UK General Election 2015 | Conservatives win with an overall majority

[Jippy]

Yeah, could've been Lib Dem perhaps. Not sure though.

You didn't miss much. There was a bloke who'd been 'on the sick' for 20 years but seemed to have been wrongly thrown on the scrapheap by DSS officials and had since found work and was a lot happier. I like Kirsty Wark, but less so her desperation to try and screw an angle of the tumescent debate, going on about how he'd 'seen the light' and maybe others on benefits should follow his example.
Wouldn't accuse her of being agenda-led so much. As a journo, it's your worst nightmare when you are 45 mins into a one hour interview or debate and still don't have a vaguely interesting angle for an intro to the write up.

 

[Jippy]

It's an MP you're voting for in this one. And even if you can't find out too much about the candidates, don't let that bother you. While knowing how good a local MP is individually can be helpful, it's ultimately still the party you're voting for. Unless you don't align with any of the parties in the slightest, you should still vote. If you can't find any of the candidates online, none of them are probably particularly significant.

Last time it was councils and MPs on the same night wasn't it? Just MPs this time around? Having both on the same night might be good for boosting turnout for the council elections.

 

[saivet]

I flicked over and it was on, but I was only half-watching tbh. There was a posh bloke who sounded pro-government so just assumed he was Tory. Guess he could've been a random.

Not read the article but appears the Tories did pull out

 

[saivet]

It's an MP you're voting for in this one. And even if you can't find out too much about the candidates, don't let that bother you. While knowing how good a local MP is individually can be helpful, it's ultimately still the party you're voting for. Unless you don't align with any of the parties in the slightest, you should still vote. If you can't find any of the candidates online, none of them are probably particularly significant.

I've got two voting slips. One for an MP, which I will vote based on partiea.

Then another voting slips for the election of councillors for my ward. This one, I would prefer not to vote purely on parties.

 

[Cheesy]

Last time it was councils and MPs on the same night wasn't it? Just MPs this time around? Having both on the same night might be good for boosting turnout for the council elections.

I've got two voting slips. One for an MP, which I will vote based on partiea.

Then another voting slips for the election of councillors for my ward. This one, I would prefer not to vote purely on parties.

Maybe there are council elections in England then. I think we hold ours at a different time in Scotland. All local councillors are probably shite - just go with that assumption, and go with the ones you think will be least corrupt/incompetent.

 

[saivet]

You're lucky. I never answer my door at weekends now. If it's not Lab/Con candidates, it's Jehovah's Witnesses. Guess it depends on your area and if there is a big local campaign going on.

To be fair I'm at uni so not around much. Though from speaking to my parents, no one knocks on the door apart from when packages are being delivered and had next to no leaflets regarding politics. Pretty safe Tory constituency so I guess there is little need.

 

[jeff_goldblum]

Didn't there used to be a website where you could get a run-down of your local MP's voting record?

 

[Jippy]

Not read the article but appears the Tories did pull out

My bad, but like I said, the debate was so deathly dull, don't think anyone really gained or lost from it. Is it really news if a spokesman doesn't make a newsnight debate? Not like it is the leaders debate and why should anyone be obliged to turn up on whichever media outlet's programme.

To be fair I'm at uni so not around much. Though from speaking to my parents, no one knocks on the door apart from when packages are being delivered and had next to no leaflets regarding politics. Pretty safe Tory constituency so I guess there is little need.

You're lucky. My constituency is not exactly marginal, but has the potential for a swing vote, so is being fiercely fought. Fecking pain if you go to the door thinking it's a parcel and it's someone wanting to debate Trident at 9am on a Saturday when you have a banging hangover. The god ones too.

Didn't there used to be a website where you could get a run-down of your local MP's voting record?

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/

 

[jeff_goldblum]

Cheers, @Jippy!

 

[Jippy]

Cheers, @Jippy!

