itdoesntmatterwhatthissay

3 minutes ago, mockingbird_franklin said:

well i'm glad you don't feel ridiculed, after all it was your post that was ridiculous. your summing up of your post is more than a little at odds with your actual rant

Sigh. It's okay. You can stick with policy in theory and I'll stick with policy in practice.

2 minutes ago, snowychap said:

I was just taking your two posts as quoted below at face value (link and link).

Thanks for the list of all of the things that you've done. That list may well lend support to what I posted that your opinion may indeed be well-supported and of merit (I'll leave anyone else with much more expertise in the area than I have to comment on the list if they so wish) but it does not mean that what you have lobbied for (what you have been paid to lobby for) is necessarily the only immediate solution to an issue.

You ignored almost everything in my posts apart from the bits you needed to support your argument.......it kind of brings me back to where this all started, an anti-Conservative video that ignored the real facts in favour of rhetoric....

1 minute ago, magnkarl said:

I already gave you the proof. Why are you so hurt for being called out for projecting? Corbyn often goes to SWP rallies - it really doesn't get more left than that. You can't call people out for doing one thing and then do the same thing as it suits you. The whole reason why Corbyn is the Labour party leader is because he energised the total left in his party. No one will deny that.

It's something I like the most about him; his willingness to embrace everyone. 

Sadly he hasn't quite shown the same regard for the rest of society, eg-those on the supposed right, especially relative to Brexit, but I am blaming his party for keeping him under wraps because his Eurosceptic attitude probably would've split the party further; despite me desperately wanting to hear what he really thought.

6 minutes ago, mockingbird_franklin said:

I never believed the video was giving me all the facts, just countering many of the lies peddled by our current government, I may disagree with many things the conservatives are doing, but my contempt for them comes from the unprecidented levels of dishonesty lies, spin and down right snideyness that accompanies it, , in the same way my contempt for Tony Blair and new Labour was arrivd at.

Maybe if your analysis had been one of pointing out any inaccuracies and adding any relevant facts they omitted that you considered important, rather than being an anti anyone who critsises the Conservatives rant your post wouldn't have recieved the ridicule it deserved.

Please, read my initial post. It outlines most of what you request. I criticise not campaigning on policy but anti-Conservative rhetoric, the fact that it's a very Labour mouthpiece and in a further post show that PFI was not pointed out, despite being part of the websites direct criticism; I even mention NHS agency staff.

I don't feel ridiculed at all, sometimes you need to write a little to free up the entrenched. Hopefully you're less stuck in a cycle of WYSIWYG.

28 minutes ago, snowychap said:

I'm sorry but that is merely your opinion and the opinion that you are putting forward on behalf of the part of the industry for which you are lobbying.

It may well be a well-thought out and well-supported opinion and it may well have a great deal of merit but you don't get to say that what you have lobbied for is the 'only solution' (and certainly not in the way in which you have here).

What I'm not trying to do is belittle or decry expert opinion (at least opinion that I'd expect is much more expert than mine) but rather to point out that, as you lobby on behalf of (part of) the industry, your opinion has to be seen in that context.

 

I take your premise of 'my opinion' but their promises don't even bother to tackle the issues. 
Planning is impacting the whole industry and I work with the whole industry. I work in housebuilding/construction because I have worked on the front line in much of the service sector, it's progression. I also worked under Labours ignorance and I worked under Tory mess.
I want to solve the housing crisis for all and I'm doing a better job than Labour have since I was born. (they did a good job before I was born)

I have been the MAIN proponent in industry for CLTs, co-op housing and council/housing associations. When you see 'diversity' in the Conservative manifesto it's because of our work. When you see local business being part of procurement; it's our work. Late payment policy. Land pooling. Large sites being split up. German model of CPO. Neighbourhood Planning. Small sites. Council Housing. MMC. Local Authority borrowing cap. Apprenticeships being discussed with more regard. It's our work.
Oh and speculative homes, because they increase diversity when built by regional/local companies, or even groups!

So no, my opinion has ALWAYS included the entire market and I often appear on stage with Housing Associations where we spend 90% agreeing on policy but 10% disagreeing that our guys make as much as they do; SMEs typically make a lot less.

You don't know anything about me and you haven't bothered to find anything out (clearly, as you haven't really read anything I've written). But heck, be sure to follow the Labours approach of ignoring industry. It's really helping get homes built.

41 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

It was?

Then why is our foreign minister still butchering it to this day?

 

Yes, yes it was. If people don't know by now that the figure was an poorly crafted illustration rather than a fact then then they are listening to campaigns and not facts.

