, but you guys in America are a beacon of stability compared to the mess we're in.
A lame duck Prime Minister propped up by evangelical Christians, France and Germany ready to kick our butts in Brexit negotiations, an economy going downhill faster than an elephant on rollerskates, and Nigel Farage threatening to come out of retirement.
We're fethed
I can see another Winter of Discontent in a few months time...
Dunno about that man... we have our own chaos here in the states.
But, hey... Pueto Ricoans just voted overwhelmingly to join as the 51st state.
Maybe ya'll need to vote as well to be the 52nd state! (or, how would that hypothetically work? A vote for each countries (England, Scotland, Wales, NI, etc...???)
Could it get any worst?
You're forgetting that Trump has a state visit to Britain, so yes, it can get worse
It's a pity, really. Trump desperately needs some foreign visits to distract attention from the slowly rolling clown car garbage truck wreck his presidency has become.
It would be great for him to come to the UK and be "faced" with a solid row of buttocks all along the Mall.
It's a pity, really. Trump desperately needs some foreign visits to distract attention from the slowly rolling clown car garbage truck wreck his presidency has become.
It would be great for him to come to the UK and be "faced" with a solid row of buttocks all along the Mall.
Ya'll might wanna rethink that a bit...
If you want to be put in the frontline for negotiations post-Brexit... you might want to fellatio the man's ego a bit... until after such agreement is signed of course.
But... hey... if Lord Buckethead can run for elections, I can certainly see that the "moonings" are possible.
It's a pity, really. Trump desperately needs some foreign visits to distract attention from the slowly rolling clown car garbage truck wreck his presidency has become.
It would be great for him to come to the UK and be "faced" with a solid row of buttocks all along the Mall.
Ya'll might wanna rethink that a bit...
If you want to be put in the frontline for negotiations post-Brexit... you might want to fellatio the man's ego a bit... until after such agreement is signed of course.
But... hey... if Lord Buckethead can run for elections, I can certainly see that the "moonings" are possible.
Yeah dispute the fact Trump ain't nice, he also handy to have on side right now. We could need US support before this Brexit is over.
It's a pity, really. Trump desperately needs some foreign visits to distract attention from the slowly rolling clown car garbage truck wreck his presidency has become.
It would be great for him to come to the UK and be "faced" with a solid row of buttocks all along the Mall.
Ya'll might wanna rethink that a bit...
If you want to be put in the frontline for negotiations post-Brexit... you might want to fellatio the man's ego a bit... until after such agreement is signed of course.
But... hey... if Lord Buckethead can run for elections, I can certainly see that the "moonings" are possible.
Yeah dispute the fact Trump ain't nice, he also handy to have on side right now. We could need US support before this Brexit is over.
Trump isn't the "supportive" type, at least not for free.
It's a pity, really. Trump desperately needs some foreign visits to distract attention from the slowly rolling clown car garbage truck wreck his presidency has become.
It would be great for him to come to the UK and be "faced" with a solid row of buttocks all along the Mall.
Ya'll might wanna rethink that a bit...
If you want to be put in the frontline for negotiations post-Brexit... you might want to fellatio the man's ego a bit... until after such agreement is signed of course.
But... hey... if Lord Buckethead can run for elections, I can certainly see that the "moonings" are possible.
Yeah dispute the fact Trump ain't nice, he also handy to have on side right now. We could need US support before this Brexit is over.
Trump isn't the "supportive" type, at least not for free.
Whenever you find yourself on the same side of the argument as big banks and multi-nationals, you need to step back and ask what the feth is going on.
The banks and the multi-nationals love the EU. That in itself is reason enough for me to run a mile from it.
The alternative being Aaron Banks who has a vested interest in insurance (including medical) and would gain to benefit a great deal from a collapsing NHS that no longer has the staff to support it.
There are questionable supporters on both sides. Really it has been governments overall that have failed to control them, not the EU in particular. The UK government has basically transferred the banking debt onto the UK populace and let the banks walk away with minimal cost. That's not an EU problem.
You do at least get a strong economy, freedom of movement, protection of social and environmental protections that if the Tories have their way will disappear in some ultra right wing nonsense. I think I'd take this and the banks, than lose it all and end up owing my body's organ to the likes of Mr Banks...
It's a pity, really. Trump desperately needs some foreign visits to distract attention from the slowly rolling clown car garbage truck wreck his presidency has become.
It would be great for him to come to the UK and be "faced" with a solid row of buttocks all along the Mall.
Oh man that would be hilarious to have the mall mooning the US president.
and about the best way to show what we think of him
If there's one thing the United Kingdom is well practiced in, it's soothing the egos of narcissistic sociopaths. It's what created the British Empire after all. Make Albion Perfidious Again.
Kilkrazy wrote: My next-door neighbour at lunch yesterday was convince that Labour only "won" by "cheating" by "being better" at "social media."
I know, it great at the moment. Most of the Facebook threads I have read recently are chock full of some right lovely people frothing at "bloody students being bribed" or "too stupid to know what's good for them".
A few I noticed were quite forthright in their opinions about the youth not voting in the EU referendum, and how they "should have made the effort to vote".
My shadenfreude meter is a smoking mess.
Except it's not just students. There's been a move from all those under 45 towards Labour.
It is a bit bizarre how such people are opposed to the young population actually taking more interest. After all it is their future more than the 55+ year olds. Maybe they've worked out that if it stays this way governments will start favouring the younger generation and the benefits that older generation have had for so long will become more evenly balanced.
Compel wrote: If there's one thing the United Kingdom is well practiced in, it's soothing the egos of narcissistic sociopaths. It's what created the British Empire after all. Make Albion Perfidious Again.
If one thing we good at its soothing the ego of various world leaders.
The palace, pomp, ceremony, royal family.
Though I think people might pay to see Prince Phillip and Trump meet...
The Duke has more years experience offending people. Trump met his match lol
Yeah, I was a bit miffed at that myself. Given they Oscar Lopez Rivera was just released and he's like the Puerto Ricoan Nelson Mandela. If anything I would've thought they'd be going for full on de-colonization.
Sorry off topic I know.
On another slightly off topic note: @Whirlwind- Wowza! Could you bring some of that over to the Northern Ireland assembly. You just de-escalated that conflict like a pro.
And thanks to my fellow Norn Ironers for being good lads and letting it lie. Sure it's all good craic.
Yeah, I was a bit miffed at that myself. Given they Oscar Lopez Rivera was just released and he's like the Puerto Ricoan Nelson Mandela. If anything I would've thought they'd be going for full on de-colonization.
Sorry off topic I know.
On another slightly off topic note: @Whirlwind- Wowza! Could you bring some of that over to the Northern Ireland assembly. You just de-escalated that conflict like a pro.
And thanks to my fellow Norn Ironers for being good lads and letting it lie. Sure it's all good craic.
Well Tha makes one sense but not sure how far this goes.
They use US currency, and are a what, almost protectorate of US.
Going to full state rights would give them greater sway over those things they use, and rely upon.
However also means your now part of US. Laws and such. Your no longer enjoying perks minus the abaility to have a slight gap...
