Jump to content
blandy

The banker loving, baby-eating Tory party thread (regenerated)

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, itdoesntmatterwhatthissay said:

Only to the ignorant.......

There are similarities. Both industries people have claimed that the EU is at the root of British farmers/Fishermen getting the rough end of a deal or rules imposed by "that Brussels" and unelected beaurocrats.

With fishing, the UK has the second largest quota of any EU nation,  but unlike other GOv'ts ours instead of passing the quotas on to a multitude of local SME fishermen allowed them to go to in large part, to just 3 supercompanies,

Quote

Small scale fishermen in England are struggling to retain their livelihood, while multi-million pound companies buy up the majority of fishing right, according to a new investigation by Greenpeace.

The investigation revealed that just three companies own nearly two-thirds of England’s fishing quota while some fishermen hoard quota on vessels which never cast a net.

Nearly half of the England and Wales’ quota is held by companies based outside the those countries, despite reforms to the EU’s fisheries policy, which encourage national governments to allocate fishing quota on social and environmental grounds.

The ownership of quota by large-scale fishing firms also poses greater risk to the environment and fish stocks if more destructive fishing practices are deployed.

The right to fish different species is regulated by the government, which doles out quotas to groups of companies and fishermen known as producer organisations.

While these organisations are intended to work like co-operatives, the investigation has revealed that instead a handful of people control huge swathes of the UK coast.

Who owns the England and Wales’ quota

We tracked back the ultimate owners for nearly 900 fishing vessels with quota, using national and international company registries and databases to get the first true picture of who owns the British fishing industry.

But the data only tells part of the picture.

To understand how the quota was being held we interviewed fishermen and even examined the size of fishing boats holding the quota to see if it was feasible for that boat to catch that amount of fish.

The four month long investigation found:

  • Just three companies hold 61% of all the fishing rights in England
  • 44% of England and Wales fish is owned by foreign companies
  • Some fishermen are hoarding up fishing rights on vessels that never cast a net

The findings are raising concerns amongst experts that traditional small-scale fishing is being choked out, leaving coastal communities struggling.

Jerry Percy is founder of the New Under Ten Fishermen’s Association which represents small scale fishermen and Executive Director of Low Impact Fishers of Europe. He told EnergyDesk:

“The fish in our seas are a public resource, it’s yours and mine, managed by Government on our behalf. They should therefore never be treated as just another commodity, to be bought and sold to the highest bidder”.

EU rules on fishing quota allocation also suggest that it should be distributed according to social, economic and environmental criteria.

 And on Milk, again, there's a significant impact on farmers livelihoods from a cartel of Supermarkets

Quote

The National Farmers' Union (NFU) argues that a supermarket price war, which has seen a 2.3-litre bottle of milk sell for 88p, has devalued the product in the eyes of the public, "purely to get customers through the door".

Farmers do not sell milk directly to shops. It is collected from farms by a milk processor who then bottles it or turns it into other dairy products such as cheese, butter or yoghurt.

In neither case is the EU blameless, and it doesn't have a perfect system. But the major part of the legitimate gripes that the farmers and fishers have are better directed against the UK gov't

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are three parties that have failed in this whole brexit nightmare.

1) Tories. Cameron got pushed by his back-benchers into going to the EU with a deal that they weren't ever going to sign. They could have actually lobbied the other disgruntled countries in the union to back them but instead they went gung-ho while singing "Rule Britannia" as the ship slowly sank.

2) Labour. I mean - what the hell has Labour done with Brexit? Their stance was never clear, their leaders changes their opinion on it like a flag in wind and Corbyn now said he'll also take Britain out of the single market if he's a leader. Labour has been in opposition for going on 8 years and still haven't managed to form any sort of coherent option. It's hard to place them at the moment and it feels like Corbyn is more of a rebel than a politician.

3) EU. No matter how many times people who voted remain (myself included) says that the EU will be "fine" and that it "won't affect them" I think that Brexit will plague this union for a long time. It will be used by people who are critical of it as an example of the huge machinery that couldn't adapt when it's second largest member needed some change. Immigration, spread of wealth, bureaucracy and the current American climate makes this one of the most unstable political climates that the union has ever had to endure. States like Holland\Sweden\Denmark are not many more failures\terror attacks away from calling their own referendums unless someone finds a solution to the problems that they are bearing the brunt of. Certain countries would do much better than Britain without the EU and all three of the above are amongst them. 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've posted that at least once and mentioned it various times and still fish comes up.

