Support NeoGAF

[Moosichu]

Indeed. The fact the first search happened grates me considerably.

It scares me. Civil Liberties are so important
imo. Which is why I will always vote for a party with a good track record on that over anything else. It's why I didn't vote Labour or Conservative last election
Corbyn does seem a step in the right direction but he really needs to commit to that.

 

[kitch9]

What about threatening flag waving?

Given the potential for issues I would assume security protocol would be at maximum.

 

[ruttyboy]

Given the potential for issues I would assume security protocol would be at maximum.

What does that even mean? Jail sentence for calling a visiting dignitary a cunt?

When it became clear they were armed with flags (which they were waving threateningly don't forget) would it not be appropriate to let them go? Maybe confiscate the flags if it was such a problem, but arrest and charge them?

 

[CyclopsRock]

It's super shitty. Is it literally to show Xi that "we're on his side"? I can't imagine he gives that much of a shit.

 

[Jezbollah]

I just saw that IDS paid, CGI pension advert.

I respect it in that it tells a message that needs to be said, but I cant help but think that the CGI company in question made a fuckton of more dosh than I think most would have been prepared to pay..

 

[tomtom94]

Looks like there are two major stories today:

1) The government have come over all Republican, and want to change sign-ups to the electoral register to cut voter fraud; Corbyn is out campaigning to stop it

2) Tax credits are going through the Lords, with opponents believing they are good to block it and Cameron (who turned down Lords reform) very angry that they are considering doing such a thing.

 

[Mr. Sam]

On the one hand, I think the House of Lords is stupid. On the other hand, I think the House of Commons is stupid.

 

[Jezbollah]

With regards to the Electoral Register reform, I can understand why they are going to do this - and it makes sense to an extent - but if the timing is the issue at hand then they should have thought to introduce it earlier. Italy do per-person registration, and they have always got us ballots in more than enough time for their elections - and if a country usually so disorganised can do that to people who live internationally, then the UK should be able to.

Incidentally, after having moved during the summer, there has been one item of registration that I have done (and redone a few times) out of all the things I've had to change - and that's the Electoral Register. I do like that we as a country are so persistent about something as important as being able to vote.

 

[tomtom94]

With regards to the Electoral Register reform, I can understand why they are going to do this - and it makes sense to an extent - but if the timing is the issue at hand then they should have thought to introduce it earlier. Italy do per-person registration, and they have always got us ballots in more than enough time for their elections - and if a country usually so disorganised can do that to people who live internationally, then the UK should be able to.

Incidentally, after having moved during the summer, there has been one item of registration that I have done (and redone a few times) out of all the things I've had to change - and that's the Electoral Register. I do like that we as a country are so persistent about something as important as being able to vote.

It's worth pointing out that even as a left-wing voter, I can understand a lot of the Conservatives' reforms. Including tax credits. I understand what they are trying to achieve, I just think that they have the wrong priorities.

It's the same with this. I personally think it's pig-headed of the Conservatives to push through a move that will reduce voter turnout. You can argue the morality of democracy and what rights those who choose not to participate have, but it is a simple fact that voter turnout in this country is very poor and voter apathy is very high, and what this bill is designed to do is make it so fewer people are registered. Some people might remember this was done a while back with free student prescriptions as well, changing it from something automatic to a reimbursement system. It's a mental trick designed to prey on people's desire for convenience.

I also think it's wrong of Corbyn to suggest this is a partisan issue, because while I don't doubt that it is one reason the Conservatives want to push it through, I think he needs to make the case that people should be auto-enrolled on the register from a neutral perspective. Because it would just be better.

 

[Jezbollah]

To be honest I'd want people to be auto-enrolled onto the electoral register the moment they receive their national insurance number. There is a general issue with voter enrolment, as we saw earlier in the year that there was a big push to get voters to register. I just wish this reform was cross party and actually agreed upon as being sensible.

 

[Moosichu]

It's worth pointing out that even as a left-wing voter, I can understand a lot of the Conservatives' reforms. Including tax credits. I understand what they are trying to achieve, I just think that they have the wrong priorities.

