Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The Tories are becoming a byword for ungovernable – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited May 2023 in General
The Tories are becoming a byword for ungovernable – politicalbetting.com

Tory anarchy breaks out as revolt looms on Brexit laws https://t.co/vbqfsis6bZ

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 43,449
    First, like A screeching song from Sweden!
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 54,655
    Keep calm, disciplined and focused, and deliver for the base - couple it with a sensible long-term plan that resonates in layman's terms and delivers jam.

    That's the only hope.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 46,781
    The other advantage of May 2024 is the point I made yesterday - the locals are likely to be truly terrible for the tarnished Tories, given the high base they are defending, and that will put a political shadow over the rest of the year. Taking the GE early at least avoids that, and the local defeats will get lost in the other news (and probably not be as bad on GE day, anyway, since some of the protest vote will come home).
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,051

    Keep calm, disciplined and focused, and deliver for the base - couple it with a sensible long-term plan that resonates in layman's terms and delivers jam.

    That's the only hope.

    Bring back the dream team, Truss and Johnson. The only chance your team has hereonin.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 46,781

    Keep calm, disciplined and focused, and deliver for the base - couple it with a sensible long-term plan that resonates in layman's terms and delivers jam.

    That's the only hope.

    Or a clause four moment with Sunak casting the Johnson and Truss fanbois into outer darkness….
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 46,781
    edited May 2023

    I believe I had a vastly superior “Eurovision” experience to any of you yesterday, without watching a second of the coverage from Liverpool

    I stayed on in the abbey church at Mont-Saint-Michel, after seeing the sweeping nun, for the Mass service. I think it was the first time in my life that I’ve chosen to go to a church service aside from a couple of Christmas carol services (all the others were compulsory - at boarding school, or semi-compulsory - christenings/weddings/funerals)

    I had a front row seat somehow, even though there were about two hundred French catholics in the church. Though I barely understood a word of the service, I found myself strangely moved

    The outfits were pretty camp - the men were all in dresses (ok, robes - but with funky hoods), and the setting was visually glorious. The acoustics were superb, and the singing and chanting sounded heavenly

    When all the catholics went up for Communion at the end, I got in line for a blessing. I don’t remember choosing to do so, it just seemed natural.. The monk who gave me the blessing so clearly had love in his eyes, smile, voice and heart

    I was smiling for the rest of the day, even when I got charged 27€ for a 75cl bottle of cider at the restaurant I went to for lunch afterwards

    The picture is the last I could take before the service started. Four more nuns and six more monks attended, more than half of the twenty seven permanent residents in the abbey



    That restaurant must love that place….producing a stream of dippy customers
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,175
    DougSeal said:

    Keep calm, disciplined and focused, and deliver for the base - couple it with a sensible long-term plan that resonates in layman's terms and delivers jam.

    That's the only hope.

    Bring back the dream team, Truss and Johnson. The only chance your team has hereonin.
    "If Penny were leader we'd be 30 points ahead!"
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 46,781
    DougSeal said:

    Keep calm, disciplined and focused, and deliver for the base - couple it with a sensible long-term plan that resonates in layman's terms and delivers jam.

    That's the only hope.

    Bring back the dream team, Truss and Johnson. The only chance your team has hereonin.
    I read that as ‘the only chance your team has is heroin’, which would have been closer to the mark. There is no way either Truss or Johnson can ‘come back’ without the ensuing ridicule making things far, far worse.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 46,781

    DougSeal said:

    Keep calm, disciplined and focused, and deliver for the base - couple it with a sensible long-term plan that resonates in layman's terms and delivers jam.

    That's the only hope.

    Bring back the dream team, Truss and Johnson. The only chance your team has hereonin.
    "If Penny were leader we'd be 30 points ahead!"
    If she were leader, somebody else would have got to carry the sword…..
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,256
    A non woke Penny would be fine
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,770
    The time of the sword bearer cometh
    The Indian dances at night
    And he that stands by the tower trembles
    For the paltry weasel
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 46,781
    After a very hot sunny day yesterday, it’s a murky old mornin…
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 4,955
    This is an excellent thread @TSE

    Right on the money. The tories are goners and changing leader now isn't going to help. To paraphrase the Rockfish logo, 'Your next tory PM is still in the womb.'

    Deliberate exaggeration but you get the drift. The tories are going to be out of power for a decade and probably a generation.

    They fucked the country and (most) everyone knows it.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 4,955
    IanB2 said:

    After a very hot sunny day yesterday, it’s a murky old mornin…

    Not in south Devon. Wall-to-wall blue. But it won't last, alas.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 4,955
    edited May 2023
    p.s. but what is patently clear to all is as @TSE says, Rishi Sunak is not very good.

    I think we're going to see 12 months of bitter tory in-fighting and recrimination. Come the campaign Boris will be dragged out in support and the Daily Express and Mail will wet themselves for a morning, but it will make naff all difference.