Either these arguments are indelibly ingrained or nobody is listening.

EU fisheries policy isn't perfect, but it's improving, and the things that really hurt small local fishermen are the stupid regime we've put on top. So we get daft situations like the dinghy that owns most of the south west allocation as a dummy boat for a massive business to avoid fines.

That's nuts. And it's Whitehall's problem. Not Brussels.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, blandy said:

the New Under Ten Fishermen’s Association

At first reading, I thought that meant the Tories had really rolled back the years and they'd sent little kids out to make the catch.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@blandy you're correct and we definitely have the overall say in very many issues; however,  the fishing issue is as much about the size/type of the quota as it is about the discards. An undeveloped conversation even in that article which is still very good, but it still doesn't really concentrate on that point, despite saying that it's hard for small fisherman to limit their quota and so choose to sell it on. It's bureaucracy to satisfy failed bureaucracy! 

100% agree with the supermaket issues, I drink about 6 pints every 2 days and milk is cheaper than water...and that pains me and has for years...it's actually why I started thinking about milk costs a few years back.
However, my partners father is a potato, beef and milk producer. The hoops he jumps through has destroyed his love for the job and decimated his profits, he's now stopped doing potatoes because he can't keep afloat. He also looked into selling his cows as people still come across the world to buy them, but the regulatory risk requires a high financial contribution and of course many banks have had their lending changed by the EU to reduce 'bad debt', not bad debt payers.
Yet when I bring up regulation I am jumped upon for making things easier for profit makers, well no, people need to understand how often obtrusive regulation stops small business from either existing or building a business...who then can take the strain? Only big companies who can take risks. If many of those regulations stop businesses being profitable or even to earn a living, and they are EU regs, who, ultimately, needs to do more? Again, it's bureaucracy to satisfy failed bureaucracy.

We know it's both (and I would 100% agree the UK government is most to blame, we can just ignore the EU like other counties) but we both know individual countries don't hold much weight with the EU until everything is broken. Remember, with milk, the supermarkets just said that with the quotas being relaxed,they could simply buy elsewhere so the gate price dropped. As regulation changed farmers became burdened and people like Parmalat bought very many smaller local competitors and companies.

Plus the costs of keeping the animals (food, insurance, vaccinations, process etc) went up hugely which impacted the profitability, or non-profitability of being a milk producer. Some smaller companies have diversified, for example into posh yogurt but others cannot afford the now automated system the largest companies use....at some point the EU has to deliver ways to protect produce, as they have with legally protected regional produce like champagne.

It's really sad because I'm 100% a reformer,  the EU has masses of potential, but as someone who has written to many EU Ministers  (and applied for many EU jobs) I have been very disappointed in the replies I got, (not that I get great ones from MP's). However, I get the feeling that change is not really on many people's agendas (EU, UK, voters), status quo is easier, especially not our MP's where - sadly for many of the guys who enjoy a bash and not a discussion - the only ones that seem to have any finger on any pulse are the Conservatives, which from the point of discussion/success going forward, is a real disaster! 

Edited by itdoesntmatterwhatthissay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, magnkarl said:

2) Labour. I mean - what the hell has Labour done with Brexit? Their stance was never clear, their leaders changes their opinion on it like a flag in wind and Corbyn now said he'll also take Britain out of the single market if he's a leader. Labour has been in opposition for going on 8 years and still haven't managed to form any sort of coherent option. It's hard to place them at the moment and it feels like Corbyn is more of a rebel than a politician.

Not meaning to go around just defending Labour but they've done the only thing they possibly can do to keep any chance of power. Current populism of this country dictates that you have to support a full hard brexit or get decimated in the polls and in turn elections. If Labour go half-cocked at anything, the papers will destroy them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, darrenm said:

Not meaning to go around just defending Labour but they've done the only thing they possibly can do to keep any chance of power. Current populism of this country dictates that you have to support a full hard brexit or get decimated in the polls and in turn elections. If Labour go half-cocked at anything, the papers will destroy them.

Wouldn't you say that Labour's whole approach to the referendum was pretty half cocked? I don't think anyone knew what JC wanted for the referendum until it was over. The only one who mobilised properly against Brexit was the Lib Dems.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Wouldn't you say that Labour's whole approach to the referendum was pretty half cocked? I don't think anyone knew what JC wanted for the referendum until it was over. The only one who mobilised properly against Brexit was the Lib Dems.

