General British politics discussion thread

ancapailldorcha

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Assuming we don't blow up or drown the planet in the meantime, i firmly believe future generations will look back on this period, past 40 years or so, and wonder why the lives of millions and whole towns and communities were so casually subjugated to the whims of the free market, to then being so easily exploited by right wing populists stoking resentment against immigrants and other minorities. And somehow it was seen as the orthodox position to subscribe to this viewpoint, that the markets would fix everything, while alternatives were portrayed as radical loony leftism. The current predicament, not necessarily caused but most certainly exacerbated by neoliberal policies, offers a chance for a badly needed reset. But i wouldn't be very hopeful of this generation seizing it tbh.

You're overthinking this. It's quite simple and you've answered the first part of your post with the rest of it. Neoliberalism dictates that the market knows best and that the state should have no role beyond funding private security and military firms with taxpayer's cash. Anything else is deemed wasteful.

These areas weren't left behind, they were abandoned. They've always had representation in the House of Commons. It's been known for decades the state they're in for this reason among others.

We only got a referendum because a craven PR-man playing prime minister decided to take the lazy, easy way out rather than developing a spine and showing some form of leadership. After all, it worked on the Scots. Have your mates in the media bombard them with propaganda, call a referendum when polling looks favourable and hope for the best. Just forget the fact that they utterly despise the EU and will act accordingly if you're daft enough to call a referendum to shutdown a party that's already been crushed by FPTP multiple times because if you do then you can be surprised when you lose.

In FPTP, you don't see gains unless you hit the mid-twenties in terms of percentage of the popular vote gained.

That's probably enough about Brexit. In other news, Farage is carrying on with his plans for an anti-lockdown Reform party. It's a good name as it can stand for pretty much any cause of the day he opts to rail against. He's got Richard Tice as Reform's chairman so there's another remnant of UKP/BxP.

And as things stand, it looks like the Tories led by a historian have learned absolutely nothing from Cameron's mistake of trying to placate his rabid nationalists and Johnson looks set to be pressured in exactly the same manner that Cameron was.

To go back to the economically abandoned parts of the UK or, if you prefer most of the UK, it looks like the levelling up will be delayed indefinitely. It took Cameron over half a decade simply to decide to build a new runway at Heathrow. It's a shame because Covid has shown that working from home in many professions is perfectly viable. It can also be good for these areas if people can stay there and spend more time and money there rather than buying £10 sandwiches from tax-dodging chains. Johnson seems to want to restore the status quo which is disappointing. If my job is to write training materials and I own a property in Leigh-on-Sea, there's no reason for me to spend over three hours a day commuting when that can be done at home with meetings over Zoom. I think the local area would benefit.

I just don't see there being time before 2024 for Johnson to attain anything significant for his red wall seats. If he doesn't as seems likely, it'll be interesting to see if they flip back to Labour.

Joe_ Public

My point is you won't rejuvenate post industrial towns or landscape with the continuation of policies and beliefs that contributed to it in the first place. And just the government saying they're going to throw money at it means nothing. They'll start chucking a few billion up that way a year or two before the election and it's just cosmetic. Like the billion they chucked at northern ireland to buy the dup. Even all the state interventions to assuage the effects of covid, you can see clearly how it discommodes sunak and other tories to have to do it. It goes against every fibre of their being and I just can't help thinking there'll be a kickback when the crisis finally ends and they go back to what they do best.

I don't see rejuvenation without necessary structural change, a national broadband strategy just for one example. But we were told that was crazy talk when labour mentioned it last december. I think ubi is interesting too but they'll never go for that.

PommieBast

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Even all the state interventions to assuage the effects of covid, you can see clearly how it discommodes sunak and other tories to have to do it. It goes against every fibre of their being and I just can't help thinking there'll be a kickback when the crisis finally ends and they go back to what they do best.

For those in L&SE levelling-up means them picking up the tab. Not surprised Conservative grassroots in my home-town area are livid.

breezy1985

PommieBast wrote: »

For those in L&SE levelling-up means them picking up the tab. Not surprised Conservative grassroots in my home-town area are livid.

