# Urgent Statement from PM today



## ger147 (Apr 18, 2017)

Any guesses what it might be? Outside in the street number 10 announcements are usually major news...


----------



## virtuocity (Apr 18, 2017)

May announces amnesty for the disabled to hand over the shirts off their back, before the govt are forced to make further policy changes.


----------



## USER1999 (Apr 18, 2017)

We are at war with North Korea?


----------



## patricks148 (Apr 18, 2017)

maybe sending warships to the Sea of Japan?


----------



## Cherry13 (Apr 18, 2017)

Looks like general election on 8th June.


----------



## USER1999 (Apr 18, 2017)

Looks like an election. Baffled as to why though. She has a mandate, so there is no need for it.


----------



## ger147 (Apr 18, 2017)

The only thing I can think of is a snap election on the premise that we have a 2nd EU referendum if she wins as she was never in favour of leaving the EU in the first place.

But that would be a GE with Tory vs Tory, the only scenario where they could possibly lose a GE and so therefore not very likely.


----------



## Three (Apr 18, 2017)

General Election in June. 

Great move. 
The whole thing will be about Brexit, great way of surreptitiously getting essentially a second vote.


----------



## ger147 (Apr 18, 2017)

So 8th June GE it is.


----------



## ScienceBoy (Apr 18, 2017)

Three said:



			General Election in June. 

Great move. 
The whole thing will be about Brexit, great way of surreptitiously getting essentially a second vote.
		
Click to expand...

I'm a remainer and I certainly hope we don't get another referendum, cause more chaos.

This is a crazy thing and a good thing. Let's get in a good conservative brexiter and be done with it.

TBH who else is there to vote for? I would normally go greens in generals but I can't waste a vote this time round.


----------



## fundy (Apr 18, 2017)

oh joy, whats left of the political parties get to embarrass themselves again, albeit not as much as some will do on here!


----------



## larmen (Apr 18, 2017)

What a sh**y move.

You have 24 month of tight schedule to get a deal for the country.
Let's waste the 1st 2 month if it for internal fighting.

Is it because labour is weak right now and she thinks she can gain? Do it in 25 months!
Is it because she isn't sure about Brexit? Do it before triggering article 50. Can always start the clock after that if you win.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Apr 18, 2017)

Interesting, on paper the Torys should walk it, but if Labour kick out Corbin who most people see as unelectable and get in an Anti Brexit candidate and campaign hard to remain , it could be a lot closer.

I can see why she is doing it, she needs her own mandate, not an inherited one.


----------



## jp5 (Apr 18, 2017)

Haven't we got enough to be doing in the next 24 months?! Take up a few months of that time running yet another vote.

Not sure how anyone can trust TM, seems guaranteed she will do the opposite of what she claims most of the time!


----------



## Pathetic Shark (Apr 18, 2017)

And as an added bonus, we now have THREE threads on here where some people can spout their bigoted opinions ....  I'm off to get some popcorn - anyone else want any?


----------



## jp5 (Apr 18, 2017)

larmen said:



			What a sh**y move.

You have 24 month of tight schedule to get a deal for the country.
Let's waste the 1st 2 month if it for internal fighting.

Is it because labour is weak right now and she thinks she can gain? Do it in 25 months!
Is it because she isn't sure about Brexit? Do it before triggering article 50. Can always start the clock after that if you win.
		
Click to expand...

Agreed - if it were to be done it should have been before Article 50. Or after the two years are up.

But to waste our limited negotiating time is madness.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Apr 18, 2017)

Pathetic Shark said:



			And as an added bonus, we now have THREE threads on here where some people can spout their bigoted opinions ....  I'm off to get some popcorn - anyone else want any?
		
Click to expand...

Toffee flavour for me please, 
Yes but it's only for about 7 weeks, the other 2 threads are pretty open ended &#128563;


----------



## palindromicbob (Apr 18, 2017)

jp5 said:



			Agreed - if it were to be done it should have been before Article 50. Or after the two years are up.

But to waste our limited negotiating time is madness.
		
Click to expand...

She can't do anything with the current stance within government because of the opposition. If she wins a GE it give her a stronger mandate and shuts down lots of opposition stance. If it backfires then she's out and there will be a hell of a lot of back peddling.   Would have made more since before triggering article 50 though.


----------



## ger147 (Apr 18, 2017)

Based on her statememt, it looks to me very much like taking advantage of the Corbyn factor to boost her HoC's majority to a more workable level.

If Labour support her motion tomorrow, it will be turkeys voting for Xmas.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 18, 2017)

larmen said:



			...
Is it because she isn't sure about Brexit? Do it before triggering article 50. Can always start the clock after that if you win.
		
Click to expand...

Er....Article 50 has already been triggered!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 18, 2017)

Now is not the time.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 18, 2017)

She currently has a majority of 12. This could give her a huge majority. The only surprise is that it was not called earlier. At least it will bring an end to the disaster that is Corbyn and his cohorts. 

Incidentally, my money this morning was a press conference relating to N. Korea. I didn't see this coming. Another good reason why I don't gamble, I'd be very poor.


----------



## jp5 (Apr 18, 2017)

It does rather make a mockery of the claim that an IndyRef2 in 18 months would be too soon for such a vote, when there'll be another GE in just a couple of months!


----------



## virtuocity (Apr 18, 2017)

jp5 said:



			It does rather make a mockery of the claim that an IndyRef2 in 18 months would be too soon for such a vote, when there'll be another GE in just a couple of months!
		
Click to expand...

A huge amount of Scottish unionists will unite behind their Tory candidate which may see a couple of SNP MPs unemployed come the 9th of June.  This would provide May with a (flawed) vindication of her decision to deny Scotland with a 2nd indy ref.  

It's horrifying to think what more damage the Tories can do to health and social care and the inequality gap over the next 5 years.  I really cannot fathom how anyone could possibly vote for this party, unless doing so completely selfishly.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 18, 2017)

virtuocity said:



			A huge amount of Scottish unionists will unite behind their Tory candidate which may see a couple of SNP MPs unemployed come the 9th of June.  This would provide May with a (flawed) vindication of her decision to deny Scotland with a 2nd indy ref.  

It's horrifying to think what more damage the Tories can do to health and social care and the inequality gap over the next 5 years.  I really cannot fathom how anyone could possibly vote for this party, unless doing so completely selfishly.
		
Click to expand...

It'll be all about independence here. So some of us are between a rock and a hard place. I'll vote for whichever candidate has the best chance of unseating the SNP... and just hope that isn't a Tory.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 18, 2017)

Only reason for this is for Tory party interests.
She has a majority in Parliament.
The majority have voted for Brexit.
All now on hold while we go through a GE.
Everyone expects theTory majority to increase, just like we expected a no brexit vote and Trump to lose.

Just what if? what if we get a hung Parliament or a reduce minority.

Her announcement blamed everyone else for this call for a GE, but again, she has a mandate and a majority now and we don't need further uncertainty. It's all on her shoulders.


----------



## Crazyface (Apr 18, 2017)

I find it very difficult to understand some Scottish resentment to being in the UK. Free prescriptions, try living down in England. Â£8.40!!!!!! Free university education.....Â£20k PLUS down here. Just what the hell are you moaning about. Go on your own and see how it feel to be paying for it all again. No you'll stay? Thought so.


----------



## Crazyface (Apr 18, 2017)

TM has probably had a chat with smarter people than us and realised she needs a vote from the population to be fully clear about what we (the people) want. This is it REMOANERS. Your LAST chance. Please then after it all SHUT UP !!!


----------



## Stuart_C (Apr 18, 2017)

Theresa May live on the Andrew Marr show said" I won't be calling a snap election", what's changed?

Can we really trust this woman?


----------



## MegaSteve (Apr 18, 2017)

No matter where I place my cross I'll still have a Tory MP representing me come June 9th... So, a pointless exercise for me... Hopefully a dry day so I don't get wet walking to polling station...

Another step towards wriggling out of Brexit methinks...

Born a sceptic me...


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 18, 2017)

Crazyface said:



			TM has probably had a chat with smarter people than us and realised she needs a vote from the population to be fully clear about what we (the people) want. This is it REMOANERS. Your LAST chance. Please then after it all SHUT UP !!!
		
Click to expand...

Rubbish, her party have a majority, everyone else can moan as much as they like, she holds all the cards!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 18, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			It'll be all about independence here. So some of us are between a rock and a hard place. I'll vote for whichever candidate has the best chance of unseating the SNP... and just hope that isn't a Tory.
		
Click to expand...

Good news for me is that initial research on my new constituency shows we actually have a labour mp. Phew!


----------



## virtuocity (Apr 18, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			It'll be all about independence here. So some of us are between a rock and a hard place. I'll vote for whichever candidate has the best chance of unseating the SNP... and just hope that isn't a Tory.
		
Click to expand...

You'd vote for a Tory candidate if they appeared to have the best chance of unseating a SNP candidate?


----------



## ger147 (Apr 18, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			Good news for me is that initial research on my new constituency shows we actually have a labour mp. Phew!
		
Click to expand...

Rarer than a mountain snow leopard in these parts.


----------



## virtuocity (Apr 18, 2017)

Stuart_C said:



			Can we really trust this woman?
		
Click to expand...

No.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 18, 2017)

Which leader do you trust? Easy to put holes in any of the current bunch. Least worst option and each person has to make that decision.


----------



## BrianM (Apr 18, 2017)

Crazyface said:



			I find it very difficult to understand some Scottish resentment to being in the UK. Free prescriptions, try living down in England. Â£8.40!!!!!! Free university education.....Â£20k PLUS down here. Just what the hell are you moaning about. Go on your own and see how it feel to be paying for it all again. No you'll stay? Thought so.
		
Click to expand...

You spout some drivel.
What has this got to do with the PM calling an Election.


----------



## User62651 (Apr 18, 2017)

Her reasons for holding a GE are not true. Political analysts had her arguments for GE in shreds after 10 minutes.
No-one foresaw her statement earlier because she fundamentally said she wouldn't do this, it's not a political masterstroke, it's telling porky pies. 

She was Remain, now she's Brexit.
'There will be no snap general election before 2020' - now there is (subject to tomorrows vote)
'Now is not the time' to Holyrood as it's too disruptive, however a GE in 7 weeks is perfectly ok.

She's got a hard job but doing one thing after saying another time and again doesn't lend itself to winning trust from all us plebs out here. 

Really hope somehow a coalition government comes from all this for moderation. Can't see how but we live in strange times.

Also cant see how SNP will take 56 of 59 seats again, could be their bubble starts to burst now as Lib Dems have been punished for their Tory sharing in Govt 2010-15 and are bound to get a few heartland areas back I think on their EU stance alone.

No idea how I'll vote this time, should it get approved tomorrow.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 18, 2017)

virtuocity said:



			You'd vote for a Tory candidate if they appeared to have the best chance of unseating a SNP candidate?
		
Click to expand...

Lesser of two evils, the snp are ruining our country.


----------



## User62651 (Apr 18, 2017)

If you're both pro UK Union and pro EU then Lib Dem is you're only real choice come June 8th. That should sit well with a lot of voters.

Tim Farron will be dancing a jig. He should pick up seats from all of Conservatives, Labour and SNP. Conservatives should get a good share of former UKIP support which will perhaps help win them a few more seats.

Anyone think they know how UKIP will fare - got 12% vote share in 2015, I reckon it'll be less than half that 5% at best. No Farage = no votes.


----------



## MegaSteve (Apr 18, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			If you're both pro UK Union and pro EU then Lib Dem is you're only real choice come June 8th. That should sit well with a lot of voters.

Tim Farron will be dancing a jig. He should pick up seats from all of Conservatives, Labour and SNP. Conservatives should get a good share of former UKIP support which will perhaps help win them a few more seats.

Anyone think they know how UKIP will fare - got 12% vote share in 2015, I reckon it'll be less than half that 5% at best. No Farage = no votes.
		
Click to expand...



The thought of Tim Farron dancing a proverbial jig over the next few weeks will give me nightmares ...

And, I wouldn't be surprised if Nige doesn't chance his luck as an independent somewhere...


----------



## Dellboy (Apr 18, 2017)

Great news, Tories to come back with a majority of 100+, push Brexit through and then get on with the normal day to day stuff, cant wait for June now


----------



## Khamelion (Apr 18, 2017)

A few of the replies on the thread are about can May be trusted, of course she can't, no politician can, they all have as many faces as suits them, depending on who they are talking to and on whatever subject.

There is always another agenda behind the one they are talking about, always an excuse as to why they change their minds on any given subject, they will spin any topic to suit their needs as they see fit and then tell the next person who'll listen something completely different.

As for this GE, she explained that in her announcement in front of number 10 earlier today.

As the old joke goes, how do you know a politician is lying? Their lips are moving.


----------



## drdel (Apr 18, 2017)

It is obvious why now as Labour, Liberals and SNP have all recently said they will frustrate the Brexit plans as much as possible. Also the Lords have stated the same. Up until now the PM thought the opposition would accept the referendum result, they haven't so she needs a clear mandate going forward.

Not going back on her word just accepting new circumstances and moving on - good strategy.


----------



## User62651 (Apr 18, 2017)

So 48% of electorate not happy with Brexit (along with an awful lot of young folks who didn't to vote in EU ref) perhaps many of whom looking to give Tories a kicking especially if there's even a slim chance of reversing Brexit - that's potentially a lot of voters for Tories to lose.

May will win for sure (given getting back UKIP votes I think) and probably increase Tory majority but she cannot unite the UK despite the rhetoric, that's what happens when you can win outright power with less than 37% of vote and have a country or union of countries so divided.

Map at last general election, hardly an even spread of politcal views UK wide, very polarised across borders and from urban/rural.

Afterwards she'll tell us she now has a mandate to do what she likes but I can't see how this GE will help achieve much of anything for the UK tbh.




Re table Tory vote share only went up 0.8% in 2015 from 2010, it's the 15% LibDem crash and the UKIP 9% gain from 2015 and what happens to that vote share in June that's of real interest, will LDs recover and UKIP lose and where do those votes then go?


----------



## ger147 (Apr 18, 2017)

Solves the George Osborne issue from a few weeks back as presumably he won't be standing for re-election?


----------



## User62651 (Apr 18, 2017)

ger147 said:



			Solves the George Osborne issue from a few weeks back as presumably he won't be standing for re-election?
		
Click to expand...

Why do you think that? I know he has the paper editorial thing now but I think he harbours political ambitions, is relatively young, is biding his time and is still hungry for the top job. No?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 18, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Why do you think that? I know he has the paper editorial thing now but I think he harbours political ambitions, is relatively young, is biding his time and is still hungry for the top job. No?
		
Click to expand...

At Christmas my elder daughter predicted a summer election after May had resigned.
Osbourne seen as the 'uniting' Tory leader.


----------



## ger147 (Apr 18, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Why do you think that? I know he has the paper editorial thing now but I think he harbours political ambitions, is relatively young, is biding his time and is still hungry for the top job. No?
		
Click to expand...

His constituency is due to disappear at the next GE which is now 8th June, so the presumption was he would stand down in 2020, otherwise he would need to find another seat.

Seems like TM has brought his retirement plans forward...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 18, 2017)

Dellboy said:



			Great news, Tories to come back with a majority of 100+, push Brexit through and then get on with the normal day to day stuff, cant wait for June now
		
Click to expand...

Great news for the right wing branch of the Tory party perhaps, that would be around 20% of sitting MP's.
Might not be great news if you wish to keep a United Kingdom though.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 18, 2017)

ger147 said:



			His constituency is due to disappear at the next GE which is now 8th June, so the presumption was he would stand down in 2020, otherwise he would need to find another seat.

Seems like TM has brought his retirement plans forward...
		
Click to expand...

Have those boundary changes been brought in yet though? Will we not be voting based on the current set up?

I used to live in his constituency, grew up there. It is solid Tory, as are the surrounding areas. If he wants a seat there he will get one.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 18, 2017)

Oh joy - isn't that exactly what the country needs right now - something else to divide the country. I wonder if these politicians actually do care about the general public ? Surely this is just a poor late April Fools joke ? 

Do they realise they are playing games with people's lives. It's all pathetic.


----------



## ger147 (Apr 18, 2017)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Have those boundary changes been brought in yet though? Will we not be voting based on the current set up?

I used to live in his constituency, grew up there. It is solid Tory, as are the surrounding areas. If he wants a seat there he will get one.
		
Click to expand...

I don't know if the boundary changes will be in effect for this GE. It's been reported as the next GE since they were announced and this is now the next GE so we'll have to wait and see I suppose.


----------



## IanM (Apr 18, 2017)

Hmm... a colleague who was moaning about Theresa until today for being a coward in NOT calling a Gen Election, is now calling her a coward for calling it at a time when the opposition is in a mess!   

The only hope Comrade Corbyn has is that all the Remain folk vote Labour... bet this GE is going to be all about EU!  (Thought we did all that this time last year?)  Or calling the GE in June when there's not much rain is a risk for the Tories

Maybe the Mods can just cut and paste all the Article 50 posts and save everyone the time.  I wonder what I'll be told I didn't understand this time?


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 18, 2017)

IanM said:



			Hmm... a colleague who was moaning about Theresa until today for being a coward in NOT calling a Gen Election, is now calling her a coward for calling it at a time when the opposition is in a mess! ?
		
Click to expand...

As did all the other party leaders. It appears that the great SNP leader has changed her mind (I know, no change there then).


----------



## delc (Apr 18, 2017)

Theresa May has to get a 2/3rds majority in Parliament to hold a General Election within the 5 fixed period.  Probably not a problem, but you never know!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 18, 2017)

The Rev Stu calls it pretty well from North Britain.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-end-of-sanity/#comments


----------



## ColchesterFC (Apr 18, 2017)

Haven't we had people on this forum and in the general public complaining about Theresa May being an "unelected" PM? And now many of those same people are complaining about her calling a general election. Seems that with some people she can't win no matter what she does. And it's hardly going to affect Brexit negotiations as they haven't really started yet and the EU are still sorting out their position.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 18, 2017)

Tory Electoral Fraud.......seems to be trending on twitter


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 18, 2017)

'Do you know that Polling Stations are occasionally used as primary schools'

That made me smile


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 18, 2017)

Fisherman out again. Break from the blog.


----------



## Tashyboy (Apr 18, 2017)

Goodbye labour and Corbyn


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 18, 2017)

This is extremely rude and NSFW but extremely funny.  And true. IMHO. 

[video=youtube_share;rTDWd9-zqzc]https://youtu.be/rTDWd9-zqzc[/video]


----------



## the smiling assassin (Apr 18, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The Rev Stu calls it pretty well from North Britain.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-end-of-sanity/#comments

Click to expand...

I particularly enjoyed Ian's deluded optimism...
Ian McCubbin says:
I agree with all you say and it will give SNP a mandate for declaring Scotland independent.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 18, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The Rev Stu calls it pretty well from North Britain.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-end-of-sanity/#comments

Click to expand...

Quite possibly the first time I've ever agreed with the bath seperatist!


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 18, 2017)

ger147 said:



			I don't know if the boundary changes will be in effect for this GE. It's been reported as the next GE since they were announced and this is now the next GE so we'll have to wait and see I suppose.
		
Click to expand...

I've googled this and the changes won't be in for this election. The aim was to consult and confirm the changes in 2018 so that the changes were ready for the 2020 election. This has come too soon.


----------



## Bazzatron (Apr 18, 2017)

I've no idea how any of this works but will this have any effect in the dollar rate? I'm going to America in June and obviously want as much for my Â£s as possible.


----------



## Pathetic Shark (Apr 19, 2017)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Oh joy - isn't that exactly what the country needs right now - something else to divide the country. I wonder if these politicians actually do care about the general public ? Surely this is just a poor late April Fools joke ? 

Do they realise they are playing games with people's lives. It's all pathetic.
		
Click to expand...

If the other parties had accepted the will of the public in the vote to leave the European Union, then there would be no need for this.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 19, 2017)

Pathetic Shark said:



			If the other parties had accepted the will of the public in the vote to leave the European Union, then there would be no need for this.
		
Click to expand...

They did, they backed the Government in triggering Article 50, May has a majority, she doesn't need support from other parties.
Her statement is a smokescreen


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 19, 2017)

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/polit...sa-may-announces-last-election-20170418126203


----------



## User62651 (Apr 19, 2017)

pauldj42 said:



			They did, they backed the Government in triggering Article 50, May has a majority, she doesn't need support from other parties.
Her statement is a smokescreen
		
Click to expand...

It is a smokescreen but a hopelessy thin see through smokescreen. Maybe a little honesty wouldn't go amiss as a leader.

She's playing the cards to win herself more power, that's politics and they're all at it on all sides but her word is worth nowt, sneaked into power last year by keeping her head down, power has now gone to her head.

She can't even tell the media in front of No 10 what she's doing without reading words written by someone else.

So hope this all backfires on her. Heading for a one party state soon, unhealthy.


----------



## delc (Apr 19, 2017)

The UK's nett contribution to the EU is about Â£10 billion a year, which works out to about Â£200 per taxpayer on average. The General Election by itself will probably cost more than that!  At least it will delay the Brexit process by another few weeks. ðŸ˜€


----------



## Crazyface (Apr 19, 2017)

BrianM said:



			You spout some drivel.
What has this got to do with the PM calling an Election.
		
Click to expand...

?????

Drivel? Do the people of Scotland Wales get free prescriptions? Do the young people of Scotland get free university education? (not sure about Wales). In England it cost Â£8.40 a prescription. In England our young have to pay for university education. Point out what mistakes I have made in these statements?


----------



## User62651 (Apr 19, 2017)

delc said:



			The UK's nett contribution to the EU is about Â£10 billion a year, which works out to about Â£200 per taxpayer on average. The General Election by itself will probably cost more than that!  At least it will delay the Brexit process by another few weeks. ðŸ˜€
		
Click to expand...

Keep fighting DelC! Hope your lot take a good few seats back off Cons. LD Brexit stance is bound to help win votes I think. LDs were right about Iraq when no-one listended and they're right about Brexit too. We need people like Vince Cable and David Laws, good politicians, around again.


----------



## Crazyface (Apr 19, 2017)

Pathetic Shark said:



			If the other parties had accepted the will of the public in the vote to leave the European Union, then there would be no need for this.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly!


----------



## User62651 (Apr 19, 2017)

Lib Dems have taken 5000+ new members in one day since May's forked tongue announcement yesterday. Hopefully a sign of things swinging away from May and towards coalition govt.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 19, 2017)

I'd argue she is doing this as if not then she will have to hold an election after we have come out of Europe and god knows what the UK will look like then or how the electorate will feel about the tories. 

Where as now she is well ahead in the polls and there is not really an effective opposition. The election will mostly be fought on Brexit, but the win will allow her to push ahead with her nasty (IMHO of course) domestic policies including starving schools of any money under the auspices of them becoming 'more efficient'. It will also allow her to make a break with the last Tory manifesto as it seems she does not agree with most of it so she can push ahead with a hard Brexit and her ideological pet projects like grammar schools.  Personally I feel it will be a horrible time for the UK under 5 years of relatively hard right Tory rule whilst coming out of Europe, but I appreciate that certain people will will find her strangely exciting as she reminds them of Thatcher.


----------



## User62651 (Apr 19, 2017)

Crazyface said:



			?????

Drivel? Do the people of Scotland Wales get free prescriptions? Do the young people of Scotland get free university education? (not sure about Wales). In England it cost Â£8.40 a prescription. In England our young have to pay for university education. Point out what mistakes I have made in these statements?
		
Click to expand...

We have a government and devolution, if Holyrood chooses to make policies for Scotland, that's their and our call. Holyrood doesn't need to answer to Westminster on devolved matters. If you're jealous that's your problem. Japan gets free childcare for everyone, I'm jealous of that as I have to pay a lot (in Scotland) for childcare. Different countries different rules.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 19, 2017)

Crazyface said:



			TM has probably had a chat with smarter people than us and realised she needs a vote from the population to be fully clear about what we (the people) want. This is it REMOANERS. *Your LAST chance.* *Please then after it all SHUT UP !!!*

Click to expand...

And to think the Brexiters moan about the remainers not understanding what a democracy is...


----------



## delc (Apr 19, 2017)

There is a rumour going around that Polling Stations are also sometimes used as schools and community centres! &#128514;&#128514;&#128514;


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 19, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			And to think the Brexiters moan about the remainers not understanding what a democracy is... 

Click to expand...

I'm a bit confused what it is!   I thought it was where the majority vote is what people accept as the National policy.

Oh! Edit:


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 19, 2017)

Sounds like they all have a 'Mandate'   I think Delc has one as well!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 19, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			It is a smokescreen but a hopelessy thin see through smokescreen. Maybe a little honesty wouldn't go amiss as a leader.

She's playing the cards to win herself more power, that's politics and they're all at it on all sides but her word is worth nowt, sneaked into power last year by keeping her head down, power has now gone to her head.

She can't even tell the media in front of No 10 what she's doing without reading words written by someone else.

So hope this all backfires on her. Heading for a one party state soon, unhealthy.
		
Click to expand...

Well said, May has been played for a fool by the right wing section of her Tory party.
This has nothing to do with a united Britain and everything to do with keeping half of a political party in power.
Imagine if Liam Fox was leader and had acted as May has just done......the country would be up in arms.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 19, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			And to think the Brexiters moan about the remainers not understanding what a democracy is... 

Click to expand...

Then the remainers now have been given a chance to turn it all on its head. They were the ones that argued that leaveing the EU was far to important an issue for the electorate to decide  and should be left in the hands of MPs now it looks like all the party's MPs think the election is a good idea and are going to vote in favour and some of the electorate appear to be changing their stance and don't like MPs making decisions.

Could it be the same people who said May didn't have a mandate to be PM and should hold an election.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 19, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Well said, May has been played for a fool by the right wing section of her Tory party.
This has nothing to do with a united Britain and everything to do with keeping half of a political party in power.
Imagine if Liam Fox was leader and had acted as May has just done......the country would be up in arms.
		
Click to expand...

