General Election 2015

[trousers]

Stop asking me difficult questions. I just post random stuff that looks vaguely interesting. I'm not intellectual enough to come up with original and insightful thoughts of my own.

 

Edited 23 March, 2015 by trousers

[saint si]

It depends on how you define 'privatisation of NHS services'. Does this graph show / include non-clinical services such as catering, cleaning, maintenance, portering? Does it include using private hospitals (at no charge to the patient) for elective surgery in order to reduce waiting times?

 

Or does it solely show outsourcing of clinical services such as oncology, ophthalmology, orthopaedics?

 

Because the distinction is important.

 

A billion times this. What about purchasing pharmaceuticals and other supplies from the private sector... does that count? Or should the NHS make everything it uses too?

 

There is also a fairly significant difference between privatisation and outsourcing and I'm a bit surprised that they are being conflated in this manner.

[Saintandy666]

So, what about Cameron and his no third term intention, repeating Blair's similar blunder. Seems to be a complete and bizarre own goal. Ignoring the presumption that he'll even get a second term, he appears to have kickstarted the search for the next Tory leader in a very public sense, even naming potential successors! Any Cameron second term will now be beset by whispers of when he will stand down to give the next person a decent run, and I can't see him lasting beyond c. 2017/18 now. Question is, would a potential successor then repeat Brown's mistake of no election?! Although this is all without stating that a Tory led government is at present no means a given, quite far from it really.

 

What worries me though is Theresa May. Whilst Cameron is generally a 'moderate' Tory, she is anything but. If she had had her way there would no Human Right's Act, a snoopers charter to spy on us all and a vague and conceived ban on 'extremists' speaking on university campuses. I'm quite worried that a person who seems to care so little for civil liberties could get the keys to number 10 via the backdoor route, and that seems to be what could happen now. Vote Cameron and end up with May.

[Batman]

So, what about Cameron and his no third term intention, repeating Blair's similar blunder. Seems to be a complete and bizarre own goal. Ignoring the presumption that he'll even get a second term, he appears to have kickstarted the search for the next Tory leader in a very public sense, even naming potential successors! Any Cameron second term will now be beset by whispers of when he will stand down to give the next person a decent run, and I can't see him lasting beyond c. 2017/18 now. Question is, would a potential successor then repeat Brown's mistake of no election?! Although this is all without stating that a Tory led government is at present no means a given, quite far from it really.

 

What worries me though is Theresa May. Whilst Cameron is generally a 'moderate' Tory, she is anything but. If she had had her way there would no Human Right's Act, a snoopers charter to spy on us all and a vague and conceived ban on 'extremists' speaking on university campuses. I'm quite worried that a person who seems to care so little for civil liberties could get the keys to number 10 via the backdoor route, and that seems to be what could happen now. Vote Cameron and end up with May.

 

Won't you be able to not vote for her party in a general election?

 

If she is so horrible, what is the worry??

[CB Fry]

Won't you be able to not vote for her party in a general election?

 

If she is so horrible, what is the worry??

That's the end of all the political threads on here then.

[pap]

Won't you be able to not vote for her party in a general election?

 

If she is so horrible, what is the worry??

 

That's brill. I didn't realise that young SaintAndy666 wielded that much political power. I was trundling along with the entirely false assumption that it would be the party able to return the most members from 650 seats that would have the best chances of forming a government.

 

SaintAndy666; can you get those files for please? You know the ones I mean. There's a lad.

[trousers]

Any Cameron second term will now be beset by whispers of when he will stand down to give the next person a decent run

 

Journos would have stoked up these "whispers" during the next term regardless of how Cameron answered the BBC's question yesterday. In fact, had he done what politicians usually do and avoid answering the question that would have given rise to even more speculation in due course. I thought you'd find it refreshing that a politician actually said what they were thinking rather than put up a smoke screen?

 

"Damned if they do...."

 

Anyway, it'll be Boris next rather than May so fret ye not

Edited 24 March, 2015 by trousers

[Saintandy666]

Journos would have stoked up these "whispers" during the next term regardless of how Cameron answered the BBC's question yesterday. In fact, had he done what politicians usually do and avoid answering the question that would have given rise to even more speculation in due course. I thought you'd find it refreshing that a politician actually said what they were thinking rather than put up a smoke screen?

 

"Damned if they do...."

 

Anyway, it'll be Boris next rather than May so fret ye not

 

Oh, it's certainly nice to know! Well done Dave there. But it is a strategic cock-up and comes across a tiny bit arrogant also. He should have just said 'I'm putting all my thoughts into getting a second term at the moment'. My point on the tories in general now is that if you vote Cameron, he will be gone by 2017/18 and whilst he is a relatively moderate Tory, he will most likely be replaced by a very unmoderate Tory who has attempted to introduce a series of very worry laws which infringe on civil liberties.

