politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The issues: Which parties are seen to be best

Good evening, everyone.

Mr. kle4, you're right to be outraged. If the media had anything about them they'd be (rightly) hammering the police over this, day after day.

An innocent man appears to have been fitted up, and the police have been caught out blatantly lying.

Cyclefree said:

tim said:

@ftwestminster: Miliband warns of fight with Fleet Street http://t.co/kWzD1bDg7H

Contrast Eds balls of steel with the cowering posh lads grovelling to the powerful in all areas of British life

(that's the subtext anyway)

I don't want politicians fighting with the press. Nor do I want them toadying to it. I want politicians who accept and understand that in a liberal democracy free speech is essential and that that will mean that the press will write things which they will not like.

What we have now are politicians who - either through appeasement or bullying/regulation - are seeking to control the press and what they say. Neither are good.

Labour became insanely authoritarian during its time in government. It shows no sign - under Milliband - of understanding why that was a bad thing, let alone changing. This, for me anyway, is one reason why I cannot bring myself to vote Labour. A more genuinely liberal Labour party might well get my vote. But we do not have - alas - such a Labour party.

As for John Major, what fun to read his speech. I particularly liked this phrase: "politicians should protect people not institutions". That should be tattoo'ed on the forehead of every actual and aspiring politician.

A post with so much sense I'd suspect I wrote it myself were it not concisely and precisely covering a variety of topics in a short amount of space.

DavidL said:

TGOHF said:

tim said:

TGOHF said:

Easterross said:

UNITE are calling for a new owner with a social conscience, i.e. one which will bow to demands made by UNITE and the Scottish news was reporting at lunchtime that John Swinney is casting around for someone to buy Grangemouth from INEOS.

Why don't UNITE take over the running of the plant.

Pay rises all round !

You may have missed this on the previous thread

"Given you've obviously researched this what % of the costs at Grangemouth are A.Labour costs. B.Final salary pension cost not funded by pension funds"

A. £10M a month too high.

B. £200M and rising.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/grangemouth-alex-salmond-in-hunt-for-buyer-1-3149580

These are both major problems, hence the condition of closing the final salary pension scheme and the changes in conditions, but they are not the problem.

The problem is that the feed stock from the North sea is running out and the site needs to substantially improve it's harbour access to obtain more base material to work the site at anything like full capacity. There has to be an economic case for that capital investment and at the moment there simply isn't.

Without the new investment the site will die. It does not look good. A government that had Scotland's interests at heart would be moving heaven and earth to involve Westminster on this and try to find a way to subsidise the capital needs without falling foul of EU law. But I can't see that happening either.

LOL , David , you must be joking , Westminster would rather see it shut than help the SNP.

Like this?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-18/weil-on-finance-u-k-s-censorship-diktats.html

TheWatcher said:

tim said:

@Cyclefree.

Miliband is clearly going to take on the energy companies, the press and his own big donors while Cameron is in the pocket of all three, that's the message isn't it, good luck to him, the contrast with Cameron is stark if he pulls it off

You rate politicians above a Free Press?

Hilarious demos asgainst the governments Go Home Vans in Gerrard St.

How will George explain this to his new best friends who are building our brand new nuclear power stations?

tim said:

@Cyclefree.

Miliband is clearly going to take on the energy companies, the press and his own big donors while Cameron is in the pocket of all three, that's the message isn't it, good luck to him, the contrast with Cameron is stark if he pulls it off

You'e missing the point. I have no issue with him taking on the energy companies or Unite. The latter is internal party politics and the former is what an opposition leader should do (though it might have been better if he'd done something about energy when he was the energy minister in government). However, good for him in showing that he understands people's concerns about energy prices.

But I do have a big issue with any politician seeking to control the press by whatever means, whether cuddling up to them or spitting at them. This is bad for democracy, bad for freedom of speech and thought, bad for us. It tells me something important about Milliband: that his instincts are worryingly illiberal and that he does not really value something which it took people in this country hundreds of years to fight for and which those in authority are always seeking to restrain and control.

And still Ed Miliband continues to ignore the escalating dispute at Grangemouth, instead he has announced that he is going to rally the Labour troops and pick another fight with Fleet Street.

