The Politics Thread

[thebish]

Moving away from the traveller debate.

Does anyone anywhere think Ed Milliband is up to the job?

Being left of centre I'd like to see Labour being led by somebody half decent. This guy just strikes me as a typical 21st century manufactured politician. He seems to be a master at pre rehearsed- stick to the script- bollox and yet devoid of any real substance. Can't see him being any threat to the Tories

no - he's not - but nor is his Mr Bean brother... the labour party has purged itself of anyone worth leading it...

Who are these people, out of interest?

Labour politicians I've respected in the last ten years:

Tony Blair
David Miliband
Charles Clarke

Really struggling for names now...

I don't know - they've been purged! (I mean - over a loooong period of time - at the top end of the labour party, they simply don't exist anymore...) the tories are pretty much the same - and the lib dems - in all the parties we have identikit media-whores who don't act according to conviction even if they have conviction - indeed they often act in opposition to their convictions for short-term crowd-pleasing...

the Ken Clarkes of the Tory party are a dying breed....

of the CURRENT labour top table, I'd like to see someone like Jon Cruddas in charge - but it won't happen.

[Harry Genshaw]

Moving away from the traveller debate.

Does anyone anywhere think Ed Milliband is up to the job?

Being left of centre I'd like to see Labour being led by somebody half decent. This guy just strikes me as a typical 21st century manufactured politician. He seems to be a master at pre rehearsed- stick to the script- bollox and yet devoid of any real substance. Can't see him being any threat to the Tories

no - he's not - but nor is his Mr Bean brother... the labour party has purged itself of anyone worth leading it...

Who are these people, out of interest?

Labour politicians I've respected in the last ten years:

Tony Blair
David Miliband
Charles Clarke

Really struggling for names now...

I suppose it's down to personal taste -
Prescott, Short, Kinnock & Dalyell for me.

Agree with BWFC Insane though that some folk would never vote for Milliband based on his appearance/nasal twang (which I thought he was having fixed - can't say I've noticed a difference )

[William the White]

Moving away from the traveller debate.

Does anyone anywhere think Ed Milliband is up to the job?

Being left of centre I'd like to see Labour being led by somebody half decent. This guy just strikes me as a typical 21st century manufactured politician. He seems to be a master at pre rehearsed- stick to the script- bollox and yet devoid of any real substance. Can't see him being any threat to the Tories

no - he's not - but nor is his Mr Bean brother... the labour party has purged itself of anyone worth leading it...

Who are these people, out of interest?

Labour politicians I've respected in the last ten years:

Tony Blair
David Miliband
Charles Clarke

Really struggling for names now...

I suppose it's down to personal taste -
Prescott, Short, Kinnock & Dalyell for me.

Agree with BWFC Insane though that some folk would never vote for Milliband based on his appearance/nasal twang (which I thought he was having fixed - can't say I've noticed a difference )

Prescott's degeneration from seafarers strike leader to croquet is a classic case of total incorporation into the smug British ruling class [he never fitted, but he could be patronised charmingly]. I'm a fan of Claire Short - she played it pretty straight, and even the compromises she made against her own inclination seemed honest ones. Kinnock was once an honest politician, misplaced as leader, who was prepared to make concessions to the rabid tabloids, in a vain hope they would at least temper their seeking of his warm blood trickling from the throat they had just savaged. Dalyell was an engaging nuisance who found his points of strength and went for them and caused significant worry to Thatcher's people (and his own party).

None of them a credible party leader. John Smith was, though, and that was a sad loss. Blair was an excellent politician who kept the Tories out of power for 13 years - so credit to him for that. Personally, I despised him.

Ed Miliband is an electoral disaster. David less so. I'd prefer David because the Tories also are weak in their leadership and Miliband D would piss on them... Their father was a political thinker of high order... The sons are politicians, both, who don't think, they just scheme... But scheming the Tories out of power would do for me, in the short term...

Tony Benn remains the last senior Labour politician I really respected...

[Worthy4England]

No, it's not coming down to stereotyping. I didn't mention crime (in fact I don't think I've mentioned it all thread (but would stand to be corrected) you did.

What I said was low-cost housing is probably more likely to get a wider distribution of the population from different backgrounds trying to get on the property ladder (you did say "low cost" as opposed to "council housing" didn't you?). Moving one load of pikeys attracts one social grouping - one load of pikeys. Which does nothing for their future prospects of integrating into society. It keeps them separate. If they want separation shunt 'em up to the Outer Hebrides or sommat. Strikes me they just want everything they want. Separate from wider society, but near enough to take the benefit of wider society when it suits them, and we're all supposed to bang the same drum?

You didn't mention theft, but you did mention not sending their kids to school, you mentioned having to clean up their shit (implying presumably littering if nothing else) and you implied tax avoidance, all crime, and the latter two the sort of anti-social petty crime that all travellers often get tarred with. There is nothing to suggest everybody who wants to live a travelling lifestyle is guilty of any or all of these.

If they don't want to play our game, why should we bend to play theirs?

