Second. A very good post, Mrs Cyclefree. Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat?
I particularly liked your paragraph about London and the bankers. A lot of people who post on PB seem to be concerned only with the effect that the Referendum result will have on the financial sector.
In a way I think that this referendum has been more divisive - or brought out the divisions more clearly - precisely because it was not a GE and because every vote counted. It has also made me rethink my approach to the voting system. We should make every vote count. We may not like the result but better that than sullen acquiescence/indifference for years and then - boom - a shock.
Im not sure that you can say every vote counted . You could equally argue that the referendum had the greatest number of votes ever cast which did not count . If I had not voted at all or switched votes it would not only have made no difference to the result but also not have changed the %s of the 2 outcomes .
However, on this point, I agree with Cyclefree. If I take your argument, the loser's vote never counts !
Cyclefree appears to be changing her preference. In our GE's: in about 450 seats, there is no point voting at all. I could say the same in 40 out of 50 seats in the US.
All of the politicians involved in what was laughingly called a debate lied and lied. It is what they do. And then people choose.
I was going to vote LEAVE before the campaign even started. I decided that I would NOT watch any of the TV debates or QTs during the campaign itself.
I barely watched any of those, the stuff that persuaded me to back remain came entirely outside the main campaign. And since the vote I have gone from a marginal remainer through to the full "Lib Dem"..
@joncraig: Among Ruth Davidson's jokes in speech to pol corrs: "Labour still fumbling with its flies while Tories enjoying postal coital cigarette."
@tnewtondunn: "We're already enjoying a post-coital cigarette having withdrawn our enormous Johnson", @RuthDavidsonMSP on Tory v Labour leadership races
Theresa May is the arch-insider. She's not looking for a scrap, and if she ever did decide to get feisty, it wouldn't take long for briefing, health rumours, not up to it rumours etc.
Brexit gives us an opportunity, but it is just that. This country needs a serious survival plan for the 21st century. I don't see any sign that May has the right plan or even thinks one is necessary.
Second. A very good post, Mrs Cyclefree. Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat?
I particularly liked your paragraph about London and the bankers. A lot of people who post on PB seem to be concerned only with the effect that the Referendum result will have on the financial sector.
Interestingly, two of the junior Cyclefrees joined the Lib Dems in the last fortnight and I voted for them last year. There was a very good local LD candidate in my constituency.
I work in the financial sector but I was struck by what the Northern bit of my family and all our friends in Millom and roundabout said during the referendum. They were pretty much all for Leave, thought it would win and felt that London needed a reality check. And indeed when I go there it makes me realise that what gets taken for granted in London is really not at all normal in the rest of the country. It is not enough for London to say that we pay for everything: behaving like Lady Bountiful is not really tenable long-term.
In a way I think that this referendum has been more divisive - or brought out the divisions more clearly - precisely because it was not a GE and because every vote counted. It has also made me rethink my approach to the voting system. We should make every vote count. We may not like the result but better that than sullen acquiescence/indifference for years and then - boom - a shock.
Perhaps TSE could give us his views?
A very good thread header, Ms Cyclefree - and a good follow up post.
I've had my dalliances with LibDem politics in the past, and believe that the party has a valuable contribution to make to British Politics. (I join with the praise for the LibDems in putting the country first in the coalition after the 2010 General Election.)
For me, though, the red line has always been their Europhilia. It's a perfectly valid and respectable view of course - but one which ultimately puts me off completely.
All of the politicians involved in what was laughingly called a debate lied and lied. It is what they do. And then people choose.
I was going to vote LEAVE before the campaign even started. I decided that I would NOT watch any of the TV debates or QTs during the campaign itself.
I barely watched any of those, the stuff that persuaded me to back remain came entirely outside the main campaign. And since the vote I have gone from a marginal remainer through to the full "Lib Dem"..
Second. A very good post, Mrs Cyclefree. Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat?
I particularly liked your paragraph about London and the bankers. A lot of people who post on PB seem to be concerned only with the effect that the Referendum result will have on the financial sector.
Interestingly, two of the junior Cyclefrees joined the Lib Dems in the last fortnight and I voted for them last year. There was a very good local LD candidate in my constituency.
I work in the financial sector but I was struck by what the Northern bit of my family and all our friends in Millom and roundabout said during the referendum. They were pretty much all for Leave, thought it would win and felt that London needed a reality check. And indeed when I go there it makes me realise that what gets taken for granted in London is really not at all normal in the rest of the country. It is not enough for London to say that we pay for everything: behaving like Lady Bountiful is not really tenable long-term.
In a way I think that this referendum has been more divisive - or brought out the divisions more clearly - precisely because it was not a GE and because every vote counted. It has also made me rethink my approach to the voting system. We should make every vote count. We may not like the result but better that than sullen acquiescence/indifference for years and then - boom - a shock.
Perhaps TSE could give us his views?
Can I also thank you for an excellent article. I'm writing a big piece right now - called The Discontented - looking at the reasons why so many people in so many places are unhappy. I'll share it when I'm done. (Yes, with the whole of PB...)
What I find most interesting is that there is only one developed world country (that's not a massive commodity exporter) that's managed to square the circle in the last 25 years, and that's Germany.
East Germany in 1990 was a lot worse place than Millom, with lower skills, failing firms, and rising unemployment. Germany managed to revitalise its East, such that the unemployment rate in Brandenberg or Mecklenberg are below 6%. And they did it without the massively unbalanced economy that we have: there's no massive current account issue, or consumer debt issue, or reliance on housing or the vagaries of finance.
We would do well to learn lessons from the Germans as far as how regional policy should work.
The lessons to learn from Germany are surely the same ones to learn from China. Hold down your exchange rate and wage economic warfare on your neighbours?
Second. A very good post, Mrs Cyclefree. Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat?
I particularly liked your paragraph about London and the bankers. A lot of people who post on PB seem to be concerned only with the effect that the Referendum result will have on the financial sector.
Interestingly, two of the junior Cyclefrees joined the Lib Dems in the last fortnight and I voted for them last year. There was a very good local LD candidate in my constituency.
I work in the financial sector but I was struck by what the Northern bit of my family and all our friends in Millom and roundabout said during the referendum. They were pretty much all for Leave, thought it would win and felt that London needed a reality check. And indeed when I go there it makes me realise that what gets taken for granted in London is really not at all normal in the rest of the country. It is not enough for London to say that we pay for everything: behaving like Lady Bountiful is not really tenable long-term.
In a way I think that this referendum has been more divisive - or brought out the divisions more clearly - precisely because it was not a GE and because every vote counted. It has also made me rethink my approach to the voting system. We should make every vote count. We may not like the result but better that than sullen acquiescence/indifference for years and then - boom - a shock.
Perhaps TSE could give us his views?
I was drinking on Sunday night, in a rural Essex pub, with thje Secretary of the local Labour Party, a retired graduate with an Essex WWC background, who had been, for the first time in his life to the Durham Miners Gala (his wife’s family live thereabouts). He was very struck by the feelings he encountered; very similar to those described as being those of family in Millom. He had been working hard for Remain before the referendum, but was now strugging to square his own particular intellectual circle. In particular he notd the number of people he met who either were, or had close family members, on zero-hours contracts, or who were otherwise struggling to make ends meet.
Agreed. But why blame the EU for that. Do they think zero-hour contracts will go away in Brexit Tory government ?
Another great piece from Cyclefree. ... Do we need a form of PR so that the opinions of the inhabitants of the rotten boroughs count? I rather think we do.
Yes, we damn well do. I doubt it will happen, though. It won't be in the interests of the politicians - or at least not those that are in power.
Personally I think FPTP+ - an evolution of the FPTP system rather than revolution might be the way ahead. It is working well in Scotland imo, and a party can only get a majority if it is overwhemingly popular in all areas.
A few tweets saying that 'Senior Labour figures' are hoping to stop Corbyn voting. He gets a vote? Utterly shambolic joke of a leadership process, crafted by the towering political intellect that was Ed Miliband.
Of course he gets a vote, he is on the NEC.
In most other walks of life, a declaration of conflict of interest would be necessary and abstention from decision making would follow. Forgot we were talking about Labour internal governance. Even the Lib Dems can run a process better than this.
All of the politicians involved in what was laughingly called a debate lied and lied. It is what they do. And then people choose.
I was going to vote LEAVE before the campaign even started. I decided that I would NOT watch any of the TV debates or QTs during the campaign itself.
I barely watched any of those, the stuff that persuaded me to back remain came entirely outside the main campaign. And since the vote I have gone from a marginal remainer through to the full "Lib Dem"..
You'd rejoin the EU warts and all?
I think we're better off in personally.
Even with Euro and Schengen? We're not going to be allowed back in with all of our existing opt-outs.
The big problem is that in the UK we have corporate subsidies and a welfare system which discourages people from working. We must reform the benefits and tax credits system in the country. We can then spend the money on improving the life chances of young people and those left behind by globalisation. Better education, training and retraining. All of this costs a huge amount of money but we're spending £29bn on in working benefits and £20bn on housing benefits per year. A disproportionately large amount of this money goes to EU migrants. Take the draw of in working and housing benefits away and unskilled migration falls while wages increase. UK companies have survived on low skilled migrants who are subsidised by government largesse. Remove the largesse and the companies will adapt.
