Anything Political

[PeverilPeril 3,283]

I voted labour however I get the feeling that 'Labour' is redundant. The very word 'labour'. Do people think of themselves as labour? It used to be OK when millions of us worked at Players, Raleigh or 'dahn pit'. today we work in the service industry, health, teaching, tech, industries etc. far more middle professionals and individuals about who in the old days would have been in the Players warehouse. We used to have a political identity but even the NE have lost that. Lib Dems have failed to take up the new class and the Conservative have won through on populism. Tony tried to re brand Labour with New Labour but that fizzled out. Very disappointed with Sir Invisible.....

 

An unsophisticated view...PP

 

[Brew 5,418]

I think you're right PP the popular mindset has changed far beyond  the 'werkin class n proud of it' days. 

Labour needs to change and drag itself away from  19th century slogans and worn out idealism - it won't do it with the bunch of nellies running the show at the moment

 

[DJ360 6,730]

I agree with you both. But anyone who thinks that the 'working class' is no longer relevant is missing the point by a country mile. 

Of course the old style, easily identified groups such as miners, dockers, steelworkers etc.. are now dispersed.. but the vast bulk of the population is still entirely dependent upon a wage...and often only a couple of wage packets away from homelessness.  There's your 'political identity' PP.

 

Yet they are still ruled over by those who are not wage dependent..and in most cases don't care.

 

If and when that ever changes.. I might stop feeling the need to be a democratic socialist..and I might stop hating  Tory politicians..and wondering how people can vote for them.

[radfordred 6,284]

Get out my pub! 

 

[Brew 5,418]

The Queens speech contains signs Boris is tightening the screw and apparently we have no one to stop or even challenge him. Boris stamped all over Starmer in the house today and totally peed on his strawberries.

 

Keir spoke in platitudes and generalisations (without much conviction), only to have Boris on his feet in seconds fully armed with facts and figures and positively dancing with energy.

An invisible man leading an invisible team, how on earth he did he get the job and who had ever heard of those in the shadow cabinet?

 

Shuffle away Keir it will make not one jot of difference and blaming your deputy does you no favours at all.

 

[DJ360 6,730]

Jim...Whatever I feel about the current state of the Labour Party....and I could say an awful lot if I could be bothered... I'm far more concerned by what you say about the Queen's Speech and Boris's increasingly confident right wing authoritarian agenda.  I know that you recognise the Tories for what they are.. mostly. 

 

I'm just left wondering if all those who voted for Johnson and his crew basically to get their way over Brexit..realise just what they have done. They have given almost absolute power to a bunch of crooks and fascists... who have in any case totally failed to deliver Brexit in anything like a workable form..because Johnson was desperate to 'Get Brexit Dun'..at any price... and he is incompetent.

 

Quote

The 26 pieces of legislation the Queen did introduce included:

• A Health and Care Bill to better integrate the NHS and social care systems.
• A Planning Bill to make it easier to build new homes, schools and hospitals.
• New laws to scrap the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act, meaning it will be easier for Mr Johnson to call an early general election before 2024.
• An Elections Integrity Bill requiring citizens to produce voter ID at the ballot box.
• A Counter-State Threats Bill to introduce a US-style register of foreign agents to help counter espionage and influence from hostile governments.
• The return of the controversial Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, which saw “Kill the Bill” demonstrations over concerns that it would curtail the right to protest when it was last before Parliament.
• A Higher Education (Free Speech) Bill giving regulators the power to fine universities or students’ unions in England if they fail to protect freedom of expression.

The government also promised a “levelling-up White Paper” setting out how Mr Johnson intends to meet the promises made to voters in former Labour-voting areas like Hartlepool, where the Tories triumphed in last week’s by-election.

Also promised were measures to ban so-called conversion therapy to protect LGBT+ communities from “abhorrent practices” that can cause mental and physical harm.

The PM said the Queen’s Speech will “fulfil our pledge to unite and level up and build back a better Britain”.

