politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How an anti-Brexit party could be created without the need to
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How an anti-Brexit party could be created without the need to leave existing parties
It has been rehearsed many time over – the massive challenges that a new party would face simply getting off the ground.
Comments
-
First ?0
-
I find this idea every bit as dubious as my comment precedence...0
-
... what is there in this for the main parties to allow it ?
It would seem seriously to undermine party discipline (which might be fine from a voter's POV, but certainly isn't from the party's), and risks giving a leg up to a new party getting itself established - and possibly poaching MPs.0 -
Labour/coop is a long established "dual party" setup.
I think a 'European' dual party whilst doable in theory falls at the first hurdle of say disavowing the whips of one of the big two where there is a conflict between 'Labour' and 'Democrats' (Or indeed the 'Conservatives' and 'Democrats' say.
I think candidates standing as 'Democrat & Conservative party', well they wouldn't get past the party selection.0 -
I've just had a comment disappear. Odd.
Anyway, the gist of it was that no, the big parties won't allow it. They won't allow joint billing with themselves, they won't allow their candidates to serve two masters, they won't want to display their splits in public (between endorsed and non-endorsed candidates), and they won't want to flag up that some of their candidates superficially have more in common with members of other parties than with their own.0 -
0
-
The list of people thrashing around with completely impractical ways of trying to pretend that we are not leaving the EU gets longer by the day.
What's more, we'll have left by the next GE (almost certainly). A 'pro-EU' party will be as irrelevant as an 'anti-Indian-independence' party would have been in 1950.0 -
Theoretically it would work. In practice most Conservatives are too deranged to consider adopting anyone who isn't ready to declare war on the EU, never mind work to deBrexit. I can't see Labour sharing candidates with parties that they don't have sufficiently tamed either.0
-
It's the silly season. Brexit is happening. It's going to be a disaster but that's no excuse for not staring the grim truth in the face.Richard_Nabavi said:The list of people thrashing around with completely impractical ways of trying to pretend that we are not leaving the EU gets longer by the day.
0 -
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/1694088/#Comment_1694088david_herdson said:I've just had a comment disappear. Odd.
0 -
Sadly I think that's right.david_herdson said:I've just had a comment disappear. Odd.
Anyway, the gist of it was that no, the big parties won't allow it. They won't allow joint billing with themselves, they won't allow their candidates to serve two masters, they won't want to display their splits in public (between endorsed and non-endorsed candidates), and they won't want to flag up that some of their candidates superficially have more in common with members of other parties than with their own.
On another subject, in the "you'd need a heart of stone not to laugh" department:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/11/migrant-rescue-ship-sails-to-aid-of-stranded-far-right-activists0 -
FPT rottenborough mentioned that Chapman wanted to charge VAT on private school fees. This is illegal under EU rules as it bans the charging of VAT on education provision. Can't have it both ways....0
-
More details on efforts to start a new party:
https://forums.politicsisdead.com/topic/14-people-organising-remain-political-parties
Seems the Just Party are already up and running.
http://www.thejustparty.org.uk/0 -
Your second paragraph illustrates why your thinking on this issue has become so muddled. The EU and its influence on out politics isn't going away in March 2019. No matter what happens that is one thing that is an absolute certainty.Richard_Nabavi said:The list of people thrashing around with completely impractical ways of trying to pretend that we are not leaving the EU gets longer by the day.
What's more, we'll have left by the next GE (almost certainly). A 'pro-EU' party will be as irrelevant as an 'anti-Indian-independence' party would have been in 1950.0 -
boulay said:
FPT rottenborough mentioned that Chapman wanted to charge VAT on private school fees. This is illegal under EU rules as it bans the charging of VAT on education provision. Can't have it both ways....
Unravelling already.0 -
There isn't much point for this with Labour, when all except a handful of our MPs and candidates are Remainers. I suppose we could sub-divide into Remainer (accepts the democratic result) and Remainer (sticks two fingers up at the voters), but there are not too many in the latter category.
This is more an issue for the Tories, where in the case of most of their MPs I have no idea if they are Remain or Leave. In some cases they managed to campaign for both sides at different stages during the referendum campaign. Perhaps they could be more covert - describe themselves as "Conservative and Unionist" if they are pro-EU and simply as Conservative if they support Brexit.0 -
My thinking has been entirely clear, both before and after the referendum. You are right that the EU will continue to have a big influence on the UK, but the nature of the debate will change completely on leaving. In fact, it should have changed already with the invocation of Article 50, but it seems that some people are a bit slow on the uptake.williamglenn said:Your second paragraph illustrates why your thinking on this issue has become so muddled. The EU and its influence on out politics isn't going away in March 2019. No matter what happens that is one thing that is an absolute certainty.
0 -
In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.0
-
Many Remainers accept hard Brexit:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamesball/remain-and-leave-voters-are-surprisingly-united-on-backing?utm_term=.wrQP10QJq#.mnnWp0oz20 -
Well, depends whether you accept that the other EU countries wouldn't agree if we announced we wanted to abandon Brexit and renounce A50.Richard_Nabavi said:In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.
I suspect FR and GE would arm twist everyone into agreeing.0 -
From a Scottish perspective, any Labour party candidate (or elected) who got into even a vague consensus with the Tories would quickly be an ex-member of the LP, and I suspect that there will be something similar in reverse in the Scottish Tories. It just would lead to a lot of abuse from the SNP. As such, in England, it would also play well into the hands of UKIP, Plaid and even the LibDems (if they played it).0
-
It's not going to be a Rejoin-EU party (at least not yet); it would be a pro-EU party! ie, one that doesn't view the EU as our enemy and the faintest whiff of cross-border joint responsibility for widget specification enforcement as an attack on our sovereignty.Richard_Nabavi said:The list of people thrashing around with completely impractical ways of trying to pretend that we are not leaving the EU gets longer by the day.
What's more, we'll have left by the next GE (almost certainly). A 'pro-EU' party will be as irrelevant as an 'anti-Indian-independence' party would have been in 1950.0 -
I don't see why it should have. To say "I want to leave the EU but stay in the single market" is perfectly sensible. Trouble is, breathe that to many Brexiters, and they want you locked up in the Tower.Richard_Nabavi said:
My thinking has been entirely clear, both before and after the referendum. You are right that the EU will continue to have a big influence on the UK, but the nature of the debate will change completely on leaving. In fact, it should have changed already with the invocation of Article 50, but it seems that some people are a bit slow on the uptake.williamglenn said:Your second paragraph illustrates why your thinking on this issue has become so muddled. The EU and its influence on out politics isn't going away in March 2019. No matter what happens that is one thing that is an absolute certainty.
0 -
LOL!!Richard_Nabavi said:In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.
But yes, they did manage to organise some marches and so on earlier.
Did they just have faith that if they protested enough and made enough noise, somehow one of the big parties, or just a mass rebellion of MPs, would see off the Article 50 threat?
