General Election 2017

[ml1dch]

54 minutes ago, darrenm said:

It's funny but scarily accurate

 

How can people still be doing piss-poor Downfall parodies in 2017?

What next, a parody Budweiser "Whassup" advert?

[mikeyp102]

1 hour ago, PompeyVillan said:

Sorry mate, not picking on you. But those "quizzes" are horrendous.

And to make your mind up on the basis of someone elses subjective definition of politics is... Erm...

It's okay to not be turned on by politics, but please take a few hours to find out about current, relevant policy pledges. Look at the opposition objectively and see what bits you like as well as dislike. 

Look up your local candidates, because they are the one's representing you in parliament, voting on your behalf. Should you ever have an issue you need your MP to look into, you'll want someone that cares about the same things as you. your local MP is only a phonecall away, I've spoken to mine about the NHS. He knows how I feel. 

Manifestos should be released tomorrow/this week. Avoid the tabloids of all persuasions because all they want to finish induce outrage. 

And by all means take a view on the leaders but remember they have changed in recent years (Blair - Brown, Cameron - May). 

 

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. 

[chrisp65]

8 minutes 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. 

Absolutely definitely.

Speaking directly to a good local politician can achieve a lot. It got my father a job when he was unemployed. It got a contact name with a barrister that saved a football team that now has over 600 kids in an academy. It prevented the local comp being subject to a truly bad, utterly flawed expansion proposal.

I'm more of the opposite view now. I can't do anything much about Theresa May, but I can help influence what happens locally via all my local politicians, from MP's to councillors.

 

[Xann]

17 minutes ago, mikeyp102 said:

Out of interest has speaking to your local MP ever achieved anything?

Aye, Sadiq did a sterling job on HMRC on my behalf when he was MP here.

 

[PompeyVillan]

1 hour 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. 

Not really, but I didn't expect him to be able to too much. My local MP is from a party I oppose, and he's a bit of a stooge but I respect him for speaking with me on several occasions. I'm civil with him, and ask him difficult questions and he's more than civil back. 

At the very least I've made my voice heard, and it's on an issue plenty of other constituents have brought up. 

So when he represents us in parliament he knows what his people think. Not all politicians are arsewipes, most are decent folk who play a tough game. 

[HanoiVillan]

Two different Tory politicians have offered to help me with a particular situation, in at least some capacity . . . I haven't actually asked either of them yet, and I guess the proof of the pudding etc, but they did at least offer. 

Most politicians, from all parties, take the constituency work seriously. You've got a really shit MP if they don't. 

[TrentVilla]

So May makes a grab for those on the left not behind Corbyn... 

[a m ole]

4 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

So May makes a grab for those on the left not behind Corbyn... 

I'm sure she thinks it's a great idea to increase the wage necessary for people to live! It would be better to ensure people actually earn it...

[TrentVilla]

Just now, a m ole said:

I'm sure she thinks it's a great idea to increase the wage necessary for people to live! It would be better to ensure people actually earn it...

Not entirely clear what you mean....

[a m ole]

9 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

Not entirely clear what you mean....

nevermind, I didn't realise they'd started calling minimum wage the 'living wage' for over 25s. I was under the impression it was a guideline that employers could choose to adhere to. Like the equivalent of saying "We think everyone should be entitled to a speedboat from their employer"

[Davkaus]

12 minutes ago, a m ole said:

nevermind, I didn't realise they'd started calling minimum wage the 'living wage' for over 25s. I was under the impression it was a guideline that employers could choose to adhere to. Like the equivalent of saying "We think everyone should be entitled to a speedboat from their employer"

It was a PR masterclass by the evil **** tories.

It was a phrase used buy the Living Wage foundation. The tories used it to rebrand the minimum wage, and while they increased the minimum wage, it's still noticeably below the actual living wage. Bastards.

Tories all over. Nevermind ensuring people earn a fair wage, just use spin and deception to make people think they're getting a good deal. Still, based on your speedboat comment, it looks like you'll approve.

Edited May 15, 2017 by Davkaus

[snowychap]

3 hours ago, TrentVilla said:

So May makes a grab for those on the left not behind Corbyn... 

If anyone falls for what the Tories claim they are offering on 'workers' rights' then they're utterly barmy.

I don't really agree with the last word.

Edited May 15, 2017 by snowychap

[snowychap]

What are the Tories really offering as their supposed 'biggest expansion of workers' rights'?

Keeping the ones that already exist, i.e. existing workers' rights from the EU;

a right to an unpaid year off to care for a family memeber - so not really applicable to people who can't afford to take a year unpaid;

a right to training - what does that really mean and, as per the tweet above, how does that get enforced?;

measures to protect pensions - having listened to the sessions about the BHS thing, I thought that there were already 'measures' but that agencies weren't enforcing them though I may well be miles out;

national 'living wage' would rise in line with average earnings during the next parliament - so an effective real terms cut if inflation is higher than the average earnings increase and an incentive to keep pay raises down across the board.

 

All this from a party which, whilst in government, brought in that Trade Union Act last year.

Edited May 15, 2017 by snowychap

[itdoesntmatterwhatthissay]

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. 

[itdoesntmatterwhatthissay]

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.

[snowychap]

20 minutes ago, itdoesntmatterwhatthissay said:

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. 

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.

Edited May 15, 2017 by snowychap
some bad grammars

[a m ole]

3 hours ago, Davkaus said:

It was a PR masterclass by the evil **** tories.

It was a phrase used buy the Living Wage foundation. The tories used it to rebrand the minimum wage, and while they increased the minimum wage, it's still noticeably below the actual living wage. Bastards.

Tories all over. Nevermind ensuring people earn a fair wage, just use spin and deception to make people think they're getting a good deal. Still, based on your speedboat comment, it looks like you'll approve.

I definitely don't approve! My implication in the first place was that they're cynically taking credit for suggesting the lowest paid should be given a living wage but not doing anything about it. 

Edited May 15, 2017 by a m ole

[snowychap]

 

Number of school leavers on electoral roll in England falls 25%

Quote

Young people are facing a “voter registration time bomb”, according to analysis by the Electoral Reform Society, whose analysis shows the number of school leavers on the electoral roll has dropped by more than a quarter in three years.

The society, which campaigns on access to democracy, said parties needed to step up their game to register young people, who are more likely to fall off the electoral roll after the introduction of individual electoral registration in 2014.

That change saw a shift from a single person, usually a parent, registering everyone in the household on their behalf to each voter having to register individually. Universities can also no longer automatically register students.

Crucially, the system has seen a sharp decline in the number of so-called attainers, 16- and 17-year-olds listed on the register so that they automatically receive voting rights when they turn 18. In Scotland, the number of attainers has dropped by more than a third since 2014 and by more than a quarter in England.

...more on link

 

[PieFacE]

When this election was announced I had no idea who I was going to vote for, and was probably simply not going to vote.

However, I think for the first time ever I'm going to vote for Labour. They've done enough to win me over, wonder how many others like me there are?

I'd guess not nearly enough. 

[HanoiVillan]

56 minutes ago, snowychap said:

 

Number of school leavers on electoral roll in England falls 25%

 

Tory plans working exactly as intended, seems like.