Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Keiran Pedley: LAB’s making a big mistake to assume that th

245

Comments

  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,335

    You have descended into Fluffygook, but if you're saying a decision to relocate Trident or its successor will have been made by the end of 2018, sure, I'll bet £50 against that.
    If you're going to get involved in these longer term bets, I expect you to start taking better care of your liver.

    Your statement related to tuition-fees and NHS. You're are free to walk-away....
    No, my statement related to the proposition of Trident being relocated (one you happily pontificated upon) and the laughable notion that this would significantly knock Scottish GDP.

    You've walked away, but that's cool.
  • Options

    Nice balanced paper review on the BBC this morning I see

    Did you miss 'Dateline London' earlier. Only Mark Comode Kermode was missing....
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scotland hating Loonies are out early this morning

    Anyone who doesn't blindly support the SNP "hates Scotland"

    There's your "civic Nationalism", right there. It's Bollocks
    I think the losing part is finally beginning to sink in for the angry party.

    Only Eck seems to have his fingers in his ears - bravely shouting the odds when his boss is on the other side of the world...

  • Options



    In my opinion, Labour actually need Corbyn as a leader at this point in time. Sure, he probably will never be PM, but then, realistically, none of the other three will be, either. What Labour need is to tear itself apart, to rebuild itself into something that reflects what it purports to represent. If you think Cooper, Kendal and Burnham are what you need, then you may as well vote Tory. Corbyn as leader will split the party,undoubtedly, and cause Labour a lot of pain, and a fair few years more in opposition, but at the end of it, it might be a party rejuvenated, and worth voting for.

    Good to have you back. Corbyn will not be a controlling figure, not least in part because his own rebellions over the years, but also because there simply are not the numbers for him to have a Corbynite shadow cabinet. I think there will not be an external split in the party, but there will be a variety of internal caucuses. Hopefully this would regenerate the party and give fresh impetus, but it could all fall apart into navel gazing and chaos.

    Cheers!
    How's life in the NHS? I'm considering a secondment to EMAS, as an alternative to redundancy......
  • Options

    Off-topic: the NHS up here in remotest Scotland is superb. I injured myself on Friday in a fall, and once I got back to civilisation (aka the nearest village) I realised it was bad. The hotel called for a doctor, who arrived within half an hour, despite having been in a village twenty miles away. He also came on Saturday morning to check up on me.

    Not bad considering it takes days just to get an appointment in Cambridge.

    The Barnett dividend. The SNP wants to get rid of it.

  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited August 2015

    A good piece and I agree, but it stops short of proposing who should lead labour and why. I said on here the other day that labour will split in two if Corbyn wins, I stand by that. Never underestimate the ego of politicians, the smart suits in new labour simply won't be able to tolerate a Corbyn led Labour Party.

    Nah, they won't split. The institutional advantages of the Labour party are simply too strong - as the SDP proved, policies don't matter if you can't get enough votes in the right places.

    You'll have an internal split: 8 shadow cabinet members forming a caucus (let's call it the Labour Reform Committee) and building out backbench support from that. In not being part of it up front Burnham has shot his fox, so to speak, and Cooper isn't material to be the unifying candidate. My gut tells me a bet on the Prince over the Water would be interesting in these circumstances: senior, untainted, not actively disloyal (because he isn't in Parliament), perhaps with Cooper acting as his proxy.

    If Jezza stumbles they will be ready to pounce. I don't think he (or they) would win. But he could easily be the Michael Howard candidate in 2020. And then we get a Kinnock as PM in 2025...
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    If, and we shall have to see what the legislation actually says, every public sector worker dealing face to face with the public is going to have to speak fluent English then the NHS is going to be in big trouble. I suspect, though, that a new definition of "fluent" will be constructed and this will turn out to be another Cameron wheeze.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    He does know all the words to The Internationale though.

    I'm always puzzled by Sam Delany's regular appearance - he once edited Heat magazine and is BFF with the nitwit Richard Bacon.

    Nice balanced paper review on the BBC this morning I see

    Did you miss 'Dateline London' earlier. Only Mark Comode Kermode was missing....
  • Options
    calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    edited August 2015
    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scotland hating Loonies are out early this morning

    Anyone who doesn't blindly support the SNP "hates Scotland"

    There's your "civic Nationalism", right there. It's Bollocks
    I think the losing part is finally beginning to sink in for the angry party.

    Only Eck seems to have his fingers in his ears - bravely shouting the odds when his boss is on the other side of the world...

    You guys are on top form, I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!
  • Options
    FluffyThoughtsFluffyThoughts Posts: 2,420
    edited August 2015

    No, my statement related to the proposition of Trident being relocated (one you happily pontificated upon) and the laughable notion that this would significantly knock Scottish GDP.

    You've walked away, but that's cool.

    Happy to accept:

    # Trident for the next forty years (or whatever successor becomes),
    # No free tuitions by end 2018 (CY) in Scotland, and
    # An even worse SNHS (that gives up 'free-prescriptions').

    So disagreement there then Th'UD....

    Oh: Trident:
    ...one you happily pontificated upon....
    : Source? Or are you defaming me...?

  • Options

    What we can say from watching this race is that Labour members generally think the current Conservative government is pretty good, or at least not particularly bad.

    We don't know what it says yet, especially about Labour members specifically. What it may tell us, though, is that there are a lot of self-indulgent lefties out there who voted Green or did not vote at all in May, who are much more into identity politics than in doing anything about changing the country, and who will walk away once the leadership vote has taken place, leaving the actual membership to pick up the pieces.



  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,017
    Miss Plato, unfair on Delaney.

    You missed out that he used to work for Harriet Harman.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548



    In my opinion, Labour actually need Corbyn as a leader at this point in time. Sure, he probably will never be PM, but then, realistically, none of the other three will be, either. What Labour need is to tear itself apart, to rebuild itself into something that reflects what it purports to represent. If you think Cooper, Kendal and Burnham are what you need, then you may as well vote Tory. Corbyn as leader will split the party,undoubtedly, and cause Labour a lot of pain, and a fair few years more in opposition, but at the end of it, it might be a party rejuvenated, and worth voting for.

    Good to have you back. Corbyn will not be a controlling figure, not least in part because his own rebellions over the years, but also because there simply are not the numbers for him to have a Corbynite shadow cabinet. I think there will not be an external split in the party, but there will be a variety of internal caucuses. Hopefully this would regenerate the party and give fresh impetus, but it could all fall apart into navel gazing and chaos.

    Cheers!
    How's life in the NHS? I'm considering a secondment to EMAS, as an alternative to redundancy......
    EMAS sounds better than redundancy.

    The latest SNAFU is that all our operating theatre staff have been put onto 7 day contracts so they can be forced to work weekends. This has led to those with families leaving as incompatable with their domestic situation, and we are unable to staff theatres in office hours because of unfilled vacancies. Jeremy Hunt is a genius.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    calum said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scotland hating Loonies are out early this morning

    Anyone who doesn't blindly support the SNP "hates Scotland"

    There's your "civic Nationalism", right there. It's Bollocks
    I think the losing part is finally beginning to sink in for the angry party.

    Only Eck seems to have his fingers in his ears - bravely shouting the odds when his boss is on the other side of the world...

    You guys are on top form, I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!
    No the kicking was last September - but Eck has been dancing round the ring so punch drunk he thinks he's won. It's over - move on and start focussing on actually running Scotland rather than messing about pretending you want a rematch very few people want - and you would lose again.

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Mr Rawnsley isn't impressed. Given he wrote a book called End Of The Party - maybe he's just soothsaying?! Labour is really two parties. And they simply can’t stand each other
    Those with a vote in the contest who are still unsure which Labour party they should be backing have been provided with a clarifying test by Dave Ward, the general secretary of the Communication Workers Union. Announcing the CWU’s endorsement of the MP for Islington North, Mr Ward declared that the union’s executive had acted on medical advice: “There is a virus within the Labour party and Jeremy Corbyn is the antidote.” “The virus” being the Blairites.

    Incidentally, this was not an off-the-cuff remark in an interview. It is the language used in the formal declaration made by the union so we must assume that the CWU weighed its words before deciding to compare the former Labour prime minister to a disease. If you think New Labour was the political equivalent of Ebola, then you probably belong in the Corbyn Labour party. If you think that three election victories and 13 years in power had something to commend them, you should probably be in the non-Corbyn Labour party.

    Not since the 1980s has Labour been so starkly polarised. So the follow-on question is whether a Corbyn victory would ultimately lead to a formal split. At the moment, both sides are saying that won’t happen...
    Charles said:

    A good piece and I agree, but it stops short of proposing who should lead labour and why. I said on here the other day that labour will split in two if Corbyn wins, I stand by that. Never underestimate the ego of politicians, the smart suits in new labour simply won't be able to tolerate a Corbyn led Labour Party.

    Nah, they won't split. The institutional advantages of the Labour party are simply too strong - as the SDP proved, policies don't matter if you can't get enough votes in the right places.

    You'll have an internal split: 8 shadow cabinet members forming a caucus (let's call it the Labour Reform Committee) and building out backbench support from that. In not being part of it up front Burnham has shot his fox, so to speak, and Cooper isn't material to be the unifying candidate. My gut tells me a bet on the Prince over the Water would be interesting in these circumstances: senior, untainted, not actively disloyal (because he isn't in Parliament), perhaps with Cooper acting as his proxy.

    If Jezza stumbles they will be ready to pounce. I don't think he (or they) would win. But he could easily be the Michael Howard candidate in 2020. And then we get a Kinnock as PM in 2025...
  • Options
    o/t last night someone mentioned it but I'm up for a fantasy league football mini-pb league... don't mind where.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    From the looks of the precis - it's the equiv of leaving school with a grade C GCSE in English. My spoken O Level French wouldn't qualify me for much except Would you like fries with that?