Whenever you find yourself on the same side of the argument as big banks and multi-nationals, you need to step back and ask what the feth is going on.
The banks and the multi-nationals love the EU. That in itself is reason enough for me to run a mile from it.
C'mon DINLT, you can do better than this. It's such a lazy argument.
And I'm sure you'd find it just as tiresome if someone said:
Whenever you find yourself on the same side of the argument as bigots and racists, you need to step back and ask what the feth is going on.
The bigots and the racists hate the EU. That in itself is reason enough for me to embrace it.
I think one of the greatest ironies of the last year is the rush of so called liberals and progressives to embrace the European Union, given the Left's historic opposition to the European project.
In response to your point, is Corbyn a racist and a bigot? He's been sticking two fingers up to the EU for decades. I'd bet my pension pot and my house that Corbyn vote to Leave on June 23rd.
Whenever you find yourself on the same side of the argument as big banks and multi-nationals, you need to step back and ask what the feth is going on.
The banks and the multi-nationals love the EU. That in itself is reason enough for me to run a mile from it.
C'mon DINLT, you can do better than this. It's such a lazy argument.
And I'm sure you'd find it just as tiresome if someone said:
Whenever you find yourself on the same side of the argument as bigots and racists, you need to step back and ask what the feth is going on.
The bigots and the racists hate the EU. That in itself is reason enough for me to embrace it.
I think one of the greatest ironies of the last year is the rush of so called liberals and progressives to embrace the European Union, given the Left's historic opposition to the European project.
In response to your point, is Corbyn a racist and a bigot? He's been sticking two fingers up to the EU for decades. I'd bet my pension pot and my house that Corbyn vote to Leave on June 23rd.
I'm sure he did. As you say, he's been openly opposed to the EU for as long as I've been alive. And the recent comments from his shadow chancellor make me think his position hasn't been softened just because he now leads the Labour party.
But that's all beside my point, which was that such arguments are reductive and and quite dishonest. Someone's support for the EU is no more undermined by the fact that big corp is on their side than your support for leaving the EU is because the racist old fart I used to work with is on yours.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
feeder wrote: Not everyone who voted Leave is a racist/bigot, just like not everyone who voted Remain is a billionaire banker. that's why it's not a great argument.
This is what I was trying to say, only feeder managed it with a lot less fannying about.
Whenever you find yourself on the same side of the argument as big banks and multi-nationals, you need to step back and ask what the feth is going on.
The banks and the multi-nationals love the EU. That in itself is reason enough for me to run a mile from it.
C'mon DINLT, you can do better than this. It's such a lazy argument.
And I'm sure you'd find it just as tiresome if someone said:
Whenever you find yourself on the same side of the argument as bigots and racists, you need to step back and ask what the feth is going on.
The bigots and the racists hate the EU. That in itself is reason enough for me to embrace it.
I think one of the greatest ironies of the last year is the rush of so called liberals and progressives to embrace the European Union, given the Left's historic opposition to the European project.
How is that an irony? Liberals usually aren't very left-wing, only compared to right-wing conservatives.
Thats an idiotic headline generating policy. So gunowners now have State blessing to use their firearms for self defence? So fething what? Does this policy amount to Conceal and Carry? If Gun-owners are still not allowed to carry their guns on their person as they go about their daily life then it won't do any good because they'll never have their guns at hand when they need them.
What use are their guns in self defence, if the're locked away at home (because they'd be arrested for carrying them in public) and they get caught up in a terror attack at a concert or market or crossing a bridge on their way to work or on the London Underground? What good is a gun, if it gets confiscated by security at a Concert and the Police come to arrest YOU as a terror suspect?
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Thats an idiotic headline generating policy. So gunowners now have State blessing to use their firearms for self defence? So fething what? Does this policy amount to Conceal and Carry? If Gun-owners are still not allowed to carry their guns on their person as they go about their daily life then it won't do any good because they'll never have their guns at hand when they need them.
What use are their guns in self defence, if the're locked away at home (because they'd be arrested for carrying them in public) and they get caught up in a terror attack at a concert or market or crossing a bridge on their way to work or on the London Underground? What good is a gun, if it gets confiscated by security at a Concert and the Police come to arrest YOU as a terror suspect?
We seen the response tactics, and the polices fact in London its going nigh on immediate military response forces.
Your more likely to get shot than help and cause more panic as police think your another attacker diluting there response to real attacker...
Yeah, I was a bit miffed at that myself. Given they Oscar Lopez Rivera was just released and he's like the Puerto Ricoan Nelson Mandela. If anything I would've thought they'd be going for full on de-colonization.
Puerto Rico is totally bankrupt. Not the best time to go all take back control and sovereignty stuff.
And the why is a very interesting read. Basically PR had a legal loophole which made many US companies put up subsidiaries there. Clinton closed that loophole and basically wiped the Puerto Rican economy in a swift strike. Low taxes became unsustainable and the exodus continued.
The government borrowed and borrowed to cover the income gap until it finally declared themselves bankrupt-ish earlier this year.
The PR and Oklahoma cases should be mandatory reading for any de-regulation gurus. I'll try to sneak a few copies at a Tory convention next time I'm in Britain.
The battles of summer have begun a new and the Fury road has reopened. The French have not solved the problem, only managed to nudge them to new locations.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Thats an idiotic headline generating policy. So gunowners now have State blessing to use their firearms for self defence? So fething what? Does this policy amount to Conceal and Carry? If Gun-owners are still not allowed to carry their guns on their person as they go about their daily life then it won't do any good because they'll never have their guns at hand when they need them.
What use are their guns in self defence, if the're locked away at home (because they'd be arrested for carrying them in public) and they get caught up in a terror attack at a concert or market or crossing a bridge on their way to work or on the London Underground? What good is a gun, if it gets confiscated by security at a Concert and the Police come to arrest YOU as a terror suspect?
We seen the response tactics, and the polices fact in London its going nigh on immediate military response forces.
Your more likely to get shot than help and cause more panic as police think your another attacker diluting there response to real attacker...
This whole affair is a good example of why elected police and crime commissioners are arguably a bad idea.
The PCC blurted out this possibly popular proposal without waiting to consult the police themselves.
So what exactly is May's negotiating position to ensure DUP compliance? Seems to me like she's not exactly in a great position to avoid having to concede too much for their support.
Maybe someone should tell her about the city hall flag. They'd do anything for that!
jhe90 wrote: The battles of summer have begun a new and the Fury road has reopened. The French have not solved the problem, only managed to nudge them to new locations.
This whole affair is a good example of why elected police and crime commissioners are arguably a bad idea.
The PCC blurted out this possibly popular proposal without waiting to consult the police themselves.
I think you are being too negative, look at the positives. Arm the populace, then let them "take back control".
Give it six months and the Leave and Remain side would be shooting each other. We'd quickly devolve into a brief, but bloody, civil war.
Then whichever side is left standing gets their say on Wrexit. It solves many other problems too. The number of pensioners we'd have to support would rapidly decrease; there would no longer be a housing shortage; there wouldn't be an economy to worry about; and no one in there right mind would want to come here from any part of the world ever again, immediately solving the "immigration crisis". Sounds like a perfectly reasonable idea. All the police have to do is protect places like schools etc.
