BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Oct 23 - 08:12 PM

We have a prime minister and a leader of the opposition who are both one hundred percent blinkered about the Israel/Hamas conflict. I have heard barely a single word of sympathy for the wretched and desperate people of Gaza from either of them. It's all the fault of Hamas, Israel has the right to defend itself, blah blah. It's not Hamas that has cut off water, food and fuel to the outdoor prison which is Gaza. It's not Hamas that has bombed hospitals and schools. It's not Hamas that has killed many hundreds of children and it's not Hamas that has created a million refugees. You don't need to do any of those things to unarmed civilians in order to "defend yourself." Sunak and Starmer are in the pockets of the pro-Israel lobby and they are frightened to death of saying anything that sounds even remotely like a glimmer of criticism of the Israeli regime. Starmer wouldn't even say that it's OK to sport a Palestinian flag in the street, a straight lift from the Suella Braverman near-fascist creed. That was in Starmer's interview with Nick Ferrari on LBC and I could hardly believe the pusillanimous self-deception I was hearing from the bloke who's probably going to be the next PM. Pathetic and totally unfair.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: peteglasgow
Date: 16 Oct 23 - 10:10 AM

i was a corbyn supporter but it was horrible canvassing for him in the last election in workington. i voted for starmer as leader - same policies (up the '19 manifesto!) plus electability. i've left the party (again - 3rd time. or maybe 4th) i;m now reduced to longing to see tory tears on election night and a hope for some decent policies. looks like we won't have a strong snp government as an inspiration either .all depressing

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: DMcG
Date: 09 Oct 23 - 01:23 PM

Something a bit intriguing happening. I can post messages to mudcat from my phone, but not from my PC. Obviously something antiviral is blocking me...

Ehat I was going to say is the Labour Policy document makes interesting reading as far as setting the direction is concerned.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Oct 23 - 02:23 PM

Agreed.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Oct 23 - 02:13 PM

The is a ry irritating form of punditry about. The first sentence warns you cannot read too much into a single by election result. Then every following sentence makes exactly that assumption.

What I would say is the result is morale-boosting for Labour and morale-sapping for the SNP. I don't think I would go much further.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Oct 23 - 06:16 PM

This SNP/Labour thang. Good win, very impressive, etc. But...

Is this a classic case of incumbents losing and challengers indulging in hubris?

Tories: imploded for years, laughing stock, etc: lose their deposit.

SNP: scandal over MP that had held the seat, broke covid law big-time, etc. Finance scandal over Nicola Sturgeon. No progress regarding independence push. Low turnout. Etc.

Pundits are saying that this means Labour could get 40 Scottish seats. My arse. Not a chance. This was a by-election, a low-turnout protest vote. Blew the doors off, eh? More like found the wrong car key and had to go back in the house to look for the right one.

Never a truer word was spoken: governments lose elections, oppositions don't win them. There's a lot of work to do. I'm still a Labour Party member, by the way. And there's a whole bunch of antisemitism inconvenience coming up that will hardly make the party top-dogs look good...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Captain Swing
Date: 05 Oct 23 - 03:44 PM

I remember going on two school visits aged 15 in 5th yr (Y11 in today's money). One was to the Lincolnshire Show and the other was to see a production of Hamlet. We managed to get served with pints of brown ale on both occasions.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 05 Oct 23 - 02:27 PM

Mrs. Backwoodsperson and I had exactly that conversation, and we both wondered if it’s the first step towards ID Cards?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: DMcG
Date: 05 Oct 23 - 12:35 PM

If you are raiaing the legal age to buy cigarettes one year per year then in say 15 years you will need to be challenging people to prove they are 30 and not 29.

I don't see how you are going to do that without some form of national ID system.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Oct 23 - 04:10 AM

This one tickles me. Just shows how out of touch they are with the North

Tories promise Manchester a tram extension that already exists!

