I was out campaigning with a senior cabinet minister yesterday who told us that Tories are deserting the party in droves in Kensington...make of it what you will...
We are getting far too much of opinions first with only those facts which support the favoured opinion following on as a very distant second, if at all.
Labour will promise free social care like in Scotland.
They need to narrow the tories advantage with the grey vote somewhat.
It might work.
On the other hand, pensioners are old enough to remember when Old Labour was last in power. All power cuts, piles of rotting rubbish in the streets, unburied corpses, rampant inflation and going cap-in-hand to the Gnomes of Zurich.
If, as we are consistently told, a great reservoir of Scottish voters will never forgive the Tories for Maggie, it follows that there probably exists another great reservoir of older voters who have neither forgiven nor forgotten the Winter of Discontent.
Bribery may not be enough.
Quite I’m “only” 55 but the 70’s are seared into my brain. I have zero desire to go back. None. It was crap.
The disco music was fantastic. (I'm a retrospective fan, I wasn't around at the time).
No you have a point there the music ( not just disco) was great. Sitting in a black out from 18.00 to 22.00 eating a bit of toast your mum had hurriedly stuck under the grill as she got home from work at 17.45 not so much. Also quizzing your dad why he’d got Deutschmark travellers’ cheques as we were in Spain for a week “ because you couldn’t rely on the Pound not being suspended”.
It was shite. May 79!was a total liberation. We are still living in that world. Corbyn wants to go back to 1975. I was there. It was crap, believe me,
You know the power cuts were under a Tory government right?
The tories were never in power in the 70s. Bad, Wrong think.
O/T Labour spending £10bn pa on building 100,000 council houses a year sounds a lot... until you start to compare it with £88bn for HS2 or £18bn for Crossrail.
Quite aside from the health issues I detest the all-pervasive funk of cannabis which permeates into neighbours gardens and homes whenever anyone smokes in within 80yds.
We haven’t achieved the success of largely eliminating tobacco stench from the public realm (which is more toxic in smell but far more localised) only to see it replaced by the sickly-sweet and decadently unpleasant stench of cannabis.
I have no issues with resins, biscuits, tablets or other orally ingested or injected versions.
Agreed completely!
The fact its all pervasive is part of what shows how much prohibition has failed though IMO. But yes I'd far rather it be sold more in consumable rather than smokable formats for that reasons.
It’s also made (and I surprise myself in saying this) Charles look good by comparison. He’s been more statesmanlike and decisive behind the scenes (without at all making it about him) than I’ve seen before which bodes well for the future.
I don't know much about the monarchy but I do know it won't survive King Gobshite. Unless he has the grace to die soon after coronation and they plant the crown on William's shiny pate.
It won’t in all the Commonwealth realms.
I’m confident it will do so here. Charles is old and well-past official retirement age, and William will rapidly take over many duties once he’s Prince of Wales.
Labour will promise free social care like in Scotland.
They need to narrow the tories advantage with the grey vote somewhat.
It might work.
On the other hand, pensioners are old enough to remember when Old Labour was last in power. All power cuts, piles of rotting rubbish in the streets, unburied corpses, rampant inflation and going cap-in-hand to the Gnomes of Zurich.
If, as we are consistently told, a great reservoir of Scottish voters will never forgive the Tories for Maggie, it follows that there probably exists another great reservoir of older voters who have neither forgiven nor forgotten the Winter of Discontent.
Bribery may not be enough.
Quite I’m “only” 55 but the 70’s are seared into my brain. I have zero desire to go back. None. It was crap.
The disco music was fantastic. (I'm a retrospective fan, I wasn't around at the time).
No you have a point there the music ( not just disco) was great. Sitting in a black out from 18.00 to 22.00 eating a bit of toast your mum had hurriedly stuck under the grill as she got home from work at 17.45 not so much. Also quizzing your dad why he’d got Deutschmark travellers’ cheques as we were in Spain for a week “ because you couldn’t rely on the Pound not being suspended”.
It was shite. May 79!was a total liberation. We are still living in that world. Corbyn wants to go back to 1975. I was there. It was crap, believe me,
You know the power cuts were under a Tory government right?
The tories were never in power in the 70s. Bad, Wrong think.
Ps @MarqueeMark I disagree with Undemocratic Swinson on a lot but one thing she is not doing is just "wringing her hands on drugs". She has proposed a rational evidence based solution unlike others.
If you don't want gangs fighting over drugs legalise the drugs. Prohibition has failed.
I would suggest you read Peter Hitchens on cannabis. He makes a convincing case for why it should never be legalised.
