The Politics Thread

[thebish]

New Politics.... chapter One

The Lib Dems - despite now being in power - want to renogotiate the rules so that they can still claim opposition-party funding for "researchers"

bonkers!


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/p ... 132497.ece


surely that's not ferreting out all the government savings that couold possibly be made???? eh??

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

New Politics.... chapter One

The Lib Dems - despite now being in power - want to renogotiate the rules so that they can still claim opposition-party funding for "researchers"

bonkers!


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/p ... 132497.ece


surely that's not ferreting out all the government savings that couold possibly be made???? eh??

I'm not sure about this one - would democracy be served by the Lib Dem machinery withering away because the funding they rely on has now gone?

Anyway, I saw this and thought of you, Bish:

http://www.moillusions.com/2008/01/poth ... usion.html

[BWFC_Insane]

MWIEC we may not always agree on politics but you are a knowledgeable chap.

What is your considered opinion of what happens during the next election.

Lets take scenario A.

The coalition more or less holds with the odd disagreement on some policies but basically they manage to do what they set out to do.

However, they are deemed only a partial success by the public as their policies are not seen as "popular" and we're in for a very tight election indeed.

Do the Tories and Lib Dems, stick together and indeed "campaign together"? Do they separate and argue in the debates, all the while knowing they may well need another coalition to form a government? Or do they separate completely and stand along?

I realise this is all conjecture and speculation and nobody really knows yet, but I wonder what you think will happen?

[thebish]

New Politics.... chapter One

The Lib Dems - despite now being in power - want to renogotiate the rules so that they can still claim opposition-party funding for "researchers"

bonkers!


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/p ... 132497.ece


surely that's not ferreting out all the government savings that couold possibly be made???? eh??

I'm not sure about this one - would democracy be served by the Lib Dem machinery withering away because the funding they rely on has now gone?

Anyway, I saw this and thought of you, Bish:

http://www.moillusions.com/2008/01/poth ... usion.html

very cool!

does it serve democracy to fund the coalition govt in power to employ researchers to oppose its own policies?

[TANGODANCER]

Anyway, I saw this and thought of you, Bish:

http://www.moillusions.com/2008/01/poth ... usion.html

That's a great idea. Get somebody to panic and swerve over into a vehicle in the next lane. Intellllliiiigeeenttt.

[thebish]

Anyway, I saw this and thought of you, Bish:

http://www.moillusions.com/2008/01/poth ... usion.html

That's a great idea. Get somebody to panic and swerve over into a vehicle in the next lane. Intellllliiiigeeenttt.

nahh - there was a pothole in the next lane too...

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

MWIEC we may not always agree on politics but you are a knowledgeable chap.

What is your considered opinion of what happens during the next election.

Lets take scenario A.

The coalition more or less holds with the odd disagreement on some policies but basically they manage to do what they set out to do.

However, they are deemed only a partial success by the public as their policies are not seen as "popular" and we're in for a very tight election indeed.

Do the Tories and Lib Dems, stick together and indeed "campaign together"? Do they separate and argue in the debates, all the while knowing they may well need another coalition to form a government? Or do they separate completely and stand along?

I realise this is all conjecture and speculation and nobody really knows yet, but I wonder what you think will happen?

Obviously you're right in saying 'events' will get in the way of any prediction...

Your scenario seems to involve the current arrangements going the distance, i.e. 5 years.

If we have an election in five years' time, I can't imagine that the Conservatives and Lib Dems will campaign as one. They will both have to take ownership of the coalition's record, and explain and defend their roles in what will have taken place, but I expect they will offer separate manifestos again and discuss compromises on them again, if they are called upon to do so.

My feeling is that if they came together, and didn't stand candidates against each other etc, the result would be seen as a group only interested in power, and the electorate would probably punish them for it.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

New Politics.... chapter One

The Lib Dems - despite now being in power - want to renogotiate the rules so that they can still claim opposition-party funding for "researchers"

bonkers!


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/p ... 132497.ece


surely that's not ferreting out all the government savings that couold possibly be made???? eh??

