A cross party problem

Forums New posts
egb_hibs

egb_hibs

Private Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2002
Was listening to Miriam Cates, former tory mp and now GB news presenter, defending Labour earlier.

She said they and the tories (and by implication any governing party) are now trapped in the same bind. Everyone knows Britain needs massive reform, but any measures that might start to make inroads cause MPs to shit it over losing their seats, and so rebellions against leadership follow, preventing any meaningful change.

I think this is absolutely right, and while some may prefer to blame politicians for everything, the electorate is massively at fault and totally unwilling to face reality: this is the root of the above problem.

Not that politicians are not to blame also. The above can work because rival parties promise milk and honey rather than agreeing the governing party needs to do hard things - which they could do while still disagreeing on which hard things.

Moreover, Labour made a mess of some of their unpopular measures given choices they made in parallel. I think getting the country to accept tough calls requires coherent messaging and an even handed approach rather than the appearance of targeting enemies and rewarding friends.

Anyway, what do y'all think; are we voters to blame as well as politicians? If not, how do you reckon governments can actually go about tackling our unsustainable position while not getting turfed out?
 
egb_hibs said:
Was listening to Miriam Cates, former tory mp and now GB news presenter, defending Labour earlier.

She said they and the tories (and by implication any governing party) are now trapped in the same bind. Everyone knows Britain needs massive reform, but any measures that might start to make inroads cause MPs to shit it over losing their seats, and so rebellions against leadership follow, preventing any meaningful change.

I think this is absolutely right, and while some may prefer to blame politicians for everything, the electorate is massively at fault and totally unwilling to face reality: this is the root of the above problem.

Not that politicians are not to blame also. The above can work because rival parties promise milk and honey rather than agreeing the governing party needs to do hard things - which they could do while still disagreeing on which hard things.

Moreover, Labour made a mess of some of their unpopular measures given choices they made in parallel. I think getting the country to accept tough calls requires coherent messaging and an even handed approach rather than the appearance of targeting enemies and rewarding friends.

Anyway, what do y'all think; are we voters to blame as well as politicians? If not, how do you reckon governments can actually go about tackling our unsustainable position while not getting turfed out?
Click to expand...
If Starmer had any balls he would tell the rebels to go fuck themselves. What are they going to do? Force a vote of no confidence? Their party is so unpopular they would probably lose to Reform. Want to lose your seats after less than a year? No? Well shut the fuck up.
But he doesn't and just makes himself look vacillating and weak.
 
Sancho Panza said:
If Starmer had any balls he would tell the rebels to go fuck themselves. What are they going to do? Force a vote of no confidence? Their party is so unpopular they would probably lose to Reform. Want to lose your seats after less than a year? No? Well shut the fuck up.
But he doesn't and just makes himself look vacillating and weak.
Click to expand...
I take the point, but I think Cates' point maintains. They'd be more likely to replace Starmer with Rayner who might go full on populist and avoid all hard decisions. But if the government did collapse and Reform came in, they'd be in the same position - pursue the unaffordable populism they are pitching, or themselves get punted if they tried to get real.
 
egb_hibs said:
Was listening to Miriam Cates, former tory mp and now GB news presenter, defending Labour earlier.

She said they and the tories (and by implication any governing party) are now trapped in the same bind. Everyone knows Britain needs massive reform, but any measures that might start to make inroads cause MPs to shit it over losing their seats, and so rebellions against leadership follow, preventing any meaningful change.

I think this is absolutely right, and while some may prefer to blame politicians for everything, the electorate is massively at fault and totally unwilling to face reality: this is the root of the above problem.

Not that politicians are not to blame also. The above can work because rival parties promise milk and honey rather than agreeing the governing party needs to do hard things - which they could do while still disagreeing on which hard things.

Moreover, Labour made a mess of some of their unpopular measures given choices they made in parallel. I think getting the country to accept tough calls requires coherent messaging and an even handed approach rather than the appearance of targeting enemies and rewarding friends.