It's the same with this. I personally think it's pig-headed of the Conservatives to push through a move that will reduce voter turnout. You can argue the morality of democracy and what rights those who choose not to participate have, but it is a simple fact that voter turnout in this country is very poor and voter apathy is very high, and what this bill is designed to do is make it so fewer people are registered. Some people might remember this was done a while back with free student prescriptions as well, changing it from something automatic to a reimbursement system. It's a mental trick designed to prey on people's desire for convenience.

I also think it's wrong of Corbyn to suggest this is a partisan issue, because while I don't doubt that it is one reason the Conservatives want to push it through, I think he needs to make the case that people should be auto-enrolled on the register from a neutral perspective. Because it would just be better.

The thing about tax credits is that they will go down as a result if an increased minimum wage. They are a cure to a problem that should be prevented. But removing a cure while half-heartedly preventing it won't work.

 

[CyclopsRock]

I just saw that IDS paid, CGI pension advert.

I respect it in that it tells a message that needs to be said, but I cant help but think that the CGI company in question made a fuckton of more dosh than I think most would have been prepared to pay..

Not that this makes it any better, but I can almost guarantee that they didn't. The majority of that money would have gone directly to the TV channels, print media and billboard people where the adverts are shown. The actual production of the campaign would have been done by an agency and *they* get the budget and *they* have to get X, Y and Z done and still get their profit. So the CGI guys likely never even liased with the DWP, let alone get paid by them. For those guys, it would just have been another job. The agency might have made a killing (they usually do) but £8.5m for a marketing budget isn't that much - like I said, most will have gone to ITV etc.

Source: I work in the VFX department of a small film company.

 

[CyclopsRock]

What are the changes being proposed to voter registration? I'd argue that the main difference than with the GOP is that we just had a mayor kicked out of office after not only illegal activities (which doesn't have anything to do with the register) but also voter fraud - yet if it weren't for the hard, unpaid work of local petitioners, none of it would have come to light. So clearly there are problems with the current system, and it's hard to have too much faith in the official statistics on fraud because, again, they didn't *think* there was voter fraud in Tower Hamlets. Who knows how widespread it could be?

Like I said though, I dunno what the proposals are.

 

[kitch9]

What does that even mean? Jail sentence for calling a visiting dignitary a cunt?

When it became clear they were armed with flags (which they were waving threateningly don't forget) would it not be appropriate to let them go? Maybe confiscate the flags if it was such a problem, but arrest and charge them?

No but protocol will be to remove potential trouble from the area swiftly.

 

[phisheep]

What are the changes being proposed to voter registration? I'd argue that the main difference than with the GOP is that we just had a mayor kicked out of office after not only illegal activities (which doesn't have anything to do with the register) but also voter fraud - yet if it weren't for the hard, unpaid work of local petitioners, none of it would have come to light. So clearly there are problems with the current system, and it's hard to have too much faith in the official statistics on fraud because, again, they didn't *think* there was voter fraud in Tower Hamlets. Who knows how widespread it could be?

Like I said though, I dunno what the proposals are.

Essentially it is a change from being registered by the "head of the household" where you live to individuals being responsible for registering themselves. Since under the old system the "head of household" not only put you on the register but also requested postal votes, there was obviously some potential for fraud (which has, I understand, been evidenced in about two places but isn't thought to be widespread by any means). It is probably not a necessary change, but sounds sort of sensible, if only to get rid of the "head of household" stereotype.

There's not likely to be any negative impact on voter turnout, since that is measured as a percentage of those registered to vote. As those who can't be bothered to register probably also won't be voting I expect that, purely as a matter of numbers, voter turnout will go up a bit - though that doesn't necessarily mean that more people are voting.

The major problem with the proposal is that it is tied into the Boundary Commission review which aims to reduce the number of seats in the Commons to 600 or so, and to roughly equalise the size of constituencies as measured by the number of registered voters as opposed to, say, by the actual population. Labour would argue this is unfair to them as inner-city Labour constituencies are typically under-represented on the register; while the Conservatives would argue that, well, if you want to equalise the value of votes then it is registered voters that matter.

