3. There is SUCH a difference between a party built on worker rights, the same as unions, and rich plutocrats buying democracy. You are such a Tory! :lol:

 

There's no need to insult me. ;)

 

Three words that illustrate what can happen when the unions get too powerful : Winter Of Discontent

Edited November 2, 20186 yr by vidcapper

Not an insult. Statement of fact.

 

Two words for when capitalists and the rich push FAR too push: French revolution.

Not an insult. Statement of fact.

 

If it makes you happy to believe that... :rolleyes:

 

There's really no position on the political scale that matches mine - i'm left-leaning on economic matters, but decidedly right-wing on social ones.

 

Two words for when capitalists and the rich push FAR too push: French revolution.

 

We're a long long way from that!

 

NB there was a *Labour* gov't in power during the winter of discontent - and the fallout from that led to 18 years of Tory gov't... :(

Edited November 2, 20186 yr by vidcapper

DUP has withdrawn support. Tories have had to accept every Labour amendment to the budget, so Labour is ruling from the opposition. BBTory doesn't think this is news, not even for a small article, for some reason. Labour should vote against the deal anyway and cause a Tory collapse.

DUP has withdrawn support. Tories have had to accept every Labour amendment to the budget, so Labour is ruling from the opposition. BBTory doesn't think this is news, not even for a small article, for some reason. Labour should vote against the deal anyway and cause a Tory collapse.

Except for the vote which the government won because some Labour MPs, including Corbyn, couldn’t be bothered to turn up.

In early November the 'Brexit Communications Grid Summary' was leaked to the press detailing how No10 were going to 'sell the deal' to MPs, business, and the wider public. At the time they adamantly refuted the veracity of the document stating:

 

The misspelling and childish language in this document should be enough to make clear it doesn't represent the government's thinking. You would expect the government to have plans for all situations — to be clear, this isn't one of them.

 

Since then a number of events listed in the plan that 'doesn't represent the government's thinking' have happened including... 19th November - "We have delivered on the referendum" PM speaks at the CBI conference. Government lining up 25 top business voices including Carolyn Fairbairn and lots of world leaders eg Japanese PM to tweet support for the deal. PM visits border communities and business in NI and maybe also to Wales to visit agri and export businesses... etc

 

A report on BuzzFeed reveals that the leaked grid was indeed the plan and that they've priced in losing the FIRST vote on 11th December:

 

According to Whitehall officials who are familiar with the operation, Project Vote has “already priced in” losing the meaningful vote in the Commons slated for Dec. 11.

 

They are aware that one serving cabinet minister has admitted privately they may not be able to vote for the deal, and a second has told friends they are thinking of resigning before the vote. BuzzFeed News has calculated that 95 Conservative MPs have publicly indicated they won’t vote for the withdrawal agreement.

 

While the crack team is battling hard for the best result, it is accepted inside Number 10 that keeping the margin of defeat as low as possible may now be the priority, a DExEU source said.

 

If May loses the meaningful vote by fewer than 100 MPs, government aides believe they are “still in the game” and have a chance of winning a second vote before Christmas. Lose by more than 100, and they fear the deficit would be insurmountable and the PM in resignation territory.

 

Finally, it has today become clear that FULL legal advice on the deal will now not be available to MPs despite a motion being passed unanimously in the HoC two weeks ago demanding its publication for MPs. Keir Starmer has written to David Liddington demanding full publication of the advice. The government could be heading for a full on confrontation with the commons!

Stramge how a "narrow defeat" has now been redefined to mean losing by 100. At the weekend, it was thirty. Of course, losing by 100 means that around 58% of MPs would have voted against. Funny how that constitutes a narrow defeat while 52% is treated as an overwhelming victory.

95 Tory MPs voting against + all other non-Tory MPs (minus Sinn Fein) gives a defeat of 99.

 

Of course there is also the irony of allowing a SECOND vote, whilst denying the British Public the chance of the very same thing - or as TM would say: 'politicians telling the people they got it wrong the first time and should try again.' !!

In contempt of parliament. Rumours are Mad May has cancelled the vote! Her government also has given advice for MPs to go to food banks hospitals, etc, but ONLY with photogtaphers present. This corrupt lot are getting a head start on an election campaign it would seem! Though how effective standing next to food banks they created and hospitals they are privatising with smiles on their faces remains to be seen...

 

So strong. So stable. So table.

I think it is worth pointing out that the last time a government lost 3 votes on the same day was in 1978.

 

That government ended 14 months later after losing a motion of no confidence by 311-310... I wonder if history will repeat itself?

If they lose on the deal by 190 mps as predictions say ... no.

John Redwood, a firm opponent of PM May has been knighted for services to errr, well, hmmm, errr self-interest?

 

John Redwood receives knighthood in the #NewYearsHonours.

He honourably voted against equal gay rights. He bravely voted against equality/human rights. He chivalrously voted against rights of EU nationals living in the UK. He nobly voted for cuts in welfare benefits...

...he gallantly voted against spending public money to create jobs for young unemployed people, he heroically voted for mass surveillance, he kindly voted against measures to prevent climate change, he graciously voted against the hunting ban...

 

thanks to Richard Littler on Twitter for the summary. There's so much, much more that can be added to this heroic list.

 

Joker - he tried to take the leadership of Major in 1995 too and has consistently voted against anything liberal!

 

So makes sense for the establishment to reward him with a knighthood!

The farce goes on. The government has awarded a contract to a company called Seaborne Freight to provide some ferry services if we crash out of the EU without a deal.

 

Who? Good question. The company was set up two years ago and, so far, has as much experience in running a ferry service as Buzzjack does and doesn't actually own any ferries. The government claim to have carried out "due diligence", but it is hard to see what evidence they might have looked at given there company's lack of trading history. Of course, the department responsible is Transport, run by the spectacularly thick Chaos Grayling, so I suppose we shouldn't be surprised.

 

EDIT: Oops, auto-correct seems to have changed Chris (or whatever I actually typed) to Chaos. I think I'll leave it be.

You couldn't make it up could you!!

Someone did a spot of digging on Twitter. Turns out at the top of this tree is a relative of top Tory doner mr jcb

Someone did a spot of digging on Twitter. Turns out at the top of this tree is a relative of top Tory doner mr jcb

They really are acting as if they think they can get away with anything.

They really are acting as if they think they can get away with anything.

 

Surely making *some* provision, rather than none, is a good idea?

Surely making *some* provision, rather than none, is a good idea?

The government has it within its power to prevent us crashing out without a deal. That makes it very different from, for example, planning for severe winter weather. If they are going to make plans, wouldn’t choosing a company with a record of being able to deliver be quite a good idea? Would you want to hand the contract for dealing with winter weather to a company with no gritting lorries and no snow ploughs?

Surely making *some* provision, rather than none, is a good idea?

 

No. When they spectacularly fail it's throwing money away for nothing and delaying actually sorting things out properly in the first place. What usually happens is politicians make political decisions twisting the arguments to get the biased political decision they want (via paying firms who do as they are told to make the case) - and having made it, they then have to keep saying it's a runaway success as they become a bottomless pit for more and more cash because to admit failure is to admit they are spectacularly useless and refuse to listen to experts who know what they are doing.

 

At least that's my experience of Tory politicians locally over the last 30 years (I work for them).