This plonker spouting nonsense is simply making things worse but I did watch the interview and what did Boris actually say?
He was trying to talk about taking back control, eughhhh, before being cut off, but I can't find anywhere on Peston where he says 'yes, £350m is going to the NHS', just a jumble of words that he wasn't allowed to get out. (maybe I missed some of the interview?)

You don't see me calling Corbyn a terrorist for his thoughts on the IRA, or lack of them. Because he's not and anyone I see or have spoken to who mentioned it, I shot down.

24 minutes ago, mockingbird_franklin said:

oh dear looks like it was serious after all. shame you could have had a glittering career as a farcasist, I suggest you rewatch the video and reapprase your wildly inaccurate analysis of it, have a nice long hard think and you may just prevent yourself looking even more of a fool than you already do.

Sigh. I suggest you learn something about the NHS before assuming a video is giving you all the facts.
I believe policy has to be deliverable and realistic in the context of not only the environment you have, but one you want to achieve. Clearly a fools life for me.
 

11 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Perhaps they thought that what you were lobbying for wasn't the correct solution?

Unless you want a supply challenge for the next decade it's the only immediate solution.

Besides, they have agreed with me and similar voices in many meetings (we even worked together on the Neighbourhood Planning Bill) they just aren't ready to take on local authorities in a manifesto just like they're not ready to take on electoral reform.

9 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

There are plenty of reasons not to vote Labour and some seem better than their campaigning style:

Angela Rayner being one.

 

That's kind of my point. We have her and Jess Phillips as MP's; why? Because of people voting on parties on not politicians. Same for Godsiff. I know they're all Labour but they are people who have impacted me personally, who didn't give and don't give a proper carp. (Many awful Conservative ones too)

Videos and images from 'a-political' parties which only explore one POV are simply adding the weight of misunderstanding and emboldening others. 

I am the very first to criticise a bad Conservative policy but I feel others are first to criticise the party before considering what the policy even means. I am as unpopular with Conservatives as I am with Labour supporters.

3 minutes ago, mockingbird_franklin said:

oh and does anybody know what the insult 'Bus Brigade' actually means

 

I can tell you if you like; the people who go on about '£350m to the NHS' when they was cleared up as soon as it was mentioned.

50 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

I'm not a Labour supporter and I think this is totally wrong.

Labour produced a manifesto, totally costed and have campaigned incredibly effectively based on what they believe will work for the country.

The Tories, with the media in tow, have belittled Labour, produced a crap manifesto with no costings or basis in fact and have repeated tired, old slogans over and over again.

Full credit to Labour; they have run a fantastic campaign based around engagement in policy rather than mudslinging.

Not mudslinging? Coalitions with other parties to 'stop the evil Tories'.....sigh....

Engagement in policy, jesus tap dancing christ. I spent the last 2 weeks begging Labour manifesto writers and researchers to consider planning policy because it was the route of almost ALL affordability in the UK.....yet developers were blamed in the final document....great engagement and understanding of the real problem....even the Conservatives have bothered to listen more than Labour have, and I lobbied when Cameron was in power!

When the people alliance make a video that shows what the Labour party were responsible for - that includes the Conservative failures - post it me. That's was my point and further evidence that this campaign is more about not voting conservative than voting for someone with answers they like.

At least this weekend Labour have pointed out a real policy flaw on social policy! Though they've not offered the solution...actually let me just check the manifesto....nope, it's not there either, nothing tangible anyway.

40 minutes ago, mockingbird_franklin said:

Congratulations on the best comedy post on the year

 

Congratulations on the most entrenched lack of reality moment in your life

I guess the air is still thin on the 'bus brigade'.

26 minutes ago, Xann said:

Oh really?

Yup. My voting record is very mixed; in local and general elections.

33 minutes ago, dAVe80 said:

Erm, OK.

"Anti-campaigning" is a tactic used by every party.  You must have heard the phrases,"coalition of chaos", "terrorist symperthiser", etc, right? Would you describe these as promoting the Conservatives, or attacking Labour?

As for the video, it's made by The People's Assembly, who are essentially an anti-austerity movement. They oppose austerity, which is what the Tories have imposed on us. If you google them, you will see straight away, they are no aligned to any political party. It's the second point on the first page of their website. So they have nothing to do with Labour. Also when you watch the video, it's actual NHS staff that are in it. Does it not tell you how bad things are, when the people who know the NHS best, are telling people not to vote Conservative?   

Yes it is but since 1997 it's been used so heavily. I'll criticise any party for doing it but I grew up watching Labour do it best and they learnt nothing from the EU ref.

