Off Topic The Politics Thread

[sb_73]

Is it me or does Theresa May's 'shared society', with central government tasked to intervene in the operation of bureaucracies and markets on behalf of people*, but more specifically communities, sound, well, un-Tory? Certainly un Thatcherite, with the old emphasis on 'no such thing as society' as 'individual responsibility'. Interesting. About as much chance of delivering something as Cameron's Big Society of course.

Her latest pronouncements on Brexit, though still vague, do at least show a grip on reality, you can't have your cake and eat it, if you want full control of borders, law making, trade treaties etc you can't stay in the single market or even the customs union. So we negotiate on how we leave (budget contributions, migrant status etc) and, perhaps in parallel, perhaps after, a series of sector by sector trade agreements. Lower taxes and allow immigration quotas to British based companies to encourage them to stay and invest in the meantime.

What does perplex me is how May can make assertions that a simple binary choice referendum on the EU means that the British people also want fundamental change in the way Britain is run. She can infer this, fine, and I may not disagree, but to state it as fact is bullshit.

* this does not of course apply to me as a fully paid up citizen of nowhere. Hint to disMay - if you want to major on unity and 'sharing' don't kick off by slagging off bits of your electorate - including many Tory party donors, who are saying the bank is now closed in numbers.

 

[ELLERS]

It's cold tonight...................****ing brexit!!!!

 

[YorkshireHoopster]

Is it me or does Theresa May's 'shared society', with central government tasked to intervene in the operation of bureaucracies and markets on behalf of people*, but more specifically communities, sound, well, un-Tory? Certainly un Thatcherite, with the old emphasis on 'no such thing as society' as 'individual responsibility'. Interesting. About as much chance of delivering something as Cameron's Big Society of course.

Her latest pronouncements on Brexit, though still vague, do at least show a grip on reality, you can't have your cake and eat it, if you want full control of borders, law making, trade treaties etc you can't stay in the single market or even the customs union. So we negotiate on how we leave (budget contributions, migrant status etc) and, perhaps in parallel, perhaps after, a series of sector by sector trade agreements. Lower taxes and allow immigration quotas to British based companies to encourage them to stay and invest in the meantime.

What does perplex me is how May can make assertions that a simple binary choice referendum on the EU means that the British people also want fundamental change in the way Britain is run. She can infer this, fine, and I may not disagree, but to state it as fact is bullshit.

* this does not of course apply to me as a fully paid up citizen of nowhere. Hint to disMay - if you want to major on unity and 'sharing' don't kick off by slagging off bits of your electorate - including many Tory party donors, who are saying the bank is now closed in numbers.

I'm not sure that she has said anything momentous at all. A large part of the problem is that all the political journalists and politicians on both sides of the argument look for significance in every pronouncement she makes. So far she has said nothing concrete about her stance on Brexit and nothing that you could rely on about her intentions as PM elsewhere. And she has said in 57 different ways. For that she is to be applauded. Those who lose the argument will only find out what she is doing when and after she has done it. The bit I heard in the car this afternoon followed up with an interview with Keir Starmer who tried to nail his colours to the mast only to be shot down with one critical question.........."and is that what Jeremy Corbyn thinks?" I think if was a Labour Party spokeman I'd be tempted to answer that the interviewer had asked for my comments and if he wanted to know what Corbyn thought he could go and ask him. Interview over.

May just about keeps everyone happy for now by not actually telling anyone what she is really doing and thinking. Then again I could be entirely wrong and she simply doesn't have a clue. Roll on March so that we can actually begin the process.

 

[sb_73]

I'm not sure that she has said anything momentous at all. A large part of the problem is that all the political journalists and politicians on both sides of the argument look for significance in every pronouncement she makes. So far she has said nothing concrete about her stance on Brexit and nothing that you could rely on about her intentions as PM elsewhere. And she has said in 57 different ways. For that she is to be applauded. Those who lose the argument will only find out what she is doing when and after she has done it. The bit I heard in the car this afternoon followed up with an interview with Keir Starmer who tried to nail his colours to the mast only to be shot down with one critical question.........."and is that what Jeremy Corbyn thinks?" I think if was a Labour Party spokeman I'd be tempted to answer that the interviewer had asked for my comments and if he wanted to know what Corbyn thought he could go and ask him. Interview over.

May just about keeps everyone happy for now by not actually telling anyone what she is really doing and thinking. Then again I could be entirely wrong and she simply doesn't have a clue. Roll on March so that we can actually begin the process.

