|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Feb 10, 2017 8:37:42 GMT
It has been conclusively shown that migration has a net contribution to the economy! Young, well-educated people who want to work! We've got an ageing population that doesn't work, needs medical and social care. It's taxes from young workers that is paying for this! How is it Farage and all the U.K.I.P. M.E.P.s don't count as having done "alright" out of the E.U.? They have some of the worst attendance records and benefit from all the salaries, expenses and perks! We've decided to Trigger Article 50 yet Farage and his U.K.I.P. mates won't give up their lavish lifestyle? U.K.I.P. have always got an excuse to stay on the E.U. gravy train! From the late great Tony Benn: ( no real point in attending the EU parliament...I can confirm this having been a few times myself) "When I saw how the European Union was developing, it was very obvious that what they had in mind was not democratic. I mean, in Britain you vote for the government and therefore the government has to listen to you, and if you don’t like it you can change it. But in Europe all the key positions are appointed, not elected – the Commission, for example. All appointed, not one of them elected." www.google.co.uk/amp/s/semipartisansam.com/2016/03/03/tony-benn-and-the-left-wing-case-for-brexit/amp/How many times have you voted for the Head of the British civil service, Governor of the Bank of England, C.E.O. of Stoke council?
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Feb 10, 2017 8:43:14 GMT
No, it is a lie that U.K.I.P. perpetuates that migrants don't make a net positive contribution? In my flats, I have lived with a white Brit who hasn't done a days work in ca. 30 years. He has been a very regular visitor to Her Majesty's Hotels. His net cost to the British Exchequer runs into millions of pounds and he's only into his fifties! Now, if you think Farage and U.K.I.P. are effective by damaging our economy, are you personally going to make up the financial shortfall for my fellow flat owner's benefits, state pension, holidays in Brixton/Belmarsh et al etc.? I don't know if you have noticed but we already have an housing and health service crisis in this country NOW. One cause of this is too much demand on the services. In respect of trade prospects that is what we make of the opportunities , as a free, sovereign, self governing country....how it develops in the future is conjecture( as is the future of the EU that you worship and the Euro) As different perspective: (By the way the issue is...who CONTROLS immigration, NOT the merits of it ) The Tory government, after 6 years, has just announced a re-think on housing policy! Thatcher's 'every-one should buy not rent' ideology has been ditched. The government has finally made land hoarding more difficult. You can't blame our inability to build enough homes for 25 years on some-one who's migrated here 25 weeks ago!
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 10, 2017 8:55:12 GMT
A quick tot up shows Conservative for 36 years, Labour for 25 years and Coalition for 5 years. And a Labour MP in Stoke Central during that entire period. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Insanity is thinking Thatcher was better than Attlee, Heath was better Wilson, Cameron was better than Blair! Of course, Stoke Central instead of having M.P.s like Mark Fisher, Tristram Hunt could have been blessed with having Margaret Thatcher, the M.P. who took free school milk off children! As it was a Tory led Coalition, that's 41 years Tory and just 25 years Labour! Harold Wilson first stopped free school milk in 1968 to secondary schools, thatcher carried it on in 71 to children over 7, released documents showed that she fought Heath to stop the cuts but he over ruled her, in 1980 they put £25m into LEA's to help poor families continue to receive free milk. But don't let the facts get in the way of a populist story People need to vote for something different in Stoke, whether it be Green, purple or grey, just not red or blue, take off the blinkers show central government you want more change, if people keep voting labour all the time, even when they are in this state, the City will always be neglected as nobody will look at it until it becomes a marginal seat, only then will people want to look to change it to get votes.
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Feb 10, 2017 9:11:57 GMT
Insanity is thinking Thatcher was better than Attlee, Heath was better Wilson, Cameron was better than Blair! Of course, Stoke Central instead of having M.P.s like Mark Fisher, Tristram Hunt could have been blessed with having Margaret Thatcher, the M.P. who took free school milk off children! As it was a Tory led Coalition, that's 41 years Tory and just 25 years Labour! Harold Wilson first stopped free school milk in 1968 to secondary schools, thatcher carried it on in 71 to children over 7, released documents showed that she fought Heath to stop the cuts but he over ruled her, in 1980 they put £25m into LEA's to help poor families continue to receive free milk. But don't let the facts get in the way of a populist story People need to vote for something different in Stoke, whether it be Green, purple or grey, just not red or blue, take off the blinkers show central government you want more change, if people keep voting labour all the time, even when they are in this state, the City will always be neglected as nobody will look at it until it becomes a marginal seat, only then will people want to look to change it to get votes. So, the facts are two Tory politicians argued over stopping free school milk to children over 7 but still implemented it in 1971! Then in 1980 they means tested it! Compassionate Conservatism at its best laced with the usual Tory twisting of the truth! What Tory hypocrisy about marginal seats! It's the Tories who are cutting the number of seats from 650 to 600 in order to reduce the number of marginal seats! Seats like Stafford will have rural, Conservative areas added to them to make them safe Tory seats! In Stoke & Newcastle the number of seats will fall from 4 to 3 but will still be safe Labour seats. Therefore, your argument about making your seat marginal by swapping your usual vote is bogus as the Tories are organising boundaries which make swing seats less numerous! I bet the same Tories aren't telling their voters in stockbroker Surrey to change their votes to make Guildford a marginal seat!
