Possibly I still found it astounding that Tory MPs were demanding to allocate no cabinet seats to the Lib-Dems that kind of thinking is what busts coalitions and loses you support in an election.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Printable View
Possibly I still found it astounding that Tory MPs were demanding to allocate no cabinet seats to the Lib-Dems that kind of thinking is what busts coalitions and loses you support in an election.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
I know there hasn't been much discussion at all about how and when the deficit will be "managed" or "cut", do you have any idea how savage the cuts in public spending would have to be to redress the situation in less than 5 years?Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
If you think Thatcher is stigmatised now, it's bound to be worse for whoever enacts these cuts -especially if that's the only way they will reduce the deficit...
Well I reckon the Afghan war accounts for a lot of spending there is a saving straight away
This would be true, were it not for the fact that a Lib-Lab coalition was never going to happen. So basically, Clegg made a show of negotiating with Labour was just grubby politics. It was an attempt to try to strong-arm the Conservatives, and get a concession on electoral reform.Quote:
Originally Posted by alh_p
Actually, I do have an idea, and I work in education.Quote:
Originally Posted by alh_p
Realistically, tax rises at this time will depress growth in the private sector, which currently accounts for less that 50% of GDP. Tax rises will result in a further gowth of the Public Sector, which is only a short-term solution and potentially creates mores problems in a year or two.
lol, sounds like exactly the same kind of bargaining as the lib-dems attempted by courting Labour.Quote:
Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy
i agree with PVC that regardless of the necessity of the labour talks, it has made clegg look underhanded, not a good thing for a leader whose reputation depends on his 'new' politics image.
You what! Public Order Act? Police and Criminal Evidence Act? Removal of right to silence?Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
move along nothing to see here new Tory Lib government by end of week
meh. He's been an MEP for years... He's not new... And AFAIK his idea on "new politics" was a renewal and increase in cross party comisions, rather than glorying in the singlemindedness afforded by massive majorities. Speaking to all sides is very lib dem, if you ask me...Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
They let you near children!!!!? :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
he might be, along with his other fifteen activists and three thousand voters, the real opportunity of the surge vanished once people actually took a serious look at their policies.Quote:
Originally Posted by alh_p
is that a polite way of saying inconsistent and opportunistic?
LOL, collegiate was the word I had in mind :beam:Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
My money is on a Tory/LD coalition, proportional representation within the next 2 years and devolution into an English parliament after that. Any takers?
most it will be is a referendum on PR, no certainty that it will be accepted.
Well it looks like the election coverage may be at an end soon. In that case I think a roll call is due, for those spinsters who spun their party and tried to persuade us that there polices were best, despite how awful they may have been. And let's not forgot those politicos, who's indecisive conclusions meant that even now, we still have no idea what's going on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UudTo_1ifYI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-DEcMeB3r8
Brown is at the Palace and resigning as Prime Minister. Her Majesty will be inviting David Cameron to form the next government.
Yes to the first - the latter two? Not a chance.Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
Did anyone see Adam Boulton lose it on sky what a eejit
Just watched Brown's resignation speech. Fair play to the bloke.
Wow. I'm four pages behind. :dizzy2:
Does anyone think the Liberal Democrats are the real winners in this election? How can a party in the minority loose seats yet have so much power?
ID cards, removal of Doble Jeaprody, Habeus Corpus, retention of the DNA of innocents, restriction of the right to public demonstration, massive crimal databases, massive survailence of the citizenry (and yes, I know the list is replete with spelling errors).Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Still, the Conservatives have a better record, if only because they aren't prone to dicking about with our Constitution.
I'm sorry, I should have been more clear, I work in University education.Quote:
Originally Posted by alh_p
What constitution
we won't find out 'how' much power until we see which bits of the the various manifesto's have been torn up...............Quote:
Originally Posted by Vladimir
amen!Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
Brillo was on about the deficit last week. Talking to various heads he said this and it actually made my eyes water. All through Thatchers reign she took measures to reduce the deficit by 2% and that the next government will have to reduce it by more than 20% year on year. :sweatdrop:Quote:
Originally Posted by alh_p
Hang onto your hats kiddies, it's going to be a bumpy ride.
