-
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.
- Thread starter Chinner
- Start date
The 1922 Committee tends to be a moaning house for Thatcherite extremists who will never be happy until we leave Europe.
They haven't seemed to understand that for a coalition to work, both sides have to drop certain policies and make concessions.
Interesting info about what Cameron started today: http://blogs.wsj.com/iainmartin/201...tic-reforms-moves-to-neuter-his-backbenchers/
They haven't seemed to understand that for a coalition to work, both sides have to drop certain policies and make concessions.
Interesting info about what Cameron started today: http://blogs.wsj.com/iainmartin/201...tic-reforms-moves-to-neuter-his-backbenchers/
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
PJV3 said:
Ultimately if a party wants to eject people for rebelling against the whip, the party is going to eject people for rebelling against the whip. Ultimately if people want to rebel against the whip even if it means ejection, they're going to rebel against the whip even if it means ejection. That's a feature of any Westminster system.
In Canada we had a major schism in our conservative party (the Canadian Alliance at the time) some years ago that resulted in several high up members leaving the caucus. They were referred to in the media as "The Rebel Alliance" (groan!). That wasn't even over a specific policy or anything, it was just a general show of non-confidence in their leader.
So the thing about this vote is that it's a bit moot. Some parties are very top-down and allow relatively little internal dissention. Some are a little more open. Either way, the party leader's style will be pushed on the whole caucus. If the vote fails, you'll still see harsher whipping and more top-down leadership. This vote doesn't change anything, it's just a public reflection of Cameron's intent to govern close to the chest.
Note that our current government in Canada basically uses the Prime Minister's office to make 100% of policy; they not only marginalize the backbenchers, they marginalize the ministers. The ministers are only talking heads to convey the PMO's wishes.
That's not necessarily good or bad, mind you, in that every leader has a different style and every leader decides how to use his/her "superstars" and "rookies" as it were, but people cheering just because the people being screwed here are grumpy old men might be missing the fact that this represents a power grab by whatever your equivalent of the PMO is.
Dr Zhivago
Member
Fucking hell, Cameron's for real? :O :O
Bill Cash was on C4 news claiming the Tories had been 'elected' with a 'mandate' to repeal the Human Rights Act. :lol :lol :lol
Bill Cash was on C4 news claiming the Tories had been 'elected' with a 'mandate' to repeal the Human Rights Act. :lol :lol :lol
This move will only serve to damage Bill Cash and friends, the old dinosaurs that nearly destroyed Major's government.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastricht_Rebels
I fully support what Cammo is doing, but I'm not so sure if it will actually go through.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastricht_Rebels
I fully support what Cammo is doing, but I'm not so sure if it will actually go through.
How is Osborne going to justify stopping the NI rise while raising VAT? Surely you should go for the more progressive tax rather than the regressive one? If Mothercare or whoever thought they were getting a VAT rise instead of NI they'd never have supported the Tories on that move either. Political fucking point scoring on the economy, such a tool.
When did he announce a VAT increase? I'm pretty sure that the other day he said that the banking levy takes them over the 20% of the deficit reduction he wanted to make by tax, with the other 80% coming from spending cuts. VAT increase is still "no plans" territory.
--
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/may/19/royal-mail-privatisation-plan
--
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/may/19/royal-mail-privatisation-plan
GO VINCE, CRUSH THE UNIONS!
Dark Machine
Member
Mark Steel wrote a great piece in the Indy today that basically craps on FabCam and the other Union haters. The BA strike has been declared illegal because they didn't announce that there were 11 spoiled papers enough times. Never mind of course that the ballot came out 7,482 in favour of action to 1,789 against. Next time he predicts that Willie and the judges will make up a new rule that they have to announce the result in a Geordie Accent, or maybe as a piece of contemporary dance. Walsh says that "Most of our staff don't support this strike!" yeah because he's gone round to them and personally collected all their opinions hasn't he, the Union's presentation of the factual vote results means absolutely nothing.Walsh and the BA management are buffoons, whatever you may think about the BA staff taking action, they've voted and that's their right as workers. You can pooh pooh it all you like, but when the management comes for you...