You're right they are, so when they criticise PFI why don't they focus on Labour? - who while didn't introduce it - did make it so easy and ready to facilitate. Plus the reliance on agency staff IS a Labour policy so they can't talk about effing talk about waste unless they mention Labour!
They are not aligned to any political party is as naive as saying bankers don't support the Conservatives. You know they're aligned, you know the partisan approach is pro-Labour and you know it's not as simple as 'vote against them to get this'. You can't be a-political and say don't vote for these, not in a 2 party system...otherwise they'd say, 'don't vote for management breaking Labour either!'

10 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

I'n not surprised that young people have no enthusiasm to vote.

Most people live in safe seats so their vote doesn't matter.

We need voting reform to engage more people. Not just those living in marginal seats.

Hell yes. It means awful Conservatives who feel they have a right to a seat and terrible Labour MP's being produced through the system can do one and we might - hahahaha, yeah right - go through a period where policy is discussed and not simply campaign slogans.

But then young people would be even less inclined to vote; they don't appear to really care about how something will work, just whether it sounds good in theory.

17 hours ago, Xann said:

 

Whoever made that video is a disgrace and a perfect reason why people should vote Conservative...but at least I'll give them some credit for using the word Conservative rather than Tory.
10 years on from Brown/Blair and they're still pushing anti-campaigning rather than campaigning on their own policies....because they have none (unless you love a good promise). Another perfect reason why Labour are the nasty party.

It's such a shame that the Labour party act this way but it's to be expected now. These last few weeks have felt like the referendum all over again where truth has been obscured and facts appropriated for messaging. 

Best post of the year for me because I was still a swinging voter with Labour on the radar; but **** that. I can't consider a party who campaigns on others failures without appreciating their own. The Peoples Assembly are another bloody mouthpiece who care more about ousting the Conservatives and supporting the Labour agenda than policy.

Edit -

To clarify - I'm not actually saying people should vote conservative but when it comes down to 'Don't vote Conservative', it's a really sad state of affairs.
The is meant to be an anti-austerity movement who mention policy like PFI, but who haven't considered what that means in terms of Labours failures,
It's anti conservative rather than pro-policy.  It's brexit all over again....things can only get better....

3 minutes ago, dAVe80 said:

Even if we don't win, we're giving a bloody good go. Unfortunately we still have detractors in the party, like my own LABOUR MP, who told a local BBC reporter that people weren't going to vote Labour because of Jeremy, and the Tories were going to win by an historic margin. Talk about rallying the troops!

Disgraceful isn't it. It's one reason I struggle to vote Labour; a lack of unity and a focus on their own careers. 

I expect a lot more from the Labour party, but then the manifesto excluded electoral reform in favour of 'constitutional convention', so meh, what should I expect!

15 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Their policies on migration are painfully stupid, but sadly I've reached the conclusion that this is what most people want and only time will persuade them otherwise. 

They don't want it either, it's just an arbitrary target to win votes. It's as defective as it is effective, 

31 minutes ago, Chindie said:

This manifesto appears to be even grimmer than you'd expect.

But turkeys will vote for Christmas.

Not read it all yet (and I'm expecting some real mess ups) but in housebuilding and construction (today's focus for me due to work) they are way ahead of the other, frankly clueless parties.

24 minutes ago, blandy said:

I saw it. I kind of thought it irrelevant to the main point, so didn't bother googling and replying -  I heard what I posted on the radio driving home. Whatever the exact figures the sub-point was that that we're making an awful lot of cars right now...

We have more people buying cars worldwide, more people registering them in the UK but we're manufacturing less vehicles than we did 17 years ago........so we're not as productive as we once were despite a resurgence. 

I get we're building more cars but how does that stack up relative to environment change and population increase? I personally feel that's important whatever the main point was.#
What might prove that wrong is the increase in vehicle manufacturing worldwide, that impacts whether relatively we've been even more successful...I haven't checked those stats yet...I'm driving home shortly, perhaps the radio will tell me

On 4/25/2017 at 06:09, blandy said:

We build more cars here than we've ever done and the factories are efficient. We have unfettered access, for the moment, to the single market. We are good at making and selling cars. As we know, Nissan and the rest very much regard the single market as key to business and so to the jobs of all the workers at their factories and those of their suppliers etc.

I'm going to post what I posted a few weeks back but perhaps you missed....or you're taking a Labour approach to facts

Efficiency is definitely one important factor in why they are staying however I am going to question where you got your stats from. To me it seems 2000 was the glory year; with car ownership also in the 25m mark. We have a lot more cars on our and foreign roads, so perhaps the stats aren't actually all that great?

As with San Fran and the EV car fiasco, Japanese companies are already moving design/production to Britain to try and realise a marketplace post-Brexit. 

24 minutes ago, PauloBarnesi said:

With so much passion on here, how many people belong to a political party, or even more importantly stood for public office?

I wouldn’t vote for Corbyn in a month of Sundays, but I would happily cast my vote for Darren.

