The Labour Government

[Vic]

I am not suggesting for a moment we are in imminent danger of a muslim theocracy, as you say the numbers are of course too small. The point I was making and I think you accept is that a small highly motivated minority can take control of a passive majority and exercise power. Therefore there is no comfort in the numbers that suggest only a minority of UK muslims prefer Sharia law. We saw at the last election in that the muslim vote was being re-organised along more sectarian lines , this will be an opportunity for militant Islam and they will have scant respect for the British liberal values you mention. This will pose a threat to our way of life in regard to tolerance, free speech etc.

As to your second point, I do wonder sometimes if our version of democracy will survive but usually convince myself it will. I am not surprised therefore that some may not reach the same conclusion.
Democracy surely has to be seen to work , the will of the majority should prevail and be seen to prevail. Unfortunately in recent times we have seen the opposite. Whatever your opinion of Brexit, the country voted to leave the EU, yet this democratic vote was undermined at every turn in our own Parliament with the complicity of the Speaker of the House. The establishment conspired to thwart the democratic will of the people.
The majority of the electorate want to see considerably lower immigration, both major political parties know this, they both promise to deliver this yet in government they do the opposite.
At the last election, the Labour Party won 63% of the seats in Parliament with barely 33% of the vote, is their agenda the will of the people? The system does not work.

That said I would suggest that the biggest driver of the anti - democracy sentiment you mention is that the problems of the Country seem intractable. None of the major parties or politicians inspire confidence or have any sense of consensus between them on how to move forward. The country is divided by identity politics, culture wars, generational wealth disparity etc, you could easily be forgiven for feeling it is ungovernable.
In such circumstances, is surprising that some might yearn for an strong authoritarian leader to cut through all the different interest groups and do, on balance what is right for the majority and the country , I don't think so and history tells us we shouldn't be surprised either.

Who are these people ? Nothing sinister ,just ordinary, hard working tax payers, fucked off with paying for everything, not being listened to and being taken for granted. Are they organised and funded - no , they are just taken for granted.

No wonder the CCP are as dismissive of our version of democracy as we are of theirs.

Wrong thread, and nearly a decade ago, but "Whatever your opinion of Brexit, the country voted to leave the EU, yet this democratic vote was undermined at every turn in our own Parliament with the complicity of the Speaker of the House" is utter tosh.

What was undermined was the expectation of a small minority that their version of Brexit (e.g. no deal is better than a bad deal) should determine how a narrow victory based on lies should work out.

 

[metalblue]

Looks like he can use it for whatever he wants as long as he declares it. The question that the Good Law Society is rightly asking is what are these healthcare companies expecting from the Health Secretary in exchange for the tens of thousands of pounds they are giving him? He is after all only a tenporary guardian of OUR NHS, we should have a right to know what has been asked by these companies.

I kind of hoped, rather naively, that this sort of thing would stop when Labour came to power. Ho hum.

No chance that it was ever going to stop. Lammy had about £250k or so donated by the Chinese to him a couple of years ago or so.

I guess the donators hope it gives them some sort of ability to have conversations with the minister or one of their juniors. To a degree we can’t be surprised these people/firms want the ability to press their case, it only becomes a problem if it influences decisions that aren’t in the best interests of the nation.

 

[Postman Pep]

The Labour party. Funding through donations which above a certain figure have to be registered and declared.

Not really. These are individual donations to support the parliamentary work of Streeting, staffing costs, campaigns etc. They don't all go in one big pot.

Probably, but that begs the question as to why we are having a redundant conversation over legal donations which are used to buy access and influence.

I mean it was only 2 pages back but I brought it up in relation to the MOS hit piece on Zarah Sultana. Sure there is a suggestion she may be in breach for not declaring her partner works for the FBU but the wider accusation is of a 'conflict of interests'.

Surely the same applies to the man with the brief of overseeing NHS reform while receiving substantial donations from private healthcare interests? Unless of course you think the level of scrutiny you alluded to should be limited to whether it is within the rules and not the nature of the access and influence.

If so presumably you are fine with this.

