Taking sides: the dividing lines of British politics

by tlttf Thu Jan 31, 2013 9:16 am

First topic message reminder :

Fantastic article from the "New Statesman", sums up politics as is?

Taking sides: the dividing lines of British politics

All parties love the easy, polarising rhetoric of “us” against “them” – but how distinct are their ideas?

By Rafael Behr, Published 31 January 2013

There is a reliable way to tell if David Cameron is rattled. When the Prime Minister is on shaky ground, he hurls the charge of being “left-wing” at Ed Miliband as if it were the foulest thing he could say within the bounds of parliamentary protocol. The “Red Ed” label has never been a plausible line of attack but it is a comforting fiction for senior Conservatives who deride the Labour leader’s agenda as a slide into unelectable socialism.

Take time out from tribalism and read the article!

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/politics/2013/01/taking-sides-dividing-lines-british-politics

by Redflag Sat Jun 08, 2013 1:05 pm

But it would be nice if once in a while you put your hands up to the things that the Tory party are getting wrong, instead of just quoting the Daily Fail. I know the Labour party did not get everything right in their 13 years in office, and have put my hands up to it, but if my party behaved the same way as the Tories do they would not be MY party for long.

As Ivan has said Osborne made £400,000 profit on his second home, the one WE the taxpayers paid for, if that was a Labour MP we would never be allowed to forget it from yourself, but because its a Tory MP that is OK. Just what I and others have been saying, one law for them and a different one for the rest of us.

by tlttf Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:51 am

In reality, there is now no difference whatsoever between the 3 main parties, they simply rephrase the same story and some (unfortunately) fall for the soft sell every time. Vote for an independent or failing that UKIP. You know it makes sense. Read this article from the Independent paper and open your eyes.

"One by one, Labour's dominoes are falling," as Michael Portillo said on BBC1's This Week on Thursday. Accepting coalition spending limits; supporting free schools; admitting mistakes were made in the NHS. In each case, the retreat has been stealthy, with plenty of confusing diversionary tactics to conceal what has been happening. But each time, differences between Labour and the coalition – differences liable to be unpopular – have been dropped.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/recovery-means-dumping-labour-policies-8669703.html

by oftenwrong Sun Jun 23, 2013 11:36 am

If a one-time Minister in Thatcher's Government were ever to be heard saying nice things about the Labour Party I think I might find myself slightly surprised.

by Redflag Sun Jun 23, 2013 11:49 am

tlttf wrote:In reality, there is now no difference whatsoever between the 3 main parties, they simply rephrase the same story and some (unfortunately) fall for the soft sell every time. Vote for an independent or failing that UKIP. You know it makes sense. Read this article from the Independent paper and open your eyes.

"One by one, Labour's dominoes are falling," as Michael Portillo said on BBC1's This Week on Thursday. Accepting coalition spending limits; supporting free schools; admitting mistakes were made in the NHS. In each case, the retreat has been stealthy, with plenty of confusing diversionary tactics to conceal what has been happening. But each time, differences between Labour and the coalition – differences liable to be unpopular – have been dropped.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/recovery-means-dumping-labour-policies-8669703.html

The shadow education Minister Stephen Twigg DOES NOT support Free Schools because they allow anybody off the streets to teach in these schools, without teacher qualifacations so if you want to your kids to come out of school thicker than what they where at the age of 5yrs, carrry on and support the dick head Tories.

As for the NHS the 18yrs of Tory neglect had left the NHS in deep shyte when the Labour gov't came into power in 1997, and that is where most of the money that you harp on about was spent on, people dying before they could get there operations waiting times was up to around 18 months thanks to that old hag the Maggot and her Tory MUPPETS.

by bobby Sun Jun 23, 2013 5:39 pm

thanks to that old hag the Maggot and her Tory MUPPETS

Thankfully the Bitch will not get any older!.

by Redflag Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:16 pm

bobby wrote:thanks to that old hag the Maggot and her Tory MUPPETS

Thankfully the Bitch will not get any older!.

I say thank God she is gone to that INFERNO down below where she will be among her many Tory friends Bobby.

by oftenwrong Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:27 am

Payday loans websites blocked by Haringey council

http://money.uk.msn.com/guardian/payday-loans-websites-blocked-by-haringey-council-2

At first sight a common-sense move. The Payday Loans industry is an albatross around the neck of the Poor. But where does this potentially lead? Could e.g. Tory-controlled Councils proscribe left-leaning websites like Cutting Edge?

by **Ivan** Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:50 am

oftenwrong wrote:-
Could Tory-controlled Councils proscribe left-leaning websites like Cutting Edge?

