+- The UK Babe Channels Forum (https://www.babeshows.co.uk)
+-- Forum: General (/forumdisplay.php?fid=19)
+--- Forum: All Other Subjects (/forumdisplay.php?fid=114)
+---- Forum: News Zone (/forumdisplay.php?fid=111)
+---- Thread: Time for a change? (/showthread.php?tid=62118)
Time for a change? - bytor - 21-09-2014 12:25
On tv last night I saw a commentator on the RT news channel stating that if England were given the same rights as Scotland and were to have their own assembly, one that was concerned with just English matters then what would Scotland have gained from the referendum.
Switching over, I then saw main reason Labour will fail at the general election, Ed Milibland; furthering his wrong man in the right position credentials by insisting that England doesn’t want its own version of a national assembly, that it is only fair that the Scots, Welsh etc can all have a say in the day to day affairs of the English. He feels that what the English really want is a minimum wage of £8 an hour.
Really? Yes thats an attractive idea that strikes at the social conscience but how is that going to be paid for in a still recovering economy-by rising taxes and hitting small to medium businesses obviously. Milibland is simply showing us that what Labour really fear is losing a large part of their vote should there be a change in the constitution. I would prefer a Labour government over a Tory one any day but they will struggle to convince people that they can be trusted after the disaster they made last time. Gordon Brown, a major reason behind the recession should be put on trial for his actions, selling 60% of our national gold reserves to prop up a New York banker effectively.
Am I missing something here? Wasn't the whole point of the referendum in Scotland meant to decide whether or not the people in Scotland wished to remain part of the UK or become its own independent sovereign state? That the majority chose to remain means it accepts the benefits and of course the faults that come with belonging to the greater entity that is the UK.
This doesn’t mean it should have more favourable terms than any of its partner nations in the UK. The current feeling among many in England is that we always seem to be ignored when it comes to having a national identity.Now I’m not some flag waving patriot or right wing bigot but I do wonder at the hypocrisy of us (English) as a nation; one that will gladly celebrate St Patricks day in pubs all over England yet seemingly has an inbred fear of being seen to celebrate our own national day. Rightly so the Scots celebrate Burns night and have their own public holidays as do the Welsh.
To me and everyone I have spoken too all that people living in England would like is to share in better and equal representation. Certainly not superiority or leadership over our partners in the UK.
Just as something to throw out there perhaps we should look at the US as a model for change in our multi-cultural society. While the US has many, many faults, the origins of its government lie in a deeply held principle to overcome the tyranny of an overbearing 18th Century government thousands of miles away in Great Britain that unfairly taxed its overseas colonists while failing to listen to their concerns….sounds familiar?
Perhaps what the UK needs is a major overhaul of a political structure that is so out of touch with mainstream society.
Each country in the UK could have elected local MP’s sitting in a national assembly, providing government for that country. Each of these assemblies could then send elected ‘representatives' to a 'higher' national ‘house’ (replacing the totally undemocratic House of Lords) that provides direction as a United Kingdom, representing the home nations as a stronger combined force on the global stage. Perhaps then we might actually get a fairer and proportional system…for the people by the people etc.
Obviously it would never happen in this country as the people in power, the money men, financiers and politicians would never allow it
RE: Time for a change? - Goodfella3041 - 21-09-2014 16:29
Intriguing post.
In the late-referendum panic, the Westminster mob really put the cat amongst the pigeons with the 'devo max' pledge. It was a last gasp effort to buy off the undecided Scots and -- given the demographic split of the outcome -- it is not one from which they can artfully retreat.
It then begs the question: What about Wales and Northern Ireland? And indeed, what about England? I would go even further and say, what about London?
In fact, leaving aside emotion, patriotism, history and nationalism, there is -- in strictly hardheaded economic and pragmatic terms -- more logic and greater benefit to all in extending devolution to London than to any of the home nations. London is a completely different animal to the rest of the country. Different needs, different challenges, different opportunities. London has more in common with Shanghai, New York, Moscow and Singapore than it does with Birmingham, Manchester, Newcastle and Leeds.
Does it really make sense to define laws on planning, council tax, business rates, transport, environment, etc. consistently across England, when it has an elephant in the room called London? I think everyone would benefit, within and outside London, if the capital was treated differently. Not preferentially, mind you. Just differently.
That tangent aside, in his cackhanded attempt at walking back the Devo Max pledge, David Milibland did say one interesting thing. He proposed a "constitutional convention" in 2015 to look at the UK constitution in a root-and-branch way. That might be a good thing. Then again, the UK constitution -- such as it is and unlike the heavily codified American one -- is a heaving body of law that has evolved (and continues to evolve) through an uninterrupted tradition that dates back to Magna Carta. Through better and worse, it made us a formidable European power, a more-or-less just society, a global empire, an innovator, inventor and industrialist, and it saw us through wars and depressions, Thatcher and Blair.