In both cases the biggest argument for legalising it is strength (and quality) control..
the reason the market is making it stronger all the time is because there is no control over that market.
So there needs to be more study about the effects of different types of cannabis, the consequences of decriminalisation and how one enforces effectively against those peddling the stuff we don’t want. Rather than a rush to legalisation on the basis of “Well I smoked some at university 20 years ago and it did me no harm”.
A proper Royal Commission looking at all the evidence properly is needed here. Not rushed through and I’ll-thought out policies.
Surely your two examples (cigarettes and sugar - you could add alcohol of course) illustrate exactly why legalisation and regulation are the best approach.
Imagine if sugar was an illegal substance - there'd be criminal gangs producing, distributing and selling it. If cigarettes were not regulated there'd be no control at all of the strength ot toxins in them.
Finally, look what happened in prohibition America - we have a similar situation now with drugs.
We need evidence. Simply describing the inconsistencies with other products or what happened a century ago in the US is not evidence about what is on offer today, its effects and what the right course of action should be now.
We have a current system where cabinet ministers happily admit drug use and face no consequences for it. It is an organised hypocrisy, and it is small wonder that the laws on drugs are held in general contempt.
Labour will promise free social care like in Scotland.
They need to narrow the tories advantage with the grey vote somewhat.
It might work.
On the other hand, pensioners are old enough to remember when Old Labour was last in power. All power cuts, piles of rotting rubbish in the streets, unburied corpses, rampant inflation and going cap-in-hand to the Gnomes of Zurich.
If, as we are consistently told, a great reservoir of Scottish voters will never forgive the Tories for Maggie, it follows that there probably exists another great reservoir of older voters who have neither forgiven nor forgotten the Winter of Discontent.
Bribery may not be enough.
Quite I’m “only” 55 but the 70’s are seared into my brain. I have zero desire to go back. None. It was crap.
The disco music was fantastic. (I'm a retrospective fan, I wasn't around at the time).
No you have a point there the music ( not just disco) was great. Sitting in a black out from 18.00 to 22.00 eating a bit of toast your mum had hurriedly stuck under the grill as she got home from work at 17.45 not so much. Also quizzing your dad why he’d got Deutschmark travellers’ cheques as we were in Spain for a week “ because you couldn’t rely on the Pound not being suspended”.
It was shite. May 79!was a total liberation. We are still living in that world. Corbyn wants to go back to 1975. I was there. It was crap, believe me,
You know the power cuts were under a Tory government right?
The tories were never in power in the 70s. Bad, Wrong think.
Labour will promise free social care like in Scotland.
They need to narrow the tories advantage with the grey vote somewhat.
It might work.
On the other hand, pensioners are old enough to remember when Old Labour was last in power. All power cuts, piles of rotting rubbish in the streets, unburied corpses, rampant inflation and going cap-in-hand to the Gnomes of Zurich.
If, as we are consistently told, a great reservoir of Scottish voters will never forgive the Tories for Maggie, it follows that there probably exists another great reservoir of older voters who have neither forgiven nor forgotten the Winter of Discontent.
Bribery may not be enough.
Quite I’m “only” 55 but the 70’s are seared into my brain. I have zero desire to go back. None. It was crap.
The disco music was fantastic. (I'm a retrospective fan, I wasn't around at the time).
No you have a point there the music ( not just disco) was great. Sitting in a black out from 18.00 to 22.00 eating a bit of toast your mum had hurriedly stuck under the grill as she got home from work at 17.45 not so much. Also quizzing your dad why he’d got Deutschmark travellers’ cheques as we were in Spain for a week “ because you couldn’t rely on the Pound not being suspended”.
It was shite. May 79!was a total liberation. We are still living in that world. Corbyn wants to go back to 1975. I was there. It was crap, believe me,
You know the power cuts were under a Tory government right?
The tories were never in power in the 70s. Bad, Wrong think.
Bizarre.
I think you'll find the Tories were in power between 19 June 1970 and 4 March 1974 (during which 3-day week and planned power-cuts) and from 4 May 1979 onwards.
True. But if the legal stuff is the weak stuff which does no harm then the risk is that there is still an illegal market for the strong stuff which does do harm. So how does one deal with that? Those who want decriminalisation need to have a good answer to that.
Or the other risk is that we make legal something which does cause harm - especially to the young - which does not seem to me to be a particularly moral or sensible thing to do. It’s an odd society which makes a fuss about smoking cigarettes (rightly) or eating too much sugar (again rightly) but is ok about smoking cannabis, regardless of whether it causes problems.