Why not? The BBC has been well and truly gagged by the Tories, so a discussion forum would present no challenge. (Yesterday, thousands of teachers went on strike in the north of England, but I heard no mention of it on Radio 4, which was more interested in Michael Fabricant's hair and dining arrangements.)

As Wonga has made at least one large donation to the Tory Party, don't expect any Tory councils to ban access to payday loan companies. Wonga has just been duly rewarded by Osborne, who is making the unemployed wait seven days before they can submit a claim, increasing the likelihood that they will resort to getting money from a 'loan shark'.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-wonga-coup-chancellor-george-osbornes-gift-to-the-payday-lenders-in-government-spending-review-8675581.html

by Redflag Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:04 am

Ivan that is all Wonga and their likes are "LOAN SHARKS", the only difference is instead of coming round and knee-capping the borrower their interest charges go up daily so for a loan of £100.00 you can end up paying back £800.00-£1,000 so their profit is huge as is their % rate.

by **Ivan** Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:11 am

Conservative ministers agreed to hold meetings with the controversial payday loans company Wonga in exchange for payments to the party.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/loans/9613729/Loan-firms-wonga-buys-the-ears-of-ministers.html

The stench of corruption is never far away from Cameron and his depraved government.

by sickchip Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:52 pm

What dividing lines?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/27/ed-balls-prudent-full-throttle-fury

by Redflag Fri Jun 28, 2013 6:59 pm

Ivan wrote:Conservative ministers agreed to hold meetings with the controversial payday loans company Wonga in exchange for payments to the party.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/loans/9613729/Loan-firms-wonga-buys-the-ears-of-ministers.html

The stench of corruption is never far away from Cameron and his depraved government.

Did you know Ivan that one of the Tory parties biggest donors Lord Beecroft is part owner of Wonga, apparently one of his companies has quite a few shares in Wonga the stench coming from the entire Tory party is enough to knock you on your back.

by oftenwrong Mon Jul 01, 2013 7:57 pm

There is apparently no division about the proposed award of a pay-rise to MPs, averaging £10K.

Apparently the poor lambs are being forced to take it without ever having been consulted.

by boatlady Tue Jul 02, 2013 8:26 am

It's really quite obscene in my view

by Redflag Tue Jul 02, 2013 4:22 pm

oftenwrong wrote:There is apparently no division about the proposed award of a pay-rise to MPs, averaging £10K.

Apparently the poor lambs are being forced to take it without ever having been consulted.

The MPs would not dare bring this in, or risk loosing there seat at the next general election no matter what party and if Cameron does not bring in a law to stop this the Tory party will have a hard job making excuses to there constituents why they are getting such big pay hikes when the rest of the UK are on pay freezes or pay cuts, after all the MPs are civil servants and they have awarded pay rise of no more than 1% too all civil servants so that is all they should get and not a penny more.

by oftenwrong Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:31 pm

The career of an MP is only calculable until the next General Election. Which tends to make their concern about remuneration a short-term consideration.

by Redflag Wed Jul 03, 2013 10:59 am

oftenwrong wrote:The career of an MP is only calculable until the next General Election. Which tends to make their concern about remuneration a short-term consideration.

Do you think OW that this pay rise will go through or will they be sneaky about it ??

by boatlady Wed Jul 03, 2013 12:29 pm

Personally, I think it's a done deal

by Redflag Thu Jul 04, 2013 6:48 am

boatlady wrote:Personally, I think it's a done deal

If it is a done deal boatlady we need a good investigative reporter to let the people of the UK know that it has gone through then stand back and watch the people of the the UK get really angry at the politicians.

by boatlady Thu Jul 04, 2013 9:03 am

I think lots of people are really angry already - translating that anger into action is another thing.
However angry we feel, we have to have a government of sorts, otherwise there's no infrastructure - no body to take responsibility for roads, education, social care, benefits, military defence, international trade etc etc
If all the politicians are equally bad, we have the choice between one set of rogues and fools or another set of equally bad rogues and fools.

Then you get the vote split because little splinter groups think they've found a party (like UKIP or the Green Party) that's different - because those minority parties are different they don't have the organisation to fight and win a General Election, which is just as well because quite often they are single issue parties without policies except in one narrowly defined area.

Then you get some sort of mess, like the current coalition that, as far as I can see, has given up even any pretence of governing in the interest of the electorate and is just governing in the interest of assuring a fat future for its members after the inevitable eventual defeat.