So yeah, tl;dr bugger the right wingers who claim all democratic strikes should be banned because it inconveniences them. Walsh and his cronies might put up the finger to the Union, but don't be shocked when the Union sticks two right back in their faces.
Also this part privatisation of the Royal Mail could be bad or good, the government will still hold overall control (like 60%) of the company, but private capital and management might help efficiency and keep costs down. On the other hand it will probably turn out like Metronet and Tube Lines. In which case BOO Vince! You're making a mistake!
So yeah, tl;dr bugger the right wingers who claim all democratic strikes should be banned because it inconveniences them. Walsh and his cronies might put up the finger to the Union, but don't be shocked when the Union sticks two right back in their faces.
Also this part privatisation of the Royal Mail could be bad or good, the government will still hold overall control (like 60%) of the company, but private capital and management might help efficiency and keep costs down. On the other hand it will probably turn out like Metronet and Tube Lines. In which case BOO Vince! You're making a mistake!
Dark Machine said:
When you're disrupting thousands of travelers and causing tens of millions of pounds worth of damage to a company, you need to to follow the fucking law. Think the law doesn't apply to you? You're gunna get fucked over, just as Unite has been twice in six months.
It is damn true that most BA workers don't want these strikes. BALPA (pilots' union) debated the cuts and saw they were fair to secure future job security and to stabilize the company. As did baggage handlers and groundstaff.
You seem to completely ignore the fact that air hostesses are grossly overpaid at BA. They're unskilled workers that have an unsustainable wage. It's fine when times are good, but when you need to make cuts you have to accept them. Unite don't give a fuck about the greater good of the company, they just want to big up their ego. They're a disgrace.
Dark Machine
Member
FabCam said:
And you seem to ignore the fact that they have a right to strike if they feel unfairly treated. Pilot's Union can do what it likes, that's it's own affair. Just because they debate the decision doesn't make them right, just because BA hate it (why wouldn't they?) doesn't make them right, hell just because Unite are doing it doesn't make them right. But you're implying that striking is inherently wrong, it's not, it's a workers right against management if they feel unfairly treated.
How exactly are Cabin Crew unskilled? Do you have any idea as to what these people have to be trained to do? They're no longer sky waiters you know. All that health and safety crap before the flight? Actions in the event of a crash, unruly passengers, terrorist incidents are all part of the program now, especially at a company like BA. You say Unite don't give a fuck about the company? Well seems to me Walsh and BA don't give a fuck about their workers. They're a disgrace. Why doesn't Walsh resign for his crap handling of this mess? He's been insinuating that the Union members actually don't want the strike (they do), that BA will go bust because of it (it won't, ash cloud) and that somehow he's this Union breaking superhero (he's not, he's a rich arsehole). The rulings smack of a deal between walsh and the courts, they're rediculous technicalities that no sensible person would even countenance as truly legitimate for ruling a properly balloted and democratically voted for strike illegal. Walsh and BA are desperately buying time and trying to stall the process enough to exhaust the Union members. I hope and pray it doesn't work.
You want your workers not to strike? Sit down and talk properly to get a deal. Walsh and BA haven't done that. Militancy on both sides is costing the company, Brown was right not to get involved in this, and I'm sorry to the rest of the thread if this is shitting it up, but the way you sir have seemingly celebrated and delighted in the rulings against Unions angers me greatly. Like I said, one day, the management will come for you too. They always do.
Subliminal
Member
Fuck. VAT will just be WRONG if its 20%. Hopefully its not forever.
i think it's an unfair tax rise to be honest. back when i had to do maths and faced a common question of asking me to calculate VAT on something it was at the more difficult 17.5% value; kids these days will breeze through those questions now they only have to work out using the 20% value. it's outrageous.
