Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Britain is a how many party system?

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited May 2013 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Britain is a how many party system?

The main news narrative over in recent days has been “Britain is a four party system country” following the success of UKIP in the county council elections, I, however would counter that by saying “Britain is in fact a thirteen party system” and hasn’t been a four party system for well over twenty years

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited May 2013
    First!

    Previously a firm believer in FTPT, I think a shift to PR (maybe STV, but I hope not) is inevitable over the next decade.

    A Labour majority with 30% and/or zero UKIP seats with 25% will be seen as so manifestly unfair that public pressure will lead to a change.

    We have Germanic parliamentary future!
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,081
    Anorak said:

    .

    Nice placeholder.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 102,767
    Nice piece Harry
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 102,767
    Which was the Scottish seat in 1992 that saw all four parties get around 24% of the vote.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited May 2013
    Polruan said:

    Anorak said:

    .

    Nice placeholder.
    I know. I feel bad about that. *sheepish* I have written a proper comment now, though!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 102,767
    edited May 2013

    Which was the Scottish seat in 1992 that saw all four parties get around 24% of the vote.

    It was Danny Alexander predecessor seat

    Liberal Democrat Sir David Russell Johnston 13,258 26.0%

    Labour David John Stewart 12,800 25.1%

    SNP Fergus Stewart Ewing 12,562 24.7%

    Conservative John Scott 11,517 22.6%

    Green John Martin 766 1.5%

    Majority 458 0.9 −10.6

    Turnout 50,903 73.6 +2.7

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverness,_Nairn_and_Lochaber_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 43,702
    FPT
    According to the ONS today between 2005 and 2011 the UK fell from 5th to 12th in terms of household income. Really a remarkable fall: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_310463.pdf

    It also fell 12 places in respect of unemployment.

    The chart on p18 of the report in respect of public sector debt is equally depressing. At the end of the period we were still below the EU average but catching up very fast with all our previous advantage (largely the outcome of North Sea tax revenues) lost.

    And more than 30% of our population want to trust the party responsible for this with our governance once again? Bah!
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    Mr Hayfield, I think you properly mean GB rather than UK.

    In UK terms you'd have to include the NI parties, who've clocked over 1% at elections over the years.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Britain is a two party system. Only two parties have any reasonable chance of supplying the leadership of the next government.
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,081
    @Anorak - I'm not so sure. We've had governments with large majorities elected by small proportions of the electorate on a regular basis, and the third party obtaining a fraction of the seats it "should" obtain. It's hard to see where the tipping point would be (why should a high, barely represented vote for UKIP produce different results to a high, barely represented vote for LD?), particularly as the present system will continue to give Lab & Con a good 75% of the seats, and it's not going to be in their interests to change it.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 36,895
    It's largely a two party system: anti-Tory and anti-Labour. The anti-Tory party has been well organised and highly-motivated for 20 years, but it may now be meeting its match. We shall see.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    antifrank said:

    Britain is a two party system. Only two parties have any reasonable chance of supplying the leadership of the next government.

    Bollocks. You could claim the same of Germany on that basis (SDP/CDU), which would also be bollocks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_federal_election,_2009
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    antifrank said:

    Britain is a two party system. Only two parties have any reasonable chance of supplying the leadership of the next government.

    Really? How did the LibDems get into positions of power this time around then?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    @Anorak The system is two party. The voting is not.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Polruan said:

    @Anorak - I'm not so sure. We've had governments with large majorities elected by small proportions of the electorate on a regular basis, and the third party obtaining a fraction of the seats it "should" obtain. It's hard to see where the tipping point would be (why should a high, barely represented vote for UKIP produce different results to a high, barely represented vote for LD?), particularly as the present system will continue to give Lab & Con a good 75% of the seats, and it's not going to be in their interests to change it.

    Well, one reason is that 40%+ of the electorate will could have, in effect, been disenfranchised (UKIP+LD). Another is a better public awareness of other voting mechanisms, and experience of them (Euro elections). Another is that the internet gives lobby groups much greater reach and the capability to organise than has previously been the case.

    All of these weaken the "it's happened before" argument, and my view is that, in totality, they'll overturn it. You can tell me how wrong I was in 2023!
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited May 2013
    antifrank said:

    @Anorak The system is two party. The voting is not.

    You're veering into sophistry there. Lawyers, eh! :)
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Anorak said:

    antifrank said:

    @Anorak The system is two party. The voting is not.

    You're veering into sophistry there...
    I am a lawyer. But the question was how many parties in the system? And the answer is two, maybe three if you're feeling very generous.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    antifrank said:

    Anorak said:

    antifrank said:

    @Anorak The system is two party. The voting is not.

    You're veering into sophistry there...
    I am a lawyer. But the question was how many parties in the system? And the answer is two, maybe three if you're feeling very generous.
    I know you are. How do you define 'system' (that's not a facetious question, btw)?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 16,156
    Anorak said:

    antifrank said:

    @Anorak The system is two party. The voting is not.

    That's why he gets paid the big bucks.

  • TwistedFireStopperTwistedFireStopper Posts: 2,538
    edited May 2013
    I think we can only have either a Labour PM, or a Conservative PM, under the current system, so I'd reckon that makes it a 2 party system. Dunno how other systems would affect the numbers.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    antifrank said:

    And the answer is two, maybe three if you're feeling very generous.

