The Politics Thread

[cityfanlee23]

No comments from the con supporters about Major's comments this week then.

 

You know comments about the ruling party as opposed to corbyncomments.

 

Certainly not Ignored by me.

[MooseBreath]

Credit to Major for seeming to feel that high levels of inequality and relative poverty do matter. Struck quite a contrast with Cameron's correspondence with Tory-run Oxfordshire County Council criticising their public service cuts

Is Cameron really clueless, out-of-touch or cynical enough to have drafted a letter suggesting that swingeing cuts to local government budgets should have little impact on locally-funded public services? Maybe it was some thicko/Young Conservative intern in his office?

Interesting that Major is still pushing the role of business and charities in poverty alleviation. I thought that the "Big Society" policy was supposed to be harnessing them to solve the problem 5 years ago? Whatever happened to "the Big Society"?

Certainly, there is a role for business and charities to play. A lot of charities are having their public grants cancelled or squeezed, though, making them ever more reliant on Joe Pubic - and a lot of business involvement is tokenistic and for self-promotion purposes (nothing massively wrong with that - businesses mainly exist to make profits; it is our democratic representatives who should be playing more of a leading role).

Many of the issues causing relative poverty and inequality are sufficiently difficult to need social/political expertise and a long-term response that is more likely to come from sustained public policies, not business contributions, anyway: poor diet, under-education, structural unemployment within particular communities and/or families etc.

I think the order Major proposed his solutions in is the order of priority.

Fixing housing supply issues and investing in infrastructure will lead to more people in well paid productive work paying less for housing.

From there you've got more tax take with which to improve education and people have more disposable income with which to donate to charity and choose to buy products and services from more socially responsible businesses.

It's interesting that people have picked up on this as if it's a criticism of the current government because I don't think it is at all. I think it just restates the overarching intention of spending cuts which is to enable the country to spend more money on things that actually work to improve lives, rather than nonsense like hand outs.

[Alf Bentley]

I think the order Major proposed his solutions in is the order of priority.

Fixing housing supply issues and investing in infrastructure will lead to more people in well paid productive work paying less for housing.

From there you've got more tax take with which to improve education and people have more disposable income with which to donate to charity and choose to buy products and services from more socially responsible businesses.

It's interesting that people have picked up on this as if it's a criticism of the current government because I don't think it is at all. I think it just restates the overarching intention of spending cuts which is to enable the country to spend more money on things that actually work to improve lives, rather than nonsense like hand outs.

 

 

I don't have a problem with much of what you say there.

 

I saw it as a "one nation Conservatism" speech. It wasn't just intended as criticism of the current government, but expressed unease at the divided society that this government is now presiding over. That's not to assign all the blame to the current and/or previous coalition government. Much of that inequality/relative poverty has built up over decades, so previous governments, blue and red, share the blame. But it is Cameron's Tories who have been in charge for 5+ years now and who have the power to do something about it now. Half-baked ideas like "the Big Society" just aren't cutting the mustard. Even Major's speech states that: he describes the inequality & unhealthy lives as "shocking", calls on business to do more and calls for more regulation of charities. He's clearly implying that the current government needs to do more to ensure that things change, whoever ends up leading and implementing that change, public, private or voluntary sector.

 

The last Labour govt can be justly criticised for allowing the tax credits bill to mushroom instead of improving pay, skills, education, investment etc. But the solution isn't for the Tories to seek to save money by stripping away tax credits from low-income working families before alternative income is available from higher pay, lower tax on low pay or higher-skilled work. Otherwise, Major's "shocking situation" will just get worse - and the state of society matters, not just the deficit figure.

 

Money does need to be stripped out of welfare and reassigned to more productive and/or critical spending (boosting skills/education, tackling structural deprivation, proportionately increasing health/social care spending due to our aging population etc.). But 

we need longer-term, more concerted solutions that reduce dependency on tax credits / benefits. Slashing welfare without adequate alternatives is a recipe for widescale social problems - and the abandonment of the "one nation" ideal.