The timeframe would have been very short for what they wanted to achieve, but if they'd got their backsides in serious gear, and a lot of big names had rallied to the cause, then perhaps the 2017 GE would have been their best chance of stopping Brexit. But they didn't even get themselves onto the ballot paper. Were they leaving the Lib Dems to do that for them? Mad mad mad if they thought the Lib Dems would really win that election on a Europhile wave. Instead the vast majority of votes went to parties that supported the referendum vote being respected.0 -
"There’s no reason why pro-brexiteers shouldn’t do the same."
Except that by the time of the next general election, we will have Left the EU.0 -
There's no mechanism for doing so, even if the political will existed in the UK and in the EU. It would require ratification by 27 countries, in a timescale which is completely impossible. It just ain't gonna happen.rottenborough said:
Well, depends whether you accept that the other EU countries wouldn't agree if we announced we wanted to abandon Brexit and renounce A50.Richard_Nabavi said:In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.
I suspect FR and GE would arm twist everyone into agreeing.0 -
So a 'coupon' election, if the losing side was the one handing out coupons. Got it.0
-
Meanwhile, Buzzfeed has the results of a YouGov poll on attitudes to Europe.
The conclusion:
These results indicate that despite the impression given across the press and from politicians of a deeply divided nation, when voters think of the actual details of what they want from Brexit, neither group is that distinct – and generally they lean towards a harder Brexit.0 -
The crucial moment for Remainers was immediately after the referendum, when the government (and the Brexiteers) clearly had no idea what to do. If Labour had, say, given a lead and defined the issue in those critical months we wouldn't even be talking about a 'hard Brexit' or a 'soft Brexit', it would be defined in entirely different (and probably more sensible) terms.Richard_Nabavi said:In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.
Instead Labour's sensible-centrists chose to go ahead with their plan and fling themselves like lemmings at Corbyn and against the membership, giving the hard-line Brexiteers a free hand to define the referendum result however they wanted.0 -
The Brexiteers are caught in a trap of their own design. If there's an analogy to be made with horses, bolting from the stable is not it.Richard_Nabavi said:In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.
0 -
Yet another Leaver blaming Remainers for the crapness of the deal that they're "negotiating". Vote Leave, accept responsibility.Winstanley said:
The crucial moment for Remainers was immediately after the referendum, when the government (and the Brexiteers) clearly had no idea what to do. If Labour had, say, given a lead and defined the issue in those critical months we wouldn't even be talking about a 'hard Brexit' or a 'soft Brexit', it would be defined in entirely different (and probably more sensible) terms.Richard_Nabavi said:In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.
Instead Labour's sensible-centrists chose to go ahead with their plan and fling themselves like lemmings at Corbyn and against the membership, giving the hard-line Brexiteers a free hand to define the referendum result however they wanted.0 -
Who's a Leaver?AlastairMeeks said:
Yet another Leaver blaming Remainers for the crapness of the deal that they're "negotiating". Vote Leave, accept responsibility.Winstanley said:
The crucial moment for Remainers was immediately after the referendum, when the government (and the Brexiteers) clearly had no idea what to do. If Labour had, say, given a lead and defined the issue in those critical months we wouldn't even be talking about a 'hard Brexit' or a 'soft Brexit', it would be defined in entirely different (and probably more sensible) terms.Richard_Nabavi said:In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.
Instead Labour's sensible-centrists chose to go ahead with their plan and fling themselves like lemmings at Corbyn and against the membership, giving the hard-line Brexiteers a free hand to define the referendum result however they wanted.0 -
Because that is like "I want a divorce but you can keep on shagging me".TOPPING said:
I don't see why it should have. To say "I want to leave the EU but stay in the single market" is perfectly sensible. Trouble is, breathe that to many Brexiters, and they want you locked up in the Tower.Richard_Nabavi said:
My thinking has been entirely clear, both before and after the referendum. You are right that the EU will continue to have a big influence on the UK, but the nature of the debate will change completely on leaving. In fact, it should have changed already with the invocation of Article 50, but it seems that some people are a bit slow on the uptake.williamglenn said:Your second paragraph illustrates why your thinking on this issue has become so muddled. The EU and its influence on out politics isn't going away in March 2019. No matter what happens that is one thing that is an absolute certainty.
0 -
As pitched by Brexiteers before the voteSandyRentool said:Because that is like "I want a divorce but you can keep on shagging me".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xGt3QmRSZY0 -
But Leavers assured us getting a Brexit deal would be quick and easy.Winstanley said:
The crucial moment for Remainers was immediately after the referendum, when the government (and the Brexiteers) clearly had no idea what to do. If Labour had, say, given a lead and defined the issue in those critical months we wouldn't even be talking about a 'hard Brexit' or a 'soft Brexit', it would be defined in entirely different (and probably more sensible) terms.Richard_Nabavi said:In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.
Instead Labour's sensible-centrists chose to go ahead with their plan and fling themselves like lemmings at Corbyn and against the membership, giving the hard-line Brexiteers a free hand to define the referendum result however they wanted.
Are you saying Remainers shouldn't have fallen for the bull promulgated by Leavers?0 -
On topic, not going to happen.
2015 was ideal for a coupon election, not now.0 -
Plenty of people get divorced and keep on shagging. Thing is, they're divorced.SandyRentool said:
Because that is like "I want a divorce but you can keep on shagging me".TOPPING said:
I don't see why it should have. To say "I want to leave the EU but stay in the single market" is perfectly sensible. Trouble is, breathe that to many Brexiters, and they want you locked up in the Tower.Richard_Nabavi said:
My thinking has been entirely clear, both before and after the referendum. You are right that the EU will continue to have a big influence on the UK, but the nature of the debate will change completely on leaving. In fact, it should have changed already with the invocation of Article 50, but it seems that some people are a bit slow on the uptake.williamglenn said:Your second paragraph illustrates why your thinking on this issue has become so muddled. The EU and its influence on out politics isn't going away in March 2019. No matter what happens that is one thing that is an absolute certainty.
0 -
Good afternoon, everyone.
An interesting suggestion but the comparison also highlights a significant difference. The Co-op is a Labour identity. Not all Labour MPs are Co-op, but all Co-op MPs are Labour. The proposal above is for a cross-party subdivision not an intra-party divide.
How do the EU-phile MPs divide if Parliament is hung? If it's along party lines, then what impact has the tag had? If it's for whomever is most pro-EU, you almost* may as well form a new party.