It was Labour Party policy to back remain at the time (though individual MPs were allowed to back Leave), In actual fact, the press by and large ignored anything they did and said so that would explain why you think their approach was half cocked. The worst thing that Corbyn did was the shambolic 7/10 comment, which was deliberate as a 12-year-old school kid could have deflected that particular question but Corbyn chose not to

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, bickster said:

It was Labour Party policy to back remain at the time (though individual MPs were allowed to back Leave), In actual fact, the press by and large ignored anything they did and said so that would explain why you think their approach was half cocked. The worst thing that Corbyn did was the shambolic 7/10 comment, which was deliberate as a 12-year-old school kid could have deflected that particular question but Corbyn chose not to

To some extent that is probably true. But it is strange to me how Labour managed to make so much noise in general in the GE but barely any at all with the referendum. The whole "all the press is against us"-card is getting a bit tiring when it can be selectively used like this. Labour didn't mobilise well for Brexit - could that possibly be because there was quite a lot of support for a hard break within the party rather than the usual media bias theory?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, magnkarl said:

Wouldn't you say that Labour's whole approach to the referendum was pretty half cocked? I don't think anyone knew what JC wanted for the referendum until it was over. The only one who mobilised properly against Brexit was the Lib Dems.

I 100% agree with you and Labour were very clever in grabbing very many Lib Dem votes. I was genuinely excited about my Lib Dem's chances in Hall Green but the final result was awful and people voting on the EU and anti-Tory killed their vote...in part because of clever Labour campaigning, or non-campaigning when misinformation existed! Now my guy has retired (because of the swing nonsense) and street lighting, roads, parks, rubbish, social rent, facilities etc will all suffer and that's terrible, but heck, sod peoples local living standards, let's get the Tories out to replace them with guys who also don't understand the granular issues of policy.

I felt JC was silenced before the referendum and I was desperate to hear from him, especially as he's an obvious critic and proper rebel. Funny how Trident is okay to be an open conversation between the leader and party but Brexit absolutely isn't. Quite simply, this is not a new type of politics in the slightest and Labour are every bit, perhaps worse, liars than the Conservatives. But then that's nothing new, Labour always trick people into their lies, the Tories for the most, lay out how they're going to screw people over and we all see it coming.

People say, well Corbyn isn't a leader so he's not making decisions, but that's nonsense, he's a conversation and agenda setter and in parliament his guys challenge the opposition.....but they haven't and it suits them to oppose with anti-Tory rhetoric and not Tory policy discussion. Look at the recent drugs debate, why did Abbot bother turning up? Blunt (Conservative) was the major challenger to the government.

In the last few months I've been on two panels with Labour MPs and tbh, it's clear they have no intention of understanding anyone's POV and simply want to get their rhetoric for votes across.

The same debate exists in local and central govt, people are very happy to blame the UK government for EU failure but not blame local government for central government problems. Well many of those local governments are Labour but everything is the Conservatives fault.....the arguments simply don't add up.

Edited by itdoesntmatterwhatthissay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

To some extent that is probably true. But it is strange to me how Labour managed to make so much noise in general in the GE but barely any at all with the referendum. The whole "all the press is against us"-card is getting a bit tiring when it can be selectively used like this. Labour didn't mobilise well for Brexit - could that possibly be because there was quite a lot of support for a hard break within the party rather than the usual media bias theory?

It's pretty easy to work out. The Remain Campaign was essentially fronted by Cameron and Osbourne. The referendum was essentially Tory ideas vs Tory ideas. Labour Remain MPs were out and about up and down the country every day but received very few column inches for their troubles. The media, by and large, ignored them, I'm also fairly convinced that the Labour leadership weren't unhappy with this

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

could that possibly be because there was quite a lot of support for a hard break within the party rather than the usual media bias theory?

 

I'd also say that this bit is utterly incorrect.

I'd say the majority of Labour MPs true feelings are remain

I'd say the vast majority of Labour Party Members (not supporters) is also still firmly remain.

The one thing I've never managed to work out is why the Unions back Corbyn to the hilt but it surely cant be in the working man's interests to lose the rights he's gained in the EU. As soon as we're out of the EU, those rights will be what the Tories attack first. It's a huge gamble to assume Corbyn will actually get elected, their position makes no sense at all

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bickster said:

I'd also say that this bit is utterly incorrect.