    Three is overly generous to Nigel Farage. This was a strand of the argument in the run-up to the ridiculous debates before the last election. If Salmond wasn't up there because he was never going to be PM then Clegg didn't deserve a podium either. Both or neither, based on having a reasonable caucus of MPs.

  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    antifrank said:

    Anorak said:

    antifrank said:

    @Anorak The system is two party. The voting is not.

    You're veering into sophistry there...
    I am a lawyer. But the question was how many parties in the system? And the answer is two, maybe three if you're feeling very generous.
    The conventional description is two and a half. I mean at some point you're not really arguing about the situation, but what you're measuring the system as.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 59,118
    edited May 2013
    If we did degrade into some vile PR sort of electoral system I'd hope (but not expect) the premiership to become separated from the legislature and subject to direct election.

    Edited extra bit: very interesting article, incidentally, Mr. Hayfield.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    antifrank said:

    Britain is a two party system. Only two parties have any reasonable chance of supplying the leadership of the next government.

    I dont think that can be the definition - for almost all its history only two parties were capable of leading a government in the Irish Republic but it was very far from being a two party system.

  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    I think we can only have either a Labour PM, or a Conservative Pm, under the current system, so I'd reckon that makes it a 2 party system. Dunno how other systems would affect the numbers.

    That supposes that the PM rules as a dictator, which has never been the case in the UK. Any party with a reasonable chance of making up a coalition must be considered part of the 'system' as their views will influence policy and legislation.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 102,767
    edited May 2013

    If we did degrade into some vile PR sort of electoral system I'd hope (but not expect) the premiership to become separated from the legislature and subject to direct election.

    Edited extra bit: very interesting article, incidentally, Mr. Hayfield.

    Huzzah, you're coming around to my view that we need a directly elected Dictator/Tyrant.

    Next you'll be admitting Caesar is superior to Hannibal in every way imaginable.
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,081

    If we did degrade into some vile PR sort of electoral system I'd hope (but not expect) the premiership to become separated from the legislature and subject to direct election.

    Edited extra bit: very interesting article, incidentally, Mr. Hayfield.

    Mr D - by your own standards, are you considering "vile PR" as a tautology, by any chance?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 102,767
    Polruan said:

    If we did degrade into some vile PR sort of electoral system I'd hope (but not expect) the premiership to become separated from the legislature and subject to direct election.

    Edited extra bit: very interesting article, incidentally, Mr. Hayfield.

    Mr D - by your own standards, are you considering "vile PR" as a tautology, by any chance?
    The first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,246
    edited May 2013
    I said the same after 1983 and 2005.The only grouping that can change the system are those that prosper with the system.

    Why should they charge?

    Only two years ago we had a referendum and the outcome in favour of first past the post was overwhelming.

    Anorak said:

    First!

    Previously a firm believer in FTPT, I think a shift to PR (maybe STV, but I hope not) is inevitable over the next decade.

    A Labour majority with 30% and/or zero UKIP seats with 25% will be seen as so manifestly unfair that public pressure will lead to a change.

    We have Germanic parliamentary future!

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645

    If we did degrade into some vile PR sort of electoral system I'd hope (but not expect) the premiership to become separated from the legislature and subject to direct election.

    Edited extra bit: very interesting article, incidentally, Mr. Hayfield.

    Huzzah, you're coming around to my view that we need a directly elected Dictator/Tyrant.

    Next you'll be admitting Caesar is superior to Hannibal in every way imaginable.
    Only Nicomedes IV could be the ultimate judge of that.
  • This absurd spy story out of Moscow has cheered me right up!
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 16,156
    Survation:
    For Westminster “state of the parties” questions polling companies need to stop not mentioning UKIP in the first instance...

    We would argue that the doubling of ICM’s support level for UKIP in one month was due to UKIP simply being understated in their previous polls.
    http://survation.com/2013/05/icm-research-shows-ukip-support-doubling-in-29-days-another-clear-indication-polling-industry-methodology-needs-to-change/
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 59,118
    Mr. Eagles, by neither definition would such a role be a dictator, you silly man.

    Msrs. Polruan/Eagles, very good.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    @MikeSmithson

    "Only two years ago we had a referendum and the outcome in favour of first past the post was overwhelming."

    Or more accurately, you old yellow perilist, the majority against AV was overwhelming.
  • glassfetglassfet Posts: 220
    edited May 2013
  • edintokyo

    Survation may be right, but there will always be a point when a rising party has to be treated more systematically by polling companies. Its easier for internet pollsters as they can just list them, on the phone not so easy.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,889
    edited May 2013
    I've just heard Ken Clark extolling the virtues of the EU and ridiculing those who want to leave. It occurred to me that in the absence of anyone really having knowledge of the benefits or otherwise it's going to come down to celebrity endorsement by politicians past and present and as any advertiser will tell you there are few things more persuasive.

    For; Ken Clark David Cameron Ed Milliband Nick Clegg Paddy Ashdown Shirley Williams Michael Hesseltine Tony Blair Gordon Brown and Richard Branson

    Against; Jacob Rees Mogg Nigel Lawson Norman Lamont Peter Bone Nigel Farage John Redwood Rupert Murdoch Bill Cash Michael Gove and Stuart Wheeler

    I might have inadvertently missed the odd person but there really is no contest. Those against are for the most part seen as a bunch of freaks and oddballs.

