[Politics] The General Election Thread

[Thunder Bolt]

It’s got nothing to do with the Tories as “The Cube” is a privately owned building. I do wish people would check the facts before making inaccurate claims - embarrassing really!

The Tories could have made it law to make landlords remove cladding like this or even outlaw this cheap cladding. Instead they have been playing silly games with votes in Parliament or even trying to suspend Parliament until the Supreme court ruled it unlawful.

It has happened on their watch, so their responsibility.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Let us hope that all those in favour have public sector or DB pensions, because if McDonnell gets his way and continues his raids on industry, those poor saps whose pension funds depend on the stockmarket are going to take a hit!

Despite arguments against it like that, some people will still approve of it. See Indyref1 in 2014 and Brexit in 2016 for reference and welcome to the joy and reality of politics in the 21st Century. Reasoned debate on the substance of such things, compromise and middle ground have already become so quaint.

 

[Two Professors]

Tories 1870:
Free Education would mean anarchy.
Tories 1916:
Votes for women would destroy our society.
Tories 1944:
Free healthcare would bankrupt our country.
Tories 2019:
Free Broadband is crazed Communism.

This one trumps the lot:

 

[theonlymikey]

It’s got nothing to do with the Tories as “The Cube” is a privately owned building. I do wish people would check the facts before making inaccurate claims - embarrassing really!

Because apparently acting governments are no longer allowed to introduce laws and legislation in this land. The kind of laws to stop this type of cladding being used, and forcibly, for this cladding to be changed.

check the facts before making inaccurate claims. Here's a fact for you. Many people died in a fire, where flammable cladding made the fire worse. roll on two years, it's happened again, and the government have implement no changes to stop it.

Consider this fact well. and. truly. checked.

 

[Two Professors]

Yesterday I was almost taken in by the media's quotes of outraged tory bluster about Labour's broad band idea. Nobody blustering mentioned 'by 2030'. I wonder how soon the criticism will be spun around to make it sound like Labour's broadband policy is 'too little, too late' ?

I have had it with all the tory lies and, when you add in stuff like that above - can't even deal with flammable cladding, FFS - the tories are now Dead To Me.

I'm voting labour. The prancing ninnies, who will doubtless call me a deluded commie-loving IRA-supporting tosser, can absolutley do one.

I live in hope that a law is passed forcing people to publicly apologise when they spread stories on twatter without evidence,

 

[dingodan]

Tories 1870:
Free Education would mean anarchy.
Tories 1916:
Votes for women would destroy our society.
Tories 1944:
Free healthcare would bankrupt our country.
Tories 2019:
Free Broadband is crazed Communism.

The 1870 Education Act was opposed by some, including many liberals, for quite complex reasons (for example, Joseph Chamberlain opposed the bill). It was also opposed by many of the poor, and by those who feared State/Church indoctrination of entire generations. Also, under the act parents still had to pay fees, although schools could pay on behalf of poor children, but they rarely did. It was eventually replaced by The 1902 Education Act which set up LEAs and set up a statutory system of secondary education, enacted by a Conservative government.

In 1928, women were enfranchised on the same terms as men. By a Conservative government.

In 1944 The white paper "A national health service", was published. It detailed the wartime (Conservative) coalition government’s vision for a comprehensive, free and unified health service.

You are either lying or have been lied to.

I'll just assume lied to.

Happy to help.

 

[Bodian]

112 yesterday, down to 50 today!

View attachment 117187

To be fair, the drop is because of a significant change in the way they have been applying the percentage vote to seats - not because of any swing in voting intentions.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

It’s got nothing to do with the Tories as “The Cube” is a privately owned building. I do wish people would check the facts before making inaccurate claims - embarrassing really!

My house is a privately-owned building and I have to comply with all kinds of building regulations enforced upon me - the latest during my renovations is to have fire doors on bedrooms because the new window openings are apparently too small to act as fire escapes.

So governmental regulations can force me to do this to mitigate risk of fire, but flammable cladding on the outside of buildings, they can't be bothered to regulate this in a post-Grenfell world? I suppose they are hiding behind 'on-going investigation bollocks.

 

[Bozza]

To be fair, the drop is because of a significant change in the way they have been applying the percentage vote to seats - not because of any swing in voting intentions.

The three-digit majority did seem somewhat outlandish!

 

[melias shoes]

I have had it with all the tory lies and, when you add in stuff like that above - can't even deal with flammable cladding, FFS - the tories are now Dead To Me.
.

I was under the impression that they already were to you H.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I wouldn't dream of calling you names, Harry, but as a uni lecturer you no doubt have a nice secure pension, despite recent changes, and will be somewhat sheltered from the financial lunacy of the far left. Some of us are rather more exposed to the danger.
You deluded.......................
Oh sorry, I wasn't going to say that.
Lots of Love,
A prancing ninnie.

In which case, you sound like exactly the type of voter that Johnson, JRM and Cummings are t̶a̶r̶g̶e̶t̶t̶i̶n̶g̶ putting at the top of their agenda.