Well, I'm probably wrong then. But most of the commentators seem to agree, the message was we leave the EU and negotiate a trade deal with it. The only questions would be what does the trade deal look like and how soon can it be in place? If so, good, that's what I think the majority voted for in the referendum. Let's get on with it.

Who cares what Labour think nowadays?

 

[GoldhawkRoad]

Well, I'm probably wrong then. But most of the commentators seem to agree, the message was we leave the EU and negotiate a trade deal with it. The only questions would be what does the trade deal look like and how soon can it be in place? If so, good, that's what I think the majority voted for in the referendum. Let's get on with it.

Who cares what Labour think nowadays?

What I got, is what I already knew - that there never was a "Soft Brexit" option because May made Border Control a red line, and Merkel made Free Movement in Exchange for Membership of the Single Market a red line.

So we're out of the EU completely, and must now negotiate a Tailored Brexit - ie tailored commercial arrangements for different industry sectors. How successful we'll be will depend on factors such as whether the EU is prepared to cut its nose to spite its face on tariffs, how important access to the financial market in London is to EU businesses and how important UK defence capabilities are to the EU (given the rise of Russia and the fact that only France has similar and Germany has none at all).

On another topic, surely it is time to preclude by statute strikes on rail transport, and instead have expedited arbitration where there is a dispute. Read an excellent article by Joe Haines, Harold Wilson's press secretary, who is calling for strike bans in the public sector full stop. Can't argue with it.

 

[sb_73]

What I got, is what I already knew - that there never was a "Soft Brexit" option because May made Border Control a red line, and Merkel made Free Movement in Exchange for Membership of the Single Market a red line.

So we're out of the EU completely, and must now negotiate a Tailored Brexit - ie tailored commercial arrangements for different industry sectors. How successful we'll be will depend on factors such as whether the EU is prepared to cut its nose to spite its face on tariffs, how important access to the financial market in London is to EU businesses and how important UK defence capabilities are to the EU (given the rise of Russia and the fact that only France has similar and Germany has none at all).

On another topic, surely it is time to preclude by statute strikes on rail transport, and instead have expedited arbitration where there is a dispute. Read an excellent article by Joe Haines, Harold Wilson's press secretary, who is calling for strike bans in the public sector full stop. Can't argue with it.

**** me, we agree, though I would use different vocabulary (and in business terms, we need the EU as much as they need us, if not more so) on the first bit. There is a soft Brexit option of course, there are always options, but not for disMay. It still amuses me to think that she will actually control immigration when we have 'control of her borders' given her record and that of her advisors Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill at the Home Office on non EU immigration. I don't think the UK was ever going to be involved in EU specific defence or an EU foreign policy, it was one of our opt outs. Boris has said the UK has no problem with an EU army. Our commitment to the defence of Europe comes through NATO, which would be the instrument of response to Russia if it comes to that. It's looking increasingly dodgy in the Baltics, Russia has 330,000 troops on the borders and is playing the Russian minorities in those countries to destabilise them, al la Ukraine. With Trump I don't think NATO will do anything to oppose. Apparently Russia now has a first use policy and is targeting limited nuclear strikes on Berlin, Warsaw and Copenhagen.

Regarding strike action, do you then rely on the Government to protect public sector workers rights and terms and conditions? Interesting to see Theresa's stance on this, as she is apparently defender of the downtrodden now. If workers have absolutely no threats to make, particularly in shoddily run public and quasi public institutions they will be exploited, sadly, in some instances. Has Joe Haines forgotten that rail is in the private sector in the U.K.? At his age he can be forgiven for it, though not for allowing a Prime Minister showing the signs of dementia to remain in office for so long.

 

[cor blymie]

I see the Labour controlled borough of Lewisham has threatened a CPO on Millwall to develop around the area. Could the same thing happen under the Labour controlled borough of Hammersmith?

 

[TheBigDipper]

<snip>
On another topic, surely it is time to preclude by statute strikes on rail transport, and instead have expedited arbitration where there is a dispute. Read an excellent article by Joe Haines, Harold Wilson's press secretary, who is calling for strike bans in the public sector full stop. Can't argue with it.

It's hard to argue against as a general principle. The other side of the coin is that this brings a responsibility to the employer to have a work environment where the staff don't feel the need to strike to get the employer to be reasonable and fair. That could be difficult to achieve, as employers (particularly those that are run for profit yet paid for by the public purse) have a tendency to exploit their staff if the staff are in a weak position.