Considering all the negative press and the fact that most of the people on the mainland haven't even heard of the DUP, it could very well be in the DUP's interests to just go. "Hey, we're not jerks as much as people are saying we are. We get it, the mainland UK has different social tendencies and focuses compared to Northern Ireland, we're not wanting to change that. But, you know what WOULD be better for both Northern Ireland AND the UK as a whole, if we get a bunch more juicy business investment, that way we're spreading even more out away from London and helping the rest of the country to boot."
Compel wrote: Considering all the negative press and the fact that most of the people on the mainland haven't even heard of the DUP, it could very well be in the DUP's interests to just go. "Hey, we're not jerks as much as people are saying we are. We get it, the mainland UK has different social tendencies and focuses compared to Northern Ireland, we're not wanting to change that. But, you know what WOULD be better for both Northern Ireland AND the UK as a whole, if we get a bunch more juicy business investment, that way we're spreading even more out away from London and helping the rest of the country to boot."
Because it is extremely divisive. Why should one area of the UK get an overly proportional say on a party that is rapidly going into melt down. Why does the SW or east of England that has the same if not more MPs not get a larger say or more funding. The Tories will still push through austerity in a different way. The money to prop up DUP will have to come from somewhere. What happens if this comes from Sinn Fein supporting areas (or that is how DUP spend it?)
Also I see May still doesn't get it. In the press conference she stated
Theresa May says there's "a unity of purpose" in the UK among all people, Leave and Remain, to get on with Brexit and make a success of it.
Which makes me wonder whether she has learnt anything at all and is back to resorting to sound bites. You only have to speak to people to see that the country is just as divided as ever and that half the country would be quite happy if they canned Wrexit and half want to be done with the EU and damn the consequences (mainly for those that want to remain). It makes you wonder what ivory tower she actually lives in or why she is doing her best impression of the three monkeys.
So talks with the DUP about the future of the government are still ongoing and May pops over to France for photo ops with Macron Either the DUP talks are going so well she feels she can leave the fine print to others, or she's the political equivalent of Bernie from Weekend at Bernie's. Question is who's holding her up and waving her hands about to convince others she's still alive?
GoatboyBeta wrote: So talks with the DUP about the future of the government are still ongoing and May pops over to France for photo ops with Macron Either the DUP talks are going so well she feels she can leave the fine print to others, or she's the political equivalent of Bernie from Weekend at Bernie's. Question is who's holding her up and waving her hands about to convince others she's still alive?
Mayeb she leaving certain areas of certain details to ministers who specialise?
Part a Tory party taking power off her?
Interesting data from YouGov. Seemingly Labour won in every employment demographic bar the reitred. Takes the wind out of the they-only-won-votes-amongst-students-and-wasters sails.
Part of the reason why the "money spent per head" is less in England than the other home nations, is because England's economy is vastly larger and richer than all the rest of the UK put together. E.g the Square Mile of the City of London produces about 16% of the entire GDP of the UK. (Obviously this will decrease after Brexit.)
Thus the extra money in Scotland, Wales and NI is simply redistribution of wealth.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The "regions" also get a bigger share of EU development grants than England.
Kilkrazy wrote: Part of the reason why the "money spent per head" is less in England than the other home nations, is because England's economy is vastly larger and richer than all the rest of the UK put together. E.g the Square Mile of the City of London produces about 16% of the entire GDP of the UK. (Obviously this will decrease after Brexit.)
Thus the extra money in Scotland, Wales and NI is simply redistribution of wealth.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The "regions" also get a bigger share of EU development grants than England.
(Obviously this will be reduced after Brexit.)
Yup. And population density will affect it a fair bit too, especially when it comes to spending on infrastructure.
10 miles of new rail will cost the same whether it's used by 170,000 heading into Birmingham New Street or 7000 going to Cardiff Queen Street.
Kilkrazy wrote: Part of the reason why the "money spent per head" is less in England than the other home nations, is because England's economy is vastly larger and richer than all the rest of the UK put together. E.g the Square Mile of the City of London produces about 16% of the entire GDP of the UK. (Obviously this will decrease after Brexit.)
Thus the extra money in Scotland, Wales and NI is simply redistribution of wealth.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The "regions" also get a bigger share of EU development grants than England.
(Obviously this will be reduced after Brexit.)
Yup. And population density will affect it a fair bit too, especially when it comes to spending on infrastructure.
10 miles of new rail will cost the same whether it's used by 170,000 heading into Birmingham New Street or 7000 going to Cardiff Queen Street.
Indeed. And this increases by orders of magnitude when you start dealing with Scottish Islands, which there are a lot of and some are awfully isolated.
Kilkrazy wrote: Part of the reason why the "money spent per head" is less in England than the other home nations, is because England's economy is vastly larger and richer than all the rest of the UK put together. E.g the Square Mile of the City of London produces about 16% of the entire GDP of the UK. (Obviously this will decrease after Brexit.)
Thus the extra money in Scotland, Wales and NI is simply redistribution of wealth.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The "regions" also get a bigger share of EU development grants than England.
(Obviously this will be reduced after Brexit.)
Yup. And population density will affect it a fair bit too, especially when it comes to spending on infrastructure.
10 miles of new rail will cost the same whether it's used by 170,000 heading into Birmingham New Street or 7000 going to Cardiff Queen Street.
Indeed. And this increases by orders of magnitude when you start dealing with Scottish Islands, which there are a lot of and some are awfully isolated.
Though I wonder if volume of traffic has an effect on maintainance costs that even things out in the long run. Maybe not but I can see bigger platforms and higher capacity trains etc in cities costing significantly more than a country halt for a two carriage service.
And that London figure would be nowhere near 16% had the production capability in the rest of the UK been invested in instead of being sold out in favour of clearing banks and financial services who pay scant tax back into the economy. Now we've got cities gutted of their livelihoods and a national economy ballanced on the whims of self intrested big business. They'll naff off to wherever suits them and we'll be left with nothing to sell.
A redistribution of wealth is long overdue. Reinvestment is key.
I think you are being too negative, look at the positives. Arm the populace, then let them "take back control".
Give it six months and the Leave and Remain side would be shooting each other. We'd quickly devolve into a brief, but bloody, civil war.
Then whichever side is left standing gets their say on Wrexit. It solves many other problems too. The number of pensioners we'd have to support would rapidly decrease; there would no longer be a housing shortage; there wouldn't be an economy to worry about; and no one in there right mind would want to come here from any part of the world ever again, immediately solving the "immigration crisis". Sounds like a perfectly reasonable idea. All the police have to do is protect places like schools etc.
Whirlwind, I'm the one supposed to propose brutal, heartless, but ultimately necessary things that horrify our fellow posters.
Kilkrazy wrote: Part of the reason why the "money spent per head" is less in England than the other home nations, is because England's economy is vastly larger and richer than all the rest of the UK put together. E.g the Square Mile of the City of London produces about 16% of the entire GDP of the UK. (Obviously this will decrease after Brexit.)