As always, we must look to a supply side solution and they are out there. We just need a PM with the cojones to do it.
"unskilled migration falls while wages increase" - possibly... but something we could predict with some certainty will be collapse of the social care sector.
With £30-40bn in savings available we could increase direct funding and wages for care workers to the living wage. What we're doing right now is subsidising unsustainable business models. If the UK were a company the EU would have collared it under illegal state aid rules.
The problem is that care provision is largely reliant on local authority funding - that money isn't there. I worked with two home-care companies a few years ago and their profit margins were squeezed by local authorities to unsustainable levels. One went under - the other moved away from council contract work and towards private clients.
That was pre-living wage legislation - I can't see that one surviving
All of the politicians involved in what was laughingly called a debate lied and lied. It is what they do. And then people choose.
I was going to vote LEAVE before the campaign even started. I decided that I would NOT watch any of the TV debates or QTs during the campaign itself.
I barely watched any of those, the stuff that persuaded me to back remain came entirely outside the main campaign. And since the vote I have gone from a marginal remainer through to the full "Lib Dem"..
Second. A very good post, Mrs Cyclefree. Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat?
I particularly liked your paragraph about London and the bankers. A lot of people who post on PB seem to be concerned only with the effect that the Referendum result will have on the financial sector.
Interestingly, two of the junior Cyclefrees joined the Lib Dems in the last fortnight and I voted for them last year. There was a very good local LD candidate in my constituency.
I work in the financial sector but I was struck by what the Northern bit of my family and all our friends in Millom and roundabout said during the referendum. They were pretty much all for Leave, thought it would win and felt that London needed a reality check. And indeed when I go there it makes me realise that what gets taken for granted in London is really not at all normal in the rest of the country. It is not enough for London to say that we pay for everything: behaving like Lady Bountiful is not really tenable long-term.
In a way I think that this referendum has been more divisive - or brought out the divisions more clearly - precisely because it was not a GE and because every vote counted. It has also made me rethink my approach to the voting system. We should make every vote count. We may not like the result but better that than sullen acquiescence/indifference for years and then - boom - a shock.
Perhaps TSE could give us his views?
Can I also thank you for an excellent article. I'm writing a big piece right now - called The Discontented - looking at the reasons why so many people in so many places are unhappy. I'll share it when I'm done. (Yes, with the whole of PB...)
What I find most interesting is that there is only one developed world country (that's not a massive commodity exporter) that's managed to square the circle in the last 25 years, and that's Germany.
East Germany in 1990 was a lot worse place than Millom, with lower skills, failing firms, and rising unemployment. Germany managed to revitalise its East, such that the unemployment rate in Brandenberg or Mecklenberg are below 6%. And they did it without the massively unbalanced economy that we have: there's no massive current account issue, or consumer debt issue, or reliance on housing or the vagaries of finance.
We would do well to learn lessons from the Germans as far as how regional policy should work.
The lessons to learn from Germany are surely the same ones to learn from China. Hold down your exchange rate and wage economic warfare on your neighbours?
No. Massive investment. Every German paid 7% of their taxes again. So, if tax = €100, they paid anoth €7 towards the Ossie fund.
This is the standard rhetoric of all Tories since forever.
What they'll do is what they always do, try to grow the economy by cutting taxes and regulation while trying to get poor people to blame their problems on foreigners.
And this is the standard rallying cry (and usual tosh) of non Tories everywhere. Yet still we're the natural party of government. Democracy eh?
Cutting taxes and regulation does indeed grow the economy, and getting poor people to blame their problems on foreigners is an effective, time-tested political strategy.
It's a balancing act though, because the combination of the second part with democracy bollockses up the first part. They don't normally get backed into a corner the way Cameron did: Pretending to be against the EU so he could blame foreigners for things, then ending up having to admit he supported it and hoping the voters didn't take his previous position too seriously.
A great article and something that strikes a chord with me. Although a confirmed Tory (I believe they are best set to govern the country) I do tend to the more gentle side of politics and some left wing ideas are not necessarily wrong.
Agree: the conservatives have allowed themselves to be captured by the graspers in society, the bankers and the multinationals. We need to remember that we elect leaders to govern for all, not just a small elite.
@joncraig: Among Ruth Davidson's jokes in speech to pol corrs: "Labour still fumbling with its flies while Tories enjoying postal coital cigarette."
@tnewtondunn: "We're already enjoying a post-coital cigarette having withdrawn our enormous Johnson", @RuthDavidsonMSP on Tory v Labour leadership races
LOL.
And even a betting tip for us lot:
@smashmorePH: Ruth Davidson: "It's worth a flutter on David Mundell staying Scottish Secretary."
First class thread header. I might argue over one or two specifics but to do so would be to quibble. All front benchers should read this and then be forced to go to Millom in Cumberland and lodge in a local B&B for a week and immerse themselves in provincial life.
"What the result of this referendum has revealed – perhaps even more than Britain’s attitude to the EU – is how little the political class understands the country and people it is seeking to represent and govern."
It has also revealed that the Media in his country need to broaden their contacts beyond their dinner party circuit. Our chatterati never seem to chatter to anybody outside the M25, or more than a mile from Salford's MediaCity. The air of "how bloody DARE they!" that accompanied the Brexit result was comical and troubling in equal measure.
The reference to Millom took me back 50 years.My family left when the Ironworks closed down in the early 60's. I have returned on quite a few occasions. Main employment is either 25 miles south, Barrow Shipyard or 25 miles north Winscale/ Sellafield. There is now a prison a few miles away which provides some employment, but the people I know regularly travel a distance to work. This is staunch Labour but they will have voted Leave with a passion. There are no privileged few.
I have family about 2 miles away and know the place well. We have been going there for the last 30 years and my husband's family have been there/Silecroft since the end of the war. The area is beautiful but not a part of the Lakes many know well and it's often forgotten that parts of it are not doing very well. There is a very different perspective there. The decline in regional politicians with a real base and hinterland in their regions is one reason, I think, that so much of the political class is out of touch. Ken Clarke is probably one of the last of that type of politician, ironically enough.
Another great piece from Cyclefree. ... Do we need a form of PR so that the opinions of the inhabitants of the rotten boroughs count? I rather think we do.
Yes, we damn well do. I doubt it will happen, though. It won't be in the interests of the politicians - or at least not those that are in power.
Personally I think FPTP+ - an evolution of the FPTP system rather than revolution might be the way ahead. It is working well in Scotland imo, and a party can only get a majority if it is overwhemingly popular in all areas.
Wouldn't disagree with that, Mr. Star. The problem is that it requires the government of the day to give away some of its power and maybe decrease the chance of it being re-elected. Strangely none of them have seen that to be a good thing to do.
I think we need a new Reform Act, probably preceded by a Royal Commision. No government is going to do it though, certainly not in next few years.
Second. A very good post, Mrs Cyclefree. Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat?
I particularly liked your paragraph about London and the bankers. A lot of people who post on PB seem to be concerned only with the effect that the Referendum result will have on the financial sector.
Interestingly, two of the junior Cyclefrees joined the Lib Dems in the last fortnight and I voted for them last year. There was a very good local LD candidate in my constituency.
I work in the financial sector but I was struck by what the Northern bit of my family and all our friends in Millom and roundabout said during the referendum. They were pretty much all for Leave, thought it would win and felt that London needed a reality check. And indeed when I go there it makes me realise that what gets taken for granted in London is really not at all normal in the rest of the country. It is not enough for London to say that we pay for everything: behaving like Lady Bountiful is not really tenable long-term.
In a way I think that this referendum has been more divisive - or brought out the divisions more clearly - precisely because it was not a GE and because every vote counted. It has also made me rethink my approach to the voting system. We should make every vote count. We may not like the result but better that than sullen acquiescence/indifference for years and then - boom - a shock.
Perhaps TSE could give us his views?
A very good thread header, Ms Cyclefree - and a good follow up post.
I've had my dalliances with LibDem politics in the past, and believe that the party has a valuable contribution to make to British Politics. (I join with the praise for the LibDems in putting the country first in the coalition after the 2010 General Election.)
For me, though, the red line has always been their Europhilia. It's a perfectly valid and respectable view of course - but one which ultimately puts me off completely.
Re your last point, it's the same for me (though I don't join parties in any case). Interestingly, both the junior Cyclefrees felt that the Lib Dems had been unfairly treated for their brave decision to join the Coalition, thought Labour a joke and felt that the Tories in the last year had not been anything like as good as the Coalition. The EU was less of an issue but for them they felt European and somehow felt that this vote took some of that away. I agree with much of their views. There is a very fine line between those with similar views who voted Leave and those who, reluctantly perhaps, voted Remain.
There is a case for a better Europe than the one we currently have or are likely to have on offer for the foreseeable future.
A few tweets saying that 'Senior Labour figures' are hoping to stop Corbyn voting. He gets a vote? Utterly shambolic joke of a leadership process, crafted by the towering political intellect that was Ed Miliband.
Of course he gets a vote, he is on the NEC.
