BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 May 17 - 06:30 AM


What qualification do you need to vote Dave?
Does not misleading work both ways?

I did not mention any qualifications to vote did I? ask an unqualified and misled populace to make a decision. The qualification to vote is well known. I was talking about decision making. The qualification to decide how to run the economy should reside with those who are best advised. The populace were not best advised because both sides were misled.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 May 17 - 06:44 AM

The referendum campaign was a very unfunny joke from start to finish.

Already been to Florence this year, Mike, and we're off to Lake Como soon. Much later on we have a trip to Madeira lined up. Luckily, I bagged most of my euros before the pound collapsed! As for hope, I don't think Labour has got much chance. But if May fails to increase her majority, or ends up being the minority government, she won't be able to claim that mighty mandate she's been after in order to go and beat up the EU. That will be interesting. And she might not last long.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: MikeL2
Date: 30 May 17 - 06:58 AM

Hi Steve

We used to go to Madeira a lot. We found it to be a fantastic place.
I am sure you will enjoy it.

It is a bit steep.....no not the prices but the hiils. But I am sure you will love them.

Regards

Mike

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 May 17 - 07:07 AM

Never been, Mike, but we're looking forward to it. We're staying just outside Funchal in a B&B with a view!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 May 17 - 07:41 AM

We are off to Bayeux in September all being well. Just a short break to visit the Mother in Law's final resting place but I am trying to get there for at least 4 days. Been before and I could spend a full day in the cathedral! Quite fancy seeing Lisieux as well. Anyone been?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 30 May 17 - 07:46 AM

Much talk of a land value tax in the media. I wonder how many labour voters this would impact? Just when the Labour prospects are beginning to worry the Tories, this stunning wheeze to generate income is splashed over the media. I wonder who is trying to sabotage who in this instance.
Will the lefty landowners abstain, abscond or simply switch allegiance?
This is normally the sort of dastardly deed that spineless politicians go in for once elected. Bleating about it prior to an election is electoral suicide.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: DMcG
Date: 30 May 17 - 08:28 AM

Ah, yes, a land tax. Apparently the Conservatives have come up with an average figure of £4000. Nice to see the figure come from someone without any vested interest in the outcome. And there's that sneaky "average". I am not saying it would happen but it is quite possible for all but the biggest landowners to pay the same as they do now in council tax and still treble the average if big land owners charges go up. That's maths, not politics.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 May 17 - 08:33 AM

Dave,
The Tories, goaded by UKIP, took to the polls to ask an unqualified and misled populace to make a decision

All the parties were in favour of a referendum, and what qualification should be required to vote in a referendum, and in what way was were we misled?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 May 17 - 08:45 AM

Any party voting against a referendum would have been committing suicide. There was little opposition to it in any case because everybody thought we'd vote remain. And we were scaremongered to by the remain side and promised £350 million per week for the NHS. Plenty more. Maybe you slept through it, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 May 17 - 08:46 AM

Promised by the leave side obviously.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 May 17 - 09:31 AM

No mention was made of being qualified to vote. Only qualified to make a decision. 2nd time of saying. I expect the question will be asked again but after answering it twice it does get a bit monotonous.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 May 17 - 12:03 PM

Any party voting against a referendum would have been committing suicide.

Yes, so Dave was wrong to blame it all on the Tories.

No mention was made of being qualified to vote. Only qualified to make a decision.

The decision was made by the referendum vote Dave. Who did you mean was not qualified to make the decision by voting?

Steve, as you say, both sides made misleading statements that were challenged and debated openly for us all to be kept informed.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 30 May 17 - 03:44 PM

The money saved by leaving the EU was never "promised" to anybody.

The leave campaign said that it was money which "could" be spent on the NHS, meaning that it would be "better spent" on the NHS or any other worthy cause.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 May 17 - 04:14 PM

Rubbish. You're rewriting history. Go back and check your facts.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 May 17 - 05:10 PM

I have said over and over and over again that parliament should have made the decision rather than abdicating it to an ill informed and misled populace. The party with the overall majority in parliament at the time of choosing to put the issue to the people was the Tories. Even if the other parties disagreed it did not matter. They were in overall control. The buck stops there.

