5 years hard labour ?

[AndyN01]

Some straightforward honesty would be a start.

If there's a cost then say so and say how it's going to be met.

I'm afraid that I'm old enough to have been brought up with the ethos of you can only have what you can afford. 

If you want something then you have to be realistic about what you can do to be able to afford it or change your plans.

Conversely I have big issues with folks who are clearly taking the mickey and massively playing the system leading to obscene "profits" for a microscopic few.

it's why I never buy anything from Amazon.

[Parts-King]

On 7/7/2024 at 11:53 AM, Big_D said:

I didn't vote for Labour purely on the basis of the sheer, and overwhelming, amount of pamphlets that were shoved through my letterbox, and the number of times they knocked on my door asking me to vote for them. I would get on average, 5 leaflets a day, and when their supporters were canvassing an area they would knock on my door on average three times a day. Their supporters had no respect for my property and felt it was their God given right to wander aimlessly through my garden while discussing their next target.  Enough is enough.

If we take conservative figures (excuse the pun) of a leaflet costing a penny, I must have received at least 70 leaflets over a two week period. While this equates to 70pence wasted through my door, the figures increase when we look at the entire country. 

According to Google, 66.9 million people lived in the UK in 2022. Assuming that 70p was wasted on 10 million homes, this equates to an amount of £700,000, or enough money to fund 28 nurses at a salary of £25000 per year. To me this is an absolute waste.

Not to mention the waste of my time when I need to answer the door unnecessarily.

If Labour can't respect my property, and couldn't care less about the amount of paper they waste in the form of leaflets, how can they respect the resources of the country.

Sorry Labour, but your strategy to get me to vote by bombarding me with leaflets and supporters failed. You've lost me as a voter.

LOL I wouldn't make a decision on who to vote for on the basis of them putting too many leaflets through the door 🤣🤣

At my house, I had no idea who any of the other candidates were, except Tory, they sent snail mail TWICE through the post in one week, and leaflet dropped a further 3 times, NOT ONCE did they mention what they would do for the country, every single item on their leaflets was knocking what Labour would do, and if you didn't want a Labour landslide then you must vote Tory, absolute shambles, they should not be allowed to knock what others would do, we want to know what any particular party would do 

[Benzowner]

I'm wondering if PR will raise it's head, after the GE we need it. 34% of the vote, note, not the electorate, and they get a whopping majority? That is certainly not representative and I am sure why there was such a low turn out. Many people thinking not worth it my vote wont count, under PR it would count an awful lot more.

[Haliotis]

Most of the mail shots that came through our door had two main themes.   (1) Each party indicated a proposed  ‘soft’ manifesto that they believed the electorate would probably warm to - the fringe parties, knowing they would not get into power, having the most bold ideas.    (2) Each party claimed that they knew best how to run the country, and tried to frighten their opposition by dire warnings of how we would suffer from the results of the vote.

I am looking forward to the resumption of PMQ - it will be interesting to see how the new government and the opposition clash now that their roles have reversed.

[Bper]

On the subject of fringe parties, I find it difficult why people struggle to accept the idea of Reform UK becoming a direct opposition to the government, or perhaps even forming the next government in five years. I've encountered numerous disparaging comments about Nigel Farage and can't quite understand why. Over the years, I've listened to him and have always found his remarks to be in line with what many believe is best for this country. 

He has consistently highlighted the mismanagement of Brexit by the government.Immigration seems to be the main reason he gets labeled as far right, which I find unjustified. Discussing both legal and illegal migration and its impacts on social and economic problems included shouldn't be dismissed as far right rhetoric.

It's worth considering that if immigration continues unchecked, we might face issues similar to those in other parts of Europe, such as significant demographic changes, pressure on public services, and social tensions. Addressing these concerns through open and honest discussion is crucial for our country's future stability and prosperity.

[Cyker]

It's basically because he is an untrustworthy liar - Reform are just UKIP in disguise and the entire basis of their party is to say anything to convince you to vote for them without backing up any of it - That's basically how populist parties work.

The fact that he's now complaining about Brexit when he was the one who got the ball rolling that eventually caused it it just shows how contortionist his attitude is - Even when he gets what he wants he complains about it to try and deflect the blame of the fallout away from himself.

The worst thing is people still believe him - There was no way Brexit would ever have been as clean and favourable as he now keeps trying to make out it could have been, but as I keep saying he's an artist at selling a dream.

Talk is cheap, and all they do is talk but they don't do jack. As soon as some hard choices come their way they disappear like rats down a sewer, only to pop up again and heckle the people that eventually made the hard choice saying they should have made the other choice and egging on the people the choice negatively affected.

