Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: not on facebook on September 12, 2017, 01:52:11 am
-
I don't get it corbyn orders his Labour members all to vote one way as in against the Tory party objective on the brexit effort .
But 7 Labour Party members vote in favour of Tory wishes and a majority of 36 helps the Torys no end.
-
:aok: Maybe playing him at his own game, do as your leader did!
-
I don't have a leader as they are all as bad as each other ,but after saying that that Caroline flint for don valley Labour seems to shoot from the hip and is well worth her salt.
She seems to bring something different to the table with her and don't seem like the rest at the moment.
Take out Abbott and replace that talking car crash with flint and Labour look much much better but far from perfect.
-
They'd have had a majority regardless. Frank Field is that far to the right of the party he's a Tory in all but name anyway and Dennis Skinner has always hated the EU from what I can tell.
-
They'd have had a majority regardless. Frank Field is that far to the right of the party he's a Tory in all but name anyway and Dennis Skinner has always hated the EU from what I can tell.
Most people up north voted for brexit in the big vote ,but when the Labour Party members went to vote yesterday the Labour Party order them to vote against what their constinuancys voted for .
7 Labour voted in line with the Tory wish yesterday and I guess within line of the community's they repesent who all voted for brexit .
Mrs Clint abstanined from the vote .
I can't see all 7 Labour mps been far right minded can I ?
It's the fact that corbyn barked down to all Labour mps to vote a certain way ,when from where Iam looking it goes against what many Labour community's had voted for .
-
MPs are voted to represent their constituents according to their own and the party they stand fors viewpoint, not act as their constituents' puppet.
-
If MP's fail to represent their constituents by going against what they want you can bet your starboard knacker they won't be re-elected.
-
They'd have had a majority regardless. Frank Field is that far to the right of the party he's a Tory in all but name anyway and Dennis Skinner has always hated the EU from what I can tell.
Most people up north voted for brexit in the big vote ,but when the Labour Party members went to vote yesterday the Labour Party order them to vote against what their constinuancys voted for .
7 Labour voted in line with the Tory wish yesterday and I guess within line of the community's they repesent who all voted for brexit .
Mrs Clint abstanined from the vote .
I can't see all 7 Labour mps been far right minded can I ?
It's the fact that corbyn barked down to all Labour mps to vote a certain way ,when from where Iam looking it goes against what many Labour community's had voted for .
You say "barked down" as if he's the only party leader that's ever imposed a strong whip on a vote...
-
If MP's fail to represent their constituents by going against what they want you can bet your starboard knacker they won't be re-elected.
Of course the electorate can vote them out if they want, that's how the system works.
However, you cannot transpose the result of a referendum onto individual MPs votes in the Commons. If you did, how would you work out which MPs should vote to represent the 48% of the electorate who voted to remain...or do you think they shouldn't have any representation at all in the Commons?
-
They'd have had a majority regardless. Frank Field is that far to the right of the party he's a Tory in all but name anyway and Dennis Skinner has always hated the EU from what I can tell.
Most people up north voted for brexit in the big vote ,but when the Labour Party members went to vote yesterday the Labour Party order them to vote against what their constinuancys voted for .
7 Labour voted in line with the Tory wish yesterday and I guess within line of the community's they repesent who all voted for brexit .
Mrs Clint abstanined from the vote .
I can't see all 7 Labour mps been far right minded can I ?
It's the fact that corbyn barked down to all Labour mps to vote a certain way ,when from where Iam looking it goes against what many Labour community's had voted for .
With all due respect that's because you don't understand the vote.
Corbyn's opposition was due to the fact that the conservatives want more power, which would allow them to make decisions without consulting parliament. Not because he didn't want Brexit.
The last time a western government had that type of free for all bestowed upon them was literally Germany right before Hitler's kicked off for the second time.
So now because Corbyn has been voted down the tories can remove all your workers rights. Stupid Corbyn hey!!
-
If MP's fail to represent their constituents by going against what they want you can bet your starboard knacker they won't be re-elected.
Of course the electorate can vote them out if they want, that's how the system works.
However, you cannot transpose the result of a referendum onto individual MPs votes in the Commons. If you did, how would you work out which MPs should vote to represent the 48% of the electorate who voted to remain...or do you think they shouldn't have any representation at all in the Commons?
MP's can do what they like, but If they fail to represent their constituents by going against what they want you can bet your starboard knacker they won't be re-elected.
-
I don't get it corbyn orders his Labour members all to vote one way as in against the Tory party objective on the brexit effort .
But 7 Labour Party members vote in favour of Tory wishes and a majority of 36 helps the Torys no end.
Maybe it's because they know Corbyn is a bell end??
-
I don't get it corbyn orders his Labour members all to vote one way as in against the Tory party objective on the brexit effort .
But 7 Labour Party members vote in favour of Tory wishes and a majority of 36 helps the Torys no end.
Maybe it's because they know Corbyn is a bell end??
Even thou corbyn is not my cup of tea by some distance ,but not quite a country mile he seems to have some qualitys as he still the Labour leader and did quite well in last general elections.
Not heard owt from his side kick abbot for sometime and the sooner he ditches her the better in my book.
-
I don't get it corbyn orders his Labour members all to vote one way as in against the Tory party objective on the brexit effort .
But 7 Labour Party members vote in favour of Tory wishes and a majority of 36 helps the Torys no end.
Maybe it's because they know Corbyn is a bell end??
Is that what the daily mail
Told you or have you got your own views as to why you think he might be a bell end. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.
-
Yet again you talk rubbish nof .The cities of LEEDS and YORK and the town of HARROGATE all voted overwhelmingly to remain = that's just in my area.
-
Yet again you talk rubbish nof .The cities of LEEDS and YORK and the town of HARROGATE all voted overwhelmingly to remain = that's just in my area.
Truck me the odd eyed mad science professor has some bbbbbbbb's in his bonet .
I quote the lead singer of stone roses ' get your bees out ,get your bees out '
-
You got the right number of b's in bonnet. Shame about the n's you imbecile !
-
By the way there are no Stone Roses lyrics 'Get your bees out !
-
Jeff don't go down this road as there is only one winner on this aspect of Ian brown > stone roses and bees or b's fella.
If you need a pointer think Amsterdam or was it Rotterdam,whichever the bees / b's were comming out.
-
Yet again you talk rubbish nof .The cities of LEEDS and YORK and the town of HARROGATE all voted overwhelmingly to remain = that's just in my area.
You've forgotten those little town up Norf called Manchester, Liverpool, Newcastle, . Then there were Leicester, Brighton, Cardiff, Belfast all the Scottish cities and of course our capital city as well as Gibraltar - all snided with filthy Europeans. Biggest votes against were either areas that had few if any immigrants or seasonal fruit and vegetable pickers " stealing " jobs within a country with the lowest unemployment rate for 50 years . Bizarre isn't it ?
Fact is the places where most of the immigrants have made their home voted to Remain and strangely enough those that had the lion's share of EU Development funds to help them out of the stranglehold that we have all complained about voted fecking Leave.
Estimates are that Doncaster alone received over £ 900 million of EU Development funding . Square that one then because I can't- it wasn't the EU that took away the mining and steel industries from South Yorkshire was it ? As for Europeans we have ALWAYS had Polish living in the Don Valley they helped us get back on our feet post WW11 , since they worked the mines, flew the hurricanes and spitfires during the Battle of Britain etc.
If you think for one minute that the North / South divide will worry the people of London and the Home Counties post Brexit .......it won't. It will be back to business as usual .
However you've got your Parliamentary sovereignty back with cherries on top only now 30-40 Tories will make every decision for you - forget Parliament for it is the " will of the people " to give most if not ALL the power in the land to a few stinking millionaires and STILL some don't realise what is happening !
-
Where was the 900 million quid+ spent in Doncaster?
-
Where was the 900 million quid+ spent in Doncaster?
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/how-1billion-of-eu-money-has-benefited-south-yorkshire-1-7383999&ved=0ahUKEwiu842ahKzWAhXrLsAKHVuiCmkQFghDMAI&usg=AFQjCNHZfoCj9CgK1lyXZYDRP0Lrs5FjaQ
Apologies it was South Yorkshire but has the place improved over the last 40 years - yes in spades but I'm not fighting this all out again it's gone just like the power in my last paragraph. You/ me / we have been taken for suckered and soon the Boundary Commission will take that elusive Labour Electoral win even further away .
-
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.doncaster.gov.uk/services/transport-streets-parking/transport-schemes-and-projects&ved=0ahUKEwiu842ahKzWAhXrLsAKHVuiCmkQFghRMAQ&usg=AFQjCNG1TsAUwCmNHNBo2wUhZEk3zughmw
-
Little one's everywhere too , here recently in Thorne just off the MI8 . There are many more throughout the Borough.
Check this site out too Bentley and note dates :-
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/revealed-
-
Sorry blocking me from pasting ....you will be amazed
-
Bentley where are you .........................?
-
What do you want me to comment on Hoola? You pointed out that you're 'not fighting this all out again', so I respected your decision!
-
Yet again you talk rubbish nof .The cities of LEEDS and YORK and the town of HARROGATE all voted overwhelmingly to remain = that's just in my area.