I'm not sure about this one - would democracy be served by the Lib Dem machinery withering away because the funding they rely on has now gone?

Anyway, I saw this and thought of you, Bish:

http://www.moillusions.com/2008/01/poth ... usion.html

very cool!

does it serve democracy to fund the coalition govt in power to employ researchers to oppose its own policies?

If it ensures that the weaker partners of the coalition survive intact to fight the next election, then yes!

[thebish]

New Politics.... chapter One

The Lib Dems - despite now being in power - want to renogotiate the rules so that they can still claim opposition-party funding for "researchers"

bonkers!


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/p ... 132497.ece


surely that's not ferreting out all the government savings that couold possibly be made???? eh??

I'm not sure about this one - would democracy be served by the Lib Dem machinery withering away because the funding they rely on has now gone?

Anyway, I saw this and thought of you, Bish:

http://www.moillusions.com/2008/01/poth ... usion.html

very cool!

does it serve democracy to fund the coalition govt in power to employ researchers to oppose its own policies?

If it ensures that the weaker partners of the coalition survive intact to fight the next election, then yes!

are you suggesting that the country should prop up a party that has problems with its funding? and are you suggesting the lib dems would cease top exist for the want of £2million? - redundancies among their researchers is the consequence - summat that their emergency budget will impose upon quite a lot of people and organisations - without the possibility of changing the rules to subsidise them....

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

are you suggesting that the country should prop up a party that has problems with its funding? and are you suggesting the lib dems would cease top exist for the want of £2million? - redundancies among their researchers is the consequence - summat that their emergency budget will impose upon quite a lot of people and organisations - without the possibility of changing the rules to subsidise them....

I started by saying I'm not sure about this - I'm inviting suggestions more than I am doling them out!

All I'm saying is that it seems to me that the rules as they are now were not designed for the coalition situation, and that it would be an odd an perverse thing IF being in government for five years meant that the Lib Dem machine were significantly weaker at the end of the process that it was at the start.

[thebish]

are you suggesting that the country should prop up a party that has problems with its funding? and are you suggesting the lib dems would cease top exist for the want of £2million? - redundancies among their researchers is the consequence - summat that their emergency budget will impose upon quite a lot of people and organisations - without the possibility of changing the rules to subsidise them....

I started by saying I'm not sure about this - I'm inviting suggestions more than I am doling them out!

All I'm saying is that it seems to me that the rules as they are now were not designed for the coalition situation, and that it would be an odd an perverse thing IF being in government for five years meant that the Lib Dem machine were significantly weaker at the end of the process that it was at the start.

ok - but....

Government activity is financed - government has access to advisors and apropriate funding as it sees fit to manage the running of government departments. The "Short Money" is specifically: "to enable Opposition parties more effectively to fulfil their Parliamentary functions." It has three components:

1. Funding to assist an opposition party in carrying out its Parliamentary business
2. Funding for the opposition parties’ travel and associated expenses
3. Funding for the running costs of the Leader of the Opposition’s office

all of these items in respect of the party(ies) in power are already accounted for. The fact that the lib dems used theirs for funding researchers is entirely their business - and it is not for the likes of them to ensure that the likes of you and me enter into some kind of back-door state funding of party machinery.

the lib dems are NOT now in opposition, they are in government.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

are you suggesting that the country should prop up a party that has problems with its funding? and are you suggesting the lib dems would cease top exist for the want of £2million? - redundancies among their researchers is the consequence - summat that their emergency budget will impose upon quite a lot of people and organisations - without the possibility of changing the rules to subsidise them....

I started by saying I'm not sure about this - I'm inviting suggestions more than I am doling them out!

All I'm saying is that it seems to me that the rules as they are now were not designed for the coalition situation, and that it would be an odd an perverse thing IF being in government for five years meant that the Lib Dem machine were significantly weaker at the end of the process that it was at the start.

ok - but....