I guess if we don't get rid of the coalition in 2015 ALL the wealth will be cunningly stashed offshore by the next General Election and the cupboard will really be bare.
It seems to me, that the only hope would be to return a Labour government and then PESTER MP's on each and every issue.

But I may be wrong

by oftenwrong Thu Jul 04, 2013 11:17 am

"It seems to me, that the only hope would be to return a Labour government and then PESTER MP's on each and every issue."

The idea of a "Wealth Tax" is gaining ground in discussion amongst some socialist groups. Some European administrations, in addition to Income Tax, levy a 0.2% impost on personal wealth such as ownership of Land, houses, cars, boats and shareholdings. It might be all that Labour needed to balance the books after a General Election victory.

by Redflag Thu Jul 04, 2013 12:07 pm

Can I add to your list OW, the House of Lords needs a good clean out that would save us around £300.00 per day by 500 that would save us £750,000 per week over the year that would mount up to a tidy sum saved over the year.

by oftenwrong Thu Jul 04, 2013 5:47 pm

Clegg announced an intention to reform The Lords, but his coalition partners made him sit on the naughty step until the urge passed. He retaliated by refusing to support Tory plans to redraw electoral boundaries to their advantage.

School holidays - SORRY! House of Commons Recess, starts on 18 July 2013.

by tlttf Fri Jul 05, 2013 7:18 am

Has the labour party been overtaken by the unite union?

Apparently unite has monopolised the last 9 out 11 labour candidates for mp's, do you think this is right. A union with a membership of 1.2 million (hardly a national party) is pushing more than it's weight within the labour party, is this good for democracy?

In Falkirk where the labour party has 200 members they have managed (obviously nothing untoward) to take control of who is put forward as a potential mp. Id this good for democracy and is Ed strong enough as a leader (he's not showing it yet) to fight for control of the party or should he allow the labour party to move to the left and give the electorate a genuine choice rather than the same policies renamed that we presently suffer under with 3 liberal minded parties?

by **Ivan** Fri Jul 05, 2013 9:17 am

tlttf. Unite represents a lot more people than the private health companies who have donated £20 million to the Tories. Unite represents a lot more people than Wonga.com, which has given money to the Tories and been rewarded by Osborne with a 7-day wait for benefit claimants, which will help to ensure they get into debt and need a payday loan.

6.5 million people in the UK are in trade unions. It wasn't trade unions which brought about the global credit crunch but bankers, the natural constituency of the Tories. Unions fought and won holiday pay, maternity rights and health and safety at work.

The Labour Party was set up for working people. One minute you're moaning about it being indistinguishable from the Tories and the Lib Dems, the next your complaining when it is. Is it good for democracy that the representatives of working people have some influence in a political party? Yes it is.

by Redflag Fri Jul 05, 2013 10:35 am

tlttf wrote:Has the labour party been overtaken by the unite union?

Apparently unite has monopolised the last 9 out 11 labour candidates for mp's, do you think this is right. A union with a membership of 1.2 million (hardly a national party) is pushing more than it's weight within the labour party, is this good for democracy?

In Falkirk where the labour party has 200 members they have managed (obviously nothing untoward) to take control of who is put forward as a potential mp. Id this good for democracy and is Ed strong enough as a leader (he's not showing it yet) to fight for control of the party or should he allow the labour party to move to the left and give the electorate a genuine choice rather than the same policies renamed that we presently suffer under with 3 liberal minded parties?

You have a cheek tittf to talk about the way the Labour party selects its MPs, as Ivan has pointed out the Labour party came from three agriculture workers who stood up to the landed gentry who wanted to reduce their pittance of wages even more, and for their trouble they were deported to Austrailia. This shows people what the Tories were then and proves there is no difference from the Tories of that time to today's Tories. This brought the best out of the people of the UK, it took them THREE YEARS to get those three men returned to the UK.