    Doctors will require better spoken English.

    If, and we shall have to see what the legislation actually says, every public sector worker dealing face to face with the public is going to have to speak fluent English then the NHS is going to be in big trouble. I suspect, though, that a new definition of "fluent" will be constructed and this will turn out to be another Cameron wheeze.

  • Options

    o/t last night someone mentioned it but I'm up for a fantasy league football mini-pb league... don't mind where.

    Whiteheart Lane...?
  • Options
    William_HWilliam_H Posts: 346
    Plato said:

    The 5% came from a YouGov poll - can't put my finger on it right now, perhaps someone with better GoogleFu can help me here.

    MattW said:

    @Miss Plato

    >I can understand the Oh Fcuk It mentality of electing Corbyn and throwing a party in the Party, but it's the most self-indulgent way to behave. Being hung for a sheep has to be the oddest form of political behaviour, if you want to win. Then again, only 5% of Corbynites think they could win under him, so perhaps its more of a feature than a bug.

    Is there a source for that 5% number? Sounds low.

    For me it's political - a chance to get socialism out of our mainstream for a few decades, which would be an excellent thing. Worth the risk, because I don't believe that JC would fare well.

    >Re the unions - the Bill to change how political donations are divvied up also needs to be factored in. Labour are on the back foot here and I can't see Mr Corbyn being donation friendly from many other sources.

    I think Mr Cameron is plucking this goose the wrong way. The 40% feels too Flashman. Is there a danger he'll save the Unions from themselves? Bite the bullet and make certain essential services non-strike, including the London Tube.

    I'd say for the politics he needs a rights based approach that Lab can't oppose. TUs claim to represent their members. So let them - multi-party affiliation / donations to any legal political party based on members wishes.

    And the NUS needs to be a voluntary society for those who join it, not running services, perhaps not govt funded, and not handing a platform to whoever happen to be the current bunch of fruitcakes.

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/94enqtd1fz/LabourLeadership_150721_day_two_W.pdf

    Only 5% of Corbyn's supporters chose "He has the best chance of winning" from a list of reasons, as one of their 2 or 3 reasons for voting for him. But this isn't the same as only 5% thinking he can win - some no doubt think he can win, but realistically acknowledge that other candidates would find it easier, others perhaps simply find that Corbyn's likelihood of victory less compelling than other reasons, such as supporting his policies.
  • Options
    TwistedFireStopperTwistedFireStopper Posts: 2,538
    edited August 2015



    In my opinion, Labour actually need Corbyn as a leader at this point in time. Sure, he probably will never be PM, but then, realistically, none of the other three will be, either. What Labour need is to tear itself apart, to rebuild itself into something that reflects what it purports to represent. If you think Cooper, Kendal and Burnham are what you need, then you may as well vote Tory. Corbyn as leader will split the party,undoubtedly, and cause Labour a lot of pain, and a fair few years more in opposition, but at the end of it, it might be a party rejuvenated, and worth voting for.

    Good to have you back. Corbyn will not be a controlling figure, not least in part because his own rebellions over the years, but also because there simply are not the numbers for him to have a Corbynite shadow cabinet. I think there will not be an external split in the party, but there will be a variety of internal caucuses. Hopefully this would regenerate the party and give fresh impetus, but it could all fall apart into navel gazing and chaos.

    Cheers!
    How's life in the NHS? I'm considering a secondment to EMAS, as an alternative to redundancy......
    EMAS sounds better than redundancy.

    The latest SNAFU is that all our operating theatre staff have been put onto 7 day contracts so they can be forced to work weekends. This has led to those with families leaving as incompatable with their domestic situation, and we are unable to staff theatres in office hours because of unfilled vacancies. Jeremy Hunt is a genius.
    He's not related to our senior management team, is he? We've got to shed 102 front line operational firefighters ASAP, but we're getting leave canceled because we don't have enough bums on fire engine seats.......and they've admitted we'll probably have to recruit before 2020. Genius planning all round.

  • Options
    TGOHF said:

    calum said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scotland hating Loonies are out early this morning

    Anyone who doesn't blindly support the SNP "hates Scotland"

    There's your "civic Nationalism", right there. It's Bollocks
    I think the losing part is finally beginning to sink in for the angry party.

    Only Eck seems to have his fingers in his ears - bravely shouting the odds when his boss is on the other side of the world...

    You guys are on top form, I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!
    No the kicking was last September - but Eck has been dancing round the ring so punch drunk he thinks he's won. It's over - move on and start focussing on actually running Scotland rather than messing about pretending you want a rematch very few people want - and you would lose again.

    Sadly, the Tory reaction to the referendum result means it is not over. Talk about dusting your opponent down and inviting him to get up off the floor to try again ...
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited August 2015
    Kinnock Snr is finally adding his 2p.
    In the leadership election, we are not choosing the chair of a discussion group who can preside over two years or more of fascinating debate while the Tories play hell with cuts in local services and public investment, extend injustice and flatlining incomes, sustain or worsen private debt, and deepen the balance-of-payments, productivity, housing and poverty deficits.

    We have to elect a leader capable of taking us to victory in the 2020 election and of being Labour prime minister. The Trotskyite left and the Telegraph right who might participate in this election clearly have their own malign purposes. I hope that everyone else voting in the leadership election – the great majority who are true Labour people – will make their decision with the greatest possible sincerity and realism.

    The vote is not simply about our justified rage against the injustice, inefficiency and waste inflicted by Tory policies now and in the coming years. It must be focused relentlessly on how we can maximise our strength over those years and on our ability to win the 2020 election. For us, and for those people of all ages and every condition that we seek to help and advance, it won’t be enough to protest – our ideas and ideals must appeal and prevail.

    What we can say from watching this race is that Labour members generally think the current Conservative government is pretty good, or at least not particularly bad.

    We don't know what it says yet, especially about Labour members specifically. What it may tell us, though, is that there are a lot of self-indulgent lefties out there who voted Green or did not vote at all in May, who are much more into identity politics than in doing anything about changing the country, and who will walk away once the leadership vote has taken place, leaving the actual membership to pick up the pieces.



  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Plato said:

    From the looks of the precis - it's the equiv of leaving school with a grade C GCSE in English. My spoken O Level French wouldn't qualify me for much except Would you like fries with that?

    Doctors will require better spoken English.

    If, and we shall have to see what the legislation actually says, every public sector worker dealing face to face with the public is going to have to speak fluent English then the NHS is going to be in big trouble. I suspect, though, that a new definition of "fluent" will be constructed and this will turn out to be another Cameron wheeze.

    Another Cameron Wheeze then. He really wasn't joking when he said he was the true heir to Blair.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Barnesian said:

    How about the Falkland Islands? Huge boost to the local economy, and far enough away from mainland Britain to minimise any collateral damage. It would also deter the Argentinians.

    Aldermaston may be difficult (even with St Helena's new airport). And - AIUI - we do not deply our deterrant south of the equator.

    Are you an equestrian? If so; please trot-on....
    AWE is still pretty active at Aldermaston, but the communications to the English Channel leave something to be desired
  • Options
    TwistedFireStopperTwistedFireStopper Posts: 2,538
    edited August 2015
    Plato said:

    Kinnock Snr is finally adding his 2p.

    In the leadership election, we are not choosing the chair of a discussion group who can preside over two years or more of fascinating debate while the Tories play hell with cuts in local services and public investment, extend injustice and flatlining incomes, sustain or worsen private debt, and deepen the balance-of-payments, productivity, housing and poverty deficits.

    We have to elect a leader capable of taking us to victory in the 2020 election and of being Labour prime minister. The Trotskyite left and the Telegraph right who might participate in this election clearly have their own malign purposes. I hope that everyone else voting in the leadership election – the great majority who are true Labour people – will make their decision with the greatest possible sincerity and realism.

    The vote is not simply about our justified rage against the injustice, inefficiency and waste inflicted by Tory policies now and in the coming years. It must be focused relentlessly on how we can maximise our strength over those years and on our ability to win the 2020 election. For us, and for those people of all ages and every condition that we seek to help and advance, it won’t be enough to protest – our ideas and ideals must appeal and prevail.

    What we can say from watching this race is that Labour members generally think the current Conservative government is pretty good, or at least not particularly bad.

    We don't know what it says yet, especially about Labour members specifically. What it may tell us, though, is that there are a lot of self-indulgent lefties out there who voted Green or did not vote at all in May, who are much more into identity politics than in doing anything about changing the country, and who will walk away once the leadership vote has taken place, leaving the actual membership to pick up the pieces.





    Kinnock doesn't seem very popular in the comments, with Labour and Tories both ripping into him and his lad.

  • Options
    I am pro-the Union.

    Pro-Labour, but anti-Corbyn.

    And I support Spurs.

    I must have done some very bad things in a previous life.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,335
    TGOHF said:

    calum said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scotland hating Loonies are out early this morning

    Anyone who doesn't blindly support the SNP "hates Scotland"

    There's your "civic Nationalism", right there. It's Bollocks
    I think the losing part is finally beginning to sink in for the angry party.

    Only Eck seems to have his fingers in his ears - bravely shouting the odds when his boss is on the other side of the world...

    You guys are on top form, I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!
    No the kicking was last September - but Eck has been dancing round the ring so punch drunk he thinks he's won. It's over - move on and start focussing on actually running Scotland rather than messing about pretending you want a rematch very few people want - and you would lose again.

    The plastic Jock view of a faraway country of which he knows little.

    'A MAJORITY of Scots want a second independence referendum within the next 10 years – but the result would be another No, says a poll.

    The exclusive survey for the Daily Record has shown a growing appetite for a fresh vote on Scotland’s future before 2025.