No the whole of the United Kingdom voted by a majority leave! there was not individual votes for different cities or countries within the UK
-
Brexit is not all about money while immigration is good in many ways for this country in other ways it's not, many immigrants have no intention of ever intergrating, so many places you go to now in England it's the same streets of immigrants, maybe it's time to stop putting different nationalities in the same street where possible and try a different approach, if different nationalities lived on the same street they might even talk to each other and get on? Or maybe not!
-
What is Labour's policy on Brexit because he cant seem to figure out what it is..One minute its staying in the single market the next it isn't...It seems to depend on which shadow minister is speaking at the time and frankly what day it is...You can argue which area voted what,it's immaterial the fact is collectively we voted out...And I for one am glad Labour are not involved in the negotiations as I suspect are they...
-
What is Labour's policy on Brexit because he cant seem to figure out what it is..One minute its staying in the single market the next it isn't...It seems to depend on which shadow minister is speaking at the time and frankly what day it is...You can argue which area voted what,it's immaterial the fact is collectively we voted out...And I for one am glad Labour are not involved in the negotiations as I suspect are they...
Sounds just like the Tories, in fact. And they are involved in the negotiations.
-
Bpool since the beginning of time groups of immigrants have lived in close proximity to their fellow countrymen in much the same way as many of our people living in Spain, France , Italy do so today .
However as they eventually integrate they split up and integrate and generally become more nationalistic than the general population.
Many of them are anti immigration too ( they become like ex- smokers about smoking) . Speak to 2nd generation Afro- Caribbeans, Indians , Pakistanis and they are generally conservative and fiercely loyal to the Crown and country.
It has been the pace of immigration and the reluctance of successive governments to ensure that adequate infrastructure to society is there to accommodate them that brings about the problems. They are blamed for lack of houses , hospital beds, school places when indeed their taxes over the last 40 + years more than paid for those to be fully in place.
They are/ were always a convenient target to blame when the austerity packages hit the Public Services. They did not cause the banking crisis, they did not cause tax avoidance. Also they did not affect the controls on immigration that successive Governments have had at their disposal - and rarely if ever used .
Some on here are still pointing the finger at the working immigrants in this country when 1) you know they have a positive financial impact on the nation's finances 2) you know that there were controls on the numbers coming here in EU regulations but rarely used 3 ) they don't take the jobs of Brits or have a negligible affect on the wages of jobs in that category.
N. B . Our Unemployment rate is currently the lowest it has been for decades !
I say that given those facts anyone yes anyone on here that still wants to blame immigrants from a) being here b) using our/their services c) living in close knit groups is either wittingly or unwittingly being a Racist .
I hope some of you will think this through and realise that successive Governments have used them and the EU as convenient scapegoats to cover up for their own failings , banking crises, maladministration, planning, skimming etc . Moreover they have made sure that the blame sat elsewhere and in league with an ever- willing press brought about a society that has become the most xenophobic and über- nationalistic than at any time in my life .
Please some of you think it through, check the facts because like the £ 350 million a week to the NHS blatant lie - other information and deliberate misconceptions will prove to be false and deliberately misleading.
Now instead of dealing with our " supposed " immigration problems quietly and responsibly within EU law we now have chosen to de-regulate thus damaging protections at work, in the quality of goods we buy, the jobs we will lose and the inflation we will all feel the effects of gradually whether Brits here or abroad we will also ALL suffer adversely from the weakness in the £ .
It certainly doesn't look like " taking back control " to me . More like out of control !!
-
What is Labour's policy on Brexit because he cant seem to figure out what it is..One minute its staying in the single market the next it isn't...It seems to depend on which shadow minister is speaking at the time and frankly what day it is...You can argue which area voted what,it's immaterial the fact is collectively we voted out...And I for one am glad Labour are not involved in the negotiations as I suspect are they...
Sounds just like the Tories, in fact. And they are involved in the negotiations.
Exactly Glyn this is like entrusting your house to an arsonist for the weekend as you merrily go on your way.
Both sides SHOULD have a position it's simply not good enough for HM Opposition to sit happily on it' s hands waiting for a Government that is at odds with itself quietly pissing the country down a cliff face to call an election.
-
Bpool since the beginning of time groups of immigrants have lived in close proximity to their fellow countrymen in much the same way as many of our people living in Spain, France , Italy do so today .
However as they eventually integrate they split up and integrate and generally become more nationalistic than the general population.
Many of them are anti immigration too ( they become like ex- smokers about smoking) . Speak to 2nd generation Afro- Caribbeans, Indians , Pakistanis and they are generally conservative and fiercely loyal to the Crown and country.
It has been the pace of immigration and the reluctance of successive governments to ensure that adequate infrastructure to society is there to accommodate them that brings about the problems. They are blamed for lack of houses , hospital beds, school places when indeed their taxes over the last 40 + years more than paid for those to be fully in place.
They are/ were always a convenient target to blame when the austerity packages hit the Public Services. They did not cause the banking crisis, they did not cause tax avoidance. Also they did not affect the controls on immigration that successive Governments have had at their disposal - and rarely if ever used .
Some on here are still pointing the finger at the working immigrants in this country when 1) you know they have a positive financial impact on the nation's finances 2) you know that there were controls on the numbers coming here in EU regulations but rarely used 3 ) they don't take the jobs of Brits or have a negligible affect on the wages of jobs in that category.
N. B . Our Unemployment rate is currently the lowest it has been for decades !
I say that given those facts anyone yes anyone on here that still wants to blame immigrants from a) being here b) using our/their services c) living in close knit groups is either wittingly or unwittingly being a Racist .
I hope some of you will think this through and realise that successive Governments have used them and the EU as convenient scapegoats to cover up for their own failings , banking crises, maladministration, planning, skimming etc . Moreover they have made sure that the blame sat elsewhere and in league with an ever- willing press brought about a society that has become the most xenophobic and über- nationalistic than at any time in my life .
Please some of you think it through, check the facts because like the £ 350 million a week to the NHS blatant lie - other information and deliberate misconceptions will prove to be false and deliberately misleading.
Now instead of dealing with our " supposed " immigration problems quietly and responsibly within EU law we now have chosen to de-regulate thus damaging protections at work, in the quality of goods we buy, the jobs we will lose and the inflation we will all feel the effects of gradually whether Brits here or abroad we will also ALL suffer adversely from the weakness in the £ .
It certainly doesn't look like " taking back control " to me . More like out of control !!
Post of the century that Hoola.
-
Bpool since the beginning of time groups of immigrants have lived in close proximity to their fellow countrymen in much the same way as many of our people living in Spain, France , Italy do so today .
However as they eventually integrate they split up and integrate and generally become more nationalistic than the general population.
Many of them are anti immigration too ( they become like ex- smokers about smoking) . Speak to 2nd generation Afro- Caribbeans, Indians , Pakistanis and they are generally conservative and fiercely loyal to the Crown and country.
It has been the pace of immigration and the reluctance of successive governments to ensure that adequate infrastructure to society is there to accommodate them that brings about the problems. They are blamed for lack of houses , hospital beds, school places when indeed their taxes over the last 40 + years more than paid for those to be fully in place.
They are/ were always a convenient target to blame when the austerity packages hit the Public Services. They did not cause the banking crisis, they did not cause tax avoidance. Also they did not affect the controls on immigration that successive Governments have had at their disposal - and rarely if ever used .
Some on here are still pointing the finger at the working immigrants in this country when 1) you know they have a positive financial impact on the nation's finances 2) you know that there were controls on the numbers coming here in EU regulations but rarely used 3 ) they don't take the jobs of Brits or have a negligible affect on the wages of jobs in that category.
N. B . Our Unemployment rate is currently the lowest it has been for decades !
I say that given those facts anyone yes anyone on here that still wants to blame immigrants from a) being here b) using our/their services c) living in close knit groups is either wittingly or unwittingly being a Racist .
I hope some of you will think this through and realise that successive Governments have used them and the EU as convenient scapegoats to cover up for their own failings , banking crises, maladministration, planning, skimming etc . Moreover they have made sure that the blame sat elsewhere and in league with an ever- willing press brought about a society that has become the most xenophobic and über- nationalistic than at any time in my life .
Please some of you think it through, check the facts because like the £ 350 million a week to the NHS blatant lie - other information and deliberate misconceptions will prove to be false and deliberately misleading.
Now instead of dealing with our " supposed " immigration problems quietly and responsibly within EU law we now have chosen to de-regulate thus damaging protections at work, in the quality of goods we buy, the jobs we will lose and the inflation we will all feel the effects of gradually whether Brits here or abroad we will also ALL suffer adversely from the weakness in the £ .
It certainly doesn't look like " taking back control " to me . More like out of control !!
Post of the century that Hoola.
Seconded..
-
Probably the most sensible politics based post ever on here.
Puts some of our experts to shame.
-
Personally I voted to leave and it didn't have one jot to do with immigration...It was purely from a business point of view,i don't believe it will cost jobs but create them..i'm tired of playing on a unfair disadvantage with our European neighbours..It's destroyed our industry's especially the Steel industry..I'm tired of losing work to Countries in the European union because on one hand they pay there employee's peanuts, while on the other our own contributions to the the EU allow them to be subsidised... to take our own industry of us!!!!...In the meantime people over here want more money ,more rights and to stay in the EU..They want it all ways over and it's crushing us..
