Any chance we could get Dan Hannan to run for U.S. Senate next year?

**Furunculus** · 03-26-2009, 10:22

the rejection of regional government was three fold:
> it would just be another layer of government. (already have local and national, neither of which would change)
> it wouldn't result in any meaningful addition to the prinicple of localism. (regional gov't does nothing to put more power in those hands who can usefully wield it, i.e. local MP's
> it was an artificial construct. (there was no connection to a regional representative, he didn't belong to your county, and cared nothing for your town).

I opposed labours regional Gov't, it was a terrible idea, but that does nothing to devalue properly implemented localism.

**Pannonian** · 03-26-2009, 10:25

Originally Posted by Furunculus

the rejection of regional government was three fold:
> it would just be another layer of government. (already have local and national, neither of which would change)
> it wouldn't result in any meaningful addition to the prinicple of localism. (regional gov't does nothing to put more power in those hands who can usefully wield it, i.e. local MP's
> it was an artificial construct. (there was no connection to a regional representative, he didn't belong to your county, and cared nothing for your town).

I opposed labours regional Gov't, it was a terrible idea, but that does nothing to devalue properly implemented localism.

So what would properly implemented localism be?

**Furunculus** · 03-26-2009, 11:35

devolve power from central government and quangos to local government and town halls, not create an artificial middle layer than has no national or local acceptance and little power to achieve anything.

this would include a greater proportion of local spending paid for by local taxation and allocatable according to local priorities.
it would also include elected police chiefs as one example of gov't services under local control.

wales has already demonstrated that it is possible to reabsorb the functions of quangos back into democratically accountable gov't.

does it create the possibility of a BNP member being elected as police commisioner? yes it does.
but have a little faith, this is britain not albania, and the commisioner would still have to act in accordance to the laws of the land.

it may not appeal to you, in which case i'd recommend you brace yourself, because a good deal of it is going to happen in the next five years.

**Fragony** · 03-26-2009, 11:43

It would be bad for the UK to lose their politician. Not that the british press is allowed to talk to him anyway, he's better of in a country.

**InsaneApache** · 03-26-2009, 13:00

Well he slapped down the Great Leader there didn't he?

Labour are going to be wiped out come the next election. They'll be lucky to get 100 seats. It's just like 1978 all over again. Unfortunatley this time it looks as though their core supporters will probably vote BNP not Tory.

Every single labour administration has left the country in a more parlous state than when they found it. Every single labour administration has been ejected from office with unemployment higher than when in entered office.

Havn't a clue. Couldn't run a bath. Hapless, hopeless and deluded.

@ Don I think we'll keep him and send George Galloway instead. Obama will love him.

**Fragony** · 03-26-2009, 13:15

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

Labour are going to be wiped out come the next election. They'll be lucky to get 100 seats. It's just like 1978 all over again. Unfortunatley this time it looks as though their core supporters will probably vote BNP not Tory.

Same here, but it would be a shame if they go to BNP scum (yes I once said that I would vote BNP if I was british, a look on their website cured me forever). The UK needs a populist rightwing movement like our flaming mozart, the 'decent' right. My boy is going strong.

**LittleGrizzly** · 03-26-2009, 13:23

(yes I once said that I would vote BNP if I was british, a look on their website cured me forever).

Good! the BNP are scum... pure and simple!

I think the labour only having 100 seats is way out from what it will be... personally i don't see them finishing with less than 200... still of course a major loss but that would be a lowest estimate...

I don't think the BNP will make paticularly huge gains... the sun and the daily mail will probably help whip them up a bit but with a bit of time since the terrorist attacks i don't feel many will fall for thier crap...

**Pannonian** · 03-26-2009, 13:35

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

Well he slapped down the Great Leader there didn't he?

Labour are going to be wiped out come the next election. They'll be lucky to get 100 seats. It's just like 1978 all over again. Unfortunatley this time it looks as though their core supporters will probably vote BNP not Tory.

Every single labour administration has left the country in a more parlous state than when they found it. Every single labour administration has been ejected from office with unemployment higher than when in entered office.