Break out the deodorant, the thought of the great unwashed with their arms up


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 19, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Well said, May has been played for a fool by the right wing section of her Tory party.
This has nothing to do with a united Britain and everything to do with keeping half of a political party in power.
Imagine if Liam Fox was leader and had acted as May has just done......the country would be up in arms.
		
Click to expand...

Its politics and every party does everything for their benefit as you know to well if you live in Scotland.


----------



## MegaSteve (Apr 19, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Keep fighting DelC! Hope your lot take a good few seats back off Cons. LD Brexit stance is bound to help win votes I think. LDs were right about Iraq when no-one listended and they're right about Brexit too. We need people like Vince Cable and David Laws, good politicians, around again.
		
Click to expand...


The last thing 'we' need is Vince the Cable anywhere near government... He's shafted 'the people' already why do 'we' need him or the Libdems, in general, in Westminster? When in coalition they proved to be a TOTAL embarrassment...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 19, 2017)

So Prime Minister Theresa May tells us the need for a GE is because the country is coming together (it's not) yet parliament remains divided - frustrating Brexit - it's called opposition dear PM

And then I listen to the Home Secretary Amber Rudd this morning tell us the need for the GE is because it's timing - nothing much will be done until after the coming French elections and can't have us having a GE soon after the 2yr clock has stopped ticking.  But dear HS - these things have been known - they are not new.  Before Art50 was triggered there was strong suggestions being made that triggering should be left until September 2017 to get the French and German elections out of the way - but No - May was adamant about end March for Art50. 

They are both talking farm manure.  

Bottom line is that May wants to wipe out opposition to Brexit and get a vote in while economic things seem OK; before the economy starts to struggle and public services really start to fall apart; and before the deal with the EU will be seen to be as difficult and damaging as it may well be.    

And the DM says - "Crush the Saboteurs"  - what the hell is THAT  about - you want to bring the country together then you don't crush opposition to Brexit.  Who do the DM want to crush - Me?  Besides what does the DM think is being sabotaged?  What?  This DM rant is completely unfounded fury to ignite passions and emotions in Leave voters against those of us who opposed Brexit - as if WE who oppose Brexit will be the responsible for the difficult and poor deal that we negotiate with the EU?  But we don't HAVE a deal yet.  The DM is appealing to emotions on the unstated premis that there will be a poor deal.  But it might actually be a good deal - so what is the DM on about?    Is this how Theresa May thinks the country is coming together.  It is disgusting. 

What a mess.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 19, 2017)

MegaSteve said:



			The last thing 'we' need is Vince the Cable anywhere near government... He's shafted 'the people' already why do 'we' need him or the Libdems, in general, in Westminster? *When in coalition they proved to be a TOTAL embarrassment..*.
		
Click to expand...

Or they kept the more right wing of the Tory party in check to prevent them unleashing very socially divisive policies around benefits and education  that unfairly target certain sections of the population (mostly non Tory voters) and generally running the public sector into the ground. Like they are doing now. IMHO


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 19, 2017)

Old Skier said:



			Then the remainers now have been given a chance to turn it all on its head. T*hey were the ones that argued that leaveing the EU was far to important an issue for the electorate to decide  and should be left in the hands of MPs now it looks like all the party's MPs think the election is a good idea and are going to vote in favour and some of the electorate appear to be changing their stance and don't like MPs making decisions.*

Could it be the same people who said May didn't have a mandate to be PM and should hold an election.
		
Click to expand...

Am liking your logic there.  Equating the ability of MPs to vote if they want Brexit or not with MPs voting for a general election. Makes complete sense, in a 3-2-1 dusty bin kind of way.


----------



## MegaSteve (Apr 19, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Or they kept the more right wing of the Tory party in check to prevent them unleashing very socially divisive policies around benefits and education  that unfairly target certain sections of the population (mostly non Tory voters) and generally running the public sector into the ground. Like they are doing now. IMHO 

Click to expand...

On key points, within their own election mandate, they turned their backs on the folk that voted for them...

And, yes I agree, they probably delayed 'matters' getting a whole lot worse...


----------



## JamesR (Apr 19, 2017)

MegaSteve said:



*On key points, within their own election mandate, they turned their backs on the folk that voted for them...*

And, yes I agree, they probably delayed 'matters' getting a whole lot worse...
		
Click to expand...

They weren't in a position to carry out their own manifesto a they weren't the ruling party, merely a small part of the coalition.
My fear is that by holding them against the manifesto pledges rather than what they prevented the Tories from doing they have been cast down to the bottom of the pile.
Hopefully, now the Tories have gone further and further right since the last election, some old LD voters will return and restore them to a higher tier.


----------



## MegaSteve (Apr 19, 2017)

JamesR said:



			They weren't in a position to carry out their own manifesto a they weren't the ruling party, merely a small part of the coalition.
My fear is that by holding them against the manifesto pledges rather than what they prevented the Tories from doing they have been cast down to the bottom of the pile.
Hopefully, now the Tories have gone further and further right since the last election, some old LD voters will return and restore them to a higher tier.
		
Click to expand...


They were in a position to put up a better 'fight' than they did...


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 19, 2017)

JamesR said:



			They weren't in a position to carry out their own manifesto a they weren't the ruling party, merely a small part of the coalition.
My fear is that by holding them against the manifesto pledges rather than what they prevented the Tories from doing they have been cast down to the bottom of the pile.
Hopefully, now the Tories have gone further and further right since the last election, some old LD voters will return and restore them to a higher tier.
		
Click to expand...

They sold out for a chance at power, did they honestly believe the tories would not blame them and cut them lose when it came to the following GE


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 19, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Am liking your logic there.  Equating the ability of MPs to vote if they want Brexit or not with MPs voting for a general election. Makes complete sense, in a 3-2-1 dusty bin kind of way.
		
Click to expand...

Just keeping it in line with all the posts on the thread.


----------



## IanM (Apr 19, 2017)

Huge grumbles on these pages and non Tory and Remain Lobbies calling May an "unelected PM".....

Huge grumbles by exactly the same folk when she does.

Nice.


As I understand it, she is standing against a tramp who calls HAMAS and Hezbollah "his friends" (and his previous with the IRA isn't pleasant) and a baby faced wombat currently making a fool of himself for his religion based homophobia  

...I guess making it a Brexit/Remain Referendum re-run is how they'll have to play it.  Otherwise it'll be a bloodbath


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 19, 2017)

IanM said:



			Huge grumbles on these pages and non Tory and Remain Lobbies calling May an "unelected PM".....

Huge grumbles by exactly the same folk when she does.

Nice.


As I understand it, she is standing against a tramp who calls HAMAS and Hezbollah "his friends" (and his previous with the IRA isn't pleasant) and a baby faced wombat currently making a fool of himself for his religion based homophobia  

...I guess making it a Brexit/Remain Referendum re-run is how they'll have to play it.  Otherwise it'll be a bloodbath
		
Click to expand...

I voted to leave the EU and cannot see any reason for her to call the GE, she has the mandate and a majority, it's ok being petty and name calling, but what if she's made a bad call, what if she gets it wrong. Who are you going to blame or insult then?


----------



## IanM (Apr 19, 2017)

pauldj42 said:



			I voted to leave the EU and cannot see any reason for her to call the GE, she has the mandate and a majority, it's ok being petty and name calling, but what if she's made a bad call, what if she gets it wrong. Who are you going to blame or insult then?
		
Click to expand...


I also cannot see any reason to call a GE - other than to give the PM the mandate her detractors say she doesn't have.  I also think it is a bad call.... why take the risk.  She's cleary been told she's so far ahead in the Polls its ok.  BUT a rerun of the Referendum is much closer than a Tory/Labour choice.

As for name calling..... ok, my visual impressions of those two is subjective on my part, but the quotes are there for all to see....and that's the scary bit


----------



## ger147 (Apr 19, 2017)

Confirmation that Osborne is quitting as an MP at the upcoming GE. So every cloud etc.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 19, 2017)

Best news so far :whoo:


----------



## MegaSteve (Apr 19, 2017)

ger147 said:



			Confirmation that Osborne is quitting as an MP at the upcoming GE. So every cloud etc.
		
Click to expand...




Lord Tyrion said:



			Best news so far :whoo:
		
Click to expand...


I wonder if he now regrets taking the job at the standard...

Think he believes he still has a future in politics being the misguided fool he is...


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 19, 2017)

He is young enough to go back in if he wants to but former Chancellors are rarely popular and he failed to gauge that. I suspect his ego tells him anything is possible and he now has a free run at trousering as much money as he can without anyone questioning him. Expect to hear him getting even more banking directorships in the coming months. Kerrcching at Osborne Towers.


----------



## User62651 (Apr 19, 2017)

Common knowledge May detests Osbourne so he's probably figured he's on a hiding to nothing hanging about the back benches for another 5 years. Expect we'll see him in future back in a Govt ministerial role. Week's a long time in politics.


----------



## DRW (Apr 19, 2017)

Tis all potty.

Hope Mays party doesn't get a majority elected and it backfires on them. Would all be brexit and DavidCam all over again. That said not sure who you vote for that said.


----------



## MegaSteve (Apr 19, 2017)

Bottom line is, that few of us have a vote that carries much/any 'influence'...

For the vast majority, we all ready know who our MP will be come June 9th irrespective of how we cast our vote...


----------



## User62651 (Apr 19, 2017)

MegaSteve said:



			Bottom line is, that few of us have a vote that carries much/any 'influence'...

For the vast majority, we all ready know who our MP will be come June 9th irrespective of how we cast our vote...
		
Click to expand...

Our SNP MP had an 8,500 majority from 52,000 voting in 2015. However it was Lib Dem/Liberal seat going way back to 1992 before that (6 general elections) so there is still a strong case that my vote could matter as the 2015 SNP surge has to wane a bit I think so could be considered a marginal, who knows. Even a Conservative won this seat in 1983 Scotland had 21 Conservative MPs back then, weren't always toxic up here, wonder if they can get more than 1 this time round.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 19, 2017)

MegaSteve said:



			Bottom line is, that few of us have a vote that carries much/any 'influence'...

For the vast majority, we all ready know who our MP will be come June 9th irrespective of how we cast our vote...
		
Click to expand...

You could argue that a few constituencies are very easy to predict (but after recent elections that is possibly less easy to predict nowadays) . However that is different from saying that your vote does not have any influence.

I do find it strange this attitude that if you do not vote for whoever won then your vote is worthless, it does not matter.  Of course it matters, a 10,000 majority is a lot different from a 300 majority when it comes to how MPs behave and how they treat their constituents. Yes in both cases the particular MP has won and the winning party will set policy, but if a party has a number of MPs with a slender majority then the context is very different. I am increasingly more open to PR for our elections now as opposed to 1st past the post.  As I think in modern society that is becoming increasingly out of date and will just lead to more and more entrenched ideological views and less and less compromise.


----------



## jp5 (Apr 19, 2017)

DarrenWilliams said:



			Tis all potty.

Hope Mays party doesn't get a majority elected and it backfires on them. Would all be brexit and DavidCam all over again. That said not sure who you vote for that said.
		
Click to expand...

Similarly amusing would be May's solidly Remain constituency of Maidenhead giving her the boot.


----------



## larmen (Apr 19, 2017)

jp5 said:



			Similarly amusing would be May's solidly Remain constituency of Maidenhead giving her the boot.
		
Click to expand...

The only leaves they would want maybe?


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 19, 2017)

People forget May campaigned to Remain, although very feebly to be fair. All she is doing now is enacting what the UK public asked her to do.


----------



## DRW (Apr 19, 2017)

Lord Tyrion said:



			People forget May campaigned to Remain, although very feebly to be fair. All she is doing now is enacting what the UK public asked her to do.
		
Click to expand...

Personally I think she is trying to play the game.

I don't like people playing games with other peoples lives. The upper classes in power need to realise people can bite back and nothing is certain in life.....

It could become very interesting if labour promise to backtrack on Brexit and fight the campaign on that point, would really split the vote(not that I agree with that approach but still the brexit vote was like 50:50).


----------



## the smiling assassin (Apr 19, 2017)

May's back tracking recorded on bbc radio sounds almost word-for-word like Gove's move on the leadership..


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 19, 2017)

DarrenWilliams said:



			Personally I think she is trying to play the game.

I don't like people playing games with other peoples lives. The upper classes in power need to realise people can bite back and nothing is certain in life.....

*It could become very interesting if labour promise to backtrack on Brexit and fight the campaign on that point,* would really split the vote(not that I agree with that approach but still the brexit vote was like 50:50).
		
Click to expand...

I think if Labour had an electable leader then that play may create a few inroads into the inevitable Tory majority.  But in its current state then I fear all that will do is play into the hands of the Tories more who will point out Labour have not got a proper policy on Brexit.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 19, 2017)

the smiling assassin said:



			May's back tracking recorded on bbc radio sounds almost word-for-word like Gove's move on the leadership..
		
Click to expand...

Ironically enough you could argue Corbyn is the most trust worthy politician there is in regards to doing what he says.  All the rest near the top seem to flip flop, back track and sometimes outright lie based mostly on political expediency and their personal political ambitions.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 19, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Our SNP MP had an 8,500 majority from 52,000 voting in 2015. However it was Lib Dem/Liberal seat going way back to 1992 before that (6 general elections) so there is still a strong case that my vote could matter as the 2015 SNP surge has to wane a bit I think so could be considered a marginal, who knows. Even a Conservative won this seat in 1983 Scotland had 21 Conservative MPs back then, weren't always toxic up here, wonder if they can get more than 1 this time round.

Click to expand...

You can hear it now, and read the newspaper headlines..
Tory's win two seats in Scotland and ' the Scots people have spoken out against Independence'.


----------



## drdel (Apr 19, 2017)

The reason it is taking place is because the next GE would otherwise have come at the worst time of the Brexit negotiations and given the EUs reaction and the HoL frustation tactics. 

No choice so the right movement.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Apr 19, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			You can hear it now, and read the newspaper headlines..
Tory's win two seats in Scotland and ' the Scots people have spoken out against Independence'.
		
Click to expand...

What do you think would constitute the Scots people speaking out against Independence? 5 seats for the Tories, 10 seats? Not having a pop at you, genuinely interested if you think that there is a tipping point based purely on the GE result.


----------



## larmen (Apr 19, 2017)

drdel said:



			The reason it is taking place is because the next GE would otherwise have come at the worst time of the Brexit negotiations and given the EUs reaction and the HoL frustation tactics. 

No choice so the right movement.
		
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it have been 2020? And that is past 2019 when the negotiations are likely to finish.


----------



## drdel (Apr 19, 2017)

larmen said:



			Wouldn't it have been 2020? And that is past 2019 when the negotiations are likely to finish.
		
Click to expand...

But it's proximity would encourage EU negotiators to delay as they would see the encumbant PM as weakened during they electioneering.


----------



## larmen (Apr 19, 2017)

drdel said:



			But it's proximity would encourage EU negotiators to delay as they would see the encumbant PM as weakened during they electioneering.
		
Click to expand...

Instead the UK is wasting 7 weeks for sure, just to avoid a might be?


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 19, 2017)

I think people are reading too much into this.  It's probably exactly what she is saying, she and her Cabinet are frustrated by the gerrymandering over Brexit being carried out by Labour, SNP, LibDems, HOL and want to get a better majority and mandate from the General Public to get the job done.   I cant see what the problem is, we will all have the opportunity to vote for who we prefer as our MP.   Or does it work some other way now?


----------



## Beezerk (Apr 19, 2017)

So what would happen if Corbyn suddenly resigned and Labour get a new "popular" face in charge? Sadly impossible but it would make for a great race.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 19, 2017)

Beezerk said:



			So what would happen if Corbyn suddenly resigned and Labour get a new "popular" face in charge? Sadly impossible but it would make for a great race.
		
Click to expand...

Problem is they dont have one.


----------



## Beezerk (Apr 19, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			Problem is they dont have one.
		
Click to expand...

Well there is that as well &#128513;

Chuka Umunna a tell thi.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 19, 2017)

Aeroplane for the elder Miliband &#128512;. That would make it a contest.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 19, 2017)

Lib Dems very near won South West Surrey from the Tories back in the 2001 GE.  On a vote of 50,000 the Tories held it with a majority of 800.  Jeremy Hunt is a fairly popular constituency MP but a lot of unhappiness with him over the NHS; he was a Remainer  but has just now gone with the Brexit Flow.  And Waverley Borough - most of SW Surrey - was massively Remain.  Potential for an upset - Lib Dems unseat Jeremy Hunt?


----------



## delc (Apr 19, 2017)

I am reasonably convinced that this election has been called to settle another internecine battle between different factions within the Tory Party, as was last year's referendum. It would nice if they governed in the National interest for once! &#9785;&#65039;


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 19, 2017)

I am forecasting a Tory majority of around 100


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 19, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			I am forecasting a Tory majority of around 100
		
Click to expand...

How many seats do predict UKIP will win?


----------



## Dellboy (Apr 19, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			I am forecasting a Tory majority of around 100
		
Click to expand...

Would like 110-115 but could live with 80-90


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 19, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			How many seats do predict UKIP will win?
		
Click to expand...

Probably none but I'm a Tory so Hey Ho.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 19, 2017)

I'm afraid it's just terribly weak leadership. She flip flops on the big issues, makes unambiguous statements only to change her mind later, shows rank hypocrisy over the timing of indyref2 while calling a GE and pure cowardice by calling an election but refusing to debate with the other leaders.

Embarrassing.


----------



## delc (Apr 20, 2017)

If Mrs May thinks she has such a strong case, why is she so afraid of debating it in public? Is it because she can't just read out a pre-written speech?  At least David Cameron was a good debator! &#128580;


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 20, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			I'm afraid it's just terribly weak leadership. She flip flops on the big issues, makes unambiguous statements only to change her mind later, shows rank hypocrisy over the timing of indyref2 while calling a GE and pure cowardice by calling an election but refusing to debate with the other leaders.

Embarrassing.
		
Click to expand...

Yes but she's a bit like Thatcher! You know, smash the unions, make Britain great again, exterminating all benefit scroungers.  And she wears leather trousers so as a man of a certain age, that introduces some sexual frisson into politics which we have been sorely missing since Thatch went. Grrrrrrr. What's not to like about that??


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 20, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			I'm afraid it's just terribly weak leadership. She flip flops on the big issues, makes unambiguous statements only to change her mind later, shows rank hypocrisy over the timing of indyref2 while calling a GE and pure cowardice by calling an election but refusing to debate with the other leaders.

Embarrassing.
		
Click to expand...

Totally agree, unfortunately some people will still believe the lies.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 20, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			I'm afraid it's just terribly weak leadership. She flip flops on the big issues, makes unambiguous statements only to change her mind later, shows rank hypocrisy over the timing of indyref2 while calling a GE and pure cowardice by calling an election but refusing to debate with the other leaders.

Embarrassing.
		
Click to expand...

Her historical voting record is not great either, shows another side of her.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 20, 2017)

pauldj42 said:



			Totally agree, unfortunately some people will still believe the lies.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, you seem to.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 20, 2017)

I'm guessing it helps take all the focus away from the scandal the Tories are currently facing


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 20, 2017)

delc said:



			If Mrs May thinks she has such a strong case, why is she so afraid of debating it in public? Is it because she can't just read out a pre-written speech?  At least David Cameron was a good debator! &#63044;
		
Click to expand...

If my memory is correct Cameron refused to debate on TV with the others.  

Regarding why she doesn't want to, rather than can't, I suggest it because she has better things to do with her time than stand on a stage with a bunch of Muppets throwing insults at each other.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 20, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			Yes, you seem to.
		
Click to expand...

Please tell me why the current Government majority that was good enough last week/month to continue with Brexit is no longer good enough, please remember I voted to leave the EU.


----------



## MegaSteve (Apr 20, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			You could argue that a few constituencies are very easy to predict (but after recent elections that is possibly less easy to predict nowadays) . However that is different from saying that your vote does not have any influence.

I do find it strange this attitude that if you do not vote for whoever won then your vote is worthless, it does not matter.  Of course it matters, a 10,000 majority is a lot different from a 300 majority when it comes to how MPs behave and how they treat their constituents. Yes in both cases the particular MP has won and the winning party will set policy, but if a party has a number of MPs with a slender majority then the context is very different. I am increasingly more open to PR for our elections now as opposed to 1st past the post.  As I think in modern society that is becoming increasingly out of date and will just lead to more and more entrenched ideological views and less and less compromise.
		
Click to expand...

Living in a constituency where the person wearing the blue rosette gets 50%+ of the vote leaving the rest to fight over the scraps I genuinely feel my vote, in the scheme of things, counts for little... Lived here thru' nine GE's and only ever had one knock on the door from a prospective candidate or representative of... And, the way the boundaries have been manipulated, in recent times, I am sure there more than ever before constituencies with similar 'issues'...


----------



## User62651 (Apr 20, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			I'm afraid it's just terribly weak leadership. She flip flops on the big issues, makes unambiguous statements only to change her mind later, shows rank hypocrisy over the timing of indyref2 while calling a GE and pure cowardice by calling an election but refusing to debate with the other leaders.

Embarrassing.
		
Click to expand...

Bout sums it up for a lot of people! 

Since Tories got a majority in 2015 seems it's been one disastrous decision after another for Conservative self interest, not for the country.
May is driving huge wedges further in to this already disunited Kingdom, poor leadership.
Knock LibDems all you like, that temperance to the Tory agenda 2010-15 was a very good thing. Coalition govt is needed, works in many countries. First past post system letting a 36.9% view control all is wrong.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 20, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			If my memory is correct Cameron refused to debate on TV with the others.  

Regarding why she doesn't want to, rather than can't, I suggest it because she has better things to do with her time than stand on a stage with a bunch of Muppets throwing insults at each other.
		
Click to expand...

Or it's a far better way to reach more voters and get your message across.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 20, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			I'm afraid it's just terribly weak leadership. She flip flops on the big issues, makes unambiguous statements only to change her mind later, shows rank hypocrisy over the timing of indyref2 while calling a GE and pure cowardice by calling an election but refusing to debate with the other leaders.

Embarrassing.
		
Click to expand...

Remind you of anyone up above the wall.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 20, 2017)

pauldj42 said:



			Or it's a far better way to reach more voters and get your message across.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not convinced it does anything other than make people even more critical of politicians.  These staged 'so called' debates seem to achieve nothing, they can put people off due to the inevitable mud slinging they promote.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 20, 2017)

delc said:



			If Mrs May thinks she has such a strong case, why is she so afraid of debating it in public? Is it because she can't just read out a pre-written speech?  At least David Cameron was a good debator! &#63044;
		
Click to expand...

Maybe because, as many suggested on a thread previously that they are a waste of time and money and rarely change a voters mind.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 20, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			I'm afraid it's just terribly weak leadership. She flip flops on the big issues, makes unambiguous statements only to change her mind later, shows rank hypocrisy over the timing of indyref2 

Embarrassing.
		
Click to expand...

Enough on the SNP, lets get back to the election.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 20, 2017)

Sorry forgot to post the link in the post

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.in...ry-party-paul-nuttall-david-a7690106.html?amp


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 20, 2017)

Old Skier said:



			Remind you of anyone up above the wall.
		
Click to expand...

It doesn't actually. I like sturgeon (assuming that's who you mean) even less than May but they are chalk and cheese.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 20, 2017)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Sorry forgot to post the link in the post

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.in...ry-party-paul-nuttall-david-a7690106.html?amp

Click to expand...

Says MPs, unfortunately no names or party mentioned. Nobody daft enough to take information from an anonymous source seriously even if it might be true. Or are they.


----------



## User62651 (Apr 20, 2017)

Old Skier said:



			Says MPs, unfortunately no names or party mentioned. Nobody daft enough to take information from an anonymous source seriously even if it might be true. Or are they.
		
Click to expand...

This expenses question was asked of PM in Commons yesterday by an SNP MP, May said question was unworthy of the asker and said no more on it. Never answers question on any topic she hasn't prepared for, can't think on her feet. She is turning into Maggie2, gawd help us all.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 20, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			This expenses question was asked of PM in Commons yesterday by an SNP MP, May said question was unworthy of the asker and said no more on it. Never answers question on any topic she hasn't prepared for, can't think on her feet. *She is turning into Maggie2, gawd help us all*.
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately (IMHO) I think that idea is very attractive for a good number of voters...


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 20, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			I'm not convinced it does anything other than make people even more critical of politicians.  These staged 'so called' debates seem to achieve nothing, they can put people off due to the inevitable mud slinging they promote.
		
Click to expand...

Rightly or wrongly people make a decision for who they will vote for on a number of reasons. And how a potential PM behaves and carries themselves in a debate when they are challenged is one of them.  Lets face it, the PM will be in quite a few 'debates' in the near future which are quite important to the future of the UK to say the least. 

I for one would quite like to see how the potential leader of my country acts under pressure, how truthful they seem, on a basic 'likeability' level, are they the type of person I would trust to lead us. Her voting record and mostly ideological based policies in the areas of education and welfare do not overly endear her to me. If she thinks she is too busy to open herself up to the public and questions from other potential leaders of this country then so be it. But by ducking out of these I feel it says more about how TMay thinks of the electorate than she realises
.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 20, 2017)

TM wont do a live debate because she doesn't need to. She is miles ahead. All that can happen from her point of view is that she looks bad and loses votes. She is not good thinking on the hoof, she is wooden and scripted. It is not her natural environment.

She is unlikely to gain more votes, none that will make a difference anyway, and so it is a free hit for all of the other leaders. TM does not have to do anything spectacular during this election, she just has to avoid banana skins. Live debates are a banana skin so avoid. No strategist would let her near a live debate.


----------



## jp5 (Apr 20, 2017)

And how will the PM not bothering to turn up to a debate go down with the electorate?

Not very well I would think.

She will have plenty of banana skin moments with the EU negotiations so not a good look to be dodging on the basis of that.


----------



## spongebob59 (Apr 20, 2017)

Having seen some of the US live debates, I fail to see what they add.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 20, 2017)

spongebob59 said:



			Having seen some of the US live debates, I fail to see what they add.
		