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 10, 2017 9:20:29 GMT
From the late great Tony Benn: ( no real point in attending the EU parliament...I can confirm this having been a few times myself) "When I saw how the European Union was developing, it was very obvious that what they had in mind was not democratic. I mean, in Britain you vote for the government and therefore the government has to listen to you, and if you don’t like it you can change it. But in Europe all the key positions are appointed, not elected – the Commission, for example. All appointed, not one of them elected." www.google.co.uk/amp/s/semipartisansam.com/2016/03/03/tony-benn-and-the-left-wing-case-for-brexit/amp/How many times have you voted for the Head of the British civil service, Governor of the Bank of England, C.E.O. of Stoke council? So you are okay to let others make your decisions, even if they are faceless bureaucrats...they must be laughing at you ( and us Brits)
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 10, 2017 9:23:29 GMT
I don't know if you have noticed but we already have an housing and health service crisis in this country NOW. One cause of this is too much demand on the services. In respect of trade prospects that is what we make of the opportunities , as a free, sovereign, self governing country....how it develops in the future is conjecture( as is the future of the EU that you worship and the Euro) As different perspective: (By the way the issue is...who CONTROLS immigration, NOT the merits of it ) The Tory government, after 6 years, has just announced a re-think on housing policy! Thatcher's 'every-one should buy not rent' ideology has been ditched. The government has finally made land hoarding more difficult. You can't blame our inability to build enough homes for 25 years on some-one who's migrated here 25 weeks ago! It doest help though to have a net 300000 to accommodate per year....but the issue is WHO decides.,Parliament or Angela Merkel? The alternative to controlled immigration is uncontrolled immigration.... a recipe for disaster.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 10, 2017 9:24:22 GMT
Harold Wilson first stopped free school milk in 1968 to secondary schools, thatcher carried it on in 71 to children over 7, released documents showed that she fought Heath to stop the cuts but he over ruled her, in 1980 they put £25m into LEA's to help poor families continue to receive free milk. But don't let the facts get in the way of a populist story People need to vote for something different in Stoke, whether it be Green, purple or grey, just not red or blue, take off the blinkers show central government you want more change, if people keep voting labour all the time, even when they are in this state, the City will always be neglected as nobody will look at it until it becomes a marginal seat, only then will people want to look to change it to get votes. So, the facts are two Tory politicians argued over stopping free school milk to children over 7 but still implemented it in 1971! Then in 1980 they means tested it! Compassionate Conservatism at its best laced with the usual Tory twisting of the truth! What Tory hypocrisy about marginal seats! It's the Tories who are cutting the number of seats from 650 to 600 in order to reduce the number of marginal seats! Seats like Stafford will have rural, Conservative areas added to them to make them safe Tory seats! In Stoke & Newcastle the number of seats will fall from 4 to 3 but will still be safe Labour seats. Therefore, your argument about making your seat marginal by swapping your usual vote is bogus as the Tories are organising boundaries which make swing seats less numerous! I bet the same Tories aren't telling their voters in stockbroker Surrey to change their votes to make Guildford a marginal seat! The point I was making was that Thatcher tried to stop it but was over ruled by her boss, the PM, so your accusations on Thatcher are wrong. But please answer me this one - why didn't the labour government re-introduce it when they came back to power or even means test and increase money to it like Thatcher did?You have gone off on a tangent on the seats, I wasn't on about seats being reduced, just that nobody gives a flying fuck about SToke if it's a safe seat no matter what state the place is in, safe seat no matter what,Labour won't need to bother much as it's theirs, Tories won't bother as they know they won't get in, . And you are blaming the Tories for changing the boundaries, it is the elctoral reform society, an idependent group that does it. www.electoral-reform.org.uk/governance
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 10, 2017 9:33:52 GMT
I don't know if you have noticed but we already have an housing and health service crisis in this country NOW. One cause of this is too much demand on the services. In respect of trade prospects that is what we make of the opportunities , as a free, sovereign, self governing country....how it develops in the future is conjecture( as is the future of the EU that you worship and the Euro) As different perspective: (By the way the issue is...who CONTROLS immigration, NOT the merits of it ) The Tory government, after 6 years, has just announced a re-think on housing policy! Thatcher's 'every-one should buy not rent' ideology has been ditched. The government has finally made land hoarding more difficult. You can't blame our inability to build enough homes for 25 years on some-one who's migrated here 25 weeks ago! In 2010 - 2015 there was a coalition government, Tory led yes, but the deputy PM was a liberal, business and finance positions were liberal, so the Tories have only been a full government since 2015, just stating facts. check out a few facts on here about the different parties housing policies: - blogs.spectator.co.uk/2013/09/labours-claim-of-being-the-party-of-council-housing-is-in-tatters/Investment in housing plunged under Blair and Brown to its lowest level for decades. During their first 12 months in power they spent less than in any year of Thatcher and Major’s 18-year reign. Their poverty of social housing ambition persisted throughout most of their administration. A big increase only arrived in its dying days- as a prop for builders tripped up by the financial crisis.and when they let in 5 million european workers to add to the crisis, it's a recipe for disaster
