The 2005 general election is nearly upon us. Which way will you vote, and you reasons why. Here is a brief list of the potential contestants, please add your own.


More tax!
Less tax!
Dont know!
Death to all infidels!
Who gives a shit?

The great pretender.

Well,well well! Thats a fine rogues gallery you have posted there.
I think 'Phoney Tony' will just about be top of that heap.
Which way will I go? The blue camp just about shades it for me. On the other hand, if Tony does win again, then his lot will have clear up the mess he has made over the last eight years. And that, good reader, is some mess.

A choice between ArseHole 1 (BLiar) & ArseHole 2 (Dracula the failure, just as self serving & 2 faced) is not very attractive.

Both want to take away our freedom.

Dracula would also screw up the economy & the NHS.

Kennedy, nice bloke, nice party, mostly nice policies but no good at playing political games so won't get to the top.

Monster Raving Loony Party policies, so loony that they almost make sense but what's the point?
At least they give us a laugh.

Hoping for a hung parliament.

Can you trust Dracula?, I dont think so. Im going for the dummy Blair.

GF

Trust & Politician!

Those 2 words just don't belong together.

NEVER trust a Politician!
Always keep your eye on them.
NEVER turn your back on them & leave them to get on with it.

It would be good if someone stood over them with a whip & hit them the moment they stepped out of line!

They need constant monitoring but the media doesn't do that job because they have their own agenda.

Words of Wizdom there apple. Did you see the prog on the Poll Tax riots after the BBC1 news last night. Id forgotten just how vicious the whole thing was. Some horrific scenes in the streets of london. Wasnt it Dracula who drafted the poll tax up???????????.

cheers GF.

apple:

"It would be good if someone stood over them with a whip & hit them the moment they stepped out of line!"
You mean like Blair does now?

gf. Missed that.
Poll Tax is still the fairer way! Why should an old age couple pay the same as 'next door' with several wage earners?
Notice that the most vociferous objectors are always 'the usual suspects'! SWP et al.

GF,

Saw some of it, didn't need reminding.
Yep, it was mostly Dracula.

standber, Nope Local income tax is even fairer.

Then anyone on tiny wages is not unfairly burdoned, not just the old age couple that you mention.

17 years we had to put up with the Tories not listenining to the public, then comes along B'liar and same thing happens. We are taking a dangerous road, taking away peoples civil liberties and it wont be long before anyone gets put away (with no trial) for disagreeing with the government. New labour are more Tory than the tories. Is there a real choice???? Could the liberals govern?? The less of all evils to me.

ps Whats the next thing to get banned (could be a new thread)
fishing
green laneing (motorbikes)
motor sport
football
horse riding
walking
darts

Kivver,

It was 18 years, did you get a year off, you lucky person.

I wish BLiar & Dracula were banned from elections.

There all tossers. Nothing to choose between them. They'll tell you want you want to hear to get in and then do exactly what they want. We live in a democratic dictatorship. We're all thick, don't know anything and will do what we're told. Peasants that's us the masses. Me, the only vote I'll make is a very big "V" (that's a Winston) to the lot of them.

MS

apple.
I'll go along with a local tax.

Many a pundit said we would suffer with Labours massive majority.....it's happened alright. Some crank with a red tie dreams up something and it's law next day. Through on the nod.
Thank god they didn't completely emasculate the Lords. It would be even worse.

stabdber

You've just described a Democratic Dictatorship.

MS

I think they should put the House of Lords up as a party for election. The only defenders of democracy in Parliament. I'll vote for them.

MS
Democracy: The least worse system.
It is employed from as lowly as the local dart team, through Local Gov to National Gov. There is no other equitable way.
Many people have died fighting for it. The least we can hope is that we do not elect someone who decides to become a dictator. Mugabe.....fancy him?
A strong Upper House is our salvation.

Country going down the pan with the aid of europe (due to stupid rules and billions wasted mainly in fraud). The constant scaremongering, terrorist attack, bird flu, Jordon singing in the eurovision song contest, we are not really going to fall these age old ways of divide and rule are we??

An unelected upper house. There by birth, someone's mate or what ever. You don't elect them nor can you get rid of them. Is Blair, Thatcher or who ever any less of a Dictator the Mugabe. The only difference as I see it is that they are a bit more suttle about how they go about it. Dark forces are at work in this county just as they are elsewhere. Dictators don't listen. Sound familiar.

MS

We certainly dont want the Torries back in. Wasted the majority of North Sea Oil revenues on paying for unemployment which they wanted.

Remember they only look after the top 10% of society, dont let 'the jobsworths and two bob millionaires' of this world tell you anything else. Remember the chain gangs when Thatcher was in power, 1 job vacancy for every 100 unemployed.

Young men and women in chain gangs doing the jobs that the likes of Mears and Enterprise do now. Gangs on city centre street corners hanging about doing nothing.

The torries want it all back truth be known.

I agree. GF for PM. Got my vote.
My view Thatcher was a disaster for this county.

MS

sir bob gelof for PM!!!!!! What great job he would do!!, long as he promises not to sing.

Thatcher did not get rid of the miners.........the miners did. Greed.

And what has Bliar done? Put umpteen thousnds into Government employ. Don't forget, after six month they cannot be sacked. Think of all them copper bottomed pensions that will have to paid for. Not from their ranks but from the productive jobs in private hands. Brown has filched billions of pension fund money from the private sector. Tax and spend, the Socialist way.
Don't forget the burgeoning legions of 'Incapacity' claimants.
Get preggers, get a flat! School children getting 30 to go to school.
Where does all that binge drink money come from? Please tell me.
The catalogue of ineptitude is endless. And who will have to clear up the mess?
Not Bliar. He will soon be having a despised title. Lord Bliar of Bollockdrop.

Thatcher was a menace and should be put on a war crimes tribunal for the sinking of the Belgrano, argies out of the zone and running away, undeniable. B'liar and bush should follow them in. How caN THEY TALK ABOUT DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM AND ACT LIKE THEY DO.

Kivver

Your absolutely right, can't add anymore to that.

standber

I was wondering if you'd get to the miners. It wasn't greed that caused the strike. It was ordinary hard working men fighting to save there jobs and there way of life, and to give them a decent standard of living for their families. It turned father against son, brother against brother and neighbour against neighbour. Whole communities were turned against each other with the effects still being felt today. Everything Scargill predicted happened. The hardship those proud communities went through to try and keep there jobs was huge. They were demonized by the right wing press that thought Thatcher was wonderful and their ranks were infiltrated by plain clothes police and army trying to making them look worse. Dark forces were at work. And where is the mining industry today, totally defunct. Ordinary people fighting for what they considered their right..a decent life. Not too much to ask for was it.
And today we have Blair, who wouldn't listen to the voices of 1 million britons, so determined was he to have his war. No one kills in my name, no sir, trying to say it's in my countries best interest, bollocks. Are we safer now, well you tell me.
That's it I'm off the soap box now.

MS

They were brave men led by a donkey!! The coal piled higher and higher because nobody would buy it at a price which would keep those men's wages paid we were importing coal at less than half the price it cost to produce ours MT stood firm against foolish ideas that we could continue to prop up an ailing industry. It was heart breaking to watch and yes there were dark forces at work nothing to do with the poor miners just hell bent on causing maximum trouble for our country!
Think about it a lot of those people are now in the new clean healthy industries attracted to the areas by gov subsidies etc. Would any of you really want your children to work down a pit in this day and age ?? The fear of change led to the inevitable and MT had more guts and integrity than anyone up there these days---load of self seeking worms never prepared to face up to their messes and resign- the list is endless- they just smarm and pass the buck!! Middle England is picking up the bill for all the benefits,credits and gov. millions employed in one quango after another plus Prescotts 5 star trips to keep him busy doing nothing.
I'm happy I'm nearly at the end of my working life as red tape and the burdens loaded on my business while I'm sympathetic to some of them are driving jobs out of the door and as for training places forget it-just can't afford it any more. We're going to hell in a hand cart if this lot get in again!
sorry for the rant-you guys set me off!

A lot of what you say is true and makes sence. Its just the way she went about it. If she was in the wizard of oz she would be the Tin Man. She was heartless! I agree about these money eating quangos and red tape, you only have to look at the bottom of your letterbox every day. Its time a new party rose from the ashes that wants fairness and justice for all. A world where governments treat all thier citizens with respect. Its also time to face the problems, global warming, resources running low, immigration, and no 1 problem ironically greed.

micky.
I didn't bring Maggie into the argument, somebody else did.
Upon Nationalisation, all the miners were proud and fantastic. But they had taken over an industry that had been starved of money through the threat of being nationalised........and the managers spent like crazy. They asked for, and got, everything. Records fell by the week and the lads were earning good money. They were kings and rightly proud.
But time and tide move on. The old stalwarts retired to be replaced with those who had no 'esprit de corps' of the mining fraternity of the old days.
Times were good. So good that they could afford a few 'sickies' and still pick up a fair whack. So, to the Friday off they added the occaisional Monday.
This got to be common place. Output began to stagnate. The gov were in a cleft stick. The miners went on strike and Ted caved in and gave them more money in need for more coal. The miner was king.....but with a different face.
Maggie comes on the scene.
She gave in to their every demand. Good money, open book for overtime.
Coal streamed out of the pits and still the miners asked for more. But their greed clouded their eyes. Every power station was cramfull full of coal and every minehead the same. Coal was stored everywhere.
A deal was done with Poland, US and Australia. "Can we have coal if we ask for it?" Yes was the reply.
The scene was set. Maggie pulled the shutters down and the rest is history.
Scargill? An utter prat. He fought for his own reputation and wage packet.
With the miners gone he would have no power base. He went everywhere.
Even to Saltley coking and gas complex........and didn't see the stockpile of coal there. BUT HE HAD IGNORED THE OBVIOUS! The miners day had ended with oil being found.
If he had had a brain in his head, he would have accepted that coal could not compete. BUT HE COULD HAVE WOUND DOWN THE INDUSTRY TO THE MINERS ADVANTAGE.
Not him. He was too busy sucking up to Moscow. He suffered from the vapours.....vodka vapours.
moneyplus is right. No civilised nation should put men into stygian darkness, many feet underground, to earn a living. It's barbaric and I feel glad for those youths who, had history been different, would they themselves been doing that thankless task.
If you have read that book: 'The ragged trousered phillantropists' don't treat it as a bible. It isn't one but an excellent read nonetheless.

Those miners would gladly be underground now than on the pathetic soul destroying retraining garbage courses they were on and are still on and move on from one to another because theres nothing else well some of them are working on the check outs at Tescos. Talk about soul destroying.

Go into the Working Mens clubs of Barnsley and Doncaster and ask them what they feel about Thatcher and the liar Heseltine who said" no pits would be closed" but only 12 months later plans came out for the closing of 25 plus pits.

YOU JUST CANT TRUST THE TORYS.

GF. Dont forget Dracula was one of them, as he changed?????????????????, dont make me laugh. Its all about who you trust most at this election more than any other in the recent past I feel. And as for the Gulf war (right or wrong) there isnt a PM in this country who wouldnt have followed Bush in, so lets stop talking silly and get that one out of the way pronto.

thier all ----ing liars trust none
of them tax tax taxed to death
we do know what it feels like

HUSTLER - in spain in the not to distant future
if can sell buisiness without giving all the gains to
.gov out of kindness and of course being a Brit (only cap used
not educated )

gf
The lucky ones are those that got out before silicosis or pneumonicosis struck.

A tories aim is the country first and himself second.
A Labourites is himself first, Socialism second and f*** the country.
(Example? Prescott. Just look at him)

lol standber!



Keep it coming, it will make his lairdship turn in his benifits queue.



Regards to all from mananaland.


ps, I see that arsehole Gerry Adams is still leading the NL plonkers a merry dance. Is it that they are trully stupid, or so idealistic that they cant see he is laughing at them?


grrrrh!

Well I never thought my posting would provoke so much debate and excellent posts they are. Well done all of you, it's good to see we do still care what ever side of the divide you're on. My point, which has been shown up in your posts is, there is nothing to choose between them. Who do you choose, who can you trust, I just don't know. If ever this country needed a real leader, now would be a good time to come forward.
Once again great posts guys. Sandber, good reply. Next subject, should prostitution be available on the NHS?

LOL

MS

Sex on the NHS? What an idea. mickeyskint for PM!

I think we should look for someone who is aware of our special
needs as a voting group....and therefore I propose..



(drum roll.....)



GoldDog for Prime Minister!!!!

;>)

Micky...........my son!

The name you are looking for is on the tip of your tongue.
The sainted Lady herself............

Baroness Thatcher

..........if only. Big sigh.

Sex on the NHS? You already have it. At least the twirlies have

..........Viagra on prescription. ~:-))

maxk. Let him know. The old *astard.

You just cant trust the Torys, vote labour. Personally Ive never had it as good as a business man over the term of this Labour government. I cant see what they have done wrong. Put the Torys back in power and the unstability will return to the market place and the shop floor. Browns done an excelent job bar cutting capital gains. We have stability and not the swings and round abouts the Torys alway produce. You know it makes sense vote for labour.

GF.

One thing that as to be done by who ever wins(labour)is that local councils have to be scrapped. The amount of waste is unbeleiavable.

Just look at the job adverts in your local rag to see what pathetic positions are being created. I dont know what the alternative is, any thoughts??????.

GF.

gf
What about the bumper bundle of non-jobs every month in the Gullible (Guardian)?
Clever clogs Brown has shunted a pile of costings onto the local Gov. You WILL pay..he'll make sure of that.
Alternative ? Vote Tory. Then you will find out the mess we are in through Socialism. Or vote Socialist and carry on dreaming.......for a while. Then the brick will drop.

Well all I know is that 'us up North' have been a lot better off under the Labour party. More Jobs, more Schools, more University places,lower prices, more positive EXPECTATION the one thing the Torys always take away from Middle Britain.

Yes we might pay a little more tax under labour, but for sure we wont see the fat cats get fatter and fatter like they would under the Torys.

Remember the Torys only look after the top 10% of people.

YOU CANT TRUST THE TORYS.

GF

Sorry GF-can't agree with you at all. The economy was stable due to Lawson and Clarke when Brown took over the good times were just around the corner. All Brown did was continue with many TORY policies, saw sense on staying out of the Euro ( TORY policy-thank goodness though Clarke wanted us in) handed over interest rate decisions to the bank of England- good sense-- and then brought in the 66+ tax rises and extra fuel duty, zillions of speeding fines which are tax by any other name!, robbed the pension funds so many poor pensioners now haven't got one, filtered off the lottery funds-think stupid Dome etc and gay black onelegged support groups etc-- took on 4 Billion more civil servants to reduce the unemployment figures or moved them to incapacity benefit which has gone up 7 times! Poured money into schools and hospitals which areeven dirtier and more badly managed than ever.
Just seen a man on working lunch saying he prefers to work but would be 50 a week better off if he stayed home and lived on his benefits. Where's the sense in that!
I used to employ 3 trainees and now have to turn them away, can't afford them. They are not productive for a year and the promised help just doesn't go anywhere. Put them on a training scheme 2 days a week for a year then tell them they are qualified---no employer would touch them let alone afford them!
Get proper training on the job and our youngsters stand a better chance, as it is they don't have a chance to get out of the colleges and don't know what service means when working in shops etc-they'd rather chat with their mates! I have no problem with pushing jobs and help up North I'm sure its needed but remember our friend Gordon is piling the bills very high indeed and his stealth taxes are going nowhere near paying for them. The **** will hit the fan after the election and only us poor mugs are here to pick up the tab!!
I should think the Tories would rather not win because they will get the blame for the mess that's around the corner the sensible answer is to leave Tony preening his way to the absolute pits and then the Tories try to sort it out in 4 years time!
Even better put 50 women up there and ban men from politics- I'd have a go! Condy's looking good in the states. cheers MP

moneyplus,

You are out of touch with reality, you can't trust anyone.

Point taken you old cynic!

gf
Prescott got his comeuppance 'up north'. They told him to sod off with his extra layers local Gov. Now he wants to knock half of the place down and make the same mistake as the fifties-sixties. Go upward.
But he is intent on a big building scheme.....down the South-East where it's jam packed already. Brand new rabbit hutches for 60,000. One builder said the only way he could get that price was if they were all wood construction.
I wonder what they would call the place? Domesville maybe? Prescotts pipedream?
They would have to ban the sale of Heinz Beanz that's for sure.

What a sad state of affaires it's all come to. Not one politician or party we can trust completely to do the right thing for this country and all it's people. No wonder we're fed up with the decision makers. And the real sad part is there's nothing on the horizon, no one better, no guiding light. So it's Hobson's choice.
Oh well think I'll roll a fat one.

MS

Good post MS, my point entirely, its all about trust this next election and lets face it you cant trust Dracula thats for sure.

GF.

The best vote might be a non vote, anyone else subscribe to this theory?. Might show them that we are all fed up with the lot of them.

GF.

What about giving the libs a chance??? They cant do any worse.

GF

Got to say I'm wondering if I should bother, especially as The Red Lion is opposite the village hall. With the non vote I just keep getting the feeling that with so many countries not having the vote we all should use it. But then we're back to where we were, Hobson's choice. I have a feeling that 'Stella' might get mine. Oh I don't know.
The only problem I have with the Libs is their policy towards europe. I'm not anti but I'm not totally pro. I think they would give too much away and I just couldn't bear the thought of being told what to by the French and Germans.

How about Jordan as PM. She has a couple of big points in her favour guys.

MS

The Libs.......



LOL !

moneyplus suggested I paid a visit here, knowing I was a great fan of her investment prowess and hoped it would spill over to her politics. Not far out actually: I think I would give women a chance to run the show; can't do worse than the men. I don't include Maggie as a woman; she was strongly against any competition from other women and thought like a man. As to the result: propose a narrow Major-like margin for Labour. They would then be hounded from left and right and collapse in a compost-like heap. If they didn't they would have to cut out any thing extreme and we might even get some decent decision-making. So my suggestion is that you should give 50.5% of your vote to labour and 49.5 to the conservatives. Best done by a CFD, of course (you would expect me to say that)! kivver suggests the liberals but they disappeared 20 years ago!

Eric

If you watch the TV programme with Alan Sugar called The Apprentice, I can't help think most women haven't got what it takes to be high achievers. There is the odd exception of course, but generally it should be left to us men. If Churchill was born a woman we would all be speaking German. No not for me, I like people who know their place in life.

MS

My goodness!

Prepare to handbagged micky!

mickey

The obvious reply: if Chamberlain had been born a woman, we wouldn't have needed Churchill!

Eric

I am only young, and inexperienced in the general way of the world, but allow me to demonstrate my opinions on the forthcoming election.

Liberal Democrats - a party that likes to sit between two sides as much as possible in order to find its position on an issue. 'What do you think Tony? and you Michael? Right, well, I very much think it's a case of compromising.' Great, right up until you're leading. Then how do you find your position? I agree with the principle of raising taxes on the highest earners - those who disagree are entitled to their opinion, but in my view when you are earning that much you can afford to give a little to people worse off than yourselves. Nonetheless, I don't think the Lib Dems have the ability or strength for effective leadership.

Conservatives - where to begin? A party that seems to consist entirely of rich self-serving egotists. The statistics from previous Tory governments speak for themselves. As for cutting tax, this is a joke. Our public services are already underfunded, so where exactly is the spending going to be cut? At the moment, their answer to this question is 'we'll cut out all the middle managers'. Well, that's great and all, but as a long term cost-cutting exercise the flaws are fairly obvious I presume. Perhaps their plan is to continue that greatest of ideas, privatisation. After all, look how successful it was for the transport system. Hang on, it's in a ruinous state. The Conservatives have a proven track record in messing things up. A party that cannot even find itself an appealing new leader, and instead resurrects a semi-fascist Thatcherite, is hardly going to run a country very well. The party is in chaos. Expect Howard to be replaced as soon as the Tories lose in May; if he is not replaced, then the Conservatives are in an even worse state than it seems even now.

Labour - smug, spin-oriented, but look at the figures. This is an effective government. Stable economy, record employment, a successful scheme in the New Deal and the minimum wage (that the Tories opposed because of the dangers to the economy - I think we'll all admit that was yet another Conservative mistake). The downside to Labour seems to come from their forcing through of bills; however it is my opinion that this is more down to hugely ineffective opposition than as a result of any untoward leadership. I do not agree with every policy and bill that they draft, but I almost invariably find their position to be far superior to that of the ramshackle opposition parties.

The solution? Keep labour in, with a lesser majority. Luckily this is almost certainly what will happen.

Just a couple more points:
- Watching prime-ministers questions is always hilarious. It demonstrates how good Blair is at argument, and how inept Kennedy and Howard are. Watching this every week makes me more and more sure that of the three, he is the only viable option as a leader of our country. So he's stubborn? Good. I want the leader of my country to be able to stand his ground.
- Some may consider speeding fines to be a stealth tax but there's a simple solution. Don't speed. It is after all illegal. Would you complain about a fine for any other criminal offense? I doubt it. Either continue speeding and accept that you get caught, or don't speed anymore. You know the fines that can be imposed when you get in your car.
- Petrol prices had better bloody well be going up. Because there isn't that much left.

Thanks if you got to the end of this, and good luck with your investments. Personally I began investing only 1 month ago, I'm happy to report a 70% profit so far.

Adios

kshammas: after that nonsense, I suggest you retire and you can talk about your success as an investor for the rest of your life! EWR

maxk,

terrific header!


Mickey,

Bit near the mark!


Eric,

post 51, superb reposte!

It would be nice to have a government of any persuasion who put more emphasis on the quality of life than they do on 'growth'. Perhaps we should become more like the civilised Northern Europeans and less like the violent Americans?

Eric, with all due respect, what part of my nonsense did you particularly disagree with? Am happy to be enlightened by more senior people on politics, but in my 21 years of life, I can only comment on what I have seen. I have a great deal of respect for you after following many of your comments on SEO and ASC in recent weeks, so am keen to hear your in-depth opinions on the matter!

Also, 70% was not a boast, I realise I will almost certainly lose most of it!

Regards
Kevin.

On the final day the day we vote, you know whats going to put the party in power pure greed because as humans we always resort to that. The NHS, Schools, social services , crime etc it all goes through the window.

Its whos going to let you earn more dosh and keep most of it. It as to be Labour, yes we hear the ramblings of Howard and well er, well er, well er' well er, sorry dont know any of the conservatives, harping on at how they will cut back taxes in TIME, yes IN TIME, but just who for?????????????.

The top 10% of people in this country.

YOU JUST CANT TRUST THE TORYS.

GF.

goldfinger - from your comments I assume that you've never tried running a business under labour lol!

Have done for the last two governments and no problems at all. Dont know what the fuss is about. Youd only blame the torys the same way.

GF.

Great stuff! Keep it up chaps-pity more female input isn't forthcoming but like your comments Eric. Where are you girls???

kshammas.
Could have saved yourself a lot of time.....you should have just said 'vote for duplicitous Tony'.

All great G'mnts have been led by great leaders. Some have been perceived to be a great leader and been proven wrong. The trick is, knowing who would achieve greatness. That of course is an impossibility. Only history is the judge of greatness. Tony of course will fail the test.
But the problem as seen by many who would vote Conservative,is, Michael Howard.
Sadly, I don't think Michael will achieve greatness. A good technocrat is about all one can say. He doesn't inspire though. Tony did. And blew it.
So who instead of Michael? Hague? Fantastic orator who was force reared far,far too soon. Nobody likes a lippy youngster. His time might come again when memory has faded a bit.
No. My choice would be David Davies. A hard working self made man from the lowest rungs of the social scale. He knows what life is all about.
Not mouthy.Quiet and with well constructed arguments. A hint of hardness there that is shown when he has the chance at the Despatch Box. He doesn't shout but lets the other man hang himself.
Look him up. You'll find him with Google. Great? Only time will tell.

what a great thread!

very entertaining and certainly strong views expressed on both sides.

