Off Topic Political Debate

2011 Committee on Standards in Public Life report
In November 2011 the Committee on Standards on Public Life, chaired by Sir Christopher Kelly, published a Report on "Political Party Finance. Ending the big donor culture". It is their 13th report, Cm. 8208. The report made five main recommendations: (a) Contribution limit of GBP10,000 per donor, party and year; (b) this limit should not apply to affiliated trade union affiliation fees if such fees are raised by an "opt in"; (c) existing limits for campaign spending should be cut by about 15 per cent; (d) in addition to the present "policy development grant" eligible parties should be granted public funding at the rate of GBP3.00 per vote in Westminster elections and GBP 1.50 per vote in devolved and European elections; (e) income tax relief should be available for donations up to GBP 1,000 and membership fees to political parties.[8]

 

They're definitely not the Nasty Party...

A Tory councillor tried to persuade party colleagues to join him in a smear campaign against local domestic violence services and women’s rights campaigners, a leaked email shows.

Scott Harris, a Conservative member of Portsmouth council, wrote in the email that he had been compiling information on a number of political opponents operating in the city before council elections.

He singles out Aurora New Dawn, a local domestic violence support charity, and its chief executive, Shonagh Dillon, as well as a local chapter of the feminist group Sisters Uncut, who have been critical of council plans for drastic cuts to domestic violence services.

please log in to view this image

Women’s rights campaigner Shonagh Dillon was one of the targets of a planned smear campaign. Photograph: National Diversity Awards

However, they and others named by Harris received the email after it was mistakenly sent out in a chain. The message says: “The elections are coming and the politics are dirty. The tricks by the Lib Dems, the lies and the smear are disgusting.
“Quite frankly it might be a good idea to play dirty this time. I know we shouldn’t go down to their gutter politics but should we continue to stand by and allow this to go on?

“I’m also compiling some stuff on Shonagh Dillion [sic], Aurora New Dawn and Sisters Uncut. Interestingly I’ve found some stuff on [local socialist activist] Jon Woods and the SWP locally which will be useful when the loony left come calling nearer May.”

 

Surely you have more in your life than desperately trawling the entire media outlets for any story that may show tories in a bad light.

sad, sad, sad.

 

looks who's back!

To be honest there's not that much research to be done. They create their own headlines on a weekly basis...

 

Oh well, if it keeps you off your X box.

Nothing will change so you can look forward to decades of whinging.

 

This is a bit rich coming from you. Every post you made on this thread was an attack on Labour/the left.

I'm just reporting facts. That's probably the bit you're uncomfortable with...It's not just random attacks not backed up by any proof.

Corbyn is still Labour leader and his ratings are going up week by week, even with the constant barrage of media attacks on him.

I'm looking forward to the 2020 election now. By then the Tories will have had enough time to show themselves for what they really are...

 

I'm off to mix with the proletariat at White Hart Lane, good luck with comrade Corbyn, I desperately hope you are right about him remaining as leader. Many wilderness years ahead.

COYH's

 

No he hasn't!!!

 

I get my news from the Guardian and the BBC website, they have the best layouts and are the nicest to read, and although I don't align myself with their editorial views (the Guardian is too New-Labourish for my liking and less said about the BBC the better...) they still have by far the fairest reporting available online.

On the subject of guns, yet another example of why they should be banned. There's absolutely no justification for stuff like this happening....

An 11-year-old boy has been found guilty of murdering an eight-year-old girl after she and her sister refused to let him see their puppies.

WATE-TV reports that judge Dennis Roach this week found the boy guilty of first-degree murder and sentenced him to custody in Tennessee until he turns 19.

In his order, which WATE posted online, Roach said the state should use all reasonable resources to determine why the boy shot the girl, and he should be treated and rehabilitated so this never happens again.

“A child who commits first-degree murder cannot be willy-nilly turned loose into society,” Roach wrote.

The boy, who has been identified by US media, was in detention and being evaluated as to where he should be placed, said Rob Johnson, a spokesman for Tennessee’s department of children’s services. “Like any other child who comes into custody, he would need a thorough assessment and evaluation to determine the best placement,” Johnson said.

“At this time, it would likely be at an intensive treatment program at one of our private providers.”

The boy has five siblings — three brothers and two sisters — who have been placed with relatives and the state, Johnson said.