 

First off.. there is almost no evidence to support Johnson's assertion that Voter Fraud is anything other than a very minor issue, if an issue at all in the UK. So why is it so high on his agenda?  Well..it's clear that he is 'Gerrymandering'  by attempting to put photo ID into the mix, in the full knowledge that this is far more likely to affect those who are alienated or marginalised.. such as those who do not hold a Passport, Driving License etc.  One of his apologists on the TV yesterday spent a lot of time trying to explain how anyone who does not possess such ID would be able to get alternative proof of ID from their local authority.  In other words..a further obstacle to voting..and one which begs the question WTF is the Polling Card for?  Said woman also totally failed to provide any evidence whatsoever to demonstrate that voter fraud is an issue.  Even were there an issue, I do not see it as a major one compared to sorting out Cladding, Housing issues in general, Windrush injustices, DWP failures resulting in suicides, Social Care, etc...etc... And of course Johnson is also looking to gain a short term advantage by scrapping the Fixed Term Parliaments Act so that he can grab another term while the nation is still pnch drunk from Covid.

 

Add in that Johnson is pressing ahead with his Crime Bill or whatever it is called.. with the clear intention of reducing the right to protest... with people risking years in gaol for peacefully protesting. 

 

Planning?  More a 'sop' to his Construction and Development buddies than a serious attempt to fix housing.  We don't need more green field development.. we need brown field sites clearing up by those who created them and then properly redeveloped.

 

As for the rest of it?  Mealy mouthed platitudes.  Levelling Up?  I think it was that well known Tory Laura Kuennsberg who claimed that Govt. has 'struggled' to implement levelling up policies..  Cobblers.. they haven't struggled because they have made no serious attempt.

 

'Fixing Social Care..once and for all'?  No detail..no nothing.

 

I just hope that people wake up.. but previous experience gives me little hope.

 

 

[Brew 5,418]

I agree with most of what you say but fascinated by your reluctance to face the crisis, and it is a crisis in my view, within the Labour party. There is much you say that could be said but prefer not to, much better to divert attention away from Labour and attack Boris.

 

Until the party gets it act together nothing is going to change. Ordinary rank and file supporters should be howling from the rooftops. Even, it seems Labour MP's are sweeping the issues under the carpet and looking the other way while Johnson runs riot. Having said that I feel sorry for them, who can they turn to?

 

The left can jump up and down all they like blaming the others, never themselves, but they have had at least ten years to get their act together and only have themselves to blame for failing to do so.

True they have dismissed their militant masters, but have replaced them with politically correct ones.

The sad truth is you can get your black/Asian./female balance right but positive discrimination is still discrimination and is no guarantee of competence.

 

Insinuating bias through Kuensberg  may have some legs bit's only a minor point and calling Johnson incompetent is delusional. Look at his record, against the odds he became Mayor of London, won the Brexit argument, ousted the incumbent Prime minister  and is now leader of one of the biggest economies in the world. If you're looking for incompetence you're looking the wrong way...

[DJ360 6,730]

7 hours ago, Brew said:

I agree with most of what you say but fascinated by your reluctance to face the crisis, and it is a crisis in my view, within the Labour party. There is much you say that could be said but prefer not to, much better to divert attention away from Labour and attack Boris.

 

 

Hmm.. a classic case of the failings of online communication that you referred to in another thread... coupled with my rather lazy composition...resulting in you wrongly assuming that I want to divert attention away from Labour.  I don't.. but then neither do I want both real and imagined problems within Labour to allow Johnson off the hook..  Also..since it is pretty clear that Labour will not be forming a Govt any time soon.. it is in my view more immediately important to call Johnson out and if possible stop him from enacting his anti democratic policies.

 

Of course I recognise the crisis in the Labour Party.  I just didn't want to get into it there.. when I was busy picking up on Johnson's obviously dodgy and dangerous agenda.. which.. as I've said at least several times previously.. was 'hidden in plain sight' in the Tory Manifesto.

 

So....  The Labour Party...

IMHO.. there are many facets to this issue and no simple answer. Also, I firmly believe that Labour is not only a victim of its own internal failings, but of a massive political re-alignment within the UK population.. which has complex causes, but many of which are traceable back to Thatcher.

 

I'm not impressed by comments about factionalism in the party.  It's always been factional.. or as they used to say. 'a broad church'.

 

Labour definitely needs to see who the real enemy is.. and the real enemy is not within.