Whether you see this as levelling the playing field or as outrageous gerrymandering depends which side you are on. Both sides are exaggerating for effect.

 

[Moosichu]

IMO, everyone in the borders of the country should be allowed voting or at least count as a voter, including prisoners. Voting should be a right not a privilege.

 

[Par Score]

The major problem with the proposal is that it is tied into the Boundary Commission review which aims to reduce the number of seats in the Commons to 600 or so, and to roughly equalise the size of constituencies as measured by the number of registered voters as opposed to, say, by the actual population. Labour would argue this is unfair to them as inner-city Labour constituencies are typically under-represented on the register; while the Conservatives would argue that, well, if you want to equalise the value of votes then it is registered voters that matter.

Whether you see this as levelling the playing field or as outrageous gerrymandering depends which side you are on. Both sides are exaggerating for effect.

This is one of those few issues where I agree with practically every principle of what the Tories are trying to do. But the methods they're using for all of these changes mark them as a blatant tilting of the system in their favour.

We should be reducing the cost of Parliament, we should be making boundaries fairer, we should be moving to an individualised model of voter registration, etc, etc. But we shouldn't be doing it in almost any of the ways that the Tories seem to be planning to.

Same deal with Tax Credits now that I think about it. The government shouldn't be in the business of subsidising companies paying unacceptably low wages, but the way to fix that is not to rip those subsidies away from the employees but from the employers.

 

[phisheep]

Same deal with Tax Credits now that I think about it. The government shouldn't be in the business of subsidising companies paying unacceptably low wages, but the way to fix that is not to rip those subsidies away from the employees but from the employers.

I'm not sure that there is a way of doing that, as the problem (I think) is mostly not the level of wages given, but the number of hours worked. The minimum wage covers off the level-of-pay issue, the tax credits cover the hours-worked issue. So it's not like there's an employer for the unworked hours to remove the subsidy from.

Might be talking out of my hat here though.

 

[Uzzy]

Showdown in the Lords today. Will we get a proper constitutional crisis? I kinda hope so just for a chance to reform parliament, though I expect Cameron would just flood the Lords instead.

 

[Roberto Larcos]

Showdown in the Lords today. Will we get a proper constitutional crisis? I kinda hope so just for a chance to reform parliament, though I expect Cameron would just flood the Lords instead.

It's not a constitutional crisis though, the Lords have (rightfully) shot down legislation before. It's their job. Government is just throwing a hissy-fit because they're not getting their way.

If it was part of their manifesto it'd be completely different.

 

[phisheep]

It's not a constitutional crisis though, the Lords have (rightfully) shot down legislation before. It's their job. Government is just throwing a hissy-fit because they're not getting their way.

"We've got a problem with the unelected chamber. I know, let's un-elect even more of them, that'll fix it!"

 

[Par Score]

If it was part of their manifesto it'd be completely different.

Bingo. This is the other serious problem with the Tax Credit changes: They were explicitly ruled out pre-election.

 

[N7Commander95]

I mean, if the lords don't shoot down a very damaging and extremely undemocratic measure which no one actually voted for then what good are they?

 

[Fernando Fernandez]

Just seen a tweet saying all these Tory peers they are packing the House of Lords with get paid at least £350 today to vote these tax credit cuts through?

 

[Moosichu]

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015...-no-10-showing-contempt-for-international-law

 

[RedShift]

Saudi relationship with UK 'at risk', warns ambassador
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34635206

Saudi prince demands the UK respects their oppressive regime as they're about to whip a 74 year old British man to death for making himself some home brew.

Why are we allied with these sick fucks?

 

[phisheep]

Saudi prince demands the UK respects their oppressive regime as they're about to whip a 74 year old British man to death for making himself some home brew.

"To death" is overstating it more than a bit. So, apparently is "whipping".

 

[kitch9]

Saudi relationship with UK 'at risk', warns ambassador
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34635206

Saudi prince demands the UK respects their oppressive regime as they're about to whip a 74 year old British man to death for making himself some home brew.

Why are we allied with these sick fucks?