The problem with Blair is that he is a Liar. I simply do not trust the man. I am a conservative at heart and acknowledge that their leadership right now is up the swanny but the labour leadership is a lapdog to the US and is a master of (barely) stealth taxation.

The reality is that these days, as with the US, most parties are just left or right of centre. i just want a leader that i, as a citizen, can trust and have faith in. I do not with the current leadership.

when it comes to the iraq war i agree saddam should have been deposed but look at the way that plan was executed....all based on lies. at least go through the official channels for more time and then declare war. idiots.
we all know its about oil and we all know its about control in the middle east so bloody well acknowledge that fact. I don't see 100billion being spent trying to avoid the next genocide in Africa! they are all such hypocrites.

Anyway, i have seen the other side...Singapore. It is a nanny/police state following a supply side economic policy. heres the other part - 22% income tax, no CGT/IHT and VAT of 4%. Massive govenment surplus and 30 degrees all year round. lived there for 5 years so i can see how good it can be. if i have any wise cracks about "go back and live there then" all i will say is Blighty is home and always will be because that is where my family is.

So, a few views from me - for the record i would like no CGT, abolish the ridiculous IHT and make up the money by raising cigarettes to 20 per pack. Oh, and as for the PM...my vote goes to Mickey Skint's Mother in Law! Legend.

pop.
some good points..........don't know about mickys m-in-law. Is she tall and curvacious? Photo micky?

Taxation. It has been proven over and over again: Reduce taxation and more tax is gathered.
Over-tax the high earners and we will have a repeat of what happened the last time Labour tried it......brain drain.
IHT. A bearly acceptable tax that has been taken to it's limits.
CGT. Ditto. Why do they screw the people with ingenuity SO much?
State Pension.The New Zealand way is very attractive. After ten or more years in NZ, everybody gets the same pension. Worked or not. (The mothers who have reared the children 'haven't worked', but rightly get the same.)
The massive gain? 95% of the people who used to run the greatly overstaffed
pension dept are found USEFUL work.

Must go. Just had a call to do some bloody work! Sod.

Standber, you seem to have gone from a Capitalist to a Communist...........

"State Pension.The New Zealand way is very attractive. After ten or more years in NZ, everybody gets the same pension. Worked or not."ENDS

If thats the way of your thinking one as to question why you dont see workers and non workers all getting the same income. A very strange remark from a torry.

Anyway back to pensions here, you can bet your bottom dollar good old Gordon as given the pensioners a tenner extra in the budget today to secure their votes come election day. NICE.

Vote Labour, YOU CANT TRUST THE TORYS AND DRACULA.

GF.

EWRobson,

in message 53 you said that kshammas message 52 was nonsense.

In fact, it was a quite balanced view compared to some of the posts on this thread which are totally 1 sided & refuse to see the faults in the party that they support.


mickeyskint in message 42

You said

"What a sad state of affairs it's all come to. Not one politician or party we can trust..."

IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN LIKE THAT!

We need a written constitution that specifies constant monitoring of the politicians. This is the only way to keep them in line.

We have a right to know what they are doing.

Any voter without a criminal record should be able to find out anything so that politicians can be forced to abide by very tight constitutional anticorruption laws.

It should be illegal for a politician to benefit from anything unless specifically permitted to do so by legislation.

Politicians love secrets.
Secrets should not be permitted, the only thing that should be allowed is a delay of public release of information because it would compromise a current operation but they should have to prove that in a closed court if a voter requests the information.
As soon as the operation is over, further delay should be illegal as specified by a written constitution.

i am also an advocate of paying politicians significantly more than they earn now. that way the best and brightest would be attracted. pay an MP 250/- a year and some industry stars may be attracted. contravertial but i have seen this work around the world. stops corruption and brings in the brains. that wage bill in nothing versus treasury income.

just an idea and then we wouldn't have to put up with the current bunch of "leaders"

What a fantastic Budget from Gordon Brown, like I predicted the 'Grey Vote' now secured and just look at the investment in enterprise Sir Alan Sugar was overwhelmed.

It certainly was a budget for the family and in paticular middle Britain.

Gordon was at his very best what a great chancellor he is, I filled up when he gave details on the spending on the Queen Mothers Memorial a shrewd investment this for the Foreign Travel Industry.

Yes he was brilliant and Im still shivering at all the effort and passion he put into his speech very much unlike the ravings of his opposite number today dracula who I would have mistaken for a football yob were it not for the suit he was wearing. And there behind him was good old Oliver Leftwing ....... tit, anyone recognise that handle from advfn?. As usual looking like the little mole he is. Strange how all the torys look the same, they all appear to have their eyes half closed, I suppose its inbreeding that as done that.

Anyway my conclusion, Labour will now go on and walk the next election, still a big majority will be maintained.

REMEMBER you cant trust DRACULA AND THE TORYS.

GF.

You could be wrong GF--people know when they're being bribed and a lot of the promised goodies don't materialise. Promises promises and poof they disappear!
Yes Gordon does seem to be the most sincere one among them but all these handouts have to be paid for either by borrowing which he has done massively or taxing hard working middle England. ie US! My father always said he was labour in his heart but knew we couldn't pay for their policies-so Tory in his brain! You will never ever reach the point that all people are on the same income it is a fact that the top leaders in industry etc create the wealth for this country to support the not so able. Tax these people to the hilt and they find ways of avoiding it, move their money off shore, relocate the business abroad or simply leave the country altogether. We are getting near the point when people and businesses are suffering like Dyson cleaners now made abroad, and call centres moving to India etc. crunch time is approaching and 3 months of every tax payers earnings are already earmarked for the government coffers so June is your tax earning freedom date--that's without all the indirect taxes we pay! Tory or Labour I think that's enough of my income supporting the tax credits and whatever 40% and spend it wisely. There's not much evidence to convince me it is being spent wisely!! How much income extra to this would you be prepared to have taken from you before you too would want to leave the country-it's 40% and no more for me!!
This is a great thread because no one ever calls to my front door for me to air my views, I live in on Dartmoor. Stay there and shut up do I hear you say?
cheers MP

GF

Sounds like you want to have Gordon's babies.
Take those blinkers off.

It's not all rosy but on balance the economy looks as if it will remain stable.

Brown has got a good track record & every year, the Tories & the international economic organisations say that his budget is bad or even disasterous.

Every year they are proved wrong, & the economy keeps on steadily growing.
Almost the whole world went into recession last time but we didn't.

I don't want the Tories to screw it all up AGAIN but I will have to put up with an ARSEHOLE called Blair for the sake of a stable economy.

Blair is a right wing ARSEHOLE but Howard is an even bigger ARSEHOLE & even more right wing.


Give me a hung parliament because that gives them less power.


Your comment about trust is rather superfluous.

Like I said before.

Trust & Politician!

Those 2 words just don't belong together.

Apple a hung parliaments no good nothing gets passed and they will have to return to the country. Anyway Blair will stand down and Brown will have taken over by 2007.

Im going for a 90 seat labour majority.

GF.

GF.
You do not know what you want! Other than Gordon for PM.

Oh, and try to refrain from swearing. It makes for better reading.

And it is Tory singular with Tories plural.

The Budget? Like the Curates egg.

Sadly I think you may be right there. They all seem to develop massive egos, feather their nests, drive around in fleets of limousines, stay in 5 star luxury and thumb their noses at the struggling worker bees! There are just a few that still seem sincere in both main parties--Clare Short( though she had to toe the party line and struggled with it) Mo Mowlem (daft as a brush) Gordon ( who is so down to earth he makes himself look silly and pretentious by turning up to every grand occasion in a suit instead of the normal dress- this silliness will prevent him being PM I think unless he stops making a political point)
Oliver(too gentle and nice for his own good) David Davis( sincere but a quiet bruiser and one to watch) and William Hague ( thoroughly decent but put forward far too soon and admits he wasn't normal to be in politics so young) He's definitely a future leader again but is doing far too well out of the bunfight!

Then there's ME of course and finally Mickey's M in Law!! spoilt for choice.

Socialists are all the same. "What is yours is mine".

USSR
East Germany
Poland
Italy (If they are in longer than six months)
China (Still. But I think the skin is falling from their eyes)
Best of the bunch? CUBA. But even Fidel can't make it work .

I'm surprised GF isn't banging the drum for PR. Silly Billy. (Wasn't that old 'spray it again'? You know, one of your lot.)

hi standber////Daivd Davies has indeed con his way up the pole////but he has suported alot of ideals // that could infact if acted upon STOP OTHERS FROM HAVING THE SAME CHANCE/////oh by the way////I WOULD NEVER TRUST/////////THETORRIES////////////////NEVER/////

moneyplus,

Come back to reality.

Here are another 2 words just don't belong together.

Sincere & Politician!



standber,

Socialism is just a word that they throw arround.

It does not & can not exist because it is illogical.

Castro is not a Socialist nor any of those who called themselves Socialist that ever got their hands on power.

Anyone in power soon realises that they can't be a Socialist because it is illogical & they soon resort to guns & secret police to stay in power.


Socialism is economic system where the means of production, distribution and exchange is controlled by the state.

As the abandoned Clause 4 of the Labour Party said:

'To secure for the producers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry, and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible, upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production distribution and exchange and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry and service.'

This is unworkable & therefore illogical.

& of course is yet another opportunity for corruption.

Great posts and strong views well done all of you. My post re the ladies was tonge in cheek and was intended to provoke them in to the discussion. Looks like I failed. It's really good to read different views, all put together so well, I've throughly enjoyed the last 10 minutes. My wedding anniversary today so I'm cooking the steaks. Splashed out on a bottle of champers as well, the real stuff, so I'll be pissed later on. I'll have one for you moneyplus, good luck.

Rab C Nesbitt for PM

MS

CORRUPTION HAPPENS//// ALSO UNDER A CAPITALIST///SYSTEM////IN GOOD ALL USA///IN GOOD OLD CAPITALISTIC EUC// DARE I SAY IN DEAR OLD UK./////

APPLE for PM!!--you've summed it all up so well. Unfortunately we have to have someone in charge so who do you back? Otherwise Anarchy and I'm definitely off!

micky
Don't be frit! Lets have a foto of your ma-in-law. I hear say she is a looker?

Congrats on your wedding anniversary. Comisserations to the lady. ~:-))

apple.
Socialists is what they are known as. Invariably Communists.
I.E USSR. Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics.
British Socialists have Commies among them. (Dennis Skinner--The Beast of Bolsover for one). A rose by any other name eh?

britollad. Get a new keyboard. It's playing up. Does the forward oblique stroke get stuck? Bin the board.

The chap I'm most disappointed with is Goldfinger - some people should stick to their level of primary competency and gf is a great tipster and stock-picker. But how can he view the budget as anything other than a chimera. Brown is actually giving away 1.8bill and raising 2.1bill. His 200 for pensioners council tax is for one year only. Boateng was slouched in a heap on Newsnight annihilated by Paxman. I think 67% of voters will see through the chenannigins and I believe GF will be embarrassed.

If Labour get in with a small majority then we could well see some fun, which will make the Major Government look like Premiership Champions. Howard is outpointing Blair every round so far but I suspect the contest doesn't have enough rounds. Never mind, to take over in a year or two with a decimated socialist party sounds a good idea.

Now, how about Alan Shearer for PM. Two great goals tonight but the one I really liked was Keiron Dyer's. Eight wins in a row! Fourth spot is on and a Champions League place, perhaps with an FA Cup and an Eufa Cup to go along with it. Only need another 15 wins!

Hey! This thread is a great idea. Apologies to kshammas though. I didn't have a cat to kick and anyone who says anything complimentary about Tony Bliar has me shouting at the Telly and dog slinking to its basket!

Eric

Eric - I don't like Blair either! But you must surely admit that when it comes to arguing effectively (and I can only comment on things such as Priminister's Questions) that Howard always ends up with egg on his face? Blair has an answer for everything. I don't like him, but he's good at what he does. I don't support all that many of Labour's policies, but I support more of them than other parties for the reasons I outlined previously. For example, still being a student myself I wholeheartedly disagree with the Labour policy on getting 50% of young people to university. That isn't what university is for; there is nothing wrong with skilled work - the life of academia is not for everyone. I, as a reasonably intelligent person, struggle more than my fair share with my degree, and personally I feel that learning for learning's sake is somewhat foolish. Other disagreements with Blair are on the war (I disagree fundamentally with the way we were led to war, but let's not forget that the Tories backed the government all the way) and the fox-hunting bill (though my personal position is anti-hunt I feel there will always be more pressing issues to attend to).

I just can't trust the Tories (he says, as he steals goldfingers tagline), and in particular could never be happy with Michael Howard in charge. Particularly their harping on about asylum seekers and immigrants. Their position to me borders on racism. Whilst I agree that one should look after one's own people first, I don't think it necessary for that to be to the detriment of others. I didn't see people complaining about the initiatives to bring doctors and nurses from overseas to get more people into the health service quickly.

Anyway, just my two (or twenty) penny's worth, and for my part I'm hoping for a somewhat narrower Labour victory.

Regards,
Kevin.

PS Eric, do you think Souness can persuade Shearer to give it another season?

Now we are really talking turkey! Can Souness persuade Shearer to give it another season: no! Can Shepherd: no! But might Shearer decide himself to go for another season: yes! First, jackie's record. Second: he's enjoying himself hugely at the moment. Third, fourth and fifth: the fans!

Regards, Eric

Come off it Eric, you said.......................................

"Howard is outpointing Blair every round so far but I suspect the contest doesn't have enough rounds." Ends, where do you get that from???????????????. I say he was like a football thug this afternoon on his reply, but Blair wether you like him or not will be retuned 90 plus seats majority. We need stability in this country especially for the market, the Torys will mess that up for sure. We dont need boom and bust again. Oh and by the way I am an Economist in fact a PHD Economist, "primary competency" you said? think again Eric please.
Theres no need to fall, out here. Im just taking it very light hearted. It aint worth taking it any other way.

Stanber where have I sworn (and if I have my sincere appologies) and please stop being petty re- to the English language, this is not a personal debate and Im sure your a very nice person no matter what your political preferences are. Please take it in the nature it was set up for. At the end of the day we should all remain online buddies , were just having a good tounge thrashing surely?.
Lets face it theres nothing else to do on rotten days like today.

GF.

Forget democracy, one man will choose the next government - Rupert Murdoch

The New York Times reports that The Sun, Britain's most widely read newspaper, followed Murdoch's lead in dropping its traditional conservative affiliation to endorse Tony Blair, the New Labor candidate. News Corp.'s other British papers, The Times of London, The Sunday Times and the tabloid News of the World, all concurred. The papers account for about 35% of the newspaper market in Britain. Blair backed "a communications bill in the British Parliament that would loosen restrictions on foreign media ownership and allow a major newspaper publisher to own a broadcast television station as well a provision its critics call the 'Murdoch clause' because it seems to apply mainly to News Corp.

Tony dances to his tune! Also it was Murdoch who pushed for and backed the invasion of Iraq openly saying "for it's oil".

That's why I refuse to register to vote - It's a set up!

An excelent set up Brian. LOL.

GF.

kshammas and apple - ive always been a labour supporter all my life and waited 18 terrible years for them to get in. The problem is Tony Blair is a liar, how can you trust a thing the smug git says. I'd like labour to stay in but get rid of b'liar.

Tony blair good at what he does? try telling that to an Iraqi.

So when will fony step aside for the grabber? Surely people can see the set up for what it is.


As for the budget, when will we get the real details? Cos the reality sure as hell wasnt presented by fun loving gordon.

loving the B'liar! never thought of that...someone send that to Murdoch!

Kivver,

All politicians are liars!

They have to lie to get elected, get used to it!

However, Blair has truly earned the title BLiar because his record on Iraq was so bad it takes your breath away.

The only thing that takes your breath away even more is the fact that so many people believed him.

I could see through it so why couldn't the majority of other people?


BTW
Did you see Howard on the news last week parading his kids in front of the cameras?

They were saying, "My dad's always right & he always knows what's best for me & you can trust him."

Oh please! Treat the voters like grownups for goodness sake!

What would you expect them to say?
Some kids get on with their parents & some don't.
They wouldn't be anywhere near the camera if they didn't get on with their parents.

They agreed to do it & they were probably given a script.

They think that the voters are so naive that they will fall for such pewtrid crap.

The worrying thing is that some people will fall for it.

GF.

Sincere apologies! It was not you. It was someone who was replying to you and
I took offence.
As for wrong usage, forgive my being pickie. Being a proud Tory it grated a little.
Forgiven?

moneyplus,

You want me for PM ????????

I don't think so.

I would take the job if I could just start tommorow BUT I don't think I could face all the hassle I would have to go through to get there.

All the parties would be sharpening their knives to get me.

The Murdoch media empire would set out to get me, there would be no privacy, it would be a living hell.

Would I risk all that with such a low chance of winning?


That is the system we have got.

We need better laws for elections that are nailed down in a constitution that can not be changed by the politicians, only by the voters.

I support state funding of political parties, he who pays the piper calls the tune.
It should be illegal in any way give money to a political party that has got seats. Those with seats should be funded by the taxpayer with the top 2 parties getting 10million per year & the others getting a proportion of 10million related to the number of votes that they got at the preceding election.

This would put end to such things as Formula1/Tobbaco donations to parties.


As for having someone in charge so who do I back?

NOT Just 1 person?????????

That is part of the problem, the PM has the power to hand out cabinet posts, that is too much leverage.

I think that parliament should legally have to elect the PM after every general election & in the middle of each 4.5 year term & the cabinet every year but be able to take an extra vote in between if they want to.

On balance, I want to see a coalition of Liberal & Labour.

The priority is to keep the economy growing & not have any sudden changes in economic policy to put that at risk.

Hopefully, the Liberals would curb the worst excesses of Blairs right wing agenda.

There are of course no guarantees.
After all we are talking about politicians.

Excellent post Apple. I wish there was a lot more debate like this instead of the forced TV programmes where the politicos seem incapable of answering Paxman and co. with a straight yes or no! waffle while brain engages it seems to me.
Trouble with a coalition of any sort is the parties are so wide apart on their pledges nothing would get through--only in war situation does coalition appear to work. Agree on the money points you made--it's not worth all the abuse and contempt heaped on you as a politician but they brought it on themselves--power sex money and greed is a strong brew!! I think look at each individual MP if they've done a good job for their constituents vote them in again. If they do as their told and don't bother to show up in Parliament ditch them. I'm never going to favour any but the Tories though. :)

moneyplus,

You said, nothing would get through.

That would be a good thing.

Year in, year out, they pass more & more & more laws.

Why do we need all these new laws?????????

They need them more than we do, they have to keep passing more laws to pretend to justify their existence.

In practice though, it wouldn't be nothing, the really urgent & important things would go through & THERE WOULD A LOT MORE DEBATE.

That is a problem for them, not for us, they would hate it.

It would be heated debate & that would attract media attention so the voters would be better informed.

So a coalition could be a very good thing.

Its got to be howard,,,,,,,frankie howard,,the season ticket holder.

Get an idea today, pass a law tomorrow. Through on the nod. Stupid.
Get rid of 'em.

Nice one standber,bunch of free loaders!!

standber,

It seems you how I feel about the situation.

did you know that bin laden has a degree in economics

Stanber, no problems lets face it we are all having a good time here I feel because the markets are lousy. I just feel we are all letting off steam. No one should take offence at remarks made on this thread, we all get wound up now and again and go over the top me especially.

I hope You Eric and others havent been upset by any remarks I have made, I trully take in the other persons point of view and then use it alongside what I already have as knowledge.

I hope the best party win.

cheers GF.

GF
We'll have a pint when you have made your second million ~:-))
Cheers.

Morning all from mananaland.


Whats the latest news/scandal/cock-up from our fearless leaders?

morning...i just want to understand the "bin laden has a degree in economics" quote (post 99)

so bloody what! unfortunatley throughout history the better educated are probably more likely to be successful in their meglomaniac pursuits!

not having a go but it is a bit of a silly comment!

The main reason not to vote for Blair was brought home to me last night. In a bar they were playing a tape of Blair and Bush edited so that they were singing Lionel Richies's song 'I'll always love you' to each other. It was very funny but they are like two mad men together, think they can rule the world like Hitler. We want a prime minster who can think for himself and not have a love affair with Bush
:-)

Dynamite,

that won't be Howard, he's even more in love with Bush.


The Punch & Judy show continued yesterday

with that silly argument about whether the Tory "cut" of 35 billion actually counted as a cut.

The journalist who started it said you can't cut it before it has been spent.

What a load of dummies, not one of them actually noticed the fact that YOU DEFINITELY CAN'T CUT IT AFTER IT HAS BEEN SPENT.

BY THEN, IT'S TOO LATE, IT'S GONE!

They were all too busy with their Punch & Judy show to notice.

Bliar was floundering.

I dont like the B Liar, finding him conceited and stupid. Many of his arguments are fallacious and self-serving and based on false beliefs. I keep on expecting him to pick up his banjo and start playing Im a believer and trying to get his cohorts to do likewise. Many of those, whom he has entrenched around himself, would probably do so. His new Band could be called Teflon Tony and his Cronies,or the New Spivs managed and promoted by the Texas Twister.

From memory, didnt like the policies of Howard, but much of what he tried to instigate was promoted by the old witch, who drove the Conservative Party at that time.

But I feel many of the right winged policies implemented by this government would not have been passed by Parliament if the Tories were in power. The unfortunate thing for me is that the labour party has lost its morality and social values and now worship Mammon and hanging on to power. A large amount of it partys membership seems interested in their own self-advancement and in wishing Tonys patronage have cow downed to him and forgone their own basic morality.

The money which was wasted and continues to be wasted on the Iraq war could have been use for social issues, such as grants for students, education in general, policing, decent pensions and overseas aid. The latter would have helped prevent terrorism developing and spreading. The Iraq war has increased the threat of terrorism and finance many of the Bush elite RE-construction and oil companies.

I would like to see after the election a Socialist government lead by Gordon Brown, but with a very much-reduced majority with The Liberal Democrat Party being the largest second party. I feel the Liberals, stated the fallacies of the Iraq War and have been consistently honest with their policies. Also with their policies for the Health Service, Education, Pensions and Taxation appear reasonable. I also think compared with the other two main parties the Liberals seem to show a common decency and consideration of others.

I went to a working class university 45 years ago, the majority of those who attended could not have done so without the aid of grants. Many of us went on to have high earnings and were in the position to pay a reasonable amount of tax to aid others to do likewise. But many, who were also well educated and took jobs, which were socially responsible and beneficial to society, would never been able to pay the level of taxation, which this government is now promoting for the next generation in the form of Loans.

It is unlikely that the children of Tony and his cronies will leave university with a debt around their necks. They are more likely to have two properties in Bristol and a holiday home in Tuscany and a job made for them in the city, or, perhaps they may be found a short cut up the same greasy pole as their parents.


Here ends this mornings sermon.

Did anybody see the program about Kelly last night.


Right back to the market.

Reality Fred, reality.

Don't ignore the reality of Howard's record & rhetoric that went with it.

The Tories would have passed even more right winged laws, they are soulmates of right winged American conservatives.

I agree about Blair & I would rather have Brown BUT always remember that if they do something that you like, it isn't because they care about you, it's because it happens to coincide with WHAT THEY WANT.