 

On Boris, I'm not so sure. He kind of peaked a few years back, and whilst he is popular with the public, I'm not so sure about his levels with the Tory party and whether they would vote for him enmass for the leader. He'll need to clear up his game a bit - show he is a bit more serious before any run, in my opinion anyways.

[Saintandy666]

That's brill. I didn't realise that young SaintAndy666 wielded that much political power. I was trundling along with the entirely false assumption that it would be the party able to return the most members from 650 seats that would have the best chances of forming a government.

 

SaintAndy666; can you get those files for please? You know the ones I mean. There's a lad.

 

I sadly do not live in a marginal constituency, and my uni constituency is completely unmarginal also (though it is next door to a very marginal one, so that's quite exciting). But in terms of my vote, it'll have to be an on principle one!

[buctootim]

Journos would have stoked up these "whispers" during the next term regardless of how Cameron answered the BBC's question yesterday. In fact, had he done what politicians usually do and avoid answering the question that would have given rise to even more speculation in due course. I thought you'd find it refreshing that a politician actually said what they were thinking rather than put up a smoke screen?

 

"Damned if they do...."

 

Anyway, it'll be Boris next rather than May so fret ye not

 

We should have an 8 year max term. Its unhealthy for anyone to be PM longer and it would do away with the speculation.

[Batman]

That's the end of all the political threads on here then.

 

Good point. Could be added to many of the posts on this thread.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

We should have an 8 year max term. Its unhealthy for anyone to be PM longer and it would do away with the speculation.

 

Haven't they fixed parliament to 5 year terms now?

[Bearsy]

Oh, it's certainly nice to know! Well done Dave there. But it is a strategic cock-up and comes across a tiny bit arrogant also. He should have just said 'I'm putting all my thoughts into getting a second term at the moment'. My point on the tories in general now is that if you vote Cameron, he will be gone by 2017/18 and whilst he is a relatively moderate Tory, he will most likely be replaced by a very unmoderate Tory who has attempted to introduce a series of very worry laws which infringe on civil liberties.

 

Politician in giving a straight answer to a question scandal! He just earned himself the floating bear votes

[Saintandy666]

Haven't they fixed parliament to 5 year terms now?

 

It is fixed to 5 years - but that can be overturned by either a 2/3rds majority vote for an election. Or just a 'No confidence' vote by a simple majority, followed by 14 days in which another government can not be formed. 5 years is too long in my opinion, 4 would be better.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

It is fixed to 5 years - but that can be overturned by either a 2/3rds majority vote for an election. Or just a 'No confidence' vote by a simple majority, followed by 14 days in which another government can not be formed. 5 years is too long in my opinion, 4 would be better.

 

Ok, so a better suggestion for tim would be 10 years. As in 2 full terms (as it is).

[buctootim]

Ok, so a better suggestion for tim would be 10 years. As in 2 full terms (as it is).

 

But changing the party leader (ie the putative PM) at the same time as the election throws up problems of 'who is the new guy?' 'what will they do?. It might actually work better to have the PM on four year cycles and parliament on five.

[saint si]

Looking at it another way - if the new party leader was agreed 3-6 months before the general election, this would allow the incumbent PM to focus on "running the country" right up to the election date, whilst the new leader could focus entirely on the campaign.

 

Might also provide an advantage as voters like to vote for change (i.e. hoping for better), and a new leader would give some illusion of change even if main party policies are not affected.

[buctootim]

Looking at it another way - if the new party leader was agreed 3-6 months before the general election, this would allow the incumbent PM to focus on "running the country" right up to the election date, whilst the new leader could focus entirely on the campaign.

 

Might also provide an advantage as voters like to vote for change (i.e. hoping for better), and a new leader would give some illusion of change even if main party policies are not affected.

 

I dont disagree with the logic - its just 10 years as PM is too long imo. You inevitably lose touch with reality - as was the case with Thatcher and Blair towards the end.

Edited 24 March, 2015 by buctootim

[Saintandy666]

Looking at it another way - if the new party leader was agreed 3-6 months before the general election, this would allow the incumbent PM to focus on "running the country" right up to the election date, whilst the new leader could focus entirely on the campaign.

 

Might also provide an advantage as voters like to vote for change (i.e. hoping for better), and a new leader would give some illusion of change even if main party policies are not affected.

 

If we had a presidential system, this could work. Even incumbent President has to be approved via primary system.

[Lord Duckhunter]

But changing the party leader (ie the putative PM) at the same time as the election throws up problems of 'who is the new guy?' 'what will they do?. It might actually work better to have the PM on four year cycles and parliament on five.