I'd say the majority of Labour MPs true feelings are remain

I'd say the vast majority of Labour Party Members (not supporters) is also still firmly remain.

The one thing I've never managed to work out is why the Unions back Corbyn to the hilt but it surely cant be in the working man's interests to lose the rights he's gained in the EU. As soon as we're out of the EU, those rights will be what the Tories attack first. It's a huge gamble to assume Corbyn will actually get elected, their position makes no sense at all

Agreed. It baffles me too. Hence why I was never really sure where I had Labour in the referendum. JC was clearly told to not air his views, but in who's interest is that? Not his young voters, that's for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bickster said:

It's pretty easy to work out. The Remain Campaign was essentially fronted by Cameron and Osbourne. The referendum was essentially Tory ideas vs Tory ideas. Labour Remain MPs were out and about up and down the country every day but received very few column inches for their troubles. The media, by and large, ignored them, I'm also fairly convinced that the Labour leadership weren't unhappy with this

I sat on brexit panels, I attended brexit meetings and I gave comments on brexit articles; you're wrong, Labour really didn't have a clue and tbh it wasn't about column inches, it was about front benches/representatives not know anything .  I am still attending those meetings and brief members who attend on our behalf, nothing has changed but now I am finding out that trade unions know even less than Labour MP's.
Despite spending much time arguing with them, the Conservatives were a godsend in helping me understand the barriers under the EU and those which weren't barriers, Labour were an obstacle because they had to wait for a Conservative to answer in order to be informed.

When Corbyn mentioned the 'posted workers directive' the laughs from all sides tells you a lot about the ignorance of understanding EU policy. But that comment got inches and attention, because they actually had more than rhetoric in their armoury. 

While you're correct that Remain was Cameron and Osborne, the £350m bus criticism was a major Labour campaign and again, that should point to the deficiencies in their 'argument' a that message is still running.

Edited by itdoesntmatterwhatthissay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, itdoesntmatterwhatthissay said:

Despite spending much time arguing with them, the Conservatives were a godsend in helping me understand the barriers under the EU and those which weren't barriers...

 

Ooh, lessons from the Dark Side.

Of course the Tories are familiar with the European regs that stop them making £.

You get fed whatever fits their agenda.

Since that often means public money going into private hands, you maybe don't ask many awkward questions?

3 hours ago, itdoesntmatterwhatthissay said:

Labour were an obstacle because they had to wait for a Conservative to answer in order to be informed.

Funny how the the party in power gets information faster than the opposition.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Xann said:

 

Ooh, lessons from the Dark Side.

Of course the Tories are familiar with the European regs that stop them making £.

You get fed whatever fits their agenda.

Since that often means public money going into private hands, you maybe don't ask many awkward questions?

Nope, lessons. My meetings have been cross-party (that means every party has been involved..or invited...some didn't turn up)
You eat up whatever information you glance at from whichever party suits your mood that day. I have spent my working life trying to funnel public money away from failing private business and back into the public sector, when it works. My blog is basically full of those stories and exists because of the failed state and failed state approach to relying on the private sector. Otherwise I have been helping both the public sector and the third sector improve how they operate.

I have thrived taking on local and central government (all the parties) and while I can't say I ask the right questions 100% of the time, I'm probably not that smart, I always ask the awkward questions and now get paid to do that. 

The sad thing is you don't actually read anything I write as I have consistently criticised the way all parties have funnelled money away from the public sector, including the main offenders who put all this in place, the Labour party. It's still happening now with local governement, which apparently is always central's fault....sigh!

Sadly, of all the people in here you're the one who consistently misses the point in favour of criticising me and it's fine. I have never and will never give up on the uninformed and I hope one day you and your chums can learn something past the rhetoric you are so desperately hanging on to. If I add to that weight and someone smarter or with stronger rhetoric changes your mind, so be it. I will simply give you facts, I can't control whether you even bother to research their validity. Sadly, in this instance it goes for the people who liked your post too. 

Quote

Funny how the the party in power gets information faster than the opposition.

You're telling me that the party in power has better access to information that has been changing the way the UK operates for over 20 years? Despite Labour and many of their existing MP's being in charge for 13 years? And the leader being a critic? The info exists in the public domain and has for decades!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â