As to keeping us all informed try this for size

Vote Leave director admits they won because they lied to the public

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: DMcG
Date: 30 May 17 - 05:31 PM

leave campaign said that it was money which "could" be spent on the NHS, meaning that it would be "better spent" on the NHS or any other worthy cause.

Ok, show me a genuine photo of a bus used in the referendum that referred to any other worthy cause.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 31 May 17 - 02:04 AM

Lies, the EU, the British electorate and the referendums:

1: Referendums seem perfectly OK to those complaining about them here whenever they give what they consider the right result. The British electorate seem well enough informed and qualified then.

2: The British electorate were lied to in 1973 when we were asked to vote to join.

3: The British electorate were lied to in 1975 when we were asked to confirm our desire to stay in Europe.

4: Over the years as the EU forced through it's political agenda people began to realise what was going on. Maastricht was almost a bridge too far, we objected and came a way with a rebate. Lisbon however was even too much for three other members of the Union (France, The Netherlands and Ireland).

5: Over the changes via more than 480 articles in the Lisbon Treaty the British electorate started to grumble and Gordon Brown promised the electorate a referendum on EU membership. That promise was reneged on when the original Lisbon Treaty was ditched and via a technicality was reintroduced by the EU Commission in a much reduced form that did not require unanimous Council of Ministers approval.

6: In the Conservatives 2010 General Election manifesto an EU Referendum was promised by Cameron. Unfortunately the Conservatives did not win the 2010 election with sufficient seats to form a Government and went into a coalition with the Liberal-Democrats who insisted that the promised referendum was abandoned.

7: Ever since Lisbon a small political party dedicated to getting the UK out the EU was becoming more and more vocal, started to threaten the voting base of all the main UK political parties.

8: In the Conservatives 2015 General Election manifesto the promise to hold a referendum on EU membership reappeared, this time they did win with a sufficient number of seats because the Lib-Dem vote basically collapsed. True to their word the Conservatives held the referendum and the vote was to Leave.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 May 17 - 02:53 AM

1: Referendums seem perfectly OK to those complaining about them here whenever they give what they consider the right result. The British electorate seem well enough informed and qualified then.

Read my lips.

I have said over and over and over again that parliament should have made the decision rather than abdicating it to an ill informed and misled populace.

This is true of ALL referendums. I disagree with them in principle whatever the result. The government of the day should have the bottle to make a decision on all major issues. It is what they are elected to do. It is what they are paid for. It is why we pay an army of civil servants to advise them.

2: The British electorate were lied to in 1973 when we were asked to vote to join.

3: The British electorate were lied to in 1975 when we were asked to confirm our desire to stay in Europe.

Yes and yes. Please provide examples of me complaining about the results in 1973 and 1975 :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 31 May 17 - 03:39 AM

The government of the day should have the bottle to make a decision on all major issues. It is what they are elected to do. It is what they are paid for. It is why we pay an army of civil servants to advise them.

Well judging from what came out the mouths of those elected politicians, who oddly enough Gnome, only seemed to adopt what their civil servants told them when it suited them. They appear to be less informed than most.

But as you seem to take the view that they should decide all major issues then I take it that you fully agreed with their decisions with regard to "Blair's wars".

The Government of the day is elected to govern the country and act in the country's best interests, politically, economically and in all matters concerning the security of the nation and the safety of it's population. When matters arise that dictate a major change (i.e. Whether we want to change our voting system, or, whether or not we wish to be members of the EU) then the entire electorate of the country must be asked to give direction, once those views are known it is up to the government of the day and the civil service to implement that decision in the best possible way in the best interests of the country.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 May 17 - 04:12 AM

But as you seem to take the view that they should decide all major issues then I take it that you fully agreed with their decisions with regard to "Blair's wars".

I take it you are having some difficulty comprehending what I am saying, Teribus. The government of the day, regardless of who they are, have a mandate to run the country on our behalf. They should do it. Whether we agree with what they are doing or not, it is their job. If enough people disagree, we have the choice to elect a new government. It is how democracy works.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 May 17 - 04:26 AM

Rubbish. You're rewriting history. Go back and check your facts

Ake was right.