As for socialism, it is illogical!

SEE Message 75.



You seem disappointed that politicians worship Mammon BUT it has always been like that, get used to it.

You said,
"Right back to the market."

Yep, back to worshipping Mammon, NONE of us can be trusted :-)

Its a pity the Tories aint going to win cos at least they have promised to rid us of the Mickey Mouse Assembley we have here in Wales.

Waste of time , waste of money and full of pratts.

Rant over.

Socialism is not illogical,but is sometimes a little impractical. Especially when forced at too quickly.


Back to the market.

By the way did you know Dil worships MAM!

Who's MAM , thats valley speak for Mum innit ?

I'll vote for the blues, as I always have.....but I do wish we had David Davis instead of MH. MH has baggage that is doing him no good at all.
Still, I might get the best that is possible. Labour elected with a greatly reduced majority and that would mean them sorting out their own dung.
And it would stop them playing silly buggers with our country.

Hola senors.


Has the general election bin cancelled?

Are there no stories of stupid government to report??


Come on, lets have em, this thread is also aimed at all the dozy arseholes who take our tax money and produce nowt...their numbers are legion.

Tories' brave new economic policy takes a kicking

Race for Downing Street colds up

by College Green

Sensational Conservative plans put forward by vibrant young leader Mike Howard to reward voters after he sweeps to power have been unveiled to general surprise as the race for Downing Street colds up. Howard has already revitalised the Tories to such an extent that previous party has-beens such as IDS are now being talked about reverentially and with his new scheme even opponents say that he has taken things to "an unbelievable new level".

The proposals announced amid rumours that even Howard himself is considering defecting to New Labour and with Tony Blair now only 227 per cent ahead in the polls would see increased spending on defence, health, social security, education, road building, public transport, overseas aid, farming, fishing, and forestry along with every taxpayer receiving a rebate of 5m plus a free family ticket to Chessington World of Adventures (not valid at weekends).

As the General Election nears and polls show Conservative voting support hovering near the psychologically significant 0 per cent mark and with name recognition level for Howard himself even amongst Tory MPs and his own family at no higher than 0.5 per cent, the need for a "radical" policy to get voters enthused had become clear.

Early indications are that Howard has been extremely bold but Conservative strategists have rejected the idea that the plan should in any way be seen as a sign of "desperation". Reaction to the scheme has been mixed with some reporters preferring to write about cats stuck up trees and others dismissing the entire plan as "utter and unmitigated cobblers".

Any cogent press comment has tended towards the time-honoured "figures don't add up" line of attack. However, one expert at Tory HQ we spoke to explained that the "fully costed" part of the programme could be explained by the fact that "since there's not a cat in hell's chance of Michael being elected, it won't be costing anything and we reckon that's affordable, don't you?"

Brown tells brussels to get stuffed,could pick up a few votes there...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,3604,1443032,00.html

So the old dogs gonna be queen. What ever next.

MS

I thought that no divorced peep could have the title. Isnt there a precident with the duke of windsor?

I don't know what the rules are but I'm sure she won't accept the title anyway.

MS

Amities / As a true decadent libertine and something of a libeterian the very thought of either Blair, or Count Dracula, is quite daunting. Four more years of Blair taxing us all into bankruptcy or the Count frightening us with his very countanance is far from ideal as a choice. What an utter and complete farce.And expensive. lt is difficult not to perceive who is as more of a traditional Tory ? Both men -Blair as PM and the Count as the Home Secatary- have made great inroads to diluting personal freedoms and civil liberties and rendered or rather, reinforced the Europeon notion that the British state is a virtual Police state .Both these power crazed zealots are stuck up the bottom of the caped wonder himself .No !! Not Batman . l mean Bush !; and as such are greatly deserving of a poke in the eye with a shitty stick .,,,,Anyway democracy is a complete misnomer- undefinable & bankrupt of reason .A mere plattitude.An invention. A meaningless hypothesis.Allowing the lowest common denominator to predominate .The stupid leading the even more stupid ,,oh give me a break . The silly idea never worked in Ancient Athens whom posterity rememebers as its home; and it certainly doesnt work now. ,,,,,lts juste as Orwell said ,,,All men are equal ; but some men are more equal than others ,,,,, Actually the sex on the NHS sounds a votewinner to me . Who proposes that ?? They got my vote. ..As for suggestions ,,,,,,,A modern day Enoch Powell for a start . ....a'bientot @+ J.,,,,

Looks like its me for PM then. Oh by the way I forgot to say that sex on the NHS would be compulsory.

PS. Please excuse the shaky typing, its just the thought of it. And sod the gypsies.

MS

Vile dangerous nonesense, or common sense?

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/election/comment/0,15803,1443633,00.html

gotta love the guardian. had to stop reading it when i was 8 because is was so damn left wing.

love the FT

MS for PM and make his MIL Queen.

loving this Blog, i mean thread.....

Council tax rises of up to 100% to be capped

Peter Hetherington, regional affairs editor
Thursday March 24, 2005
The Guardian

Ministers tried to present Conservative councils as high spenders yesterday by moving to cap the budgets of nine authorities which have posted inflation-busting council tax rises for the new financial year beginning next week.
The increases range from 9% in Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, to 100% in South Cambridgeshire and have prompted the local government minister, Nick Raynsford, to claim that the councils had posted high increases in the hope of being bailed out by a Conservative government.



But the leader of the Local Government Association accused the government of "political posturing" and said it had failed to address a deeper funding crisis which will hit households next year.
Overall, however, figures released by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister showed that increases for the average Band D household would be 4.1%, the lowest for 11 years but still twice the rate of inflation.

Mr Raynsford accused the Tories of hypocrisy. He said they were blaming the government for tax rises while preparing to cut a Whitehall grant to town halls in a multi-billion pound economy drive.

But the shadow local gov ernment secretary, Caroline Spelman, said council tax bills had soared by 76% since Labour came to power, despite claims eight years ago from Tony Blair that he planned no tax no increases.

Coming close to accusing the government of setting up Tory councils for capping, she said the council tax had become Labour's favoured stealth tax, "with local councillors taking the blame when bills hit the doormat". In the event of a third term for Labour, she claimed bills would soar further, thanks to "fiddled funding" and the first revaluation of properties on which the tax is based since it was introduced 12 years ago.

The LGA condemned the government's decision. All of the selected authorities are district councils. But the selected districts have small budgets, with county councils responsible for more expensive services such as education and social care.

Spending in South Cambridgeshire - a low spending authority - represents only 11% of the overall council tax bill for householders. The remainder is levied by Cambridgeshire county council.

Sir Sandy Bruce-Lockhart, the LGA chairman, said if the government were really concerned about council tax payers it would have addressed a 1.5bn "black hole" in council budgets for 2006 which will force up taxes next year. This year the chancellor, Gordon Brown, gave councils an extra 1bn to keep increases to a minimum in the run up to a general election.

"Local government does all it can to keep council taxes down, but with dozens of new spending pressures as a result of central government policy, councils are facing a huge hole in their budgets, with no idea how this spending gap is likely to be plugged," Sir Sandy said.

The offenders

Percentage council tax rises:

South Cambridgeshire 100%

Aylesbury 9%

Daventry 11.9%

Hambleton 17.6%

Huntingdon 12.7%

Mid Bedfordshire 13.3%

North Dorset 23.3%

Runnymeade 17.5%

Sedgemoor 11.8%
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1444332,00.html

See the latest polls from YouGov on the header.


Are things going pear shaped for the new tories?

Vote early....vote often.....



http://politics.guardian.co.uk/election/story/0,15803,1446853,00.html

Rise in postal votes fuels fear of fraud

Alert in marginals as Guardian survey reveals threefold increase in applications

Sandra Laville and Steve Dinneen
Monday March 28, 2005
The Guardian

If he can keep Crystal Palace in the Premiership, I think Iain Dowie would find it pretty easy running the country.
He could'nt be any worse than all the current MP's.

It is looking marvellous. Horray! Another year of Teflon Tony, Mandy and Allan, perhaps with luck, Alistair, Hewitt, Reid as well. Gosh arent we fortunate to have leaders like these.
Perhaps the only problem is if there is an increase in Lib Dem MPs and then their own flock might chuck them out. But this lot of sheep cant even bleat in tune.

Don't be too sure, the Tories are catching up in the polls--pity Michael Howard made that mistake this weekend a bit OTT I think. After all we want them to cut out waste what's wrong with saying there's a lot more waste to cut we know it's there.

Cut waste. Good idea. Get rid of the Tories!










8-)

Some of you go on about Thatcher but you totally forget what Labour prior to her were like, you got short memories when it suits you.
Do you remember 20% odd inflation
Do you remember the unions always in No 10
Do you remember IMF controlling our finances
I could go on but Margaret was what this country needed and it needed a Kick up the arshole.
Where are we now we have the biggest lying controlling bunch who will stop at nothing to get there way even hounding you to the death and if you say anything to oppose them they get Campbell to dig all the shit he can find on you, they are the most manipulative bunch we have ever had.
We have the biggest trade gap ever.
We have sold most of our gold cheaply.
we have gone to war on a lie.
We have tossed millions at a health service thats done bugger all.
We now owe the IMF money again (who tell Brown that he is heading for a black hole).
We have red tape suffocating business.
We have crime increasing at a hell of a rate
We have our armed forces going to war with crap weapons and no body armour and insufficient body armour
We queue down the street when a national health dentist opens up.
We find it hard to get onto a doctors list.
What the f**k more do you need to tell you something is wrong.
We treat people on the NHS who have never paid a penny in.
We treat them when they get off the planes when they come here for treatment for free.
Yes we need Labour like we need a fucking hole in the head.
The only thing they have achieved is banning FOX HUNTING
Don't say anything about the Economy because they f*****g inherited that in a very good state.
Labour have infiltrated the BBC and the Civil service and the secret service so that they all do what they are told and if you don't then god help you.
I might not have put this all very well but I am sick absolutely sick of this lot. Wake up before its too late.

You must have huge corns.







8-)

No I am a realist and you cant f*****g dispute the facts.
How do you feel about Gt Ormond Street closing beds because its run out of funds, let alone other hospitals turning away patients for the same reason and don't forget when you do get in you too could have a luverly dose of MRSA and bye the way you had really better hope that Chicken Flu don't get here because you will get f**k all help and its a killer.

Apart from the language!---well said Cavman you've told it exactly right and a lot of Labour supporters would agree with you. Trouble is how do you get people off their backsides to use their vote which ever way??
I think it's such a disgrace that we have a free vote and yet millions don't care enough to use it. Is the internet the way forward or more citizen education in schools? We have the power and ignore it at our peril!

cavman2,

You are more than entitled to your opinion, but please do not use the swear words - I have edited them as they may offend.

Ian

Do you know that many Europeans view the UK as a police state these days.

One nutter tries to set fire to his foot on a plane and it is used as an excuse to take away our civil liberties.
There's certainly something very strange going on!

IanT I apologise for the language and thankyou for editing them, I was on my high horse at the time.

cavman2 - no problem at all.

Ian

Caveman2


1) Selling of the National silver. (as described by a previous Tory Prime Minister)
2) Wasting of the north sea oil and gas resources
3) Destroying the moral by constant changes and increases in administrators and paper work of the
a) Nurses
b) Doctors
c) Hospitals
d) University staff
e) Teachers
f) Police
We are still suffering the consequences of that loss of moral and the loss of cohesive goals in those services. Children, patients, students are suffering and the future generations will suffer the consequences of those reactions. It was a period of those who thought they new better inflicting their ideas on those who did know, not being prepared to listen to those who were practicing.
4) Concentration of self-advancement over societys advancement.
5) Destruction of parts of society. The major being the mining communities. The coal mining industry needed changes and reforms since 1946, but the way it was implanted was by rape. I think that Scargill was not conducive to that change and was as idiotic in his approach, as much as Thatcher was vindictive, uncaring and evil. Many of the changes, which were introduced, were necessary but could have been done in a more humane and less socially destructive ways.
6) Black Wednesday
7) The Sleaze
8) Destruction of index linked Pensions.
9) The running down of the railways before flogging the carcass to the scavengers.
10) I wont go on.
11) O happy days are here again.



Unfortunately, Blair and his cohorts have introduced the most right winged policies in the shortest period I can remember.

Also a major problem I see with recent governments is they are more in preserving their own skins by utilise short term planning, which they think is politically advantageous to themselves, rather than long term planning to deal with the long term serious problems which are gathering.

I think a plague on all their houses is apt.


By the way you should have heard my language when I wrote this!

As an ex labour voter (sorry for having faith in this b'liar bloke) i agree with a lot of what cavman says. But how would it be any different under the tories. if nhs cant improve with more money how the hell are they going to do it with less.

I feel we are to blame, there is culture of when clock goes its time to go home. A culture of delegating and passing the buck. Pass the work to somebody else. Lots of people (not all of course) have no idea of hard days work. As a teacher i see loads out the gate soon as the bell goes (i never leave for at least 2-3 hours after). Police (not all) will look for the easy nab rather than put themselves in the firing line. Doctors cant be bothered to refer you or fill in the paper work. I got to the physio at my hospital 5 mins late so he gave me 10mins instead of 15 said he finished at 4.30 and off he went. If we all put in a fair days work for fair days pay we will all benifit.

The people at the top are responsible for the people below, goverment, managers, heads, police chiefs etc but how often do they admit the blame, RARELY.

Why dont people vote, because there is no choice or little choice.

Well said lads. I'm with you fred.

MS

maxk

Your Guardian article: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/election/story/0,15803,1446853,00.html

Socialists even skew that report!

The trial collapsed. Why? The four accused "....may not be fairly treated and their 'Human Rights' may be infringed". They were caught red-handed with the forgeries in their posession.
Quote from report: 'The men were represented by SIX BARRISTERS, who gave their services free'.
Another quote: "There was conclusive evidence that the signatures on the ballot forms matched that of Councillor Islam in 122 cases. Such examples of matching signatures could not have occurred by coincidence, Mr Sukul added."
.........and Mr Sukul was representing the petitioners!
So why on earth did it collapse? The Guardian won't say.
Needless to say, the Conservatives don't benefit from all this skulduggery.

From my experience of my own fairly recent hospital admission I am trying to avoid being readmitted for as long as I possibly can. I was appalled by the standards of nursing, cleaning, ambulance services, and attention of junior doctors, and of general over all care.

One of the major factors I thought was due outside providers and agency nurses. There appeared to be little continuity or acceptance of responsibility and also friction between those employed by the agency and the staff.

Also because of the various reorganisations within the health service there is little influence of the older and sometimes senior medical and nursing staff who are knowledgeable and experience. Many of these are disillusioned and serving out their time having been frustrated in the past when they attempted to inform of consequences of the dictates of the new administrators.

The other main problem is that there is a lack of discipline and even if a sister of a ward gives an instruction it may or not be carried out. The instruction seemingly been dealt with at the whim of the recipient.

I feel it is necessary for any recovery in the hospital service it will be necessary to regain the central hospital board made up of the head of nursing staff, and senior members of the medical and surgical team staff, social and various speciality staff workers who administer the hospital or units via an administrator.

Also, that the body is given authority and support to implement procedure of discipline if instructions are not carried out correctly.

All workers within the hospital should be answerable to the board and in general the hospitals should be the employer of those who work within it.

Again the each department should have its own administrator ie. sister or equivalent with authority to tell the nurses, cleaners etc. what to do and what not to do. Also her duties would be to liase with the doctors, physiotherapists, pharmacists or other caring staff.

The same type of organisation could be applied to all departments

Personally, I would not have liked to prepare food on the ward I recovered in. My wife brought my food in and I was glad to escape as soon as practical.

But much of the decay in this part of the health service was due to the destruction of moral of hospital staff by the implementation of barmy political policies.

The same appears to have happened in schools and is happening in universities.



And now back to the B awful market.

Oh please Fred how in the hell can you blame all of what you said on the Tories, just how long does labour need to make it better Oh Hum.
Everything you say is far worse than it ever was(well except Fox hunting) is not 10 years enough to make a small reversal of what you say was wrong.
As for sleaze the Tories were babies in comparison to this lot, has Tony ever told the truth about anything and his wife deals with ex cons.
The Civil Service is supposed to be neutral but they do Tonies bidding for sexed up dossiers,the BBC was neutral but Alastair Campbell tells them what to do, we have police who are more interested in putting up speed cameras for the government to earn money than policing the streets.
If you think Doctors were worse under the Tories then you ought to here what our Doctor says.
As for society well just look at the crime rate ooops sorry forgot thats the Tories fault, look at the state of the hospitals ooops sorry thats the Tories fault, look at the lack of Dentists ooops sorry thats the Tories fault.
Pensions it is true the Tories gave Companies a holiday on paying in to the Pension Funds, why because the Pension Funds were awash with money, now who taxed them let me guess oh yes of course it was G Brown silly me and also the Pension Funds mismanaged their investments when the market went down.I seem to remember that Boots the Chemist did'nt.
Tony lies on everything he tried to muscle his way into the Queen Mothers(God Bless her) funeral and publicly stated he had'nt but Black Rod knows better he was threatened and his name blackened but he told the truth rather like Dr Kelly who was then hounded to his death in suspicious circumstances.
Railways if it was such a bad idea why did not Labour reverse it probably because before it had been privatised sucsesive Goverments had under funded it and no one seems to want to admit that it will never pay for itself.Its a money pit and will probably always will be and don't forget Tony insisted that trains run after the big derailment even though the Operators insisted that public was put at risk but he was more worried what the voters thought than your safety.
How can you say the present Tories will and won@t do because they are a different team just as Blairs mob were different to Kinnock,Callaghan,Wilson etc
lets take a chance damn it it can't possibly be worse.

The whole lot should change their deportment,manners and dress sense.I've never seen such a load of sloppy unhealthy politicians in my life.Most unprepossessing.Put to shame by the African politicians,for example,who are a satorial experience
The guffawing and lounging about in the House of Commons makes me want to scream.Where is the serious intent to do GOOD?Young,ineffective,nervous MPs don't stand a chance when the hounds are at bay in the lower chamber.
Scrap the present politicians and replace them with children upto the age of eighteen....then we will start to protect our environment,because that is the ONLY thing that counts.

If anybody thinks it will be any different under the tories you must be mad. Jamie oliver and Bob Geldof would do a great job.

Kivver your obsessed how can you make such a statement with the present state we are in with these lying arrogant bullying idiots
Have you a crystal ball or something, if you know the future then please tip us some shares to buy.

17 years under the tories is how i know. Dont talk to me about lying scumbags and going to war on a lie. Remember the Belgrano, sailing away from the falklands and miles outside the exclusion zone. How many ex tory cabinate ministers ended up in JAIL!!!!and they still think they did nothing wrong. Major and his family values whilst do in it to Edwina Curry!! That ugly geezer bonking in his Chelsea shirt and many, many more tails of woe and heartlessness.

I used to think labour would do a good job, i was a passionate supporter and obviously dilusioned, just like you are if you think the tories will do any better. They are all as bad as each other and in it for the power and the glory. Wouldnt it be nice if somebody came along and said we have serious problems in health, crime, schools, immigration, environmental issues, energy and fuel etc and we are going to confront those problems, tell the public the truth (maybe a bit of consensus) and make stark choices and do something about it. We cannot bury our heads in the sand for ever.

Fred1new.

Why should anyone take any order if they don't want to?

After six months of doing what they are told, they graduate!

I.E. They CANNOT be sacked. It's crazy. If they are dismissed, they have the whole State on their side and the employer is the villain.
This absolute shower of a 'Government' have let Socialism run riot throughout the whole system of governance.

Historically we used to get a 70 to 80% turnout at general elections. Last time though it fell from 71% in '97 to 59% in '01 - I'd love to see it fall below 50% this time because then these professional politicians really couldn't pretend they had a mandate to govern.
No wonder TB is encouraging postal ballots and the obvious abuse that goes with it. Ironical though that this is probably yet another reason why many of us have lost faith in the present system and deliberatly won't take part!

Reading the postings boys it looks to me we don't like any of them. It's Hobson's choice.

MS

brianboru.

Every man and his dog knows that postal ballots are wide open to abuse.
The Socialists won't put the block on and stop it. They're the ones that gain.
Is there any recorded history, prior to about 1960, of vote rigging or postal fixing? (Other than maybe 100 years ago).
The four vote fixers in Brum (allegedly ~:-)) )appear to have got away with it. And they were caught red-handed. The voting commissioner said: ' he was not sure that the rights of the defendants were safeguarded'. Wot a load of...........

Bollocks is the word you are looking for perhaps standber. No doubt they will all be voting tory.....:-)

Stanber, Yes. Many many think when the Parlimentary Boundaries were redefined a short time ago. (In years)
Maybe it would be interesting, if proportional representation was introduced.
Many think that it is is a fairer system.

MaxK
Hi, Max!

Fred1new.
PR? No way. Ask the Eyties. After WW II, they had an election and new Gov every 12 month for about 20 years. Sheer waste of time and effort. The idea sounds good but it just does not work. Cheers.

Cows coming home.....



Britain



March 31, 2005

Tax assault on middle class cuts incomes as poll looms
By Jill Sherman and Gary Duncan






AVERAGE household incomes have fallen for the first time in almost 15 years, according to new government figures.
The middle classes were hardest hit, with people earning more than 27,000 suffering a 1 per cent fall in their incomes last year.

The disclosures will come as a blow to Labour as it prepares to place the economy at the centre of its election campaign.



A further blow to the Governments economic track record came as a key high street spending survey dropped to its lowest level since last September.

The Tories last night seized on the figures from the Office for National Statistics, saying that the income drop was a direct result of the taxes Labour had introduced since 2001.

An analysis of the data by the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) showed that the average household income after tax and benefits 21,000 fell by 0.2 per cent in real terms between 2002-03 and 2003-04 from 409 to 408 a week, or 52 in the year. The last time average incomes fell was in the early 1990s.

But the middle classes, whom Labour is desperate to court, were hardest hit between 2002/3 and 2003/4 by the tax changes. A single-earner couple on 40,000 with one child would have lost 117 per year a loss of 0.4 per cent. A couple with two earners and two children on a combined income of 60,000 would have lost 841.25 a year a loss of 1.9 per cent.

The IFS said that the drop was due to the 1 per cent increase in national insurance rates in Gordon Browns 2002 Budget and his decision to freeze personal allowances. But it also claimed that above- inflation increases in council tax had reduced average incomes by a further 0.3 per cent.

Andrew Shephard, an IFS research economist, said: Without the two tax changes and the hike in council tax, average households would have been 0.9 per cent better off.

The new figures will embarrass ministers today as they hold a pre-election Cabinet meeting at which the economy will be confirmed as the centrepiece of Labours campaign.

David Willetts, the Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, said: This is a devastating evaluation of what Labour have done to hard-working families. On average, they got poorer last year compared with the year before.

Tony Blair is widely expected to announce on Monday that the election will be on May 5 and the first seven to ten days will be dominated by a campaign that focuses on Labours economic vision for Britain.

The Chancellor, who is back at the centre of Labours election effort, and Mr Blair will urge minsiters to exploit to the limit the gaffe by Howard Flight, the former deputy chairman of the Conservatives, suggesting that his party has hidden plans to cut spending.

The ONS figures also confirmed the Chancellors determination to redistribute wealth. The income of the poorest fifth of the population grew by 1 per cent between 2002-03 and 2004-05 while the income of the richest 5 per cent fell by 1 per cent.

