• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

UK PoliGAF thread of tell me about the rabbits again, Dave.

Jackpot

Banned
Boris Johnson goes on a rant saying the next director general of the BBC should be a Tory. Because who would want an impartial news service?

He manages to blame them for:
  • not being super-postive about the Olympics
  • not giving free publicity to London-based start-up companies
  • difficulties in his recent mayoral election campaign
  • unfairly "shafting" Murdoch-owned media outlets by daring to cover the Leveson inquiry
  • not being Eurosceptic

He also lays the credit for all the past 30 years economic growth on Thatcher and says Labour halted it with over-regulation.

The statist, defeatist and biased BBC is on the wrong wavelength

No wonder – and I speak as one who has just fought a campaign in which I sometimes felt that my chief opponent was the local BBC news – the prevailing view of Beeb newsrooms is, with honourable exceptions, statist, corporatist, defeatist, anti-business, Europhile and, above all, overwhelmingly biased to the Left.

Eurosceptic views are still treated as if they were vaguely mad and unpleasant, even though the Eurosceptic analysis has been proved overwhelmingly right.

In all its lavish coverage of Murdoch, hacking and BSkyB, the BBC never properly explains the reasons why other media organisations – including the BBC – want to shaft a free-market competitor (and this basic dishonesty is spotted by the electorate; it’s one of the reasons real people are so apathetic about the Leveson business).

The broad history of the past 30 years in the UK is that the Thatcher government took us out of an economic death-spiral of Seventies complacency. Spending was tackled, the unions were contained, the City was unleashed, and a series of important supply-side reforms helped to deliver a long boom; and when the exhausted and fractious Tories were eventually chucked out in 1997, it was Labour that profited – politically – from those reforms.

The boom continued, in spite of everything Blair and Brown did to choke it. They over-regulated

I have sometimes wondered why BBC London never carries stories about dynamic start-ups or amazing London exports – and then concluded gloomily that it just not in the nature of that show.

the Lib Dems should allow the Government to appoint someone to run the BBC who is free-market, pro-business and understands the depths of the problems this country faces. We need someone who knows about the work ethic, and cutting costs. We need a Tory, and no mucking around. If we can’t change the Beeb, we can’t change the country.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...nd-biased-BBC-is-on-the-wrong-wavelength.html

Laugh along with his entertaining personality all you want, he's still a scumbag. I don't know how people can be ok with this scale of revisionism yet rage everytime an US senator claims Obama traveld back in time and caused the credit crunch and the banks did nothing wrong.
 

PJV3

Member
Boris Johnson does my fucking nut in. He spends more time licking Murdochs shitter than Mensch does. Sorry Tories you can't have your British Fox news, leave the BBC alone.
 

nib95

Banned
Fucking Londoners voting him in again. Honestly.

That tax scandal didn't do Ken any favours, but I kind of hoped Londoners would have the sense to see past it.
 

nib95

Banned
Why did they even pick Ken?

Cheaper fares, more police, cheaper energy bills, new renting measures etc.

But he wasn't voted in. So Borris's vague pledge to usher in more jobs for the young, cut council tax etc won out. Terrible move by London. I think they voted more on personality and politics than actual policy.
 

PJV3

Member
Well, the first few cost like what, £1.6mil each? 8 times more than a double decker if I remember correctly. So yea, they better be nice.

Bloody hell, i remember when you could get a jet fighter and have change for an ice cream for that much.

"To be fair, Boris' term as mayor was competent".

I congratulate him on doing nothing with confidence, i am being a little harsh(only a little).
 
Cheaper fares, more police, cheaper energy bills, new renting measures etc.

But he wasn't voted in. So Borris's vague pledge to usher in more jobs for the young, cut council tax etc won out. Terrible move by London. I think they voted more on personality and politics than actual policy.

He's just so repulsive though. I know its not a popularity contest but he goes by red ken and screams of old style socialism. He just seems like a poor choice to go against someone like boris.
 

gerg

Member
Well, the first few cost like what, £1.6mil each? 8 times more than a double decker if I remember correctly. So yea, they better be nice.

Sure. But they represent the most pragmatic and realistic revival of something that is considered as an icon for London (in comparison to Ken's introduction of the bendy buses), and hopefully they will have a service life that will ultimately prove to be of good value for money.
 