The slogan on the bus was,
"We send the EU 350 million pounds a week
let's fund our NHS instead."

That is a statement of fact followed by a suggestion of how else it might be spent.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 May 17 - 04:41 AM

Dave, did you ever speak out against referenda before that vote?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 31 May 17 - 04:43 AM

D the G. There is also a place in democracy for referendums. Many EU members have held referendums relating to the EU, including Greenland that voted for out. You frequently state that the populace is not capable of making a decision and that politicians are. Is papal infallibility shared among MPs upon election, or are they purely elected because the local electoral committees parade them before us. Is Boris the clown more qualified than I am to vote on leaving or staying in the UK. The fallout of a successful Brexit impacts on individuals in totally different ways and no doubt sways their voting decision.
The idea that MPs are superior beings more capable of voting for in or out is risible.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 May 17 - 04:51 AM

I for one have spoken out against all referendums all my sentient life.

I note that you've admitted at last that you're a Tory, Teribus. I refer to the word "unfortunately" in your patronising history of referendums post.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 May 17 - 05:11 AM

Yes, Keith. I did.

Iains

The idea that MPs are superior beings more capable of voting for in or out is risible.

It is indeed. They are far from superior beings but they are paid well to do a job. They are voted in to do that job. We fund an army of advisors and personal secretaries to help them to do that job and when they refuse to it, I think it stinks.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: DMcG
Date: 31 May 17 - 06:07 AM

Rubbish. You're rewriting history. Go back and check your facts

Ake was right. 

The slogan on the bus was,
"We send the EU 350 million pounds a week
let's fund our NHS instead."

That is a statement of fact followed by a suggestion of how else it might be spent.

So I ask you what I asked ake: can you give evidence of any other suggestion with similar prominence? Was there a bus saying "Let's fund our police instead" for example?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 May 17 - 06:18 AM

It was a slogan, not a manifesto!

It was debated in depth at the time. We all had the chance to weigh up the justifications and criticisms of and for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: DMcG
Date: 31 May 17 - 06:38 AM

That sounds like a "No I can't".

So the position seems to be:

We have a potential £350m a week saving we can spend on useful things.
Here is our list of useful things we are prepared to.make a big thing of:
1. The NHS

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 May 17 - 06:42 AM

Dave,
Yes, Keith. I did.

Not on here Dave.
You made a couple of posts about the referendum debate but never disparaged the idea of actually having a referendum.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 May 17 - 06:45 AM

We have a potential £350m a week saving we can spend on useful things.
Here is our list of useful things we are prepared to.make a big thing of:
1. The NHS

There was not room for a comprehensive list on the side of a bus.
It was just a slogan.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 May 17 - 07:22 AM

Stop being so bloody disingenuous, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: DMcG
Date: 31 May 17 - 07:22 AM

Buses can be repainted.

But if the list was longer, what is the explanation for why, out of all the possibilities, they chose the NHS? Was it at random? Or did they have a reason to select it and if so, what was it?

I suggest it was not accidental.

I also suggest it was to make people think the funds would be going into the NHS. To deliberately compose a slogan that appears to say one thing nut on careful reading says another is something to be ashamed of, not proud.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 May 17 - 10:46 AM

Not on here Dave.

Hardly surprising seeing as Mudcat forms around 0.01% of my life, it is first and foremost a folk music forum rather than a political site and it is full of people who have nothing better to do than try to win pointless victories.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 31 May 17 - 11:33 AM

Keith is not being disingenuous "D"....you are.
The slogan was "political speak", but it was not a lie.

If the slogan had said "we will spend that money on the NHS"...that would have been a lie, unless of course the government do spend it on the NHS, then it would be the truth.