New Labour. New Britain.
Well, there we are. An extraordinary few days.
I'm rather pleased to be impressed with Prime Minister Cameron. The coalition with the Liberals is far-sighted, and the policy compromises on both sides are genuinely intelligent. The Liberals have given most ground, as they should, but the step towards an AV referendum is sensible. I'm a little sad that the rumour circulating that Osborne was to be replaced by Ken Clarke and Vince Cable as First Secretary proved unfounded, but I still think young Osborne will be Lamonted later this year.
A real coalition government, and for the first time since the war. :shocked: I hope it proves stable, as I think it gives the best hope for the serious decisions to come.
I was particularly amused by the way Labour imploded and gave Mr Clegg every reason to abandon talks. Contrary to some views expressed above, I think his approach was well-timed, putting fear into the Tories just when he needed them to get serious about sealing the deal. Good negotiating, and he would never have been able to sell the Tory deal to his own party if he hadn't explored the "progressive" option. Then Labour gave him the perfect way out - they proved not to be serious. Boom, straight back to the Tory negotiators, who jumped with joy, and to his own party he could shrug and say it was never on with Labour. Deal done.
Far from being an opportunist, I thought he proved himself a shrewd politician. He and Cameron seem to get on (as opposed to Brown's bullying phone calls) which bodes well for a partnership.
I think the country is in good hands. Now for the pain.
Oh dear. Polly Toynbee's upset. Good. :laugh4:
i agreed above that clegg probably had no option but to explore a progressive coalition before his rabid membership would accept a lib-con deal, and its not clegg acted improperly in doing so, but the cloak-and-dagger discussions with labour will give lie to the claim that clegg is all new politics, believe me, he is now firmly cemented in the political establishment in the eyes of the people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost
few things can bring such instant and unvarnished joy to me, even in the absence of the details that cause this to be true, my thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
And yet I was criticised for saying the same thing about Furunuculus' attitude to the Lib Dems. :stare:Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
Labour have become as bad as the Tories, I agree. But that's only because they have tried so hard to adopt Tory policy in this regard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
ID cards were originally a Tory wheeze. Restriction of public demonstration was entirely a Tory creation (Public Order Act). Video surveillance society was an extension of a Tory policy.
Once again, let me be clear, I hate both of them. But my loathing for the Tories is something primal. They actually disgust me.
que?Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
that is unhealthy, you need to sort that out. even i don't hate labour, i just have a mild and patronizing contempt for their philosophy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
I agree with Furunculus on this one. Parties change over time and should be judged on what they do primarily, not on what they say or heaven forbid what they said or did decades ago.
A primal loathing / hatred for a party is to me very odd, especially as has been pointed out, most fo the "loony Right" ideas have been implemented by a "Left" wing party (well, no one called Labour "liberal", did they). But then Tories have always been about local power and freedoms, whereas Labour is a Centralising Stalinist mindset verging on belief - when it doesn't work, legislate some more layers to help sort out the other twelve...
~:smoking:
That's just silly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
The Tories were in charge for most of the Troubles, including the most brutal times, but they never tried to remove historic rights, create thousands of new offences, or lock people up without a trial.
The erosion of civil liberties and the gradual march of the centralised police state has been unchecked by either party, and indeed hastened by both.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
The Tories introduced the Public Order Act of 1986 which severly curtailed the right to demonstrate. Making it obligatory to notify and get approval from the police for both the timing, size and route of any march or protest. It also criminalised gypsies and travellers and broke up previously permitted convoys/gatherings of those people - mainly because the Tories didn't like them - being all scruffy and that.
