politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Birds of a Feather
Comments
-
No, its a matter of representation. It is a matter of the North of England being properly represented by its own folk. It is a matter of the working class being properly represented. It is a matter of the Welsh being properly represented.Jonathan said:
So it’s a matter of miles, a neighbouring seat ok, but one beyond that not. Where can you draw the line? A bit of an arbitrary silly rule.
If being local was key the voters would vote for it. They don’t. Historically people vote for parties and then the individual. You’re arguing for identity politics.
You wouldn't argue against black or minority ethnic being properly represented, or women being properly represented. It is the same principle.
There are too many affluent middle-class white males from the South of England in Parliament. Often representing seats with which they have no connection.
There is an important principle involved here. Equality of representation. Our Parliament should look like our countries.0 -
Foxy said:
The problem is that party selections are either under the control of a hundred or so local members, or a national party favouring its SPADS. Local voters rarely get a say, and when they do their choices are often at odds will local parties and national leaders, Sarah Wollaston for example.kle4 said:
Indeey selection issue.Jonathan said:
So, if you happen to be born or live in an opponents safe seat you can never get involved in national politics. Hmmm.YBarddCwsc said:
Nonrutiny.JohnWheatley said:
On
I simply find enforcing a local connection to be a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It's unnecessarily restrictive for far from obvious benefit, and although people moan after the fact sometimes I'm with Jonathan on this one, people vote for parties and really don't seem to prioritising local connection when making their decision which they can still do if they want.YBarddCwsc said:
For god's sake, we're not taking about cutting edge research in quantum gravity.kle4 said:
And how do you judge what is a suitably genuine connection? As I pointed out, someone could undeniably have connection with a place and be less worthy to represent it than someone brand new to the area.Foxy said:
I dont think anyone is suggesting a birth certificate is required in order to be the MP for the area, just a genuine connection.Jonathan said:
So, if you happen to be born or live in an opponents safe seat you can never get involved in national politics. Hmmm.YBarddCwsc said:
Nonsense.JohnWheatley said:
On that bas
Wilson could have represented Huddersfield or any neighbouring Labour constituency in West Yorkshire (is there really a difficulty in finding Labour seats in west Yorkshire ?),
Callaghan could have represented Portsmouth (it has a Labour MP at the moment).
In fact, at the time you're talking about, there were Labour MPs in Kent and East Anglia and all over the South of England. So, your point hardly stands up to scrutiny.
Have you seen the standard of our MPs?
Most people are "worthy" enough.
Since enforcing a local connection will in no way guarantee a higher quality of MP nor even that they are better at taking note of and representing the local area, where's the need for it? If the problem is the quality of the people who are MPs, who selects them and so on, this does nothing to advance the quality.0 -
Or the French Third Republic, which was set up by the monarchists as a “transition” to a restoration of the Bourbons while they waited for the Comte de Chambourd (who refused the crown unless the Tricolour was replaced by the Bourbon flag) to die. When he eventually did they had got so used to it they didn’t bother with his heir and the transitional republic remained until 1940.DougSeal said:
It will be a QI fact in 2116, like the Easter Act still being on the statute books waiting for implementation. “Technically the UK’s associate status is designed to facilitate its transition out of the EU, a transition that has been ongoing since 2019!”Philip_Thompson said:
That's because the Swedes rejected Euro membership in their referendum. Not because the Swedes backed it.MattW said:
19 years later, Sweden is still in transition to the Euro !!Philip_Thompson said:
If we are still in transition by 2116 they'll have a point!DougSeal said:Great header. What always springs to mind for me is the Irish Republican constitutional theory that the only mandate that mattered was the 1919 election, which (to their minds) ratified the 1916 declaration of an Irish Republic. No democratic decision of the Irish electorate since then concerned them, such exercises were organised by the 26 and 6 county illigitimate entities. The IRA was the army of the true republic of 1916 to which all Irishmen owed their allegiance.
Similarly the “will of the people” in 2016 is eternal, can never be changed, and any attempt to deviate is illigitimate. But in truth no mandate lasts forever and the further we get from 2016 that stemming from the referendum is inevitably going to weaken. In 2116, while we are in our 97th year of a “transition” the provisional wing of leavers will still be trotting out “...but 17.4 million people...”.0 -
No one wants no deal as much as Coveney does. 'We must not have X. Not fudging slightly on Y causes X. So we must have X'.williamglenn said:
Actions, not words, prove that he wants no deal.0 -
This can’t be true because we keep being told that the EU is an unstoppable federalising monster that renders its nation states utterly supine, hence we have to LEAVE.MattW said:
19 years later, Sweden is still in transition to the Euro !!Philip_Thompson said:
If we are still in transition by 2116 they'll have a point!DougSeal said:Great header. What always springs to mind for me is the Irish Republican constitutional theory that the only mandate that mattered was the 1919 election, which (to their minds) ratified the 1916 declaration of an Irish Republic. No democratic decision of the Irish electorate since then concerned them, such exercises were organised by the 26 and 6 county illigitimate entities. The IRA was the army of the true republic of 1916 to which all Irishmen owed their allegiance.
Similarly the “will of the people” in 2016 is eternal, can never be changed, and any attempt to deviate is illigitimate. But in truth no mandate lasts forever and the further we get from 2016 that stemming from the referendum is inevitably going to weaken. In 2116, while we are in our 97th year of a “transition” the provisional wing of leavers will still be trotting out “...but 17.4 million people...”.0 -
...an undeserved gift....???Scott_P said:https://twitter.com/BBCJLandale/status/1099631769144516609
If Jews in Europe are afraid again, that is shameful for us all. Every single attack on them is also an attack on our liberal democracy. We have to regard Jewish life as an undeserved gift and do everything we can to protect it.
I hope that is a translation error!0 -
0
-
The hard border (X) is his briar patch.kle4 said:
No one wants no deal as much as Coveney does. 'We must not have X. Not fudging slightly on Y causes X. So we must have X'.williamglenn said:
Actions, not words, prove that he wants no deal.
0 -
I want more independent MPs (*), and think the party system as it is implemented in this country is failing us. The power to impose candidates on a constituency is a powerful one, and increases the odds of such a candidate following the party line, rather than the local interest. After all, they have no real connection with the local area, might not need to remain in the area once they get voted out, and they owe their position to the party.kle4 said:I simply find enforcing a local connection to be a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It's unnecessarily restrictive for far from obvious benefit, and although people moan after the fact sometimes I'm with Jonathan on this one, people vote for parties and really don't seem to prioritising local connection when making their decision which they can still do if they want.
Since enforcing a local connection will in no way guarantee a higher quality of MP nor even that they are better at taking note of and representing the local area, where's the need for it? If the problem is the quality of the people who are MPs, who selects them and so on, this does nothing to advance the quality.
No system will guarantee quality of candidate: in many cases the quality will not be known until they are tested. But localism will be better than SPADs and friends of people at the top of the party.
(*) This has been my longstanding position, before this week's developments with TIG.0 -
That’s a nationalistic priority. I agree diversity matters and prefer proportional representation. But making geographical divisions matter more than they do already? No.YBarddCwsc said:
No, its a matter of representation. It is a matter of the North of England being properly represented by its own folk. It is a matter of the working class being properly represented. It is a matter of the Welsh being properly represented.Jonathan said:
So it’s a matter of miles, a neighbouring seat ok, but one beyond that not. Where can you draw the line? A bit of an arbitrary silly rule.
If being local was key the voters would vote for it. They don’t. Historically people vote for parties and then the individual. You’re arguing for identity politics.
You wouldn't argue against black or minority ethnic being properly represented, or women being properly represented. It is the same principle.
There are too many affluent middle-class white males from the South of England in Parliament. Often representing seats with which they have no connection.
There is an important principle involved here. Equality of representation. Our Parliament should look like our countries.0 -
It's a gift to us that we do not deserve.MarqueeMark said:
...an undeserved gift....???Scott_P said:https://twitter.com/BBCJLandale/status/1099631769144516609
If Jews in Europe are afraid again, that is shameful for us all. Every single attack on them is also an attack on our liberal democracy. We have to regard Jewish life as an undeserved gift and do everything we can to protect it.
I hope that is a translation error!
0 -
I think that is wildly optimistic.JosiasJessop said:
No system will guarantee quality of candidate: in many cases the quality will not be known until they are tested. But localism will be better than SPADs and friends of people at the top of the party.kle4 said:I simply find enforcing a local connection to be a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It's unnecessarily restrictive for far from obvious benefit, and although people moan after the fact sometimes I'm with Jonathan on this one, people vote for parties and really don't seem to prioritising local connection when making their decision which they can still do if they want.
Since enforcing a local connection will in no way guarantee a higher quality of MP nor even that they are better at taking note of and representing the local area, where's the need for it? If the problem is the quality of the people who are MPs, who selects them and so on, this does nothing to advance the quality.
