General Election 2010

Don't get me wrong - the current government has gone law crazy and has stripped many civil liberties. I just don't think the current opposition wouldn't have done them themselves (and has done by voting in favour).

same goes for the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan.. I can't imagine the Tories not having done the same

Don't get me wrong - the current government has gone law crazy and has stripped many civil liberties. I just don't think the current opposition wouldn't have done them themselves (and has done by voting in favour).

possibly, but the current opposition has stood up to 90 days, has stood up to expansion by stealth of the DNA database as well as other things like the use of RIPA and giving powers of surveillance (which were intended for serious law enforcement) to councils. I know that this is easier in opposition but I just think this Government has gone too far too often which is why I won't vote for them.

On top of that they have f*cked the public finances so we will be paying shedloads of tax to pay interest as opposed to spending it on front line services. Taxes will probably have to rise to pay off the debt whilst at the same time we will be expecting public services to be cut. Essentially the country has been moved to a position where we will be paying more for lessin the coming years imho.

same goes for the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan.. I can't imagine the Tories not having done the same

Perhaps, at the same time the only people who had all the evidence available were the Labour cabinet. It was their arguments that took us there. However, I think you are probably right that the Tories would have done the same, purely cos of the pressure from the yanks.

Well exactly, we were part and parcel of establishing the ECHR*, but the HRA puts it inside UK law. You no longer have to go to expensive European Courts, andn it's more clearly defined.

• not something that the nebulous 'Europe' did to us.
  
  

Oh and can I add Lord Ashcroft to BQ's list of "Tony's Mates", it was Hague who badgered for his appointment. What's your position on Non Doms?

Never really trust anyone who wants to be a politician, and actually makes it past councillor stage.

What I was trying to ask, but it being early in the day, lacked the vocabulary to do so, was if there are any instances of the Human Rights act having been used successfully to defend the human rights of an innocent Briton? I'm aware of the daily mail examples where it's supposedly been used to prevent justice being done, but no-one ever makes news about successes. If there have been such cases, could these rights have been defended using pre-existing laws? The government have roundly ignored the Human Rights act when they send police thugs to kettle protesters, so was it ever more than a piece of spin?

Ashcroft should be fired. Non Doms should not be allowed in government. Of course if the second chamber was directly elected, he would not be 'Lord' Ashcroft and Hague would have had no say in the matter.
And I would agree with your last statement too, except I wouldn't trust the ones who haven't made it past councillor stage either.

same goes for the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan.. I can't imagine the Tories not having done the same

This is an odd statement, because the Tories were in power when we last went to war with Iraq. History shows that they waited for a UN resolution, and an invitation from Kuwait to defend it from an invasion, built an international coalition, and then stopped as soon as the terms of that resolution were fulfilled. They did not march on Baghdad, and refused outright to countenance a regime change in Iraq, recognising quite rightly that it would result in massive instability in the region and an intractable war from which we would find it difficult to extricate themselves. (They probably also realised that However bad Saddam was, he was the least worst option.)

I also think that going to war with Iraq was a particularly New Labour vanity for one particular reason. I think Tony Blair, having modelled himself on Thatcher, really wanted a Falklands. But of course whereas that was a simple matter of defending British territory against an invader, with Iraq Blair made Britain the invader illegally entering a sovereign state and seeking to overthrow its head. I studied international law at university and can say with some certainty that there is no grey area. It is absolutely illegal to invade a sovereign state, and definitely illegal to remove its head of state without a UN mandate.

It's believable that they would have gone into Afghanistan I suppose, but the legality of that was more clear-cut. And without the distraction of Iraq it's conceivable that that campaign might have gone better.

For me personally the last ten years have switched me from a default labour voter to a committed green voter. Both Labour and the Tories are locked into an obsolete mindset of top-down Government, disdain bordering on actual hostility to democratic mechanisms and institutions, and an unforgivable brown-nosed servility to the blatantly incompetent and parasitic financial services sector. Both have no real understanding of the urgent need to prepare for a world in which oil is no longer affordable or even available, and -truly unforgivable given their apparent political stances - both seem to lack any real understanding of or commitment to the free market. And that's before I even start on the venal, small-minded, self-righteous attitudes of their MP's, or the wars... Two big gangs of absolute dongs, is what they are, and a big part of the appeal of the Green party is that they're completely outside the current system.

