|
Post by Minor on May 14, 2010 6:32:18 GMT 1
I see that the coalition have decided to 'half'scr@p the rise in NI. Employees pay, employers don't. Shape of things to come? Half a story, that is tied in with the no tax paid below £10,000. You can't have both it would be too expensive.
|
|
|
Post by nicko on May 14, 2010 7:14:24 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2010 7:23:34 GMT 1
Absolutely outrageous if they pass this ruling about a 55%-45% majority needed to vote out the government. Where was this in anyone's manifesto?
Mr Mugabi you are welcome in our so called parliamentary democracy.
|
|
|
Post by mrbunny on May 14, 2010 7:57:10 GMT 1
Con Dem is a good combination. What about combining Dave and Nick ? Naive
|
|
|
Post by rglenshrew on May 14, 2010 10:52:01 GMT 1
Prime Minister David Cameron is a fast mover, he had only been in office for less than 15 minutes when he put the first Scottish family out on the street! I might be alone here but I reckon the SNP will get a fair few extra votes from the Scottish after the last time the Tories were about. Some may be reluctant though with the Lib Dem's in amoungst it as well.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on May 14, 2010 11:50:31 GMT 1
I see that the coalition have decided to 'half'scr@p the rise in NI. Employees pay, employers don't. Shape of things to come? Half a story, that is tied in with the no tax paid below £10,000. You can't have both it would be too expensive. The no tax paid below £10,000 isn't happening in one go - expect to wait a few years before that target's reached, if ever. That'll really help the lowest paid won't it? There are people already paying no tax on their earnings and they'll get precisely zilch out of this. Whereas a couple each earning national average wage will be quids in. Very liberal. I thought the £10k thing was a half baked, uncosted shove-it-in-the-manifesto-for-publicity type of measure. I expected it to be dropped quietly and I'm staggered the Lib Dems have pushed so hard on it. How much will it cost then? What about this deficit that "the markets" are so cross about and we're waiting to be punished for? How's this helping?
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on May 14, 2010 12:12:19 GMT 1
Half a story, that is tied in with the no tax paid below £10,000. You can't have both it would be too expensive. The no tax paid below £10,000 isn't happening in one go - expect to wait a few years before that target's reached, if ever. That'll really help the lowest paid won't it? There are people already paying no tax on their earnings and they'll get precisely zilch out of this. Whereas a couple each earning national average wage will be quids in. Very liberal. I thought the £10k thing was a half baked, uncosted shove-it-in-the-manifesto-for-publicity type of measure. I expected it to be dropped quietly and I'm staggered the Lib Dems have pushed so hard on it. How much will it cost then? What about this deficit that "the markets" are so cross about and we're waiting to be punished for? How's this helping? Don't hold your breath waiting for a reply from Minor, like Mr Bunny he doesn't do questions, preferring to ignore them and move on to the next emoticon laden potshot.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on May 14, 2010 14:04:57 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on May 14, 2010 14:08:53 GMT 1
Absolutely outrageous if they pass this ruling about a 55%-45% majority needed to vote out the government. Where was this in anyone's manifesto? Mr Mugabi you are welcome in our so called parliamentary democracy. All hail the "new politics"!
|
|
poirot
Midland League Division Two
Posts: 243
|
Post by poirot on May 14, 2010 14:09:40 GMT 1
Just one little point this country is now screwed now we will be having liberal input into the goverment.How long till it al goes booooooooooooooooooooooooom? O joy. There was me thinking that there was very little to be cheerful about now that my vote has ben betrayed, when here comes a little bit of comfort. Heavenly hates the arrangement - so, by definition, there must be some good in it. By the way. Are Cameron's prefered 'allies' - the "homophobes and nutters" now Clegg's best mates aswell
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on May 14, 2010 15:13:56 GMT 1
Absolutely outrageous if they pass this ruling about a 55%-45% majority needed to vote out the government. Where was this in anyone's manifesto? Mr Mugabi you are welcome in our so called parliamentary democracy. Surprising isn't it that the Tories have 47% of the MP's so they can't be defeated in a vote of confidence even if the Liberals leave the coalition. Definitely a case of attempting to make sure we have a Tory government for the next 5 years whatever the means. Any MP that supports this move will not be an honourable member.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2010 16:25:46 GMT 1
Absolutely outrageous if they pass this ruling about a 55%-45% majority needed to vote out the government. Where was this in anyone's manifesto? Mr Mugabi you are welcome in our so called parliamentary democracy. i agree its a disgrace. doesnt bode well that the first thing cameron does as prime minister is ensure he cant be removed from government for 5 years even if his coalition "chums" wake up.
|
|
|
Post by Minor on May 14, 2010 16:29:51 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by ratcliffesghost on May 14, 2010 16:53:09 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2010 17:06:25 GMT 1
this really deserves a thread of its own but do i recall Gordon and Tony getting lambasted over claims of cuts to the defence budget by honourable members (b and a) and the cons? well guess what, apparently there was plenty of money that could be cut without affecting our troops all along. news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8682097.stmcouldnt make it up could you, at least it took 13 years for some people to decide that Labour where liers and cheats, its taken all of 3 days with this lot.