    Cameron should have no fear of a referendum because It's a done deal
  • agingjbagingjb Posts: 76
    We could have (I don't advocate it) an electoral system where the PM is elected directly by FPTP. The winner appoints 400 MPs, second place appoints 200 MPs, the rest get as many MPs as their percentage of the vote (at most 20 or so, usually 10 or less).

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 16,156
    edited May 2013

    edintokyo

    Survation may be right, but there will always be a point when a rising party has to be treated more systematically by polling companies. Its easier for internet pollsters as they can just list them, on the phone not so easy.

    Probably true. Anyhow, not mentioning them must be super-charging the "salience" issue that Nick Palmer mentioned.

    1) Tories talk about Europe.
    2) More voters remember the existence of UKIP when asked by pollsters.
    3) Con score drops.
    4) Tories freak out.
    5) Go back to step (1).
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited May 2013
  • samsam Posts: 727
    edited May 2013
    Roger said:

    I've just heard Ken Clark extolling the virtues of the EU and ridiculing those who want to leave. It occurred to me that in the absence of anyone really having knowledge of the benefits and otherwise it's going to come down to celebrity endorsement by politicians past and present and as any advertiser will tell you there are few things more persuasive.

    For; Ken Clark David Cameron Ed Milliband Nick Clegg Paddy Ashdown Shirley Williams Michael Hesseltine Tony Blair Gordon Brown and Richard Branson

    Against; Jacob Rees Mogg Nigel Lawson Norman Lamont Peter Bone Nigel Farage John Redwood Rupert Murdoch Bill Cash Michael Gove and Stuart Wheeler

    I might have inadvertently missed the odd person but there really is no contest. Those against are for the most part seen as a bunch of freaks and oddballs.

    Cameron should have no fear of a referendum because It's a done deal


    You missed out the most polished, tv friendly and frequently seen on BBC of the lot from the second group...

    Michael Portillo...

    not to mention Jamie Oliver...

    But you kept the ugly old ones there in while remembering the trendy types in the "Stay in" camp.

    No bias intended Im sure



  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    O/T I just googled johnloony's excellent LD bar chart from a couple of years ago and was sad to see all the old comments have disappeared. Are these now lost forever?

    http://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2011/01/14/and-so-onto-barnsley-central/
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    edited May 2013


    Running tally: 14 seats

    Which in itself may be a problem. If UKIP doesnt *increase* its polling between now and GE 2015 then 14 seats will be too much of a stretch for them. If they go for as many as 14 and poll at ICM's level yesterday (18%) then they might let a few slip away for want of tighter targeting.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 41,675

    If we did degrade into some vile PR sort of electoral system I'd hope (but not expect) the premiership to become separated from the legislature and subject to direct election.

    Edited extra bit: very interesting article, incidentally, Mr. Hayfield.

    Huzzah, you're coming around to my view that we need a directly elected Dictator/Tyrant.

    Next you'll be admitting Caesar is superior to Hannibal in every way imaginable.
    Palpatine was better than either!
  • Stephen Tall has produced a list of target UKIP seats, based on the recent local elections. Seats not previously mentioned by Survation's analysis are:

    Running tally: 14 seats

    Interesting list. Seaside towns prominent.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645
    sam said:

    Roger said:

    I've just heard Ken Clark extolling the virtues of the EU and ridiculing those who want to leave. It occurred to me that in the absence of anyone really having knowledge of the benefits and otherwise it's going to come down to celebrity endorsement by politicians past and present and as any advertiser will tell you there are few things more persuasive.

    For; Ken Clark David Cameron Ed Milliband Nick Clegg Paddy Ashdown Shirley Williams Michael Hesseltine Tony Blair Gordon Brown and Richard Branson

    Against; Jacob Rees Mogg Nigel Lawson Norman Lamont Peter Bone Nigel Farage John Redwood Rupert Murdoch Bill Cash Michael Gove and Stuart Wheeler

    I might have inadvertently missed the odd person but there really is no contest. Those against are for the most part seen as a bunch of freaks and oddballs.

    Cameron should have no fear of a referendum because It's a done deal


    You missed out the most polished, tv friendly and frequently seen on BBC of the lot from the second group...

    Michael Portillo...

    not to mention Jamie Oliver...

    But you kept the ugly old ones there in while remembering the trendy types in the "Stay in" camp.

    No bias intended Im sure



    Sam,

    please be nicer to Roger, he's going through a tough patch atm. All his show biz mates keep getting asked awkward questions by Her Majesty's Constabulary, his social calendar has collapsed, he has no mates left in Cannes and is facing the prospect of a rainy holiday in Clacton on Sea just to soak up some glamour.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 41,675
    Roger said:

    I've just heard Ken Clark extolling the virtues of the EU and ridiculing those who want to leave. It occurred to me that in the absence of anyone really having knowledge of the benefits or otherwise it's going to come down to celebrity endorsement by politicians past and present and as any advertiser will tell you there are few things more persuasive.

    For; Ken Clark David Cameron Ed Milliband Nick Clegg Paddy Ashdown Shirley Williams Michael Hesseltine Tony Blair Gordon Brown and Richard Branson

    Against; Jacob Rees Mogg Nigel Lawson Norman Lamont Peter Bone Nigel Farage John Redwood Rupert Murdoch Bill Cash Michael Gove and Stuart Wheeler

    I might have inadvertently missed the odd person but there really is no contest. Those against are for the most part seen as a bunch of freaks and oddballs.

    Cameron should have no fear of a referendum because It's a done deal

    Ken Clarke = Euroholic!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 59,118
    For list:
    "Ken Clark David Cameron Ed Milliband Nick Clegg Paddy Ashdown Shirley Williams Michael Hesseltine Tony Blair Gordon Brown and Richard Branson"

    Excepting Cameron and Brown, weren't all the others in favour of joining the euro too?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/michaelheaver/100216882/labour-betrayed-its-most-loyal-working-class-supporters-and-it-doesnt-even-care/

    "Lord Mandelson’s horrifying admission that the Labour Party “sent out search parties” to ensure a wave of migration came to Britain is surely one of the most devastating revelations in the history of that party.
    After all, Labour was set up as a party for the ordinary British working man – the blue-collar grafter. Linked to trade unions, it was meant to fight for the very people who are now taking the brunt of the pain caused by mass open-door immigration.
    It is a truly wretched legacy. Think about it. New Labour in government essentially embarked upon a policy of giving up on the prosperity and life chances of their own citizens in favour of an opportunistic project to change the make-up of Britain. The outcome is that in the first year of the Coalition, out of 181,000 extra people of working age who found work, only 14,000 were British nationals."
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645

    For list:
    "Ken Clark David Cameron Ed Milliband Nick Clegg Paddy Ashdown Shirley Williams Michael Hesseltine Tony Blair Gordon Brown and Richard Branson"

    Excepting Cameron and Brown, weren't all the others in favour of joining the euro too?

    If you had to pick a list of establishment prats who got rich off your back, it would be hard to better this. A gift to NOTAs everywhere.
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    It will be interesting to see the timing of the tightening of fiscal policy! A true test of how independent the BoE is from Government.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10056484/Rate-rise-will-trigger-economic-shock-former-BoE-policymakers-warn.html
  • For list:
    "Ken Clark David Cameron Ed Milliband Nick Clegg Paddy Ashdown Shirley Williams Michael Hesseltine Tony Blair Gordon Brown and Richard Branson"

    That list is as good a reason to vote "out" as any I can think of.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Neil said:


    Running tally: 14 seats

    Which in itself may be a problem. If UKIP doesnt *increase* its polling between now and GE 2015 then 14 seats will be too much of a stretch for them. If they go for as many as 14 and poll at ICM's level yesterday (18%) then they might let a few slip away for want of tighter targeting.
    Their website now gives them a way to capture supporters address/contact details, rather than just members. Which should help their resources.

    http://www.ukip.org/index.php/get-involved/support-ukip/activist

  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    This is a very powerful argument presented by Survation. However, will the other main pollsters change their methods? I think that there is still an underlying urge in these pollsters, to hope that UKIP will go away, disappear and stop being awkward.

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Their website now gives them a way to capture supporters address/contact details, rather than just members. Which should help their resources.

    I'm sure a lot of things will help but the point remains that unless they improve their polling from here then 14 seats will probably be too much of a stretch and they'll have to target fewer seats than listed so far. Mind you, having too many potential target seats is a better problem than not having enough. The Greens would love to have 14 potential targets.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645
    tim said:

    Another flagship policy of Cameron's, made up on the hoof at PMQ's goes wrong

    "David Cameron’s energy reforms ‘will cost customers £100’"

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/david-camerons-energy-reforms-will-cost-customers-100-8615582.html

    Everyone in the world besides the PM seems to have known that if you put everyone on the cheapest tariff the cheapest tariff disappears.

    Ho hum

    energy prices are a ripoff because of green taxes and falling capacity.

    labour introduced the taxes and EdM refused to build the power stations.

    but keep posting.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,124
    tim said:

    For list:
    "Ken Clark David Cameron Ed Milliband Nick Clegg Paddy Ashdown Shirley Williams Michael Hesseltine Tony Blair Gordon Brown and Richard Branson"

    Excepting Cameron and Brown, weren't all the others in favour of joining the euro too?

    Miliband was in favour of the Euro?

    Thought you normally claimed he and Balls were allied with Brown.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/andrew_marr_show/9599748.stm

    Pretty much on the fence. He said he doesn't see it happening in his political life time, but says nothing about what he thought about it in the past...probably because he's never had to.
  • Guilty verdicts at the Central Criminal Court in the Oxford case.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645

    tim said:

    For list:
    "Ken Clark David Cameron Ed Milliband Nick Clegg Paddy Ashdown Shirley Williams Michael Hesseltine Tony Blair Gordon Brown and Richard Branson"

    Excepting Cameron and Brown, weren't all the others in favour of joining the euro too?

    Miliband was in favour of the Euro?

    Thought you normally claimed he and Balls were allied with Brown.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/andrew_marr_show/9599748.stm

    Pretty much on the fence. He said he doesn't see it happening in his political life time, but says nothing about what he thought about it in the past...probably because he's never had to.
    So a blank mind to go with his blank piece of paper.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,156
    Members of a sex grooming ring are found guilty of raping and exploiting children in Oxford.
    BBC ticker.

    Will Harman ever speak out about this and other cases.
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,662
    edited May 2013
    Swansea Council is showing Eurovision on an open air Big Screen.
    Bonnie was born in a village near Neath.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 16,156

    Neil said:


    Running tally: 14 seats

    Which in itself may be a problem. If UKIP doesnt *increase* its polling between now and GE 2015 then 14 seats will be too much of a stretch for them. If they go for as many as 14 and poll at ICM's level yesterday (18%) then they might let a few slip away for want of tighter targeting.
    Their website now gives them a way to capture supporters address/contact details, rather than just members. Which should help their resources.

    http://www.ukip.org/index.php/get-involved/support-ukip/activist

    Speaking of which, anyone know if the Tories have managed to put their voter contact database back together?
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,094
    "David Cameron’s energy reforms ‘will cost customers £100’"

    The best way to reduce bills would be to go back in time, shoot EdM before he becomes Energy Secretary, replace him with a look-alike, expand energy from waste and include polar bears in the waste (sorry, Neil).
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,662
    Sinn Fein's Teddy Bear says Farage hasn't understood their EU policy well
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,124
    tim said:

    tim said:

    For list:
    "Ken Clark David Cameron Ed Milliband Nick Clegg Paddy Ashdown Shirley Williams Michael Hesseltine Tony Blair Gordon Brown and Richard Branson"

    Excepting Cameron and Brown, weren't all the others in favour of joining the euro too?

    Miliband was in favour of the Euro?

    Thought you normally claimed he and Balls were allied with Brown.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/andrew_marr_show/9599748.stm

    Pretty much on the fence. He said he doesn't see it happening in his political life time, but says nothing about what he thought about it in the past...probably because he's never had to.

    ANDREW MARR:

    (over) In your political lifetime?

    ED MILIBAND:

    No, I think that's very unlikely.


    Again you didn't read or understand what you were posting.

    You can claim Miliband and Brown were Brown allies, but you can't therefore claim they supported the Euro.
    Balls was even opposed to the ERM when Cameron was supporting Lamont.
    I'm not claiming it either way...you're the one too dim to understand what I just posted.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    tim said:

    For list:
    "Ken Clark David Cameron Ed Milliband Nick Clegg Paddy Ashdown Shirley Williams Michael Hesseltine Tony Blair Gordon Brown and Richard Branson"

    Excepting Cameron and Brown, weren't all the others in favour of joining the euro too?

    Miliband was in favour of the Euro?

    Thought you normally claimed he and Balls were allied with Brown.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/andrew_marr_show/9599748.stm

    Pretty much on the fence. He said he doesn't see it happening in his political life time, but says nothing about what he thought about it in the past...probably because he's never had to.
    So a blank mind to go with his blank piece of paper.
    We've had 3 "sub prime" Energy secretaries in a row.

    Crybaby, jailbird and a humbug.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 41,675
    "Ken Clarke David Cameron Ed Milliband Nick Clegg Paddy Ashdown Shirley Williams Michael Hesseltine Tony Blair Gordon Brown and Richard Branson"

    Euroholics Anonymous?

    :)
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645
    tim said:

    tim said:

    Another flagship policy of Cameron's, made up on the hoof at PMQ's goes wrong

    "David Cameron’s energy reforms ‘will cost customers £100’"

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/david-camerons-energy-reforms-will-cost-customers-100-8615582.html

    Everyone in the world besides the PM seems to have known that if you put everyone on the cheapest tariff the cheapest tariff disappears.

    Ho hum

    energy prices are a ripoff because of green taxes and falling capacity.

    labour introduced the taxes and EdM refused to build the power stations.

    but keep posting.

    Well you have to ask yourself why Cameron turned this PMQs brain fart into a flagship bound to fail.
    Obviously in political terms the people who will lose out, those who have switched accounts are likely to be the most active and noisy when it comes to noticing their bills.

    Amateurism as usual


    I wouldn't ask myself that at all. I'd ask why are we taxing energy, what are we doing about securing capacity and why do all shades of government let big energy co's off the hook.

    But if you think trolling Cameron's going to cut your bills go ahead.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 30,776
    tim said:

    tim said:

    Another flagship policy of Cameron's, made up on the hoof at PMQ's goes wrong

    "David Cameron’s energy reforms ‘will cost customers £100’"

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/david-camerons-energy-reforms-will-cost-customers-100-8615582.html

    Everyone in the world besides the PM seems to have known that if you put everyone on the cheapest tariff the cheapest tariff disappears.

    Ho hum

    energy prices are a ripoff because of green taxes and falling capacity.

    labour introduced the taxes and EdM refused to build the power stations.

    but keep posting.

    Well you have to ask yourself why Cameron turned this PMQs brain fart into a flagship bound to fail.
    Obviously in political terms the people who will lose out, those who have switched accounts are likely to be the most active and noisy when it comes to noticing their bills.

    Amateurism as usual

    And pray tell what sort of change can be done where there are never losers?

    What you are saying is that *no* change should ever be made because someone will lose out and bitch on the media.

    The key is to try to mitigate the effects on people, or to have firm enough control to brush off the complaints, especially if they are spurious.