The incomes of poorer households were boosted by new and more generous tax credits, while the better-off were hit by rises in income tax, national insurance and council tax, Mr Shephard said. This redistributive package has nudged inequality lower, although the Government cannot yet claim that it is definitely on a downward trend.

The IFS said that pensioner poverty fell slightly but suggested that Labour would miss one of its key child poverty targets.

The ONS figures showed there were 100,000 fewer children in poverty, after housing costs, in 2003-04 than in 2002-03. But the IFS said that to meet its target to cut child poverty by a quarter by 2004-05 Labour would have to ensure a further 500,000 children were lifted out of poverty next year.

At least you wouldn't have a government for very long. But I don't think the result would necessarily be the same. It doesn't have to produce instability.

This seems to be the usual thing Labour diehards blaming Tories and Tory diehards blaming Labour.
There is only one Question how come Labour has not improved anything when Tony said he would correct everything at his first election and don't say the economy because he inherited that and anybody with a miasma of brainpower knows that.
Please tell me what he has reversed in any way.
Don't go on about Tories bonking, because Labour are just as bad and they also hound people like Dr Kelly who paid the ultimate for speaking the TRUTH.
Think bonking is safer.

Fred1new
PR means an unstable gathering wherever the seat of government is.....it certainly 'aint a legislative body. Nobody will agree with anyone else.
The best to be got out of PR is; 'I'll vote for what you want if you will vote for what I want'.
In this country it would mean Lab or Con in cahoots with Lib.....always.
Plus a string of other 'Parties' with one or two MP's.

YOBS --be afraid-be very afraid!! Nice one Michael we need more like this followed by action when they get in.

Whoops!


No feelgood factor as house prices suffer worst fall in 10 years

Larry Elliott
Friday April 1, 2005
The Guardian

Tony Blair's plan to make the economy the centrepiece of Labour's re-election strategy suffered a fresh blow yesterday when Britain's biggest building society reported the sharpest fall in house prices for 10 years.

http://money.guardian.co.uk/news_/story/0,1456,1449876,00.html

MaxK
The seams are beginning to pop.
As I used to say to lardy; 'The ratshit will build and build then you will be out.' The usual pattern with these people.

Did you see Question Time last night? Margaret Hodge gave a long diatribe about how wonderful Labour are and how well they had done. Not a single handclap!
George Galloway performed very well. He gave Tony and Labour a real right bollocking. The audience loved it.
Hope all ok. Rgds. S.

I see a report out today states that in the early years of labour a company pensioner retiring got 4 times what he gets today the reason being the billions of pounds G Brown has taken out of the pot in TAX.
I can assure you he did'nt help me because my pension is down due to him and I will probably have to work and I thought I had done my stint after 40 odd years of unbroken employment.

I thought George Galloway was superb--if only he could control his tendency to temper and some of his more daft ideas he's worth backing and has gone up in my estimation pity he's in the wilderness! Margaret Hodge was pathetic, Lembik Opik a clown but David Cameron was impressive--a future Conservative leader I think.

cavman2
..........but you must feel very good and proud that YOU have provided some of the money that gives kids 30 a week to go to school? And another 100 at the end of term if they have been good. The whole lot stinks.

Who would want to lead the Tory Party other than into the wilderess.



Forgot they are already there!!!











8-)))

moneyplus.
Hodges stupid grin when someone disagrees with her. Grrrrrr
Cameron was good. I'd like to see David Davies at the top though....no baggage like MH.

Wisest thing David Davies could do is go cap in hand to the Lib Dems and beg to be let in.





:-)



Happiness is here again!

Standber,
No not really I feel great giving it to illegal immigrants who have never paid in a penny to the system and of course trying to heal those ones that bring disease with them like TB.

Labour targets gay vote with beermats

Tania Branigan, political correspondent
Saturday April 2, 2005
The Guardian
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/election/story/0,15803,1450747,00.html

Labour activists are hoping that gay voters will find inspiration at the bottom of their pints, by launching a beermat campaign to win their support.

The mats, distributed to clubs and bars by the Labour Campaign for Lesbian and Gay Rights (LCLGR), say a vote for the Liberal Democrats would "let Tory hate back in". Sponsored by the GMB union, they tell drinkers: "Go to bed with Charlie ... wake up with Howard."

inspiration at the bottom ..........LOL !

Worrying and sad that in Zimbabwe voters will queue 10 hours and more--in a hopeless cause to make their vote but over here the I'm all right jack mentality means people don't like what's going on but won't get up and use their vote. Polls predict the lowest turnout ever and there's not many new contributors to the debate on this thread. Apathy could lead us down the Zimbabwe path!

'But when there's no realistic choice, why vote?' would be the common answer. Personally I think there is a choice, and that Labour should be kept in, albeit with a far smaller majority.

Whether you agree or disagree with my political position, I believe there still is a choice. But most of the country doesn't. This is because all politicians do seem to do these days is resort to petty disputes about pseudo-policies in an attempt to win the grey/gay/youth/woman/etc. vote, rather than actually sticking to ideals and principles. A lot of people I know have told me they will not be voting, out of choice. To those people I always say the same thing; go to the polling station and actively abstein. Turnout is higher, and the politicians can't cling to voter apathy. Staying out of the polling stations is not effective. Going there and choosing to abstein sends out a message. Still, realistically no one will do that and the MPs will continue to have their excuses ready made.

Just my two pennies worth.

Yes private eye have got it, get out b'liar, get in brown.

Did you see the recent report where we are using the worlds resources up at unsustainable rate. Im afraid its time to make some tough choices and make some sacrafices. Are YOU (all) prepared too??????? if you dont our children are going to suffer (im lucky i havent got any). but greed as always been a great motivator and i cant see that changing.

So, they have found against the 'Birmingham 6'. And rightly so. Trust devious people to find ways to cheat.
And what about the six Barristers who gave their services without charge?
What were they defending? Certainly not some poor individual who had come up against the full might of the law.
Another way the Australians are showing us the the way to go! Compulsory
voting, in person or no vote. Signature checked against registration form if any doubt.

Is Foney going for a Mugabe solution?



Judge quashes 'fraudulent' council elections
By Alex Thompson and Matthew Cooper, PA
04 April 2005



A High Court judge today launched a scathing attack on the current postal voting system after quashing the results of last year's elections in two wards on Birmingham City Council.

Richard Mawrey QC, sitting as an election commissioner, found six sitting Labour Party councillors in the Aston and Bordesley Green wards guilty of corrupt and illegal practices during June 10 poll.

The judge said at the hearing at the Birmingham and Midland Institute he was satisfied the fraud was "overwhelming" and had been orchestrated by local party officials.

Mr Mawrey said evidence of "massive, systematic and organised fraud" in the campaign had made "a mockery" of the election.

The judge said the system was "hopelessly insecure" and expressed regret that recent warnings about the failings had been dismissed by the Government as "scaremongering".

Reading from the executive summary of his judgment to a packed court, the judge said: "This system is wide open to fraud and any would-be political fraudster knows that it's wide open to fraud."

Speaking outside court, a spokesman for the People's Justice Party, the successful petitioners in the Bordesley Green ward, called for postal voting to be outlawed at the forthcoming General Election.

The PJP spokesman said: "We have won justice for our party and for the people of Bordesley Green.

"We welcome the judge's decision and the chance to fight new elections."

But he added: "The Commissioner has confirmed our fear that there is every likelihood that the forthcoming General Election will be blighted by postal vote fraud.

"Birmingham now has a huge number of people permanently registered for postal votes, many without their knowledge."

Postal voting on demand had undermined the principle of the secret ballot and public confidence in elections, the PJP spokesman claimed.

The judge ruled that not less than 1,500 and maybe more than 2,000 votes had been cast fraudulently in Bordesley Green.

The PJP spokesman continued: This is a truly shocking state of affairs and we hope that the perpetrators of the fraud will now be brought to account.

"The police should mount a thorough investigation into the vote rigging.

"We have uncovered further evidence and we are keen to help the police."

The Electoral Reform Society said today's judgment highlighted the need for urgent action to protect and maintain confidence in the voting system.

The organisation has been monitoring the current postal vote system since the decision to move to postal voting on demand five years ago.

A spokesman for the organisation said: "We welcome attempts to make voting more convenient for people accustomed to a modern lifestyle, but do not believe that such convenience should come at the expense of the security or privacy of the ballot.

"We accept postal voting as part of the modern electoral process, but we believe that it must be managed in an efficient manner with little risk of fraud.

"We do not believe that electoral fraud is confined to Birmingham, to the Labour Party or, most importantly, to particular communities."

Recent cases in Blackburn, Guildford and Hackney involving people from different backgrounds and different parties disprove the view that fraud was not widespread, the ERS believes.

The ERS spokesman said: "We are not alarmist and do not believe that the outcome of, say, the general election is likely to be seriously affected by fraud, but we are concerned that the cases which have come to the public's attention so far may be only part of a wider problem.

"We believe that urgent action must be taken."


http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/story.jsp?story=626344

So with rampant postal fraud and rampant gerrymandering we are headed for a fair election!!

Probably find it was Mandies or Campbells idea.

Another Prescott--BOOB!

well gf, i've left the country cos of the dreadful state of UK. I can only see it getting even WORSE in next decade at least, maybe even next 30 to 40 years. I will not return unless things improve.

That means the death penalty for Brown, Blair and Jack McConnell esp. Little catholic piece of scum that he is.

I'd prefer Joseph Stalin to take over UK right now. He might have been brutal but he would make people nicer. I've been to eastern europe many times in last few years and seen how much nicer these people r compared to selfish ignorant people in UK

Are things going pear shaped for Fony?



Labour lead drops by five points

Poll results in full (pdf)

Alan Travis and Michael White
Tuesday April 5, 2005
The Guardian

Tony Blair will this morning formally ask the Queen to call the long-promised May 5 general election, with only a slim three-point lead over the Conservatives in his back pocket, according to the latest Guardian/ICM poll.

The survey shows that the bounce in Labour's fortunes in the immediate aftermath of Gordon Brown's popular budget has proved short-lived and the eight-point lead the party enjoyed two weeks ago has been cut to three points now.

Full article here.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/election/story/0,15803,1452292,00.html

Tories in front by a nose---better get more postal votes rigged!! Note even the Chinese won't buy Rover even with millions of pounds of our money in as a sweetener---because of the huge black hole in it's pension pot, clever Gordon he thought but now the pigeons are coming home to roost!

Shame they wouldnt agree to a public punch up, but I suppose this is better than nothing......Who's going first? Who's got the bottle??



Special report: election 2005

BBC scoops party leaders for live TV first

Dominic Timms
Tuesday April 5, 2005
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/election/story/0,15803,1452743,00.html


Tony Blair, Michael Howard and Charles Kennedy have agreed to appear on live television for the first time in the same programme.

The leaders of the three major political parties will each be grilled in a special edition of Question Time on April 28.

The BBC said today it considered an American-style head-to-head debate but didn't approach Labour because they had publically ruled it out.

However, the corporation is still heralding this as a major scoop - such was the party leaders' nervousness about taking part in live debates during the last election that the BBC was forced to broadcast three separate Question Time specials.


Article continues

This is the nearest British voters will get to a US-style debate with each leader appearing consecutively in the 90-minute special to be hosted by Question Time regular David Dimbleby.
"We did talk about a live debate but it became perfectly clear that particularly Labour had no interest," said Helen Boaden, the head of BBC news.

"It's going to be pretty splashy. We're giving a big chunk of BBC airtime over to the debate and it is going to be interesting to see how the individual leaders react to being cross-examined by the same audience."

The BBC unveiled its election coverage just hours after Mr Blair went to Buckingham Palace to confirm that May 5 would be polling day.

Ric Bailey, the executive editor in charge of Question Time, said the leaders had agreed to take part in the debate although details about who will appear first have yet to be thrashed out.

"We haven't been talking to the leaders all that long. We came up with the proposals and we got a tacit agreement. A lot of the detail and the choreography has got to be sorted out but they will appear live on the same programme," he said.

Fear in the ranks over votes still up for grabs

Don't be misled by the polls. Not since 1992 has a result been so in doubt

Martin Kettle
Wednesday April 6, 2005
The Guardian
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/polls/comment/0,11030,1453182,00.html

All election results always seem inevitable in retrospect, the undefeated three-time general election winner Margaret Thatcher writes in her memoirs - but, as she then goes on to say, none of them ever look that way at the start of the campaign.
It is as certain as anything can be that there was a nervous and excited end-of-term mood among ministers yesterday when Tony Blair finally confirmed the worst-kept political secret of the year - that there will be a general election on Thursday May 5.



But it is just as certain that the mood of eagerness for the coming fray will have mingled with some genuine gut-tighten ing buttock-clenching fear, as ministers pored over a clutch of new polls showing Labour's lead narrowing. As they prepared to leave their familiar Whitehall bubble behind only the bravest will not have wondered whether they will see their ministerial offices again.
Sometimes that sort of fear is absurd. There was no evidence whatsoever to support the famous "wobbly Thursday" panic in the Thatcher high command seven days before polling day in 1987; a week later the Tories predictably trounced Labour with a majority of 102.

This time, though, Britain is embarking on the first election since 1992 in which the result is genuinely in doubt. Thirteen years ago the uncertainty had an apparently solid foundation: the opinion polls were neck-and-neck between the Tories and Labour at the start of the campaign and remained so to the end - even the election night exit polls predicted a hung parliament.

In 2005 the uncertainty is altogether harder to pin down, though it is every bit as potent. This time the polls mostly put Labour ahead - the three-point lead identified by this week's latest Guardian/ ICM survey is in line with most of the other surveys of recent days. This time it is not just the way that the public intends to vote that is the big question, as whether it intends to vote at all.

The media, of course, love a contest rather than a walkover, especially after 2001, and will play that element up. Nevertheless, there is a real sense, and not just in the Westminster village, that many voters are undecided about their voting intention or are not committed to that intention. That has fed the suspicion that all is not as the pollsters claim - and that therefore this could be the most unpredictable and exciting contest for years.

There are several serious reasons why this election is hard to call. The main one is the apparent unravelling of Tony Blair's national popularity, mainly because of the Iraq war, and the consequent disassembling of his big tent coalition that swept all before it in the past two elections.

The means, first, that the tactical voting against the Tories that marked the 1997 and 2001 contests may unwind. Labour voters in seats that Labour cannot win are likely to remain happy voting for (mainly) Liberal Democrats; Blair's unpopularity may even give this process a boost. But Lib Dem and other third-party voters may be less inclined to return the favour where Labour is strong. That could let the Tories back into the game in a lot of seats they lost in 1997 and 2001.

The second consequence could be a pronounced swing against Labour in seats where the war remains a particular touchstone - seats with significant Muslim electorates, for example, or seats containing a lot of students.

A third factor could be the disaffection of the Labour core vote, though this is sometimes exaggerated. Nevertheless, extensive disgruntlement in the Labour heartlands (and elsewhere) could result in reduced turnout, protest voting for parties of the extreme right (or possibly the left) and a general volatility that could have unpredictable results, perhaps rewarding effective single-issue campaigns such as the "Save Kidderminster Hospital" campaign that ousted Labour in favour of an independent in 2001.

Regions

Britain's regions rarely respond uniformly in elections, and if several of these factors impact together, there could be dramatic differences in different parts of the country. The north-east and Wales swung against more heavily against Labour in 2001 than the south-west and the south-east. That could suggest that the latter regions will be more difficult for Labour this time, or it may imply that opposition parties will be most likely to make gains in areas where Labour has been weakened.

There could be a similarly uneven pattern in urban Britain, too. Labour's success in 1997 and 2001 has been followed by widespread opposition successes in local government elections. The Lib Dems think they are in with a good shout in Newcastle and perhaps Sheffield and Birmingham. The Tories hope to make inroads in Edinburgh and Bristol. But it is London - where Ken Livingstone's mayoral re-election may mask a wider slump in Labour fortunes - where the contest will be the fiercest and changes possibly the largest.

If the polls are right, however, Labour may do far better than the on-the-ground experts suspect. Even when the result of an election is heavily odds-on, as it was for Thatcher in 1987, the capacity of likely winners to panic - as the Tories did on the famous "wobbly Thursday" - should never be ignored.

But it is all to play for now. "Cabinet that morning was abuzz," recalled John Major of March 11 1992, when he called a general election he would eventually win by a majority of 21. "Everyone present believed we could win, but not everyone thought we would. Looking around the cabinet table, I could see some ministers wondering if they would sit around it again."

Even Major himself was not immune from doubt. Sitting in the Queen's study in Buckingham Palace while he sought the formal dissolution, a royal corgi settled with its nose on the prime ministerial foot. "As I idly stroked the back of his neck, I wondered if Neil Kinnock liked dogs," Major wrote in his memoirs.

Not even Blair's greatest enemy can accuse him of taking the voters for granted. So when Blair had his own dissolution audience with the Queen yesterday, it is a fair bet that he too may have wondered how Michael Howard would get on with the corgis.

News today that since labour took power Industries output has slowly declined and is due to all the red tape that has been issued and the crafty taxes that labour are so good at.

UK will soon be bankrupt!!!!!! Especially if labour win again.

Come on labour, u can do it. Haha, haha.

i dont care anymore as i've now left shitty britain. now in sunnier climbs and enjoying life again.

scotinvestor

Don't shit on the place you have left....you may be happy to step into your
own dung. But nonetheless, good luck.

What was it that Tony Bliar kept trumpeting so annoyingly? Ah, yes;

EDUCATION EDUCATION EDUCATION!

Read what his own Party think of situation today.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/04/07/nlit07.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/04/07/ixportal.html

Curtesy of The Daily Telegraph.

Educashun is za mess stanber, but what did you expect, real progress??


LOL !

10.45pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MG Rover goes into administration

Mark Tran and agencies
Thursday April 7, 2005
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,3604,1454341,00.html

Workers at MG Rover leave the Longbridge plant, Birmingham Thursday April 7, 2005 after production was suspended. Photograph: Rui Vieira/PA


MG Rover is going into administration after its proposed Chinese partner pulled out of a deal, the trade and industry secretary, Patricia Hewitt, announced tonight.
Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation (SAIC) said grant aid had not been forthcoming so "there can be no deal".

The development threatens thousands of job at the company's factory in Longbridge, Birmingham and at firms throughout the West Midlands which supply the company.

At a brief but tense press conference by Ms Hewitt and Tony Woodley, leader of the Transport and General Workers Union, the minister said the board of MG Rover had decided to call in the receivers.



"This is a devastating blow to all those involved - the workers and their families, the company's suppliers and the wider community. Tonight our thoughts are with them," she added.
The minister said a partnership with SAIC had been critical to MG Rover's future and the company, government and unions had been working "tirelessly round-the-clock" to try to secure the deal. "In the end, SAIC made it clear that they were not confident about the future solvency of MG Rover, and therefore there was no reasonable prospect of a deal.

"The government stood ready to issue bridging finance of over 100 million to help, but without a deal there was no possibility of a bridging loan. SAIC, for their part, indicated that bridging loan finance would not have solved their concerns."

She said the government and unions would work with the administrator to try to secure future car manufacturing at Longbridge. The government would be providing a support package and set up a Rover taskforce, with more details to be announced tomorrow.

SAIC stressed tonight it had always made it clear that MG Rover would have to be solvent for at least two years for the partnership deal to go ahead.

A spokesman said that the DTI had offered to provide interim grant aid but added: "Such grant aid has not been forthcoming. SAIC can do nothing. There can be no deal."

Mr Woodley revealed that Tony Blair had a 25-minute call with a senior figure in the Chinese government as recently as yesterday evening.

Mr Woodley said unions would carry on fighting for jobs at Longbridge and he pledged to work with the receivers to salvage what he could. "The last thing we want to see is another supermarket on a car manufacturing plant."

Mr Woodley and Ms Hewitt will travel to Longbridge tomorrow to meet workers.

Rover had warned earlier today that time was "clearly running out" to clinch a rescue deal with SAIC and urged the British government to make a decision on a bridging loan.

In a clear sign of its growing impatience with the government, Rover said in a statement: "Today MG Rover called on the government to make a decision on the bridging loan which will open the way to the car maker completing complex negotiations with the Chinese company SAIC (Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation)."

The statement was designed to prod the government into finalising its offer of a 100m loan for loss-making Rover to pave the way to a final agreement with SAIC. Rover said the loan was crucial if the partnership was to go ahead.

Earlier, Rover, Britain's last mass car maker, suspended production at its UK factory, blaming "isolated" component supply problems. The company said cars were not being built on the day shift at its plant in Longbridge, Birmingham.

However, Rover had insisted the suspension was temporary and said it remained optimistic that production would return to normal.

Rover said: "Given the amount of negative media coverage this week it is no surprise that we have suffered a few isolated component supply problems. For this reason we have temporarily suspended production."

Underlining the growing sense of crisis surrounding Rover, one West Midlands based firm that suspended supplies to Rover disclosed it was owed almost 1m.

Wagon, which makes door frames for the Longbridge plant, said in a statement: "The board of Wagon announces that, in view of MG Rover's current inability to meet its payment obligations, it has decided to suspend supplies to MG Rover with immediate effect. Wagon currently has approximately 0.9m of receivables outstanding with MG Rover."

Wagon, which employs 1,000 workers in the UK, said it would restructure parts of its operation if supplies to MG Rover were terminated permanently. Rover said the directors of its holding company had offered 10m of their own money to help secure the government loan. "The PVH (Phoenix Venture Holdings) directors will provide 10m of personal money to convince the government of our commitment. What we need now is the government to decide," Peter Beale, the PVH vice-chairman, said.

On the record on Newsnight a few minutes ago--the board of Rover denied emphatically that they had called in the receivers. Price Waterhouse were asked to advise them and they are outraged at Patricia Hewitts announcement-which is wrong and she had no right to make!! Another Gov. BOOB-which will definitely put paid to poor old Rover and efforts to keep her afloat. look out for red faces tomorrow.

Nothing to do with me....she says..

40m support for car firm suppliers

The Government has announced a 40 million package of support for firms which supply MG Rover following the collapse of talks aimed at securing the company's future. Trade and Industry Secretary Patricia Hewitt revealed that some companies in the West Midlands which supply components for manufacturing at the huge MG Rover factory in Longbridge, Birmingham, had started to lay off workers. The collapse of the proposed partnership with the Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation threatens 6,000 jobs at Longbridge but an estimated 18,000 jobs in companies which supply MG Rover are now also threatened,


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,174-1560504,00.html

MG Rover suppliers lay off hundreds - report
AFX


LONDON (AFX) - Suppliers of under-threat car maker MG Rover have begun laying off hundreds of workers despite a government aid package for them, the Press Association reported citing industry sources.

Rover's failure to reach a deal with Shanghai Automotive Industrial Corp (SAIC) has not only put in jeopardy Rover's own 6,100-strong workforce but also an estimated 18,000 jobs in its component suppliers.

The Transport and General Workers' Union (TGWU) said the news highlighted the urgency of resurrecting some kind of deal which will save Rover's Longbridge factory from complete closure.

Car components maker Wagon PLC last week warned that it would restructure its UK manufacturing operations if supplies to Rover were not restarted.

The 6,000 Longbridge workers have been told to report to work as normal Monday when they will hear from administrators whether they are to be laid off immediately.

The British government last Friday pledged a support package worth 40 mln stg to MG Rover's suppliers following the collapse of the talks with SAIC.

lc/ga/ak





COPYRIGHT



Copyright AFX News Limited 2005. All rights reserved.