.0 -
I saw a thread the other day about how many Councillors Lab had lost since Corbyn through defection.
Different question - how many Councils have changed leadership from Labour?
They have lost Ashfield, which is now lead by Independents nee Libdems.
Brighton looks possible.
Any others?0 -
The Labour brand is not the thing of wonder that many in Labour think it is. It's always been tainted for many by the ine inclusion of the far left, even before the far left led it. Imagine a party with the mainstream left's values and shorn of both the personnel and the associations of the far left. That's got to be anelectorally attractive proposition, surely?Philip_Thompson said:
I don't agree with Dan.rottenborough said:
Yes if you don't agree with Corbyn you should leave the party. But that's still a very minority position. And the more Corbyn's "enemies" leave the party the more secure his grip on the party becomes. Its a conundrum.
Tom Watson should join TIG and lead an exodus of MPs to TIG. That would destroy Corbyn, by destroying Labour. Which is why he doesn't want to do it.
It is Labourites love of the Labour brand, rather than rather Labour is meant to stand for, that is keeping Corbyn secure.
Harold Wilson famously said the Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing. Under Corbyn the morals are that of Communism, Maduro and Antisemitism. For the sane left it is nothing. Take what made Labour good in your eyes and rebuild it in TIG.
0 -
We believe you Labour......
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/jewish-labour-supporters-write-letter-support-corbyn
LABOUR under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn is a “crucial ally in the fight against anti-semitism,” a letter by 201 Jewish members and supporters of the party says.
Riiighht
0 -
Mr. kle4, it's a definitely temporary backstop that the UK can't leave without EU consent and which the EU refuses to have made explicitly temporary in a legally binding document.
Whatever else one might think, that stacks up about as well as a shield made of cheese.0 -
https://twitter.com/adamlangleben/status/1099262411868057600Floater said:We believe you Labour......
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/jewish-labour-supporters-write-letter-support-corbyn
LABOUR under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn is a “crucial ally in the fight against anti-semitism,” a letter by 201 Jewish members and supporters of the party says.
Riiighht0 -
You might well be right. But the current system is totally borken.kle4 said:
I think that is wildly optimistic.JosiasJessop said:
No system will guarantee quality of candidate: in many cases the quality will not be known until they are tested. But localism will be better than SPADs and friends of people at the top of the party.kle4 said:I simply find enforcing a local connection to be a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It's unnecessarily restrictive for far from obvious benefit, and although people moan after the fact sometimes I'm with Jonathan on this one, people vote for parties and really don't seem to prioritising local connection when making their decision which they can still do if they want.
Since enforcing a local connection will in no way guarantee a higher quality of MP nor even that they are better at taking note of and representing the local area, where's the need for it? If the problem is the quality of the people who are MPs, who selects them and so on, this does nothing to advance the quality.
.0 -
The remarkable thing though is that Labour is in opposition against a tired looking government that's been in power for nearly a decade, with their other centre/centre-left opposition destroyed. It should be winning not losing councils.MattW said:I saw a thread the other day about how many Councillors Lab had lost since Corbyn through defection.
Different question - how many Councils have changed leadership from Labour?
They have lost Ashfield, which is now lead by Independents nee Libdems.
Brighton looks possible.
Any others?0 -
He still has much support. Some, many, are never going anywhere no matter what happens. Next round of defections, if any, will be very interesting in how it affects those people. Even 9 leaving can be dismissed, but at some point you cannot just insist everything is all ok.Floater said:We believe you Labour......
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/jewish-labour-supporters-write-letter-support-corbyn
LABOUR under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn is a “crucial ally in the fight against anti-semitism,” a letter by 201 Jewish members and supporters of the party says.
Riiighht
0 -
Coveney, like the rest of his Government, and indeed its Opposition would rather we stayed.kle4 said:
No one wants no deal as much as Coveney does. 'We must not have X. Not fudging slightly on Y causes X. So we must have X'.williamglenn said:
Actions, not words, prove that he wants no deal.0 -
Yes localism would be better but that is for the voters to decide.JosiasJessop said:
I want more independent MPs (*), and think the party system as it is implemented in this country is failing us. The power to impose candidates on a constituency is a powerful one, and increases the odds of such a candidate following the party line, rather than the local interest. After all, they have no real connection with the local area, might not need to remain in the area once they get voted out, and they owe their position to the party.kle4 said:I simply find enforcing a local connection to be a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It's unnecessarily restrictive for far from obvious benefit, and although people moan after the fact sometimes I'm with Jonathan on this one, people vote for parties and really don't seem to prioritising local connection when making their decision which they can still do if they want.
Since enforcing a local connection will in no way guarantee a higher quality of MP nor even that they are better at taking note of and representing the local area, where's the need for it? If the problem is the quality of the people who are MPs, who selects them and so on, this does nothing to advance the quality.
No system will guarantee quality of candidate: in many cases the quality will not be known until they are tested. But localism will be better than SPADs and friends of people at the top of the party.
(*) This has been my longstanding position, before this week's developments with TIG.
Any restrictions on who is "approved" to seek election should be avoided, that is the way of dictators across the globe. To ensure their opponents are not approved to get elected.
Ultimately who the voters choose should get elected. However that may be.0 -
David Lammy correctly pointed out that over 45 per cent of Oxbridge intake comes from London & the South of England.Jonathan said:
That’s a nationalistic priority. I agree diversity matters and prefer proportional representation. But making geographical divisions matter more than they do already? No.
You're happy with that? It is a geographical bias.
As Lammy correctly understands, geography is correlated with wealth and class.
0 -
Coveney deserves no deal.OldKingCole said:
Coveney, like the rest of his Government, and indeed its Opposition would rather we stayed.kle4 said:
No one wants no deal as much as Coveney does. 'We must not have X. Not fudging slightly on Y causes X. So we must have X'.williamglenn said:
Actions, not words, prove that he wants no deal.
If we could somehow inflict no deal on Ireland without it affecting us, that would be poetic justice.0 -
I'm sure many do. But everyone should have had, well, a backstop to not being able to get us to stay. Making it stay or no deal (because unfortunately the deal as is simply won't go through) rather than indulge in a tiny amount of fudge which the EU is famous for, is hugely reckless unless one is happy to see it happen. Coveney's actions indicate he is very happy for it to happen, and so like many of our own MPs is a liar when they moan about the disruption it will cause.OldKingCole said:
Coveney, like the rest of his Government, and indeed its Opposition would rather we stayed.kle4 said:
No one wants no deal as much as Coveney does. 'We must not have X. Not fudging slightly on Y causes X. So we must have X'.williamglenn said:
Actions, not words, prove that he wants no deal.0 -
Oh? I thought the UK supermarkets' transition from prosecuting people for taking food from their skips to tokenistic recycling of excess was relatively recent. Looking it up it seems just under 8k tonnes of leftover supermarket food is 'repurposed' per year which I'm pretty sure is a drop in the oceans of need and total wasted.MattW said:
That seems pretty much the same as the system here. Presumably, that is also admirable.Theuniondivvie said:
Their system of working with grocers and retailers to use excess & otherwise wasted food seems (admirably) as much of a principle as feeding the needy.MattW said:
The figure is from the main organisation, Tafel, that runs food banks in Germany.OldKingCole said:
I'm a 'bit' chary of citing Ian Duncan Smith as an authority.MattW said:>@Old King Cole
Those are some fair points, but, and it's quite a big but, too a lot of people it doesn't feel like that. For example, why are food banks 'prospering'..... obviously need inverted commas for that....... if unemployment is down and wages are rising?
"All of them are nonprofit organizations. The Tafel support more than 1.5 million people in need of food throughout the country – nearly one third of them are children and youth."
https://www.tafel.de/english-information/
If IDS had got that wrong, it would have been very publicly debunked very quickly and thrown at him via Twitter, and interminably ever after.
Afaics the main drive is to have food collection points at supermarkets where you can contribute to food banks with food you've bought at said supermarket, all very virtue signally but not quite what I'd describe as admirable.0 -
Labour's crucial role in the fight against anti-semitism is creating the anti-semitism to fight against.Floater said:We believe you Labour......
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/jewish-labour-supporters-write-letter-support-corbyn
LABOUR under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn is a “crucial ally in the fight against anti-semitism,” a letter by 201 Jewish members and supporters of the party says.
Riiighht0 -
The same argument can be used against the current system: when parties impose candidates against the wishes of the local constituency. Or, say, party lists.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes localism would be better but that is for the voters to decide.JosiasJessop said:
I want more independent MPs (*), and think the party system as it is implemented in this country is failing us. The power to impose candidates on a constituency is a powerful one, and increases the odds of such a candidate following the party line, rather than the local interest. After all, they have no real connection with the local area, might not need to remain in the area once they get voted out, and they owe their position to the party.kle4 said:I simply find enforcing a local connection to be a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It's unnecessarily restrictive for far from obvious benefit, and although people moan after the fact sometimes I'm with Jonathan on this one, people vote for parties and really don't seem to prioritising local connection when making their decision which they can still do if they want.