Foreign Office met pro-Israel lobbyist to discuss arms exports

Exclusive: Pro-Israel lobbyist Trevor Chinn offered top diplomat ‘recommendations’ on Middle East policy.

www.declassifieduk.org

 

[metalblue]

"wes streeting always was a right wing, lickspittle ****"

I knew there was a reason I quite liked him ya leftie tosser ;)

 

[Postman Pep]

I knew there was a reason I quite liked him ya leftie tosser ;)

 

[metalblue]

View attachment 159399

Hahahaha

 

[BobKowalski]

Not really. These are individual donations to support the parliamentary work of Streeting, staffing costs, campaigns etc. They don't all go in one big pot.

I mean it was only 2 pages back but I brought it up in relation to the MOS hit piece on Zarah Sultana. Sure there is a suggestion she may be in breach for not declaring her partner works for the FBU but the wider accusation is of a 'conflict of interests'.

Surely the same applies to the man with the brief of overseeing NHS reform while receiving substantial donations from private healthcare interests? Unless of course you think the level of scrutiny you alluded to should be limited to whether it is within the rules and not the nature of the access and influence.

If so presumably you are fine with this.

Foreign Office met pro-Israel lobbyist to discuss arms exports

Exclusive: Pro-Israel lobbyist Trevor Chinn offered top diplomat ‘recommendations’ on Middle East policy.

www.declassifieduk.org

Not at all. As I said in another post I question why these donations are legal and that they shouldn’t be. The issue then becomes a wider one in how we fund political parties and whether State funding is part of the solution.

In the meantime all donations should be registered, scrutinised and questions/concerns raised etc., which is what is happening here. But, I don’t have to ask what these people are getting, or hoping to get, for their money as we already know.

Crucially, though, Labour have to operate within the current laws, irrespective of my opinion on the laws. That is my issue with the Johnson’s and Farage’s of this world who treat rules and laws as an inconvenience to circumvent.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Not at all. As I said in another post I question why these donations are legal and that they shouldn’t be. The issue then becomes a wider one in how we fund political parties and whether State funding is part of the solution.

In the meantime all donations should be registered, scrutinised and questions/concerns raised etc., which is what is happening here. But, I don’t have to ask what these people are getting, or hoping to get, for their money as we already know.

Crucially, though, Labour have to operate within the current laws, irrespective of my opinion on the laws. That is my issue with the Johnson’s and Farage’s of this world who treat rules and laws as an inconvenience to circumvent.

I agree entirely Bob, the ability to influence policy via donations or bribes as they are also known should be removed completely. Surely we all want this? Big business and wealthy individuals should not have any more influence than you or I. They can write letters and put their case for change in meetings etc just like the rest of us.

 

[hilts]

Probably, but that begs the question as to why we are having a redundant conversation over legal donations which are used to buy access and influence.

The conversation should be why is this legal and should we allow it? Is State funding the answer with perhaps a positive weighting for less mainstream political parties that score above a minimum percentage in a GE - Greens, Reform, Count Buckethead.

I read it much more as health Secretary/Labour receives money from private health companies. They're gonna want their pound of flesh I agree about state funding rather than donations. It's a problem most countries have tbh.

Personally I would allow them an election fund, they get plenty of free publicity on the TV. They should stand by their records and words.

It's no coincidence the rich get richer and it's the rich that give rather generous donations.

 

[hilts]

Not sure if people realise that every MP receives donations. There’s a 1007 page online document that anyone can check to see what each MP receives. Streeting’s looks fairly unremarkable compared to the rest.

This has been discussed many a time under different parties so its not a Streeting thing but the optics are bad when donations are given from private health companies to the guy in charge of the NHS. Like I said the Tories got called for it many a time, we are all aware there is no law breaking.

And I'm sure everyone was so dismissive and apathetic to it under them as well :-;

Everything comes around again on here but unfortunately not everyone likes to play with a straight bat. It seems the colour of the uniform is the main decider.

 

[hilts]

View attachment 159399

That's earily uncanny :-)

 

[hilts]

No chance that it was ever going to stop. Lammy had about £250k or so donated by the Chinese to him a couple of years ago or so.

I guess the donators hope it gives them some sort of ability to have conversations with the minister or one of their juniors. To a degree we can’t be surprised these people/firms want the ability to press their case, it only becomes a problem if it influences decisions that aren’t in the best interests of the nation.

