2015 post UK election discussion

[daylightrobber]

They are parties with hundreds of MPs and counsellors and hundreds of thousands of members. Like anything on such vast scale, you will get bad eggs.

UKIP, even with their considerably smaller representation, have difficulty with racist members and candidates.

The reason is of course obvious - Farage admitted in his interview with Evan Davies that the party gas used provocative racial anti-immigrant language to gain popularity.

But they don't do it just to gain popularity, it's part of who they are.............

It took me six hours and 15 minutes to get here – it should have taken three-and-a-half to four. That is nothing to do with professionalism, what it does have to do with is a population that is going through the roof chiefly because of open-door immigration and the fact that the M4 is not as navigable as it used to be.

If this is the sort of $hit Farage comes out with in interview, what the hell does he say behind closed doors

 

[neil999]

Wouldn't surprise me. I also wouldn't rule out a Labour mp defecting.

nah

 

[Reidy's Bottle Of Grecian]

Mrs. Tree did. I didn't.

As a teacher, Mrs. Tree has experience working in both sectors.

Research indicates that, unsurprisingly, there are "good" and "bad" schools in both sectors - as far as you can rely on OFSTED or ISI (independent school equivalent of OFSTED) assessments.

As I teacher I would imagine that Mrs Tree is a member of 1 of of the teaching unions ? It may well be compulsory and she is but not through choice ?

Now Mrs Tree will have work conditions, pay rises and a contract that have been negotiated by Unions, Unions that are seen by many as left wing trouble makers and are often seen to be bigger trouble makers the further down the pay scale and perceived 'importance' of the workers that they represent. Many people will indeed have never been a member of any union whatsoever, but the fact remains that without unions they also would have far different working conditions and contracts.
Obviously there was a time when the unions were walking out over the slightest little thing that the vast majority look back upon now and think that they were taking the piddle really, but then most of the working population have had to multi-task and be flexible in their jobs so looking back it seems way over the top how folk used to act although you can also see how recognised trades were protecting their livelihoods and skills at the time.

Folk look at Union Members negatively and in particular those that don't support Labour, but virtually everyone will be benefitting from something that a trade union has negotiated in the past.


I also reckon that there is a fair majority as well that have absolutely no concept of working shifts, which are very often these days of the continental rotating type (24/7) as opposed to the old Earlies,Lates & Nights. Those people would be horrified if their employer was to tell them that they had to switch to shift work if they've been used to only ever doing a day job on weekdays but that's the reality for many, and again its often at the lower end of the pay scale.
In Engineering I see jobs advertised that are rotating shifts for what amounts to the day rate + inflation from 20 odd years ago, I see jobs that are the same wage as when I finished my apprenticeship in 1990... with far more responsibility and workload.

 

[The Esk]

And there's a name from the past....Michael Foot...what an absolute shambles of a politician......The Russians loved him though.......

Michael Foot was a brilliant politician and a brilliant man, albeit by his own admission he should never have become leader of the Labour Party. Born of an age where oratory was a more required skill than tv appeal he was one of the most compelling speakers I have heard - not only for the content but for his wonderful delivery with the occasional rasp for emphasis.

He was a man of great principle also - he tried in conjunction with Enoch Powell (however unlikely that sounds) to abolish the rights of hereditary peers in the House of Lords in the 1960's. He later refused to enter the Lords as a life peer. He was a life long pacifist, and lost the Labour Whip for 2 years for his opposition to defence spending.

Enoch Powell called him "the outstanding Parliamentarian of our time".

 

[SNova]

nah

I wouldn't rule it out mate, I'd bet there are some Euro-sceptics within Labour.

 

[neil999]

I wouldn't rule it out mate, I'd bet there are some Euro-sceptics within Labour.

oh yeah, but the rest of ukips policies are the anthiesis of most of labours ideals

 

[1966efc]

Michael Foot was a brilliant politician and a brilliant man, albeit by his own admission he should never have become leader of the Labour Party. Born of an age where oratory was a more required skill than tv appeal he was one of the most compelling speakers I have heard - not only for the content but for his wonderful delivery with the occasional rasp for emphasis".