    The die is cast.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 59,559
    Good morning

    The only way forward for the conservative party is to back Sunak and marginalise the Johnson disciples who to be fair are the usual suspects and a dimishing if noisy band

    I fully expect a Starmer led government in 24 and indeed the conservative party needs to go into opposition and hopefully then accept the only way forward is as a one nation party

    I do not detect any desire amongst the vast majority of conservatives mps to foist another PM on the country

    On another subject our son has been on 3 RNLI shouts in just 15 hours as the lovely weather arrives and people unwittingly put themselves at risk on the sea. Indeed shouts across the country rocketed this weekend
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 4,955
    By the way, the big moment of Eurovision was not Kate: sheer desperation by the Express and Mail. She was on for about 2 seconds and her appearance was greeted by boos in the Liverpudlian audience.

    No, I thought the real tear-jerker was You'll Never Walk Alone with the Golden Gate in Kiev. Wow.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 59,559
    Heathener said:

    By the way, the big moment of Eurovision was not Kate: sheer desperation by the Express and Mail. She was on for about 2 seconds and her appearance was greeted by boos in the Liverpudlian audience.

    No, I thought the real tear-jerker was You'll Never Walk Alone with the Golden Gate in Kiev. Wow.

    You do know both can be true if you strip away your blinkers
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 4,955

    Heathener said:

    By the way, the big moment of Eurovision was not Kate: sheer desperation by the Express and Mail. She was on for about 2 seconds and her appearance was greeted by boos in the Liverpudlian audience.

    No, I thought the real tear-jerker was You'll Never Walk Alone with the Golden Gate in Kiev. Wow.

    You do know both can be true if you strip away your blinkers
    Not sure a private school educated princess playing piano in a palace has quite the same impact on cash-strapped Britain and war-torn Ukraine ...
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 59,559
    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    By the way, the big moment of Eurovision was not Kate: sheer desperation by the Express and Mail. She was on for about 2 seconds and her appearance was greeted by boos in the Liverpudlian audience.

    No, I thought the real tear-jerker was You'll Never Walk Alone with the Golden Gate in Kiev. Wow.

    You do know both can be true if you strip away your blinkers
    Not sure a private school educated princess playing piano in a palace has quite the same impact on cash-strapped Britain and war-torn Ukraine ...
    No point in arguing with your prejeuduces
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 4,955



    On another subject our son has been on 3 RNLI shouts in just 15 hours as the lovely weather arrives and people unwittingly put themselves at risk on the sea. Indeed shouts across the country rocketed this weekend

    We have a lifeboat station here and a coastguard watch. They do such a fantastic job. Well done him but sorry for the increase in calls.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,003
    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    By the way, the big moment of Eurovision was not Kate: sheer desperation by the Express and Mail. She was on for about 2 seconds and her appearance was greeted by boos in the Liverpudlian audience.

    No, I thought the real tear-jerker was You'll Never Walk Alone with the Golden Gate in Kiev. Wow.

    You do know both can be true if you strip away your blinkers
    Not sure a private school educated princess playing piano in a palace has quite the same impact on cash-strapped Britain and war-torn Ukraine ...
    I'm always amused when lefties care more about where someone has come from, than their character.

    If an upper class person said: "Not sure a state-school educated single-mother playing piano in a bingo hall has quite the same impact..." they would get yelled at. ;)
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 4,955
    edited May 2023

    deliver for the base -.

    This is exactly the problem. Delivering for the base means delivering for the tory membership, whose views are completely misaligned with the mainstream voter.

    No. You (as in y'all) need to silence the nutty right-wingers and anti-woke base appeal.

    You need to move to the centre and try and wrestle middle England back.

    But you won't. Not for at least two and probably three general elections. It is ever thus, on both Left and Right.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 4,955

    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    By the way, the big moment of Eurovision was not Kate: sheer desperation by the Express and Mail. She was on for about 2 seconds and her appearance was greeted by boos in the Liverpudlian audience.

    No, I thought the real tear-jerker was You'll Never Walk Alone with the Golden Gate in Kiev. Wow.

    You do know both can be true if you strip away your blinkers
    Not sure a private school educated princess playing piano in a palace has quite the same impact on cash-strapped Britain and war-torn Ukraine ...
    I'm always amused when lefties care more about where someone has come from, than their character.

    If an upper class person said: "Not sure a state-school educated single-mother playing piano in a bingo hall has quite the same impact..." they would get yelled at. ;)
    Another tone deaf tory.

    You're going to have a long time in the political wilderness to reflect on where you got it so wrong.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 59,559
    Heathener said:



    On another subject our son has been on 3 RNLI shouts in just 15 hours as the lovely weather arrives and people unwittingly put themselves at risk on the sea. Indeed shouts across the country rocketed this weekend

    We have a lifeboat station here and a coastguard watch. They do such a fantastic job. Well done him but sorry for the increase in calls.
    It is expected as soon as nice weather arrives on the coast

    He goes to Poole today for a sea survival course which includes capsizing the inshore lifeboat and learning how to escape from the craft and right it

    Indeed he hopes to qualify as a helm in his first command after just 2 years in the service
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 4,955

    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    By the way, the big moment of Eurovision was not Kate: sheer desperation by the Express and Mail. She was on for about 2 seconds and her appearance was greeted by boos in the Liverpudlian audience.