|
|
|
Post by boothenboy75 on Feb 10, 2017 9:33:56 GMT
So, the facts are two Tory politicians argued over stopping free school milk to children over 7 but still implemented it in 1971! Then in 1980 they means tested it! Compassionate Conservatism at its best laced with the usual Tory twisting of the truth! What Tory hypocrisy about marginal seats! It's the Tories who are cutting the number of seats from 650 to 600 in order to reduce the number of marginal seats! Seats like Stafford will have rural, Conservative areas added to them to make them safe Tory seats! In Stoke & Newcastle the number of seats will fall from 4 to 3 but will still be safe Labour seats. Therefore, your argument about making your seat marginal by swapping your usual vote is bogus as the Tories are organising boundaries which make swing seats less numerous! I bet the same Tories aren't telling their voters in stockbroker Surrey to change their votes to make Guildford a marginal seat! The point I was making was that Thatcher tried to stop it but was over ruled by her boss, the PM, so your accusations on Thatcher are wrong. But please answer me this one - why didn't the labour government re-introduce it when they came back to power or even means test and increase money to it like Thatcher did?You have gone off on a tangent on the seats, I wasn't on about seats being reduced, just that nobody gives a flying fuck about SToke if it's a safe seat no matter what state the place is in, safe seat no matter what,Labour won't need to bother much as it's theirs, Tories won't bother as they know they won't get in, . And you are blaming the Tories for changing the boundaries, it is the elctoral reform society, an idependent group that does it. www.electoral-reform.org.uk/governanceYou are wasting your breath mate. That Labour were the 1st to remove free school milk is a bit like how it was Labour who introduced university tuition fees and it was Labour who introduced privatisation into the NHS. Anyone thinking of voting Labour wants poking with a big stick. They've done sweet FA for this area for decades and decades and decades and you have imbeciles queueing up to support them. At least the Tories support their voting heartlands (Suffolk) where as we've been taken for granted for faaaaaaaaaaaaar too long. Vote Labour for more of the same.
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Feb 10, 2017 9:35:21 GMT
So, the facts are two Tory politicians argued over stopping free school milk to children over 7 but still implemented it in 1971! Then in 1980 they means tested it! Compassionate Conservatism at its best laced with the usual Tory twisting of the truth! What Tory hypocrisy about marginal seats! It's the Tories who are cutting the number of seats from 650 to 600 in order to reduce the number of marginal seats! Seats like Stafford will have rural, Conservative areas added to them to make them safe Tory seats! In Stoke & Newcastle the number of seats will fall from 4 to 3 but will still be safe Labour seats. Therefore, your argument about making your seat marginal by swapping your usual vote is bogus as the Tories are organising boundaries which make swing seats less numerous! I bet the same Tories aren't telling their voters in stockbroker Surrey to change their votes to make Guildford a marginal seat! The point I was making was that Thatcher tried to stop it but was over ruled by her boss, the PM, so your accusations on Thatcher are wrong. But please answer me this one - why didn't the labour government re-introduce it when they came back to power or even means test and increase money to it like Thatcher did?You have gone off on a tangent on the seats, I wasn't on about seats being reduced, just that nobody gives a flying fuck about SToke if it's a safe seat no matter what state the place is in, safe seat no matter what,Labour won't need to bother much as it's theirs, Tories won't bother as they know they won't get in, . And you are blaming the Tories for changing the boundaries, it is the elctoral reform society, an idependent group that does it. www.electoral-reform.org.uk/governanceYou're missing the point Tory Boy! The boundaries are indeed set independently but the number of seats e.g. 650 or 600 or even 50 is set by parliament! Parliament isn't independent! It's run by the Tories! The reduction in the number of seats means bigger constituencies and this means more outlying, Conservative areas get added into many seats! Therefore, the number of marginals will decrease. Therefore, to argue for voters to change their Labour votes in Stoke Central is a con-trick as this only increases the chance of a Conservative government. I repeat, the same Tories telling Labour voters in Stoke Central to vote differently won't be telling Tory voters in Lichfield to do something similar! As for Heath and Thatcher, Thatcher took Cabinet collective responsibility for the decision to take free school milk off children! If she disagreed with it so much she could have resigned!