Amities / With reference to an earliar post regarding the perception of the UK to us Europeons. Allow me to preface this piece by saying l am French;- both extremely nationalistic and proud : and part of the growing army of Jean-Marie Le Pen supporters following the dogma that France is for us FRENCH !! and we are not allowing our culture to be comprimised by the scourge of mass immigration ! ,,,,,AFTER all it was ONLY immigration into France in the 1980s that brought what are now permanent high levels of crime . Perhpas some would call that Fascism but that is a pure misnomer and if it avoids a future civil war it is absolutely essential. Lets not forget even Holland , a once reknowned bastion of liberalism, now has the Nationalist Party as the second biggest party in the country .ltaly is the same. Spain has never been any different. l have no problem with France allowing our fellow Europeon tribal cousins entry but draw a line at unproductive purely economic refugeees from countries where life is so very cheap and crime is thier ONLY forte and agenda. lts like a Trojan Horse scenario .We open the gates and our enemies are within . So if my sentiments are unpalateable to certain quaters like whimps who read the Guardian then so be it . l dont give a jot . =====But to the point .From my vantage point beneath the gossamer thin veneer of apparent political accountability the UK is the definition of a "police state " of the very first order hanging dearly to the shirt tails of world policemen/ terrorist -The USA . My observation is one of a vicious, hypocritical, arbitary and utterly corrupt state prepared to unleash its OWN army dressed in police attire on its OWN people as it did in its successful attempt to smash the miners union via the miners strike; and yet somewhat perversely frees murdering worthless lRA scum whose bloodlust and greed knew no bounds from life sentances imposed legitimately through the UK courts for the worst crimes in the criminal calander . all this against a background of a state which at one stage had such vast oil/ gas revenues it could have joined OPEC but more importantly have totally revolutionised its own countries antiquated industrial infrastructure -eg ,lts delapidated rail system and afforded with consumate EASE to give every city and major town a REAL facelift But they didnt . They gave it to thier cronies { ln France our channel trains travel at 200 kmh but have to slow down by 50 % when entering the UK as the rail is in need of replacement. ) More importantly they could have made for an made for a environment of decent housing,hospitals with untold fortunes at thier disposal , schools with all pre-requisite aids to learning. and SECURITY for its people. But , of course, it was all totally corruptly squandered and shared by the very select few. And to think had it not been for the persistance of Anthony Benn as Minister of Energy in the 70s North sea exploration may never have even happened . l know. l am a resource analyist specializing in energy ; and i know how juste much revenue North sea oil brought to your coffers .The few "elephant fields " came on tap on tap juste in time for Thatcher to spend on all the WRONG things like err War .The Uk had so much oil it that at one time BP were casing and cementing over 300 billion barrel fields as they knew through seismic survey bigger fields existed .But what can one expect from a state whose status qou has remained continous and uninterupted for several centuries, and subsequently, institutions and elitist organizations have evolved and developed which operate by stealth in the background and have had many centuries of perfecting the very subtle art of keeping both the prols in order, the middle classes appeased, and the aristos privaleged. And more than anything SHAPING the future . Corruption of the truth is due to that odious box people call a TV .And you have to ask yourself who controls that box as a media . The very same names who counselled Henry V11 and V111 and Elizabeth 1 counsel todays politicians .This was no better illustrated more so than in Margeret Thatchers first administration. The great aristocrats of the Plantaganet and Angevin dynasties of 700 years ago with French names are still among the political elite lurking in the background. !You need only look at the origins of the names of the Permanant Secataries of State who instruct ministers who come and go like the seasons .But the permanant secataries are exactly that . PERMANANT . !!As are your later Dutch & Hanoverian masters .Lets face it the English are ruled over by the house of Saxe -Coburg-Gotha and decadence,hedonism greed and corruption is its middle name . Little wonder countries like its ex colony Nigeria emulates its ex master -except Nigeria is a fledgeling democracy ( sic ) and lacks the sophistication and fiscal tools and instruments of keeping a secret of its absurd corruption in somewhat contrast to the UK which is an expert - eg -FTSE companies raiding their pension funds The day is arriving when pension funds will be utterly bankrupt . . Ohh the whole thing is beyond repair and not worth even going into to. . l see no future in a country where it will be a crime to be poor within a few years and i FULLY endorse the feelings of Scotinvestor as to why anyone with both money and pure common sense would even entertain the idea of being domiciled in a country - a dour sad hinterland of uppity RACIST blacks and Asians and all bizzare types gibbering all types of nonsense and all carving out gang cultures,propogating fear among citizens and targetting the youth with thier drugges, guns and causing a plethora of social problems. Africa is screaming out for literate blacks to form beaurocracies so why dont they go and do something productive like rebuilding thier own continenet ,,,, ! l note with some concern that Derby recently homed a few hundred Armenians right in the middle of a Pakistani community; and the cheeky Pakistanis complained that this was their patch and vociferously complained as to Derby city councils actions which had been ordered by Central govt anyway . ......The nerve of these bloody people. They have more front than Blair who thinks the iraqis posed such a threat we had better risk life and limb , spend billions,travel thousands of miles and give them a damned good larruping; yet he is quite content to release suspected lraqi terorists/ recidivists from Belmarsh prison to cavort around London ,,,ls that sane ? Am i on the wrong train here or something ?? Well am l ? ..... its open to debate. lm quite reasonable ....l mean am i sitting next to a maniac with a bomb inserted in his rectum on the jubilee line ? ...l mean come on now ? What with the ghettos that have become 50% of East London ..Aww the sceanario worsens ...Can you imagine breaking down in Clapton on the road to Bethnal Green in a Ferrari right outside a excusive black individuals pub ? Well actually i ran out of petrol,,lol ..became something of a sideshow actually ....As if i were Mr pimp daddy or something ...ohhh what a performance that was ,, and inbetween stopping people wishing to have a "kwik drive" while politely refusing offers of everything from ganga to crack to uranium 237n and Kalachinikov assualt weapons ,,,,, and resisting would be assailants,,, it was not my idea of what makes a good night ... ... You will not find many men who have had as privaleged background as myself but the thought of Michael Howard running the show is utter madness. the 1980s revisited ,,,Deport them anyway Michael . ,,,,,lm here purely for the money i can command in the city..l personally dont give a s$& anyway about who wins the election Does it really matter ?,,vraiment ? C'est creve ou marche oui ?,a'bientot ..@+ J

Spot on I'm afraid.

One thing that always amazes me in the UK is the number of folk you describe as 'proles' who'll vote Conservative in the next election! Bit like the Wildebeest voting for the lions - but plenty will!

As for our immigration it's even worse than that into your France, though with similar results! I feel it's terrible that our masters allowed the floodgates to open and our industrial towns and cities to be swamped with supposed cheap labour from the 3rd world. Most who neither have anything in common with our culture nor wish to embrace it. Political correctness is fine if you live on ones country estate in Gloucestershire but a totally diferent matter if you live in a city like Bradford! And, and... my local town has large numbers of rather threatening Iraqi Kurds hanging round the centre - why on earth are they not back in Iraq? Surely Saddam has very little chance of getting back into power there? Asylum seekers my ar$e! Are we really such a soft touch!

I'd say Vive La Revolution but the working class seems to have lost their balls since the miners strike collapsed.

brinboru

............so i'll put you down as 'Labour' and more immigration then?

I already said further up the thread that I won't be voting for any party.

I wouldn't vote for New 'Labour' (Bit of a misnomer there) - because of the dishonest way they went to war with Iraq and their free for all immigration policy.

I wouldn't vote Con because they are only interested in rewarding the very richest few percent of our population. Strangely enough, if they do get in, I believe we will see a run on the , a house price slump and a fall in the stock market. The first because the international markets don't believe they have the experience to run the economy and the second two because they will try to drastically reduce spending which will result in a steep an increase in unemployment and a real lack of consumer confidence.

My goodness!

Such strong feelings from our French cousin. Le Pen has no real chance of power, but might cause the French gov to think a bit harder about immigration. urope cant house the rest of the worlds excess populations, regardless of what the pols would have you think.

As for the world health service (formally the nhs) Look at the madness thats going on there.

Latest poll from the guardian, so it must be right....lol

Maxk
I'm surprised that you buy the Gullible!
Numbers alone will point up the impossibility of being able to take the worlds unwanted. Just one percent of Indias' would be 10 million.
It has nothing to do with race. I would not like 10 million Ozzies or Yanks or Canucks or Germans or French or Nips or Argies. Common sense really.

Amities/ D'accord completement ..

Morning all.


stanber, the daily worker is an excellent read, they dislike fony just as much as we do.




Fony telling people how it is, and what they can do with thier opinions!

FrenchConnection.

You still in blighty or back in la belle france?

hi kshammas I completly agree with // after all //not so long ago///people die/// to give the right for common working class to vote

Conservatives will win next election: Official

Popular newspaper's support confirms the inevitable

by Chris Miller

Political experts are predicting a huge victory for the Conservative party at the next general election after leading newspaper the Daily Express took paedophile asylum seekers off its front page for the first time in eight months last Thursday and used the space to declare its support for the Tories.

The paper, owned by talented pornographer and all-round nice guy Richard Desmond, is known to wield huge influence both in media circles and across British society as a whole. Accordingly, this editorial policy is certain to have a significant effect on the next election.

"Its inevitable that the Express readers will be drawn towards the Conservative party when voting time comes around, said Professor Anthony King of the University of Essex, the leading authority on British politics who is never off the telly. How many readers does it have? Im not sure exactly, but I know its lots and lots. Enough to cause a decisive swing, Id say. Definitely."

Media experts have also commented on the Expresss declaration.

Everyone knows that, where the Daily Express leads, all other newspapers follow, said Dan Woodall, a lecturer in media studies at the University of East London. "It cant be long before the Daily Mail and the Sun back the Tories as well. Maybe even the Telegraph. This is really going to shake things up."

Woodall pointed out that many Express readers are in the influential over-70 age bracket as well. "If the paper can convince even those readers start voting Tory who knows?" he said. "We could be looking at the biggest landslide in history."

Leader of the Conservatives Michael Howard expressed his jubilation at the news.

"This is great for us," he said, pausing momentarily from nailing a peasant's hat to his head. "It could signal a repeat of the elections under Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s when, as the popular catchphrase had it, 'It was the Express wot won it'. Now if you'll excuse me, Ive got to go and make a speech complaining about levels of Romanian immigration in South Wales."

lol !

He`s tough,ruthless & hates spin.Howard is the man to lead britain,

Instead of charm he is offering ronseal politics,triumph of substance over style,,and so say the daily express!!

He does have the speech ,, but does he have the policies.

Special report: election 2005

New fears over postal vote fraud

System nears crisis point as main parties are told to stop interfering

Hugh Muir, Sandra Laville and Audrey Gillan
Wednesday April 13, 2005
The Guardian
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/election/story/0,15803,1458341,00.html

The three main political parties were yesterday urged to withdraw from active participation in the postal-voting system amid fears that public confidence in the process has reached crisis point.

Returning officers and officials from the Electoral Reform Society have called on Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats to place strict curbs on their activists to ensure there is minimum party intervention in voting procedures. They have reiterated that, except in very limited circumstances, there should be "no third party intervention".


Article continues

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, the Guardian has established that party officials and candidates are still seeking to involve themselves in the process of applying for postal votes by sending forms direct to electors and asking them to complete and return them to their offices.
The practice is not illegal but, in the light of the scandal in Birmingham - where a judge found rogue Labour activists and candidates tampered with forms - it is now heavily frowned upon.

In the wake of the Birmingham case, in which Richard Mawrey QC found the postal-voting system was "wide open to fraud", guidelines were issued to political parties by the Electoral Commission and the Association of Chief Police Officers, warning them to steer clear of involvement in postal voting.

"Because of the risks of suspicions that the application may be altered and the risk of the application form being delayed or lost in transit, the local electoral registration officer's address should be the preferred address given for the return of application forms," the guidelines said.

But some candidates are flouting this advice. In a personal letter to voters in east London this week, the Labour MP Oona King told them to fill out the enclosed application form "and return it to me at the address shown", adding: "Then you can vote from the comfort of your own home."

Challenged yesterday by her opponent, the Respect candidate George Galloway, who accused her of "corruption of the democratic process", Ms King's office said: "It has always been the case [that we ask voters to send application forms to us] and it has been for around 10 years. We have a strict code of conduct."

In Brent East, the Liberal Democrat Sarah Teather sent voters an application form and urged them to "return the form to the Liberal Democrats using the envelope enclosed".

Her election agent, Chris Leaman, said the party was acting within Electoral Commission guidelines.

But returning officers expressed frustration yesterday that parties were still getting involved in postal voting. Peter Woodward, electoral services officer at Cardiff city council, said Labour and the Conservatives were culpable. "We have had electors talking to us saying that they were not happy with the way this was being done, they felt political parties were pushing them. There is a suggestion from some residents that they have been not exactly pressurised but heavily encouraged into applying for a postal vote and sending it through the party involved. We are not happy about it."

In Newham, east London, Mary Bradley, acting returning officer, said: "I think it would be more wise for political parties to stay completely clear of the postal-voting system in view of what has happened recently."

Experts believe that up to 6 million of the 44 million votes likely to be cast on May 5 will be postal votes and, in key marginal constituencies, they could be decisive.

The warnings came as the scale of alleged electoral fraud in the UK emerged. A survey by the Crown Prosecution Service, released to the Guardian, revealed there were 39 ongoing investigations into fraud, including cases where criminal charges have been made and those where lawyers were examining police reports.

In addition, police forces in Woking, Lancashire, Greater Manchester, Bradford and Burnley were investigating claims of postal-voting fraud.

Police in Birmingham were told yesterday to start a new criminal investigation into the six Labour councillors who were found guilty of "massive, widespread organised" postal-voting fraud at last June's local elections. A CPS spokesman said prosecution lawyers had asked police to investigate "with urgency".

Election officers said they were anxious to re-build confidence. One senior returning officer said voters had contacted his office seeking to relinquish their postal votes and regain their right to vote at a polling station.

Malcolm Dumper, of the Association of Electoral Administrators, said: "We have had an electoral system in place for more than a century built on trust and we now find ourselves in a position of being ridiculed in other countries because our process is flawed. Any third-party intervention should be removed."

The face of Micheal Howard when hes lost the general election.........



cheers GF

That is tony with the BLOOD OF OUR TROOPS displayed.

Liberals are very confident we all will be willing to pay MORE tax!! Local income tax sounds very much like the dreaded poll tax to me and we all know the result of that--riots in Trafalgar Square!! Tories sounding better and better to me.

It's probably going to be many years before the Conservative Party get into power again. From where I sit they look a pretty forlorn and aging bunch with any half decent potential leaders (Clarke for instance) sidelined by the Thatcherites. That's not healthy for a democracy but it seems it's the way things are. I'd imagine any young, slightly right wing politician with ambition will probably join the New Labour party if they want to get on. Sad really, I'd much prefer to return to a proper Labour / Tory choice myself.

Good ol gordon states that he will not put up income tax or vat. So what is he going to put up? Council taxes have benn rising at a far faster rate than inflation, mostly on the back of central gov cutbacks.

Whats the betting? NI perhaps??

George Galloway causing trouble again..he he!

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,6903,1461669,00.html

Swan kebab: The sickening truth

Immigrant savages decimate our beloved British fauna
by Lester Haines Daily Express Political Reporter

The news that asylum seekers have been abducting her Imperial Majestyness Liz II's swans and preparing them for human consumption in some kind of depraved barbecue ritual will send an icy chill to the very heart of any right-minded Englishman.

It appears that the 10,000 per week in cash, luxury Docklands flat and free MPV each and every immigrant receives upon arrival in the UK is insufficient to satisfy their desire to strip this country of everything which is not nailed down wildfowl included.

These are the sobering facts behind the rape of our countryside:

Each week Albanian paedophiles trap more than 1,000,000 sparrows in nets, to be sold on by Russian "handlers" to Afghani refugees. Although the consumption of sparrows is strictly forbidden in Afghanistan, experts believe that these "customers" acquired a taste for them while hanging around in French bistros waiting for an opportunity to sneak through the Channel Tunnel. The sparrows are force-fed calvados and snails until plump enough to be swallowed live by cackling ragheads.

Experts predict that the much-loved badger will be extinct in this country by 2006. The cuddly black-and-white creature has been targeted because Chinese sweatshop workers believe its penis to have magical powers rendering the user immune to deportation. Furthermore, doctors fear that the Triad gangs behind the carnage may pass on deadly TB to cattle and, terrifyingly, defenceless kiddies. Farmers are reported to be "livid" at the destruction of their traditional countryside friend. EU compensation for the emotional distress could run into billions of euros.

Every year thousands of foxes die in agony after pursuit by men on horses and packs of dogs. Sickeningly, the animal is not even eaten, but is rather considered "sport". Page seven of the Daily Mail recently described this practice as "the most filthy example of inhumanity we can imagine", while pages nine and ten featured a graphic of John Bull in hunting pink astride a magnificent steed under the headline: "Is this the last bastion of Englishness against the sewage-laden tsunami of immigrant so-called 'culture'?". A good question.

And that should be an end to the matter. There is, however, another school of thought which believes that, rather than curbing foreigners' insatiable appetite for any animal they can lay their sweaty hands on regardless of how photogenic it may be they should be encouraged to rid Britain of some of its more thorny zoological headaches.

Indeed, the government has prepared a colourful recipe booklet in 281 languages, showing how troublesome species could be put to culinary use. As one government minister put it: "If we can get these Johnnys off the swan and onto the rat, we'd have an effective vermin control programme coupled to massive savings for the taxpayers."

We at The Rockall Times asked our cookery correspondent Delia Rhodes to try out some of the booklet's suggestions. She declared herself impressed, and here are a few of her favourites. Most of the ingredients are available either in the wild or from a landfill site. Some of the items may require a trip to the supermarket, and one is available only in an upmarket Italian deli in Notting Hill. If you do not live in Notting Hill, or near a supermarket, or indeed a landfill site, simply substitute Sunny D according to taste.

Rat Pie of Merrie Olde England
Ingredients:

Rats
Shortcrust pastry*
Oysters*
Stout*
Organic hand-reared shallots*
1 free-range ostrich egg*
Thigh-rubbed Iranian black pepper*
(*Optional)
Method: Take rats, oysters, chopped shallots and season well with black pepper. Marinate overnight in stout, then gently wrap in shortcrust pastry envelope. Glaze pastry with yolk of ostrich egg and bake for 90 minutes at gas mark 4. Serves an entire reception centre for three weeks.

Delia says: Young, tender rats are the best. Older examples may require extra time in the marinade. Be sure to clean the urinary tract fully to prevent contracting Weil's disease. Wash down with a cheeky Romanian Merlot. Delicious.

Squirrel Scallopine
Ingredients:

4 Grey squirrel escalopes*
Seasoned Patagonian rough-crushed wholemeal flour
2oz "I Can't Believe It's Not Butter!"
8oz Alsace truffelized button morels, trimmed and sliced
1 tin supermarket-brand strong lager
(*Not the red variety, for God's sake)
Method: Beat the escalopes flat. Dip in flour and fry in a large griddle pan using the "I Can't Believe It's Not Butter!". When escalopes are brown on both sides, lower the heat and add the mushrooms. Cook for 1.3 seconds, then add the lager. Cover and simmer for 20 minutes. Serve on a bed of bee-tickled Bengali crescent rice, flavoured with Uzbekistan extra-virgin saffron heads.

Delia says: Terrific. Enjoy the subtle chicken-like flavour and texture of the squirrel, while complimenting yourself that there is one less tree rat in the world. The tail makes a handy duster, too.

Tortilla Argentina
Ingredients:

Cardboard box
Method: Cut 12-inch diameter circles from cardboard box. Bake in clay oven for ten minutes. Serve. A great fun snack for kids.

Delia says: Can be tough unless pre-soaked overnight in llama spittle. Good as a packed lunch for beggars, though.

Henman Surprise
Ingredients:

One second-rate British tennis player
Method: Tie tennis player to table. Slice open abdomen and extract talent with a pair of tweezers (Note: This can be notoriously difficult to find, so have patience.) Once extracted, place talent immediately on very, very small wheat cracker and eat. Throw remains of tennis player into ditch.

Delia says: I must say I found this tasteless and insubstantial and was left with a feeling of emptiness and disappointment. A glass of Pimms and some strawberries and cream soon cheered me up, though. And the surprise? No more simpering temp secretaries with Union Jacks tattooed on their ar$es shouting "Come on Tim!" for two weeks next June. I believe this is what's called a "right result".

Next week
Laughing immigrants steal decorated war hero's replacement hip joint while he sleeps, then exchange it on Russian black market for sickening paedophile porn

Open government....lol !


Blair defies records demand

David Leigh and Rob Evans
Tuesday April 19, 2005
The Guardian

Records of the prime minister's dealings with a controversial Labour donor, the millionaire businessman Paul Drayson, should be released in the public interest, the independent parliamentary watchdog has ruled. But Downing Street has refused to comply, and claims other documents have been shredded.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foi/story/0,9061,1462770,00.html

The immigrants have also been witnessed catching and taking fish from Canals, Rivers and lakes etc. Free grub.

Now't wrong wi a nice trout from't upper Swale. However a two ounce roach from the Leeds Liverpool canal's a different kettle of fish ;-)

Are people really this disintersted in the election?



Lowest turnout ever?

They go after anything and they try hardest for Carp, also they don't worry who sees them apparently.

Thats it for the tories, the sun backs Fony Bliar:


http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2005050000-2005082056,00.html

Well they would they think the Sun shines out of his backside.

Is there that much apathy about the election out there?


Judging by this thread, we're doomed!

Sad isn't it ? our lives are dominated by politics and when we have a choice as to which politicians are worthy of our vote people can't be bothered to think about it or turn out and use their vote. No use complaining or saying I always vote the way my family have always voted--when they're in you've got to accept whatever actions they take for the next 5 years! People who don't want to think or use their vote lose the right to complain!!

A right good read!

Brian Sedgemore: 'I urge everyone to give Blair a bloody nose at the election'
26 April 2005


http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?story=633038

Blair showed his contempt for the law by appointing an unholy trinity of home secretaries who have been deeply flawed:

Jack Straw was simply not up to the job. David Blunkett saw himself as some sort of deified demi-god, issuing new commandments on a daily basis for the six o'clock news.

And then there's poor Charlie Clarke, a bit of a chump preaching the politics of fear who was dealt a cruel hand by Blunkett over the Terrorism Act.

He is keeping very quiet during this election campaign for some reason. Charles was the housing chairman in Hackney when I was the MP and to describe him as bloody useless would be to heap high praise on him.

Some say I should have stayed for things to change under Gordon Brown. The "Iron Chancellor" has a massive intellect but no backbone. He stayed carefully away from the difficult issues:- the nature of parliamentary democracy; the illegal war; the denial of trial by jury; Belmarsh, the control orders and pass laws.

And John Prescott - the defender of the left - has done a Faustian deal with the Devil for the price of a cup of tea and a pat on the back from Tony.

It is against this background that I finally decided I could no longer support the Labour Government and would join the Liberal Democrats to work for a nobler vision of Britain.

STILL people say I've voted Labour all my life--I'm not going to change!! What do you think of the BNP manifesto?? Only about 6 people there to hear them say it will be compulsory to keep an assault rifle under the bed to use on anyone who seems a threat and politicians if they deserve it!! lock yourself in if they get in.

Is it all starting to go pear shaped for fony? This article is from the guardian, so it must be true!

Private poll reveals Labour fears

Neck and neck in key marginals

Patrick Wintour and Michael White
Wednesday April 27, 2005
The Guardian
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/election/story/0,15803,1471113,00.html

Tony Blair speaks to journalists at a technology school in London. Photograph: Peter Macdiarmid/Getty

Labour is under mounting pressure in marginal seats in the face of strong voter scepticism and a disciplined Conservative attack which has reduced Labour's lead to 2% or less in key constituencies.