-
Probably the most sensible politics based post ever on here.
Puts some of our experts to shame.
Blows me out of the water does that week though got post ,but you can bet that some of the heavyweights on here will be trying to pick whatever faults they can dig up with it.
It's human nature
-
I agree with it 100%.
-
Personally I voted to leave and it didn't have one jot to do with immigration...It was purely from a business point of view,i don't believe it will cost jobs but create them..i'm tired of playing on a unfair disadvantage with our European neighbours..It's destroyed our industry's especially the Steel industry..I'm tired of losing work to Countries in the European union because on one hand they pay there employee's peanuts, while on the other our own contributions to the the EU allow them to be subsidised... to take our own industry of us!!!!...In the meantime people over here want more money ,more rights and to stay in the EU..They want it all ways over and it's crushing us..
Sorry Wing Co I am genuinely confused by this. Would you mind giving us a bit more detail on how the EU has destroyed the British Steel industry? Who are those countries who pay peanuts who have benefitted? Germany, France, Italy, Holland, they all seem to have large steel industries?
I am old enough to remember the 1970's, when BS employed over 250 000 people (many in my family). I also remember Thatcher and McGregor closing Shotton, Corby, Normanby Park and others so that by 1981 it was down to 88 000. Then after privatisation they closed Rotherham and Ravenscraig so that by 1997 it was down to 28 000. When Tata took over in 2007 it was 23 000.
So how was this the fault of the EU and not Tory government policies?
-
I am a bit bemused by the promise to buy out all of the PFI schemes as it will somehow save the NHS etc money, these schemes were a product of the last Labour Government and anyone could see they were a bad deal,a bit like the days when you could buy aMotor bike from Cusssies at 25% yearly interest.
Apparently the Govt will borrow £50 billion on the Chucky to buy out these schemes somehow thereby saving money? Now when they borrow the money plus £50 billion for Student loans ,plus £50 billion to re privatise the Rail net work it's gonna solve all of our problems!
Reminds me of that film 'Viva Zapata' when he tries to solve his money problems by printing billions of Pesos. More 'Quantative easing' perchance?
-
I thought the idea with the PFI buyback is that the government would purchase them with government bonds - so they wont be borrowing anything but would be saving £3b a year interest for the next 30 years?
-
How does that work Wilts?
-
The problem is hoola many are not intergratting and have no intention of it, many town are unrecognizable to what they were and in many cases not for the best, look at many towns in east lancashire it's completely split into half a town of Asian and half white and none of very few will ever talk to the other race
-
I take it you have never visited " gated " ex- pat communities of ours in the Algarve or the many inhabited areas in Spain . Most Brits don't utter a word of Portuguese / Spanish rarely if ever integrate . My uncle had a place in the Mercia district of Spain for 15 years ; like many others they didn't and still don't mix, expect everyone to speak English and rarely get much further than counting from uno to cinco. I note that you made a point of splitting towns into half white / half Asian.
Whenever this comes up its not the Polish community in Wheatley but usually it's always Asians . How much Urdu or Punjabi do you attempt to speak ? Where are all these places and is there just a hint of Islamaphobia here ?
In the 1950/60s it was those of Afro - Caribbeans descent that got the stick now they are cool and mainstream no- one even bothers to mention them at all these days .
-
http://www.lancashire.gov.uk/lancashire-insight/population
You might find the answers here for your region . Surprisingly 94% of households do not rely on the language skills of the young and the proportion of of BME in the region is overall only 10 % maxing out at 1: 5 in Pendle & Preston .
In Blackpool the BME make up only accounted for just 3% of the population.
As you can see NEVER was there anymore than a proportion of 1 : 8 in Lancashire.
-
I take it you have never visited " gated " ex- pat communities of ours in the Algarve or the many inhabited areas in Spain . Most Brits don't utter a word of Portuguese / Spanish rarely if ever integrate . My uncle had a place in the Mercia district of Spain for 15 years ; like many others they didn't and still don't mix, expect everyone to speak English and rarely get much further than counting from uno to cinco. I note that you made a point of splitting towns into half white / half Asian.
Whenever this comes up its not the Polish community in Wheatley but usually it's always Asians . How much Urdu or Punjabi do you attempt to speak ? Where are all these places and is there just a hint of Islamaphobia here ?
In the 1950/60s it was those of Afro - Caribbeans descent that got the stick now they are cool and mainstream no- one even bothers to mention them at all these days .
Was the Irish in the 70s/80s.
-
I take it you have never visited " gated " ex- pat communities of ours in the Algarve or the many inhabited areas in Spain . Most Brits don't utter a word of Portuguese / Spanish rarely if ever integrate . My uncle had a place in the Mercia district of Spain for 15 years ; like many others they didn't and still don't mix, expect everyone to speak English and rarely get much further than counting from uno to cinco. I note that you made a point of splitting towns into half white / half Asian.
Whenever this comes up its not the Polish community in Wheatley but usually it's always Asians . How much Urdu or Punjabi do you attempt to speak ? Where are all these places and is there just a hint of Islamaphobia here ?
In the 1950/60s it was those of Afro - Caribbeans descent that got the stick now they are cool and mainstream no- one even bothers to mention them at all these days .
Was the Irish in the 70s/80s.
130 years ago it was the Jews.
Plus ça change.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKEsyIuTrO8
-
... anyone else not seeing anything in that post at all?
-
... anyone else not seeing anything in that post at all?
" Less is more " perhaps just like art invisiposts must have some hidden meaning that the author wants you to think about ?
-
... anyone else not seeing anything in that post at all?
" Less is more " perhaps just like art invisiposts must have some hidden meaning that the author wants you to think about ?
:laugh:
I see it now, but there was just a massive space when I looked last night. Weird.
-
Personally I feel Corbyn got it wrong during the referendum campaign. For 30 years he’s been a critique of the EU and took that stance from a left wing anti capitalism point of view. He could have took that view point during the referendum, instead the left wing argument was only being championed by right wing political jesters such as Farage and Boris. I have no doubt in my mind that had Corbyn championed the Brexit vote he would be in Number 10.
Sadly it was an open goal, but that is why he doesn’t have a Brexit stance because he doesn’t need to. He’s not the one doing the negotiating (not yet, anyway) and it wasn’t him that called the referendum to settle a debate in his own party.
-
It has been the pace of immigration and the reluctance of successive governments to ensure that adequate infrastructure to society is there to accommodate them that brings about the problems.
They are/ were always a convenient target to blame when the austerity packages hit the Public Services. They did not cause the banking crisis, they did not cause tax avoidance. Also they did not affect the controls on immigration that successive Governments have had at their disposal - and rarely if ever used .
Some on here are still pointing the finger at the working immigrants in this country when 1) you know they have a positive financial impact on the nation's finances 2) you know that there were controls on the numbers coming here in EU regulations but rarely used 3 ) they don't take the jobs of Brits or have a negligible affect on the wages of jobs in that category.
N. B . Our Unemployment rate is currently the lowest it has been for decades !
I say that given those facts anyone yes anyone on here that still wants to blame immigrants from a) being here b) using our/their services c) living in close knit groups is either wittingly or unwittingly being a Racist .
I hope some of you will think this through and realise that successive Governments have used them and the EU as convenient scapegoats to cover up for their own failings , banking crises, maladministration, planning,
The "pace of immigration" was Britain then preparing for ever closer union,the inability to provide for larger numbers is down to government trying to keep Britain within the spending limits imposed by the Thatcherite EU criteria for joining the single currency,can you explain what that is Foolahoop or not got a clue?
Tell me why has not one single sanctimonious,idiotic, banal bonehead on here called for Rohingya Muslims,the ones really at the shitend of life that East Europeans have no understanding of,to be given places to live in Britain,especially not you Foolahoop,you witting Racist bigot you
-
I take it you have never visited " gated " ex- pat communities of ours in the Algarve or the many inhabited areas in Spain . Most Brits don't utter a word of Portuguese / Spanish rarely if ever integrate . My uncle had a place in the Mercia district of Spain for 15 years ; like many others they didn't and still don't mix, expect everyone to speak English and rarely get much further than counting from uno to cinco. I note that you made a point of splitting towns into half white / half Asian.
Whenever this comes up its not the Polish community in Wheatley but usually it's always Asians . How much Urdu or Punjabi do you attempt to speak ? Where are all these places and is there just a hint of Islamaphobia here ?
In the 1950/60s it was those of Afro - Caribbeans descent that got the stick now they are cool and mainstream no- one even bothers to mention them at all these days .
yes mate beacause I have a opinion I'm a racist
-
Personally I voted to leave and it didn't have one jot to do with immigration...It was purely from a business point of view,i don't believe it will cost jobs but create them..i'm tired of playing on a unfair disadvantage with our European neighbours..It's destroyed our industry's especially the Steel industry..I'm tired of losing work to Countries in the European union because on one hand they pay there employee's peanuts, while on the other our own contributions to the the EU allow them to be subsidised... to take our own industry of us!!!!...In the meantime people over here want more money ,more rights and to stay in the EU..They want it all ways over and it's crushing us..