Click to expand...

I'd disagree.  Surely they gave people an opportunity to see how the candidates operated in that environment?


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 20, 2017)

jp5 said:



			And how will the PM not bothering to turn up to a debate go down with the electorate?

Not very well I would think.
		
Click to expand...

Will she upset more of the electorate by not turning up than turning up and having a mare? She is so far ahead she can afford to upset the odd voter by ignoring the debates. If the polls were closer she would not have this luxury.


----------



## jp5 (Apr 20, 2017)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Will she upset more of the electorate by not turning up than turning up and having a mare? She is so far ahead she can afford to upset the odd voter by ignoring the debates. If the polls were closer she would not have this luxury.
		
Click to expand...

The electorate should be entitled to know if she 'has a mare'.

Not too much to ask of our PM to stand on a stage for an hour and answer some questions, is it?


----------



## User62651 (Apr 20, 2017)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Will she upset more of the electorate by not turning up than turning up and having a mare? She is so far ahead she can afford to upset the odd voter by ignoring the debates. If the polls were closer she would not have this luxury.
		
Click to expand...

The very first thing a wannabee politician does is learn how to debate. Debate is the backbone of politics. Not debating is the way of dictatorships.

She makes it look like she believes it's beneath her, if it's beneath her it shows contempt for the people she claims to lead. Did she really think being PM would be an easy ride? She may have nothing to gain from tv debate but she clearly feels she has something to gain from calling an early GE, why should she have it both ways as a publically elected official?

These debates tend to be popular with people, there are a good amount of floating voters who're undecided and it can help them decide. We don't know our leaders. TV debates lets us see them in sometimes uncomfortable situations, they're elected by the public so should be occasionally answerable to the public. Every 5 years (2 because of Mays choice this time) is not that often for a tv debate of party leaders. I enjoy watching them and I would say I am a floating voter with no party loyalty so imo May should be there and be scrutinised, she's a politician not The Queen.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 20, 2017)

I'm not saying I disagree with any of your points. I'm just pointing out that if I was in charge of her campaign I would not let her anywhere near that stage. Her strategists are thinking exactly the same. She doesn't need to do it and unless the polls give Labour a massive surge she wont do it.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 20, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			This expenses question was asked of PM in Commons yesterday by an SNP MP, May said question was unworthy of the asker and said no more on it. Never answers question on any topic she hasn't prepared for, can't think on her feet. She is turning into Maggie2, gawd help us all.
		
Click to expand...

Her non-reply to Wee Angus's question re timing of GE v Indyref2 said a lot as well.
Her snobby sneery evasive attitude to MP's asking honest questions makes my blood boil.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 20, 2017)

Lord Tyrion said:



			TM wont do a live debate because she doesn't need to. She is miles ahead. All that can happen from her point of view is that she looks bad and loses votes. She is not good thinking on the hoof, she is wooden and scripted. It is not her natural environment.

She is unlikely to gain more votes, none that will make a difference anyway, and so it is a free hit for all of the other leaders. TM does not have to do anything spectacular during this election, she just has to avoid banana skins. Live debates are a banana skin so avoid. No strategist would let her near a live debate.
		
Click to expand...

They should have everything set up for her - and, if she doesn't turn up, replace her presence with 'a tub of lard'!


----------



## IanM (Apr 20, 2017)

After months of being told she is an unelected PM with no mandate, she looked at the Polls and saw Tories on double the rating of Labour and thought..... ok then scruffy....bring it on!!   Now all those folk saying "why no election?" re thinking oh dear...there's an election! 

I stopped watching TV News and most BBC programmes about this time last year.... got fed up with all the silliness.... I guess it wont be ok to watch again for a few months...


----------



## jp5 (Apr 20, 2017)

I think most are wondering if they can trust TM to do the job, given that once she says one thing she seems to do the other.


----------



## Val (Apr 20, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Her non-reply to Wee Angus's question re timing of GE v Indyref2 said a lot as well.
Her snobby sneery evasive attitude to MP's asking honest questions makes my blood boil.
		
Click to expand...

The timing of the GE is spot on, government lasts 5 years so at worst case, we all vote wrong and off they pop 5 years later. There is no reversing Independence.


----------



## bobmac (Apr 20, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Her snobby sneery evasive attitude to MP's asking honest questions makes my blood boil.
		
Click to expand...

Which beggars the question, why on earth did you watch it? Go and do something else you enjoy.

I really don't understand why people watch stuff they know is going to make them angry, unless it's so they can then go on a forum and tell everyone how angry they are  




Foxholer said:



			They should have everything set up for her - and, if she doesn't turn up, replace her presence with '*a tub of lard*'!
		
Click to expand...

That's not very nice is it.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 20, 2017)

Bobmac, that goes back to the HiGNFY episode years ago when Roy Hattersley dropped out at the last minute. It was either too late to get someone else in or they were sceptical of his reasons for dropping out. They put a tub of lard on the desk where he was due to be and Paul Merton carried on as thought the tub was on his team, asking it questions, conferring with it. Very funny episode and the tub of lard has become synonymous with replacing a political drop out.


----------



## bobmac (Apr 20, 2017)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Bobmac, that goes back to the HiGNFY episode years ago when Roy Hattersley dropped out at the last minute. It was either too late to get someone else in or they were sceptical of his reasons for dropping out. They put a tub of lard on the desk where he was due to be and Paul Merton carried on as thought the tub was on his team, asking it questions, conferring with it. Very funny episode and the tub of lard has become synonymous with replacing a political drop out.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you, didnt know that.  
Off to Youtube to find it


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 20, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Rightly or wrongly people make a decision for who they will vote for on a number of reasons. And how a potential PM behaves and carries themselves in a debate when they are challenged is one of them.  Lets face it, the PM will be in quite a few 'debates' in the near future which are quite important to the future of the UK to say the least. 

I for one would quite like to see how the potential leader of my country acts under pressure, how truthful they seem, on a basic 'likeability' level, are they the type of person I would trust to lead us. Her voting record and mostly ideological based policies in the areas of education and welfare do not overly endear her to me. If she thinks she is too busy to open herself up to the public and questions from other potential leaders of this country then so be it. But by ducking out of these I feel it says more about how TMay thinks of the electorate than she realises
.
		
Click to expand...

If you want that then you can see it every week at PM Questions.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 21, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			If you want that then you can see it every week at PM Questions.
		
Click to expand...

Whilst I know the TV debates are not always the most edifying experiences, if you want us to make up our minds based on the staged pantomime that is PMQs, an event that preschoolers watch and say '_Christ, that's a bit immature and no way for grown people to behave really_', then god help us.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 21, 2017)

May's policies more right wing than 2005 BNP, so my poll result on the GE thread was correct.

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/arch...licies-british-national-party-manifesto-2005/


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 21, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			May's policies more right wing than 2005 BNP, so my poll result on the GE thread was correct.

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/arch...licies-british-national-party-manifesto-2005/

Click to expand...

Could be worse and be as far right as the SNP.


----------



## drdel (Apr 21, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Whilst I know the TV debates are not always the most edifying experiences, if you want us to make up our minds based on the staged pantomime that is PMQs, an event that preschoolers watch and say '_Christ, that's a bit immature and no way for grown people to behave really_', then god help us.
		
Click to expand...

And you think a TV debate will be any less staged / choreographed with selected audience, selected questions! 

IF the average person is swayed by this, constructed for TV, rubbish we're in really trouble.  

The PM is best to stay well clear as the current head of government she can only be placed on the back foot as all the others will promise anything and say anything having been responsible for the sum total of beggar all. Chaired by a presenter on an ego trip.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 21, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Whilst I know the TV debates are not always the most edifying experiences, if you want us to make up our minds based on the staged pantomime that is PMQs, an event that preschoolers watch and say '_Christ, that's a bit immature and no way for grown people to behave really_', then god help us.
		
Click to expand...

If you expect anyone to be educated by watching Teressa May having to stand on a stage with a bunch of Muppets like Corbyn, Sturgeon, those silly Wesh/Green Women and Golum then have a long "Progressive" look at yourself.


----------



## User62651 (Apr 21, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			If you expect anyone to be educated by watching Teressa May having to stand on a stage with a bunch of Muppets like Corbyn, Sturgeon, those silly Wesh and Green Women and Golum then have a long "Progressive" look at yourself.
		
Click to expand...

Well Cameron was reluctant but it didn't do him any harm last time! 
You're embarrassing yourself with that post. - you've had a pop at Welsh, women, people's appearance all in one short post, maybe you need to look at yourself?


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 21, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Well Cameron was reluctant but it didn't do him any harm last time! 
You're embarrassing yourself with that post. - you've had a pop at Welsh, women, people's appearance all in one short post, maybe you need to look at yourself?

Click to expand...

Cameron refused to do TV debates during the EU Referendum.   

You really are one of the professionally offended    I Mentioned 'That' Welsh Woman, not 'All' Welsh Women. Dont know where you get the 'Peoples appearance' from, I never even mentioned Jimmy Krankey did I


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 21, 2017)

https://www.bing.com/search?q=roy+o...88&pq=roy+orbison+running&cc=GB&setlang=en-US

Mayhem's new campaign song


----------



## User62651 (Apr 21, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			Cameron refused to do TV debates during the EU Referendum.   

You really are one of the professionally offended    I Mentioned 'That' Welsh Woman, not 'All' Welsh Women. Dont know where you get the *'Peoples appearance' from, I never even mentioned Jimmy Krankey did I :confused*:
		
Click to expand...

Gollum - hardly complimentary about Mr Farron's appearance I presume (as you used it before), is it?


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 21, 2017)

drdel said:



			And you think a TV debate will be any less staged / choreographed with selected audience, selected questions! 

IF the average person is swayed by this, constructed for TV, rubbish we're in really trouble.  

The PM is best to stay well clear as the current head of government she can only be placed on the back foot as all the others will promise anything and say anything having been responsible for the sum total of beggar all. Chaired by a presenter on an ego trip.
		
Click to expand...

Yes I imagine the questions will be selected to cover a wide range of topics, some of which will make Corbyn feel uncomfortable, some Farron and god forbid, some to Mrs May. I know that this seems a little unfair to some that our current and potentially future PM, at one of the most important times in the UKs history, should have to demean herself by debating the key issues with other potential candidates.  But I don't know, some people may see the ability to debate and defend her policies in this type of forum it as a trait of a strong leader.  Not as something she chickens out of as she can't 100% control the message and again, perish the thought, may struggle to convince the watching population of some of her policies in that situation. 

And as for the average person being swayed by this, hey, people have been swayed in recent referendums by a lot less......


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 21, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			If you expect anyone to be educated by watching Teressa May having to stand on a stage with a bunch of Muppets like Corbyn, Sturgeon, those silly Wesh/Green Women and Golum then have a long "Progressive" look at yourself.
		
Click to expand...

Well if she was so confident of the 'uselessness' of the rest of them then you would think she would relish the opportunity.  It's not as if she has not got any form in political opportunism judging by the timing of this election.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 21, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			If you expect anyone to be educated by watching Teressa May having to stand on a stage with a bunch of Muppets like Corbyn, Sturgeon, those silly Wesh/Green Women and Golum then have a long "Progressive" look at yourself.
		
Click to expand...




drdel said:



			And you think a TV debate will be any less staged / choreographed with selected audience, selected questions! 

IF the average person is swayed by this, constructed for TV, rubbish we're in really trouble.  

The PM is best to stay well clear as the current head of government she can only be placed on the back foot as all the others will promise anything and say anything having been responsible for the sum total of beggar all. Chaired by a presenter on an ego trip.
		
Click to expand...

Am also wondering if this is a point of principal.  So let's say the positions are reversed and Labour are in a commanding lead and the Labour leader declines to do a debate.  Would you still be defending the right of leaders to pick and chose when they do these debates depending on where they are in the opinion polls?  Or would you be calling for a leadership debate as a sign of a healthy democracy and as an opportunity for the labour leader to be challenged  on their policies?  Just kind of wondering that as tories, are you are taking this stance based purely on self interest.  Not that tories would ever do such a thing of course.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 21, 2017)

I find the TV debates too superficial. Its sound bite politics without real substance. Its petty points scoring and spin, with manifesto pledges taken out of context and discredited with lies. And that's from all sides. And sadly it then comes down to who is the best willy waver.

Do we really need to choose our next govt based on a TV 'contest?'


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 21, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			I find the TV debates too superficial.* Its sound bite politics* *without real substance*. Its petty points scoring and spin, with manifesto pledges taken out of context and discredited with lies. And that's from all sides. And sadly it then comes down to who is the best willy waver.

Do we really need to choose our next govt based on a TV 'contest?'
		
Click to expand...

But like it or not that is how the world operates. Trump got elected leader of the USA on 140 characters or less. 

Not saying a debate that will be the only factor in chosing, far from it.  But as I have already pointed out, we seem to be living in a post fact world where lots of people get their information from their echo chambers. And a rumour or untruth easily becomes believed as the truth by both sides. So seeing the leaders discuss things and hearing things come out of their mouths that has not been staged managed by their PR team to an inch of its life in a extremely controlled environment may be a good thing IMHO.


----------



## Reemul (Apr 21, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			But like it or not that is how the world operates. Trump got elected leader of the USA on 140 characters or less. 

Not saying a debate that will be the only factor in chosing, far from it.  But as I have already pointed out, we seem to be living in a post fact world where lots of people get their information from their echo chambers. And a rumour or untruth easily becomes believed as the truth by both sides. So seeing the leaders discuss things and hearing things come out of their mouths that has not been staged managed by their PR team to an inch of its life in a extremely controlled environment may be a good thing IMHO.
		
Click to expand...

Why does the UK have to operate like that. We don't need pointless TV debate spectacles just because the USA has them is no reason we should.

Let the parties get some good clear manifesto's up and lets hold them to them. We need really good opposition so when they aren't upheld they get a grilling and us the people get up and support this.

Standing up on TV and winning a sham debate means nothing and neither does saying well that's the way it is or it just is...


----------



## User62651 (Apr 21, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			But like it or not that is how the world operates. Trump got elected leader of the USA on 140 characters or less. 

Not saying a debate that will be the only factor in chosing, far from it.  But as I have already pointed out, we seem to be living in a post fact world where lots of people get their information from their echo chambers. And a rumour or untruth easily becomes believed as the truth by both sides. So seeing the leaders discuss things and hearing things come out of their mouths that has not been staged managed by their PR team to an inch of its life in a extremely controlled environment may be a good thing IMHO.
		
Click to expand...

Expect people in chicken suits to follow May around the hustings, surprised we haven't seen one already. She'll have to defend this position right through the campaign and will be sick of it, looked pretty flummoxed when asked today about it in her own constituency and there's 6 weeks+ to go! TV companies wont let up.:thup:

Changes her mind on everything with a huge degree of hypocrisy thrown in so fair chance she'll change her mind on this too?


----------



## spongebob59 (Apr 21, 2017)

Maybe TM should just call all the others liars and threaten to lock them up and promise to build a wall across Scotland, after all this worked for Trumpy :ears:


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 21, 2017)

Reemul said:



			Why does the UK have to operate like that. We don't need pointless TV debate spectacles just because the USA has them is no reason we should.

Let the parties get some good clear manifesto's up and lets hold them to them. We need really good opposition so when they aren't upheld they get a grilling and us the people get up and support this.

Standing up on TV and winning a sham debate means nothing and neither does saying well that's the way it is or it just is...
		
Click to expand...

Well said.

Believing we need these things becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy if we let it. Saying this is the way of the world is a cop out. We decide our world by our actions and by our inactions.


----------



## dewsweeper (Apr 21, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Well said.

Believing we need these things becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy if we let it. Saying this is the way of the world is a cop out. We decide our world by our actions and by our inactions.
		
Click to expand...

agree completely with this.
Cannot tell you how many elections I have lived through but never felt it necessary to follow other countries ways,particularly the good old US ofA.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 21, 2017)

Lots of nonsense in here as usual. It's the 21st century, let's see the leaders debate! That doesn't detract from any other info source we have but it's one more vehicle to get more people interested and to the polling station so it can only be a good thing.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 21, 2017)

Reemul said:



			Why does the UK have to operate like that. We don't need pointless TV debate spectacles 'just because the USA has them is no reason we should'.

Let the parties get some good clear manifesto's up and lets hold them to them. We need really good opposition so when they aren't upheld they get a grilling and us the people get up and support this.

Standing up on TV and winning a sham debate means nothing and neither does saying well that's the way it is or it just is...
		
Click to expand...

I do not want to see them being done 'just because the USA has them'. I want to see one as I want to see how my potential PM acts under scrutiny and challenge of their polices by other potential leaders in a debating situation. If a potential leader then tries to score cheap political points by resorting to insults and sarcasm, much as I always do on this forum, then I am intelligent enough to work out that is what they are doing and will form my opinion of them based on that.


----------



## dewsweeper (Apr 21, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			Lots of nonsense in here as usual. It's the 21st century, let's see the leaders debate! That doesn't detract from any other info source we have but it's one more vehicle to get more people interested and to the polling station so it can only be a good thing.
		
Click to expand...

sorry to have an opinion that is different to some.
Not sure a TV debate will teach anything ,people never seem able to change a long held view as is often proved in our virtual group.
I feel sure Nicola Sturgeon is better than Theresa May in a head to head debate but I still think I disagree with her aims.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 21, 2017)

dewsweeper said:



			sorry to have an opinion that is different to some.
Not sure a TV debate will teach anything ,*people never seem able to change a long held view* as is often proved in our virtual group.
I feel sure Nicola Sturgeon is better than Theresa May in a head to head debate but I still think I disagree with her aims.
		
Click to expand...

Well in that case they may as well not bother with any campaigns at all???


----------



## JT77 (Apr 21, 2017)

From what I have seen of these, they are not debates, but more loaded questions aimed at specific individuals, questions that require an answer by all, on things like health, education, fiscal policy and how they will achieve them or what they will do different to their opposition ovule be interesting but that's not what happens! 
Just a chest out shouting exercise and none of them ever truly deliver what they promise.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2017)

If TV debate is useless and Newspapers and other media are biased, campaign leaflets are lies, that only leaves us with manifesto's, shall we take them as bibles or as more lies?
Nothing changes then and we vote the way we always have or we are fooled by lies.
Were do we go to find the truth?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 21, 2017)

So many double standards on here today.

Turn it around and imagine what would have happened if Corbyn or Sturgeon had taken the same stance as May by refusing to debate.

May does not want to debate as she well knows that many of her parties policies are indefensible.


----------



## drdel (Apr 21, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Am also wondering if this is a point of principal.  So let's say the positions are reversed and Labour are in a commanding lead and the Labour leader declines to do a debate.  Would you still be defending the right of leaders to pick and chose when they do these debates depending on where they are in the opinion polls?  Or would you be calling for a leadership debate as a sign of a healthy democracy and as an opportunity for the labour leader to be challenged  on their policies?  Just kind of wondering that as tories, are you are taking this stance based purely on self interest.  Not that tories would ever do such a thing of course. 

Click to expand...

My point is not related to political colour: I'm merely suggesting that a TV 'debate' is far from useful because it is artificial in the extreme - the presenters usually just get in the way.  Research has suggested these debates do little to change voters' views - usually only reinforce entrenched attitudes.

Any PM would be unwise to bother playing such games because, as the person 'in post', they will always be portrayed as the 'accused' by the other contestants and the media hoping to driving for a sensationalistic broadcast.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 21, 2017)

drdel said:



			My point is not related to political colour: I'm merely suggesting that a TV 'debate' *is far from useful because it is artificial in the extreme *- the presenters usually just get in the way.  Research has suggested these debates do little to change voters' views - usually only reinforce entrenched attitudes.

Any PM would be unwise to bother playing such games because, as the person 'in post', they will always be portrayed as the 'accused' by the other contestants and the media hoping to driving for a sensationalistic broadcast.
		
Click to expand...

But you can apply that to most coverage.  Is the coverage you get in The Mail or The Guardian 'real'.  Is that not sensationalist at all either way?  I am really struggling to see why a TV debate is not in any way useful but the vast majority of whatever else goes on in referendums/elections is.  I'll shut up now as I have made my point ad nauseam, but in a world of biased written media on both sides, echo chambers on social media and PR guff, the idea of the leaders having to explain their policies to the nation seems to me one of the more direct ways we can see what they act like and what they think.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 21, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So many double standards on here today.

Turn it around and imagine what would have happened if Corbyn or Sturgeon had taken the same stance as May by refusing to debate.

May does not want to debate as she well knows that many of her parties policies are indefensible.
		
Click to expand...

In your opinion. 

Every policy from every party is defensible as most of them are subjective and based on a political leaning. As for Corbyn or Sturgeon refusing a TV debate, I couldn't care less.

But here's one on your heroine, Sturgeon. On April 17th she criticised May for not having a mandate to be PM as she wasn't leader of the Cons at the last election, and should call one immediately. On the 18th April she criticised May for calling an election.... Sturgeon is becoming a joke. Usually comes across as a competent politician but seems to be getting desperate in recent months.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 21, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			But you can apply that to most coverage.  Is the coverage you get in The Mail or The Guardian 'real'.  Is that not sensationalist at all either way?  I am really struggling to see why a TV debate is not in any way useful but the vast majority of whatever else goes on in referendums/elections is.  I'll shut up now as I have made my point ad nauseam, but in a world of biased written media on both sides, echo chambers on social media and PR guff, *the idea of the leaders having to explain their policies to the nation *seems to me one of the more direct ways we can see what they act like and what they think.
		
Click to expand...

They do that in a manifesto.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 21, 2017)

pauldj42 said:



			If TV debate is useless and Newspapers and other media are biased, campaign leaflets are lies, that only leaves us with manifesto's, shall we take them as bibles or as more lies?
Nothing changes then and we vote the way we always have or we are fooled by lies.
Were do we go to find the truth?
		
Click to expand...

Oh! so cynical.  personally I like to see what parties are laying out as their policy, consider their record and makeup then make a decision based on that.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			They do that in a manifesto.
		
Click to expand...

They're not worth the paper there printed on! Successive Governments have broken manifesto promises!


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			Oh! so cynical.  personally I like to see what parties are laying out as their policy, consider their record and makeup then make a decision based on that.
		
Click to expand...

It's a genuine question, what should we trust?


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 21, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So many double standards on here today.

Turn it around and imagine what would have happened if Corbyn or Sturgeon had taken the same stance as May by refusing to debate.

May does not want to debate as she well knows that many of her parties policies are indefensible.
		
Click to expand...

Even better, what if they just give us their manifesto, shut up and let us make our minds up.  Not sure about you but I have a thing called a brain in my head that allows me to make decisions based on my own observations.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 21, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			In your opinion. 

Every policy from every party is defensible as most of them are subjective and based on a political leaning. As for Corbyn or Sturgeon refusing a TV debate, I couldn't care less.

But here's one on your heroine, Sturgeon. On April 17th she criticised May for not having a mandate to be PM as she wasn't leader of the Cons at the last election, and should call one immediately. On the 18th April she criticised May for calling an election.... Sturgeon is becoming a joke. Usually comes across as a competent politician but seems to be getting desperate in recent months.
		
Click to expand...

I am of an opinion that the two child rape clause is pretty indefensible by any caring human being.
Bedroom tax not far behind.

I would love to see someone on here debate otherwise.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 21, 2017)

pauldj42 said:



			It's a genuine question, what should we trust?
		
Click to expand...

Trust what your own observations, experience and gut instinct indicate what is in the best interest of yourself, family and country.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 21, 2017)

Once again i leave myself wondering who i put my trust in when going to vote and as normal sit here thinking is it worth it and why can't there be a "none of the above". 

Since the last election it's been a couple of years of broken promises and a failed attempt to keep us in europe which imo was because the government we had were too weak and pathetic to keep us in so how on earth could I vote for them. 

Then we have Labour - what a pathetic shower they are , clearly zero vision for the future and more intent on sending the county back to financial meltdown with a leader who sat there having tea with the IRA and is clearly not fit to run our country 

And then there is the Liberals - a busted flush ever since they rolled over for the Tories , a leader who appears as untrustworthy as the rest of them 

Can't be UKIP because I'm not a racist bigot and as far from their ideals as possible , I can't vote for SNP - and certainly wouldn't ever want to vote for a party that wants to break up the union and weaken my own country 

So I'm left with Green Party or hopefully an Independent 

What a sad sorry state our countries politics are right now - political parties only interested in themselves 

Wish there was someone out there who actually cared about the UK and it's citizens


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			Trust what your own observations, experience and gut instinct indicate what is in the best interest of yourself, family and country.
		
Click to expand...

So not the manifesto you quoted before?

We're all intelligent people, the sad fact is we can't hold them accountable, look at the last lot of manifesto's, as they won the Tory is the only one that mattered within 100 days they'd broke at least 9 of their promises, now they've changed leader and called a GE therefore we've not had enough time to judge them,

Now we'll get new manifesto's 

Maybe a bit naive, but to me the manifesto's should almost be legally binding, I can understand on change of Government from one party to another, the incoming party may not have all the facts, but a party re-elected has no excuses.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 21, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I am of an opinion that the two child rape clause is pretty indefensible by any caring human being.
Bedroom tax not far behind.

I would love to see someone on here debate otherwise.
		
Click to expand...

'*two child rape clause'  *You should be ashamed of using terminology like that.   If you are asking for someone to defend the 'Two child limit on Government child subsidies' then I am happy to oblige.   Why should someone pay tax to subsidise other peoples children, especially with no upper limit on the number.  If people decide to have children then it's their responsibility to provide for them.  OK, if someone with more than two are temporarily out of work or ill then I would agree for them to be supported through benefits until they  can get back to work.     In the past, especially after the war the country needed more children and most were hard up, that's why the subsidy was introduced, it's not like that now and there is no reason why hard working people have to limit their family size when the feckless can have as many as they want and sometimes only as a cash source.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			'*two child rape clause'  *You should be ashamed of using terminology like that.   If you are asking for someone to defend the 'Two child limit on Government child subsidies' then I am happy to oblige.   Why should someone pay tax to subsidise other peoples children, especially with no upper limit on the number.  If people decide to have children then it's their responsibility to provide for them.  OK, if someone with more than two are temporarily out of work or ill then I would agree for them to be supported through benefits until they  can get back to work.     In the past, especially after the war the country needed more children and most were hard up, that's why the subsidy was introduced, it's not like that now and there is no reason why hard working people have to limit their family size when the feckless can have as many as they want and sometimes only as a cash source.
		
