Well that's a fair point. On the topic at hand, the labour party couldn't be further from the working man's party.
Unlimited immigration leading to complete saturation of the unskilled labour market (check)
Rejection of grammar schools which gives the less financially privileged a chance to thrive in an academic environment (check)
Their leader got a cushy job off the back of his family friend, Tony Benn (Check)
Lives in a £2.3million house (Check)
wow, this guy can really relate to people. Slag off Farage all you like with regards to his "i'm not part of the establishment" lines but at least he's got up everyday and gone to work trading metals or whatever it was he did.
but but but but the guardian told me there's a holocaust happening that the tory press are ignoring and the trade unions - i mean red ed - i mean ed miliband is the only one that can stop it.
Well that's a fair point. On the topic at hand, the labour party couldn't be further from the working man's party.
Unlimited immigration leading to complete saturation of the unskilled labour market (check)
Rejection of grammar schools which gives the less financially privileged a chance to thrive in an academic environment (check)
Their leader got a cushy job off the back of his family friend, Tony Benn (Check)
Lives in a £2.3million house (Check)
wow, this guy can really relate to people. Slag off Farage all you like with regards to his "i'm not part of the establishment" lines but at least he's got up everyday and gone to work trading metals or whatever it was he did.
but but but but the guardian told me there's a holocaust happening that the tory press are ignoring and the trade unions - i mean red ed - i mean ed miliband is the only one that can stop it.
Funnily enough Guardian columnists are known to cheapen terms such as 'final solution', 'holocaust' and 'genocide' when specifically referring to the Tory party.
If the main parties want to stem the growth of UKIP, then they need to:
- stop calling anyone who is against open-door immigration 'racist' - stop ignoring or ridiculing people who raise legitimate questions regarding the EU and calling them 'loonies, fruitcakes and racists' - stop being pro-immigration but having no policies as to how to nullify the negative effects immigration has on jobs and communities - if they are pro-EU, put forward an evidence-based argument for our continued membership instead of scaremongering about jobs or influence - stop rolling over every time the EU wants more money/powers/sovereignty - make serious suggestions as to how to stem the corruption and waste that is rife within the governance of the EU
Instead of the above, all the main parties are doing is a mixture of offering a referendum, making empty promises to retain powers/sovereignty, talking about limiting immigration but not offering any practical solution to stem people's concerns regarding immigration, and making vague, unenforceable promises regarding 'British jobs for British workers' or 'limiting EU migration'. The fact is UKIP is already doing all of these things, except it is doing it with the kind of conviction that the main parties cannot offer. You can't out-UKIP UKIP. You can, however, put forward evidence-based arguments as to why UKIP's policies are not in the UK's interests, and to continue to not make such arguments shows nothing but utter contempt for the electorate.
There is definitely a sustainability argument that can be made in regards to the UK's open-door to EU immigrants that more or less no other country in the EU can currently make. The annoying thing is that whilst UKIP argues for a reduction in immigration from a jingoistic point of view, the Green Party manifesto explicitly promotes population limitation...except for migration, where it implies an open-door immigration policy but the native population will be actively persuaded to have less or no children. Most issues in the UK can point to overpopulation as either the main cause or one of the causes and the Green Party is the only one who even refer to it in the manifesto. It's a shame that so much of their policy book comes straight from Marx, as otherwise they could be a viable alternative.
And another thing, it is things like that woman tweeting a picture of a mans van and St.George's flags and negatively stereotyping him that drives people to UKIP. It's like the 3 main parties don't want to compete.
Can someone explain please how Emily Thornberry negatively stereotyped the bloke whose house she photographed? Given that the only caption was "Image from Rochester", which presumably is true, any negative stereotype is in the eye of the beholder surely? Which possibly says more about the prejudices about the "metropolitan liberal elite" of those who kicked up a stink about it, than it does about her.
And another thing, it is things like that woman tweeting a picture of a mans van and St.George's flags and negatively stereotyping him that drives people to UKIP. It's like the 3 main parties don't want to compete.
Can someone explain please how Emily Thornberry negatively stereotyped the bloke whose house she photographed? Given that the only caption was "Image from Rochester", which presumably is true, any negative stereotype is in the eye of the beholder surely? Which possibly says more about the prejudices about the "metropolitan liberal elite" of those who kicked up a stink about it, than it does about her.