Of course, the government could put into place a body to oversee staff pay and conditions for those operations considered to be "public services". In which case, why not just renationalise the service and cut out the middleman?

Some of the short-term decisions of the past 30 years are coming back to bite us all, it seems. The privatisation of public services experiment has, for the most part, failed.

 

[GoldhawkRoad]

It's hard to argue against as a general principle. The other side of the coin is that this brings a responsibility to the employer to have a work environment where the staff don't feel the need to strike to get the employer to be reasonable and fair. That could be difficult to achieve, as employers (particularly those that are run for profit yet paid for by the public purse) have a tendency to exploit their staff if the staff are in a weak position.

Of course, the government could put into place a body to oversee staff pay and conditions for those operations considered to be "public services". In which case, why not just renationalise the service and cut out the middleman?

Some of the short-term decisions of the past 30 years are coming back to bite us all, it seems. The privatisation of public services experiment has, for the most part, failed.

The problem is, British Rail was sh1t while it was nationalised.

Some employers will, I agree, abuse their position, so there needs to be an independent panel to arbitrate on contentious issues. In the current dispute, it would take expert evidence on safety issues e.g. driver only trains etc and make its finding.

In the 1970's, the union barons tried to bring the country to its knees (whether Labour or Tory government). I don't trust them not to try this again now.

 

[GoldhawkRoad]

**** me, we agree, though I would use different vocabulary (and in business terms, we need the EU as much as they need us, if not more so) on the first bit. There is a soft Brexit option of course, there are always options, but not for disMay. It still amuses me to think that she will actually control immigration when we have 'control of her borders' given her record and that of her advisors Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill at the Home Office on non EU immigration. I don't think the UK was ever going to be involved in EU specific defence or an EU foreign policy, it was one of our opt outs. Boris has said the UK has no problem with an EU army. Our commitment to the defence of Europe comes through NATO, which would be the instrument of response to Russia if it comes to that. It's looking increasingly dodgy in the Baltics, Russia has 330,000 troops on the borders and is playing the Russian minorities in those countries to destabilise them, al la Ukraine. With Trump I don't think NATO will do anything to oppose. Apparently Russia now has a first use policy and is targeting limited nuclear strikes on Berlin, Warsaw and Copenhagen.

Regarding strike action, do you then rely on the Government to protect public sector workers rights and terms and conditions? Interesting to see Theresa's stance on this, as she is apparently defender of the downtrodden now. If workers have absolutely no threats to make, particularly in shoddily run public and quasi public institutions they will be exploited, sadly, in some instances. Has Joe Haines forgotten that rail is in the private sector in the U.K.? At his age he can be forgiven for it, though not for allowing a Prime Minister showing the signs of dementia to remain in office for so long.

The UK didn't want to participate in an EU army, but as you say, it does provide substantial troops and equipment under NATO. With Trump threatening to withdraw US support from NATO, and Russia increasingly belligerent, the EU member states may well take comfort from assurances from the UK. It could be a major bargaining chip in the forthcoming negotiations. What you say about Russia's policy, targeting limited nuclear strikes on Western Europe is terrifying.

 

[sb_73]

The UK didn't want to participate in an EU army, but as you say, it does provide substantial troops and equipment under NATO. With Trump threatening to withdraw US support from NATO, and Russia increasingly belligerent, the EU member states may well take comfort from assurances from the UK. It could be a major bargaining chip in the forthcoming negotiations. What you say about Russia's policy, targeting limited nuclear strikes on Western Europe is terrifying.

There was a lot on what's going on in the Baltic States in the Sunday Times yesterday. It is genuinely terrifying, though hopefully exaggerated for journalistic effect. Let's hope Trump has got some hotels in the area which he doesn't want to see obliterated. Probably a few crippling cyber attacks (air traffic control, communications, national grid systems, as well as defence systems) would make bombing redundant.

 

[TheBigDipper]

The problem is, British Rail was sh1t while it was nationalised.

Some employers will, I agree, abuse their position, so there needs to be an independent panel to arbitrate on contentious issues. In the current dispute, it would take expert evidence on safety issues e.g. driver only trains etc and make its finding.

In the 1970's, the union barons tried to bring the country to its knees (whether Labour or Tory government). I don't trust them not to try this again now.

I agree. British Rail wasn't that great when it was nationalised. It isn't any better now (IMHO) apart from some routes where it's easy to make money because the companies don't have to provide a service on those routes that do not make any money. The profitable routes seem to have nicer trains and better services. I also agree that the unions tried to run the country without a mandate to do so to serve their own ends. That was what you meant, wasn't it?