Click to expand...

You need to google that phrase, you're way of the mark with your answer

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39652791


----------



## ColchesterFC (Apr 21, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I am of an opinion that the two child rape clause is pretty indefensible by any caring human being.
*Bedroom tax* not far behind.

I would love to see someone on here debate otherwise.
		
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as the "Bedroom Tax". Why should the tax payer be expected to pay extra rent for a couple with one child to live in a three bedroom house/flat when they clearly only need a two bedroom house/flat? And equally why should a couple with three children have to live in a two bed flat because there are no available three or four bed properties available for them?

Typical populism bandwagon jumping from the party in opposition (in this case Labour but could equally apply to Tory policy when they were the opposition) to brand it a tax. This is our money they're spending and I'm sure you'd be one of the first to criticise if the government were wasting it. So why is it acceptable in your eyes for them to waste money by paying extra housing benefit for someone to have a spare room?


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 21, 2017)

pauldj42 said:



			So not the manifesto you quoted before?

We're all intelligent people, the sad fact is we can't hold them accountable, look at the last lot of manifesto's, as they won the Tory is the only one that mattered within 100 days they'd broke at least 9 of their promises, now they've changed leader and called a GE therefore we've not had enough time to judge them,

Now we'll get new manifesto's 

Maybe a bit naive, but to me the manifesto's should almost be legally binding, I can understand on change of Government from one party to another, the incoming party may not have all the facts, but a party re-elected has no excuses.
		
Click to expand...

Have you ever ran a business.  In business you need to make a business plan, both short and longer term.  It  would be folly to lock yourself into a plan that didnt allow you to revisit it on an annual basis and adjust it to meet changing circumstances.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			Have you ever ran a business.  In business you need to make a business plan, both short and longer term.  It  would be folly to lock yourself into a plan that didnt allow you to revisit it on an annual basis and adjust it to meet changing circumstances.
		
Click to expand...

So you're reinforcing the manifesto's are worthless, 9 broken promises in the first 100 days, not 12 months!


----------



## dewsweeper (Apr 21, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Well in that case they may as well not bother with any campaigns at all???
		
Click to expand...

Not so.
I genuinely dislike TV debates ,as I do programmes like Question Time,seem to always end in chaos.
In this hi tech age I feel I can gather more information from political shows like Newsnight that have strong anchors.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 21, 2017)

pauldj42 said:



			So you're reinforcing the manifesto's are worthless, 9 broken promises in the first 100 days, not 12 months!
		
Click to expand...

Not at all.   You need to make a plan, you cant just make it up as you go along.   My point was that it is folly to lock yourself into a plan that you cannot modify if circumstances change.  It is very difficult  to understand exactly how major external forces can upset the best of strategies, these can be Political, Economic, Social or Technical.  Cameron and Osborne locked the Government into unrealistic constraints IMO and May needs to break away from them so she has the flexibility to get on with Government and especially the Brexit negotiations.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			Not at all.   You need to make a plan, you cant just make it up as you go along.   My point was that it is folly to lock yourself into a plan that you cannot modify if circumstances change.  It is very difficult  to understand exactly how major external forces can upset the best of strategies, these can be Political, Economic, Social or Technical.  Cameron and Osborne locked the Government into unrealistic constraints IMO and May needs to break away from them so she has the flexibility to get on with Government and especially the Brexit negotiations.
		
Click to expand...

So Cameron's manifesto was worthless and now May who didn't support brexit needs a new manifesto to have flexibility during brexit negotiations. Cheers :thup: got it now.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 21, 2017)

pauldj42 said:



			So Cameron's manifesto was worthless and now May who didn't support brexit needs a new manifesto to have flexibility during brexit negotiations. Cheers :thup: got it now.
		
Click to expand...

Almost there.  May supported the Cabinet line during the Referendum but IMO she has never been a Europhile.  Cameron's manifesto was not completely worthless but contained some flaws that made parts of it too inflexible.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			Almost there.  May supported the Cabinet line during the Referendum but IMO she has never been a Europhile.  Cameron's manifesto was not completely worthless but contained some flaws that made parts of it too inflexible.
		
Click to expand...

But people still fell for it and voted him in and then have no recourse.
As for May's and everyone elses we can take with a pinch of salt anything planned over 12 months.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 21, 2017)

pauldj42 said:



			You need to google that phrase, you're way of the mark with your answer

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39652791

Click to expand...

No I'm not.  The issue is about stopping tax credits after two children for new claimants.   This argument about a women having a third child after a rape is a very special case and not what the change is aimed at.  I think any normal thinking person rather than gerrymandering opportunists like Sturgeon  would understand that.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 21, 2017)

pauldj42 said:



			But people still fell for it and voted him in and then have no recourse.
As for May's and everyone elses we can take with a pinch of salt anything planned over 12 months.
		
Click to expand...

I dont believe there is any convincing you that May is anything else but devious and manipulative.  If you wish to believe that then that's your prerogative but I find it very hard to believe you could at the same time not level the same accusations at the other Political leaders.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			No I'm not.  The issue is about stopping tax credits after two children for new claimants.   This argument about a women having a third child after a rape is a very special case and not what the change is aimed at.  I think any normal thinking person rather than gerrymandering opportunists like Sturgeon  would understand that.
		
Click to expand...

Read the link, Women who have a third child by rape or whilst in an abusive relationship have to fill in a form to prove what they are saying, it's inhumane, haven't they suffered enough? it should be put in with the other exemptions, it's nothing to do as per your first answer, it's about doing the right thing and providing the support these women need.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Apr 21, 2017)

pauldj42 said:



			Read the link, *Women who have a third child by rape or whilst in an abusive relationship have to fill in a form* to prove what they are saying, it's inhumane, haven't they suffered enough? it should be put in with the other exemptions, it's nothing to do as per your first answer, it's about doing the right thing and providing the support these women need.
		
Click to expand...

That's not actually true. They have to write their name on a form and the rest can be taken care of by a healthcare professional. They aren't being asked to prove anything and they don't even have to have reported the offence to the police.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2017)

ColchesterFC said:



			That's not actually true. They have to write their name on a form and the rest can be taken care of by a healthcare professional. They aren't being asked to prove anything and they don't even have to have reported the offence to the police.
		
Click to expand...

The fact they have to go and find a healthcare professional and one they trust is wrong, the whole issue is a disgrace


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 21, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



*No I'm not*.  The issue is about stopping tax credits after two children for new claimants.   This argument about a women having a third child after a rape is a very special case and not what the change is aimed at.  I think any normal thinking person rather than gerrymandering opportunists like Sturgeon  would understand that.
		
Click to expand...

Yes you are. The post by DFT which you responded to was specifically referring to the '2 child rape clause'. Please read it again. That specific phrase was used by DFT and is referring to what is causing disgust in DFT, P42 and I would argue many right thinking people.  Not the principal of a 2 child limit on tax credits, no one has argued against that in any way shape or form. Separate discussion. If you want to twist the argument by equating that phrase to a 2 child limit on tax credits and spouting off about that then so be it.  But I would argue it does you no favours whatsoever.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Apr 21, 2017)

They don't have to go and find a healthcare professional. The fact that they are pregnant means that they will already be seeing a nurse or midwife so it's not as though they have to go hunting for someone. It's a very emotive subject and some of the language being used around it such as "women having to prove to the DWP that they have been raped" and "forcing victims of rape to endure further trauma" isn't at all helpful or in actual fact true.

How would you suggest dealing with the issue? It can't simply be put in with the other exemptions as you previously suggested. A multiple birth or someone adopting a child or children are exempt and these are straightforward cases - a woman has either had triplets or she hasn't, a couple have adopted a child or they haven't. A woman who has had a child after a sexual assault absolutely should get child benefit for that child but how are the DWP supposed to know that is the case unless the victim, women's aid, healthcare professional or rape charity informs them of it.


----------



## User62651 (Apr 21, 2017)

Lamposts are festooned with SNP flyers now, didn't take long. But why do any of em do that? Do some folks drive past and think _'Gosh I forgot there's an election.... I'll vote for them on that flyer I saw first then?' _
Imo could be something that is banned - kind of pointless when you get 4 different ones stuck in the same place, so are there some areas of UK you already cant do that - The Mall London, Royal Mile Edinburgh etc?


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 21, 2017)

ColchesterFC said:



			They don't have to go and find a healthcare professional. The fact that they are pregnant means that they will already be seeing a nurse or midwife so it's not as though they have to go hunting for someone. It's a very emotive subject and some of the language being used around it such as "women having to prove to the DWP that they have been raped" and "forcing victims of rape to endure further trauma" isn't at all helpful or in actual fact true.

How would you suggest dealing with the issue? It can't simply be put in with the other exemptions as you previously suggested. A multiple birth or someone adopting a child or children are exempt and these are straightforward cases - a woman has either had triplets or she hasn't, a couple have adopted a child or they haven't. A woman who has had a child after a sexual assault absolutely should get child benefit for that child but how are the DWP supposed to know that is the case unless the victim, women's aid, healthcare professional or rape charity informs them of it.
		
Click to expand...

This puts it far better than I ever could and hopefully answers some of your questions or the problem with them.

https://amp.theguardian.com/comment...pe-rule-tax-credits-rights-children-sex-crime


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 22, 2017)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39676922

Is it only me that actually does not mind if any party says they will increase tax a bit if it means that our public services like schools, prisons and the NHS can be funded a bit better? Don't get this absolute fear of someone saying they will raise taxes really. In fact I'd admire the honesty and would much rather see that than every chancellor attempting to say they have cut the burden on the honest tax payer whereas what they are really doing is raising more revenue through other very complicated and opaque methods.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 22, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39676922

Is it only me that actually does not mind if any party says they will increase tax a bit if it means that our public services like schools, prisons and the NHS can be funded a bit better? Don't get this absolute fear of someone saying they will raise taxes really. In fact I'd admire the honesty and would much rather see that than every chancellor attempting to say they have cut the burden on the honest tax payer whereas what they are really doing is raising more revenue through other very complicated and opaque methods.
		
Click to expand...

Why would it only be you? 

Although perhaps a little more more complicated to do I'd also like to see a cap on profit margins to reduce the cost of living.


----------



## jp5 (Apr 22, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Is it only me that actually does not mind if any party says they will increase tax a bit if it means that our public services like schools, prisons and the NHS can be funded a bit better?
		
Click to expand...

I think many people feel squeezed enough as it is. Add onto that the feeling that Tories raising taxes would be to fund giveaways for the rich, and I can see why it's not palatable.

For the long term health of the country I'd be looking at fixing the housing situation. No reason why so much of people's incomes need to be tied up in housing, sure if you freed that up then most wouldn't begrudge paying a bit more for public services.

That's no easy problem to fix now, mind.


----------



## SaintHacker (Apr 22, 2017)

This time round I really do wish there was a ' none of the above' option. I may just spoil my voting slip.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 22, 2017)

SaintHacker said:



			This time round I really do wish there was a ' none of the above' option. I may just spoil my voting slip.
		
Click to expand...

Dare you to stage a dirty protest.


----------



## USER1999 (Apr 22, 2017)

I would pay more tax, may be, to support the nhs, education, etc, but on one condition. That an independent commission, of totally non affiliated people, be appointed, to review structure and waste. Because my belief is that there is plenty of money there now, but it is wasted on poor burocracy.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 22, 2017)

murphthemog said:



			I would pay more tax, may be, to support the nhs, education, etc, but on one condition. That an independent commission, of totally non affiliated people, be appointed, to review structure and waste. Because my belief is that there is plenty of money there now, but it is wasted on poor burocracy.
		
Click to expand...

Which is fairly common in the public sector unfortunately.  The NHS does need a few bob but it needs to bin the hangers on first and be radically reorganised


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 22, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39676922

Is it only me that actually does not mind if any party says they will increase tax a bit if it means that our public services like schools, prisons and the NHS can be funded a bit better? Don't get this absolute fear of someone saying they will raise taxes really. In fact I'd admire the honesty and would much rather see that than every chancellor attempting to say they have cut the burden on the honest tax payer whereas what they are really doing is raising more revenue through other very complicated and opaque methods.
		
Click to expand...

I thought the Lefties were saying that the millions of immigrants were contributing shed loads of tax, surely we should be flush enough to spend it on the NHS and Schools.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 22, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			I thought the Lefties were saying that the millions of immigrants were contributing shed loads of tax, surely we should be flush enough to spend it on the NHS and Schools.
		
Click to expand...

What the lefties fail to tell us is that if an immigrant decides to stay for less than 2 years he can choose to pay tax in his country of origin as opposed to in the UK. For example, a Romanian can choose to pay 10% income tax in Romania rather than pay 20% here. And a Bulgarian can choose to pay 16% income under the same EU/UK tax rules.

OOooohhh, let me guess... just where would you choose to pay tax if you had that option?


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 22, 2017)

murphthemog said:



			I would pay more tax, may be, to support the nhs, education, etc, but on one condition. That an independent commission, of totally non affiliated people, be appointed, to review structure and waste. *Because my belief is that there is plenty of money there now*, *but it is wasted on poor burocracy*.
		
Click to expand...

I'm a chair of governors of a state primary and I can promise you that there is not loads of money there that is being wasted on bureaucracy. There are and will be even more ruthless cuts to teachers in education just to keep schools open.  And the tories answer to this is to go mostly completely ignore the funding crisis and prattle on about grammar schools.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 22, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			I thought the Lefties were saying that the millions of immigrants were contributing shed loads of tax, surely we should be flush enough to spend it on the NHS and Schools.
		
Click to expand...

I believe the argument is that on average they contribute more than they take out.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 22, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			I believe the argument is that on average they contribute more than they take out.
		
Click to expand...

Yes and Billions of it.  Problem solved use all this extra tax to solve funding for Education and the NHS.   Surely they cant be wrong, can they?


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 22, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			I'm a chair of governors of a state primary and I can promise you that there is not loads of money there that is being wasted on bureaucracy. There are and will be even more ruthless cuts to teachers in education just to keep schools open.  And the tories answer to this is to go mostly completely ignore the funding crisis and prattle on about grammar schools.
		
Click to expand...

I was a School Governor thirty five years ago and there were the same complaints the Government were cutting spending on education resulting in the loss of Teachers and shortages of text books.   With so much of the pot having to fund gold plated pensions for teachers then there will always be a shortfall as the costs escalate.  There needs to be an honest and unbiased look at education so that we can create realistic goals and fund them.


----------



## Dando (Apr 23, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			I'm a chair of governors of a state primary and I can promise you that there is not loads of money there that is being wasted on bureaucracy. There are and will be even more ruthless cuts to teachers in education just to keep schools open.  And the tories answer to this is to go mostly completely ignore the funding crisis and prattle on about grammar schools.
		
Click to expand...

the school my other half works in has had their funding reduced by Â£1.1m. Add that to the Â£800k debt from previous years, it's no wonder the new academy trust who are taking over are looking at 25 redundancies  - mainly support staff like mrs dando. 
2 other big schools have also each made 20-30 staff redundant due to funding cuts


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 23, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			I was a School Governor thirty five years ago and there were the same complaints the Government were cutting spending on education resulting in the loss of Teachers and shortages of text books.   With so much of the pot having to fund gold plated pensions for teachers then there will always be a shortfall as the costs escalate.  There needs to be an honest and unbiased look at education so that we can create realistic goals and fund them.
		
Click to expand...

Whilst I agree that the teaching unions have not helped themselves and have partly created a boy who cried wolf situation, up until 3 or 4 years ago education was relatively well funded by successive governments. My school like many others ran a surplus that we carried over each year. There is also a whole question of fairer funding where schools are currently funded per pupil based on arcane ancient formulas that make no sense anymore. The results of this may have helped out some schools who are losing out for no other reason than rules dreamt up 30 years ago. There has been a consultation to change this and make it fairer, but that seems to have shelved now due to the election. 

However ignoring that, in the last 3 or 4 years school surpluses have dwindled anyway for no other reason that just paying staff and buying the basics the kids need.  No ipads or school trips to Barbados, just paying staff to do their job. Schools will now have to make a 8% cut in real terms by 2020 just to stay solvent.  https://www.nao.org.uk/press-release/financial-sustainability-of-schools/  The current government is being very disingenuous as it is claiming it is protecting the education budget. As all it is doing is keeping it the same whilst the costs on schools go up. It is a bit like your employer telling you you will get no pay rise for the next 4 years but that is a good thing as your wages are being protected. 

Also you can add in the dogmatic ideological approach to education the government is taking.  They were initially obsessed with academies and basically were trying to force as many schools out of local authorities and into academy chains. They do this in many ways, but one favourite tactic is by starving the LA education services of any money to be able to run an education service. That was bad enough but now we seem to have an education secretary, Justine Greening, who is absolutely clueless. I know most of them get called that, but as far as I can see the only reason she has been chosen is that she agrees with TMays weird ideological love of grammar schools and thinks that is the answer to all educations problems. It is not and is a side issue at best.  It is a bit like worrying about changing the light bulbs as the Titanic was going down. Feel free to watch the video below of her below which I think demonstrates how competent she is.  The good stuff starts at around 4.56. 

To keep our school afloat this year we have had to make some teaching assistants redundant and also basically stopped any teacher training. And I will stress we have some very clever accountants on our governing board and know what it means to cut costs and make efficiencies. This can not carry on if you want even a half decent education system for the UK. And as Dando has said above, it is happening in many schools and will only get worse.  Now if getting rid of teachers and support staff, increasing class sizes, asking for donations as some schools are and removing teaching assistants (TAs) is seen as effeciencies and needed in the education system then so be it. 

However support staff and TAs are there for a reason. TAs do a invaluable job helping out kids how have additional needs for example, support staff do a valuable tasks that need to be done in schools to keep them running, allowing teachers to get on with teaching to the best of their ability.  If you remove all that then the work still needs to be done so who will do it. Who will give the kids that need extra support that support? Who will ensure the office runs well?  Putting extra tasks onto teachers won't work as they have more than enough to do anyway. How will kids learn and be the best they can be if they are having to be taught in classes of 40 or 50 by purely newly qualified teachers as they are cheap to employ?

You can also add into this the fact that standards are getting harder (what was done in say year 8 is now done in year 7) and floor standards are rising, increasing the pressure on schools. One bad Ofsted can now mean the school is 'taken over' and people lose their jobs.  Many heads are basically at breaking point, as are many teachers. 

There is a lot of talk about making the UK great again. To me one of the fundamentals of a great country is a well educated population that can compete in a global market, no mater how much we seem to want to isolate ourselves from it. Education is an investment in the future well being of our nation, not purely a balance sheet that has to tally or an ideological play thing run on the basis of some mythical grammar school system from the 1950s.


[video=youtube;2f0yQA2WLNw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2f0yQA2WLNw[/video]


----------



## NWJocko (Apr 23, 2017)

Fair post HK however you need to look at waste and inefficiency at LEA level also rather than head straight above them to the Dept of Education/Govt policy (whilst not missing the point that they are also at fault).

The amount of money wasted by LAs is hideous and, like businesses, budgets for things that do not directly impact delivery of curriculum in schools often dwarf the money provided to schools on a per head basis.

Dept for Ed. are very poor as you say, however the whole system is appalling and leaves the schools exposed at the end of the food chain, who then face the consequences of Ofsted reports etc. It's scandalous.

Believe me when you speak to the Education Minister (not current) and hear their lack of appetite to change because of the scale involved it is quite scary and you realise why meaningful change for the positive in any area never makes it through the bureaucracy involved.......


----------



## User62651 (Apr 23, 2017)

48% of Tory MPs are privately educated, a more balanced 17% from Labour. 7% of us as a whole are privately educated. Elitism is the root of UKs education problems. If 7% of population went to state school should it not be fairer and reflective of society that somewhere near 7% of Tory MPs went to a state school?

Things will never change whilst the class system is propped up and propagated by people of inherited wealth. Lords is 50% privately educated.

By keeping the state school system on its uppers keeps those of privilege and upper class in power. Has always been thus.

Law, politics, journalism (surprise surprise), the military and medicine top jobs are dominated by private school alumni in UK.

There is and never has been a spirit of 'we're all in it together' more 'I'm alright Jack, stuff you'. We all know it but it will not change as power is held by those who do not want change/social progress. Us and them mentality exists stronger than ever.

Traditions are important and private schools are ok but not at the expense or disadvantage to state school pupils so a redress and re-prioritisation of funding on state education is badly needed, ahead of obscene spending on nuclear arsenals for example.  

For a start these schools should not have VAT exemption on fees or carry charitable status. Don't know how much that would raise but it all helps.

I'm not a loony leftie either, just feel a level playing field or at least a closer to level playing field is needed in life/opportunity for those raised in modest/poor areas and that starts by better state schooling for all to have a chance and therefore a modern UK to be successful imho. 

I got through Uni with no debts coming out given SED grants and summer jobs, no grant aviailable now, some on here having a pop at SNP for giving free Uni tuition in Scotland but you still have to pay for everything else when a student. As a country we should be helping get as many as possible educated to as high a level as possible. Modern system will be putting many poorer yet talented youngsters and their supporting families off. Don't know how we've 'progressed' from where we were to here tbh.

UK is a grim place in so many aspects these days, compared to how we were even 30 years ago. Education and NHS seem to be worst hit as usual by Tory cuts.


----------



## Karl102 (Apr 23, 2017)

I agree with both hk and nwjk.... the amount of free schools, and academies now is basically making LA maintained schools redundant, because like Ian said the LA's are not the best. The academy trusts are taking over schools that are not meeting the new tougher ofsted standards. These schools are inevitably the smaller (poorer funded) schools who have not got the staffing and material resources the bigger academy chains have.
Another waste are the technical schools (UTC's) that are not attracting pupils. There is one in Warrington closing because of lack of numbers ( http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk...lose___less_than_three_years_after_it_opened/ ) . It cost millions to open and has lasted less than 3 years.
Instead of funding these and free schools they should be investing in improving the schools they already have.....


----------



## NWJocko (Apr 23, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			48% of Tory MPs are privately educated, a more balanced 17% from Labour. 7% of us as a whole are privately educated. Elitism is the root of UKs education problems. If 7% of population went to state school should it not be fairer and reflective of society that somewhere near 7% of Tory MPs went to a state school?

Things will never change whilst the class system is propped up and propagated by people of inherited wealth. Lords is 50% privately educated.

By keeping the state school system on its uppers keeps those of privilege and upper class in power. Has always been thus.

Law, politics, journalism (surprise surprise), the military and medicine top jobs are dominated by private school alumni in UK.

There is and never has been a spirit of 'we're all in it together' more 'I'm alright Jack, stuff you'. We all know it but it will not change as power is held by those who do not want change/social progress. Us and them mentality exists stronger than ever.

Traditions are important and private schools are ok but not at the expense or disadvantage to state school pupils so a redress and re-prioritisation of funding on state education is badly needed, ahead of obscene spending on nuclear arsenals for example.  

For a start these schools should not have VAT exemption on fees or carry charitable status. Don't know how much that would raise but it all helps.

I'm not a loony leftie either, just feel a level playing field or at least a closer to level playing field is needed in life/opportunity for those raised in modest/poor areas and that starts by better state schooling for all to have a chance and therefore a modern UK to be successful imho. 

I got through Uni with no debts coming out given SED grants and summer jobs, no grant aviailable now, some on here having a pop at SNP for giving free Uni tuition in Scotland but you still have to pay for everything else when a student. As a country we should be helping get as many as possible educated to as high a level as possible. Modern system will be putting many poorer yet talented youngsters and their supporting families off. Don't know how we've 'progressed' from where we were to here tbh.

UK is a grim place in so many aspects these days, compared to how we were even 30 years ago. Education and NHS seem to be worst hit as usual by Tory cuts.
		
Click to expand...

:thup:

Excellent post


----------



## NWJocko (Apr 23, 2017)

Karl102 said:



			I agree with both hk and nwjk.... the amount of free schools, and academies now is basically making LA maintained schools redundant, because like Ian said the LA's are not the best. The academy trusts are taking over schools that are not meeting the new tougher ofsted standards. These schools are inevitably the smaller (poorer funded) schools who have not got the staffing and material resources the bigger academy chains have.
Another waste are the technical schools (UTC's) that are not attracting pupils. There is one in Warrington closing because of lack of numbers ( http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk...lose___less_than_three_years_after_it_opened/ ) . It cost millions to open and has lasted less than 3 years.
Instead of funding these and free schools they should be investing in improving the schools they already have.....
		
Click to expand...

Must drive you bonkers dealing with it every day mate. I did for about 18 months and almost sent me doolally!!! 

Such a shame as everyone I meet that teaches is so passionate about delivering the best they possibly can but are doing it with their hands tied due to waste further up.

Makes my blood boil.....


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 23, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			48% of Tory MPs are privately educated, a more balanced 17% from Labour. 7% of us as a whole are privately educated. Elitism is the root of UKs education problems. If 7% of population went to state school should it not be fairer and reflective of society that somewhere near 7% of Tory MPs went to a state school?

Things will never change whilst the class system is propped up and propagated by people of inherited wealth. Lords is 50% privately educated.

By keeping the state school system on its uppers keeps those of privilege and upper class in power. Has always been thus.

Law, politics, journalism (surprise surprise), the military and medicine top jobs are dominated by private school alumni in UK.

There is and never has been a spirit of 'we're all in it together' more 'I'm alright Jack, stuff you'. We all know it but it will not change as power is held by those who do not want change/social progress. Us and them mentality exists stronger than ever.