My son #1, daughter in law #2 and grandson #2 were there protesting on Sunday. Proud of them all! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Oct 23 - 10:25 AM

That indeed was it, Nigel. Underage kids have never had real issues getting their hands on fags or booze. I did both with gay abandon in my misspent yoof. I bought my first pint in a pub at 16 and I was wearing my full school uniform! It cost me 1s 11d by the way. In those days you could get 20 Players No 10 for half a crown. We'd buy a Watney's Party Four, take it down the park and bust the can open with a screwdriver. It was bloody 'orrible, flat as a witch's t*t.   Pour it straight down the lav and cut out the middle man...

The Tory cigarette thing and the ban-phones-in-schools thing are "good things" but they are deliberate petty sideshows. Typical Tory conference bullshit. I'm sure we'll see the same next week.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 04 Oct 23 - 09:26 AM

Steve: If you're 14 today you'll never legally be able to buy fags. Spot the hidden caveat in that sentence.
I'm guessing the 'caveat' you mean is that word 'legally'.

I'd rather spot the inaccuracy. If you're 14 now, but haven't yet had a birthday this year you were born before 1 Jan 2009, so can continue to buy cigarettes (once you're 18). The new law doesn't catch you.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Oct 23 - 09:04 AM

If you're 14 today you'll never legally be able to buy fags. Spot the hidden caveat in that sentence. And the Tories have overseen a cynical industry grooming kids to go vape-crazy. Never mind. All that saved HS2 money ("every penny of it") will be used to improve little bits of railways all over the place instead. Yeah, right, along with those 40 new hospitals.

If HS2 had gone ahead, Labour would have carried on with it. Now that it's gone, Labour won't carry on with it. Be prepared for a massive Tory defeat, then nothing changes, then Cruella for PM in five years' time. Weeee!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 03 Oct 23 - 06:37 AM

HS2 - I wonder what the government are using it to distract us from? The vast majority of UK citizens will never travel on it and won’t be affected by it no matter where it runs to.
Birmingham? Manchester? Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn (and I’d stake my pension that most UK residents don’t either)!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Oct 23 - 09:36 AM

Labour can't "regain power." The Tories will lose power and Labour will carry on with all the current Tory policies. Labour's motto seems to be "drop a pledge a week." Starmer is what we used to call the despicable LibDems, i.e., Tory-lite. In his case, very lite-weight, no courage, no charisma, no vision, no principles.

Saw a great slogan last night, can't remember where now, might have been in the comments section below the Spurs-Liverpool match (aka fiasco) report. It said (and pardon my French) "Fuck VAR and the Tories."

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 02 Oct 23 - 07:45 AM

Bugger! ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Oct 23 - 07:40 AM

100!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 02 Oct 23 - 07:25 AM

DtG the problem has been that for the last 13 years there has been a movement of the centre ground of politics increasingly to the right. We would all love to have radical socialist policies in place, but what was eft of centre 13 years ago are far left to where the political centre is now.

Labour cannot regain power until it has reclaimed the centre-ground, and then, and only then, it can start to move the pendulum back towards the left.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 02 Oct 23 - 06:42 AM

Populism is alive and well at the Tory conference, judging by Coutinho’s and Harper’s speeches - in particular, lots of Labour-slagging and Harper declaring the Conservative Party to be ‘The pro-car Party’.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Oct 23 - 02:24 AM

So how do we translate that to UK politics? The far right groups we had here never had serious high poll ratings but they frightened the mainstream parties enough to move them further right than they have been in my voting lifetime. We now have a Labour Party that are vaguely pink, Liberals that align themselves with Tories and Tories that want to implement NF policies. How can we hope to recentre things?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: MaJoC the Filk
Date: 30 Sep 23 - 08:30 AM

Short quote from this week's New European, from Tanit Koch's "Germanspaining" column:

With the far-right AfD polling well above 20%, the public discourse has changed drastically. So former Bundenpräsident Joachim Gauck took the lead. He doesn't want to leave it to the extremists, who never solve problems because they live off them.