So there needs to be more study about the effects of different types of cannabis, the consequences of decriminalisation and how one enforces effectively against those peddling the stuff we don’t want. Rather than a rush to legalisation on the basis of “Well I smoked some at university 20 years ago and it did me no harm”.
A proper Royal Commission looking at all the evidence properly is needed here. Not rushed through and I’ll-thought out policies.
Speaking personally I would legalise both the strong and weak stuff and sell it through legal mechanisms and not gangs. And let HMRC join the fight against any illegal, unregulated and untaxed sales.
Lets compare with alcohol. I don't know any alcoholics who abuse low strength beer, though that may be what they started drinking. It is high strength drinks, sometimes beer or wine but most especially spirits which are the biggest problem. But we don't criminalise spirits - and we offer education and health services to those who struggle.
I don't see anyone arguing to legalise because it did them no harm, I see arguments to legalise because prohibition has failed miserably and is leading to drug gangs.
Accurately describing the failure of a current policy is not in itself - without more - a good argument for doing the opposite.
At the risk of repeating myself, let’s get some evidence about the harm involved and then work out how best to minimise it in the most effective way. That may result in the policies you advocate but I marvel at the ability of people - and this is not aimed at you personally - to come up with such policies on the basis of relatively little or no scientific, medical, legal, criminal or other relevant knowledge in this area.
"I'm not sure that's true. I live in a very expensive area and middle-class families worry about their kids having to move away if they move out. I was elected in a decidedly middle-class home-owning ward after campaigning almost exclusively on "more social housing". I do think that "council housing" has an old-fashioned ring to it, though. And contempt for the idea of "affordable housing" (houses for sale at 85% of market rates) is almost universal, including all the Tory councillors tyhat I've talked to - round here that means £300K"
This is just a load of nonsense - I wouldn't trust anything this poster says. Binscombe is basically one large down at heel council estate on the outskirts of Godalming - "decidedly middle class" is the last thing you would call it if you went there. Calling for more council housing in just about any other ward would go down like a cup of cold sick in the Ming.
Labour will promise free social care like in Scotland.
They need to narrow the tories advantage with the grey vote somewhat.
It might work.
On the other hand, pensioners are old enough to remember when Old Labour was last in power. All power cuts, piles of rotting rubbish in the streets, unburied corpses, rampant inflation and going cap-in-hand to the Gnomes of Zurich.
If, as we are consistently told, a great reservoir of Scottish voters will never forgive the Tories for Maggie, it follows that there probably exists another great reservoir of older voters who have neither forgiven nor forgotten the Winter of Discontent.
Bribery may not be enough.
Quite I’m “only” 55 but the 70’s are seared into my brain. I have zero desire to go back. None. It was crap.
The disco music was fantastic. (I'm a retrospective fan, I wasn't around at the time).
No you have a point there the music ( not just disco) was great. Sitting in a black out from 18.00 to 22.00 eating a bit of toast your mum had hurriedly stuck under the grill as she got home from work at 17.45 not so much. Also quizzing your dad why he’d got Deutschmark travellers’ cheques as we were in Spain for a week “ because you couldn’t rely on the Pound not being suspended”.
It was shite. May 79!was a total liberation. We are still living in that world. Corbyn wants to go back to 1975. I was there. It was crap, believe me,
You know the power cuts were under a Tory government right?
The tories were never in power in the 70s. Bad, Wrong think.
They were June 70 - Feb 74 and May 79 onwards
I remember it. The blackouts were under the Tory government of Edward Heath. By the time Labour came to power the economy was in deep trouble, and essentially was run by the IMF from 1976 onwards - the imposed austerity deepening the crisis. Luckily from about 1980 onwards a huge growth in the production of North Sea oil helped turn around UK finances.
If this is truly the Brexit election then Remain should be worried.
1) There is a split Remain vote
2) remain won many fewer constituencies but won many of them with 70-75% whilst Leave won a ton more with 55-60%. If in America you were going to gerrymander the districts this is how you would do it.
It’s also made (and I surprise myself in saying this) Charles look good by comparison. He’s been more statesmanlike and decisive behind the scenes (without at all making it about him) than I’ve seen before which bodes well for the future.
I don't know much about the monarchy but I do know it won't survive King Gobshite. Unless he has the grace to die soon after coronation and they plant the crown on William's shiny pate.
It won’t in all the Commonwealth realms.
I’m confident it will do so here. Charles is old and well-past official retirement age, and William will rapidly take over many duties once he’s Prince of Wales.
Because that is just what has happened with him and his mum? And after he has waited all his life to get the gig?