I was just reading that. RIP the working man's party,
Also, news has just broken that a Labour Party communication was sent to a stillborn baby in Scotland, despite Labour repeatedly claiming they never abuse NHS records to send scaremongering comms to people. The party is literally in PR meltdown. Even Britain First has a better PR output than them at the moment.
I am interested to know what UKIP mean by teaching 'British values' in schools. Are there any specifically British values that are separate from civilized values?
I am interested to know what UKIP mean by teaching 'British values' in schools. Are there any specifically British values that are separate from civilized values?
I want the abstract term 'British' to be banned from any party's communications. It is literally used to justify everything from high immigration to massive tax hikes, or subverted in order to criticise someone else's politics/policies (i.e. calling a policy 'Un-British).
Why not just put policies out to the British voters without the word 'British' being added to them and see if the British people think they fit in with their values?
UKIP couldn't give a flying f*** about the working class and it makes me laugh when people claim they are. They can pretend to be anything they want until they get power. Farage is a clown along with a lot of the other UKIP candidates and their bigoted right wing views are thoroughly depressing. I don't want to turn the clock back to the bigotry and small mindedness of previous decades but that's where we are heading. Enoch Powell would have loved UKIP. Since Tony Blair Labour has lurched to the right and now it seems all the main parties are desperate to please the banks, tax evaders and money launderers. The majority have been royally shafted in recent times. UKIP are no better....
I am interested to know what UKIP mean by teaching 'British values' in schools. Are there any specifically British values that are separate from civilized values?
It's quite easy really. It's all to do with what outer garments you wear. The only acceptable options are a waxed Barbour, an overcoat with a velvet collar or in warmer weather a tweed jacket. Relaxing around the home, it would be a smoking jacket. (See examples below)
(The availability of milk as part of school lunch would also be removed and replaced with a pint of warm beer.)
Britain’s political system has metal fatigue. At some point it is likely to crack under the strains it now faces – most recently from Ukip in England and the SNP in Scotland. When it does, politicians from all parties will find the old ways of doing things will simply work no longer.
Just as when an aircraft’s wing snaps off, there will have been a long build-up to the moment of catastrophe. The signs have been visible for years, even decades. But until recently, most Labour and Conservative politicians thought they could carry on as normal, their duopoly protected by our first-past-the-post (FPTP) method of electing MPs.
Sixty years ago, the United Kingdom really was a two-party state. In 1955, Labour and the Tories shared 96% of the vote and 98.5% of the seats. In the 1970s, up to a quarter of votes went elsewhere, most of them to the Liberals, but this made only a modest dent in the combined ability of Labour and the Tories to dominate the House of Commons. Claims of unfairness were countered by the observation that elections did at least produce decisive outcomes.
The inconclusive result of the 2010 election should have told us those days were gone. Yet Labour and the Tories continue to assert that they are competing to form a majority government next May. That prospect grows dimmer by the week. A series of factors are combining to destroy the ability of FPTP to offer a clear choice of government.
The Lib Dems are now targeting their support more efficiently than in the past. In February 1974, the Liberals won almost 20% of the vote but won only 14 seats. Next May Nick Clegg’s party could well have half as many votes as that, but twice as many seats. The politics of Northern Ireland, Scotland and, to a lesser extent, Wales, have drifted away from England’s. None of Ulster’s 18 MPs take the whip of any Britain-wide party. Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s popular new First Minister took office last week with the real prospect that the SNP could gain 20-30 seats next May. And I wouldn’t be surprised if Plaid Cymru adds to its current tally of three MPs in Wales. Ukip is mounting a challenge to the traditional parties in England that may yield them up to ten seats next May – and make them serious challengers in dozens more in the election after that. If Ukip next year comes a clear second to Labour in towns and cities across England, it could win seats where the Conservatives have ceased to be real challengers. Indeed, last week’s by-election showed how vulnerable Labour is to Ukip’s appeal. YouGov surveys show that Labour has been losing working class support to Ukip, not just in Rochester and Strood but across the South. Indeed, the contrast between the Islington-dwelling Thornberry and Rochester’s white van men (and women) reflects a more fundamental cleavage. Labour is far more popular with London’s middle-class voters (where it has 37% support) than working class voters across the rest of the South (just 28%).
In contrast, Ukip appeals to only 9% of middle-class London voters, but is snapping at Labour’s heels among working class voters across the rest of the South, where it enjoys 25% support.