Well the tab is also getting picked up by the thousands of Northerners who have had to come to London for work and pay tax in London and rent in London most likely to conservative landlords in the SE

ancapailldorcha

PommieBast wrote: »

For those in L&SE levelling-up means them picking up the tab. Not surprised Conservative grassroots in my home-town area are livid.

They're worrying about nothing. All we've had so far is talk.

The current Parliamentary Conservative Party is a coalition of northern MP's wanting to "level up" and southern MP's who are more laissez-faire. It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out and if Johnson can keep them together. The northerners know that they have less than ideal chances of staying on post-2024 so there's less incentive for them to behave.

Joe_ Public

PommieBast wrote: »

For those in L&SE levelling-up means them picking up the tab. Not surprised Conservative grassroots in my home-town area are livid.

Not surprised to hear that tbh. Seems to be a zero sum game to a lot of people there, not much of a give and take spirit.

I'm not convinced the government really cares that much about the north. Two weeks ago they were bickering over a measly few million with Burnham and other northern reps, holding absolutely firm on their demands, and then, whaddya know, london and the south goes into lockdown too and all of a sudden the magic money tree is found. I mean, what other conclusion would you draw from that?

Sam Russell

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Not surprised to hear that tbh. Seems to be a zero sum game to a lot of people there, not much of a give and take spirit.

I'm not convinced the government really cares that much about the north. Two weeks ago they were bickering over a measly few million with Burnham and other northern reps, holding absolutely firm on their demands, and then, whaddya know, london and the south goes into lockdown too and all of a sudden the magic money tree is found. I mean, what other conclusion would you draw from that?

It is obvious that the magic money tree grows in the money orchard that is in London, mostly in the City of London.

Winter is coming for that particular orchard.

breezy1985

Sam Russell wrote: »

It is obvious that the magic money tree grows in the money orchard that is in London, mostly in the City of London.

Winter is coming for that particular orchard.

Problem is it will just keep sucking in all the money it needs and everything around it will get less. Winter is truly coming for all those pro Brexit areas that relied on the ERDF

PommieBast

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I'm not convinced the government really cares that much about the north. Two weeks ago they were bickering over a measly few million with Burnham and other northern reps, holding absolutely firm on their demands, and then, whaddya know, london and the south goes into lockdown too and all of a sudden the magic money tree is found. I mean, what other conclusion would you draw from that?

Sadiq Khan had much the same fight with TFL's funding so there is also the government's obvious anti-devolution agenda. Anyone who doubts the latter needs to see how much of a naked power-grab of former-EU areas that the Trade Remidies bill is.

Joe_ Public

PommieBast wrote: »

Sadiq Khan had much the same fight with TFL's funding so there is also the government's obvious anti-devolution agenda. Anyone who doubts the latter needs to see how much of a naked power-grab of former-EU areas that the Trade Remidies bill is.

I don't honestly know whether khan has been a great mayor for london or not, but this government has been barefacedly lying and playing politics with TfL for years now in order to make Khan look bad for the next election. Really shabby stuff and they've finally done the right thing there but they know some of those lies will stick. Actually improving people's lives and convincing them to vote for you are not necessarily the same things and conservatives understand that very well. Like in florida just now where they voted down the minimum wage and yet they still endorse trump.

breezy1985

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I don't honestly know whether khan has been a great mayor for london or not, but this government has been barefacedly lying and playing politics with TfL for years now in order to make Khan look bad for the next election. Really shabby stuff and they've finally done the right thing there but they know some of those lies will stick. Actually improving people's lives and convincing them to vote for you are not necessarily the same things and conservatives understand that very well. Like in florida just now where they voted down the minimum wage and yet they still endorse trump.

A bit like with Trump and Biden Khan didn't need to be an amazing mayor to look good as all he needed to do was put a stop to Boris and his school chums vanity projects like Garden Bridge and enforce the affordable housing requirements on the new skyscrapers

View

View wrote: »

As you are no under no obligation to vote, you didn’t have to vote for any candidate. Rather you chose to vote.

VinLieger wrote: »

No you didn't you could have run yourself as an independent and had a realistic chance of getting elected. Our current dail has 19 independents out of 166 seats, the UK has none out of 650 seats.

