|
It is easy. They're the opposition. Oppose, don't enable.
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 22:36 |
|
|
you cannot oppose the will of the british people
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:08
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:you cannot oppose the will of the british people You can, and should, using trident
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:10
|
|
|
Opposing the will of a plurality of the British people is literally the point of the Opposition.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:10
|
|
|
not sure if it is pissflaps
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:11
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Roll back devolution within Great Britain and empower local authorities. which level of local authority? empowering the county level makes sense. but the Scottish / Welsh / London devolved parliaments / assemblies all take that role. what's the point of abolishing them just to replace with newly empowered counties covering much the same areas? or if you mean the lower district / borough level of local authority, I don't think we should empower them to anywhere near the same level on things like income tax, control of the NHS, …
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:12
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:not sure if it is pissflaps I'm positive it is. Cerv posted:which level of local authority? empowering the county level makes sense. One might ask what the point of setting such assemblies up was when local authorities already fulfilled that role?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:12
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:It is easy. They're the opposition. Oppose, don't enable. Okay, so Labour should oppose any of the measures the Tories are currently considering to make life a bit easier on those renting? You can't say "They're in opposition, so their job is to oppose everything the government do", because then the government has no reason to reach across the hall to come to an agreement, or seek any wider input on anything, since the Opposition would just oppose it anyway, since it isn't being proposed by them. There's no 100% right course of action to take that can be replicated over and over. Countries are nuanced things which require some amount of consideration, including if what you might prefer is what your supporters consider to be beneficial. e: Pissflaps posted:I'm positive it is. He included why the devolved parliament/assemblies instead of local counties in the bit of his post you didn't quote mehall fucked around with this message at 12:16 on Feb 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:14
|
|
|
If the Tories come up with something that Labour thinks is a good idea then sure, support it. Brexit is not one of those things. I didn't vote Labour to help take the UK out of the EU. Nobody did. mehall posted:He included why the devolved parliament/assemblies instead of local counties in the bit of his post you didn't quote No he didn't. Scotland has had a separate NHS a lot longer than a devolved parliament.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:16
|
|
|
Zephro posted:The green belt is designed to stop housing being built wherever you want, and planning rules stop you (for instance) building a giant extension that blocks your neighbour's light. A timely Guardian article: quote:"When the planning system began in 1947, we said the value of a planning permission should go to the public good,” he explains. “The ‘uplift’ from a field to a housing development was owned by the public. Now we’ve completely changed the model, whereby we almost grant planning permissions for free and the developer takes all the profit. Yes, they must make Section 106 payments and pay Community Infrastructure Levy, but we don’t try and capture as much of that land value uplift as we could.”
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:16
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:One might ask what the point of setting such assemblies up was when local authorities already fulfilled that role? the GLC had been abolished in 86 by Thatcher with nothing to replace it. and Major abolished the 9 Scottish regional councils. (I have no idea about Wales, and don't care to look it up) 1 Scottish assembly seems to work better now than 9. it's about the same total population as London for example so a good size for it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:24
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:If the Tories come up with something that Labour thinks is a good idea then sure, support it. First, Labour are a wide platform, who encourage everyone who works for a living to vote for them. There are plenty of people who meet that criteria who voted Leave when given the opportunity, so there's a reasonable argument to be made that if Labour had been in power and had the ability to shape the argument around a potential EU referendum, there would have been plenty of support for it from their supporters. Nobody voted for Labour to take the UK out of the EU because that wasn't a policy they advertised, but now that it's an option, a roughly even %age of labour voters would be appalled as pleased if Labour stopped Brexit, so it'c clearly not as simple as you state. (as usual.) Secondly, surely the NHS Scotland should be managed/funded/governed by a level of representation of an equal size to the size of the NHS Scotland? And before you state that does his mean every single NHS trust etc should have it's own parliament/assembly, firstly they do in the form of local counties. (There's a chance it's not 1:1 in terms of area covered, but it'll be close enough) and secondly, to counter the follow-up argument of "shouldn't the local counties just manage their local NHS bits", the answer is there are already NHS boards for relevant areas, such as NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, which roughly speaking matches the area covered by Glasgow City Council, plus renfrewshire, and other bits THe point is there's already smaller sub-divisions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:24
|
|
|
English devolution generally involves neighbouring councils working together and traditionally they found the prospect of joining forces with the town or city next door even more offensive than just being ruled by London. There's been some progress on this in recent years though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:28
|
|
|
If the electorate have said they want something, whether through a referendum or a GE the role of the Opposition isn't to stop that from happening, it's to scrutinise the way the government carries out the electorate's wishes to ensure the interests of the electorate. Unfortunately (a) our political system gives them very little actual power to carry out this role, and (b) the electorate will happily vote to get screwed as long as someone else (preferably foreign) is getting screwed harder.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:33
|
|
|