    A massive 80 per cent want another referendum at some point, with 59 per cent saying it should be held in the next 10 years.'

    http://tinyurl.com/pq8v6e8
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,154
    edited August 2015
    Charles said:

    Barnesian said:

    How about the Falkland Islands? Huge boost to the local economy, and far enough away from mainland Britain to minimise any collateral damage. It would also deter the Argentinians.

    Aldermaston may be difficult (even with St Helena's new airport). And - AIUI - we do not deply our deterrant south of the equator.

    Are you an equestrian? If so; please trot-on....
    AWE is still pretty active at Aldermaston, but the communications to the English Channel leave something to be desired
    They could get up the Thames to Reading, but then the salmon ladder at Mapledurham might be a bit tricky.....
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,017
    Mr. Divvie, it seems a bit of a counter-intuitive finding, that a clear majority want a second vote but that No would win.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    The worst examples of poor spoken and written English IME were in the Civil Service at the Home Office - almost everyone with *Lunar House, Croydon* on their CV could barely string a coherent sentence together.

    It was as if every immigration candidate had ended up working behind their own desk and assessed each others communication skills by pointing and waving. Most local employers simply wouldn't give them jobs as the stigma of working there was quite enough.

    This was a while ago, but if the place is still open - I'd be surprised if its much better given how Croydon has changed downmarket.

    Plato said:

    From the looks of the precis - it's the equiv of leaving school with a grade C GCSE in English. My spoken O Level French wouldn't qualify me for much except Would you like fries with that?

    Doctors will require better spoken English.

    If, and we shall have to see what the legislation actually says, every public sector worker dealing face to face with the public is going to have to speak fluent English then the NHS is going to be in big trouble. I suspect, though, that a new definition of "fluent" will be constructed and this will turn out to be another Cameron wheeze.

    Another Cameron Wheeze then. He really wasn't joking when he said he was the true heir to Blair.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,615
    The Government of this country will have truly grown up, rejected tokenism, and shown itself to be serious about both our defence and our economy, when we ditch Trident.

    Till then, watch us continue to decline.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,154

    TGOHF said:

    calum said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scotland hating Loonies are out early this morning

    Anyone who doesn't blindly support the SNP "hates Scotland"

    There's your "civic Nationalism", right there. It's Bollocks
    I think the losing part is finally beginning to sink in for the angry party.

    Only Eck seems to have his fingers in his ears - bravely shouting the odds when his boss is on the other side of the world...

    You guys are on top form, I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!
    No the kicking was last September - but Eck has been dancing round the ring so punch drunk he thinks he's won. It's over - move on and start focussing on actually running Scotland rather than messing about pretending you want a rematch very few people want - and you would lose again.

    Sadly, the Tory reaction to the referendum result means it is not over. Talk about dusting your opponent down and inviting him to get up off the floor to try again ...
    For "Tory reaction" read "voters' reaction to the idea of the SNP having any meaningful power in Westminster" and for "means it is not over" read "means the SNP are desperate to be still heard, lest they are seen for the impotent buffoons they are".
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    calum said:

    I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!

    Zooooooooooooom

    The SNP is not Scotland.
  • Options

    The Government of this country will have truly grown up, rejected tokenism, and shown itself to be serious about both our defence and our economy, when we ditch Trident.

    Till then, watch us continue to decline.

    Stay in Scotland: Both England and the Celtic regions have seen a spike in IQ results.

    :endex:
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Plato said:

    The vote is not simply about our justified rage against the injustice, inefficiency and waste inflicted by Tory policies now and in the coming years. It must be focused relentlessly on how we can maximise our strength over those years and on our ability to win the 2020 election.

    He is just angry because injustice, inefficiency and waste is traditionally a Labour role, its a demarcation dispute.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    the SNP are desperate to be still heard, lest they are seen for the impotent buffoons they are".

    They should start with this
    Much still has to be done before Nicola Sturgeon realises her dream of making Scotland the most enlightened and socially just country on the planet. In normal circumstances, this would be no easy task but it’s rendered more difficult by the fact that Scotland currently possesses a police force not fit for a banana republic.

    For those who have observed the diminishing of Scotland’s police force from a world-renowned beacon of brusque efficiency to its current status as a national pantomime act the last few years have been painful. Nothing, though, which had previously occurred in the shambolic reign of Stephen House, chief constable of Police Scotland, matched the tragic incompetence of his force’s performance in July.
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/02/policing-in-scotland-shambles
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,615

    The Government of this country will have truly grown up, rejected tokenism, and shown itself to be serious about both our defence and our economy, when we ditch Trident.

    Till then, watch us continue to decline.

    Stay in Scotland: Both England and the Celtic regions have seen a spike in IQ results.

    :endex:
    Certainly fluffy, but I'm not detecting any thought.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    The Government of this country will have truly grown up, rejected tokenism, and shown itself to be serious about both our defence and our economy, when we ditch Trident.

    Till then, watch us continue to decline.

    2.5bn a year is pocket change, Labour governments lose that much down the back of the sofa, it will make no appreciable difference to anything except possibly losing our seat on the UN Security Council, and having to be even nicer to France as the only real nuclear power that would be left in the EU.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Plato said:

    Oh poor you! I wondered why you were posting yesterday.

    What happened? Hope you're well on the mend.

    Off-topic: the NHS up here in remotest Scotland is superb. I injured myself on Friday in a fall, and once I got back to civilisation (aka the nearest village) I realised it was bad. The hotel called for a doctor, who arrived within half an hour, despite having been in a village twenty miles away. He also came on Saturday morning to check up on me.

    Not bad considering it takes days just to get an appointment in Cambridge.

    Thanks. Suspected fracture of the heel of the radius - won't know for sure till I get it x-rayed, but the hospital is 3 hours away. As to how it happened - damned bloody stupidity. I went down a slipway to take a photo & discovered a reason they're called 'slip'ways. ;) had to walk ten miles just to get back to the ferry!

    All very embarrassing. I can't drive, so My dad & sis are driving up today to take me to hospital & home.

    Still, it's my only semi-serious injury in about 17, ,000 miles of walking, so I've not done too badly, & I spent yesterday exploring this beautiful area.
    My grandfather broke both ankles close to the top of the Matterhorn and had to walk down. Ended up with him having to use two sticks for the rest of his life. But at least he got the honour of being allowed to turn his back on the Queen.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,017
    Mr. Charles, sounds bloody awful.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,615
    edited August 2015
    Indigo said:

    The Government of this country will have truly grown up, rejected tokenism, and shown itself to be serious about both our defence and our economy, when we ditch Trident.

    Till then, watch us continue to decline.

    2.5bn a year is pocket change, Labour governments lose that much down the back of the sofa, it will make no appreciable difference to anything except possibly losing our seat on the UN Security Council, and having to be even nicer to France as the only real nuclear power that would be left in the EU.
    France *is* the only real nuclear power left in the EU. We have a rented fig leaf we are totally dependent on Uncle Sam to use.

    And on the figure you quote, I do realise that we're not going to be saved by just ditching Trident, that wasn't my point, just that it would be a huge signal of a new grown-up attitude. As would abandoning the foreign aid target etc.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758



    In my opinion, Labour actually need Corbyn as a leader at this point in time. Sure, he probably will never be PM, but then, realistically, none of the other three will be, either. What Labour need is to tear itself apart, to rebuild itself into something that reflects what it purports to represent. If you think Cooper, Kendal and Burnham are what you need, then you may as well vote Tory. Corbyn as leader will split the party,undoubtedly, and cause Labour a lot of pain, and a fair few years more in opposition, but at the end of it, it might be a party rejuvenated, and worth voting for.

    Good to have you back. Corbyn will not be a controlling figure, not least in part because his own rebellions over the years, but also because there simply are not the numbers for him to have a Corbynite shadow cabinet. I think there will not be an external split in the party, but there will be a variety of internal caucuses. Hopefully this would regenerate the party and give fresh impetus, but it could all fall apart into navel gazing and chaos.

    Cheers!
    How's life in the NHS? I'm considering a secondment to EMAS, as an alternative to redundancy......
    EMAS sounds better than redundancy.

    The latest SNAFU is that all our operating theatre staff have been put onto 7 day contracts so they can be forced to work weekends. This has led to those with families leaving as incompatable with their domestic situation, and we are unable to staff theatres in office hours because of unfilled vacancies. Jeremy Hunt is a genius.
    7 day contracts are the right thing to do (I assume it is 5 in 7?). There will clearly be a transition period as people who don't want to work on those terms look elsewhere.
  • Options
    calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    TGOHF said:

    calum said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scotland hating Loonies are out early this morning

    Anyone who doesn't blindly support the SNP "hates Scotland"

    There's your "civic Nationalism", right there. It's Bollocks
    I think the losing part is finally beginning to sink in for the angry party.

    Only Eck seems to have his fingers in his ears - bravely shouting the odds when his boss is on the other side of the world...

    You guys are on top form, I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!
    No the kicking was last September - but Eck has been dancing round the ring so punch drunk he thinks he's won. It's over - move on and start focussing on actually running Scotland rather than messing about pretending you want a rematch very few people want - and you would lose again.

    In a way I admire yours and a few others constant SNP & Scotland BAD mantra, which echoes much of the MSM post GE2015 whinging around the SNP's success. I only hope that you guys realised that this was a betting site and you didn't bet with your prejudices against the SNP - if you did - read it and weep:

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/making-lemonade/
  • Options
    saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    Sandpit said:

    Plato said:

    Corbyn's Pub had me LOL - the whole thing is worth reading. It's very Wolfie Smith.

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/lukebailey/labour-theory-of-ale?utm_term=.cizZV6yNL#.xaVdzlNnGO

    Scott_P said:

    Corbyn is a par excellence moral crusader

    Life under Corbyn...