Traditions are important and private schools are ok but not at the expense or disadvantage to state school pupils so a redress and re-prioritisation of funding on state education is badly needed, ahead of obscene spending on nuclear arsenals for example.  

For a start these schools should not have VAT exemption on fees or carry charitable status. Don't know how much that would raise but it all helps.

I'm not a loony leftie either, just feel a level playing field or at least a closer to level playing field is needed in life/opportunity for those raised in modest/poor areas and that starts by better state schooling for all to have a chance and therefore a modern UK to be successful imho. 

I got through Uni with no debts coming out given SED grants and summer jobs, no grant aviailable now, some on here having a pop at SNP for giving free Uni tuition in Scotland but you still have to pay for everything else when a student. As a country we should be helping get as many as possible educated to as high a level as possible. Modern system will be putting many poorer yet talented youngsters and their supporting families off. Don't know how we've 'progressed' from where we were to here tbh.

UK is a grim place in so many aspects these days, compared to how we were even 30 years ago. Education and NHS seem to be worst hit as usual by Tory cuts.
		
Click to expand...




NWJocko said:



			:thup:

Excellent post
		
Click to expand...

Is it really balanced to say "a more balanced 17% of Labour MP's" were privately educated? Sorry but I see that as a bias. For me a 50/50 split is balanced. When you have 50 for one side debating with 50 from the other side you have a balanced argument. When you have 83 'v' 17 you don't have a balance you have a political bias.

I agree wholeheartedly with the majority of your post in terms of desires for education but not from the standpoint of Labour have it right because they have only 17% who were privately educated(including Corbyn)...


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 23, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			48% of Tory MPs are privately educated, a more balanced 17% from Labour. 7% of us as a whole are privately educated. Elitism is the root of UKs education problems. If 7% of population went to state school should it not be fairer and reflective of society that somewhere near 7% of Tory MPs went to a state school?

Things will never change whilst the class system is propped up and propagated by people of inherited wealth. Lords is 50% privately educated.

By keeping the state school system on its uppers keeps those of privilege and upper class in power. Has always been thus.

Law, politics, journalism (surprise surprise), the military and medicine top jobs are dominated by private school alumni in UK.

There is and never has been a spirit of 'we're all in it together' more 'I'm alright Jack, stuff you'. We all know it but it will not change as power is held by those who do not want change/social progress. Us and them mentality exists stronger than ever.

Traditions are important and private schools are ok but not at the expense or disadvantage to state school pupils so a redress and re-prioritisation of funding on state education is badly needed, ahead of obscene spending on nuclear arsenals for example.  

For a start these schools should not have VAT exemption on fees *or carry charitable status*. Don't know how much that would raise but it all helps.

I'm not a loony leftie either, just feel a level playing field or at least a closer to level playing field is needed in life/opportunity for those raised in modest/poor areas and that starts by better state schooling for all to have a chance and therefore a modern UK to be successful imho. 

I got through Uni with no debts coming out given SED grants and summer jobs, no grant aviailable now, some on here having a pop at SNP for giving free Uni tuition in Scotland but you still have to pay for everything else when a student. As a country we should be helping get as many as possible educated to as high a level as possible. Modern system will be putting many poorer yet talented youngsters and their supporting families off. Don't know how we've 'progressed' from where we were to here tbh.

UK is a grim place in so many aspects these days, compared to how we were even 30 years ago. Education and NHS seem to be worst hit as usual by Tory cuts.
		
Click to expand...

Just to confuse matters all academy chains are now technically charitable trusts.  And a large proportion of secondary schools are now part of Multi Academy Trusts. 

I suppose the main issue I have with the Tory policy is that they seem to think competition is a good thing in education. Where as I would argue it really is not.  Yes you need to work efficiently as you can and yes there is some waste.  But a multitude of options in education just causes confusion and fragmentation rather than competition that drives standards up.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 23, 2017)

NWJocko said:



			Fair post HK however you need to look at *waste and inefficiency at LEA level* also rather than head straight above them to the Dept of Education/Govt policy (whilst not missing the point that they are also at fault).

The amount of money wasted by LAs is hideous and, like businesses, budgets for things that do not directly impact delivery of curriculum in schools often dwarf the money provided to schools on a per head basis.

Dept for Ed. are very poor as you say, however the whole system is appalling and leaves the schools exposed at the end of the food chain, who then face the consequences of Ofsted reports etc. It's scandalous.

Believe me when you speak to the Education Minister (not current) and hear their lack of appetite to change because of the scale involved it is quite scary and you realise why meaningful change for the positive in any area never makes it through the bureaucracy involved.......
		
Click to expand...

From my purely personal experience of dealing with my LEA they have trimmed a lot of the fat in recent years and they provide a very good service to schools on the budget they get.  But as they have less and less money to spend then they can not help any schools unless they are failing now.  So they have had to go into reactionary mode instead of in the past being proactive and helping all schools to improve.  So it means you basically have to be rubbish before you get any help with school improvement. Which IMHO is deliberate by central government as it is yet another reason why schools look at the academy route.

But I also acknowledge that some LEAs are very poor.  I just wish investment/resources/thinking was put into improving them rather than leaving them to rot over time, as a well funded education system maintained by competent LEAs to me seems the best way to go.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 23, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			48% of Tory MPs are privately educated, a more balanced 17% from Labour. 7% of us as a whole are privately educated. Elitism is the root of UKs education problems. If 7% of population went to state school should it not be fairer and reflective of society that somewhere near 7% of Tory MPs went to a state school?

Things will never change whilst the class system is propped up and propagated by people of inherited wealth. Lords is 50% privately educated.

By keeping the state school system on its uppers keeps those of privilege and upper class in power. Has always been thus.

Law, politics, journalism (surprise surprise), the military and medicine top jobs are dominated by private school alumni in UK.

There is and never has been a spirit of 'we're all in it together' more 'I'm alright Jack, stuff you'. We all know it but it will not change as power is held by those who do not want change/social progress. Us and them mentality exists stronger than ever.

Traditions are important and private schools are ok but not at the expense or disadvantage to state school pupils so a redress and re-prioritisation of funding on state education is badly needed, ahead of obscene spending on nuclear arsenals for example.  

For a start these schools should not have VAT exemption on fees or carry charitable status. Don't know how much that would raise but it all helps.

I'm not a loony leftie either, just feel a level playing field or at least a closer to level playing field is needed in life/opportunity for those raised in modest/poor areas and that starts by better state schooling for all to have a chance and therefore a modern UK to be successful imho. 

I got through Uni with no debts coming out given SED grants and summer jobs, no grant aviailable now, some on here having a pop at SNP for giving free Uni tuition in Scotland but you still have to pay for everything else when a student. As a country we should be helping get as many as possible educated to as high a level as possible. Modern system will be putting many poorer yet talented youngsters and their supporting families off. *Don't know how we've 'progressed' from where we were to here tbh*.

UK is a grim place in so many aspects these days, compared to how we were even 30 years ago. Education and NHS seem to be worst hit as usual by Tory cuts.
		
Click to expand...

I'd argue because successive governments have treated education as a ideological political tool with education secretaries increasingly using the role to forwards their personal political ideologies and short term political ambitions.  But may twas ever the way....


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 23, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			I'd argue because successive governments have treated education as a ideological political tool with education secretaries increasingly using the role to forwards their personal political ideologies and short term political ambitions.  But may twas ever the way....
		
Click to expand...

Can I add the NHS into the mix. I wish both were ran by independent organisations, answerable to parliament financially but not politically.


----------



## NWJocko (Apr 23, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			From my purely personal experience of dealing with my LEA they have trimmed a lot of the fat in recent years and they provide a very good service to schools on the budget they get.  But as they have less and less money to spend then they can not help any schools unless they are failing now.  So they have had to go into reactionary mode instead of in the past being proactive and helping all schools to improve.  So it means you basically have to be rubbish before you get any help with school improvement. Which IMHO is deliberate by central government as it is yet another reason why schools look at the academy route.

But I also acknowledge that some LEAs are very poor.  I just wish investment/resources/thinking was put into improving them rather than leaving them to rot over time, as a well funded education system maintained by competent LEAs to me seems the best way to go.
		
Click to expand...

Problem is bigger than that with LEA's, you need to look beyond the budget they allocate to schools to their overall budget and expenditure to see the real black holes.

If you look at how, for instance, SEN budgets are "packaged" rather than considering alternatives on different bases there is an awful lot of waste in there. Trimming the fat on current process is one thing, it needs a fundamental rethink on how budgets are or could be used more efficiently before I would consider any LEA to be doing a "good job" imo.

Based on the people I've come across in our LEA I would hesitate to call any of them competent other than box ticking and following current process rather than challenging themselves.


----------



## NWJocko (Apr 23, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			I'd argue because successive governments have treated education as a ideological political tool with education secretaries increasingly using the role to forwards their personal political ideologies and short term political ambitions.  But may twas ever the way....
		
Click to expand...

Completely agree, imo areas like Education/NHS/MOD should be managed by some form of cross-party/independent group who are not completely influenced by the parliamentary term and the consequent short termism....


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 23, 2017)

NWJocko said:



			Problem is bigger than that with LEA's, you need to look beyond the budget they allocate to schools to their overall budget and expenditure to see the real black holes.

If you look at how, for instance, SEN budgets are "packaged" rather than considering alternatives on different bases there is an awful lot of waste in there. Trimming the fat on current process is one thing, it needs a fundamental rethink on how budgets are or could be used more efficiently before I would consider any LEA to be doing a "good job" imo.

Based on the people I've come across in our LEA I would hesitate to call any of them competent other than *box ticking and following current process rather than challenging themselves.*

Click to expand...

To be honest I would say that more and more people in my organisation are much the same, and that is by no means exclusive to LAs.  Just a bunch of generalists who can follow a process but never really have any true competence or passion for the task they are doing.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 23, 2017)

NWJocko said:



			Based on the people I've come across in our LEA I would hesitate to call any of them competent other than box ticking and following current process rather than challenging themselves.
		
Click to expand...

I experienced something similar with BT in the mid/late 80's, and with the NHS as Trusts were formed. Civil Service entrenched mentality in organisations that needed to be increasingly commercially aware. Both organisations improved, especially the NHS, as the needs increased, but interference in the NHS hasn't helped.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 23, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			48% of Tory MPs are privately educated, a more balanced 17% from Labour. 7% of us as a whole are privately educated. Elitism is the root of UKs education problems. If 7% of population went to state school should it not be fairer and reflective of society that somewhere near 7% of Tory MPs went to a state school?

Things will never change whilst the class system is propped up and propagated by people of inherited wealth. Lords is 50% privately educated.

By keeping the state school system on its uppers keeps those of privilege and upper class in power. Has always been thus.

Law, politics, journalism (surprise surprise), the military and medicine top jobs are dominated by private school alumni in UK.

There is and never has been a spirit of 'we're all in it together' more 'I'm alright Jack, stuff you'. We all know it but it will not change as power is held by those who do not want change/social progress. Us and them mentality exists stronger than ever.

*Traditions are important and private schools are ok but not at the expense or disadvantage to state school pupils so a redress and re-prioritisation of funding on state education is badly needed*, ahead of obscene spending on nuclear arsenals for example.  

For a start these schools should not have VAT exemption on fees or carry charitable status. Don't know how much that would raise but it all helps.

I'm not a loony leftie either, just feel a level playing field or at least a closer to level playing field is needed in life/opportunity for those raised in modest/poor areas and that starts by better state schooling for all to have a chance and therefore a modern UK to be successful imho. 

I got through Uni with no debts coming out given SED grants and summer jobs, no grant aviailable now, some on here having a pop at SNP for giving free Uni tuition in Scotland but you still have to pay for everything else when a student. As a country we should be helping get as many as possible educated to as high a level as possible. Modern system will be putting many poorer yet talented youngsters and their supporting families off. Don't know how we've 'progressed' from where we were to here tbh.

UK is a grim place in so many aspects these days, compared to how we were even 30 years ago. Education and NHS seem to be worst hit as usual by Tory cuts.
		
Click to expand...

To be honest I'd argue that private schools are not the problem here from a funding perspective.  There is no money being taken out of state education by the government and put into private schools as they are self funding by fees.  It is more a case of currently the state system is split between LA Maintained schools and Academies (and who knows grammar schools again shortly).  And realistically you can not fund both properly.  There will always be people who have enough money to pay for a very high quality education in private education, but I feel the private and state sectors they can happily coexist as they are funded completely differently, and it is not one or the other.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 23, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			To be honest I'd argue that private schools are not the problem here from a funding perspective.  There is no money being taken out of state education by the government and put into private schools as they are self funding by fees.  It is more a case of currently the state system is split between LA Maintained schools and Academies (and who knows grammar schools again shortly).  And realistically you can not fund both properly.  There will always be people who have enough money to pay for a very high quality education in private education, but I feel the private and state sectors they can happily coexist as they are funded completely differently, and it is not one or the other.
		
Click to expand...

Good point. Maybe the private schools could share their accounting with the Education dept so that everyone will know what it costs to provide education.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 23, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Is it really balanced to say "a more balanced 17% of Labour MP's" were privately educated? Sorry but I see that as a bias. For me a 50/50 split is balanced. When you have 50 for one side debating with 50 from the other side you have a balanced argument. When you have 83 'v' 17 you don't have a balance you have a political bias.

I agree wholeheartedly with the majority of your post in terms of desires for education *but not from the standpoint of Labour have it right *because they have only 17% who were privately educated(including Corbyn)...
		
Click to expand...

Labour's education policy is very woolly at best. Up until recently they did not have an official policy on academies and they literally had 3 shadow secs of state in the space of 2 weeks last year when Corbyn was resigning and then he wasn't. The current shadow is OK and comes up with some half sensible things, but they are mostly rather bland statements saying what is wrong as opposed to what they would do to make it better. The education shadow under Milliband was really good but he got ousted. 

All of the flip flops in education policy over the past 2 years (compulsory academisation for all schools which then got rescinded 4 weeks later) have resulted from infighting within the Tory party and the impact of that suggested Tory policy on marginal Tory seats, not from an effective opposition with any credible alternatives. We are now at the stage where education policy in the same party did/does differ quite a lot depending if it was a Cameron or May lead initiative. In the olden days it changed between labour and tory, now it changes from one tory to another. Kind of sad really.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 23, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Labour's education policy is very woolly at best. Up until recently they did not have an official policy on academies and they literally had 3 shadow secs of state in the space of 2 weeks last year when Corbyn was resigning and then he wasn't. The current shadow is OK and comes up with some half sensible things, but they are mostly rather bland statements saying what is wrong as opposed to what they would do to make it better. The education shadow under Milliband was really good but he got ousted. 

All of the flip flops in education policy over the past 2 years (compulsory academisation for all schools which then got rescinded 4 weeks later) have resulted from infighting within the Tory party and the impact of that suggested Tory policy on marginal Tory seats, not from an effective opposition with any credible alternatives. We are now at the stage where education policy in the same party did/does differ quite a lot depending if it was a Cameron or May lead initiative. *In the olden days it changed between labour and tory, now it changes from one tory to another. Kind of sad really*.
		
Click to expand...

Prior to 2010 we had many years of Labour Government.  I cant remember there being much dissatisfaction by the Yurters that we neede more Tory Government.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Apr 23, 2017)

NWJocko said:



			Completely agree, imo areas like Education/NHS/MOD should be managed by some form of cross-party/independent group who are not completely influenced by the parliamentary term and the consequent short termism....
		
Click to expand...

What. like the BBC ?

I'll let you ponder on that.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 23, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			Prior to 2010 we had many years of Labour Government.  I cant remember there being much dissatisfaction by the Yurters that we neede more Tory Government.
		
Click to expand...

Not for the 1st time in this thread you seem to have got the wrong end of the stick.  

I was bemoaning the speed that education policy changes now within the same party. This then makes it extremely difficult to make any long term plans about the future of schools and as a chair, do what you think is in the best interests of the kids. The more I see of the DFE, multi academy trusts and the quality of the secretary of states for education the more disillusioned I get about if they really care about the future of the pupils or their own personal agendas and careers. 

When Blair then Brown was in power, whilst there were still ideological issues at play, state schools were funded relatively well which allowed teachers to get on with their jobs. That is not the case now. But I have also been pretty clear that Labour's current education policy is a bit of a shambles and do not really see them coming to power as the answer to the state education is in.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 23, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Not for the 1st time in this thread you seem to have got the wrong end of the stick.  

I was bemoaning the speed that education policy changes now within the same party. This then makes it extremely difficult to make any long term plans about the future of schools and as a chair, do what you think is in the best interests of the kids. The more I see of the DFE, multi academy trusts and the quality of the secretary of states for education the more disillusioned I get about if they really care about the future of the pupils or their own personal agendas and careers. 

When Blair then Brown was in power, whilst there were still ideological issues at play, state schools were funded relatively well which allowed teachers to get on with their jobs. That is not the case now. But I have also been pretty clear that Labour's current education policy is a bit of a shambles and do not really see them coming to power as the answer to the state education is in.
		
Click to expand...

If you have a good read about David Blunkett's performance as Ed Sec, and the flip flopping that went on then you would have a very different perspective of how the Dept for Education shifted course more times than a Spanish galleon under Labour.


----------



## NWJocko (Apr 23, 2017)

PhilTheFragger said:



			What. like the BBC ?

I'll let you ponder on that.
		
Click to expand...

Where have I suggested, or why would it have to be the same as the BBC!??


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Apr 23, 2017)

You didn't mention the BBC , I did

The make up of the organisation you were describing sounds similar to the BBC trust, which has been criticised in the past.

Just making the point that it might be more complicated than it seems&#128077;


----------



## NWJocko (Apr 23, 2017)

PhilTheFragger said:



			You didn't mention the BBC , I did

The make up of the organisation you were describing sounds similar to the BBC trust, which has been criticised in the past.

Just making the point that it might be more complicated than it seems&#128077;
		
Click to expand...

I don't expect it to be simple but because something is complicated shouldn't mean it isn't looked at and/or implemented for the greater good IMO.

Having some form of working body with a view beyond the (max) 5 year parliamentary term for Education and Healthcare etc would be better than having, potentially, a sea change in direction depending on the government of the day for me.

If the board/trust who are responsible from the BBC have made mistakes then learn from them :thup:


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 23, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



*Not for the 1st time in this thread you seem to have got the wrong end of the stick.  
*
I was bemoaning the speed that education policy changes now within the same party. This then makes it extremely difficult to make any long term plans about the future of schools and as a chair, do what you think is in the best interests of the kids. The more I see of the DFE, multi academy trusts and the quality of the secretary of states for education the more disillusioned I get about if they really care about the future of the pupils or their own personal agendas and careers. 

When Blair then Brown was in power, whilst there were still ideological issues at play, state schools were funded relatively well which allowed teachers to get on with their jobs. That is not the case now. But I have also been pretty clear that Labour's current education policy is a bit of a shambles and do not really see them coming to power as the answer to the state education is in.
		
Click to expand...

I didnt get the wrong end of the stick.  You suggested that once the change of government between Labour and the Tories introduced a form of stability and now that was lost due to their only being Tories.  I pointed out that Labour had previously had a long run in Government and such calls were not made then.


----------



## bobmac (Apr 24, 2017)

If only we had an extra Â£350m a week to spend on the NHS, education, Armed forces etc


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 24, 2017)

bobmac said:



			If only we had an extra Â£350m a week to spend on the NHS, education, Armed forces etc
		
Click to expand...

We'll soon be living in a land of milk and honey without Johnny Foreigner telling us how to do things.


----------



## bobmac (Apr 24, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			We'll soon be living in a land of milk and honey without Johnny Foreigner telling us how to do things.
		
Click to expand...

Sign me up :thup:


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 24, 2017)

bobmac said:



			Sign me up :thup:
		
Click to expand...

And me but could I swap out the Milk and Honey for Steak and Chips please.


----------



## Reemul (Apr 27, 2017)

Well I live in Dorset and voted Tory for the first time at the last election. I  am going back to Lib Dem. No vote for labour round here but I think we need to  rethink things and while Corbyn seems useless I worry for 5 years of Tory rule  with poor opposition and a large majority.

 I was up for some austerity  but worry the way the NHS and Education is going and don't think another 5 years  of cutbacks is going to help added to leaving the EU.

 Tough times ahead


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 27, 2017)

Reemul said:



			Well I live in Dorset and voted Tory for the first time at the last election. I  am going back to Lib Dem. No vote for labour round here but I think we need to  rethink things and while Corbyn seems useless I worry for 5 years of Tory rule  with poor opposition and a large majority.

 I was up for some austerity  but worry the way the NHS and Education is going and don't think another 5 years  of cutbacks is going to help added to leaving the EU.

 Tough times ahead
		
Click to expand...

The austerity thing is an issue I do feel needs further explanation to the electorate. My questions are around the "what would the state of our finances have been if we hadn't had it? Would we have been another Greece/Spain/Portugal basket case? Equally, if we'd carried on down the route of spending our way out of the financial crash would it have been better? Are there elements of public spending that need ring fencing, e.g. a triple lock on NHS/benefits spending?

My gut feel, which isn't reliable data, is that both the Tories and Labour have got it wrong... but where do we go if they have?


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 27, 2017)

Austerity - I believe the debt is now bigger than it was before. Selective cut backs that failed to solve the debt problem.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Apr 27, 2017)

I'm sure I read somewhere that this Tory government has borrowed more than all previous Labour governments combined. No idea if that is accurate but it's a scary thought if it is right. But at least the deficit is getting smaller.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 27, 2017)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Austerity - I believe the debt is now bigger than it was before. Selective cut backs that failed to solve the debt problem.
		
Click to expand...

Nearly doubled since Cameron came to power with the Tories.
Really seems to be working this austerity thing Eh.

http://www.nationaldebtclock.co.uk/

Equates to Â£51,000+ debt for every taxpayer


----------



## DRW (Apr 27, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Nearly doubled since Cameron came to power with the Tories.
Really seems to be working this austerity thing Eh.
		
Click to expand...

To reduce the yearly borrowing, then you have to do, one of two things or both :-

1) Raise more revenue (aka partly known as tax)
2) Reduce what you spend (aka partly known as austerity)

So which is it and how much are you going to pay to put right your personal percentage that you have not paid over the last few years? Sadly you can not have everything you want in this world or is there a magic wand


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 27, 2017)

Still thinking of voting Labour?  Try refreshing your memory first:

A Few Facts about Labour....

1) Up to 50 thousand 'excess' deaths were recorded at hospitals during the last Labour Government. (Research by Sir Brian Jarman of Imperial College). 
2) Hundreds of stealth taxes, paid by all.
3) Between 1997 to 2010 gas prices rose 133% and electricity prices rose 69%. Why would the public ever trust Labour on energy prices again?. 
4) The devastating impact of Labour's raid on pensions: The tax grab has cost workers Â£118bn no since 1997. (Office for Budget Responsibility).
5) Labour spent Â£148.7 million on a National Measurements Office which forces traders to measure their goods in kilograms rather than pounds.
6) The Royal Mail is now sold because of EU Postal Directive 2008/6/EC, brought in by the last Labour government.
7) Council Tax doubled under Labour - 105% increase in England, 146% Wales. (The Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy: 26/03/09).
8) In 2012/13 Labour councils employed nearly 23,000 people on zero-hour contracts.
9) Â£660 million has been cut from Labour run NHS Wales over the last three years according to the Welsh TUC.
10) When Labour came to power in 1997, spending on NHS managers was less than Â£190m. By 2010 this had increased by 450% to over Â£1bn per year.
11) Labour wasted Â£11bn of taxpayers money on a failed IT project which was eventually scrapped by the NHS in 2013.
12) Labour lumbered the NHS with vast PFI repayments - Â£50 billion worth of loans which are costing Â£300 billion in repayments.
13) It was the Labour Party who awarded the DWP Medical Services Contract to ATOS on the 15th March 2005.
14) Labour started the privatisation of the NHS. They brought in the 2006 NHS Act that introduced competition into the NHS.
15) Labour introduced competition into the NHS: Competition Act 1998, Enterprise Act 2002 & Public Sector Procurement Regulations 2006.
16) In 2006 Gordon Brown cut the flood defence budget by Â£14 million.
17) Youth unemployment rose by more than 40% during Labour's 13 years in office.
18) Total stock of social housing fell under Labour - 421,000 homes were lost from the social housing stock between 1997 and 2010.
19) British manufacturing grew by 28% between 1980 and 1997. Then, under Labour, it shrank by 6%: falling from 20% of GDP to just 11%.
20) Labour left a deficit of Â£156 billion, PFI liability of Â£301 billion, EU Rebate loss Â£9.3 billion, Sold the Gold loss Â£6 billion.
21) The last Labour government spent so much money on Labour cronies that it had a 5% structural deficit at the height of the boom.
22) 
The use of food banks went up tenfold under Labour. From 3,000 users in 2005/06 to over 40,000 by 2009/10. (The Trussell Trust/C4 FactCheck).
23) When Labour's Gordon Brown became Prime Minister in 2007, UK public debt was 44.1% of GDP. When he left in 2010, it was 148.1%.
24) Only 6,330 council houses were completed from 1998 to 2010 under Labour, compared with 17,710 in 1990 alone - Thatcher's final year as PM.
25) Tony Blair gave away a chunk of the UK's EU rebate estimated now to have cost the UK Â£9.3 billion between 2007-2013.
26) In 2010 Gordon Brown branded Rochdale voter Gillian Duffy "a bigoted woman" for daring to voice her concern about uncontrolled immigration.
27) Labour are now complaining about gambling. But they were the ones who wanted to build Super Casinos in some of the poorest areas in Britain.
28) Labour closed more mines in 5 years than Thatcher did in 11 years.. 211 mines closed under Wilson 1965-70.. 154 under Thatcher 1979-90.
29) Under Labour zero hour contracts increased by 74% between 2004 - 2009.
30) Since Labour liberalised the law in 2000 to allow postal voting on demand, the number of postal voting fraud in Labour areas has soared.
31) Labour wants to charge patients. Lord Warner said people should pay a Â£10-a-month fee to use NHS/Â£20 for every night they stay in hospital.
32) Sexed up dossiers.
33) Labour were responsible for the rise in payday lenders. Now they are campaigning against them.
34) Labour presided over the slowest growth in 50 years and produced the fastest decline in British manufacturing since manufacturing began.
35) Labour destroyed our border controls then with the help of the BBC denounced anybody who voiced concerns about mass immigration as racists.
36) Labour councils are the biggest users of zero hour contracts.
37) Under Labour between 1997 to 2010 the gap between rich and poor got wider.
38) The last Labour government doubled the rate of income tax on the lowest paid.
39) Thousands of dead Iraqi women and children.
40) Labour MPs to remember: Denis MacShane (jailed), David Chaytor (jailed), Eric Illsley (jailed), Elliot Morley (jailed), Jim Devine (jailed).
41) Blair invaded Iraq and Brown invaded the Treasury, both actions crippled us.
42) Labour opposes democracy in Britain by denying the British people a referendum on EU membership.
43) Labour Party Manifesto Pledge 2001: 'We will not introduce top-up fees'. It did. 
44) One of the reasons for high energy prices is EU driven 'Green Taxes' brought in by the last Labour government.
45) It was Labour under Blair who handed control of British food regulation to the EU, (Regulation EC no 178/2002).
46) Remember when Tony Blair and Labour essentially traded guns for access to oil with Libya.
47) The Labour Party paid only Â£14,000 in tax in 2013, on total income of Â£33.3 million. (The Spectator, 30/07/
48) A systematic Anti Semitism that runs rife throughout the Party.
49) Weapons of mass distraction.
50) Rotherham 1400 plus girls known to be groomed by Muslims & covered up by the council & police & left to continue for years.

