Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Why do some people have to drag this conversation into the gutter?

You inspired us.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Absolutely. The workers' councils seem to work very well in Germany, for example.

It's just ironic that the power elite that reacted with horror to these EU initiatives when proposed now plans to bring them into the UK in preparation for leaving the EU.

Of course it's probably all just talk.

This is Britain. The mere mention of trade unions is a red rag to a bull for some sections of British society (my elderly father still hasn't recovered from the 1970s )

so this idea of workers' councils will set off all kinds of alarms bells.

I think they're a good idea, but they might be a hard sell to a British public that is naturally suspicious and hostile to the idea of organised labour.

 MrDwhitey wrote:
So 3 penises in total in that image then.

oh well played

Gove has said, apparently, that he won't contest so PM May it is.

 Ketara wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Absolutely. The workers' councils seem to work very well in Germany, for example.

It's just ironic that the power elite...

From what I've read, May isn't really one of the power elite in the colloquial sense (Quincy Wright excluded). She's not one of the Old Boy's club that Bojo, Gove, Cameron, Osborne and so forth belong to. She did Geography at Oxford instead of PPE or History or politics, and she's not exactly made a huge number of friends in Government. Her dad was a clergyman instead of minor gentry or rich businessman. I read a quote in the Times once from a supposed Whitehall insider, who said that she was only ever chosen as 'the best of a bad lot of token women' and it's why they handed her the supposedly cursed brief of Home Secretary (so that it wouldn't affect one of the more serious male contenders when it went pear shaped). The Times journalist speculated her successful tenure there is because she's a 6am-6pm office worker who refuses to leave the details to the civil servants and concentrate entirely on policy and politics, like most ministers.

As a slightly religious gal, she's opposed most things relating to LGBT rights over the years, so I'm not massively keen on her because of that. On the other hand, she's been the driving force behind the Government opposing things like FGM. So whilst she's not the PM I'd pick, she's probably closer to us working schmoes than any of Cameron's other cronies.

This is just my take, but the more I read about May, the more I'm convinced we're going to be getting John Major version 2.0, and that's not a compliment in my book.

I have no doubt that May would be fairly competent, but with Britain BREXITING, a bold vision is needed for the UK in the 21st century.

May is not inspiring in that regard.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
May's time as home secretary was a disaster, immigration being the main failing, but the fact that she locked somebody up for 8 years, without any charges, should serve as a warning to those who value this nation's liberty.

May is too much in the pocket of those who want more surveillance of this nation's citizens...

Well we are where we are. Mays the best the Tories have to offer atm. Gove and Leadsom were headbangers and lol Boris.

I'm glad they did their leadership change quickly. Labour are going to be faffing around for months yet.

Well, the only thing scarier than having Theresa May as PM would be any of the other candidates, so hurray? I guess..

Nothing Labour is doing is making any sense.

This morning -- all within the space of 10 minutes -- they've put out a demand/request for a new general election whilst also now starting a leadership contest internally.

Pistols at Dawn wrote:
Well we are where we are. Mays the best the Tories have to offer atm. Gove and Leadsom were headbangers and lol Boris.

I'm glad they did their leadership change quickly. Labour are going to be faffing around for months yet.

Gove may be a lot of things, but he's never struck me as the type to lock somebody away for 9 years without charges against them.

The anti-terror laws in this country would make the North Koreans blush.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


This is just my take, but the more I read about May, the more I'm convinced we're going to be getting John Major version 2.0, and that's not a compliment in my book.

I have no doubt that May would be fairly competent, but with Britain BREXITING, a bold vision is needed for the UK in the 21st century.

May is not inspiring in that regard.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
May's time as home secretary was a disaster, immigration being the main failing, but the fact that she locked somebody up for 8 years, without any charges, should serve as a warning to those who value this nation's liberty.

May is too much in the pocket of those who want more surveillance of this nation's citizens...

She's always been in favour of more governmental powers to detain, place under surveillance, and arrest without due process, which I dislike heartily. In a brexit environment where she (and others like her) can no longer be blocked on such things by European legislation, that does worry me. Governments from Blair onwards have brought in ever-increasing security measures in the name of fighting terrorism, and the record so far has been that that they're deemed illegal within a few years, removed, and then replaced with slightly different worded version. But without the pressure from Europe on human rights, I fear what a kneejerk government reaction to a terrorist attack under May would do. That's one reason not to be in favour of her becoming PM, but frankly, I don't think anyone else will be any better in that respect. I think everyone bar the Lib Dems seems inclined towards the security state these days, so it's not so much a strike against her as it is the Tories.

The image that's trickled out of May is a workaholic administrator, who is capable but with little imagination. That being said, a good chunk of that image was spread by her political enemies over the years, she's not one for self-advertisement, so it's flourished somewhat. She may well bloom as the PM. Alternatively, she might be Broon MK2, or anything in between. Time alone will tell, I suspect.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Absolutely. The workers' councils seem to work very well in Germany, for example.