It's easy to attack the people making the hard choices to make yourself look good, but what have they got other than that?

 

[Benzowner]

18 hours ago, Cyker said:

It's basically because he is an untrustworthy liar - Reform are just UKIP in disguise and the entire basis of their party is to say anything to convince you to vote for them without backing up any of it - That's basically how populist parties work.

The fact that he's now complaining about Brexit when he was the one who got the ball rolling that eventually caused it it just shows how contortionist his attitude is - Even when he gets what he wants he complains about it to try and deflect the blame of the fallout away from himself.

The worst thing is people still believe him - There was no way Brexit would ever have been as clean and favourable as he now keeps trying to make out it could have been, but as I keep saying he's an artist at selling a dream.

Talk is cheap, and all they do is talk but they don't do jack. As soon as some hard choices come their way they disappear like rats down a sewer, only to pop up again and heckle the people that eventually made the hard choice saying they should have made the other choice and egging on the people the choice negatively affected.

It's easy to attack the people making the hard choices to make yourself look good, but what have they got other than that?

 

I would guess you don't like him or his policies. Brexit did not happen because most of the House of Commons especially the speaker of the house didn't want it. Teresa May was a remainer and certainly did her part not to get a smooth exit. 

NF has complained about Brexit for a number of years, but as the media were against him, as has been shown by both BBC and Channel 4 his voice had a limited audience only becoming louder when Talk TV and especially GB News started up.

Study your history, the same argument was happening about 100 or so years ago with the demise of the Whigs (Liberal) party and the rise of Labour. 

I do agree with you Talk is cheap, that's why we have this absurd 2 party, first past the post system. Both main parties give all the chat neither of them do anything and I have seen both parties in action since before Harold Wilson and Ted Heath days. Only twice in my voting lifetime has either party been "successful" Margret Thatcher and for a brief time Tony Blair although the latter should have been tried for war crimes IMO.

[Bper]

Nigel Farage has always been a polarising figure in UK politics, and it’s important to consider both the criticisms and his contributions. Many people view him as untrustworthy due to his shifting positions and populist tactics, but we need to look at the whole picture.Farage was a major force behind the push for Brexit, tapping into a sentiment that resonated with a large part of the UK public. He wasn't directly involved in negotiating the terms of Brexit, so blaming him entirely for the way it turned out seems a bit unfair.

His criticisms of how Brexit was handled can be seen as a genuine concern for delivering on the promises made during the campaign.Sure, Farage often makes broad, emotive promises without detailed plans. But his ability to connect with voters and express their frustrations has been a big part of his appeal. The fact that he has maintained a significant following shows that his message resonates with many who feel ignored by the mainstream political establishment.

Now that he’s been elected as the MP for Clacton, Farage has a real chance to influence UK policy directly. He can now participate in parliamentary debates, vote on legislation, and propose new laws. This role will hold him accountable for his positions and give him a platform to show he’s serious about his commitments.In conclusion, while it’s fair to scrutinise Farage’s past actions and rhetoric, his election as an MP opens a new chapter. It’s a chance for him to move from criticising from the sidelines to actively helping shaping the country’s future with actions and policies. 

[Cyker]

You're right I don't like him - I've watched him rise up through the ranks from when he was just another goading talkshow host and still don't understand how he's gotten to this stage.

The thing is he was promising so much out of Brexit but none of that would have happened for years, maybe decades, but he glossed over that to sell the dream.

Brexit could bring some benefits, but in the long term - In the short term it will and is damaging for both sides and that will continue for a long time; Only someone very ignorant of how things like treaties work would think you could untangle so much and so many in such a short period.

If anything this worked to his advantage as he could then blame all the fallout on everyone negotiating and continue to paint himself as the knowledgeable saviour.

The only reason he has any influence at all is because he's an expert at tapping into peoples negative feelings and stirring up anti-establishment rhetoric and mob mentality. If you look at some of the "Well if they'd done this, Brexit would have been much better" things he's said it's just wild fantasy - Maybe if the entire EU suddenly went senile and caved into every demand it would turn out like how he fantasises, but how likely was that going to happen? But people lap up these half-truths and fantasy possibilities from him because it lets them hide from the hard truths.

I could be wrong, but from what I know of him so far he's all mouth and no trousers, as the saying goes... Very good at criticizing others but not much else.

[Bper]

46 minutes ago, Cyker said:

You're right I don't like him - I've watched him rise up through the ranks from when he was just another goading talkshow host and still don't understand how he's gotten to this stage.