Subliminal
Member
Empty said:
or they could Go for,
"Our shitty Conservative coalition with some spineless libdem lapdogs raised VAT to 20%, back in the good old days it was 17.5%. Why is David Cameron a Cunt?
Vat should never have been dropped down to 15%. Alot of shops (the one i worked at at the time, for example) kept all prices the same and just helped themselves to 2.5% more money. All it served to do was take money away from the government and give it to businesses, which may have helped the recovery in some way but not in the way they wanted (by boosting the public buying things because they are cheaper).
Dark Machine
Member
VAT is an unfair tax right now because it targets everyone, including the poor, especially if the talks about extending it to food and other necessities are true. It should be the way in tax that the rich come first and the poor last in terms of paying, raising VAT targets everyone, so in that sense its fair, however it's completely un-relative to income in its function, which makes it unfair. I forsee an increase to 20% by next April, possibly in next year's proper budget.
J Tourettes
Banned
I'd like to see CrossRail cancelled and the money invested in the tube instead. Let the businesses cough up more money for it if they want it that badly.
Dark Machine
Member
avaya said:
I agree that 80% cuts is fantasy, but raising VAT above 20% whilst cutting wages in real terms would surely make a consumer spending crash all the more likely? Plus there's the effect on the poor I've already outlined. More will have to come from tax, but 'call me Dave' will have to swallow a bit more on his rich backers I fear if he wants to cut the defecit and not be seen as Thatcher and Satan's love child by most. (Then again, maybe he already is and has nothing to lose).
MarshMellow96
Member
sohois said:
But it's been mooted that it would have an effect on foodstuffs has it not?
In my own crazy world there'd be a one-off 80% tax on the country's highest earning or something like that. Would be interesting to see what that would do to the deficit.
Dark Machine
Member
sohois said:
The most recent reports and grapevine hints are saying that VAT is not only to be raised but extended to more goods, like foods, books etc. Simply raising it wouldn't generate enough income to make it worth the unpopularity.
So would NI. It's a much fairer tax and they both hit business pretty much equally. Not raising it is a joke and nothing more than political point scoring to win them a few votes in the election, Cable agrees as well. If you raise NI by Labour's planned amount you could raise VAT by less, or cut public spending by less, or close the deficit more quickly. It's a really stupid move.defel1111 said:
J Tourettes said:
THIS. If you invest even 20% of the money in the central line ( East to West London), you will be able to accomodate the extra capacity. Im fed up of seeing exposed wires, and half finished repairs all over the tube Because TFL dont have enough money to spend their way out of a pretty poor situation after metronet colapsed. At the moment the fares go up yearly and the service actually gets worse with all the closures and overcrowding. How about spending some crossrail money on an established system that can use the money rather than a vanity project that may or may not be needed.
brain_stew
Member
A raise in VAT is inevitable at this point, I'd much sooner see a rise in NI but there's been too much media attention put on it at this point that it'll be imposible to do so. Getting the £10k income tax threshold rise instead of a inheritance tax cut kinda softens the blow though.
Diane Abbott has joined Labour leadership contest!!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8693687.stm
She is my MP, and if she hasn't got a chance in hell. Good thing too!!!!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8693687.stm
She is my MP, and if she hasn't got a chance in hell. Good thing too!!!!
phisheep
NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
Salazar said:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/jun/12/terrorism.civilliberties
That wonderful speech is not the work of an utter gabbling moron.
phisheep said:
She signed a motion calling for a public holiday to recognise Darwin as Britain's prime scientific mind. She also signed a motion calling for the positive recognition of homeopathy clinics by the NHS, and one calling for the reform of British libel laws (whose greatest recent misuse was by homeopathy advocates). You couldn't get a less coherently principled voting record.
EDIT - If you have to assure the media that your leadership bid "is serious", then it's not.
Nicktendo86
Member
I can't fucking stand Dianne Abbott, she comes across very patronising. Should make the campaign more interesting though, even though we all know Mr Bean will win it...