Westminster Politics

Boris getting behind removing the pay cap so he can say he supported it when he runs for election in 4 years time.
 
Sweet Square said:
Oh the centre strikes again

Click to expand...


They need to stop trying to distance themselves from labour at every turn and go back to voting on progressive policies.

Looks like the tories will do the same, vote down policy because it would be seen as a win for Labour but then go on to propose it themselves. Fecking wankers
 
berbatrick said:
The vote totals for/against the queen's speech and the Labour amendment didn't match up exactly, I was wondering why that was.

Expected, I guess. All glory to the centre.
Click to expand...
Smores said:
They need to stop trying to distance themselves from labour at every turn and go back to voting on progressive policies.

Looks like the tories will do the same, vote down policy because it would be seen as a win for Labour but then go on to propose it themselves. Fecking wankers
Click to expand...
Its behide a paywall but Rachel Shabi sums up the Lib Dems problem

 
Last edited:
Sweet Square said:
It's behide a paywall but Rachel Shabi sums up the Lib Dems problem

Click to expand...

This is why centrism can’t gain political traction: it has no remedy for the hardships affecting so many. This satisfaction with the status quo, the assumption that the free market works just fine, is centrism’s blind spot — and its downfall.
Click to expand...
Rubbish.

Firstly rubbish, because neither the left nor right have any true answer for the 'hardships affecting so many' either. After all, "there is no magic money tree," and "People use food banks for many reasons." And the left don't really have real solutions either, although taxing the rich is a good start.

But secondly rubbish, because centralism does hold answers to solving the 'hardships affecting so many'. Want to fund the NHS? Put a penny on income tax (what a mainstay of Lib Dem policy is). Low earners in severe poverty? Take them out of the tax bracket altogether! (Which has essentially been a Lib Dem, Tory and Labour policy).

As wikipedia says
Most radical centrists borrow what they see as good ideas from left, right, and wherever else they may be found, often melding them together.[1] Most support market-based solutions to social problems with strong governmental oversight in the public interest.[7] There is support for increased global engagement and the growth of an empowered middle class in developing countries.[8] Many radical centrists work within the major political parties, but also support independent or third-party initiatives and candidacies.[9]
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_centrism

Granted, centralism isn't revolutionary, (although anyone who thinks we are on the verge of a revolution in this country is deluded). Corbyn is rather throwing the baby out with the bathwater with his policies; nationalizing every major industry instead of simply regulating the areas he wishes had more oversight.

A strong centralist leader could have destroyed the last election.
 
rcoobc said:
Rubbish.

Firstly rubbish, because neither the left nor right have any true answer for the 'hardships affecting so many' either. After all, "there is no magic money tree," and "People use food banks for many reasons." And the left don't really have real solutions either, although taxing the rich is a good start.

But secondly rubbish, because centralism does hold answers to solving the 'hardships affecting so many'. Want to fund the NHS? Put a penny on income tax (what a mainstay of Lib Dem policy is). Low earners in severe poverty? Take them out of the tax bracket altogether! (Which has essentially been a Lib Dem, Tory and Labour policy).

As wikipedia says

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_centrism

Granted, centralism isn't revolutionary, (although anyone who thinks we are on the verge of a revolution in this country is deluded). Corbyn is rather throwing the baby out with the bathwater with his policies; nationalizing every major industry instead of simply regulating the areas he wishes had more oversight.

A strong centralist leader could have destroyed the last election.
Click to expand...

And abstaining on the payrise was an answer to what exactly?

You're pitching centrism as the reasonable middleground but its as often about avoiding the debate all together as it is offering solutions to anything.
 
Smores said:
And abstaining on the payrise was an answer to what exactly?

You're pitching centrism as the reasonable middleground but its as often about avoiding the debate all together as it is offering solutions to anything.
Click to expand...
Sorry Smores, I must have missed something.

Are we talking about the Lib Dems here? As far as I know they voted with Labour to end the pay cap.
The Lib Dems have now released a statement on the defeat of the amendment. The party’s leader, Tim Farron, said:

This evening, the DUP have stood alongside their Tory paymasters cheering at the fact that they have withheld more pay for our police, our firefighters, our nurses and our teachers. Shame on them.