'' .i'm tired of playing on a unfair disadvantage with our European neighbours..It's destroyed our industry's especially the Steel industry..I'm tired of losing work to Countries in the European union because on one hand they pay there employee's peanuts, while on the other our own contributions to the the EU allow them to be subsidised... to take our own industry of us!!!!. ''
Where's the evidence for this currently we are bleating on about immigrants 'bringing down ' wage rates in this country - on that basis that basis that would make our industries MORE competitive not LESS. I take it you think that outside of the EU suddenly we will become more competitive ......with who ?
-
They'd have had a majority regardless. Frank Field is that far to the right of the party he's a Tory in all but name anyway and Dennis Skinner has always hated the EU from what I can tell.
Most people up north voted for brexit in the big vote ,but when the Labour Party members went to vote yesterday the Labour Party order them to vote against what their constinuancys voted for .
7 Labour voted in line with the Tory wish yesterday and I guess within line of the community's they repesent who all voted for brexit .
Mrs Clint abstanined from the vote .
I can't see all 7 Labour mps been far right minded can I ?
It's the fact that corbyn barked down to all Labour mps to vote a certain way ,when from where Iam looking it goes against what many Labour community's had voted for .
" Most people up north voted for brexit "
That is quite simply NOT true - where did you get this statistic from ?
Check this map out - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028
-
It has been the pace of immigration and the reluctance of successive governments to ensure that adequate infrastructure to society is there to accommodate them that brings about the problems.
They are/ were always a convenient target to blame when the austerity packages hit the Public Services. They did not cause the banking crisis, they did not cause tax avoidance. Also they did not affect the controls on immigration that successive Governments have had at their disposal - and rarely if ever used .
Some on here are still pointing the finger at the working immigrants in this country when 1) you know they have a positive financial impact on the nation's finances 2) you know that there were controls on the numbers coming here in EU regulations but rarely used 3 ) they don't take the jobs of Brits or have a negligible affect on the wages of jobs in that category.
N. B . Our Unemployment rate is currently the lowest it has been for decades !
I say that given those facts anyone yes anyone on here that still wants to blame immigrants from a) being here b) using our/their services c) living in close knit groups is either wittingly or unwittingly being a Racist .
I hope some of you will think this through and realise that successive Governments have used them and the EU as convenient scapegoats to cover up for their own failings , banking crises, maladministration, planning,
The "pace of immigration" was Britain then preparing for ever closer union,the inability to provide for larger numbers is down to government trying to keep Britain within the spending limits imposed by the Thatcherite EU criteria for joining the single currency,can you explain what that is Foolahoop or not got a clue?
Tell me why has not one single sanctimonious,idiotic, banal bonehead on here called for Rohingya Muslims,the ones really at the shitend of life that East Europeans have no understanding of,to be given places to live in Britain,especially not you Foolahoop,you witting Racist bigot you
You need some help Yargo
-
I swear that Yargo is a bot spouting random words and then defying anyone to explain their meaning.
-
They'd have had a majority regardless. Frank Field is that far to the right of the party he's a Tory in all but name anyway and Dennis Skinner has always hated the EU from what I can tell.
Most people up north voted for brexit in the big vote ,but when the Labour Party members went to vote yesterday the Labour Party order them to vote against what their constinuancys voted for .
7 Labour voted in line with the Tory wish yesterday and I guess within line of the community's they repesent who all voted for brexit .
Mrs Clint abstanined from the vote .
I can't see all 7 Labour mps been far right minded can I ?
It's the fact that corbyn barked down to all Labour mps to vote a certain way ,when from where Iam looking it goes against what many Labour community's had voted for .
" Most people up north voted for brexit "
That is quite simply NOT true - where did you get this statistic from ?
Check this map out - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028
With exception of Scotland that link pretty much backs up NOF
-
They'd have had a majority regardless. Frank Field is that far to the right of the party he's a Tory in all but name anyway and Dennis Skinner has always hated the EU from what I can tell.
Most people up north voted for brexit in the big vote ,but when the Labour Party members went to vote yesterday the Labour Party order them to vote against what their constinuancys voted for .
7 Labour voted in line with the Tory wish yesterday and I guess within line of the community's they repesent who all voted for brexit .
Mrs Clint abstanined from the vote .
I can't see all 7 Labour mps been far right minded can I ?
It's the fact that corbyn barked down to all Labour mps to vote a certain way ,when from where Iam looking it goes against what many Labour community's had voted for .
" Most people up north voted for brexit "
That is quite simply NOT true - where did you get this statistic from ?
Check this map out - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028
With exception of Scotland that link pretty much backs up NOF
Then it's a shame that 'the north' includes Scotland then, isn't it?
-
They'd have had a majority regardless. Frank Field is that far to the right of the party he's a Tory in all but name anyway and Dennis Skinner has always hated the EU from what I can tell.
Most people up north voted for brexit in the big vote ,but when the Labour Party members went to vote yesterday the Labour Party order them to vote against what their constinuancys voted for .
7 Labour voted in line with the Tory wish yesterday and I guess within line of the community's they repesent who all voted for brexit .
Mrs Clint abstanined from the vote .
I can't see all 7 Labour mps been far right minded can I ?
It's the fact that corbyn barked down to all Labour mps to vote a certain way ,when from where Iam looking it goes against what many Labour community's had voted for .
" Most people up north voted for brexit "
That is quite simply NOT true - where did you get this statistic from ?
Check this map out - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028
With exception of Scotland that link pretty much backs up NOF
Then it's a shame that 'the north' includes Scotland then, isn't it?
It's a shame I said with the exception of Scotland then isn't it.
-
Personally I feel Corbyn got it wrong during the referendum campaign. For 30 years he’s been a critique of the EU and took that stance from a left wing anti capitalism point of view. He could have took that view point during the referendum, instead the left wing argument was only being championed by right wing political jesters such as Farage and Boris. I have no doubt in my mind that had Corbyn championed the Brexit vote he would be in Number 10.
Sadly it was an open goal, but that is why he doesn’t have a Brexit stance because he doesn’t need to. He’s not the one doing the negotiating (not yet, anyway) and it wasn’t him that called the referendum to settle a debate in his own party.
I'm no fan of Corbyn but actually I think he made a fairly shrewd calculation over the Referendum, even though it didn't work out as he thought.
Had he come out in favour of Leave it would have provoked another Labour leadership crisis with Shadow Cabinet resignations etc. Corbyn probably calculated that Remain would just about win (a mistake I also made) and he might as well be on the right side of an issue which wasn't fundamental to him.
Ironically his lukewarm enthusiasm for Remain probably hindered that side more than if he'd come out for Leave.
-
They'd have had a majority regardless. Frank Field is that far to the right of the party he's a Tory in all but name anyway and Dennis Skinner has always hated the EU from what I can tell.
Most people up north voted for brexit in the big vote ,but when the Labour Party members went to vote yesterday the Labour Party order them to vote against what their constinuancys voted for .
7 Labour voted in line with the Tory wish yesterday and I guess within line of the community's they repesent who all voted for brexit .
Mrs Clint abstanined from the vote .
I can't see all 7 Labour mps been far right minded can I ?
It's the fact that corbyn barked down to all Labour mps to vote a certain way ,when from where Iam looking it goes against what many Labour community's had voted for .
" Most people up north voted for brexit "
That is quite simply NOT true - where did you get this statistic from ?
Check this map out - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028
With exception of Scotland that link pretty much backs up NOF
Then it's a shame that 'the north' includes Scotland then, isn't it?
It's a shame I said with the exception of Scotland then isn't it.
But NOF didn't, so what you say isn't really relevant is it?
-
TRB
Surely you're not suggesting that Corbyn engages in anything so base as hiding his own opinions and engaging in calculated political deception?
-
They'd have had a majority regardless. Frank Field is that far to the right of the party he's a Tory in all but name anyway and Dennis Skinner has always hated the EU from what I can tell.
Most people up north voted for brexit in the big vote ,but when the Labour Party members went to vote yesterday the Labour Party order them to vote against what their constinuancys voted for .
7 Labour voted in line with the Tory wish yesterday and I guess within line of the community's they repesent who all voted for brexit .
Mrs Clint abstanined from the vote .
I can't see all 7 Labour mps been far right minded can I ?
It's the fact that corbyn barked down to all Labour mps to vote a certain way ,when from where Iam looking it goes against what many Labour community's had voted for .
" Most people up north voted for brexit "
That is quite simply NOT true - where did you get this statistic from ?
Check this map out - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028
With exception of Scotland that link pretty much backs up NOF
No it doesn't even with Scotland the North were NOT broadly " Leave " voters .
Liverpool, Wirral, Sefton, Manchester , Stockport , Trafford, Harrogate, Leeds , York, Newcastle ALL voted Remain.
-
They'd have had a majority regardless. Frank Field is that far to the right of the party he's a Tory in all but name anyway and Dennis Skinner has always hated the EU from what I can tell.
Most people up north voted for brexit in the big vote ,but when the Labour Party members went to vote yesterday the Labour Party order them to vote against what their constinuancys voted for .
7 Labour voted in line with the Tory wish yesterday and I guess within line of the community's they repesent who all voted for brexit .
Mrs Clint abstanined from the vote .
I can't see all 7 Labour mps been far right minded can I ?
It's the fact that corbyn barked down to all Labour mps to vote a certain way ,when from where Iam looking it goes against what many Labour community's had voted for .