*This approach is likely better, from their perspective, than forming a new party due to the FPTP system. That said, the hurdle may be exaggerated because UKIP were so bloody woeful. The Greens have achieved similar MP success with far lower vote shares nationally.0 -
Clearly I live a sheltered life.TOPPING said:
Plenty of people get divorced and keep on shagging. Thing is, they're divorced.SandyRentool said:
Because that is like "I want a divorce but you can keep on shagging me".TOPPING said:
I don't see why it should have. To say "I want to leave the EU but stay in the single market" is perfectly sensible. Trouble is, breathe that to many Brexiters, and they want you locked up in the Tower.Richard_Nabavi said:
My thinking has been entirely clear, both before and after the referendum. You are right that the EU will continue to have a big influence on the UK, but the nature of the debate will change completely on leaving. In fact, it should have changed already with the invocation of Article 50, but it seems that some people are a bit slow on the uptake.williamglenn said:Your second paragraph illustrates why your thinking on this issue has become so muddled. The EU and its influence on out politics isn't going away in March 2019. No matter what happens that is one thing that is an absolute certainty.
0 -
Not sure they ever did, I'm thinking more of their bizarre priorities. Basic party discipline and they could have given the country some direction when a lead was needed, but they just couldn't wait to get Angela Eagle in.TheScreamingEagles said:
But Leavers assured us getting a Brexit deal would be quick and easy.Winstanley said:
The crucial moment for Remainers was immediately after the referendum, when the government (and the Brexiteers) clearly had no idea what to do. If Labour had, say, given a lead and defined the issue in those critical months we wouldn't even be talking about a 'hard Brexit' or a 'soft Brexit', it would be defined in entirely different (and probably more sensible) terms.Richard_Nabavi said:In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.
Instead Labour's sensible-centrists chose to go ahead with their plan and fling themselves like lemmings at Corbyn and against the membership, giving the hard-line Brexiteers a free hand to define the referendum result however they wanted.
Are you saying Remainers shouldn't have fallen for the bull promulgated by Leavers?0 -
Clearly.SandyRentool said:
Clearly I live a sheltered life.TOPPING said:
Plenty of people get divorced and keep on shagging. Thing is, they're divorced.SandyRentool said:
Because that is like "I want a divorce but you can keep on shagging me".TOPPING said:
I don't see why it should have. To say "I want to leave the EU but stay in the single market" is perfectly sensible. Trouble is, breathe that to many Brexiters, and they want you locked up in the Tower.Richard_Nabavi said:
My thinking has been entirely clear, both before and after the referendum. You are right that the EU will continue to have a big influence on the UK, but the nature of the debate will change completely on leaving. In fact, it should have changed already with the invocation of Article 50, but it seems that some people are a bit slow on the uptake.williamglenn said:Your second paragraph illustrates why your thinking on this issue has become so muddled. The EU and its influence on out politics isn't going away in March 2019. No matter what happens that is one thing that is an absolute certainty.
0 -
Mencken: "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."ThreeQuidder said:Meanwhile, Buzzfeed has the results of a YouGov poll on attitudes to Europe.
The conclusion:
These results indicate that despite the impression given across the press and from politicians of a deeply divided nation, when voters think of the actual details of what they want from Brexit, neither group is that distinct – and generally they lean towards a harder Brexit.
0 -
From last July.Winstanley said:
Not sure they ever did, I'm thinking more of their bizarre priorities. Basic party discipline and they could have given the country some direction when a lead was needed, but they just couldn't wait to get Angela Eagle in.TheScreamingEagles said:
But Leavers assured us getting a Brexit deal would be quick and easy.Winstanley said:
The crucial moment for Remainers was immediately after the referendum, when the government (and the Brexiteers) clearly had no idea what to do. If Labour had, say, given a lead and defined the issue in those critical months we wouldn't even be talking about a 'hard Brexit' or a 'soft Brexit', it would be defined in entirely different (and probably more sensible) terms.Richard_Nabavi said:In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.
Instead Labour's sensible-centrists chose to go ahead with their plan and fling themselves like lemmings at Corbyn and against the membership, giving the hard-line Brexiteers a free hand to define the referendum result however they wanted.
Are you saying Remainers shouldn't have fallen for the bull promulgated by Leavers?
Getting out of the EU can be quick and easy – the UK holds most of the cards in any negotiation.
http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2016/07/17/getting-out-of-the-eu-can-be-quick-and-easy-the-uk-holds-most-of-the-cards-in-any-negotiation/0 -
Jezza's morning read not happy with the Big Society approach...
Volunteers helping to clear uncollected waste during a long-running bin strike have been labelled a "scab army".
The Bearded Broz, who have cleared 45 tonnes of waste in Birmingham during the six-week strike, were criticised in the socialist Morning Star.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-408971140 -
The thing that I am unclear on is whether this could be done against the will of existing Parties ? I would doubt it & in that case, whats to stop the respective Leader/Head Office just deselecting The MP involved ?
Perhaps if the moves involved dozens of MPs/Local Branches it could become a Fait Accompli but that would require a lot more guts than we have seen displayed so far.0 -
FPTFF43 said:
The gap is for an outward looking, globalist, business friendly, liberal and democratic party. Brexit is as much the symptom as the cause of the problem. The Lib Dems have two of those adjectives in their name but I don't think they are it, unless they are prepared to reposition themselves and potentially lose some of their rural bastions.AlastairMeeks said:James Chapman is clearly having a lot of fun on holiday. There is potentially a gap in the market for a new political party. But it's not an anti-Brexit gap. The gap for a new political party is for one that makes its top priority the welfare of the British people, as opposed to Brexit delusions or a socialist fantasy.
The pool for the internationalist party I am talking about is ca 30% of the electorate. It's s minority now but that could change.ThreeQuidder said:Meanwhile, Buzzfeed has the results of a YouGov poll on attitudes to Europe.
The conclusion:
These results indicate that despite the impression given across the press and from politicians of a deeply divided nation, when voters think of the actual details of what they want from Brexit, neither group is that distinct – and generally they lean towards a harder Brexit.0 -
I meant I wasn't sure Remainers ever did fall for it. it's the fact that they should have known how important the post-referendum period would be (regardless of what the vote was), and that Labour's MPs chose to remove themselves from the field for the duration.TheScreamingEagles said:
From last July.Winstanley said:
Not sure they ever did, I'm thinking more of their bizarre priorities. Basic party discipline and they could have given the country some direction when a lead was needed, but they just couldn't wait to get Angela Eagle in.TheScreamingEagles said:
But Leavers assured us getting a Brexit deal would be quick and easy.Winstanley said:
The crucial moment for Remainers was immediately after the referendum, when the government (and the Brexiteers) clearly had no idea what to do. If Labour had, say, given a lead and defined the issue in those critical months we wouldn't even be talking about a 'hard Brexit' or a 'soft Brexit', it would be defined in entirely different (and probably more sensible) terms.Richard_Nabavi said:In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.
Instead Labour's sensible-centrists chose to go ahead with their plan and fling themselves like lemmings at Corbyn and against the membership, giving the hard-line Brexiteers a free hand to define the referendum result however they wanted.
Are you saying Remainers shouldn't have fallen for the bull promulgated by Leavers?