But it's all the Tory Party's fault.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 27, 2017)

Old Skier said:



			Still thinking of voting Labour?  Try refreshing your memory first:

A Few Facts about Labour....

1) Up to 50 thousand 'excess' deaths were recorded at hospitals during the last Labour Government. (Research by Sir Brian Jarman of Imperial College). 
2) Hundreds of stealth taxes, paid by all.
3) Between 1997 to 2010 gas prices rose 133% and electricity prices rose 69%. Why would the public ever trust Labour on energy prices again?. 
4) The devastating impact of Labour's raid on pensions: The tax grab has cost workers Â£118bn no since 1997. (Office for Budget Responsibility).
5) Labour spent Â£148.7 million on a National Measurements Office which forces traders to measure their goods in kilograms rather than pounds.
6) The Royal Mail is now sold because of EU Postal Directive 2008/6/EC, brought in by the last Labour government.
7) Council Tax doubled under Labour - 105% increase in England, 146% Wales. (The Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy: 26/03/09).
8) In 2012/13 Labour councils employed nearly 23,000 people on zero-hour contracts.
9) Â£660 million has been cut from Labour run NHS Wales over the last three years according to the Welsh TUC.
10) When Labour came to power in 1997, spending on NHS managers was less than Â£190m. By 2010 this had increased by 450% to over Â£1bn per year.
11) Labour wasted Â£11bn of taxpayers money on a failed IT project which was eventually scrapped by the NHS in 2013.
12) Labour lumbered the NHS with vast PFI repayments - Â£50 billion worth of loans which are costing Â£300 billion in repayments.
13) It was the Labour Party who awarded the DWP Medical Services Contract to ATOS on the 15th March 2005.
14) Labour started the privatisation of the NHS. They brought in the 2006 NHS Act that introduced competition into the NHS.
15) Labour introduced competition into the NHS: Competition Act 1998, Enterprise Act 2002 & Public Sector Procurement Regulations 2006.
16) In 2006 Gordon Brown cut the flood defence budget by Â£14 million.
17) Youth unemployment rose by more than 40% during Labour's 13 years in office.
18) Total stock of social housing fell under Labour - 421,000 homes were lost from the social housing stock between 1997 and 2010.
19) British manufacturing grew by 28% between 1980 and 1997. Then, under Labour, it shrank by 6%: falling from 20% of GDP to just 11%.
20) Labour left a deficit of Â£156 billion, PFI liability of Â£301 billion, EU Rebate loss Â£9.3 billion, Sold the Gold loss Â£6 billion.
21) The last Labour government spent so much money on Labour cronies that it had a 5% structural deficit at the height of the boom.
22) 
The use of food banks went up tenfold under Labour. From 3,000 users in 2005/06 to over 40,000 by 2009/10. (The Trussell Trust/C4 FactCheck).
23) When Labour's Gordon Brown became Prime Minister in 2007, UK public debt was 44.1% of GDP. When he left in 2010, it was 148.1%.
24) Only 6,330 council houses were completed from 1998 to 2010 under Labour, compared with 17,710 in 1990 alone - Thatcher's final year as PM.
25) Tony Blair gave away a chunk of the UK's EU rebate estimated now to have cost the UK Â£9.3 billion between 2007-2013.
26) In 2010 Gordon Brown branded Rochdale voter Gillian Duffy "a bigoted woman" for daring to voice her concern about uncontrolled immigration.
27) Labour are now complaining about gambling. But they were the ones who wanted to build Super Casinos in some of the poorest areas in Britain.
28) Labour closed more mines in 5 years than Thatcher did in 11 years.. 211 mines closed under Wilson 1965-70.. 154 under Thatcher 1979-90.
29) Under Labour zero hour contracts increased by 74% between 2004 - 2009.
30) Since Labour liberalised the law in 2000 to allow postal voting on demand, the number of postal voting fraud in Labour areas has soared.
31) Labour wants to charge patients. Lord Warner said people should pay a Â£10-a-month fee to use NHS/Â£20 for every night they stay in hospital.
32) Sexed up dossiers.
33) Labour were responsible for the rise in payday lenders. Now they are campaigning against them.
34) Labour presided over the slowest growth in 50 years and produced the fastest decline in British manufacturing since manufacturing began.
35) Labour destroyed our border controls then with the help of the BBC denounced anybody who voiced concerns about mass immigration as racists.
36) Labour councils are the biggest users of zero hour contracts.
37) Under Labour between 1997 to 2010 the gap between rich and poor got wider.
38) The last Labour government doubled the rate of income tax on the lowest paid.
39) Thousands of dead Iraqi women and children.
40) Labour MPs to remember: Denis MacShane (jailed), David Chaytor (jailed), Eric Illsley (jailed), Elliot Morley (jailed), Jim Devine (jailed).
41) Blair invaded Iraq and Brown invaded the Treasury, both actions crippled us.
42) Labour opposes democracy in Britain by denying the British people a referendum on EU membership.
43) Labour Party Manifesto Pledge 2001: 'We will not introduce top-up fees'. It did. 
44) One of the reasons for high energy prices is EU driven 'Green Taxes' brought in by the last Labour government.
45) It was Labour under Blair who handed control of British food regulation to the EU, (Regulation EC no 178/2002).
46) Remember when Tony Blair and Labour essentially traded guns for access to oil with Libya.
47) The Labour Party paid only Â£14,000 in tax in 2013, on total income of Â£33.3 million. (The Spectator, 30/07/
48) A systematic Anti Semitism that runs rife throughout the Party.
49) Weapons of mass distraction.
50) Rotherham 1400 plus girls known to be groomed by Muslims & covered up by the council & police & left to continue for years.

But it's all the Tory Party's fault.
		
Click to expand...

Im pretty sure you can see a list just as bad that will be assigned to the Tory Party - they are no better than Labour and both parties and their supporters will sit there pointing the finger of blame at each other when the truth is both are to blame for the issues our country has faced over the last 40 plus years. 

They only get into government because there is no one credible to challenge the pair of them - Lib Dems ruined their chances for life after they got lumbered with all the issues after the coalition 

Shame for the UK that we have to chose between two corrupt pathetic political parties that are only ever going to look after themselves and their own interests - none of them give two hoots about the UK and the majority of it's residents


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 27, 2017)

Old Skier said:



			Still thinking of voting Labour?  Try refreshing your memory first:

A Few Facts about Labour....

1) Up to 50 thousand 'excess' deaths were recorded at hospitals during the last Labour Government. (Research by Sir Brian Jarman of Imperial College). 
2) Hundreds of stealth taxes, paid by all.
3) Between 1997 to 2010 gas prices rose 133% and electricity prices rose 69%. Why would the public ever trust Labour on energy prices again?. 
4) The devastating impact of Labour's raid on pensions: The tax grab has cost workers Â£118bn no since 1997. (Office for Budget Responsibility).
5) Labour spent Â£148.7 million on a National Measurements Office which forces traders to measure their goods in kilograms rather than pounds.
6) The Royal Mail is now sold because of EU Postal Directive 2008/6/EC, brought in by the last Labour government.
7) Council Tax doubled under Labour - 105% increase in England, 146% Wales. (The Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy: 26/03/09).
8) In 2012/13 Labour councils employed nearly 23,000 people on zero-hour contracts.
9) Â£660 million has been cut from Labour run NHS Wales over the last three years according to the Welsh TUC.
10) When Labour came to power in 1997, spending on NHS managers was less than Â£190m. By 2010 this had increased by 450% to over Â£1bn per year.
11) Labour wasted Â£11bn of taxpayers money on a failed IT project which was eventually scrapped by the NHS in 2013.
12) Labour lumbered the NHS with vast PFI repayments - Â£50 billion worth of loans which are costing Â£300 billion in repayments.
13) It was the Labour Party who awarded the DWP Medical Services Contract to ATOS on the 15th March 2005.
14) Labour started the privatisation of the NHS. They brought in the 2006 NHS Act that introduced competition into the NHS.
15) Labour introduced competition into the NHS: Competition Act 1998, Enterprise Act 2002 & Public Sector Procurement Regulations 2006.
16) In 2006 Gordon Brown cut the flood defence budget by Â£14 million.
17) Youth unemployment rose by more than 40% during Labour's 13 years in office.
18) Total stock of social housing fell under Labour - 421,000 homes were lost from the social housing stock between 1997 and 2010.
19) British manufacturing grew by 28% between 1980 and 1997. Then, under Labour, it shrank by 6%: falling from 20% of GDP to just 11%.
20) Labour left a deficit of Â£156 billion, PFI liability of Â£301 billion, EU Rebate loss Â£9.3 billion, Sold the Gold loss Â£6 billion.
21) The last Labour government spent so much money on Labour cronies that it had a 5% structural deficit at the height of the boom.
22) 
The use of food banks went up tenfold under Labour. From 3,000 users in 2005/06 to over 40,000 by 2009/10. (The Trussell Trust/C4 FactCheck).
23) When Labour's Gordon Brown became Prime Minister in 2007, UK public debt was 44.1% of GDP. When he left in 2010, it was 148.1%.
24) Only 6,330 council houses were completed from 1998 to 2010 under Labour, compared with 17,710 in 1990 alone - Thatcher's final year as PM.
25) Tony Blair gave away a chunk of the UK's EU rebate estimated now to have cost the UK Â£9.3 billion between 2007-2013.
26) In 2010 Gordon Brown branded Rochdale voter Gillian Duffy "a bigoted woman" for daring to voice her concern about uncontrolled immigration.
27) Labour are now complaining about gambling. But they were the ones who wanted to build Super Casinos in some of the poorest areas in Britain.
28) Labour closed more mines in 5 years than Thatcher did in 11 years.. 211 mines closed under Wilson 1965-70.. 154 under Thatcher 1979-90.
29) Under Labour zero hour contracts increased by 74% between 2004 - 2009.
30) Since Labour liberalised the law in 2000 to allow postal voting on demand, the number of postal voting fraud in Labour areas has soared.
31) Labour wants to charge patients. Lord Warner said people should pay a Â£10-a-month fee to use NHS/Â£20 for every night they stay in hospital.
32) Sexed up dossiers.
33) Labour were responsible for the rise in payday lenders. Now they are campaigning against them.
34) Labour presided over the slowest growth in 50 years and produced the fastest decline in British manufacturing since manufacturing began.
35) Labour destroyed our border controls then with the help of the BBC denounced anybody who voiced concerns about mass immigration as racists.
36) Labour councils are the biggest users of zero hour contracts.
37) Under Labour between 1997 to 2010 the gap between rich and poor got wider.
38) The last Labour government doubled the rate of income tax on the lowest paid.
39) Thousands of dead Iraqi women and children.
40) Labour MPs to remember: Denis MacShane (jailed), David Chaytor (jailed), Eric Illsley (jailed), Elliot Morley (jailed), Jim Devine (jailed).
41) Blair invaded Iraq and Brown invaded the Treasury, both actions crippled us.
42) Labour opposes democracy in Britain by denying the British people a referendum on EU membership.
43) Labour Party Manifesto Pledge 2001: 'We will not introduce top-up fees'. It did. 
44) One of the reasons for high energy prices is EU driven 'Green Taxes' brought in by the last Labour government.
45) It was Labour under Blair who handed control of British food regulation to the EU, (Regulation EC no 178/2002).
46) Remember when Tony Blair and Labour essentially traded guns for access to oil with Libya.
47) The Labour Party paid only Â£14,000 in tax in 2013, on total income of Â£33.3 million. (The Spectator, 30/07/
48) A systematic Anti Semitism that runs rife throughout the Party.
49) Weapons of mass distraction.
50) Rotherham 1400 plus girls known to be groomed by Muslims & covered up by the council & police & left to continue for years.

But it's all the Tory Party's fault.
		
Click to expand...


Labour Party top 50 achievements since being elected in 1997 - Published 2010

1. Longest period of sustained low inflation since the 60s.

2. Low mortgage rates.

3. Introduced the National Minimum Wage and raised it to Â£5.52.

4. Over 14,000 more police in England and Wales.

5. Cut overall crime by 32 per cent.

6. Record levels of literacy and numeracy in schools.

7. Young people achieving some of the best ever results at 14, 16, and 18.

8. Funding for every pupil in England has doubled.

9. Employment is at its highest level ever.

10. Written off up to 100 per cent of debt owed by poorest countries.

11. 85,000 more nurses.

12. 32,000 more doctors.

13. Brought back matrons to hospital wards.

14. Devolved power to the Scottish Parliament.

15. Devolved power to the Welsh Assembly.

16. Dads now get paternity leave of 2 weeks for the first time.

17. NHS Direct offering free convenient patient advice.

18. Gift aid was worth Â£828 million to charities last year.

19. Restored city-wide government to London.

20. Record number of students in higher education.

21. Child benefit up 26 per cent since 1997.

22. Delivered 2,200 Sure Start Childrenâ€™s Centres.

23. Introduced the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

24. Â£200 winter fuel payment to pensioners & up to Â£300 for over-80s.

25. On course to exceed our Kyoto target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

26. Restored devolved government to Northern Ireland.

27. Over 36,000 more teachers in England and 274,000 more support staff and teaching assistants.

28. All full time workers now have a right to 24 days paid holiday.

29. A million pensioners lifted out of poverty.

30. 600,000 children lifted out of relative poverty.

31. Introduced child tax credit giving more money to parents.

32. Scrapped Section 28 and introduced Civil Partnerships.

33. Brought over 1 million social homes up to standard.

34. Inpatient waiting lists down by over half a million since 1997.

35. Banned fox hunting.

36. Cleanest rivers, beaches, drinking water and air since before the industrial revolution.

37. Free TV licences for over-75s.

38. Banned fur farming and the testing of cosmetics on animals.

39. Free breast cancer screening for all women aged between 50-70.

40. Free off peak local bus travel for over-60s.

41. New Deal â€“ helped over 1.8 million people into work.

42. Over 3 million child trust funds have been started.

43. Free eye test for over 60s.

44. More than doubled the number of apprenticeships.

45. Free entry to national museums and galleries.

46. Overseas aid budget more than doubled.

47. Heart disease deaths down by 150,000 and cancer deaths down by 50,000.

48. Cut long-term youth unemployment by 75 per cent.

49. Free nursery places for every three and four-year-olds.

50. Free fruit for most four to six-year-olds at school.

Just to provide a bit of balance :thup:


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 27, 2017)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Im pretty sure you can see a list just as bad that will be assigned to the Tory Party - they are no better than Labour and both parties and their supporters will sit there pointing the finger of blame at each other when the truth is both are to blame for the issues our country has faced over the last 40 plus years. 

They only get into government because there is no one credible to challenge the pair of them - Lib Dems ruined their chances for life after they got lumbered with all the issues after the coalition 

Shame for the UK that we have to chose between two corrupt pathetic political parties that are only ever going to look after themselves and their own interests - none of them give two hoots about the UK and the majority of it's residents
		
Click to expand...

Completely agree but it will get its bites from the blind.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 27, 2017)

DarrenWilliams said:



			To reduce the yearly borrowing, then you have to do, one of two things or both :-

1) Raise more revenue (aka partly known as tax)
2) Reduce what you spend (aka partly known as austerity)

So which is it and how much are you going to pay to put right your personal percentage that you have not paid over the last few years? Sadly you can not have everything you want in this world or is there a magic wand 

Click to expand...

And your alternative would be more austerity which, if Tory policy carries on as it has done for the last seven years, seems to equate to more debt.
Personally I would be happy to pay more tax to Holyrood, but definitely not to Westminster


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 27, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			And your alternative would be more austerity which, if Tory policy carries on as it has done for the last seven years, seems to equate to more debt.
Personally I would be happy to pay more tax to Holyrood, but definitely not to Westminster
		
Click to expand...

I presume then you will not require any services that may be subsidised by the U.K. Government or are you just on one of your regular fishing trips.


----------



## IanM (Apr 27, 2017)

Was interested in seeing the Labour Party Election Broadcast at 6pm tonight on BBC1.  

Much more polished and professional than normal.  



Then an article about who isn't in any way responsible for a foiled terrorist attack in London today and I sussed it was the BBC News at 6!


----------



## DRW (Apr 27, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			And your alternative would be more austerity which, if Tory policy carries on as it has done for the last seven years, seems to equate to more debt.
Personally I would be happy to pay more tax to Holyrood, but definitely not to Westminster
		
Click to expand...

Funny how you know my choice, thank you for telling me. Not even sure why you think you know my answer  :mmm:

How much extra tax a year would you be willing to pay to help reduce the yearly borrowings?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 27, 2017)

DarrenWilliams said:



			Funny how you know my choice, thank you for telling me. Not even sure why you think you know my answer  :mmm:

How much extra tax a year would you be willing to pay to help reduce the yearly borrowings?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, strange one that, perhaps I read between the lines.

For Westminster, nil.
For Holyrood, what would be considered by the government as my fair share.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 27, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			And your alternative would be more austerity which, if Tory policy carries on as it has done for the last seven years, seems to equate to more debt.
Personally I would be happy to pay more tax to Holyrood, but definitely not to Westminster
		
Click to expand...

I would be happy to pay more tax to Westminster but not to Holyrood.  They get too much from me already.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 28, 2017)

Stolen from the Internet but sums it up for me 

[FONT=&quot]I would love to elect a government led by someone both competent and humane, but this option will not be on the ballot paper. The choice today is between brutal efficiency in pursuit of a disastrous agenda, and gentle inefficiency in pursuit of a better world. I know which I favour.[/FONT]


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 28, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Stolen from the Internet but sums it up for me 

I would love to elect a government led by someone both competent and humane, but this option will not be on the ballot paper. The choice today is between brutal efficiency in pursuit of a disastrous agenda, and gentle inefficiency in pursuit of a better world. I know which I favour.

Click to expand...

Sadly, I feel it falls down on affordability. I'd like to see a 1 year tax hike, with a promise to return to gentle tax rates. We all want a better NHS and social care system but how many of us are willing to pay for it? 

How many are willing to give up their holiday in the sun for one year just to reconcile the NHS funding gap or to not reduce benefits?

We all want a well rounded, caring society but who is actually willing to take a 10% rise in tax to fund it?

Sounds great but when you ask someone what their annual tax bill is and then suggest they give up another 10% they baulk at it but if you tell them they'll need a Â£5000 operation this year and would they be willing to contribute Â£1000 towards it they immediately say yes.

Honestly, there's a lot of people out there that want a caring society but aren't willing to pay for it. And then it's the governments fault.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Apr 28, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Sadly, I feel it falls down on affordability. I'd like to see a 1 year tax hike, with a promise to return to gentle tax rates. We all want a better NHS and social care system but how many of us are willing to pay for it? 

How many are willing to give up their holiday in the sun for one year just to reconcile the NHS funding gap or to not reduce benefits?

We all want a well rounded, caring society but who is actually willing to take a 10% rise in tax to fund it?

Sounds great but when you ask someone what their annual tax bill is and then suggest they give up another 10% they baulk at it but if you tell them they'll need a Â£5000 operation this year and would they be willing to contribute Â£1000 towards it they immediately say yes.

Honestly, there's a lot of people out there that want a caring society but aren't willing to pay for it. And then it's the governments fault.
		
Click to expand...

It's not this Governments fault Bri, it's succesive Governments fault, Joe Public is sick of being lied to and everyone blaming everyone else, I know I'm day dreaming when I say it, but I genuinely wish all Party Manifesto's were legally binding, that way they'll only campaign on reality and are accountable.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Apr 28, 2017)

Maybe people would be more willing to pay more tax if they thought that big business were paying their dues as well. It seems it is too easy for the likes of Amazon, Star bucks etc to shuffle the paperwork around so that there tax bill bears no resemblance to their actual sales and profits in this country.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 28, 2017)

pauldj42 said:



			It's not this Governments fault Bri, it's succesive Governments fault, Joe Public is sick of being lied to and everyone blaming everyone else, I know I'm day dreaming when I say it, but I genuinely wish all Party Manifesto's were legally binding, that way they'll only campaign on reality and are accountable.
		
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly. Successive govts have shied away from difficult decisions by not including them in manifestos. They also put vanity projects into manifestos to win votes knowing full well they won't implement them.



ColchesterFC said:



			Maybe people would be more willing to pay more tax if they thought that big business were paying their dues as well. It seems it is too easy for the likes of Amazon, Star bucks etc to shuffle the paperwork around so that there tax bill bears no resemblance to their actual sales and profits in this country.
		
Click to expand...

Two wrongs don't make a right. Do you want a first class NHS or not? Yes the Starbucks of this world need chasing, which would limit personal tax hikes but do you support a 10% tax hike or not?


----------



## Dellboy (Apr 28, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			We'll soon be living in a land of milk and honey without Johnny Foreigner telling us how to do things.
		
Click to expand...

So Scotland is going ahead with the referendum then :thup:


----------



## DRW (Apr 28, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Yes, strange one that, perhaps I read between the lines.

For Westminster, nil.
For Holyrood, what would be considered by the government as my fair share.
		
Click to expand...



Have to laugh at how someone thinks they know from a few posts on a forum....Reading between the lines, assuming, guessing is not the wisest thing to do and is frequently incorrect....

Is your fair share another Â£1, Â£10, Â£100, Â£500, Â£750, Â£1000, Â£2500, Â£5000, Â£10000 or more a year ? How much would you be willing to pay, you haven't actually answered the question, true MP style answer


----------



## ColchesterFC (Apr 28, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Two wrongs don't make a right. Do you want a first class NHS or not? Yes the Starbucks of this world need chasing, which would limit personal tax hikes but do you support a 10% tax hike or not?
		
Click to expand...

What two wrongs?

IF the government showed that they were tackling tax avoidance by the big companies then yes I would be prepared to pay more tax myself. I don't think that at my level of income a 10% tax rise would be justified, or necessary, if the government clamped down on avoidance/evasion but I absolutely believe that those in society earning more should pay more.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 28, 2017)

ColchesterFC said:



			Maybe people would be more willing to pay more tax if they thought that big business were paying their dues as well. It seems it is too easy for the likes of Amazon, Star bucks etc to shuffle the paperwork around so that there tax bill bears no resemblance to their actual sales and profits in this country.
		
Click to expand...

My wife does indeed look after tax and 'shuffle the paperwork' around for a very large global company.  And the first thing is that it is legal and virtually impossible to stop unless they go over really the top, as we live in a globalised world where there will always be countries who use lower business tax rates to attract investment.   The only way you could do this is have one rule for every country, and that will never happen.  Hey, we have allegedly just made a great step forwards to enable us to set our own rules, so every country being able to do that must be a good thing yes??

Also the scale of all this 'magical billions of pounds of tax' sat unclaimed is vastly over exaggerated for political gain by parties and the media, who need to keep their readership very angry all the time about the state of the world. If anyone suggests they will fund a policy by chasing up the tax all these companies are allegedly avoiding then don't believe a word of it. It will never happen plus the amount gained would be nowhere near enough to fund any major policy or 'giveaway'.


----------



## jp5 (Apr 28, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Stolen from the Internet but sums it up for me 

[FONT="]I would love to elect a government led by someone both competent and humane, but this option will not be on the ballot paper. The choice today is between brutal efficiency in pursuit of a disastrous agenda, and gentle inefficiency in pursuit of a better world. I know which I favour.[/FONT]

Click to expand...

Well put.

Quite frankly if the country votes in May with an overwhelming majority then we deserve everything we get.

I've heard nothing but vacuous tautologies from her. Not a shred of policy on how to deal with the issues this country will face.

Having said that elections have been unpredictable of late, so at this stage I'd say it's a 50/50 toss up. Still hope for the "gentle inefficiency"


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 28, 2017)

ColchesterFC said:



			What two wrongs?

IF the government showed that they were tackling tax avoidance by the big companies then yes I would be prepared to pay more tax myself. I don't think that at my level of income a 10% tax rise would be justified, or necessary, if the government clamped down on avoidance/evasion but I absolutely believe that those in society earning more should pay more.
		
Click to expand...

Tax avoidance isn't illegal. Blame successive govts for having a system that allows it. I don't blame any company that operates within the rules. They are doing nothing wrong. But I do blame a govt that allows an inequality/immorality to exist.

Some say that if you don't give those companies the tax breaks they go where they can get them. Rubbish! That only applies to manufacturing. Service industries and retailers need to operate where their markets are. But then you have the problem of taxing companies to the extent that their margin drops below a level that allows them to pay out the dividend to their shareholders, which leads to price rises... its a no win for the little man in the street.