|
|
|
Post by mrbunny on May 14, 2010 17:30:44 GMT 1
Absolutely outrageous if they pass this ruling about a 55%-45% majority needed to vote out the government. Where was this in anyone's manifesto? Mr Mugabi you are welcome in our so called parliamentary democracy. i agree its a disgrace. doesnt bode well that the first thing cameron does as prime minister is ensure he cant be removed from government for 5 years even if his coalition "chums" wake up. Agreed,it is a very dodgy start. Doesn't bode well if this is how they are kicking off.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on May 14, 2010 17:34:06 GMT 1
Surprisingly, the view is very different once you're in power.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2010 17:36:05 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by mrbunny on May 14, 2010 17:36:44 GMT 1
this really deserves a thread of its own but do i recall Gordon and Tony getting lambasted over claims of cuts to the defence budget by honourable members (b and a) and the cons? well guess what, apparently there was plenty of money that could be cut without affecting our troops all along. news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8682097.stmcouldnt make it up could you, at least it took 13 years for some people to decide that Labour where liers and cheats, its taken all of 3 days with this lot. Getting them body armour that fits would be nice.Having seen pictures from Afghanistan taken in the last few months with many soldiers having body armour that doesn't protect your torso fully that is something that needs sorting. That is obvious whoever is in power.I expect the Tories to sort that out,if they don't i will be the first to slag them off.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Rickerton on May 14, 2010 18:39:28 GMT 1
As well as the changes to the vote of no confidence, I'm amazed more hasn't been more made, both pre and post election, of Cameron's plans to reduce the number of MP's in the Commons by 100. I'm not actually sure how the plans stand with the coalition deal (though I haven't seen mention of it being dropped,) but if he succeeds it would be highly advantageous to the Tories in future elections.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on May 14, 2010 18:55:01 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2010 19:59:29 GMT 1
Thanks very much for that, appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by nicko on May 15, 2010 8:31:26 GMT 1
The ConDem coalition is playing free and easy with our un-written constitution, just like Labour have done in the past when it suits them.
I'm not saying it's right, but it's how our system works.
It should be part of the electoral/parliamentary reform that we have a written constitution and then things like the 55% majority for ousting the Government can't happen without proper debate and voting etc.
Yet more proof that our system is bankrupt and un-democratic.
|
|
|
Post by MartinB on May 15, 2010 8:54:06 GMT 1
Absolutely outrageous if they pass this ruling about a 55%-45% majority needed to vote out the government. Where was this in anyone's manifesto? Mr Mugabi you are welcome in our so called parliamentary democracy. i agree its a disgrace. doesnt bode well that the first thing cameron does as prime minister is ensure he cant be removed from government for 5 years even if his coalition "chums" wake up. Fixed term Parliaments do make some sense. Otherwise you can have the situation of a Party printing money to try to sort out the mess they have presided over with the ecomony and hoping everything gets better before they call an election. But that would never happen under the wonderful Labour Party would it Matron? I am so pleased Tony and Gordon removed boom and bust. Also Matron you were having ago about nobody voting for this Government. So it is right that with a lower turn out at the previous election a Party gets 35% of the vote and has a large majority yet at this election with a larger turn out a party with 37% of the vote doesn't have the same power? I actually like the position we have got at the moment. With Politics there is far to much bickering between the two main parties, I think this Government has more chance of sorting out the mess because they will be using views for both sides of political opinion. I am pleased we don't have the same old same old from the two main parties
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2010 10:06:19 GMT 1
[ Fixed term Parliaments do make some sense. Otherwise you can have the situation of a Party printing money to try to sort out the mess they have presided over with the ecomony and hoping everything gets better before they call an election. But that would never happen under the wonderful Labour Party would it Matron? Did Labour make any changes to our "consitution" that made it more or less impossible for them to be removed from office before there five years was up? Simple yes or no Martin.I am so pleased Tony and Gordon removed boom and bust. Indeed, should have done more to stop our bankers and the other world economies messing us up thoughAlso Matron you were having ago about nobody voting for this Government. So it is right that with a lower turn out at the previous election a Party gets 35% of the vote and has a large majority yet at this election with a larger turn out a party with 37% of the vote doesn't have the same power? Not really, but that the system we have worked to for centuries and is a completely different question. Honestly? yes the system needs to change. For what i have no idea. Coming back to my point you a critisising, how many people did vote for our new government. Do you have the latest figures? Did you vote for the condem party? what was their manifesto like? I actually like the position we have got at the moment. With Politics there is far to much bickering between the two main parties, I think this Government has more chance of sorting out the mess because they will be using views for both sides of political opinion. I am pleased we don't have the same old same old from the two main parties so am i, cos watching all you anti Labour boys squirming and trying to justify the unjustiable is ****in hilarious 5 more years
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on May 15, 2010 12:07:03 GMT 1
i agree its a disgrace. doesnt bode well that the first thing cameron does as prime minister is ensure he cant be removed from government for 5 years even if his coalition "chums" wake up. I am so pleased Tony and Gordon removed boom and bust. Labour were in power, so they take the rap. Fair enough. But why don't you acknowledge this was a global problem and we would have been seriously affected whoever of the three main parties were in power? Did Gordon Brown cause the global crisis? Can you tell me with a straight face that we would have been better placed to deal with the crisis had the market worshipping Tories had been in power? Would the Tories have prevented recession turning into depression? Did they make the right calls when they opposed Brown's intervention?