.... I've never heard the problem with extremists stated so concisely before.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Sep 23 - 11:03 AM

Well still no planes full of refugees to Rwanda and still no asylum seekers on the barge. So Cruella goes to the US, gives a speech to a right-wing think-tank in which she disses the 70-year-old UN refugee convention and does a nice bit of dog-whistling to her disreputable fellow-travellers about women and gay people seeking refuge too lightly. Cruella for PM! (which is clearly what she's after).

Now Fishi Rishi has sanctioned drilling for oil in Rosebank, the biggest undeveloped oilfield in the North Sea - and stodgy Starmer has said he won't revoke the licence when he gets in. A disastrous Sunak decision, coming on top of his rowing back of other environmental policies last week, and one which Starmer could have stopped in its tracks. In the words of Corporal Fraser, we're all doomed...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: MaJoC the Filk
Date: 14 Aug 23 - 10:01 AM

Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong.
                                 -- H. L. Mencken

The purpose of the barge is not to house asylum seekers: it's to provide headline fodder about a moral panic they stirred up in the first place.

.... Hm: It's been reported that the political "silly season" went away. *bzzt* Wrong: it's silly season the year round.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Aug 23 - 09:51 AM

I think Cruella is looking to buy it and make a quick profit. Probably sell it to Rwanda...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Rain Dog
Date: 14 Aug 23 - 09:14 AM

Scrap value only? Your best joke yet.

Once they have cleared up the Legionella bacteria problem I am sure that there will still be a use for it somewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Aug 23 - 08:53 AM

If they find anything else wrong with it, it'll be scrap value only. By the way, even if it fills right up it will hold just 1% of asylum seekers. Anyone got another 99 going spare?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Rain Dog
Date: 14 Aug 23 - 08:01 AM

"Anyone wanna buy a third-hand defunct barge, seats 500, or possibly none...?"

I was not aware that the owners were looking to sell.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 14 Aug 23 - 03:19 AM

They should tow it up the Thames and moor it by the Palace of Westminster. Then it could be used to house MPs, and save the taxpayer a fortune by removing the opportunity for those ‘second-home’ flip-flop scams they seem to love so much.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 23 - 07:52 PM

Anyone wanna buy a third-hand defunct barge, seats 500, or possibly none...? And has anyone seen Suella recently?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Aug 23 - 07:52 AM

Apologies, pressed the ‘Go’ button before I added the disclaimer -

“As always, the standard disclaimer applies - IMHO, and YMMV.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Aug 23 - 07:49 AM

And “Finger right on the button” was my opinion, Nigel. No need to write ‘War and Peace’, that’s the speciality of others on the forum.

FWIW, the difference between pit-closures during Wilson’s tenure and those of the Thatcher years is the matter of intent and purpose - in the case of the Wilson closures, the intent was to make the coal industry operate more efficiently and thereby ensure its continuation, whereas Thatcher’s intent - as Attila pointed out correctly in his piece - was to break the trade-unions, emasculate worker-power, and destroy the industry. It was a vicious, politically-driven, ideological enterprise, and a major part of the Tory Class-war of that period.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Aug 23 - 06:59 AM

My opinion of the miners’ strike and its aftermath is that the miners were cannon-fodder in a war of opposing political ideologies conducted by two crackpots.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: MaJoC the Filk
Date: 01 Aug 23 - 06:51 AM

My memory of the time was that the pits were closing anyway .... but that Maggie Hatchett chose that hill for Arthur Scargill to die on, and he obliged her.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 01 Aug 23 - 06:36 AM

Backwoodsman:
If you're going to blockquote some external source could you at least give your opinions on the matter, not just state "finger right on the button"?