Getting out of the EU can be quick and easy – the UK holds most of the cards in any negotiation.
http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2016/07/17/getting-out-of-the-eu-can-be-quick-and-easy-the-uk-holds-most-of-the-cards-in-any-negotiation/0 -
Mr Smithson - you're saying that the things that you want are some sort of pain-free addition to any candidate's manifesto. I find it very hard to believe that there are politicians out there who find themselves constrained by electoral law and who are gagging to support forbidden ideas.
The LD's are far more electable than you think (even you).0 -
And, as ever, the standard maxim applies: if you don't work to make things better, what will happen? Other people will make things worse.Winstanley said:
I meant I wasn't sure Remainers ever did fall for it. it's the fact that they should have known how important the post-referendum period would be (regardless of what the vote was), and that Labour's MPs chose to remove themselves from the field for the duration.TheScreamingEagles said:
From last July.Winstanley said:
Not sure they ever did, I'm thinking more of their bizarre priorities. Basic party discipline and they could have given the country some direction when a lead was needed, but they just couldn't wait to get Angela Eagle in.TheScreamingEagles said:
But Leavers assured us getting a Brexit deal would be quick and easy.Winstanley said:
The crucial moment for Remainers was immediately after the referendum, when the government (and the Brexiteers) clearly had no idea what to do. If Labour had, say, given a lead and defined the issue in those critical months we wouldn't even be talking about a 'hard Brexit' or a 'soft Brexit', it would be defined in entirely different (and probably more sensible) terms.Richard_Nabavi said:In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.
Instead Labour's sensible-centrists chose to go ahead with their plan and fling themselves like lemmings at Corbyn and against the membership, giving the hard-line Brexiteers a free hand to define the referendum result however they wanted.
Are you saying Remainers shouldn't have fallen for the bull promulgated by Leavers?
Getting out of the EU can be quick and easy – the UK holds most of the cards in any negotiation.
http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2016/07/17/getting-out-of-the-eu-can-be-quick-and-easy-the-uk-holds-most-of-the-cards-in-any-negotiation/0 -
Many Remain voters now largely agree that Brexit should mean the UK taking full control over its borders, leaving the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, and paying only a small "divorce bill" to the EU, according to major new academic research.
A groundbreaking project by the London School of Economics and Oxford University surveying more than 20,000 people – which BuzzFeed News has seen exclusively ahead of its official publication – reveals that when the British public are asked in detail what they want from the negotiations, there is more support for harder Brexit options because Leavers and a significant number of Remainers back them.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamesball/remain-and-leave-voters-are-surprisingly-united-on-backing?utm_term=.oj8dL0dY2w#.nhJ70O7gm30 -
The lady in the article saying they're 'scabs with a good heart' is probably right. Good for them for volunteering to keep their streets cleaned for a couple of weeks. Unfortunate that it's simultaneously undermining a legitimate strike over job cuts, which could lead to long-term harm for the service if they go ahead.FrancisUrquhart said:Jezza's morning read not happy with the Big Society approach...
Volunteers helping to clear uncollected waste during a long-running bin strike have been labelled a "scab army".
The Bearded Broz, who have cleared 45 tonnes of waste in Birmingham during the six-week strike, were criticised in the socialist Morning Star.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-408971140 -
There is a mechanism: the European Council could agree to 'delay' Brexit by some very long period - 100 years, say - and then tidy up the details in the next Treaty.Richard_Nabavi said:
There's no mechanism for doing so, even if the political will existed in the UK and in the EU. It would require ratification by 27 countries, in a timescale which is completely impossible. It just ain't gonna happen.rottenborough said:
Well, depends whether you accept that the other EU countries wouldn't agree if we announced we wanted to abandon Brexit and renounce A50.Richard_Nabavi said:In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.
I suspect FR and GE would arm twist everyone into agreeing.
But that's theoretical. No-one from the UK government is going to ask for it.0 -
Mr. Herdson, it'd also be politically interesting for the next election.0
-
If there's 45 tonnes of waste in the streets in summer (even so poor a summer as we're currently having), that is not legitimate. It not only makes life unpleasant for but is actively harmful to thousands of people who have absolutely no power to resolve the dispute.Winstanley said:
The lady in the article saying they're 'scabs with a good heart' is probably right. Good for them for volunteering to keep their streets cleaned for a couple of weeks. Unfortunate that it's simultaneously undermining a legitimate strike over job cuts, which could lead to long-term harm for the service if they go ahead.FrancisUrquhart said:Jezza's morning read not happy with the Big Society approach...
Volunteers helping to clear uncollected waste during a long-running bin strike have been labelled a "scab army".
The Bearded Broz, who have cleared 45 tonnes of waste in Birmingham during the six-week strike, were criticised in the socialist Morning Star.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-408971140 -
If strikes didn't cause discomfort, workers wouldn't be valued for what they do when they're not on strike. The community can put pressure on their elected representatives to resolve the dispute.ThreeQuidder said:
If there's 45 tonnes of waste in the streets in summer (even so poor a summer as we're currently having), that is not legitimate. It not only makes life unpleasant for but is actively harmful to thousands of people who have absolutely no power to resolve the dispute.Winstanley said:
The lady in the article saying they're 'scabs with a good heart' is probably right. Good for them for volunteering to keep their streets cleaned for a couple of weeks. Unfortunate that it's simultaneously undermining a legitimate strike over job cuts, which could lead to long-term harm for the service if they go ahead.FrancisUrquhart said:Jezza's morning read not happy with the Big Society approach...
Volunteers helping to clear uncollected waste during a long-running bin strike have been labelled a "scab army".
The Bearded Broz, who have cleared 45 tonnes of waste in Birmingham during the six-week strike, were criticised in the socialist Morning Star.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-408971140 -
It would probably *prompt* an election were the government to request such an extension.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Herdson, it'd also be politically interesting for the next election.
0 -
Pressure. Wow.Winstanley said:
If strikes didn't cause discomfort, workers wouldn't be valued for what they do when they're not on strike. The community can put pressure on their elected representatives to resolve the dispute.ThreeQuidder said:
If there's 45 tonnes of waste in the streets in summer (even so poor a summer as we're currently having), that is not legitimate. It not only makes life unpleasant for but is actively harmful to thousands of people who have absolutely no power to resolve the dispute.Winstanley said:
The lady in the article saying they're 'scabs with a good heart' is probably right. Good for them for volunteering to keep their streets cleaned for a couple of weeks. Unfortunate that it's simultaneously undermining a legitimate strike over job cuts, which could lead to long-term harm for the service if they go ahead.FrancisUrquhart said:Jezza's morning read not happy with the Big Society approach...
Volunteers helping to clear uncollected waste during a long-running bin strike have been labelled a "scab army".