Man, and you guys gave us shit for electing Bush twice? That's awful right-wing drivel to be spat out by the mayor of one of the cosmopolitan hubs of the free world.
 

nib95

Banned
He's just so repulsive though. I know its not a popularity contest but he goes by red ken and screams of old style socialism. He just seems like a poor choice to go against someone like boris.

Lol what. He just cares for the city deeply and tries to balance out the scales more than his counter parts. Nothing wrong with that. He certainly did a lot more good for London than Borris has or imo will do. And honestly, on the topic of socialism, people barely know the meaning of it is any more. The UK doesn't have anything resembling a proper prominent socialist or left wing party any more. Labour are more centrist and Tories are just far right.

That's part of the problem with this country. We need a proper force on the left. Not just one's that pretend to be.
 

War Peaceman

You're a big guy.
Man, and you guys gave us shit for electing Bush twice? That's awful right-wing drivel to be spat out by the mayor of one of the cosmopolitan hubs of the free world.

It is awful, but his actions as mayor were not reflective of his beliefs. Reelecting him is understandable in that context, unlike Bush.
 

CHEEZMO™

Obsidian fan
And honestly, on the topic of socialism, people barely know the meaning of it is any more. The UK doesn't have anything resembling a proper prominent socialist or left wing party any more. Labour are more centrist and Tories are just far right.

That's part of the problem with this country. We need a proper force on the left. Not just one's that pretend to be.

Troof.
 
It is awful, but his actions as mayor were not reflective of his beliefs. Reelecting him is understandable in that context, unlike Bush.

Gotcha. I'm imagining he was spouting this stuff on the election trail, but how can he talk about "unleashing the City" right after the "london whale" and Chase blew billions on more risky bets?
 

PJV3

Member
About the Bendy buses, it isn't just the cost of the routemaster that has to be considered.

' A study conducted in September 2008 found that replacing articulated vehicles on routes 38, 507, and 521, whilst maintaining overall route capacity, would cost an additional £12.6m per annum, due to the additional vehicles necessitated'

And the Evening standard had a big hand in undermining confidence in the buses, Boris being a friend of the owner helped, pretty much like he wants at the BBC.
 
Lol what. He just cares for the city deeply and tries to balance out the scales more than his counter parts. Nothing wrong with that. He certainly did a lot more good for London than Borris has or imo will do. And honestly, on the topic of socialism, people barely know the meaning of it is any more. The UK doesn't have anything resembling a proper prominent socialist or left wing party any more. Labour are more centrist and Tories are just far right.

That's part of the problem with this country. We need a proper force on the left. Not just one's that pretend to be.

Not saying he can't be on the left but do you really want to go back to the 70s labor? That's what I meant. The left can't look at the past and just imitate that. I'm talking about the stagnation of that time period.
 

Bo-Locks

Member
Lol what. He just cares for the city deeply and tries to balance out the scales more than his counter parts. Nothing wrong with that. He certainly did a lot more good for London than Borris has or imo will do. And honestly, on the topic of socialism, people barely know the meaning of it is any more. The UK doesn't have anything resembling a proper prominent socialist or left wing party any more. Labour are more centrist and Tories are just far right.

That's part of the problem with this country. We need a proper force on the left. Not just one's that pretend to be.

The tories aren't "far right" at all. There are some backbenchers who are determined to drag the party off to the right, but overall Cameron has moved the party to the centre since 2005. These days there is very little difference between Labour and the Conservatives. The problem with politics in this country is that the main parties have all gravitated toward the centre, and so it doesn't really matter whether you vote red, blue or yellow. That is ultimately what is giving fringe parties (like UKIP, the Greens, and others) a look in.

I think we're on a political precipitous in this country. Labour and the Cons could diverge, while the Lib Dems are destroyed, and we could end up with a massively polarised left vs right (without the religious nonsense) like in the US, or we could see the rise of smaller parties like the Greens, UKIP, BNP, and we'd have a more fragmented "European" style parliament with more coalitions and cross party dialogue.

And Ken lost because he's a dick, and Londoners were fed up with his bullshit, that's it. His tax avoidance (and hypocrisy), anti-semitism and homophobia (in that order) lost him the election.
 

War Peaceman

You're a big guy.
Not saying he can't be on the left but do you really want to go back to the 70s labor? That's what I meant. The left can't look at the past and just imitate that. I'm talking about the stagnation of that time period.