Since enforcing a local connection will in no way guarantee a higher quality of MP nor even that they are better at taking note of and representing the local area, where's the need for it? If the problem is the quality of the people who are MPs, who selects them and so on, this does nothing to advance the quality.
No system will guarantee quality of candidate: in many cases the quality will not be known until they are tested. But localism will be better than SPADs and friends of people at the top of the party.
(*) This has been my longstanding position, before this week's developments with TIG.
Any restrictions on who is "approved" to seek election should be avoided, that is the way of dictators across the globe. To ensure their opponents are not approved to get elected.
Ultimately who the voters choose should get elected. However that may be.
0 -
I agree entirely.Endillion said:
The merits of MPs having pre-existing roots in the constituencies they serve is up for debate, but it's clearly wrong to state it as a factor in the case of Luciana Berger. She wasn't brought up there, certainly, but she's been the MP there since 2010, and is now married to a Liverpudlian, and starting a family there. She had no or few complaints about her attachments prior to the Corbyn era.justin124 said:
But what was Michael Foot's connection with Ebbw Vale? Or Churchill's connection with seats such as Oldham, Manchester NW, Dundee or Epping? What was Gaitskell's link with Leeds South or Wilson's to Ormskirk /Huyton? What drew Asquith to East Fife - and later Paisley?YBarddCwsc said:Some of the problems with deselections are simply due to parties parachuting candidates in.
Luciana Berger was born in Wembley and went to Haberdashers Aske, then Univ. of Birmingham. She has no connection with Liverpool Wavertree.
Nick Boles seems to have spent most of life in London, went to Winchester College, then Oxford Univ. He has no connection with Grantham and Stamford.
These MPs should quite properly be deselected, as they are not at all representative of their constituencies.
They might be suitable as London MPs.
London is already grotesquely fat with its self-importance. We don't need endless MPs from London representing Liverpool or East of England.
In any case I can see the potential for a lot of negative side effects of forcing candidates to have deeper connections. There are a lot of parts of the country where this would be simply impractical for one or other party - how on earth would Labour fill its roster in (say) rural Staffordshire? Or the Conservatives in Liverpool?
Is it not a good thing to allow talented people the chance to enter Parliament in cases where they grew up in an area either dominated by the other side, or has a full slate of mediocre yet untouchable sitting MPs in safe seats, with no retirement date in sight? Or that candidates get to practice campaigning in seats they have no chance in, with a view to gaining the experience they need to have a proper tilt at a winnable marginal five years later?0 -
You’re changing the subject quite heavily there. If you want a conversation about Oxbridge now? Fine. Two seriously screwed up institutions that churn out some seriously screwed up individuals. There are bigger problems in Oxbridge than geography.YBarddCwsc said:
David Lammy correctly pointed out that over 45 per cent of Oxbridge intake comes form London & the South of England.Jonathan said:
That’s a nationalistic priority. I agree diversity matters and prefer proportional representation. But making geographical divisions matter more than they do already? No.
You're happy with that? It is a geographical bias.
As Lammy correctly understands, geography is correlated with wealth and class.0 -
Is it? Turnout has gone up 4 GEs in a row (if barely in a few cases) and very few people seem concerned where their MP comes from.JosiasJessop said:
You might well be right. But the current system is totally broken.kle4 said:
I think that is wildly optimistic.JosiasJessop said:
No system will guarantee quality of candidate: in many cases the quality will not be known until they are tested. But localism will be better than SPADs and friends of people at the top of the party.kle4 said:I simply find enforcing a local connection to be a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It's unnecessarily restrictive for far from obvious benefit, and although people moan after the fact sometimes I'm with Jonathan on this one, people vote for parties and really don't seem to prioritising local connection when making their decision which they can still do if they want.
Since enforcing a local connection will in no way guarantee a higher quality of MP nor even that they are better at taking note of and representing the local area, where's the need for it? If the problem is the quality of the people who are MPs, who selects them and so on, this does nothing to advance the quality.
.0 -
The whole pop quiz thing is bullshit.YBarddCwsc said:
The problem is that some demographics and groups are wildly over-represented in Parliament. You can surely see how dangerous that is.DavidL said:
I think that is a terrible idea based on a highly distorted view of the importance of a local connection. Should I only take cases from Dundee and turn down cases in Glasgow because I don't live there? If people don't like a politician from elsewhere standing they don't have to vote for them. The evidence is that the odd by election aside they are really not that bothered.
Lawyers, for example, are vastly over-represented. Computer programmers vastly under-represented -- now many MPs could write even a small python program?
Luciana Berger representing Liverpool Wavertress --- you're having a larf:
"Asked by the local newspaper to answer four questions on her adopted city, Ms Berger stumbled, admitting she had never heard of the legendary Liverpool football manager Bill Shankly, nor did she know who sang "Ferry Across the Mersey" (Gerry & the Pacemakers), The actor and Liverpool celebrity Ricky Tomlinson threatened to stand against her after it emerged that during the candidate selection she had stayed at the house of the outgoing Blairite incumbent MP, Jane Kennedy." (The Independent 23 April 2010).
And we haven't even mentioned her personalised number plate yet.
But a personalised number plate?
Huge lack of judgement and limited understanding of the value of money0 -
Largely white, commuter and rural Witham is represented by Priti Patel. Her husband is a Councillor in Bexley so presumably they have a home there.YBarddCwsc said:
No, its a matter of representation. It is a matter of the North of England being properly represented by its own folk. It is a matter of the working class being properly represented. It is a matter of the Welsh being properly represented.Jonathan said:
So it’s a matter of miles, a neighbouring seat ok, but one beyond that not. Where can you draw the line? A bit of an arbitrary silly rule.
If being local was key the voters would vote for it. They don’t. Historically people vote for parties and then the individual. You’re arguing for identity politics.
You wouldn't argue against black or minority ethnic being properly represented, or women being properly represented. It is the same principle.
There are too many affluent middle-class white males from the South of England in Parliament. Often representing seats with which they have no connection.
There is an important principle involved here. Equality of representation. Our Parliament should look like our countries.
Just saying.0 -
The header is the mirror of how those on the left of the Labour party felt during the NL years.
And indeed, how leavers would be feeling of remain has won by a single vote in 2016...because we all know that issue would be 'settled for a generation' if that had happened.
To be honest I think both the New Labour centrists and remainers need to get themselves beyond stage 1 and moving towards stage 5...for their own state of minds.
https://grief.com/the-five-stages-of-grief/
0 -
Poetic justice for what; England has mistreated Ireland for centuries.Philip_Thompson said:
Coveney deserves no deal.OldKingCole said:
Coveney, like the rest of his Government, and indeed its Opposition would rather we stayed.kle4 said:
No one wants no deal as much as Coveney does. 'We must not have X. Not fudging slightly on Y causes X. So we must have X'.williamglenn said:
Actions, not words, prove that he wants no deal.
If we could somehow inflict no deal on Ireland without it affecting us, that would be poetic justice.
And no, I'm not Irish, not even enough to get me an Irish passport.0 -
LOL - makes perfect sensewilliamglenn said:
Labour's crucial role in the fight against anti-semitism is creating the anti-semitism to fight against.Floater said:We believe you Labour......
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/jewish-labour-supporters-write-letter-support-corbyn
LABOUR under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn is a “crucial ally in the fight against anti-semitism,” a letter by 201 Jewish members and supporters of the party says.
Riiighht0 -
In my opinion all elected representatives should be able to justify a strong connection to the area they represent. This could include being born or raised (school - not university) or settled (living and working there for say 5 years) either in the constituency or in a near neighbour. Parachuting in non-local candidates should not happen - there are always enough suitabe local candidates to choose from without carpetbaggers..0
-
WowScott_P said:
https://twitter.com/adamlangleben/status/1099262411868057600Floater said:We believe you Labour......
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/jewish-labour-supporters-write-letter-support-corbyn
LABOUR under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn is a “crucial ally in the fight against anti-semitism,” a letter by 201 Jewish members and supporters of the party says.
Riiighht0 -
In London super prime the market is down 20% since 2015 (10% since 2016 so the rate of decline is slowing). But transactions are few in numberIanB2 said:
Yet that is a graph of changes, and the line only lately just dips slightly below the 0% level. Hardly a correction. Yet.MattW said:DavidL said:
House prices seem pretty static other than in the frothy London end of the market which is dominated by foreign cash. This is a good thing as affordability is increasing, hence the growth of first time buyers.