The Bearded Broz, who have cleared 45 tonnes of waste in Birmingham during the six-week strike, were criticised in the socialist Morning Star.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-408971140 -
The stark difference between Remainers and Leavers in the polls is that only a tiny percentage of Leave voters think Britain will be worse off economically after Brexit while only a tiny percentage of Remain voters think it WON'T be. Brexit being a price worth paying is a nonsense to Leavers because they don't actually think there is a price to be paid for Brexit. . Equally they take a hard line on the issues surrounding Brexit because they don't think there are any trade offs to be made. None of these things have any economic implications whatever so you can get low immigration, no ECJ, no payments to the EU free of cost.ThreeQuidder said:Meanwhile, Buzzfeed has the results of a YouGov poll on attitudes to Europe.
The conclusion:
These results indicate that despite the impression given across the press and from politicians of a deeply divided nation, when voters think of the actual details of what they want from Brexit, neither group is that distinct – and generally they lean towards a harder Brexit.0 -
Mr. 43, bracketing all Leave voters together makes things easier but also less true to life.
Except for leaving the customs union, I've said repeatedly I'm open to arguments on the best way to leave the EU. Not claiming to be representative of anyone other than myself, but the idea all Leave voters have the same view is as silly as claiming all Remain voters love the EU or want to adopt the euro.0 -
Wow? The council has a responsibility to the people who elect it, the union to the workers it represents. If the council has pushed refuse workers to vote 90% in favour of a strike, it's clearly failing to do right by its community. Why shouldn't a community put pressure on its elected representatives to do right by them? What else do you call it when you do petitions and fire off emails at your representatives?ThreeQuidder said:
Pressure. Wow.Winstanley said:
If strikes didn't cause discomfort, workers wouldn't be valued for what they do when they're not on strike. The community can put pressure on their elected representatives to resolve the dispute.ThreeQuidder said:
If there's 45 tonnes of waste in the streets in summer (even so poor a summer as we're currently having), that is not legitimate. It not only makes life unpleasant for but is actively harmful to thousands of people who have absolutely no power to resolve the dispute.Winstanley said:
The lady in the article saying they're 'scabs with a good heart' is probably right. Good for them for volunteering to keep their streets cleaned for a couple of weeks. Unfortunate that it's simultaneously undermining a legitimate strike over job cuts, which could lead to long-term harm for the service if they go ahead.FrancisUrquhart said:Jezza's morning read not happy with the Big Society approach...
Volunteers helping to clear uncollected waste during a long-running bin strike have been labelled a "scab army".
The Bearded Broz, who have cleared 45 tonnes of waste in Birmingham during the six-week strike, were criticised in the socialist Morning Star.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-408971140 -
So you think that the banks should get together and refuse to let you access your money from time to time, just so that you value their services properly?Winstanley said:If strikes didn't cause discomfort, workers wouldn't be valued for what they do when they're not on strike. The community can put pressure on their elected representatives to resolve the dispute.
0 -
Pointless. Ineffective.Winstanley said:What else do you call it when you do petitions and fire off emails at your representatives?
0 -
You could end up with the following election candidates in a constituency
Labour/New European
Conservative/New European
Liberal Democrat/New European
Green/New European
UKIP0 -
Latest German poll:
CDU: 40%
SPD: 24%
Greens: 8%
Left: 8%
FDP: 8%
AfD: 8%
Others: 4%
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/0 -
Is there now a "settled view" on Brexit that we are leaving the EU's control?FF43 said:
The stark difference between Remainers and Leavers in the polls is that only a tiny percentage of Leave voters think Britain will be worse off economically after Brexit while only a tiny percentage of Remain voters think it WON'T be. Brexit being a price worth paying is a nonsense to Leavers because they don't actually think there is a price to be paid for Brexit. . Equally they take a hard line on the issues surrounding Brexit because they don't think there are any trade offs to be made. None of these things have any economic implications whatever so you can get low immigration, no ECJ, no payments to the EU free of cost.ThreeQuidder said:Meanwhile, Buzzfeed has the results of a YouGov poll on attitudes to Europe.
The conclusion:
These results indicate that despite the impression given across the press and from politicians of a deeply divided nation, when voters think of the actual details of what they want from Brexit, neither group is that distinct – and generally they lean towards a harder Brexit.
0 -
The relationship between a bank and its customers is clearly not the same as between a union and an employer. Looking at reality rather than hypotheticals, Unite members in Birmingham are exercising their legal right to strike, talking about safety issues and avoiding pay cuts for the lowest paid. They've clearly indicated they're willing to discuss the demands of the council and meet them half-way. If the strike continues, I think it's the council's fault for trying to ride roughshod over them.Richard_Nabavi said:
So you think that the banks should get together and refuse to let you access your money from time to time, just so that you value their services properly?Winstanley said:If strikes didn't cause discomfort, workers wouldn't be valued for what they do when they're not on strike. The community can put pressure on their elected representatives to resolve the dispute.
0 -
Is the national living wage starting to cause more problems than Brexit at the moment.Especially in the retail sector with Asda Sainsbury's Tesco Wilkos announcing job cuts.0
-
It's a shame the old Chartist demand for the ability to immediately recall representatives wasn't taken up. Seems to me like we have a situation where 1) the union is doing a pretty good job of representing the will of its members, the whole point of its existence; 2) the council is doing a crap job of representing the will of its electorate, the whole point of its existence.ThreeQuidder said:
Pointless. Ineffective.Winstanley said:What else do you call it when you do petitions and fire off emails at your representatives?
Maybe if there were better mechanisms of accountability the council would be 'getting round the table' etc. rather than trying to bully its workforce and allowing these strikes to continue...0 -
But you seemed to think there was some kind of virtue in causing discomfort, in order to be appreciated by the customers of the services. So I don't see why the same fine moral purpose wouldn't apply to a temporary withdrawal of service by the high street banks (whose services tend to be taken completely for granted), perhaps in an attempt to extort higher charges - exactly what strikers try to do.Winstanley said:
The relationship between a bank and its customers is clearly not the same as between a union and an employer. Looking at reality rather than hypotheticals, Unite members in Birmingham are exercising their legal right to strike, talking about safety issues and avoiding pay cuts for the lowest paid. They've clearly indicated they're willing to discuss the demands of the council and meet them half-way. If the strike continues, I think it's the council's fault for trying to ride roughshod over them.Richard_Nabavi said:
So you think that the banks should get together and refuse to let you access your money from time to time, just so that you value their services properly?Winstanley said:If strikes didn't cause discomfort, workers wouldn't be valued for what they do when they're not on strike. The community can put pressure on their elected representatives to resolve the dispute.
0 -
Well yes, that was the time to stop Brexit.Richard_Nabavi said:In hindsight, the most odd thing about the continuity Remainers is that they have waited until after Article 50 was triggered before trying to stop Brexit. The Stable Door Party would be the most appropriate name.