Actually the convention is that those who have an interest do not attend the meeting. Another convention Corbyn is riding roughshod over.
Second. A very good post, Mrs Cyclefree. Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat?
I particularly liked your paragraph about London and the bankers. A lot of people who post on PB seem to be concerned only with the effect that the Referendum result will have on the financial sector.
Interestingly, two of the junior Cyclefrees joined the Lib Dems in the last fortnight and I voted for them last year. There was a very good local LD candidate in my constituency.
I work in the financial sector but I was struck by what the Northern bit of my family and all our friends in Millom and roundabout said during the referendum. They were pretty much all for Leave, thought it would win and felt that London needed a reality check. And indeed when I go there it makes me realise that what gets taken for granted in London is really not at all normal in the rest of the country. It is not enough for London to say that we pay for everything: behaving like Lady Bountiful is not really tenable long-term.
In a way I think that this referendum has been more divisive - or brought out the divisions more clearly - precisely because it was not a GE and because every vote counted. It has also made me rethink my approach to the voting system. We should make every vote count. We may not like the result but better that than sullen acquiescence/indifference for years and then - boom - a shock.
Perhaps TSE could give us his views?
If it was all about the voting system surely the discontent which we see all over Europe would be confined to the UK. I think it is deeper than that. Plus let''s be clear 48 v 52 is a clear victory but a country pretty well divided and that does not automatically mean that the 'leavers' were/are totally right about everything. the best that can be said about their motivations is that they were as selfish as everyone else's.
On topic, the Tories have a long and honourable tradition of stealing the left's clothes and wearing them better, from Peel and Disraeli through to the Butlerite 1950s and on to Cameron and May today.
The funny thing is that the Tories think they are clever when they do that.
It's seen the party successfully through 200 years, over half of it in government and with only one major split in that time.
Labour, by contrast, is little more than a century old and has already suffered two major splits and is currently flirting with a third.
No. Massive investment. Every German paid 7% of their taxes again. So, if tax = €100, they paid anoth €7 towards the Ossie fund.
Again a lesson to learn from China about spare capacity and, again, waging economic war on your neighbours. None of what Germany has done is rocket science, in fact a prolonged period of weak Sterling will eventually see the UK head towards a similar model, but without a failing part if a currency union to hold down rates it will be tough to maintain without the introduction of a price ceiling by the BoE.
I'm very sceptical about "economic miracles" every winner creates a loser. Southern Europe has lost and Germany has won.
Millom at night was quite a sight, With the ironworks in full swing. The sky was aflame, from furnace and train. As the ore was wheeled in.
Showers of sparks, explode in the dark, Like a thousand shooting stars. While the haematite boiled, scorched workers toiled. Producing the pig-iron bars.
While under the sea, on bended knee, Miners are hacking out ore. Within pillars and stalls, they create vast halls. Endeavouring, to search for more.
Then in sixty-eight, an awful fate, Befell, this small mining town. Jobs would be lost, at a terrible cost. With the ironworks closing down.
Within half a year, they faced their fears. Hodbarrow mines were no more. The last shift went down, deep underground. Death to the Cumbrian ore.
The mines, now gone from this small town. But the memory, still lives on. The miners lost, the jobs it's cost; And pride still soldiers on
Still, I feel proud, when heard out loud, A Millomite born and bred! I think of the mines, of all the hard times; And the tears, this town has shed.
Second. A very good post, Mrs Cyclefree. Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat?
I particularly liked your paragraph about London and the bankers. A lot of people who post on PB seem to be concerned only with the effect that the Referendum result will have on the financial sector.
Interestingly, two of the junior Cyclefrees joined the Lib Dems in the last fortnight and I voted for them last year. There was a very good local LD candidate in my constituency.
I work in the financial sector but I was struck by what the Northern bit of my family and all our friends in Millom and roundabout said during the referendum. They were pretty much all for Leave, thought it would win and felt that London needed a reality check. And indeed when I go there it makes me realise that what gets taken for granted in London is really not at all normal in the rest of the country. It is not enough for London to say that we pay for everything: behaving like Lady Bountiful is not really tenable long-term.
In a way I think that this referendum has been more divisive - or brought out the divisions more clearly - precisely because it was not a GE and because every vote counted. It has also made me rethink my approach to the voting system. We should make every vote count. We may not like the result but better that than sullen acquiescence/indifference for years and then - boom - a shock.
Perhaps TSE could give us his views?
Can I also thank you for an excellent article. I'm writing a big piece right now - called The Discontented - looking at the reasons why so many people in so many places are unhappy. I'll share it when I'm done. (Yes, with the whole of PB...)
What I find most interesting is that there is only one developed world country (that's not a massive commodity exporter) that's managed to square the circle in the last 25 years, and that's Germany.
East Germany in 1990 was a lot worse place than Millom, with lower skills, failing firms, and rising unemployment. Germany managed to revitalise its East, such that the unemployment rate in Brandenberg or Mecklenberg are below 6%. And they did it without the massively unbalanced economy that we have: there's no massive current account issue, or consumer debt issue, or reliance on housing or the vagaries of finance.
We would do well to learn lessons from the Germans as far as how regional policy should work.
I thought the East was heavily dependent on subsidy from the West.
And, (which is relevant to Cyclefree's article) the young unemployed have gone West.
Thank you Cycle Free. Yes the focus needs to be on the have nots and how to improve the life for most of them. They need to have less competition for unskilled jobs, more choice of housing and less pressure on other services such as the NHS which they wish to access. With that has to be a shift away from rights to responsibilities. The welfare support that we each should have a right to must be linked to our responsibility to contribute. A contribution based system.
Totally agree about welfare - which ironically is how it works in most EU countries - but this is where the liberal left will part company with you and why things like the welfare system and the NHS are completely and inevitably permanently unaffordable.
@PickardJE: And today I'm told that Paul Flynn yesterday asked Corbyn to resign during meeting of shadow cabinet. Just called him to check: he hung up.
Surely there's a chance that in a new vote of members, Corbyn won't actually win this time round.
Won't there be some September 2015 Corbyn supporters who have seen how hopeless he is who might change horses?
More importantly, does my £3 cover me for an election about to start in 2016 or do I have to subscribe again? :-)
Why are you voting in another party's leadership election? That's pretty uncivic if you are doing so to game the result. Shameful in fact.
Is Bob Sykes a Conservative party member ?
I'd say it is poor form (And a breach of rules) if so. If he isn't then it is fair enough.
I will not be voting this time round personally.
When you register for £3 you are registering as a Labour supporter. If you are in fact a Labour opponent that is morally wrong. You are trying to game the leadership election of a party you oppose. Corbyn has brought misery on to millions of Labour voters in part thanks to the three quid gamers. Shameful stuff.
The big problem is that in the UK we have corporate subsidies and a welfare system which discourages people from working. We must reform the benefits and tax credits system in the country. We can then spend the money on improving the life chances of young people and those left behind by globalisation. Better education, training and retraining. All of this costs a huge amount of money but we're spending £29bn on in working benefits and £20bn on housing benefits per year. A disproportionately large amount of this money goes to EU migrants. Take the draw of in working and housing benefits away and unskilled migration falls while wages increase. UK companies have survived on low skilled migrants who are subsidised by government largesse. Remove the largesse and the companies will adapt.
As always, we must look to a supply side solution and they are out there. We just need a PM with the cojones to do it.
"unskilled migration falls while wages increase" - possibly... but something we could predict with some certainty will be collapse of the social care sector.
With £30-40bn in savings available we could increase direct funding and wages for care workers to the living wage. What we're doing right now is subsidising unsustainable business models. If the UK were a company the EU would have collared it under illegal state aid rules.
The problem is that care provision is largely reliant on local authority funding - that money isn't there. I worked with two home-care companies a few years ago and their profit margins were squeezed by local authorities to unsustainable levels. One went under - the other moved away from council contract work and towards private clients.
That was pre-living wage legislation - I can't see that one surviving
Thats where the additional funding would make a difference. We could hypothecate it so that LAs can't just splurge it on useless stuff as well.
Surely there's a chance that in a new vote of members, Corbyn won't actually win this time round.
Won't there be some September 2015 Corbyn supporters who have seen how hopeless he is who might change horses?
More importantly, does my £3 cover me for an election about to start in 2016 or do I have to subscribe again? :-)
Why are you voting in another party's leadership election? That's pretty uncivic if you are doing so to game the result. Shameful in fact.
Is Bob Sykes a Conservative party member ?
I'd say it is poor form (And a breach of rules) if so. If he isn't then it is fair enough.
I will not be voting this time round personally.
When you register for £3 you are registering as a Labour supporter. If you are in fact a Labour opponent that is morally wrong. You are trying to game the leadership election of a party you oppose. Corbyn has brought misery on to millions of Labour voters in part thanks to the three quid gamers. Shameful stuff.
Well Labour wouldn't have been in this mess if everyone had voted the same way as me
On topic, the Tories have a long and honourable tradition of stealing the left's clothes and wearing them better, from Peel and Disraeli through to the Butlerite 1950s and on to Cameron and May today.
The funny thing is that the Tories think they are clever when they do that.
It's seen the party successfully through 200 years, over half of it in government and with only one major split in that time.