I was busy so didn't post it yesterday, but this reminds me of the polling they did in November. https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/11/17/brexit-briefing/ Also please note in that that 68% of those polled think we need to go ahead and Brexit. It's interesting that Leave obviously are overwhelmingly happy to do so, but Remain voters are divided pretty evenly between those who feel that we should support the Government's follow through and those who want to ignore it. E: It's the "Support of Brexit Referendum" option on the Crunchbox at the bottom if you want the graph. Laradus fucked around with this message at 12:40 on Feb 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:35
|
|
|
mehall posted:YouGov have specifically asked Labour voters what they want on Brexit, and the results are as spread as we've all been saying for months: So it turns out soft Brexit is the position which alienates the least Labour voters. Or to put it another way, Pissflaps is wrong about literally everything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:37
|
|
|
jabby posted:So it turns out soft Brexit is the position which alienates the least Labour voters. People are prepared to accept soft Brexit because it's better than labour's current approach which is to enable a hard Brexit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:42
|
|
|
Paxman posted:English devolution generally involves neighbouring councils working together and traditionally they found the prospect of joining forces with the town or city next door even more offensive than just being ruled by London. There's been some progress on this in recent years though. If the people of Glasgow, Inverness & Aberdeen can handle being "ruled" from Edinburgh, I reckon the folk of Middlesbrough & Durham should suck it up & accept being ruled from Newcastle.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:47
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:No he didn't. Scotland has had a separate NHS a lot longer than a devolved parliament. I don't think the NHS was ever under the control of the low level district councils. only referred to the NHS to say it's an example of something that should not be devolved that far.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:50
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:you cannot oppose the will of the british people this is something a crazy person would write.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:50
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:If the people of Glasgow, Inverness & Aberdeen can handle being "ruled" from Edinburgh, I reckon the folk of Middlesbrough & Durham should suck it up & accept being ruled from Newcastle.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:52
|
|
|
Cerv posted:I don't think the NHS was ever under the control of the low level district councils. only referred to the NHS to say it's an example of something that should not be devolved that far. I don't think it was either but the existence of a Scottish NHS before the parliament Holyrood shows that the latter is not essential for the former.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:54
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Durham yes, but should Middlesbrough be ruled from Newcastle or York? this poo poo right here is how the war of the roses 2 will start.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:53
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Durham yes, but should Middlesbrough be ruled from Newcastle or York?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:54
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Durham yes, but should Middlesbrough be ruled from Newcastle or York? Ask them which they'd prefer, then choose the other one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:55
|
|
|
Relax, bigots. There is already a Tees Valley specific devolution agreement. Nothing to do with York or Newcastle.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:56
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:Newcastle, because York has to put up with their pisshead shiny suited day drinkers any time the races are on which frankly is burdensome enough. You've given me nasty flashbacks to when I used to live on Micklegate. Race day was a loving nightmare.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:56
|
|
|
The main actual ruckus wrt York and Leeds council is who gets to be in charge of Harrogate, which both think they should be despite both being really dissimilar to HGate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:57
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Relax, bigots. There is already a Tees Valley specific devolution agreement. Nothing to do with York or Newcastle. Is it 10,000 gallons of napalm?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
Baron Corbyn posted:You've given me nasty flashbacks to when I used to live on Micklegate. Race day was a loving nightmare.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
Pppppoll news https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/828919569058320384 Labour's Brexit Strategy sees them shooting up by 1% to just 15% behind the Tories. Looks like voting for it really is a vote winner after all?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 13:15
|
|
|
Oh dear me posted:A timely Guardian article:
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 13:30
|
|
|
Zephro posted:A land value tax (which is what this essentially is) is one of those ideas that hangs around Westminster like a ghost. Every couple of years someone points out that it would be a really good idea, and then nothing gets done.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 13:33
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:The problem is that after the first guy points out that it would be a good idea, a second guy points out that it would cost a huge amount of political capital to make the change, with no short term payoff.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 13:36
|
|
|
https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-policy-agenda/brexit/news/83133/jeremy-corbyn-facing-shadow-cabinet-split-he-orders Three line whip in favour of a50 at the third reading by the sound of it
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 13:42
|
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-policy-agenda/brexit/news/83133/jeremy-corbyn-facing-shadow-cabinet-split-he-orders Magical. At least Labour were able to extract all those concessions and maintain their stunning popularity in exchange.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 13:48
|
|
|
First Tory to speak after Sajid Javid complains that a Labour council built 6000 homes 'unnecessarily' on green belt land, and why wasn't the government able to stop them? Quite a spectacular return to form.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
Having slept on it I'd actually be all right with Corbyn whipping the other way as well particularly with the amendments failing. It's definitely a harder sell though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 14:07
|
|
|
jabby posted:
Can we get this in the next OP?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 14:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 22:36 |
|
|
Sajid Javid also promising to protect green belt land but look 'more seriously at density' so that available land is used 'more efficiently'. I've nothing against high density housing, but it's a total gently caress you to the poor to cram them into tiny flats when there's plenty of land available but rich people like looking at useless fields too much.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 14:15
|
|