" Most people up north voted for brexit "
That is quite simply NOT true - where did you get this statistic from ?
Check this map out - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028
With exception of Scotland that link pretty much backs up NOF
Then it's a shame that 'the north' includes Scotland then, isn't it?
It's a shame I said with the exception of Scotland then isn't it.
But NOF didn't, so what you say isn't really relevant is it?
Glyn you are one boring, sarcastic argumentative individual
-
They'd have had a majority regardless. Frank Field is that far to the right of the party he's a Tory in all but name anyway and Dennis Skinner has always hated the EU from what I can tell.
Most people up north voted for brexit in the big vote ,but when the Labour Party members went to vote yesterday the Labour Party order them to vote against what their constinuancys voted for .
7 Labour voted in line with the Tory wish yesterday and I guess within line of the community's they repesent who all voted for brexit .
Mrs Clint abstanined from the vote .
I can't see all 7 Labour mps been far right minded can I ?
It's the fact that corbyn barked down to all Labour mps to vote a certain way ,when from where Iam looking it goes against what many Labour community's had voted for .
" Most people up north voted for brexit "
That is quite simply NOT true - where did you get this statistic from ?
Check this map out - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028
With exception of Scotland that link pretty much backs up NOF
Then it's a shame that 'the north' includes Scotland then, isn't it?
It's a shame I said with the exception of Scotland then isn't it.
You can't say it IS and then say EXCEPT to make your argument can you ?
-
They'd have had a majority regardless. Frank Field is that far to the right of the party he's a Tory in all but name anyway and Dennis Skinner has always hated the EU from what I can tell.
Most people up north voted for brexit in the big vote ,but when the Labour Party members went to vote yesterday the Labour Party order them to vote against what their constinuancys voted for .
7 Labour voted in line with the Tory wish yesterday and I guess within line of the community's they repesent who all voted for brexit .
Mrs Clint abstanined from the vote .
I can't see all 7 Labour mps been far right minded can I ?
It's the fact that corbyn barked down to all Labour mps to vote a certain way ,when from where Iam looking it goes against what many Labour community's had voted for .
" Most people up north voted for brexit "
That is quite simply NOT true - where did you get this statistic from ?
Check this map out - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028
With exception of Scotland that link pretty much backs up NOF
Then it's a shame that 'the north' includes Scotland then, isn't it?
It's a shame I said with the exception of Scotland then isn't it.
But NOF didn't, so what you say isn't really relevant is it?
Glyn you are one boring, sarcastic argumentative individual
It was you that questioned /argued with my post first wasn't it not Glyn - you are the argumentative one.
If just 600k had changed their minds the result would have been athe worst a draw for Remain. Do you think the South voted to Leave in droves too - if so where did the 16,000,000 + Remain voters come from ?
-
They'd have had a majority regardless. Frank Field is that far to the right of the party he's a Tory in all but name anyway and Dennis Skinner has always hated the EU from what I can tell.
Most people up north voted for brexit in the big vote ,but when the Labour Party members went to vote yesterday the Labour Party order them to vote against what their constinuancys voted for .
7 Labour voted in line with the Tory wish yesterday and I guess within line of the community's they repesent who all voted for brexit .
Mrs Clint abstanined from the vote .
I can't see all 7 Labour mps been far right minded can I ?
It's the fact that corbyn barked down to all Labour mps to vote a certain way ,when from where Iam looking it goes against what many Labour community's had voted for .
" Most people up north voted for brexit "
That is quite simply NOT true - where did you get this statistic from ?
Check this map out - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028
With exception of Scotland that link pretty much backs up NOF
Then it's a shame that 'the north' includes Scotland then, isn't it?
It's a shame I said with the exception of Scotland then isn't it.
But NOF didn't, so what you say isn't really relevant is it?
Glyn you are one boring, sarcastic argumentative individual
It was you that questioned /argued with my post first wasn't it not Glyn - you are the argumentative one.
If just 600k had changed their minds the result would have been athe worst a draw for Remain. Do you think the South voted to Leave in droves too - if so where did the 16,000,000 + Remain voters come from ?
It was you who questioned NOF first was it not?
-
Yes and backed it up - you theneed decided to arbitrarily cut off a third of the UK!
-
I get the impression that NOF was referring to the North as the North of England. I suspect people who frequently jump down his throat thought the same, but chose to ignore that, in order to continue to clutch at straws to give the tired old argument more life.
Let's look at what happened. Del boy said, "With exception of Scotland that link pretty much backs up NOF".
That statement is 100% correct and true.
I suppose Hoola's statement that "If just 600k had changed their minds the result would have been at the worst a draw for Remain" is also true, but's that's just plain silly!
-
I get the impression that NOF was referring to the North as the North of England. I suspect people who frequently jump down his throat thought the same, but chose to ignore that, in order to continue to clutch at straws to give the tired old argument more life.
Let's look at what happened. Del boy said, "With exception of Scotland that link pretty much backs up NOF".
That statement is 100% correct and true.
I suppose Hoola's statement that "If just 600k had changed their minds the result would have been at the worst a draw for Remain" is also true, but's that's just plain silly!
Thank you Bentley common sense at last.
-
I get the impression that NOF was referring to the North as the North of England. I suspect people who frequently jump down his throat thought the same, but chose to ignore that, in order to continue to clutch at straws to give the tired old argument more life.
I never thought NOF meant 'up north' as meaning 'ignoring Scotland' at all. But I ignored it as I wasn't the one debating the point with him, unlike someone else who decided to stick their oar in and rewrite what NOF said for him just to be argumentative. All I did was point out that that wasn't what NOF said in the first place and yet I'm the one who gets called argumentative!
-
I get the impression that NOF was referring to the North as the North of England. I suspect people who frequently jump down his throat thought the same, but chose to ignore that, in order to continue to clutch at straws to give the tired old argument more life.
I never thought NOF meant 'up north' as meaning 'ignoring Scotland' at all. But I ignored it as I wasn't the one debating the point with him, unlike someone else who decided to stick their oar in and rewrite what NOF said for him just to be argumentative. All I did was point out that that wasn't what NOF said in the first place and yet I'm the one who gets called argumentative!
Being very selective with the points there again Glyn to suit your argument
-
TRB
Surely you're not suggesting that Corbyn engages in anything so base as hiding his own opinions and engaging in calculated political deception?
It does make you wonder, because if he had undergone some Road-To-Damascus conversion to the idea that the EU was a Good Thing you'd have expected him to engage in the campaign with more enthusiasm than he did.
Also, he seems reluctant even now to really hold May to account over her handling of Brexit. And he seems willing for Labour's policy to be confusing at best. Do Labour think we should stay in the Single Market, for example? It probably depends who you ask and when.
-
TR
We're well and truly through the looking glass.
The PM has been a lifelong supporter of the EU, but heads a party which is strongly anti-EU and so has to half-heartedly claim she is also anti-EU.
The leader of the opposition has been a lifelong opponent of the EU but heads a party which is strongly pro-EU and so has to half-heartedly claim he is pro-EU.
Armando Iannucci or Peter Jay could have a field day with this material.
-
Meanwhile, the SNP claim to be wildly pro-EU. But 35% of their supporters voted for Brexit. As I would have done were I an SNP supporter as it's the only route to Scottish Independence.
The only two parties which have remained true to their principles are the LDs and UKIP. Both of whom of made themselves utterly irrelevant by their incompetence.
What a good old British Farce, eh? It'd be hilarious if the consequences weren't going to be so bad for us all.
-
I get the impression that NOF was referring to the North as the North of England. I suspect people who frequently jump down his throat thought the same, but chose to ignore that, in order to continue to clutch at straws to give the tired old argument more life.
I never thought NOF meant 'up north' as meaning 'ignoring Scotland' at all. But I ignored it as I wasn't the one debating the point with him, unlike someone else who decided to stick their oar in and rewrite what NOF said for him just to be argumentative. All I did was point out that that wasn't what NOF said in the first place and yet I'm the one who gets called argumentative!
Being very selective with the points there again Glyn to suit your argument
What did I miss out?
-
I get the impression that NOF was referring to the North as the North of England. I suspect people who frequently jump down his throat thought the same, but chose to ignore that, in order to continue to clutch at straws to give the tired old argument more life.
I never thought NOF meant 'up north' as meaning 'ignoring Scotland' at all. But I ignored it as I wasn't the one debating the point with him, unlike someone else who decided to stick their oar in and rewrite what NOF said for him just to be argumentative. All I did was point out that that wasn't what NOF said in the first place and yet I'm the one who gets called argumentative!
Being very selective with the points there again Glyn to suit your argument
What did I miss out?
I also said you were boring and sarcastic not just argumentative. As i said very selective.
-
I get the impression that NOF was referring to the North as the North of England. I suspect people who frequently jump down his throat thought the same, but chose to ignore that, in order to continue to clutch at straws to give the tired old argument more life.
I never thought NOF meant 'up north' as meaning 'ignoring Scotland' at all. But I ignored it as I wasn't the one debating the point with him, unlike someone else who decided to stick their oar in and rewrite what NOF said for him just to be argumentative. All I did was point out that that wasn't what NOF said in the first place and yet I'm the one who gets called argumentative!
