Cousin Jack wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 4:18 pm
...I am less than happy that the Courts appear to be able to over-ride Parliament. IMO democracy should mean that Parliament makes the law, judges apply it. It seems to me that the Supreme court is making a takeover bid, and I am not happy at all. MPs are mostly wankers, but at least we have a chance to sack them every few years.
Wasn't that the whole point? The government came up with a policy but didn't put in to legislation the means to enact its own policy.
The courts are absolutely correct in what they've said and how they've interpreted the current law. The problem is that government thought they could skip the pesky legislataive part.
demographic wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 3:17 pm
Interesting that in that poll, even if the conservatives gain every Reform UK vote they still wouldn't beat Labour.
Maybe if they'd realised that a few years ago we could have done without all that culture wars wank they've been playing with to get a small amout of extreme right votes.
Its embarrassing to watch them running about like an angry child.
I think there's less people on the far right than the conservatives imagine there is. Hence the result of that poll.
Aside from a genuinely tiny amount of people I think the extreme right only exists in the UK as a figment of some peoples imagination.
It's an interesting perspective. I suppose the NF and BNP were quite small really. But then, the far left is probably quite small too. Maybe both sides of the House need to stop reacting to the outliers...and chuck them out of the parties/stop trying to be a tribute act to them/stop taking donations from them/stop trying to push the outliers further apart with dog-whistle politics.
I do suspect there are more votes to be trawled from the 'far right' than the 'far left' though and that's quite a driver if an MP thinks they're going to get kicked out into civvy Street.
Doubt is not a pleasant condition.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Voltaire
Cousin Jack wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 4:18 pm
...I am less than happy that the Courts appear to be able to over-ride Parliament. IMO democracy should mean that Parliament makes the law, judges apply it. It seems to me that the Supreme court is making a takeover bid, and I am not happy at all. MPs are mostly wankers, but at least we have a chance to sack them every few years.
Wasn't that the whole point? The government came up with a policy but didn't put in to legislation the means to enact its own policy.
The courts are absolutely correct in what they've said and how they've interpreted the current law. The problem is that government thought they could skip the pesky legislataive part.
Haven't really paid much attention over Rwanda, as I said it was a daft policy that was never going to work for more than a handful of people. It was just a stupid idea that should have been killed at birth.
However, didn't they have to make some sort of legislation to give themselves the power to deport people to Rwanda? Presumably that was enacted via Parliament? And now the Supreme Court is over-riding that legislation, whatever it was.
Cousin Jack wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:23 pm
However, didn't they have to make some sort of legislation to give themselves the power to deport people to Rwanda? Presumably that was enacted via Parliament? And now the Supreme Court is over-riding that legislation, whatever it was.
No, there never was any legislation (afaik), just a half-arsed policy. The courts can't override legislation, but they can override government policy if they believe it infringes current legisalation/law. The courts can't make law, they can only uphold/interpret current law.
Mr. Dazzle wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:51 pm
Sunak is proposing to make that exact legislation now.
Court said its illegal. Change what's legal. In a nutshell.
This is the sting, it was never really about a few hundred asylum seekers, it was about changing the laws for everyone in the UK and to get us to clamour to give our rights away.
It's not over yet.
Count Steer wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:21 pm
I do suspect there are more votes to be trawled from the 'far right' than the 'far left' though and that's quite a driver if an MP thinks they're going to get kicked out into civvy Street.
So the far right propaganda might appeal to those who are stupid, poor and a racist, where as the left wing propaganda only needs to find poor people with a chip on their shoulder, and there are millions of them.
It's frankly incredible, in fact it's astounding, that working people do not want to vote for a party that is supposed to be for working people.
I don't totally disagree, but, riddle me this, if voting had an intelligence bar that people had to get over in order to vote*, how do you think it would impact GE results? a) as the system is now b) if voting was compulsory?
* Which I've stated I'd be in favour of but my solution to that one is to offer education, education, education as someone once said. I'd rather live in an educated population than not.
PS I haven't voted Labour for years. I do have my party membership card from 1984 though as I thought it was quite iconic.
Doubt is not a pleasant condition.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Voltaire
I have never joined a political party. i have however voted for all 3 major parties in assorted elections. I am a floating voter, and IMO all sensible people should be. I vote for the party I think has the best policies to deal with the current issues, not the one that has the best bar/cheapest beer.
Mr. Dazzle wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:51 pm
Sunak is proposing to make that exact legislation now.
Court said its illegal. Change what's legal. In a nutshell.
It is a daft idea, best just to forget it. If he dies the legislation it is still only going to ship out a few 00s of people. And it will cost a fortune.
Potter wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:32 pm
Allowing extremists to run the Labour Party might have finished it forever.