0 -
I'd move banks, except I'm with alot of them as it is !Richard_Nabavi said:
But you seemed to think there was some kind of virtue in causing discomfort, in order to be appreciated by the customers of the services. So I don't see why the same fine moral purpose wouldn't apply to a temporary withdrawal of service by the high street banks (whose services tend to be taken completely for granted), perhaps in an attempt to extort higher charges - exactly what strikers try to do.0 -
So that is why rail companies cancel trains - so that the passengers appreciate the service all the more when it does actually run.Richard_Nabavi said:
But you seemed to think there was some kind of virtue in causing discomfort, in order to be appreciated by the customers of the services. So I don't see why the same fine moral purpose wouldn't apply to a temporary withdrawal of service by the high street banks (whose services tend to be taken completely for granted), perhaps in an attempt to extort higher charges - exactly what strikers try to do.Winstanley said:
The relationship between a bank and its customers is clearly not the same as between a union and an employer. Looking at reality rather than hypotheticals, Unite members in Birmingham are exercising their legal right to strike, talking about safety issues and avoiding pay cuts for the lowest paid. They've clearly indicated they're willing to discuss the demands of the council and meet them half-way. If the strike continues, I think it's the council's fault for trying to ride roughshod over them.Richard_Nabavi said:
So you think that the banks should get together and refuse to let you access your money from time to time, just so that you value their services properly?Winstanley said:If strikes didn't cause discomfort, workers wouldn't be valued for what they do when they're not on strike. The community can put pressure on their elected representatives to resolve the dispute.
0 -
If Luton dustmen went on strike, I think I'd also want to get rid of the rubbish, rather than letting it pile up in the street.Winstanley said:
The lady in the article saying they're 'scabs with a good heart' is probably right. Good for them for volunteering to keep their streets cleaned for a couple of weeks. Unfortunate that it's simultaneously undermining a legitimate strike over job cuts, which could lead to long-term harm for the service if they go ahead.FrancisUrquhart said:Jezza's morning read not happy with the Big Society approach...
Volunteers helping to clear uncollected waste during a long-running bin strike have been labelled a "scab army".
The Bearded Broz, who have cleared 45 tonnes of waste in Birmingham during the six-week strike, were criticised in the socialist Morning Star.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-408971140 -
If it were left to the 'man in the street' to determine the resolution of the strike, they'd probably sack the binmen wholesale (which would be illegal but that's beside the point).Winstanley said:
Wow? The council has a responsibility to the people who elect it, the union to the workers it represents. If the council has pushed refuse workers to vote 90% in favour of a strike, it's clearly failing to do right by its community. Why shouldn't a community put pressure on its elected representatives to do right by them? What else do you call it when you do petitions and fire off emails at your representatives?ThreeQuidder said:
Pressure. Wow.Winstanley said:
If strikes didn't cause discomfort, workers wouldn't be valued for what they do when they're not on strike. The community can put pressure on their elected representatives to resolve the dispute.ThreeQuidder said:
If there's 45 tonnes of waste in the streets in summer (even so poor a summer as we're currently having), that is not legitimate. It not only makes life unpleasant for but is actively harmful to thousands of people who have absolutely no power to resolve the dispute.Winstanley said:
The lady in the article saying they're 'scabs with a good heart' is probably right. Good for them for volunteering to keep their streets cleaned for a couple of weeks. Unfortunate that it's simultaneously undermining a legitimate strike over job cuts, which could lead to long-term harm for the service if they go ahead.FrancisUrquhart said:Jezza's morning read not happy with the Big Society approach...
Volunteers helping to clear uncollected waste during a long-running bin strike have been labelled a "scab army".
The Bearded Broz, who have cleared 45 tonnes of waste in Birmingham during the six-week strike, were criticised in the socialist Morning Star.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-408971140 -
'Virtue' and 'moral purpose' in economics belong to the 16th century. What I said was 'valued'. If a high-street bank thought it could gain by withdrawing its services, if it could do so legally and according to contract, there wouldn't be any moral obligation for it not to. It would just be a struggle of interests.Richard_Nabavi said:
But that's not what you said. You seemed to think there was some kind of virtue in causing discomfort, in order to be appreciated by the customers of the services. So I don't see why the same fine moral purpose wouldn't apply to a temporary withdrawal of service by the high street banks (whose services tend to be taken completely for granted), perhaps in an attempt to extort higher charges - exactly what strikers try to do.Winstanley said:
The relationship between a bank and its customers is clearly not the same as between a union and an employer. Looking at reality rather than hypotheticals, Unite members in Birmingham are exercising their legal right to strike, talking about safety issues and avoiding pay cuts for the lowest paid. They've clearly indicated they're willing to discuss the demands of the council and meet them half-way. If the strike continues, I think it's the council's fault for trying to ride roughshod over them.Richard_Nabavi said:
So you think that the banks should get together and refuse to let you access your money from time to time, just so that you value their services properly?Winstanley said:If strikes didn't cause discomfort, workers wouldn't be valued for what they do when they're not on strike. The community can put pressure on their elected representatives to resolve the dispute.
0 -
You're blaming the council for the union choosing to strike?Winstanley said:
It's a shame the old Chartist demand for the ability to immediately recall representatives wasn't taken up. Seems to me like we have a situation where 1) the union is doing a pretty good job of representing the will of its members, the whole point of its existence; 2) the council is doing a crap job of representing the will of its electorate, the whole point of its existence.ThreeQuidder said:
Pointless. Ineffective.Winstanley said:What else do you call it when you do petitions and fire off emails at your representatives?
Maybe if there were better mechanisms of accountability the council would be 'getting round the table' etc. rather than trying to bully its workforce and allowing these strikes to continue...0 -
Merkel, you beauty ! [ a little bit of exaggeration there ]AndyJS said:Latest German poll:
CDU: 40%
SPD: 24%
Greens: 8%
Left: 8%
FDP: 8%
AfD: 8%
Others: 4%
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/0 -
Looks like the Free Democrats could once again go from having no MPs to being in government. I think that's happened before at least once.surbiton said:
Merkel, you beauty ! [ a little bit of exaggeration there ]AndyJS said:Latest German poll:
CDU: 40%
SPD: 24%
Greens: 8%
Left: 8%
FDP: 8%
AfD: 8%
Others: 4%
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/0 -
Yes, 90% of the council workers balloted didn't vote for a strike for no reason. The union is just representing the will of its members.ThreeQuidder said:
You're blaming the council for the union choosing to strike?Winstanley said:
It's a shame the old Chartist demand for the ability to immediately recall representatives wasn't taken up. Seems to me like we have a situation where 1) the union is doing a pretty good job of representing the will of its members, the whole point of its existence; 2) the council is doing a crap job of representing the will of its electorate, the whole point of its existence.ThreeQuidder said:
Pointless. Ineffective.Winstanley said:What else do you call it when you do petitions and fire off emails at your representatives?