 

But you are voting for a local MP, not a party. We don't have a presidential system . The pm is the person who can command a majority in the commons, therefore if the torys want to change leaders they are fully entitled to, your mp will remain the same person. You cant start putting rules in place about how long someone can serve, if they command a majority they can serve for as long as they want. They step down because they realise theyll become an electrol liability , nothing else. Theyre all obsessed with how history will judge them.

 

The party leader may not even get elected to the commons ( certainly possible in cleggs case) , or even not be a member of the commons as in Bennett and Farage.

Edited 24 March, 2015 by Lord Duckhunter

[Saintandy666]

But you are voting for a local MP, not a party. We don't have a presidential system . The pm is the person who can command a majority in the commons, therefore if the torys want to change leaders they are fully entitled to, your mp will remain the same person. The party leader may not even get elected to the commons ( certainly possible in cleggs case) , or even not be a member of the commons as in Bennett and Farage.

 

That's the technical truth, but there's a tension there as politics has become increasingly about the leader and party as opposed to the individual MP. Likewise with Brown, if there is a change of PM, there would be a lot of clamour for another election so the people can feel like they endorsed them.

[hutch]

Increasingly since when, Andy. In your experience, like.

[Saintandy666]

Increasingly since when, Andy. In your experience, like.

 

What do you think Hutch, in your experience?

[hutch]

Same old same old. None of it is new.

[Saintandy666]

Same old same old. None of it is new.

 

So you don't think the way in which politics is done and presented, and the balance of power between an MP and their party, has changed at all the past 20-30 years? What makes you think that?

[pap]

Cameron getting heckled by pensioners at Age UK.

 

[video=youtube;7zsi-g4JpvY]

 

I like the bit at the end where he tries to do a "deal" with them so they won't boo and jeer

 

Arficus maximus, as the Romans might* have said.

 

*I'm not confident.

[Lord Duckhunter]

That's the technical truth, but there's a tension there as politics has become increasingly about the leader and party as opposed to the individual MP. Likewise with Brown, if there is a change of PM, there would be a lot of clamour for another election so the people can feel like they endorsed them.

 

My point was in response to calls for a fixed term pm . It is not the job of the state to legislate for how long somebody can be leader of a party . It is up to the party members who their leader is and for how long they can lead the party .

[JackFrost]

Cameron & Miliband Live has just started on C4

[LGTL]

Cameron being utterly eaten alive. Good luck Ed.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Ed will be bricking it , if he performs like he did in yesterday's PMQ's he's going to get nuked

[LGTL]

Well one thing is certain, he can't do any worse then call me Dave.

[Lord Duckhunter]

The format is playing right into his hands now.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Cameron struggled, Ed is going to be car crash tv.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

As an aside, I've been relegated to the bedroom to watch it cos the other half wants to watch Towie and not this 'boring rubbish'.

 

FML.

[Lord Duckhunter]

The audiance have sucked the life out of it. I'm not interested in whether disabled Doris from Woking is under apricated by employers , I want Paxo , wiggy Neil and others interviewing them , not a bunch of star struck joes . Boring

[aintforever]

Cameron was ripped apart, **** knows how milliband will cope with that.

 

What is the point in some of these questions FFS

[Unbelievable Jeff]

The audiance have sucked the life out of it. I'm not interested in whether disabled Doris from Woking is under apricated by employers , I want Paxo , wiggy Neil and others interviewing them , not a bunch of star struck joes . Boring

 

****ing sycophants.

[Lord Duckhunter]

" Hi prime minister ."

 

"my question is , do you love fluffy kittens?"

[CB Fry]

Kay Burley is dreadful.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Clapped after first question, gone downhill massively since then.

[Patrick Bateman]

Clapped after first question, gone downhill massively since then.

 

Jesus, you're not watching that guff are you? Bung Alien on.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Jesus, you're not watching that guff are you? Bung Alien on.

 

Ha! I like watching politicians squirm!

[CB Fry]

Inside Number 9 about to start. Will have to catch up with Paxo's demolition of Ed later.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Milliband is so unnatural , terrible . The audiance are monsterin him . But, Kay Burly has been embarrassing , much much harder on Ed .Totally biased , disgrace .

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Milliband is so unnatural , terrible . The audiance are monsterin him . But, Kay Burly has been embarrassing , much much harder on Ed .Totally biased , disgrace .

 

The audience seem like a Tory audience, he did so badly.

 

And now Paxman...

[The Cat]

I thought Milliband did alright. He'll have my vote if he comes out and straight up calls Paxman a ****.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

I thought Milliband did alright. He'll have my vote if he comes out and straight up calls Paxman a ****.

 

I like his grey patch, looks like Cruella De Ville...

[Lord Duckhunter]

"Are we full "

 

" No, but we need to get immigration down" FFS

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Paxman going easy on him

[LGTL]

The bias from Kay was disgraceful.