UK Politics

[steviewevie]

Just now, LJS said:

Did the Labour manifesto mention the 2cbc?

errr...I don;t know but it was made clear when anyone asked that they weren't scrapping it.

[steviewevie]

but they didn't say they would abolish the monarchy either.

[steviewevie]

4 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

errr...I don;t know but it was made clear when anyone asked that they weren't scrapping it.

or at least they weren't until they could afford it or something.

[kaosmark2]

23 minutes ago, LJS said:

It's ok to discipline MPs for voting in favour of a measure to partly address child poverty, because ... No idea.

 

Can someone help me?

 

Sir Kid Starver is wanting to assert his authority on Labour backbenchers.

[steviewevie]

4 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

 

Sir Kid Starver is wanting to assert his authority on Labour backbenchers.

yes, he literally starves children, is a massive racist, homophobe and transphobe, and supports genocide.

He's basically satan.

[LJS]

8 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

yes, he literally starves children, is a massive racist, homophobe and transphobe, and supports genocide.

He's basically satan.

Wouldn't go quite that far.

He is only a medium sized racist & doesn't actively support genocide, merely condones it.

And I don't think he's really Satan just one of his minor acolytes.

Edited July 23 by LJS

[steviewevie]

4 minutes ago, LJS said:

Wouldn't go quite that far.

He is only a medium sized racist & doesn't actively support genocide, merely condones it.

And I don't think he's really Satan just one of his minor acolytes.

at least he's not bald.

[kaosmark2]

29 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

yes, he literally starves children, is a massive racist, homophobe and transphobe, and supports genocide.

He's basically satan.

 

The 3-line whip is an authoritarian move designed to assert control and shut down rebellion early. It's entirely a political move.

 

However, he's doing it regarding a policy that is shown to lead to kids going hungry. This is evidenced, with all sorts of both direct and indirect statistics, including things like average child height in the UK.

 

I think I've been pretty fairly critical of Starmer? I've not compared him to Trump, or Salmond. I've said he inspires me less than Blair, and I have issues with how he handles a lot of stuff, both on policy and political games.

 

I don't think Starmer is actively homophobic or transphobic, in the way that Streeting or Duffield are. I just think he's prepared to let vulnerable people suffer in his pursuit of power. He does the corporate propaganda around Pride, then he turns around and says bigoted stuff so as to appease bigots. He fence-sits on those issues and it pisses everyone except his fanatical supporters off.

 

I've never accused him of supporting genocide. I have and will accuse him of turning an excessively blind eye to it. Like it or not, Israel is a UK ally and will almost certainly remain so. My stance is that the UK should stop supplying weapons to Israel (and Saudi fwiw), until a ceasefire is agreed. Use the political leverage of the alliance and supplies to, at minimum, force Israel to allow aid into Gaza.

 

This straw-manning doesn't do you any favours. I'm not some rabid disappointed Corbynista who thinks ideological purity matters more than getting in government and doing positive things. But one of the ways I defended Starmer to friends, is that getting into govt allows Labour to reduce child poverty. If he's going to call a 3-line whip against that, what's the point of the compromises?

Edited July 23 by kaosmark2

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, kaosmark2 said:

 

The 3-line whip is an authoritarian move designed to assert control and shut down rebellion early. It's entirely a political move.

 

However, he's doing it regarding a policy that is shown to lead to kids going hungry. This is evidenced, with all sorts of both direct and indirect statistics, including things like average child height in the UK.

 

I think I've been pretty fairly critical of Starmer? I've not compared him to Trump, or Salmond. I've said he inspires me less than Blair, and I have issues with how he handles a lot of stuff, both on policy and political games.

 

I don't think Starmer is actively homophobic or transphobic, in the way that Streeting or Duffield are. I just think he's prepared to let vulnerable people suffer in his pursuit of power. He does the corporate propaganda around Pride, then he turns around and says bigoted stuff so as to appease bigots. He fence-sits on those issues and it pisses everyone except his fanatical supporters off.

 

I've never accused him of supporting genocide. I have and will accuse him of turning an excessive blind eye to it. Like it or not, Israel is a UK ally and will almost certainly remain so. My stance is that the UK should stop supplying weapons to Israel (and Saudi fwiw), until a ceasefire is agreed. Use the political leverage of the alliance and supplies to, at minimum, force Israel to allow aid into Gaza.