More broadly, it is clear that Ukip’s stand on immigration strikes a chord with working class voters in a way that Labour’s does not. A recent YouGov survey for the Times found that by 32-28%, Britain’s middle class voters think immigration has helped the economy grow faster. But by a large 40-16% margin, working class voters disagree.
However, the same survey found that immigration is not the only issue on which Labour is struggling with working class support. More fundamentally, middle-class voters are broadly happy with the way Britain has evolved since the 1980s, despite the economic strains of recent years, and are optimistic about the future. Working class voters tend to think that Britain has gone to the dogs. As many as 46% would like to turn the clock back 20-30 years, if they could. Only 26% disagree. Labour’s leading lights are plainly comfortable with the diverse culture of Britain today; many of their working-class voters are not.
Add Ukip’s rise to the Lib Dem, Scotland, Ulster and Wales factors, and there could be up to 100 MPs next May that sport neither red nor blue rosettes. That would mean Labour and the Conservatives fighting over 550 seats. To win a working majority, one of them would need at least 330. That means reducing the other to 220. I can’t see that happening.
Let’s lob in 30 Lib Dem MPs. A modest coalition majority would require either Labour or Tory to defeat the other by a margin of at least 300-250. That’s possible, but by no means certain. And if Ukip bites chunks out of Labour territory in 2020, that year’s government-building arithmetic could be even more complex.
There is, then, a real possibility that, for years to come, at least three parties will need to work together in some fashion to provide stable government. The weekend after each general election could see the SNP, Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionists, and even Ukip, helping to decide Britain’s future. And whatever specific agreement they reach, they will be steering Britain’s constitution through uncharted waters."
"We have our usual rush of Monday polls today, all showing a slightly healthier Labour lead than of late.
The first of Populus‘s two twice weekly polls had topline figures of CON 31%, LAB 36%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 15%, GRN 5% (tabs). Populus’s average so far this month has been CON 34%, LAB 36%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 13%, so this has the Conservatives a little lower than usual, UKIP a little higher than usual.
Lord Ashcroft‘s weekly poll had topline figures of CON 27%, LAB 32%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 18%, GRN 7% (tabs). Compared to his recent polls this has the Conservatives down a tad, Labour and UKIP both up a tad.
The daily YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 30%, LAB 34%, LDEM 6%, UKIP 18%, GRN 6%. YouGov’s average figures so far this month have been CON 33%, LAB 33%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 16% – so again, the Conservatives lower than usual, UKIP higher than usual.
None of the figures are different enough from recent polls to be sure the difference isn’t just normal sample variation, but the fact all three are showing a shift in the same direction (Conservatives down, UKIP up) means it’s possible we are seeing a bit of a publicity boost for UKIP following Rochester & Strood last week. Time will tell.
Note also what it doesn’t show – any decrease in Labour’s support following several days of fussing about White Vans and Emily Thornberry."
I am interested to know what UKIP mean by teaching 'British values' in schools. Are there any specifically British values that are separate from civilized values?
Well we don't burn poppies or flags to make a political point, but we do burn an effigy of Guy Fawkes to remind us that terror plots seldom succeed in the end.
Then there is tea, scones, votes and education for women, fish n chips, chip n pin, nudist beaches, pubs, men's volleyball matches without ticket restrictions, M&S underwear.......the list goes on.
A dilemma both for the rabidly pro EU Cameron since it comes from his own side and UKIP since it purports to achieve the aim of getting out of the EU which has been their traditional raison d'etre.
Note also what it doesn’t show – any decrease in Labour’s support following several days of fussing about White Vans and Emily Thornberry."
I suspect dyed-in-the-wool Labour supporters are just that - staunch. It's the party of the working man don't cha know. (No matter what the reality.) A Labour voter will always vote Labour (unless it's raining of course in which case they'll stay at home).
What Labour will not be doing with their latest batch of bumbling antics is attracting any new support.
There is barely a politician who knows what a billion is, Len. Its all piles and piles of imaginary money we dont actually have, going round in ever increasing circles and it will end up like the oozalum bird. Those of us with screen names dating back to 60s heroes probably won't be around when it happens but happen it will, with an almighty fiscal "bang" when the people the UK borrows from wake up to the fact that we are bust on any sensible test of insolvency.
After that, I think, EU migration will not be perceived as a problem but no doubt will be remembered by some as a cause; whether true or false. We're all doomed, DOOMED, Mr. Mainwaring!