Isn't it a bit harsh to assess from a historical viewpoint the endpoint of the Labour government? What happened between 1997-2005? Also, as the economy is overwhelmingly the most important factor in any election, wouldn't it be almost inevitable that the final days of any government would be economically shaky? The Major government might be an exception, but in his case the downturn took place through most of his administration, with the upturn happening right at the end - I doubt his government would have fallen had it been like 1997 all the way through.

Originally Posted by Fragony

Same here, but it would be a shame if they go to BNP scum (yes I once said that I would vote BNP if I was british, a look on their website cured me forever). The UK needs a populist rightwing movement like our flaming mozart, the 'decent' right. My boy is going strong.

The old style Tories and socialists are dead. All that is left is different flavours of Thatcherism, which is the accepted wisdom. However, Britain isn't yet ready to fully buy into liberalism, so there are still scraps of wanting to invest in government services, with the NHS being the most sacred of the cows. The defining feature of Brown's administration is the increase in data gathering, because he doesn't trust the government departments to efficiently spend their allocated money. Which I don't really blame him for, as they are indeed wasteful, but it does increase bureaucracy and its expenditure while also stressing out civil servants and decreasing their efficiency. I suppose the boon of the Brown government is that we'll have a better idea than ever of how government effs up, so we can avoid these mistakes in the future.

**InsaneApache** · 03-26-2009, 13:47

What happened between 1997-2005?

We're paying the price for it now.

**Seamus Fermanagh** · 03-26-2009, 14:14

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

Well he slapped down the Great Leader there didn't he?

Labour are going to be wiped out come the next election. They'll be lucky to get 100 seats. It's just like 1978 all over again. Unfortunatley this time it looks as though their core supporters will probably vote BNP not Tory.

Every single labour administration has left the country in a more parlous state than when they found it. Every single labour administration has been ejected from office with unemployment higher than when in entered office.

Havn't a clue. Couldn't run a bath. Hapless, hopeless and deluded.

@ Don I think we'll keep him and send George Galloway instead. Obama will love him.

While I know it was not at all your intent, the conotations of the original term are sexist. I have attempted to replace the term in as minimally changed a fashion as possible. SF

**LittleGrizzly** · 03-26-2009, 15:23

My youngest lad and his family live in a council house. It's a rough estate too. Talking with him and some of his friends is alarming. Not one is prepared to vote Labour. All of them have done in the past. Guess who they intend to vote for? Something I'm hearing more and more these days. Something I never heard twenty years ago. That's the Blair legacy.

I hear the lets vote BNP from quite a few young people... fortunately these are usually the people who don't bother to register to vote and haven't usually got the intelligence to convince anyone with half a brain..

The trouble with personal experience is it tends to limit you to seperate regions with different reactions to labour... my labour mp actually made gains in his majority last election!! when nationally theres was a decent percentage swing away from labour... so my experiences are probably not the usual but im sure you would find a fair few labour voters round my area... i fully expect him to be re-elected next election..

I think the main thing holding the BNP back from the gains you expect is the lazyness of thier voters, i know several people who come up with the lets vote BNP line and im pretty sure not one of them is registered to vote..

Something I'm hearing more and more these days. Something I never heard twenty years ago. That's the Blair legacy.

I agree somewhat... but probably for different reasons than you...

Labours shift to the centre ground (though we should give Kinnock a share of the credit/blame for this as well) caused alot of people who want left wing governance to be annoyed and looking for an alternative... i personally went for the lib dems but for some people the alternative was BNP

The iraq war... a much disliked war... especially among the leftys who voted for labour... again LD is the better alternative if you didn't like the war but some choose BNP instead

The terrorist attacks... obviously if you have an anti muslim agenda and a muslim does something bad it is a boost to your agenda....

Spin and general dislike of politicians... im not sure about the spin but i have been told that labour do it far more than previous goverments, this and the corruption always associated with politicians make people look for something different... BNP are radically different to regular politicians and so appeal to people...

Their potential voters aren't, better wise up

I would happily call a percentage of thier vote scum... thinking on it i think you could group bnp voters under the headings scum and idiot... but as i have said in the past... thier policys don't nessecarily reflect all of thier voters desires...

For example protest votes and the like...