The boy and his victim, eight-year-old MaKayla Dyer, lived in the same mobile home park in White Pine, Tennessee. MaKayla, her 11-year-old sister and another girl, also 11, were playing outside and talking to the boy while he was sitting at his bedroom window on 3 October 2015. He asked the sisters to fetch their puppies, the judge’s order said, and when they refused he got a 12-gauge shotgun and a BB gun and told the girls he had guns. According to the judge’s description of the events, McKayla laughed at him and responded that the guns were not real.

The boy “then made certain the gun was loaded, cocked the hammer on the gun and shot the victim just above the heart at a downward trajectory”, the judge wrote.

The girl fell backward, “quickly lost consciousness, and was later confirmed dead”, the judge wrote, adding that three witnesses saw McKayla within one minute after she was shot.

“The mother of the child knelt on the ground and picked her up, placing her child in her arms as she passed away.”

The boy had been trained in firearm safety and had hunted with his father and grandfather, the judge noted.

 

Certainly a tragic case Toby, but despite guns being banned in the UK you find that they are still available to some who should not have them. This is part of an article from the BBC.

A householder suffered "life-changing injuries" when he was shot by burglars through a bedroom door.

The victim, aged in his 40s, was hit in the leg after two men forced their way into his home in Sible Hedingham, Essex, in the early hours of Saturday.

They threatened their victim before shooting him through a door after he locked himself in the bedroom, said police.

The men then fled the house without taking anything.

Police found the wounded man after being called just before 04:40 GMT.

"He locked himself in a bedroom and it is believed a gun was then fired through the door injuring him," said Det Sgt Mark Cadd, of Essex Police.

"This was an extremely distressing incident for the victim and he has suffered life-changing injuries which have left him in great pain.

I am told that there are checks if you wish to obtain a firearm in France, and you have to pass an exam if you wish to join the chasse. However it is much easier to obtain one in Belgium. This says to me that you have to legislate to have them banned worldwide if you wish to stop them falling into the wrong hands. Maybe the EU should look into common policies for ownership, although I doubt that it could stop them arriving from elsewhere.

 

Another reason to rejoice in the death of the Schengen Agreement.

 

I think it said that the gun had been used in Essex. Has Essex joined the Schengen zone unnoticed?

 

You know quite well I was referring to the facts regarding your comments about obtaining firearm licences in France compared to Belgium. It is impossible to ban guns worldwide so it is imperative for each country to control its own borders, something the countries within the Schengen Agreement area have only just realised to their detriment.

 

And I am quite sure that you realized that despite the UK having control of it's borders another gun crime has taken place. With over 2,000 offences in London and the West Midlands alone in 2014 you cannot say that this has got anything to do with outside influences. Instead of trying to put a spin on it try looking at why these things are happening there.

 

I think you are both right. There is a problem with gun crime in Britain, West Midland Police reported of the issues with guns being used by rival drug gangs in Birmingham just this week, but it is largely an issue whose root cause is at home. Supply of guns from aboard is not such a big issue, it's the theft of legally held guns and the modification of replica guns that is fuelling the supply - there are not many Uzi's or AK47's on our streets.
But without a doubt having no border controls inside Europe makes it very easy for terrorists and criminals to buy and transport illegal guns around Europe. With a large source of guns available in the Balkan countries and in some of the old Eastern Bloc countries, it is very easy for them to turn up on the streets of Paris or other cities & towns in Europe.
One of my sons has a shotgun licence and a gun that is kept locked in a gun cabinet that is bolted to a solid wall in a very inaccessible place - he went shooting yesterday.

 

Which is more than our players did yesterday......

 

I was never discussing gun crime at all. I was only referring to countries having differing rules which they are entitled to do. I was simply furthering our previous discussion on the merits, or particularly the problems of the Schengen Agreement.

Andrew Neill that well known, extremely experienced, journalist declared that in his opinion the Schengen Agreement was dead since some of the Paris terrorists freely moved from Syria without being challenged. No politician will take responsibility for making it easier to repeat the atrocities. If it is widely accepted that the external borders cannot be policed adequately then the only solution is internal borders to provide some checks.

 

So why put it after two posts that were discussing gun crime? Not very convincing.

 

I don't need to convince anyone. If you are are confused that is not my problem.

 

You are quite entitled to your views, but it is a shame that you cannot engage with a subject that is being discussed.