And then later the Criminal Justic and Public Order Act of 1994 which allowed the police to break up a gathering of more than 20 people in the open, as well as curtailing the right to silence. It also criminalised a number or previously civil infractions - tresspass, protest, etc. It also gave police powers to stop gatherings where there was music consisting of 'repetitive beats' in a panicky reaction to tabloid headlines regarding raves and dance music. The act was used last year in this city to close down a family barbeque!
Family BBQ shut down by police
Yeah, we'll now find out about the state engineered famine and correctional work camps will we?Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
I think you might be right to call Labour Statist, in that they believe the state should have a larger and broader presence. Otherwise one might as well follow your example and lable the Tories Fascist and/or Nazi.
This post contains the biggest contradiction I have ever witnessed on this board. The Conservative party had as their mantra throughout the 80's that they would roll back the frontiers of the state. And yet Thatcher presided over an era which saw massive, yes massive increases in state spending, size, scope and power. Reagan in the US did the same bit of duplicity.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
Local powers and freedoms? What on earth are you talking about? Thatcher abolished various Labour held local councils including the GLC entirely for political reasons.
mervyn king agrees that the deficit needs to be chopped now, so we can have an end to stupid labour statements about taking money out of the economy, the state does not create wealth:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance...t-the-deficit/
It does if you work in the public sector. Or do the families of teachers, police, nurses and soldiers live on thin air?Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
Increases in state spending that have been dwarfed by Labour. Thatcher managed to stop the increase in the Civil Service. Since then it's ballooned. Did she manage to do enough? No. But if she took one step in one direction, Labour have been sprinting in the other.
Breaking up Labour fiefdoms - especially the GLC was hardly taking the power from the populace. Red Ken returned to be London mayor and was known for his Monarchical style.
Nazis were just as big on a massive state as Stalin was. Merely as Nazis were extreme right and Stalin extreme left doesn't mean they don't share many traits.
~:smoking:
GodwinQuote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
Idaho, I was replying to the above. Odd you chose to highlight me though...Quote:
Originally Posted by alh_p
~:smoking:
hold on a minute, i forgot for a second that our problems are an economy stalled by excessive public spending and a financial market precariously unable to finance its own massive deficit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
if the public sector is too large then it must get chopped. you cannot magic money into existence to pay for more doctors and teachers than you can afford, much as labour has tried.
as usual labour bequeaths a train-wreck of an economy to their successors, and as usual the tory's will get the opprobrium of having to fix it. business as usual.
seeing as brown just left office it seems relevant to recall his words on entering the treasury in 1997 on being informed by a civil servant that the tory's had left him an economy in sterling condition; "what do you want me to do, send them a F$&%&$& thank you note?"
if only Osbourne could be so glib!
True, I pulled the Godwin, but it was in response to you bandying "Stalinist" around with the same level of consideration as the usual lesser-spotted Godwin, often seen grazing in these forums.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
But a large chunk of the money for teachers and doctors comes back as tax, and is less money to be paid in benefits. And those employed people then spend that wealth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
Compare that to the owners of big businesses who are non-dom so pay no tax.
hmmm, ten thousand non-doms running ten thousand successful companies that create tens of billions in tax revenue, vs hundreds of thousands of unaffordable public sector jobs who consume (and recycle a small proportion of) the tax revenue from the private sector.
easy choice, we live beyond our means, cut public spending.
the fixation on 'privilege' is beside the point, and utterly ignores reality.
How about as Non-Doms pay no tax they renounce rights to anything tax pays for, it is only fair. :wacko:Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
how about we reduce punitive top-level taxes that encourage top-earners in the private sector from becoming non-doms.
FACT: the top one percent of earners generated a greater tax income for the exchequer when the top-rate of taxation was abolished under thatcher.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
There are jobs that doctors can do outside of the Public Sector! Teachers too! :idea:
You act like these are Endangered Species who need to be protected by handouts of money. No - they are trained professionals and can work elsewhere. For example, I now do the majority of my work for the Pharmaceutical Industry, and my wife works in a Private hospital. Our taxes still go to the government and little / no money comes from it.