(And quite successfully, apparently )

I'm sure he was only joking

 

[BLOCK F]

Despite arguments against it like that, some people will still approve of it. See Indyref1 in 2014 and Brexit in 2016 for reference and welcome to the joy and reality of politics in the 21st Century. Reasoned debate on the substance of such things, compromise and middle ground have already become so quaint.

I am not familiar with any Indyrefs; however, I do agree that compromise and middle ground have, as you say, become so quaint.
I said in another post that the older I get, the more I believe that some kind of PR arrangement may be the way forward.
I am no keen student of politics and I know that system is not perfect either, but it may be better than the horrific bollocks we seem to go through these days.

 

[BLOCK F]

In which case, you sound like exactly the type of voter that Johnson, JRM and Cummings are t̶a̶r̶g̶e̶t̶t̶i̶n̶g̶ putting at the top of their agenda.

(And quite successfully, apparently )

Good Morning Watford,
May be it is my age, but you've lost me. Could you explain more fully.

P.S. Love your Jag. Mine is a more sedate XJ!

 

[Wardy's twin]

Suggestions that flammable cladding involved in the Bolton student fires. Ooops. How will Tories spin this one?

Labour council....we told them but they didn't listen.

 

[theonlymikey]

Labour council....we told them but they didn't listen.

Please tell me this is a joke? Are you seriously trying to blame Labour for this governments inaction?

 

[Surrey Phil]

My house is a privately-owned building and I have to comply with all kinds of building regulations enforced upon me - the latest during my renovations is to have fire doors on bedrooms because the new window openings are apparently too small to act as fire escapes.

So governmental regulations can force me to do this to mitigate risk of fire, but flammable cladding on the outside of buildings, they can't be bothered to regulate this in a post-Grenfell world? I suppose they are hiding behind 'on-going investigation bollocks.

Governments can change regulations of course but with private estates the cost of compliance falls on the leaseholders. I manage a high rise building with 100 properties in and the cost to replace the cladding is just under £3m, that’s £30k per flat. Most leaseholders simply cannot raise that amount, so it is unrealistic to expect this to be a quick fix. The issue is with building regulations and in this buildings case it is 17 years old, so built in 2002 when Labour were in power!

 

[lawros left foot]

The 1870 Education Act was opposed by some, including many liberals, for quite complex reasons (for example, Joseph Chamberlain opposed the bill). It was also opposed by many of the poor, and by those who feared State/Church indoctrination of entire generations. Also, under the act parents still had to pay fees, although schools could pay on behalf of poor children, but they rarely did. It was eventually replaced by The 1902 Education Act which set up LEAs and set up a statutory system of secondary education, enacted by a Conservative government.

In 1928, women were enfranchised on the same terms as men. By a Conservative government.

In 1944 The white paper "A national health service", was published. It detailed the wartime (Conservative) coalition government’s vision for a comprehensive, free and unified health service.

You are either lying or have been lied to.

I'll just assume lied to.

Happy to help.

edit

 

[theonlymikey]

Governments can change regulations of course but with private estates the cost of compliance falls on the leaseholders. I manage a high rise building with 100 properties in and the cost to replace the cladding is just under £3m, that’s £30k per flat. Most leaseholders simply cannot raise that amount, so it is unrealistic to expect this to be a quick fix. The issue is with building regulations and in this buildings case it is 17 years old, so built in 2002 when Labour were in power!

Either way a life is worth more than £30k.

Could there perhaps have been a fund? I'm sure there could have been lots of ways for the the government to step in and help tenants AND leaseholders.

 

[dingodan]

edit

I said what I said, and it's true.

The women's vote was vigorously opposed by many women in 1916, that doesn't mean women today should be considered anti-women though does it.

These things are nowhere near as simple as you would like to pretend.

Infact, Millicent Garrett Fawcett believed that party-affiliated women’s organisations (such as the Primrose League) were essential to the fight to enfranchise women: “the organised political work of women has grown since 1884, and has become so valuable that none of the parties can afford to do without it or to alienate it.”

The Conservative Party were the first party to organise large numbers of women for political work through the Primrose League and had the largest body of politicised women in the nation. Leaders of the Conservative Party and many prominent male and female members had spoken in favor of female enfranchisement prior to 1918, and it was a coalition government, to which the Conservatives belonged, that voted the Representation of the People Act of 1918. It was a Conservative majority government in 1928 that enfranchised women on the same terms as men.

There are plenty of people today who simply believe that Conservatives opposed womens participation in politics, and that it was a liberal vs conservative battle which liberals won.

Sorry you are being lied to and manipulated by people you think are "the good guys".

Learn history, don't be a tool of political propaganda.

Thanks.

 

[Wardy's twin]

Please tell me this is a jojke? Are you seriously trying to blame Labour for this governments inaction?

I was being facetious ... it will be anyone's fault but the Tories.

It's not a joking matter but another example when you focus on profit.