No worries. It's interesting, I'm just looking at our Labour incumbent now -Andy Slaugter- post-gerrymandering of the Hammersmith constituency which lumped together safe Tory seats Fulham and Chelsea and stuck us with Shepherd's Bush, pushing us Labour. I like the guy and said before that he intervened in a dispute we had with council contractors with an email, which did seem to speed things up. Would vote for him, but not his party.

His voting record is a mixed bag though. Feels very inconsistent. Not sure why he would vote against occupational pensions, anti-tax avoidance measures and raising income tax thresholds, but then be mad up for increasing benefits?

• Voted moderately against encouraging occupational pensions
• Voted a mixture of for and against automatic enrolment in occupational pensions
• Voted very strongly against raising the threshold at which people start to pay income tax
  
• Voted strongly against measures to reduce tax avoidance
  
• Voted strongly for paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability
  
• • Voted very strongly against an investigation into the Iraq war
  • Voted very strongly for replacing Trident with a new nuclear weapons system
  • Voted moderately for more EU integration
  • Voted moderately against a referendum on the UK's membership of the EU
  • Voted moderately for strengthening the Military Covenant

 

[peterstorey]

His voting record is a mixed bag though. Feels very inconsistent. Not sure why he would vote against occupational pensions, anti-tax avoidance measures and raising income tax thresholds, but then be mad up for increasing benefits?

It's probably a shit analysis done by some half-arsed algorithm

 

[Jippy]

It's probably a shit analysis done by some half-arsed algorithm

The voted 'moderately', 'strongly' or whatever, seems to be based on whether they voted on more than one stage of a bill- some seem to have had several readings. It's not perfect, agreed- if you vote in one sitting, arguably you've made your view known and the ranking of whether he, or anyone else, 'moderately' or 'strongly' cares on that basis is unfair and clearly doesn't factor in things like maybe he was dealing with constituency issues, was overseas or whatever.

 

[Jippy]

At the risk of sounding all Daily Mail, why is this scumbag being housed by the council down this street where two bed flats cost in excess of £400k? Oh, and he is Linford Christie's bastard son.

April 21, 2015
CHRISTIE:SON OF OLYMPIC CHAMP ADMITS DRUGS CHARGES
WEST KENSINGTON The son of Olympic hero sprinter Linford Christie was caught with £1,500 worth of cocaine and heroin - just months after he was jailed for allowing his home to be used as a drugs den. Liam Linford Oliver-Christie, 29, was caught with the class A narcotics under his floorboards during a police raid on 30 September 2013. With the help of a sniffer dog police uncovered the haul and 'drugs paraphernalia' at his council flat in (62) Lakeside Road, West Kensington, west London. Oliver-Christie, wearing a black leather jacket and bright pink trainers, admitted two counts of possessing class A drugs at Isleworth Crown Court.
http://courtnewsuk.co.uk/newsgallery/

He has form too.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-jailed-flat-used-help-2-cocaine-dealers.html
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/linford-christies-son-admits-possessing-5559278

 

[peterstorey]

Katie? Is that you?

 

[Jippy]

Katie? Is that you?

It's my fecking street Pete and am not sure you'd be thrilled if the council kept rehousing some jailbird druggie scumbag down yours. Even if his dad was a gold medallist.

 

[Jippy]

Katie? Is that you?

Oh and Goldman Sachs has come out anti-Labour. Let's see if the vampire squid can do some good.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e7eb2dd6-e845-11e4-baf0-00144feab7de.html#axzz3XzbqMT7k

 

[peterstorey]

Oh and Goldman Sachs has come out anti-Labour. Let's see if the vampire squid can do some good.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e7eb2dd6-e845-11e4-baf0-00144feab7de.html#axzz3XzbqMT7k

Knock me dahn wiv a fevver... Goldman Sucks (and other rich clunts) want a Tory government...

'Goldman Sachs has warned that a Labour-led government is likely to spark a sell-off by investors, adding its voice to City concerns about the prospect of Ed Miliband in Downing Street'.

[BTW that never happens - in fact the Tory referendum shite is more likely to cause market perturbation].