Anyway, what do y'all think; are we voters to blame as well as politicians? If not, how do you reckon governments can actually go about tackling our unsustainable position while not getting turfed out?
Click to expand...
I'd say this is pretty much spot on (I need to self flagellate now that I've agreed with you on something).

Sancho's point is where I see it too
 
The electorate have full time jobs, that is reality. most don't care or have little interest in Westminster. We're not at fault for the way we're Governed.
When we put an X on that ballot paper, we expect the Politician's to deliver on their Manifesto promise's. They seldom do. .
 
connerg said:
The electorate have full time jobs, that is reality. most don't care or have little interest in Westminster. We're not at fault for the way we're Governed.
When we put an X on that ballot paper, we expect the Politician's to deliver on their Manifesto promise's. They seldom do. .
Click to expand...
That's not really the point she was making. It's not about the inticracies of policy detail its about the electorate accepting reality. If that's not possible democracy is a bust anyway.
 
Not sure sure it's the voters. They have faced years of austerity,falling wages and rampant inflation so I wouldn't blame them for not trusting politicians. The tories created the situation we have now and are facing the abyss. The politicians we have now are the worst in my time voting imho. No heseltine,Clarke,Kennedy,even Gordon brown when chancellor. The voters are wrong to swing to reform but can you blame them when this generation is worse off than their parents. Business has to be looked after first then the needs of the voters a distant second. Always been that way unfortunately. I've had the idealism sucked out of me as have thousands of other folk no doubt.
 
Maybe politicians should stop the promises then. Start being realistic.

But na. The snout will always win.
 
And all of them VERY well fed. In fact overfed in my humble opinion.

Those giants of politics like 🤔 eh 🤔 well there's 🤔 and 🤔
 
Well fed and watered. There is 9 bars and 19 restaurant's in Westminster? Subsidised price's too.
 
Aye but let's be honest all the voting along party lines (or snorting them) and braying at pmq's is thirsty hungry work.

They don't seem to give a toss about workers so close the bars and boozers down and open a Greggs.

And the fuckers can buy their own scran.
 
connerg said:
Well fed and watered. There is 9 bars and 19 restaurant's in Westminster? Subsidised price's too.
Click to expand...
We get our politicians cheap. We don't attract better calibre because we don't pay them enough. If you look at what MPs actually do - all the hours, stress, travel etc etc its a pretty miserable existence. The comments on this thread confirm exactly why it's more the fault of the electorate than the politicians. Completely out of touch with economic realities.
 
Aha well done Smurf. I can now ask my usually unanswered question.

Who exactly are those folk who would be a better type of politician? What would they bring to politics?

Party's have conferences where they make up lies eh sorry have a manifesto. The elected politicos then follow that manifesto.

So who do you reckon would make one of those top politicians who deserve a massive wedge of money for following a party manifesto?

Who stands out in the UK now who would be super snouters?
 
As politics revolves around money would those who work in high finance make the super politico?

But they may be economically gifted but what do they know about folk scraping by in the housing schemes?

Maybe get more working/ trade union politicos. But then their knowledge of high finance would be limited.

So I would say that those making the manifestos would be the decision makers.
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
Aha well done Smurf. I can now ask my usually unanswered question.

Who exactly are those folk who would be a better type of politician? What would they bring to politics?

Party's have conferences where they make up lies eh sorry have a manifesto. The elected politicos then follow that manifesto.

So who do you reckon would make one of those top politicians who deserve a massive wedge of money for following a party manifesto?

Who stands out in the UK now who would be super snouters?
Click to expand...
One of the most obvious examples, might perhaps be successful business people who in order to succeed have to manage demands from multiple competing interests within a confined budget (which they need to earn), navigate domestic and international law and fend off competitors and other external threats, while continually innovating to stay relevant.

Good luck finding anyone like that on an MPs salary. Ditto first class lawyers, engineers, planners and others who might be useful.