The thing is he was promising so much out of Brexit but none of that would have happened for years, maybe decades, but he glossed over that to sell the dream.

Brexit could bring some benefits, but in the long term - In the short term it will and is damaging for both sides and that will continue for a long time; Only someone very ignorant of how things like treaties work would think you could untangle so much and so many in such a short period.

If anything this worked to his advantage as he could then blame all the fallout on everyone negotiating and continue to paint himself as the knowledgeable saviour.

The only reason he has any influence at all is because he's an expert at tapping into peoples negative feelings and stirring up anti-establishment rhetoric and mob mentality. If you look at some of the "Well if they'd done this, Brexit would have been much better" things he's said it's just wild fantasy - Maybe if the entire EU suddenly went senile and caved into every demand it would turn out like how he fantasises, but how likely was that going to happen? But people lap up these half-truths and fantasy possibilities from him because it lets them hide from the hard truths.

I could be wrong, but from what I know of him so far he's all mouth and no trousers, as the saying goes... Very good at criticizing others but not much else.

While Nigel Farage certainly gained attention and support, especially during the Brexit campaign, I don't think he had direct influence over political decisions. His role was more about advocating and shaping public opinion than making policy or negotiating deals. Farage was effective at connecting with voters and tapping into anti-establishment sentiments, but attributing significant political influence to him might exaggerate his actual impact on policymaking. In my view, Farage excelled in rhetoric and criticism rather than substantive governance. He voiced concerns and criticisms effectively, but his ability to bring about meaningful change was limited by his position outside formal government roles.

I am prepared to wait and see if he can actually bring about change now he is in Parliament; however, I also think we need to be mindful that this is a small party and it will take time. I also believe that we must give the new Labour government a chance to show if their manifesto pledges and governance bring about positive change, which they have based their election mantra on.Whatever happens in the coming years, it is critical that something different happens to address the decline this country has been experiencing for years. If change is not forthcoming and decline continues, I can see the real possibility that Reform will become a major party and potentially form the future government.

[Bper]

I noticed that the King's Speech focused a lot on setting up new authorities and quangos, probably to handle policies that Keir Starmer’s isn’t looking to deal with directly. Given how vague Labour’s policies were during the election, I thought they’d provide more details in the speech.There are 35 proposals on the table, so plenty to dissect over the next few weeks. Still, nothing too groundbreaking was mentioned, which might mean they’re playing it safe or planning to roll things out slowly. 

[AndyN01]

The devil is always in the detail and the subsequent action, or lack of it......

And, sadly, currently the level of detail in most things (certainly not just politics) appears woefully inadequate - or known but hidden?

Time will tell....

[Cyker]

I'd be happier for them to roll things out slowly - Every decision that's been made in a short time frame has just turned into a massive ***show.

They need to plan things out properly, carefully, with contingencies, and get cross-party support so the project will be done properly and not have the plug pulled half-way through, wasting more tax payer money: The amount of aborted long term projects in this country, and the money wasted in doing so, is astounding.

And if they don't get that agreement, just don't do it and use the money for more beneficial things.

I'm still amazed that we managed to ever complete the channel tunnel with the co-operation of the french!! If we tried to do something like that now there'd be a tunnel about a quarter of the way from both ends, 10x the money spent, and then nothing to show for it as bickering and infighting between both sides and internally ends up sending the costs spiralling out of control until it gets cancelled.

[Bper]

Labour's plan to bring the railways back into public ownership once current contracts expire is part of their policy proposals. Will this move actually alleviate the daily frustrations experienced by rail passengers? Additionally, could it result in higher rail fares? Finally, would unions use this opportunity to pressure the government for more frequent pay rises, potentially holding it to ransom?

[Bper]

Keir Starmer's decision to allocate £84 million of taxpayer money to humanitarian aid in the Middle East and Africa is supposed to address the root causes of migration by supporting charitable organisations in these regions. However, this move is already drawing significant criticism.

Many argue that this expenditure will not effectively impact migration to the UK and question the logic behind sending taxpayer money abroad when there are far more pressing domestic issues. Critics say this is a misguided use of funds that could be better spent on improving infrastructure, public services, and support for people already in the UK.The promise that this aid will deter migration seems tenuous at best. There's little evidence to suggest that such initiatives will make any meaningful difference in the numbers of people seeking to come to the UK. 

This announcement is a superficial attempt to appear proactive without addressing the real, complex issues surrounding migration and domestic policy needs.

[Cyker]

TBH I've stopped caring - Let them get on with it and see what happens.

