Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Losing councils and by elections is par for the course. It won't influence policy, nor should it. I would be surprised if the Conservatives and Libs didn't do badly. It is not really important if the government is not popular. That is not its purpose. More people trust the Conservatives than Labour over the economy.

fred - that is unwarranted .... the arrangements were made several years ago

Hays,

I quite agree, the tories are like lemmings, but you must be blind.

Your government is already turning its said, previous economic policy around, The only problem is the amount of damage it has already done, by their stupdity.

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

The local elections are good pointers to the results at the next general election.

You are supposed to have a history as pollster.

You must and been gathering the crosses.

I hope I can wait round long enough to see the next general election.

======

What are the bookies odds for that election at the moment?

cynic, in response to your post about Baroness Thatcher's funeral - yes I agree with having it and the expense involved. One of the reasons I agree with it is that this country spent a huge amount on Princess Diana's funeral and very few people kicked up a fuss about that. If you actually put it into perspective - taking away all the emotion involved in this debate - what these two people contributed to their service in public life in this country, then I personally don't grudge one penny of my tax contributions as a sign of my respect to Margaret Thatcher.

fred - i trust your last post was not addressed to me, as if so, everything is miles wide of the mark

DB - i was not remotely referring to the cost which, in the scale of things is peanuts ..... my question was whether or not it was setting a dangerous (a bit too strong) precedent by affording MT a quasi state funeral .... apart from WSC (very special case) this has not been given to any other PM ever

"....a quasi state funeral." I think this is mainly due to the Falklands campaign and is reinforced by the strong military presence which will be attending and participating in the funeral. I think the military themselves and the Falklands veterans have had some say in the forthcoming events.

I begrudge every penny spent on Di's funeral. What was the point to it all except to satisfy an hysterical public. The outpoururing of emotion over Di's death was nausiating. A stupid woman who's celebrity was her own and the press,s invention doesn't put her seat belt on and she gets a state funeral.

I agree it is setting a dangerous precedent, but equally there are certain members of our Royal Family who don't justify the pomp and circumstance either. Where do we draw the line?

Thatcher's funeral is well deserved. Had it not been against her wishes, she would probably have had a proper state funeral. It was obvious from the comments, even from many Labour politicians that she was one of our greatest PMs, second only to Churchill.

I suspect that there would be more opposition to a state funeral for Blair. Did don't forget that around 50% still like Thatcher. Only the lefty activists are against her. Blair has a huge number of people who hate him.

Thatcher's body will rest in the Palace of Westminster overnight Tuesday which I suppose is a compromise to lying in state.

Haystack , you must be in a minority of 1 if you think Thatcher is more deserving of a state funeral than Princess Di.

Can't remember anyone celebrating Di's death , whole country at the time was united for a change.

MT's funeral is looking more like a political stunt by the Tories day by day. Ffs she said herself she didn't want this type of crap.

... and her "Labour isn't working . 1 million unemloyed" is only something she could ever have dreamed of maintaining.

3 million after she finished .... yep well worth a State Funeral , what an acheivment.

The whole county was in a state of hysteria. I was in the shower in a hotel in Sicily when I heard the not unexpected news of Di's death. I say not unexpected as she seemed to roaring around the world in an aimless fashion. Luckily, I was abroad until I flew back on the day of her funeral so missed that as well. It was interesting to see the absurd oupouring of motion for someone who people had some idealised view of. I watched the news while away and was grateful to be able view the nonsense going on in the UK from a distance. I have since found that there is a significant number of people who agree with me. I can see it was difficult for people to speak out at the time against the mass hysteria. I have a fairly low opinion of Di as a celebrity. I don't mean that I dislike her or anything like that, but I regard her as insignificant as a public figure. I am sure she was a very nice not very bright (zero GCSEs from an expensive education) ordinary woman who would be very pleasant to meet.

Many of the people still working before Thatcher were working in industries that the UK was propping up and draining money from the economy. Those businesses had to be shut down and the economy rebalanced.

"for someone who people had idealised views of" ... that's rich coming from you Haystack.

"Those businesses had to be shut down and the economy rebalanced."


Sooooo .... what the feck was her Labour isn't working shite all about ?

Was there a part two I missed saying "Labour isn't working now but wait to see how bad I'm gonna make it" ???

Labour wasn't working as a government. That was pretty clear.

Cynic,

Post, 23705

No not replying to you, but the Dumbo Hays.

To me, Diana appeared to be a relatively harmless naive young woman, not very bright, (but brighter than Hays), who was popular with the country and seemed to as useful in her role, as any of the other member that family is.

I think with the "state" at that time, it would have been difficult not to have given her a state burial, especially after Blair, with his little speech, had grab the public attention and whipped up the hysteria around her death. I winced when I heard his "little speech" eulogising her.)

But, strangely there seemed little animosity to-wards her and many seemed to unite and support her.


Thatcher was psychopathic, (Hays look up meaning) malevolent, divisive woman, but nevertheless a PM. (She had divided the torie party and those divisions are still there.)

If it was the practice to give "state burials", so be it, but it isn't and the tories are producing a "political stunt" at the expense of the public, unless of course there is going to be a "whip around at party headquarters".

Perhaps, hoping the hysteria being created around her funeral will be of benefit to the party cause.

Of course, Hays will be dipping deep into his pockets as a mark of his respect for the dear lady.

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

As far her benefit to the country as a whole, she reminds me of the surgeon congratulating himself after cutting off a patient's broken leg, because it was quicker than pinning, splintering and a period of rest.

Didn't matter that the patient couldn't walk again, unaided.

But each to their own mother.