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Feb 10, 2017 9:41:47 GMT
The point I was making was that Thatcher tried to stop it but was over ruled by her boss, the PM, so your accusations on Thatcher are wrong. But please answer me this one - why didn't the labour government re-introduce it when they came back to power or even means test and increase money to it like Thatcher did?You have gone off on a tangent on the seats, I wasn't on about seats being reduced, just that nobody gives a flying fuck about SToke if it's a safe seat no matter what state the place is in, safe seat no matter what,Labour won't need to bother much as it's theirs, Tories won't bother as they know they won't get in, . And you are blaming the Tories for changing the boundaries, it is the elctoral reform society, an idependent group that does it. www.electoral-reform.org.uk/governanceYou are wasting your breath mate. That Labour were the 1st to remove free school milk is a bit like how it was Labour who introduced university tuition fees and it was Labour who introduced privatisation into the NHS. Anyone thinking of voting Labour wants poking with a big stick. They've done sweet FA for this area for decades and decades and decades and you have imbeciles queueing up to support them. At least the Tories support their voting heartlands (Suffolk) where as we've been taken for granted for faaaaaaaaaaaaar too long. Vote Labour for more of the same. But it is the degree and extent you introduce measures that matters. It's true the Tories support their Tory heartlands but they able to do that with the votes of Tory M.P.s in Staffs Moorlands, Stone, Stafford, Burton and many other Staffs, South Cheshire seats. If you think of adding Stoke Central to that list, what will M/s May think? Oh, I've got the g.e. in the bag no need to worry about Stoke at all!
|
|
|
Post by boothenboy75 on Feb 10, 2017 9:42:42 GMT
The point I was making was that Thatcher tried to stop it but was over ruled by her boss, the PM, so your accusations on Thatcher are wrong. But please answer me this one - why didn't the labour government re-introduce it when they came back to power or even means test and increase money to it like Thatcher did?You have gone off on a tangent on the seats, I wasn't on about seats being reduced, just that nobody gives a flying fuck about SToke if it's a safe seat no matter what state the place is in, safe seat no matter what,Labour won't need to bother much as it's theirs, Tories won't bother as they know they won't get in, . And you are blaming the Tories for changing the boundaries, it is the elctoral reform society, an idependent group that does it. www.electoral-reform.org.uk/governanceYour missing the point Tory Boy! The boundaries are indeed set independently but the number of seats e.g. 650 or 600 or even 50 is set by parliament! Parliament isn't independent! It's run by the Tories! The reduction in the number of seats means bigger constituencies and this means more outlying, Conservative areas get added into many seats! Therefore, the number of marginals will decrease. Therefore, to argue for voters to change their Labour votes in Stoke Central is a con-trick as this only increases the chance of a Conservative government. I repeat, the same Tories telling Labour voters in Stoke Central to vote differently won't be telling Tory voters in Lichfield to do something similar!
As for Heath and Thatcher, Thatcher took Cabinet collective responsibility for the decision to take free school milk off children! If she disagreed with it so much she could have resigned! I will. Vote UKIP in Stoke, Lichfield, Oxford, Birmingham, everywhere. Because by and large the rest are all as bad as each other.
|
|
|
Post by boothenboy75 on Feb 10, 2017 9:47:02 GMT
You are wasting your breath mate. That Labour were the 1st to remove free school milk is a bit like how it was Labour who introduced university tuition fees and it was Labour who introduced privatisation into the NHS. Anyone thinking of voting Labour wants poking with a big stick. They've done sweet FA for this area for decades and decades and decades and you have imbeciles queueing up to support them. At least the Tories support their voting heartlands (Suffolk) where as we've been taken for granted for faaaaaaaaaaaaar too long. Vote Labour for more of the same. But it is the degree and extent you introduce measures that matters. It's true the Tories support their Tory heartlands but they able to do that with the votes of Tory M.P.s in Staffs Moorlands, Stone, Stafford, Burton and many other Staffs, South Cheshire seats. If you think of adding Stoke Central to that list, what will M/s May think? Oh, I've got the g.e. in the bag no need to worry about Stoke at all! Come off it, as soon as Labour introduced uni fees of £3k per year, everyone knew they would only go one way. One of the few areas that has never benefited from a sweetheart deal is us, so voting labour or tory will make zero difference to the local area. Sure the tories will do nothing to support the local economy but labour never have either. So forgive me if I give all of them the finger and hopefully if enough others do we might start to get somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Feb 10, 2017 9:47:15 GMT
Your missing the point Tory Boy! The boundaries are indeed set independently but the number of seats e.g. 650 or 600 or even 50 is set by parliament! Parliament isn't independent! It's run by the Tories! The reduction in the number of seats means bigger constituencies and this means more outlying, Conservative areas get added into many seats! Therefore, the number of marginals will decrease. Therefore, to argue for voters to change their Labour votes in Stoke Central is a con-trick as this only increases the chance of a Conservative government. I repeat, the same Tories telling Labour voters in Stoke Central to vote differently won't be telling Tory voters in Lichfield to do something similar!
As for Heath and Thatcher, Thatcher took Cabinet collective responsibility for the decision to take free school milk off children! If she disagreed with it so much she could have resigned! I will. Vote UKIP in Stoke, Lichfield, Oxford, Birmingham, everywhere. Because by and large the rest are all as bad as each other. I know you're a U.K.I.P. voter but I thought only Nutjob could live in several places at the same time!
