UK General Discussion

[freefair]

Why? because he's got opinions and views you disagree with, that are on the other side of the political spectrum? Jeez.

[Leftbehind]

That and exploiting the desperate conditions for workers here, by using unpaid internships or rather creating phoney positions and then plagiarising the submissions he got for his books. Just another hypocritical capitalist scumbag, all in all.

[You kip if you want to...]

Tom Watson resigns over Falkirk. Nips any suggestion that it's to undermine EdM in the bud.

http://labourlist.org/2013/07/tom-watson-resigns-from-the-shadow-cabinet/

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This basically just seems to be - incompetent - branch stacking. Not that I'd defend branch stacking or anything (it's really not groovy at all), but, eh.

[afleitch]

If anything it's a reflection on Labour's leadership (now that they officially have one) in Scotland which is...more than wanting.

[You kip if you want to...]

Miliband HQ have been pushing for a 'clause 4 moment' since day one. This is it.

The unions'll grin and bare it, they elected the bloke at the end of the day, because who else are they gonna jump behind, the Tories? the Liberals? ... Respect?

[Leftbehind]

Well they don't have to jump behind the existing options. What's the point jumping behind a bloke itching to symbolically attack you? I mean, they jumped behind Ed because the alternative was David.

But that's largely devil's advocate - I don't think the unions will depart, either. Although I have to laugh, you'd think selection stitch-ups were a new thing the way Labour HQ have reacted - perhaps it's more because of who's doing it.

[You kip if you want to...]

I think what all sides, especially the Tories, forget is that for the vast majority of voters, it's really a case of 'Len McWho?'.

[Leftbehind]

Well it suits them enormously if their first introduction to him for many is rigging Labour internal elections, and it risks - with days of coverage over it and escalation in a bid to appear tough - ever more likely to be. 

[You kip if you want to...]

A question I've been trying to mull over for the past few days that I'm sure you lot can try and answer for me:

With such a massive drop-off for the LibDems since the election, what is the "image" of a stereotypical Liberal Democrat voter in their remaining 8-12% base? What sections of society remain (relatively) strong for them?

We, of course, know (generally) what kind of people the Liberals have lost, but who's left still voting for them?

[Silent Hunter]

Lord Prescott quits Privy Council over press regulation procedures

[Leftbehind]

A question I've been trying to mull over for the past few days that I'm sure you lot can try and answer for me:

With such a massive drop-off for the LibDems since the election, what is the "image" of a stereotypical Liberal Democrat voter in their remaining 8-12% base? What sections of society remain (relatively) strong for them?

We, of course, know (generally) what kind of people the Liberals have lost, but who's left still voting for them?

English afleitch's.

[You kip if you want to...]

Seems to be a collective "WTF!?" aimed at the Guardian after their antics on the unions story a few days ago.

[You kip if you want to...]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23180965

Dave's KRudd moment?

[Leftbehind]

Seems to be a collective "WTF!?" aimed at the Guardian after their antics on the unions story a few days ago.

Which turn out to be true...

So Ed's effectively diluting union and members influence (going around the unions via opt-in and bringing in primaries).

[Leftbehind]

Another hugely unpopular privatisation that in all likelihood won't get reversed. Hard not to despair.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Another hugely unpopular privatisation that in all likelihood won't get reversed. Hard not to despair.

It's not as if government mints make real money these days.  Still. privatization only makes sense if the government is to going to have competition in coin-making.

[freefair]

Another hugely unpopular privatisation that in all likelihood won't get reversed. Hard not to despair.

They all start out unpopular, but apart from Gas and Rail, where there's either no competition or consumer inertia/oligopolies and, they have been obviously good and popular choices with little to no bad side effects. Most of them are now seen to be completely normal (ie BT, BA ThomasCook, Jaguar (which will cause a boom in Wolverhampton!!),Corus, Gleneagles Hotel, Pickfords removals). I don't see Royal Mail being much different, as it has lots of competition and room for manouvre, and lots of incentives to co-operate and compete with others for best and/or cheapest service. Unless your idea of socialism is to prevent large private businesses from even existing, or to satick up for many of the incompetent postpersons they are compelled to employ, I don't see the practical objection. And I'm no Burkean Tory, so I'm not bothered if they replace the Queen's head.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I... er... wouldn't include Corus on a list of supposedly successful privatisations if I were you... the privatisation of steel has been almost as disastrous as the privatisation of coal (back in the news at the moment, of course) and that was supposed to be disastrous...