Plus he may have seen King Lear. Baldy's ho has a distinctly Goneril look to her from where I'm sitting.
Test. Hope it works - I am hopeless at pasting links etc.
OK - That did seem to work (surprisingly). The chart shows the forecast swing away from different parties, with both main parties losing support in their heartlands.
Test. Hope it works - I am hopeless at pasting links etc.
So this just shows swings, not seats won? The colours don't seem to match the tallies... am confused.
It's a chart showing the most significant negative swing in each seat (the party losing most support), and it is shaded by the extent of each swing (paler indicates smaller swing) - but you are right, the seat tally in the box at the side is showing the 1st place result (seats won by each party)
Ps @MarqueeMark I disagree with Undemocratic Swinson on a lot but one thing she is not doing is just "wringing her hands on drugs". She has proposed a rational evidence based solution unlike others.
If you don't want gangs fighting over drugs legalise the drugs. Prohibition has failed.
I don't agree with Philip on many subjects, but on this we are in complete agreement. People take drugs, always have, always will. Decriminalise and tax is the way forward.
It's a crazy world when alcohol, with all the damage to society that brings, is legal and marijuana isn't.
I appreciate the situation is more nuanced with harder drugs, but again prohibition has patently failed. Time to be pragmatic.
Test. Hope it works - I am hopeless at pasting links etc.
OK - That did seem to work (surprisingly). The chart shows the forecast swing away from different parties, with both main parties losing support in their heartlands.
Test. Hope it works - I am hopeless at pasting links etc.
OK - That did seem to work (surprisingly). The chart shows the forecast swing away from different parties, with both main parties losing support in their heartlands.
That would at least be nice for my SCons bets.
That's swing away from SCon in Scotland.
Now I'm reading the map properly, and initially it's a bit counterintuitive but makes sense from an analysis POV, Con Hold St Ives.
On topic I think the LDs would be in danger of a 2010 repeat if there is a hung parliament. The timescales are such that they probably couldnt both stop Corbyn becoming PM and avoid a no deal Jan Brexit. So they will obviously allow Corbyn to be PM even if they dont give any c&s or go into a coalition.
(Some of) their voters will see them as reneging on the promise to not do a deal with Corbyn. They will protest that they didnt do any deal, but I doubt that message would get through properly.
Another election would probably follow a 2nd ref campaign in less than a year, so little time for them to recover.
If there is a hung parliament, the best course of action for LDs would be to table a revoke bill, when that fails, another extension forcing bill that takes us to at least 2021. Then they should just agitate for another GE asap. Their best strategy is attrition against Lab under Corbyn and Cons under Johnson, if they give either party enough time to change leadership post failure (hung parliament is arguably more of a failure of Johnson than Corbyn, but the noise is if Labour isn't the largest party / can't form a government, Corbyn and McDonnell resign). As long as Johnson and Corbyn are leaders of their parties, LDs have a chance at gains. If Emily Thornberry becomes Lab leader, for example, they start feeling squeezed again.
There wont be a majority for an extension without a plan let alone revoke in a hung parliament. There will (probably) be a wafer thin majority for a 2nd referendum, which will require Corbyn as PM. It is perfectly realistic that there is no majority for anything and we crash out no deal on Jan 31st.
No deal is more likely Jan 31st than it ever was on Mar 31 or Oct 31.
I'm not saying these outcomes are highly likely, but what I think LDs should do in their own political interest.
Depending on how unified the Cons stay during a hung parliament would depend on an extension vote. I could see many Cons voting to extend rather than have a second referendum.
Accurately describing the failure of a current policy is not in itself - without more - a good argument for doing the opposite.
At the risk of repeating myself, let’s get some evidence about the harm involved and then work out how best to minimise it in the most effective way. That may result in the policies you advocate but I marvel at the ability of people - and this is not aimed at you personally - to come up with such policies on the basis of relatively little or no scientific, medical, legal, criminal or other relevant knowledge in this area.
Not sure what your complaint is. If you are saying posters here are making it up as they go along - well, I certainly am, but we all have to get through life making decisions "on the basis of relatively little or no scientific, medical, legal, criminal or other relevant knowledge" because we can't all be experts at everything. This includes people like governments and MPs and judges. If you are saying there is insufficient research into cannabis out there, I am not sure what would satisfy you. There's tons. Governments are there to formulate and enact policies, not to set up Royal Commissions.