 

But Labour also needs to recognise that 'yer average' voter these days doesn't necessarily identify with Labour.  There are numerous reasons for this... but I'd say the biggest single one is the collapse of the old..clearly identifiable industrial groupings such as Miners etc.. and the anti trade union policies of successive Tory Govts.

To Be Continued...

 

[Brew 5,418]

Also..since it is pretty clear that Labour will not be forming a Govt any time soon.. it is in my view more immediately important to call Johnson out and if possible stop him from enacting his anti democratic policies.

 

This is rather the point I’m making. How can there be an effective opposition when those opposing are so weak and virtually unseen? To emphasise the point, name members of the shadow cabinet and I can almost guarantee you will not name as many as you can in the Tory cabinet.

 

I want to see him taken to task in the house, I want to see someone stand up to him and give as good as they get. Spouting a set piece then sitting there like a schoolboy being lectured and told off is not opposition.

 

The Tories ‘obviously’ dodgy agenda is only obvious to Big Issue sellers and a man with a dog on a string. A bit flippant but you get the gist.  It’s obviously not obvious to those who sit opposite or they would try tackling the points we’re talking about.

 

One thing I do like is the present setup in the house with the distancing stopping the hooray Henry’s shouting and jeering, now I can hear what’s being said.

 

You’re right about the population and changes in attitudes. PP and I have said as much.

The driving force I suspect is affluence! People are living far beyond their grandparents dreams and listening to the ‘old folk’ talking about the old days and hard times has little relevance to them other than idle curiosity.

 

I’m not saying everything in the garden is coming up roses or that we don’t have serious issues. We do have food banks, we do have homeless but the  majority don't see them and that's another topic.

Looking at just my street in an old mining town, D H Lawrence country (with a Tory MP), virtually every house has two cars on the drive. (My next door neighbour has four).  I seriously doubt they want to hear about or discuss comrades, solidarity, class struggle, revolution etc.

 

 We can, as you say, trace the changes back to Thatcher and the self-serving yuppie me, me. me, brigade but what good does that do us? You can't drive forward whilst looking back. Labour needs let the past go, the banners, the marches, the brass bands and so on… put them away, back in the box and move on.

 

Is it not slightly disconcerting that you seem OK with factionalism within the party purely on the basis it’s always been so?

 

The Tories and the unions were as bad as each other but the rise and fall of unionism and collective bargaining is for another day.

[Oztalgian 3,296]

27 minutes ago, Brew said:

Labour needs let the past go

 

27 minutes ago, Brew said:

but the rise and fall of unionism and collective bargaining

A couple of observations from afar.

Does the Labour party still call its members "comrades"?

 

I  feel that the need for strong unions is as great now is it ever was. The rise of the "gig economy" zero hour contracts with major multi-national corporations. What is wrong with unions fighting for fair wages, benefits, safer and better working conditions for their members and collective bargaining (admittedly more difficult in the gig economy)? The employers of many people today are equally exploitative of their employees as they were before the dawn of unions during the industrial revolution.

[Brew 5,418]

2 hours ago, Oztalgian said:

Does the Labour party still call its members "comrades"?

 

Google the phrase Oz. You will find several references and the word 'comrade' usually used in slightly pejorative terms. I don't know if party members still use it but the mindset of class struggle is certainly there:

 

'We will put class at the heart of Britain’s equality agenda and create a new ground for discrimination on the basis of socio-economic disadvantage' (Labour manifesto).

 

Clearly nonsense. how would you frame it, enact it or police such a law? 'Here a fine for driving a car bigger than your neighbour, here a fine for not shopping at Poundland'...

 

It can't be done and they know it but what the phrase and others like it is designed to do, in my opinion, is keep the idea of them and us alive in a pseudo class war.

 

The trouble is the party faithful suck up this kind of inverse snobbery.

 

There is a need for unions I have no doubts. I was a member for thirty years and a shop steward for five.

 

Read of the 'Winter of Discontent' where unions seemingly challenged the labour government for control and in a perverse sense helped Thatcher to No10, but unionism is wandering off topic.

 

My hypothesis is that unless Labour radically overhaul they will stay in the shadow of Johnson and his ilk for many more years to come,

 

 

 

[DJ360 6,730]

13 hours ago, Brew said:

This is rather the point I’m making. How can there be an effective opposition when those opposing are so weak and virtually unseen? 

