Off Topic Political Debate

I don't think he sees much difference between Thatcher and Blair - New Labour was Thatcher mark 2.

 

Things will not be different because it is not the politicians who actually run the UK. It is Senior Civil "Servants" and the Treasury who do. Regardless of whichever party (or parties) form the next government, their policies will be amended, adulterated or simply ignored by face-less bureaucrats in Whitehall. These men (and I use this deliberately) all live in Surrey or "leafy Bucks" and are dedicated to preserving the status quo (and I don't mean Rick Parfitt). It is these men that "Big Business" influences and even directs - and there are many ways in which that is accomplished - not all being ethical or even legal.

So you can all argue about Tories being fascists, Labour being Communists etc. etc. until you are blue in the face - it won't make a happence of difference.

 

I remember Yes Minister and that was thought to be a fairly accurate picture of political life.

 

Although some on here have quite happily placed Labour, Communism and even the Nazis under the same label - I don't think that anyone has, as yet, called the Tories Fascists (despite Thatcher's apparent love for Pinochet !). Much as I might agree with you on some points here it is, unfortunately, a blueprint for doing nothing. I take the view that all power structures which have been created by people, can also be changed by them. The situation you describe is nothing other than the accumulation of millions of people 'doing nothing' ie. content to be ruled, and resigned that those above will do their own thing whatever. Populations which are 'politically active' eg. the Scandinavians, Swiss, Austrians etc. take responsibility for their environment and do not have to live under the hopeless scenario which you have described.

 

Ah but I didn't anywhere advocate "doing nothing" now did I? And I certainly don't consider what I said to be any sort of "blueprint". I'm just not convinced that the "political" system in this country, as evolved, to be capable of changing things.

The arguments should be about how we dismantle what has been created over decades/centuries. How we rid ourselves of this crapulent layer of self-serving Establishment Ministry Men. How we break the links between Global Corporations and senior Civil Servants. How we devolve more decision making to the regions and how we equalise the opportunities between London, the South-East and the so-called Northern Powerhouse.

I'm afraid that I do not know the answer - but we sure as hell can't "do nothing".

 

At least Blair had the intelligence to realise that the UK (mainly England) had rejected the 60's/70's left wing socialism for good. After the years of strife inflicted on the UK by the powerful union warlords the public had had enough. Blair knew the working class had aspirations to be homeowners, share owners, chance to be self employed and merge with the former middle class.
Despite the impression the casual reader may glean from this forum, England is overwhelmingly a Conservative country, the tories having over 100 more MP's than Labour.
People complain that the politicians are all the same, well maybe the major parties all realise that they need to populate the centre right ground to stand a chance of ever being elected.

Of course there is a temporary bounce of the anti-asterity brigade but I predict once Alex Salmond flexes his muscles in the next parliament it will infuriate the English leading to a worsening relationship between the two countries. That is exactly what the SNP is looking forward to but the ultimate winners will be the Conservatives once devolution for the Scottish is completed in less than 5 years.

The future is bright, the future is blue.

 

With only just over 90,000 members and an average age of over 70 will there still be a Conservative Party in 5 years time ? Maybe the reason why Blair moved so far to the right was that he realised that there was no longer a cohesive industrial working class left to vote Labour. I don't know how you can come to the conclusion that England is overwhelmingly a Conservative country, when did they last manage more than 37% of an electoral turnout of 60% - by your own acknowledgement the Liberals are also too far left for you - meaning that the only way the Tories can ever have a chance of winning anything is because the opposition is divided, this being the only reason Thatcher won anything.

 

I came to the conclusion that England is a Conservative country due to fact that the recent parliament had 294 English MP's to Labours's 191, overwhelming I would say. The only consensus is the SNP, welsh and the Greens.

I cannot see the percentage of Tory MP's v Labour MP's changing much. If the tories are the largest party after May they will correct the unfair constituent boundaries which will capture another 15/20 MP's next time.

 

Sorry I meant 294 tory MP's to Labour's 191

 

It does make you wonder if the Tories are planning a long game, in which in which Labour will get into bed with the SNP to form a government - and the price to pay will another referendum. But it would be suicide for Milibland, but can he resist the chance to be PM?

 

Whatever happens wy. it will be a messy result. The days in which either of the 2 parties could dream of 40% + of the vote are long gone, and so coalition is the name of the game. The UK. does not however have a tradition of coalition government but needs to learn fast, and it appears that, like it or not, the SNP will emerge as the 3rd party. In some ways I think both parties want to lose this one - does Cameron really want a majority which commits him to an EU referendum which would rip his party apart ? Is a Tory-Ukip coalition possible? - not on your life, because it implies both parties doing well which is more or less impossible. My belief is that in the end Miliband will be PM, firstly because of the way votes translate into seats (which is I admit unfair - but the Tories used the same system in the past) and secondly because he is the best placed to form a coalition - and is the only one capable of forming a 3 party coalition, which may be necessary. The one thing which I would bet on is that whoever wins will have problems surviving the full 5 years - so it may be a good election to lose ! Having said that I would dread a possible EU Referendum - can you imagine how the million or so Britons living in the EU are viewing that possibility ?

 

Your most sensible post to date, it actually makes sense.

If the tories form the next government Merkel will throw a few scraps to Cameron who will subsequently recommend staying in. The country will vote to stay in but it will possibly cause a larger rift within the tories.

In the unlikely event of voting to leave the EU there would new arrangements to protect the interest of Britons living abroad in the EU and foreign EU nationals living in Britain.

There would also be a free trade arrangement, the German car manufacturers would not want to lose the UK as one of their best export markets.

 

Mmmm, interesting so we base our arguments for leaving the EU on a nebulous "free trade agreement". Of course the EU would rush to sign such an agreement, with the UK having none of the obligations put into place to ensure a level playing field for trade within the EU. Likely?

And what of non car-related trade? With our vast market of 70 million, we could also go out and dictate terms to the North American Block, the Asian Tigers, the "Commonwealth" who we jettisoned so brutally in the 70s and who have since made other arrangements.

Smacks of the "Fog in Channel, Continent isolated" arrogance so prevalent amongst UKIP and many Conservatives. BTW we no longer have an Empire to impose trade upon.

Give me a few Merkel "scraps" any day over the likely outcome and terminal decline of the UK if we left the EU.

 

I do not think that if Britain left the EU that they would be in a position to negotiate the terms of their exit ! Also there is no reason to suppose that the typical European reaction to it would not be similar to the English reaction to Scotland going it alone. One other point here is that the main difference between us is not one of politics - but rather that I presume all posts on here are sensible even if I may disagree with them.

 

If there is one reason NOT to vote Tory that is it

Seriously though.. .we have to think of the medium term and what is best for our country......

 

please log in to view this image

 

I thought everyone had a polo horse in their grounds, it keeps the groom busy.

 

I sold mine as he was a different colour to the 7 Arabian stallions and I hate badly coordinated gardens!

 

i told the wife she cant have them on our 8 acres as im not paying to have all trees cut down