    No, I thought the real tear-jerker was You'll Never Walk Alone with the Golden Gate in Kiev. Wow.

    You do know both can be true if you strip away your blinkers
    Not sure a private school educated princess playing piano in a palace has quite the same impact on cash-strapped Britain and war-torn Ukraine ...
    No point in arguing with your prejeuduces
    My "prejudice" is currently 27% ahead in the opinion polls and LibDem-Lab are polling twice the tory share.

    How's yours?
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 13,186
    DougSeal said:

    Keep calm, disciplined and focused, and deliver for the base - couple it with a sensible long-term plan that resonates in layman's terms and delivers jam.

    That's the only hope.

    Bring back the dream team, Truss and Johnson. The only chance your team has hereonin.
    You are so right, Doug.

    Johnson as PM, Truss at No 11, JRM as Foreign Secretary, Williamson at Education, Patel at the Home Office, Braverman the Business Secretary, Environment for Kemi - a Cabinet of all the talents.

    What could possibly go wrong?
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,051

    DougSeal said:

    Keep calm, disciplined and focused, and deliver for the base - couple it with a sensible long-term plan that resonates in layman's terms and delivers jam.

    That's the only hope.

    Bring back the dream team, Truss and Johnson. The only chance your team has hereonin.
    You are so right, Doug.

    Johnson as PM, Truss at No 11, JRM as Foreign Secretary, Williamson at Education, Patel at the Home Office, Braverman the Business Secretary, Environment for Kemi - a Cabinet of all the talents.

    What could possibly go wrong?
    Swap the first two around and you’ve got an unbeatable dream team.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 59,559
    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    By the way, the big moment of Eurovision was not Kate: sheer desperation by the Express and Mail. She was on for about 2 seconds and her appearance was greeted by boos in the Liverpudlian audience.

    No, I thought the real tear-jerker was You'll Never Walk Alone with the Golden Gate in Kiev. Wow.

    You do know both can be true if you strip away your blinkers
    Not sure a private school educated princess playing piano in a palace has quite the same impact on cash-strapped Britain and war-torn Ukraine ...
    No point in arguing with your prejeuduces
    My "prejudice" is currently 27% ahead in the opinion polls and LibDem-Lab are polling twice the tory share.

    How's yours?
    I try to be fair and balanced and I doubt even 27% agree with your comments about the small moment of time Kate played on the piano
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,051

    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    By the way, the big moment of Eurovision was not Kate: sheer desperation by the Express and Mail. She was on for about 2 seconds and her appearance was greeted by boos in the Liverpudlian audience.

    No, I thought the real tear-jerker was You'll Never Walk Alone with the Golden Gate in Kiev. Wow.

    You do know both can be true if you strip away your blinkers
    Not sure a private school educated princess playing piano in a palace has quite the same impact on cash-strapped Britain and war-torn Ukraine ...
    No point in arguing with your prejeuduces
    He’s right though. No disrespect to the PoW but it was a tone deaf moment in the whole thing and a massive error by the producers.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 59,559
    DougSeal said:

    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    By the way, the big moment of Eurovision was not Kate: sheer desperation by the Express and Mail. She was on for about 2 seconds and her appearance was greeted by boos in the Liverpudlian audience.

    No, I thought the real tear-jerker was You'll Never Walk Alone with the Golden Gate in Kiev. Wow.

    You do know both can be true if you strip away your blinkers
    Not sure a private school educated princess playing piano in a palace has quite the same impact on cash-strapped Britain and war-torn Ukraine ...
    No point in arguing with your prejeuduces
    He’s right though. No disrespect to the PoW but it was a tone deaf moment in the whole thing and a massive error by the producers.
    I think you will find Ukrainians disagreeing with you
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,003
    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    By the way, the big moment of Eurovision was not Kate: sheer desperation by the Express and Mail. She was on for about 2 seconds and her appearance was greeted by boos in the Liverpudlian audience.

    No, I thought the real tear-jerker was You'll Never Walk Alone with the Golden Gate in Kiev. Wow.

    You do know both can be true if you strip away your blinkers
    Not sure a private school educated princess playing piano in a palace has quite the same impact on cash-strapped Britain and war-torn Ukraine ...
    I'm always amused when lefties care more about where someone has come from, than their character.

    If an upper class person said: "Not sure a state-school educated single-mother playing piano in a bingo hall has quite the same impact..." they would get yelled at. ;)
    Another tone deaf tory.

    You're going to have a long time in the political wilderness to reflect on where you got it so wrong.
    I'm not a Tory. You appear to be one of the posters who think that if someone doesn't agree with you, then they're the enemy. Which is both wrong and a self-defeating attitude.