It's just ironic that the power elite that reacted with horror to these EU initiatives when proposed now plans to bring them into the UK in preparation for leaving the EU.

Of course it's probably all just talk.

This is Britain. The mere mention of trade unions is a red rag to a bull for some sections of British society (my elderly father still hasn't recovered from the 1970s )

so this idea of workers' councils will set off all kinds of alarms bells.

I think they're a good idea, but they might be a hard sell to a British public that is naturally suspicious and hostile to the idea of organised labour.

No, worker's councils are a great idea! It makes the sense the EU would want such a thing. Is first step on road to Council Union!
Does anyone know what the Russian word for a union of worker's councils is btw?

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Does anyone know what the Russian word for a union of worker's councils is btw?

Soviet is workers council isn't it? (Trying to remember my GCSE History lessons on the Soviet Union from 9 years ago is hard )

 Ketara wrote:

She's always been in favour of more governmental powers to detain, place under surveillance, and arrest without due process, which I dislike heartily. In a brexit environment where she (and others like her) can no longer be blocked on such things by European legislation, that does worry me.

How many times did we go through the whole "the ECHR isn't the EU" deal in the old thread?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

She's always been in favour of more governmental powers to detain, place under surveillance, and arrest without due process, which I dislike heartily. In a brexit environment where she (and others like her) can no longer be blocked on such things by European legislation, that does worry me.

How many times did we go through the whole "the ECHR isn't the EU" deal in the old thread?

The Tories also want to leave the ECHR. The EU requires us to sign up to the ECHR, I think (which we should do anyway as Britain played a leading role in writing the European Convention on Human Rights).

Soviet is used to denote a worker's council, or peasant's council prior to the Russian revolution.

So USSR stands for Union of Worker's Council Socialiast Republics.
Doesn't quite have the same ring to it.

Interesting that the party without quotas for female MPs and doesn't push positive affirmative action for female politicians, and doesn't bang on endlessly about the glass ceiling for women provides the UK's 2nd female prime minister. The Labour Party and Liberal Democrats have no potential female leaders in sight.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

She's always been in favour of more governmental powers to detain, place under surveillance, and arrest without due process, which I dislike heartily. In a brexit environment where she (and others like her) can no longer be blocked on such things by European legislation, that does worry me.

How many times did we go through the whole "the ECHR isn't the EU" deal in the old thread?

With us not being in the EU, the odds of us leaving the ECHR is heightened considerably. Certainly, with EU membership no longer a factor, there's nothing stopping any Government saying they intend to withdraw from it and draw up a British version to replace it. It's been a regular feature in the press for some time now, so I'm not entirely certain why you're attempting to link back to that tired old argument.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_British_Bill_of_Rights

 Waaagh_Gonads wrote:
.... The Labour Party and Liberal Democrats have no potential female leaders in sight.

Hang on a minute, there's Angela Eagle.....oh right...

It just occurred to me that this time next year, we could be looking at Hilary Clinton, Theresa May, Angela Merkel, and Marine Le Pen sitting around a table representing the Western world. What an interesting thought.

I've despised every Conservative government I've ever had the misfortune of living under, but despite losing Cameron, and despite the deep divisions during the referendum over Europe, the Tories have re-grouped, and bounced back in record time...

I have a grudging respect for them

Labour, in contrast, are a shambles. Their call for a General Election is risible, especially when they're on the verge of civil war, and by all accounts, the Labour party coffers are running on empty. . Why would May gamble a small working majority for an extra year in power?

May will be made PM within 48 hours apparently! That one moved fast!

The Brexit issue will be top of the agenda, and I'm looking forward to seeing the new Cabinet....

Yeah, right now a snap election is THE LAST THING we need. We need unity and leadership.Labour is pretty much destroying itself lol. I think, generally speaking, the Conservatives are the only one who have a leg to stand on currently. Mandate or not. Finish the term and go from there. Every bugger else needs to sort their selves out.

The Conservative Party has always seen the achievement of power as its primary mission. What to do with it is a secondary concern.

Naturally there are factions behind the scenes and their quarrels sometimes break out in to public view, as with John Major's "bastards". Let's not forget the EU referendum was nothing to do with "the will of the people" or "democracy", it was a bid by Cameron to prevent another public breakout of "the bastards".

I have just heard that May is to be the new PM after Leadsom withdrew her bid.

Extraordinary! Everyone who hoped to benefit from the referendum; Cameron, BoJo, Gove and Farage, has seen their ship of hope sunk under them in a brief few weeks. Meanwhile boring old May, the outsider, has slipped through the inside of the curve.

Serves them right, the spankers.

 reds8n wrote:
Nothing Labour is doing is making any sense.

This morning -- all within the space of 10 minutes -- they've put out a demand/request for a new general election whilst also now starting a leadership contest internally.

As we now have fixed term parliaments by law, Labour calling for a general election is just ignorant and strongly implies they have contempt for legal procedure.
If they called for a Bill to repeal the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011 then that would be different, they might yet do so, but throwing rattles out of pram doesnt help them or anyone else.