[Webbo]

No comments from the con supporters about Major's comments this week then.

 

You know comments about the ruling party as opposed to corbyncomments.

What did you want me to say?

[Guest MattP]

Corbyn absolutely savaged at the PLP meeting tonight over his stream of insane comments since the Paris attacks.

A bad result in Oldham and it might not be long before we see him challenged.

[Claridge]

Corbyn absolutely savaged at the PLP meeting tonight over his stream of insane comments since the Paris attacks.

A bad result in Oldham and it might not be long before we see him challenged.

BBC reporting that Corbyn does not support, a shoot to kill policy in the event of a terrorist attack.

What a twat if true

[Dr The Singh]

Cameron and Conservatives must be laughing there tits off. How inept is Corbyn, the fooker can't even a yes/no question without going into some leftist fit. The question on shoot to kill, wtf does he expect the police to do to save lives, and protect there own??????

What a foolish twaattt

[Jon the Hat]

Corbyn looking more and more like an academic lost in the real world.

[Bayfox]

BBC reporting that Corbyn does not support, a shoot to kill policy in the event of a terrorist attack.

What a twat if true

Just watched the interview

He said it.

Yeah you see that bloke there with a shit load of semtex on his chest. Just shoot him in the leg and hope he doesn't detonate it.

Ffs

[Charl91]

I'm relatively neutral in relation to Corbyn, but that was a particularly moronic thing to say. 

[Guest MattP]

This weekend has showed his true colours.

Does he really value the life of a suicide bomber over the one of an innocent civilian? Stupid thing to say and he'll rightly get absolutely panned for it.

[Claridge]

This weekend has showed his true colours.

Does he really value the life of a suicide bomber over the one of an innocent civilian? Stupid thing to say and he'll rightly get absolutely panned for it.

Thought Hilary Benn was going to burst into tears on the today programme, trying to defend Corbyn. Benn knows Corbyn's not quite right so why is he in the shadow cabinet. 

[Jon the Hat]

Thought Hilary Benn was going to burst into tears on the today programme, trying to defend Corbyn. Benn knows Corbyn's not quite right so why is he in the shadow cabinet. 

 

I think if Corbyn only picked people who agreed with him he wouldn't have enough people to form a shadow cabinet.

[Thracian]

BBC reporting that Corbyn does not support, a shoot to kill policy in the event of a terrorist attack.

What a twat if true

 

BBC reporting that Corbyn does not support, a shoot to kill policy in the event of a terrorist attack.

What a twat if true

 

 

Whether you agree or disagree it's wrong to take his comments out of context. I read what he says. It's vague and evasive in parts but if he's sincere in what he said it made some sense.

He was advocating a measured response, and broadly in an effort to prevent escalation of a situation or particular problems. Just perhaps he said he didn't "know" how he'd react to a particular scenario was because he'd not been in it and didn't know.

And if people in authority had actually acted lawfully and responsibly on what they saw and knew before the Paris attrocities, perhaps no-one would have died. Where does the blame lie. Firmly on the terrorists who make no secret of their intent. Or, to some extent, on those paid to combat those terrorists but who failed to do that despite discovering likely perpetrators - according to reports? If they don't know they can't act but if they do know what chance is there if they don't do something?        

[Guest MattP]

Whether you agree or disagree it's wrong to take his comments out of context. I read what he says. It's vague and evasive in parts but if he's sincere in what he said it made some sense. He was advocating a measured response, and broadly in an effort to prevent escalation of a situation or particular problems. Just perhaps he said he didn't "know" how he'd react to a particular scenario was because he'd not been in it and didn't know.    

 

If only we had recently had a event where something similar had happened to make the question less hyperthetical.

[Jon the Hat]

Lets be clear, there is no doubt at the Corbyn means what he says, he has been head fo Stop the War coalition for years, and they have openly declared time and again that this is all caused by western aggression, and have defended the poor exploited terrorists as victims.