I have friends who a Doctors who are Investment bankers, Hedge Fund Managers, Private Equity Anlysts and now many colleagues working in similar ways to what I do.
allah_p, I take your point. Statist would have been a more accurate and less emotive term to use :bow:
~:smoking:
Yeah - they really do add wealth to.. er.. themselves :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
Except for the post-war Labour government. They turned the country round from being utterly bankrupt, to fuelling the 1950's boom in just 6 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
So, Civil servants are fine and great - even when being paid over £100k (head of the BBC rakes in closer to £800k). Because let's not forget all the taxes they pay (and forget about the unfunded pensions...)Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Leave for Industry / consulting / banking: Eeeeevil b*stards, only enriching themselves... Paying the same taxes, and often earning less than senior Civil servants...
Do you read before posting?
Managing to get a boom after a war is shooting fish in a barrel. Germany managed that, after being bombed flat, millions of refugees and partitioned!
~:smoking:
I haven't been following this election. So, do you or do you not have a new King/Queen? :7queen:
:laugh4:
Do you leave Afghanistan? If so, when?
No, no new queen yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregoshi
These people never have to work a day in their life, they don't know stress, nor want, nor sweat. So they all live to well within their nineties.
lol, the queen and phil work harder, every single day, for more days of the year, than you or I ever will.Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
To be fair, I think the "Stalinist" comment was more to do with the Labour method of centralised numbers-led organisation. I'm afraid that form of planning is correct;ly labelised "Stalinist" in a technical sense, irrc, Labour even goes so far as to have, "five year plans".Quote:
Originally Posted by alh_p
I don't think Rory actually intended to go as far as to suggest that Labour is the Politburo of Communist Russia.
And what did they use for that? massive loans from America, that we only paid off a few years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
the full text of the coalition agreement:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...agreement.html
Good question. Both parties supported intervention in Afghanistan and the new PM previously said that he won't "cut and run". Clegg had strategy concerns but appears to back the mission if it's done "right". So the troops are probably there to stay for a while longer.Quote:
Originally Posted by KukriKhan
How does the new coalition EU policy stack up against cameron's six pledges:
Good
We agree that the British Government will be a positive participant in the European Union, playing a strong and positive role with our partners, with the goal of ensuring that all the nations of Europe are equipped to face the challenges of the 21st century: global competitiveness, global warming and global poverty.
6) Repatriation of control over social and employment legislation
We agree that there should be no further transfer of sovereignty or powers over the course of the next Parliament. We will examine the balance of the EU’s existing competences and will, in particular, work to limit the application of the Working Time Directive in the United Kingdom.
1) The referendum lock
3) A guaranteed say for MP’s if Ministers want the EU to extend its powers
We agree that we will amend the 1972 European Communities Act so that any proposed future Treaty that transferred areas of power, or competences, would be subject to a referendum on that Treaty – a ‘referendum lock’. We will amend the 1972 European Communities Act so that the use of any passerelle would require primary legislation.
2) A United Kingdom sovereignty bill
We will examine the case for a United Kingdom Sovereignty Bill to make it clear that ultimate authority remains with Parliament.
Good
We agree that Britain will not join or prepare to join the Euro in this Parliament.
Nice waffle
We agree that we will strongly defend the UK’s national interests in the forthcoming EU budget negotiations and that the EU budget should only focus on those areas where the EU can add value.
Who cares, feel good stuff
We agree that we will press for the European Parliament only to have one seat, in Brussels.
5) Return of powers over criminal justice
We agree that we will approach forthcoming legislation in the area of criminal justice on a case by case basis, with a view to maximising our country’s security, protecting Britain’s civil liberties and preserving the integrity of our criminal justice system. Britain will not participate in the establishment of any European Public Prosecutor.