    To my mind, the proposed change is fairly sane. The current system is broken, and prone to abuse by the energy companies, as I have detailed passim.
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    SeanT said:

    http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/story/2013-05-14/verdicts-in-oxford-sex-trial/

    2 MINUTES AGO VERDICTS IN OXFORD SEX TRIAL
    Another guilty verdict in Bullfinch trial
    Anjum Dogar convicted on nine counts including rape and child trafficking.

    3 MINUTES AGO
    Guilty verdicts in Bullfinch trial
    Kamar Jamil has been found guilty of eight offences including rape. Ahktar Dogar found guilty of 11 counts including rape.

    So by previous sentences it'll be about 6 months for each offence :(

    How is this different from what that animal did who has been sent down for a minimum of 38 years.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    tim said:

    tim said:

    Another flagship policy of Cameron's, made up on the hoof at PMQ's goes wrong

    "David Cameron’s energy reforms ‘will cost customers £100’"

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/david-camerons-energy-reforms-will-cost-customers-100-8615582.html

    Everyone in the world besides the PM seems to have known that if you put everyone on the cheapest tariff the cheapest tariff disappears.

    Ho hum

    energy prices are a ripoff because of green taxes and falling capacity.

    labour introduced the taxes and EdM refused to build the power stations.

    but keep posting.

    Well you have to ask yourself why Cameron turned this PMQs brain fart into a flagship bound to fail.
    Obviously in political terms the people who will lose out, those who have switched accounts are likely to be the most active and noisy when it comes to noticing their bills.

    Amateurism as usual


    I wouldn't ask myself that at all. I'd ask why are we taxing energy, what are we doing about securing capacity and why do all shades of government let big energy co's off the hook.

    But if you think trolling Cameron's going to cut your bills go ahead.
    What would our bills be if we hadn't signed up to any silly Kyoto/Copenhagen hairshirts ?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 59,118
    Mr. Flashman (deceased), I fear humbugs will be greatly offended by your association of them with the likes of Davey.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    SeanT said:

    http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/story/2013-05-14/verdicts-in-oxford-sex-trial/

    2 MINUTES AGO VERDICTS IN OXFORD SEX TRIAL
    Another guilty verdict in Bullfinch trial
    Anjum Dogar convicted on nine counts including rape and child trafficking.

    3 MINUTES AGO
    Guilty verdicts in Bullfinch trial
    Kamar Jamil has been found guilty of eight offences including rape. Ahktar Dogar found guilty of 11 counts including rape.

    Swedish blokes again ?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645
    TGOHF said:

    tim said:

    tim said:

    Another flagship policy of Cameron's, made up on the hoof at PMQ's goes wrong

    "David Cameron’s energy reforms ‘will cost customers £100’"

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/david-camerons-energy-reforms-will-cost-customers-100-8615582.html

    Everyone in the world besides the PM seems to have known that if you put everyone on the cheapest tariff the cheapest tariff disappears.

    Ho hum

    energy prices are a ripoff because of green taxes and falling capacity.

    labour introduced the taxes and EdM refused to build the power stations.

    but keep posting.

    Well you have to ask yourself why Cameron turned this PMQs brain fart into a flagship bound to fail.
    Obviously in political terms the people who will lose out, those who have switched accounts are likely to be the most active and noisy when it comes to noticing their bills.

    Amateurism as usual


    I wouldn't ask myself that at all. I'd ask why are we taxing energy, what are we doing about securing capacity and why do all shades of government let big energy co's off the hook.

    But if you think trolling Cameron's going to cut your bills go ahead.
    What would our bills be if we hadn't signed up to any silly Kyoto/Copenhagen hairshirts ?
    Affordable.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,252
    On topic, we have a two and a half-plus party system for Westminster. Other rules apply elsewhere.

    Only two parties supply the leadership of governments. In addition, there is a third party which may, from time to time, form an alliance with either of the other two but which also provides the voters with the option to vote against the other two - except when it is in coalition with one of them. At that point, the 'plus' may come in, in the form of other parties, though most notably UKIP at them moment to fill the void.

    It's also worth noting that although nationally there may be predominantly four parties scoring in the polls at the moment (or five in Wales; UKIP aren't a factor in Scotland yet), there are very few specific places where all or even most are in contention. Most seats will remain one- or two-party mini-systems which, as SO rightly noted centre around Tory/anti-Tory or Labour/anti-Labour contests.
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,662
    Ouch

    Kevan Jones MP on twitter: "Unite union accused of manipulating Labour selection procedures http://gu.com/p/3fndk/tw via @guardian Union & Hartlepool Peter remember!"

    Kevan Jones is the North Durham MP...from GMB.... he's usually credited for having helped "fixing" Hartlepool selection in 1992...he's said to have been instrumental in implanting David Miliband in South Shields too...basically the regional fixer
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 43,702
    If I have got this right Tim's complaint today is that because a handful have lost the benefit of very favourable tariffs this means that Cameron's policy of ensuring that the majority get put on the lowest tariff then available is a failure.

    So although hundreds of thousands (including lazy sods like me) will benefit from this change this was a "brain fart" and presumably power companies should have been allowed to go on messing about with tariffs ripping us off?