Poor guys definitely getting whipped. Saying that, if he wanted a glass of wine, probably living in Saudi should have been low on his list of priorities.

 

[tomtom94]

I mean the thing about the House of Lords is that the Conservatives are right to an extent, the House lost most of their power centuries ago because it is wrong for an unelected body of the aristocracy/rich/whatever they're supposed to represent to block legislation put forward by a government that has been voted for by the people.

The fundamental problem with that, however, is that if the Lords doesn't exist in at least some capacity as a check on the power of the government, then what exactly is the purpose of its existence?

So I'm kind of all for Labour and the Lib Dems doing what they're doing, but I do worry for what could happen in response. I don't think I've ever seen a party advocate my preferred options for Lords reform.

I'm not going to get into the "do the Conservatives have a mandate" or not because that to me is more an issue with FPTP than with the fundamental structure of the Houses. (also because fuckwit backbenchers tried to use it as an excuse not to pass the gay marriage bill)

 

[RobotNinjaHornets]

Saudi relationship with UK 'at risk', warns ambassador
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34635206

Saudi prince demands the UK respects their oppressive regime as they're about to whip a 74 year old British man to death for making himself some home brew.

Why are we allied with these sick fucks?

Also beheading and crucifying a man they arrested at 17 for protesting.

 

[Jezbollah]

Looks like that human rights council chummyness did fuck all at the end of the day..

 

[CyclopsRock]

Bingo. This is the other serious problem with the Tax Credit changes: They were explicitly ruled out pre-election.

Pretty sure they didn't, though they implied that they weren't going to do it.

Also beheading and crucifying a man they arrested at 17 for protesting.

Yeah, this is the bigger deal tbh. Like someone (kmag??) said earlier, the guys been In Saudi creaming their oil money for decades and he knows their laws, and he broke them. If he wants to make homebrew, he should go live in a country - such as the one he was born in - where it's legal. The punishment is, IMO, unfair but he knew the risks.

 

[Moosichu]

Pretty sure they didn't, though they implied that they weren't going to do it.



Yeah, this is the bigger deal tbh. Like someone (kmag??) said earlier, the guys been In Saudi creaming their oil money for decades and he knows their laws, and he broke them. If he wants to make homebrew, he should go live in a country - such as the one he was born in - where it's legal. The punishment is, IMO, unfair but he knew the risks.

Very strong implications.
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/8367926

If the UK took a stance on human rights, Saudi Arabia would know the risks of keeping all their laws.

 

[tomtom94]

Pretty sure they didn't, though they implied that they weren't going to do it.

As Moosichu said, Gove in an interview on Radio 4: "We are going to freeze tax credits for two years, we are not going to cut them" and I'm pretty sure Cameron ruled them out on Question Time as well? That was a week before the election.

Then again, you could argue that if the government only did stuff they were mandated to do, we are going to end up behind everyone else, that's why we have representative democracy in the first place.

Then again again, if people turned on Clegg for tuition fees then people should absolutely be crucifying Osborne and Cameron for tax credits.

hecantkeepgettingawaywithit.gif

 

[Uzzy]

It's not a constitutional crisis though, the Lords have (rightfully) shot down legislation before. It's their job. Government is just throwing a hissy-fit because they're not getting their way.

If it was part of their manifesto it'd be completely different.

I'm pretty sure that the Government won't view it that way! And they do have some strong arguments on their side too. The 1911 Parliament Act is pretty clear that the Commons has supremacy over the Lords when it comes to finance bills.

If anything, this just makes it clear that reform of the House of Lords is well overdue. If they can't serve as a check to the Government's power without provoking a constitutional crisis then what the hell are they there for?

 

[Mindwipe]

If anything, this just makes it clear that reform of the House of Lords is well overdue. If they can't serve as a check to the Government's power without provoking a constitutional crisis then what the hell are they there for?

Cameron has made it pretty clear he doesn't think there should be checks on his power - that by virtue of having being elected under a broken system that means he should not be constrained in any way - hence attacks on FOI, judicial review, legal aid, treaty obligations and now the Lords.