Maybe if there were better mechanisms of accountability the council would be 'getting round the table' etc. rather than trying to bully its workforce and allowing these strikes to continue...0 -
From a LinkedIn contact:
It's interesting that the EU is offering a ring-fenced member state residency to UK nationals there but wishes the UK to offer UK residency across the whole UK to EU citizens located in the UK. The nature of the EU is clearly malleable. They're a purported negotiating counterparty, talking of exit payments and trade deals, when that's advantageous, but when it isn't, the EU rather conveniently becomes a collection of local states. Which is it to be?0 -
Ms. Aforethought, indeed. The same way the EU has collective liabilities which means the UK must pay, but not collective assets, of which we are due our share.0
-
Winstanley said:
YesThreeQuidder said:
You're blaming the council for the union choosing to strike?Winstanley said:
It's a shame the old Chartist demand for the ability to immediately recall representatives wasn't taken up. Seems to me like we have a situation where 1) the union is doing a pretty good job of representing the will of its members, the whole point of its existence; 2) the council is doing a crap job of representing the will of its electorate, the whole point of its existence.ThreeQuidder said:
Pointless. Ineffective.Winstanley said:What else do you call it when you do petitions and fire off emails at your representatives?
Maybe if there were better mechanisms of accountability the council would be 'getting round the table' etc. rather than trying to bully its workforce and allowing these strikes to continue... 0 -
Yes, that must be the reason. As a fairly frequent customer of Southern Rail, I think it works - I certainly appreciate the occasions when the train exists and runs on schedule!SandyRentool said:So that is why rail companies cancel trains - so that the passengers appreciate the service all the more when it does actually run.
0 -
...I don't notice much pressure being put on the EU to change its direction to accommodate UK wishes. Nor are there signs of change. The Cameron deal was effectively a rebuff - and the UK public realised that. Even on the way out the EU's main focus so far is more money. The UK had no war debt write-off in the last century and repaid everything. German had its debt written off in 1953. France had Marshall Aid. It has taken the UK a long time to build back up. Now this has happened it is being asked to fund a dream without having its views taken into account. From outside the UK can still decide to defend the EU in times of trouble if it wishes to do so. I suspect it often will. But it will be taken less for granted.Morris_Dancer said:Ms. Aforethought, indeed. The same way the EU has collective liabilities which means the UK must pay, but not collective assets, of which we are due our share.
MIFID 2 is profoundly against the interests of Britain's finance industry, but was imposed by the financial industry experts of places like Estonia and Hungary. Would Britain be able to damage the German car industry similarly, one wonders?0 -
And where does the concept of 'scab' belong ?Winstanley said:
'Virtue' and 'moral purpose' in economics belong to the 16th century. What I said was 'valued'. If a high-street bank thought it could gain by withdrawing its services, if it could do so legally and according to contract, there wouldn't be any moral obligation for it not to. It would just be a struggle of interests.Richard_Nabavi said:
But that's not what you said. You seemed to think there was some kind of virtue in causing discomfort, in order to be appreciated by the customers of the services. So I don't see why the same fine moral purpose wouldn't apply to a temporary withdrawal of service by the high street banks (whose services tend to be taken completely for granted), perhaps in an attempt to extort higher charges - exactly what strikers try to do.Winstanley said:
The relationship between a bank and its customers is clearly not the same as between a union and an employer. Looking at reality rather than hypotheticals, Unite members in Birmingham are exercising their legal right to strike, talking about safety issues and avoiding pay cuts for the lowest paid. They've clearly indicated they're willing to discuss the demands of the council and meet them half-way. If the strike continues, I think it's the council's fault for trying to ride roughshod over them.Richard_Nabavi said:
So you think that the banks should get together and refuse to let you access your money from time to time, just so that you value their services properly?Winstanley said:If strikes didn't cause discomfort, workers wouldn't be valued for what they do when they're not on strike. The community can put pressure on their elected representatives to resolve the dispute.
0 -
@Alice_Aforethought, FPT
I was needlessly rude there, Nigel - please accept my apologies. I didn't mean to be and I do try not to be….
No offence taken, Alice.
I'm sure we can return to the discussion in due course.0 -
He can because it is not illegal under EU rules. The education exemption only applies to "bodies governed by public law having such as their aim or by other organisations recognised by the Member State concerned as having similar objects". Private schools are not governed by public law as they do not get most of their funding from the state. So all the government has to do is decide not to recognise private schools as having similar objects and they can charge VAT.boulay said:FPT rottenborough mentioned that Chapman wanted to charge VAT on private school fees. This is illegal under EU rules as it bans the charging of VAT on education provision. Can't have it both ways....
0 -
Just to add, independent schools already pay VAT on supplies. If they were recognised by the government as having similar objects as per the VAT directive, independent schools would not pay VAT on goods and services closely related to the supply of education. It therefore appears there is no legal obstacle to the imposition of VAT on school fees.prh47bridge said:
He can because it is not illegal under EU rules. The education exemption only applies to "bodies governed by public law having such as their aim or by other organisations recognised by the Member State concerned as having similar objects". Private schools are not governed by public law as they do not get most of their funding from the state. So all the government has to do is decide not to recognise private schools as having similar objects and they can charge VAT.boulay said:FPT rottenborough mentioned that Chapman wanted to charge VAT on private school fees. This is illegal under EU rules as it bans the charging of VAT on education provision. Can't have it both ways....
0 -
All businesses pay VAT on their taxable purchases...prh47bridge said:
Just to add, independent schools already pay VAT on supplies.prh47bridge said:
He can because it is not illegal under EU rules. The education exemption only applies to "bodies governed by public law having such as their aim or by other organisations recognised by the Member State concerned as having similar objects". Private schools are not governed by public law as they do not get most of their funding from the state. So all the government has to do is decide not to recognise private schools as having similar objects and they can charge VAT.boulay said:FPT rottenborough mentioned that Chapman wanted to charge VAT on private school fees. This is illegal under EU rules as it bans the charging of VAT on education provision. Can't have it both ways....
0 -
Do you have any experience of strikes? Nobody will vote for a strike for no reason. In this instance, the council has presented refuse workers with a 'list of demands' to make the service cheaper, including some that the workers find unacceptable.ThreeQuidder said:Winstanley said:
YesThreeQuidder said:
You're blaming the council for the union choosing to strike?Winstanley said:
It's a shame the old Chartist demand for the ability to immediately recall representatives wasn't taken up. Seems to me like we have a situation where 1) the union is doing a pretty good job of representing the will of its members, the whole point of its existence; 2) the council is doing a crap job of representing the will of its electorate, the whole point of its existence.ThreeQuidder said:
Pointless. Ineffective.Winstanley said:What else do you call it when you do petitions and fire off emails at your representatives?
Maybe if there were better mechanisms of accountability the council would be 'getting round the table' etc. rather than trying to bully its workforce and allowing these strikes to continue...