    @dizzy_thinks: http://t.co/DqB98NULF1 << neat little tale about "Corbyn's World"</p>
    No comment about Corbyn running a pub could be allowed to pass without this one in reply.
    http://www.themarketingblog.co.uk/2013/04/explanation-of-tax-10-men-go-into-a-bar…/
    Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100…
    If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this…

    ...

    But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important.They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
    It would appear the rich bastard was exploiting them all anyway, according to this comment.

    John Anderson - October 11, 2013
    The rich man had been paying for the drinks because he had employed the others on low wages, exploiting their labour. He decided to retire to the Maldives and thus did not turn up again.The other men decided to carry on the business as a co-operative and were thus able to pay for their own drinks
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,615
    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    Oh poor you! I wondered why you were posting yesterday.

    What happened? Hope you're well on the mend.

    Off-topic: the NHS up here in remotest Scotland is superb. I injured myself on Friday in a fall, and once I got back to civilisation (aka the nearest village) I realised it was bad. The hotel called for a doctor, who arrived within half an hour, despite having been in a village twenty miles away. He also came on Saturday morning to check up on me.

    Not bad considering it takes days just to get an appointment in Cambridge.

    Thanks. Suspected fracture of the heel of the radius - won't know for sure till I get it x-rayed, but the hospital is 3 hours away. As to how it happened - damned bloody stupidity. I went down a slipway to take a photo & discovered a reason they're called 'slip'ways. ;) had to walk ten miles just to get back to the ferry!

    All very embarrassing. I can't drive, so My dad & sis are driving up today to take me to hospital & home.

    Still, it's my only semi-serious injury in about 17, ,000 miles of walking, so I've not done too badly, & I spent yesterday exploring this beautiful area.
    My grandfather broke both ankles close to the top of the Matterhorn and had to walk down. Ended up with him having to use two sticks for the rest of his life. But at least he got the honour of being allowed to turn his back on the Queen.
    Good Lord. No-one around to give him a piggy back?
  • Options

    TGOHF said:

    calum said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scotland hating Loonies are out early this morning

    Anyone who doesn't blindly support the SNP "hates Scotland"

    There's your "civic Nationalism", right there. It's Bollocks
    I think the losing part is finally beginning to sink in for the angry party.

    Only Eck seems to have his fingers in his ears - bravely shouting the odds when his boss is on the other side of the world...

    You guys are on top form, I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!
    No the kicking was last September - but Eck has been dancing round the ring so punch drunk he thinks he's won. It's over - move on and start focussing on actually running Scotland rather than messing about pretending you want a rematch very few people want - and you would lose again.

    Sadly, the Tory reaction to the referendum result means it is not over. Talk about dusting your opponent down and inviting him to get up off the floor to try again ...
    For "Tory reaction" read "voters' reaction to the idea of the SNP having any meaningful power in Westminster" and for "means it is not over" read "means the SNP are desperate to be still heard, lest they are seen for the impotent buffoons they are".

    No, read Cameron talking about EV4EL instead of unity and reconciliation in his reaction to the referendum result; observe the election campaign that sparked despair among Scottish Tories; witness Chris Grayling's comically inept attempt to force through a botched up version of EV4EL; and note the Tories' lack of interest in a cross-party constitutional convention designed to sort out the current mess in a long-term, consensual way. Each one a gift and combined manna from heaven for an SNP seeking to keep the independence flame alive.

  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,981
    edited August 2015
    Charles said:



    In my opinion, Labour actually need Corbyn as a leader at this point in time. Sure, he probably will never be PM, but then, realistically, none of the other three will be, either. What Labour need is to tear itself apart, to rebuild itself into something that reflects what it purports to represent. If you think Cooper, Kendal and Burnham are what you need, then you may as well vote Tory. Corbyn as leader will split the party,undoubtedly, and cause Labour a lot of pain, and a fair few years more in opposition, but at the end of it, it might be a party rejuvenated, and worth voting for.

    Good to have you back. Corbyn will not be a controlling figure, not least in part because his own rebellions over the years, but also because there simply are not the numbers for him to have a Corbynite shadow cabinet. I think there will not be an external split in the party, but there will be a variety of internal caucuses. Hopefully this would regenerate the party and give fresh impetus, but it could all fall apart into navel gazing and chaos.

    Cheers!
    How's life in the NHS? I'm considering a secondment to EMAS, as an alternative to redundancy......
    EMAS sounds better than redundancy.

    The latest SNAFU is that all our operating theatre staff have been put onto 7 day contracts so they can be forced to work weekends. This has led to those with families leaving as incompatable with their domestic situation, and we are unable to staff theatres in office hours because of unfilled vacancies. Jeremy Hunt is a genius.
    7 day contracts are the right thing to do (I assume it is 5 in 7?). There will clearly be a transition period as people who don't want to work on those terms look elsewhere.

    And are then replaced by who? More immigrants presumably. If they are able to get into the country given the new absolute quotas we now have,

  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    Oh poor you! I wondered why you were posting yesterday.

    What happened? Hope you're well on the mend.

    Off-topic: the NHS up here in remotest Scotland is superb. I injured myself on Friday in a fall, and once I got back to civilisation (aka the nearest village) I realised it was bad. The hotel called for a doctor, who arrived within half an hour, despite having been in a village twenty miles away. He also came on Saturday morning to check up on me.

    Not bad considering it takes days just to get an appointment in Cambridge.

    Thanks. Suspected fracture of the heel of the radius - won't know for sure till I get it x-rayed, but the hospital is 3 hours away. As to how it happened - damned bloody stupidity. I went down a slipway to take a photo & discovered a reason they're called 'slip'ways. ;) had to walk ten miles just to get back to the ferry!

    All very embarrassing. I can't drive, so My dad & sis are driving up today to take me to hospital & home.

    Still, it's my only semi-serious injury in about 17, ,000 miles of walking, so I've not done too badly, & I spent yesterday exploring this beautiful area.
    My grandfather broke both ankles close to the top of the Matterhorn and had to walk down. Ended up with him having to use two sticks for the rest of his life. But at least he got the honour of being allowed to turn his back on the Queen.
    Good Lord. No-one around to give him a piggy back?
    Difficult to do that when you are on ropes. It was only part of the way - down from the shoulder and then about a mile or so to a meadow where they could get a copter to land. This was back in the old days. The bone ended up being fragmented, so although they fixed it from a working perspective, there were pieces left in that it was like having severe arthritis.
  • Options
    saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245

    TGOHF said:

    calum said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scotland hating Loonies are out early this morning

    Anyone who doesn't blindly support the SNP "hates Scotland"

    There's your "civic Nationalism", right there. It's Bollocks
    I think the losing part is finally beginning to sink in for the angry party.

    Only Eck seems to have his fingers in his ears - bravely shouting the odds when his boss is on the other side of the world...

    You guys are on top form, I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!
    No the kicking was last September - but Eck has been dancing round the ring so punch drunk he thinks he's won. It's over - move on and start focussing on actually running Scotland rather than messing about pretending you want a rematch very few people want - and you would lose again.

    Sadly, the Tory reaction to the referendum result means it is not over. Talk about dusting your opponent down and inviting him to get up off the floor to try again ...
    For "Tory reaction" read "voters' reaction to the idea of the SNP having any meaningful power in Westminster" and for "means it is not over" read "means the SNP are desperate to be still heard, lest they are seen for the impotent buffoons they are".

    No, read Cameron talking about EV4EL instead of unity and reconciliation in his reaction to the referendum result; observe the election campaign that sparked despair among Scottish Tories; witness Chris Grayling's comically inept attempt to force through a botched up version of EV4EL; and note the Tories' lack of interest in a cross-party constitutional convention designed to sort out the current mess in a long-term, consensual way. Each one a gift and combined manna from heaven for an SNP seeking to keep the independence flame alive.

    If the SNP truly want independence, they need to extend the franchise to the whole of the UK, that way they will actually get a yes. But in that event, they would actually be held responsible for their actions so it's not going to happen.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,017
    Mr. Observer, I won't argue that Grayling's other than inept, but it's ridiculous to throw far more powers at Scotland have nothing approaching equality for England.

    English laws for English votes is a reasonable stepping stone, but an English Parliament is needed.

    Anyway, if you're critical of Cameron (and you are) what would you have done? Hurled more powers at Holyrood and not even considered the injustice of the situation for England (and, to a lesser extent, Wales)?
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,335
    saddened said:

    TGOHF said:

    calum said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scotland hating Loonies are out early this morning

    Anyone who doesn't blindly support the SNP "hates Scotland"

    There's your "civic Nationalism", right there. It's Bollocks
    I think the losing part is finally beginning to sink in for the angry party.

    Only Eck seems to have his fingers in his ears - bravely shouting the odds when his boss is on the other side of the world...

    You guys are on top form, I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!
    No the kicking was last September - but Eck has been dancing round the ring so punch drunk he thinks he's won. It's over - move on and start focussing on actually running Scotland rather than messing about pretending you want a rematch very few people want - and you would lose again.

    Sadly, the Tory reaction to the referendum result means it is not over. Talk about dusting your opponent down and inviting him to get up off the floor to try again ...
    For "Tory reaction" read "voters' reaction to the idea of the SNP having any meaningful power in Westminster" and for "means it is not over" read "means the SNP are desperate to be still heard, lest they are seen for the impotent buffoons they are".

    No, read Cameron talking about EV4EL instead of unity and reconciliation in his reaction to the referendum result; observe the election campaign that sparked despair among Scottish Tories; witness Chris Grayling's comically inept attempt to force through a botched up version of EV4EL; and note the Tories' lack of interest in a cross-party constitutional convention designed to sort out the current mess in a long-term, consensual way. Each one a gift and combined manna from heaven for an SNP seeking to keep the independence flame alive.