For example, do you agree with his comment "because closing pits and wrecking communities was a Tory ideological class war decision"? Are you aware, or is he aware, that more pits were closed under Wilson (Lab.) than under Thatcher (Con.) ?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: MaJoC the Filk
Date: 01 Aug 23 - 05:56 AM

Time was when people would complain of unduly cold weather, and I'd say "I blame global warming", meaning climate change shifting the weather patterns around. England's suffering a mild cold spell this week, while much of Europe, and the rest of the world, burns. Be careful what you wish for, Stanron.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Stanron
Date: 01 Aug 23 - 04:58 AM

The planet isn't burning in Clayton Manchester UK. It's colder here than it has been for the last four weeks and five days. 14 degrees C as I write this. Perhaps it's a Guarniad typo and he meant to write " The Lefties are boring".

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Aug 23 - 03:51 AM

Ignoring American attempts to derail this thread, and back to UK Politics - Attila the Stockbroker on FarceBook this morning, finger right on the button as usual…

”The planet is burning and Sunak is issuing new oil and gas licences, ripping up commitments and sending a message to the world that the U.K. doesn’t give a monkey’s. He’s doing it because he thinks it will glean the Tories working class votes. And his excuse is that these new fields will use ‘carbon capture’ technology.

Now I may be wrong, but I seem to remember this phrase from the latter days of the miners’ campaign, when it was posited as a way of keeping pits open while minimising carbon emissions.

Back then of course it was dismissed out of hand, because closing pits and wrecking communities was a Tory ideological class war decision which had nothing to do with climate change concerns - the coal was simply imported from elsewhere.

If it had been implemented then there would have been less carbon in the atmosphere and fewer mining communities destroyed - but destroying mining communities was the Tories’ Thatcherite aim. Back then, they were ‘the enemy within’, and obliterating them was part of a strategy to cut off the head of the trade union movement and destroy organised labour once and for all.

But in this new era, when the right wing tabloids have, incredibly, managed to persuade some of those very same communities to switch sides by blaming ‘immigrants’ for the crimes committed by the Tories, feeding xenophobia and stoking division, re-opening oil and gas fields and granting new mining licences is seen as a strategy to win votes.

And, as before, the climate crisis doesn’t even enter the equation. It’s all just a cynical electioneering strategy.

Close down communities for ideological and electoral reasons, offer them false hope on the same basis. A cynical crime against the planet.”

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Donuel
Date: 31 Jul 23 - 05:39 PM

As an internet ghost, you aren't worth a pense of legal fees.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Jul 23 - 05:00 PM

Go ahead, Donuel! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Jul 23 - 03:52 PM

BG :-D

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 31 Jul 23 - 03:48 PM

It’s frictional too, Dave - it certainly rubs some people the wrong way! ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Jul 23 - 10:24 AM

Everything you do seems fictional Don.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Donuel
Date: 31 Jul 23 - 10:09 AM

The British monarch can't be arrested or be the subject of civil and criminal proceedings, meaning he is effectively exempt from the law. King Charles enjoys sovereign immunity, meaning he can't be prosecuted under a civil or criminal investigation.

HOWEVER I could sue Steve Shaw for defamation or pay to have 4,000 of his internet posts removed but since I use a fictional avatar it complicates matters.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Howard Jones
Date: 30 Jul 23 - 06:43 PM

€250,000 is the President of Ireland's salary. That does actually go into his own pocket, whereas as far as I am aware the King does not receive a salary. The cost of running the Office of the President is more than €4.8m. That is of course considerably less than the Sovereign Grant, but it covers the same sort of expenses - staff, office costs, travel etc.

I can't find a figure for the number of engagements the President carries out, but it is probably in the hundreds rather than the 3000 or so carried out by the Royal Family, which as you point out includes those carried out by other working royals as well as the king, so of course the costs are less.

If you like to think of these engagements as "junkets" fair enough, although they seem to be popular with the public. You may wish to replace the monarchy with a republic. but I think you'll find that in many republics the president's role includes similar junkets. I also think you'll find that the state pays for them. Republics also have state funerals and investitures. However I quite understand if you feel there are too many of these junkets and that they're unnecessary.

