The Good News thread, local jobs, economy etc

[Guest MattP]

Anyway back on topic...

 

Tories take lead in the polls again for the first time in two years...

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/03/conservatives-lead-labour-opinion-poll

 

 

Asked who they would vote for if the general election were to be held tomorrow, 35% of people backed the Conservatives, compared with 34% for Labour

YouGov’s research, which was conducted after the Tory conference, also shows voters support Cameron’s pledge to lower income tax by 2020, but remain sceptical that they will be better off as a result.

It reveals that people expect their finances to suffer less under a Conservative government, but believe they will be poorer after five years, irrespective of who is in Downing Street.

If the Conservatives win the election, 28% of voters expect to be better off at the end of five years, compared with 37% who think they will be worse off.

If Labour wins, 17% expect to be better off and 42% worse off.

 

The bottom line, can you imagine just who that 17% are?

 

Edited 3 October 2014 by MattP

[purpleronnie]

Err? Not really following what that has to do with this.

Reserving human rights to people only if the government say so is putting politicians above the law. 

 

Surely you can't see this as anything but pandering to UKIP?

[David Guiza]

Then who is Cameron and his politicians accountable to, or do we just vote in a Government every 5 years and then nothing? There are only a small percentage of absolute rights held by the HRA anyway, the rest are conditional. Some talk as though the HRA is a restrictive and inflexible block on domestic powers, which it isn't. I don't agree that prisoners should be given the vote either, and I also believe that a whole life sentence is justified in certain situations, as do the UK - hence why it hasn't been enforced. The Commission and ECHR are in place to protect absolute rights, and judge on qualified and limited rights if they believe that a member state has infringed them.

Furthermore, hundreds of laws are made each year by unelected bodies, rightly or wrongly. Judges have been making law in the UK for centuries, a simple case such as Donoghue v Stevenson shows exactly that.

[Guest MattP]

Reserving human rights to people only if the government say so is putting politicians above the law. 

 

Surely you can't see this as anything but pandering to UKIP?

 

No it isn't at all, give me an example of how that could be?

 

He actually promised the same thing in 2010 so I don't think it is, and public support is just as widespread for removing the HMA among Labour supporters as it is on the right hand side of politics.

 

Then who is Cameron and his politicians accountable to, or do we just vote in a Government every 5 years and then nothing? There are only a small percentage of absolute rights held by the HRA anyway, the rest are conditional. Some talk as though the HRA is a restrictive and inflexible block on domestic powers, which it isn't. I don't agree that prisoners should be given the vote either, and I also believe that a whole life sentence is justified in certain situations, as do the UK - hence why it hasn't been enforced. The Commission and ECHR are in place to protect absolute rights, and judge on qualified and limited rights if they believe that a member state has infringed them.

Furthermore, hundreds of laws are made each year by unelected bodies, rightly or wrongly. Judges have been making law in the UK for centuries, a simple case such as Donoghue v Stevenson shows exactly that.

 

The electorate, which is far more than you can say about any of these European judges.

[purpleronnie]

Anyway back on topic...

 

Tories take lead in the polls again for the first time in two years...

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/03/conservatives-lead-labour-opinion-poll

 

 

 

 

 

If only they weren't behind labour in the 40 marginal seats they might have a chance...but they are.  Coupled with a big swing from Lib dem to labour in other marginal seats it still looks good for labour.

[Rincewind]

Foreign judges that know nothing about life in Britain? You could say the same about MP's that know nothing about living on minimum wage.

The investigates take the allegations very seriously and there would have to be sufficient grounds  to launch an in investigation. They have been gathering information and personal testimonials from people affected. Various groups as well as MP's in debates in the HOC have asked the DWP to release certain information under the Freedom of information act. They have refused once and it went to a complaints court who have said they must supply the info. They are still refusing and using delaying tactics saying they will publish but won't say when.

To me this sounds a little suspicious. The HRA affects everyone and governments should not be able to pick and choose the parts that suit their policies IMO.

[Guest MattP]

If only they weren't behind labour in the 40 marginal seats they might have a chance...but they are.  Coupled with a big swing from Lib dem to labour in other marginal seats it still looks good for labour.

 

You need a bit more than 40 marginals Ron considering you need 326 for a outright majority and with English devo coming up you could kiss goodbye to the Scottish MP's being whipped in to force through laws you wouldn't couldn't get.

 

I'd absolutely love to see Labout fall 4-5 short and UKIP to get 4-5, imagine the smile on Nigel Farage's face knowing Ed can either bring him in as deputy or go back to the country again in a few months time knowing that the electorate knew he refused to work under a coalition under UKIP and seeing that wedge of votes going back to the Tories

[ADK]

Wouldn't we just get a minority government?

[Webbo]

Foreign judges that know nothing about life in Britain? You could say the same about MP's that know nothing about living on minimum wage.

 

Yet again Ken you've shoe horned in your own ridiculous prejudices which have nothing to do with the debate. The fact is a) Nobody knows how they are. b) They are answerable to no one.

 

We've had this Human Rights Act for less than 20 years and we managed perfectly well without it before. To hear some of the ridiculous objections to this you'd think Hitler was coming to power.

[ADK]

I quite like the ECHR as it gives an extra layer of protection to the public. Just another reason not to vote Tory then.

[Rincewind]

I quite like the ECHR as it gives an extra layer of protection to the public. Just another reason not to vote Tory then.

Enough said.