A private report presented to Labour's London HQ has revealed that the overall Labour national lead is lagging in the marginals with up to 100 seats showing their candidates at most 2% ahead of Tory or Lib Dem challengers. In the most serious cases Labour lags 2% behind its rivals.



The internal report delivered to Alan Milburn, the campaign coordinator, at a so-called field operations meeting, suggested that the number certain to vote is still only about 56% overall - 3% down on 2001 - in a campaign which will be decided on turnout. Independent polls point the same way.
"None of the polls are showing the steady rise in the definite-to-vote [group] as there was four years ago," the report warned. "Labour no longer has the wind in its sails as it did in 1997. No government that has been in power for eight years does."

Based on analysis, feedback and canvass returns, the report cites four marginals -only one of them in the Tories' top 20 target seats - where the vote is admitted to be "neck and neck".

They are Shipley, held by junior minister, Chris Leslie, with a majority of 1,428; Hammersmith and Fulham (2,015); Forest of Dean (2,049); and Hove (3,171). They would fall on swings between 1.6% and 3.8%.

Labour admits its campaign is also "very difficult" in outer London's Enfield North (2,291), Croydon Central (3,984) and Harrow West (6,156) - even though Harrow, an unexpected gain in 1997, is the Tories' 115th target seat, well above Michael Howard's expectations.

The Milburn team has told Tony Blair this underlines the volatility of the immigration and asylum issue which Mr Howard, urged on by his Australian campaign advisers, is pushing into centre stage.

The Labour analysis is not picking up strong regional variations in voting intentions - as widely predicted by polling experts - but "loads of local factors".

Mr Milburn admitted last night: "Our research is showing that, in particular, women feel the election coverage is not focusing on the issues that concern them most. The truth is the [media] debate never settles long enough on one issue."

With barely a week left to sway votes in the becalmed 2005 campaign such remarks reflect dismay and frustration that disaffected Labour voters could go for other parties with dramatic consequences for the Labour majority.

Last night the Labour analysis appeared to find independent corroboration from a Mori poll for the Financial Times. On the day when Labour defector to the Lib Dems, retiring MP Brian Sedgemore, made headline news, the FT reported that among those certain to vote, Labour's lead is just two points - 36:34:23 - over the Tories and Lib Dems. That compared with 39:32:22 a week ago.

According to Mori, 80% of Tory voters are now certain to vote, compared with 71% a week ago. Labour's comparable figure is 64%, against 66% last week. Both figures suggest that Mr Howard's negative tactics are undermining Labour cohesion.

"It is the number of definite-to-votes who will make or break this election," Mr Milburn concedes.

At yesterday's campaign press conference Mr Blair was even more candid as he explained what aides call Mr Howard's "2-0 strategy" - Monday's admission that the Tories are trailing. "It's a classic strategy to say you cannot really win... Why do they keep using the phrase 'send a message'? It's as if there was not an election happening. That strategy deployed in Australia delivered a conservative government when people thought there would be a Labour government," Mr Blair said.

Mr Milburn said: "The idea is to garner the protest vote, to suggest [voters]... can take a cost-free kick at an incumbent government."

What does does it feel like voting for Labour. A party which it led by what some of those voters and the probably the majority of the country "believes" (one of Tony's favourite word) to be a perpetual liar. How many of those voters are voting to cripple the next generation with debts if that generation attempt to go for university education. (While a large number of the MPs benefitted from the grant system to higher education and then achieved professional status. Their kids will not have the incomes of Cherry and B Liar to bail them out.) What a rotten country is emerging at the effect of this misled "New Labour".

Vote Monster Raving Loonies.

Not really one to get drawn into political discussions, but I couldn't resist. Labour are getting slammed for being liars etc. They have told half truths to an extent, but do you honestly believe the Tories or Lib Dems would do any better? Shocking grasp of politics if you do, and you clearly didn't live through the Tories last time in power. I think people are missing the bigger picture here. Labour have done amazing things for the economy, however I accept they aren't prone to mistakes - but isn't anyone? The polls suggest most people agree they are the right party for the job, so most people think they are the best. They will on election day.

The contentious issue of the war is in my opinion ultimately irrelavant as it would have happened regardless of UK input, something does need to be done to knock out a murdering tyrant like Saddam, it was the right thing to do, whether the reasons for arriving at that conclusion were cloudy or not. Saddam still killed people by the thousand, left the rest of his country in abject poverty, harboured other murdering terrorists like Osama. Don't forget 9/11, Kuwait etc.

I see the arguments for paying more attention to this countries problems as oppose to the worlds, but does that mean its right to forget the rest of the world? Are we to just leave it to someone else to deal with 'cos its not our business'?

In my opinion Blairs integrity remains intact, and in my view there is no real opposition to speak of. Labour for me, until I see a viable alternative.

Chiva, agreed

fredInew////////get real get a life oh change your NEWSPAPER///

Bristles,KS and Chiv

Blair refused to show independency of a true leader, by kowtowing to Bush and appearing on the platform of his master.

He should have respected the United Nations, which for all its weaknesses and faults is still the best chance for world development and peace.

By rejecting the chance for the weapons of war inspectors under Blick to complete their inspection he showed a complete disregard for the United nations and the rest of sovereign countries.

With support of the United Nations I would have accepted action against IRAQ.

But it appears that the major breakers of the Iraqi sanctions were America, and Britain who supplied Saddam with military weaponry when it suited them. But were looking for excuses to invade for American control in the Middle East. Check how many based America has on other countries soil.

If the United Nations had been involved they would have had a post war plan and not have the cock up that is no the state of Iraq.

Although Brown seems to have managed the economy relatively successfully for the last seven years, this was basically by given the responsibility to the Bank of England and leaving well alone, this period was built on the backs of a future looking episode in a Major government. (I have no truck for Tories, but do recognise those actions.)

The criticism I have of the B Liar and his period in office is the short-termisn and pandering to the public whim by the socialist government which had such a mandate for change.

He has not faced up to the responsibility for changes in pension policies, the changes in organisation which the social services, Health services, and Education preferring to decentralise the responsibilities to a local area management in order not to be held accountable.

As far as I am concerned I think Blair is self-deceiving, self advancing, acting with the ability of an old ham or a political spiv.

I wonder how much the ongoing economical problems in Britain and America has or will be effected by the costs of bombing another country into submission. Usually aggressors are generally defeated, unfortunately it sometimes takes to long for this to happen.

Bristles, Educate me, which papers do you read beside the Sun and Mirror? Perhaps Private Eye.

Done wonders for the economy on the back of the Tories.
50 quarters without a setback, but 20 of those quarters were when the Tories were in power.
Can blame the bank of England now when it all goes pearshape.
He`s not done my pension a lot of good though.
He`s not done my council tax a lot of good.
He`s not done my tax allowance a lot of good.

Labours Pension is safe because they topped the shortfall up from the Public Purse whilst they just left ours in a MESS.(Tax anyone)
When the Tories where in the Pensions had so much money they gave the Companies a Pension Holiday for a year.
I lived through the previous Labour Government, you know the one that when it fell they said Labour was finished.When they left a mountain of debt with the IMF.Inflation above 25% and interest rates for a saver to savour.
The Tories got rid of debt and the Unions grasping Power and created a fab economy but they had a bit of sleaze so Tony said and were booted out. But I would say their sleaze is nothing to what Labour have been upto, at least we did not have men dying for a Tony Blair WAR.
Well guess what we owe the IMF another Mountain of Debt, our Gold reserves have been flogged at a knockdown price.
Since Labour took power Industrial output has FALLEN and we have the biggest trade deficit ever.
So whats he improved we live in a nanny state everything is governed by red tape and everything that should be neutral has been infiltrated by Labour Men.
If you speak the truth like Dr Kelly you will be FINGERED and your reputation and Job finished.

Blairs Plane hit by LIGHTNING, IS THIS A MESSAGE FROM THE GODS.

Pity it didn't hit him on the ground. I wouldn't have like the crew to suffer his "god's wrath" or "pleasure".

Porky --Cavman--AGREE with all you say. I'm in despair when I read people think they've got a strong economy-it's all built on billions of debt and robbery by stealth pensions etc. like a house of cards its beginning to fall apart--whoever wins they've got a hell of a mess to sort out!

Tories did it before and I hope they can do it again, I have to say i'm amazed that any person who has any financial capability can think that Labour has done any good.
Last time we were even deeper in debt to the IMF to the extent they controlled our economy.

Good news for the tories.


Safe seat ensures return of Rifkind

Ex-minister to end 7-year absence

James Meek
Thursday April 28, 2005
The Guardian http://politics.guardian.co.uk/election/story/0,15803,1471788,00.html

Bring back Maggie !!!

FREDInew day today tmes/telegragh also weekends F.T. OK/YOU HAVE LET THE CAT OUT OF THE BAG///MAGGIE WHO CAUSE ? THE PENSION/EDUCATION/TRANSPORT/HOUSING PRODLEMS////????WHO ///

I never called Maggie a cat. I have used some others words though!

Interesting thought though. If you put B Liar, Howard and Maggie in a bag, who do you think would get out first?

Markx Then stop concentrating on the Sports Supplements. There are other pages.

cavman and moneyplus (239 & 240)

And there's me thinking I was alone in seeing the shit we really are in!

When the scales fall from the eyes of the feckless, it will be pitiful to see.

My only wish was for David Davies to be in the driving seat. Can't have everything I suppose.

oh oh///BEWARE////THE THREE WISEMEN(PERSONS) THEY COULDNOT SEE THE SHIT WE WERE IN UNDER THOSE NICE HONEST TORRIES what crap/////

The tories inherited it AGAIN from a labour gov--remember Jim Callaghan--crisis what crisis??? I bet I'm older and remember more than you Bristle Rubbish piled up in the streets-the dead lying in mortuaries unburied for weeks etc. It took YEARS of pain and struggle for the tories to get it right- only for labour to take on and ruin it all again after cruising along on the tory stability for the first term !! We are at the top of a debt mountain-gov. borrowing and credit card debt with no assets left behind us- Gordon has sold off our gold! Whoever gets in life is not going to stay comfortable perhaps if Labour gets in again the scales will fall from your eyes I'm getting to the age when I'm past caring!!

hi moneyplus do you remenber poll tax?doyou remenber black wednesday? do you remenber who/ sold off the state silver to their friends some who were still MPS/////

Yes-poll tax was as they now admit a mistake and could have worked if they had gradually brought it in. also the current lib dem idea of local income tax based on the number of earners in the house sounds almost exactly the same to me just a different name! payment based on the number of people in a house does seem a fairer way of collecting money rather than based on the value of a property with maybe only one person in it--it's just very difficult to know how to bring it in without big trouble!!
Black Wednesday was the fault of the IMF--we should never have joined-b. europeans! Maggie never wanted to go in but Lawson, Major and Clarke shafted her by threatening to resign en masse if she held out against Europe any longer!! Now the tide is turning and the city big wigs are realising what a corrupt selfserving organisation it really is!!
Selling the silver?? hmm--as far as I can remember that was Harold Macmillan as a past PM who didn't approve of something and said it was like selling the family silver but don't know what it refers to. Now we've sold the gold as well!! not much left hey?

This is fun for me--bring it on!! I hope I'm not annoying you just teasing--as I said I'm too old to worry too much. cheers Bristle MP

Moneyplus.

Macmillan in context of the Maggies misgovernment did say selling of the "Family Silver" referring to selling off the previously nationalised industries at cut down prices to satisfy its own followers.

That government also abused the exploitation of the North Sea Reserves.

Rather than using these profits to improve the infrastructure of the country of the country that government plundered the finances to reward the rich and party or camp followers by Tax reductions to the already rich.

That period of government was partially responsible for the break down in social responsibility we are now suffering, imbuing the young a lack of moral responsibility and furthering the attitude and action self first and bugger your neighbour as long as you can get away with it. The actions could be illegal or socially dismissive as long as you didnt get exposed.

Well how come after all the time Foney has had cannot he have made one Jot of difference apart from making everything worse and landing us with another mountain of DEBT.
He promised utopia at the first and at the second said we need a bit more time, now I understand he meant more time to completely ---k it all up.

Fred--I tend to agree with you on that. trouble is the decline in political standards has continued apace and the same with society in general. I once ticked off a student on Paddington station who was aggressively abusing his poor Mother using every word a foul four letter one---he was so shocked he looked at me as if I was from another planet!! I feel as though I am sometimes!
No one is ashamed-no one resigns anymore only self counts! so who do we put in??--goodness knows why they want to get in it's a thankless task.
I think we should have a new party--the honourable party. William Hague, Ann Widdecombe, Charles Kennedy, George Galloway and yes Michael Howard!

Any other suggestions for my new party--oh I forgot Eric and Stockdog!

I have always thought of Tony as a Tory mole.

You're quick off the mark--how about you in the new honourable party?

ps This is much more fun than watching my stocks bathing in red!

bristlelad.

Refresh my memory for me,if you would. That nice mister Brown..........how
many tons of gold did he sell at the lowest price for years? And what price is that shiny stuff today?

The Euro.....that new kid on the block. How many billions of pounds did that
nice mister Brown spend in buying Euros at the entry price and what price are they now?

Ponder this fact. It is without question, one the agonies of life today....
juveniles creating mayhem in virtually every sphere of life in this country.
The worst of course within the confines of education. They KNOW they can get way with near murder and nothing can be done to stop them.
From accusations of assault to charges of sexual molestation, the teachers are powerless. In giving a pupil poor marks or suspending them from the class
invites attack by the parent. Teachers are ham-strung at every turn by PC
and Human Rights. Youngsters, still at school, are sexually promiscuous.
.......and now 'Daisy- Chaining'. Ye gods. What gives them a kick? Beating
up OAPs.
Every child at school today and those that have left within the last five
years have been taught within guidelines set by Tony Blair and continually
changing Education Ministers.
Universities are having to give remedial English classes to new entrants.
The Army are having to recruit overseas to build up the Infantry Regiments.
The Service Corps, Logistics, Engineers, Signals, REME etc are in a desperate
state for recruits. Industry? Have a guess.
AND WE'VE GOT THEM AGAIN, it appears.

Evening folks.


standber.

I would go along with your comments in general. However I think you must put it in context.

Whilst the rules are the same for all schools, they are applied in different degrees, depending on where they are/who runs them etc. Most of the out of control schools are in traditional loony labour inner city/town controlled areas. Mix in umpteen different base languages, and you have a recipe for disaster...how do you teach someone who cant speak the lingo?

My daughter is now at uni doing a Bsc, there are NO remedial anglais readers/writers on her course or as far as she knows (i have asked) in this uni. They wouldnt stand a chance. The culprits i suspect, are the new (ex poly's) uni's who appear to take all comers...anything to keep the numbers up and keep the excess 18+ y/o's off the dole.

All governments spout the speel about education, but I wonder if that is what they really want? I think they would be far happier with a complacent electorate of sheep who will do as they are told.

In the meantime, the marching morons continue to swell the ranks.


I fear for my daughters future.

Excellent speech from Michael Howard today--can only guess that those who don't like him dont really listen to what he says. I believe he means every word and deserves his chance as PM.

Howard says that he will always tell the truth.
Blair says that he has never lied.
Do they really think that we are that nae?

On the other hand, why are the voters so surprised that politicians tell lies?

It has always been like that!
They have to lie to get elected!

That is the system that they have created & (given the choice) they wouldnt have it any other way.
But of course, it shouldnt be their choice to decide on the rules of our political system. The rules should be set by a written constitution that can only be amended by the voters.

Corruption is the natural state of politics, it is normal human behaviour, get used to it!

That doesnt mean that we have to give up & assume that nothing can be done to put things right.

We just have to recognise the reality of human motivation & behaviour & design a constitution where TRUST IS NOT REQUIRED.

It is fundamentally wrong to trust a politician.

When human beings get a taste of power, their lust for power & wealth will always override their sense of right & wrong.
This happens even if they start out as well meaning people.

Like I said, politics has always been like that, it is normal human behaviour. We have to get used to it & act accordingly to design a constitution that takes this into account in order to put things right.
Not only should it take this into account but anticorruption laws should be the bedrock of the constitution.

It is not difficult to design a constitution where trust is not a requirement of the system.
The most important part is that intensive monitoring of politicians must be built into the constitution.
This is the only way to keep them in line.

We have a right to know what they are doing.


Democracy is easily corrupted & degraded by the lack of constitutional laws to prevent rich people buying influence.

The corrupters want people to give up on it & not bother to vote because it makes it easier for them to have their way.

Only if voters have access to information can politicians be forced to abide by very tight constitutional anticorruption laws.



A constitution & a bill of rights are essential.


A truly democratic constitution would insist on :-

1.
Proportional representation, so that a party that gets 1/3 of the votes cannot get 2/3 of the seats.

2.
It should be illegal in any way give money to a political party that has got seats. (He who pays the piper calls the tune.)
Those with seats should be funded by the taxpayer with the top 2 parties getting 10million per year & the others getting a proportion of 10million related to the number of votes that they got at the preceding election.
(This would put end to such things as Formula1/Tobbaco donations to parties.)

A party without seats should only be allowed to raise & spend funds equal to the smallest party with seats provided that it has got a candidate for every seat in the country & will have the amount reduced proportionately for every seat without a candidate.
(This prevents a party pretending that all of its candidates are in different parties just to get more money.)

3.
Political lobbying by organisations should be illegal.
The only lobbying allowed is to be by individuals & all conversations & other communications are recorded & published.
The ordinary individual has a right to anonymity when these are published but the politician involved does not.

4.
Voters should have to pay a fine if they do not vote.
(Just like they do in Australia.)
They should also be able to vote early at a special polling station in the week leading up to the election & elections should be held all weekend instead of 1 day. There should be mobile polling stations in supermarket car parks.



5.
There should be an extra box at the bottom of the ballot paper so that voters will be able to vote for NONE of the above candidates.


6.
Political advertising should be illegal.
At the moment, this only applies to TV adverts.
TV progs must be accurate about giving equal time to parties & rights to reply.


7.
Any small group of voters that have never committed any crime & never been involved in politics before should have the right to check up on what any politician is doing or has done & where our money goes.
No information should be kept from these voters provided that they agree not to disclose information that would allow a criminal to escape or be the direct cause of harm to an innocent person or provide a weapon to someone. All other information should be disclosed & published. Action should then be taken so that the rest of the information can be published without negative consequences.

Any group of voters should have the right to investigate a politician but individuals should be disqualified as investigators for acting maliciously or criminally.

(Politicians love secrets.)
Secrets should not be permitted, the only thing that should be allowed is a delay of public release of information because it would compromise a current operation but they should have to prove that in a closed court if a voter requests the information.
As soon as the operation is over, further delay should be illegal as specified by the constitution.


8.
Elections should happen on fixed date.
4.5 years would be appropriate so that elections could alternate between spring or autumn, just in case a particular time of year gave an advantage to the party in power.
Any politician that resigns before the fixed date should be banned from taking part for 10 years.
Politicians should not be allowed to decide the date of an election.

(At the moment, they can call an election any time within 5 years of the last election but they can change that law whenever they like because there is no constitution.)

9.
Parliament should legally have to elect the PM after every general election & in the middle of each 4.5 year term & the cabinet every year but be able to take an extra vote in between if they want to.


10.
Currently, there are many decisions that ministers can make without the approval of Parliament & without even telling them.
Even if they do know, there is nothing that MPs can do about them. Some of these decisions do have a time limit on them in which Parliament can take a vote on them BUT these are usually taken during the summer recess to prevent Parliament from having anything to do with them.
This should be illegal.
Parliament must be informed about ALL decisions & 50 MPs should be enough to force a vote on anything.

11.
It should be illegal for a politician to benefit from anything unless specifically permitted to do so by the constitution.

Politicians who break the rules of the House of Commons should go to jail. (The register of members interests is just a joke. Currently, they are just excluded for a couple of days.)

12.
The house of Lords should be replaced by a house of experts.
These should be qualified people.
2 seats allocated to represent each area of expertise all sciences, branches of medicine, the arts, business etc. Currently, it is overstaffed with lawyers but we would still need to allocate a few seats for them.

Anyone who has ever been a member of a political party or has publicly supported a political party in the preceding 20 years must be disqualified from the house of experts.

These experts must be nominated by 1,000 members of the public (NOT politicians) signing their nomination when there is a vacancy.
They can of course refuse the nomination but it must be illegal for them to campaign.

TV programs must be broadcast giving information about them but politicians must not be allowed to campaign for or against them.
Only members of the public will be allowed to campaign for or against them unless they have a direct connection with them.

The voters will then vote to approve them or not at the same time as the council elections, which take place once a year.

If there is more than 1 nomination for the same seat then voters must list their 1st choice, 2nd choice etc.

Once approved, they can stay in the house of experts for a maximum of 25 years after which they can never return.

The only power that the house of experts should have is to delay legislation by amending it. The maximum delay should be 18 months after which, they cannot reintroduce the same or remotely similar amendment. After that, if they still insist on their amendment then they can call a referendum on it. Otherwise, the commons gets its way.


They must subject to the same rules of public scrutiny & anticorruption as MPs.

=====================

To any politician who objects to any of this, I say, What are you trying to hide?

As far as constitutional laws are concerned, democracy is pretty easy to fix.

The real problem is; how do we get there from where we are now?
Those in control will try to prevent change.

It looks impossible, but on the other hand, go back 400 years (The divine right of kings etc.) & look at where we are now.
Such change looked even more impossible from back then.
BUT HERE WE ARE!
The right to vote did happen!

In the nineties, the impossible happened again. This time it was South Africa, its not perfect but it was a big step forward.



Obviously, democracy is not the answer to everything.

There should be a bill of rights stating the rights of the individual. The bill of rights should enshrine the principle that individuals or minorities cannot be oppressed or persecuted by the majority no matter what the majority votes for.

A bill of rights must prevent someone being disadvantaged just because other people dont like them.

How about voting to torture a TV presenter or voting about who to lock up in a concentration camp & send to the gas chambers?
It would be democratic but it wouldnt be right.
Minorities must be protected.

That is why a bill of rights is essential.

A bill of rights must guarantee freedom & human rights.
The freedom to do whatever you want to do as long as it does not affect anyone else without their consent. If it does affect someone then there have to be laws about it & those laws have to be decided by democracy.
The only exception to consent is freedom of speech but
incitement to violence is not an exception.

The bill of rights should contain the right to privacy except in cases of hypocrisy, corruption, other crime or danger to the public.
When the media reports on someone then there should be an equal right to reply in the same media.

=======================================

You are probably asking yourself how I ever had the time to to come up with all this boring stuff.

Many years ago, I was on a long coach journey & I forgot to take a book with me.

Some of you probably think that I should go on another one & not come back, especially if you are involved in politics.
If so, what are you trying to hide?
Or are you rich & have grown accustomed to buying influence?

Oh well only another few days of watching politicians play jump the toilet before we vote.

Well thought out apple-trouble is politicians only listen to us leading up to an election after that-forget it!

Excellent apple!

moneyplus,
Thanks for the compliment.

Im sorry I cant say the same about your adoration of Howard in message 260.

How many times have I got to tell you, You cant trust a politician.

Howard is typical of the sort of hypocrite that becomes a politician.
Just like all the others, he is very selective with his use of statistics when talking about asylum seekers.
He fails to mention the fact that when he was home secretary & there was a rapidly growing backlog of asylum cases, HE gave amnesty to over 14,500 asylum seekers just to reduce the backlog & make the figures look better.