[Thracian]

If only we had recently had a event where something similar had happened to make the question less hyperthetical.

 

 

 

I wouldn't wish that on people but it does emphasise how little qualified Corbyn is to lead anyone. However, on what he actually said it's hard to criticise.

The bloke seems to see no sense in taking action that makes a situation worse and seems to place more faith in dialogue than force.

Broadly I agree with him and the consequences of various actions in the Middle East so far, only seem to emphasise the sense in that because there doesn't even seem to be an end plan much less the international co-ordination necessary to fashion one. Quite the contrary from what I've read, which is a lot.     

[David Guiza]

http://news.yahoo.com/us-approves-1-29bn-sale-bombs-saudi-arabia-170132936.html

 

Why does everybody deal so happily with Saudi Arabia, or is that a $illy question?

[Merging Cultures]

Wow Corbyn has lost the plot.

[Rincewind]

All I have seen quoted on here is that Corbyn does not believe shoot to kill is the best policy. I do not know what context it was said. I am sure he did not say that then walked away.

It depends  on the situation surely. If a person has  explosives strapped to him holding a hairpin trigger would not the loosening hold of his hand set it off? Also if a person can be arrested securely then they may be 'persuaded' to give out valuable information 

I don't think it would be possible to say all this in a short interview if asked specific questions. 

Of course if there was a hostage and shootout situation any means should be used to end it but shoot to kill should be the last resort and I believe even the police and security services believe that.

[MooseBreath]

I was hoping Corbyn could hold it together until the next election, allowing Osborne to easily destroy him on his way to number 10. But it's starting to look like he won't last that long. He might not even last til Christmas. What's the record for the shortest time someone has been leader of a major political party?

[Claridge]

I was hoping Corbyn could hold it together until the next election, allowing Osborne to easily destroy him on his way to number 10. But it's starting to look like he won't last that long. He might not even last til Christmas. What's the record for the shortest time someone has been leader of a major political party?

Labour have no one else of any substance to replace him anyway. 

[Head Honcho]

I wouldn't wish that on people but it does emphasise how little qualified Corbyn is to lead anyone. However, on what he actually said it's hard to criticise.

The bloke seems to see no sense in taking action that makes a situation worse and seems to place more faith in dialogue than force.

Broadly I agree with him and the consequences of various actions in the Middle East so far, only seem to emphasise the sense in that because there doesn't even seem to be an end plan much less the international co-ordination necessary to fashion one. Quite the contrary from what I've read, which is a lot.     

ISIS aren't interested in dialogue. Shoot to kill at the point of engagement is the only policy.

 

I'm still open on whether it should be used in cases like Jihadi John but I think on this occasion it was the right thing.

[Head Honcho]

Cameron and Conservatives must be laughing there tits off. How inept is Corbyn, the fooker can't even a yes/no question without going into some leftist fit. The question on shoot to kill, wtf does he expect the police to do to save lives, and protect there own??????

What a foolish twaattt

That's his game though isn't it.

 

There's no middle ground with him it's far left or nothing.

 

These statements of his may seem foolish to us but he picks up votes everytime.

 

He doesn't care where the votes come from but he's telling the people of the UK vote for me if this is what you believe in and he doesn't care about anything or anyone else.

 

A very dangerous man who could quite possibly engage enough people to form a government.

[leicsmac]

That's his game though isn't it.

 

There's no middle ground with him it's far left or nothing.

 

These statements of his may seem foolish to us but he picks up votes everytime.

 

He doesn't care where the votes come from but he's telling the people of the UK vote for me if this is what you believe in and he doesn't care about anything or anyone else.

 

A very dangerous man who could quite possibly engage enough people to form a government.

 

I thought the right wing admired "black and white", objective figures? They certainly adore Thatcher, for whom the "middle ground" was a sign of the most insipid weakness.