I belong to one now after spending 7 years in the wilderness. A few parliamentary debates swayed me.

I have been trying to stand for quite a few years but for whatever reason I've been unable to get my foot in the door. When I lived in Hall Green I would have tried to stand for the Lib Dems but I had to support the candidate Jerry Evans, not challenge him. If anyone deserves a chance it's him! 

I foolishly went the way of working in as many useful industries as possible before putting myself forward. I actually thought policy mattered! Ha.

When I moved to Brighton I offered to start up my old projects (tackling isolation and loneliness, youth projects and affordable housing policy) with a major political party. My passion was ignored..
That was 12 months before the snap election and of course when it was announced I put my name forward again; I just wanted them to meet me properly. All I'm after is a shot, turn me down if I'm no bloody good!
The local association ignored me again and 2 weeks later a parachuted candidate was chosen; in both seats local to me. I'm still helping them but they still haven't campaigned on any local issues.

I almost stood as an independent because I was so frustrated; imo local issues matter and I'm bloody sick of them being sidelined.

I still consider myself a floating voter, despite putting my hand in my pocket to belong to a party. But what it painful is that very few of these MP's know anything about real life and there is not an active search for representation. 
Even now the push for more women in so very frustrating; especially when 40% of Conservatives MPs went to the 'golden triangle' of universities. 50% of their party did too. And in Labour it's 40%, with a hefty dollop of St Andrews and Durham thrown in. 50% of Lib Dem MP's went to those universities too.

I'll keep battling but I suffer from the desire to make peoples lives better, not make them know who I am.

1 hour ago, snowychap said:

You were making a point about 'thinking for ourselves' and 'making informed decisions on how much we want to engage with lasting politicial choices' and you went on to make points about other elections and, supposedly, what they actually meant.

You included the 1975 United Kingdom European Community (Common Market) membership referendum and a comment about joining the EU and a single currency system. Whilst the EC may have morphed over time in to the EU (and one could get in to a deep discussion as to whether that was the intent all the time for some and all of the stuff about federalism and closer political union being at the heart of what some people wanted) and a single currency may have come about two decades later, were people expected to have foreseen that and thus voted with this clairvoyance to hand?

If your point was merely that there is much more to a simple yes/no question, especially in politics, than what is on the face of it then I'd agree. What I would also argue, though, is that anything implied or inferred is done so from the point of view of the speaker or the listener (writer/reader) and thus open to interpretation and not presentable as undeniable and incontravertible.

I think voters should have been a little more aware but having just read the 1975 literature I can see why they weren't! It made the EC argument with gusto but the non-EC one with trepidation. However, anyone with any common sense would've known the EU would grow,

It's much harder than a 'yes/no' question but those claiming they didn't know the consequences should take a little more responsibility for their interaction pre and post ref. Especially if they know what the single market was! (and some people still don't).

Absolutely agree with the incontrovertible pov; people still hear 'we're spending £350m on the NHS' when I hadn't once considered that.

16 hours ago, mikeyp102 said:

Out of interest has speaking to your local MP ever achieved anything? I've never had any personal dealings, although the two times I have liaised with them in professional capacity (both were trying to help individual constituents with insurance claims) I politely told them to jog on as they  weren't aiding anything. 

I spent 7 years helping a Lib Dem parliamentary candidate (and Cllr) because he was and is a legend locally.
In fact I'm still helping him now despite campaigning for another party and living 200 miles away from his constituency.

So great when the local MP is actually hardworking.

On 5/12/2017 at 10:54, snowychap said:

Come again?

People voted in 1975 to remain part of (not join) the EC.
The EC changed beyond recognition and our opinions never mattered in any subsequent referendum. 

Much like this election, the full facts were not there for all to see yet a decision was made, stuck to and never revisited for a second opinion. 

14 hours ago, Awol said:

Take back control. That was the leave message. Borders, laws, money. That's what was the message of the entire campaign, wasn't it?

Single market membership blocks all of those things which is why the Remain campaign spelled it out over and over again.

A vote to leave the EU is a vote to leave the single market. We all heard it, saw it and read it in black and white in the Government leaflet under the heading "What happens it we leave?" 

I really don't understand how people can still deny it.

Awol I'm with you. I understand everyone else's point of view and Blandy is right that it wasn't explicit but heck, we need to do some thinking for ourselves and make informed decisions on how much we want to engage with lasting political choices.

I notice the same ill-feeling is not directed at other votes.
Alternative Vote - Yes / No - Not a vote for 'electoral reform' but clearly that's what it was for.
Join the EEC - Not to join the EU or single currency system.
General election - So I'm choosing a candidate to represent me locally but actually forms national government.....erm, okay. I bet people really understand that.