UK Politics

Classic :cool:
 

Attachments

  • FSpeech.jpg
    FSpeech.jpg
    63.2 KB · Views: 261
tomorton said:
Amber Rudd had nowhere left to go, she either wan't in charge of what her department was doing or knew but wanted to conceal it or stupidly thought it didn't matter either way. She did show a burst of determination to deal with the crises affecting members of the Windrush generation but it was too little too late.

She actually had no need to conceal there were deportation targets as these have long been in place under both Conservative and Labour Home Secretaries for years so she had nothing to gain from concealing them. The more likely scenario is that she was just incompetent.

No clear word from Dianne Abbott on what Labour's policy is on the 1 million estimated illegal immigrants.
Click to expand...


Agree with your pov here Tomorton but why bring Labour into it or DA not that I like her or think her fit for purpose :cheesy:

Rudd lied to the committee or inadvertently skewed reply. Either way TM didn't come out and correct her but kept quiet. Ample time for her to say she made an error. Situation is deliberate effort to mislead by both and hide to deflect.

To say Labour are just as incompetent is just playing dirty politics. No change there. :)
 
So have you ditched lib/dem now Atilla and sworn allegiance to jezza ?
 
mike. said:
So have you ditched lib/dem now Atilla and sworn allegiance to jezza ?
Click to expand...

Said so before - I'll vote tactically to get Tories out who are damaging the UK. Never seen such a bad crop.

Still hold the view this Windrush is a TM issue and she shows her true colours.

Who ever conjured up that Windrush system were obviously incompetent nits.

Fell off me chair when I heard their proposition for claiming custom duties and paying back the EU. Simplified system indeed. What a load of utter total rubbish??? I'm stunned and shocked at the level of incompetence.

Politics going bankrupt in UK.


LibDems the last and only hope left to do right by the country ;)
 
Windrush citizens were mistakenly mixed up with illegal immigrants when it came to proving your right to stay, Unfortunately that’s all it was, a mix up.. non have been deported and you got a head on a plate as an apology so alls good isn’t it.
 
Atilla said:
Agree with your pov here Tomorton but why bring Labour into it or DA not that I like her or think her fit for purpose :cheesy:

Rudd lied to the committee or inadvertently skewed reply. Either way TM didn't come out and correct her but kept quiet. Ample time for her to say she made an error. Situation is deliberate effort to mislead by both and hide to deflect.

To say Labour are just as incompetent is just playing dirty politics. No change there. :)
Click to expand...


I brought the deportation targets policy used by Labour Home Secretaries in as it is the truth. Deportation targets are not new and should not be contentious in principle: I support the idea of deportation targets and so do both main parties. I don't say Labour have been incompetent when running the Home Office.

But a minister who doesn't know how her department works and is prepared to talk about a policy (of not using deportation targets) which she has not put in place or checked as in place is an idiot and has to go.


PS: Amber Rudd is also reported as having tried to shift some blame onto her HO officials, as if they were to blame for the results of ministers' policies. As a former local government and civil service official, I can say that if any minister does this, they commit the ultimate crime and have to go sooner rather than later.
 
Last edited:
Local Elections - my summary

Labour lose voters to LibDems
Tories stay about the same
UKIP lose voters to Tories and non-voters
UKIP lose voters to UKIP replacement For Britain
 
UKIP were a one-trick pony, a single-issue lobby group. Farage led them brilliantly in this task but the party could only have become a major parliamentary force if he had formed a new coalition party with Euro-sceptics etc. from the two major parties. UKIP had the chance to supplant the Lib-Dems as the third party. But Farage's ego would never have permitted a partnership. It didn't even allow for the development of successors to the party leader's seat. So he got what he wanted, but maybe much less than he could have achieved. Now he can only shout from the stands like the rest of us.
 
Ooh! Jeremy Corbyn

So, even up against a shambolic, split and rather rudderless government Jezza doesn't make any progress. Says it all !
 
Council elections turns out a draw.

Labour took 1 council from Conservative control, Conservatives took 1 from Labour, Lib Dems took 2 from Conservatives. (from 136 announced results of 150).

Only way this all means anything is if turnout was extraordinarily high, seems unlikely. If turnout is lower than average, you could perhaps conclude people don't think much of English politicians.
 
barjon said:
Does society shape politics or does politics shape society? Bit like like asking if the futures shape the index or does the index shape the futures. :LOL:
Click to expand...

Politics reacts to society which in turn causes a counter-reaction which then provokes a reaction in politics, bit a of a catch 22 ;) Unless they are collecting taxes, in which case politics just does what it wants and society more or less puts up with it, both should be a balancing act.