Being very selective with the points there again Glyn to suit your argument
What did I miss out?
I also said you were boring and sarcastic not just argumentative. As i said very selective.
We all know what you said. Boring and sarcastic (although how you divine sarcasm from the written word I don't know) is your opinion and thankfully the operation of your mind is nothing to do with me.
We can all already see that you called me selective. That means I left something of of my description of what I've written. I asked you what I've missed out. You've refused to do so. Or is it that you can't find anything I've missed out and so you're being the selective one in refusing to tell us?
-
Like I said boring
-
Answer me, then I'll stop boring you. Simple.
If you don't, I - and everybody else - can only presume you don't know the meaning of the word selective and will no doubt resort to more abuse because you can't answer any other way.
-
I don't think NOF 'ignored' Scotland in his reference to the North. I just think he was meaning the North of England. To ignore something is to refuse to take notice of or acknowledge, or disregard intentionally. I don't think he did.
It's obvious that you thought he did, hence the sarcastic accusation that he 'ignored' Scotland as being part of the North.
-
I don't think NOF 'ignored' Scotland in his reference to the North. I just think he was meaning the North of England. To ignore something is to refuse to take notice of or acknowledge, or disregard intentionally. I don't think he did.
It's obvious that you thought he did, hence the sarcastic accusation that he 'ignored' Scotland as being part of the North.
That's all well and good. Apart from the fact that I didn't say NOF ignored Scotland at all, whether sarcastic or not. Which it wasn't. In fact I have already clearly said that I think NOF's use of 'up north' includes Scotland.
-
Answer me, then I'll stop boring you. Simple.
If you don't, I - and everybody else - can only presume you don't know the meaning of the word selective and will no doubt resort to more abuse because you can't answer any other way.
The part where I stated "excluding Scotland" you selectively ignored the excluding part. Is that ok for you.
-
Answer me, then I'll stop boring you. Simple.
If you don't, I - and everybody else - can only presume you don't know the meaning of the word selective and will no doubt resort to more abuse because you can't answer any other way.
The part where I stated "excluding Scotland" you selectively ignored the excluding part. Is that ok for you.
As I was giving an account of my actions and not yours, why would I have included it at all?
As it happens, I did anyway:
unlike someone else who decided to stick their oar in and rewrite what NOF said for him just to be argumentative.
-
I don't think NOF 'ignored' Scotland in his reference to the North. I just think he was meaning the North of England. To ignore something is to refuse to take notice of or acknowledge, or disregard intentionally. I don't think he did.
It's obvious that you thought he did, hence the sarcastic accusation that he 'ignored' Scotland as being part of the North.
That's all well and good. Apart from the fact that I didn't say NOF ignored Scotland at all, whether sarcastic or not. Which it wasn't. In fact I have already clearly said that I think NOF's use of 'up north' includes Scotland.
Well if that's the case I must have got lost in the translation of your gobbledegook.
I still think that NOF was referring to the North of England, but omitted to say the 'of England' bit and that you refused to accept that suggestion in order to continue your boring campaign of doom.
-
I don't think NOF 'ignored' Scotland in his reference to the North. I just think he was meaning the North of England. To ignore something is to refuse to take notice of or acknowledge, or disregard intentionally. I don't think he did.
It's obvious that you thought he did, hence the sarcastic accusation that he 'ignored' Scotland as being part of the North.
That's all well and good. Apart from the fact that I didn't say NOF ignored Scotland at all, whether sarcastic or not. Which it wasn't. In fact I have already clearly said that I think NOF's use of 'up north' includes Scotland.
Well if that's the case I must have got lost in the translation of your gobbledegook.
I still think that NOF was referring to the North of England, but omitted to say the 'of England' bit and that you refused to accept that suggestion in order to continue your boring campaign of doom.
No, it's much simpler than your conspiracy theory. I refused to accept it purely because it wasn't what NOF said.
-
I don't think NOF 'ignored' Scotland in his reference to the North. I just think he was meaning the North of England. To ignore something is to refuse to take notice of or acknowledge, or disregard intentionally. I don't think he did.
It's obvious that you thought he did, hence the sarcastic accusation that he 'ignored' Scotland as being part of the North.
That's all well and good. Apart from the fact that I didn't say NOF ignored Scotland at all, whether sarcastic or not. Which it wasn't. In fact I have already clearly said that I think NOF's use of 'up north' includes Scotland.
Well if that's the case I must have got lost in the translation of your gobbledegook.
I still think that NOF was referring to the North of England, but omitted to say the 'of England' bit and that you refused to accept that suggestion in order to continue your boring campaign of doom.
It's still not true whatever geographical division you want to give it. 28% of the population (12 million people) didn't vote nd are not shown on those maps. Only in very small micro areas, like Stoke, Thurrock, Boston did the number of people voting Leave outnumber the Remain and Non-Voters put together.
The number of people in 'the north' who voted Leave in the referendum was greater than that who voted to Remain - but most people in the north did not vote for Brexit.
-
Most people who voted did! That's poor even for your standards Wilts!
-
TR
We're well and truly through the looking glass.
The PM has been a lifelong supporter of the EU, but heads a party which is strongly anti-EU and so has to half-heartedly claim she is also anti-EU.
The leader of the opposition has been a lifelong opponent of the EU but heads a party which is strongly pro-EU and so has to half-heartedly claim he is pro-EU.
Armando Iannucci or Peter Jay could have a field day with this material.
To be fair, Theresa May's support for Remain was about as lukewarm as Corbyn's. Was she hedging her bets for a future leadership challenge or was she a "shy Leaver?" Although unlike Corbyn she didn't have a previous record of voting against the EU.
It simply reinforces my long-held view that the established political parties are no longer fit for purpose and need to be broken up with a form of PR being introduced. Maybe once the dust from Brexit has settled that will happen.
-
TRB
I've agreed with you before about the desirability of PR in this country. The true position is that we actually have maybe 5 political groupings.
Far Right - Moderate Right - Centre - Moderate Left - Far Left.
Each one of those has the support of about 20% of the electorate. A grown up arrangement would allow 5 independent parties, each broadly representing one of those groups. Then we could have sensible coalition govt with collaborations between combinations of those groups.
Instead, the Tory and Labour parties are already coalitions of groups with really very diverse and contradictory views. There is little that Rees-Mogg and Ken Clarke agree on, from Europe to gay rights. Similarly, Dennis Skinner and, say, David Miliband would not have any common ground on issues from the EU to NATO.
Ours is a a very unsatisfactory system. It used to be said that it was still better than OR because it gave us strong Govt whereas coalitions tend to be unstable. But German Govt never seems unstable. And since 1964, 7 of the last 15 elections have resulted in no majority (Feb 74, 10, 17) or small majorities with the Govt then being far from strong (64, Oct 74, 92, 15). So that argument doesn't hold.
But you can forget it TRB. We'll not see PR in your or my lifetimes. There was a possibility of it when UKIP and/or the LDs were running at 20%. No chance now those two have committed political suicide and the two old parties are both back to >40% support.
-
I do wonder if the effects of Brexit might cause one or both of the main parties to fracture. Yes, this year's GE was probably the strongest affirmation of Two-Party politics (in England anyway) since 1979. But we are moving into uncharted waters...
-
TRB
It's this simple.
1) Without PR, there is no logic whatsoever to the Tories or Labour splitting. It's electoral suicide in a FPTP system. See: SDP, 1983.
2) With electorally strong Tory and Labour parties, there is no drive to bring in PR. Why would either party dispense with a system that potentially enables them to get almost unbridled power with 43-44% of the vote?
There's no push and there's no pull for PR. Always the chance of something unexpected happening but it would have to be seismic to challenge any of the logic above.
-
They have been debating PR and changes to the electoral voting system in Parliament today - although it seems unlikey to go any further.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41775307
-
TRB
It's this simple.
1) Without PR, there is no logic whatsoever to the Tories or Labour splitting. It's electoral suicide in a FPTP system. See: SDP, 1983.
2) With electorally strong Tory and Labour parties, there is no drive to bring in PR. Why would either party dispense with a system that potentially enables them to get almost unbridled power with 43-44% of the vote?
There's no push and there's no pull for PR. Always the chance of something unexpected happening but it would have to be seismic to challenge any of the logic above.
Apart from the chance the people had to change things in 2011 that they proceeded to piss up the wall, of course.
-
Glyn
Aye. Except that wasn't remotely close to proper PR. And it came in a totally different political climate. At (or shortly after) peak-LD.
If Clegg had been a really serious politician, we'd have had PR by now.
He could have turned down coalition in 2010. Gone for not voting to bring down the Tories. Just yet. Let them make themselves as unpopular as they did through Austerity. Let Labour panic in a navel-gazing year or two about what they stood for. Sweep up the centre-left support. Then bring the Govt down in 2012. Force an election. Win 100+ seats and demand REAL PR as the price of support for the next Parliament.
But he wasn't up to that job. He was dazzled by the idea of coalition. He was bullied by Isborne and Mervyn King into signing up lock stock and barrel to Austerity. So by the time the PR-lite referendum came along, everyone hated the LDs and no-one voted for it.
A kid in an adult's game.
-
Not to mention AV is shite as well.
-
But it would have been a first step away from FPTP, and made people more amenable to further change in the future.