As such we are riddled with students unions politicians who've done nothing other than graduate to the real thing, various otherwise unemployable placard wavers in suits, a bunch of managerial types who in a business would be stuck at their level - perhaps running a call centre team, some ideological zealots, and a few folk rich enough the salary is irrelevant.

A professional and ideological civil service will run rings round them, while solutions to problems in the most dangerous era since WW2 are in the hands of people who are equipped to monitor toilet breaks and make sure everyone has done their DEI training.
 
Can you throw some names in then eegie who would fit the bill you mention?

And again they would have to follow the party line and manifesto wouldn't they?
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
Aha well done Smurf. I can now ask my usually unanswered question.

Who exactly are those folk who would be a better type of politician? What would they bring to politics?

Party's have conferences where they make up lies eh sorry have a manifesto. The elected politicos then follow that manifesto.

So who do you reckon would make one of those top politicians who deserve a massive wedge of money for following a party manifesto?

Who stands out in the UK now who would be super snouters?
Click to expand...
Exactly, they're all bent as fuck once voted in. Pay them more? You must be fucking joking @Smurf. Where's the money coming from? as you're so fond of asking. I know, slash pensions and give it to the pricks in Westminster. Pay for better minds so they can figure out better ways to fuck over the suckers who voted for them.
 
You could stand the most clever fucker in the country up as an MP but they STILL need to follow the party manifesto.

If they don't they lose the whip and end up binned.

And the next stooge comes in at the next elections.

And so it goes on. 🐷🐷🐷🐽🐽🐽
 
The manifesto is really just a set of objectives that are usually dependent on money. Generating that money is usually dependent on economic performance particularly at a time of already high taxes and high borrowing.

So it's one thing having a set of objectives. Any fool can have and set objectives. The delivery and execution of they objectives is another thing entirely. You come up against lots and lots of opposition to that very execution within the government machine of civil servants. Look how impossible delivery of a new runway is at Heathrow! Read a book like Rory Stewart "Politics on the Edge" to gain insight into how unbelievably difficult it is for government ministers to deliver on policy. Or put aside all prejudices and listen to Dominic Cummings explain how it works and how fucked the UK is until the inner mechanisms of government are completely ripped apart. I mean genuinely everyone should listen to Cummings on this and they'll far better understand a lot.

Very few government ministers deliver on policy because they're not clever enough and not qualified. One's that have had success such as say a Michael Hesteltine had proven experience of achievement in his own business building something hugely successful. He wanted to give something back and didn't get into politics for money but for personal ambition. He'd never in a million years been attracted by the money to be a politician. Government needs more like him in it but very few of high calibre in business are now attracted to life in politics.

So we now end up in a situation like the other week a Labour Government minister Sarah Jones the Minister of State for Industry with her salary of IIRC MP 90K plus for being minister another 40K. So around 130K a year - so £2500 a week, and she who has never started or ran a business. Who has never had any experience of wealth or job creation has outlined a Labour Government plan of 'The UK's Modern Industrial Strategy' to create one million well paid jobs....

I mean FFS are we serious here? Or are we really just burying our heads in the sand hoping for miracles. The government minister devising that plan should be an experienced and proven person of business. Who has been there done it in creating wealth and jobs. And let's be honest on more than £357 per day.
 
Then the uni party needs smashed Smurf they need dismantled and started again.

Yep government ministers are usually there because they kiss arse.

The new runway at Heathrow. Once again a London benefit. The folk outside the M25 get the odd crumb thrown down.

So we have all these captains of industry who know how to work budgets. So it's only fair they release the manifesto saying that they CAN do this but CANT do that.

But they still need the proles to vote for them.
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
Can you throw some names in then eegie who would fit the bill you mention?
Click to expand...
I can't really no, because they're not in politics, probably for the reasons given!
They'll be sitting in businesses and law offices around the place and unknown to me.

I'm saying, basically, we need a whole class of people that are not the current political class.
EH17 Jimmy said:
And again they would have to follow the party line and manifesto wouldn't they?
Click to expand...
Well the party leadership sets the manifesto. Like any other collective undertaking you need to get to that point by demonstrating your chops within the organisation. Those who lead businesses, to stick with that example, were following their own bosses while they were more junior. Its the same everywhere and cant really be any different.