However for politics to maintain control they must exert control by deception, deflection, force and secrecy, there's no other way they can attempt to control society. We all know it goes on, the game is for politics to keep it hidden, whilst society attempts to find out what they are up to. For that you need transparency, scrutiny and a none-state controlled press, none of which we really have.

However with the advent of modern communications and the internet, the free press cat is out of the bag, it's interesting to see the methods by which the establishment attempts to control it, prompting further changes in society and so on......

It's gone on since Tudor times, just the technology and methods are updated and it's a global phenomenon with much more complexity.
 
Last edited:
Signalcalc said:
Politics reacts to society which in turn causes a counter-reaction which then provokes a reaction in politics, bit a of a catch 22 ;) Unless they are collecting taxes, in which case politics just does what it wants and society more or less puts up with it, both should be a balancing act.

However for politics to maintain control they must exert control by deception, deflection, force and secrecy, there's no other way they can attempt to control society. We all know it goes on, the game is for politics to keep it hidden, whilst society attempts to find out what they are up to. For that you need transparency, scrutiny and a none-state controlled press, none of which we really have.

However with the advent of modern communications and the internet, the free press cat is out of the bag, it's interesting to see the methods by which the establishment attempts to control it, prompting further changes in society and so on......

It's gone on since Tudor times, just the technology and methods are updated and it's a global phenomenon with much more complexity.
Click to expand...

I don’t think politicians attempt to control society. Most try to do what they think is best for society - whilst maybe taking the opportunity to feather their own nests to a greater or lesser degree. Their job is to manage a huge number of people to enable them to live together cheek by Jowl in relative harmony and reasonable prosperity. Not easy.

Nor do I think it’s all done by deception, deflection, force and secrecy. The press delight in exposing such things - as do her majesty’s loyal opposition. That’s their job!
 
barjon this is so naive. maybe 100 yrs ago...

people don't just go into politics, most get involved at a low level, then fking realize the goldmine (aka PUBLIC $) they stumbled on to.

there's nothing like easy $ pilfered from taxpayer.

Don't know anything about UK, but US ...
sad state of affairs, i'm sorry to say
 
real statesmen are few and far b/w these days.

there's a few out there..not enuf

:cry:
 
We are going to have to start working together on our home, the planet EARTH the only home WE all have.

Population is exploding, we must rid ourselves of the notion of selfish tribes.

I'm not suggesting the solutions are easy, by far. But we must start thinking CLEARLY. RATIONALLY.

If we are to not only survive, but prosper.

And this requires REAL STATESMEN in public service.

:D
 
barjon said:
I don’t think politicians attempt to control society. Most try to do what they think is best for society - whilst maybe taking the opportunity to feather their own nests to a greater or lesser degree. Their job is to manage a huge number of people to enable them to live together cheek by Jowl in relative harmony and reasonable prosperity. Not easy.

Nor do I think it’s all done by deception, deflection, force and secrecy. The press delight in exposing such things - as do her majesty’s loyal opposition. That’s their job!
Click to expand...

I suppose it depends on the viewpoint that you take. If you take a view that politicians are in it for the good of society then that is one viewpoint.

If you take a view that politicians are just the enactors or conduits (some would say puppets) by which society is 'controlled' by the real power brokers (rich individuals such as the George Soros's, the soon-to-be FANG powerbase, The EU collective, the banks, the corporate lobbyists etc) then you might look at politics in a different light, there are many questions that need to be answered about changes that are taking place. Those questions are becoming more difficult to ask because, lo and behold, the law is being used (and corrupted) to silence those asking the questions.

Now, I have no problem with those that wish to take the line that HM's opposition is challenging the current government or that the billion dollar corporate media 'exposes' what goes on, but when HM's opposition is no better than HM Govt from a moral standpoint, then that argument looks less convincing. Dig just a little bit deeper to see who owns, manages and funds the corporate media and you might then trust what they are saying a little less and begin to question why they are saying it. You see cover-ups and journalists that don't toe the line being smeared and sacked when they get too close to 'the truth' - why?

There are political mistakes made that are blindingly obvious that are reported on by MSM and make it into PMs questions and yet a straightforward explanation/answer is never presented, if that's not deception, deflection and secrecy then I'm not sure what is! Why so much fake news, why so much media bias?

And why should we tolerate politicians feathering their nests (just a little)? They serve us, we pay their wages, if politicians really are in it for the good of society then why do they corrupt their own positions for personal gain? And we see that corruption from the top filtering down through all aspects of civil life, not necessarily just monetarily either. We should not be tolerating it and yet it is allowed to continue, often without punishment when exposed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

wasp
Uk
2 3
Replies
41
Views
12K
JTrader
JTrader
Top