Whilst I agree with you that @Cyclefree has overegged the rhetorical pudding a little in the lead, can you point me to this frothy London market? AFAICS it is experiencing a useful correction.
Is there another London I don't know about?
Most people I know in London are whinging their heads off about loss of perceived wealth.0 -
People can choose to vote against the carpetbaggers if it is a problem. If they care more about the party brand than carpetbagging I don't see why rules need to be in place to prevent the latter.Penddu said:In my opinion all elected representatives should be able to justify a strong connection to the area they represent. This could include being born or raised (school - not university) or settled (living and working there for say 5 years) either in the constituency or in a near neighbour. Parachuting in non-local candidates should not happen - there are always enough suitabe local candidates to choose from without carpetbaggers..
0 -
The atavistic desire of Brexiteers to see Ireland suffer for their changed allegiances is something to behold.OldKingCole said:
Poetic justice for what; England has mistreated Ireland for centuries.Philip_Thompson said:
Coveney deserves no deal.OldKingCole said:
Coveney, like the rest of his Government, and indeed its Opposition would rather we stayed.kle4 said:
No one wants no deal as much as Coveney does. 'We must not have X. Not fudging slightly on Y causes X. So we must have X'.williamglenn said:
Actions, not words, prove that he wants no deal.
If we could somehow inflict no deal on Ireland without it affecting us, that would be poetic justice.
And no, I'm not Irish, not even enough to get me an Irish passport.0 -
Yep, it is. We have a fairly lamentable standard of MPs: some gems, but also some incredibly poor candidates who are only in position because of who they know in the national party. That's bad for the country.kle4 said:
Is it? Turnout has gone up 4 GEs in a row (if barely in a few cases) and very few people seem concerned where their MP comes from.JosiasJessop said:
You might well be right. But the current system is totally broken.kle4 said:
I think that is wildly optimistic.JosiasJessop said:
No system will guarantee quality of candidate: in many cases the quality will not be known until they are tested. But localism will be better than SPADs and friends of people at the top of the party.kle4 said:I simply find enforcing a local connection to be a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It's unnecessarily restrictive for far from obvious benefit, and although people moan after the fact sometimes I'm with Jonathan on this one, people vote for parties and really don't seem to prioritising local connection when making their decision which they can still do if they want.
Since enforcing a local connection will in no way guarantee a higher quality of MP nor even that they are better at taking note of and representing the local area, where's the need for it? If the problem is the quality of the people who are MPs, who selects them and so on, this does nothing to advance the quality.
.
Perhaps localism isn't the answer, and perhaps it is. But we cannot continue blindly selecting candidates for the benefit of the national party over the area they're supposed to represent.0 -
However he is as untrustworthy as you get , the champion liar.SquareRoot said:
There are literally no politicians that can be trusted.Yorkcity said:
Gove is a duplicitous, not to be trusted man.Big_G_NorthWales said:Compare and contrast Michael Gove's attitude on Marr to the conservative leavers hoping they will rejoin and Emily Thornberry's vicious attack yesterday on the labour leavers.
Indeed the same can be said about TM attitude compared to Corbyn's 'good riddance' comments0 -
The fact that LOTO is even referring to the Morning Star, shows how far Labour have collapsed into a far left sect.Floater said:
WowScott_P said:
https://twitter.com/adamlangleben/status/1099262411868057600Floater said:We believe you Labour......
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/jewish-labour-supporters-write-letter-support-corbyn
LABOUR under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn is a “crucial ally in the fight against anti-semitism,” a letter by 201 Jewish members and supporters of the party says.
Riiighht0 -
Thanks for the comments all.
A few points:-
1. @DavidL is right that I have not addressed the economy. I did not intend to. But the actions of the people in Westminster will have an effect on our economic prospects and are certainly having an effect on how Britain is being perceived. That will I think have an effect on our prospects.
2. It is not just anti-Semitism which is the problem with Corbyn’s Labour. It is the fact that it is in the grip of the Far Left which has a repellent attitude on wealth creation, how to run an economy, security, foreign alliances and the proper balance between state controll and individual liberty. Even if the anti-semitism issue were resolved, Labour under the Far Left would be unfit for power. Under the mainstream left, it would have valuable things to offer. But that is not where it is at now nor where it will ever be under Corbyn. It is his whole strand of political thinking which needs to be removed from Labour not merely that he and his supporters stop saying unpleasant things about Jews.
And, yes, I have upped the rhetoric a little. Isn’t that what headers are for?
It is summer in my garden. The conservatory doors and windows are open. The bees are buzzing, the flowers are turning their faces to the sun. As shall I.0 -
ALL brexiteers?Theuniondivvie said:
The atavistic desire of Brexiteers to see Ireland suffer for their changed allegiances is something to behold.OldKingCole said:
Poetic justice for what; England has mistreated Ireland for centuries.Philip_Thompson said:
Coveney deserves no deal.OldKingCole said:
Coveney, like the rest of his Government, and indeed its Opposition would rather we stayed.kle4 said:
No one wants no deal as much as Coveney does. 'We must not have X. Not fudging slightly on Y causes X. So we must have X'.williamglenn said:
Actions, not words, prove that he wants no deal.
If we could somehow inflict no deal on Ireland without it affecting us, that would be poetic justice.
And no, I'm not Irish, not even enough to get me an Irish passport.
Seems like a bit of a stretch0 -
I agree. A tone deaf comment which demonstrates why the Irish mistrust us to the point that the backstop is needed. The idea that what we put the Irish through remotely compares to the “inconvenience” of a permanent customs arrangement (I’ve seen @Philip_Thompson describe it as “subjugation” which demonstrates a complete lack of any historical understanding of he word) is in some way even remotely comparable to the one sided “deals” we and many other imperialist countries imposed on others. Given their history why should the Irish believe a word our government tells them? That’s why they want a binding commitment. It is our many chickens coming home to roost.OldKingCole said:
Poetic justice for what; England has mistreated Ireland for centuries.Philip_Thompson said:
Coveney deserves no deal.OldKingCole said:
Coveney, like the rest of his Government, and indeed its Opposition would rather we stayed.kle4 said:
No one wants no deal as much as Coveney does. 'We must not have X. Not fudging slightly on Y causes X. So we must have X'.williamglenn said:
Actions, not words, prove that he wants no deal.
If we could somehow inflict no deal on Ireland without it affecting us, that would be poetic justice.
And no, I'm not Irish, not even enough to get me an Irish passport.0 -
Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/10988960874259128320 -
The statement that there were "no or few complaints about her attachments prior to Corbyn" is not true.Endillion said:
The merits of MPs having pre-existing roots in the constituencies they serve is up for debate, but it's clearly wrong to state it as a factor in the case of Luciana Berger. She wasn't brought up there, certainly, but she's been the MP there since 2010, and is now married to a Liverpudlian, and starting a family there. She had no or few complaints about her attachments prior to the Corbyn era.
https://tinyurl.com/y6y6p8zy
If being an MP required a really specialised set of skills, I might agree -- but I don't think it does.
It requires compassion, level-headedness, some intelligence, some articulacy. Many, many people have the skills to become MPs.
It is more important that Parliament is really representative of the countries. That for me trumps the individual right of someone who may wish to be an MP but finds their local constituencies blocked.
It is the same issue as Fabian Hamilton MP and the all-women shortlist for Leeds North East.
Fabian Hamilton said: "For six years, I was chair of Leeds city council's equal opportunities committee. Equal ops was my life. And to find that, as far as the Labour Party is concerned, equal opportunity now means positive discrimination, came as a real shock to me. I am told that my generation of men will just have to stand back and make way for women. And I understand why certain women in the Party have pushed that policy. But I think they're wrong. What they don't seem to take on board is that I've only got one life, too. I didn't choose my time on earth any more than I chose my sex or my race. And I really mean it when I say that being kept out of a job just because I'm a man offends me as deeply as being kept out of a job just because I'm a Jew"
You agree with Hamilton.
I don't. It is more important for our Parliament to be representative, and that means an equal number of women (amongst other things). For me, that trumps Fabian Hamilton's "right" to be an MP.
Similarly, it is more important that the North of England is properly represented by Northerners than that Jonathan from the South of England can become an MP.0 -
Quality should not be our goal, or at least only quality of character.kle4 said:Foxy said:
The problem is that party selections are either under the control of a hundred or so local members, or a national party favouring its SPADS. Local voters rarely get a say, and when they do their choices are often at odds will local parties and national leaders, Sarah Wollaston for example.kle4 said:
Indeey selection issue.Jonathan said:
So, if you happen to be born or live in an opponents safe seat you can never get involved in national politics. Hmmm.YBarddCwsc said:
Nonrutiny.JohnWheatley said:
On
I simply find enforcing aYBarddCwsc said:
For god's sake, we're not taking about cutting edge research in quantum gravity.kle4 said:
And how do you judge what is a suitably genuine connection? As I pointed out, someone could undeniably have connection with a place and be less worthy to represent it than someone brand new to the area.Foxy said:
I dont think anyone is suggesting a birth certificate is required in order to be the MP for the area, just a genuine connection.Jonathan said:
So, if you happen to be born or liveYBarddCwsc said:
Have you seen the standard of our MPs?