As to the "justified, or necessary..." it still comes back to what sort of country do we want and are we willing to fund it? If we aren't willing to give up the tax dollars to fund a caring society don't cry foul of a govt that doesn't do it.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 28, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Tax avoidance isn't illegal. Blame successive govts for having a system that allows it. I don't blame any company that operates within the rules. They are doing nothing wrong. But I do blame a govt that allows an inequality/immorality to exist.

Some say that if you don't give those companies the tax breaks they go where they can get them. Rubbish! That only applies to manufacturing. Service industries and retailers need to operate where their markets are. But then you have the problem of taxing companies to *the extent that their margin drops below a level that allows them to pay out the dividend to their shareholders, which leads to price rises... its a no win for the little man in the street.
*
As to the "justified, or necessary..." it still comes back to what sort of country do we want and are we willing to fund it? If we aren't willing to give up the tax dollars to fund a caring society don't cry foul of a govt that doesn't do it.
		
Click to expand...

Spot on.  Also people probably underestimate how much of their pensions and savings are tied into the ability of these companies to keep making profits and please their shareholders.  Not saying that is a reason to let them get away with some things, but we live in a very independent complicated financial world.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 28, 2017)

jp5 said:



			Well put.

Quite frankly if the country votes in May with an overwhelming majority then we deserve everything we get.

I've heard nothing but vacuous tautologies from her. Not a shred of policy on how to deal with the issues this country will face.

Having said that elections have been unpredictable of late, so at this stage I'd say it's a 50/50 toss up. Still hope for the "gentle inefficiency" 

Click to expand...

One of her recent factory visits was to an 'invited' audience after the workers had been sent home, and she could not even remember the name of the town she was in.
Does she take Tory voters for complete mugwumps.


----------



## User62651 (Apr 28, 2017)

Sky news website has a live GE voting poll, currently reading

Cons 40%
Lib Dems 32%
Labour 17%
UKIP 4%
Green 2%
SNP 3%

I would think Sky News is a reasonably neutral source even if owned by a right winger in Murdoch. It's a smallish sample so far but these figures don't surprise me and I wonder if this will be roughly where we are on 8th June? Talking point is the LibDem and Labour %'s for me. Lib Dems Brexit stance will be a vote catcher for them, how that translates to seats is another matter of course. 
Far from a cut and dried result perhaps?


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 28, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Sky news website has a live GE voting poll, currently reading

Cons 40%
Lib Dems 32%
Labour 17%
UKIP 4%
Green 2%
SNP 3%

I would think Sky News is a reasonably neutral source even if owned by a right winger in Murdoch. It's a smallish sample so far but these figures don't surprise me and I wonder if this will be roughly where we are on 8th June? Talking point is the LibDem and Labour %'s for me. Lib Dems Brexit stance will be a vote catcher for them, how that translates to seats is another matter of course. 
Far from a cut and dried result perhaps?
		
Click to expand...

I'll eat my hat and subscribe to The Daily Mail if those results occur (with hat eating slightly more of a attractive option of the two to me). 

 Would be nice to see the woolly liberals do well (IMHO as a libtard snowflake) but I think when push comes to shove they will get nowhere near as many votes as that.


----------



## User62651 (Apr 28, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			I'll eat my hat and subscribe to The Daily Mail if those results occur (with hat eating slightly more of a attractive option of the two to me). 

 Would be nice to see the woolly liberals do well (IMHO as a libtard snowflake) but I think when push comes to shove they will get nowhere near as many votes as that.
		
Click to expand...

Well easy to forget in this Govt and right wing press led 24/7 Brexit propaganda we can't escape that 48% didn't want it, you'd think it was 20% the way May behaves, that's a lot of potential votes for a non hard brexit option. Watch this space.


----------



## ger147 (Apr 28, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Sky news website has a live GE voting poll, currently reading

Cons 40%
Lib Dems 32%
Labour 17%
UKIP 4%
Green 2%
SNP 3%

I would think Sky News is a reasonably neutral source even if owned by a right winger in Murdoch. It's a smallish sample so far but these figures don't surprise me and I wonder if this will be roughly where we are on 8th June? Talking point is the LibDem and Labour %'s for me. Lib Dems Brexit stance will be a vote catcher for them, how that translates to seats is another matter of course. 
Far from a cut and dried result perhaps?
		
Click to expand...

The only number that matters above is 40% for the Torys. If they actually get 40% of the vote then they will romp the election with a large increase in their majority.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 28, 2017)

ger147 said:



*The only number that matters above is 40% for the Torys*. If they actually get 40% of the vote then they will romp the election with a large increase in their majority.
		
Click to expand...

Well yes and no.  From a 1st past the post then yes it does.  But arguably from a point of view of the country coming together and forming policy by some sort of consensus in the best interests of lots of people then the amount other parties get is also of relevance. IMHO.


----------



## ger147 (Apr 28, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Well yes and no.  From a 1st past the post then yes it does.  But arguably from a point of view of the country coming together and forming policy by some sort of consensus in the best interests of lots of people then the amount other parties get is also of relevance. IMHO.
		
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it be great if that's what politics and general elections were about...


----------



## User62651 (Apr 28, 2017)

ger147 said:



			The only number that matters above is 40% for the Torys. If they actually get 40% of the vote then they will romp the election with a large increase in their majority.
		
Click to expand...

Yep I agree that's very likely scenario but it depends on vote split a lot.

UKIP got 12% of UK votes and no seats last time whilst SNP won 56 seats of 59 in Scotland with exactly 50% of vote up here. Can go either way.

Tactical voting can help with that scenario and will happen up here against SNP this time, could happen down south too, people thinking if I dont want a Tory MP who has the best chance of unseating them and vote for them even though it's not their party of choice. That's what is bound to happen as the election is all about Brexit and little else.


----------



## ger147 (Apr 28, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Yep I agree that's very likely scenario but it depends on vote split a lot.

UKIP got 12% of UK votes and no seats last time whilst SNP won 56 seats of 59 in Scotland with exactly 50% of vote up here. Can go either way.

Tactical voting can help with that scenario and will happen up here against SNP this time, could happen down south too, people thinking if I dont want a Tory MP who has the best chance of unseating them and vote for them even though it's not their party of choice. That's what is bound to happen as the election is all about Brexit and little else.
		
Click to expand...

If the Torys get 40% they will romp it, end of.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 28, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Well yes and no.  From a 1st past the post then yes it does.  But arguably from a point of view of the country coming together and forming policy by some sort of consensus in the best interests of lots of people then the amount other parties get is also of relevance. IMHO.
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, in terms of the GE its only the first past the post that counts.

As for who will vote for who - purely anecdotal, but I am absolutely gobsmacked, totally stunned, to hear my better half saying she is going to vote Tory. Dyed in the wool Labour voter, and Remainer, daughter of a senior shop steward... voting Tory?!?!?

I asked why. Corbyn and Diane Abbott. We don't do politics in our house as she's always been hard Labour... I'm still stunned by her revelation.

I then asked about voting LibDem. Farron. He is way too arrogant with his blame and wheedling about Brexit! And she's a Remainer... I can't fathom it


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 28, 2017)

If there is a worse politician out there than Diane Abbott please post their name. She will cost Labour a stack of votes.


----------



## User62651 (Apr 28, 2017)

Same poll has now moved slightly to  -

Cons 39%
Lib Dem 33%
Labour 17%
UKIP 3%

from 1,264 votes to date. Both hard Brexit parties down already, get in.

Poll does follow a Vince Cable article mind.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 28, 2017)

Tories got 36% last GE.
Tactical voting this time could make a big difference.
I also think many Tory/Stay voters will abstain, a couple of my Tory friends are saying they will not vote. 
The strength of the Labour vote could also surprise us.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Apr 28, 2017)

One of the many problems for the Lib Dems over the years is that their votes are spread to widely. They come second too often, no real heartland. A high % vote does not necessarily translate into seats for them.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 28, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Tories got 36% last GE.
Tactical voting this time could make a big difference.
I also think many Tory/Stay voters will abstain, a couple of my Tory friends are saying they will not vote. 
The strength of the Labour vote could also surprise us.
		
Click to expand...

I'll go with you on the Labour vote. I think they're going to do way better than expected.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 28, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Unfortunately, in terms of the GE its only the first past the post that counts.

As for who will vote for who - purely anecdotal, but I am absolutely gobsmacked, totally stunned, to hear my better half saying she is going to vote Tory. Dyed in the wool Labour voter, and Remainer, daughter of a senior shop steward... voting Tory?!?!?

I asked why. Corbyn and Diane Abbott. We don't do politics in our house as she's always been hard Labour... I'm still stunned by her revelation.

I then asked about voting LibDem. Farron.* He is way too arrogant* with his blame and wheedling about Brexit! And she's a Remainer... I can't fathom it
		
Click to expand...

yet the tories are full of humility......


----------



## IanM (Apr 28, 2017)

Politics....no wonder folk are at loggerheads....

In the *General Election Thread* - the people slagging off the status quo are the very same people in the* Brexit *Thread desperate to retain it at all costs! 

Elsewhere, the people protesting about shortages of hospital beds and school places are the very same people advocating "open border immigration."   

Anyone else confused?


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 28, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			yet the tories are full of humility...... 

Click to expand...

But the comment is about Farron. What the Tories are is relevant to Farron's behaviour in what way?

The Press association poll, published 5 hours ago and is a combination of all major polls has a 7 day average of;

Cons 46%
Lab 27%
LibDems 11%
UKIP 7%
Greens 3%


----------



## ger147 (Apr 29, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			But the comment is about Farron. What the Tories are is relevant to Farron's behaviour in what way?

The Press association poll, published 5 hours ago and is a combination of all major polls has a 7 day average of;

Cons 46%
Lab 27%
LibDems 11%
UKIP 7%
Greens 3%
		
Click to expand...

46% is a huge number, if the Torys get close to that they will have a huge majority.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 29, 2017)

ger147 said:



			46% is a huge number, if the Torys get close to that they will have a huge majority.
		
Click to expand...

Which is a damning indictment of our electoral system.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 29, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			Which is a damning indictment of our electoral system.
		
Click to expand...

What worries me about a number like that has already been seen in Scotland. The SNP get about 50% of the vote but get 56 out of 59 seats. Equally, the electorate had a vote on proportional representation and, coupled with a mini-Project Fear, rejected it.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 29, 2017)

FairwayDodger said:



			Which is a damning indictment of our electoral system.
		
Click to expand...

So right, a system that involves wearing black stockings and walking backwards has no place in a modern parliament.

Root and branch change needed for the UK to devolve rather than disappear.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 29, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



*So right, a system that involves wearing black stockings and walking backwards has no place in a modern parliament.*

Root and branch change needed for the UK to devolve rather than disappear.
		
Click to expand...

Your getting confused Doom.  I think you're talking about the Troon S&M club.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 29, 2017)

https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamieross/...illage-hall-in?utm_term=.vnxMz9qG4#.wcap68jXe

There is a strong and stable village hut with a strong and stable selected small group of Scottish Tory supporters listening to our weak as water PM.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 29, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamieross/...illage-hall-in?utm_term=.vnxMz9qG4#.wcap68jXe

There is a strong and stable village hut with a strong and stable selected small group of Scottish Tory supporters listening to our weak as water PM.
		
Click to expand...

And shows that she is willing to engage with even the smallest community in the remotest of places.

Which version of spin do you prefer.

Maybe you should post up some of the several links that show all isn't well in the SNP, including the spat she is having with Salmond


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 29, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamieross/...illage-hall-in?utm_term=.vnxMz9qG4#.wcap68jXe

There is a strong and stable village hut with a strong and stable selected small group of Scottish Tory supporters listening to our weak as water PM.
		
Click to expand...

They're going to believe us again! 


View attachment 22528


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 30, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			And shows that she is willing to engage with even the smallest community in the remotest of places.

Which version of spin do you prefer.

Maybe you should post up some of the several links that show all isn't well in the SNP, including the spat she is having with Salmond
		
Click to expand...

So a 200 strong bussed in group of grey haired Scots supporting Perthshire Tories is representing the village of Crathie.... aye right.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 30, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So a 200 strong bussed in group of grey haired Scots supporting Perthshire Tories is representing the village of Crathie.... aye right.
		
Click to expand...

And the SNP don't bus in the rabid ones.... aye right. 

Let's be honest here, go on I dare you, May could have 30,000 in the audience and you still wouldn't have a good word to say. I might not be a Tory voter but at least I'm open minded...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 30, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Maybe you should post up some of the several links that show all isn't well in the SNP, including the spat she is having with Salmond
		
Click to expand...

Sorry my computer will not let me view the content of those sites.
Also I am not an English Daily Express or Mail reader


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 30, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Sorry my computer will not let me view the content of those sites.
Also I am not an English Daily Express or Mail reader
		
Click to expand...

 Don't tell me you've foolishly bought one of those nationalist computers? Does it play Flower of Scotland whilst it boots up?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 30, 2017)

Hobbit said:



 Don't tell me you've foolishly bought one of those nationalist computers? Does it play Flower of Scotland whilst it boots up?
		
Click to expand...

Nope, just a normal one that steers me away from dangerous right wing extremist sites.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 30, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Nope, just a normal one that steers me away from dangerous right wing extremist sites.
		
Click to expand...

Not working then !


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 30, 2017)

Strong and Stable..........three times in 30 seconds on Peston show:whoo:
I win.....


BTW May thinks nurses use food banks for many complex reasons.
May I suggest that nurses use food banks because they are starving, broke and poorly paid. 
Simples really.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 30, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			Not working then !
		
Click to expand...

It is working well.
If you are suggesting that Golf Monthly is a dangerous right wing extremist site I think you are somewhat off the mark.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 30, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			It is working well.
*If you are suggesting that Golf Monthly is a dangerous right wing extremist site I think you are somewhat off the mark.*

Click to expand...

You have read some of the posts in OOB haven't you....


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 30, 2017)

Why do the communist on here think that all those who don't agree with them are extreme right wing.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 30, 2017)

Old Skier said:



			Why do the communist on here think that all those who don't agree with them are extreme right wing.
		
Click to expand...

It's the norm for Yurt Dwelling, Yogurt Knitting, Mugwumps.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 30, 2017)

As I'm not a Harry Potter reader I'll take your word for it.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 30, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			It's the norm for Yurt Dwelling, Yogurt Knitting, Mugwumps.
		
Click to expand...

Yea butttt........... I can at least name a politician who would represent my views on QT.
The right wing guys on here seem to be tooooo embarrassed to do that.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 30, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			You have read some of the posts in OOB haven't you....

Click to expand...


I have a good tolerance level.
The odd few ones are a trifle scary though.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 30, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Yea butttt........... I can at least name a politician who would represent my views on QT.
The right wing guys on here seem to be tooooo embarrassed to do that.
		
Click to expand...

But your views are not to be in the EU. Or are you not really an SNP supporter.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Apr 30, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			It's the norm for Yurt Dwelling, Yogurt Knitting, *Mugwumps*.
		
Click to expand...

Warning in that there are lots of sweary words, but go to 30 seconds..[video=youtube_share;1ngbhVKqKaQ]https://youtu.be/1ngbhVKqKaQ[/video]


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 30, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Yea butttt........... I can at least name a politician who would represent my views on QT.
The right wing guys on here seem to be tooooo embarrassed to do that.
		
Click to expand...

Were not embarrassed, we just don't believe in feeding the Troll.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 1, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			Were not embarrassed, we just don't believe in feeding the Troll.
		
Click to expand...

I don't believe you, it's not hard to name ONE single current UK politician who supports your political views.
There is no logical reason for refusing to do so.
The silence from you and your ilk is deafening.


----------



## Hobbit (May 1, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I don't believe you, it's not hard to name ONE single current UK politician who supports your political views.
There is no logical reason for refusing to do so.
The silence from you and your ilk is deafening.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe those people who haven't listed anyone just can't be bothered with your constant willy waving. This "oh look what Wings has said," as though its the gospel according to Saint Nicola. You decry the hard right, whoever they are, from a position of being a far left nationalist.

There's plenty of far right politicians out there, well and truly in the public eye. Why do you need someone to name them for you? The "no logical reason for refusing to do so" is very logical. You're not worth the effort.


----------



## User62651 (May 1, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Maybe those people who haven't listed anyone just can't be bothered with your constant willy waving. This "oh look what Wings has said," as though its the gospel according to Saint Nicola. You decry the hard right, whoever they are, from a position of being a far left nationalist.

There's plenty of far right politicians out there, well and truly in the public eye. Why do you need someone to name them for you? The "no logical reason for refusing to do so" is very logical. You're not worth the effort.
		
Click to expand...

Sounding very like Theresa (how dare there be any opposition) May!


----------



## Hobbit (May 1, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Sounding very like Theresa (how dare there be any opposition) May!
		
Click to expand...

I don't mind intelligent opposition, and without it we'd be in a bigger mess than we are on the rocky road to Brexit, but mindless willy waving... it just gets wearing. Where's the engagement in a willy waving debate? "Name a right winger." Why? I'd much prefer to find a centre-ist that I could vote for. 

SNP socialist policies - great, but what about funding them. Tory stripping benefits policies, they've gone too far. Far (Islington) looney left Labour, taking it to the bad old days of Michael Foot. Rabid Farron... to be honest, I can't find anyone I want to vote for.


----------



## Old Skier (May 1, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I don't believe you, it's not hard to name ONE single current UK politician who supports your political views.
There is no logical reason for refusing to do so.
The silence from you and your ilk is deafening.
		
Click to expand...

How about the SNP leader. She refused to commit to the EU if Scotland became independent so she must be in favour of leaving.


----------



## SocketRocket (May 1, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I don't believe you, it's not hard to name ONE single current UK politician who supports your political views.
There is no logical reason for refusing to do so.
The silence from you and your ilk is deafening.
		
Click to expand...

The logical reason is that it seems to be getting to you.   Dont worry too much though, given time and medication you will probably get over it.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 1, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			The logical reason is that it seems to be getting to you.   Dont worry too much though, given time and medication you will probably get over it.
		
Click to expand...

Not getting to me in the at all. I am super cool.
I just find it amazing that a group of fairly loud political radicals on this thread cannot name one politician would represent their views.


----------



## SocketRocket (May 1, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Not getting to me in the at all. I am super cool.
I just find it amazing that a group of fairly loud political radicals on this thread cannot name one politician would represent their views.
		
Click to expand...

Come on then, you tell us who you think we should choose as you are so 'Cool' about it.


----------



## Old Skier (May 2, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Not getting to me in the at all. I am super cool.
I just find it amazing that a group of fairly loud political radicals on this thread cannot name one politician would represent their views.
		
Click to expand...

The only radical appears to be you. Once again I give you the leader of the SNP who is openly against being a member of the EU stating they had no plans to apply for membership if Scotland became independent.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 2, 2017)

Struth Davidson there trying to defend the indefensible.
My English friends tell me that the rape clause/two child cap is hardly on the radar in the South of England, is this true?


https://stv.tv/news/politics/1387400-ruth-davidson-on-rape-clause-all-they-do-is-tick-a-box/


----------



## PhilTheFragger (May 2, 2017)

Must admit I hadn't heard of the issue until it was raised on a thread on these pages.
For some reason it's not a story down here

Not sure why it isnt


----------



## SocketRocket (May 2, 2017)

I dont understand what the alternative is.  Is it that any Woman saying she was raped or coerced into conceiving a child should be enough to allow them additional child benefits.  I dont believe anyone considers a genuine case should be denied and I also believe that the Woman does not have to give all the details themselves.  If people think the Government are wrong here then please explain how they believe it should be managed?


----------



## Lord Tyrion (May 3, 2017)

When Diane Abbott had her meltdown yesterday she stated that she "mis spoke". Has she just invented a new word? Has anyone ever heard someone using that before?


----------



## User62651 (May 3, 2017)

Lord Tyrion said:



			When Diane Abbott had her meltdown yesterday she stated that she "mis spoke". Has she just invented a new word? Has anyone ever heard someone using that before?
		
Click to expand...

not new, not that unusual a term or verb to use, common enough.

Was the Greens leader last time (2015) on radio I recall getting all in a muddle, not defending Dianne Abbott but we all get a mental block / brain fatigue sometimes especially when pressured. Maybe she should just resort to repeating a slogan ad nauseum as a standard response to every question.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (May 3, 2017)

No problem with any politician have a brain fade moment. It shows they are human. I've just never heard that phrase before and thought it made her look silly. Bit of a conscious uncoupling moment for me.


----------



## User62651 (May 3, 2017)

Lord Tyrion said:



			No problem with any politician have a brain fade moment. It shows they are human. I've just never heard that phrase before and thought it made her look silly. Bit of a conscious uncoupling moment for me.
		
Click to expand...

You're right, it was an odd choice of words but she had to think of something, couldn't just say "Look we've just made that new policy on policing up yesterday to win votes and I failed to prepare for questioning on it" which is very likely the case. It was a blip in a long campaign. We the electorate are pretty fed up with this general election campaign already so will jump on politicians on all sides making a balls up, it amuses us but in the bigger picture I don't think her struggles yesterday are going to impact the election result or the way people vote, if it was Corbyn struggling then maybe.


----------



## FairwayDodger (May 3, 2017)

Lord Tyrion said:



			When Diane Abbott had her meltdown yesterday she stated that she "mis spoke". Has she just invented a new word? Has anyone ever heard someone using that before?
		
Click to expand...

Very common expression, especially in politics where foot in mouth disease is becoming ever more prevalent.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 3, 2017)

Dianne Abbott?  Oh dear - oh dear - oh dear.


----------



## spongebob59 (May 3, 2017)




----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 3, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Maybe she should just resort to repeating a slogan ad nauseum as a standard response to every question.

Click to expand...

That would be the strong and stable thing to use, especially for people with very small brains.

Beginning to look like PM Mayhem is starting to lose the plot.


----------



## SocketRocket (May 3, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			when pressured. Maybe she should just resort to repeating a slogan ad nauseum as a standard response to every question.

Click to expand...

Labour have a new Slogan now:


----------



## Hobbit (May 3, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Beginning to look like PM Mayhem is starting to lose the plot.
		
Click to expand...

At least cranky Krankie will have company


----------



## Old Skier (May 3, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			At least cranky Krankie will have company
		
Click to expand...

Shes not likely to lose it that much.


----------



## User62651 (May 3, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			At least cranky Krankie will have company
		
Click to expand...

Nippy Sweetie is keeping quite a low profile just now imo, May's making quite a good job (with Davidsons help) of estranging just about everyone up here at the moment with her naff slogans and anti-EU cobblers perhaps NS is just letting her get on with it?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 3, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That would be the strong and stable thing to use, especially for people with very small brains.

Beginning to look like PM Mayhem is starting to lose the plot.
		
Click to expand...

Assumes she had a plot to start with.

And with her 180deg flip-flop from _Remain _to _Leave_ I doubt she has a plan for Brexit either.  So why not just paint the EU as the baddies (see 'tough-talking' speech today) so that when we leave with _No Deal_ we know who to blame - and it won't be strict Aunt Theresa.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 3, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Nippy Sweetie is keeping quite a low profile just now imo, May's making quite a good job (with Davidsons help) of estranging just about everyone up here at the moment with her naff slogans and anti-EU cobblers perhaps NS is just letting her get on with it?
		
Click to expand...

Coalition of Chaos...that'll be May and DExEU?

I'm glad it's not just me who finds her slogans utterly naff, tedious and frankly rather too undergraduate.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 3, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Nippy Sweetie is keeping quite a low profile just now imo, May's making quite a good job (with Davidsons help) of estranging just about everyone up here at the moment with her naff slogans and anti-EU cobblers perhaps NS is just letting her get on with it?
		
Click to expand...

Nicola just needs to keep quiet and keep breathing as May, Davidson and Corbyn are making superb recruiting officers for the SNP.......tick tock.


----------



## Hacker Khan (May 3, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			Labour have a new Slogan now:

View attachment 22550

Click to expand...

So effectively what they are saying is that Labour will prioritise the funding of public services like education and the NHS possibly through increases in taxes (plus the Tories have not ruled out raising taxes either) over getting more weapons of mass destruction? 

Sounds OK to me.....


----------



## SocketRocket (May 3, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			So effectively what they are saying is that Labour will prioritise the funding of public services like education and the NHS possibly through increases in taxes (plus the Tories have not ruled out raising taxes either) over getting more weapons of mass destruction? 

Sounds OK to me.....
		
Click to expand...

If you fail to follow the economics then Diane Abbott will be pleased to explain the detail to you.  Regarding Trident, you are aware that the Labour official line is to support it even though their leader doesn't but Hey Ho thsts the way the party works now.  Regarding the NHS and Education, do you really believe that Labour will pour in funding so that they will never want for anything! 

You do like slipping into debates and outpouring your hatred for all things Tory but you never make it clear what you are suggesting the solution is to all our problems.  I am asking you directly who you believe should be the party in Government that will satisfy your discontent?     Waiting for your answer!


----------



## Hacker Khan (May 4, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			If you fail to follow the economics then Diane Abbott will be pleased to explain the detail to you.  Regarding Trident, you are aware that the Labour official line is to support it even though their leader doesn't but Hey Ho thsts the way the party works now.  Regarding the NHS and Education, do you really believe that Labour will pour in funding so that they will never want for anything! 

You do like slipping into debates and outpouring your hatred for all things Tory but you never make it clear what you are suggesting the solution is to all our problems.  *I am asking you directly who you believe should be the party in Government that will satisfy your discontent?     Waiting for your answer!*

Click to expand...

Well if you read my post you would see that I said 'Sounds OK to me'. Which may give you a hint of where I may be going. With regards to trident then I honestly do not give a toss as it is just a ploy by certain politicians who need to keep the public in a perpetual state of fear so they can say they are the best to defend your nation. Not sure how many Tridents we have used as opposed to how many teachers we have lost or operations that have been cancelled or increase in people living rough on the streets in the past 20 years. 