Neither of which gets around the simple fact, that you have to vote for individuals, you can't vote directly for a party.

VinLieger wrote: »

You are massively oversimplifying the issue just to avoid admitting the literal objective truth that FPTP as a voting system favours far more the larger parties and mathematically inevitably leaves only 2 parties as the choices for voters.

no, I am demonstrating that all systems favour the bigger parties, regardless of how or what you call them.

Sam Russell

Aegir wrote: »

Neither of which gets around the simple fact, that you have to vote for individuals, you can't vote directly for a party.



no, I am demonstrating that all systems favour the bigger parties, regardless of how or what you call them.

Well, the FPTP system makes voters cast their vote along party lines - otherwise the vote is 'wasted'.

When the U insisted that EU Parliamentary votes had to be by proportional representation, the UK complied by introducing a list system where voters were required to cast the vote for the party, and the party would the select the successful candidates.

So in the UK, the party retains all power to itself. The individual counts for nothing. Most parties like to have control, but the UK carries further than others.

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, the FPTP system makes voters cast their vote along party lines - otherwise the vote is 'wasted'.

When the U insisted that EU Parliamentary votes had to be by proportional representation, the UK complied by introducing a list system where voters were required to cast the vote for the party, and the party would the select the successful candidates.

So in the UK, the party retains all power to itself. The individual counts for nothing. Most parties like to have control, but the UK carries further than others.

EU parliament elections have to be either party list, or STV. both of which favour larger parties and both systems require the party to nominate candidates. In this respect, every country is the same.

Ask Maria Bailey, she would confirm this.

quokula

breezy1985 wrote: »

A bit like with Trump and Biden Khan didn't need to be an amazing mayor to look good as all he needed to do was put a stop to Boris and his school chums vanity projects like Garden Bridge and enforce the affordable housing requirements on the new skyscrapers

In fairness Boris was a reasonably competent mayor for the most part, aside from certain vanity projects that made headlines and wasted money, but not all that much money in the scope of a budget the size of London's. There's a reason why his bid for Tory leader focussed heavily on his London Mayorship and glossed over his role as foreign secretary.

Unlike Trump, he is actually pretty intelligent, but he has the same narcissistic streak and lack of ethics and he just calculated that going the populist / xenophobic route was an easy way to get into power. This has resulted in him now being surrounded by some really awful advisors who believe in that stuff, along with the purge of decent Tory MPs. It was quite revealing to see how he's ended up with Labour supporting him against his own party to do the right thing regarding COVID recently.

breezy1985

quokula wrote: »

In fairness Boris was a reasonably competent mayor for the most part, aside from certain vanity projects that made headlines and wasted money, but not all that much money in the scope of a budget the size of London's. There's a reason why his bid for Tory leader focussed heavily on his London Mayorship and glossed over his role as foreign secretary.

Unlike Trump, he is actually pretty intelligent, but he has the same narcissistic streak and lack of ethics and he just calculated that going the populist / xenophobic route was an easy way to get into power. This has resulted in him now being surrounded by some really awful advisors who believe in that stuff, along with the purge of decent Tory MPs. It was quite revealing to see how he's ended up with Labour supporting him against his own party to do the right thing regarding COVID recently.

What did he do that made him a good mayor of London?
He was gifted an Olympics and the Boris bikes from a previous administration, hiked transport costs and changed rules building firms all over the city to circumvent their affordable housing duties to push the poor our into the sticks. He was mayor during some good times for London but I can't think of anything he done that he could point to and say it was thanks to him

PeadarCo

Aegir wrote: »

EU parliament elections have to be either party list, or STV. both of which favour larger parties and both systems require the party to nominate candidates. In this respect, every country is the same.

Ask Maria Bailey, she would confirm this.

The issue is that both those systems produce a fairer representation of what voters want that the UK system currently does. UKIP being a perfect example. They have always heavily underrepresented in the UK parliament. This is a massive problem as Brexit has shown when both mainstream parties are taken over by a relatively small group of fanatics that aren't representative of the wider population.

Democracy favours people who organise and join together to work for a common goal. And this goes for lots of things outside politics. There's only so much any person can do on their own in any walk of life.