Most people are "worthy" enough.
Since enforcing a local connection will in no way guarantee a higher quality of MP nor even that they are better at taking note of and representing the local area, where's the need for it? If the problem is the quality of the people who are MPs, who selects them and so on, this does nothing to advance the quality.
If we regard intelligence, education, connections, commitment to a party, success in other fields as markers of quality then we will continue to have a self replicating oligarchy.
There is a bigger need of hospital porters as Doctors, policemen as barristers, office cleaners as bankers, if we are to have a representative parliament. Localism helps up to a point, but I would rather a London postie representing Hull than a local barrister.
My own scheme is to replace the Lords with a senate appointed internally for 5 year terms by local councils, better representation and a stimulus for good people to enter local government, and stick with it.0 -
I think it would be electorally attractive for a few terms, but would lose support after it got us embroiled in a series of messy foreign wars.Cookie said:
The Labour brand is not the thing of wonder that many in Labour think it is. It's always been tainted for many by the ine inclusion of the far left, even before the far left led it. Imagine a party with the mainstream left's values and shorn of both the personnel and the associations of the far left. That's got to be anelectorally attractive proposition, surely?Philip_Thompson said:
I don't agree with Dan.rottenborough said:
Yes if you don't agree with Corbyn you should leave the party. But that's still a very minority position. And the more Corbyn's "enemies" leave the party the more secure his grip on the party becomes. Its a conundrum.
Tom Watson should join TIG and lead an exodus of MPs to TIG. That would destroy Corbyn, by destroying Labour. Which is why he doesn't want to do it.
It is Labourites love of the Labour brand, rather than rather Labour is meant to stand for, that is keeping Corbyn secure.
Harold Wilson famously said the Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing. Under Corbyn the morals are that of Communism, Maduro and Antisemitism. For the sane left it is nothing. Take what made Labour good in your eyes and rebuild it in TIG.
Oh wait, I used the wrong tense there.0 -
The problem is NOT people being parachuted into safe seats.
It’s that there are safe seats in the first place. FPTP creates these little silos, but the way it has been implemented in the UK doubly reinforces party fiefdoms.
Address the cause, not the symptoms.0 -
Any system would create safe seats. A list system certainly would.Jonathan said:The problem is NOT people being parachuted into safe seats.
It’s that there are safe seats in the first place. FPTP creates these little silos, but the way it has been implemented in the UK doubly reinforces party fiefdoms.
Address the cause, not the symptoms.0 -
Reading that it’s hard to see how he can be described as a leftie. Women need to stay at home to wipe their parents’ bottoms, young people should not movevfrom where they were born. It’s reactionary nonsense.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
0 -
Disagree with this on two counts:Penddu said:In my opinion all elected representatives should be able to justify a strong connection to the area they represent. This could include being born or raised (school - not university) or settled (living and working there for say 5 years) either in the constituency or in a near neighbour. Parachuting in non-local candidates should not happen - there are always enough suitabe local candidates to choose from without carpetbaggers..
1) Plenty of people I know who went to University somewhere feel and are much more connected to the place than those who were born and raised there; and
2) It seems that often aren't enough suitable candidates to pick from even with carpetbaggers.
0 -
Things would need to be stirred up regularly.Slackbladder said:
Any system would create safe seats. A list system certainly would.Jonathan said:The problem is NOT people being parachuted into safe seats.
It’s that there are safe seats in the first place. FPTP creates these little silos, but the way it has been implemented in the UK doubly reinforces party fiefdoms.
Address the cause, not the symptoms.0 -
Stay classy.YBarddCwsc said:
The statement that there were "no or few complaints about her attachments prior to Corbyn" is not true.Endillion said:
The merits of MPs having pre-existing roots in the constituencies they serve is up for debate, but it's clearly wrong to state it as a factor in the case of Luciana Berger. She wasn't brought up there, certainly, but she's been the MP there since 2010, and is now married to a Liverpudlian, and starting a family there. She had no or few complaints about her attachments prior to the Corbyn era.
https://tinyurl.com/y6y6p8zy
If being an MP required a really specialised set of skills, I might agree -- but I don't think it does.
It requires compassion, level-headedness, some intelligence, some articulacy. Many, many people have the skills to become MPs.
It is more important that Parliament is really representative of the countries. That for me trumps the individual right of someone who may wish to be an MP but finds their local constituencies blocked.
It is the same issue as Fabian Hamilton MP and the all-women shortlist for Leeds North East.
Fabian Hamilton said: "For six years, I was chair of Leeds city council's equal opportunities committee. Equal ops was my life. And to find that, as far as the Labour Party is concerned, equal opportunity now means positive discrimination, came as a real shock to me. I am told that my generation of men will just have to stand back and make way for women. And I understand why certain women in the Party have pushed that policy. But I think they're wrong. What they don't seem to take on board is that I've only got one life, too. I didn't choose my time on earth any more than I chose my sex or my race. And I really mean it when I say that being kept out of a job just because I'm a man offends me as deeply as being kept out of a job just because I'm a Jew"
You agree with Hamilton.
I don't. It is more important for our Parliament to be representative, and that means an equal number of women (amongst other things). For me, that trumps Fabian Hamilton's "right" to be an MP.
Similarly, it is more important that the North of England is properly represented by Northerners than that Jonathan from the South of England can become an MP.0 -
The term 'Brexiteers' is not equivalent to 'all Brexiteers', though like all Brexiteers you seem to think it is.Floater said:
ALL brexiteers?Theuniondivvie said:
The atavistic desire of Brexiteers to see Ireland suffer for their changed allegiances is something to behold.OldKingCole said:
Poetic justice for what; England has mistreated Ireland for centuries.Philip_Thompson said:
Coveney deserves no deal.OldKingCole said:
Coveney, like the rest of his Government, and indeed its Opposition would rather we stayed.kle4 said:
No one wants no deal as much as Coveney does. 'We must not have X. Not fudging slightly on Y causes X. So we must have X'.williamglenn said:
Actions, not words, prove that he wants no deal.
If we could somehow inflict no deal on Ireland without it affecting us, that would be poetic justice.
And no, I'm not Irish, not even enough to get me an Irish passport.
Seems like a bit of a stretch0 -
Not really in STV, unless a particular candidate has earned itSlackbladder said:
Any system would create safe seats. A list system certainly would.Jonathan said:The problem is NOT people being parachuted into safe seats.
It’s that there are safe seats in the first place. FPTP creates these little silos, but the way it has been implemented in the UK doubly reinforces party fiefdoms.
Address the cause, not the symptoms.0 -
Especially when they just pick their pals and toadies, politics like democracy is a joke in the UKJosiasJessop said:
I want more independent MPs (*), and think the party system as it is implemented in this country is failing us. The power to impose candidates on a constituency is a powerful one, and increases the odds of such a candidate following the party line, rather than the local interest. After all, they have no real connection with the local area, might not need to remain in the area once they get voted out, and they owe their position to the party.kle4 said:I simply find enforcing a local connection to be a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It's unnecessarily restrictive for far from obvious benefit, and although people moan after the fact sometimes I'm with Jonathan on this one, people vote for parties and really don't seem to prioritising local connection when making their decision which they can still do if they want.
Since enforcing a local connection will in no way guarantee a higher quality of MP nor even that they are better at taking note of and representing the local area, where's the need for it? If the problem is the quality of the people who are MPs, who selects them and so on, this does nothing to advance the quality.
No system will guarantee quality of candidate: in many cases the quality will not be known until they are tested. But localism will be better than SPADs and friends of people at the top of the party.
(*) This has been my longstanding position, before this week's developments with TIG.0 -
Not the Single Stochastic Vote...Slackbladder said:
Any system would create safe seats. A list system certainly would.Jonathan said:The problem is NOT people being parachuted into safe seats.
It’s that there are safe seats in the first place. FPTP creates these little silos, but the way it has been implemented in the UK doubly reinforces party fiefdoms.
Address the cause, not the symptoms.0 -
1) That is a local connection. We're not saying you have to have a birth right to represent a constituency.Endillion said:
Disagree with this on two counts:Penddu said:In my opinion all elected representatives should be able to justify a strong connection to the area they represent. This could include being born or raised (school - not university) or settled (living and working there for say 5 years) either in the constituency or in a near neighbour. Parachuting in non-local candidates should not happen - there are always enough suitabe local candidates to choose from without carpetbaggers..