"I'm not sure that's true. I live in a very expensive area and middle-class families worry about their kids having to move away if they move out. I was elected in a decidedly middle-class home-owning ward after campaigning almost exclusively on "more social housing". I do think that "council housing" has an old-fashioned ring to it, though. And contempt for the idea of "affordable housing" (houses for sale at 85% of market rates) is almost universal, including all the Tory councillors tyhat I've talked to - round here that means £300K"
This is just a load of nonsense - I wouldn't trust anything this poster says. Binscombe is basically one large down at heel council estate on the outskirts of Godalming - "decidedly middle class" is the last thing you would call it if you went there. Calling for more council housing in just about any other ward would go down like a cup of cold sick in the Ming.
I'm pretty sure that was posted by NickPalmer, well known poster here and ex MP...
My own anecdotal is our Tory MP campaigning regularly on more council houses and affordable houses in leafy Snorbs. Now, I imagine this is because the central government have decreed we need 10k houses in 10 years, and most developers seeing average house prices around here will use it as a huge cash cow, and the only way to stop local uproar is pretend that it will all be affordable housing and council houses for people's kiddies when they come back from uni, but still. Snorbs is not one big down at heel council estate and lots of people are only willing to entertain the notion of more housing if it includes council / affordable housing.
Do Labour realise that council houses are not aspirational ?
And that few home owners want more council houses being built anywhere near where they live.
I'm not sure that's true. I live in a very expensive area and middle-class families worry about their kids having to move away if they move out. I was elected in a decidedly middle-class home-owning ward after campaigning almost exclusively on "more social housing". I do think that "council housing" has an old-fashioned ring to it, though. And contempt for the idea of "affordable housing" (houses for sale at 85% of market rates) is almost universal, including all the Tory councillors tyhat I've talked to - round here that means £300K.
What is housing affordability in Surrey compared to Nottinghamshire ?
I'm not sure that gaining votes in Surrey but losing them in Nottinghamshire is a good trade for Labour.
Do Labour realise that council houses are not aspirational ?
And that few home owners want more council houses being built anywhere near where they live.
Corbyn Labour does not do aspiration, in Corbyn and McDonnell's dream UK everyone would live in a council house, work for the public sector, be a member of a trade union and send their kids to the local comp
I am proud to send my kids to local schools - the eldest is at the local comp. I would happily join a trade union if my employer recognised them. I have worked for the public sector in the past and would do so again - it's full of hard working people. And I would be glad to see more council houses - better that than mass homelessness or Rachmanism in the private rental market - although I am lucky enough to own my own home thanks to the hard work of me and my wife. Since I grew up without much money, went to the local comp, and now have three degrees and a very well paid job I guess I am an example of aspiration. But unlike you I don't want to shit all over people who are less fortunate than me.
No Corbyn Labour just wants to shit all over people with any aspiration and destroy wealth and property in this country
Do Labour realise that council houses are not aspirational ?
And that few home owners want more council houses being built anywhere near where they live.
I'm not sure that's true. I live in a very expensive area and middle-class families worry about their kids having to move away if they move out. I was elected in a decidedly middle-class home-owning ward after campaigning almost exclusively on "more social housing". I do think that "council housing" has an old-fashioned ring to it, though. And contempt for the idea of "affordable housing" (houses for sale at 85% of market rates) is almost universal, including all the Tory councillors tyhat I've talked to - round here that means £300K.
What is housing affordability in Surrey compared to Nottinghamshire ?
I'm not sure that gaining votes in Surrey but losing them in Nottinghamshire is a good trade for Labour.
To illustrate - how many seats are Labour defending in the affordable blue zone on this map compared to how many seats are Labour defending in the unaffordable red zone:
Surely your two examples (cigarettes and sugar - you could add alcohol of course) illustrate exactly why legalisation and regulation are the best approach.
Imagine if sugar was an illegal substance - there'd be criminal gangs producing, distributing and selling it. If cigarettes were not regulated there'd be no control at all of the strength ot toxins in them.
Finally, look what happened in prohibition America - we have a similar situation now with drugs.
We need evidence. Simply describing the inconsistencies with other products or what happened a century ago in the US is not evidence about what is on offer today, its effects and what the right course of action should be now.
What's happening now with gangs on our streets is literally consistent with what happened in the US a century ago. We have abundant evidence prohibition has failed - again! If you want evidence then evidence do we have prohibition is working?
That is perhaps to misread Prohibition. While the legal banning of alcohol was a marked political failure, Prohibition itself was the symptom of a general societal disillusion with alcohol and the damage it was doing.
I am not seeing any sign that Swinson is cutting through in this election campaign at all. I mean, don't get me wrong, I actually like that policy and thought Ed Davey sounded very like Conservative Chancellors of old with his pitch but it is more puritanical than even Hammond ever was with deeply uncomfortable short term implications.