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Feb 10, 2017 13:36:33 GMT
The point I was making was that Thatcher tried to stop it but was over ruled by her boss, the PM, so your accusations on Thatcher are wrong. But please answer me this one - why didn't the labour government re-introduce it when they came back to power or even means test and increase money to it like Thatcher did?You have gone off on a tangent on the seats, I wasn't on about seats being reduced, just that nobody gives a flying fuck about SToke if it's a safe seat no matter what state the place is in, safe seat no matter what,Labour won't need to bother much as it's theirs, Tories won't bother as they know they won't get in, . And you are blaming the Tories for changing the boundaries, it is the elctoral reform society, an idependent group that does it. www.electoral-reform.org.uk/governanceYou're missing the point Tory Boy! The boundaries are indeed set independently but the number of seats e.g. 650 or 600 or even 50 is set by parliament! Parliament isn't independent! It's run by the Tories! The reduction in the number of seats means bigger constituencies and this means more outlying, Conservative areas get added into many seats! Therefore, the number of marginals will decrease. Therefore, to argue for voters to change their Labour votes in Stoke Central is a con-trick as this only increases the chance of a Conservative government. I repeat, the same Tories telling Labour voters in Stoke Central to vote differently won't be telling Tory voters in Lichfield to do something similar! As for Heath and Thatcher, Thatcher took Cabinet collective responsibility for the decision to take free school milk off children! If she disagreed with it so much she could have resigned! It was Cameron who initiated the boundary changes wasn't it? Culling MP's from 650 down to 600 is welcome. I'm sure the idea is to make the number of constituents similar in every constituency, about 70,000 I think. Not the area size of the constituency. The idea of voting UKIP in this by-election is to send a message and put Stoke Central on the map during the most important political changes since the War. Whether UKIP or Labour win the by-election won't change the fact that the present Government is Conservative and the seat won't exist in the 2020 GE. EDIT: If Lichfield was a shit hole that had been forgotten after being represented for 67 consecutive years by Conservative MP's then YES I would vote differently.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Feb 10, 2017 14:04:18 GMT
Decades ahead they struggle with next year, they do say God invented economists to make weather forecasters look good. It isn't a case of decades to come, the slowdown in the economy has occurred last year and this year! This is despite big spending on credit cards! So, it is happening now! I find it fascinating that 'followyoudown''s Tory Party invented the OBR to provide forecasts for future budgets. I assume, the Tories are so convinced that these forecasts are worthless, M/s May will now stand up in parliament and announce she is disbanding it? budgetresponsibility.org.uk/about-the-obr/what-we-do/You'd probably be even more fascinated if you understood the full scope of what an independent fiscal watchdog actually does
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Feb 10, 2017 14:21:22 GMT
But it is the degree and extent you introduce measures that matters. It's true the Tories support their Tory heartlands but they able to do that with the votes of Tory M.P.s in Staffs Moorlands, Stone, Stafford, Burton and many other Staffs, South Cheshire seats. If you think of adding Stoke Central to that list, what will M/s May think? Oh, I've got the g.e. in the bag no need to worry about Stoke at all! Come off it, as soon as Labour introduced uni fees of £3k per year, everyone knew they would only go one way. One of the few areas that has never benefited from a sweetheart deal is us, so voting labour or tory will make zero difference to the local area. Sure the tories will do nothing to support the local economy but labour never have either. So forgive me if I give all of them the finger and hopefully if enough others do we might start to get somewhere. The single worse domestic decision by Blair. Under the Socialist tag line of Education Education Education he all but privatised the higher education system. Funding was cut so institutes were forced to put bum's on seats by selling degree places. Educational entry levels were lowered. Millions of 18 year old's thinking they should go to Uni for a better job resulted in millions of 21 year old's with 30 grands worth of debt around their neck and a 2:2 being the minimum to stack shelves at Tesco's.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 10, 2017 16:24:18 GMT
The point I was making was that Thatcher tried to stop it but was over ruled by her boss, the PM, so your accusations on Thatcher are wrong. But please answer me this one - why didn't the labour government re-introduce it when they came back to power or even means test and increase money to it like Thatcher did?You have gone off on a tangent on the seats, I wasn't on about seats being reduced, just that nobody gives a flying fuck about SToke if it's a safe seat no matter what state the place is in, safe seat no matter what,Labour won't need to bother much as it's theirs, Tories won't bother as they know they won't get in, . And you are blaming the Tories for changing the boundaries, it is the elctoral reform society, an idependent group that does it. www.electoral-reform.org.uk/governanceYou're missing the point Tory Boy! The boundaries are indeed set independently but the number of seats e.g. 650 or 600 or even 50 is set by parliament! Parliament isn't independent! It's run by the Tories! The reduction in the number of seats means bigger constituencies and this means more outlying, Conservative areas get added into many seats! Therefore, the number of marginals will decrease. Therefore, to argue for voters to change their Labour votes in Stoke Central is a con-trick as this only increases the chance of a Conservative government. I repeat, the same Tories telling Labour voters in Stoke Central to vote differently won't be telling Tory voters in Lichfield to do something similar! As for Heath and Thatcher, Thatcher took Cabinet collective responsibility for the decision to take free school milk off children! If she disagreed with it so much she could have resigned! I'm not a Tory Boy, so keep insults away please, always a sign you've lost a debate. The boundaries commission, 1 each in england, Scotland, Wales and Northern ireland report every 5 years to the Government on potential changes, the next one is due in 2018. Why are you getting so het up about the number of constituencies, in the Blair years it rose to 659 before it was reduced to 646 in 2005, they are always changing to match the population changes, it's always going up and down, we should be glad that there aren't so many MP's leaching off the system. Parliament is independent, it's run by a governement from MP's which is voted in by the electorate, MP's can vote against bill's if they do not like them, and it's current speaker is a labour MP. If people from Lichfield come on here moaning that the place is a dump and are fed up with nothing happening then maybe I would say something, but they aren't are they, the thread title is about Stoke on trent, not Lichfield