BBC - Grangemouth's economic significance

Miss Fitalass, Comrade Miliband's vision of good news cannot be undermined by the bourgeois capitalists running the press!

tim said:

@Cyclefree

You can have a free press without the PM being on his knees in front of Dacre or Murdoch.
blockquote>

Of course. But he didn't need to react to the Mail article; he could simply have ignored it on the "Publish and Be Damned" principle.

What is much more worrying is his statement - before he had even read the Leveson report - that he would implement it in full and his belief that the state i.e. politicians should regulate the press. I don't agree with this.

I don't agree with the way Blair and Brown sucked up to Murdoch or the way Cameron tried/tries to. I think politicians should simply accept that the press has a job/role to play in a democracy and keep them at a safe distance not become best buddies, knight them or try and silence them.

I also don't like the fact that Milliband seems to reserve his greatest energies for fighting the press rather than fighting for things which matter to voters - though his stance on energy is a change to that. It does sometimes seem that politicians are fighting their own battles rather than fighting to make the world better for us.

Major's speech on the forgotten poor/near-poor was rather eloquent on this point and it is something which has not been heard from our politicians for far too long.

Royal Mail: This could become a big political story very quickly:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24624943

I see that Labour have already trotted out the usual nonsense; however, this particular hedge fund is rather special in a number of ways:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Children's_Investment_Fund_Foundation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Children's_Investment_Fund_Management

Could get very interesting if they are activist shareholders, as is their wont.

So if the energy companies face a windfall tax,won`t that put the lights out?

Cammo is trying to copy the Miliband freeze with minor changes.

This is the real `con`.

RichardNabavi said:

Royal Mail: This could become a big political story very quickly:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24624943

I see that Labour have already trotted out the usual nonsense; however, this particular hedge fund is rather special in a number of ways:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Children's_Investment_Fund_Foundation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Children's_Investment_Fund_Management

Could get very interesting if they are activist shareholders, as is their wont.

The link between activist shareholders and "city fat cats" is strained in the public conciousness, one suspects. Throw in the charity angle and it doesn't look like a golden apple for Labour.

Re Grangemouth,many will have never toured a site like this,the sheer scale of investment and technology is mindblowing,it is huge,I did plenty of business up there.
By comparison,I have been round several nuclear power stations,and they are relatively boring.
I actually bought an old world war 2 Shell oil refinery,most of which was demolished,but even what was left was impresive.
Unite have sleepwalked into a disaster,and my betting is INEOS will close the refining side,and keep some of the more profitable sections.

MrJones said:

If the media in this country was just the BBC would the grooming gangs ever have been reported?

Please stop. Thank you.

MrJones said:

If the media in this country was just the BBC would the grooming gangs ever have been reported?

Did someone say they wanted the BBC to be the only media in the UK or something?

kle4 said:

tim said:

@Cyclefree

You can have a free press without the PM being on his knees in front of Dacre or Murdoch.
Dacre overreached, Ed gave him a good slap, that's healthy in a democracy isn't it?

Is that all he is hoping to achieve though? Labour's record with illiberal tendancies in the past decade (not saying the Tories are pioneers of liberalism mind you) would make me cautious about that, though since he stands such a good chance of becoming PM, I must just hope my caution proves unfounded.

The Government's proposals in response to Leveson (which little Ed supports) is most definitely not what Leveson recommended. It was a further compromise deal which was hastily cobbled together at the last minute with a quite bizarre focus on the new Royal charter aspect . I know the thinking behind that but the Royals simply do not put the fear of god into the press anymore so it was misplaced and also not particularly conducive to the charter being seen as fully independent and well away from the hands of the establishment as well as the press barons.

The carrot of the arbitration service, the arms length for a totally new PCC independent of the press barons and the code of conduct for Editors set by the press and approved by an independent figure are the main improvements on the old discredited PCC. But just like for Ireland, where the press barons are quite happy to operate under a Leveson style system, it will depend on the press getting on board for it. Desmond signed up to the Irish system after all and he despised the PCC here even though it was a complete joke.

They may not sign up to it. In which case the press will then be putting all their faith in the press barons not making any glaring f***ups for the foreseeable future. Not particularly wise given their track record to date, but it's absolutely their choice if that's what they want to do.