 

[Jippy]

Knock me dahn wiv a fevver... Goldman Sucks (and other rich clunts) want a Tory government...

'Goldman Sachs has warned that a Labour-led government is likely to spark a sell-off by investors, adding its voice to City concerns about the prospect of Ed Miliband in Downing Street'.

May have been trolling there and Goldmans' concerns that Labour might gun for zero hours contracts (which were fine under Brown) are obviously not going to get sympathy from the man on the street.
I actually dislike them- I've had very low level corporate interaction with them and confirm they are arrogant wankers. Their predictions are laughably bad (google oil and gold). No idea how they remain so successful. Think we've found some common ground here Pete!

 

[jeff_goldblum]

No worries. It's interesting, I'm just looking at our Labour incumbent now -Andy Slaugter- post-gerrymandering of the Hammersmith constituency which lumped together safe Tory seats Fulham and Chelsea and stuck us with Shepherd's Bush, pushing us Labour. I like the guy and said before that he intervened in a dispute we had with council contractors with an email, which did seem to speed things up. Would vote for him, but not his party.

His voting record is a mixed bag though. Feels very inconsistent. Not sure why he would vote against occupational pensions, anti-tax avoidance measures and raising income tax thresholds, but then be mad up for increasing benefits?

• Voted moderately against encouraging occupational pensions
• Voted a mixture of for and against automatic enrolment in occupational pensions
• Voted very strongly against raising the threshold at which people start to pay income tax
  
• Voted strongly against measures to reduce tax avoidance
  
• Voted strongly for paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to illness or disability
  
• • Voted very strongly against an investigation into the Iraq war
  • Voted very strongly for replacing Trident with a new nuclear weapons system
  • Voted moderately for more EU integration
  • Voted moderately against a referendum on the UK's membership of the EU
  • Voted moderately for strengthening the Military Covenant

I dunno how the policy stuff works, but it's worth checking the bit where it tells you the extent to which they vote against their party whip.

edit - apparently Andy Slaughter hasn't rebelled against his party in parliament and did so very rarely during the last one. I imagine that probably accounts for the mess of policies given the shift in the party between the Blair/Brown years and the current leadership.

 

[bishblaize]

At the risk of sounding all Daily Mail, why is this scumbag being housed by the council down this street where two bed flats cost in excess of £400k? Oh, and he is Linford Christie's bastard son.

The price of flats has feck all to do with it. If the council owns a flat in that street, they're going to put someone in it.

 

[sun_tzu]

At the risk of sounding all Daily Mail, why is this scumbag being housed by the council down this street where two bed flats cost in excess of £400k? Oh, and he is Linford Christie's bastard son.

Location, Location, Location - the local council has properties in the local area and 400k for a two bed flat in west kensington is pretty low

A quick look on right move at two bed properties within 1 mile of the address shows 41 pages of property available

it is not until page 21 that you find anything for less than a million pounds though, and its page 39 until you get to half a million.

at just over 400k on page 41 you get something like this http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-49186735.html

which is nice enough but is certainly not opulent living... 420K close to me would get you this http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-31396389.html

So basically houses in West Kensington cost a lot which is quite unsurprising but it seems like the council is being quite responsible and using housing at the more affordable end of the local spectrum

 

[Jippy]

The price of flats has feck all to do with it. If the council owns a flat in that street, they're going to put someone in it.

You can understand why people who work fecking hard to afford a flat down this street are pissed off when some druggie jailbird is housed for free at the taxpayers' expense though?

 

[Jippy]

Location, Location, Location - the local council has properties in the local area and 400k for a two bed flat in west kensington is pretty low

A quick look on right move at two bed properties within 1 mile of the address shows 41 pages of property available

it is not until page 21 that you find anything for less than a million pounds though, and its page 39 until you get to half a million.

at just over 400k on page 41 you get something like this http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-49186735.html

which is nice enough but is certainly not opulent living... 420K close to me would get you this http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-31396389.html

So basically houses in West Kensington cost a lot which is quite unsurprising but it seems like the council is being quite responsible and using housing at the more affordable end of the local spectrum

It's actually Brook Green, not West Ken- the papers got that wrong- and I was being conservative. Seen some on the market for over £500k that are smaller than ours and without a garden.
It's misleading looking at nearby straights tbh, as it is in lots of parts of London. A couple of streets east and you heading Shepherd's Bush way so the value goes down and a couple east, you are bang on the green and you can add £100k.
I guess I'm a nimby but few are going to welcome repeat offenders being housed down their street, a street which costs working people a fortune to live down.