Thus the extra money in Scotland, Wales and NI is simply redistribution of wealth.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The "regions" also get a bigger share of EU development grants than England.
(Obviously this will be reduced after Brexit.)
Yup. And population density will affect it a fair bit too, especially when it comes to spending on infrastructure.
10 miles of new rail will cost the same whether it's used by 170,000 heading into Birmingham New Street or 7000 going to Cardiff Queen Street.
Indeed. And this increases by orders of magnitude when you start dealing with Scottish Islands, which there are a lot of and some are awfully isolated.
England has a many times higher population density and numbers than wales and Scotland.
If we add up costs on value per head and the amount of users per x amount spent.
Its obvious that some projects will always be getting priority . There looking at that in a sense of value for money/positive economic impact.
nfe wrote: Interesting data from YouGov. Seemingly Labour won in every employment demographic bar the reitred. Takes the wind out of the they-only-won-votes-amongst-students-and-wasters sails.
nfe wrote: Interesting data from YouGov. Seemingly Labour won in every employment demographic bar the reitred. Takes the wind out of the they-only-won-votes-amongst-students-and-wasters sails.
Kilkrazy wrote: Part of the reason why the "money spent per head" is less in England than the other home nations, is because England's economy is vastly larger and richer than all the rest of the UK put together. E.g the Square Mile of the City of London produces about 16% of the entire GDP of the UK. (Obviously this will decrease after Brexit.)
Thus the extra money in Scotland, Wales and NI is simply redistribution of wealth.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The "regions" also get a bigger share of EU development grants than England.
(Obviously this will be reduced after Brexit.)
Yup. And population density will affect it a fair bit too, especially when it comes to spending on infrastructure.
10 miles of new rail will cost the same whether it's used by 170,000 heading into Birmingham New Street or 7000 going to Cardiff Queen Street.
Indeed. And this increases by orders of magnitude when you start dealing with Scottish Islands, which there are a lot of and some are awfully isolated.
Though I wonder if volume of traffic has an effect on maintainance costs that even things out in the long run. Maybe not but I can see bigger platforms and higher capacity trains etc in cities costing significantly more than a country halt for a two carriage service.
I'm sure it will, and that's probably the case in the highlands, just as in rural Wales, both of which have further complicated infrastructure because of their networks of mountains and valleys, but in all but one case in the islands we're talking about ferries and planes rather than railways or roads, which I suspect jump the cost-per-mile-travelled a fair whack, alongside a load of energy connectivity problems. Electricity in the Shetlands isn't just a case of rolling the national grid another mile up the road...
Kilkrazy wrote: These days it can be offshore windmills or tidal stations. We might soon see the Shetlands exporting energy to the mainland.
If only folks would enthusiastically invest in it. I think Eigg is pretty much self-sufficient in power, but I'm not sure that goes for any other islands (and Eigg only has to cater for about 70 people, two shops, an a tiny school and sorta-town-hall).
Gavin Barwell: Theresa May's new chief of staff faces questions over delayed tower block fire safety review
Mr Barwell was housing minister when the review was again delayed, fire expert confirms
I woke up early this morning and saw these reports of the fire on the BBC. It is very distressing to think that hundreds of people may have been trapped on the upper levels.
It's not just Barwell, dozens of Tory MPs regularly enjoy putting the brakes on any housing or safety regulation, ie those who are private landlords themselves. Profit >>> lives, you can always find more tenants.
Imagine you were the ex-housing minister and were now the chief of staff to a Prime Minister whose government rejected increased safety regulation and whose party controlled the council that ignored repeated complaints about the safety standards and refurbishment of a tower block whose upkeep was sold to a private firm and was involved in a catastrophic fire. That would be bad.
welshhoppo wrote: Still kind of odd considering they did better last week
As for the fire, shocking. But was the gov in charge of maintenance or was it the local council? Genuinely curious.
Yeah.. He won seats. In lib Dems terms he won.
Sure they lost some but ones like Clegg had baggage.
And yeah, shocking fire, they have seemed to pin point and are looking at the cladding added in a refit.
Insulation, cladding, may or may not be at highest grade fire spec...
Tim Farron stepping down doesn't sit easily with me either... It kinda feels like a success to bad media practices... And I'm not a fan of the implication that you can't be a practicing Christian and lead a liberal party. On the other hand how enthusiastic would I be for voting for the guy and party if I was queer.
Didn't Lib Dems reduce their proportion of the votes though? They got more seats down to voting patterns but actually lost 45,000 votes compared with 2015. They didn't pick up any of the UKIP deserters (not that that is in any way surprising). As a numbers excercise the Lib Dems continue to lose support. It would be interesting to know how many of those lost voters were due to tactical voting to support "any one but the Tories".
nfe wrote: Imagine you were the ex-housing minister and were now the chief of staff to a Prime Minister whose government rejected increased safety regulation and whose party controlled the council that ignored repeated complaints about the safety standards and refurbishment of a tower block whose upkeep was sold to a private firm and was involved in a catastrophic fire. That would be bad.
An action group for Grenfell Tower accused their landlords of been “evil, unprincipled” and like a “mini-mafia” before a fire ravished the building this morning.
More than 50 casualties have been taken to five hospitals following the inferno, London Ambulance Service chiefs have confirmed
A helicopter ambulance was among dozens of 999 crews scrambled to the scene, but ambulance were unable to confirm the severity of their injuries.
A Met Police spokesman said there have been a number of fatalities following the fire in North Kensington in the early hours this morning.
Questions will now be asked of the property’s management and whether the incident could have been prevented.
According to local blog, the Grenfell Action Group, residents of Grenfell Tower had “warned the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea who own this property and the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation who supposedly manage all social housing in RBKC on the Council’s behalf” about fire safety issues eight times over the last three years on their blog.
“We have posted numerous warnings in recent years about the very poor fire safety standards at Grenfell Tower and elsewhere in RBKC,” they write, adding “all our warnings fell on deaf ears”.
One excerpt said that “only a catastrophic event will expose the ineptitude and incompetence of our landlord”…. “and bring an end to the dangerous living conditions and neglect of health and safety legislation that they inflict upon their tenants and leaseholders”.
A comment on another blog posted in 2015 warned: “Let’s hope we won’t have any serious fires on any of those estates because it appears that someone’s death is possibly the only thing that might stir the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation out of its extreme complacency.”
The Labour Party proposed an amendment to the Government’s new Housing and Planning Bill – that would required private landlords to make their homes safe and “fit for human habitation” last year – but it was rejected by the Conservatives. According to Parliament’s register of interests, 72 of the MPs who voted against the amendment were themselves landlords who derive an income from a property.
Over 50 casualties have been taken to five local hospitals and the Metropolitan Police confirm fatalities.
A residents' action group in the west London tower block that was engulfed in flames on Wednesday morning had made repeated warnings about the standard of fire safety in the building and predicted that only a catastrophic event would expose how bad the problem had got.
The Grenfell Action Group used its blog on at least eight occasions in the last three years to say fire safety standards were inadequate in the 24-storey tower and that the building's landlord, the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO), needed to do more.
