Conservatives

Vote Green.

 

Isn't Nick Ferrari somewhere to the right of Farage though? I would imagine there would be some screening of questions and perhaps he is not as hard on her as he would be on the leaders on the other parties.

 

https://twitter.com/JoshBew95/status/862630412203552768

 

I'll start then - I'm 'considering' it. I definitely won't be voting for Labour as I didn't in the last election either.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Not really. If I had to guess I would say that he votes Tory but he certainly isn't extreme in any way and he is very balanced in his interviews. I've heard him tear strips off MPs from all parties if they are unprepared or inaccurate.

 

Fair enough. Just seen him a couple of times on a program on Sky News and he was always the right side of the conversation. Although seeing as the current Labour policies are described as hard left when they are the policies of the centre-right parties in Europe it just gets a bit confusing.

 

Yep, that Manifesto, why save the NHS when you can chase a fox around.

 

I listened to a tory voter on TV the other day when asked what was wrong with Jeremy Corbin he just said "he does not look like a leader" now I thought what should a leader look like, Can any one tell me.

 

Vote who you feel has ideals etc that match your own.
Vote for who you feel will lead the country best.
Vote for who you want to vote for. Dont bow to peer pressure and namecalling.
If you want to vote tory rather than labour and you get called names under the sun it says more about them than it does you.
If you cant decide who to vote for then spoil the paper rather than sit at home.

People should be thankful we live in a country that allows freedom to vote and express opinions.

 

Excellent (if depressing) post How I feel too. I also would add, referring to your "no vote is a wasted vote" comment is that it is high time GE votes were mandatory with the proviso that the ballot paper included a 'none of the above' option. It would end the usual "low turnout does not give legitimacy to the Government" arguments and give a warning shot to the elected party if the none of these was I high percentage. It is a better indicator than people just not bothering to turn out. .
My one hope is that if (and she probably will be) May is elected she turns out to be sincere in her statements of Working for All. The shallow repetition of catch phrases is pretty much standard fare at elections rather like fly posters for an event which never carry detail just a big headline.
It might be that her apparent previous lack of results in her past roles was that she is a leader not a follower and under Cameron and Gideon she was unable to shape the party/departments how she wanted. For every Thatcher there must be someone within the Cons. who comes along who has compassion and a real vision of how things should be. I am not holding my breath.
As I said though, one can only hope

 

We should consider ourselves lucky that he is nowhere near being a prospective leader of the Cons Used discredited statistics regarding weekend A&E deaths to support his argument, guilty of expenses fiddling, known to be a big supporter of private Health care like USA, obstructive, arrogant and uncompromising during negotiations regarding Junior doctors contracts and imposing contracts. Objectional man with a sense of self entitlement

 

It's a sad state of affairs.

Probably why Cameron & Blair did so well at elections, good speakers & looked the part

 

Who do we blame - media commentators or we 'the sheeple' fed a diet image conscious celebrities which now encompasses, not just entertainment but business and politics?

 

https://twitter.com/laboureoin/status/863329042837233664

If I were into conspiracy theories


Sent from my iPad using Barnsley FC BBS Fans Forum

 

The **** ups were caused by a number of trusts still running XP and server 2003 as the OS.

Fair enough Hunts a bellend but to park the blame solely at his door appears to be nothing more than a poor attempt to attack 'the torys'

Perhaps,rather than attack hunt perhaps we should be asking why the trusts/ccgs affected did not upgrade their own IT systems when it was known XP etc was being mothballed by microsoft.
Bear in mind although funding comes from central government these organisations are self budgeting and are responsible for the maintainence of their own internal IT departments.

About a 5th of the Uks trusts and CCGs were affected.

So how come the other 4/5 werent?

 

Money is the issue. Wales decided to upgrade and paid for it. Hunt and his department decided to chance it on grounds of cost.

I'd say it's reasonable to say that for years Government IT has been underfunded and what money is available has been used poorly. But specifically on the decision to not look to replace when support was withdrawn has to lie with Hunt. He is presiding over **** up and chaos. Any manager in business who had failed on all their core apps ms would be replaced. Keeping him in place is a politically decision linked to denationalising the NHS.


Sent from my iPad using Barnsley FC BBS Fans Forum

 

You are right.

Money is the issue. Spending it in the correct areas is the issue. Not so much the amount of funding a CCG/trust is given.

You are also right that infrastructure especially around it has been neglected.

Questions need to be asked at board level as to why. Those in charge. Get them to accept responsibility rather than buck passing to central gov.

Given that 80% or so of the trusts/ccgs were unaffected. . .

Lets be right though. Its seemingly heresy to critise the Church of the NHS.
Which is one of the reasons its in the current state is in.
Regardless of incumbent in charge.

 

A majority of this is false, but you crack on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Correct. These decisions are made at trust level however having worked on IT projects in the NHS I know there are sometimes reasons why platforms and systems aren't upgraded. It's not always due to funding but often due to compatibility with other specialist software. There are decisions to be made and costs to consider but as you point out the majority of trusts weren't hit by the virus.

This has affected 76 countries (at the last count) so spreads significantly further than the NHS. I'm sure funding and platform isn't going to be the underlying reason for the hack in many of the cases around the world. Even the most secure systems are only as strong as it's weakest link.

Just to give a comparison Paris airport has some systems associated with their air traffic control that are still on Windows 3.11 and this isn't an issue of funding.

Ultimately the only people responsible for this outrageous act of hacking are the despicable criminals who carried it out. This won't stop some from using it as a stick to beat the government.

 

I asked one on facebook yesterday (who was engaging in reasoned debate) why he said he thought Corbyn was weak. After initially not giving any reason and me probing further, he then said the fact that he doesn't claim much on his expenses and cycles to work is too measured and borderline hippy which doesn't project confidence. He said Britan has a stiff upper lip mentality and felt we needed May's 'poker face' to get us through Brexit.