You actually think that Starmer is an extremist?
No I don't think he's an extremist, I think he's a rather slow moving academic type who wouldn't make a good PM, but he's not an extremist, at least not in where he stands on the political spectrum anyway.
Count Steer wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:27 pm
I don't totally disagree, but, riddle me this, if voting had an intelligence bar that people had to get over in order to vote*, how do you think it would impact GE results? a) as the system is now b) if voting was compulsory?
Just watching the evening news - a young woman is complaining that a "miracle dieting drug" that she bought via an Instagram account (interview cuts to video footage from said Instagram account where some absolute freaky monster with an incredible amount of plastic surgery - including what seems to be buttock implants - badly 'demonstrates' how you're supposed to administer some really hooky looking unbranded vials of liquid) that subsequently made her really ill. It's dressed up like a really really low rent version of Watchdog. I mean what next? Don't drill your eyeballs?
These are the same people that have spent three years being adamant that covid vaccine testing was bodged because "my opinion (that I might have got from Facebook ) is valid", they're sick "of science" and is definitely part of some global conspiracy.
So yes, an IQ test to weed out the morons. I'm not bothered if that means less chance of "my favoured party" being elected. But fwiw, Brexit wouldn't have happened, so there.
Count Steer wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:27 pm
I don't totally disagree, but, riddle me this, if voting had an intelligence bar that people had to get over in order to vote*, how do you think it would impact GE results? a) as the system is now b) if voting was compulsory?
Just watching the evening news - a young woman is complaining that a "miracle dieting drug" that she bought via an Instagram account (interview cuts to video footage from said Instagram account where some absolute freaky monster with an incredible amount of plastic surgery - including what seems to be buttock implants - badly 'demonstrates' how you're supposed to administer some really hooky looking unbranded vials of liquid) that subsequently made her really ill. It's dressed up like a really really low rent version of Watchdog. I mean what next? Don't drill your eyeballs?
These are the same people that have spent three years being adamant that covid vaccine testing was bodged because "my opinion (that I might have got from Facebook ) is valid", they're sick "of science" and is definitely part of some global conspiracy.
So yes, an IQ test to weed out the morons. I'm not bothered if that means less chance of "my favoured party" being elected. But fwiw, Brexit wouldn't have happened, so there.
No I don't think he's an extremist, I think he's a rather slow moving academic type who wouldn't make a good PM, but he's not an extremist, at least not in where he stands on the political spectrum anyway.
I didn't think you were talking about Starmer.
Starmer is the present incumbent of the Leader of the Labour Party gig, and he has been quietly purging the so-called extremists from the party. So as the extremists are on the run and well away from any positions of power how can they be a threat? The Labour Party is a very different animal to what it was in the Corbyn years.
Lol, IQ test for voting! Nothing should be ever further away from happening. Just imagine how that would work out for the working classes and the disadvantaged! You elitist bastards!!
No I don't think he's an extremist, I think he's a rather slow moving academic type who wouldn't make a good PM, but he's not an extremist, at least not in where he stands on the political spectrum anyway.
I didn't think you were talking about Starmer.
Starmer is the present incumbent of the Leader of the Labour Party gig, and he has been quietly purging the so-called extremists from the party. So as the extremists are on the run and well away from any positions of power how can they be a threat? The Labour Party is a very different animal to what it was in the Corbyn years.
It's all quite interesting. If we are to believe all we read Corbyn was the hero of the left and a rampant anti-semite. At the same time that left ie Momentum, lead by Jon Lansman made Corbyn their leader. (To be totally accurate they made him leader, then formed Momentum 4 weeks later). It kind of slipped people's notice that the founder of Momentum was, in fact, Jewish. How did such a thing happen? Did Lansman not realise? How could he be cheerleader for such a person?
Either way, Corbyn is history (some won't let it lie though)....but Momentum isn't, although their membership has dropped.
Doubt is not a pleasant condition.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Voltaire
Count Steer wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 7:37 pm
It's all quite interesting. If we are to believe all we read Corbyn was the hero of the left and a rampant anti-semite. At the same time that left ie Momentum, lead by Jon Lansman made Corbyn their leader. (To be totally accurate they made him leader, then formed Momentum 4 weeks later). It kind of slipped people's notice that the founder of Momentum was, in fact, Jewish. How did such a thing happen? Did Lansman not realise? How could he be cheerleader for such a person?
Either way, Corbyn is history (some won't let it lie though)....but Momentum isn't, although their membership has dropped.
I think many people have HUGE problems separating anti-Israel sympathy with anti-semitism. I have no idea whether Corbyn was anti-semitic, he was certainly sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, and thus by definition not a fan of Israel. Perhaps Lansman was a Jewish bloke that shared the same views.
You elitist bastards!! 