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 10, 2017 16:28:22 GMT
The point I was making was that Thatcher tried to stop it but was over ruled by her boss, the PM, so your accusations on Thatcher are wrong. But please answer me this one - why didn't the labour government re-introduce it when they came back to power or even means test and increase money to it like Thatcher did?You have gone off on a tangent on the seats, I wasn't on about seats being reduced, just that nobody gives a flying fuck about SToke if it's a safe seat no matter what state the place is in, safe seat no matter what,Labour won't need to bother much as it's theirs, Tories won't bother as they know they won't get in, . And you are blaming the Tories for changing the boundaries, it is the elctoral reform society, an idependent group that does it. www.electoral-reform.org.uk/governanceYou are wasting your breath mate. That Labour were the 1st to remove free school milk is a bit like how it was Labour who introduced university tuition fees and it was Labour who introduced privatisation into the NHS. Anyone thinking of voting Labour wants poking with a big stick. They've done sweet FA for this area for decades and decades and decades and you have imbeciles queueing up to support them. At least the Tories support their voting heartlands (Suffolk) where as we've been taken for granted for faaaaaaaaaaaaar too long. Vote Labour for more of the same. It's the same when they keep quoting Thatcher killed off manufacturing, and have to keep reminding them that it was under the Blair years that it was really decimated.
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Feb 10, 2017 16:50:59 GMT
You're missing the point Tory Boy! The boundaries are indeed set independently but the number of seats e.g. 650 or 600 or even 50 is set by parliament! Parliament isn't independent! It's run by the Tories! The reduction in the number of seats means bigger constituencies and this means more outlying, Conservative areas get added into many seats! Therefore, the number of marginals will decrease. Therefore, to argue for voters to change their Labour votes in Stoke Central is a con-trick as this only increases the chance of a Conservative government. I repeat, the same Tories telling Labour voters in Stoke Central to vote differently won't be telling Tory voters in Lichfield to do something similar! As for Heath and Thatcher, Thatcher took Cabinet collective responsibility for the decision to take free school milk off children! If she disagreed with it so much she could have resigned! I'm not a Tory Boy, so keep insults away please, always a sign you've lost a debate. The boundaries commission, 1 each in england, Scotland, Wales and Northern ireland report every 5 years to the Government on potential changes, the next one is due in 2018. Why are you getting so het up about the number of constituencies, in the Blair years it rose to 659 before it was reduced to 646 in 2005, they are always changing to match the population changes, it's always going up and down, we should be glad that there aren't so many MP's leaching off the system. Parliament is independent, it's run by a governement from MP's which is voted in by the electorate, MP's can vote against bill's if they do not like them, and it's current speaker is a labour MP. If people from Lichfield come on here moaning that the place is a dump and are fed up with nothing happening then maybe I would say something, but they aren't are they, the thread title is about Stoke on trent, not Lichfield Yes, you are a Tory Boy! I notice that you're ex R.N. so I'm not surprised by your moronic right wing politics! As for facts:1. The Speaker is a former Conservative not Labour M.P. 2. If the number of seats matched population changes they would be increasing not decreasing. 3.The Boundaries Commission are basing their seats on a register which excludes millions of voters, many of them students, poor and Labour voters. The Electoral Commission has warned the government about this! Indeed, the Tories are trialling photo I.D. which many people won't have! But parliament isn't independent, it has a Conservative majority. Haven't you noticed that M/s May and her government are all Conservatives? It's wrong for Lichfield people to come on here moaning about Stoke but perfectly acceptable for Northwich people to do just that! Tory Boy hypocrisy to go with your Tory Boy ignorance!
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Feb 10, 2017 16:55:20 GMT
You are wasting your breath mate. That Labour were the 1st to remove free school milk is a bit like how it was Labour who introduced university tuition fees and it was Labour who introduced privatisation into the NHS. Anyone thinking of voting Labour wants poking with a big stick. They've done sweet FA for this area for decades and decades and decades and you have imbeciles queueing up to support them. At least the Tories support their voting heartlands (Suffolk) where as we've been taken for granted for faaaaaaaaaaaaar too long. Vote Labour for more of the same. It's the same when they keep quoting Thatcher killed off manufacturing, and have to keep reminding them that it was under the Blair years that it was really decimated. If I remember the data from the last time we had this debate the decline in manufacturing was no more steep under Blair than Thatcher. When you consider, the increase in automation and the increasing impact of globalisation during the post Thatcher period it says a lot about the self induced two recessions Mrs Thatcher subjected the country to!