The fact of the matter is that the UK voting system regularly results in governments that get large majorities with less than 50% of the vote. Its not good for any country in the long term if governments get the authority to make sweeping changes against the will of over half the electorate.

Leroy42

quokula wrote: »

Unlike Trump, he is actually pretty intelligent, but he has the same narcissistic streak and lack of ethics and he just calculated that going the populist / xenophobic route was an easy way to get into power. This has resulted in him now being surrounded by some really awful advisors who believe in that stuff, along with the purge of decent Tory MPs. It was quite revealing to see how he's ended up with Labour supporting him against his own party to do the right thing regarding COVID recently.

You make it sound like Johnson is a prisoner to these people, disliking their ideas but powerless to do anything about them. He either is in agreement with them, or he is accepting their wishes in order to get power.

Two sides of the same coin really.

breezy1985

quokula wrote: »

Unlike Trump, he is actually pretty intelligent, but he has the same narcissistic streak and lack of ethics and he just calculated that going the populist / xenophobic route was an easy way to get into power. This has resulted in him now being surrounded by some really awful advisors who believe in that stuff, along with the purge of decent Tory MPs. It was quite revealing to see how he's ended up with Labour supporting him against his own party to do the right thing regarding COVID recently.

I dont think he really is that intelligent its just that his gimmick is different to Trumps. Trump goes for the common man idiot where as Alex puts on his best Churchill mumble and rattles out some quote from an old poet or the classics and goes on little pseudo-intellectual rants to play up to his expensively educated toff "Boris" persona.


Yes he made it to the top (with the help of course of his rich connected high society friends) so he's not thick but not overly intelligent either

Sam Russell

breezy1985 wrote: »

I dont think he really is that intelligent its just that his gimmick is different to Trumps. Trump goes for the common man idiot where as Alex puts on his best Churchill mumble and rattles out some quote from an old poet or the classics and goes on little pseudo-intellectual rants to play up to his expensively educated toff "Boris" persona.

Yes he made it to the top (with the help of course of his rich connected high society friends) so he's not thick but not overly intelligent either

Apart from his inability to tell the truth or even tell the difference, he suffers two fatal flaws - only one might be possible to forgive but the combination of the two makes him completely unsuitable for high office.

1. He is not on top of details - he either does not understand them, or he is unable to get someone else to tell him which way to go. He needs a good civil servant like Appleby to steer him from the rocks.

2. He is lazy, which would not be such a problem if he surrounded himself with brilliant, hard working able people. Unfortunately he surrounds himself with people who have none of those qualities - in fact most of them are devoid of any redeeming qualities at all.

So we await the final heave to oust from the hot seat, just as his transatlantic buddy has received.

May it come soon, like now.

Professor Moriarty

Sam Russell wrote: »

Apart from his inability to tell the truth or even tell the difference, he suffers two fatal flaws - only one might be possible to forgive but the combination of the two makes him completely unsuitable for high office.

1. He is not on top of details - he either does not understand them, or he is unable to get someone else to tell him which way to go. He needs a good civil servant like Appleby to steer him from the rocks.

2. He is lazy, which would not be such a problem if he surrounded himself with brilliant, hard working able people. Unfortunately he surrounds himself with people who have none of those qualities - in fact most of them are devoid of any redeeming qualities at all.

So we await the final heave to oust from the hot seat, just as his transatlantic buddy has received.

May it come soon, like now.

The Telegraph believes that the Pfizer vaccine will save his premiership.

BonnieSituation

Did we all have the pleasure of seeing Raab butcher a simple Yes/No question on Ridge yesterday?

https://twitter.com/RidgeOnSunday/status/1325372406630936577?s=09

Even for Dominic it was a particularly awful performance. Some of Sophy's facial expressions are priceless too!

Has there ever been such an inept political grouping that lies so often that even simple Yes/No questions end up being titanic battles of endurance?

They don't even know what to do anymore.

Sam Russell

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The Telegraph believes that the Pfizer vaccine will save his premiership.

Of course that particular paper does not admit that Brexit, whatever the outcome, will have any effect on his premiership - deal or no deal. I suspect there may be some bias in that view.