Well I would say £250k is a lot for a chat without any obligation to act but more importantly why should rich individuals or companies get the ear of any minister rather than Bob in his care home.

 

[metalblue]

Well I would say £250k is a lot for a chat without any obligation to act but more importantly why should rich individuals or companies get the ear of any minister rather than Bob in his care home.

Like those in the Rose Network? No idea mate but 10 large used to get you tea and biscuits with that tool makers kid.

 

[hilts]

Like those in the Rose Network? No idea mate but 10 large used to get you tea and biscuits with that tool makers kid.

Rose Network – The Labour Party

Our Rose Network is a nationwide network of like-minded Labour supporters committed to supporting our Labour government.

labour.org.uk

I'm gonna go for the 2024 circle. I have offered one English pound and expect my hip operation before 2027.

I eagerly await my reply.

 

[Postman Pep]

Not at all. As I said in another post I question why these donations are legal and that they shouldn’t be. The issue then becomes a wider one in how we fund political parties and whether State funding is part of the solution.

In the meantime all donations should be registered, scrutinised and questions/concerns raised etc., which is what is happening here. But, I don’t have to ask what these people are getting, or hoping to get, for their money as we already know.

Crucially, though, Labour have to operate within the current laws, irrespective of my opinion on the laws. That is my issue with the Johnson’s and Farage’s of this world who treat rules and laws as an inconvenience to circumvent.

Hard to disagree with any of that. To be clear I wasn't expecting you fill the void left by the lobby hacks ;-)

As to a solution

 

[Hertzblue]

Wrong thread, and nearly a decade ago, but "Whatever your opinion of Brexit, the country voted to leave the EU, yet this democratic vote was undermined at every turn in our own Parliament with the complicity of the Speaker of the House" is utter tosh.

What was undermined was the expectation of a small minority that their version of Brexit (e.g. no deal is better than a bad deal) should determine how a narrow victory based on lies should work out.

No, not the wrong thread, I was replying to another posters concerns about a proportion of the electorate losing faith in democracy, therefore entirely appropriate.
Not surprised you are not big on democracy though, more surprised you are a fan of the EU - the Peoples Republic is more attainable outside of that Capitalist cabal.

 

[hilts]

Hard to disagree with any of that. To be clear I wasn't expecting you fill the void left by the lobby hacks ;-)

As to a solution

View attachment 159432

I miss Robin Williams.

Rose Network – The Labour Party

Our Rose Network is a nationwide network of like-minded Labour supporters committed to supporting our Labour government.

labour.org.uk

Anyhow I do wonder with politicians if they just lack any self awareness, have an inflated opinion of oneself or are having a joke at peoples expense.

Let's have a look at those circles

1945 circle Atlee gave us the NHS, top socialist. He's the cheapest version

1964 circle Wilson expanding welfare state, improving inequality, second cheapest version

1997 circle Blair now its open to the more loaded individual in the new Labour version. I mean who doesn't like a bit of Socialism but business need a little love.

2024 circle Starmer now you need to be super loaded for new Labour 2.0 and joining the main titled leader, yes lawyer Sir Keir Starmer. How much? Well we can't say you need to contact us to discuss all the wonderful opportunities for a person of your wealth.

I mean its hard to imagine someone not seeing the hilarious irony of it all.

I'm going fake website surely?

 

[Vic]

No, not the wrong thread, I was replying to another posters concerns about a proportion of the electorate losing faith in democracy, therefore entirely appropriate.
Not surprised you are not big on democracy though, more surprised you are a fan of the EU - the Peoples Republic is more attainable outside of that Capitalist cabal.

I wanted more democracy. I wanted another democratic vote on leaving the EU once the lies about what it would mean were exposed.

 

[hilts]

I wanted more democracy. I wanted another democratic vote on leaving the EU once the lies about what it would mean were exposed.

Kinell we would have to rerun every general election ever bloody held, still end up with a minority get a majority of seats though.
If only for a democracy where members of a political party could vote for some sort of bloody change.

Manifestos would still be mainly a work of fiction mind,

Fiction or lies whatever:-)

 

[TinFoilHat]

UK special investigations team doubles tax haul in crackdown on the rich

HMRC department raised £1.5bn in 2023-24 tax year

www.ft.com