I also agree with their legalisation policy for pot although it is very much a work in progress.
But they are not so much struggling to get a hearing as failing to persuade. Their position on Brexit has a very definite ceiling and it is turning out that ceiling is somewhat lower than many might have thought. Getting squeezed by something as dysfunctional and, frankly, repellent as Corbyn's Labour party is just embarrassing. It is a frustration to me that the appetite for a sane alternative seems so limited.
They could - should - have mirrored Labour on Brexit. By two parties suggesting it might in itself have made the renegotiate -> revote seem less muddled. But it would have done what Labour did to the Tories in 2017: left not a fag paper between the two parties on Brexit, so highlighting the differences on all other policies. And those differences would have been that Labour is Loony Marxit Left, the LibDems are sensible Left, with a sensible Budget being proposed by a sensible Chancellor in waiting - our price for a Coalition, Labour.
Instead, Swinson has fucked it up.
BiB - Do you think that would have been to the Lib Dems' benefit? I'm not so sure. It's their clear Brexit policy that has brought back to life the Lab/Lib Dem front.
And the ITV Debate neatly framed the absurdity of the duopoly. Johnson and Corbyn arguing over whose leave deal was best. Imagine if the LibDems had adopted a similar position to Labour - who would be representing the majority remain voters? The Greens and the SNP?
I understand your point but I don’t think the Lib Dems needed to go to revoke . Everyone knew they were the strongest party for Remain .
It’s put some Remainers in a very uncomfortable position because to be blunt it’s just not very democratic . You’ll not find many people more pro EU than me but I have deep reservations about revoke .
+ 1
BTW off topic, I watched the first 2 episodes of the Crown. A bit disappointing. Very good production values but Olivia Coleman was disappointing and the script was incredibly clunky and unsubtle in places, with a very poor rip off of Alan Bennett in the Queen/Blunt scenes.
It’s also made (and I surprise myself in saying this) Charles look good by comparison. He’s been more statesmanlike and decisive behind the scenes (without at all making it about him) than I’ve seen before which bodes well for the future.
I don't know much about the monarchy but I do know it won't survive King Gobshite. Unless he has the grace to die soon after coronation and they plant the crown on William's shiny pate.
Rubbish, Charles now has an approval rating of 48% positive and 22% negative, higher than Boris and Corbyn
Do Labour realise that council houses are not aspirational ?
And that few home owners want more council houses being built anywhere near where they live.
Corbyn Labour does not do aspiration, in Corbyn and McDonnell's dream UK everyone would live in a council house, work for the public sector, be a member of a trade union and send their kids to the local comp
For about the last 90 years, living in a council house HAS represented a step up the housing ladder for most tenants in the privately rented sector.
Unless you bought that councik house under Thatcher's right to buy policy not really
In both cases the biggest argument for legalising it is strength (and quality) control..
the reason the market is making it stronger all the time is because there is no control over that market.
True. But if the legal stuff is the weak stuff which does no harm then the risk is that there is still an illegal market for the strong stuff which does do harm. So how does one deal with that? Those who want decriminalisation need to have a good answer to that.
Or the other risk is that we make legal something which does cause harm - especially to the young - which does not seem to me to be a particularly moral or sensible thing to do. It’s an odd society which makes a fuss about smoking cigarettes (rightly) or eating too much sugar (again rightly) but is ok about smoking cannabis, regardless of whether it causes problems.
So there needs to be more study about the effects of different types of cannabis, the consequences of decriminalisation and how one enforces effectively against those peddling the stuff we don’t want. Rather than a rush to legalisation on the basis of “Well I smoked some at university 20 years ago and it did me no harm”.
A proper Royal Commission looking at all the evidence properly is needed here. Not rushed through and I’ll-thought out policies.
Speaking personally I would legalise both the strong and weak stuff and sell it through legal mechanisms and not gangs. And let HMRC join the fight against any illegal, unregulated and untaxed sales.
Lets compare with alcohol. I don't know any alcoholics who abuse low strength beer, though that may be what they started drinking. It is high strength drinks, sometimes beer or wine but most especially spirits which are the biggest problem. But we don't criminalise spirits - and we offer education and health services to those who struggle.
I don't see anyone arguing to legalise because it did them no harm, I see arguments to legalise because prohibition has failed miserably and is leading to drug gangs.
I thinks that's right. One doesn't see many objections to alcohol being legal because some crackpot goes blind from distilling moonshine in their shed.