Labour, by contrast, is little more than a century old and has already suffered two major splits and is currently flirting with a third.
Flirting with? Presumably you are involved in some sort of understatement of the day competition David?
The big problem is that in the UK we have corporate subsidies and a welfare system which discourages people from working. We must reform the benefits and tax credits system in the country. We can then spend the money on improving the life chances of young people and those left behind by globalisation. Better education, training and retraining. All of this costs a huge amount of money but we're spending £29bn on in working benefits and £20bn on housing benefits per year. A disproportionately large amount of this money goes to EU migrants. Take the draw of in working and housing benefits away and unskilled migration falls while wages increase. UK companies have survived on low skilled migrants who are subsidised by government largesse. Remove the largesse and the companies will adapt.
As always, we must look to a supply side solution and they are out there. We just need a PM with the cojones to do it.
Surely there's a chance that in a new vote of members, Corbyn won't actually win this time round.
Won't there be some September 2015 Corbyn supporters who have seen how hopeless he is who might change horses?
More importantly, does my £3 cover me for an election about to start in 2016 or do I have to subscribe again? :-)
Why are you voting in another party's leadership election? That's pretty uncivic if you are doing so to game the result. Shameful in fact.
Is Bob Sykes a Conservative party member ?
I'd say it is poor form (And a breach of rules) if so. If he isn't then it is fair enough.
I will not be voting this time round personally.
When you register for £3 you are registering as a Labour supporter. If you are in fact a Labour opponent that is morally wrong. You are trying to game the leadership election of a party you oppose. Corbyn has brought misery on to millions of Labour voters in part thanks to the three quid gamers. Shameful stuff.
If you believe destroying the Labour Party is in the national interest then it is morally justified.
Surely there's a chance that in a new vote of members, Corbyn won't actually win this time round.
Won't there be some September 2015 Corbyn supporters who have seen how hopeless he is who might change horses?
More importantly, does my £3 cover me for an election about to start in 2016 or do I have to subscribe again? :-)
Why are you voting in another party's leadership election? That's pretty uncivic if you are doing so to game the result. Shameful in fact.
Is Bob Sykes a Conservative party member ?
I'd say it is poor form (And a breach of rules) if so. If he isn't then it is fair enough.
I will not be voting this time round personally.
When you register for £3 you are registering as a Labour supporter. If you are in fact a Labour opponent that is morally wrong. You are trying to game the leadership election of a party you oppose. Corbyn has brought misery on to millions of Labour voters in part thanks to the three quid gamers. Shameful stuff.
Anyone who votes for the Labour Party deserves their misery. They are an abhorrent shower who have spent their existence trying to destroy the UK. Their only claim of relevance is the founding of the NHS but every advanced economy (excepet one) moved to public health provision without needing a Labour Party and if anything the NHS model is rather monolithic and difficult to change which may not be for the best in the long run.
Labour are deserving of death and anyone who wants to see that and pays their £3 to accelerate that is worthy of great praise. They are doing their bit for the nation.
Surely there's a chance that in a new vote of members, Corbyn won't actually win this time round.
Won't there be some September 2015 Corbyn supporters who have seen how hopeless he is who might change horses?
More importantly, does my £3 cover me for an election about to start in 2016 or do I have to subscribe again? :-)
Why are you voting in another party's leadership election? That's pretty uncivic if you are doing so to game the result. Shameful in fact.
Is Bob Sykes a Conservative party member ?
I'd say it is poor form (And a breach of rules) if so. If he isn't then it is fair enough.
I will not be voting this time round personally.
When you register for £3 you are registering as a Labour supporter. If you are in fact a Labour opponent that is morally wrong. You are trying to game the leadership election of a party you oppose. Corbyn has brought misery on to millions of Labour voters in part thanks to the three quid gamers. Shameful stuff.
Well Labour wouldn't have been in this mess if everyone had voted the same way as me
Surely there's a chance that in a new vote of members, Corbyn won't actually win this time round.
Won't there be some September 2015 Corbyn supporters who have seen how hopeless he is who might change horses?
More importantly, does my £3 cover me for an election about to start in 2016 or do I have to subscribe again? :-)
Why are you voting in another party's leadership election? That's pretty uncivic if you are doing so to game the result. Shameful in fact.
Is Bob Sykes a Conservative party member ?
I'd say it is poor form (And a breach of rules) if so. If he isn't then it is fair enough.
I will not be voting this time round personally.
When you register for £3 you are registering as a Labour supporter. If you are in fact a Labour opponent that is morally wrong. You are trying to game the leadership election of a party you oppose. Corbyn has brought misery on to millions of Labour voters in part thanks to the three quid gamers. Shameful stuff.
Well Labour wouldn't have been in this mess if everyone had voted the same way as me
1. Kendall
And 2??!
The second preferences were never counted
I was a member of no party at the time and voted Green at the last GE
The reference to Millom took me back 50 years.My family left when the Ironworks closed down in the early 60's. I have returned on quite a few occasions. Main employment is either 25 miles south, Barrow Shipyard or 25 miles north Winscale/ Sellafield. There is now a prison a few miles away which provides some employment, but the people I know regularly travel a distance to work. This is staunch Labour but they will have voted Leave with a passion. There are no privileged few.
I have family about 2 miles away and know the place well. We have been going there for the last 30 years and my husband's family have been there/Silecroft since the end of the war. The area is beautiful but not a part of the Lakes many know well and it's often forgotten that parts of it are not doing very well. There is a very different perspective there. The decline in regional politicians with a real base and hinterland in their regions is one reason, I think, that so much of the political class is out of touch. Ken Clarke is probably one of the last of that type of politician, ironically enough.
Surely there's a chance that in a new vote of members, Corbyn won't actually win this time round.
Won't there be some September 2015 Corbyn supporters who have seen how hopeless he is who might change horses?
More importantly, does my £3 cover me for an election about to start in 2016 or do I have to subscribe again? :-)
Why are you voting in another party's leadership election? That's pretty uncivic if you are doing so to game the result. Shameful in fact.
Is Bob Sykes a Conservative party member ?
I'd say it is poor form (And a breach of rules) if so. If he isn't then it is fair enough.
I will not be voting this time round personally.
When you register for £3 you are registering as a Labour supporter. If you are in fact a Labour opponent that is morally wrong. You are trying to game the leadership election of a party you oppose. Corbyn has brought misery on to millions of Labour voters in part thanks to the three quid gamers. Shameful stuff.
Well Labour wouldn't have been in this mess if everyone had voted the same way as me
Surely there's a chance that in a new vote of members, Corbyn won't actually win this time round.
Won't there be some September 2015 Corbyn supporters who have seen how hopeless he is who might change horses?
More importantly, does my £3 cover me for an election about to start in 2016 or do I have to subscribe again? :-)
Why are you voting in another party's leadership election? That's pretty uncivic if you are doing so to game the result. Shameful in fact.
Is Bob Sykes a Conservative party member ?
I'd say it is poor form (And a breach of rules) if so. If he isn't then it is fair enough.
I will not be voting this time round personally.
When you register for £3 you are registering as a Labour supporter. If you are in fact a Labour opponent that is morally wrong. You are trying to game the leadership election of a party you oppose. Corbyn has brought misery on to millions of Labour voters in part thanks to the three quid gamers. Shameful stuff.
Anyone who votes for the Labour Party deserves their misery. They are an abhorrent shower who have spent their existence trying to destroy the UK. Their only claim of relevance is the founding of the NHS but every advanced economy (excepet one) moved to public health provision without needing a Labour Party and if anything the NHS model is rather monolithic and difficult to change which may not be for the best in the long run.
Labour are deserving of death and anyone who wants to see that and pays their £3 to accelerate that is worthy of great praise. They are doing their bit for the nation.
"Founding of the NHS"
Which was 71 years ago - even Villa have done something good in that timeframe.
TCPoliticalBetting - you might want to check your father's prescriptions. When my mother came to me after a period in hospital she was confined to bed and just stared into the corner like a cat. I went through the drugs she had - when I came to a particular antipsychotic the nurse said "Oh, don't take her off that - she will want to get out of bed". She is much more alert and interested in things without that drug.
@PickardJE: And today I'm told that Paul Flynn yesterday asked Corbyn to resign during meeting of shadow cabinet. Just called him to check: he hung up.
Paul Flynn is a neocon Red Tory Blairite. I'm sure @bigjohnowls will fill you in.
Good afternoon all. Another great article from Cyclefree. Kudos!
My political journey started in March 2014, when my wife Jenny was diagnosed with terminal lung cancer. She immediately contracted pneumonia, followed by a pleural empyema. I spent most of the summer of 2014 in and around the oncology suite in Hereford.
Jenny was eligible for PIP, which amounted to £138.75 p.w. (that's the maximum). We were comfortably off, but it struck me for the first time in a long time, and in a very visceral way, what the effect of a serious illness would have on an 'ordinary' family. The bulk of that money went on petrol and parking (NHS discounts apply, but are limited). If we hadn't have been affluent, we would have been in terrible financial difficulty on top of the emotional distress we were going through.
