The Politics Thread

[thebish]

So the tories have finally handed over the paperwork to the electoral commission - they failed to do so, twice - and so the Electoral Commission had to get a high court order - the first time they've ever had to do that...

the Police and Crime Commissioner narrowly elected here in Devon & Cornwall was the election agent for the MP who was elected here last summer - she is under investigation, which is not a great start for someone overseeing Police in the area... they've had to farm the enquiry to another force that she's not in charge of... not that she's been suspended or stood down or anything while investigations proceed.

Great to see that Corbyn has Labour so well organised and focused so they're in a good position to take full advantage of any by-elections this may well trigger.

well, they did win two by-elections last week - not that you'd have known that from media coverage!

[bedwetter2]

So the tories have finally handed over the paperwork to the electoral commission - they failed to do so, twice - and so the Electoral Commission had to get a high court order - the first time they've ever had to do that...

the Police and Crime Commissioner narrowly elected here in Devon & Cornwall was the election agent for the MP who was elected here last summer - she is under investigation, which is not a great start for someone overseeing Police in the area... they've had to farm the enquiry to another force that she's not in charge of... not that she's been suspended or stood down or anything while investigations proceed.

Great to see that Corbyn has Labour so well organised and focused so they're in a good position to take full advantage of any by-elections this may well trigger.

well, they did win two by-elections last week - not that you'd have known that from media coverage!

Does the well known phrase or saying "much reduced majority" mean anything to you?

[thebish]

errr... it means "still won"!

[thebish]

on a different topic...

Last year the United Nations General Assembly endorsed a series of discussions to work out paths toward multilateral disarmament. Unfortunately the UK Disarmament Ambassador has (again) been instructed by Foreign and Commonwealth Office to boycott proceedings.

[bedwetter2]

errr... it means "still won"!

Err, it doesn't though does it. It means that despite a supposedly unpopular fissured party being in Government, HM's official opposition is losing votes to virtually every other party in supposed safe seats. Not success.

[thebish]

errr... it means "still won"!

Err, it doesn't though does it. It means that despite a supposedly unpopular fissured party being in Government, HM's official opposition is losing votes to virtually every other party in supposed safe seats. Not success.

but - crucially in the context of a by-election - winning!

[Prufrock]

Well, you're both wrong!

In Sheffield the share of the vote went up, considerably. In Wales it went down slightly.

But winning by elections in sheffield and industrial Wales may not be all that to brag about for a Labour leader! Though Ken Livingstone reckons Hitler once won by-elections. There may have been bigger political stories last week.

[thebish]

Well, you're both wrong!

In Sheffield the share of the vote went up, considerably. In Wales it went down slightly.

But winning by elections in sheffield and industrial Wales may not be all that to brag about for a Labour leader! Though Ken Livingstone reckons Hitler once won by-elections. There may have been bigger political stories last week.

not sure a labour leader is bragging about it - I'm just thebish pointing out that labour won two by-elections last week, is all!

[bedwetter2]

Well, you're both wrong!

In Sheffield the share of the vote went up, considerably. In Wales it went down slightly.

But winning by elections in sheffield and industrial Wales may not be all that to brag about for a Labour leader! Though Ken Livingstone reckons Hitler once won by-elections. There may have been bigger political stories last week.

Booo to you, bringing your facts where they are not wanted.

[Lord Kangana]

Yeah, but you can prove anything with facts.

[Lord Kangana]

thing is... the national figure is made up of more than just one company!

Yeah, as I say - must be just us

See, how we're doing as a manufacturing exporter tends to mirror what's going on nationally, but you'll have to take my word for that. The exchange rate is moving in our favour and efficiency is at an absolute high. I look forward to your post at the end of Q2.

The exchange rate is going in our favour because whilst we have stopped quantitative easing, the Eurozone is still undergoing theres. Under the circumstances, the pound should actually be doing better than it is because theyve given us a head start.

[Lord Kangana]

Theirs even

[thebish]

so - today it was announced that the tories will attempt to scrap the human rights act...

(I expect it will be opposed from both sides - so won't amount to anything as they will probably have to back off - but - hey - this seems to be the basic modus operandi of the current govt - announce legislation - then decide against it later on... )

[Enoch]

What's happening to the Human Responsibilities Act?

[Prufrock]

Behave !

[thebish]

with Corbyn threatening to join forces with Tory backbench eurosceptics and the SNP and the DUP over the alleged failure of HMGov to include a bill that would “protect the National Health Service from the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership" (TTIP) An amendment may be proposed - leading to the real possibility that HMGov would be defeated on a Queen's Speech vote for the first time in about 100yrs...

[Prufrock]

Pretty sure I read earlier that TTIP wouldn't cover the nhs anyway. I'd do, should be a pretty easy amendment to get!

[thebish]

Pretty sure I read earlier that TTIP wouldn't cover the nhs anyway. I'd do, should be a pretty easy amendment to get!

hence my use of th phrase "alleged failure"...

I think the argument might be that it is not yet totally clear being as the final text is not ready, and also around how watertight the talked-about exemptions for public healthcare might be...

fullfact, for instance, thinks the matter is far from settled...

Countries sign these kinds of agreements to boost international trade. So foreign businesses may be granted 'market access' to particular sectors, and given 'national treatment'—putting them on a par with domestic companies.

Market access means that any remaining state monopolies must be abolished. These include public services that are provided by the state or by a limited number of suppliers—like the NHS. If a country doesn't want to open its public services to wider competition, it must leave those services out of any trade agreement.

It's surprisingly hard to be certain to be sure that any such exemption will stick. It's down to how an international dispute settlement panel interprets what the agreement says.

The EU has said that its draft treaty with Canada would be a model for TTIP. That deal includes a general exemption, or 'carve-out', for services provided "in the exercise of governmental authority". But what this concept covers is a little uncertain, and many international lawyers think it doesn't exempt most public services.

So the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with Canada also states that 'public utilities'—including health services—can be provided by a state monopoly or can be limited to a certain number of private providers.

The most specific way that CETA addresses public healthcare is that it contains a dedicated exemption from both market access and national treatment. It says that EU countries reserve the right to "adopt or maintain" measures excluding foreign companies from "health services which receive public funding or State support in any form and are therefore not considered to be privately funded".

That's intended to allow EU governments to keep their health services public, or nationalise them in future.

It might be tricky, though, to decide exactly what's covered. A company could claim that support services not directly related to patient care—such as the IT system—isn't part of "health services". And the Unite union's legal advice argues that the clause contradicts itself, and wouldn't have the required effect.

[Lord Kangana]

Am I not right in saying that Canada has a greater degree of public healthcare provision than the-frankly-stoneage-US? And therefore, under those circumstances is more likely to have an equal need for such a clause?

[Worthy4England]

So as I read this, someone wants protection from something, they're not quite sure what it is or whether it's going to happen, they just know they want protection for it?

Great. Maybe they could articulate what it is?