 

Yes.  I get that, but I didn't want to cover in the post in question. 

 

Incidentally.. yes.. I know that you understand the meaning of 'Hegemonic', but I like to think that our discussions attract an audience of more than two..

 

13 hours ago, Brew said:

I want to see him taken to task in the house, I want to see someone stand up to him and give as good as they get. Spouting a set piece then sitting there like a schoolboy being lectured and told off is not opposition.

 

Agreed.  If I recall Starmer was seen as a cross between a 'safe pair of hands'..and frankly, a sop to the party Right.

 

13 hours ago, Brew said:

The Tories ‘obviously’ dodgy agenda is only obvious to Big Issue sellers and a man with a dog on a string. A bit flippant but you get the gist.  It’s obviously not obvious to those who sit opposite or they would try tackling the points we’re talking about.

 

This mystifies me.  It's one thing for the 'yer average voter' not to see this stuff coming..or to recognise the danger it poses to our already fragile democracy... but it's something else for the opposition not to see it.  I suspect they see it very clearly but regard it as a bit too esoteric an argument to make at say.. PMQs.

 

I also get the strong impression that part of Labour, or at least Starmer's 'strategy'....is to just wait and let Johnson et.al hang themselves.  It's not going to happen ..precisely because people have short memories and can only see the vaccination programme and pubs opening.

 

13 hours ago, Brew said:

I’m not saying everything in the garden is coming up roses or that we don’t have serious issues. We do have food banks, we do have homeless but the  majority don't see them and that's another topic.

 

It's not that.  It's the way that the Tories so obviously and blatantly pick and choose which issues to 'fix'.  Take the cladding issue for example.  Why are they not pursuing those responsible?  Why are they sitting back and allowing landlords etc.. to effectively bankrupt tenants?  It's obvious to me.. it's because they simply will not take on their crooked friends and co-conspirators.  So it will drag on for more years..  And yet they were able to move with lightning speed to pour money into some very ill advised responses to Covid.  It all points one way.  But.. back to Labour.. they really should be hammering these points home 24/7..over and over again.

 

13 hours ago, Brew said:

I seriously doubt they want to hear about or discuss comrades, solidarity, class struggle, revolution etc.

 

 

I think you exaggerate.   I was a Labour Party member.. a Trade Union Rep and a Parish Councillor... for years.  I never heard tired old stuff like that from party members. I only heard such stuff from far left 'entryists' who tried to latch onto strike action I was involved in ..for e.g. in the Thatcher era.. and they mostly got told where to go.

It's true that some use the term 'comrades' at Labour Conference.. but it's a minor issue. It's history and tradition.  Singing the Red Flag has as much connection to current reality as does singing the National Anthem.  Both are archaic. 

The Labour Party is a Democratic Party. (And throughout its history.. much more so that the Tory Party) It has never been interested in overthrowing the system..which would involve overthrowing Parliament and other elements of the State.  At present.. the Tories are far more culpable in that regard.

 

'Class Struggle' is interesting.  Sure.. the old Upper/Middle/Working class boundaries are blurred and changed... and for at least three decades a third 'underclass' has been recognised by those who analyse such things.  But the fact remains that a small number of very wealthy people, born into privelege, are still calling the shots.  And Johnson.. an all but talentless liar and wastrel.. is representative of the breed.  I cannot understand why people fail to see this.  Being relatively wealthy.. like some on here for e.g., really should not lead to voting Tory, because it will never secure any priveleges, or enable entry into that cabal.

 

So.. coming back again to the problem for Labour.

 

It's very difficult, because since Thatcher.. the Tories and their fellow travellers in the media.. have been very successful in convincing much of the electorate that Unions are evil and that Socialism is a dirty word. That is a long recognised phenomenon.

So. we have many in the population cheerfully voting against their own interests.  And this is also a recognised phenomenon in 'democracies' World wide.

 

It's difficult to come up with easy answers..  but the first thing is that Labour need to STOP APOLOGISING!!!  Labour has nothing to apologise for and has not been in power for 11 years.

 

 Next essential is a 'coalition of the left'.  I'd see that involving existing Labour, Greens, Lib Dems and anybody not Tory or Wannabe Facist/Racist/Xenophobic.  The Tories have quietly formed a coalition with the right, including remnants of UKIP and assorted other far right groups. Time for the Left to do the same... There are more of us.  we just need to get smarter.

 

Next up.  A new name.  I can't see it being a good idea to abandon 'Labour' completely.. but maybe 'Democratic Labour'  Sadly, SDLP has been used and ruined.

 

We are in a different game here.. this one has Parliamentary Democracy in the UK as a prize. 

 

 I see that as quite important.

 

[Oztalgian 3,296]

18 hours ago, Brew said:

unless Labour radically overhaul they will stay in the shadow of Johnson and his ilk for many more years to come,

Yes and the same thing is happening here too. Labor at the Federal level is rapidly losing relevance and does not seem able to capitalise on the blatant rorts of the Liberal party or the behavior and scandal attached to many of the Lib/Nat coalition members. Strangely in the most recent state elections the party in power has received a huge boost in vote that most pundits say is due to their handling of the covid issues. Both states re-elected Labor and in WA the Liberal (Conservative) party was reduced to a rump of only 2 seats and its coalition partner has four. Labor has a massive 53 seats.

I wonder if the UK had an election soon if Boris would benefit greatly from incumbency and his handling of the covid vaccination roll out and Brexit. or would Joe Public penalize them for the sleaze factor?

[DJ360 6,730]

More evidence of BBC collusion with Tories.

 

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/984297/Number-10-and-HM-Treasury-special-advisers_-meetings-October-to-December-2020.csv/preview

 

 

[Brew 5,418]

Sorry Col but there is no evidence in the link you provide of anything untoward, it's merely a list of diary entries.

The BBC, the Times, Express, Newscorp etc.  regularly meet with government advisors and officials -  it's their jobl 

 

Tolhurst is a left wing Twitter merchant looking for an 'angle' to promote his books.  I need more than conjecture to convince me

[DJ360 6,730]

Kuennsberg has form.  'The Prime Minister's Priorities' is a deliberately vague term. and just because Tolhurst is left wing doesn't make him wrong.

[Brew 5,418]

Doesn't make him right either.

 Kuensberg may have form but a diary entry is hardly proof of a conspiracy. Had it been clandestine and exclusive it may raise an eyebrow but it wasn't and from your link it would seem to be a regular meeting with various journalists.  Out of six meetings she only attended two of them.  'The Prime Minister's Priorities' is hardly vague, it seems fairly self explanatory to me. A meeting with professional political writers and journalists to discuss where and what they think the Prime Minister should concentrate on, hardly Machiavellian. 

[DJ360 6,730]

No transcripts as far as I can see.  That is enough cause for concern.

[DJ360 6,730]

1 hour ago, Brew said:

A meeting with professional political writers and journalists to discuss where and what they think the Prime Minister should concentrate on,

Really?

Seriously?

If 'they' means the press then it is absolutely bang out of order.  The press is meant to report political action.. not to advise on it.

 

Open and transparent Press Conferences are one thing.  Cosy little un minuted meetings between senior BBC officials and the Govt. are something else entirely.

[Brew 5,418]

1 hour ago, DJ360 said:

If 'they' means the press then it is absolutely bang out of order.

 

Apologies if my awkward turn of phrase gave the impression I have any idea what they talked about.

 

1 hour ago, DJ360 said:

Cosy little un minuted meetings between senior BBC officials and the Govt. are something else entirely.

 

It could quite easily be to give the BBC management ideas on the PM's ideas for the organisation, nothing more sinister than that. How do you know there are no minutes? and tell me you have never had an informal chat as a councillor. 

It's not exactly clever of them to publish the meetings, past present and future if they are plotting and scheming.

You're generating a lot of smoke Col, there is no fire.

 

 

[Brew 5,418]

I suspect they see it very clearly but regard it as a bit too esoteric an argument to make at say... PMQs.

 

The precursor to the proposed Police and Crime bill was the ‘Covert Human Intelligence sources (Criminal Conduct) Act. It gives the police almost unlimited power to spy on citizens through covert surveillance.

Now we are facing the biggest attack on freedom of expression and the right of protest in I don’t know how long. The police will even be able to disperse and arrest people simply for making too much noise! And you seriously think Labour MP’s consider it too esoteric and not worth a question?

 

Taking your example of Grenfell and lack of action I have to disagree. There is an enquiry ongoing as we speak. I should also point out it is estimated that 44% of all high rise buildings have Grenfell type cladding, not all are controlled or owned by Tory acolytes.

 

It has never been interested in overthrowing the system..which would involve overthrowing Parliament and other elements of the State

 

I don’t suggest Labour ever wanted to overthrow the system, they’re not anarchists, they want to be part of and control it.

 

Being relatively wealthy.. like some on here for e.g., really should not lead to voting Tory, because it will never secure any priveleges, or enable entry into that cabal

 

I don’t believe anyone votes Tory to try and secure privileges or entry into any sort of cabal. Much more likely they have long memories…

 

And yet they were able to move with lightning speed to pour money into some very ill advised responses to Covid. 

 

There is a growing call for an enquiry about just that and why we were so unprepared. RUBBISH. No country or organisation was prepared, it was as we have said so many times unprecedented!

 

 

For anyone who thinks they can do better answer this:

 

 

There will be a deadly pandemic in 2031 and thousands will die. We now have ten years advanced notice.

We don’t where it will start, we don’t know what the symptoms will be, we don’t know if it’s an airborne, waterborne, or a contact contagion….   What they going to do about it?

 

 

Your right about the words labour and socialism being dirty words. It’s a matter of perception. People can see ‘socialist’ states around the world and do not think it would be good to live under such conditions. Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea etc.

I have no answers to offer, a name change would never get off the ground and dropping ‘Labour’ would be a disaster. How many new parties have there been in the last few years? Everyone crashed and burned.

 

[Brew 5,418]

10 hours ago, Oztalgian said:

I wonder if the UK had an election soon if Boris would benefit greatly from incumbency and his handling of the covid vaccination roll out and Brexit. or would Joe Public penalize them for the sleaze factor?

 I can't answer with certainty but if an election were called next week I reckon he would have a landslide. The sleaze factor is not all that important to the hoi polloi unless he's charged with a criminal offence. He's had mistresses and illegitimate children but think of the kerfuffle the Profumo scandal caused, it would have to be on that level to oust him. If the sleaze is about anyone but him, he'll just fire them... job done.

Many folk consider elections a PITA and Labour have a long, long way to go before they are back in the running.

[Oztalgian 3,296]

Would it change the political landscape if voting was compulsory.

We have compulsory enrollment and voting in Federal and State election but not local  government. Many Australians who have recently be.come eligible to vote have not enrolled to do so.

The turnout at our last local government elections (non compulsory) was 77%. 

The turnout in the recent UK elections was between 24% and 51% with the average turnout of 35%.

It seems to me that as Brew says most people in the UK see voting as a PITA or simply just don't care.

[DJ360 6,730]

6 hours ago, Brew said:

Now we are facing the biggest attack on freedom of expression and the right of protest in I don’t know how long. The police will even be able to disperse and arrest people simply for making too much noise! And you seriously think Labour MP’s consider it too esoteric and not worth a question?

 

It's a fair point. 

 

6 hours ago, Brew said:

Taking your example of Grenfell and lack of action I have to disagree. There is an enquiry ongoing as we speak.

 

Yes.. there is an enquiry.. and it is very, very slow.  There is clear evidence that manufacturers and installers of this cladding broke or ignored safety guidelines.  They KNEW that this stuff did not meet safety specs.. yet they went ahead and fitted it anyway.. This is already known.  I would bet a significant sum that nobody will face any consequence for criminal actions which resulted in all those deaths at Grenfell.

 

6 hours ago, Brew said:

I should also point out it is estimated that 44% of all high rise buildings have Grenfell type cladding, not all are controlled or owned by Tory acolytes.

 

No.. they aren't. but the manufacturers of the stuff..and the construction companies who installed it.. are clearly culpable.  And why are flat owners being forced to pay for the replacement of cladding which they did not fit, did not benefit from and could not reasonably be expected to understand..or even be aware of?

Jim.. you know this is criminal and you know that the Tories are dragging their heels.

 

6 hours ago, Brew said:

I don’t suggest Labour ever wanted to overthrow the system, they’re not anarchists, they want to be part of and control it.

 

 

Labour's origins are in the Trade Unions and Unions only exist because of Capitalism.  That much is true.  But you did mention 'Class War' and 'Revolution' as Labour traits....  And I don't believe most Labour members want either.. or to control 'the system'.  they just want it to be considerably fairer and more balanced than it is presently.

 

6 hours ago, Brew said:

I don’t believe anyone votes Tory to try and secure privileges or entry into any sort of cabal. Much more likely they have long memories…

 

Disagree.  Many Tory voters wish to 'roll back the state' and see tax cuts... because they do not see why they should...from their perspective.. 'pay for others to live on benefits'.  It's a mindset which was promoted by Cameron..and hysterically supported by the Daily Mail.

 

6 hours ago, Brew said:

There is a growing call for an enquiry about just that and why we were so unprepared. RUBBISH. No country or organisation was prepared, it was as we have said so many times unprecedented!

 

Again.. I believe you are ignoring facts. 

-The Tories progressively and determinedly reduced NHS funding and capability for years.

-The Tories ignored the recommendations of Pandemic Preparedness Plans and failed to keep stocks of PPE  replenished and in date.

 

I'm not saying that Johnson's lot weren't confronted with an unprecedented issue.  I'm saying that their penny pinching and fundamentally anti NHS stance made things worse than they needed to be.

 

Next.. add in Johnson's cavalier attitude in general.

 

It was not a good response.  While Johnson was pratting about.. I was securing my own and my families health as best I could with whatever I could muster.

7 hours ago, Brew said:

There will be a deadly pandemic in 2031 and thousands will die. We now have ten years advanced notice.

We don’t where it will start, we don’t know what the symptoms will be, we don’t know if it’s an airborne, waterborne, or a contact contagion….   What they going to do about it?

 

 

Simple.  We prepare for all eventualities and instead of cutting costs and hoping for the best.. we actually invest in the basis of a response.  We can do it for Nuclear War.. why not for disease?

7 hours ago, Brew said:

Your right about the words labour and socialism being dirty words. It’s a matter of perception. People can see ‘socialist’ states around the world and do not think it would be good to live under such conditions. Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea etc.

I have no answers to offer, a name change would never get off the ground and dropping ‘Labour’ would be a disaster. How many new parties have there been in the last few years? Everyone crashed and burned.

 

So.. a 'Coalition of the Left' 

[Brew 5,418]

Oz there are 23 countries with compulsory voting, only 10 enforce it. I’ve read the arguments for and not convinced, arguments against I find far more persuasive.

----------

Yes.. there is an enquiry.. and it is very, very slow.

 

Unfortunately in an enquiry this complex it will take some time. There are hundreds of witnesses who need to give evidence and that evidence will need verifying. I won’t prejudge the outcome.

 

The flat owners need to look to their solicitors who allowed them to sign an agreement that placed  them in such an onerous position though it may be they were well aware of the commitment.  It does seem wrong but we don’t know all the facts.

 

And I don't believe most Labour members want either.. or to control 'the system'.

 

 Labour want control of course they do, they want to run the country as set out in their manifesto.  They want to be the system!

The words revolution, and class along with ideas like renationalising industries are  typically associated with the left and I doubt most voters differentiate between far, centre or democratic socialism. It’s all in the perception.

 

Many Tory voters wish to 'roll back the state.

 

Labour also wants to roll things back though in a different way.  Blair who wanted  to go back to 1940 something by flogging off part of the NHS? Or Corbyn’s plan for industries?

You seem to be implying that Labour are more altruistic than Tory voters. You must have far more faith in your fellow man than I.

 

I'm saying that their penny pinching and fundamentally anti NHS stance made things worse than they needed to be.

 

It’s good job then  that Blair’s plan to flog off part of the NHS as mentioned above never got off the ground or we would probably be in an even more parlous state.

 

Simple.  We prepare for all eventualities and instead of cutting costs and hoping for the best..

 

Of all the answers I expected I did not think it would be quite so naïve, you surprise me. If we prepare for all eventualities it would not only be impossible it would cost billions for facilities that are not used but maintained ‘just in case’. You were very critical of the Nightingale hospitals if I remember correctly and they were hardly in the same league as covering all eventualities. I can only imagine your criticism of the expense alone.

 

Coalition? Hmmm the problem is if you drop Labour from the title they lose their identity