As I was cooling my heels for long periods of time, I talked to a lot of people, mainly middle aged or older, obviously all sick. It really reset my views. There's a whole raft of people who we are able to conveniently ignore; the sick, the underemployed, the culturally displaced.
As I wrote last night, we can't keep treating our working poor as if they're some kind of fungible commodity. Freedom of movement has, as Cyclefree points out, worked to export unemployment from Eastern to Western Europe, and broken the classical relationship between labour supply, demand and wage levels.
For those who point to record employment figures; we have 1.6 million unemployed. Around half a million have been out of work for more than a year and just over half a million young unemployed.
I hope that EUref is a wake up call. I fear that it won't be.
I thought the East was heavily dependent on subsidy from the West.
And, (which is relevant to Cyclefree's article) the young unemployed have gone West.
It remains heavily dependent on subsidy, albeit less than it was previously.
But here's the thing: East Germany now has a thriving manufacturing and industrial base, that exports all over the world. Berlin's population is growing, and it's one of the most exciting cities in the world, and is second only to London in terms of number of technology start-ups.
The German education system produced employable people in East Germany, and their structure of apprenticeships, and targeted investment encouraged people to set up manufacturing there.
Surely there's a chance that in a new vote of members, Corbyn won't actually win this time round.
Won't there be some September 2015 Corbyn supporters who have seen how hopeless he is who might change horses?
More importantly, does my £3 cover me for an election about to start in 2016 or do I have to subscribe again? :-)
Why are you voting in another party's leadership election? That's pretty uncivic if you are doing so to game the result. Shameful in fact.
Is Bob Sykes a Conservative party member ?
I'd say it is poor form (And a breach of rules) if so. If he isn't then it is fair enough.
I will not be voting this time round personally.
When you register for £3 you are registering as a Labour supporter. If you are in fact a Labour opponent that is morally wrong. You are trying to game the leadership election of a party you oppose. Corbyn has brought misery on to millions of Labour voters in part thanks to the three quid gamers. Shameful stuff.
Well Labour wouldn't have been in this mess if everyone had voted the same way as me
1. Kendall
And 2??!
The second preferences were never counted
I was a member of no party at the time and voted Green at the last GE
Surely there's a chance that in a new vote of members, Corbyn won't actually win this time round.
Won't there be some September 2015 Corbyn supporters who have seen how hopeless he is who might change horses?
More importantly, does my £3 cover me for an election about to start in 2016 or do I have to subscribe again? :-)
Why are you voting in another party's leadership election? That's pretty uncivic if you are doing so to game the result. Shameful in fact.
Is Bob Sykes a Conservative party member ?
I'd say it is poor form (And a breach of rules) if so. If he isn't then it is fair enough.
I will not be voting this time round personally.
When you register for £3 you are registering as a Labour supporter. If you are in fact a Labour opponent that is morally wrong. You are trying to game the leadership election of a party you oppose. Corbyn has brought misery on to millions of Labour voters in part thanks to the three quid gamers. Shameful stuff.
Well Labour wouldn't have been in this mess if everyone had voted the same way as me
The reference to Millom took me back 50 years.My family left when the Ironworks closed down in the early 60's. I have returned on quite a few occasions. Main employment is either 25 miles south, Barrow Shipyard or 25 miles north Winscale/ Sellafield. There is now a prison a few miles away which provides some employment, but the people I know regularly travel a distance to work. This is staunch Labour but they will have voted Leave with a passion. There are no privileged few.
I have family about 2 miles away and know the place well. We have been going there for the last 30 years and my husband's family have been there/Silecroft since the end of the war. The area is beautiful but not a part of the Lakes many know well and it's often forgotten that parts of it are not doing very well. There is a very different perspective there. The decline in regional politicians with a real base and hinterland in their regions is one reason, I think, that so much of the political class is out of touch. Ken Clarke is probably one of the last of that type of politician, ironically enough.
In one of those curious life coincidences, one of the very first cases I did as a pupil barrister involved the building of Barrow General Hospital. I spent about a month in November in a caravan taking notes while the proper barristers argued about anything and everything. I was the only woman there and the sexism displayed by some of the male clients was shocking. Still, they decided that - as a treat - I would get to choose the wine at dinner. I took full advantage of the opportunity. Tasting fine wines at someone else's expense is one way of ignoring some pretty boorish behaviour. The opposing barrister was charming; his daughter is the actress Emily Blunt. It was my first visit to the Lake District. Years later I found myself married and holidaying for far from that very same hospital and, on one occasion, having to take my daughter there for suspected appendicitis. On that occasion, there was an outbreak of suspected Legionnaire's Disease so we were told to push off to London, which we did. Judging by the problems during its building I'm not entirely sure how happy I'd be being treated there........
The big problem is that in the UK we have corporate subsidies and a welfare system which discourages people from working. We must reform the benefits and tax credits system in the country. We can then spend the money on improving the life chances of young people and those left behind by globalisation. Better education, training and retraining. All of this costs a huge amount of money but we're spending £29bn on in working benefits and £20bn on housing benefits per year. A disproportionately large amount of this money goes to EU migrants. Take the draw of in working and housing benefits away and unskilled migration falls while wages increase. UK companies have survived on low skilled migrants who are subsidised by government largesse. Remove the largesse and the companies will adapt.
As always, we must look to a supply side solution and they are out there. We just need a PM with the cojones to do it.
"unskilled migration falls while wages increase" - possibly... but something we could predict with some certainty will be collapse of the social care sector.
With £30-40bn in savings available we could increase direct funding and wages for care workers to the living wage. What we're doing right now is subsidising unsustainable business models. If the UK were a company the EU would have collared it under illegal state aid rules.
The problem is that care provision is largely reliant on local authority funding - that money isn't there. I worked with two home-care companies a few years ago and their profit margins were squeezed by local authorities to unsustainable levels. One went under - the other moved away from council contract work and towards private clients.
That was pre-living wage legislation - I can't see that one surviving
Thats where the additional funding would make a difference. We could hypothecate it so that LAs can't just splurge it on useless stuff as well.
Another Lib Dem policy - they have all the answers, you know
Surely there's a chance that in a new vote of members, Corbyn won't actually win this time round.
Won't there be some September 2015 Corbyn supporters who have seen how hopeless he is who might change horses?
More importantly, does my £3 cover me for an election about to start in 2016 or do I have to subscribe again? :-)
Why are you voting in another party's leadership election? That's pretty uncivic if you are doing so to game the result. Shameful in fact.
Is Bob Sykes a Conservative party member ?
I'd say it is poor form (And a breach of rules) if so. If he isn't then it is fair enough.
I will not be voting this time round personally.
When you register for £3 you are registering as a Labour supporter. If you are in fact a Labour opponent that is morally wrong. You are trying to game the leadership election of a party you oppose. Corbyn has brought misery on to millions of Labour voters in part thanks to the three quid gamers. Shameful stuff.
Anyone who votes for the Labour Party deserves their misery. They are an abhorrent shower who have spent their existence trying to destroy the UK. Their only claim of relevance is the founding of the NHS but every advanced economy (excepet one) moved to public health provision without needing a Labour Party and if anything the NHS model is rather monolithic and difficult to change which may not be for the best in the long run.
Labour are deserving of death and anyone who wants to see that and pays their £3 to accelerate that is worthy of great praise. They are doing their bit for the nation.
An awful sentiment that does you no credit at all.
Excellent piece, CF. It chimes very closely with what I think. I would have so much wanted Remain to win and then to deal with some of these issues. It's a what-if, now and realistically, I think the "elite" would have heaved a sigh of relief, ignored the lesson and carried on as before. Unfortunately the Leave win makes any intrinsic improvement almost impossible. It will now be about damage limitation, saving costs and making the best of a situation.
I thought the East was heavily dependent on subsidy from the West.
And, (which is relevant to Cyclefree's article) the young unemployed have gone West.
It remains heavily dependent on subsidy, albeit less than it was previously.
But here's the thing: East Germany now has a thriving manufacturing and industrial base, that exports all over the world. Berlin's population is growing, and it's one of the most exciting cities in the world, and is second only to London in terms of number of technology start-ups.
The German education system produced employable people in East Germany, and their structure of apprenticeships, and targeted investment encouraged people to set up manufacturing there.
There is a lot we can learn.
There is a huge amount of resentment in the former west though (local governments particularly), that they have paid the price of the old East's new roads, raid and Internet.
I thought the East was heavily dependent on subsidy from the West.
And, (which is relevant to Cyclefree's article) the young unemployed have gone West.
It remains heavily dependent on subsidy, albeit less than it was previously.
But here's the thing: East Germany now has a thriving manufacturing and industrial base, that exports all over the world. Berlin's population is growing, and it's one of the most exciting cities in the world, and is second only to London in terms of number of technology start-ups.
The German education system produced employable people in East Germany, and their structure of apprenticeships, and targeted investment encouraged people to set up manufacturing there.
There is a lot we can learn.
The problem is that we have no way of funding a massive expansion of the education system, especially for technical and specialist education. The government's priorities are to keep the welfare state going, until that changes no lessons will be learned and very little will change.
I thought the East was heavily dependent on subsidy from the West.
And, (which is relevant to Cyclefree's article) the young unemployed have gone West.