There is barely a politician who knows what a billion is, Len. Its all piles and piles of imaginary money we dont actually have, going round in ever increasing circles and it will end up like the oozalum bird. Those of us with screen names dating back to 60s heroes probably won't be around when it happens but happen it will, with an almighty fiscal "bang" when the people the UK borrows from wake up to the fact that we are bust on any sensible test of insolvency.
After that, I think, EU migration will not be perceived as a problem but no doubt will be remembered by some as a cause; whether true or false. We're all doomed, DOOMED, Mr. Mainwaring!
Thus speaks the prophet Bryan.
that Bryan .. he's not a prophet .. just a VERY naughty boy
Will start this by saying that I really dislike UKIP because they are totally deflecting attention from deeper problems by blaming 'immigrants' but those immigrants are the symptom rather than the disease. The problem isn't immigrants - it's possibly the fact that the welfare state and the welfare system is perceived as being broken and UKIP are taking advantage of this. It's not the Romanians or the Bulgarians taking the piss with that system - most of them are probably here to work. It's actually the likes of some of the people who live in my street in Charlton who have never worked and have no intention of working. If that makes me sound like a Tory I'm not. I just spent some time living in parts of the world where if you don't work you starve and that changed my perspective forever. We need to help those who need our help (and that's why I would never vote for parties on the right) but we also need to stop people taking the piss out of a system that is designed to protect the weak - whether those taking the piss are bankers or benefit cheats. Last point - as I watch Liverpool slogging it out with Bulgarians in the background - the Labour Party needs to take back the votes of the white working classes in this country. It was disgraceful for the Labour Party to make fun of 'Rochester Man.' He's the person they need to vote for them if they are to win the next election and I hope they do, but they won't if they keep trying to sit on the fence and please nobody by attempting to please everybody. UKIP aren't the voice of the working man/woman, but sadly they're the only one speaking in his/her language. Maybe what we all need in the next election is what my wife suggests - what they have in Student Union elections (where she works) - None of the Above (RON) - Reopen Nominations.
We need to help those who need our help (and that's why I would never vote for parties on the right) but we also need to stop people taking the piss out of a system that is designed to protect the weak - whether those taking the piss are bankers or benefit.
Why do you assume that 'parties on the right' should feel any different from that?
As a Conservative (with a small c) I too believe this 100%. I've spent my working life bending over backwards to help people who are prepared to help themselves.
However, I see more and more people who just can't be arsed and always expect someone else to do something for them. It's always someone else's fault, never their own. And they're nearly all Brits.
Currently, no party on the left is acting as a vehicle for social justice or for combating poverty. Throwing money at a problem doesn't solve it and usually makes it worse - nearly every problem Labour tried to solve by throwing money at simply made the problem worse, from welfare to the NHS. Unfortunately this is the great myth that the leftist voices of this country continue to peddle - that Labour are the only party that cares about the poor and social justice - this is simply not true.
The other myth that the left continue to perpetuate is that rich people paying their taxes leads to cuts in public services. This couldn't be further from the truth. Not since World War 2 has the actual wealth the UK has held been even considered in terms of public spending. The idea that a mansion tax or a luxury tax will be used to plug gaps in the welfare state is ludicrous. The Treasury doesn't look at its figures and think 'Oh, Lewis Hamilton moved his tax base abroad, cancel the new maternity ward in Rochdale'. If the government wants to spend money, it will spend it. Gordon Brown proved this when Labour went on a 13 year spending spree. Most tax rises during that period were against the poor and middle classes. All this served to do was to spread poverty across a larger base whilst more and more wealth was concentrated amongst the wealthy few. This is exactly the same outcome as every other socialised state: misery is shared by the bottom and middle of society whilst the rich elite continue to get more riches and power. No amount of taxes would change this situation.
Well, it's difficult to say. But the implication seems to be that certain projects are over budget - where have we heard that before! However the money isn't disappearing into thin air - something will happen with it. What we aren't told is how many and the value of projects that will be in the UK (if any). So, there might be a net benefit to the UK, or not. From that skimpy report, we just don't know.
Here's an example of an EU funded project in the UK:
UNITED KINGDOM - Unique solution of sludge treatment demanded now around Europe and the World
What's unique: One of the products of wastewater treatment processes is sewage sludge. Every year ten million tonnes of sewage sludge are produced in Europe, containing enough energy to meet the electricity and heating needs for 1.7 million homes.