    I went to both state and public school. I met good and bad people in both, and realised that people in both can suffer from very similar issues. Going to a private school is not a bad thing; nor is it a good thing IMO. But you appear to be based in this brain-dead class warfare zone that makes Labour utterly repellant.

    (For the record, I've been against Johnson as PM since his MoL days, and argued with tories about this on here when he was seen as their New Hope; it was clear he would be a bad PM. I don't think I've voted Conservative since 2017, and have voted for all main English parties in elections. I'm likely to vote Labour at the next GE (or Lib Dem...), despite my lack of enthusiasm for Starmer.)
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,051

    DougSeal said:

    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    By the way, the big moment of Eurovision was not Kate: sheer desperation by the Express and Mail. She was on for about 2 seconds and her appearance was greeted by boos in the Liverpudlian audience.

    No, I thought the real tear-jerker was You'll Never Walk Alone with the Golden Gate in Kiev. Wow.

    You do know both can be true if you strip away your blinkers
    Not sure a private school educated princess playing piano in a palace has quite the same impact on cash-strapped Britain and war-torn Ukraine ...
    No point in arguing with your prejeuduces
    He’s right though. No disrespect to the PoW but it was a tone deaf moment in the whole thing and a massive error by the producers.
    I think you will find Ukrainians disagreeing with you
    Not many.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,865
    Good morning, everyone.

    Hubris in anticipated or actual triumph always reminds me of Meleager. Or Julius Caesar.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,256
    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    By the way, the big moment of Eurovision was not Kate: sheer desperation by the Express and Mail. She was on for about 2 seconds and her appearance was greeted by boos in the Liverpudlian audience.

    No, I thought the real tear-jerker was You'll Never Walk Alone with the Golden Gate in Kiev. Wow.

    You do know both can be true if you strip away your blinkers
    Not sure a private school educated princess playing piano in a palace has quite the same impact on cash-strapped Britain and war-torn Ukraine ...
    I'm always amused when lefties care more about where someone has come from, than their character.

    If an upper class person said: "Not sure a state-school educated single-mother playing piano in a bingo hall has quite the same impact..." they would get yelled at. ;)
    Another tone deaf tory.

    You're going to have a long time in the political wilderness to reflect on where you got it so wrong.
    You have verbal diarrhoea
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,288
    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    By the way, the big moment of Eurovision was not Kate: sheer desperation by the Express and Mail. She was on for about 2 seconds and her appearance was greeted by boos in the Liverpudlian audience.

    No, I thought the real tear-jerker was You'll Never Walk Alone with the Golden Gate in Kiev. Wow.

    You do know both can be true if you strip away your blinkers
    Not sure a private school educated princess playing piano in a palace has quite the same impact on cash-strapped Britain and war-torn Ukraine ...
    No point in arguing with your prejeuduces
    My "prejudice" is currently 27% ahead in the opinion polls and LibDem-Lab are polling twice the tory share.

    How's yours?
    How’s your flask ?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,217

    Keep calm, disciplined and focused, and deliver for the base - couple it with a sensible long-term plan that resonates in layman's terms and delivers jam.

    That's the only hope.

    So there's no hope?
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,288
    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,868
    Twelve hours without water here in West Sussex. Twice in three years. Southern water needs to go.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 8,615
    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Both are cynical and self serving, but there is a huge difference.

    One enfranchises more voters; the other disenfranchises voters. One expands democratic rights; the other restricts them.

    I’m not convinced on votes for 16 year olds personally, given most are still completely financially dependent and not yet making decisions for others, but it’s a reasonable thing to look at. Why not 17 - same age as driving.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,415
    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,369
    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    No I don't because these are category changes whereas voter suppression denies people their rights and undermines democracy.

    We can debate whether to extend the franchise to 16/17 year olds and permanent residents of the UK. There's no right or wrong, unlike voter suppression, which is plain wrong.

    Personally, I strongly favour votes for 16/17 year olds, which is the case in Scotland, highly successful and supported by almost everyone. I'm open on votes for permanent residents.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,475
    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    I believe the proposal (which I don't agree with, fwiw) is to give the vote to lawful permanent residents (those granted "indefinite leave to remain").

    That's both EU and non-EU citizens.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,217
    edited May 2023

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    Why?

    Tourists pay VAT. And fuel tax. Should they have the vote?

    Small children pay tax when buying things online. Should they?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,475
    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    So, if they pass their driving license at 17 they should be able to vote then?
  • TimSTimS Posts: 8,615
    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    I think people with permanent residency in the UK and tax resident here should be able to vote in GEs. That should be reciprocated overseas too. Ideally something the OECD could have an overarching agreement on.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,217
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    So, if they pass their driving license at 17 they should be able to vote then?
    What about marry?
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,879
    TimS said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Both are cynical and self serving, but there is a huge difference.

    One enfranchises more voters; the other disenfranchises voters. One expands democratic rights; the other restricts them.

    I’m not convinced on votes for 16 year olds personally, given most are still completely financially dependent and not yet making decisions for others, but it’s a reasonable thing to look at. Why not 17 - same age as driving.
    They should definitely been allowed to vote on Brexit.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,475
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    Why?