-----------------------------------------------------
4) Opt out from the charter of fundamental rights
Only one casualty that i can see.
conclusion
I'm reasonably happy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
Especially as we spend the days typing away on t'internet...Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
quite. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by alh_p
That's good news. That'll give my guys breathing room to find some other-than-humiliating way out of there.Quote:
Originally Posted by therother
On behalf of the US public: thanks for your continued support, above and beyond The Call. The rest of you guys (nations) too. :bow:
That's very kind, lets hope y'all don't drag us off anywhere else...Quote:
Originally Posted by KukriKhan
From your lips (or... typewriting fingertips) to God's ear.Quote:
Originally Posted by alh_p
anyone know who got europe minister?
I'm crossing my fingers it's a Lib-Dem.
Things which annoyed me today:
Lib Dems complaining that they have seats in government. Most people would be ecstatic. As for the argument that they should of formed a "rainbow alliance" (lol, Alex Salmond) it wasn't really plausible and plus this way, shouldn't the lib dems see it as a chance to dilute some of the more right-wing Conservative policies? I may never understand how certain liberals and left thinkers can allow tribalistic political views and their hate for the "nasty party" to obscure the fact that the lib dems have got a strong deal and their leadership knows it. I'm not saying it's just a symptom of progressives, but any lib Dem which turns in their membership over such a deal is a hypocrite. It means they don't really want consensus government, just consensus government where the centre-right parties are excluded.
My guess would be that they would give that to a moderately pro-EU Tory.Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
I don't get this bit:
Either the parliaments are fixed term or they aren't. A majority party could just get the whip behind a government led motion to dissolve the house and have an election :confused:Quote:
Following this motion, legislation will be brought forward to make provision for fixed term parliaments of five years. This legislation will also provide for dissolution if 55% or more of the House votes in favour.
It would make sense with a coalition (sytem).Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Imagine, for example, the current parliament but LibDem having 100 seats. Con + LibDem and Lab + LibDem would each have over 55%.
is it not announced yet?Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
Maybe we could return the favor. I've always wanted to visit South America.Quote:
Originally Posted by alh_p
There is a full list here - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politi...10/8675705.stmQuote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
No European Minister on it.
Quite, reading over the financial part of the agreement, it looks like a plan to cut hard whilst protecting the most vulnerable. Generally speaking, both parties have taken the best and most sensible parts of their manifesto's and merged them, rather than just bolting bits together.Quote:
Originally Posted by tibilicus
The Liberals have got a good deal, so have the Conservatives, and (I hope) has the country.
At least thus far things look very promising.
hmmm, not announced yet, suspicious, i sense a lib-dem in the force.................Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
Or just no minister, Cameron said he was going to significantly reduce the size of the cabinet. Europe is a good candidate to be axed, because it will be devisive either way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
Interesting coalition.
If everything works well, you'll end up with a more conservative slate of economic policies and a sober foreign policy with an emphasis on the UK and not the EU, but all of this will be tempered by an integrated "conscience" that pushes for individual liberties and restrains economic reform etc. that is too sweeping in its effect.
If everything doesn't work out, you'll end up with a wishy-washy essay in paralysis that does everything it can to perpetuate itself with only tangential regard for the UK voter.
I hope you folks end up with the former.
Owen Paterson got the North ha ha ha poor fella he must have annoyed someone
that would be an awesome result, really hadn't seriously considered that, put europe back where it belongs; under the aegis of the FCO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
it could be quite cool, and given that the Guv'nor reckons the coming cuts will be so nasty as to keep the instigating party out of power for a generation, why not share that pain with the 'nice' party and show them what realpolitik is all about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
More than that... if this comes off New Labour will look like the darkest and most incompetant government of the 20th Century, in Brtiatian at least.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
Good news for them, New Labour was only the worse. They should have experienced Thatcher.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla