Anything Political

[philmayfield 6,130]

Online voting will definitely happen in years to come. When you look at the logistics involved in getting boxes to the polling stations, sending out the tellers, collecting the boxes, counting the votes. What a shocking waste of time and resources.

[Cliff Ton 10,464]

27 minutes ago, philmayfield said:

The problem is there are so many people out there who are indifferent to the workings of our democracy or just plain stupid.

 

And they are usually the first to complain about anything they don't like....and they often voted for the party which enacted the legislation they don't like.

[siddha 825]

1 hour ago, Brew said:

Our particular form of representative democracy is not among the best I  agree (it ranks 16th, France 24th – US 25th).  However, I disagree that it's sole purpose is to maintain the monarchy. Quite why republicans get so upset about the throne is mystifying, usually it's down to money, something aired here before, and on close examination the cost is minute.

 

I did not say that its sole purpose was to maintain the monarchy.  I said, Our Governance "It is arcane and based on preserving a now several hundred year old monarchic meritocracy"

Your helpful comments on democracy are interesting thank you. 

[philmayfield 6,130]

The Queen does have a certain amount of public support. She has maintained dignity during her reign and has not espoused any controversial causes. When the next batch come along I think the popularity of the monarchy will wane. We’re there to be a succession of freak yachting accidents we might even have Andrew on the throne!

[Brew 5,416]

On an entirely different tack, when the twin tower were hit  one of Blair's acolytes, Jo Moore?, said it was a good day to bury bad news. Today whilst all the furore about Christmas Parties and Covid is distracting us, the  "Police Crime and Sentencing Bill', 'The Health and Care Bill' plus 'the National borders Bill' quietly make their way through parliament.

 

It all sounds quite innocuous but on closer inspection there are serious ramifications buried in the small print.

The new powers granted to the police are quite Draconian and the health bill, in its present form, will have far-reaching effects on the NHS by making it easier to scale back on what it delivers.

 

I may be crying wolf but I can see in the not too distant future the NHS reduced to an emergency only service, everything else you pay for.

 

My own mealy-mouthed MP answered my query with a non-committal set piece that basically said he supported the bill, though he couldn't quite say what it all meant, and that it wasn't privatisation. I never mentioned it or said it was, obviously it was on his mind though.

[DJ360 6,728]

21 hours ago, Brew said:

In the 1998 Local Government Act the aim was to ensure local authorities  undertake  activities only if they can do so competitively. This was amended in the 1999 act to include the terms efficiency and effectiveness.

Someone somewhere was thinking along the  lines  that not all councils are competent or as effective as they should be.

The Act came up for review in 2011, but I don't know if anything changed.

 

 

Well it is helpful that 'competitively', which is meaningless in terms of service delivery and only alludes to 'cost/profitability', was amended to include 'efficiency and effectiveness'.  But, as I keep on pointing out, efficiency is too often construed as 'cheap', and 'effective', is precisely what those issueing/writing contracts/regs/specs say it is, such that the 'effective' delivery of a contract which does not address a real need, is about as much use as a chocolate fireguard.

 

I'd also point out that Central Govt..especially Tory Central Govt.. (Tory hating..well yes.. but also fact), is way too fond of dumping issues onto Local Govt.  If it is relatively easy to privatise, and nicely profitable... it gets taken away from Local Govt.  If it is difficult to 'monetise', such as Adult Social Care, Youth Services etc.. it gets dumped onto Local Govt.  This stuff is all old hat.

 

21 hours ago, Brew said:

Something to consider:

 

City council seem to have a lot of managers managing managers.

The executive is a team of 34, and 7,500 employees.The city has debts over a billion £ and faces action if they don't get it down, this equates to £3,500, per person.

 

The County Council Executive is only 15 (4 part-time consultants)  and 15,000+ employees.

County debt equates to £723 per person.

 

As I've previously said, I am in no position to respond in detail re: NCC.  However, I think it might be reasonable to observe that the City Council caters for a population of around 300000, while the County Council covers a population of around 800000, over a massively wider area.  I think it is also reasonable to assume that on average, city dwellers are more deprived than county dwellers.  Eitherway, it is nearly impossible to make a meaningful comparison between  the City and the County in terms of funding/costs/efficency.

 

[DJ360 6,728]

9 hours ago, Brew said:

On an entirely different tack, when the twin tower were hit  one of Blair's acolytes, Jo Moore?, said it was a good day to bury bad news.

 

Thanks for the post. Remind me to come back on this tomorrow.. it's a bit late now.

[DJ360 6,728]

On 12/11/2021 at 3:51 PM, Brew said:

On an entirely different tack, when the twin tower were hit  one of Blair's acolytes, Jo Moore?, said it was a good day to bury bad news. Today whilst all the furore about Christmas Parties and Covid is distracting us, the  "Police Crime and Sentencing Bill', 'The Health and Care Bill' plus 'the National borders Bill' quietly make their way through parliament.

 

It all sounds quite innocuous but on closer inspection there are serious ramifications buried in the small print.

The new powers granted to the police are quite Draconian and the health bill, in its present form, will have far-reaching effects on the NHS by making it easier to scale back on what it delivers.

 

I may be crying wolf but I can see in the not too distant future the NHS reduced to an emergency only service, everything else you pay for.

 

My own mealy-mouthed MP answered my query with a non-committal set piece that basically said he supported the bill, though he couldn't quite say what it all meant, and that it wasn't privatisation. I never mentioned it or said it was, obviously it was on his mind though.

 

I agree with all of the above.  I'd add in an even more worrying one.  Johnson is trying to give powers to ministers to override judicial decisions they don’t like.  This a very dangerous move.

 

First, for those who don't get this..which does not include Brew, this country has something called the 'Separation of Powers'.  Put very simply, this means that the 'Executive' (The Government), the 'Legislature' (Parliament) and the Judiciary (The Law Courts) each have independent power, so that none can unduly influence, or control the other. The reality is a bit more complex, but what I put above is basically it.

 

So, Johnson, still smarting from being 'slapped down', by both Parliament, and the Law, after he lied to the Queen and tried to illegally 'Prorogue' Parliament whilst he was leading a minority Govt., is trying to weaken both. So, this little tinpot bully is willing to damage our Democracy, and those components of our State which are there to defend us from Dictators like him.

 

Regardless of your personal political leanings, if you are not worried by this, you should be.

[DJ360 6,728]

On 12/11/2021 at 12:19 PM, philmayfield said:

 The problem is there are so many people out there who are indifferent to the workings of our democracy or just plain stupid.

 

Amen to both.  I never cease to be amazed at the number of people who feign 'no interest', in Politics, and seem incapable of grasping that there is literally no more important subject when it comes to the progress and conditions of their lives.

 

However, if young people do not have the basics explained to them in school, it's difficult to see how they will gain more knowledge later.

I'm out of touch.. but as far as I know, Govt. is so terrified that young people might actually learn to think for themselves on the back of some basic understanding of our system, that they will not allow any meaningful teaching of 'Govt. and Politics'  (For want of a better term..) in schools.  They are terrified that Teachers are all 'Commies' and will teach the kids to rebel.

 

[Brew 5,416]

 

9 hours ago, DJ360 said:

I'm out of touch.. but as far as I know, Govt. is so terrified that young people might actually learn to think for themselves on the back of some basic understanding of our system, that they will not allow any meaningful teaching of 'Govt. and Politics'  (For want of a better term..) in schools. 

'Citizenship' is part of the national curriculum but is a minefield. The law says the subject must be balanced as per here:

 

https://www.teachingcitizenship.org.uk/sites/teachingcitizenship.org.uk/files/Briefing for Schools - remaining impartial and avoiding partisan activity - final.pdf

 

The old saw "never talk of religion or politics" is pertinent, who decides what is balanced and what is not? Which is why I suspect teachers are wary of the subject, who can truly teach politics and remain impartial?

[DJ360 6,728]

12 hours ago, Brew said:

who can truly teach politics and remain impartial?

 

Obviously it is difficult.  At my first Uni lecture in Political Theory, the lecturer asked the same question and we doubted he could remain neutral.  He agreed, told us his political allegiances and left it to us to 'filter' them out.

 

Thing is, it ought to be possible to teach an updated version of Govt. and Politics, simplified if necessary for secondary school pupils, without needing to touch on the political views of any party.  What kids need  to understand is the  structure and function of Govt and its component parts.  Issues around that can be largely dealt with without getting into the politics of it all.

The standard text we used for this basic stuff was 'Governing Britain', by Hanson and Walles, which is still about up to I think a 1990 edition., I'm sure there are more recent books in similar vein.

[DJ360 6,728]

Good to see Boris the Liar get a good kicking in the North Shropshire By-Election.  Very well deserved IMHO.

I'm pretty sure his days as Tory Leader and PM are numbered, but the most likely outcome is that he will be replaced by someone rather more focused and less accident prone, but still just as uncaring about really making any serious changes to the major socio-economic issues which plague this country and have catapulted it even more quickly into the terminal decline started by Thatcher. 

And of course all those 'dyed in the wool'  Shropshire Conservatives who have returned a Tory MP for 200 years are not going to change overnight.  Most of them were just sending the Tory Party a message, not rejecting it.

On the other hand the result does clearly show that the neither Boris nor the Tories are 'Teflon Coated'. In my view, people will only allow the Tories to hide behind the Pandemic for so long before they start to demand real socio-economic change and progress, as promised, rather than constant scandal, corruption, evasion, bluster and policy failure. 

The main plank of Boris The Liar's promises was 'Getting Brexit Done'.  He has not only failed miserably on that, but he and his gang obviously failed to make any plans to alleviate the entirely predictable labour shortages and other negative effects of Brexit.  They have failed. There can be no disputing that.

They also need to be stopped from attacking the core of our democracy, as I described above.

 

There are a few other issues which these useless crooks have either created, made worse, or ignored for more than a decade:

 

• Sorting 'Brexit' (If they really must.)
• Levelling Up
• Ending corrupt lobbying/contracting practices
• Tackling Homelessness and the wider Housing Crisis. Grenfell, the coontinued 'cladding' scandal.
• Sorting out Rail Travel and Transport in general. Ending the foreign ownership of UK Transport.
• Ending foreign ownership of UK Water and other utilities.
• NHS Funding
• Child Poverty
• Energy Poverty and ending the foreign ownership of UK Energy Supplies
• Food Poverty
• Education
• Skills Training
• Employment Services
• Youth Services
• Adult Social Care

Need I go on?

[Oztalgian 3,290]

Well said DJ360.

Sadly after almost a decade of conservative government in Australia we face many of the same issues. We have a chance to make a fundamental change with our upcoming SA State and Federal elections in the new year. However I fear that the blatant lies and pork barreling of the political right may see them elected again.

[Brew 5,416]

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

Good to see Boris the Liar get a good kicking in the North Shropshire By-Election.

 

All good points and well-made.

 

At the end of the day it was a protest against boorish Boris and clear evidence the press are not, as you so often say, Tory biased. It's the continual battering and lurid headlines in the press and media he is taking, (deservedly) that has swung the voter's allegiance.

 

Unfortunately the Lib Dems are so inconspicuous I can't even call the leader to mind, and with policies that are virtually unknown we can say with certainty there will be zero change in the status quo.

 

Labour have not exactly covered themselves in glory, more than 12% of their supporters have deserted.

 

It's the p*** poor quality of our opposition that keeps Boris in power, we don't really have a viable alternative.

The only way he will fall is through a Tory rebellion.   I suspect however, anyone who wins his job will drink from a poisoned chalice – which probably explains why there are no obvious challengers sticking their head up at the moment.

 

May 2024 is still a long way off.

[PeverilPeril 3,281]

There was more than the Brexit issue that got Boris the backing of the party - he was deemed the one that could win a general election through populism. Both reasons for supporting him are now redundant.

[Brew 5,416]

It's easy to denigrate Boris but let's not forget he is a formidable opponent, a merciless strategist and one of the great survivalists of modern times. I can think of no other in recent history with his record who manages to keep coming up trumps.  It seems to make no mind or matter that he's a liar, a scoundrel and illegally suspended parliament, he's still there and still the PM whether we like it or not.

 

Dismissing him as a fool would be a huge mistake for any opponent to make.

How many politicians resigned their seat and against all the odds became Lord Mayor, twice, then returned and bagged the biggest prize of all?

 

He deliberately crafts an ebullient, somewhat bumbling persona. The visits where he wears hard hats too small, hi vis that don't fit, hair styled by hand grenade etc. Somehow voters find it, and his apparent stance against johnny foreigner, appealing. He did after all produce the largest landslide for almost 50 years that swept him into power.

[philmayfield 6,130]

He wasn’t up against any serious opposition though. It was more that Corbyn lost it rather than Boris won it.

[Brew 5,416]

Corbyn did not present well it's true, but to turn the 'red wall' blue was no mean feat.

[philmayfield 6,130]

I think of Labour had a credible, moderate leader at the time then the Tory majority would not have been as great. Even now they are a party of nonentities as indeed are the Liberals.

[Jill Sparrow 10,305]

Piers Corbyn in the news, I see.  I know it's cold, but really!

 

You can choose your friends.....

[Brew 5,416]

"Hammer to death". "Burn down MP's offices".

Had it been a Muslim who said the same, I have little doubt there would be terror charges laid and half his family under suspicion of aiding and abetting.

[Jill Sparrow 10,305]

Oh, come on. Piers is just a typical English eccentric. We're famous for em. Mad as a box of frogs. He might even be prime ministerial material. I mean, look at the present incumbent...

[Brew 5,416]

I'm aware you have your tongue firmly in your cheek, but I'm also aware of and comparing the treatment of  Dr Issam Bassalat  and Piers Corbyn.

 

Bassalat, was arrested at Edinburgh airport and charged under the terror laws because he couldn't open his mobile phone. Note, could not, not refused. 

 

He made no threats, did not want to hammer anyone to death or set fires, he was simply returning from holiday.

The phone he claims was faulty but did the police examine it? - no, they couldn't be bothered, it couldn't be read so it stands to reason he must be a terrorist and not a weird English eccentric. And anyway he has a funny name and brown skin.

 

Edit:

They offered no evidence and he was found not guilty..

[Jill Sparrow 10,305]

My tongue is so firmly embedded in my cheek these days that I now have a severe sthpeech impethiment and no one can understhand a worm I'm thaying!  

[Cliff Ton 10,464]

Piers Corbyn was put on the planet to make everyone else appear totally normal in comparison.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-59717571