    If the SNP truly want independence, they need to extend the franchise to the whole of the UK, that way they will actually get a yes. But in that event, they would actually be held responsible for their actions so it's not going to happen.
    Can you explain how a party that represents only Scottish constituences can extend a franchise to the whole of the UK? I'd be very interested in the mechanism that would enable this.
  • Options
    FluffyThoughtsFluffyThoughts Posts: 2,420
    edited August 2015
    calum said:


    Living within 40 miles of the base I find your sentiments above rather unpleasant. Hopefully there will never be an incident which causes you to reflect upon what you have just said.

    Sorry Calum, but so what?

    I have two homes - such is work - that require me to live within 40 miles of Aldermaston. My wife owns (and rents) another that will also be within scope.

    London and the Sarf-'Eest pay for this stuff. No-one ever said life was fair...!

    ;)
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited August 2015

    Charles said:



    In my opinion, Labour actually need Corbyn as a leader at this point in time. Sure, he probably will never be PM, but then, realistically, none of the other three will be, either. What Labour need is to tear itself apart, to rebuild itself into something that reflects what it purports to represent. If you think Cooper, Kendal and Burnham are what you need, then you may as well vote Tory. Corbyn as leader will split the party,undoubtedly, and cause Labour a lot of pain, and a fair few years more in opposition, but at the end of it, it might be a party rejuvenated, and worth voting for.

    Good to have you back. Corbyn will not be a controlling figure, not least in part because his own rebellions over the years, but also because there simply are not the numbers for him to have a Corbynite shadow cabinet. I think there will not be an external split in the party, but there will be a variety of internal caucuses. Hopefully this would regenerate the party and give fresh impetus, but it could all fall apart into navel gazing and chaos.

    Cheers!
    How's life in the NHS? I'm considering a secondment to EMAS, as an alternative to redundancy......
    EMAS sounds better than redundancy.

    The latest SNAFU is that all our operating theatre staff have been put onto 7 day contracts so they can be forced to work weekends. This has led to those with families leaving as incompatable with their domestic situation, and we are unable to staff theatres in office hours because of unfilled vacancies. Jeremy Hunt is a genius.
    7 day contracts are the right thing to do (I assume it is 5 in 7?). There will clearly be a transition period as people who don't want to work on those terms look elsewhere.

    And are then replaced by who? More immigrants presumably. If they are able to get into the country given the new absolute quotas we now have,

    Replaced by people who are willing to work to those contracts. I don't really care who.

    People need rest time, but it is ludicrous that the capital investment in the NHS is idle for so much of the time
  • Options

    TGOHF said:

    calum said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scotland hating Loonies are out early this morning

    Anyone who doesn't blindly support the SNP "hates Scotland"

    There's your "civic Nationalism", right there. It's Bollocks
    I think the losing part is finally beginning to sink in for the angry party.

    Only Eck seems to have his fingers in his ears - bravely shouting the odds when his boss is on the other side of the world...

    You guys are on top form, I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!
    No the kicking was last September - but Eck has been dancing round the ring so punch drunk he thinks he's won. It's over - move on and start focussing on actually running Scotland rather than messing about pretending you want a rematch very few people want - and you would lose again.

    Sadly, the Tory reaction to the referendum result means it is not over. Talk about dusting your opponent down and inviting him to get up off the floor to try again ...
    For "Tory reaction" read "voters' reaction to the idea of the SNP having any meaningful power in Westminster" and for "means it is not over" read "means the SNP are desperate to be still heard, lest they are seen for the impotent buffoons they are".

    No, read Cameron talking about EV4EL instead of unity and reconciliation in his reaction to the referendum result; observe the election campaign that sparked despair among Scottish Tories; witness Chris Grayling's comically inept attempt to force through a botched up version of EV4EL; and note the Tories' lack of interest in a cross-party constitutional convention designed to sort out the current mess in a long-term, consensual way. Each one a gift and combined manna from heaven for an SNP seeking to keep the independence flame alive.

    Do you want to abolish SV4SL? If not then why should we not have EV4EL.

    Bloody minded hypocrites. Either we have devolution in which case there is SV4SL and EV4EL or we don't in which case we have British Votes for British Laws.
  • Options
    calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    Scott_P said:

    calum said:

    I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!

    Zooooooooooooom

    The SNP is not Scotland.
    With the SNP already polling at around 60% and given David Cameron's rather unhelpful contribution to the Scottish Tories cause, the SNP's surge is set to continue. Much of this renewed surge is driven by the perceived anti-Scotland stance of the MSM and folks like yourself.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,154


    No, read Cameron talking about EV4EL instead of unity and reconciliation in his reaction to the referendum result; observe the election campaign that sparked despair among Scottish Tories; witness Chris Grayling's comically inept attempt to force through a botched up version of EV4EL; and note the Tories' lack of interest in a cross-party constitutional convention designed to sort out the current mess in a long-term, consensual way. Each one a gift and combined manna from heaven for an SNP seeking to keep the independence flame alive.

    The manna from heaven dropped in Cameron's lap - it was the likes of Salmond joking about writing Labour's budget. Thanks for the majority, Alex....


  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,615
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    Oh poor you! I wondered why you were posting yesterday.

    What happened? Hope you're well on the mend.

    Off-topic: the NHS up here in remotest Scotland is superb. I injured myself on Friday in a fall, and once I got back to civilisation (aka the nearest village) I realised it was bad. The hotel called for a doctor, who arrived within half an hour, despite having been in a village twenty miles away. He also came on Saturday morning to check up on me.

    Not bad considering it takes days just to get an appointment in Cambridge.

    Thanks. Suspected fracture of the heel of the radius - won't know for sure till I get it x-rayed, but the hospital is 3 hours away. As to how it happened - damned bloody stupidity. I went down a slipway to take a photo & discovered a reason they're called 'slip'ways. ;) had to walk ten miles just to get back to the ferry!

    All very embarrassing. I can't drive, so My dad & sis are driving up today to take me to hospital & home.

    Still, it's my only semi-serious injury in about 17, ,000 miles of walking, so I've not done too badly, & I spent yesterday exploring this beautiful area.
    My grandfather broke both ankles close to the top of the Matterhorn and had to walk down. Ended up with him having to use two sticks for the rest of his life. But at least he got the honour of being allowed to turn his back on the Queen.
    Good Lord. No-one around to give him a piggy back?
    Difficult to do that when you are on ropes. It was only part of the way - down from the shoulder and then about a mile or so to a meadow where they could get a copter to land. This was back in the old days. The bone ended up being fragmented, so although they fixed it from a working perspective, there were pieces left in that it was like having severe arthritis.
    I think I'd be mentally scarred for life too. Clearly made of stern stuff.
  • Options
    On the topic of English Votes for English Laws this is one area I find Cameron has been completely weak. We should be implementing true English Votes - ie Scottish MPs are 100% excluded on devolved matters, just as English MPs are on Scottish matters. Not this lame fourth reading or other nonsense.

    Grow a pair Cameron and exclude the Scots from devolved matters since they won't implement a true self-denying ordinance. It is the right thing to do.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Oh please. Most Scots voted No. About 50% didn't vote SNP. I know riding the wave is heady, but Scotland doesn't = SNP.
    calum said:

    Scott_P said:

    calum said:

    I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!

    Zooooooooooooom

    The SNP is not Scotland.
    With the SNP already polling at around 60% and given David Cameron's rather unhelpful contribution to the Scottish Tories cause, the SNP's surge is set to continue. Much of this renewed surge is driven by the perceived anti-Scotland stance of the MSM and folks like yourself.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    TGOHF said:

    calum said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scotland hating Loonies are out early this morning

    Anyone who doesn't blindly support the SNP "hates Scotland"

    There's your "civic Nationalism", right there. It's Bollocks
    I think the losing part is finally beginning to sink in for the angry party.

    Only Eck seems to have his fingers in his ears - bravely shouting the odds when his boss is on the other side of the world...

    You guys are on top form, I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!
    No the kicking was last September - but Eck has been dancing round the ring so punch drunk he thinks he's won. It's over - move on and start focussing on actually running Scotland rather than messing about pretending you want a rematch very few people want - and you would lose again.

    Sadly, the Tory reaction to the referendum result means it is not over. Talk about dusting your opponent down and inviting him to get up off the floor to try again ...
    For "Tory reaction" read "voters' reaction to the idea of the SNP having any meaningful power in Westminster" and for "means it is not over" read "means the SNP are desperate to be still heard, lest they are seen for the impotent buffoons they are".

    No, read Cameron talking about EV4EL instead of unity and reconciliation in his reaction to the referendum result; observe the election campaign that sparked despair among Scottish Tories; witness Chris Grayling's comically inept attempt to force through a botched up version of EV4EL; and note the Tories' lack of interest in a cross-party constitutional convention designed to sort out the current mess in a long-term, consensual way. Each one a gift and combined manna from heaven for an SNP seeking to keep the independence flame alive.

    Do you want to abolish SV4SL? If not then why should we not have EV4EL.

    Bloody minded hypocrites. Either we have devolution in which case there is SV4SL and EV4EL or we don't in which case we have British Votes for British Laws.
    It's called loss aversion.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion
  • Options

    o/t last night someone mentioned it but I'm up for a fantasy league football mini-pb league... don't mind where.

    I've grabbed the bull by the horns and set up a league on the free fantasy league game from the premier league.

    http://fantasy.premierleague.com/

    The code to join this private league is 1336513-316355

    Should no one else play, then I'll have a decent chance of a top 4 finish at least (rare for we Spurs fans)
  • Options
    English Votes for English Laws is one area I find Cameron to have been completely weak. We should be 100% implementing this - ie a full exclusion of Scottish MPs from the entire process of English laws just as English MPs are fully excluded from writing Scottish laws. Not this half-hearted fourth reading nonsense but with the Scottish MPs still having a final say - they should be completely and 100% excluded on devolved matters.

    Grow a pair Cameron and implement real EVEL.