A LIFE project called MAD but better, set out to demonstrate a new system based on an entirely natural microbial cycle. It harnesses the actions of a series of bacteria to accelerate the mineralization process of complex organic matter, to return nutrients to the soil while destroying dangerous pathogens.
Some 12 EU Member States and 26 countries around the world have now shown interest in replicating the treatment plant. Part of the appeal is the low price: the cost of sludge disposal is further reduced to just €210 per tonne of dry solid, half the standard cost of landfill. The technique also saves farmers around €175 per ha in fertiliser replacement.
As Dubbya said “There’s a lot of pages, a lot of lines and a lot of numbers.” The addings up and subtractings that go on in Brussels make little sense to me, but truly, how on earth do they get to calculate that we owe more money because our GDP received a £10bn boost from prostitution and the drugs trade?
Comments
If the main parties want to stem the growth of UKIP, then they need to:
- stop calling anyone who is against open-door immigration 'racist'
- stop ignoring or ridiculing people who raise legitimate questions regarding the EU and calling them 'loonies, fruitcakes and racists'
- stop being pro-immigration but having no policies as to how to nullify the negative effects immigration has on jobs and communities
- if they are pro-EU, put forward an evidence-based argument for our continued membership instead of scaremongering about jobs or influence
- stop rolling over every time the EU wants more money/powers/sovereignty
- make serious suggestions as to how to stem the corruption and waste that is rife within the governance of the EU
Instead of the above, all the main parties are doing is a mixture of offering a referendum, making empty promises to retain powers/sovereignty, talking about limiting immigration but not offering any practical solution to stem people's concerns regarding immigration, and making vague, unenforceable promises regarding 'British jobs for British workers' or 'limiting EU migration'. The fact is UKIP is already doing all of these things, except it is doing it with the kind of conviction that the main parties cannot offer. You can't out-UKIP UKIP. You can, however, put forward evidence-based arguments as to why UKIP's policies are not in the UK's interests, and to continue to not make such arguments shows nothing but utter contempt for the electorate.
There is definitely a sustainability argument that can be made in regards to the UK's open-door to EU immigrants that more or less no other country in the EU can currently make. The annoying thing is that whilst UKIP argues for a reduction in immigration from a jingoistic point of view, the Green Party manifesto explicitly promotes population limitation...except for migration, where it implies an open-door immigration policy but the native population will be actively persuaded to have less or no children. Most issues in the UK can point to overpopulation as either the main cause or one of the causes and the Green Party is the only one who even refer to it in the manifesto. It's a shame that so much of their policy book comes straight from Marx, as otherwise they could be a viable alternative.
http://order-order.com/2014/11/24/lady-nugees-walled-garden/
Also, news has just broken that a Labour Party communication was sent to a stillborn baby in Scotland, despite Labour repeatedly claiming they never abuse NHS records to send scaremongering comms to people. The party is literally in PR meltdown. Even Britain First has a better PR output than them at the moment.
Why not just put policies out to the British voters without the word 'British' being added to them and see if the British people think they fit in with their values?
Farage is a clown along with a lot of the other UKIP candidates and their bigoted right wing views are thoroughly depressing.
I don't want to turn the clock back to the bigotry and small mindedness of previous decades but that's where we are heading. Enoch Powell would have loved UKIP.
Since Tony Blair Labour has lurched to the right and now it seems all the main parties are desperate to please the banks, tax evaders and money launderers.
The majority have been royally shafted in recent times. UKIP are no better....
(The availability of milk as part of school lunch would also be removed and replaced with a pint of warm beer.)
matchesfashion.com/product/215727?country=GBR¤cy=GBP&indcurrency=GBP&vzwty=cgid:15144185577|tsid:15858|cid:274894137|lid:90399609897|nw:g|crid:50167816257|rnd:15124132018760008744|dvc:c|adp:1o4|bku:1&mkwid=nNotrtGK&gclid=CLakwKOrlcICFanItAodFysAqw
"Multi-party coalitions could be the new normal
Britain’s political system has metal fatigue. At some point it is likely to crack under the strains it now faces – most recently from Ukip in England and the SNP in Scotland. When it does, politicians from all parties will find the old ways of doing things will simply work no longer.
Just as when an aircraft’s wing snaps off, there will have been a long build-up to the moment of catastrophe. The signs have been visible for years, even decades. But until recently, most Labour and Conservative politicians thought they could carry on as normal, their duopoly protected by our first-past-the-post (FPTP) method of electing MPs.