1) Plenty of people I know who went to University somewhere feel and are much more connected to the place than those who were born and raised there; and
2) It seems that often aren't enough suitable candidates to pick from even with carpetbaggers.
2) There are plenty of local people who could do the job well, but they don't apply because they think they are not worthy.0 -
It's PB, Fraser is barely to the right of Hoxha through that red tinted lens.SouthamObserver said:
Reading that it’s hard to see how he can be described as a leftie. Women need to stay at home to wipe their parents’ bottoms, young people should not movevfrom where they were born. It’s reactionary nonsense.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/10988960874259128320 -
I think you'd make a great MP.Jonathan said:
Stay classy.YBarddCwsc said:
The statement that there were "no or few complaints about her attachments prior to Corbyn" is not true.Endillion said:
The merits of MPs having pre-existing roots in the constituencies they serve is up for debate, but it's clearly wrong to state it as a factor in the case of Luciana Berger. She wasn't brought up there, certainly, but she's been the MP there since 2010, and is now married to a Liverpudlian, and starting a family there. She had no or few complaints about her attachments prior to the Corbyn era.
https://tinyurl.com/y6y6p8zy
If being an MP required a really specialised set of skills, I might agree -- but I don't think it does.
It requires compassion, level-headedness, some intelligence, some articulacy. Many, many people have the skills to become MPs.
It is more important that Parliament is really representative of the countries. That for me trumps the individual right of someone who may wish to be an MP but finds their local constituencies blocked.
It is the same issue as Fabian Hamilton MP and the all-women shortlist for Leeds North East.
Fabian Hamilton said: "For six years, I was chair of Leeds city council's equal opportunities committee. Equal ops was my life. And to find that, as far as the Labour Party is concerned, equal opportunity now means positive discrimination, came as a real shock to me. I am told that my generation of men will just have to stand back and make way for women. And I understand why certain women in the Party have pushed that policy. But I think they're wrong. What they don't seem to take on board is that I've only got one life, too. I didn't choose my time on earth any more than I chose my sex or my race. And I really mean it when I say that being kept out of a job just because I'm a man offends me as deeply as being kept out of a job just because I'm a Jew"
You agree with Hamilton.
I don't. It is more important for our Parliament to be representative, and that means an equal number of women (amongst other things). For me, that trumps Fabian Hamilton's "right" to be an MP.
Similarly, it is more important that the North of England is properly represented by Northerners than that Jonathan from the South of England can become an MP.
I just don't think you should be an MP for e.g., Liverpool Wavertree.0 -
That's an interesting article.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
I've said before that modern middle class life increasingly demands an exploited immigrant serf class for menial service sector activities together with an exploited foreign workforce for agricultural and manufactured produce.0 -
Your last point I agree with but putting unsuitable people in just to make up a quota for gender, race , religion etc is just plain stupid and discriminatory, worse than the current old boys network systemYBarddCwsc said:
The statement that there were "no or few complaints about her attachments prior to Corbyn" is not true.Endillion said:
The merits of MPs having pre-existing roots in the constituencies they serve is up for debate, but it's clearly wrong to state it as a factor in the case of Luciana Berger. She wasn't brought up there, certainly, but she's been the MP there since 2010, and is now married to a Liverpudlian, and starting a family there. She had no or few complaints about her attachments prior to the Corbyn era.
https://tinyurl.com/y6y6p8zy
If being an MP required a really specialised set of skills, I might agree -- but I don't think it does.
It requires compassion, level-headedness, some intelligence, some articulacy. Many, many people have the skills to become MPs.
It is more important that Parliament is really representative of the countries. That for me trumps the individual right of someone who may wish to be an MP but finds their local constituencies blocked.
It is the same issue as Fabian Hamilton MP and the all-women shortlist for Leeds North East.
Fabian Hamilton said: "For six years, I was chair of Leeds city council's equal opportunities committee. Equal ops was my life. And to find that, as far as the Labour Party is concerned, equal opportunity now means positive discrimination, came as a real shock to me. I am told that my generation of men will just have to stand back and make way for women. And I understand why certain women in the Party have pushed that policy. But I think they're wrong. What they don't seem to take on board is that I've only got one life, too. I didn't choose my time on earth any more than I chose my sex or my race. And I really mean it when I say that being kept out of a job just because I'm a man offends me as deeply as being kept out of a job just because I'm a Jew"
You agree with Hamilton.
I don't. It is more important for our Parliament to be representative, and that means an equal number of women (amongst other things). For me, that trumps Fabian Hamilton's "right" to be an MP.
Similarly, it is more important that the North of England is properly represented by Northerners than that Jonathan from the South of England can become an MP.0 -
Wasn't that Richard_Nabavi's proposal?Foxy said:
Not the Single Stochastic Vote...Slackbladder said:
Any system would create safe seats. A list system certainly would.Jonathan said:The problem is NOT people being parachuted into safe seats.
It’s that there are safe seats in the first place. FPTP creates these little silos, but the way it has been implemented in the UK doubly reinforces party fiefdoms.
Address the cause, not the symptoms.
Quite brilliant and fair, yet completely unacceptable.0 -
You just need to look at the absolute losers on list system in Scotland, to see how that does not work. The level of dross is unbelievable, they get stuffed in real vote and just slide in on list.Jonathan said:
Things would need to be stirred up regularly.Slackbladder said:
Any system would create safe seats. A list system certainly would.Jonathan said:The problem is NOT people being parachuted into safe seats.
It’s that there are safe seats in the first place. FPTP creates these little silos, but the way it has been implemented in the UK doubly reinforces party fiefdoms.
Address the cause, not the symptoms.
PS: Murso Fraser is perfect example, rejected at the ballot box 7 times but permanent fixture at Holyrood.0 -
I like FPTP for nostalgic reasons but recognise it's a totally antiquated system and needs to be replaced by STV as soon as possible. (Election night wouldn't be as interesting without FPTP).Jonathan said:The problem is NOT people being parachuted into safe seats.
It’s that there are safe seats in the first place. FPTP creates these little silos, but the way it has been implemented in the UK doubly reinforces party fiefdoms.
Address the cause, not the symptoms.0 -
1) I agree with you - @Penddu explicitly excluded university as a connection.YBarddCwsc said:
1) That is a local connection. We're not saying you have to have a birth right to represent a constituency.Endillion said:
Disagree with this on two counts:Penddu said:In my opinion all elected representatives should be able to justify a strong connection to the area they represent. This could include being born or raised (school - not university) or settled (living and working there for say 5 years) either in the constituency or in a near neighbour. Parachuting in non-local candidates should not happen - there are always enough suitabe local candidates to choose from without carpetbaggers..
1) Plenty of people I know who went to University somewhere feel and are much more connected to the place than those who were born and raised there; and
2) It seems that often aren't enough suitable candidates to pick from even with carpetbaggers.
2) There are plenty of local people who could do the job well, but they don't apply because they think they are not worthy.
2) No idea, but unless they're actively not applying at all because they know they'll be overlooked due to flavour of the month being parachuted in from central office (which I agree with you is an issue), I don't see that as a problem.0 -
I'm sure that brings great sorrow to the average London voter.Charles said:
In London super prime the market is down 20% since 2015 (10% since 2016 so the rate of decline is slowing). But transactions are few in numberIanB2 said:
Yet that is a graph of changes, and the line only lately just dips slightly below the 0% level. Hardly a correction. Yet.MattW said:DavidL said:
House prices seem pretty static other than in the frothy London end of the market which is dominated by foreign cash. This is a good thing as affordability is increasing, hence the growth of first time buyers.
Whilst I agree with you that @Cyclefree has overegged the rhetorical pudding a little in the lead, can you point me to this frothy London market? AFAICS it is experiencing a useful correction.
Is there another London I don't know about?
Most people I know in London are whinging their heads off about loss of perceived wealth.
Outer London doesn't seem to be 'suffering' overall from falling house prices yet:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/housepriceindex/october2018#house-price-growth-varies-between-london-boroughs
For the likes of semis in Romford and Bromley prices might still be increasing.0 -
Why just middle class? Do working class daughters tend to stay at home to wipe their elderly fathers’ bottoms?another_richard said:
That's an interesting article.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
I've said before that modern middle class life increasingly demands an exploited immigrant serf class for menial service sector activities together with an exploited foreign workforce for agricultural and manufactured produce.
0 -
Agree with this. A voting system like STV enables the voters to choose between multiple candidates from the same party, so that the voters can decide if they want to vote for the local candidate for party x, or the non-local candidate.Jonathan said:The problem is NOT people being parachuted into safe seats.
It’s that there are safe seats in the first place. FPTP creates these little silos, but the way it has been implemented in the UK doubly reinforces party fiefdoms.
Address the cause, not the symptoms.