"Let's spend the money on the NHS instead" is an invitation to consider how the money should be sensibly spent.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 May 17 - 12:39 PM

Dave, during the referendum campaign you posted about the debate.
You did not mention that you do not believe in referendums then, so perhaps not a strongly held view of yours.
Mind you, we all thought that remain was going to win back then.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 May 17 - 12:46 PM

Today, Labour party member Philip Jones who allegedly accused a Jewish BBC journalist of being a "Zionist" after she conducted a car crash radio interview with Jeremy Corbyn has been suspended by the party.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: DMcG
Date: 31 May 17 - 12:50 PM

It wasn't me who used the word disingenuous, ake, but we will let that pass.

As I have said several times, I go with the main Aquinas criteria for a lie: the intention to mislead. That is not the same as an untruth. Sorry if we disagree about something so fundamental, but there we are.

And you are right that there are alternative phrases that could have been used to make it clear that money was to be spent on the NHS, has that been the intention. Equally there are phrases that could have been used to make it clear it was only a suggestion has that been the intention. The lie is in the equivocation.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 May 17 - 01:02 PM

Whatever Keith. As you seem to know more about my views than I do maybe you can tell me what I think about the price of fish. Or genital warts. Or Justin Bieber...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 31 May 17 - 01:48 PM

The slogan was "political speak", but it was not a lie.


Bullshit. Right up there with "I am not a crook".

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 31 May 17 - 04:24 PM

In my experience Greg, most politicians are "crooks"!

I am extremely sorry "D", that was careless of me and I of course withdraw the remark.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jun 17 - 03:12 AM

Dave, I do not claim to know anything about you, but anyone who only mentions their disapproval of referendums after the vote has gone against them inevitably faces a credibility problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Jun 17 - 05:10 AM

Just a few points on that Keith.

1. I didn't post anything at all on here between April and October 2016
2. My Facebook status throughout June 2016 reflected my views
3. I really could not give a shit whether you believe me or not
4. The people that do matter know the truth

Now, can we get back to something sensible?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jun 17 - 06:19 AM

That was a childish and stupid remark, Keith.

I don't think that all politicians are crooks. Paul Tyler, our MP for years, was no crook and neither was his LibDem successor Dan Rogerson. One of their Tory predecessors was, however. No names, no pack drill. Jeremy Corbyn is no crook and neither was Michael Foot or Jimmy Carter. Jo Cox was no crook (my sister knew Jo and her mother from Jo's childhood). It's an ignorant remark to condemn most or all politicians as "all crooks" or "all the same." We have to have politicians. They need both our close scrutiny and our support. If we don't take an interest in politics, which is quite hard work, or don't vote in elections, we'll get the politicians we deserve. If they turn out to be "all crooks," etc., then we should be looking to ourselves. We put them there.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jun 17 - 06:39 AM

"Anyone who only mentions their disapproval of referendums after the vote has gone against them inevitably faces a credibility problem. "

In what sense is that childish or stupid Steve?
I think it a reasonable observation.

Dave, I referred to your posts about the debate made in April 2016.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jun 17 - 08:06 AM

It is not reasonable. It's a smear. If you want to question someone's integrity you need to show your evidence. Actually, it's trolling.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Jun 17 - 10:20 AM

Ah, the ones where we were taking the piss because you said you had nothing more to say and then posted again a dozen or so times? Tell you what, Keith. I have stated quite categorically that by putting important issues to a referendum the government of the day are abducting responsibility. I have always said it. I probably always will unless I am convinced otherwise by events I cannot yet forsee.

You do not believe me. I could not give a shit what you believe. Do you really think that there is any point continuing down this road?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Jun 17 - 10:29 AM

Abdicating responsibility that should read. Although abducting could be an option...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 01 Jun 17 - 10:59 AM

Speaking of crooks.....

Brexit leader Nigel Farage is 'person of interest' in FBI investigation into Trump and Russia.

FBI interested in former Ukip leader's ties with people connected to US president and WikiLeaks' Julian Assange.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/01/nigel-farage-is-person-of-interest-in-fbi-investigation-into-trump-and-russia

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jun 17 - 11:40 AM

"Anyone who only mentions their disapproval of referendums after the vote has gone against them inevitably faces a credibility problem. "

Sorry but that remains a fact, not a smear.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Jun 17 - 11:48 AM

So, who only mentioned their disapproval after the event then, Keith?

DtG