I dont agree with either side on this issue, they are both using it to get the votes of bigots.

Howard was found guilty of acting illegally when he was home secretary BUT there was no penalty. He wasnt disqualified from office, no prison sentence, no fine for him, nothing!

He was interfering in the prison system, Im sure you remember the famous Paxman interview where he refused to answer a question about it no matter how many times he was asked.
My theory is that he didnt want to incriminate himself.


In 1995 when the House of Lords ruled he acted illegally over criminal compensation. Mr Howard said "I don't wish to comment on that, frankly it is not a criminal matter."

April 5 1995 the Law Lords ruled that Mr Howard (the Home Secretary) had acted illegally in using prerogative powers to replace the 1964 common law scheme for compensation with a tariff scheme which slashed the compensation paid to the worst-affected victims.

The tariff scheme resulted in significantly lower awards for victims of crime. Many victims who suffered the most serious injuries, including police officers and fire fighters, had compensation slashed to just a tenth of what it would have been under the previous scheme. (Has this been put right since? Of course not, they found a way around it with amendments to other legislation passing through.)

There were quite a few occasions when Howard was found guilty of acting illegally.


He is not alone, many Tory & Labour ministers have been found guilty of acting illegally but nothing ever happens to them.

Howard brought in a range of repressive laws reducing the right to freedom of assembly and freedom of speech in the 1994 Criminal Justice Act & Blunket carried on in the same way.


moneyplus, Why do you believe he means every word?
Please DON'T be like most other people & believe what you WANT to believe.
So take those blinkers off & see him for what he is.


They are not all the same but they are all bad.
It will be like this until we change the system.
The best we can do on Thursday is look for competence.


Not long to go now.
As we keep on watching them all play jump the toilet, maybe one of them will fall in.

Thanks brianboru,

but it's only a statement of the obvious.

Political expediency is the name of the games for all the parties.

Not one has a single bedrock issue that cannot be negotiated...none!

Once the election is out of the way, it will be business as usual. ie, sort out the preferential pay and pension rises for pols, tax the hell out of anyone actually earning a productive crust (a vanishing species) muddle on as normal trying not to step on any minorities toes, majorities are fair game though, as long as they are white/middle class/male/add your own discription.


What a wonderfull world.

oh dear apple --we have to have some poor sod in charge unfortunately. I just think Howard etc are more competent and less corrupt than a lot of others!! However looking at it both ways I even felt sorry for Tony Blair on ITV tonight.

hi moneyplus//oh that nice honest competent and uncorrupted mr howard the same howard who put the boot into john major who ran off with someones wife??true and blue well they were ALLdoing it in that tory party at time //hi apple I COULD NOT AGREE MORE WITH WHAT YOU SAY THAN IF I SAID IT MYSELF YOU PUT IT MUCH BETTER THAN I//THANKS

Is our michael going to the match tonight,i belive so.

It is important to realise how most of the decisions on this planet are made.

They are not made by considering the facts & coming up with a logical conclusion.

They are usually made with personal self interest or sometimes with just a gut feeling.
(Jumping to conclusions also plays a large part in the positions that people take up.)

THEN the evidence is slanted to support that decision.

The person involved concocts whatever kind of story he/she can to back it up.

The person usually searches around for facts or half truths or unproven information or lies to back it up.

They often use things that they know have already been proven wrong & hope that you havent heard about them.

The other side of the coin is that they will do their utmost to avoid facts that prove that their decision is utterly baseless.

They will also do their utmost to avoid facts even slightly contradict them.

This is how decisions are made in meetings.
I have seen this occur wherever decisions are made or opinions are given. I have seen it in TV documentaries & news programmes. I have seen it happen in the daily life of families.
I have seen it happen in shops.
This is what lawyers do in court, they are not there to expose the truth, they are there to win.

This even occurs in industry including situations where large sums of money are involved. Yes, even then, reality is pushed to one side.

It wasnt until I recognised this, that I started to win the arguments in meetings instead of getting involved in a heated argument.

Somebody once said, Choose your facts carefully.

This is what people do but mostly not carefully.

Never take arguments at face value, work out what makes people tick.

Quite often, it just boils down to someone not wanting to learn a new software package but they never actually say what the real reason is. Indeed, the discussion in the meeting may be totally unrelated to software. Instead of saying what the real reason is they just become more & more inventive with their illogical arguments & their slanted & selective disclosure of information.


The classic example of this is (Yes you guessed it!) Blairs decision about invading Iraq.


Here is another example for you.

Standber, I accuse you of Choosing your facts carefully. In message 154.

You said:
PR? No way. Ask the Eyties. After WW II, they had an election and new Gov every 12 month for about 20 years.
Sheer waste of time and effort. The idea sounds good but it just does not work.

You chose Italy.

I think PR works in Scotland but your definition of works really depends on whether you agree with what they have done.
You may not agree with the abolition of student fees in Scotland, a compromise that they were pressured into by the liberals.
You may not agree with the long term state funded care for the elderly already in place in Scotland & now to be copied here.
(Well you never know, it might be.)

However, you cannot dispute the fact that hasnt been an election every 12 months in Scotland.

I think that PR has got an exceptionally good record in Denmark but YOU didnt choose Denmark.

Germany has got PR & Germany used to be the economic power house of Europe until it threw all it Deutchmarks into a big bottomless pit called East Germany.

Neither Germany nor Denmark has had its government fall every 12 months.


Lets get back to Italy for a moment.

Italian politics was distorted by the Mafia with the backing of the CIA from world war 2 up until the fall of the Soviet Union.

Many Italian politicians were bought & paid for by the Mafia.
I suspect that many of them still are because the depth of corruption was so great that it is very difficult to reverse.
Many Italian politicians have been put on trial, some have been convicted but I think that many have got away with it due to continuing threats, corruption & blackmail.

The US did this in order to keep the communists out of power.
The digging up of the arms caches was covered on Newsnight & Channel4 news at the time. If the communists ever took power then they were to be told the location of these weapons & to use them to overthrow a communist government.

This was openly admitted to by the Americans involved on Newsnight & Channel4 news at the time.

You can check this for yourself, go & ask the BBC & Channel4 for the records of their programmes. They may even dig them out of the archives for you & let you watch them.

If you wanted to select a biased example then you would choose Italy but the problems of Italy are just not relevant to PR.


Sorry to single you out Standber but you provided a convenient example of Choosing your facts carefully.


The other great clichis Being economical with the truth.

Politicians practice very hard at being economical with the truth.

Howard does it.
Blair does it.
Even Kennedy does it.

Kennedy needs more practice.


--------------------------------------

My suggestion for PR is an additional member system so that every constituency still has a link with an MP.

BUT NOT with a Party List for the Additional Members.

A Party List IS A STITCH UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I suggest an additional member system with A VOTERS LIST!

Here is how it would work:

1.
Double the size of the constituencies & thereby halve the number of constituencies.

2.
Directly elect 1 MP per constituency on 1st past the post.
So half the MPs will be constituency MPs.


3.
For each Party, make a Voters List of all the candidates that came second & put them in order of those who got the highest percentage of the vote in their constituency.
So top of the list would be someone who came so close that his voters could almost taste it but they felt robbed by just a few votes.

(In this way, it is the voters who decide who gets a seat in Parliament, not the Party Hierarchy who would give priority to arse-lickers.)
(This allows us to keep out candidates who we definitely do not want instead of having our wishes bypassed by the party.)


4.
Allocate seats for the additional members to top up their totals to match their percentage of the vote.
This would be done by taking the required number of candidates from the top part of the Voters List for each Party.

5.
Additional members must be disqualified from ministerial office.
(That will make some candidates try harder to explain themselves at the election.)

6.
MPs who sit on committees must also be disqualified from ministerial office for 5 years.

--------------------------------------------------


With PR, the politicians would not be able to coerce people by saying that they were wasting their votes.

They would not be able to con people into voting for them by saying that a vote for a smaller party would let the other big party in by the back door.

Almost every vote would matter, not just those of the floating voters in the marginal constituencies.

Currently, unless you are a floating voter in a marginal constituency then YOU DONT MATTER!

Bristles I am not quite sure what you trying to say.

Is it the following:- John Major ran off with someone elses wife. I dont think either participant seemed to have done much running.

I think Michael Howard, if he did run off with someone elses wife certainly at least seems to have good taste. However, I didnt think that a wife was somebodys property and also, it takes two to Tango.

Sometimes I wish somebody would run off with my wife. (I hope she doesnt find me writing this.)

I think also in consideration of illegal actions, there is a difference between Criminal Law and Civil law. Many of the actions of Blunket, Howard and other Home Secretaries, which have been appealed against were civil actions. (Like appealing against a decision made by a jurys, a hire court may overturn the decision and judges decisions. Neither the jury nor the judge has broken criminal law. )

The latter actions were done openly, not corruptly, in private discussion in private rooms behind lock doors.

I think in Blairs case of Iraq, he deliberately and knowingly attempted to deceive Parliament, the cabinet and the British public and possibly himself. (He now seems to believe his own flawed arguments.)

He has a case to answer. I think he is responsible for a large part of the disillusionment felt with politics in this country at the moment, by his disregard of international law and the United Nations, which will give others the right to go to war on a whim.

I think it is unlikely that you will have politicians in position of power who do not show the foibles of the rest of society, but in the case of Blair I would like to see his foible exposed and he humiliated.

I dont usually have such strong feelings or wish to see somebody destroyed, but I think his crime and the consequences of his crime has done so much harm that I think it is necessary, in an attempt to prevent reoccurrences by him, or similar actions of others of his ilk in the future.

There are no penalties for politicians who act illegally.

Consequently, there is nothing to hold them back so they go ahead & do it because they might as well try it & see if they can get away with it.

If there were penalties then they would take very careful legal advice before using prerogative powers.

They wouldn't want a tame, compliant Attourney General.
They would want one that was right.

apple
Proportional Representation............read about the Italian political scene
post WWll. Disaster.

That caught my eye. Don't know what else you had to say. Too long. Skipped to the next post.

Standber,

You didn't read it but I said that I accuse you of Choosing your facts carefully.

When you cite the Italian situation.

I have completely demolished your use of that example.

I know we are all financial giants on this bulletin board, and being so I would be grateful if someone could reveal to me the financial costs per week of the Iraq war and cost of sustaining the "peace".


Also, just as interesting to me, what gains we may have gather if the sums involved were use in Overseas Development? (even with all its problems of implementation.)


Again, why has no party discussed the ongoing economics of the war in relationship to pensions and hospitals costs, etc.?


Not all of the politicioans can have shares in Armaments or the construction industries.

Fred1new,

I seem to remember Blair being pushed into giving the cost on TV.

He said that the total cost of IRAQ to us so far was about 5Billion.

Whether you believe him or not is up to you.

As for the ongoing cost per week, he didn't say.

Has anybody noticed that our 'secret' vote isn't?

Check it out when (if) you go and vote this Thursday. You will notice that the ballot papers have an index number on their top corner, which is written down against your name when you present yourself at the polling station. Hence they (the men in grey suits) are able to determine which way you vote.

Don't believe me? I have been concerned(ish) about this for a long time now. At the last election I actually wrote on my ballot paper about my concerns that my vote was in fact not a secret. Several days later I received a letter from one of my local MPs (I won't say who) attempting to explain and becalm my concerns. The MP informed me that the only person who has cause to consult the ballot papers and cross-reference them against the electoral roll is the Returning Officer, and that this would only be done if there was allegations of double voting. So, its for security reasons. Sounds fair enough. But hang on just a moment - where did this particular MP get my name and address from - and how did they know about my concern? QED

Nothing new about that StarFrog.

I too have pointed that out to people.

Politicians don't like to to talk about it.

If it has EVER been discussed on TV then I missed it!

But I doubt that it has.

The dire (& normal) state of politics causes us to make some very distasteful choices but Im not voting Labour or Tory.

moneyplus,
So you think the Tories are more competent?

As far as I know, avoiding a recession in this country while most of the world goes into recession has never been done before.
(At least not in the last century.)


There are all sorts of things being promised in this election.

None of them are going to matter at all if the economy goes down the pan. There will be spending cuts AND tax increases AND mortgage increases if the economy goes down the pan. You could be paying less tax if you lose your job. Do you want to lose your house?

Better NHS, more police, better transport etc.
You can forget all that if the economy is screwed up.

You still might not get them if the economy goes well but at least you will still have your house & your job.


It's not all rosy but on balance the economy looks as if it will remain stable. I base my opinion on the significant dangers that I see & on Browns good track record.

I dont like Brown but he has got a good track record & every year, the Tories & the international economic organisations say that his budget is bad or even disastrous.

Every year they are proved wrong, & the economy keeps on steadily growing.
Almost the whole world started into recession in 2000-2001, but we didn't.

The Tories gave us 2 very deep recessions, 1 boom & a very feeble crawl out of recession.
Then they tried to take the credit for the slow recovery when all they had done was stop kicking the economy so hard while it was down.

The thing about the economy is that is so easy to screw it up & it isnt the government that can actually put it right when they have stopped kicking it.
It is only business that can do that.

Brown has given the economy some kicks & I thought that they were significant BUT I was proved wrong & so were the Tory critics.
The economy just kept on growing. Even with the red tape.


To avoid a recession while most of the world goes into recession & out the other end has never happened in this country before.

(Perhaps you can dig up an example if you go back more than a century but different economic circumstances would make it irrelevant.)

I don't want the Tories to screw it all up AGAIN but I will have to put up with a distasteful arrogant Blair for a while for the sake of a stable economy.

I fear for the economy if we get an intellectual Pigmy like Letwin as chancellor.

Hes the Tory that they gagged when he did a Howard Flight during the last election. How many billions of spending cuts was that Mr Letwin?

The slogan of Bill Clintons campaign was,
Its the economy stupid.

That is ALWAYS true!

-------------------------------------------

Give me a hung parliament because that gives them less power.

Labour has changed since the abysmal years of the Wilson/Callaghan government of the 70s but oh dear, look what they have turned into.
I cant say that they have turned into a monster because they already were a monster BUT at least they havent screwed up the economy yet.

Im voting Liberal, I dont agree with ALL their policies but if it gives me a hung parliament then Ill be pleased as long as Brown is still chancellor or Labour leader.

The arrogant Blair says, dont take the risk but that is not a risk in my constituency.

Weigh up the numbers in your constituency & you decide!

Economy what economy, we owe the IMF billions and in case you forget it was the PREVIOUS LABOUR GOVERNMENT that owed so much to the IMF that they were dictating how we run our economy and don't forget the inflation and interest rates that went with it.
Took the Tories ages to sort out and they set in train the Economy that labour are now messing up.
How about the biggest TRADE DEFICIT ever courtesy of labour.
How about Industrial output started declining ever since Labour took power, on what was claimed a sleazy government. But labour has shown them what true lies and bullying is all about.Dr Kelly he stood for the truth look where that got him-harrased to death.
How about most of our Gold reserves that were sold at a knockdown price and then the silly idiot went and bought loads of Euros. Dah
Pensions that Gordon has raided and left in a mess (work to your 70),(He He i'm retired so i'm alright Jack but you lot will suffer for these labour dopes and they will be alright because they dipped into your pockets to top up their shortfall) ) under the Tories the pension schemes had enough funds to allow Companies a Pension Holiday.
How about the Institutions and BBC that have been infiltrated by LABOUR HENCHMAN.
Business has now declared in favour of a Tory Goverment.
In a way I hope that Labour wins and then you will really see how they can mess up the Economy for the IMF have warned we are heading for a BLACK HOLE and then labour will have to sort it out. L O L

Whatever about the imf debt...that will be repaid from taxpayers pockets.


The real problem is personal debt, fuelled by the enhanced property boom, people using thier houses as cash dispensers...the cows must come home sooner or later.



Hopefully when Brown is at the helm, let him pay for it!

Rather than a hung parliament, wouldn't it be better to hang parliment?

Sound idea Fred!

A labour supporter, but blair is liar, took us to war on a lie. Why doesnt any one care about the iraqi people that could be your brother, sister, mum, daughter, grandfather etc Its not their fault Hussain was in control. My conscience will not allow me to vote for that. The tories would have done the same, so its the liberals for me (though it hurts to vote for them).

Kivver.
Blair dearly wanted a "Maggie", so he lied and put himself in hock to Bush......and has been found out.

No, it was not the Iraqis fault that Soddem was in power. And they lost 100,000
in the second war. But how many had Soddem put down of his own people if not his own brand of Islam? With many more to be killed over the years?

The French did not ask for Boney. Nor the Germans Hitler or the Russians Stalin. It's an endless argument. Should we go and get rid of Mugabe?

Read about the disaster that is Darfur......and it's cause. Should we mount an Expedition? There would not be many takers for that idea, I can assure you.

Sleep well on your dilemma :~)

The MOST Important issue is not being discussed.

That issue is ENERGY!

It is energy that makes people rich.
I am not talking about individuals, I am talking about everybody.

Of course information & education can make 1 person rich but that is mainly due to the shifting of wealth from a group of people to that person.

It is just not possible for everybody on this planet to lead happy & fulfilling lives until we solve the energy problem.

The amount of cheap, easily available energy places an upper limit on the tangible wealth of the people on the planet.

Global warming is going to kill billions of us if we dont hurry up & solve this problem because China & India are likely to exceed the CO2 output of the rest of the world by several hundred percent.

Hydrogen & Helium are SAFE.
Uranium & Plutonium are NOT SAFE.

The solution is NOT the current form of Nuclear Power.
Once again, we are being lied to by the politicians because they want the Nuclear Fission Industry because they want the weapons.

Current Nuclear Power stations use Nuclear FISSION.

Nuclear Fission Power stations are dangerous, they are terrorist targets, they require fascist style security, they produce radioactive waste & they lead to the spread of Nuclear Weapons.

AND Nuclear Fission Power stations do not give us any extra energy!
(See below for the reasons why!)

Fission SPLITS Atoms into smaller ones.
Fusion COMBINES Atoms into bigger ones.

FISSION is NOT a solution!
FUSION is our only hope of Nuclear Power!


Hydrogen & Helium are NOT RADIOACTIVE.
Nuclear FUSION is inherently CLEAN & SAFE.
(See below for the reasons why!)

But its harder to do.

15 years ago, at the Joint European Torus project, at Culham in Oxfordshire, they reached break even point where they got more energy out than they put in.

They needed to build a larger version for their next prototype.
This has not been started!
WHY? Because the USA, Europeans, Japanese & Russians decided to get together & try to save money by having 1 joint project.

Since then, they have been arguing about where it was going to be built & who will get the contracts.

This is the most URGENT issue facing the planet BUT ANOTHER 15 YEARS HAVE BEEN LOST!

With the Manhattan Project when they developed the 1st Atomic Bomb, they didnt care how much it was going to cost & they gave it whatever resources that were asked for because they wanted it as quickly as possible.

Nuclear FUSION requires greater URGENCY!

The energy released by Fusing Light Atoms together is many times greater than that released by splitting Heavy Atoms like Uranium & it doesnt produce such appalling radioactive waste.

Fusion produces clean energy with no radioactive problems, no danger to the public no matter what goes wrong or what crashes into it.

We need to get started with a huge investment into Fusion Energy so that we can abandon oil & coal completely. It may be huge but it is cheaper than the Iraq war.



===============================================

What can Fusion do for us?

Looking back at history, Democracy has a habit of growing & spreading but is limited by a ceiling that rises as our technical ability to access energy grows.

Democracy increases & decreases from time to time but it cant go above that limit.

You cant have Democracy without Energy.
Without fossil fuels, we would be working on the land just to grow enough food to stay alive. That kind of society can support only a few people who dont work on the land so the rest of us would be under the foot of a handful of barons & their thugs.

Competition for energy/wealth causes war not democracy.

Do the Fusion thing & there will be so much available energy that there will be no competition for it & it will be clean, safe energy.

Renewable energy will only be enough to buy us some time until Fusion is developed. It is not enough to take everybody out of poverty.

Energy is Wealth.



******************************************************

How is it that Fusion can be CLEAN?

When Deuterium & Helium3 are fused together, the result is ordinary Helium4 (a very useful gas) & a proton which is Hydrogen1 & is also rocket fuel.

There is nothing radioactive & the energy is carried off by the kinetic energy of the Helium & Hydrogen nuclei which are steerable because they are charged particles & can therefore be deflected by electric & magnetic fields.

A movement of charge is an electric current so we go straight to electricity
WITHOUT the wasteful intermediate steps of boilng water & running a steam turbine to turn a generator & losing 60% of the energy.

All we have to do is pass the fast moving nuclei down a particle accelerator in reverse to produce an alternating current to get the electrical energy into a more usable form.

Only around 2% of the energy would be lost in this process & the amount of energy produced for a small amount of fuel is staggeringly large.

When the waste Hydrogen is burnt, it produces Water but it is much more efficient to put it in a fuel cell & produce even more electricity.

Fuel cells can also be used to run electric cars.


**********************************************************
Why Nuclear Fission Power stations are no good.

It takes the output of 5 power stations to supply the energy that goes into the building of 1 Nuclear Fission Power station.

That figure comes from the Open University.

It takes about 7 years to build a Nuclear Fission Power station.
SO
It takes about 35 years to get back the energy that you put into building it.
BUT
They only last about 35 years.
SO
Nuclear Fission Power stations do not give us any extra energy!

The older they get, the more chance of an accident.

BUT Its WORSE than that because it takes a large amount of energy to run them & maintain them & fix them & they dont run all the time.

It also takes a large amount of energy
to mine & process the fuel,
to deal with the waste,
to store the waste & look after it for thousands of years.
to decommission them & deal with the radioactive rubble, metal & other junk at the end of their life.

So you cant win with Nuclear Fission Power stations.

This is of course explicitly demonstrated by the fact that British Energy keeps going bust.

British Energy didnt have to pay for:
The building of the current ones.
The building of the fuel processing facilities.
The building of the waste processing facilities.
The fuel & waste transportation facilities.
The security systems.
The repeatedly aborted building of the waste disposal facilities.
(Do you want the waste in your back yard?)

The government keeps on handing over more & more of our taxes to bail it out.
It still keeps going bust.

The government hands over another half Billion & another half Billion & another half Billion & so it goes on.

Even with all that, British Energy still cant make a profit.
This shows that Nuclear Fission cannot give us the energy we want, all we can do is dangerously try to get back some of the energy that went into building these things.

We must develop Fusion.

apple.

If it was as easy to control fusion, i'm sure someone would be knocking out takeaway fusion power stations next week. It's not that simple, at the moment there is no known way of controlling fusion reactions outside dial a yield. It's very crude, you cant simply turn it on and off. Fission at least can be damped down to control the reaction, not quite so esy with fusion. Also there are problems with containment, there is no none way to control fusion once set in motion.


Or at least thats what i believe...I am ready to be persuaded otherwise.

BTW. Thers something fishy going on with the polls, there would appear to be lots of tactical voting which is making the news seem wrong.


Any ideas?

Maxk
How ya doin?
Is apple lardy by any chance? He's got the same complaint.
Cheers.

MaxK,

Fusion is very easy to turn off, the problem is to keep it going.

Like I said an enormous investment is required, on the scale of the project to produce the 1st atom bomb but the participants have been arguing for the last 15 years about where the next experimental reactor should be built & who is going to get the contracts.

standber, I have accused you of something, click here to find out what

Will your response be predictable or will you just say nothing?

apple - Sorry chief, but a few mistakes in your argument.

The argument about needing 5 power stations to build one nuclear station is a load of tosh (not suprising if it was sourced by the open university). You could equally argue that it takes the energy from 3 power stations to make one hospital, or two for a school, etc. Should we not make hospitals?