    If the vast majority are now to be on the best rate it stands to reason that that rate will be somewhat higher than the very best rate available to a handful which largely existed to justify the claims that they were somehow cheaper than their rivals. This does not make the scheme a failure, it simply imposes some fairness on a defective market that was being abused.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,156
    Councillor Brewer being investigated by police.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-22518684

    Ethical standards = PC speak?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 71,143

    tim said:

    tim said:

    Another flagship policy of Cameron's, made up on the hoof at PMQ's goes wrong

    "David Cameron’s energy reforms ‘will cost customers £100’"

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/david-camerons-energy-reforms-will-cost-customers-100-8615582.html

    Everyone in the world besides the PM seems to have known that if you put everyone on the cheapest tariff the cheapest tariff disappears.

    Ho hum

    energy prices are a ripoff because of green taxes and falling capacity.

    labour introduced the taxes and EdM refused to build the power stations.

    but keep posting.

    Well you have to ask yourself why Cameron turned this PMQs brain fart into a flagship bound to fail.
    Obviously in political terms the people who will lose out, those who have switched accounts are likely to be the most active and noisy when it comes to noticing their bills.

    Amateurism as usual

    And pray tell what sort of change can be done where there are never losers?

    What you are saying is that *no* change should ever be made because someone will lose out and bitch on the media.

    The key is to try to mitigate the effects on people, or to have firm enough control to brush off the complaints, especially if they are spurious.

    To my mind, the proposed change is fairly sane. The current system is broken, and prone to abuse by the energy companies, as I have detailed passim.
    As someone who shops around thats going to hit me in the pocket. Kippers for breakfast in 2015 atm methinks.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 30,776
    tim said:

    @JosiasJessop.

    Why not introduce three tariffs for bread while you're at it?

    Bread != energy
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    @Andrea

    Presumably Peter has no problem with manipulating selections in, say, Stoke.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    tim said:

    @JosiasJessop.

    Why not introduce three tariffs for bread while you're at it?

    tim wants to cancel savings for those that pay electronically by direct debit ?
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    Can sentences run in series in this country and if so why isn't it done more often?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645
    tim said:

    @DavidL

    The best rates disappear, the power companies will make exactly the same profit, it was just a brain fart at PMQs which became a meaningless policy.

    so if it's meaningless why are you so worked up about it ?
  • Blue_rog said:

    SeanT said:

    http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/story/2013-05-14/verdicts-in-oxford-sex-trial/

    2 MINUTES AGO VERDICTS IN OXFORD SEX TRIAL
    Another guilty verdict in Bullfinch trial
    Anjum Dogar convicted on nine counts including rape and child trafficking.

    3 MINUTES AGO
    Guilty verdicts in Bullfinch trial
    Kamar Jamil has been found guilty of eight offences including rape. Ahktar Dogar found guilty of 11 counts including rape.

    So by previous sentences it'll be about 6 months for each offence :(

    How is this different from what that animal did who has been sent down for a minimum of 38 years.
    I think rape and murder trumps rape alone. Not that those found guilty in this trial don't deserve harsh sentences.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 43,702
    tim said:

    @DavidL

    The best rates disappear, the power companies will make exactly the same profit, it was just a brain fart at PMQs which became a meaningless policy.

    But those who can't be arsed or those who are old or stupid (I may fit more than one of these categories) will benefit. If you were some right wing zealot who believed in free markets above all else I could understand your objection to this sort of state intervention. But from a left wing perspective I am really having serious problems in working out what you think the problem is.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 59,118
    Dr. Spyn, whilst the councillor's comments were reminiscent of Sparta's approach to children I think it's intensely disturbing that a man is being investigated by the police for it.

    It's reminiscent (although not quite as mad) as when the Conservative MP was investigated for calling some scruffy urchin 'unkempt'.

    Freedom of speech has got to include the freedom to be disagreeable, obnoxious and offensive, otherwise it's no freedom at all. And who determines what words and sentiments are off-limits? Should we all buy PC dictionaries?
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited May 2013

    Blue_rog said:

    SeanT said:

    http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/story/2013-05-14/verdicts-in-oxford-sex-trial/

    2 MINUTES AGO VERDICTS IN OXFORD SEX TRIAL
    Another guilty verdict in Bullfinch trial
    Anjum Dogar convicted on nine counts including rape and child trafficking.

    3 MINUTES AGO
    Guilty verdicts in Bullfinch trial
    Kamar Jamil has been found guilty of eight offences including rape. Ahktar Dogar found guilty of 11 counts including rape.

    So by previous sentences it'll be about 6 months for each offence :(

    How is this different from what that animal did who has been sent down for a minimum of 38 years.
    I think rape and murder trumps rape alone. Not that those found guilty in this trial don't deserve harsh sentences.

    Plus his 'previous', including GBH and racially aggravated assault, filled a reasonably-sized lever-arch file. This will have added to the tariff.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Hannan on board too.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100216918/an-inout-referendum-and-a-bill-in-this-session-david-cameron-has-delivered/

    "In any event, tomorrow’s division is now an irrelevance. The vote that matters is the one on the referendum Bill itself which, unlike the declaratory amendment to the Queen’s Speech, will have legislative force. Supporters of an In/Out vote, in all parties, should focus on that Bill when it comes.

    My impression, having taken soundings this morning, is that most of the people for whom the EU is the main issue are now satisfied. The comment thread that follows will, of course, tell a different story. "



    Any update on rEd's open goal ?