It remains heavily dependent on subsidy, albeit less than it was previously.
But here's the thing: East Germany now has a thriving manufacturing and industrial base, that exports all over the world. Berlin's population is growing, and it's one of the most exciting cities in the world, and is second only to London in terms of number of technology start-ups.
The German education system produced employable people in East Germany, and their structure of apprenticeships, and targeted investment encouraged people to set up manufacturing there.
There is a lot we can learn.
Please dont make me cry. German politicians do serious stuff ours play namecalling.
Second. A very good post, Mrs Cyclefree. Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat?
I particularly liked your paragraph about London and the bankers. A lot of people who post on PB seem to be concerned only with the effect that the Referendum result will have on the financial sector.
Interestingly, two of the junior Cyclefrees joined the Lib Dems in the last fortnight and I voted for them last year. There was a very good local LD candidate in my constituency.
I work in the financial sector but I was struck by what the Northern bit of my family and all our friends in Millom and roundabout said during the referendum. They were pretty much all for Leave, thought it would win and felt that London needed a reality check. And indeed when I go there it makes me realise that what gets taken for granted in London is really not at all normal in the rest of the country. It is not enough for London to say that we pay for everything: behaving like Lady Bountiful is not really tenable long-term.
In a way I think that this referendum has been more divisive - or brought out the divisions more clearly - precisely because it was not a GE and because every vote counted. It has also made me rethink my approach to the voting system. We should make every vote count. We may not like the result but better that than sullen acquiescence/indifference for years and then - boom - a shock.
Perhaps TSE could give us his views?
Can I also thank you for an excellent article. I'm writing a big piece right now - called The Discontented - looking at the reasons why so many people in so many places are unhappy. I'll share it when I'm done. (Yes, with the whole of PB...)
What I find most interesting is that there is only one developed world country (that's not a massive commodity exporter) that's managed to square the circle in the last 25 years, and that's Germany.
East Germany in 1990 was a lot worse place than Millom, with lower skills, failing firms, and rising unemployment. Germany managed to revitalise its East, such that the unemployment rate in Brandenberg or Mecklenberg are below 6%. And they did it without the massively unbalanced economy that we have: there's no massive current account issue, or consumer debt issue, or reliance on housing or the vagaries of finance.
We would do well to learn lessons from the Germans as far as how regional policy should work.
I thought the East was heavily dependent on subsidy from the West.
And, (which is relevant to Cyclefree's article) the young unemployed have gone West.
Correct - at the end of the day it is very difficult to buck the market.
The big problem is that in the UK we have corporate subsidies and a welfare system which discourages people from working. We must reform the benefits and tax credits system in the country. We can then spend the money on improving the life chances of young people and those left behind by globalisation. Better education, training and retraining. All of this costs a huge amount of money but we're spending £29bn on in working benefits and £20bn on housing benefits per year. A disproportionately large amount of this money goes to EU migrants. Take the draw of in working and housing benefits away and unskilled migration falls while wages increase. UK companies have survived on low skilled migrants who are subsidised by government largesse. Remove the largesse and the companies will adapt.
As always, we must look to a supply side solution and they are out there. We just need a PM with the cojones to do it.
"unskilled migration falls while wages increase" - possibly... but something we could predict with some certainty will be collapse of the social care sector.
With £30-40bn in savings available we could increase direct funding and wages for care workers to the living wage. What we're doing right now is subsidising unsustainable business models. If the UK were a company the EU would have collared it under illegal state aid rules.
The problem is that care provision is largely reliant on local authority funding - that money isn't there. I worked with two home-care companies a few years ago and their profit margins were squeezed by local authorities to unsustainable levels. One went under - the other moved away from council contract work and towards private clients.
That was pre-living wage legislation - I can't see that one surviving
Thats where the additional funding would make a difference. We could hypothecate it so that LAs can't just splurge it on useless stuff as well.
Another Lib Dem policy - they have all the answers, you know
To cut in working benefits and housing benefit? That's Lib Dem policy?
I wonder what sort of Dave we'll see at PMQ's tomorrow. Will it be the conciliatory Dave trying to spread oil on the troubled Westminster waters or the combative Dave sticking the knife in to Leavers and Labour?
From an entertainment point of view I'd like to the the fighting Dave shouting and finger pointing for 30 mins
Above all, the fruits of the economy need to be much more fairly shared – not (or not just) in the form of handouts to the poorer areas but in terms of proper and visible investment in infrastructure and services and people and housing, in people being given control over what happens where they live. It means increased taxation of the better off. It means companies ensuring that the jobs boom really does benefit people in all parts of Britain. It means those at the top curbing their desire to take an ever increasing share of what their companies produce and sharing the fruits of their collective endeavours with the workers. And plenty more besides.
Second. A very good post, Mrs Cyclefree. Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat?
I particularly liked your paragraph about London and the bankers. A lot of people who post on PB seem to be concerned only with the effect that the Referendum result will have on the financial sector.
In a way I think that this referendum has been more divisive - or brought out the divisions more clearly - precisely because it was not a GE and because every vote counted. It has also made me rethink my approach to the voting system. We should make every vote count. We may not like the result but better that than sullen acquiescence/indifference for years and then - boom - a shock.
Im not sure that you can say every vote counted . You could equally argue that the referendum had the greatest number of votes ever cast which did not count . If I had not voted at all or switched votes it would not only have made no difference to the result but also not have changed the %s of the 2 outcomes .
However, on this point, I agree with Cyclefree. If I take your argument, the loser's vote never counts !
Cyclefree appears to be changing her preference. In our GE's: in about 450 seats, there is no point voting at all. I could say the same in 40 out of 50 seats in the US.
And yet a lot more seats do change hands than that, something which the new boundaries will probably contribute further to. Scotland is exceptional but even in England and Wales, whether through demographic change or hard slog, seats that were once 'safe' become vulnerable (and vice versa), in addition to the short-term marginals.
But the crucial point is this: no seat is inevitably safe by some natural law: every candidate starts on zero and if one party wins time after time then that's because it's what the people there want.
I wll probably be abused for asking this, but the political conversation need to involve everyone; not just the voters in marginal seats.
Do we need a form of PR so that the opinions of the inhabitants of the rotten boroughs count? I rather think we do.
Yes to AV!!
Actually I agree with you but cant see how it ever comes about
The 1.5m who voted in the referendum because they realised their vote counted for once are an unanswerable argument for voting reform. If politics is to be for all the people all the people need to have a meaningful say.
I used to think this constituency was a bad example of votes not counting as it's been Tory since 1910. Then I discovered that North Shropshire has had a Tory MP since 1835.
Not so much a job for life, more a job for Owen Patterson and all his descendants, as long as they have a Blue rosette.
As only Nixon could go to China, only Labour will truly be able to go after an un- and anti-skills culture that's fundamentally incompatible with the 21st century technological advancement. The best anyone else can hope for is some kind of holding action to stop the rot getting any worse. That's why, in spite of May's statements, in this area I'm not particularly hopeful for May's government.
Anyone who votes for the Labour Party deserves their misery. They are an abhorrent shower who have spent their existence trying to destroy the UK. Their only claim of relevance is the founding of the NHS but every advanced economy (excepet one) moved to public health provision without needing a Labour Party and if anything the NHS model is rather monolithic and difficult to change which may not be for the best in the long run.
Labour are deserving of death and anyone who wants to see that and pays their £3 to accelerate that is worthy of great praise. They are doing their bit for the nation.
An awful sentiment that does you no credit at all.
How about instead you try and justify the Labour party.
They don't stand up for working people, in fact, people in safe Labour seats areas have consistently got relatively poorer over the period of the party's existence. They brought in multi-culturalism which created significant problems with immigration which historically, the UK had been very good at coping with and integrating with but now, thanks to Labour, there are ghettos and segregation. Most recently, they managed to create a benefit dependency amongst the MIDDLE class. Just to try and engineer a dependence on Labour to prop up those benefits.
Everything Labour have ever done has been bad (with the sole NHS exception). They are a party of failure and an ugly stain on British politics.
Second. A very good post, Mrs Cyclefree. Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat?
I particularly liked your paragraph about London and the bankers. A lot of people who post on PB seem to be concerned only with the effect that the Referendum result will have on the financial sector.
The tragedy of the 2010 result was that the LibDems were forced into coalition with the Tories when their world view was actually closest to at least understanding the challenges the post-crisis age was throwing up, even if they had not worked out all of the answers.
A great article by cyclefree - lots of kudos2u
If May sees a lot of this and genuinely wants to move the Tories onto this ground, it will be fascinating to see how it goes down with the party behind her. If she gets away with it, they will be in power until we are all long gone.
The Labour Party, together with the electoral system that it has always acted to keep us lumbered with, is the single biggest obstacle to any sort of alternative approach becoming credible.
Consider - at this very moment, a new Conservative Prime Minister is moving into no. 10 and appointing her cabinet tasked with the job of taking the country forward through these times of crisis, both real and potential; meanwhile the Labour Party is meeting to argue about different legal interpretations of some clause in its constitution.
