The British Politics Thread
  • I think it was good to see that UKIP are not, no matter how much they try not to be, anything more than a EU protest party. 

    Over the last 12 months I thought they were beginning a shift to the mainstream and that worried me but its clear from the debate that they are still just a protest party that will fade into the distance over time. And I don't think they'll get anywhere near the votes that the polls suggest.
  • Having watched the debate, Nicola Sturgeon struck me as the one who was most measured, succinct and sensible. Exactly what I would look for in a politician or prime minister.
    Gamertard: Laddergoat       PSN: HMV
  • So it's agreed - we're all moving to Scotland.
  • davyK
    Show networks
    Xbox
    davyK13
    Steam
    dbkelly

    Send message
    Has anyone found out yet why the 4th biggest party in the UK Parliament wasn't invited to the debate?
  • Because NI politics is different or something so they would have had to invite everyone.
  • I thought it was very sad that when the girl asked what the party leaders would do to make young people feel like they had a decent future ahead of them all of them just bleeted about sending kids to university.

    Good shit guys, lets lump more kids with 44k of debt before they have to try and buy a house that now costs 8-10 times the average salary, which they will be paying for until they retire at 70+. Oh and lets just forget about trying to provide a varied jobs market that has opportunities for the practical as well as the academically minded. Academically minded in the UK seems to mean working shitty admin jobs in an office though as a graduate as far as I can tell.
    Don't try and place me in a box, you cocks. If there's one thing I'm not, it's fucking rectangular.
  • Thats the one thing Farage said that I agreed with. 

    Basically its policy to get as many people to uni, doing mostly shitty useless degrees now that there are no technical colleges left. 

    Now someone is told not to do an apprenticeship - or similar -  if they have any modicum of intelligence at school. So 4 years later armed with a degree in Media Studies they are in the exact same position but with less drive and ambition because their career outlook is a call centre rather than being a skilled tradesman who can grow a business, for example.

    And at least us fucking jocks get it for free: Its literally setting people up to fail in life just so a school can say we got X percentage of people into university.
  • davyK
    Show networks
    Xbox
    davyK13
    Steam
    dbkelly

    Send message
    Because NI politics is different or something so they would have had to invite everyone.

    Looks like they did. The Greens? Fuck me.

    The DUP have 8 seats. They have kept the Tories in power in the past (John Major days). There's a chance they will get more this time. Their leader is 1st Minister of the local assembly. Why wasn't he invited?

    I'm not expecting a sensible answer by the way because there isn't one. The BBC bounced it because the DUP lawyers were sharpening their knives for a rumble with a public body. The democratic deficit is still in full force here.

  • No, they would have had to invite 4 parties from NI.

    Tbh, despite thinking Sturgeon was the best, her and Leanne Wood shouldn't have been there, as they don't stand in enough places. Same for DUP.
  • EvilRedEye
    Show networks
    Twitter
    adrianongaming
    Xbox
    EvilRedEye8
    PSN
    EvilRedEye8
    Steam
    EvilRedEye8

    Send message
    Kinda wonder how this will pan out in future. We only had this many parties this time because the Lib Dems have collapsed.
    "ERE's like Mr. Muscle, he loves the things he hates"
  • I disagree Dante I think the leaders from all major parties should stand for debate. Just because I can't personally vote for them doesn't mean they shouldn't be made visible. Otherwise you'll only ever get English politicians standing, and that kind of insular shit where one nation rides roughshod over the others is part of what's caused the discontent in Scotland.

    It's time we moved away from this two/three party bollocks anyway. Plenty of people thought the Greens shouldn't be there for example...
  • davyK
    Show networks
    Xbox
    davyK13
    Steam
    dbkelly

    Send message
    I've no problem with the NI parties not getting invited - provided parties from other regions aren't invited. I know we have bunch of dysfunctional balloons over here, and I don't think I've ever been annoyed about anything like this in the past , but this has really pissed me off.
  • EvilRedEye wrote:
    Kinda wonder how this will pan out in future. We only had this many parties this time because the Lib Dems have collapsed.

    Was it not because they obviously felt forced to include the SNP post referendum and then had to include Greens et al because they get more of the vote. 

    If it wasn't for the scope of influence Scottish nationalism is having I think it would have still been Lab/Con/Lib.
  • It's got entirely everything to do with cameron being a chickenshit.
  • EvilRedEye
    Show networks
    Twitter
    adrianongaming
    Xbox
    EvilRedEye8
    PSN
    EvilRedEye8
    Steam
    EvilRedEye8

    Send message
    Thing is I think everyone broadly agrees that the debates should be more expansive than just the Tories and Labour but it's quite difficult to decide what to do and then apply that over multiple general elections when we're in such a period of transition. Support for the smaller parties is currently unstable and if we end up with another hung parliament there might be quite serious calls to introduce PR before the next election, in which case the focus changes from seats to share of votes, etc. etc.