Government activity is financed - government has access to advisors and apropriate funding as it sees fit to manage the running of government departments. The "Short Money" is specifically: "to enable Opposition parties more effectively to fulfil their Parliamentary functions." It has three components:

1. Funding to assist an opposition party in carrying out its Parliamentary business
2. Funding for the opposition parties’ travel and associated expenses
3. Funding for the running costs of the Leader of the Opposition’s office

all of these items in respect of the party(ies) in power are already accounted for. The fact that the lib dems used theirs for funding researchers is entirely their business - and it is not for the likes of them to ensure that the likes of you and me enter into some kind of back-door state funding of party machinery.

the lib dems are NOT now in opposition, they are in government.

Yep, fair enough, I get all of that.

But the fact is that the Lib Dems do not have ministers in every department and full access to the civil service. This isn't an ordinary situation.

I haven't become some sort of cheerleader for the Lib Dems - I can only repeat my view, whatever the rules say, that it doesn't seem obviously desirable that they should become weaker as a result of being in government.

[Worthy4England]

Think it's probably all a bit of a "wooden dollars" conversation.

It all comes from the Public purse somewhere.

[thebish]

But the fact is that the Lib Dems do not have ministers in every department and full access to the civil service. This isn't an ordinary situation.

I haven't become some sort of cheerleader for the Lib Dems - I can only repeat my view, whatever the rules say, that it doesn't seem obviously desirable that they should become weaker as a result of being in government.

Fair enough - but I do think it is important to maintain a distinction between the government machine and the party machine - and it is not the job of government to fund the party machine in this way....

anyway - as you must recognise - I am likely to jump on any libcon-bashing bandwagon that cares to rear its ugly head - cos it makes me feel better!

[William the White]

But the fact is that the Lib Dems do not have ministers in every department and full access to the civil service. This isn't an ordinary situation.

I haven't become some sort of cheerleader for the Lib Dems - I can only repeat my view, whatever the rules say, that it doesn't seem obviously desirable that they should become weaker as a result of being in government.

Fair enough - but I do think it is important to maintain a distinction between the government machine and the party machine - and it is not the job of government to fund the party machine in this way....

anyway - as you must recognise - I am likely to jump on any libcon-bashing bandwagon that cares to rear its ugly head - cos it makes me feel better!

try not to feel bad about yourself on this one...

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

But the fact is that the Lib Dems do not have ministers in every department and full access to the civil service. This isn't an ordinary situation.

I haven't become some sort of cheerleader for the Lib Dems - I can only repeat my view, whatever the rules say, that it doesn't seem obviously desirable that they should become weaker as a result of being in government.

Fair enough - but I do think it is important to maintain a distinction between the government machine and the party machine - and it is not the job of government to fund the party machine in this way....

anyway - as you must recognise - I am likely to jump on any libcon-bashing bandwagon that cares to rear its ugly head - cos it makes me feel better!

Right, well obviously I understood that that was what was going on!

I suppose the Lib Dem argument would also go further and say that their dependence on public money is virtuous in that they are not beholden either to big business or the unions.

Anyway, I'm not particularly exercised by it, but I thought I'd just offer the view that it's not quite the 'Lib Dems try to have it both ways' scandal that some are painting it to be.

[Worthy4England]

Anyway, I'm not particularly exercised by it, but I thought I'd just offer the view that it's not quite the 'Lib Dems try to have it both ways' scandal that some are painting it to be.

But of course, one of the joys of being in Government, is that everything's a scandal.

In Opposition, all you can do is, of course, steer the press to other people's "scandals"

[bobo the clown]

or the falklands... or Wales....

Oi, bugger.

Not till the 'move the border west' campaign is completed to my satisfaction !!

[Lord Kangana]

Who'd a thowt eh, that the bish would be the greatest benefactor of this brave new coalition world? Now that all our kids are going to have to rely on charity or the church for some form of education, how long before he's writing his memoirs about saving poor little east end urchins, and ladies of the night? Dickensian? Pah. TheBishian. You'll be minted fella. I for one am so proud.

[Prufrock]

Surely now they've got some power they could just sell some peerages to raise the dosh ?