Sixty years ago, the United Kingdom really was a two-party state. In 1955, Labour and the Tories shared 96% of the vote and 98.5% of the seats. In the 1970s, up to a quarter of votes went elsewhere, most of them to the Liberals, but this made only a modest dent in the combined ability of Labour and the Tories to dominate the House of Commons. Claims of unfairness were countered by the observation that elections did at least produce decisive outcomes.
The inconclusive result of the 2010 election should have told us those days were gone. Yet Labour and the Tories continue to assert that they are competing to form a majority government next May. That prospect grows dimmer by the week. A series of factors are combining to destroy the ability of FPTP to offer a clear choice of government.
The Lib Dems are now targeting their support more efficiently than in the past. In February 1974, the Liberals won almost 20% of the vote but won only 14 seats. Next May Nick Clegg’s party could well have half as many votes as that, but twice as many seats.
The politics of Northern Ireland, Scotland and, to a lesser extent, Wales, have drifted away from England’s. None of Ulster’s 18 MPs take the whip of any Britain-wide party. Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s popular new First Minister took office last week with the real prospect that the SNP could gain 20-30 seats next May. And I wouldn’t be surprised if Plaid Cymru adds to its current tally of three MPs in Wales.
Ukip is mounting a challenge to the traditional parties in England that may yield them up to ten seats next May – and make them serious challengers in dozens more in the election after that. If Ukip next year comes a clear second to Labour in towns and cities across England, it could win seats where the Conservatives have ceased to be real challengers.
Indeed, last week’s by-election showed how vulnerable Labour is to Ukip’s appeal. YouGov surveys show that Labour has been losing working class support to Ukip, not just in Rochester and Strood but across the South. Indeed, the contrast between the Islington-dwelling Thornberry and Rochester’s white van men (and women) reflects a more fundamental cleavage. Labour is far more popular with London’s middle-class voters (where it has 37% support) than working class voters across the rest of the South (just 28%).
In contrast, Ukip appeals to only 9% of middle-class London voters, but is snapping at Labour’s heels among working class voters across the rest of the South, where it enjoys 25% support.
More broadly, it is clear that Ukip’s stand on immigration strikes a chord with working class voters in a way that Labour’s does not. A recent YouGov survey for the Times found that by 32-28%, Britain’s middle class voters think immigration has helped the economy grow faster. But by a large 40-16% margin, working class voters disagree.
However, the same survey found that immigration is not the only issue on which Labour is struggling with working class support. More fundamentally, middle-class voters are broadly happy with the way Britain has evolved since the 1980s, despite the economic strains of recent years, and are optimistic about the future. Working class voters tend to think that Britain has gone to the dogs. As many as 46% would like to turn the clock back 20-30 years, if they could. Only 26% disagree. Labour’s leading lights are plainly comfortable with the diverse culture of Britain today; many of their working-class voters are not.
Add Ukip’s rise to the Lib Dem, Scotland, Ulster and Wales factors, and there could be up to 100 MPs next May that sport neither red nor blue rosettes. That would mean Labour and the Conservatives fighting over 550 seats. To win a working majority, one of them would need at least 330. That means reducing the other to 220. I can’t see that happening.
Let’s lob in 30 Lib Dem MPs. A modest coalition majority would require either Labour or Tory to defeat the other by a margin of at least 300-250. That’s possible, but by no means certain. And if Ukip bites chunks out of Labour territory in 2020, that year’s government-building arithmetic could be even more complex.
There is, then, a real possibility that, for years to come, at least three parties will need to work together in some fashion to provide stable government. The weekend after each general election could see the SNP, Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionists, and even Ukip, helping to decide Britain’s future. And whatever specific agreement they reach, they will be steering Britain’s constitution through uncharted waters."
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/
"We have our usual rush of Monday polls today, all showing a slightly healthier Labour lead than of late.
The first of Populus‘s two twice weekly polls had topline figures of CON 31%, LAB 36%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 15%, GRN 5% (tabs). Populus’s average so far this month has been CON 34%, LAB 36%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 13%, so this has the Conservatives a little lower than usual, UKIP a little higher than usual.
Lord Ashcroft‘s weekly poll had topline figures of CON 27%, LAB 32%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 18%, GRN 7% (tabs). Compared to his recent polls this has the Conservatives down a tad, Labour and UKIP both up a tad.