Thank you Cycle Free. Yes the focus needs to be on the have nots and how to improve the life for most of them. They need to have less competition for unskilled jobs, more choice of housing and less pressure on other services such as the NHS which they wish to access. With that has to be a shift away from rights to responsibilities. The welfare support that we each should have a right to must be linked to our responsibility to contribute. A contribution based system.
Totally agree about welfare - which ironically is how it works in most EU countries - but this is where the liberal left will part company with you and why things like the welfare system and the NHS are completely and inevitably permanently unaffordable.
It would be interesting to see an actual simulation on this with numbers.
With a few exceptions, the government pays welfare recipients what it thinks is barely enough to live on. If you're going to make the system more contributory, you either have to give them less than you think is barely enough to live on, which is going to cost you a non-zero amount dealing with the mess in the health service and the justice system, or you give contributors more than non-contributors, which obviously costs more than the status quo.
Second. A very good post, Mrs Cyclefree. Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat?
I particularly liked your paragraph about London and the bankers. A lot of people who post on PB seem to be concerned only with the effect that the Referendum result will have on the financial sector.
In a way I think that this referendum has been more divisive - or brought out the divisions more clearly - precisely because it was not a GE and because every vote counted. It has also made me rethink my approach to the voting system. We should make every vote count. We may not like the result but better that than sullen acquiescence/indifference for years and then - boom - a shock.
Im not sure that you can say every vote counted . You could equally argue that the referendum had the greatest number of votes ever cast which did not count . If I had not voted at all or switched votes it would not only have made no difference to the result but also not have changed the %s of the 2 outcomes .
However, on this point, I agree with Cyclefree. If I take your argument, the loser's vote never counts !
Cyclefree appears to be changing her preference. In our GE's: in about 450 seats, there is no point voting at all. I could say the same in 40 out of 50 seats in the US.
To add a further thought. It was UKIP who were primarily behind the Brexit referendum, not because they won but because of the threat that they posed. Were those 4m votes 'wasted' when they've just achieved their core objective? Not at all - they were the mechanism through which that objective was delivered.
Second. A very good post, Mrs Cyclefree. Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat?
I particularly liked your paragraph about London and the bankers. A lot of people who post on PB seem to be concerned only with the effect that the Referendum result will have on the financial sector.
Interestingly, two of the junior Cyclefrees joined the Lib Dems in the last fortnight and I voted for them last year. There was a very good local LD candidate in my constituency.
I work in the financial sector but I was struck by what the Northern bit of my family and all our friends in Millom and roundabout said during the referendum. They were pretty much all for Leave, thought it would win and felt that London needed a reality check. And indeed when I go there it makes me realise that what gets taken for granted in London is really not at all normal in the rest of the country. It is not enough for London to say that we pay for everything: behaving like Lady Bountiful is not really tenable long-term.
In a way I think that this referendum has been more divisive - or brought out the divisions more clearly - precisely because it was not a GE and because every vote counted. It has also made me rethink my approach to the voting system. We should make every vote count. We may not like the result but better that than sullen acquiescence/indifference for years and then - boom - a shock.
Perhaps TSE could give us his views?
Can I also thank you for an excellent article. I'm writing a big piece right now - called The Discontented - looking at the reasons why so many people in so many places are unhappy. I'll share it when I'm done. (Yes, with the whole of PB...)
What I find most interesting is that there is only one developed world country (that's not a massive commodity exporter) that's managed to square the circle in the last 25 years, and that's Germany.
East Germany in 1990 was a lot worse place than Millom, with lower skills, failing firms, and rising unemployment. Germany managed to revitalise its East, such that the unemployment rate in Brandenberg or Mecklenberg are below 6%. And they did it without the massively unbalanced economy that we have: there's no massive current account issue, or consumer debt issue, or reliance on housing or the vagaries of finance.
We would do well to learn lessons from the Germans as far as how regional policy should work.
The lessons to learn from Germany are surely the same ones to learn from China. Hold down your exchange rate and wage economic warfare on your neighbours?
That is a bit unfair, Mr. Max. Germany built its economy long before the Euro existed. It was based on a solid currency.
Nice piece, CF. As a Tory member I can still recognise that Ed Miliband's criticisms had some grains of truth in them for us to address.
This Vox piece, ostensibly about Pokémon Go, is relevant:
[T]he Pokémon Go economy also has some real downsides. One has to do with regional inequality. Nintendo and its partners are rumored to be earning more than $1 million per day from Pokémon Go. That money is flowing away from small and medium cities and toward big technology companies concentrated in big cities.
I wll probably be abused for asking this, but the political conversation need to involve everyone; not just the voters in marginal seats.
Do we need a form of PR so that the opinions of the inhabitants of the rotten boroughs count? I rather think we do.
Yes to AV!!
Actually I agree with you but cant see how it ever comes about
The 1.5m who voted in the referendum because they realised their vote counted for once are an unanswerable argument for voting reform. If politics is to be for all the people all the people need to have a meaningful say.
Precisely this. Anyone talking about listening to ordinary people in left-behind towns who then continues to advocate FPTP is a hypocrite. It's really as simple as that. And, yes, I include all Labour supporters, MPs and ex-ministers in that.
There are, I believe, contingency plans in place to make Miss Cyclefree dictator.
CycleeFree has agreed to make me Dictator.
After 10 years, I shall put myself up for re-election.
Though I will be changing the title from Dictator to Tyrant.
As a friend of mine put it, my opponents would use the slogan 'TSE, putting the dick in Dictator'
Have I?
I think you'll find that it is now time for elegant and tough ladies to sort out (again) the messes left by men........
(Plus it's Dictatrix. And the skeletons in my cupboard would make Ms Leadsom look like Mother Theresa. My CV is accurate but I believe in living life to the full. Though I probably outdo you in shoes. And I don't believe in Dictators anyway....)
Second. A very good post, Mrs Cyclefree. Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat?
I particularly liked your paragraph about London and the bankers. A lot of people who post on PB seem to be concerned only with the effect that the Referendum result will have on the financial sector.
In a way I think that this referendum has been more divisive - or brought out the divisions more clearly - precisely because it was not a GE and because every vote counted. It has also made me rethink my approach to the voting system. We should make every vote count. We may not like the result but better that than sullen acquiescence/indifference for years and then - boom - a shock.
Im not sure that you can say every vote counted . You could equally argue that the referendum had the greatest number of votes ever cast which did not count . If I had not voted at all or switched votes it would not only have made no difference to the result but also not have changed the %s of the 2 outcomes .
However, on this point, I agree with Cyclefree. If I take your argument, the loser's vote never counts !
Cyclefree appears to be changing her preference. In our GE's: in about 450 seats, there is no point voting at all. I could say the same in 40 out of 50 seats in the US.
And yet a lot more seats do change hands than that, something which the new boundaries will probably contribute further to. Scotland is exceptional but even in England and Wales, whether through demographic change or hard slog, seats that were once 'safe' become vulnerable (and vice versa), in addition to the short-term marginals.
But the crucial point is this: no seat is inevitably safe by some natural law: every candidate starts on zero and if one party wins time after time then that's because it's what the people there want.
Because the boundary review process is essentially a pitched battle between the two big parties - and the lawyers they spend money to employ arguing their case at boundary review hearings - and because both of the two big parties principal interest is to defend and create safe seats for their senior politicians - the long run trend is for the proportion of seats that are safe to increase and the proportion that are marginal to decline.
Thank you Cycle Free. Yes the focus needs to be on the have nots and how to improve the life for most of them. They need to have less competition for unskilled jobs, more choice of housing and less pressure on other services such as the NHS which they wish to access. With that has to be a shift away from rights to responsibilities. The welfare support that we each should have a right to must be linked to our responsibility to contribute. A contribution based system.
Totally agree about welfare - which ironically is how it works in most EU countries - but this is where the liberal left will part company with you and why things like the welfare system and the NHS are completely and inevitably permanently unaffordable.
It would be interesting to see an actual simulation on this with numbers.
With a few exceptions, the government pays welfare recipients what it thinks is barely enough to live on. If you're going to make the system more contributory, you either have to give them less than you think is barely enough to live on, which is going to cost you a non-zero amount dealing with the mess in the health service and the justice system, or you give contributors more than non-contributors, which obviously costs more than the status quo.
Oooooh demasiado complicado para mi! However, as I said, in most EU countries, including here in Spain welfare benefits are largely contribution based. No put in - no take out. It seems to work pretty well and there is a moral rectitude about it which people seem to like. And it deters foreign immigrant freeloaders. What has happened in the UK seems very different - the state welfare system is too big and above all, too universal. that in itself seems to have engendered a ridiculous sense of entitlement - with people on very high levels of salary still raking in all sorts of state benefits. Crazy.
Just a little snippet the European Space Agency seem to have just committed to invest in the British company Reaction Engines Ltd to the tune of ten million quid. Not a huge sum but straws in the wind.
Comments
Cyclefree appears to be changing her preference. In our GE's: in about 450 seats, there is no point voting at all. I could say the same in 40 out of 50 seats in the US.
Brexit gives us an opportunity, but it is just that. This country needs a serious survival plan for the 21st century. I don't see any sign that May has the right plan or even thinks one is necessary.