    Tourists pay VAT. And fuel tax. Should they have the vote?

    Small children pay tax when buying things online. Should they?
    Personally, I'd split the baby, and give them (lawful permanent residents, not 16 year olds) the right to vote in local elections, but not generals.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 8,615
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    So, if they pass their driving license at 17 they should be able to vote then?
    That might be a bit unfair to Green Party voters.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,217
    TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    So, if they pass their driving license at 17 they should be able to vote then?
    That might be a bit unfair to Green Party voters.
    @Dura_Ace waves hello.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,475
    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    So, if they pass their driving license at 17 they should be able to vote then?
    What about marry?
    Then you should have been more specific.

    It was ambiguous whether someone being old to drive *or* marry meant either or both. Indeed, unless you used the word "and", you were very much open to misinterpretation.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,288
    TimS said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Both are cynical and self serving, but there is a huge difference.

    One enfranchises more voters; the other disenfranchises voters. One expands democratic rights; the other restricts them.

    I’m not convinced on votes for 16 year olds personally, given most are still completely financially dependent and not yet making decisions for others, but it’s a reasonable thing to look at. Why not 17 - same age as driving.
    There really is no difference. EU citizens are not British citizens. They choose to work here, as do citizens of other nations. If they are British citizens fine, if not then I can see no reason, other than cynical political advantage, to offer them a vote and why just EU citizens. Why not citizens of other nations.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,217
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    Why?

    Tourists pay VAT. And fuel tax. Should they have the vote?

    Small children pay tax when buying things online. Should they?
    Personally, I'd split the baby, and give them (lawful permanent residents, not 16 year olds) the right to vote in local elections, but not generals.
    Don't they already have that? That was the deal when we were in the EU, anyway.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 8,615
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    Why?

    Tourists pay VAT. And fuel tax. Should they have the vote?

    Small children pay tax when buying things online. Should they?
    There is a very clear distinction between consumption taxes and income taxes. The latter is driven by the government’s taxing right on an individual’s livelihood. It is based on the status of the taxpayer. You are either resident here or somewhere else. Consumption taxes come from a very different tradition.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,475
    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    So, if they pass their driving license at 17 they should be able to vote then?
    What about marry?
    Also, people can marry at 16 with the approval of their parents. Will the same stipulation apply to voting?
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,879
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    Why?

    Tourists pay VAT. And fuel tax. Should they have the vote?

    Small children pay tax when buying things online. Should they?
    Tax on goods. Don’t buy them if you object/ think too expensive. But you have no choice about whether or not to pay income tax.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,288

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    So should we remove the vote from non taxpayers ?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,475

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    Why?

    Tourists pay VAT. And fuel tax. Should they have the vote?

    Small children pay tax when buying things online. Should they?
    Tax on goods. Don’t buy them if you object/ think too expensive. But you have no choice about whether or not to pay income tax.
    Sure you do: don't want to pay income tax, don't have an income.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,217
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    So, if they pass their driving license at 17 they should be able to vote then?
    What about marry?
    Then you should have been more specific.

    It was ambiguous whether someone being old to drive *or* marry meant either or both. Indeed, unless you used the word "and", you were very much open to misinterpretation.
    My point is we seem to be tightening up rules on various things sixteen and seventeen year olds can do, and simultaneously slacking off in others, for no discernible rhyme or reason.

    It looks stupid, because it is stupid.

    It would be better to have a serious think about what is or isn't appropriate and at what age. And then stick to it.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,415
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    Why?

    Tourists pay VAT. And fuel tax. Should they have the vote?

    Small children pay tax when buying things online. Should they?
    I’m guess as usual I’m too subtle for you with my word play and historical reference.

    My comment was a play on this famous slogan popularised by those traitorous colonials.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_taxation_without_representation
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,475
    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    Why?

    Tourists pay VAT. And fuel tax. Should they have the vote?

    Small children pay tax when buying things online. Should they?
    Personally, I'd split the baby, and give them (lawful permanent residents, not 16 year olds) the right to vote in local elections, but not generals.
    Don't they already have that? That was the deal when we were in the EU, anyway.
    In the old days, all EU citizens got to vote in local elections.

    The proposal from Labour is to give all lawful permanent residents the vote.

    There is nothing in Labour's proposal about the EU.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,217
    TimS said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    Why?

    Tourists pay VAT. And fuel tax. Should they have the vote?

    Small children pay tax when buying things online. Should they?
    There is a very clear distinction between consumption taxes and income taxes. The latter is driven by the government’s taxing right on an individual’s livelihood. It is based on the status of the taxpayer. You are either resident here or somewhere else. Consumption taxes come from a very different tradition.
    Really?

    It was consumption taxes drove the American War of Independence, for example.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,217

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    Why?

    Tourists pay VAT. And fuel tax. Should they have the vote?

    Small children pay tax when buying things online. Should they?
    I’m guess as usual I’m too subtle for you with my word play and historical reference.