    PS sorry if this message appears twice. I posted it but it didn't appear so I re-wrote it.
  • Options

    TGOHF said:

    calum said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:

    Scotland hating Loonies are out early this morning

    Anyone who doesn't blindly support the SNP "hates Scotland"

    There's your "civic Nationalism", right there. It's Bollocks
    I think the losing part is finally beginning to sink in for the angry party.

    Only Eck seems to have his fingers in his ears - bravely shouting the odds when his boss is on the other side of the world...

    You guys are on top form, I didn't realise that the 2nd of August was lets try and give the SNP and Scotland a good kicking day !!
    No the kicking was last September - but Eck has been dancing round the ring so punch drunk he thinks he's won. It's over - move on and start focussing on actually running Scotland rather than messing about pretending you want a rematch very few people want - and you would lose again.

    Sadly, the Tory reaction to the referendum result means it is not over. Talk about dusting your opponent down and inviting him to get up off the floor to try again ...
    For "Tory reaction" read "voters' reaction to the idea of the SNP having any meaningful power in Westminster" and for "means it is not over" read "means the SNP are desperate to be still heard, lest they are seen for the impotent buffoons they are".

    No, read Cameron talking about EV4EL instead of unity and reconciliation in his reaction to the referendum result; observe the election campaign that sparked despair among Scottish Tories; witness Chris Grayling's comically inept attempt to force through a botched up version of EV4EL; and note the Tories' lack of interest in a cross-party constitutional convention designed to sort out the current mess in a long-term, consensual way. Each one a gift and combined manna from heaven for an SNP seeking to keep the independence flame alive.

    Do you want to abolish SV4SL? If not then why should we not have EV4EL.

    Bloody minded hypocrites. Either we have devolution in which case there is SV4SL and EV4EL or we don't in which case we have British Votes for British Laws.

    Of course we should. But we should have them in a way that is designed to reflect the views of English voters and as part of a wider constitutional settlement. Given that the Tories have an overall Commons majority, the only way that the Tories do not get through English-only legislation in this parliament is if English Tory MPs vote against. The way the issue has been handled has been an absolute gift to the SNP.

  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,808
    edited August 2015
    On Topic: I think the one, if anything, that swings it for Corbo, will be slanted encouragement of members to vote by Union call centres.

    UNITE have proved quite willing to manipulate any system they can, and I see no reason why they wouldn't do so in this case. They have the data as to their members' opinions.

    Is there any reason?
  • Options

    Mr. Observer, I won't argue that Grayling's other than inept, but it's ridiculous to throw far more powers at Scotland have nothing approaching equality for England.

    English laws for English votes is a reasonable stepping stone, but an English Parliament is needed.

    Anyway, if you're critical of Cameron (and you are) what would you have done? Hurled more powers at Holyrood and not even considered the injustice of the situation for England (and, to a lesser extent, Wales)?

    I would have not linked EV4EL to the result of the referendum on the day after the result had been declared. I would have used my speech them to welcome the result and to focus on unity. And I would have advocated and instituted a full constitutional convention after the election while putting in place temporary measures that ensure the wishes of English voters are reflected in legislation that only affects England.

  • Options
    FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    Corbyn does have a very simple appeal and is stating a lot of the right things to Labour party loyalists in a very clear, convincing and understandable way, without prevarications or dodging the questions. It is possible that many of the Labour-leader voters will find JC's approach a relief after undergoing the mental convolutions of EdM and he could get past the 50% on the first ballot.

  • Options

    No, read Cameron talking about EV4EL instead of unity and reconciliation in his reaction to the referendum result; observe the election campaign that sparked despair among Scottish Tories; witness Chris Grayling's comically inept attempt to force through a botched up version of EV4EL; and note the Tories' lack of interest in a cross-party constitutional convention designed to sort out the current mess in a long-term, consensual way. Each one a gift and combined manna from heaven for an SNP seeking to keep the independence flame alive.

    Do you want to abolish SV4SL? If not then why should we not have EV4EL.

    Bloody minded hypocrites. Either we have devolution in which case there is SV4SL and EV4EL or we don't in which case we have British Votes for British Laws.

    Of course we should. But we should have them in a way that is designed to reflect the views of English voters and as part of a wider constitutional settlement. Given that the Tories have an overall Commons majority, the only way that the Tories do not get through English-only legislation in this parliament is if English Tory MPs vote against. The way the issue has been handled has been an absolute gift to the SNP.

    That doesn't solve the problem. So even if an English majority votes on something with a tiny Tory rebellion being assisted by over 50 Scots to defeat the English majority then that's democratically OK in your eyes?

    Besides this Parliament is not the only one, we should resolve the issue now for the future as it should have been resolved 17 years ago. It has only festered since and not tackling it will not make it go away anymore than it has gone away in the last 17 years. EVEL will address the democratic divide and then we can either move on or face the next problem.

    There is absolutely no non-partisan reason to support SVSL but oppose EVEL. It is hypocrisy and seeking partisan advantage.
  • Options
    PaulyPauly Posts: 897
    People in England don't want an English parliament. And we should NOT get one unless we vote in a referendum for it.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,163
  • Options
    FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    edited August 2015
    Re: Immigration. It would appear that the major blockage to getting this right (and deterring the hopefuls at Calais and elsewhere) is our judiciary who seem to have a unique interpretation of the HR/Immigration laws, which is not matched by most of our EU neighbours.

    I seem to recall that DC said something about new legislation when Parliament returns in September - surely this is too late and needs to be done now. Just how many of our MPs would be upset by having to return in August?
  • Options

    Mr. Observer, I won't argue that Grayling's other than inept, but it's ridiculous to throw far more powers at Scotland have nothing approaching equality for England.

    English laws for English votes is a reasonable stepping stone, but an English Parliament is needed.

    Anyway, if you're critical of Cameron (and you are) what would you have done? Hurled more powers at Holyrood and not even considered the injustice of the situation for England (and, to a lesser extent, Wales)?

    I would have not linked EV4EL to the result of the referendum on the day after the result had been declared. I would have used my speech them to welcome the result and to focus on unity. And I would have advocated and instituted a full constitutional convention after the election while putting in place temporary measures that ensure the wishes of English voters are reflected in legislation that only affects England.

    File this under trying to have your cake and eat it too. Of course EVEL is linked to the result of the referendum it would take a complete fool not to link the two. Besides if he'd said it before the referendum you'd have been having a go at Cameron for that too.

    As for a constitutional convention, that's just can-kicking claptrap. We have a Parliament, that is all the convention we need. The Scots over 300 years ago decided to join the Parliament, then 300 years later decided to partially-withdraw from it. They need to be excluded from the matters they chose to partially withdraw from and then its problem solved. We don't need to invent a new Parliament to replace the one we already have that preceded Scotland joining the union.
  • Options
    JPJ2JPJ2 Posts: 378
    Plato

    "Oh please. Most Scots voted No. About 50% didn't vote SNP. I know riding the wave is heady, but Scotland doesn't = SNP. "

    I might just about concede that point, but whatever about the limits of the SNP support, it surely towers over the democratic strength of the one Scottish Tory, the one Scottish Labour and the one Scottish Lib Dem MP.
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    rcs1000 said:
    How many deaf mutes have public facing roles in the public sector?
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:
    And Scots. :-)
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I honestly find it baffling that we're back here again in 1983. Mr Corbyn's apple pie and kumbaya comes adrift just as EdM's milky version did. Marxism is all fine and dandy over the dinner table, if you ignore human nature - and how it votes.

    Given that Marxism hasn't swept all before it, tells us that there's a fatal flaw. And in the pockets where it still hangs on, all the economies are basketcases or failing badly. Voters look at it and say No Thanks.

    Idealism is called that for a reason - it's not real-life, yet once again we have great swathes of naivety, mixed with Class War and lashings of What's Yours Is Mine trying to convert us again.

    I'm sure it will seduce a few along the way - but it doesn't take much unpicking to point out why it's failed everywhere else and rejected 30yrs ago.
    Financier said:

    Corbyn does have a very simple appeal and is stating a lot of the right things to Labour party loyalists in a very clear, convincing and understandable way, without prevarications or dodging the questions. It is possible that many of the Labour-leader voters will find JC's approach a relief after undergoing the mental convolutions of EdM and he could get past the 50% on the first ballot.

  • Options

    No, read Cameron talking about EV4EL instead of unity and reconciliation in his reaction to the referendum result; observe the election campaign that sparked despair among Scottish Tories; witness Chris Grayling's comically inept attempt to force through a botched up version of EV4EL; and note the Tories' lack of interest in a cross-party constitutional convention designed to sort out the current mess in a long-term, consensual way. Each one a gift and combined manna from heaven for an SNP seeking to keep the independence flame alive.

    Do you want to abolish SV4SL? If not then why should we not have EV4EL.

    Bloody minded hypocrites. Either we have devolution in which case there is SV4SL and EV4EL or we don't in which case we have British Votes for British Laws.

    Of course we should. But we should have them in a way that is designed to reflect the views of English voters and as part of a wider constitutional settlement. Given that the Tories have an overall Commons majority, the only way that the Tories do not get through English-only legislation in this parliament is if English Tory MPs vote against. The way the issue has been handled has been an absolute gift to the SNP.

    That doesn't solve the problem. So even if an English majority votes on something with a tiny Tory rebellion being assisted by over 50 Scots to defeat the English majority then that's democratically OK in your eyes?

    Besides this Parliament is not the only one, we should resolve the issue now for the future as it should have been resolved 17 years ago. It has only festered since and not tackling it will not make it go away anymore than it has gone away in the last 17 years. EVEL will address the democratic divide and then we can either move on or face the next problem.

    There is absolutely no non-partisan reason to support SVSL but oppose EVEL. It is hypocrisy and seeking partisan advantage.

    I would happily support EV4EL on the same basis that SV4SL take place. Would you?