Compel wrote: Tim Farron stepping down doesn't sit easily with me either... It kinda feels like a success to bad media practices... And I'm not a fan of the implication that you can't be a practicing Christian and lead a liberal party. On the other hand how enthusiastic would I be for voting for the guy and party if I was queer.
Just because he may believe one thing personaly does not mean he is againste veryone else.
He is likely, to a certainty able to accept and not have any issues with different person who may live a different life style.
As for the fire, shocking. But was the gov in charge of maintenance or was it the local council? Genuinely curious.
The local council owns the building but operations were handed over to a private firm several years ago (effectively the private company lease the building for want of a better word) but it's limited for use as social housing (i.e. just couldn't turn it into a load of penthouses).
The reports are that after the 2009 flats fire in London where people died, there was a plan to review the guidance on safety in flats and effectively what the minimum standard is. Tories got in and it kept on being deferred and still hasn't really got off the ground. The Tories policy is that it should be businesses that decide what is 'safe' and they need to report failings to the HSE. Of course that does lead to the situation that companies can cut corners in the assumption that the worst won't happen.
Problem for May is that the person that was responsible for reviewing fire safety on tower blocks was Gavin Barwell who spent four years putting it back and back. He is now Mays Chief of Staff after losing his seat. The previous minister Brandon Lewis on coroner reports that sprinklers should be retrofitted to all old high rises was reported to have said it wasn't the governments responsibility to legislate on this. Noting that the US do require this.
My assumption is that the cladding wasn't properly risk assessed and hence cheap, flammable material was used. No one assessed the chance that the outside of the building might catch fire, but it did. It was warm last night (especially in London) which means that windows would have been open. Updrafts from the fire would have taken burning debris into rooms and hence it spread rapidly.
I expect that someone will get a heavy fine/prison sentence for this.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Henry wrote: Didn't Lib Dems reduce their proportion of the votes though? They got more seats down to voting patterns but actually lost 45,000 votes compared with 2015. They didn't pick up any of the UKIP deserters (not that that is in any way surprising). As a numbers excercise the Lib Dems continue to lose support. It would be interesting to know how many of those lost voters were due to tactical voting to support "any one but the Tories".
You can put me in that category. I voted to stop May and that made the choice Labour. My heart is really with the LD/Greens but without a proportional representation it is a wasted vote.
nfe wrote: Imagine you were the ex-housing minister and were now the chief of staff to a Prime Minister whose government rejected increased safety regulation and whose party controlled the council that ignored repeated complaints about the safety standards and refurbishment of a tower block whose upkeep was sold to a private firm and was involved in a catastrophic fire. That would be bad.
I hope heads roll. I fear they wont.
Probably just gonna end up with a slap on the wrist
For example the only group of people that voted for Tories was those that had retired. Those with lower education voted Tory.
There's a direct correlation between voting Remain and voting Labour (assume that this is to try and protect from hard Brexit).
Effectively May has no support other than those that have retired and have a lower education level (because education when they grew up was poor).
There's not much difference between Labour and Cons on wealth. Though if you take Left wing views then they easily out do Tory supporters.
Basically Tories don't speak for anyone other than (generally) the old uneducated part of the population that because they vote in greater numbers have a larger say.
I don't buy the victim-playing. It's his own fault that he's incapable of dealing competently with questions, or simply responding honestly to them, not the fault of journalists for pressing a question someone keeps dodging.
If he doesn't think homosexual sex is a sin, he could have said that the first time he was asked instead of dodging it relentlessly for far too long.
His excuse for that is that he believes his religious views don't influence his politics. If that's the case, he shouldn't have told an evangelical magazine that he wished he could make abortion stop but that instead he'd have to try and use science to force legislation to prevent it. He probably should have voted for LGBTQ rights consistently, too, rather than up to the point where they came into conflict with people's religiously-motivated prejudices.
This has nothing to do with someone being persecuted for their religion (he's a white British protestant for goodness sake) and everything to do with being asked questions that pertain directly to his politics and to people's voting interests. Even if he voted against his own beliefs at all times, would you want to vote for someone who thought your nature was innately sinful? You might, but plenty wouldn't, and it's absurd to insist that denying them the opportunity to know is preferable.
Compel wrote: Tim Farron stepping down doesn't sit easily with me either... It kinda feels like a success to bad media practices... And I'm not a fan of the implication that you can't be a practicing Christian and lead a liberal party. On the other hand how enthusiastic would I be for voting for the guy and party if I was queer.
Just because he may believe one thing personaly does not mean he is againste veryone else.
He is likely, to a certainty able to accept and not have any issues with different person who may live a different life style.
I agree with you.
I don't have an issue with Farron being Christian and believing that being a homosexual is a sin. I have a problem with him voting on that principle. And he never has. I think it's important that MPs are allowed to have their own private faith beliefs providing they continue impartially to represent the interests of their electors, as Farron did.
There was far too much media "badgering" of individual leaders and candidates about petty points designed to trip them up in the coverage of this campaign. Except May, of course, who kept herself well away from any potentially unsympathetic interviewers.
There was far too much media "badgering" of individual leaders and candidates about petty points designed to trip them up in the coverage of this campaign. Except May, of course, who kept herself well away from any potentially unsympathetic interviewers.
I'm not sure May needed much tripping up, she was quite happy to do that herself...
nfe wrote: This has nothing to do with someone being persecuted for their religion (he's a white British protestant for goodness sake) and everything to do with being asked questions that pertain directly to his politics and to people's voting interests. Even if he voted against his own beliefs at all times, would you want to vote for someone who thought your nature was innately sinful? You might, but plenty wouldn't, and it's absurd to insist that denying them the opportunity to know is preferable.
One might also ask the same of Sadiq Khan with him being a Muslim after all...but they won't, because that would be racist. Right?
nfe wrote: This has nothing to do with someone being persecuted for their religion (he's a white British protestant for goodness sake) and everything to do with being asked questions that pertain directly to his politics and to people's voting interests. Even if he voted against his own beliefs at all times, would you want to vote for someone who thought your nature was innately sinful? You might, but plenty wouldn't, and it's absurd to insist that denying them the opportunity to know is preferable.
One might also ask the same of Sadiq Khan with him being a Muslim after all...but they won't, because that would be racist. Right?
nfe wrote: This has nothing to do with someone being persecuted for their religion (he's a white British protestant for goodness sake) and everything to do with being asked questions that pertain directly to his politics and to people's voting interests. Even if he voted against his own beliefs at all times, would you want to vote for someone who thought your nature was innately sinful? You might, but plenty wouldn't, and it's absurd to insist that denying them the opportunity to know is preferable.
One might also ask the same of Sadiq Khan with him being a Muslim after all...but they won't, because that would be racist. Right?
Erm... I thought Khan supported gay marriage?
Yes, but the point being discussed is whether people have a right to know an MP's personal religious beliefs on an issue.
My counter argument is...why are Muslim MP's not subjected to the same treatment?
(thats a rhetorical question by the way. We all know the answer).
Automatically Appended Next Post: Back on the subject of the London tower block fire, riot Police were deployed to protect firefighters against falling debris.