I'm tempted to suggest that you force parties to give voters a choice by mandating that they stand more candidates than seats available in the constituency.0 -
Starting from the supposition that an MP's job is to represent his constituents in parliament (stop laughing now) I would say that to know the problems in your constituency takes a certain amount of local knowledge. Yes they do case work but merely seeing the cases so desperate that they have turned to their mp doesn't in my mind give a good oversight of the local environment and the problems of its denizens.DavidL said:
Glad to hear it but I would suggest it is closer than you think. Most of our politician's time is taken up with case work. If you are helping an asylum seeker from Syria who cares where you yourself come from? If you are trying to help someone whose homeless or living with damp, ditto. And for national politics (which, in my view, really should be an MP's focus) the local connection is not relevant at all. What do you think politicians gain from a local connection?
Its part of a wider problem where are mp's generally don't have lifestyles like most of us and seem blind therefore to the deficiencies in life. How many of them get threatened with losing their job due to the inadequacies of public transport for example? How many have existed on that cusp between choosing food or heat before they decided green levies on power were a good idea? I am sure you catch my drift
0 -
When I was a lad in the 70s, Skinheads/Ska/Mod culture was a big thing and it tied into early football hooligan culture around these parts. As a 14 year old, I knew a couple of lads who had elder brothers and uncles heavily involved in The Baby Squad, Leicester City's own particular brand of knuckle dragger. They were skinny,nasty racist little bastards then, and the one I still bump into regularly has turned into a fat, nasty big racist bastard!SouthamObserver said:
Yep, France seems much more racially polarised - perhaps because it is far less integrated. My memory of the NF and BNP marches of those 70s and 80s is that they were largely composed of skinheads. I guess those same people are now just fatter and following Tommy Robinson around.kle4 said:
I was not aware that was so in the 70s. It is something I guess. Although aren't the FN in France more supported by the young than the old? So I guess it is not a universal thing.SouthamObserver said:One striking thing about the far right gatherings you see these days: those attending are generally middle aged or older. In the 70s and 80s the NF and BNP marches attracted much younger, mostly male, participants. Racism just seems unfathomable to most young people now. That’s progress!
0 -
Berger was selected for Wavertree in 2010 despite the silly griping about whether or not she followed football etc. There were no moves to deselect her between 2010 and 2015.YBarddCwsc said:
The statement that there were "no or few complaints about her attachments prior to Corbyn" is not true.
https://tinyurl.com/y6y6p8zy
If being an MP required a really specialised set of skills, I might agree -- but I don't think it does.
It requires compassion, level-headedness, some intelligence, some articulacy. Many, many people have the skills to become MPs.
It is more important that Parliament is really representative of the countries. That for me trumps the individual right of someone who may wish to be an MP but finds their local constituencies blocked.
It is the same issue as Fabian Hamilton MP and the all-women shortlist for Leeds North East.
Fabian Hamilton said: "For six years, I was chair of Leeds city council's equal opportunities committee. Equal ops was my life. And to find that, as far as the Labour Party is concerned, equal opportunity now means positive discrimination, came as a real shock to me. I am told that my generation of men will just have to stand back and make way for women. And I understand why certain women in the Party have pushed that policy. But I think they're wrong. What they don't seem to take on board is that I've only got one life, too. I didn't choose my time on earth any more than I chose my sex or my race. And I really mean it when I say that being kept out of a job just because I'm a man offends me as deeply as being kept out of a job just because I'm a Jew"
You agree with Hamilton.
I don't. It is more important for our Parliament to be representative, and that means an equal number of women (amongst other things). For me, that trumps Fabian Hamilton's "right" to be an MP.
Similarly, it is more important that the North of England is properly represented by Northerners than that Jonathan from the South of England can become an MP.
I would add to your list of MP skills: hard working, thick skinned, and for a lot of the likely candidates, a willingness to take a substantial pay cut for a lot of thankless effort. Which I think reduces the number of available candidates substantially, especially given the abuse they now get from all sides every time they open (or don't open) their mouths on almost any topic.
I'm more inclined to Hamilton's view than yours, to be sure: I agree with the need for Parliament to be representative (as I would guess did he) - but that means removing barriers and encouraging equal participation, not arbitrary quotas.0 -
Ha, ha - sounds familiar!!twistedfirestopper3 said:
When I was a lad in the 70s, Skinheads/Ska/Mod culture was a big thing and it tied into early football hooligan culture around these parts. As a 14 year old, I knew a couple of lads who had elder brothers and uncles heavily involved in The Baby Squad, Leicester City's own particular brand of knuckle dragger. They were skinny,nasty racist little bastards then, and the one I still bump into regularly has turned into a fat, nasty big racist bastard!SouthamObserver said:
Yep, France seems much more racially polarised - perhaps because it is far less integrated. My memory of the NF and BNP marches of those 70s and 80s is that they were largely composed of skinheads. I guess those same people are now just fatter and following Tommy Robinson around.kle4 said:
I was not aware that was so in the 70s. It is something I guess. Although aren't the FN in France more supported by the young than the old? So I guess it is not a universal thing.SouthamObserver said:One striking thing about the far right gatherings you see these days: those attending are generally middle aged or older. In the 70s and 80s the NF and BNP marches attracted much younger, mostly male, participants. Racism just seems unfathomable to most young people now. That’s progress!
0 -
That rather assumes they'll be given a local candidate from party x, instead of that party's list being filled with toadys and people from the other end of the country.OblitusSumMe said:
Agree with this. A voting system like STV enables the voters to choose between multiple candidates from the same party, so that the voters can decide if they want to vote for the local candidate for party x, or the non-local candidate.Jonathan said:The problem is NOT people being parachuted into safe seats.
It’s that there are safe seats in the first place. FPTP creates these little silos, but the way it has been implemented in the UK doubly reinforces party fiefdoms.
Address the cause, not the symptoms.
I'm tempted to suggest that you force parties to give voters a choice by mandating that they stand more candidates than seats available in the constituency.
The problem is the power of the national party, and it is easy for them to skew proposed systems to their own advantage. A localism requirement, as I propose, would be very hard for them to overcome - and any candidate being parachuted in would have to make a long-term commitment with no immediate rewards.0 -
Its putting an opposite view to the globalist nonsense that young people should move around the world with the result they end up renting a room in Walthamstow, being exploited in a crap job and being tens of thousands in debt.SouthamObserver said:
Reading that it’s hard to see how he can be described as a leftie. Women need to stay at home to wipe their parents’ bottoms, young people should not movevfrom where they were born. It’s reactionary nonsense.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
With all the profits going to the George Osbornes of the world.0 -
A century ago, about a third of working class women were in service.another_richard said:
That's an interesting article.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
I've said before that modern middle class life increasingly demands an exploited immigrant serf class for menial service sector activities together with an exploited foreign workforce for agricultural and manufactured produce.
In many ways we are returning to those days, though prefering casual rather than permanent employment for our serfs.0 -
Barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen. A Brexiteers dream of Empire days...another_richard said:
Its putting an opposite view to the globalist nonsense that young people should move around the world with the result they end up renting a room in Walthamstow, being exploited in a crap job and being tens of thousands in debt.SouthamObserver said:
Reading that it’s hard to see how he can be described as a leftie. Women need to stay at home to wipe their parents’ bottoms, young people should not movevfrom where they were born. It’s reactionary nonsense.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
With all the profits going to the George Osbornes of the world.0 -
The reward for leaving is more unpaid adult arsewiping opportunities?SouthamObserver said:
Reading that it’s hard to see how he can be described as a leftie. Women need to stay at home to wipe their parents’ bottoms, young people should not movevfrom where they were born. It’s reactionary nonsense.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
I'm in.
Tangentially, a disabled friend of mine is constantly irritated by references to the need for bottom wipers, on the basis that if you can get the bottom to an appropriately modified toilet in time, automated bottom washing and drying is one of the most mature, satisfactory and elegant technologies out there, and has been for decades.0 -
It’s literally saying young people should stay where they’re born and women should not aspire to anything more than looking after their elderly parents. Obviously, this does not apply to Fraser or his family.another_richard said:
Its putting an opposite view to the globalist nonsense that young people should move around the world with the result they end up renting a room in Walthamstow, being exploited in a crap job and being tens of thousands in debt.SouthamObserver said:
Reading that it’s hard to see how he can be described as a leftie. Women need to stay at home to wipe their parents’ bottoms, young people should not movevfrom where they were born. It’s reactionary nonsense.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
With all the profits going to the George Osbornes of the world.
0 -
I think your final statement is quite telling and shows a lot of bias.Endillion said:
There were no moves to deselect her between 2010 and 2015.
I would add to your list of MP skills: hard working, thick skinned, and for a lot of the likely candidates, a willingness to take a substantial pay cut for a lot of thankless effort.