After Theresa May’s disastrous missteps this shows nature of the government we have been left with.

This U-turn on a U-turn will stick in the throat of million of hard working public servants, many of whom recently ran towards danger, be it Manchester, Grenfell or London Bridge. These people go above and beyond and yet the government snubs them.
Click to expand...
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-to-fund-better-public-services-politics-live


Now if I have missed something I profusely apologise. Maybe I've missed today's event's???
 
Edit x2
@Smores @Sweet Square
Okay, this should clear it up
Interesting comments / conversation ...

@Joswinson as my MP, can you clarify how you voted yesterday?

Sure, I voted against Queen's Speech overall & supported amends to end public sector pay cap, to stay in Single Market & to protect NI women

Abstained on Labour amendment basically praising their whole manifesto, as agree with some of it but not all, esp e.g. not being in Sing Mkt

Just to clarify, you did abstain on the vote to end the public sector pay cap then?

No. I voted to end the public sector pay cap, in line with the Lib Dem policies I stood on 3 wks ago.

Thank you. I'm relieved to hear this

LibDems voted to end auterity, and abstained on Labour manifesto due to the focus on total manifesto and leaving of the single market. The tweet posted here is not honest.
Click to expand...


There is no way the Lib Dems would release a statement criticising the DUP for voting down the pay rise when they themselves abstained. Sounds like the lib Dems voted the first amendment down which was too "Corbyn-heavy" but voted for the next ones.
 
rcoobc said:
Corbyn is rather throwing the baby out with the bathwater with his policies; nationalizing every major industry instead of simply regulating the areas he wishes had more oversight.
Click to expand...

Why should we assume nationalization is automatically a negative? Why is it good to have essential services like rail, power and water in the hands of private companies? They haven't delivered low prices to the consumer, the service has been pretty crap and the only people who seem to have benefited are shareholders.

So please tell me, what is so great about it? Is there something special about having your electricity delivered by one company and not another? When you need to catch a train do you benefit from one line having been granted to one company and another to another?
 
rcoobc said:
Rubbish.

Firstly rubbish, because neither the left nor right have any true answer for the 'hardships affecting so many' either. After all, "there is no magic money tree," and "People use food banks for many reasons." And the left don't really have real solutions either, although taxing the rich is a good start.
Click to expand...
Labour's Alternative Models of Ownership Report was far more interesting than anything the other parties put out.

http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/PDFs/9472_Alternative Models of Ownership all_v4.pdf

https://newsocialist.org.uk/labours-alternative-models-of-ownership-report/

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/06/labour-corbyn-general-election-nationalization

rcoobc said:
But secondly rubbish, because centralism does hold answers to solving the 'hardships affecting so many'. Want to fund the NHS? Put a penny on income tax (what a mainstay of Lib Dem policy is). Low earners in severe poverty? Take them out of the tax bracket altogether! (Which has essentially been a Lib Dem, Tory and Labour policy).
Click to expand...
The Lib Dems who went into colatiosion and attacked the welfare state, The NHS and the most vulnerable in society.

rcoobc said:
(although anyone who thinks we are on the verge of a revolution in this country is deluded).Corbyn is rather throwing the baby out with the bathwater with his policies; nationalizing every major industry instead of simply regulating the areas he wishes had more oversight.
Click to expand...
''Nothing has change! they insist, of politics in a world that has for many change beyond recognition''

rcoobc said:
A strong centralist leader could have destroyed the last election.
Click to expand...
'That there is no one with sufficiently sharp spin,suits or cheekbones delivering the message. How they yearn for a British Emmanuel Macron,the ex-financer who inspired a record low turnout in the French election,to save us'
 
rcoobc said:
Edit x2
@Smores @Sweet Square
Okay, this should clear it up



There is no way the Lib Dems would release a statement criticising the DUP for voting down the pay rise when they themselves abstained. Sounds like the lib Dems voted the first amendment down which was too "Corbyn-heavy" but voted for the next ones.
Click to expand...

Also cheers for this.
 