We have other problems as well which I believe just as serious though more difficult to put in a neat little fixable package. Today’s politicians have been shaped, like the rest of their class, by universities, arts and media that are basically stupid; that dont want to understand the world because they prefer comforting narratives.

If you aren't subsequently roughed up by real life experience, you go into politics profoundly intellectually hobbled.

Related to that, political and economic ideologies as we know them are bust. Socialism is dead. Conservatism is dead. Liberalism is dead. Global capitalism is kaput.

Very few politicians have ever contributed anything of note to the political or economic
philosophies their parties align too, that requires far more clever people who have never been thick on the ground and are even less likely to emerge today.

If you compare the brutal intelligence and unflinching grasp of the world that leaders of the CCP possess, or Putin, or the Saudis or Israelis, there is simply no comparison. They've got it because they need it. We got too comfortable and disappeared up our own arseholes. We turned against understanding reality, driven by potty ideas and too much money.

There is truth in the cliche:

"Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times."
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
You could stand the most clever fucker in the country up as an MP but they STILL need to follow the party manifesto.

If they don't they lose the whip and end up binned.

And the next stooge comes in at the next elections.

And so it goes on. 🐷🐷🐷🐽🐽🐽
Click to expand...
Simple 👍
 
Smurf said:
We get our politicians cheap. We don't attract better calibre because we don't pay them enough. If you look at what MPs actually do - all the hours, stress, travel etc etc its a pretty miserable existence. The comments on this thread confirm exactly why it's more the fault of the electorate than the politicians. Completely out of touch with economic realities.
Click to expand...
You forgot to mention, MP's have fingers in many pie's. Awarding lucrative Government contracts to their pals, in return for a seat on the board/shares of the company.
About 25 years ago, the Labour MP Ellliot Morely, was caught claiming Mortgage payments through his expenses. His Mortgage had finished. When he was rumbled, his reply was, he didn't realise his Mortgage was paid off.
 
Eegie so you reckon if the trough got filled up to say £150,000 basic those industry top notchers would jump at the chance?

So they are motivated by money? Because if they are at the top of their game just now they will have a few £'s tucked away.

And when they decide to stand as an MP what will they promise us thick fuckers who need the red tops to tell us what day it is?
 
connerg said:
You forgot to mention, MP's have fingers in many pie's. Awarding lucrative Government contracts to their pals, in return for a seat on the board/shares of the company.
Click to expand...
Outside covid where government procurement processes were binned, do you have any examples of this?
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
Eegie so you reckon if the trough got filled up to say £150,000 basic those industry top notchers would jump at the chance?

So they are motivated by money? Because if they are at the top of their game just now they will have a few £'s tucked away.

And when they decide to stand as an MP what will they promise us thick fuckers who need the red tops to tell us what day it is?
Click to expand...
They will promise whatever they think will guarantee votes, whilst investigating all the extra ways to make money they didn't have access to before.
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
Eegie so you reckon if the trough got filled up to say £150,000 basic those industry top notchers would jump at the chance?

So they are motivated by money? Because if they are at the top of their game just now they will have a few £'s tucked away.

And when they decide to stand as an MP what will they promise us thick fuckers who need the red tops to tell us what day it is?
Click to expand...
You're never going to get the very top guys based on money. You could only ever get them once they had made some and were then motivated by other things like patriotism or a sense of duty. Things we have virtually demolished over recent decades, so well done us.

The smartest people having been groomed to believe prioritising the interests of britain is racist, that the things that hold societies together are reactionary, that they aren't beholden to more than 'my truth', and that there is no higher purpose than maximising ones own potential. It has consequences.

What you can do is improve the calibre that you do get. You'll never get Messi but you might get Martin Boyle. Instead we get Harry McKirdy.
 