Although he may remind people of that period, I hardly think what he actually did as Mayor is anything remotely like 70s Labour. Though I'd certainly like to hear that argument, if you believe it.

The tories aren't "far right" at all. There are some backbenchers who are determined to drag the party off to the right, but overall Cameron has moved the party to the centre since 2005. These days there is very little difference between Labour and the Conservatives. The problem with politics in this country is that the main parties have all gravitated toward the centre, and so it doesn't really matter whether you vote red, blue or yellow. That is ultimately what is giving fringe parties (like UKIP, the Greens, and others) a look in.

I think we're on a political precipitous in this country. Labour and the Cons could diverge, while the Lib Dems are destroyed, and we could end up with a massively polarised left vs right (without the religious nonsense) like in the US, or we could see the rise of smaller parties like the Greens, UKIP, BNP, and we'd have a more fragmented "European" style parliament with more coalitions and cross party dialogue.

I disagree - the Conservatives are more right wing than their image suggests. They are a fractured, confused party, sure, but the dominant wings - the Eurosceptics and the Thatcherites are both intensely right wing. Socially the leadership is fairly centrist, though. Most aren't Republican-esque nutjobs, but you only need to look at their attacks on benefits, particularly for the disabled, their attacks of legal funding and their general privatisation to see their quite extreme agenda.

Also, we won't see that fragmentation. It will (slow term) revert to a more two-party system but it will shift to the left, which doesn't mean left wing, because the Tories will not win a majority at the next election and I would wager, will lose. Labour will be slightly to the left of New Labour, particularly socially, and I'd expect economically too at the current rate. This will draw the Tories back. But of course, this is all speculation - who knows what major world events could happen and change things. Who knows whether this government's love affair with NI will have any effect?


And Ken lost because he's a dick, and Londoners were fed up with his bullshit, that's it. His tax avoidance (and hypocrisy), anti-semitism and homophobia (in that order) lost him the election.

No one with half a brain or any knowledge seriously thinks that Ken is a homophobe. To suggest such a thing is absurd when you look at the related legislation that he introduced.

However, he is a (comparably) unlikeable guy, albeit one who has done a lot of good things for the city. I'd say he lost because he ran a terrible campaign, blighted with awful comments, regrettable tax avoidance and promised to reduce fares (a promise he reneged on before). That it was close is a measure of his lack of charisma and his personal failings in the campaign, because he really should have won.
Gotcha. I'm imagining he was spouting this stuff on the election trail, but how can he talk about "unleashing the City" right after the "london whale" and Chase blew billions on more risky bets?

He barely said anything on the election trail as far as I can tell, besides swearing and confrontation. Nothing of real substance, anyway. The guy's a horrible, privileged right-winger in my view, but his mayoral term was largely professional and competent. Largely because he was bound by a very tenuous mandate (London is definitely Labour) and his support team was very effective (not necessarily a criticism).

I can appreciate that people voted for him beyond a simple "Lol Boris is well funny guys" - he's charismatic and he proved himself to be decent. I just don't buy the argument that he represents a more popular brand of Conservatism: he's just a likeable chap who when people agree with what he says, is passed off as a people's champion but when he does or says something silly it is good old Boris and he somehow dodges the bullet.
 
Lol what. He just cares for the city deeply and tries to balance out the scales more than his counter parts. Nothing wrong with that. He certainly did a lot more good for London than Borris has or imo will do. And honestly, on the topic of socialism, people barely know the meaning of it is any more. The UK doesn't have anything resembling a proper prominent socialist or left wing party any more. Labour are more centrist and Tories are just far right.

That's part of the problem with this country. We need a proper force on the left. Not just one's that pretend to be.

If you honestly think the Tories are far right then you have a seriously warped world-view. I have never seen any indication from the Tory party that they want me to move back to India and for all non-whites to be sent "home".

I really hope you saying this is just classic internet hyperbole because if you truly believe that the main centre right party is far right then you need to get out more.
 
If you honestly think the Tories are far right then you have a seriously warped world-view. I have never seen any indication from the Tory party that they want me to move back to India and for all non-whites to be sent "home".

I really hope you saying this is just classic internet hyperbole because if you truly believe that the main centre right party is far right then you need to get out more.

what you're describing is what most people consider to be the extreme right. The current tory party does appear to be somewhat far right, but not as much as one would expect.
 