I've had my dalliances with LibDem politics in the past, and believe that the party has a valuable contribution to make to British Politics. (I join with the praise for the LibDems in putting the country first in the coalition after the 2010 General Election.)
For me, though, the red line has always been their Europhilia. It's a perfectly valid and respectable view of course - but one which ultimately puts me off completely.
In most other walks of life, a declaration of conflict of interest would be necessary and abstention from decision making would follow. Forgot we were talking about Labour internal governance. Even the Lib Dems can run a process better than this.
That was pre-living wage legislation - I can't see that one surviving
It's a balancing act though, because the combination of the second part with democracy bollockses up the first part. They don't normally get backed into a corner the way Cameron did: Pretending to be against the EU so he could blame foreigners for things, then ending up having to admit he supported it and hoping the voters didn't take his previous position too seriously.
@smashmorePH: Ruth Davidson: "It's worth a flutter on David Mundell staying Scottish Secretary."
It has also revealed that the Media in his country need to broaden their contacts beyond their dinner party circuit. Our chatterati never seem to chatter to anybody outside the M25, or more than a mile from Salford's MediaCity. The air of "how bloody DARE they!" that accompanied the Brexit result was comical and troubling in equal measure.
[mostly my work]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Herbert_Wallace
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Wallace
A tragedy/triumph of British justice?
I think we need a new Reform Act, probably preceded by a Royal Commision. No government is going to do it though, certainly not in next few years.
There is a case for a better Europe than the one we currently have or are likely to have on offer for the foreseeable future.
Labour, by contrast, is little more than a century old and has already suffered two major splits and is currently flirting with a third.
I'd say it is poor form (And a breach of rules) if so. If he isn't then it is fair enough.
I will not be voting this time round personally.
FBI no longer actively investigating D.B. Cooper case
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/db-cooper-cold-case-225405#ixzz4ECSBve00
I'm very sceptical about "economic miracles" every winner creates a loser. Southern Europe has lost and Germany has won.
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000533532
Millom at night was quite a sight,
With the ironworks in full swing.
The sky was aflame, from furnace and train.
As the ore was wheeled in.
Showers of sparks, explode in the dark,
Like a thousand shooting stars.
While the haematite boiled, scorched workers toiled.
Producing the pig-iron bars.
While under the sea, on bended knee,
Miners are hacking out ore.
Within pillars and stalls, they create vast halls.
Endeavouring, to search for more.
Then in sixty-eight, an awful fate,
Befell, this small mining town.
Jobs would be lost, at a terrible cost.
With the ironworks closing down.
Within half a year, they faced their fears.
Hodbarrow mines were no more.
The last shift went down, deep underground.
Death to the Cumbrian ore.
The mines, now gone from this small town.
But the memory, still lives on.
The miners lost, the jobs it's cost;
And pride still soldiers on
Still, I feel proud, when heard out loud,
A Millomite born and bred!
I think of the mines, of all the hard times;
And the tears, this town has shed.
And, (which is relevant to Cyclefree's article) the young unemployed have gone West.
Just called him to check: he hung up.
1. Kendall
There are, I believe, contingency plans in place to make Miss Cyclefree dictator.
Labour are deserving of death and anyone who wants to see that and pays their £3 to accelerate that is worthy of great praise. They are doing their bit for the nation.
I was a member of no party at the time and voted Green at the last GE
On another point: thanks for an interesting article, Ms Free.
https://afterlabour.org/2016/07/12/corbyn-and-the-new-political-puritans/
Which was 71 years ago - even Villa have done something good in that timeframe.
After 10 years, I shall put myself up for re-election.
Though I will be changing the title from Dictator to Tyrant.
As a friend of mine put it, my opponents would use the slogan 'TSE, putting the dick in Dictator'
My political journey started in March 2014, when my wife Jenny was diagnosed with terminal lung cancer. She immediately contracted pneumonia, followed by a pleural empyema. I spent most of the summer of 2014 in and around the oncology suite in Hereford.
Jenny was eligible for PIP, which amounted to £138.75 p.w. (that's the maximum). We were comfortably off, but it struck me for the first time in a long time, and in a very visceral way, what the effect of a serious illness would have on an 'ordinary' family. The bulk of that money went on petrol and parking (NHS discounts apply, but are limited). If we hadn't have been affluent, we would have been in terrible financial difficulty on top of the emotional distress we were going through.
As I was cooling my heels for long periods of time, I talked to a lot of people, mainly middle aged or older, obviously all sick. It really reset my views. There's a whole raft of people who we are able to conveniently ignore; the sick, the underemployed, the culturally displaced.
As I wrote last night, we can't keep treating our working poor as if they're some kind of fungible commodity. Freedom of movement has, as Cyclefree points out, worked to export unemployment from Eastern to Western Europe, and broken the classical relationship between labour supply, demand and wage levels.
For those who point to record employment figures; we have 1.6 million unemployed. Around half a million have been out of work for more than a year and just over half a million young unemployed.
I hope that EUref is a wake up call. I fear that it won't be.
Mrs BJ is charged with interupting GhostBusters when the result is in
But here's the thing: East Germany now has a thriving manufacturing and industrial base, that exports all over the world. Berlin's population is growing, and it's one of the most exciting cities in the world, and is second only to London in terms of number of technology start-ups.
The German education system produced employable people in East Germany, and their structure of apprenticeships, and targeted investment encouraged people to set up manufacturing there.
There is a lot we can learn.
In one of those curious life coincidences, one of the very first cases I did as a pupil barrister involved the building of Barrow General Hospital. I spent about a month in November in a caravan taking notes while the proper barristers argued about anything and everything. I was the only woman there and the sexism displayed by some of the male clients was shocking. Still, they decided that - as a treat - I would get to choose the wine at dinner. I took full advantage of the opportunity. Tasting fine wines at someone else's expense is one way of ignoring some pretty boorish behaviour. The opposing barrister was charming; his daughter is the actress Emily Blunt. It was my first visit to the Lake District. Years later I found myself married and holidaying for far from that very same hospital and, on one occasion, having to take my daughter there for suspected appendicitis. On that occasion, there was an outbreak of suspected Legionnaire's Disease so we were told to push off to London, which we did. Judging by the problems during its building I'm not entirely sure how happy I'd be being treated there........
Depressing
There is learning to take from that also.
From an entertainment point of view I'd like to the the fighting Dave shouting and finger pointing for 30 mins
Absolutely spot on.
But the crucial point is this: no seat is inevitably safe by some natural law: every candidate starts on zero and if one party wins time after time then that's because it's what the people there want.
Not so much a job for life, more a job for Owen Patterson and all his descendants, as long as they have a Blue rosette.
Hannan is in favour of PR though.
They don't stand up for working people, in fact, people in safe Labour seats areas have consistently got relatively poorer over the period of the party's existence. They brought in multi-culturalism which created significant problems with immigration which historically, the UK had been very good at coping with and integrating with but now, thanks to Labour, there are ghettos and segregation. Most recently, they managed to create a benefit dependency amongst the MIDDLE class. Just to try and engineer a dependence on Labour to prop up those benefits.
Everything Labour have ever done has been bad (with the sole NHS exception). They are a party of failure and an ugly stain on British politics.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/752756344713777152
A great article by cyclefree - lots of kudos2u
If May sees a lot of this and genuinely wants to move the Tories onto this ground, it will be fascinating to see how it goes down with the party behind her. If she gets away with it, they will be in power until we are all long gone.
The Labour Party, together with the electoral system that it has always acted to keep us lumbered with, is the single biggest obstacle to any sort of alternative approach becoming credible.
Consider - at this very moment, a new Conservative Prime Minister is moving into no. 10 and appointing her cabinet tasked with the job of taking the country forward through these times of crisis, both real and potential; meanwhile the Labour Party is meeting to argue about different legal interpretations of some clause in its constitution.
With a few exceptions, the government pays welfare recipients what it thinks is barely enough to live on. If you're going to make the system more contributory, you either have to give them less than you think is barely enough to live on, which is going to cost you a non-zero amount dealing with the mess in the health service and the justice system, or you give contributors more than non-contributors, which obviously costs more than the status quo.
This Vox piece, ostensibly about Pokémon Go, is relevant:
[T]he Pokémon Go economy also has some real downsides. One has to do with regional inequality. Nintendo and its partners are rumored to be earning more than $1 million per day from Pokémon Go. That money is flowing away from small and medium cities and toward big technology companies concentrated in big cities.
http://www.vox.com/2016/7/12/12152728/pokemon-go-economic-problems
You were much more measured and credible than the other guy.
.@RuthDavidsonMSP sticks the boot in at Lobby Lunch: "Before politics, I single-handedly saved the banking system. Speaking as a mother..."
.@RuthDavidsonMSP: "I didn't say that, you can't report that, and it would be gutter journalism of the lowest order..."
Have I?
I think you'll find that it is now time for elegant and tough ladies to sort out (again) the messes left by men........
(Plus it's Dictatrix. And the skeletons in my cupboard would make Ms Leadsom look like Mother Theresa. My CV is accurate but I believe in living life to the full. Though I probably outdo you in shoes. And I don't believe in Dictators anyway....)
I said this would be likely. It's nice to be right once in a blue moon