 

[Mockney]

Why should it affect you whether someone else lives in a house like yours? Does all council housing have to be of a suitably squalid nature just to reasure those who aren't council housed that they've done better?

Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to Ukip.

 

[bishblaize]

You can understand why people who work fecking hard to afford a flat down this street are pissed off when some druggie jailbird is housed for free at the taxpayers' expense though?

Of course I understand. Lots of people are inherently self-serving and can't stand the thought of anyone they don't like having something nice. The fact that the person in question's life is probably a wreck and they're more than likely heading for a life of frustration and unfulfilment isnt enough. They also have to live in shit while it happens, apparently.

 

[LitterBug]

You can understand why people who work fecking hard to afford a flat down this street are pissed off when some druggie jailbird is housed for free at the taxpayers' expense though?

How precious of them. They have as much of a right to live in a house there as the council has to house its tenants. They have the same ownership rights a the council so quite frankly if they don't like it they can feck off.

 

[bishblaize]

Another policy picker, this time on the Grauniad

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...ion-2015-what-do-the-party-policies-offer-you

 

[Jippy]

How precious of them. They have as much of a right to live in a house there as the council has to house its tenants. They have the same ownership rights a the council so quite frankly if they don't like it they can feck off.

Of course I understand. Lots of people are inherently self-serving and can't stand the thought of anyone they don't like having something nice. The fact that the person in question's life is probably a wreck and they're more than likely heading for a life of frustration and unfulfilment isnt enough. They also have to live in shit while it happens, apparently.

I guess it show's crime does pay. You can be a repeat offender and serial jailbird but don't worry, Hammersmith & Fulham will give you a £400-500k Victorian flat when you come out of your latest stint in jail.

 

[bishblaize]

I guess it show's crime does pay. You can be a repeat offender and serial jailbird but don't worry, Hammersmith & Fulham will give you a £400-500k Victorian flat when you come out of your latest stint in jail.

You realise they dont actually give them the flat dont you?

 

[Jippy]

You realise they dont actually give them the flat dont you?

Yeah but they let him stay in it, no matter how many times he goes to prison. They don't hand over the deeds know, but if you think about the hoohah surrounding the so-called bedroom tax, half of the moaning is about it the fact it uproots people from their family home. There is scant consideration to the fact it is actually the council's home and maybe taxpayers shouldn't be funding a solitary individual living in a three bed flat when families with kids need them. People use the ownership issue loosely to fit their own agenda.

 

[bishblaize]

Yeah but they let him stay in it, no matter how many times he goes to prison. They don't hand over the deeds know, but if you think about the hoohah surrounding the so-called bedroom tax, half of the moaning is about it the fact it uproots people from their family home. There is scant consideration to the fact it is actually the council's home and maybe taxpayers shouldn't be funding a solitary individual living in a three bed flat when families with kids need them. People use the ownership issue loosely to fit their own agenda.

So many issues. Firstly criminal acts are a breach of a tenancy agreement & anyone breaching it faces eviction. I've helped countless people who've been evicted for just that kind of stuff in Manchester.

Secondly there's nothing wrong with asking people to leave council properties that are too large for them, the rules have long since allowed that. The problem is that there are vastly more two and three bedroom properties than there are one bedroom flats, which means people have no choice about moving. There's literally nowhere for them to go to. Plus there are people, such as families with disabled children, who need a spare bedroom, but are still being hit by the bedroom tax.

