Off Topic Political Debate

It's not a question of repeating, or not repeating, mistakes. Labour's membership is 3 times bigger, which means they have more on the streets getting the message across when it comes to a ground campaign. Bearing in mind the uncertainty of a hard Brexit it could well be that the Tories don't have the same financial backing as in the past. In reality Blair has no right to make comments of that nature - it was he that presided over a party which halved in size and his brand had become a toxic one by the end. If there is a reason why they are not 20% ahead then it comes down to Brexit - namely the voters do not know what they would get under Labour, and this would be no different if Blair was in charge.

 

It is quite usual for opposition parties to be well ahead during the UK government's term in office. The fact is the Labour Party is only showing momentum in its recruitment of far left supporters, it has little appeal to voters that occupy the middle ground. McDonnell's frightening spending spurge, senior shadow cabinet fluffs and the huge split in the party has alienated traditional Labour supporters. Blair was only stating the obvious because he sees little chance of a Labour victory with the likely lads in charge. The Labour position on Brexit changes daily, nobody knows what they stand for.

 

Just watched a bit of a debate in the HOC about the budget. They were talking about housing at that stage, and the point was being made that the large house builders are the ones sitting on land banks. The suggestion being put forward was that individual plots should be made available by local councils as they are here, with small builders able to provide houses, or indeed self build projects. Exactly what SH has championed in the past, and something I would agree with. The suggestion came from the opposition front bench and was ignored when the minister stood up to respond. Shame that he doesn't listen to perfectly reasonable suggestions.

 

The idea of creating affordable serviced plots as in France is an excellent way of building more houses. A vast number of people want to build their own house but normally fail because of the shortage and the inflated price of building land. I'm sure the influence of the major builders has been far too strong with all governments, this must be stopped. The value of their shares reduced yesterday but I'm not sure how seriously this government will curtail their activity. There has been recent projects in the UK which involved councils providing land for self build which is why we have had the highest start numbers for years but still is not enough.

 

So both you and I are agreed that what the Labour party was putting forward was a decent proposal. No doubt some of the silly papers would not go along with it. I would also like to know how much some of the large builders contribute to the Tory party.

 

I'm not aware of the Labour proposals. I would expect most of the press would agree the large builders have too much control over the industry. It is such an obvious answer for councils to supply land and the site services, the government could also provide affordable finance, especially while interest rates are so low. There are areas of low grade green belt land that could be used without destroying the countryside, although I cannot see the Tories tackling this issue with a minority government.

 

You describe what the government could do. Why won't they do it then? This was what the opposition was proposing. I can only suggest that local councils who do sit on brown field sites, let alone green belt land which at one time they let out to farmers, but now push out the tenant of his home and livelihood, have been so starved of funding that they cannot commit to providing the plots. Looking at the figures from all sources today, there is little chance of money being made available from central government.

 

The effect of Labour's recession is long lasting. Unfortunately there is a finite amount of cash, the aid budget should be diverted to causes such as these.

 

What you are saying is that the government is wrong, but you would rather blame it on the opposition. You talk about borrowing while interest rates are low, but cannot quite bring yourself to admit that is what the Labour party is saying on housing. I am no more a fan of the Tories than some of the extreme Labour policies, but would not shove decent ideas from wherever they came to one side because of a political affiliation.

 

The problem Labour has is due to its recent announcements on spending have been unfunded and expensive, adding £500 billion to our debt mountain. Specific targeted areas such as serviced building land may not actually cost the government anything in the long run. The cost of providing each plot would be less than the actual sale price. If the building societies can offer fixed rate mortgages for less than 1% the government should be able to also, especially to those on the council waiting lists.

 

The trouble is that Hammond yesterday was forced into the position where he had to say that borrowing for Brexit was unlimited. He didn't know, but the £3bn was only the start, and he doesn't have it unless that magic money tree has reappeared. Where are the government going to find these cheap means of funding when they don't have any money? They will have to borrow it, yes or no? I have said that I agree to your idea of councils providing serviced plots, but until central government allows them to borrow, or the government itself does, then this will just go round and round and nothing will happen. Send a letter to your MP and tell him what to do.

 

What most people keep forgetting is much of what the government spends is borrowed money. They are the first to moan when the government takes a responsible attitude and tries to live within its means. The government has already earmarked funds to help increase the housing stock, I would make my suggestion a priority. The UK should not continue to borrow large amounts to keep its commitment on foreign aid, some of this cash could be used for necessary UK projects.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...meron-had-deal-with-murdoch-for-2010-election

Ken Clarke on the Cameron/Murdoch deal that saw the Sun back the Tories in 2010.

Nothing new I suppose, but it does show how corporate agendas can degrade a democratic system, and how they actually get inside a government and advise it. It basically makes our votes meaningless, just the means to keep the Establishment in power.

 

And on a similar theme - how government helps the porn industry.

https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/...ut-to-change-in-a-way-youre-not-going-to-like

 

https://www.thenation.com/article/a...ady-been-a-disaster-for-people-with-diabetes/

Just a small sample of what the Tories want for the UK instead of the NHS. There is something so wrong with any government that allows a sentence such as this to ever be uttered - Shane Patrick Boyle, a founder of Zine Fest Houston, died on March 18 after his GoFundMe campaign to pay for insulin came up $50 short.

When the heck will the electorate wake up to itself?

 

Those that oppose sensible fiscal management and insist on unlimited public spending are simply loading debt onto our children and grandchildren.

 

Quite a fair article on Corbyn.

PETER OBORNE: This was the week that convinced me Jeremy Corbyn will never be Prime Minister

 

Who the hell is Peter Oborne ? He repeats the same old mantras in a different way - look at the rhetoric: 'Crazy Marxist Policies' - I have seen nothing in Corbyn's agenda to justify this claim. 'Befriending of extremists' - the negative way of interpreting the believe that a way to dialogue should remain open. 'Still the party of economic responsibility' - must be the joke of the year because all the costs of Brexit must be laid at the door of the Tories. It was also not the fault of Labour that Britain's economy became so badly inbalanced and so heavily dependent on the financial sector. 'The nightmare of Britain in the 70s' - Mostly caused by the Suez war and the resultant oil crisis, the results of which Callaghan negotiated very well. Another article full of soundbites and rhetoric from a right wing hack - why do you bother reading such obvious propaganda ?

 

The best interview of Jeremy Corbyn I've seen was by a stand-up comedian. However, for anyone looking for the usual political-type interview, it's not for you as it's more a chat-show style interview as it included talking about his childhood and his parents, the death of one of his brothers and what drove him into politics. It was interesting that John Bishop had an idea to put to Corbyn that there should be independent heads of the NHS and Education, in the same way that the Bank of England does. Corbyn said that there is already one for the NHS, and I assume that the head of OFSTED could be considered the one for education, but I certainly wouldn't be able to say who they are.

 

The problem is that most bread is full of soya flour which my wife is intolerant to. Fortunately we have invested in a decent breadmaker but it's still an expensive option.