Y
egb_hibs said:
Outside covid where government procurement processes were binned, do you have any examples of this?
Click to expand...
Yes. When Beeching closed the branch lines of the UK rail network, he proclaimed the car was the future and we need a Motorway system to support it.
It has since transpired, he was on the board of a concrete manufacturing company. That company was involved in the construction of the Motorway's.
 
connerg said:
Y

Yes. When Beeching closed the branch lines of the UK rail network, he proclained the car was the future and we need a Motorway system to support it.
It has since transpired, he was on the board of a concrete manufacturing company. That company was involved in the construction of the Motorway's.
Click to expand...
Surely that was just a coincidence 🙄
 
connerg said:
Y

Yes. When Beeching closed the branch lines of the UK rail network, he proclaimed the car was the future and we need a Motorway system to support it.
It has since transpired, he was on the board of a concrete manufacturing company. That company was involved in the construction of the Motorway's.
Click to expand...
Beeching wasn't- it was Ernest Marples who was Minister for Transport. A very dodgy self made businessman. Labour reversed some of the cuts when they came in in 1964 but much of the damage had been done. A key failing for Beeching was that he didn't factor the role branch lines had in feeding traffic to the main line. But this was also a time where the aspiration to own a car was huge. It really was seen as the future.
 
connerg said:
Y

Yes. When Beeching closed the branch lines of the UK rail network, he proclained the car was the future and we need a Motorway system to support it.
It has since transpired, he was on the board of a concrete manufacturing company. That company was involved in the construction of the Motorway's.
Click to expand...
Before my time but Google suggests Beeching was recruited to railways from ICI, who granted him a leave of absence to take on the job. He returned when it was done. Doesn't sound very cloak and dagger to me, nor does the conclusion at the time that cars and buses were the future. And it was the early 60s. I had thought you were suggesting this was a commonplace today.

I can't speak of all the myriad ministers that have come and gone, but the UK PM who has most obviously lined his pockets after leaving office is Blair. He did so by doing stuff like advising despots how to spin the murder of their people, not going to do a job for some company awarded contracts. Other lesser examples are similar such as Boris' speaking engagements etc - though Brexit blew his chance of a lucrative business gig.

Actually I suppose Nick Clegg is probably a better example ? But I'm not sure the government was awarding facebook contracts. I think he was hired for his address book and to schmooze liberal politicans - hence he was bumped when Trump came in. I can't remember what Cameron did but I think in that vein? These people become useful for their contacts.

Im not saying there is no corruption - but I doubt its decisive at national level. I suspect far more goes on in local government. Government procurement is very, very thorough.
 
Local Government, well look at the Statutory Notice scandal in Edinburgh a few years ago. A £30k roofing bill turned into £300k.
People did get jailed for it though.
 
connerg said:
Local Government, well look at the Statutory Notice scandal in Edinburgh a few years ago. A £30k roofing bill turned into £300k.
People did get jailed for it though.
Click to expand...
Yup. I expect this will be much more riddled, precisely cos its more toy town and local, ie local buyers and suppliers sharing a small pond.
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
As politics revolves around money would those who work in high finance make the super politico?

But they may be economically gifted but what do they know about folk scraping by in the housing schemes?

Maybe get more working/ trade union politicos. But then their knowledge of high finance would be limited.

So I would say that those making the manifestos would be the decision makers.
Click to expand...

In Camerons govt 14 of the cabinet were millionares some of them multi millionares. I wonder how they perceived the world. Politics should be a vocation like teaching and nursing and while remuneration is important you should be doing it to help others not take every freebie going. It sets a shocking example of the them and us attitude. No wonder millions have switched of from politics and there are more who identify as independent than the two main parties in the usa. Folk have had enough being lectured at and being shafted. Much as I detested thatcher at least she did what she said she would do. Now politicians make it up on the hoof to try and appease the latest think-tank results. Just try and implement policies that help those at the bottom of the scale and bridge the gap between rich and poor and the jobs a good un.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
  • Menu
  • Home
  • Hibs Chat
  • New Posts
  • Just Back
  • Chatroom