They may be correct in that whatever way Brexit turns out, the outcome for Johnson will be the same - not good.

Professor Moriarty

Sam Russell wrote: »

Of course that particular paper does not admit that Brexit, whatever the outcome, will have any effect on his premiership - deal or no deal. I suspect there may be some bias in that view.

They may be correct in that whatever way Brexit turns out, the outcome for Johnson will be the same - not good.

The Telegraph is no longer a proper newspaper with independent reportage. Every news item is accompanied by at least two opinion pieces. It is increasingly populated by evermore right-wing columnists and, seen through the prism of Brexit at any price, their opinion of him fluctuates. They oscillate between lauding him when he forces the EU to "cave on fishing" and attacking him if he shows any sign of hesitancy on No Deal. Essentially, he's unimportant to them other than as a symbol of Brexit and they will tear apart his legacy, such as it will be, once he's gone.

breezy1985

Sam Russell wrote: »

Apart from his inability to tell the truth or even tell the difference, he suffers two fatal flaws - only one might be possible to forgive but the combination of the two makes him completely unsuitable for high office.

1. He is not on top of details - he either does not understand them, or he is unable to get someone else to tell him which way to go. He needs a good civil servant like Appleby to steer him from the rocks.

2. He is lazy, which would not be such a problem if he surrounded himself with brilliant, hard working able people. Unfortunately he surrounds himself with people who have none of those qualities - in fact most of them are devoid of any redeeming qualities at all.

So we await the final heave to oust from the hot seat, just as his transatlantic buddy has received.

May it come soon, like now.

On number 2 have you seen the job Spitting Image done on him and his cabinet/advisors. Cummings in particular is excellent

Sam Russell

breezy1985 wrote: »

On number 2 have you seen the job Spitting Image done on him and his cabinet/advisors. Cummings in particular is excellent

I have not seen it at all, where is it on?

breezy1985

Sam Russell wrote: »

I have not seen it at all, where is it on?

For now you can only get clips on YouTube as full episodes are only on BBC/ITVs new subscription service which is not available here yet

Joe_ Public

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The Telegraph is no longer a proper newspaper with independent reportage. Every news item is accompanied by at least two opinion pieces. It is increasingly populated by evermore right-wing columnists and, seen through the prism of Brexit at any price, their opinion of him fluctuates. They oscillate between lauding him when he forces the EU to "cave on fishing" and attacking him if he shows any sign of hesitancy on No Deal. Essentially, he's unimportant to them other than as a symbol of Brexit and they will tear apart his legacy, such as it will be, once he's gone.

Agree on that. Though i would imagine johnson will have obvious designs on spaffing out those ridiculously overpaid columns for them again once he can successfully liberate himself from the shackles of his penurious pm salary. I think the telegraph just likes to serve him little reminder every now and again that they can break him as well as make him, like when they deign to give a platform to starmer every now and again.

Professor Moriarty

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Agree on that. Though i would imagine johnson will have obvious designs on spaffing out those ridiculously overpaid columns for them again once he can successfully liberate himself from the shackles of his penurious pm salary. I think the telegraph just likes to serve him little reminder every now and again that they can break him as well as make him, like when they deign to give a platform to starmer every now and again.

Exactly. He's completely in thrall to The Telegraph Barclay brothers who are the epitome of capitalism. The Telegraph is the guiding light for Johnson. If he strays from the light he's in trouble. I actually can't think of any previous PM who was so manipulated and so controlled.

Joe_ Public

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Exactly. He's completely in thrall to The Telegraph Barclay brothers who are the epitome of capitalism. The Telegraph is the guiding light for Johnson. If he strays from the light he's in trouble. I actually can't think of any previous PM who was so manipulated and so controlled.

Suppose it makes a change from murdoch calling all the shots - he's busy running a mile from the donald at the moment. Sad thing is, though, while i never agreed with it, telegraph once at least had a bit of integrity and intellectual heft, when you consider the likes of Max Hastings and Charles Moore. Now, it's just pure spin and nonsense, like the columnist i heard on the BBC yesterday regurgitating the eu always blink at the last minute line. Oborne leaving was pretty much the last straw for it, I'd say.