So do you know what it takes for a man to be selected by the Tory party, let me enlighten you from the proof of todays Tory MPs, MONEY of your own or inherited from parents or your own business which says to me HOW MUCH DO THEY HAVE TO PAY THE TORY PARTY TO REACH THE SELECTION COMMITTEE . So the Tory MPs buy their way into the House of Commons and you have the nerve to talk about the Labour party. I also notice there was no inquiry into "Dinner at No10 & Chequers" when WEALTHY business men and Tory donors were paying £250,000 for dinner with the PM, with a policy change thrown in for dessert, and we all know what Lord Beecroft wanted, workers rights CANCELLED and with the growth of zero hour contracts and the the loss of Workers Time Directive So when do you think there will be an inquiry, unlike Ed Miliband when the trouble in Falkirk came to light he acted ass quickly as possible.

by **Ivan** Fri Jul 05, 2013 11:43 am

tlttf wrote:-
Apparently unite has monopolised the last 9 out 11 labour candidates for mp's

Any evidence to support that assertion?? Rolling Eyes

by oftenwrong Fri Jul 05, 2013 11:43 am

It's all part of the softening-up process to prepare the Public for a statutory coverage of election expenses.

by sickchip Fri Jul 05, 2013 4:20 pm

Miliband should have told Cameron to shut up and that Labour are proud to be associated with Unions - organisations that fought for better wages, rights, and conditions for the general population.

In fact you all owe gratitude to the unions for enabling your current lifestyles to happen. If unions hadn't been formed, organised, and fought your corner where do you think you'd be now.

It's pathetic that the Labour party are 'embarrassed' and unable to staunchly defend their ties to the unions.

Some of the comments on this article have the Labour party pretty much spot on:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/05/labour-needs-unions-real-world-falkirk-selection

by Redflag Fri Jul 05, 2013 5:16 pm

I do not know sickchip if you have read my post on this, as for Ed telling Cameron to shut up it is something he would use just like, he used "The Mess Labour Left" (it's called the drip drip effect) trying to blame the Labour party for the deficit when in REALITY the majority of the money borrowed by the Labour party was to BAIL OUT the greedy bankers. So in my book Ed Miliband did the only thing he could, not unless you would prefer for England to vote the Tories back into power in 2015, and I'm sure you do not need me to tell you what that would mean.

by oftenwrong Fri Jul 05, 2013 7:32 pm

The Tory propaganda machine will try to ensure that the topic of Labour's commitment to the Trade Unions is front-and-centre of the news from now until Election Day.

by Redflag Sat Jul 06, 2013 8:35 am

oftenwrong wrote:The Tory propaganda machine will try to ensure that the topic of Labour's commitment to the Trade Unions is front-and-centre of the news from now until Election Day.

I agree OW but why will the Labour party not hit back ? the Tory party money comes from the hedge fund managers and Tory donors who keep their money in OFF SHORE ACCOUNTS not forgetting the ones the Tories have given lucrative gov't contracts to.

So I think its about time the Labour party got their propaganda machine into gear and gave the Tories a really good taste of their own medicine.

by tlttf Sat Jul 06, 2013 9:31 am

Does anybody really believe that a union should have control over who is put forward as a candidate mp?

by sickchip Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:34 am

oftenwrong wrote:The Tory propaganda machine will try to ensure that the topic of Labour's commitment to the Trade Unions is front-and-centre of the news from now until Election Day.

.....and the Labour party should embrace that and make people realise that unions basically got them where they are.

Since when was Union a dirty word? Just after 'socialism' become a dirty word?

Redflag,

With all due respect there is not a chance of Labour, in its present incarnation, winning the next election. Staying schtum and running scared of the 'tory propaganda machine' is not playing it clever.

by **Ivan** Sat Jul 06, 2013 12:15 pm

tlttf wrote:-
Does anybody really believe that a union should have control over who is put forward as a candidate mp?

Unions don't control anything - and what on earth is "a candidate MP"? Either you're a candidate (before an election) or an MP (if you win it). Rolling Eyes

************************************************

Labour's links to the trade unions? I'm proud of them

Extracts from an article by Jon Ashworth MP:-

“Labour MPs from all backgrounds and outlooks have union connections. It’s part of our Labour tradition and we share the same commitment to values of equality and social justice. That doesn’t mean we all sign up to the dot and comma of every single resolution passed at every single union annual policy conference. But given that the Labour Party was formed by trade unions to improve the conditions of working people, and that today through the unions millions of working people are affiliated to the party, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that Labour MPs campaign alongside trade unionists on issues such as zero hours contracts and the bedroom tax.

Some parliamentary candidates win selection with the nominations of affiliated trade unions. But there are plenty of parliamentary candidates who won while beating a rival supposed ‘union candidate’. And of course all the other Labour affiliates have nomination rights too (if active at a local level), ranging from Labour Students to Scientists for Labour.

But here’s the thing about the Labour Party’s selection rules: only candidates who have won nominations from branches of ordinary party members are able to make it onto the final shortlist that goes forward to the all-member ballot. In short, you can have all the union nominations in the world but without the backing of ordinary grassroots party members, you’ll get nowhere. So disappointingly for Grant Shapps, the Tory chairman, there isn’t some shady central command structure forcing union candidates onto constituencies across the country.”