If they're worried about getting stereotyped, they should find different company to keep.

Because not everyone has to play the same game. We aren't talking the taxes game, or the abiding by the law game, no-body, I think, has said they should be exempt from that, so why do they have to define their lives by 'our' game. Who is even 'us'?

I didn't say they had to play our game, I said why should I help them play theirs?

If you prefer, I'll call it my game, but if there's only me playing it, then there'll be no problem putting to a public vote, proposed developments in people's back-yards will there?

[Worthy4England]

Moving away from the traveller debate.

Does anyone anywhere think Ed Milliband is up to the job?

Being left of centre I'd like to see Labour being led by somebody half decent. This guy just strikes me as a typical 21st century manufactured politician. He seems to be a master at pre rehearsed- stick to the script- bollox and yet devoid of any real substance. Can't see him being any threat to the Tories

no - he's not - but nor is his Mr Bean brother... the labour party has purged itself of anyone worth leading it...

Who are these people, out of interest?

Labour politicians I've respected in the last ten years:

Tony Blair
David Miliband
Charles Clarke

Really struggling for names now...

I suppose it's down to personal taste -
Prescott, Short, Kinnock & Dalyell for me.

Agree with BWFC Insane though that some folk would never vote for Milliband based on his appearance/nasal twang (which I thought he was having fixed - can't say I've noticed a difference )

Prescott's degeneration from seafarers strike leader to croquet is a classic case of total incorporation into the smug British ruling class [he never fitted, but he could be patronised charmingly]. I'm a fan of Claire Short - she played it pretty straight, and even the compromises she made against her own inclination seemed honest ones. Kinnock was once an honest politician, misplaced as leader, who was prepared to make concessions to the rabid tabloids, in a vain hope they would at least temper their seeking of his warm blood trickling from the throat they had just savaged. Dalyell was an engaging nuisance who found his points of strength and went for them and caused significant worry to Thatcher's people (and his own party).

None of them a credible party leader. John Smith was, though, and that was a sad loss. Blair was an excellent politician who kept the Tories out of power for 13 years - so credit to him for that. Personally, I despised him.

Ed Miliband is an electoral disaster. David less so. I'd prefer David because the Tories also are weak in their leadership and Miliband D would piss on them... Their father was a political thinker of high order... The sons are politicians, both, who don't think, they just scheme... But scheming the Tories out of power would do for me, in the short term...

Tony Benn remains the last senior Labour politician I really respected...

I'm sure no conversation would be complete without The Beast of Bolsover?

Ed is indeed an electoral disaster. John Smith was a hero. Tony Blair prompted me to rip my membership card up.

[William the White]

I'm sure no conversation would be complete without The Beast of Bolsover?

Ed is indeed an electoral disaster. John Smith was a hero. Tony Blair prompted me to rip my membership card up.

Dennis Skinner was, of course, a delight in so many ways... like he thought it right to do an 8 hour shift in Parliament... And he was (is) an absolute master of proletarian insults to the Tories, who could never quite get him (probably because he'd never totally trashed Cambridge while drunk so not their kind of people)...

So, cheers, Worthy, made me think of one of my definitely fave MPs ever...

Blair made me tear up the card...

[Prufrock]

No, it's not coming down to stereotyping. I didn't mention crime (in fact I don't think I've mentioned it all thread (but would stand to be corrected) you did.

What I said was low-cost housing is probably more likely to get a wider distribution of the population from different backgrounds trying to get on the property ladder (you did say "low cost" as opposed to "council housing" didn't you?). Moving one load of pikeys attracts one social grouping - one load of pikeys. Which does nothing for their future prospects of integrating into society. It keeps them separate. If they want separation shunt 'em up to the Outer Hebrides or sommat. Strikes me they just want everything they want. Separate from wider society, but near enough to take the benefit of wider society when it suits them, and we're all supposed to bang the same drum?

You didn't mention theft, but you did mention not sending their kids to school, you mentioned having to clean up their shit (implying presumably littering if nothing else) and you implied tax avoidance, all crime, and the latter two the sort of anti-social petty crime that all travellers often get tarred with. There is nothing to suggest everybody who wants to live a travelling lifestyle is guilty of any or all of these.

If they don't want to play our game, why should we bend to play theirs?

If they're worried about getting stereotyped, they should find different company to keep.

Because not everyone has to play the same game. We aren't talking the taxes game, or the abiding by the law game, no-body, I think, has said they should be exempt from that, so why do they have to define their lives by 'our' game. Who is even 'us'?

I didn't say they had to play our game, I said why should I help them play theirs?

If you prefer, I'll call it my game, but if there's only me playing it, then there'll be no problem putting to a public vote, proposed developments in people's back-yards will there?

You'd get developments for fook all in people's back yards if you put it to a vote.

And you didn't say why should you help pay for theirs, you said why should 'we' (whoever 'we' are) bend to play theirs. Not the same thing. We don't have to play it, bent or otherwise, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to.