  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019

    Blue_rog said:

    SeanT said:

    http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/story/2013-05-14/verdicts-in-oxford-sex-trial/

    2 MINUTES AGO VERDICTS IN OXFORD SEX TRIAL
    Another guilty verdict in Bullfinch trial
    Anjum Dogar convicted on nine counts including rape and child trafficking.

    3 MINUTES AGO
    Guilty verdicts in Bullfinch trial
    Kamar Jamil has been found guilty of eight offences including rape. Ahktar Dogar found guilty of 11 counts including rape.

    So by previous sentences it'll be about 6 months for each offence :(

    How is this different from what that animal did who has been sent down for a minimum of 38 years.
    I think rape and murder trumps rape alone. Not that those found guilty in this trial don't deserve harsh sentences.

    Thank you for the somewhat more considered reply than one I received earlier. My main point was the sheer number of convictions and the objectionable nature of the offences. In other cases the perpetrators have received short total sentences if it is divided by the number of offences. I agree rape and murder is worse than rape alone but in this type of case, it becomes a very thin line.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,063
    @tim - Naturally you omitted this part of the article

    ".... while the majority on standard tariffs may get savings averaging around £34.

    I appreciate you are far-rightist on cutting benefits for the poorest and most vulnerable, so I guess this is consistent with your repulsive reactionary outlook, enjoying as you do, a noticeably high family income.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,156

    Ouch

    Kevan Jones MP on twitter: "Unite union accused of manipulating Labour selection procedures http://gu.com/p/3fndk/tw via @guardian Union & Hartlepool Peter remember!"

    Kevan Jones is the North Durham MP...from GMB.... he's usually credited for having helped "fixing" Hartlepool selection in 1992...he's said to have been instrumental in implanting David Miliband in South Shields too...basically the regional fixer

    Is it related to this in Falkirk?

    http://ericjoyce.co.uk/2013/05/fkuk-working-class-mps/
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Also from Hannan - no idea if this chap is against same sex whatever...

    "‘I don’t understand something’, a Latvian MEP told me this morning. ‘Cameron supports a referendum on leaving the EU, yes?

    But Miliband and the other guy, the Liberal, they oppose it. So why don’t Eurosceptics attack Labour and the Liberals?’"


    The other guy - LOL, should refer to Clegg as that from now on.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited May 2013
    tim said:

    Tory nutters have gifted Salmond this line

    norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS
    Alex Salmond says a vote for Independence is a vote to stay in EU; a vote for union is a vote towards the EU exit door

    What makes you think they're unhappy about that? (the 'nutters' I mean)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 71,143
    Just reading UKIP's energy policy pdf. Very impressive. No green nonsense in there.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,645
    tim said:

    Tory nutters have gifted Salmond this line

    norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS
    Alex Salmond says a vote for Independence is a vote to stay in EU; a vote for union is a vote towards the EU exit door

    Small beer compared to Brown's antics. The man's a liability, keep him away from the Indy Ref.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Anorak said:

    tim said:

    Tory nutters have gifted Salmond this line
    0
    norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS
    Alex Salmond says a vote for Independence is a vote to stay in EU; a vote for union is a vote towards the EU exit door

    What makes you think they're unhappy about that? (the 'nutters' I mean)
    Lol - Salmond on track to lose 2 referendums in 3 years - is that a record ?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 43,702
    TGOHF said:

    Also from Hannan - no idea if this chap is against same sex whatever...

    "‘I don’t understand something’, a Latvian MEP told me this morning. ‘Cameron supports a referendum on leaving the EU, yes?

    But Miliband and the other guy, the Liberal, they oppose it. So why don’t Eurosceptics attack Labour and the Liberals?’"


    The other guy - LOL, should refer to Clegg as that from now on.

    And the leader of the third largest party in Latvia is....
    (no googling now).
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    SeanT said:

    Blue_rog said:

    SeanT said:

    http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/story/2013-05-14/verdicts-in-oxford-sex-trial/

    2 MINUTES AGO VERDICTS IN OXFORD SEX TRIAL
    Another guilty verdict in Bullfinch trial
    Anjum Dogar convicted on nine counts including rape and child trafficking.

    3 MINUTES AGO
    Guilty verdicts in Bullfinch trial
    Kamar Jamil has been found guilty of eight offences including rape. Ahktar Dogar found guilty of 11 counts including rape.

    So by previous sentences it'll be about 6 months for each offence :(

    How is this different from what that animal did who has been sent down for a minimum of 38 years.
    I think rape and murder trumps rape alone. Not that those found guilty in this trial don't deserve harsh sentences.

    Indeed, but it wasn't just rape:

    "In a four month-long trial, an Old Bailey jury heard evidence about six girls being drugged and suffering sadistic abuse.

    The court heard victims were plied with alcohol and drugs before being forced to perform sex acts. Some had also been beaten, burned and threatened."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-22438623

    The children - aged from 11 upwards - were tortured and terrorised in the most indescribable ways. The details are numbing. It's too depressing to rehearse them here: you'll find them on google.

    So, no, it ain't murder. But it's about as nasty as you can get, short of murder: sexual torture of children. Let's hope the judges do what is necessary.
    Thanks Sean. You can tell why you're a writer and I'm not :-) You couldn't have expressed my disgust any better.
This discussion has been closed.