    My comment was a play on this famous slogan popularised by those traitorous colonials.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_taxation_without_representation
    Believe it or not, I got the reference. I just thought it didn't work as a point.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 8,615
    Taz said:

    TimS said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Both are cynical and self serving, but there is a huge difference.

    One enfranchises more voters; the other disenfranchises voters. One expands democratic rights; the other restricts them.

    I’m not convinced on votes for 16 year olds personally, given most are still completely financially dependent and not yet making decisions for others, but it’s a reasonable thing to look at. Why not 17 - same age as driving.
    There really is no difference. EU citizens are not British citizens. They choose to work here, as do citizens of other nations. If they are British citizens fine, if not then I can see no reason, other than cynical political advantage, to offer them a vote and why just EU citizens. Why not citizens of other nations.
    There is a very clear difference between restricting someone’s right to vote and expanding people’s right to vote.

    It’s like saying there’s no difference between 1. making speeding a criminal offence, or 2. increasing the speed limit to 80mph. You might not agree with 2, but it’s very clearly different,
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,415
    Taz said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    So should we remove the vote from non taxpayers ?
    Ideally yes.

    But I’m ok with giving top rate taxpayers more than one vote as thanks for our hard work/compensation for stealing our personal allowance.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,373

    Keep calm, disciplined and focused, and deliver for the base - couple it with a sensible long-term plan that resonates in layman's terms and delivers jam.

    That's the only hope.

    That can be good advice, but not for rats in a sack.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,868
    Turnout in elections is worryingly low. That’s the problem to solve. It’s not good for the country that people do not engage. Cliques are rewarded. I’m interested in ideas that get more people out to vote.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,051
    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    I don’t think you can justify giving Irish citizens the vote but not other EU citizens. It’s clearly discriminatory.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 8,615
    ydoethur said:

    TimS said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    Why?

    Tourists pay VAT. And fuel tax. Should they have the vote?

    Small children pay tax when buying things online. Should they?
    There is a very clear distinction between consumption taxes and income taxes. The latter is driven by the government’s taxing right on an individual’s livelihood. It is based on the status of the taxpayer. You are either resident here or somewhere else. Consumption taxes come from a very different tradition.
    Really?

    It was consumption taxes drove the American War of Independence, for example.
    It was seen as extraterritoriality. We see similar battles these days over sanctions regimes and punitive tariffs. But different. The argument kicking off the US war was not the right of individuals to vote but the right of the colonies to have any representation in the UK Parliament.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 42,715

    Taz said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    So should we remove the vote from non taxpayers ?
    Ideally yes.

    But I’m ok with giving top rate taxpayers more than one vote as thanks for our hard work/compensation for stealing our personal allowance.
    You’re being a bit In The Wet with that idea
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,373

    DougSeal said:

    Keep calm, disciplined and focused, and deliver for the base - couple it with a sensible long-term plan that resonates in layman's terms and delivers jam.

    That's the only hope.

    Bring back the dream team, Truss and Johnson. The only chance your team has hereonin.
    You are so right, Doug.

    Johnson as PM, Truss at No 11, JRM as Foreign Secretary, Williamson at Education, Patel at the Home Office, Braverman the Business Secretary, Environment for Kemi - a Cabinet of all the talents.

    What could possibly go wrong?
    Given that a number have held those posts, and the rest been in cabinet, it already has.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 8,615
    Taz said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    So should we remove the vote from non taxpayers ?
    Anyone living in the UK long term is a “taxpayer” even if they don’t currently have any income,,
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,217
    DougSeal said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    I don’t think you can justify giving Irish citizens the vote but not other EU citizens. It’s clearly discriminatory.
    Northern Ireland is what makes it different. And that's different for very obvious historical reasons.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 42,715
    edited May 2023
    Jonathan said:

    Turnout in elections is worryingly low. That’s the problem to solve. It’s not good for the country that people do not engage. Cliques are rewarded. I’m interested in ideas that get more people out to vote.

    Elections last 2 weeks. The strict laws on bribing the electors are relaxed so that bribing them with gin to vote for you is OK.

    This would mean that the votes of all the @SeanTs would be up for grabs.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,369
    edited May 2023
    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    So, if they pass their driving license at 17 they should be able to vote then?
    What about marry?
    Then you should have been more specific.

    It was ambiguous whether someone being old to drive *or* marry meant either or both. Indeed, unless you used the word "and", you were very much open to misinterpretation.
    My point is we seem to be tightening up rules on various things sixteen and seventeen year olds can do, and simultaneously slacking off in others, for no discernible rhyme or reason.

    It looks stupid, because it is stupid.

    It would be better to have a serious think about what is or isn't appropriate and at what age. And then stick to it.
    I'm strongly in favour of votes for 16/17 year olds because voting is learned behavior and far too few young people are learning that behaviour, to the detriment of democracy. Having elections while young people are at school is an opportunity. It can be seen as an apprenticeship, if you will.

