|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Jul 8, 2024 18:19:13 GMT
He’d probably be one of the better candidates Is he still an MP? I thought he regained his seat? |
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jul 8, 2024 18:25:06 GMT
He’d probably be one of the better candidates Is he still an MP? I believe so ? |
|
|
|
Post by frasier37 on Jul 8, 2024 18:26:36 GMT
Quick extinction hopefully
|
|
|
|
Post by Olgrligm on Jul 8, 2024 21:44:05 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Jul 8, 2024 23:36:21 GMT
To stand as a candidate in a UK Parliamentary General Election you need to be at least 18 years old and: a British citizen a citizen of the Republic of Ireland a citizen of a commonwealth country who does not require leave to enter or remain in the UK, or has indefinite leave to remain in the UK You also need a numberof signatures from people living within the constituency too. If this ends up being true then surely it also brings into question about more wide spread electoral fraud too? If a fake person can register to stand - can't they also potentially register to vote? Surely registering to stand should be a more rigorous process than registering to vote? |
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jul 8, 2024 23:36:57 GMT
Oh and some of this is with Jonathan Reynolds the new Business Secretary. He is coming in to devise a 10 year plan to incent companies to hire from the UK rather than more cheaply from overseas. But before his feet have touched the ground the Unite Union have dragged him off to Port Talbot and told him to ask Rachel Reeves for a million quid a day to save 1,800 jobs at the iconic steel works.Do you have any links to this as my understanding is the complete opposite? The Conservative Government had pledged £500M to Tata who would invest another £750M to build 2 Arc furnaces This in turn would shut down the Blast Furnaces at Port Talbot with the loss of 2,800 Jobs and of course the actual Production of Steel. Arc Furnaces only recycle Scrap Steel. My understanding was that Reynolds was prepared to honour the £500M to Tata but wanted to talk to Tata about building a DRI Steel Production with UK Investment which is carbon friendly and does actually Produce Steel, but I guess you know better. There obviously is the other consideration that the Chinese owned BRITISH STEEL also has two blast furnaces which will also need closure if Net Zero Targets are to be met which is why the Labour Manifesto contained £2.5Bn of supports for Steel Industry It's a bit of a dilemma when you sell off British Industry to India and China I guess It's also possibly of interest to the dwindling Car and Aerospace Industry in UK whether it may rely on which quality of Steel, recycled or raw.for their continued production in UK I'm surprised out resident expert on Loss making Steel Industry and Environmentalist hasn't given his opinion yet. |
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 9, 2024 6:52:37 GMT
Any word or sighting of Gullis yet?
|
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jul 9, 2024 6:57:35 GMT
Any word or sighting of Gullis yet? None...  |
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 9, 2024 7:03:55 GMT
Applying to be Farage's personal gong scourer, maybe.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jul 9, 2024 8:09:34 GMT
Oh and some of this is with Jonathan Reynolds the new Business Secretary. He is coming in to devise a 10 year plan to incent companies to hire from the UK rather than more cheaply from overseas. But before his feet have touched the ground the Unite Union have dragged him off to Port Talbot and told him to ask Rachel Reeves for a million quid a day to save 1,800 jobs at the iconic steel works.Do you have any links to this as my understanding is the complete opposite? The Conservative Government had pledged £500M to Tata who would invest another £750M to build 2 Arc furnaces This in turn would shut down the Blast Furnaces at Port Talbot with the loss of 2,800 Jobs and of course the actual Production of Steel. Arc Furnaces only recycle Scrap Steel. My understanding was that Reynolds was prepared to honour the £500M to Tata but wanted to talk to Tata about building a DRI Steel Production with UK Investment which is carbon friendly and does actually Produce Steel, but I guess you know better. There obviously is the other consideration that the Chinese owned BRITISH STEEL also has two blast furnaces which will also need closure if Net Zero Targets are to be met which is why the Labour Manifesto contained £2.5Bn of supports for Steel Industry It's a bit of a dilemma when you sell off British Industry to India and China I guess It's also possibly of interest to the dwindling Car and Aerospace Industry in UK whether it may rely on which quality of Steel, recycled or raw.for their continued production in UK I'm surprised out resident expert on Loss making Steel Industry and Environmentalist hasn't given his opinion yet. I absolutely don't know any better, you have far more knowledge of the details than me. I just saw the Unite lady on the news say Reynolds needs to get his sorry arse down to Port Talbot to save the last remaining 1,800 steel jobs before they are gone! And some locals looking hopeful that he can and will. |
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Jul 9, 2024 8:10:44 GMT
Any word or sighting of Gullis yet? He was on Radio Stoke yesterday, not his normal shouty self, he sounded almost human 🙂 No chance of him deflecting to Reform he says, determined to build back up the Tories and have another go next time around, sadly he's staying in the SOT area 😕 Reckons he's going to 'dust off his CV' and see if anyone will employ him. Wouldn't have thought he'd need employment seeing as he's apparently worth £5 million 🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jul 9, 2024 8:21:13 GMT
Any word or sighting of Gullis yet? He was on Radio Stoke yesterday, not his normal shouty self, he sounded almost human 🙂 No chance of him deflecting to Reform he says, determined to build back up the Tories and have another go next time around, sadly he's staying in the SOT area 😕 Reckons he's going to 'dust off his CV' and see if anyone will employ him. Wouldn't have thought he'd need employment seeing as he's apparently worth £5 million 🤔  |
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Jul 9, 2024 8:45:57 GMT
The Tories still gained a quarter of the vote - they won't be going extinct and people shouldn't wish for it really. There are much worse options that could take its place than the Cameron/BoJo/Sunak version of the Conservative Party which despite rhetoric, is quite centrist really.