You never heard Nye. As a young kid, stood at an open air rally near Wrexham. Utter silence when he spoke; almost devotion when he took breath.

 

[peteblue]

Michael Foot was a brilliant politician and a brilliant man, albeit by his own admission he should never have become leader of the Labour Party. Born of an age where oratory was a more required skill than tv appeal he was one of the most compelling speakers I have heard - not only for the content but for his wonderful delivery with the occasional rasp for emphasis.

He was a man of great principle also - he tried in conjunction with Enoch Powell (however unlikely that sounds) to abolish the rights of hereditary peers in the House of Lords in the 1960's. He was a life long pacifist, and lost the Labour Whip for 2 years for his opposition to defence spending.

Enoch Powell called him "the outstanding Parliamentarian of our time".

He was a great orator, no doubt about that, but he was a fool. Russia regarded him as a useful fool. He was a man of principles, but they were misguided in the extreme. Fortunately the UK electorate saw straight through him.......

 

[chewee]

Dan Jarvis has ruled himself out, was he a good option @chewee ?

The ex-soldier vibe might have played well with those fools who couldn't name a single policy before voting, the sort of fools who unfortunately you need to win

He was certainly a front runner. Personally I do not think Tristram Hunt or Andy Burnham are the answer. Chuka or Kendall for me, need a fresh face that will dominate the centre.

I see David Miliband has put the knife in, nice words at the end about being brothers but a very calculated attack prior to that. He could have just ruled himself out of the race, no real need to comment on policy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politi...ng&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=news_central

 

[The Esk]

You never heard Nye. As a young kid, stood at an open air rally near Wrexham. Utter silence when he spoke; almost devotion when he took breath.

Must have been great. There's something magical about a great orator, it's a fantastic skill, wonderful to witness.

 

[The Esk]

but he was a fool

With respect Pete, you'll have to read a lot of books written by Foot's political enemies before you find anyone calling him a fool.

 

[peteblue]

With respect Pete, you'll have to read a lot of books written by Foot's political enemies before you find anyone calling him a fool.

Ok, naive........

 

[daylightrobber]

Actually what they reported he said was :

• Introduce a moratorium on permanent immigration for five years
• allow skilled workers to come to work in the UK on temporary work permits
• take steps to find and remove the estimated 1-2m illegal immigrants living in the UK

But that's not as catchy as the total ban headline.

Skilled workers can come in under visas during that time. In otherwords immigration that covers the needs of business.

What he's saying is that he wants to control the rise in population because public services and housing are already under a lot of pressure and over capacity and this would give them a chance to catch up. He also excluded asylum seekers from this.

I don't see what's wrong with that? Could anyone explain to me without using terms like race, racism or xenophobia? I would love to honestly know.

We don't owe it to anyone to allow them to come and live here. You can't move to America or Australia or China or pretty much anywhere and do that.

Which housing is over capacity due to immigrants? Immigrants tend not to have access to social housing. They can apply, but they won't get it ahead of anyone with a connection to the area. Immigrants do not put a strain on social housing - It's a myth.

The other myth is of course economic contribution. Immigrants put more in than they take out. We get the skills and labour without having to pay for the education and training. This is not to say that public services aren't under pressure but when you look at the bigger picture it is one of net contribution. Government policy not to invest in public services are why they are strained.

 

[peteblue]

Must have been great. There's something magical about a great orator, it's a fantastic skill, wonderful to witness.

Its the difference between a prepared speech and a speech that comes from the soul.......

 

[peteblue]

Which housing is over capacity due to immigrants? Immigrants tend not to have access to social housing. They can apply, but they won't get it ahead of anyone with a connection to the area. Immigrants do not put a strain on social housing - It's a myth.

The other myth is of course economic contribution. Immigrants put more in than they take out. We get the skills and labour without having to pay for the education and training. This is not to say that public services aren't under pressure but when you look at the bigger picture it is one of net contribution. Government policy not to invest in public services are why they are strained.

I think you make a very fair point about educated and trained immigrants. We do benefit, but at what cost to their original country......