Kentonio said:
Why should we assume nationalization is automatically a negative? Why is it good to have essential services like rail, power and water in the hands of private companies? They haven't delivered low prices to the consumer, the service has been pretty crap and the only people who seem to have benefited are shareholders.

So please tell me, what is so great about it? Is there something special about having your electricity delivered by one company and not another? When you need to catch a train do you benefit from one line having been granted to one company and another to another?
Click to expand...
I mean, I voted Labour in the GE, so I clearly don't mind it too much. But Government spending is pretty much the most inefficient way of spending money, with some exceptions.

If you want to pave a parking space on your garden, you look for a person to do that, pay him to do that, and it's done. Government's would create a committee, launch a consultation, open up a system to accept bids from private companies, and so on.

Obviously I don't include everything with that. Rail I think should be completely in public hands (if strikes can be done away with). NHS, obviously, public. Emergency services, public.

Sweet Square said:
'That there is no one with sufficiently sharp spin,suits or cheekbones delivering the message. How they yearn for a British Emmanuel Macron,the ex-financer who inspired a record low turnout in the French election,to save us'
Click to expand...
I would say that every Frenchman who stayed away from the polling stations, in effect, was a vote for Macron.

If you are a traditional Labour/Tory voter in this country, and would never vote for anyone else, but you can't bring yourself to vote for them against this new "centralist" party... you clearly have either given up on politics entirely (why? It's never mattered more!) or it's because maybe you can't vote for either (head says central, heart says right/left).

That's my theory anyway.
 
Also, the Lib Dems problem in the last election wasn't that they couldn't find solutions to problems... The Lib Dems problem was that they could bogged down defending a single policy (Brexit) and basically had no positivity whatsoever. Which is why I voted Labour
 
Just saw this retweeted:



Dr Sarah Wollaston:

'Momentum and that hard-Left movement are personalising it. I genuinely feel there's a small step from normalising violent language to normalising actual violence.

'If you tolerate this, you start to feel other things are acceptable. It moves from damaging buildings to damaging people.

'During the election campaign, I knocked on a lot of doors. I got the feeling the real British public are not like that. If they want to have a robust disagreement with you face to face, they will.

'An overwhelming number of people I meet in my job are wonderful. This is a tiny, intolerant and cowardly minority.

'Jeremy Corbyn says he wants to see kinder politics, but I would like him to acknowledge that these people are linked to the hard Left of the Labour Party. He should try to do something about it.'
Click to expand...

Sheryll Murray:

'Our open democracy has to be valued. I'd hate to see politics become the preserve of those who can afford to barricade themselves behind the gates of mansions for protection. I like to go and meet my constituents.'
Click to expand...

Murray was the source of some discussion during the election thread a i recall.
 
Last edited:
Dobba said:
Nothing to see here. Everybody move on.
Click to expand...
You would think they would try to hide it better. Also The Guardian came out yesterday with a editorial endorsing Macron, the fact that a left wing Labour Party with socialist leader(And a Marxist Shadow Chancellor)is not only the biggest left wing party in Europe but polling between 40-45% goes to show the power of people.

Incredible really.
 
Sweet Square said:
You would think they would try to hide it better. Also The Guardian came out yesterday with a editorial endorsing Macron, the fact that a left wing Labour Party with socialist leader(And a Marxist Shadow Chancellor)is not only the biggest left wing party in Europe but polling between 40-45% goes to show the power of people.

Incredible really.
Click to expand...

Link to the article?
 
Sweet Square said:
The Guardian came out yesterday with a editorial endorsing Macron, the fact that a left wing Labour Party with socialist leader(And a Marxist Shadow Chancellor)is not only the biggest left wing party in Europe but polling between 40-45% goes to show the power of people.

Incredible really.
Click to expand...
No, you see, we need 'centrism' people like Macron offers because...reasons and things and stuff.
 
Or because France has structural faults limiting its growth, linked to its Labour markets, employment laws and pension benefits?
 
Sweet Square said:
You would think they would try to hide it better. Also The Guardian came out yesterday with a editorial endorsing Macron, the fact that a left wing Labour Party with socialist leader(And a Marxist Shadow Chancellor)is not only the biggest left wing party in Europe but polling between 40-45% goes to show the power of people.