 

This straw-manning doesn't do you any favours. I'm not some rapid disappointed Corbynista who thinks ideological purity matters more than getting in government and doing positive things. But one of the ways I defended Starmer to friends, is that getting into govt allows Labour to reduce child poverty. If he's going to call a 3-line whip against that, what's the point of the compromises?

woah.

yeah, it is political...and this is what MPs who are rebelling are doing, because they know they aren't going to win.

It is going to get scrapped, everyone knows it, but not yet.

[Neil]

7 hours ago, Nobody Interesting said:

What I said was that we could do it with solar, tidal and wind cheaper and faster and I also said that saying we need to do it while we wait for nuclear is foily when we do not need nuclear at all and that it is expensive.

greens have been blocking the best tidal schemes for the last fifty years, its why we don't have any.

[Neil]

31 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

or at least they weren't until they could afford it or something.

are that snp saying labour should extra tax Scotland to pay for what the scots want?

[kaosmark2]

Just now, steviewevie said:

woah.

yeah, it is political...and this is what MPs who are rebelling are doing, because they know they aren't going to win.

It is going to get scrapped, everyone knows it, but not yet.

 

It's going to get scrapped, but not yet, because Starmer needs to show Labour MPs who got into politics to fight child poverty... that he's boss and they can only fight child poverty when he says they can?

 

Frankly, I don't think this political game does anyone any good, including Starmer. It won't make him look generous and glorious when he "changes his mind" and scraps it in 2 years time. It'll make it look like he finally capitulated. I think it's both a cruel political game to play, and one where him winning it doesn't actually give him any real advantages.

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, Neil said:

are that snp saying labour should extra tax Scotland to pay for what the scots want?

I think we should sell it

[steviewevie]

Just now, kaosmark2 said:

 

It's going to get scrapped, but not yet, because Starmer needs to show Labour MPs who got into politics to fight child poverty... that he's boss and they can only fight child poverty when he says they can?

 

Frankly, I don't think this political game does anyone any good, including Starmer. It won't make him look generous and glorious when he "changes his mind" and scraps it in 2 years time. It'll make it look like he finally capitulated. I think it's both a cruel political game to play, and one where him winning it doesn't actually give him any real advantages.

No, because they haven't even done their budget yet.

[Nobody Interesting]

56 minutes ago, LJS said:

It's ok to discipline MPs for voting in favour of a measure to partly address child poverty, because ... No idea.

 

Can someone help me?

 

Just another reason the UK system needs change. It is pathetic that such action is taken on anything let alone trying to stop kids going hungry.

We are told that constituency MP's are there to represent their constinuents so we cannot have PR that does not have that............... are we saying that people in 412 constituencies want kids to go hungry?

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

Just another reason the UK system needs change. It is pathetic that such action is taken on anything let alone trying to stop kids going hungry.

We are told that constituency MP's are there to represent their constinuents so we cannot have PR that does not have that............... are we saying that people in 412 constituencies want kids to go hungry?

party over starving children every time.

[steviewevie]

vote happening now. Bet there isn't any whip removing or anything in the end.

[Nobody Interesting]

3 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

party over starving children every time.

 

Haven't you got lots of reading to do as well as sorting lots of questions on reading others have done?

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

vote happening now. Bet there isn't any whip removing or anything in the end.

or it isn't yet...just put bbc parliament on and haven't a scooby. Need Ozanne.

[steviewevie]

ok, the last amendment was one tabled by the tories on defence spending. Fortunately that didn't win otherwise we'd have to spend more on guns and not poor children.

[Neil]

18 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I think we should sell it

i've got sixpence.(too much:P )

[Nobody Interesting]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

stick it up your whole.

 

I see your ability to debate is as low as it usually is.

 

Have  a nice time talking to yourself on here.

[steviewevie]

oh no. I think the missus wants to go to the trafford centre. I'll have to tell her I need to wait for the results of the vote for amendment D of the king's speech.

[LJS]

9 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

oh no. I think the missus wants to go to the trafford centre. I'll have to tell her I need to wait for the results of the vote for amendment D of the king's speech.

Is she not allowed out on her own?

[LJS]

Got it wrong earlier. Starmer is Satan.