Some idiot just charged on to stage at Labour conference

The Tories were very pally with Savile.

 

I guess it’s easy to forget that some people only know the Post Thatcherite world. They have no experience of any sort of society that isn’t based around selfishness and promotion of the self. That they don’t understand that there are different ways to operate a society other than greed and that the desire for power for the sake of power is meaningless.

If you have no ambition to run things differently. No desire to change the country for the better. To create community and values. If all you want is your turn at the trough then that’s fine. It just does nothing to address the real issues that the country faces.

40 years of post Thatcherite consensus that Starmer does not want to change and those on this thread support have broken this country. We are a failing state. A poor country with a very rich crust. Reading the lack of any sort of passion and ambition of people on this thread is pretty depressing. It’s Thatchers final victory that people from Barnsley cannot see any other world than the one she created.

“What do we want?
Not very much?
When do we want it?
2012”

 

cant like this enough

 

I doubt there's anyone on here that wouldn't want the vision you espouse, Jim. But the plain fact is that 31 of the last 44 years (since Thatcher was elected) have been spent under Tory rule. My humble opinion is that this country is innately conservative (small and large) and it's against that backdrop that any change must be attempted. Boring, but achievable. You put me in mind of Daniel Chandler's book 'Free And Equal'. All laudable stuff (building on John Rawls' 'A Theory of Justice'). But neither Starmer nor anyone else is starting with a blank sheet of paper.

 

Would love all that to be true. Unfortunately more than 50% of England normally vote for the opposite so there's a bit of a problem actually getting it done.

Ambition doesn't equal reality or possibility. Vested interests would no doubt see it differently.

 

Although I can’t condone the way the guy did it I sympathise with his cause. The word “Power” is what it’s all about. Neither party is prepared to accept a dominant influence to power, they want it all and first past the post gives them that.
What you vote for is a decision about what the government in power does with your money. They both use it to satisfy the vested interests of their financiers and have total power to do so. If they had to get agreement across the house before they pay off their backers they may not attract the same vested interest.
Of course it would give minorities more power, both right, left and green, but the momentum may become forward, rather than side to side.
The current system rewards the party that can coerce enough votes and an effective way to do this is by selling populist lies.
The acid test is results and if you can find one thing that is better than it was 12 years ago under the Tory government then you may have a reason for voting for them. How much of our money had ended up in the pockets of Tory backers in that time?
Getting back to the guy in the conference he makes a good point, that nobody is listening and willing to change the system. I understand his frustration.

 

Me too. I would love to see us move to a PR system to make sure what we have in Parliament better represents the broader views we have as a country. I think it would change things for the better.

But until we have it, it's about playing the game IMHO.

 

Or could it be that he is not willing to go through the appropriate channels to persuade people of his viewpoint? I grow weary of people saying they are "not being listened to" when what they really mean is people do not agree with them.

 

Same here. I've wanted PR in place for years. It's not an ambition that is concentrated solely within the Lib Dems and those further left than me in their outlook.

The one opportunity we had to achieve it was wasted due to a poorly compromised referendum option and no clear picture about how it would operate. I voted for it because it was better than the status quo, but I recall thinking at the time that there hadn't been a compelling argument made and that the Lib Dems had wasted the opportunity which they'd insisted upon as part of them going into coalition with the Tories.

I sense the same ambition within many ordinary Labour members too, and I can see it becoming a relevant issue across a Labour government's first term in office to the extent that it might become part of the next GE campaign. For the upcoming one, it's largely a distraction to the key issues on which the campaign will be fought, and it's understandable to me why it's not seen as a Labour priority.

 

Generally, its under 50% even in England of voters that vote for the governing party. In 2019, it was 47%. So the majority of voters don't get anything that they voted for. FPTP is an outdated system.

 

I have read that the Tories went into coalition promising a vote on PR, then switched it to make the options FPTP or a different way of counting FPTP - which is what AV effectively was - stitching up the LibDems in the process. See also tuition fees and a few other policies.

 

The pre-coalition commitment was 'a referendum on PR'. We didn't ultimately get one which was clear, or meaningful, to many people.

The question asked was, "At present, the UK uses the "first past the post" system to elect MPs to the House of Commons. Should the "alternative vote" system be used instead?"

Unless you were hugely invested in the process, the explanations given at the time about the AV system were vague and confusing. Consequently, it was a question that, to the disinterested, would have been very suggestive towards voting no.

 

It was the same with the EU referendum. Like it or not, the wording of a question can influence the answer given. This is a major problem with opinion polls of all sizes - especially with leading questions.

 

Maggie definitely wa.

 

Correct Sir.

 

I had to watch that Jimmy Saville drama just to see what happened and i honestly couldn't belive how bad he was. He crawled round thatcher for a knighthood and got it although she wa warned what he was like, hope they both rot in hell.

 

No they don't... I've just got back from conference and you get your card scanned and checked no metal detectors or other security unless you have a bag though which is also checked separately.

 

I've explained this several times on previous posts my friend. Can't be arsed going over it all again. Its there if you look. Cheers