    This is the case in Scotland. It's supported almost by everyone. Ruth Davidson was a big proponent.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,217

    Taz said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    So should we remove the vote from non taxpayers ?
    Ideally yes.

    But I’m ok with giving top rate taxpayers more than one vote as thanks for our hard work/compensation for stealing our personal allowance.
    You’re being a bit In The Wet with that idea
    He's just Shuting his mouth off.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,475
    DougSeal said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    I don’t think you can justify giving Irish citizens the vote but not other EU citizens. It’s clearly discriminatory.
    Under UK law (that predates our entry into the EEC/EC/EU), Irish citizens are not considered aliens. They have the rights of British citizens.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 44,770
    Greetings from halfway across the Red Sea where there is undue excitement about dolphins




  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,965
    edited May 2023

    Keep calm, disciplined and focused, and deliver for the base - couple it with a sensible long-term plan that resonates in layman's terms and delivers jam.

    That's the only hope.

    IanB2 said:

    The other advantage of May 2024 is the point I made yesterday - the locals are likely to be truly terrible for the tarnished Tories, given the high base they are defending, and that will put a political shadow over the rest of the year. Taking the GE early at least avoids that, and the local defeats will get lost in the other news (and probably not be as bad on GE day, anyway, since some of the protest vote will come home).

    My case for Spring '24 is that it's just after a Budget, so that's the moment to pretend that a recovery is underway and use it as an excuse for targeted tax cuts, then go straight to the country. I'd not considered the local elections angle, but it's another tick in the column.

    In Hunt's place, which thank Christ I am not, I would favour the abolition of IHT (to get the rich olds all hard and wet,) plus a token but eye-catching penny off the basic rate. I'd then claim that Labour would hike taxes back up and wreck the glorious recovery.

    Of course, a direct cash bribe to the elderly would also help. I wonder if the Tories might find an excuse to jack up the state pension next year in excess of what's mandated by the triple lock?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,373
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    So, if they pass their driving license at 17 they should be able to vote then?
    And should we remove the right to vote from those judged to have lost the capacity to drive ?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,217
    Leon said:

    Greetings from halfway across the Red Sea where there is undue excitement about dolphins




    Is there some porpoise to that post?
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 4,360
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    Why?

    Tourists pay VAT. And fuel tax. Should they have the vote?

    Small children pay tax when buying things online. Should they?
    Personally, I'd split the baby, and give them (lawful permanent residents, not 16 year olds) the right to vote in local elections, but not generals.
    Don't they already have that? That was the deal when we were in the EU, anyway.
    In the old days, all EU citizens got to vote in local elections.

    The proposal from Labour is to give all lawful permanent residents the vote.

    There is nothing in Labour's proposal about the EU.
    You can still vote in local elections if you’re an EU national . The DT seems to be highlighting EU nationals possible extended rights to vote as a means to wind up the right wing who for some reason think continuing to demonize them is a good thing !

    The proposal if confirmed is somewhat risky from Labour although I think if you pay taxes and reside here you should get that vote .
  • TimSTimS Posts: 8,615
    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    Greetings from halfway across the Red Sea where there is undue excitement about dolphins




    Is there some porpoise to that post?
    Sticking your bottlenose in again
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 54,655
    Jonathan said:

    Turnout in elections is worryingly low. That’s the problem to solve. It’s not good for the country that people do not engage. Cliques are rewarded. I’m interested in ideas that get more people out to vote.

    Heathener's hyper-partisan and crowing rants got me out to vote.

    Suppose that's one way.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,965
    Jonathan said:

    Turnout in elections is worryingly low. That’s the problem to solve. It’s not good for the country that people do not engage. Cliques are rewarded. I’m interested in ideas that get more people out to vote.

    You mean something other than "we're all going to do basically the same thing, but we'll be less shit at it than the other lot"?

    Good luck with that.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,051
    rcs1000 said:

    DougSeal said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    I don’t think you can justify giving Irish citizens the vote but not other EU citizens. It’s clearly discriminatory.
    Under UK law (that predates our entry into the EEC/EC/EU), Irish citizens are not considered aliens. They have the rights of British citizens.
    I know. The Ireland Act 1949. Section 2 specifically. I do some immigration law. I know things. It’s still discriminatory.
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 1,653
    IanB2 said:

    The other advantage of May 2024 is the point I made yesterday - the locals are likely to be truly terrible for the tarnished Tories, given the high base they are defending, and that will put a political shadow over the rest of the year. Taking the GE early at least avoids that, and the local defeats will get lost in the other news (and probably not be as bad on GE day, anyway, since some of the protest vote will come home).

    It's very valid reasoning, but the GE is the gift of the PM.

    if he goes in May 2024 and loses, he'll go down as the footnote in history and be remembered like Lord Home (who? to most in the street). Hang on till October or November and he at least manages nearly two years.

    Now, to you, I or him, that matters, though to the man on the street, fifty years from now, they'll still go 'Who?' when asked about Sunak.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,373
    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    Greetings from halfway across the Red Sea where there is undue excitement about dolphins




    Is there some porpoise to that post?
    It’s quite evidently porpoiseless.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 26,714
    Remember that if the unthinkable happens and the Tories do Bring Back Boris, I've been calling it for ages.