To be fair, this is just how politics is - They could do anything and it would draw criticism from someone; If I got into power, resurrected Jesus, perfected Nuclear Fusion and changed Thursday to Trackday, it's a certainty there'd be a group complaining about it.  

 

[Rhymes with Paris]

2 minutes ago, Cyker said:

TBH I've stopped caring - Let them get on with it and see what happens.

To be fair, this is just how politics is - They could do anything and it would draw criticism from someone; If I got into power, resurrected Jesus, perfected Nuclear Fusion and changed Thursday to Trackday, it's a certainty there'd be a group complaining about it.  

 

There have been worse policies than yours Cyker.

There is a chap who sometimes stands in the high street (pedestrianised of course) with a yellow top hat on, and shouts "Armageddon Armageddon" .

Either he is referring to the end of the world (we're all dooomed I tell ya, dooomed)

Or he means arm a geddon out of here, probably the best course of action given the ape like creatures that swig cheap cider and spice,and threaten passers by around there.

* Original Armageddon reference credit due to the late great Spike Milligan.

 

[Bper]

The recent return of migrants by the UK Border Force to France demonstrates that with proper cooperation, France is willing to take back small boat migrants. Despite millions of pounds given to France over the years, this event, where 13 asylum seekers were taken back to Calais at France's request, highlights that returns are possible. This raises the question: why is this happening now and not when the Conservatives were in government?"

[Cyker]

I guess they were more antagonistic towards France and the EU generally, more demanding than negotiating. Either that or both sides are trying to ingratiate themselves with the new incumbent.

Still, it's always good to see mutual co-operation so hopefully that will help rebuild our international ties.

[Corolly Poly]

On 7/18/2024 at 7:21 PM, Bper said:

Keir Starmer's decision to allocate £84 million of taxpayer money to humanitarian aid in the Middle East and Africa is supposed to address the root causes of migration by supporting charitable organisations in these regions. However, this move is already drawing significant criticism.

Many argue that this expenditure will not effectively impact migration to the UK and question the logic behind sending taxpayer money abroad when there are far more pressing domestic issues. Critics say this is a misguided use of funds that could be better spent on improving infrastructure, public services, and support for people already in the UK.The promise that this aid will deter migration seems tenuous at best. There's little evidence to suggest that such initiatives will make any meaningful difference in the numbers of people seeking to come to the UK. 

This announcement is a superficial attempt to appear proactive without addressing the real, complex issues surrounding migration and domestic policy needs.

Thank you for that party political broadcast on behalf of the Conservative party😂

[Corolly Poly]

On 7/17/2024 at 6:46 PM, Bper said:

Labour's plan to bring the railways back into public ownership once current contracts expire is part of their policy proposals. Will this move actually alleviate the daily frustrations experienced by rail passengers? Additionally, could it result in higher rail fares? Finally, would unions use this opportunity to pressure the government for more frequent pay rises, potentially holding it to ransom?

Who knows but it can't get much worse and has to be worth a punt.

[Corolly Poly]

On 7/10/2024 at 2:19 PM, Bper said:

"Nigel Farage ...

Now that he’s been elected as the MP for Clacton, Farage has a real chance to influence UK policy directly. He can now participate in parliamentary debates, vote on legislation, and propose new laws. "

 

only if he takes his head out of Trumps *rs*, leaves America and comes back to do what he was elected to do by his constituents.

[Bper]

15 minutes ago, Corolly Poly said:

only if he takes his head out of Trumps *rs*, leaves America and comes back to do what he was elected to do by his constituents.

Well he has become good friends with him over the years and flew out to support him. He turned down a offer of a job from Trump to run as a possible MP. I think we have to give him a chance to see how the Reform party perform over the next few years.The same for Starmer.😄

[Corolly Poly]

2 minutes ago, Bper said:

Well he has become good friends with him over the years and flew out to support him. He turned down a offer of a job from Trump to run as a possible MP. I think we have to give him a chance to see how the Reform party perform over the next few years.The same for Starmer.😄

What support is he offering? I don't think Trump needs comforting and as far as I can see Trump has had little time for him. Can he dress a wound better than the incompetent that stuck part of a sanitary towel on his ear? In which case he might have a purpose over there rather than just seeking publicity.

[Bper]

1 minute ago, Corolly Poly said:

What support is he offering? I don't think Trump needs comforting and as far as I can see Trump has had little time for him. Can he dress a wound better than the incompetent that stuck part of a sanitary towel on his ear? In which case he might have a purpose over there rather than just seeking publicity.

The thing is we don't know the exact relationship they have,its not always about political gain or publicity, people do have friends and sometimes genuinely just want to show support.