Spoiler:
Automatically Appended Next Post: For feths sake. Apparently £1 million was spent on the flammable exterior cladding to make the building look pretty, but an external fire escape was deemed "too expensive".
fething vile.
And of course, the usual empty platitudes are trotted out. "Lessons will be learned". No they won't, they weren't learned in 2009 when the previous incident of this sort occurred. The only way lessons will truly be learned is if people are criminally prosecuted and punished HARSHLY with significant prison sentences.
nfe wrote: This has nothing to do with someone being persecuted for their religion (he's a white British protestant for goodness sake) and everything to do with being asked questions that pertain directly to his politics and to people's voting interests. Even if he voted against his own beliefs at all times, would you want to vote for someone who thought your nature was innately sinful? You might, but plenty wouldn't, and it's absurd to insist that denying them the opportunity to know is preferable.
One might also ask the same of Sadiq Khan with him being a Muslim after all...but they won't, because that would be racist. Right?
Not if he'd expressed extremely conservative, theologically motivated views previously. Farron wasn't attacked on the topic because he was Christian, he was attacked on it because he had expressed views on it before and his voting record demonstrates his commital to LGBTQ rights up to the point the conflict with freedom to religious prejudice (the key problem at the heart of liberalism: what to do when two freedoms cannot coexist in law).
If it was just because he was Christian, then there's a long list of MPs who are far more important who'd get the same treatment. Starting right at the first among equals.
I feel like the only way "lessons will be learned" is when people get off their sympathetic sofas and take to the streets in protest to demand human rights and decent living standards. Its only when the voice of the people can't be ignored or silenced that the government will act to appease them. Otherwise they just keep getting away with it and we all keep letting them. The people have the power.
theCrowe wrote: I feel like the only way "lessons will be learned" is when people get off their sympathetic sofas and take to the streets in protest to demand human rights and decent living standards. Its only when the voice of the people can't be ignored or silenced that the government will act to appease them. Otherwise they just keep getting away with it and we all keep letting them. The people have the power.
There's a list doing the rounds of Tory MPs who defeated an amendment to the housing act to ensure properties are fit for human habitation, who also happen to be Landlords.
This has to be another nail in the coffin of the current incarnation of the Tory party. When such glaring self interest is displayed over the national interest, it's time for a clean out of the political pool.
At the very real risk of political opportunism, we need to keep the spotlight on this completely avoidable tragedy and ensure that Parliament moves swiftly to prevent it happening again. We need to learn to stop doing things on the cheap just because they're cheap. Shift back toward value over cost.
For anyone looking to, there's a genuine fundraising page here. This is one linked to on various national news sites, so seems about as legit as you can hope. Better than joining random ones off social media.
theCrowe wrote: I feel like the only way "lessons will be learned" is when people get off their sympathetic sofas and take to the streets in protest to demand human rights and decent living standards. Its only when the voice of the people can't be ignored or silenced that the government will act to appease them. Otherwise they just keep getting away with it and we all keep letting them. The people have the power.
How about we do it like they do in China and let a few heads roll, literally?
China reported an estimated 300,000 victims in total.[1] Six babies died from kidney stones and other kidney damage and an estimated 54,000 babies were hospitalized.[2][3] The chemical gives the appearance of higher protein content when added to milk, leading to protein deficiency in the formula. In a separate incident four years prior, watered-down milk had resulted in 12 infant deaths from malnutrition.[4]
The scandal broke on 16 July 2008, after sixteen babies in Gansu Province were diagnosed with kidney stones.[cm 1] The babies were fed infant formula produced by Shijiazhuang-based Sanlu Group. After the initial focus on Sanlu—market leader in the budget segment—government inspections revealed the problem existed to a lesser degree in products from 21 other companies, including an Arla Foods-Mengniu joint venture company known as Arla Mengniu, Yili, and Yashili.[5]
The issue raised concerns about food safety and political corruption in China, and damaged the reputation of China's food exports. At least 11 countries stopped all imports of Chinese dairy products.
A number of criminal prosecutions were conducted by the Chinese government. Two people were executed, one given a suspended death penalty, three people receiving life imprisonment, two receiving 15-year jail terms,[6] and seven local government officials, as well as the Director of the Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine (AQSIQ), being fired or forced to resign.[7]
The cladding used in the recent renovation of the Grenfell Tower in London, where a devastating fatal fire ripped through the building, is similar to the cladding that was used in a residential tower that went up in flames in Melbourne three years ago.
Who says they've learnt lessons? The same things happen over and over again, even when there's been fatalities, and nothing is ever done to rectify it, other than saying 'lessons have been learnt'.
EDIT: I think this what you're implying Shadow Captain but it's so important I felt the need to repeat it.
The cladding used in the recent renovation of the Grenfell Tower in London, where a devastating fatal fire ripped through the building, is similar to the cladding that was used in a residential tower that went up in flames in Melbourne three years ago.
Heroic public sector staff deserve more pay - Hunt
Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt has indicated he will press the chancellor to give public sector staff more pay.
He made the comments following a speech in which he praised the way NHS staff and the other emergency services responded to the recent terrorist attacks and the Grenfell Tower fire.
He said, in particular, he had "a great deal of sympathy" for the case made by nurses for an end to the pay cap.
The cap means public sector staff rises are limited to 1% a year until 2019........
....The union said a combination of pay freezes and caps has meant that nurses have had a 14% pay cut since 2010.
The cladding used in the recent renovation of the Grenfell Tower in London, where a devastating fatal fire ripped through the building, is similar to the cladding that was used in a residential tower that went up in flames in Melbourne three years ago.
The problem is that we have learnt from the mistakes from before but the government kept delaying any plans to review H&S guidelines (one might be slightly suspicious if 40% of the Tories are landlords). These Tories much prefer to hammer people when it goes wrong rather than put costs on businesses to try and prevent it in the first place (as this costs the businesses money). The problem with this approach is it will always end in a disaster because businesses will always try to push the limits to keep costs down. The real lesson won't actually be learnt, which is if you legislate properly you won't have to deal with these circumstances. Yes you can't protect from an asteroid knocking a building down, but there should be no reason in the UK for skyscraper buildings to become a raging inferno in less than half an hour.
Of course having people like this in government doesn't really help.
Theresa May just visited #GrenfellTower but left after refusing to meet any residents. Appalling
... classy as usual there.
..apparently due to "security concerns"
I think we can agree that she had learnt absolute nothing from the election fiasco. Doesn't want to recognise the people she is meant to represent (compared to who she wants to represent which is the wealthy Tory party donors).
She's just afraid of the challenge. Now where's that chicken song.
The Fire Brigade used to be in legal charge of issuing fire safety certificates.
This was taken away in favour of a semi-voluntary system with lax enforcement, whereby the legal owner (the council) was enabled to hand off "responsibility" to a private company operating the building as an agent.
This clearly has resulted in this appalling and largely avoidable tragedy.
People are rightly very angry. The public inquiry needs to be completed this year, not simply kick the ball into the long grass as so often happens.
I hope Corbyn will keep pushing this in Parliament.