It could be an odd thing to say, but both the main party's seem to too focused on party politics and not what is best for the country, does that make sense? Surely we must have moved on enough to leave these extremes behind? The day to day running of the country should be boring, not made up of soundbites or short term gimmicks.

I believe a civilised society has a moral responsibility to look after the weak and vulnerable. That all children should have access to a decent education so that they can reach their full potential. Taxes should be fair and not excessive. If you've worked hard and managed to the £50k+ salary bank why should you suddenly lose a big chunk of it? I'm sure if they closed tax loopholes and controlled government waste then that would help.

I really do dread what is to come as I have no faith in either party at the moment.

 Orlanth wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
Nothing Labour is doing is making any sense.

This morning -- all within the space of 10 minutes -- they've put out a demand/request for a new general election whilst also now starting a leadership contest internally.

As we now have fixed term parliaments by law, Labour calling for a general election is just ignorant and strongly implies they have contempt for legal procedure.
If they called for a Bill to repeal the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011 then that would be different, they might yet do so, but throwing rattles out of pram doesnt help them or anyone else.

General elections can still be called early by putting through an act of parliament.

http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2016/07/11/david-cameron-just-announced-hell-nolonger-pm-weds-hilariously-british-way-possible/


TBF he carries the tune quiet well.

 Orlanth wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
Nothing Labour is doing is making any sense.

This morning -- all within the space of 10 minutes -- they've put out a demand/request for a new general election whilst also now starting a leadership contest internally.

As we now have fixed term parliaments by law, Labour calling for a general election is just ignorant and strongly implies they have contempt for legal procedure.
If they called for a Bill to repeal the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011 then that would be different, they might yet do so, but throwing rattles out of pram doesnt help them or anyone else.

The current parliament can be dissolved by a vote of no confidence or by a simple 2/3rds majority of MPs, it doesn't have to run for five years.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Wolfstan wrote:
It could be an odd thing to say, but both the main party's seem to too focused on party politics and not what is best for the country, does that make sense? Surely we must have moved on enough to leave these extremes behind? The day to day running of the country should be boring, not made up of soundbites or short term gimmicks.

I believe a civilised society has a moral responsibility to look after the weak and vulnerable. That all children should have access to a decent education so that they can reach their full potential. Taxes should be fair and not excessive. If you've worked hard and managed to the £50k+ salary bank why should you suddenly lose a big chunk of it? I'm sure if they closed tax loopholes and controlled government waste then that would help.

I really do dread what is to come as I have no faith in either party at the moment.

All political parties are a combination of different impulses and influences. Some are out for themselves and their friends, some are concerned with good government and the health of the nation.

It isn't easy to see what is best for the nation, and it gets worse when people start to use ideology or nepotism instead of analysis.

My worry over the past 20 years has been that we need a healthy economy because everything else depends on it. However what is the point in a healthy economy if it only benefits the top 10%? Maybe it's possible for an economy actually to be unhealthy and still benefit the top 10%.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The Conservative Party has always seen the achievement of power as its primary mission. What to do with it is a secondary concern.

Naturally there are factions behind the scenes and their quarrels sometimes break out in to public view, as with John Major's "bastards". Let's not forget the EU referendum was nothing to do with "the will of the people" or "democracy", it was a bid by Cameron to prevent another public breakout of "the bastards".

I have just heard that May is to be the new PM after Leadsom withdrew her bid.

Extraordinary! Everyone who hoped to benefit from the referendum; Cameron, BoJo, Gove and Farage, has seen their ship of hope sunk under them in a brief few weeks. Meanwhile boring old May, the outsider, has slipped through the inside of the curve.

Serves them right, the spankers.

Frankly, I don't think Bojo or Gove ever had a chance. Neither of them had the party backing required. Bojo might have made it to the top two, but he'd have been sunk as every other candidate rallied behind May. Sensibly, he chose to pull out, especially after Gove started playing games. He'll get a nice fat portfolio in the new cabinet, and make a bid in five or ten years for leader.

Had remain won, Camrron and Osborne would have done very nicely for themselves, but as it is, Cameron hopped off the ship, and now Osborne is fighting not to go down with it. Him and May have had an acrimonious relationship in the past, so I daresay he's desperately hoping he's not about to wake up and find himself Minister of Agriculture or Communities or something equally lower-tier. That all being said, I have a certain level of respect for Cameron, he fell on his sword quickly and efficiently, and the minute it was clear it was May's victory, arranged for a seamless transition. None of that Tony Blair will he/won't he nonsense.

May played it safe. That could almost be called the motto of her political career. That may do us well as a country, and I'm hoping over the next few weeks a clear direction for the country will emerge. The markets and pound are crying out for reassurance right now, to the extent that May just winning allowed them to rally to a small extent.

Don't we have fixed term Parliaments now? Short of a no confidence vote, I thought the government no longer has the legal power to call an election.

I think May's a reasonably safe pair of hands - maybe a bit of "boring" will be good for GB politics, let things settle down a bit.