War Peaceman

You're a big guy.
If you honestly think the Tories are far right then you have a seriously warped world-view. I have never seen any indication from the Tory party that they want me to move back to India and for all non-whites to be sent "home".

I really hope you saying this is just classic internet hyperbole because if you truly believe that the main centre right party is far right then you need to get out more.

They are hard right (not extremist, but comfortably out there) in some ways (neoliberalism) but centrist in others - social issues usually. I guess that makes it centre right? I don't know, it is largely a semantic issue and discussing it in such terms highlights the absurdity of it. The leadership, anyway. The party doesn't really have a guiding attitude at the moment; it has lost its mind.
 

defel

Member
All I want is a socially liberal, economically conservative party. I fall in line somewhere on the right of the Lib Dems and the left of the conservative party. Give me a David Laws party, Ill vote for that.
 

phisheep

NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
Man, and you guys gave us shit for electing Bush twice? That's awful right-wing drivel to be spat out by the mayor of one of the cosmopolitan hubs of the free world.

It's worth noting that Johnson's Telegraph column is more often than not full of hyperbole, and deliberately so. Sure, he is usually out to make a political point, but is rarely the point that you get if you take only the literal meaning.

This column, for example, is about a certain sort of (presumed) public-sector mindset, not about exercising political control over the BBC.
 

nib95

Banned
If you honestly think the Tories are far right then you have a seriously warped world-view. I have never seen any indication from the Tory party that they want me to move back to India and for all non-whites to be sent "home".

I really hope you saying this is just classic internet hyperbole because if you truly believe that the main centre right party is far right then you need to get out more.

Lol. What you're referring to is what I'd describe as the extreme right. Fringe groups such as the BNP and EDL. I wouldn't expect such extremes to ever have a realistic possibility of getting in power let alone even being considered for it by anything resembling a majority.
 

Bo-Locks

Member
Although he may remind people of that period, I hardly think what he actually did as Mayor is anything remotely like 70s Labour. Though I'd certainly like to hear that argument, if you believe it.

I disagree - the Conservatives are more right wing than their image suggests. They are a fractured, confused party, sure, but the dominant wings - the Eurosceptics and the Thatcherites are both intensely right wing. Socially the leadership is fairly centrist, though. Most aren't Republican-esque nutjobs, but you only need to look at their attacks on benefits, particularly for the disabled, their attacks of legal funding and their general privatisation to see their quite extreme agenda.

Also, we won't see that fragmentation. It will (slow term) revert to a more two-party system but it will shift to the left, which doesn't mean left wing, because the Tories will not win a majority at the next election and I would wager, will lose. Labour will be slightly to the left of New Labour, particularly socially, and I'd expect economically too at the current rate. This will draw the Tories back. But of course, this is all speculation - who knows what major world events could happen and change things. Who knows whether this government's love affair with NI will have any effect?

I'm not going to pretend that the Conservatives aren't somewhat fractured, but are you really telling me that the Conservative Party can be categorised as "far right"? This is ridiculous. Look across the channel where the National Front routinely get 20% of the vote, and then tell me that the Conservatives are a "far right" party. They are the main centre-right party in the country. By these standards the Labour party would be classed as a "right wing" party and since the Orange Book I could argue that the Lib Dems are "right wing" too. Nib95 and yourself seriously need to get some perspective here.

The Eurosceptics and Thatcherites will continue to see their influence wane as the Euro crisis draws to a close (it has to sometime, right?), and they gradually die off. And lets not pretend that Labour and the Lib Dems aren't fractured, either. Labour are still dealing with the remnants of Blair/Brown, Milliband was narrowly voted in by the Unions and I don't think he's got the strength to drive the party forward. The Lib Dems are going to get smashed are the next election, too.

FWIW, I can't see the Cons winning a majority at the next election, and after a few years the equilibrium will rebalance itself and the status quo will remain. However, I'm not sure I can see Labour getting a majority either.

Going back to what I said earlier about how (imo) the main parties have merged to the centre, the examples that you gave all (in my mind, at least) prove my point. It was made perfectly clear at the last election that deep cuts were going to come from Labour or the Conservatives. I also find it pointless and rather bizarre to lambast the Conservatives as being "right wing" for cutting welfare when (not surprisingly for an opposition) Labour don't have any sort of credible plan, yet openly admit to being forced to make deep cuts, too. Ludicrous.