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Feb 10, 2017 18:10:28 GMT
I'm not a Tory Boy, so keep insults away please, always a sign you've lost a debate. The boundaries commission, 1 each in england, Scotland, Wales and Northern ireland report every 5 years to the Government on potential changes, the next one is due in 2018. Why are you getting so het up about the number of constituencies, in the Blair years it rose to 659 before it was reduced to 646 in 2005, they are always changing to match the population changes, it's always going up and down, we should be glad that there aren't so many MP's leaching off the system. Parliament is independent, it's run by a governement from MP's which is voted in by the electorate, MP's can vote against bill's if they do not like them, and it's current speaker is a labour MP. If people from Lichfield come on here moaning that the place is a dump and are fed up with nothing happening then maybe I would say something, but they aren't are they, the thread title is about Stoke on trent, not Lichfield Yes, you are a Tory Boy! I notice that you're ex R.N. so I'm not surprised by your moronic right wing politics! As for facts:1. The Speaker is a former Conservative not Labour M.P. 2. If the number of seats matched population changes they would be increasing not decreasing. 3.The Boundaries Commission are basing their seats on a register which excludes millions of voters, many of them students, poor and Labour voters. The Electoral Commission has warned the government about this! Indeed, the Tories are trialling photo I.D. which many people won't have! But parliament isn't independent, it has a Conservative majority. Haven't you noticed that M/s May and her government are all Conservatives? It's wrong for Lichfield people to come on here moaning about Stoke but perfectly acceptable for Northwich people to do just that! Tory Boy hypocrisy to go with your Tory Boy ignorance! I see you're making more friends again Cockers
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Feb 10, 2017 19:14:42 GMT
I'm not a Tory Boy, so keep insults away please, always a sign you've lost a debate. The boundaries commission, 1 each in england, Scotland, Wales and Northern ireland report every 5 years to the Government on potential changes, the next one is due in 2018. Why are you getting so het up about the number of constituencies, in the Blair years it rose to 659 before it was reduced to 646 in 2005, they are always changing to match the population changes, it's always going up and down, we should be glad that there aren't so many MP's leaching off the system. Parliament is independent, it's run by a governement from MP's which is voted in by the electorate, MP's can vote against bill's if they do not like them, and it's current speaker is a labour MP. If people from Lichfield come on here moaning that the place is a dump and are fed up with nothing happening then maybe I would say something, but they aren't are they, the thread title is about Stoke on trent, not Lichfield Yes, you are a Tory Boy! I notice that you're ex R.N. so I'm not surprised by your moronic right wing politics! As for facts:1. The Speaker is a former Conservative not Labour M.P. 2. If the number of seats matched population changes they would be increasing not decreasing. 3.The Boundaries Commission are basing their seats on a register which excludes millions of voters, many of them students, poor and Labour voters. The Electoral Commission has warned the government about this! Indeed, the Tories are trialling photo I.D. which many people won't have! But parliament isn't independent, it has a Conservative majority. Haven't you noticed that M/s May and her government are all Conservatives? It's wrong for Lichfield people to come on here moaning about Stoke but perfectly acceptable for Northwich people to do just that! Tory Boy hypocrisy to go with your Tory Boy ignorance! The number of seats are being cut to cut costs and all came out of the expenses scandal if my memory serves me right. The boundaries commission always have a cut off point, the work done was done based on that if that's thrown out and you start again in a year or two years time the data you're working with will be just as out of date as it is now, any changes get picked up in the next review as they always do. The tories are trailing voter ID and not just photo ID but also utility bills, mobile phone bills etc seems fair enough Labour have been trailing voter fraud for years
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 10, 2017 19:38:10 GMT
It's the same when they keep quoting Thatcher killed off manufacturing, and have to keep reminding them that it was under the Blair years that it was really decimated. If I remember the data from the last time we had this debate the decline in manufacturing was no more steep under Blair than Thatcher. When you consider, the increase in automation and the increasing impact of globalisation during the post Thatcher period it says a lot about the self induced two recessions Mrs Thatcher subjected the country to! just check the figures from the ons that will prove it
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 10, 2017 19:46:17 GMT
I'm not a Tory Boy, so keep insults away please, always a sign you've lost a debate. The boundaries commission, 1 each in england, Scotland, Wales and Northern ireland report every 5 years to the Government on potential changes, the next one is due in 2018. Why are you getting so het up about the number of constituencies, in the Blair years it rose to 659 before it was reduced to 646 in 2005, they are always changing to match the population changes, it's always going up and down, we should be glad that there aren't so many MP's leaching off the system. Parliament is independent, it's run by a governement from MP's which is voted in by the electorate, MP's can vote against bill's if they do not like them, and it's current speaker is a labour MP. If people from Lichfield come on here moaning that the place is a dump and are fed up with nothing happening then maybe I would say something, but they aren't are they, the thread title is about Stoke on trent, not Lichfield Yes, you are a Tory Boy! I notice that you're ex R.N. so I'm not surprised by your moronic right wing politics! As for facts:1. The Speaker is a former Conservative not Labour M.P. 2. If the number of seats matched population changes they would be increasing not decreasing. 