    The issue is not just EV4EL though, is it? It's how the constituent parts of the United Kingdom can interact with each on an equitable, long-term basis, with as wide a buy-in as possible. I can see no logical reason to oppose a constitutional convention except for narrow party advantage. Unless, that is, you are opposed to the continued existence of the UK.
  • Options
    JPJ2 said:

    Plato

    "Oh please. Most Scots voted No. About 50% didn't vote SNP. I know riding the wave is heady, but Scotland doesn't = SNP. "

    I might just about concede that point, but whatever about the limits of the SNP support, it surely towers over the democratic strength of the one Scottish Tory, the one Scottish Labour and the one Scottish Lib Dem MP.

    Well the one Scottish Tory sits on the government benches while the 56 SNP MPs squabble with the one Labour MP and his colleagues over where in the opposition benches they get to sit.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,707
    edited August 2015
    Plato said:

    I've gone from being someone who 25yrs ago gave every month to the WWF, RSPCA, Greenpeace, Dogs Trust, RNLI, British Red Cross and a host others - plus one offs - I now only do Dogs Trust occasionally, Cats Prot with tins of food and RNLI.

    The rest of them have blotted their copy books by becoming political zealots, demanding, building very shiny HQs etc.

    The whole sector is a massive industry with little in common with what I'd call a charity. I was on the trustees of a local small charitable org, and that did great work with small donations and local business philanthropy. No one was paid to do this and we camped out in the back offices of a donor if we needed a desk/phone.

    Sandpit said:

    Plato said:

    Following on from earlier discussion "Our reporter responded to an advert for a fundraiser offering a wage of up to £35,000...."

    The govt should take advantage of its majority with a serious look at charities - the sector has changed beyond all recognition in the last 18 years since I was a student on a "RAG Trip" shaking a tin outside M&S on a Saturday.

    Some public polling on this would also be useful, my hunch is that there would be support for a clampdown on targeting the vulnerable, of high pay and costs, and of charities lobbying the government with public money.
    They are the "charitable" wing of the Labour Party. All of them. The politicking is now shameless, blatant and unapologetic.

    I met a friend of a friend last night at a wedding. She told me she worked for Christian Aid.

    As an experiment, I scrolled through her Facebook feed this morning. Sure enough, all throughout early May there was every Facebook campaign slogan and meme you could mention against the Tories, and in favour of Labour/Greens, including all the cliches you'd care to name around Gove and Bullingdon Boys. She "wanted to cry" when Cameron won. There's stuff about Corbyn now being 'interesting'.

    This is the problem. I simply will not give a single penny to any of these organisations whilst they self-righteously proclaim all left-wing politics to be intrinsically virtuous, equate any opposition to that to being morally wrong, and view any challenge to be held accountable for their spending as a subversion against doctrine.

    If they knock on my door, I tell them to get lost:

    http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9595082/im-done-with-this-guilt-trip-lets-hold-charities-to-account/
  • Options
    PaulyPauly Posts: 897
    edited August 2015
    rcs1000 said:


    Pretty harsh on deaf mutes

    Death mutes can still have:
    ‘level 2’ – equivalent to a C or above at GCSE.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,154
    Financier said:

    Corbyn does have a very simple appeal and is stating a lot of the right things to Labour party loyalists in a very clear, convincing and understandable way, without prevarications or dodging the questions. It is possible that many of the Labour-leader voters will find JC's approach a relief after undergoing the mental convolutions of EdM and he could get past the 50% on the first ballot.

    Corbyn's appeal to Labour this September is very similar to that of the SNP to Scotland this May.

    With similar results....
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited August 2015

    I would happily support EV4EL on the same basis that SV4SL take place. Would you?

    The issue is not just EV4EL though, is it? It's how the constituent parts of the United Kingdom can interact with each on an equitable, long-term basis, with as wide a buy-in as possible. I can see no logical reason to oppose a constitutional convention except for narrow party advantage. Unless, that is, you are opposed to the continued existence of the UK.

    Yes fine absolutely and we have an English Parliament already, its called Westminster. I'd be happy to implement EVEL on that basis yes, would you?

    What reason is there for a constitutional convention AFTER devolution has already happened. That's like arguing about what to do with the barn door EIGHTEEN YEARS after the horse has bolted. Devolution occured eighteen years ago, we need to exclude devolved MPs and be done with it.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,017
    Mr. Pauly, disagree entirely.

    Mr. Thompson, indeed, so-called English votes for English laws, as proposed, amount to A Bit More English Consultation For English Laws. It's not good enough.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Luke Akehurst did a great analysis of how well organised the hard-Left is when it comes to mobilising their supporters.
    These established Hard Left networks have mass support in the ranks of inactive members, as well as cadres who often hold key positions as CLP or branch secretaries. They have their own mailing lists assembled over years, and their NEC candidates hold extremely potent email lists assiduously collected at speaker meetings – one boasts of being able to email 20,000 members. The potency of and disciplined vote for the Grassroots Alliance slate is regularly demonstrated in NEC elections. Last summer the left took 4 of 6 NEC slots with all 6 of their candidates getting over 21000 votes, and Ken Livingstone getting nearly 40,000. I would have thought 95% of the core 21000 and many of the other additional 19000 who backed Ken will be Corbyn voters.

    The second component is Affiliated Supporters. Basically Unite is what matters here. The other unions backing Corbyn are small craft unions like the bakers and train drivers who are vocal but not big battalions. The other big unions – GMB and Unison – do not appear to be deploying a machine for Corbyn – one may not nominate and the other may back Burnham. But Unite has followed through on the logic of its policy positions and its much-leaked national political strategy and on the spirit of the Collins Review which assumed unions would enthusiastically recruit members to vote, and has signed up large numbers. I think their claim to have signed up 50,000 affiliated supporters is credible based on local sign-ups I see as Membership Secretary in my own CLP. If last time’s impact of the union nomination on voting behaviour is anything to go by, that means another 25,000 votes for Corbyn.

    Finally there is an influx of new blood into the party. The bulk of this isn’t £3 registered supporters, of which I’ve seen a figure of 20,000 people mentioned. Most of them are about 80,000 new full members out of 260,000 who joined in April, May and June in a smaller wave inspired by Ed in the election campaign and a bigger wave motivated by trauma, anger and despair after the election defeat. In the long run these new members will be a massive asset to Labour’s renewal. In the short term they are powering Corbyn’s support...
    MattW said:

    On Topic: I think the one, if anything, that swings it for Corbo, will be slanted encouragement of members to vote by Union call centres.

    UNITE have proved quite willing to manipulate any system they can, and I see no reason why they wouldn't do so in this case. They have the data as to their members' opinions.

    Is there any reason?

  • Options
    JPJ2 said:

    Plato

    "Oh please. Most Scots voted No. About 50% didn't vote SNP. I know riding the wave is heady, but Scotland doesn't = SNP. "

    I might just about concede that point, but whatever about the limits of the SNP support, it surely towers over the democratic strength of the one Scottish Tory, the one Scottish Labour and the one Scottish Lib Dem MP.



    The 56 got around the same percentage of the vote as the 3. Such is FPTP.

  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,028
    edited August 2015
    Plato said:

    I honestly find it baffling that we're back here again in 1983. Mr Corbyn's apple pie and kumbaya comes adrift just as EdM's milky version did. Marxism is all fine and dandy over the dinner table, if you ignore human nature - and how it votes.

    Given that Marxism hasn't swept all before it, tells us that there's a fatal flaw. And in the pockets where it still hangs on, all the economies are basketcases or failing badly. Voters look at it and say No Thanks.

    Idealism is called that for a reason - it's not real-life, yet once again we have great swathes of naivety, mixed with Class War and lashings of What's Yours Is Mine trying to convert us again.

    I'm sure it will seduce a few along the way - but it doesn't take much unpicking to point out why it's failed everywhere else and rejected 30yrs ago.

    Financier said:

    Corbyn does have a very simple appeal and is stating a lot of the right things to Labour party loyalists in a very clear, convincing and understandable way, without prevarications or dodging the questions. It is possible that many of the Labour-leader voters will find JC's approach a relief after undergoing the mental convolutions of EdM and he could get past the 50% on the first ballot.

    I wouldn't say it's a given that Marxism hasn't swept all before it...
  • Options
    PaulyPauly Posts: 897
    edited August 2015

    Mr. Pauly, disagree entirely.

    Mr. Thompson, indeed, so-called English votes for English laws, as proposed, amount to A Bit More English Consultation For English Laws. It's not good enough.

    What's wrong with a referendum? Forcing a parliament onto people against their wishes isn't democracy. If we vote for it, well fantastic.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    No, read Cameron talking about EV4EL instead of unity and reconciliation in his reaction to the referendum result; observe the election campaign that sparked despair among Scottish Tories; witness Chris Grayling's comically inept attempt to force through a botched up version of EV4EL; and note the Tories' lack of interest in a cross-party constitutional convention designed to sort out the current mess in a long-term, consensual way. Each one a gift and combined manna from heaven for an SNP seeking to keep the independence flame alive.

    Do you want to abolish SV4SL? If not then why should we not have EV4EL.

    Bloody minded hypocrites. Either we have devolution in which case there is SV4SL and EV4EL or we don't in which case we have British Votes for British Laws.

    Of course we should. But we should have them in a way that is designed to reflect the views of English voters and as part of a wider constitutional settlement. Given that the Tories have an overall Commons majority, the only way that the Tories do not get through English-only legislation in this parliament is if English Tory MPs vote against. The way the issue has been handled has been an absolute gift to the SNP.

    That doesn't solve the problem. So even if an English majority votes on something with a tiny Tory rebellion being assisted by over 50 Scots to defeat the English majority then that's democratically OK in your eyes?