As for where they go now, there will be some mileage in 'net zero' migration I suspect without going full on racist but their prospects will largely be down to whether Labour actually make any difference over the next 5 years. A labour landslide in seats but not a landslide of votes - there will be a very high number of marginals in 2029.
|
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Jul 9, 2024 9:04:14 GMT
I wonder why Cameron has resigned?
|
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jul 9, 2024 9:07:47 GMT
I wonder why Cameron has resigned? No idea - but I hope the corruption commissioner's remit includes Greensill... |
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jul 9, 2024 9:10:21 GMT
I wonder why Cameron has resigned? Because he would have only been a Shadow of his former self. |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jul 9, 2024 9:19:10 GMT
The Tories still gained a quarter of the vote - they won't be going extinct and people shouldn't wish for it really. There are much worse options that could take its place than the Cameron/BoJo/Sunak version of the Conservative Party which despite rhetoric, is quite centrist really. As for where they go now, there will be some mileage in 'net zero' migration I suspect without going full on racist but their prospects will largely be down to whether Labour actually make any difference over the next 5 years. A labour landslide in seats but not a landslide of votes - there will be a very high number of marginals in 2029. IMO I wonder how many of their voters really believed in them? I wonder how many were just " diehard Tories", feared Labour or were so rich they were out of touch, unaffected. I don't think the Tories should presume they have a divine right to rule. I think if we had reelected them it would have been a disaster. They'd ran out of ideas a few years ago....moving forward would have been an embarrassment imo. The next 5 years are going to be " challenging " at the very least, nationally, environmentally, globally, culturally, economically, conflict....much more so than recent years imo. The biggest change we needed was/ is electoral reform |
|
|
|
Post by adri2008 on Jul 9, 2024 9:34:43 GMT
The Tories still gained a quarter of the vote - they won't be going extinct and people shouldn't wish for it really. There are much worse options that could take its place than the Cameron/BoJo/Sunak version of the Conservative Party which despite rhetoric, is quite centrist really. As for where they go now, there will be some mileage in 'net zero' migration I suspect without going full on racist but their prospects will largely be down to whether Labour actually make any difference over the next 5 years. A labour landslide in seats but not a landslide of votes - there will be a very high number of marginals in 2029. IMO I wonder how many of their voters really believed in them? I wonder how many were just " diehard Tories", feared Labour or were so rich they were out of touch, unaffected. I don't think the Tories should presume they have a divine right to rule. I think if we had reelected them it would have been a disaster. They'd ran out of ideas a few years ago....moving forward would have been an embarrassment imo. The next 5 years are going to be " challenging " at the very least, nationally, environmentally, globally, culturally, economically, conflict....much more so than recent years imo. The biggest change we needed was/ is electoral reform There'll be a core level of support who will vote for the Conservatives by default without paying too much attention to policy (same with Labour). Personally I prioritise economic competence when choosing how to vote - with a young family, mortgage etc. I don't want some sort of economic 'experiment' whether it comes from the left or the right. However it was very clear that Labour were winning this election so I chose to vote for my current MP (a Tory) as he'd done well on the local issues he originally campaigned on so I suspect some of the vote will have been based on local decisions. I doubt many people felt it was a good idea for the Conservative government to continue based on anything rational - it was virtually begging to be put out of its misery. |
|
ian57
Youth Player
Posts: 287
|
Post by ian57 on Jul 9, 2024 9:40:13 GMT
The tories will be back in power in either 5 or 10 years as the country will have had enough of a labour government by then.