3.The Boundaries Commission are basing their seats on a register which excludes millions of voters, many of them students, poor and Labour voters. The Electoral Commission has warned the government about this! Indeed, the Tories are trialling photo I.D. which many people won't have! But parliament isn't independent, it has a Conservative majority. Haven't you noticed that M/s May and her government are all Conservatives? It's wrong for Lichfield people to come on here moaning about Stoke but perfectly acceptable for Northwich people to do just that! Tory Boy hypocrisy to go with your Tory Boy ignorance! if you cant have a debate without slandering then its time you fooked off here. As I said before, Im not a tory boy, I have voted for different parties, yes I dont live in Stoke anymore, some of my family still do, 1 is a labour councillor and was a mayor in 2015/16, and was on the selection panel to select ruth smeeth, so I do have a bit of insight of things. 1 of my other siblings was an independent councillor, but moved away from Stoke last year. Apologies bercow was/is a tory, I had betty's party in my mind.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Feb 10, 2017 19:48:21 GMT
Come off it, as soon as Labour introduced uni fees of £3k per year, everyone knew they would only go one way. One of the few areas that has never benefited from a sweetheart deal is us, so voting labour or tory will make zero difference to the local area. Sure the tories will do nothing to support the local economy but labour never have either. So forgive me if I give all of them the finger and hopefully if enough others do we might start to get somewhere. The single worse domestic decision by Blair. Under the Socialist tag line of Education Education Education he all but privatised the higher education system. Funding was cut so institutes were forced to put bum's on seats by selling degree places. Educational entry levels were lowered. Millions of 18 year old's thinking they should go to Uni for a better job resulted in millions of 21 year old's with 30 grands worth of debt around their neck and a 2:2 being the minimum to stack shelves at Tesco's. I hired a car a few weeks ago and the guy from there who dropped me off when I returned the car was on a graduate recruitment scheme no doubt with a sizeable student loan to boot.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Feb 10, 2017 19:54:25 GMT
Yes, you are a Tory Boy! I notice that you're ex R.N. so I'm not surprised by your moronic right wing politics! As for facts:1. The Speaker is a former Conservative not Labour M.P. 2. If the number of seats matched population changes they would be increasing not decreasing. 3.The Boundaries Commission are basing their seats on a register which excludes millions of voters, many of them students, poor and Labour voters. The Electoral Commission has warned the government about this! Indeed, the Tories are trialling photo I.D. which many people won't have! But parliament isn't independent, it has a Conservative majority. Haven't you noticed that M/s May and her government are all Conservatives? It's wrong for Lichfield people to come on here moaning about Stoke but perfectly acceptable for Northwich people to do just that! Tory Boy hypocrisy to go with your Tory Boy ignorance! I see you're making more friends again Cockers How to make enemies and influence nobody
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 10, 2017 20:00:24 GMT
The single worse domestic decision by Blair. Under the Socialist tag line of Education Education Education he all but privatised the higher education system. Funding was cut so institutes were forced to put bum's on seats by selling degree places. Educational entry levels were lowered. Millions of 18 year old's thinking they should go to Uni for a better job resulted in millions of 21 year old's with 30 grands worth of debt around their neck and a 2:2 being the minimum to stack shelves at Tesco's. I hired a car a few weeks ago and the guy from there who dropped me off when I returned the car was on a graduate recruitment scheme no doubt with a sizeable student loan to boot. Sounds like "Enterprise"...my son has a Law degree and that's the scheme he is on.....mind you he loves cars and it seems a good company to work for...so far he loves his job..a mixture of admin and driving plus a pathway to make progress....in today's climate the employer can be choosey
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 10, 2017 22:58:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Feb 11, 2017 0:25:17 GMT
Yes, you are a Tory Boy! I notice that you're ex R.N. so I'm not surprised by your moronic right wing politics! As for facts:1. The Speaker is a former Conservative not Labour M.P. 2. If the number of seats matched population changes they would be increasing not decreasing. 3.The Boundaries Commission are basing their seats on a register which excludes millions of voters, many of them students, poor and Labour voters. The Electoral Commission has warned the government about this! Indeed, the Tories are trialling photo I.D. which many people won't have! But parliament isn't independent, it has a Conservative majority. Haven't you noticed that M/s May and her government are all Conservatives? It's wrong for Lichfield people to come on here moaning about Stoke but perfectly acceptable for Northwich people to do just that! Tory Boy hypocrisy to go with your Tory Boy ignorance! if you cant have a debate without slandering then its time you fooked off here. As I said before, Im not a tory boy, I have voted for different parties, yes I dont live in Stoke anymore, some of my family still do, 1 is a labour councillor and was a mayor in 2015/16, and was on the selection panel to select ruth smeeth, so I do have a bit of insight of things. 1 of my other siblings was an independent councillor, but moved away from Stoke last year. Apologies bercow was/is a tory, I had betty's party in my mind. Nice to see you realised Bercow is and always has been a Conservative! As for you not being a Tory..if it quacks like a duck it is a duck!
|
|