-
AV is marginally better than FPTP in that eliminates the need for tactical voting at constituency level. But it isn't a proportional system and therefore does little to end two party domination overall.
The AV referendum was a stitch up, a token gesture by the Conservatives to gain LD support.
That said I doubt a referendum on PR would ever get a Yes vote if one were to be held, unfortunately. The usual bingo card of garbage scare slogans will be wheeled out; 'coalitions', 'instability', 'extremist parties winning seats', 'dodgy deals in smoke filled rooms' (they never fail to mention the smoke), 'small parties holding the country to ransom', and all the rest of it. I can't see that shit not working.
-
Glyn
Which is why I voted for it.
Trouble is, it was being championed by Nick Clegg. Who had won 23% at the election the year before and magically turned that into 6-7% support in the polls within 9 months. So it was bound to fail.
As I suggested in my earlier message, that was the moment in time which a statesman would have grabbed and imposed his will on the country. Instead we got that nonentity.
-
I get the impression that NOF was referring to the North as the North of England. I suspect people who frequently jump down his throat thought the same, but chose to ignore that, in order to continue to clutch at straws to give the tired old argument more life.
Let's look at what happened. Del boy said, "With exception of Scotland that link pretty much backs up NOF".
That statement is 100% correct and true.
I suppose Hoola's statement that "If just 600k had changed their minds the result would have been at the workst a draw for Remain" is also true, but's that's just plain silly!
As silly as those claiming as most do that it was the " overwhelming " will of the people - yes right it was . I've never heard of a 16-15 win on penalties being called "overwhelming ".
-
But it would have been a first step away from FPTP, and made people more amenable to further change in the future.
I very much doubt that. It would have been a final step and I doubt it would have changed all that much.
-
But it would have been a first step away from FPTP, and made people more amenable to further change in the future.
I very much doubt that. It would have been a final step and I doubt it would have changed all that much.
The point I was making is that we have had FPTP for so long that I suspect a great many people voted to keep it purely because it's all they know and are suspicious of changing the system in any way - quite possibly so they don't have to think about any proposed alternative and make an informed decision. Once one change has been made, however small, then I think that stumbling block would be removed.
-
Glyn
Aye. Except that wasn't remotely close to proper PR. And it came in a totally different political climate. At (or shortly after) peak-LD.
If Clegg had been a really serious politician, we'd have had PR by now.
He could have turned down coalition in 2010. Gone for not voting to bring down the Tories. Just yet. Let them make themselves as unpopular as they did through Austerity. Let Labour panic in a navel-gazing year or two about what they stood for. Sweep up the centre-left support. Then bring the Govt down in 2012. Force an election. Win 100+ seats and demand REAL PR as the price of support for the next Parliament.
But he wasn't up to that job. He was dazzled by the idea of coalition. He was bullied by Isborne and Mervyn King into signing up lock stock and barrel to Austerity. So by the time the PR-lite referendum came along, everyone hated the LDs and no-one voted for it.
A kid in an adult's game.
" If Clegg had been a really serious politician, we'd have had PR by now. "
I would love to know how Clegg could have secured any form of PR for the electorate - they simply could never have got the Tories to agree to a real form of PR .
Usually , I agree with much that you write, but your obsession with denigrating Clegg at every opportunity is strange . What strength did you think he had but didn't recognise or put to proper use ?
-
But it would have been a first step away from FPTP, and made people more amenable to further change in the future.
I very much doubt that. It would have been a final step and I doubt it would have changed all that much.
The point I was making is that we have had FPTP for so long that I suspect a great many people voted to keep it purely because it's all they know and are suspicious of changing the system in any way - quite possibly so they don't have to think about any proposed alternative and make an informed decision. Once one change has been made, however small, then I think that stumbling block would be removed.
You make some good points but yet again this was never really discussed properly with the electorate and was not the best option for PR . If the electorate had been told loads of lies , promised herds of unicorns roaming the velvety clouds ( like Brexit ) - they would have voted in their millions for it. Especially if it kept furriners out .
-
Hoola
I explained how a statesman of real ability and stature could have put the LDs in a much more powerful position than they ended up by 2011. It's all there in that post that you quote.
And you're right. I DO have a big issue with Clegg. He was the one who facilitated Austerity in 2010. He didn't have to do that. He hadn't campaigned in that. He had alternatives. But Osborne and Mervyn King put the screws on him. Told him that we needed Stable Govt and Austerity or we were going to end up like Greece. It was bullshit at the time but he shite it and signed up for it.
Austerity led directly to depressed living standards which led directly to increased anti-immigrant feelings and the rise of UKIP. That led to the Brexit vote.
That's Clegg's legacy. You're damn right I've got issues with him.
-
The only other option that Clegg would have had as I see it would have been to let the Tory Party form a minority government along with the DUP - similar today strangely enough- either way " Austerity " would have been pursued but without any of the Lib/ Dem checks and or policies being implemented .
Can you name any other politician , given that position and those circumstances that would have made the Tory Party and the BofE pursue a different course. Surely you don't damn the Lib/Dems to eternity for not leaving British politics to meander all over the place at such a crucial time .
Would you have seen him swing the Liberals behind a weak and limping minority Rainbow Coalition around the by then toxic and clueless Labour Govt under Gordon Brown.
Truth is there wasn't really a politician or a permutation of Parties that could have steered this country out of the mire then . The course would probably have been a little austerity to dig ourselves out of the hole we were in .
However the weakness of both the Coalition and the Brown administrations pale into insignificance when compared with this weak lot given the green light by the " will of the people " . Soon those words or the actions undertaken under this " will " ....will have a new meaning when eventually historians paw over just how incompetent leaders of this country can be . Just for that matter, the timing when HMS UK finally was actually sent to the breaker's yard and put out of its colonial misery .
-
Hoola
No. Austerity wouldn't have been pursued. That's the whole point. There was no majority in Parliament for Austerity without the LDs voting for it. So the Tories would have had to have a significantly less aggressive Austerity approach in their Budget. Or face losing a vote on the Budget and bringing down the Govt.
That's the massive opportunity that Clegg missed. It was in his hands to prevent Austerity. But he shite it when he was put on the spot.
I don't hate Clegg for no reason. I was actually quite impressed with how he performed during the 2010 Election. But his handling of the immediate aftermath was an almighty catastrophe for his party and the country. Utterly out of his depth when a real hard-nosed bas**rd was required.
-
If Clegg had eventually forced the Tories into a corner with a resultant election ; then, as happened this year, we would probably had the electorate choosing between the two main Parties - I don't believe for one minute that the Lib/ Dems would have been able to hold onto their " soft " Tory vote and certainly not their " soft " Labour vote. You have to remember that the extra seats they took in the 2010 election were mainly but not exclusively from the Tory Party.
Which of the two main parties would you have envisaged gaining a majority in say a 2010/1/2 election ?
I believe in your scenario that the electorate would still have voted in a Tory Party ; who would then , in all likelihood, been free to pursue an austerity programme completely unfettered of any Lib/ Dem oversight/input.
-
Hoola
We GOT a Tory Govt that was free to push its Austerity programme. The LDs signed up to the Tory macroeconomic policy lock, stock and barrel. Yes there were a few concessions around the edges, but not on the single, central, crucial issue of rapid reduction in spending. The LDs supported that and voted en bloc for every one of Osborne's budgets. And as a result, the economy stagnated for 3 years. The OBR calculate that the result of the spending cuts in the budgets from 2010-2012 was a loss of GDP of 6%. That's about £150bn. Just over those three years. And that got hard wired in to become a permanent loss of wealth because we never made up the shortfall.
Clegg campaigned vigorously on an anti-Austerity programme. Then he flipped within 3 days of the Election and became a cheerleader for Austerity "or we'd end up like Greece" (as he himself said when explaining why he flipped).
Here's what the counterfactual situation could have been.
Clegg goes into discussions with the Tories. He says, "You were the only party in the country who campaigned for Austerity. You lost. You got 306/650 seats. You got 36% of the vote. You can't pass an Austerity Budget on your own. We are not going to support you on that because we don't believe in Austerity. As we said in the campaign, we believe Austerity will do severe damage to the economy.
"Apart from principled opposition to Austerity, we'd be electorally mad to support it. We've spent 10 years convincing folk that we're further left than New Labour. We've swept up millions if disillusioned Lab supporters. If we now support you to impose Austerity, we'll be committing suicide. We'll be down to single figures at the next Election and we'll be irrelevant for a generation.
"Here's what we will do. We're prepared to accept that you were the largest party. You have the right to attempt to govern. We won't obstruct most of your policies. We will abstain where necessary to allow you to get votes through. But we will veto any Austerity Budget. We are compromising. So must you. We will support a Budget which delays public spending cuts until the economy is back on its feet.
"You know the alternative? Refuse to collaborate with us. Call a 2nd General Election if you want. But you know that Gordon Brown has gone. Labour will have a new leader by the new Election. They will inevitably get a poll boost because Brown was seen as a calamity. If they take just 10 seats off you, we can form a coalition with them.
"Your call."