It takes a brave and enlightened group of men to mess with that. There is a great risk of killing the patient to cure the disease. So many perverse and unintended consequences that can come from that. And I wouldn't trust the current crop of politicians in Westminster to fix a car, let along the constitution. They seem to lack the intellectual firepower, the vision or the gravitas to have a discussion like that. Their every move seems geared to the next election, if not the next big donation. I would sooner wait until someone comes along who is genuinely up to the task; whether it take 5 years, 25 or 100.
In the meantime, let's not throw away the system that got us this far in the frail hope that puny little children like Cameron, Clegg and Miliband are somehow the men that providence has chosen to better it. They aren't. Let's wait for the next batch. Or maybe the one after that...
RE: Time for a change? - HannahsPet - 21-09-2014 17:29
The Flaw in Millibands 8£ minimum wage is he wants it in stages by 2020 in which time you will prob need about £10 an hour to live off
RE: Time for a change? - M-L-L - 05-10-2014 20:22
I see Nick Clegg is making a belated - and far too late - attempt to locate his bollocks by suddenly piping up that the Lib Dems won't support Tory cuts targeting the poorest while simultaneously offering tax cuts to others. Coincidentally close to by-elections and in a run up to General Election at which he must surely be expecting his vote to receive a continuing kicking ?
Think this will be far too late to save his and his party's electoral chances - the protest and anti-Tory tactical vote that traditionally used to go to Lib Dems is going to find other outlets at the next General Election methinks (sadly and ominously I think UKIP will benefit) in just the same way that the Scottish Parliament elections showed a sudden surge in SNP's fortunes which the Referendum seemed to prove did not necessarily reflect a full-blown support for the SNP nor for Independence : but seems to have been more a continuing protest against UK ConDem policies and a vote of no confidence in Labour - both the shambles of Pa Broon's economic legacy and the obvious no-hoper status of Millbean as a contender - not to mention the general mediocrity and anonymity of the Scottish Labour politicians in Scottish Parliament itself, whom you would struggle to name any of.
RE: Time for a change? - HannahsPet - 27-01-2015 11:12
Hmmmmm Sky polls of polls have a Labour - SNP coalition as most likely Seriously hope that doesnt happen unless Alec Salmond is made PM because Milliband is a disgrace and to have him as PM would do serious damage to our reputation in the world
Thats the trouble with politics nowadays got a leader whos ok with a party who are a bunch of
in the conservatives and a decent party in labour but seriously liability as a leader. was thinking this the other week when cameron was in Washington giving a press conference with Obama say what u like about cameron he always looks the statesmen.thats my dilemma this election.
Do i vote for Labour even though like most of there policys and our MP who is a decent MP and get milliband. Or Vote Tory they have done some good things with tax thresholds and kept the country going bankrupt but at a cost though. also like the idea of the Euro Referendum after trying re negoiaite some of the powers back to the uk
Voted Lib Dem last time mainly for the tuition fees thing so wont be doing that again. will never vote UKIP
So im torn between my heart and my head
RE: Time for a change? - lancealot790 - 27-01-2015 14:42
Why would you even consider voting for any of the mainstream parties, none of them can be trusted. Their manifestos are not worth the paper they are written on and their promises mean nothing. The reason no one can predict the outcome of the general election is because people are finally starting to see our politicians for what they really are and many of them are turning to the fringe parties.
RE: Time for a change? - HannahsPet - 27-01-2015 15:30
Only wish i could vote for Al murray
his FUKP party seem to have all the good ideas seems quite a few do http://www.kentonline.co.uk/thanet/news/pub-landlord-would-make-better-30755/
RE: Time for a change? - Doddle - 27-01-2015 15:40
I'm pro-Europe, so my choice boils down to the Lib Dems.
The LD problem is they're conflicted between the pragmatists and the purists. The Purists have spent the last 4+ years kicking off about being in coalition, because they'd rather be alone in government, which they will never achieve.
Ed Miliband's solution to unemployment - stab your brother in the back and nick his job
Single issue fringe parties (Greens, UKIP, etc) are all essentially ludicrous for the same reason - you need more than one policy to run a country, just as you need more than one reason to marry someone.
I'd vote Monster Raving Loony if I had a candidate. Sadly there are already too many loonies around here who'd make an Official Loony look sensible by comparison.
RE: Time for a change? - Tumble_Drier - 27-01-2015 17:13
There will be 2 General Elections this year. Whatever coalition is cobbled together after the May election won't last 5 minutes, particularly if the SNP are part of it.
RE: Time for a change? - HannahsPet - 27-01-2015 17:59
Be interesting to see what happens with the SNP if the case is that they do wipe labour out at the election and alec salmond gets his seat surely he would have to do all the coalition talks and be SNP leader in Westmiminister basically would by default put Nicola sturgeon in impossible position
to be honest if the SNP were to have candidates in the rest of UK i would have prob voted for them although i was very NO to any independence they do seem to be running scotland well (mind u as i live in england its only what i see on the media ) and there free NHS care and Tuition Fees would go down very well south of the border