"Fission is not dangerous". Sorry, but you are incorrect here. Firstly, the proton is a highly energetic particle that can cause massive destruction when absorbed by a medium. The helium atom stripped of its electrons is in fact the radiocative alpha particle. A fission reaction needs to be undertaken at extremely high temperatures and pressure - effectively in a plasma state. If the containment vessel were to break or leak, an uncontrolled plasma leak would burn through everything in its path. So a fission reactor is also likeley to be a terrorist target.

I could go on, but this realy isn't the place for a lecture on nuclear physics. Still, nice to see that someone has a considered view on the matter. LOL

StarFrog,

You are wrong!

Proton beams are no more risky than electricity, you just need to stay out of their way. They can cause damage & so can electricity.

They do not contaminate anything.

Proton beams & other plasma beams are used in industry already.

Plasma leaks have taken place at the reactor at Culham, they dont even rate a mention on TV news because people dont stand near the reactor when it is operating & the damaged equipment is just replaced so that they can continue with experiments.


Fission is dangerous because of unavoidable contamination & waste & bomb making.

Fusion with Deuterium & Helium3 does not cause any contamination or waste & can't be stolen to make an atom bomb.

Other forms of Fusion cause minor contamination of the reactor walls.

If you bomb a Fusion reactor, you will destroy the building, there is not enough energy in the reactor to do anything else & there would be no contamination of large areas of the country.

All the factories to produce all the parts & materials over the building period of a the current form of Nuclear Station have to be included in the energy calculations for building one.

Steel & cement are just 2 examples of the enormous energy hungry ingredients involved.



The government keeps on handing over more & more of our taxes to bail out British Energy which runs the current Fission Power Stations.
It still keeps going bust.

The government hands over another half Billion & another half Billion & another half Billion & so it goes on.

Even with all that, British Energy still cant make a profit.
This shows that Nuclear Fission cannot give us the energy we want, all we can do is dangerously try to get back some of the energy that went into building these things.

We must develop Fusion.

apple - Perhaps I should have started by stating that I am all in favour of nuclear fusion. I agree that it is the cleaner technology of the two nuclear powers. But (without the risk of being too pedantic) I felt that I had to correct some of your post.

For a start, the fusion reaction that you have been talking about is NOT the reaction commonly used in attempting fusion. The most attempted reaction is to fuse deuterium with tritium to form helium-4 and a NEUTRON - not a proton.

Now a neutron has no electrical charge, but is emitted from the reaction with considerable energy and considerable momentum which can be delivered to anything in its path. Indeed, this is the basis of the neutron bomb.

The neutron bomb is a small hydrogen bomb. The neutron bomb differs from standard nuclear weapons insofar as its primary lethal effects come from the radiation damage caused by the neutrons it emits. It is also known as an enhanced-radiation weapon (ERW).

The augmented radiation effects mean that blast and heat effects are reduced so that physical structures including houses and industrial installations, are less affected. Because neutron radiation effects drop off very rapidly with distance, there is a sharper distinction between areas of high lethality and areas with minimal radiation doses.

This was desired by the forces of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization since they have to be prepared to fight in densely populated areas; any tactical nuclear explosion will endanger civilian lives and property.

The fusion neutron bomb is more destructive than the atomic fission bomb.

Protons can contaminate. Protons are used in linear acclerators to produce more exotic nuclear particles. Put simply, they have the power to change the structure of matter. In human terms, this can mean mutation.

Arguments about power requirements to provide the steel and cement to build a reactor are the same for building a hospital. So that's not really a valid point, is it.

Oh, and British Energy are also involved in the UK's fusion program.

By the way, my background is nuclear physics.

LOL

Starfrog,

Yes, any high speed particles can cause mutation but why would you be standing in their way?

Charged particles are stopped by air, plasma beams in industry HAVE TO be operated in a vacuum.

You can burn through concrete with a plasma beam but only if you place it right up close.

There is no way a plasma leak from a fusion reactor would have enough energy to get out of the building.

Yes, the most commonly attempted experimental reaction of projects in the 80s was to fuse deuterium with tritium. But at Culham most of the experiments up to 1990 were with Deuterium only because there is a minor amount of radioactivity from Tritium & the Neutrons from the reaction do cause minor of contamination of the reactor walls. PLUS a higher temperature is required.

I already said that other forms of Fusion cause minor contamination of the reactor walls.

The form that I mainly spoke about goes straight to electricity & does not lose energy in steam turbines & generators.

Deuterium & Helium3 require an even higher temp but the good thing is that containment is slightly easier because only charged particles are involved.

There is no way that protons from a fusion reactor can contaminate because light element fusion only requires energies in the 15 to 250 KeV range depending on the type of Fusion.
Whereas particle accelerators require energies in the many MeV to many GeV range & upwards to produce exotic particles.

The fusion reaction time for the D-He3 reaction becomes significant at a temperature of about 10 KeV, and peaks about about 200 KeV. So a 100 KeV (or so) reactor looks about optimum.

Having or stealing hydrogen won't help terrorists make a fusion bomb because you can't make a fusion bomb without a fission bomb as a trigger but you should know that already.

You say that your background is nuclear physics.

Well SO IS MINE!

You say that you are in favour of Fusion so lets hear you campaign for it instead of raising red herrings like the neutron bomb.

Oh dear.


The boffins are reaching for thier nuclear handbags.......:-)


However, a straight question which one of you boffins might be able to answer.

Instead of the huge nuc power stations that we have at the moment, why not have smaller easier to maintain (i imagine) nuc reactors? I am thinking along the lines of nuc sub reactors. They appear to be very powerfull for their size. The yanks sub reactors appear to be very safe too, not needing powerfull pumps to cool/control the reactors.....just a thought.


Fusion seems a long way off, even if the pols could get thier heads together. Whereas, energy is needed now.

apple

I do apoligise for getting you so wound up. I am not raising red herrings (as you put it). But then again, what is the purpose of your posting a short essay on nuclear power when there is no apparent relevance to this with regard to the election? If no parties have brought it up in their manifestos, why bother to mention it?

If your background is nuclear physics then why do you say the following.

You state: "Charged particles are stopped by air" - where on earth do you get that idea from? Yes, some are. Alpha particles will be stopped in about 8cm of air. But if all charged particles were stopped by air then presumably no ionized particles from space would enter our atmosphere (those poor physicists trying to detect neutrinos 1000's of meters below ground ought to give up)? And what about lightning? Beta and gamma radiation? The list goes on.

You said: "You can burn through concrete with a plasma beam but only if you place it right up close." I suggest you take a look at some industrial processes that use electroplasma etching/cutting. And lasers, for that matter, can cut through concrete and steel from quite some distance.

EDIT: "Plasma beams HAVE to work in a vacuum"- Nonsense. Again, look at industrial processes involving plasma etching. You don't keep putting the workpiece in a vacuum chamber. Arc-welding, for example, is a form of plasma beam. How many welders have to enter a vacuum chamber to work?

Research at Culham: I will bow to your knoledge that earlier reserch involved fusing deuterium with helium3, but from 1997 until the end of the JET project the research has involved attempting to fuse deuterium with tritium. In fact, nearly all new fusion projects are pursuing this route. Now why do you think they changed? May I be so humble to suggest that the deuterium-helium3 method was unpracticable. So if we were to have commercial fusion reactors it is apparent that they would use the deuterium-tritium reaction with the associated release of high energy neutrons.

Don't get me wrong, apple. I'm not trying to knock fusion as a viable energy source. I agree with you that it is inherently safer than fision. I believe though that we are unlikely to see fusion reactors in this country for quite some time - not until the public are made more aware of the science. Therefore it is always important that any information we disseminate is factualy correct.


MaxK - small nuclear plants would seem a good suggestion, but has always been thwarted by the NIMBY argument.

MaxK,

You suggest having mini Fission reactors.
ie. With Uranium235 or Plutonium.

The problems that I have already talked about dont get better with small ones, they get worse.

I suppose you want to have large numbers of small ones to make up for the fact that they are small

Apart from anything else:

What a wonderful choice of targets you are providing for terrorists to contaminate areas the size of cities by bombing the reactors or flying planes into them.

A large increase in the number of targets for them.

You would also give them thousands more places to steal radioactive material from to make an Atomic Bomb or a Contamination Bomb.

Fusion does not have this problem.

You said, Energy is needed now.
Im glad to see that you recognise that the energy problem is urgent.

There is NOTHING ELSE that is MORE URGENT.

Starfrog,

Im sorry if you felt my comments about what you said were a little too strong but I had just discovered that my car battery had failed so I was feeling a bit impatient & disgruntled.

Why did I raise this issue?

As I said when I first mentioned this, the MOST Important issue is not being discussed.

The Energy issue is more important than ANYTHING else.

The other reason is that Ive got cancer & it gives me a new perspective on life. It makes me want to speak out. After all, Ive got nothing to lose by doing so. Looking back over the years, I should have spoken out on a lot of things but didnt.


Re your last message. There you go again!

I shouldnt have to explain these things to YOU, with your background!
I cant believe that your physics & applied physics knowledge is that rusty.

Perhaps you are just winding me up with all the deliberately incorrect things & red herrings that you raise.

I think that you have abandoned logic in favour of entertainment.

You ARE just trying to wind me up.

apple.


With all due respect, I dont think you are looking at this energy/nuc problem with a clear mindset.

You are still in the "huge facility" school of nuclear engineering.

I am talking about small reactors that can be easily guarded, they dont need to be above ground for that matter. The nucs used for subs are not huge, they do not present a large target, they could even be buried...some target eh?...but they would certainly require guarding, but that cost is pennies compared with the power output.

The security issue is not an issue at all, just put someone who is competant in charge. Take my word for it.


BTW, I am sorry you are not well.

All over now-not the result I wanted but we'll do better next time! There's a big black cloud looming-take cover everyone. I have really enjoyed the discussions all. cheers MP

Not the result I wanted either, funny fact is the Tories polled more votes overall than labour, yet we did not get the sort of seats we should have .
Have labour learned something from mugabe, along the lines of you might not want us but whatever we can do to make you have us.

Dont bank on pr anytime soon, but perhaps the tories will look at it in a different light now.

Talk of the devil.....


Secret papers reveal new nuclear building plan

Oliver Morgan, industrial editor
Sunday May 8, 2005
The Observer


The government's strategy to kick-start a huge nuclear power station building programme is revealed today in confidential Whitehall documents seen by The Observer.
In a 46-paragraph briefing note for incoming ministers, Joan MacNaughton, the director-general of energy policy at the new Department of Productivity, Energy and Industry, warns that key policy targets to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and boost green energy are likely to fail, and that decisions on new nuclear power stations must be taken urgently. It advises that 'it is generally easier to push ahead on controversial issues early in a new parliament'.

The document points to the key role new nuclear power stations, which do not emit carbon dioxide, would play in tackling carbon emissions. It states: 'We now have 12 nuclear stations providing 20 per cent of our electricity carbon-free. By 2020 this will fall to three stations and 7 per cent as stations are retired.'

It also points to the increased risk of an electricity supply shortage after 2008, when a number of nuclear plants are due to close, and warns of a growing reliance on imported gas supplies.

It continues: 'Extending the lives of nuclear stations and/or new build could strengthen the generating sector's contribution to CO2 reductions, by 2020 and beyond.'

But it adds that to avoid a very steep drop in nuclear output a decision is needed quickly, because it takes a decade to get stations operational. There are also obstacles that would need to be overcome in building a new generation of plants, including gaining public acceptance and dealing with nuclear waste.

The department paper is revealed as the nuclear industry gears up for a major lobbying push for new stations. The Nuclear Industry Association has been pressing on the government the need for 10 new stations to combat climate change, arguing that a large-scale building programme is the only economic way of financing them.

UK companies such as Amec and Westinghouse, the power station construction arm of state-owned British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL) - along with foreign companies such as Aveva and Bechtel of the US, have also urged the case in Whitehall.

The Whitehall briefing, a 'first day' options paper prepared for the new Secretary of State, Alan Johnson, states that the government is widely expected to 'come off the fence' on nuclear energy and advises that it should work with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Treasury and Number 10 to 'be on the front foot', making a statement on energy policy and its impact on climate change before the summer recess.

MacNaughton warns that '(carbon dioxide) emissions have been rising in recent years. We look to be falling well short of the goal to cut them by 20 per cent by 2010, absent (of) new measures'. Two of the reasons are 'falling nuclear generation' and 'weaker than predicted impact of some policy measures'.

Key among these is the attempt to boost renewable forms of energy - such as wind farms, solar power and crop-burning stations - by forcing electricity suppliers to source 10 per cent of their supplies from these sources by 2010. The paper admits 7 to 8 per cent is more likely.

MacNaughton also admits that the government's stance on the nuclear issue in the last parliament 'to keep the option open' without encouraging it 'was a compromise, endorsed by the PM, between ministers for and against'.

Now she says: 'The case for looking at the nuclear question again quickly is that, if we want to avoid a very sharp fall in nuclear's contribution to energy supplies (some fall is already certain and has begun), we should need to act soon given the long lead times (10 years) in getting a new nuclear station up and running.'

However, she lists a series of issues that need to be addressed:

'How might new stations be financed?

What kind of government support might be necessary for new build to take place?

How far would new build be consistent with our market framework for energy?

How best to secure public acceptance?

How far would we need to resolve the long outstanding issue of finding a final depository for high level nuclear waste, as a pre-condition for progressing new build?'

The previous compromise was hammered out in a 2003 white paper, Our Energy Future - creating a low-carbon economy. This was the result of a bitter Whitehall battle between pro-nuclear elements in the then Department of Trade and Industry headed by the Energy Minister Brian Wilson and in Downing Street, and a determinedly anti-nuclear group headed by Environment Secretary Margaret Beckett.

The new Energy Minister is advised to take a robust line with Defra, not only over nuclear power, but on the amount of carbon dioxide industry is allowed to emit under European regulations. DPEI's wants a higher cap than Defra, arguing that too stringent restrictions will harm productivity.

Defra is heading the government's Climate Change Programme Review, which has a crucial role in placing the issue at the top of the agenda for the UK's presidency of the G8 this year. But MacNaughton notes: 'Because Mrs Beckett opposes nuclear new build, the review has not so far considered whether nuclear should contribute to cutting emissions.'

Resistance from Defra, where Beckett remains Secretary of State, is likely to remain strong, as she is known to be particularly concerned that no decision has yet been reached on how to store Britain's stockpile of radioactive spent nuclear fuel.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1479279,00.html

I just joined this site. What an interesting mesage board.
I am not too proud to say that it has changed the way that I look at some things.
Mr caveman2 said that the torys got more votes than the reds.
Mr caveman2 are you LIEING???? Arre you a politician???
Are you a tory loser by any chance??? A fully paid up member of the losing tory party???
All the TV & papers say that Labour got 35.2% & Torys got 32.3%.
BUT SERIUSLY
YOU COULD BE RIGHT!!!!!!!!
Blair is such a scumbag that he might have fiddled a lot of those 6million postal votes!!!!

I voted green.
I was tempted to vote ukip but they are such a bunch of fashist scumbags as well. Some of there members come from the BNP.

What a rubbish tory campaign.
They used what they call dog whistle issues to attract votes.
If you treat people like dogs some of them will come when you call but a lot will turn round and bite you for treating them like idiots.

Only one in 5 of the population voted red--the tory got 60000 votes more than labour but Tony still won more seats. I can only guess some constituencies are much bigger than others!

Shag, I am sure the other parties missed you voting for them.

I say Prescott for Prime Minister, now would'nt that be fun.

apple
If you think I am going to plough through pages of diatribe to see if you have insulted me, think again.
If you HAVE insulted me, be happy.
I would hate to have to listen to all you putative Fidel Castros'. Be honest,
you do go on a bit. As for Scotland having PR - that's news to me.
Have a nice day.

standber,

not an insult, an accusation

click here to find out

& as for Castro, socialism/communism is illogical.

apple

& as for Castro, socialism/communism is illogical.

Disagree: They are very logical and the height of aspiration for humans.
Trouble is, people spoil it. Greed, corruption, power and fear are the cancers
that destroy the lofty ideals and concepts of communism.
Castro has been just about the best of all at the attempts to make it work. And the populace can't wait for him to croak.

Always have and always will vote Tory............I know where I stand with them. ALL (with few execptions)politicians lie. I just happen to think that Tories lie the least.

"Always have and always will vote Tory...........I know where I stand with them".


Profumo...Aitkin...Archer... have I missed anyone?


Sounds like your saying standber that you don't mind voting and supporting a party that's harbed those crooks.

Stan,
How about this lot with their bullying and subjugating and lying to take us to WAR.( Dr kelly is no longer here to be able to tell you)
Reid,Mandelson and Campbell and which Party releases bad news when they think the time is ripe when the publics attention is diverted elsewhere.
I know which I would prefer to these lying scumbags.

Stan
'Quoted out of context' is the term. My two sentences made a paragraph
of two lines............and you quote one sentence! I Bet you vote Socialist!

It is not the economy which determines which way the punters vote, but short term greed. The lying ---- can lead me where they like as long as they feed me. Just like camp followers.

After the hype of pre-election Blair are the bills beginning to come in. It will be interesting to see how much longer America's economic position in the world is sustained. Empires fall because of economic factors, not military might. Over the next few years it will be interesting to see the oil producers turn the screw on America and its cohorts and the economic pressure from China and Asia.

Bush's prancing around the world talking about democracy and how he has influenced it in other parts of the world is laughable. The "democracy" in America is dependant on "big money" and its legal missuse of it.

The new democracies being supported by American money in order to obtain oil deals.

How many members of congress and senate are paid and supported by large interanational companies.

This form of democracy is being imported by "New Labour" and swallowed by party members. Again it will be interesting to see half way through this "new" governments term of office, how many paid up party members have been lost and what large donations,(for Baronetcies) have been given to the three main parties of this country.

Fred1New
Before 1997, the likes of Dennis Skinner (aka The beast of Bolsover) said that the next Labour Govt would create 1000 Lordships and vote themselves out of existance. Well, Tony Blair is more astute than that. Over his period so far,
he has created enough to give him a Labour majority in the Lords. These he will
increase more and more but not abolish them. Then he can be sure that what
is referred to the Lords, he will get passed. Crafty,eh?

His latest of course is this Adonis guy. He already has the Law Lords in his pocket with the Lord Chancellor.

Tony's Cronies in the Lords. This really does represent patronage and true values of NEW LABOUR. I would think a Baron's seat is worth a couple of BOB. Do they get a pension or does the poor B----R have to survive on a protected government pension like the rest of the cabinet. That should pay some of their or their kids' mortgages.

What a bl---y hypocrisy we have installed!!!

Mind he tells me he is listening and understands the messages with all the A---- lic---- will support him for their pensions.

Mind he "believes", if his followers believe in him that the party can rule for another 100years. How long was the 3rd Reich for?

Roll on the revolution!!

hi lads/standber/fredINEW / NO WONDER YOU VOTE TORY////you are so FULL OF CRAPS i can/t believe it/////

bristlelad.

Silly boy. BTW, you've not cured your sticky 'shift' key.

According to Channel 4 lunch time news Re: Rover it looks as the pension contributions which they paid & the government New Pensions saftey net dont now appear to aply to the ex staff and managers untill the whole firm goes broke
so much for government promises.?

Parkin - The new pensions safety net was for companies that have gone broke (plus other criteria). As you put it in your post "....untill the whole firm goes broke ...". So surely, the governemnt HAS kept its promise.

Anyway - what's it got to do with the government. Rover has been insecure for some time now. Why should the government (and us tax payers) bail it out?

Starfrog, How will you feel, if the company directors of all the shares you hold pay themselves a couple of million each a year for a number of years, at the same time hiving off money into different companies before letting the company you invested in go burst. Could happen to-morrow for you.

I guess you would feel fairly aggrieved. I admit there is a problem with private and public pensions and don't feel that the companies should be subsidised by the public purse. I feel that there should be a body set up as insurance, paid for by the various companies running their own pension scheme.

However, the recent governments have ducked their responsibilities of monitoring these funds and are continuing to do so.

I think this and previous governments has abdicated on basic social or humane principles by avoiding the issues.

It appears the present government is going to try to duck its responsibilities again.

Like it or not there are a large number of decent hard working people in this country who on their incomes (or wealth) can not afford to pay into private pension schemes.
The number is going to increase considerably unless there is a review of private and public responsibilities and necessary review of taxation policies. The gap between rich and poor is growing to large and will probably lead to more disharmony in society.

I am lucky in that my pensions are more than sufficient for my needs, but I doubt that my children or grand children will be in the same situations.

Fred1new - I agree with your sentiment. But if you read my post again I was just being pedantic by pointing out to Parkin that he had shot himself in the foot with regards to an attack on this government, re: not keeping promises. Clearly they have regarding this particular issue.

My second point is also valid, whether we like it or not. Why should the government bail out those companies who mess up their pension provisions. Should we take from the governments pension reserves to top up private schemes? I agree with you that a lot of honest hard working individuals are messed about with this whole pension issue, but surely stealing from Peter to feed Jane doesn't help.

StarFrog. I dont disagree too strongly from your statements, and certainly think it is doubtful practice for the government in general to take on retrospectively financial responsibilities. But I do think this government has been ducking its responsibilities in many ways, especially the Pension Problems. There have been various statements from various ministers acknowledging these problems, but little action be taken.

As far the government as picking up the tabs, if the pensioners have insufficient funds at retirement after contributing into the company pension fund to live on, the government is unlikely to let them starve and is therefore they are eventually to pick up some tabs in one way or another.

Anyway I hope you had a profitable day.

MaxK
Any way of deleting the 'banner'? Ta.

Hi standber.

Got rid of the scrolling bit, is that what you mean?


Seeing as this thread has turned into a general rant and argue jobby. Does anyone want the rest of the header altered...if so, suggestions please.

MaxK
........the poll ratings. March?

Tell me what to do and I will shift it. Unless it can only be you.

Hope all OK and daughter enjoying uni. VBR. S.

Hi Standber.


Sorry, bin a bit busy this week. Heading is altered, but a bit pointless now as the king of all mankind has bin re-elected with a landslide vote of 34.something %. A real testament to our times.


I was thinking a new general rant/arguement thread might be appropriate, God knows theres plenty to choice for the punters.


What do you think? And anyone else.....

Suggestions??????


regards

max

I think Tony Blair and his mob have a good chance of winning this.

Not too sure if theat would be great for the country but there you go.

Next thing after the win will be ugly rumours about Blair's tenure at number 10 I expect.

I would also expect Howard to want to step down as leader of the Conservatives.

He will be far to old to lead them into the next one, so I would not blame him.

Well all the best on the day

I misread previous post which added even more to my confusion and for a moment I thought you had written Blair had step down as leader of the Conservatives.

Actually when you read the manifestoes the Tories seem more left wing than New Labour.

What will people do for power!

Fred1new

More to the point, what they do when they've got it! And did you see
the prog last night - re the devious tricks the Socialists got up to during the run-up to the GE? Amazing yes.....but not surprising.

hi all tory menbers your party now deem AFTER the election that all common menbers are unfit to chose your leader only MPS will and can be suited///WHAT A DEMOCRATIC AND PEOPLE MINDED PARTY they SEEM ///

Yes almost like the tory labour party, blocking standing members being re-elected by fixing the gender bias for the MP allowed to stand. Trying to get a fix for Tony. If you put them and some rats in a bag, which of the rats would escape first?

"which of the rats would escape first?"

Hopefully none!