And about the NI story... Labour were in bed with the Murdoch's too, that's well known. Blair also resisted in setting up a public enquiry, this Government had no choice because they were essentially forced into doing it when the story blew up last summer. Labour were quite happy to cosy up to the Murdoch's for years while they were getting their support. They only got pissy since the Sun switched allegiance. So again, I ask - Is there really a big difference between the Conservatives and Labour? You can pick the subject and I honestly don't see a big difference between either party. They're both centrist.

No one with half a brain or any knowledge seriously thinks that Ken is a homophobe. To suggest such a thing is absurd when you look at the related legislation that he introduced.

However, he is a (comparably) unlikeable guy, albeit one who has done a lot of good things for the city. I'd say he lost because he ran a terrible campaign, blighted with awful comments, regrettable tax avoidance and promised to reduce fares (a promise he reneged on before). That it was close is a measure of his lack of charisma and his personal failings in the campaign, because he really should have won.mples that you gave

I put the homophobe point last, because while I certainly don't believe him to be a homophobe, there was an off the cuff remark that he made which sticks out in my mind, that's all. I agree, he lost because of a poorly run campaign and when his tax avoidance came to light, the writing was on the wall. His work for Press TV (Iranian propaganda news channel), anti-semitic rants and pandering to the Muslim vote did turn a lot of people away.
 

SteveWD40

Member
Let's hope they conclusively charge Rupert Murdoch with this shit if they can link him to it, although I think the government would shit themselves and fuck with the judicial system to ensure this doesn't happen, if it looked likely.

I think Brooks is getting shielded as much as they can as she has a mountain of dirt on James and Rupert. She is the last shield between the Murdoch's and this shitstorm, she reported right to them, if she knew / committed crime then they are next to be looked at.

I don't dare to dream though, they are hugely powerful US citizens, can you imagine us trying to get extradition from the US for them? lol.
 

twobear

sputum-flecked apoplexy
I think Brooks is getting shielded as much as they can as she has a mountain of dirt on James and Rupert. She is the last shield between the Murdoch's and this shitstorm, she reported right to them, if she knew / committed crime then they are next to be looked at.

I don't dare to dream though, they are hugely powerful US citizens, can you imagine us trying to get extradition from the US for them? lol.

I know that bigots love to rant about the ECHR, but frankly our extradition treaty with the US has me far more pressed.
 

SteveWD40

Member
Yeah but the US are on the decline as anything but a military power, we have economic ties but we could do much better focusing on China (as zomgbbq has pointed out) since they actually value our history and ability's.

I just don't see why we need to suck up really, businesses don't give a shit about nationalistic sentiment so our economy won't be affected, we still feel the need to play "world power"? compared to most nations we still are so wtf?
 

twobear

sputum-flecked apoplexy
It's kind of a shame that we're at loggerheads with Argentina over the Falklands, because I'd sort of prefer to be cosying up to South America than China.
 
I don't dare to dream though, they are hugely powerful US citizens, can you imagine us trying to get extradition from the US for them? lol.

If we have conclusive evidence linking them to wrongdoing, and the US refuses the extradition request, we should just tear up the treaty in their faces.

Unfortunately, neither Labour nor the Tories would have the balls to do this, and UKIP, for all they bang on about Europe, are the sort of Old Tory pricks that get all dewy-eyed and nostalgic over the Special Relationship.
 

SteveWD40

Member
Unfortunately, neither Labour nor the Tories would have the balls to do this, and UKIP, for all they bang on about Europe, are the sort of Old Tory pricks that get all dewy-eyed and nostalgic over the Special Relationship.

Odd isn't it? They hate the geographic neighbours that are our biggest trading partners with who we have a long history, but they love the superpower we spawned by fighting the French too much who still celebrate revisionist history from when they "beat us" to this day.

/shrug.
 

twobear

sputum-flecked apoplexy
Despite their half-hearted support for Argentina, I don't think countries like Brazil would turn their backs on stronger trade links with major European economies.

It's just a shame we have to choose. Argentina is now growing faster than Brazil (I think). But a combination of the Falklands and the fact that they've bucked the Washington consensus will do them no favours with the political elite in the UK.
 
Top Bottom