In any event, any list of questionable privatisations should include water (which is a public scandal, frankly) as well as the entire energy sector.

Anyway, there are a lot of surprisingly remote rural areas in the UK. I grew up in one (not far from where you live, actually). Places like that are going to be so screwed by this.

[Leftbehind]

Another hugely unpopular privatisation that in all likelihood won't get reversed. Hard not to despair.

They all start out unpopular, but apart from Gas and Rail, where there's either no competition or consumer inertia/oligopolies and, they have been obviously good and popular choices with little to no bad side effects. Most of them are now seen to be completely normal (ie BT, BA ThomasCook, Jaguar (which will cause a boom in Wolverhampton!!),Corus, Gleneagles Hotel, Pickfords removals). I don't see Royal Mail being much different, as it has lots of competition and room for manouvre, and lots of incentives to co-operate and compete with others for best and/or cheapest service. Unless your idea of socialism is to prevent large private businesses from even existing, or to satick up for many of the incompetent postpersons they are compelled to employ, I don't see the practical objection. And I'm no Burkean Tory, so I'm not bothered if they replace the Queen's head.

Well firstly I am one of those socialists, but the following poll results:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

...shows you fans of privatisation are no more representative of UK opinion. Certainly shows the public are far from settled on either BT or BA, and generally favour nationalisation of our services, competition or no - remarkable, since no major party has been making the case for it for decades. Of course, it's not to keep right-wing bollocks like compelling keeping on incompetent postpersons, but because they know fine well that their services will inevitably suffer and prices will rise when the profiteering capitalist vampires get their teeth into it.

I... er... wouldn't include Corus on a list of supposedly successful privatisations if I were you... the privatisation of steel has been almost as disastrous as the privatisation of coal (back in the news at the moment, of course) and that was supposed to be disastrous...

In any event, any list of questionable privatisations should include water (which is a public scandal, frankly) as well as the entire energy sector.

Anyway, there are a lot of surprisingly remote rural areas in the UK. I grew up in one (not far from where you live, actually). Places like that are going to be so screwed by this.

Yeah, Corus has been an unmitigated disaster. But more importantly that latter point is spot on - what's the betting the rural hard-to-reach areas either become devoid of a service, or more likely the government will inevitably keep RM subsidised for precisely that, but now with all the profitable areas removed that used to subsidise them, ending up costing the UK exchequer more than when it was nationalised? Just like we see with the subsidies for buses and trains.

[afleitch]

ICM has Labour and the Tories neck and neck at 36 each with UKIP down to 7. Could it be over for the UKIP-fest?

[You kip if you want to...]

UKIP at 7 seems... odd.

[YL]

UKIP at 7 seems... odd.

Yes, hard to believe really for the current situation.  Though as a prediction of the next election result this poll may not be unreasonable.

[afleitch]

UKIP at 7 seems... odd.

Yes, hard to believe really for the current situation.  Though as a prediction of the next election result this poll may not be unreasonable.

It's ICM. Whether it's still the gold standard is up for question, but it's still a strong company. I expect a Tory victory in 2015, but that's just me.

[YL]

Unfortunately I don't think there is a "gold standard" at the moment.  ICM seem prone to wild swings (recent UKIP figures being a case in point) and have had some odd results, in particular a high BNP figure in their May poll apparently caused by overweighting one respondent, which is something which is going to cause wild swings.

I'm not necessarily a YouGov fan, but they're good for trends simply because they produce so much data.  And they show a slight UKIP decline (with the Tories benefitting) but nothing like what ICM show, and Labour still well ahead if not as high as I'd like them to be.