    To be honest, I don't think the decision that was made was terrible. The outcome you want is a coherent but reasonably inclusive debate and breaching double digits of participants in order to include NI parties that don't compete with the major UK-wide parties would have made the whole thing a complete shambles. In this particular election the SNP are even reasonably relevant to English voters due to the relative likelihood of the SNP entering into a confidence and supply agreement with Labour. It sounds as if the NI scene is sufficiently distinct that a separate debate will always suffice.
    "ERE's like Mr. Muscle, he loves the things he hates"
  • EvilRedEye
    Show networks
    Twitter
    adrianongaming
    Xbox
    EvilRedEye8
    PSN
    EvilRedEye8
    Steam
    EvilRedEye8

    Send message
    Euan wrote:
    Kinda wonder how this will pan out in future. We only had this many parties this time because the Lib Dems have collapsed.
    Was it not because they obviously felt forced to include the SNP post referendum and then had to include Greens et al because they get more of the vote.  If it wasn't for the scope of influence Scottish nationalism is having I think it would have still been Lab/Con/Lib.

    I just tried to do a bit of googling to find the criteria I'm not sure there were any, I think it was just that not inviting the DUP didn't violate impartiality rules cos of NI being all different. Apparently it's just the Conservatives, Labour, the Liberal Democrats and UKIP that are considered major parties by Ofcom.
    "ERE's like Mr. Muscle, he loves the things he hates"
  • I think it was a domino effect.

    Was originally the big 3 + Ukip THEN SNP were likely to win 50 odd seats but you can't have them without the Welsh and the the greens with their one seat in parliament needed to get involved. Also cameron called for the greens to be included.
  • It had something to do with percentage of supporters. Ofcom originally wanted to include UKIP but not Greens because they were on something like 14% and 8% respectively; Lib Dems and their 7% were only included due to being in government. Or summat.
  • It's worth noting that Cameron needed a left wing sheen remover from Miliband as at that time he would have three people attacking his credentials.
  • davyK
    Show networks
    Xbox
    davyK13
    Steam
    dbkelly

    Send message
    And seriously. Miliband. A man who back-stabbed his own brother as a leader of the country. Jesus. The guy is a tosser - might make a good wartime leader.
  • I'd pick Miliband over Cameron any day of the week.
  • davyK
    Show networks
    Xbox
    davyK13
    Steam
    dbkelly

    Send message
    I'd pick a sore before either of them. The problem with this country is it doesn't know how to pick a leader.
  • Yossarian
    Show networks
    Xbox
    Yossarian Drew
    Steam
    Yossarian_Drew

    Send message
    Perhaps, but a choice between him and Cameron is no choice at all.
    Don't prepare for appointment.
  • Yossarian
    Show networks
    Xbox
    Yossarian Drew
    Steam
    Yossarian_Drew

    Send message
    davyK wrote:
    I'd pick a sore before either of them. The problem with this country is it doesn't know how to pick a leader.

    But we don't pick leaders, we pick parties. The parties pick the leaders.
    Don't prepare for appointment.
  • Or in his case: the trade unions.
  • Yossarian
    Show networks
    Xbox
    Yossarian Drew
    Steam
    Yossarian_Drew

    Send message
    Alongside the party, yes.

    But I can't help but feel that a lot of issues around inequality and working these days could be solved by giving the trade unions a bit more power, so I don't feel too wound up about that.
    Don't prepare for appointment.
  • Me neither but a fair amount of the MP's he "leads" obviously do - which I don't think translates to a very effective political party.

    Labour would have this election sown up, compared to the current situation, if they had a different leader. He is the worst type of career politician as far as I'm concerned and that type seems pretty fucking common in the Labour Party at the moment.
  • Pretty common for all of them.
  • davyK wrote:
    And seriously. Miliband. A man who back-stabbed his own brother as a leader of the country. Jesus. The guy is a tosser - might make a good wartime leader.
    I don't get this backstabbing rhetoric? Both people thought they were right to lead the party and the members voted for ed?

    Is ed simply meant to sit and let his brother get on and lead the party as David is owed that shite? just because some tory newspapers think David has a less dorky face.


  • Euan wrote:
    Or in his case: the trade unions.

    Trade union members.

    Why hostile to trade unions anyway?

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!