The daily YouGov poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 30%, LAB 34%, LDEM 6%, UKIP 18%, GRN 6%. YouGov’s average figures so far this month have been CON 33%, LAB 33%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 16% – so again, the Conservatives lower than usual, UKIP higher than usual.
None of the figures are different enough from recent polls to be sure the difference isn’t just normal sample variation, but the fact all three are showing a shift in the same direction (Conservatives down, UKIP up) means it’s possible we are seeing a bit of a publicity boost for UKIP following Rochester & Strood last week. Time will tell.
Note also what it doesn’t show – any decrease in Labour’s support following several days of fussing about White Vans and Emily Thornberry."
Or, maybe, it's possible to buy a sackful of false promises and a box of hot air so I can be more like David Cameron or Ed Milibland.
Do we have any gold reserves left or has Gordon Brown ensured that nobody can follow in his footsteps?
I can see why politics is loved by all.
Then there is tea, scones, votes and education for women, fish n chips, chip n pin, nudist beaches, pubs, men's volleyball matches without ticket restrictions, M&S underwear.......the list goes on.
http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=85328
A dilemma both for the rabidly pro EU Cameron since it comes from his own side and UKIP since it purports to achieve the aim of getting out of the EU which has been their traditional raison d'etre.
What Labour will not be doing with their latest batch of bumbling antics is attracting any new support.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/uk-faces-£34bn-bill-for-blackhole-in-eu-budget/ar-BBfXLbt?ocid=mailsignout
After that, I think, EU migration will not be perceived as a problem but no doubt will be remembered by some as a cause; whether true or false. We're all doomed, DOOMED, Mr. Mainwaring!
Thus speaks the prophet Bryan.
Last point - as I watch Liverpool slogging it out with Bulgarians in the background - the Labour Party needs to take back the votes of the white working classes in this country.
It was disgraceful for the Labour Party to make fun of 'Rochester Man.' He's the person they need to vote for them if they are to win the next election and I hope they do, but they won't if they keep trying to sit on the fence and please nobody by attempting to please everybody.
UKIP aren't the voice of the working man/woman, but sadly they're the only one speaking in his/her language.
Maybe what we all need in the next election is what my wife suggests - what they have in Student Union elections (where she works) - None of the Above (RON) - Reopen Nominations.
As a Conservative (with a small c) I too believe this 100%. I've spent my working life bending over backwards to help people who are prepared to help themselves.
However, I see more and more people who just can't be arsed and always expect someone else to do something for them. It's always someone else's fault, never their own. And they're nearly all Brits.
The other myth that the left continue to perpetuate is that rich people paying their taxes leads to cuts in public services. This couldn't be further from the truth. Not since World War 2 has the actual wealth the UK has held been even considered in terms of public spending. The idea that a mansion tax or a luxury tax will be used to plug gaps in the welfare state is ludicrous. The Treasury doesn't look at its figures and think 'Oh, Lewis Hamilton moved his tax base abroad, cancel the new maternity ward in Rochdale'. If the government wants to spend money, it will spend it. Gordon Brown proved this when Labour went on a 13 year spending spree. Most tax rises during that period were against the poor and middle classes. All this served to do was to spread poverty across a larger base whilst more and more wealth was concentrated amongst the wealthy few. This is exactly the same outcome as every other socialised state: misery is shared by the bottom and middle of society whilst the rich elite continue to get more riches and power. No amount of taxes would change this situation.
Will we really achieve Polictical Reform with the usual two gaining another term in office???
mr osbourne tripping balls
What we aren't told is how many and the value of projects that will be in the UK (if any). So, there might be a net benefit to the UK, or not. From that skimpy report, we just don't know.
UNITED KINGDOM - Unique solution of sludge treatment demanded now around Europe and the World
What's unique: One of the products of wastewater treatment processes is sewage sludge. Every year ten million tonnes of sewage sludge are produced in Europe, containing enough energy to meet the electricity and heating needs for 1.7 million homes.
A LIFE project called MAD but better, set out to demonstrate a new system based on an entirely natural microbial cycle. It harnesses the actions of a series of bacteria to accelerate the mineralization process of complex organic matter, to return nutrients to the soil while destroying dangerous pathogens.
Some 12 EU Member States and 26 countries around the world have now shown interest in replicating the treatment plant. Part of the appeal is the low price: the cost of sludge disposal is further reduced to just €210 per tonne of dry solid, half the standard cost of landfill. The technique also saves farmers around €175 per ha in fertiliser replacement.