[Prufrock]

As for Ed, he strikes me as far less of a shit than nearly all of the Tories, and, in fairness, nearly all of the other Labour-s. As for unelectable, almost certainly, but then Boris got elected. Trouble is he has neither the charming buffoonery of Boris, or the convince folk you know what you're doing when you're winging it of Cameron, and in particular Osbourne.

[Lord Kangana]

Osborne has convinced people of anything?

There can't be that many idiots at large on these shores, can there?

[Worthy4England]

get developments for fook all in people's back yards if you put it to a vote.

And you didn't say why should you help pay for theirs, you said why should 'we' (whoever 'we' are) bend to play theirs. Not the same thing. We don't have to play it, bent or otherwise, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to.

I'm sure there'll be a massive level of public spiritedness to allow for nearby developments. Just reading what people post on here, I'm almost ready to start weighing the 'yes' vote. I'm sure it won't be a problem, and I'm just giving a minority viewpoint.

I'm a part of 'us' so 'I' and 'we' are interchangeable, I don't recall implying you or anyone else were part of the same 'we'...If you don't recognise who 'we' are, then you're probably 'them' whoever they are. I'm fairly sure your posts are full of the word 'we' too so I'm glad you have a we as well...

I don't mind them playing their game in someone else's back yard, as long as all the same rules and laws apply. Should the person whose back-yard they rock up in not want them there, they'd have my full support. I think there should also be more robust legislation in place to protect home owners against bad planning decisions that affect the value of their property adversely. Might make councils think a bit more about their own stupidity.

[thebish]

Osborne has convinced people of anything?

There can't be that many idiots at large on these shores, can there?

IIRC - there were quite a number of people on this forum before the election who swallowed his economic analysis...

[Bruce Rioja]

Here you go, defenders of this lot. You'll be able to buy lucky heather on your way into Sainsbury's. Sure you won't mind carrying your bags of shopping a half a mile down the road either. Yeah

Hundreds of people occupying the UK's biggest illegal traveller site would move to supermarket car parks if forced to leave, a High Court judge has been told.

A barrister representing travellers living at the Dale Farm site near Basildon, Essex, told Mr Justice Ouseley that such a move would mean "disruption".

Travellers have taken legal action in an attempt to stop Basildon Council evicting them from Dale Farm. They argue that eviction would be "disproportionate" because they would be left with nowhere to live.

The council has been battling for a decade to remove travellers from the site, which is in the green belt and thought to house around 400 people on about 50 pitches. Leaders say allowing travellers to stay without planning permission would send the "wrong signal" and strike "to the very principles of the rule of law".

Christopher Jacobs, for Dale Farm residents, told the judge: "Many of them would go to one or two supermarket car parks in the area with all the attendant disruption that would contain."

In written arguments handed to the judge, he added: "This occupation (of supermarket car parks) will be neither suitable nor lawful and the children concerned will be without adequate facilities." Mr Jacobs said "over 400 people, including over 100 children" would be left without "suitable accommodation" if the site was cleared.

Mr Jacobs said there was a chance that travellers could move to lawful sites and they were willing to do that. He argued that eviction should be temporarily halted - "stayed" - until the possibilities of travellers moving to lawful sites had been fully explored.

Planning permission was being pursued at two sites in the Basildon area and it was possible that alternative, lawful accommodation could be found for more than 50 families, said Mr Jacobs.

He said waiting and allowing travellers to move would enable the Dale Farm dispute to come to a "peaceful conclusion".

Mr Jacobs added: "The impact of clearance taking place now, when a stay could enable the travellers to move to a lawfully-occupied site - which they have been willing to do for some time - is disproportionate."

[thebish]

it would be better for them to stay on the site - no?

[Bruce Rioja]

it would be better for them to stay on the site - no?

And for you and I to build a housing estate on adjoining greenbelt land? Yeah, if it's good for them then it's good for me. We'd make a mint.

[Lord Kangana]

I'm in. Whats a stake worth?

[Bruce Rioja]

I'm in. Whats a stake worth?

Well, I think that that largely depends on whether or not you're a tax-dodging, thieving, litter-tipping, lawless c*nt, Kangana

There's a bonus involved if you sharpen knives - think of the personal benefit, Chef!

[Lord Kangana]

Who isn't these days? Bada bing.

[William the White]

Mr Jacobs added: "The impact of clearance taking place now, when a stay could enable the travellers to move to a lawfully-occupied site - which they have been willing to do for some time - is disproportionate."[/i]

Seems people behaving reasonably to me... Really don't understand your problem.

[Bruce Rioja]

Go on then. Let's be having your description of said land. Oh, sorry to disabuse you, William. However, lawfully owning land and living on it are seperate issues. Do carry on

Indeed, your mate Prescott did once utter something very much along the lines of "The greenbelt is a great Labour policy, and we intend to build on it".

[Worthy4England]

Should be fun. Think it's only 2 hours free parking at Sainsbury's'. After that, can charge the pikey feckers some extortionate amount. Hopefully, if they don't pay, they can be towed away.