For the full article:-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10159801/Labours-links-to-the-trade-unions-Im-proud-of-them.html

by Redflag Sat Jul 06, 2013 1:09 pm

tlttf wrote:Does anybody really believe that a union should have control over who is put forward as a candidate mp?

Or that if you have enough money you get the chance to manipulate the system and get a policy for your donation? Money makes the world go round, or in this case Politcs so have a look in your own back yard before offering your normal condemnation for the opposition. "He who is without sin" and all that, or stick that in your Tory pipe and smoke it.

by oftenwrong Sat Jul 06, 2013 5:43 pm

Tony Blair rescued the Labour Party from permanent opposition by abandoning Clause 4 - the proposal to nationalise everything which wasn't nailed down.

It's now time for Ed Miliband to pull a similar rabbit out of the hat by finally getting "The Unions" elephant out of the room and back where it belongs - in support of a Socialist Labour Party.
Honesty is the best policy.

by boatlady Sat Jul 06, 2013 6:10 pm

See I thought the whole point of a LABOUR party (it's really there in the name) is that it's a party by definition, that supports the interests of the working class.
Not surprising, then, if the Labour party chooses to affiliate itself with another organisation whose stated aim is to support the interests of the working class.
Isn't it a bit like the Tories aligning themselves with big business and the banks, as representative of the interests they are supporting?

I know I can be a bit thick about these things, but I really don't understand what the problem is

by **Ivan** Sat Jul 06, 2013 9:11 pm

sickchip wrote:-
With all due respect there is not a chance of Labour, in its present incarnation, winning the next election.

If Labour isn’t going to win the next election, who is? Can you really see the Tories breaking with all the trends of the last forty years and increasing their percentage of the vote? Can you really see anyone who wasn’t taken in by Cameron’s deceit in 2010 switching to the Tories next time? Do you even think that all of those who thought it was ‘safe’ to vote Tory in 2010 - because Cameron promised not to mess with the NHS - will stick with the nasty party?

I don’t think there’s a snowflake’s chance in hell of the Tories increasing their share of the vote and winning a majority, and the bookies seem to agree with me:-
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics-and-election/next-uk-general-election/overall-majority

by Redflag Sat Jul 06, 2013 9:18 pm

boatlady wrote:See I thought the whole point of a LABOUR party (it's really there in the name) is that it's a party by definition, that supports the interests of the working class.
Not surprising, then, if the Labour party chooses to affiliate itself with another organisation whose stated aim is to support the interests of the working class.
Isn't it a bit like the Tories aligning themselves with big business and the banks, as representative of the interests they are supporting?

I know I can be a bit thick about these things, but I really don't understand what the problem is

You boatlady in no way shape or form are thick I would suggest quite the opposite, I would not worry about the right wing views its because they know that the UK public will never vote Tory or Lib-Dem in the general election in 2015 so they will have the TAG "One Term Firm" and I do not think they like that.

But the Labour party are going to have to get there propaganda machine out and get it cleaned and oiled up and into action to give the Tories a taste of there own medicine and explain to people that the Union is where the Labour party came from, but Ed Miliband and Len McCluskey need to get into a room and get this problem sorted PRONTO.

by Redflag Sat Jul 06, 2013 9:25 pm

Ivan wrote:
sickchip wrote:-
With all due respect there is not a chance of Labour, in its present incarnation, winning the next election.
If Labour isn’t going to win the next election, who is? Can you really see the Tories breaking with all the trends of the last forty years and increasing their percentage of the vote? Can you really see anyone who wasn’t taken in by Cameron’s deceit in 2010 switching to the Tories next time? Do you even think that all of those who thought it was ‘safe’ to vote Tory in 2010 - because Cameron promised not to mess with the NHS - will stick with the nasty party?

I don’t think there’s a snowflake’s chance in hell of the Tories increasing their share of the vote and winning a majority, and the bookies seem to agree with me:-
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics-and-election/next-uk-general-election/overall-majority

I think it's the current stories that are giving everybody the jitters Ivan, all it needs is for Ed Miliband and Len McCluskey to get to the bottom of what has happened in Falkirk and then explain the ties between the Labour party and the Unions to the UK people. You're right about who is going to vote Tory at the general election in 2015, only people in the Asylum if the Tories have not sold it or given it to one of their business friends.

by Sponsored content