 

Just because there are people from the humble low paid worker to high court judges speaking out for what they believe in does not make them 'ridiculous objections' because they do not agree with the official government and their supporters viewpoints. If these people re not allowed to speak out who is going to speak out for you when you need help?

 

“Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home – so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. … Without concerned citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world.” Eleanor Roosevelt (1958).

 

Edited 3 October 2014 by Rincewind

[Guest MattP]

I quite like the ECHR as it gives an extra layer of protection to the public. Just another reason not to vote Tory then.

Protection to the public? Jesus.

The reason we are going to remove it is because of the danger it poses to us. We're giving ourselves the ability to remove threats to us instead of being forced to keep them. Do you really believe keeping the Qatadas and Hamzas etc is going to deliver a safer nation?

Actually hard to believe what I'm reading here, I expect it from a nutter like Ken obviously but you and Ronnie come across as far brighter usually.

[Guest MattP]

P.S. Ken do some more reading on that Roosevelt quote and actually see what he was defending.

[Webbo]

I quite like the ECHR as it gives an extra layer of protection to the public. Just another reason not to vote Tory then.

Who protects us from the Judges?

[The God Emperor]

I quite like the ECHR as it gives an extra layer of protection to the public. Just another reason not to vote Tory then.

It doesn't really. All your doing is protecting people from one group of corruptible and fallible human beings with a monopoly on the use of force with another group of corruptible and fallible human beings with a monopoly on the use of force. Like paying the mafia to protect you from a gang of small time thugs. 

[Rincewind]

I like it. I am a nutter for challenging the establishment and sticking up for the average low paid average working man and not believing everything that is put out by whichever party is in government

I am so glad that I am not one of those burying their head in the sandpit they have installed in their ivory tower.

What some do not realise I would still be against the changes to HR regardless of which party proposed the changes.

The changes allow the British government (whichever party is is in power)to ignore a ruling in favour of an ordinary tax paying working man if it goes against a policy that puts them in a bad light.

[Sir Fynwy]

Protection to the public? Jesus.

The reason we are going to remove it is because of the danger it poses to us. We're giving ourselves the ability to remove threats to us instead of being forced to keep them. Do you really believe keeping the Qatadas and Hamzas etc is going to deliver a safer nation?

Actually hard to believe what I'm reading here, I expect it from a nutter like Ken obviously but you and Ronnie come across as far brighter usually.

You clearly have no understanding of the ECHR or it's affect on the UK. but you have that in common with Grayling so it's not a massive surprise.

[Guest MattP]

You clearly have no understanding of the ECHR or it's affect on the UK. but you have that in common with Grayling so it's not a massive surprise.

Thanks for the compliment Nice to be compared to a man like Grayling who can see these parasites for exactly what they are.

Every law worker I've seen or heard sticking up for the ECHR seems to be being hit in the pocket. It's impossible not to be a little cynical of the bastards anyway.

[Guest MattP]

I don't mean to bash all lawyers, bit of a bee in my bonnet at the minute as my mate's being completely ****ed around at the minute by his one and the courts.

Plead guilty and went up to be sentenced twice and adjourned both times.

Now his lawyer is telling him to go trial and he's probably facing 4 years instead of the 18 months he was being told he'd get for pleading guilty.

Edited 3 October 2014 by MattP

[Rincewind]

Interesting interview with a job centre adviser. It confirms what a few have said in previous posts regarding how they operate and certain people are targeted. For instance he says if a 6.2 bloke comes in he is ignored but a nervous little man who will accept anything is more likely to be sanctioned and he says people do not challenge the reason.

This is system bashing not government. He is on Twitter if anyone wants to ask him any questions. @jobcentremole

or dispute anything he says.

 

http://slutocracy.wordpress.com/2013/11/21/interview-with-a-job-centre-advisor-sanction-targets-corruption-revealed/

.

Edited 6 October 2014 by Rincewind

[Webbo]

Interesting interview with a job centre adviser. It confirms what a few have said in previous posts regarding how they operate and certain people are targeted. For instance he says if a 6.2 bloke comes in he is ignored but a nervous little man who will accept anything is more likely to be sanctioned and he says people do not challenge the reason.

This is system bashing not government. He is on Twitter if anyone wants to ask him any questions. @jobcentremole

or dispute anything he says.

 

http://slutocracy.wordpress.com/2013/11/21/interview-with-a-job-centre-advisor-sanction-targets-corruption-revealed/

.

I appreciate you're not govt bashing and I'm not saying there isn't any truth in this but how do you know if this person is genuine? How do we know if any of this is based on reality?

[MooseBreath]

He says that job centres never have targets for how many people they have to sanction, and that he has never had to take any action that he deemed inappropriate. The rest is just the typical kind of complaints that you'll get in any workplace, the bosses are all cvnts etc etc. Based on that I'd have to conclude that there is absolutely nothing wrong with how the job centre operates.

[Rincewind]

Have you read it all? Took me at least 15 minutes to read. I think somebody that works at a Job centre will have more knowledge about the system than someone that doesn't.

[MooseBreath]

Have you read it all? Took me at least 15 minutes to read. I think somebody that works at a Job centre will have more knowledge about the system than someone that doesn't.

I agree, which is why I'm quite pleased to read this largely positive report from someone who has apparently worked there for many years.

[Webbo]

Have you read it all? Took me at least 15 minutes to read. I think somebody that works at a Job centre will have more knowledge about the system than someone that doesn't.

But it's anonymous, how do we know for sure that he/she does work in a job centre?