Thirdly none of this is anything to do with the original point about whether someone can 'deserve' to live in a certain area. Does someone who was born into money and never did a day's work in their life deserve to live in Kensington? What about someone who wins the lottery? What about people who work 12 hours a day 6 days a week on minimum wage because they weren't born bright enough to do anything that pays more? Do they not deserve to live in West London too?

 

[ThierryHenry]

The campaign's gotten so stale. Getting desperate for a gaff/ Gillian Duffy moment, just anything away from the staged events and sound-bite politics.

Also - we apparently have 13 Lib Dem voters and 25 UKIP voters on here. Anyone want to argue their corner? Haven't heard loads from the 32 Greens either.

 

[LitterBug]

So many issues. Firstly criminal acts are a breach of a tenancy agreement & anyone breaching it faces eviction. I've helped countless people who've been evicted for just that kind of stuff in Manchester.

Secondly there's nothing wrong with asking people to leave council properties that are too large for them, the rules have long since allowed that. The problem is that there are vastly more two and three bedroom properties than there are one bedroom flats, which means people have no choice about moving. There's literally nowhere for them to go to. Plus there are people, such as families with disabled children, who need a spare bedroom, but are still being hit by the bedroom tax.

Thirdly none of this is anything to do with the original point about whether someone can 'deserve' to live in a certain area. Does someone who was born into money and never did a day's work in their life deserve to live in Kensington? What about someone who wins the lottery? What about people who work 12 hours a day 6 days a week on minimum wage because they weren't born bright enough to do anything that pays more? Do they not deserve to live in West London too?

Of course not, because apparently those scabs don't fit in with the "hardworking locals"...

 

[evra]

@Jippy Your point is perfectly reasonable and I suspect most in England would agree with you. Some of the posters on this forum make Karl Marx look like Ayn Rand! All makes for interesting debates though, even if you are inevitably going to be patronised by smug socialists.

 

[LitterBug]

@Jippy Your point is perfectly reasonable and I suspect most in England would agree with you. Some of the posters on this forum make Karl Marx look like Ayn Rand! All makes for interesting debates though, even if you are inevitably going to be patronised by smug socialists.

I don't believe that all of England would agree with what he or you advocate. In fact I don't believe many on this forum would agree and if you want you can poll that. A lot of people may not like their neighbors but to suggest they have no right to be where they are for one reason or another is beyond ludicrous.

This is not about socialism, it is about freedom.

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

Another policy picker, this time on the Grauniad

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...ion-2015-what-do-the-party-policies-offer-you

And i thought the Telegraph's quiz left a lot to be desired (i took it twice and was returned Green and UKIP), some of those options are either skewed or representative of the Guardian's own viewpoint.

 

[ThierryHenry]

Decent tool: http://election.awedience.com/

Compare how the candidates in your constituency are using twitter. Can see which words come up the most, i.e. if they're mostly just using empty platitudes, or what sort of discussions they're having. Enjoyed seeing that the Labour candidate in my area's most used words were things like 'Walthamstow' (constituency), 'Women' and 'Campaign', compared to the Conservative candidate's top words of 'Labour', 'Ed' and 'Miliband'.

 

[ThierryHenry]

Our Lib Dem candidate looks about 15:

 

[LitterBug]

I had no idea that UKIP want to repeal the smoking ban until I looked at that Guardian policy check. Would anyone here actually support that?

 

[sun_tzu]

I had no idea that UKIP want to repeal the smoking ban until I looked at that Guardian policy check. Would anyone here actually support that?

I wouldn't vote on that basis but I'm pretty indifferent to it... I travel round the world with work a lot some places have a smoking ban and some don't but in my experience provided you don't spend much time in bars (which I don't) it makes pretty little difference.

I also think places would probably have designated smoking zones rather than non smoking areas as it used to be in the past so I don't think it would be that horrendous going to a restaurant etc.

That said I think UKIP are a bunch of racist xenophobic idiots who don't seem to understand the economic and political realities of trying to leave Europe and I would never vote for them - at a push I may piss on the local candidate if he was on fire - but I'd hold it in as long as possible.