Getting squeezed by something as dysfunctional and, frankly, repellent as Corbyn's Labour party is just embarrassing. It is a frustration to me that the appetite for a sane alternative seems so limited.
That's the country you live in though, and unless you have been a tireless advocate of electoral reform, it's the country you have helped to create.
Mr. Mango, it was Labour MPs alone who determined the short list and put Corbyn on it, Labour members who voted for the far left loon, and Labour MPs who mostly (thanks to Watson) failed to walk out even when claiming 'enough was enough'.
BTW off topic, I watched the first 2 episodes of the Crown. A bit disappointing. Very good production values but Olivia Coleman was disappointing and the script was incredibly clunky and unsubtle in places, with a very poor rip off of Alan Bennett in the Queen/Blunt scenes.
It does pick up - and for those of us around at the time a useful reminder of Aberfan, the moon landing, miners strike & 3 day week. The cast is absolutely top drawer and as it broadens beyond Coleman (who seems to settle into the role as the series progresses) we see the lives of Charles & Margaret for example explored (two strong performances). I suspect considerable dramatic licence has been taken!
Minor gripes - the queen and DoE watching television at breakfast in the 1960s - I'm pretty sure it didn't start until the early '80s - and everywhere they go is on a BOAC VC10 - even short hops to France.....
Do Labour realise that council houses are not aspirational ?
And that few home owners want more council houses being built anywhere near where they live.
Corbyn Labour does not do aspiration, in Corbyn and McDonnell's dream UK everyone would live in a council house, work for the public sector, be a member of a trade union and send their kids to the local comp
I am proud to send my kids to local schools - the eldest is at the local comp. I would happily join a trade union if my employer recognised them. I have worked for the public sector in the past and would do so again - it's full of hard working people. And I would be glad to see more council houses - better that than mass homelessness or Rachmanism in the private rental market - although I am lucky enough to own my own home thanks to the hard work of me and my wife. Since I grew up without much money, went to the local comp, and now have three degrees and a very well paid job I guess I am an example of aspiration. But unlike you I don't want to shit all over people who are less fortunate than me.
No Corbyn Labour just wants to shit all over people with any aspiration and destroy wealth and property in this country
Interesting. Spreading wealth more evenly doesn't destroy it; in the same vein, wealth accumulation is not wealth creation.
Labour will promise free social care like in Scotland.
They need to narrow the tories advantage with the grey vote somewhat.
It might work.
On the other hand, pensioners are old enough to remember when Old Labour was last in power. All power cuts, piles of rotting rubbish in the streets, unburied corpses, rampant inflation and going cap-in-hand to the Gnomes of Zurich.
If, as we are consistently told, a great reservoir of Scottish voters will never forgive the Tories for Maggie, it follows that there probably exists another great reservoir of older voters who have neither forgiven nor forgotten the Winter of Discontent.
Bribery may not be enough.
Quite I’m “only” 55 but the 70’s are seared into my brain. I have zero desire to go back. None. It was crap.
The disco music was fantastic. (I'm a retrospective fan, I wasn't around at the time).
No you have a point there the music ( not just disco) was great. Sitting in a black out from 18.00 to 22.00 eating a bit of toast your mum had hurriedly stuck under the grill as she got home from work at 17.45 not so much. Also quizzing your dad why he’d got Deutschmark travellers’ cheques as we were in Spain for a week “ because you couldn’t rely on the Pound not being suspended”.
It was shite. May 79!was a total liberation. We are still living in that world. Corbyn wants to go back to 1975. I was there. It was crap, believe me,
Rubbish, I loved the 70's , pay rises every month , cheap beer , dire fashion , great music , brilliant.
Healthcare Housing Planning Social Care Higher Education Transport infrastructure Pensions Tax Code reform Devolution and local government
All put on the 'too-difficult' list by successive governments, because any proper solutions (as opposed to minor tinkering dressed up as significant change) will be politically almost impossible to sell to the public.
Time to kick off non-partisan Royal Commissions on all of the above, have them look at what systems work and come up with workable proposals. If the next government can do that, I will be surprisingly shocked and happy to have voted for them.
To add to the list:
Definancialisation Climate Crisis International Security in the 21st Century Restorative Justice and Penal Reform The Nature of Work / Labour in the 21st Century AI
Meanwhile file all of healthcare, social care, mental health, fitness and healthy living, euthanasia and dignity in death under "Quality of Life". That sure will be a tonking royal commission.
It all shows that we haven't had a decent government since 1951.
They claim that HMRC forgoes 400bn a year in corporate tax reliefs. Really? That's 15% of GDP.