You say "it's a matter of principle". To me, the principle is that the state should pay for activities carried out on its behalf. However I'll leave it there, as you've clearly made your mind up.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 30 Jul 23 - 05:53 PM

Steve:
Imagine this.
We go back to everyone owning their own little plot of land, and using it to grow vegetables (and if they're very lucky to fatten livestock).
If they can't provide for their families just from this, and from trading food for services that they require (work on their habitations, etc.) They will probably end up using someone (further up the 'food chain') to arrange a 'fair' method of exchanging what they can produce for what they need to buy.
Allowing for this intermediary to make some sort of a living from this eventually you'll get a system where those who produce foodstuffs and are providing goods to those who can't, need a middle-man arranging the dealings, and taking a cut.
Eventually the middle-man will expand what he's doing and make a small profit from everyone who he is helping to deal 'what they have' for 'what they want' as people with a product to sell don't always want something that their prospective buyers want to exchange.

Just swap the 'government' or 'the royal family' for the 'middle man'.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jul 23 - 06:04 PM

More facts about the Sovereign Grant that could have Howard shifting uncomfortably from one buttock to the other:

The money pays not just for Charlie's junkets but also for those of a good number of royal hangers-on, identities unspecified. The Queen's funeral and his subsequent coronation cost the taxpayer over £200 million. It's late but I'll keep digging...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Raggytash
Date: 29 Jul 23 - 05:48 PM

Michael D Higgins, the President of Ireland, earns 250,000 Euro for his role.

I make that 1 500th of the fee.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jul 23 - 04:28 PM

It's not the cost saving to the public purse. It's the principle. Anyway, you're a dyed-in-the-wool royalist and I'm a republican (small r please). Sadly, the twain are unlikely to meet in this case. I'm sure you're a lovely, jovial fellow. That'll do me.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Howard Jones
Date: 29 Jul 23 - 04:01 PM

The Royal Family carried out around 3000 engagements last year. These included community visits, meeting visiting heads of state, investitures, garden parties etc. It doesn't include the weekly meetings with the PM, approving legislation or other constitutional duties. You may think these unnecessary or pointless pageantry, but successive governments have agreed that these are appropriate activities for the head of state. They are not of a nature which directly generates income for the country, but indirectly they contribute to international relations, and community visits and garden parties help to boost morale within the UK.

If you don't like that, campaign for change to elect a government which will get rid of it, as may happen soon in Australia. However I think you'll find that an elected president has a very similar workload. Take a look at the Irish president's engagements for example and you'll see they are of a very similar nature.

Steve is concerned that the money "doesn't rightfully belong to him", but it goes to him only in the same way as a government department's budget goes to the Secretary of State. The money is to cover the costs of the king's official duties. It doesn't go to the king personally. As far as I am aware he isn't paid a salary for performing these official duties, and his personal expenditure comes out of his private income.

You seem to have an inflated idea of his personal wealth. The Sunday Times Rich List estimates his personal wealth at £600m. That's a very tidy sum, but it's capital, not income. He could not "well afford" to pay £125m a year. Do the sums.

To repeat, these are the facts:

The Crown Estate belongs to the state, it is not the personal property of the monarch. 100% of its profits go to the Treasury, and its board is answerable to parliament. For those calling for it to be nationalised, that has effectively been the position since the eighteenth century.

The Sovereign Grant does not come out of general taxation but from the profits of the Crown Estate.

The Sovereign Grant is to cover the costs of the official duties of the monarch. It does not go to the king personally. It is overseen by trustees who are also answerable to parliament. Any surplus does not go into the king's pocket but to a reserve fund.

The Sovereign Grant amounts to around 0.01% of all public expenditure. Any changes to it either way don't materially affect the public finances. There are many respectable arguments for getting rid of the monarchy, but the cost savings to the public purse would not be noticeable.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 3
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 Jul 23 - 12:56 PM

Doing his job Howard? How does that equate to earning millions from the properties that he inherited from the people who 'acquired' them in various dodgy ways or being paid for doing sweet FA in the running of the country? I would never expect people to pay for doing an honest day's work but you are being very disingenuous suggesting that Charlie is doing either an honest day's work or making money for the country.