Incredible really.
Click to expand...

Yet they still haven't been trusted to hold an ounce of power? Says it all.
 
Untied said:




What's not to envy?
Click to expand...

Theres is mostly likely a deeper political meaning to what Macron represents but god he is also just a massive bellend.
berbatrick said:
Not a word about his policies, really. In fact it's seen as positive he didn't dwell on them!
Click to expand...
Granted this from a journalist at the Morning Star



The Guardian is a complete mess.

ThierryHenry said:
Or because France has structural faults limiting its growth, linked to its Labour markets, employment laws and pension benefits?
Click to expand...
Links ?
 
Sweet Square said:
Links ?
Click to expand...
http://www.oecd.org/economy/France_StructuralReforms.pdf

Key findings

France is one of the world’s five leading economies, as measured by GDP, a position that it owes in particular to its strength in a number of knowledge-intensive sectors (defence, high and medium- technology manufacturing, aeronautics, the nuclear industry etc.). Several of its industries have a secure technological advantage worldwide. France is also a country with a highly developed social model, the achievements of which are undeniable. The education level of the French population has risen sharply over the last three decades. Income inequality is relatively low in comparison to other OECD countries, thanks to redistribution mechanisms, and it has been relatively stable for a long time. Lastly, France scores well against numerous indicators of well-being.

Yet today, six years after the onset of the economic crisis, French growth remains weak – 0.4% this year, and at best 1% in 2015, according to the latest OECD projections. By contrast, potential growth (excluding cyclical effects) for 2008-2013 is estimated to have been 1.25%. France thus now faces great challenges as it seeks to boost its competitiveness and its medium-term growth potential and to transform its economic and social structures so as to preserve all that it has achieved in a context of heavy pressure on the public finances. The reforms that it undertakes today will determine its productivity tomorrow and its place in the world economy.

Studies consistently show that, in order to improve business competitiveness, France should give priority to reforms in four areas:

  1. (i) Optimise competition on the goods and services market. Poorly designed regulations for certain products and services can lead to lower competition and higher prices, not only for final consumers but also for the businesses that use them in their production process. This can be the case, for example, with energy, transport, retail trade, as well as legal, accounting and architecture services. Some regulations intended to protect the exercise of a profession or to allow a monopoly in a given sector can also impede efforts to enhance competitiveness throughout the industrial chain.

  2. (ii) Improve the functioning of the labour market by encouraging the supply of labour and reducing the cost of labour. These reforms will require a reduction in the " tax wedge", i.e. labour costs imposed in the form of taxes and social contributions. But reforms are also needed to improve the supply of labour, by reinforcing the incentives to work and boosting the quality of the workforce. France needs to make a special effort to foster youth employment.
  1. (iii) Purge the overall tax structure of the distortions that now weigh upon the productive apparatus and the productivity of businesses.

  2. (iv) Simplify France’s territorial organisation, which is not only costly to the public budget but results in the segmentation of policies and impedes the proper functioning of local labour markets.
Click to expand...
 


While i think it is right that government plans the removal of the pay cap for key services, it was weak for Coogan to retreat behind some woolly statement of resource reallocation and vague tax hikes. Presumably, these people are advancing a substantive message, however their responses to Bolton were trite at best. Take the reference to the 5%ers: didn't Labour already commit that money to the NHS? One of those instances where the opinion of a celeb is shown to be of no greater value than either yours or mine.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:


While i think it is right that government plans the removal of the pay cap for key services, it was weak for Coogan to retreat behind some woolly statement of resource reallocation and vague tax hikes. Presumably, these people are advancing a substantive message, however their responses to Bolton were trite at best. Take the reference to the 5%ers: didn't Labour already commit that money to the NHS? One of those instances where the opinion of a celeb is shown to be of no greater value than either yours or mine.
Click to expand...


Are you really complaining that an awareness campaign to fund schools properly is of no value because it doesn't lay out a plan for the countries budget?
I know the tory leadership has long abandoned providing any detail over anything but i think your confusing who runs the country.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.