    Besides this Parliament is not the only one, we should resolve the issue now for the future as it should have been resolved 17 years ago. It has only festered since and not tackling it will not make it go away anymore than it has gone away in the last 17 years. EVEL will address the democratic divide and then we can either move on or face the next problem.

    There is absolutely no non-partisan reason to support SVSL but oppose EVEL. It is hypocrisy and seeking partisan advantage.

    I would happily support EV4EL on the same basis that SV4SL take place. Would you?

    The issue is not just EV4EL though, is it? It's how the constituent parts of the United Kingdom can interact with each on an equitable, long-term basis, with as wide a buy-in as possible. I can see no logical reason to oppose a constitutional convention except for narrow party advantage. Unless, that is, you are opposed to the continued existence of the UK.
    Presumably the SNP would have no interest in this, since they have no interest in an federal UK, so it wouldn't get very far.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,017
    edited August 2015
    Mr. Pauly, I was disagreeing on the English parliament being undesired bit (although in retrospect the 'entirely' in my response was probably unhelpful in making it seem I might be against a referendum).
  • Options
    FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    @Plato

    Just wondering how many of those Labour-leader voters will be thinking as deeply and widely as you or how many will just vote reactively. Am pretty sure that most will not have read deeply either 1984 or Animal Farm - even if they were a set book at one time n their lives.
    Plato said:

    I honestly find it baffling that we're back here again in 1983. Mr Corbyn's apple pie and kumbaya comes adrift just as EdM's milky version did. Marxism is all fine and dandy over the dinner table, if you ignore human nature - and how it votes.

    Given that Marxism hasn't swept all before it, tells us that there's a fatal flaw. And in the pockets where it still hangs on, all the economies are basketcases or failing badly. Voters look at it and say No Thanks.

    Idealism is called that for a reason - it's not real-life, yet once again we have great swathes of naivety, mixed with Class War and lashings of What's Yours Is Mine trying to convert us again.

    I'm sure it will seduce a few along the way - but it doesn't take much unpicking to point out why it's failed everywhere else and rejected 30yrs ago.

    Financier said:

    Corbyn does have a very simple appeal and is stating a lot of the right things to Labour party loyalists in a very clear, convincing and understandable way, without prevarications or dodging the questions. It is possible that many of the Labour-leader voters will find JC's approach a relief after undergoing the mental convolutions of EdM and he could get past the 50% on the first ballot.

  • Options
    Pauly said:

    Mr. Pauly, disagree entirely.

    Mr. Thompson, indeed, so-called English votes for English laws, as proposed, amount to A Bit More English Consultation For English Laws. It's not good enough.

    What's wrong with a referendum? Forcing a parliament onto people against their wishes isn't democracy. If we vote for it, well fantastic.
    Who needs a referendum and what for?

    And having a Parliament is democracy. Kind of by definition, we never voted for Parliament it evolved over time.
  • Options
    JPJ2JPJ2 Posts: 378
    Philip_Thompson

    "Well the one Scottish Tory sits on the government benches while the 56 SNP MPs squabble with the one Labour MP and his colleagues over where in the opposition benches they get to sit. "

    Am I supposed to regard the power of the lone Tory as a triumph for democracy rather than the farce it is-just like the "Scottish" Affairs Committee having a majority of non-Scotland MPs on it?

    The end of the Union comes remorselessly nearer :-)
  • Options

    I would happily support EV4EL on the same basis that SV4SL take place. Would you?

    The issue is not just EV4EL though, is it? It's how the constituent parts of the United Kingdom can interact with each on an equitable, long-term basis, with as wide a buy-in as possible. I can see no logical reason to oppose a constitutional convention except for narrow party advantage. Unless, that is, you are opposed to the continued existence of the UK.

    Yes fine absolutely and we have an English Parliament already, its called Westminster. I'd be happy to implement EVEL on that basis yes, would you?

    What reason is there for a constitutional convention AFTER devolution has already happened. That's like arguing about what to do with the barn door EIGHTEEN YEARS after the horse has bolted. Devolution occured eighteen years ago, we need to exclude devolved MPs and be done with it.

    The MPs representing English constituencies were elected to be representatives to the UK parliament, not an English one. And they do not represent the political of the English people. If you are going to have an English parliament - and I am all for one and have been for years - then English voters have to be given the right to choose it, just as the Scots get the right to choose theirs.
  • Options
    JPJ2 said:

    Philip_Thompson

    "Well the one Scottish Tory sits on the government benches while the 56 SNP MPs squabble with the one Labour MP and his colleagues over where in the opposition benches they get to sit. "

    Am I supposed to regard the power of the lone Tory as a triumph for democracy rather than the farce it is-just like the "Scottish" Affairs Committee having a majority of non-Scotland MPs on it?

    The end of the Union comes remorselessly nearer :-)

    Considering 25% more Scots voted to remain part of the UK than to leave it ... yes
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    JPJ2 said:

    The end of the Union comes remorselessly nearer :-)

    Can we help ?

  • Options
    PaulyPauly Posts: 897

    Pauly said:

    Mr. Pauly, disagree entirely.

    Mr. Thompson, indeed, so-called English votes for English laws, as proposed, amount to A Bit More English Consultation For English Laws. It's not good enough.

    What's wrong with a referendum? Forcing a parliament onto people against their wishes isn't democracy. If we vote for it, well fantastic.
    Who needs a referendum and what for?

    And having a Parliament is democracy. Kind of by definition, we never voted for Parliament it evolved over time.
    One parliament is democracy. Giving us a parliament for England, UK and third for Europe is just excessive. It would hurt voter turnout and damage democracy.
    The referendum would give the parliament legitimacy.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    I would happily support EV4EL on the same basis that SV4SL take place. Would you?

    The issue is not just EV4EL though, is it? It's how the constituent parts of the United Kingdom can interact with each on an equitable, long-term basis, with as wide a buy-in as possible. I can see no logical reason to oppose a constitutional convention except for narrow party advantage. Unless, that is, you are opposed to the continued existence of the UK.

    Yes fine absolutely and we have an English Parliament already, its called Westminster. I'd be happy to implement EVEL on that basis yes, would you?

    What reason is there for a constitutional convention AFTER devolution has already happened. That's like arguing about what to do with the barn door EIGHTEEN YEARS after the horse has bolted. Devolution occured eighteen years ago, we need to exclude devolved MPs and be done with it.

    The MPs representing English constituencies were elected to be representatives to the UK parliament, not an English one. And they do not represent the political of the English people. If you are going to have an English parliament - and I am all for one and have been for years - then English voters have to be given the right to choose it, just as the Scots get the right to choose theirs.
    That sounds like an exercise in hair splitting. Are you seriously suggesting that if we dissolved the current parliament, and told the public that they were now electing their MP as a member for the English parliament, that they would elect someone different ?
  • Options

    I would happily support EV4EL on the same basis that SV4SL take place. Would you?

    The issue is not just EV4EL though, is it? It's how the constituent parts of the United Kingdom can interact with each on an equitable, long-term basis, with as wide a buy-in as possible. I can see no logical reason to oppose a constitutional convention except for narrow party advantage. Unless, that is, you are opposed to the continued existence of the UK.

    Yes fine absolutely and we have an English Parliament already, its called Westminster. I'd be happy to implement EVEL on that basis yes, would you?

    What reason is there for a constitutional convention AFTER devolution has already happened. That's like arguing about what to do with the barn door EIGHTEEN YEARS after the horse has bolted. Devolution occured eighteen years ago, we need to exclude devolved MPs and be done with it.

    The MPs representing English constituencies were elected to be representatives to the UK parliament, not an English one. And they do not represent the political of the English people. If you are going to have an English parliament - and I am all for one and have been for years - then English voters have to be given the right to choose it, just as the Scots get the right to choose theirs.
    No the UK Parliament is the English Parliament . The MPs representing English constituencies were elected to decide on Health, Education, taxes etc - all those things that were debated during the election campaign. The Scottish MPs were not. That Scotland has chosen to abandon Parliament does not mean we have to.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,335
    edited August 2015



    The 56 got around the same percentage of the vote as the 3. Such is FPTP.

    50% to 46.2%, not quite 'around the same percentage'.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited August 2015
    Pauly said:

    Pauly said:

    Mr. Pauly, disagree entirely.

    Mr. Thompson, indeed, so-called English votes for English laws, as proposed, amount to A Bit More English Consultation For English Laws. It's not good enough.

    What's wrong with a referendum? Forcing a parliament onto people against their wishes isn't democracy. If we vote for it, well fantastic.
    Who needs a referendum and what for?

    And having a Parliament is democracy. Kind of by definition, we never voted for Parliament it evolved over time.
    One parliament is democracy. Giving us a parliament for England, UK and third for Europe is just excessive. It would hurt voter turnout and damage democracy.
    The referendum would give the parliament legitimacy.
    In the same why as there is one for Scotland, the UK and the EU, or for Wales, the UK and the EU, or for Northern Ireland, the UK and the EU you mean ? Its okay for the other three members of the union, but not the English, its a view I suppose....
  • Options
    Pauly said:

    Pauly said:

    Mr. Pauly, disagree entirely.

    Mr. Thompson, indeed, so-called English votes for English laws, as proposed, amount to A Bit More English Consultation For English Laws. It's not good enough.

    What's wrong with a referendum? Forcing a parliament onto people against their wishes isn't democracy. If we vote for it, well fantastic.
    Who needs a referendum and what for?

    And having a Parliament is democracy. Kind of by definition, we never voted for Parliament it evolved over time.
    One parliament is democracy. Giving us a parliament for England, UK and third for Europe is just excessive. It would hurt voter turnout and damage democracy.
    The referendum would give the parliament legitimacy.
    Excluding Scottish MPs from Parliament's matters that Scotland has chosen to exclude itself from doesn't require an English Parliament.
Sign In or Register to comment.