I have not made my mind up totally yet as I do still have issues with some of Corbyn's shadow cabinet. I am not deluded to think that a Labour government will suddenly make the NHS and education perfect, it isn't about finding the perfect solution but finding a party who best represents how you would like society to be. But if there is a choice between trying to fund public services in a sensible way or mostly leaving them to rot whilst demonising anyone on benefits, then no contest to me.  

And if you think the tories are so strong and stable you have a short memory about Brexit and the aftermath.  As there is a very strong argument to say that the whole thing was instigated as there was so much infighting and fear of UKIP stealing their thunder.  Then the positioning of the key players around during the brexit referendum was mostly motivated by political ambition and manoeuvring for the leadership of the Tory party as opposed to any heartfelt economic and political reasons. Just because we now have Thatcher 2 wearing leather trouser and saying strong and stable a bit doesn't make them any more appealing to be honest.


----------



## Hacker Khan (May 4, 2017)




----------



## Hacker Khan (May 4, 2017)

Oh and here's a graph of national debt that seems to be rising despite the Tories being in power for a few years now. Plus they have not rules out tax increases. Bit hypocritical to call Labour out on that one I think....


----------



## User62651 (May 4, 2017)

Well put HK, tha absolute mire we are currently in as a country is solely down to the Tories. Labour from 1997-2010 made some duff calls for sure but they never came close to getting the country so split and in such a god awful mess domestically as we are now. Utter embarrassment of a nation presently.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 4, 2017)

Emergency meeting at Buckingham Palace this morning.
Perhaps the Queen of Scotland is moving back home.
Might account for May's raised eyebrows when she left yesterday.


----------



## Hacker Khan (May 4, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			If you fail to follow the economics then Diane Abbott will be pleased to explain the detail to you.  Regarding Trident, you are aware that the Labour official line is to support it even though their leader doesn't but Hey Ho thsts the way the party works now.  Regarding the NHS and *Education, do you really believe that Labour will pour in funding so that they will never want for anything! *

You do like slipping into debates and outpouring your hatred for all things Tory but you never make it clear what you are suggesting the solution is to all our problems.  I am asking you directly who you believe should be the party in Government that will satisfy your discontent?     Waiting for your answer!
		
Click to expand...

Whilst Labour were in power my school were able to pay enough teachers to keep class sizes at a manageable level, invest in their CPD and buy sufficient books and other resources for the pupils. The school could also provide education that was not specifically focusing on the core subjects and allow all pupils to find something they enjoyed and could succeed at. There was not massive amounts of money sloshing around, but you could run a school for the benefit of the pupils. 

Now we have had to make redundancies, have had to stop the vast majority of teacher training and have to think very carefully about purchasing any resources for the teachers to basically do their job, just so we can balance the budget.  Also, even at primary school age, pupils are mostly having to be 'taught to the test' (including utterly ridiculous things like advanced grammar that I can guarantee most adults would struggle with and will never be needed, just because Gove had to do it at his prep school back in the 70s) with little opportunity to enrich their education with non core subjects. And that is before you consider the ever shrinking pot of money to help disadvantaged pupils or those with special educational needs and disabilities, who are increasingly being left to struggle on their own as no school can afford to provide the the additional assistance they need. And believe it or not we are one of the better schools, some are in much worse positions.

So if you give me the choice then yes, I know which option I'd want for the children of this nation.  As best of luck once we have regained our independence with competing in a global market place with the standard of education most kids will be getting.  I'd consider that a bit more on June 8th rather than who is best to provide bombs and nuclear missiles.


----------



## SocketRocket (May 4, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Oh and here's a graph of national debt that seems to be rising despite the Tories being in power for a few years now. Plus they have not rules out tax increases. Bit hypocritical to call Labour out on that one I think....

View attachment 22554

Click to expand...

I think you are struggling with understanding the difference between the National Deficit   and National Debt.   The Deficit is considerably lower than when Labour left office, the Debt must be bigger unless you would prefer massive tax increases or cutting public spending dramatically.


----------



## Hobbit (May 4, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Whilst Labour were in power my school were able to pay enough teachers to keep class sizes at a manageable level, invest in their CPD and buy sufficient books and other resources for the pupils. The school could also provide education that was not specifically focusing on the core subjects and allow all pupils to find something they enjoyed and could succeed at. There was not massive amounts of money sloshing around, but you could run a school for the benefit of the pupils. 

Now we have had to make redundancies, have had to stop the vast majority of teacher training and have to think very carefully about purchasing any resources for the teachers to basically do their job, just so we can balance the budget.  Also, even at primary school age, pupils are mostly having to be 'taught to the test' (including utterly ridiculous things like advanced grammar that I can guarantee most adults would struggle with and will never be needed, just because Gove had to do it at his prep school back in the 70s) with little opportunity to enrich their education with non core subjects. And that is before you consider the ever shrinking pot of money to help disadvantaged pupils or those with special educational needs and disabilities, who are increasingly being left to struggle on their own as no school can afford to provide the the additional assistance they need. And believe it or not we are one of the better schools, some are in much worse positions.

So if you give me the choice then yes, I know which option I'd want for the children of this nation.  As best of luck once we have regained our independence with competing in a global market place with the standard of education most kids will be getting.  I'd consider that a bit more on June 8th rather than who is best to provide bombs and nuclear missiles.
		
Click to expand...

You show a graph of rising national debt then decry the lack of spending and cut backs...

For me, the only answer is raise taxes, both on individuals and corporations.


----------



## Hobbit (May 4, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Well put HK, tha absolute mire we are currently in as a country is solely down to the Tories. Labour from 1997-2010 made some duff calls for sure but they never came close to getting the country so split and in such a god awful mess domestically as we are now. Utter embarrassment of a nation presently.
		
Click to expand...

Remind me which party increased the national debt massively in those years. Remind me which party sold off all our gold. Remind which party took us into Iraq. Remind me which party opened our door to unlimited immigration from the new EU countries when every other EU country put a cap on it.

Your rose red tinted spectacles are blinkering you from some truths...


----------



## SocketRocket (May 4, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Well if you read my post you would see that I said 'Sounds OK to me'. Which may give you a hint of where I may be going. With regards to trident then I honestly do not give a toss as *it is just a ploy by certain politicians who need to keep the public in a perpetual state of fear *so they can say they are the best to defend your nation. *Not sure how many Tridents we have used as opposed to how many teachers we have lost or operations that have been cancelled or increase in people living rough on the streets in the past 20 years. *

I have not made my mind up totally yet as I do still have issues with some of Corbyn's shadow cabinet. I am not deluded to think that a Labour government will suddenly make the NHS and education perfect, it isn't about finding the perfect solution but finding a party who best represents how you would like society to be. *But if there is a choice between trying to fund public services in a sensible way or mostly leaving them to rot whilst demonising anyone on benefits*, then no contest to me.  

And if you think the tories are so strong and stable you have a short memory about Brexit and the aftermath.  As there is a very strong argument to say that the whole thing was instigated as there was so much infighting and fear of UKIP stealing their thunder.  Then the positioning of the key players around during the brexit referendum was mostly motivated by political ambition and manoeuvring for the leadership of the Tory party as opposed to any heartfelt economic and political reasons. *Just because we now have Thatcher 2 wearing leather trouser* and saying strong and stable a bit doesn't make them any more appealing to be honest.
		
Click to expand...

You are a bit of a drama queen with your exaggerations.  I never asked for an outpouring of verbal diarrhea, I just wanted to know who you would vote for.


----------



## Hacker Khan (May 4, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			You are a bit of a drama queen with your exaggerations.  I never asked for an outpouring of verbal diarrhea, I just wanted to know who you would vote for.
		
Click to expand...

Drama queen, verbal diarrhoea, classy as ever from the man who bemoans personal insults.

Make you mind up, you moan endlessly about me being sarcastic now you moan about me being passionate. Tell you what, just block me as I will you as this is just getting tedious beyond belief.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 4, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			If you fail to follow the economics then Diane Abbott will be pleased to explain the detail to you.  Regarding Trident, you are aware that the Labour official line is to support it even though their leader doesn't but Hey Ho thsts the way the party works now.  Regarding the NHS and Education, do you really believe that Labour will pour in funding so that they will never want for anything! 

You do like slipping into debates and outpouring *your hatred for all things Tory* but you never make it clear what you are suggesting the solution is to all our problems.  I am asking you directly who you believe should be the party in Government that will satisfy your discontent?     Waiting for your answer!
		
Click to expand...

Oi! I thought that that was reserved for me! or is it that you do like slipping into debates and outpouring your hatred of all things even vaguely liberal.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 4, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			Well put HK, tha absolute mire we are currently in as a country is solely down to the Tories. Labour from 1997-2010 made some duff calls for sure but they never came close to getting the country so split and in such a god awful mess domestically as we are now. Utter embarrassment of a nation presently.
		
Click to expand...

100% with you on this...will be met by furious denial and mud-slinging of course...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 4, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Whilst Labour were in power my school were able to pay enough teachers to keep class sizes at a manageable level, invest in their CPD and buy sufficient books and other resources for the pupils. The school could also provide education that was not specifically focusing on the core subjects and allow all pupils to find something they enjoyed and could succeed at. There was not massive amounts of money sloshing around, but you could run a school for the benefit of the pupils. 

Now we have had to make redundancies, have had to stop the vast majority of teacher training and have to think very carefully about purchasing any resources for the teachers to basically do their job, just so we can balance the budget.  Also, even at primary school age, pupils are mostly having to be 'taught to the test' (including utterly ridiculous things like advanced grammar that I can guarantee most adults would struggle with and will never be needed, just because Gove had to do it at his prep school back in the 70s) with little opportunity to enrich their education with non core subjects. And that is before you consider the ever shrinking pot of money to help disadvantaged pupils or those with special educational needs and disabilities, who are increasingly being left to struggle on their own as no school can afford to provide the the additional assistance they need. And believe it or not we are one of the better schools, some are in much worse positions.

So if you give me the choice then yes, I know which option I'd want for the children of this nation.  As best of luck once we have regained our independence with competing in a global market place with the standard of education most kids will be getting.  I'd consider that a bit more on June 8th rather than who is best to provide bombs and nuclear missiles.
		
Click to expand...

Some schools in my area are seriously considering moving to a four day week due to funding problems.  Can't recall such considerations being made under Labour...


----------



## Hacker Khan (May 4, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Some schools in my area are seriously considering moving to a four day week due to funding problems.  Can't recall such considerations being made under Labour...
		
Click to expand...

Some already have. Plus requests for donations from parents are becoming more common. It's an utterly disgraceful way to run the education system. Still, strong and stable leadership....

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/tories-cla...ble-leadership-as-mps-attack-funding-formula/


----------



## jp5 (May 4, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Some schools in my area are seriously considering moving to a four day week due to funding problems.  Can't recall such considerations being made under Labour...
		
Click to expand...

Four day week sounds like a great idea to me! Think it may actually be a Green Party policy.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 4, 2017)

jp5 said:



			Four day week sounds like a great idea to me! Think it may actually be a Green Party policy.
		
Click to expand...

Longer days and a day off.  That'll be a challenge for parents and carers.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (May 4, 2017)

jp5 said:



			Four day week sounds like a great idea to me! Think it may actually be a Green Party policy.
		
Click to expand...

Green part policy or a Greek party policy?


----------



## JT77 (May 4, 2017)

I try not to involve myself in all this however, i'm not sure you can blame the tories solely for where we currently stand, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/may/17/liam-byrne-note-successor


----------



## SocketRocket (May 4, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Drama queen, verbal diarrhoea, classy as ever from the man who bemoans personal insults.

Make you mind up, you moan endlessly about me being sarcastic now you moan about me being passionate. Tell you what, just block me as I will you as this is just getting tedious beyond belief.
		
Click to expand...

Feel free!


----------



## SocketRocket (May 4, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Some schools in my area are seriously considering moving to a four day week due to funding problems.  Can't recall such considerations being made under Labour...
		
Click to expand...

It all started when they encouraged millions of migrants.   How did they think it would finish?


----------



## Hobbit (May 4, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			100% with you on this...will be met by furious denial and mud-slinging of course...
		
Click to expand...




Hobbit said:



			Remind me which party increased the national debt massively in those years. Remind me which party sold off all our gold. Remind which party took us into Iraq. Remind me which party opened our door to unlimited immigration from the new EU countries when every other EU country put a cap on it.

Your rose red tinted spectacles are blinkering you from some truths...
		
Click to expand...

See above my initial response to Maxie's post. I don't like what the Tories are doing but to say Labour were wonderful whilst in power misses out a whole heap of truth. Labour ran up a massive debt during a time of boom, and were in no position to meet the bust from 2008 onwards. At best it was reckless.

No mud slinging, just honest truths. Or should we be looking for alternative truths, as taught to us by Trump?


----------



## User62651 (May 4, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			See above my initial response to Maxie's post. I don't like what the Tories are doing but to say Labour were wonderful whilst in power misses out a whole heap of truth. Labour ran up a massive debt during a time of boom, and were in no position to meet the bust from 2008 onwards. At best it was reckless.

No mud slinging, just honest truths. Or should we be looking for alternative truths, as taught to us by Trump?
		
Click to expand...

Don't think anyone said Labour were wonderful, well I didn't anyway. Was referring to UK disunity / nasty splits on both nationalistic and Brexit lines. Brexit divide can be laid solely at Tories feet, Scottish nationalism comes and goes but has never been at such a high level since Tory/LD coalition and then infinitely higher since Tories took power on their own. They're supposed to be the Unionist party but are the ones driving the wedges of divide deeper (for their own ends, not the UKs benefit)........imho


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 4, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			It all started when they encouraged millions of migrants.   How did they think it would finish?
		
Click to expand...

Really?  that's the answer to it all is it?  migrants. A school can only take pupils to it's capacity - doesn't matter their background.   And not surprisingly given I live in a wealthy part of the country where housing is all but unaffordable for the less wealthy - there are not that many migrants and their children in the catchment areas of the local primary schools - and it these schools that are considering the four day week.  Migrants then?  That's your answer?  perhaps you need to think again.


----------



## Old Skier (May 4, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Assumes she had a plot to start with.

And with her 180deg flip-flop from _Remain _to _Leave_ I doubt she has a plan for Brexit either.  So why not just paint the EU as the baddies (see 'tough-talking' speech today) so that when we leave with _No Deal_ we know who to blame - and it won't be strict Aunt Theresa.
		
Click to expand...


She has been mandated by those that had the majority vote to flip flop so your post is hog wash, unless you feel she should have ignored the democratic vote and sided with you instead.


----------



## Hacker Khan (May 4, 2017)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Really?  that's the answer to it all is it?  migrants. A school can only take pupils to it's capacity - doesn't matter their background.   And not surprisingly given I live in a wealthy part of the country where housing is all but unaffordable for the less wealthy - there are not that many migrants and their children in the catchment areas of the local primary schools - and it these schools that are considering the four day week.  Migrants then?  That's your answer?  perhaps you need to think again.
		
Click to expand...

No, he's right, if we all just jumped into a Tardis and went back to the 1950s then all this would be sorted out.   And if we got rid of all migrant kids then all schools would be great.  After all, they are mostly holding back the indigenous population....  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/e...u-migrant-pupils-perform-better-a7060106.html


----------



## Hacker Khan (May 4, 2017)

Old Skier said:



*She has been mandated by those that had the majority vote to flip flop* so your post is hog wash, unless you feel she should have ignored the democratic vote and sided with you instead.
		
Click to expand...

What this country needs is a strong and stable (and flip floppy) leadership....


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 4, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			What this country needs is a strong and stable (and flip floppy) leadership....
		
Click to expand...

I prefer the weak and wobbly slogan we have at the moment.
Proper British is weak and wobbly. 

Haven't heard 'strong and stable' for ages now [well at least two days].
I think the Ozzie guys are furiously head scratching and re-writing as we type.
'Bold as British' is my hunch for the next idiots guide punch line.


----------



## Old Skier (May 4, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			What this country needs is a strong and stable (and flip floppy) leadership....
		
Click to expand...

I presume you think she should have ignored the outcome of the referendum?


----------



## Old Skier (May 4, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I prefer the weak and wobbly slogan we have at the moment.
Proper British is weak and wobbly. 

Haven't heard 'strong and stable' for ages now [well at least two days].
I think the Ozzie guys are furiously head scratching and re-writing as we type.
'Bold as British' is my hunch for the next idiots guide punch line.
		
Click to expand...

Back fishing


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 4, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			See above my initial response to Maxie's post. I don't like what the Tories are doing but to say Labour were wonderful whilst in power misses out a whole heap of truth. Labour ran up a massive debt during a time of boom, and were in no position to meet the bust from 2008 onwards. At best it was reckless.

No mud slinging, just honest truths. Or should we be looking for alternative truths, as taught to us by Trump?
		
Click to expand...

Going back a tad further.
Remember the North Sea Oil and Loadsamoney boom.
If I recall correctly the Tory's failed in there desire to 'mend the roof when the sun is shining'.


----------



## ScienceBoy (May 8, 2017)

Just heard today Labour are going to offer free parking at hospitals... I can see this going one of 2 ways

1. Broken promise
2. Backlash on where all the money would come from.

If you are going to put money into hospitals then visitor parking is bottom of the list! I really hope this does not happen, we need the money to go into the hospitals first, at the top of the parking list is free parking for staff and regular patients (if they don't get it already).

I am more than happy to pay to park or for a short visit (4-6 hours) at the hospital.

When I had to visit daily for just over a week I asked for and got a discount pass that lasted up to 2 weeks. Cost under Â£10 IIRC and I got to park for as long as I wanted and come and go as much as I needed. 

It seems to me visitor parking is mostly sorted out, as long as you ask if you are going to be frequent for a short period of time. 

Labour, please spend the money elsewhere in hospitals if you get in!


----------



## Lord Tyrion (May 8, 2017)

Couldn't disagree more. High hospital charging for parking is a disgrace and a punishment to ill people and their families. This needs managing so that nearby workers don't use the car park for free parking but that shouldn't be beyond people to sort that out.


----------



## SocketRocket (May 8, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			No, he's right, if we all just jumped into a Tardis and went back to the 1950s then all this would be sorted out.   And if we got rid of all migrant kids then all schools would be great.  After all, they are mostly holding back the indigenous population....  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/e...u-migrant-pupils-perform-better-a7060106.html

Click to expand...

Don't need to go back to the 1950's, 15 years would be enough.

There you go again with your exaggeration/sarcasm. My comments are not racist even though you would prefer that. My concerns are population growth getting out of control and the inability of us to meet  the demands it creates.  You may be content with a population so big that it creates an increasing stress on living standards but I'm not. 

Answer me this: Are you content with the current levels of population growth in the UK?  Would you like it to be larger, if so how large?  Do you believe there should be no restriction on immigration into the UK?


----------



## User62651 (May 8, 2017)

ScienceBoy said:



			Just heard today Labour are going to offer free parking at hospitals... I can see this going one of 2 ways

1. Broken promise
2. Backlash on where all the money would come from.

If you are going to put money into hospitals then visitor parking is bottom of the list! I really hope this does not happen, we need the money to go into the hospitals first, at the top of the parking list is free parking for staff and regular patients (if they don't get it already).

I am more than happy to pay to park or for a short visit (4-6 hours) at the hospital.

When I had to visit daily for just over a week I asked for and got a discount pass that lasted up to 2 weeks. Cost under Â£10 IIRC and I got to park for as long as I wanted and come and go as much as I needed. 

It seems to me visitor parking is mostly sorted out, as long as you ask if you are going to be frequent for a short period of time. 

Labour, please spend the money elsewhere in hospitals if you get in!
		
Click to expand...

We already have free hospital parking up here so its not a vote winner for Labour here. I know it will sound abhorrent to your average Tory but penalising people to go to hospital was seen as unfair, it's hardly a day out!


----------



## SocketRocket (May 8, 2017)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Couldn't disagree more. High hospital charging for parking is a disgrace and a punishment to ill people and their families. This needs managing so that nearby workers don't use the car park for free parking but that shouldn't be beyond people to sort that out.
		
Click to expand...

A release token from the Hospital would take care of that.


----------



## Old Skier (May 8, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			We already have free hospital parking up here so its not a vote winner for Labour here. I know it will sound abhorrent to your average Tory but penalising people to go to hospital was seen as unfair, it's hardly a day out!
		
Click to expand...

Could be part of the reason Scotland's finances are in such a mess. To many freebies going around. At least make staff pay for parking  as per the normal for other workers.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 8, 2017)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Couldn't disagree more. High hospital charging for parking is a disgrace and a punishment to ill people and their families. This needs managing so that nearby workers don't use the car park for free parking but that shouldn't be beyond people to sort that out.
		
Click to expand...

I have just paid Â£63 in parking over the past 5 days - I nearly got a ticket because I was 5 mins over the "drop off" zone when i dropped off my wife who was in a lot of pain.

I saw the slimy ticket guy smile like mad as he watched an elderly couple park in a slot that wasn't actually a slot so he then slapped a parking fine on them ! 

I'm sure with the Â£350 mil a week that is coming to the NHS they can use that to fund better parking


----------



## Lord Tyrion (May 8, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			A release token from the Hospital would take care of that.
		
Click to expand...

Agreed. Not hard to resolve.


----------



## FairwayDodger (May 8, 2017)

maxfli65 said:



			We already have free hospital parking up here so its not a vote winner for Labour here. I know it will sound abhorrent to your average Tory but penalising people to go to hospital was seen as unfair, it's hardly a day out!
		
Click to expand...

Depends on the hospital, not all free.


----------



## SocketRocket (May 8, 2017)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I have just paid Â£63 in parking over the past 5 days - I nearly got a ticket because I was 5 mins over the "drop off" zone when i dropped off my wife who was in a lot of pain.

I saw the slimy ticket guy smile like mad as he watched an elderly couple park in a slot that wasn't actually a slot so he then slapped a parking fine on them ! 

I'm sure with the Â£350 mil a week that is coming to the NHS they can use that to fund better parking
		
Click to expand...

I agree that parking charges in Hospitals is too expensive and inappropriate for people in stressful situations.

It's a shame you have to use Brexit in this as it's not really anything to do with it, is it?


----------



## Pathetic Shark (May 9, 2017)

"Don't let the rich elite hijack Brexit" claims Jeremy Corbyn today.     When it was a "rich elite" lawyer who didn't like the result and started the legal campaign to overturn the result.


----------



## Region3 (May 9, 2017)

ScienceBoy said:



			at the top of the parking list is free parking for staff and regular patients (if they don't get it already).
		
Click to expand...

Can't speak for anywhere else, but my wife pays for parking where she works.


----------



## Hobbit (May 9, 2017)

Pathetic Shark said:



			"Don't let the rich elite hijack Brexit" claims Jeremy Corbyn today.     When it was a "rich elite" lawyer who didn't like the result and started the legal campaign to overturn the result.
		
Click to expand...

Its hilarious! Only 5% of the population are considered the rich elite yet Brexit is being stolen... the guy must be on drugs!


----------



## Hacker Khan (May 9, 2017)

Hold on, I'm a bit confused here, are we stepping back to the bad old days or are the Tories sticking up against the nasty energy company. Are the tories now stealing Labour's as well as UKIP's polices?  It's a confusing world The Daily Mail lives in.


----------



## Old Skier (May 9, 2017)

Hacker Khan said:



			Hold on, I'm a bit confused here, are we stepping back to the bad old days or are the Tories sticking up against the nasty energy company. Are the tories now stealing Labour's as well as UKIP's polices?  It's a confusing world The Daily Mail lives in.

View attachment 22605

Click to expand...

You realy shouldn't read such a naughty paper.


----------



## SocketRocket (May 9, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			Its hilarious! Only 5% of the population are considered the rich elite yet Brexit is being stolen... the guy must be on drugs!
		
Click to expand...

The richest 1% of the population are paying almost 30% of Income Tax and almost 50% of the working population dont pay any.


----------



## Hobbit (May 9, 2017)

SocketRocket said:



			The richest 1% of the population are paying almost 30% of Income Tax and almost 50% of the working population dont pay any.
		
Click to expand...

And those on Â£20k pay less than Â£2k, whilst those on Â£80k already pay over Â£20k. But let's hit a small percentage of the voters as it won't affect who votes for us. Rip off Britain starts with legalised robbery by a (potential) Labour govt.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 10, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			And those on Â£20k pay less than Â£2k, whilst those on Â£80k already pay over Â£20k. But let's hit a small percentage of the voters as it won't affect who votes for us. Rip off Britain starts with legalised robbery by a (potential) Labour govt.
		
Click to expand...

Â£80K is a lot of money when average wages are Â£23k.
Pretty sure those on less than Â£23k would be happy to pay more tax if they were on Â£80k
A farer tax system might just be enough to stop the nurses and retired service folk from using food banks.


----------



## Hobbit (May 10, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Â£80K is a lot of money when average wages are Â£23k.
Pretty sure those on less than Â£23k would be happy to pay more tax if they were on Â£80k
A farer tax system might just be enough to stop the nurses and retired service folk from using food banks.
		
Click to expand...

But penalising someone for being successful? If someone is on Â£80k they've earned it. I'd rather see the end of vanity projects like H2S, which shaves less than an hour off the journey to Brum.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 10, 2017)

Hobbit said:



			But penalising someone for being successful? If someone is on Â£80k they've earned it. I'd rather see the end of vanity projects like H2S, which shaves less than an hour off the journey to Brum.[/QUOTE

Penalise is a strong word I prefer paying your share and contributing to your society.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## spongebob59 (May 10, 2017)

Doon frae Troon said:





Hobbit said:



			But penalising someone for being successful? If someone is on Â£80k they've earned it. I'd rather see the end of vanity projects like H2S, which shaves less than an hour off the journey to Brum.[/QUOTE

Penalise is a strong word I prefer paying your share and contributing to your society.
		
Click to expand...

 Aren't they already doing that by paying double the base rate ?
		
Click to expand...


----------



## PhilTheFragger (May 10, 2017)

As we have 2 General Election threads going simultaneously, I'm closing this one.

All GE posts on the GE 2017 thread please folks &#128077;


----------