-
Bst, I'm not clever enough to no much about the economy but has it ever crossed your mind that austerity was the only answer,for whatever reason the country was in a poor state, labour will throw money at everything they did last time, they made it nearly impossible to get off benifits by giving you so much, while yes there was a banking crisis many labour mps admitted they overspent last time and there record with money is not the best, why if/when they get in power will it be any different?
-
Bst, I'm not clever enough to no much about the economy but has it ever crossed your mind that austerity was the only answer,for whatever reason the country was in a poor state, labour will throw money at everything they did last time, they made it nearly impossible to get off benifits by giving you so much, while yes there was a banking crisis many labour mps admitted they overspent last time and there record with money is not the best, why if/when they get in power will it be any different?
No, because it wasn't.
-
Bpool.
It wasn't. Trust me. And it doesn't take a genius to follow the arguments. This was a topic of intense debate between economics experts at the time. Economics is not an exact science, but there has rarely been a debate on this topic which has been concluded so overwhelmingly on one side as this one.
The arguments FOR Austerity at the time was that if our debt got too high, a) our economy would suffer and b) we would have to pay far higher interest on any money that we borrowed, because lenders would be scared that we'd never pay it back, so they'd want a higher return to cover the risk. That was what was happening in Greece at the time. a) was supported by a study by the American economists Carmen Reinhart & Kenneth Rogoff. They had studied about 50 cases of countries which had had high debt, and they concluded that once your debt became greater than 90% of GDP, your economic performance fell off a cliff. George Osborne regularly quoted this in speeches in 2010, saying that it proved we had to reduce our deficit. b) was just an observation: Greece had high debt - their interest rates had gone through the roof. The same could happen to us.
The arguments AGAINST Austerity were based on the work by John Maynard Keynes in the 1930. He had demonstrated that, when you are in a recession, private companies stop investing. And that leads to more job losses. And that leads to lower economic performance. And the thing can become a vicious circle. He said that the answer was for Govts to borrow to keep the economy afloat. For as long as it took for confidence to come back to the private sector. And THEN reduce Govt spending. Otherwise, the result could be a Depression that it took a long time to get out of, with a lot of lost potential wealth being squandered in the meantime?
So. Who was right?
Well it turned out Reinhart and Rogoff had made a very serious mistake in their calculations. This was demonstrated by a young PhD student in the USA who asked for their database. They sent him an Excel spreadsheet with their calculations. And he found that they had added up a column of numbers wrongly. When you corrected the error, there was no correlation between the level of debt and economic performance. So that killed that argument for Austerity.
As regards interest payments on the debt, it's true that Greece and Italy and Spain and Ireland all had problems. But the UK and USA and Japan and Canada all swa their debt increase greatly, but the interest rates that they were charged to borrow money actually FELL. And all this had been predicted by anti-Austerity economists at the time. They said the key thing was whether you had your own currency. If you did, (like UK, USA, Japan, Canada) then you were never in danger of not repaying the debt. At worst, you could tell your Central Bank to print more money to do so. So the lenders never increased their required interest charges. But Greece, Italy, Spain, Ireland couldn't print their own money because they were in the Euro. So the lenders crippled them with high interest charges.
Some much for the argument for Austerity. They were all so much piss and wind, with nothing to support them.
The argument against? The one that said that your economy would struggle if you cut Govt spending before the private sector had recovered from the recession? This is what happened throughout Europe.
(http://cdn.nybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/krugman_figure2-060613.png)
In simple terms, right across Europe, the countries which cut Govt spending hardest had the worst economic performance. Exactly as Keynes predicted.
In the UK, this is what happened.
(https://www.niesr.ac.uk/sites/default/files/images/GDP/gdp0614.jpg)
That graph shows how the UK economy suffered, then recovered in the last 6 recessions. The 2008 recession was very bad. But by 24 months in (around the time of the 2010 election) we were starting to recover. Just like we had done from every previous recession. We were recovering because the Govt was doing what Keynes said it should do. Continuing to borrow money and spend to keep the economy afloat. Another year or two and the recovery would have been well set and THEN the Govt could have cut back.
Instead, Clegg gave the Tories cover to introduce massive spending cuts after the 2010 Election. The recovery stopped dead in its tracks for 3-4 years. You can see it in that graph. Plain as day. That's not a prediction. That's the outcome of what actually happened.
This is very important. By 2014, our GDP was about 8% lower than it would have been if we'd carried on recovering like we were doing in 2010. That means the country was earning about £200bn less than it should have done. Every year. And we've never caught that back up. By now, cumulatively, we're the thick end of £1trillion pounds poorer than we should have been. About £14,000 for every man, woman and child in the country.
That's why wages have stagnated. It's nothing to do with immigration. It is the utter stupidity of Austerity.
-
I seem to remember at the time Cameron and co basically tried to reduce macroeconomic argument to a household budget, when in reality it's much much more complex than that. And of course, the majority of people have no real idea how an economy works, but almost everyone can understand the vastly simplified version of things he and Osborne put to the British people...
-
I seem to remember at the time Cameron and co basically tried to reduce macroeconomic argument to a household budget, when in reality it's much much more complex than that. And of course, the majority of people have no real idea how an economy works, but almost everyone can understand the vastly simplified version of things he and Osborne put to the British people...
This is the problem. People who don't understand economics tend to think of economics with the mind of a bookkeeper, and not that of an economist. And politicians who want to reduce government spending will exploit that tendency to their own advantage. Thatcher did just the same before the '79 election.
-
RedJ/Glynn
Nail. Head.
Cameron graduated from Oxford with a 1st Class degree in Politics, Philosophy and Economics. The very renown Oxford Professor, Vernon Bogdanor said Cameron was one of the brightest and most perceptive students he ever taught.
And yet Cameron spouted these idiotic phrases about "maxing out the nation's credit card" to justify Austerity.
He MUST have known just how mendacious he was being. He MUST have known how dangerous Austerity was in 2010. He'd been taught by some of the finest economics academics in the world and he'd excelled in his studies.
Grand, eh? His ambition to be PM and Clegg's vacuosity have cost us £1tr.
-
RedJ/Glynn
Nail. Head.
Cameron graduated from Oxford with a 1st Class degree in Politics, Philosophy and Economics. The very renown Oxford Professor, Vernon Bogdanor said Cameron was one of the brightest and most perceptive students he ever taught.
And yet Cameron spouted these idiotic phrases about "maxing out the nation's credit card" to justify Austerity.
He MUST have known just how mendacious he was being. He MUST have known how dangerous Austerity was in 2010. He'd been taught by some of the finest economics academics in the world and he'd excelled in his studies.
Grand, eh? His ambition to be PM and Clegg's vacuosity have cost us £1tr.
What he did was exactly what he always wanted to do, whether there was a financial crisis or not - reduce government spending. It's his political ideology. He was fantastically lucky to get into government with a ready-made excuse for doing it that people would swallow and not go on to complain about a government reducing public services to a shadow of what they should be. And when that excuse starts to wear thin, blame the immigrants!
-
I am just putting a presentation together on the Battle of Passchendaele (for a talk next week some tickets still available!). Here the top brass had a plan they thought would create a breakthrough in the war. When it didn't they thought it wasn't the plan that was wrong - but that the troops weren't carrying it out properly. So they had to do more of the same until it did work.
That's where we are with Austerity and I reckon history will judge it as well as Passchendaele.
One point about where the economy was when the Coalition took over in 2010 and Gordon Brown's handling of it. So much is going on at the moment that Osborne's admission that Brown did the right thing and he would have done exactly the same, seems to have sneaked through with little notice. They just saw the political opportunity there and ran with it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/18/theresa-may-sacked-george-osborne-pmqs-came-back-haunt/
-
I am just putting a presentation together on the Battle of Passchendaele (for a talk next week some tickets still available!). Here the top brass had a plan they thought would create a breakthrough in the war. When it didn't they thought it wasn't the plan that was wrong - but that the troops weren't carrying it out properly. So they had to do more of the same until it did work.
That's where we are with Austerity and I reckon history will judge it as well as Passchendaele.
One point about where the economy was when the Coalition took over in 2010 and Gordon Brown's handling of it. So much is going on at the moment that Osborne's admission that Brown did the right thing and he would have done exactly the same, seems to have sneaked through with little notice. They just saw the political opportunity there and ran with it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/18/theresa-may-sacked-george-osborne-pmqs-came-back-haunt/
That first paragraph reminds me of how Spike Milligan described the mentality of the Army: If a man dies when you hang him, keep on hanging him till he gets used to it!
-
Yeah, I saw that Wilts.
Grand, eh? Osborne vanished from public view whilst Brown, Balls and Darling steered us past an impending Great Depression in 08/09. Then when the worst was averted, he popped back up calling Labour Deficit Deniers. Now he finally admits that they did what they had to do and he'd have done the same.
Politics, eh?
-
Yeah, I saw that Wilts.
Grand, eh? Osborne vanished from public view whilst Brown, Balls and Darling steered us past an impending Great Depression in 08/09. Then when the worst was averted, he popped back up calling Labour Deficit Deniers. Now he finally admits that they did what they had to do and he'd have done the same.
Politics, eh?
Indeed they are nearly all lying toe-rags but Osborne , Gove and particularly Bojo the clown far surpass the others .
I could cry at just how poor our politicians have become generally - some seem incapable of stringing more than half a dozen words together irrelevant of the Party they represent.