That’s the way it has always worked unfortunately.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seymour Beaver on Jul 9, 2024 9:43:35 GMT
Any word or sighting of Gullis yet? Returned to Middle Earth. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jul 9, 2024 9:51:50 GMT
If immigration isn't sorted and radical Islam is allowed to continue growing then Reform isn't going anywhere. Add in a couple of terrorist attacks and they will only get stronger. The only party that can end Reform now is Labour by addressing these issues imo. The Tories have proven that they can't. I guess it depends if immigrants really are causing the cost of living crisis and the fact so many are struggling as Reform’s ideology is based upon. If not, and labour improve public services and make people’s lives better regardless of numbers of immigrants, those people will stop worrying so much about immigration. Immigration wasn’t really that big an issue until the right wing made it an issue to try and achieve Brexit. Bang on the money, excellent post. If Starmer brings down immigration but people's living standards don't improve, then it will have achieved absolutely nothing. Ironically, it's going to be harder for Starmer to actually improve people's living standards, all the while we remain in self imposed exile from the EU, due to the votes of the very people who are attracted by the rhetoric of Farage. As for The Tories themselves, it's going to be extremely difficult for them all the while that Farage is not in their party. Initially, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the grass roots members vote in somebody like Jenrick but whether he would still remain leader come the next election is another thing entirely. At that point, I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised if it was actually Farage himself or we even see a return of Boris Johnson (God forbid). |
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Jul 9, 2024 12:48:04 GMT
Jail for most of the corrupt ones hopefully.
|
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Jul 9, 2024 13:11:04 GMT
The Tories still gained a quarter of the vote - they won't be going extinct and people shouldn't wish for it really. There are much worse options that could take its place than the Cameron/BoJo/Sunak version of the Conservative Party which despite rhetoric, is quite centrist really. As for where they go now, there will be some mileage in 'net zero' migration I suspect without going full on racist but their prospects will largely be down to whether Labour actually make any difference over the next 5 years. A labour landslide in seats but not a landslide of votes - there will be a very high number of marginals in 2029. IMO I wonder how many of their voters really believed in them? I wonder how many were just " diehard Tories", feared Labour or were so rich they were out of touch, unaffected. I don't think the Tories should presume they have a divine right to rule. I think if we had reelected them it would have been a disaster. They'd ran out of ideas a few years ago....moving forward would have been an embarrassment imo. The next 5 years are going to be " challenging " at the very least, nationally, environmentally, globally, culturally, economically, conflict....much more so than recent years imo. The biggest change we needed was/ is electoral reform I'm all for electoral reform generally, but do you not think it could have been a bit of a disaster for this country at this point in time? We really need a focused Government to sort out a hell of a lot of crap across so many Departments. Now I'm not suggesting that we will get that. Time will tell Dont you think we have a better chance of getting that with a Government working to a manifesto from Day 1 though, rather than a cross-party Government that could take months to resolve anything? That would be potentially devastating for this country, surely?. Apologies for going slightly off topic here, but ultimately it could be better for the Tories that they lost so badly (through this system) because they have an opportunity to rip it up and start again and get rid of some real bad influences and dysfunctional elements (if they decide to do so) |
|
|
|
Post by fullmetaljacket on Jul 9, 2024 13:41:14 GMT
When we talk about cutting immigrants are we on about the 30k who come over on boats or the immigrants who come over via the legal routes of education, jobs, etc.
People often say cut immigration but which bit should we be cutting?
|
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jul 9, 2024 13:54:19 GMT
IMO I wonder how many of their voters really believed in them? I wonder how many were just " diehard Tories", feared Labour or were so rich they were out of touch, unaffected. I don't think the Tories should presume they have a divine right to rule. I think if we had reelected them it would have been a disaster. They'd ran out of ideas a few years ago....moving forward would have been an embarrassment imo. The next 5 years are going to be " challenging " at the very least, nationally, environmentally, globally, culturally, economically, conflict....much more so than recent years imo. The biggest change we needed was/ is electoral reform I'm all for electoral reform generally, but do you not think it could have been a bit of a disaster for this country at this point in time? We really need a focused Government to sort out a hell of a lot of crap across so many Departments. Now I'm not suggesting that we will get that. Time will tell Dont you think we have a better chance of getting that with a Government working to a manifesto from Day 1 though, rather than a cross-party Government that could take months to resolve anything? That would be potentially devastating for this country, surely?. Apologies for going slightly off topic here, but ultimately it could be better for the Tories that they lost so badly (through this system) because they have an opportunity to rip it up and start again and get rid of some real bad influences and dysfunctional elements (if they decide to do so) Yes it might have been Spit, I agree....at this time it , as you say, could have been chaos, so perhaps see what Starmer can do first. But ultimately I think parties like the Greens should have a more representative voice. And I agree time will tell. |
|
|
|