As Rangers fans, though, surely we understand the pitfalls of just replacing the management rather than addressing the real problem? Nationalised services can work if they are managed properly. Changing the manager (and the owner) doesn't work unless the real problems are addressed.

 

[GoldhawkRoad]

I agree. British Rail wasn't that great when it was nationalised. It isn't any better now (IMHO) apart from some routes where it's easy to make money because the companies don't have to provide a service on those routes that do not make any money. The profitable routes seem to have nicer trains and better services. I also agree that the unions tried to run the country without a mandate to do so to serve their own ends. That was what you meant, wasn't it?

As Rangers fans, though, surely we understand the pitfalls of just replacing the management rather than addressing the real problem? Nationalised services can work if they are managed properly. Changing the manager (and the owner) doesn't work unless the real problems are addressed.

I was actually using the phraseology of Bill Sirs (who died last year) Gen Sec of Iron and Steel who threatened to bring the industry to its knees. There was a general sense that the Marxists wanted to pull down the whole edifice cf Russia and build something in their image. It brought misery to millions

 

[TheBigDipper]

I was actually using the phraseology of Bill Sirs (who died last year) Gen Sec of Iron and Steel who threatened to bring the industry to its knees. There was a general sense that the Marxists wanted to pull down the whole edifice cf Russia and build something in their image. It brought misery to millions

That's what happens when you get fanatics filling a power vacuum - on both sides of the left/right spectrum.

Speaking of fanatics, it reminds me of the Miners strike - started in part as a political action by Scargill, in reply to another political action started by Thatcher (they are my two fanatics here) and the victims were the mislead (Scargill) and mistreated (Thatcher) miners.

As the song goes... (Genesis - The Knife, early 1970s).
"Some of you are going to die. Martyrs, of course, for the freedom that I will provide"

 

[GoldhawkRoad]

That's what happens when you get fanatics filling a power vacuum - on both sides of the left/right spectrum.

Speaking of fanatics, it reminds me of the Miners strike - started in part as a political action by Scargill, in reply to another political action started by Thatcher (they are my two fanatics here) and the victims were the mislead (Scargill) and mistreated (Thatcher) miners.

As the song goes... (Genesis - The Knife, early 1970s).
"Some of you are going to die. Martyrs, of course, for the freedom that I will provide"

Yes, it was extreme on both sides and the miners should have been treated better after the pits closed. But for decades we have all benefited from Thatcher's curbing of the unions. It concerns me now that the rail strikes may spread nationwide for political purposes. Some of the unions have a huge financial war chests.

 

[finglasqpr]

Crisis in Northern Irish politics. Martrin Mc Guinness resigns as Deputy First Minister in protest at the failure of Arlene Foster to resign.

There will be a snap election which will probably change nothing and both of them will probably return to the current roles within the space of a couple of months.

 

[aberdude]

Yes, it was extreme on both sides and the miners should have been treated better after the pits closed. But for decades we have all benefited from Thatcher's curbing of the unions. It concerns me now that the rail strikes may spread nationwide for political purposes. Some of the unions have a huge financial war chests.

thatcher is dead and thank **** for that>>>>>>>>but it doesn't stop the other puppets doing the work of the hidden hand hey

fk capatilism fk politics and fk your greedy money orientated lives

 

[kiwiqpr]

what has copenhagen done

 

[ELLERS]

I see SKY have once again succeeded in causing as many problems as they can because they cannot accept the Brexit result. Sophie Ridge interviewed May yesterday and was basically putting words in her mouth regarding the single market and today the pound dropped 1% against the dollar because the media misrepresented her comments. Cheers Sky one day people will find other ways to watch TV without being ripped off and when your presenters lose their jobs I won't bat an eyelid.

 

[sb_73]

I see SKY have once again succeeded in causing as many problems as they can because they cannot accept the Brexit result. Sophie Ridge interviewed May yesterday and was basically putting words in her mouth regarding the single market and today the pound dropped 1% against the dollar because the media misrepresented her comments. Cheers Sky one day people will find other ways to watch TV without being ripped off and when your presenters lose their jobs I won't bat an eyelid.

I agree totally about Sky being a rip off. I didn't see the interview, how was she misrepresented? From what I have read she (May) has added a bit of much needed clarity. And in a rather realistic way. Knee jerk market reactions typical.