He fetishises strong government. So any "reform" proposal from him will be about making the Commons more powerful.

 

[Beefy]

So when will we know the House of Lords result?

 

[Par Score]

Sometime this evening, the Lords sit late.

 

[kmag]

I'm pretty sure that the Government won't view it that way! And they do have some strong arguments on their side too. The 1911 Parliament Act is pretty clear that the Commons has supremacy over the Lords when it comes to finance bills.

If anything, this just makes it clear that reform of the House of Lords is well overdue. If they can't serve as a check to the Government's power without provoking a constitutional crisis then what the hell are they there for?

This isn't actually a finance bill, it's a statutory instrument which is an amendment to an existing act. The convention might still be in place but the Parliament act only restricts the Lords ability to delay Financial Bills so it's not strictly out side the Lords power.

I'm looking forward to Dave filling the Lords with more cronies. We're still a way behind the Chinese Politburo (I know it's actually the National People's Congress not the Politburo but Politburo is one of my favourite words) has 2,987 unelected members and we're only at 806 in the Lords at the moment but I reckon with a few more 'constitutional crises' we can catch them. Come on Dave, we can do it!

 

[jimbobsmells]

I feel like I would make a good Lord.

 

[War Peaceman]

Pretty sure they didn't, though they implied that they weren't going to do it.



Yeah, this is the bigger deal tbh. Like someone (kmag??) said earlier, the guys been In Saudi creaming their oil money for decades and he knows their laws, and he broke them. If he wants to make homebrew, he should go live in a country - such as the one he was born in - where it's legal. The punishment is, IMO, unfair but he knew the risks.

Completely agree with you here.

He took the risks. Saudi Arabia is a horrific regime for human rights, but he made a conscious, unforced choice.

The Saudi Arabians who have little choice but to live under their disgusting regime deserve our attention more.

 

[phisheep]

I love listening to House of Lords debates. The Archbishop of York just made an "evil Tories" speech, but so politely that I don't think anybody noticed.

EDIT: Super speech from Baroness Hayman. If I read the mood of the House right, there will likely be a delaying amendment.

 

[Jezbollah]

Lords votes to reject fatal motion against tax credit cuts by 310 to 99.

 

[phisheep]

Lords votes to reject fatal motion against tax credit cuts by 310 to 99.

That one was always going to happen - too difficult constitutionally. It's the next two that will be interesting.

 

[Jezbollah]

That one was always going to happen - too difficult constitutionally. It's the next two that will be interesting.

Yep the vote to defer is first up I think.

Edit: Looks like Labour peers voted to abstain on the fatal motion. Nicola Sturgeon is already getting making comment.

 

[CCS]

Lords have voted to delay the cuts. Good on them I say.

Also, good to see the clergy speak out. Both sad and impressive how they've been among the most vocal opposition to some of the government's most brutal cuts.

 

[Jezbollah]

Lords have voted to delay the cuts. Good on them I say.

Yep, "Lords votes for Meacher motion by 307-277 - tax credit cuts delayed until government responds to IFS."

Lords now voting on Labour tax credits motion, which demands three-year scheme to compensate low-paid.

 

[War Peaceman]

Yep the vote to defer is first up I think.

Edit: Looks like Labour peers voted to abstain on the fatal motion. Nicola Sturgeon is already getting making comment.

I think she's in the wrong here - and usually she is spot on - it would be constitutionally dangerous.

The Lords probably shouldn't exist, but holding the government to account on things it didn't promise (and let's face it, basically said they wouldn't do) is exactly what they should be doing. The Conservatives should not be allowed to pedal the lie that their minimum wage rise (paltry and punitive vs u-25s, but welcome in so much as more>less) covers for the loss of tax credits when it doesn't.

 

[Jezbollah]

Labour lords vote live now.

289 vs 272 - Labour Motion decision on delaying cuts until lowest paid are compensated has carried.

 

[RobotNinjaHornets]

Labour lords vote live now.

289 vs 272 - Labour Motion decision on delaying cuts until lowest paid are compensated has carried.

So I don't agree with the concept of an unelected upper chamber, buuuuut

Get fucked Osborne