MPs are in the top 5 per cent of UK earners. You clearly think most "likely candidates" are in a still higher percentile, as they must be willing to take a "substantial" pay cut. Not just a pay cut, a "substantial" one!!!!!
I don't.
I think there are loads of people who could do the job well and for whom being an MP would be a substantial pay rise !!
Those are the people I want to see representing Liverpool Wavertree.0 -
No, it wasn't my idea, unfortunately!geoffw said:
Wasn't that Richard_Nabavi's proposal?Foxy said:
Not the Single Stochastic Vote...Slackbladder said:
Any system would create safe seats. A list system certainly would.Jonathan said:The problem is NOT people being parachuted into safe seats.
It’s that there are safe seats in the first place. FPTP creates these little silos, but the way it has been implemented in the UK doubly reinforces party fiefdoms.
Address the cause, not the symptoms.
Quite brilliant and fair, yet completely unacceptable.0 -
The problem with Oxbridge isn't the people who went there, it's the people who nearly did.Jonathan said:
You’re changing the subject quite heavily there. If you want a conversation about Oxbridge now? Fine. Two seriously screwed up institutions that churn out some seriously screwed up individuals. There are bigger problems in Oxbridge than geography.YBarddCwsc said:
David Lammy correctly pointed out that over 45 per cent of Oxbridge intake comes form London & the South of England.Jonathan said:
That’s a nationalistic priority. I agree diversity matters and prefer proportional representation. But making geographical divisions matter more than they do already? No.
You're happy with that? It is a geographical bias.
As Lammy correctly understands, geography is correlated with wealth and class.0 -
In my experience they do so rather more.SouthamObserver said:
Why just middle class? Do working class daughters tend to stay at home to wipe their elderly fathers’ bottoms?another_richard said:
That's an interesting article.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
I've said before that modern middle class life increasingly demands an exploited immigrant serf class for menial service sector activities together with an exploited foreign workforce for agricultural and manufactured produce.
Probably through a combination of family ties being more important in working class communities, working class families being less geographically dispersed, working class people being more willing to do 'menial' jobs and working class oldies being likely to die a bit earlier.0 -
I am sure they would have shoes nowadays.Foxy said:
Barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen. A Brexiteers dream of Empire days...another_richard said:
Its putting an opposite view to the globalist nonsense that young people should move around the world with the result they end up renting a room in Walthamstow, being exploited in a crap job and being tens of thousands in debt.SouthamObserver said:
Reading that it’s hard to see how he can be described as a leftie. Women need to stay at home to wipe their parents’ bottoms, young people should not movevfrom where they were born. It’s reactionary nonsense.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
With all the profits going to the George Osbornes of the world.
PS: exceedingly sexist to assume it would be daughter's only0 -
People should always aspire to something better.SouthamObserver said:
It’s literally saying young people should stay where they’re born and women should not aspire to anything more than looking after their elderly parents. Obviously, this does not apply to Fraser or his family.another_richard said:
Its putting an opposite view to the globalist nonsense that young people should move around the world with the result they end up renting a room in Walthamstow, being exploited in a crap job and being tens of thousands in debt.SouthamObserver said:
Reading that it’s hard to see how he can be described as a leftie. Women need to stay at home to wipe their parents’ bottoms, young people should not movevfrom where they were born. It’s reactionary nonsense.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
With all the profits going to the George Osbornes of the world.
But renting a room in Walthamstow, being exploited in a crap job and being tens of thousands in debt doesn't seem to be a successful way of putting those aspirations in practice.0 -
Watson called on colleagues to “dial down the rhetoric”, adding: “I was born into the Labour party, but I think dying is a virtue that’s overrated.”
Asked whether he could join the defectors, he said: “I’ve been in the LP since I was 15 years old. You’d have to drive me out.”
They will, Tom, they will.0 -
In my experience women are a lot more likely to work than they used to and elderly parents unable to look after themselves also need looking after during working hours, not just in the evenings and weekends. I am also not sure why Fraser believes the responsibility lies solely with daughters.another_richard said:
In my experience they do so rather more.SouthamObserver said:
Why just middle class? Do working class daughters tend to stay at home to wipe their elderly fathers’ bottoms?another_richard said:
That's an interesting article.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
I've said before that modern middle class life increasingly demands an exploited immigrant serf class for menial service sector activities together with an exploited foreign workforce for agricultural and manufactured produce.
Probably through a combination of family ties being more important in working class communities, working class families being less geographically dispersed, working class people being more willing to do 'menial' jobs and working class oldies being likely to die a bit earlier.
0 -
At least the shoes will be cheaper because of Brexitmalcolmg said:
I am sure they would have shoes nowadays.Foxy said:
Barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen. A Brexiteers dream of Empire days...another_richard said:
Its putting an opposite view to the globalist nonsense that young people should move around the world with the result they end up renting a room in Walthamstow, being exploited in a crap job and being tens of thousands in debt.SouthamObserver said:
Reading that it’s hard to see how he can be described as a leftie. Women need to stay at home to wipe their parents’ bottoms, young people should not movevfrom where they were born. It’s reactionary nonsense.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
With all the profits going to the George Osbornes of the world.
PS: exceedingly sexist to assume it would be daughter's only0 -
A question: does Tom Watson's spell as Deputy Leader come up for re-election at a specific date?0
-
Weirdly enough, I think the MP salary should have a maximum: the average London salary. People keep saying that low(??!) MP's salary reduce the quality of the MP, but what we get is trust fund managers who act in the interests of the fund not the country. At least if we lowered it to, say £35K we'd get more representative MPs.YBarddCwsc said:
No, its a matter of representation. It is a matter of the North of England being properly represented by its own folk. It is a matter of the working class being properly represented. It is a matter of the Welsh being properly represented.Jonathan said:
So it’s a matter of miles, a neighbouring seat ok, but one beyond that not. Where can you draw the line? A bit of an arbitrary silly rule.
If being local was key the voters would vote for it. They don’t. Historically people vote for parties and then the individual. You’re arguing for identity politics.
You wouldn't argue against black or minority ethnic being properly represented, or women being properly represented. It is the same principle.
There are too many affluent middle-class white males from the South of England in Parliament. Often representing seats with which they have no connection.
There is an important principle involved here. Equality of representation. Our Parliament should look like our countries.0 -
One of the problems with local candidates for local people is that in constituencies of 80,000+ its a bit of an impossible thing to achieve. Some mythical inner city constituencies may be consistent to the extent than an individual can be truly representative of the whole, but generally places vary so much that you can never truly know or be representative of the whole. Indeed arguably local candidates may be at a disadvantage, because they will think and claim to know the place, when in truth they only know part of it and bias accordingly.0
-
As opposed to the Remainer dream of the 50s - the Deep South of the 1850s.Foxy said:
Barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen. A Brexiteers dream of Empire days...another_richard said:
Its putting an opposite view to the globalist nonsense that young people should move around the world with the result they end up renting a room in Walthamstow, being exploited in a crap job and being tens of thousands in debt.SouthamObserver said:
Reading that it’s hard to see how he can be described as a leftie. Women need to stay at home to wipe their parents’ bottoms, young people should not movevfrom where they were born. It’s reactionary nonsense.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
With all the profits going to the George Osbornes of the world.
Third World people slaving away in the fields and sweat shops and casually employed 'trash' for the menial service work.
Our lifestyles depend upon a lot of exploitation, we just prefer not to see or think too much about it.0 -
It is exceedingly sexist to assume the daughters do the caring of elderly relatives. It is unfortunately also mostly true.malcolmg said:
I am sure they would have shoes nowadays.Foxy said:
Barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen. A Brexiteers dream of Empire days...another_richard said:
Its putting an opposite view to the globalist nonsense that young people should move around the world with the result they end up renting a room in Walthamstow, being exploited in a crap job and being tens of thousands in debt.SouthamObserver said:
Reading that it’s hard to see how he can be described as a leftie. Women need to stay at home to wipe their parents’ bottoms, young people should not movevfrom where they were born. It’s reactionary nonsense.AndyJS said:Lefty Giles Fraser has upset a lot of other lefties with his latest article.
https://twitter.com/giles_fraser/status/1098896087425912832
With all the profits going to the George Osbornes of the world.
PS: exceedingly sexist to assume it would be daughter's only0 -
Good header. An equal opportunity dressing down for Lab and Con. Sense that Cyclefree might be joining the ranks of the non-voters next time.
'YBarddCwsc' (bit of a struggle with that) makes some great points IMO about how parliament is to its great detriment disproportionately stuffed with privately educated white males from affluent backgrounds in the South of England who have Oxbridge degrees in something that does not involve numbers.
Tom Watson even better than my man Michael Gove, I thought, on Marr. He appears to have gained gravitas in losing weight - a great swap.0