Post by Seymour Beaver on Jul 9, 2024 14:06:05 GMT
When we talk about cutting immigrants are we on about the 30k who come over on boats or the immigrants who come over via the legal routes of education, jobs, etc. People often say cut immigration but which bit should we be cutting? 'Immigration' is not a black and white (pun intended) issue. It is multi-dimensional and means different things to different people - an ambiguity all too often exploited for political gain. There is justifiable concern about immigration but without a meaningful debate about workforce planning, skills shortages, birth rates, ageing population, infrastructure, overseas aid budget, commitment to Human Rights amongst others it will not be resolved. 'Immigratikn' is not a stand alone issue. Chucking out arbitary targets like net Zero or circulating misleading videos of angry individuals diminishes the quality of that debate and does nothing to help resolve. |
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Jul 9, 2024 14:29:07 GMT
When we talk about cutting immigrants are we on about the 30k who come over on boats or the immigrants who come over via the legal routes of education, jobs, etc. People often say cut immigration but which bit should we be cutting? both, why should it be one or the other? We've a million people we should be helping to get out of a rut, get trained, a job, housed etc |
|
|
|
Post by fullmetaljacket on Jul 9, 2024 14:59:52 GMT
When we talk about cutting immigrants are we on about the 30k who come over on boats or the immigrants who come over via the legal routes of education, jobs, etc. People often say cut immigration but which bit should we be cutting? both, why should it be one or the other? We've a million people we should be helping to get out of a rut, get trained, a job, housed etc It's a fair response and I see Seymour has articulated above far better than I could. It needs a full discussion that takes into account services, ageing populations, etc. Upskilling of certain professions to make them attractive to the population. I talk here about care and social care as an example, which is where a lot of the legal visas went and which the last regime didn't track properly. |
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Jul 9, 2024 15:27:45 GMT
I'm all for electoral reform generally, but do you not think it could have been a bit of a disaster for this country at this point in time? We really need a focused Government to sort out a hell of a lot of crap across so many Departments. Now I'm not suggesting that we will get that. Time will tell Dont you think we have a better chance of getting that with a Government working to a manifesto from Day 1 though, rather than a cross-party Government that could take months to resolve anything? That would be potentially devastating for this country, surely?. Apologies for going slightly off topic here, but ultimately it could be better for the Tories that they lost so badly (through this system) because they have an opportunity to rip it up and start again and get rid of some real bad influences and dysfunctional elements (if they decide to do so) Yes it might have been Spit, I agree....at this time it , as you say, could have been chaos, so perhaps see what Starmer can do first. But ultimately I think parties like the Greens should have a more representative voice. And I agree time will tell. Why is it assumed a power sharing government will bring chaos and a single party government stability? The Tory/Lib Dem coalition under Cameron and Clegg actually got things done and was perfectly stable - if anything the Lib Dems acted as a much needed moderating influence and stopped the swivel eyed loons on the Tory right causing havoc. It was after the coalition that the wheels fell off and the last single party government with a huge majority under Johnson, Truss and Sunak was utter chaos. There isn't a massive difference between the core values of the Labour Party, Lib Dems the Greens (or for that matter the centerist Tories). If the will is there a coalition government would be a perfectly viable option. |
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jul 9, 2024 16:18:00 GMT
When we talk about cutting immigrants are we on about the 30k who come over on boats or the immigrants who come over via the legal routes of education, jobs, etc. People often say cut immigration but which bit should we be cutting? both, why should it be one or the other? We've a million people we should be helping to get out of a rut, get trained, a job, housed etc I'm not sure I recognise the 1M people but I'm sure it's relevant The problem goes much deeper due to structure of the Economy In UK there are 33M in work there are 11M Retired and 11M Economically Inactive Of the 11M Economically Inactive only *1.5M are Unemployed 2.5M are Students 2.2M are Sick 2.2M are Carers and 1M are early retired *Only 336K have been unemployed for more than a year. I agree that those classified as unemployed should be skills assessed to help back to the workplace But it is obvious that NHS waiting lists have a direct correlation to those Sick and Social Care to those Carers. One can only hope those Students are learning skills that match the workplace requirement. To make matters worse there are 2.5M receiving in work benefits again directly related to Social Care. Ergo reducing NHS Waiting lists, implementing a proper Social Care System and a proper Child Care program would increase the Workforce, Increase Taxes and Reduce Benefits. It's not Fucking Rocket Science, even if it were cost neutral it's the right thing to do. It is often argued that lowering Corporate Tax Rates produces more Tax Revenue or Reganomics as developed by Paul Harvey. I don't think I've ever heard anyone saying lowering Personal Tax Rates might have the same effect as measured on the Laffer Curve where at 0% and 100% you receive nothing. I'm not naive enough to believe that all of the 11M Economically Inactive are really looking for work but you must first look at the low hanging fruit. The more people that are in work, benefits reduce and taxes increase as well as the well being of the person. Freezing Personal Tax Rates out to current projections April 2028 is a disincentive to work for those in work or to encourage others into work Disclaimer: I'm part of the Workshy Retired |
|