I hope the people of London keep pushing this in public! Corbyn can be the cheer leader but if the public arnt demonstrably behind him in a loud and demanding way all the arguments in parliament won't matter a jot and in the end will just get postponed til they figure out what the Brexit is going on.
TM has already proven time and again that nothing else matters, not the NHS, not education, not human rights. She can change the law on all of these things if it suits, especially if it gets in the way of Brexit. Special circumstances, Special powers or some such right wing jargon.
Seriously, I could hardly believe when she said that about human rights, never was her party agenda so plainly exposed for what it really is. Get in our way and we'll change the law so you can't. Londoners need to demonstrate now before their civil liberties are legislated out from under them.
I'm really serious. The same laws that might allow "suspected terrorists" to be arrested and detained without due course for indefinite periods of time will be used against anyone who stands up for their rights and gets in the way of this party's criminal greed. That's how it's always done, in the name of public safety and then its used for suppression.
That's not the British way. Our way is to start an inquiry that takes many years to reach a conclusion. In this case, though, there is serious and fully justified public anger based on the realistic suspicion that council tenants have been left to die in order to save money.
Apparently it would cost about £200-350 K to retro-fit a sprinkler system to a tower block like Grenfell. This would not necessarily prevent the building from burning down from exterior cladding fire, but it would greatly improve the chances of the people to get out safely. That sounds like a lot of money but it's actually only about the annual salary + benefits of a lot of council leaders.
Kilkrazy wrote: That's not the British way. Our way is to start an inquiry that takes many years to reach a conclusion. In this case, though, there is serious and fully justified public anger based on the realistic suspicion that council tenants have been left to die in order to save money.
Apparently it would cost about £200-350 K to retro-fit a sprinkler system to a tower block like Grenfell. This would not necessarily prevent the building from burning down from exterior cladding fire, but it would greatly improve the chances of the people to get out safely. That sounds like a lot of money but it's actually only about the annual salary + benefits of a lot of council leaders.
That's only about 2k per flat of a large block.
When your talking saving lives that's reasonable easily.
While it does seem crazy that building regs appear to permit the use of flammable cladding like this (apparently in the US its illegal to use in buildings over 4 stories)
its incorrect to say it was just used to make the block look better, it was also used to add external insulation (and improving thermal efficiency of their housing stock appears to have been a legal obligation on councils)
no excuse for using dangerous rubbish to do it though
nfe wrote: Good of Tobias Ellwood to tell everyone on Question Time that Theresa May refused to meet residents because they're security threats. Some laugh.
Security wasn't a problem for Brenda and the Duke of Cambridge.
There has never been a multiple loss of life from a fire developing in a building protected by a properly designed, installed and maintained fire sprinkler system.
I've not got much out of her, mostly because I've not asked, but I know she's peeved at the Beeb for not getting a suitably qualified person to comment, instead choosing a litigation solicitor....who are of course well noted for their even handed and bipartisan approach to such things.
I also know she's shocked at the cladding that was used.
King’s College hospital is to lodge a complaint with the press watchdog over a journalist who allegedly impersonated a friend of a victim of the Grenfell Tower fire in order to get an interview with him.
The hospital is to file a complaint with the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso) about the behaviour of the Sun reporter. It has also written to News UK, the publisher of the Sun, Times and Sunday Times, about the incident.
“Following an incident at King’s College hospital, we have formally written to the Sun and will be informing the Independent Press Standards Organisation,” said a spokeswoman for King’s College hospital NHS foundation trust. “We are unable to comment on the specifics until our complaint has been investigated.”
It is understood that the Sun was trying to get an interview with Mario Gomes, a resident on the 21st floor who has been hailed as a hero after racing back into the building to find his 12-year-old daughter.
Sources say a Sun journalist has been accused of attempting to impersonate a friend of Gomes to hospital staff in order to interview him.
News UK claims a Sun journalist had lined up an interview with Gomes via mobile phone messages after being given his number by someone at Grenfell Tower who knew him.
A different Sun journalist, however, made the approach to staff at the hospital for the interview which Gomes then declined because the reporter allegedly claimed to be a friend. News UK denies the reporter attempted to impersonate a friend.
Ipso has not not yet received an official complaint relating to journalists impersonating friends of victims to gain access to any hospital.
Such a complaint would be investigated under clause 8 of the editors’ code, relating specifically to hospitals, which has two rules. It states: “Journalists must identify themselves and obtain permission from a responsible executive before entering non-public areas of hospitals or similar institutions to pursue inquiries.
OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote: While it does seem crazy that building regs appear to permit the use of flammable cladding like this (apparently in the US its illegal to use in buildings over 4 stories)
its incorrect to say it was just used to make the block look better, it was also used to add external insulation (and improving thermal efficiency of their housing stock appears to have been a legal obligation on councils)
no excuse for using dangerous rubbish to do it though
It was both, it clearly states that it was chosen to improve the buildings appearance as well as improve insulation in the planning application/permission.
Due to its height the tower is visible from the adjacent Avondale Conservation Area to the south and the Ladbroke Conservation Area to the east
The changes to the existing tower will improve its appearance especially when viewed from the surrounding area.
to accord with the development plan by ensuring that the character and appearance of the area are preserved and living conditions of those living near the development suitably protected
and so on.
However there is nothing intrinsically illegal with using such cladding on the outside of the building as it was likely assessed that you would never get a fire close enough and hot enough to start the material burning. Despite the fact it's happened several times before. But this is a flaw in the guidance and legislation (which is why they are all stating they complied with the rules).
The Maybot's offer of £5 million for emergency supplies adds insult to injury.
Firstly, Londoners have already rallied around so well that the community organisers of the support effort have been turning people and donations away.
Secondly, the victims don't need £5M now, they need £200K in 2016 to install a sprinkler system and fire alarms. If that had been done we would not be looking at a death toll that clearly will climb to about 100.
Thirdly, the local council of Kensington and Chelsea has already organised a very good relief effort to reassure victims about how they will be taken care of and rehoused. Oh! Wait!! They haven't actually done anything!!!
Cue a near riot at the Town Hall as the mayor or "chief executive" refuses to come out and give the people answers to their righteous questions. I wonder how much he is paid?
Channel 4 News reports that people are marching on Westminster this evening.
I decided to take a break from politics for a few days after the election, but God almighty, May's interview with the BBC only confirms that May is one of the most wretched Prime Minister's this nation has ever had the misfortune of suffering!
She is a disgrace. Not fit to hold high office. May has learned nothing from the General Election debacle. She makes David Cameron look like Lloyd George.
The only consolation is that the Tories won't let May fight another General Election. Good riddance to her
Im a little late into the discussion again, but my thoughts on the dreadful fire are as follows:
Firstly it is truly shocking that building regs today don't make it a requirement to have a sprinkler system or roof water tank and corridor hoses in all habitable high rise buildings. So many lives would have been saved if there was a sprinkler system or water source and hoses set up that people could use, if the one staircase had lighting and if the building had a fire alarm on every corridor level. The signs were misguiding and it goes without saying the review after 2009 should have happened.