Unite is arguing that the council is trying to pass the consequences of its own mismanagement of the service onto its lowest paid employees, who it represents, and have refused to engage in meaningful talks about changes to the service. The refuse workers haven't gone on strike to gain anything, but only to 'not lose as much'.
0 -
I don't think anyone has ever suggested the problem is a legal one. It's simply that to be an official candidate for a party you have to be a member of that party and all political parties have rules that automatically exclude anyone who joins another party. The Labour Party constitution has a provision for sister parties but obviously no Conservative would stand for a party that was affiliated to the Labour Party. The Labour constitution puts it like this:
"A member of the party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules."
The Conservative one puts it like this:
" Membership of the Conservative Party is not compatible with Membership of or association with
any other registered political party."0 -
Mr. TPFR, welcome to pb.com.0
-
In Birmingham 2017, clearly.Nigelb said:
And where does the concept of 'scab' belong ?Winstanley said:
'Virtue' and 'moral purpose' in economics belong to the 16th century. What I said was 'valued'. If a high-street bank thought it could gain by withdrawing its services, if it could do so legally and according to contract, there wouldn't be any moral obligation for it not to. It would just be a struggle of interests.Richard_Nabavi said:
But that's not what you said. You seemed to think there was some kind of virtue in causing discomfort, in order to be appreciated by the customers of the services. So I don't see why the same fine moral purpose wouldn't apply to a temporary withdrawal of service by the high street banks (whose services tend to be taken completely for granted), perhaps in an attempt to extort higher charges - exactly what strikers try to do.Winstanley said:
The relationship between a bank and its customers is clearly not the same as between a union and an employer. Looking at reality rather than hypotheticals, Unite members in Birmingham are exercising their legal right to strike, talking about safety issues and avoiding pay cuts for the lowest paid. They've clearly indicated they're willing to discuss the demands of the council and meet them half-way. If the strike continues, I think it's the council's fault for trying to ride roughshod over them.Richard_Nabavi said:
So you think that the banks should get together and refuse to let you access your money from time to time, just so that you value their services properly?Winstanley said:If strikes didn't cause discomfort, workers wouldn't be valued for what they do when they're not on strike. The community can put pressure on their elected representatives to resolve the dispute.
0 -
Are the Left now considered coalition "partners" ? They weren't for many years. In the UK, the Left and the Greens will have similar supporters.AndyJS said:
Looks like the Free Democrats could once again go from having no MPs to being in government. I think that's happened before at least once.surbiton said:
Merkel, you beauty ! [ a little bit of exaggeration there ]AndyJS said:Latest German poll:
CDU: 40%
SPD: 24%
Greens: 8%
Left: 8%
FDP: 8%
AfD: 8%
Others: 4%
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/0 -
Yes, the fucking RMT and ASLEF making my life miserable at least twice a year for the past twenty years even though I have no way of affecting their disputes (translation: "we want more money") and I can't even take my business elsewhere.Winstanley said:
Do you have any experience of strikes?ThreeQuidder said:Winstanley said:
YesThreeQuidder said:
You're blaming the council for the union choosing to strike?Winstanley said:
It's a shame the old Chartist demand for the ability to immediately recall representatives wasn't taken up. Seems to me like we have a situation where 1) the union is doing a pretty good job of representing the will of its members, the whole point of its existence; 2) the council is doing a crap job of representing the will of its electorate, the whole point of its existence.ThreeQuidder said:
Pointless. Ineffective.Winstanley said:What else do you call it when you do petitions and fire off emails at your representatives?
Maybe if there were better mechanisms of accountability the council would be 'getting round the table' etc. rather than trying to bully its workforce and allowing these strikes to continue...0 -
As charities I think they can recoup that.ThreeQuidder said:
All businesses pay VAT on their taxable purchases...prh47bridge said:
Just to add, independent schools already pay VAT on supplies.prh47bridge said:
He can because it is not illegal under EU rules. The education exemption only applies to "bodies governed by public law having such as their aim or by other organisations recognised by the Member State concerned as having similar objects". Private schools are not governed by public law as they do not get most of their funding from the state. So all the government has to do is decide not to recognise private schools as having similar objects and they can charge VAT.boulay said:FPT rottenborough mentioned that Chapman wanted to charge VAT on private school fees. This is illegal under EU rules as it bans the charging of VAT on education provision. Can't have it both ways....
0 -
A comment that misses the point completely.ThreeQuidder said:
All businesses pay VAT on their taxable purchases...prh47bridge said:
Just to add, independent schools already pay VAT on supplies.prh47bridge said:
He can because it is not illegal under EU rules. The education exemption only applies to "bodies governed by public law having such as their aim or by other organisations recognised by the Member State concerned as having similar objects". Private schools are not governed by public law as they do not get most of their funding from the state. So all the government has to do is decide not to recognise private schools as having similar objects and they can charge VAT.boulay said:FPT rottenborough mentioned that Chapman wanted to charge VAT on private school fees. This is illegal under EU rules as it bans the charging of VAT on education provision. Can't have it both ways....
If the government agreed that private schools have similar objects to public bodies providing education to children and young people they would be forced to make supplies to private schools exempt, regardless of whether or not the private school is a business, because that is what the VAT directive says. The fact that private schools have to pay VAT on supplies shows that the government do not regard them has having similar objects and therefore the government can charge VAT on school fees.0 -
0
-
I don't think so.surbiton said:
Are the Left now considered coalition "partners" ? They weren't for many years. In the UK, the Left and the Greens will have similar supporters.AndyJS said:
Looks like the Free Democrats could once again go from having no MPs to being in government. I think that's happened before at least once.surbiton said:
Merkel, you beauty ! [ a little bit of exaggeration there ]AndyJS said:Latest German poll:
CDU: 40%
SPD: 24%
Greens: 8%
Left: 8%
FDP: 8%
AfD: 8%
Others: 4%
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/0 -
Yes, potentially. Schulz (SPD) has said he doesn't rule it out (unlike his predecessor). But as the figures show (which are similar to most recent polls), a CDU-FDP coalition is as Andy says much the most likely outcome.surbiton said:
Are the Left now considered coalition "partners" ? They weren't for many years. In the UK, the Left and the Greens will have similar supporters.AndyJS said:
Looks like the Free Democrats could once again go from having no MPs to being in government. I think that's happened before at least once.surbiton said:
Merkel, you beauty ! [ a little bit of exaggeration there ]AndyJS said:Latest German poll:
CDU: 40%
SPD: 24%
Greens: 8%
Left: 8%
FDP: 8%
AfD: 8%
Others: 4%
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/
The figures would actually be very similar to last time, except that the FDP and AfD would pop over the 5% threshold that the both narrowly missed last time. Refugee crisis? Euro crisis? Brexit? German voters say "meh".0