|
|
|
Post by mrbunny on May 15, 2010 13:17:47 GMT 1
I am so pleased Tony and Gordon removed boom and bust. Labour were in power, so they take the rap. Fair enough. But why don't you acknowledge this was a global problem and we would have been seriously affected whoever of the three main parties were in power? Did Gordon Brown cause the global crisis? Can you tell me with a straight face that we would have been better placed to deal with the crisis had the market worshipping Tories had been in power? Would the Tories have prevented recession turning into depression? Did they make the right calls when they opposed Brown's intervention? Who knows? The thing is when you in opposition you have to disagree with the government to show there is an alternative even if you agree with some of the policies they are implementing.If you agreed with everything and backed them to the hilt you'd never get voted back in. Who knows the Tories may have done exactly the same as what Labour did but we will never know.What is certain though is that the government should be given a chance to rectify the mess they have inherited before everyone gets on their back.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on May 15, 2010 13:27:41 GMT 1
Labour were in power, so they take the rap. Fair enough. But why don't you acknowledge this was a global problem and we would have been seriously affected whoever of the three main parties were in power? Did Gordon Brown cause the global crisis? Can you tell me with a straight face that we would have been better placed to deal with the crisis had the market worshipping Tories had been in power? Would the Tories have prevented recession turning into depression? Did they make the right calls when they opposed Brown's intervention? Who knows? The thing is when you in opposition you have to disagree with the government to show there is an alternative even if you agree with some of the policies they are implementing.If you agreed with everything and backed them to the hilt you'd never get voted back in. Who knows the Tories may have done exactly the same as what Labour did but we will never know.What is certain though is that the government should be given a chance to rectify the mess they have inherited before everyone gets on their back. They didn't disagree though; neo liberal, free market capitalism is part of the Tories' DNA. Perhaps they would have ploughed less money into public services in order to line the pockets of the wealthy, but that's the only real difference.
|
|
|
Post by MartinB on May 16, 2010 11:42:34 GMT 1
[ Fixed term Parliaments do make some sense. Otherwise you can have the situation of a Party printing money to try to sort out the mess they have presided over with the ecomony and hoping everything gets better before they call an election. But that would never happen under the wonderful Labour Party would it Matron? Did Labour make any changes to our "consitution" that made it more or less impossible for them to be removed from office before there five years was up? Simple yes or no Martin.I am so pleased Tony and Gordon removed boom and bust. Indeed, should have done more to stop our bankers and the other world economies messing us up thoughAlso Matron you were having ago about nobody voting for this Government. So it is right that with a lower turn out at the previous election a Party gets 35% of the vote and has a large majority yet at this election with a larger turn out a party with 37% of the vote doesn't have the same power? Not really, but that the system we have worked to for centuries and is a completely different question. Honestly? yes the system needs to change. For what i have no idea. Coming back to my point you a critisising, how many people did vote for our new government. Do you have the latest figures? Did you vote for the condem party? what was their manifesto like? I actually like the position we have got at the moment. With Politics there is far to much bickering between the two main parties, I think this Government has more chance of sorting out the mess because they will be using views for both sides of political opinion. I am pleased we don't have the same old same old from the two main parties so am i, cos watching all you anti Labour boys squirming and trying to justify the unjustiable is ****in hilarious 5 more years 1) Did Labour make any changes to our "consitution" that made it more or less impossible for them to be removed from office before there five years was up? Answer - No ,they had 13 years to carry out their own manifisto promise and did nothing about it at all. 2) 59.1% of people who voted are seeing some policies they voted for put into action. as opposed to 35.3% in 2005. 3) I think the thing you are really laughing at is I think this was the election to lose as there are so cuts and tax rises to be made to sort out the mess.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2010 12:39:22 GMT 1
1) Did Labour make any changes to our "consitution" that made it more or less impossible for them to be removed from office before there five years was up? Answer - No ,they had 13 years to carry out their own manifisto promise and did nothing about it at all. No because that would be undemocratic 2) 59.1% of people who voted are seeing some policies they voted for put into action. as opposed to 35.3% in 2005. the principles and morals of 59.1% of people are being sacrificed to satisfy the power craving of clegg and cameron. if Labour had done such a thing as this you would be up in arms. do i smell hypocrisy?3) I think the thing you are really laughing at is I think this was the election to lose as there are so cuts and tax rises to be made to sort out the mess. What i am laughing at is all the conservative and lib dem supporters who have given me and the government i supported so much s**t over the years. watching them squirm and wriggle is nothing short of hilarious.loving it
|
|