"In January 2019, HMRC published its ‘estimated costs of tax reliefs’. This provides broad estimates as to the revenue foregone from the principal tax reliefs - those which they believe are worth over £50m. The sum of the 115 principal reliefs listed equalled over £400bn in 2018-19, with a further £690m listed under 80 ‘minor reliefs’"
Do Labour realise that council houses are not aspirational ?
And that few home owners want more council houses being built anywhere near where they live.
Corbyn Labour does not do aspiration, in Corbyn and McDonnell's dream UK everyone would live in a council house, work for the public sector, be a member of a trade union and send their kids to the local comp
I am proud to send my kids to local schools - the eldest is at the local comp. I would happily join a trade union if my employer recognised them. I have worked for the public sector in the past and would do so again - it's full of hard working people. And I would be glad to see more council houses - better that than mass homelessness or Rachmanism in the private rental market - although I am lucky enough to own my own home thanks to the hard work of me and my wife. Since I grew up without much money, went to the local comp, and now have three degrees and a very well paid job I guess I am an example of aspiration. But unlike you I don't want to shit all over people who are less fortunate than me.
No Corbyn Labour just wants to shit all over people with any aspiration and destroy wealth and property in this country
Interesting. Spreading wealth more evenly doesn't destroy it; in the same vein, wealth accumulation is not wealth creation.
You are assuming it is a zero sum game; it is not.
Comments
The fact its all pervasive is part of what shows how much prohibition has failed though IMO. But yes I'd far rather it be sold more in consumable rather than smokable formats for that reasons.
I’m confident it will do so here. Charles is old and well-past official retirement age, and William will rapidly take over many duties once he’s Prince of Wales.
(And just to be clear, I am no fan of cannabis.)
I think you'll find the Tories were in power between 19 June 1970 and 4 March 1974 (during which 3-day week and planned power-cuts) and from 4 May 1979 onwards.
At the risk of repeating myself, let’s get some evidence about the harm involved and then work out how best to minimise it in the most effective way. That may result in the policies you advocate but I marvel at the ability of people - and this is not aimed at you personally - to come up with such policies on the basis of relatively little or no scientific, medical, legal, criminal or other relevant knowledge in this area.
This is just a load of nonsense - I wouldn't trust anything this poster says. Binscombe is basically one large down at heel council estate on the outskirts of Godalming - "decidedly middle class" is the last thing you would call it if you went there. Calling for more council housing in just about any other ward would go down like a cup of cold sick in the Ming.
1) There is a split Remain vote
2) remain won many fewer constituencies but won many of them with 70-75% whilst Leave won a ton more with 55-60%. If in America you were going to gerrymander the districts this is how you would do it.
Plus he may have seen King Lear. Baldy's ho has a distinctly Goneril look to her from where I'm sitting.
It's a crazy world when alcohol, with all the damage to society that brings, is legal and marijuana isn't.
I appreciate the situation is more nuanced with harder drugs, but again prohibition has patently failed. Time to be pragmatic.
I misread it.
Depending on how unified the Cons stay during a hung parliament would depend on an extension vote. I could see many Cons voting to extend rather than have a second referendum.
My own anecdotal is our Tory MP campaigning regularly on more council houses and affordable houses in leafy Snorbs. Now, I imagine this is because the central government have decreed we need 10k houses in 10 years, and most developers seeing average house prices around here will use it as a huge cash cow, and the only way to stop local uproar is pretend that it will all be affordable housing and council houses for people's kiddies when they come back from uni, but still. Snorbs is not one big down at heel council estate and lots of people are only willing to entertain the notion of more housing if it includes council / affordable housing.
I'm not sure that gaining votes in Surrey but losing them in Nottinghamshire is a good trade for Labour.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23234033
While the legal banning of alcohol was a marked political failure, Prohibition itself was the symptom of a general societal disillusion with alcohol and the damage it was doing.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/explore/public_figure/Prince_Charles
Minor gripes - the queen and DoE watching television at breakfast in the 1960s - I'm pretty sure it didn't start until the early '80s - and everywhere they go is on a BOAC VC10 - even short hops to France.....
Definancialisation
Climate Crisis
International Security in the 21st Century
Restorative Justice and Penal Reform
The Nature of Work / Labour in the 21st Century
AI
Meanwhile file all of healthcare, social care, mental health, fitness and healthy living, euthanasia and dignity in death under "Quality of Life". That sure will be a tonking royal commission.
It all shows that we haven't had a decent government since 1951.
Detail, detail, detail.
------------------------