Secondly all building companies will look to use the cheapest product for maximum profit, technically they met the current standards but that would be the minimum standard. I think more of the cause would be the stupid building facelift in itself. Those old tower blocks would have been better to be demolished and rebuild rather than by covering up the cracks with a modern-to-be-out-if-date fake outer skin which may have proven the fatal blow in the fire.
I will of course wait until the report is out before making a proper judgement, but I think we will see a panic assessment of all similar buildings and rather ironically removal of cladding and such from them. Councils will also be forced to add in addition fire safety precautions, whether that means a water system in each building or getting away with just making everything more fire proof I don't know. I think part of the reason the review was put on hold is down to not hindering the building trade to build as many new buildings as possible.
Now on to PM May, I think the security scare was an excuse for not visiting residents, more likely it was so she wouldn't get heckled and attacked by angry residents who are ironically upset she ignored them. On the other hand so much has already been done was it necessary? Does a countries leader have to have a PR stunt to hug someone in solidarity for good image? Certainly Corbyn thinks so, but it does come across a little cheesy to me.
Finally, I guess no one in building regs ever watched Towering Inferno with Steve Mcqueen? In the film a good 40 odd years ago a similar tower block caught fire very quickly. It didn't have sprinklers but did have
Spoiler:
a roof top water tank that they opened up. Gravity caused the water to flood down the floors and douse the fire saving all the people.
I am surprised our buildings today don't have this or something similar retrofitted as regulation.
Onto another political topic, only 3 more days to go, until hopefully the Brexit negotiations steamroller ahead! Unfortunately I listened to the Jeremy Vile show on BBC radio 2 today, and his latest argument was to urge listeners to give up on Brexit because it was going to take to long and now Mrs May no longer has a majority it will be a bad Brexit scenario etc. What droning dribble! Some people (especially in the media) are so concerned with proving themselves right they want Brexit to fail. I for one want to see nothing stopping the process and for a fair and strong negotiation to come out.
I actually started to feel a bit sorry for May at one point, then I remembered the lies, vitriol and hate the right wing press attack dogs pour out on her behalf, and suddenly I'm OK with her being called names.
I really cannot believe that people actually thought she was the reincarnation of Thatcher.
r_squared wrote: I actually started to feel a bit sorry for May at one point, then I remembered the lies, vitriol and hate the right wing press attack dogs pour out on her behalf, and suddenly I'm OK with her being called names.
I really cannot believe that people actually thought she was the reincarnation of Thatcher.
Finally, I guess no one in building regs ever watched Towering Inferno with Steve Mcqueen? In the film a good 40 odd years ago a similar tower block caught fire very quickly. It didn't have sprinklers but did have
Spoiler:
a roof top water tank that they opened up. Gravity caused the water to flood down the floors and douse the fire saving all the people.
I am surprised our buildings today don't have this or something similar retrofitted as regulation.
Ehm. I don't know how to say this, but 40-year-old movies is probably not the place to look for efficient fire-fighting tech.
Finally, I guess no one in building regs ever watched Towering Inferno with Steve Mcqueen? In the film a good 40 odd years ago a similar tower block caught fire very quickly. It didn't have sprinklers but did have
Spoiler:
a roof top water tank that they opened up. Gravity caused the water to flood down the floors and douse the fire saving all the people.
I am surprised our buildings today don't have this or something similar retrofitted as regulation.
Ehm. I don't know how to say this, but 40-year-old movies is probably not the place to look for efficient fire-fighting tech.
The hell you say. Next you'll be telling me a laser swords and hokey religions are no match for a good blaster.
Folks I know little about London politics, but it's abundantly clear that London has deep deep problems. Problems that exist all over but are massively exaggerated in London.
NI has its issues but I will take them any day over Londons issues. I'm no socialist but 2k a month for a small high rise flat? Houses for sale in the 10s of millions. It's obscene.
The more I look at the current mess in UK politics the more it looks like inequality in London is the main issue. It's just not sustainable.
It's like San Diego putting up thousands of million dollar tract houses...surrounded by chaparral shrubland that goes up in flames and burns a hundred thousand acres once or twice a decade like clockwork
r_squared wrote: I actually started to feel a bit sorry for May at one point, then I remembered the lies, vitriol and hate the right wing press attack dogs pour out on her behalf, and suddenly I'm OK with her being called names.
I really cannot believe that people actually thought she was the reincarnation of Thatcher.
Superficial physical similarities?
Well theres the hair...and...and...I got nothing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I decided to take a break from politics for a few days after the election, but God almighty, May's interview with the BBC only confirms that May is one of the most wretched Prime Minister's this nation has ever had the misfortune of suffering!
She is a disgrace. Not fit to hold high office. May has learned nothing from the General Election debacle. She makes David Cameron look like Lloyd George.
The only consolation is that the Tories won't let May fight another General Election. Good riddance to her
I wouldn't say thats a consolation. It means we're stuck with the b****.
Knockagh wrote: Folks I know little about London politics, but it's abundantly clear that London has deep deep problems. Problems that exist all over but are massively exaggerated in London.
NI has its issues but I will take them any day over Londons issues. I'm no socialist but 2k a month for a small high rise flat? Houses for sale in the 10s of millions. It's obscene.
The more I look at the current mess in UK politics the more it looks like inequality in London is the main issue. It's just not sustainable.
One way is over crowding, several families or large extended family to a flat, to spread the cost. It doesn't matter as long as they work cheap so Costa doesn't get too expensive. Think it's not true? The authorities haven't divulged the population of the building, there could be many many more deaths yet.
Knockagh wrote: Folks I know little about London politics, but it's abundantly clear that London has deep deep problems. Problems that exist all over but are massively exaggerated in London.
NI has its issues but I will take them any day over Londons issues. I'm no socialist but 2k a month for a small high rise flat? Houses for sale in the 10s of millions. It's obscene.
The more I look at the current mess in UK politics the more it looks like inequality in London is the main issue. It's just not sustainable.
2k a Month.. For 2 beds, n a old tower block.
Out in the shires North you can get a 3-4 bed house for maybe 700 a month.
Knockagh wrote: Folks I know little about London politics, but it's abundantly clear that London has deep deep problems. Problems that exist all over but are massively exaggerated in London.
NI has its issues but I will take them any day over Londons issues. I'm no socialist but 2k a month for a small high rise flat? Houses for sale in the 10s of millions. It's obscene.
The more I look at the current mess in UK politics the more it looks like inequality in London is the main issue. It's just not sustainable.
2k a Month.. For 2 beds, n a old tower block.
Out in the shires North you can get a 3-4 bed house for maybe 700 a month.
2 grand would get you a rather nice property
.and for the wages many of these people work for, they could be significantly better off if they got a similar job outside of the South, but many fear taking that step, or just think there's no jobs and everywhere else is some sort of backwater wasteland.
I watched a documentary about the housing issue in London, and the real fear was apparent on the faces of those being told they were being housed outside the capital. One family were rehomed in High-Wycombe, not a bad place to live as it happens, and they fought and cried as if they were being condemned to a circle of hell. The father only had a part time job in a convenience store in London, and he was concerned he'd have to commute in! Never occurred that he could pick up an equally gak job just as easy in High-Wycombe.