    Stupid people with a mistaken sense of entitlement assuming that the public are even more stupid than they are. If they are going to get eviscerated under that remainer stab-in-the-back Sunak, what would they have to lose?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 60,373
    I thought he’d vanished forever.

    Lib Dems will not be sucked into formal Labour pact, says Vince Cable
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/14/lib-dems-will-not-be-sucked-into-formal-labour-pact-says-vince-cable
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,256
    edited May 2023
    Jonathan said:

    Twelve hours without water here in West Sussex. Twice in three years. Southern water needs to go.

    Irs not the end of the world. You live where there is extensive countryside piping.
    Who would you suggest who would better. Answers on a postcard please.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,369
    nico679 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    Why?

    Tourists pay VAT. And fuel tax. Should they have the vote?

    Small children pay tax when buying things online. Should they?
    Personally, I'd split the baby, and give them (lawful permanent residents, not 16 year olds) the right to vote in local elections, but not generals.
    Don't they already have that? That was the deal when we were in the EU, anyway.
    In the old days, all EU citizens got to vote in local elections.

    The proposal from Labour is to give all lawful permanent residents the vote.

    There is nothing in Labour's proposal about the EU.
    You can still vote in local elections if you’re an EU national . The DT seems to be highlighting EU nationals possible extended rights to vote as a means to wind up the right wing who for some reason think continuing to demonize them is a good thing !

    The proposal if confirmed is somewhat risky from Labour although I think if you pay taxes and reside here you should get that vote .
    AIUI this confuses a residual right of EU citizens to vote in English local government elections, which will substantially be withdrawn from next year with a Labour policy to extend the franchise to all permanent residents, as is already the case in Scotland except for UK level elections.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,288
    nico679 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Well, I am. I don't think non-citizens should have the vote. If they have settled status and want to vote they should take out naturalisation.

    The Commonwealth is a legacy arrangement and frankly an anachronism. Ireland of course is a special case.

    I'm also not sold on votes for 16 year olds. If we say they're not of sufficient capacity to drive or marry why should they be deemed ready to vote?
    No representation without taxation.

    If they are taxpayers then they should have the vote.
    Why?

    Tourists pay VAT. And fuel tax. Should they have the vote?

    Small children pay tax when buying things online. Should they?
    Personally, I'd split the baby, and give them (lawful permanent residents, not 16 year olds) the right to vote in local elections, but not generals.
    Don't they already have that? That was the deal when we were in the EU, anyway.
    In the old days, all EU citizens got to vote in local elections.

    The proposal from Labour is to give all lawful permanent residents the vote.

    There is nothing in Labour's proposal about the EU.
    You can still vote in local elections if you’re an EU national . The DT seems to be highlighting EU nationals possible extended rights to vote as a means to wind up the right wing who for some reason think continuing to demonize them is a good thing !

    The proposal if confirmed is somewhat risky from Labour although I think if you pay taxes and reside here you should get that vote .
    Why, if you are not a citizen here.

    There is nothing to stop people with indefinite right to remain applying for, and becoming, citizens.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,868
    edited May 2023
    It would be a novel idea for the government to do something for the base.

    Today

    * Prices are still rising with double digits.
    * Taxes are higher than they've ever been

    *You cannot get a doctor's appointment.
    *You cannot signup to a dentist.
    *The hospitals are on strike

    *The roads have potholes that would make the third world blush.
    *The trains do not run.

    *You cannot easily come and go, due to Brexit bureaucracy
    *Somehow illegal trafficking allows millions to come here.

    *The greenbelt is a building site,
    *but people cannot afford a place of their own

    *The water companies pollute our rivers at will,
    * but cannot (here for 12 hours) get clean water in the taps.

    Get that right and you deliver for the base. Instead you talk about culture wars, technical aspects of legislation and punish the victims of trafficking.

    The Tories have screwed up massively and they cannot even see it yet, let alone fix it.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 43,449
    Taz said:

    TimS said:

    Taz said:

    So I presume all the people complaining about voter registration as a Tory plot will also criticise labour for proposing to give votes to 16/17 year olds and EU citizens.

    Both are cynical and self serving, but there is a huge difference.

    One enfranchises more voters; the other disenfranchises voters. One expands democratic rights; the other restricts them.

    I’m not convinced on votes for 16 year olds personally, given most are still completely financially dependent and not yet making decisions for others, but it’s a reasonable thing to look at. Why not 17 - same age as driving.
    There really is no difference. EU citizens are not British citizens. They choose to work here, as do citizens of other nations. If they are British citizens fine, if not then I can see no reason, other than cynical political advantage, to offer them a vote and why just EU citizens. Why not citizens of other nations.
    Currently Commonwealth citizens can vote including those from Rwanda and Mozambique, if resident for a few weeks. I don't see why extending the vote to other permanent residents is worse.
This discussion has been closed.