What I was trying to ask, but it being early in the day, lacked the vocabulary to do so, was if there are any instances of the Human Rights act having been used successfully to defend the human rights of an innocent Briton? I'm aware of the daily mail examples where it's supposedly been used to prevent justice being done, but no-one ever makes news about successes. If there have been such cases, could these rights have been defended using pre-existing laws? The government have roundly ignored the Human Rights act when they send police thugs to kettle protesters, so was it ever more than a piece of spin?

Ah, the Daily Mail, it's a bit Godwin's that isn't it?

I've got meetings this morning, but start with this for the background on why it was put directly into UK law.

And ask yourself about this question "I'm aware of the daily mail examples where it's supposedly been used to prevent justice being done, but no-one ever makes news about successes." and what sells newspapers.

My flatemate's a tory voter. I told her she has to wait till may to register

I'm voting for them all. They're all so lovely I can't decide on just one.

:D

The problem is there is not one major politician out there that makes me want to vote for them. Not one of the current crop instills any sort of confidence in me that they know what they are doing.

There is a distinct lack of real world expeirience in the commons. It used to be that a Labour MP had worked his ass off down a coal mine or similar and risen through the trade unions, and that a Tory MP had been some sort of captain of industry. We have ministers for defense who have never seen action, chancellors who have never worked in the city, the list goes on.

Nowadays they are just bred straight out of Oxbridge, work in political PR for a couple of years, then try and get a seat.

There are many passionate and principled MPs, it's just that the unprincipled careerists tend to form most of the cabinet.

I don't think voting labour to stop the torys will help. If they do stay in power of course it would be fantastic not to have a tory government, but a stay in opposition or even death might be the reality new labour needs to face. Given the cuts the torys are proposing and the financial incompetence they've already demonstrated they could well be heading to become more unpopular than even the current government. Leaving space for something new? Too optimistic?

If they do stay in power you will have the fact you voted them in to bear for another 4,5 or 8 years.

Yeah, but aside from minimum wage, devolution, reform of the house of lords, the human rights act, working families tax credit, increase in funding for the nhs, surestart, direct.gov, winter fuel allowances and reduced cancer mortality rates (by 18% since 1996 because of increased funding in cancer treatment specifically)... what have Labour ever done for us?

Improved primary schools.

after promising 'an end to boom and bust' completely destroying the economy.

Of course that's Labour's fault because it only happened here.

Ah, the Daily Mail, it's a bit Godwin's that isn't it?

...

And ask yourself about this question "I'm aware of the daily mail examples where it's supposedly been used to prevent justice being done, but no-one ever makes news about successes." and what sells newspapers.

Very Godwin's considering that rag's vocal support for the Nazi party before WW2!

Agree completely about the second point too. So have there been any successes? Are there any cases which demonstrate that the HRA really has been used to positive effect?
At the moment I am agnostic. If it there are cases which show passing the HRA was a good thing (and probably need to outweigh/outnumber any cases where it has been a bad thing) then fine, I'm happy that it's in law. If there are not, then it was just a piece of pointless spin, in which case repealing it is probably a good thing. Perhaps it could even be replaced with a new act which is more effective? (I don't expect it would be though)

Of course that's Labour's fault because it only happened here.

It's Browns fault that here it was far worse than any other country in the world and we are the worst placed of any country in the world to get ourselves out of it. Brown was in thrall to the financial sector, so he replaced the effective watchdogs with the toothless FSA, gambled the entire economy on the impossibility of ever-rising house prices and a credit-led boom whose bursting was inevitable, to fund massive increases in government spending, illegal wars and the like. It was Brown that cost the country over £2billion by selling 60% of our gold at not only a historically low price, but one which he then drove further down by announcing the sale beforehand, against all advice. Judged purely on his financial judgement, the man is an incompetent arse and should be sacked.

Really?

So Iceland and Greece are all peachy then?

We're not so far behind Greece in terms of GDP. It's approaching 12%, and Greece is at 12.7%.
And the amount of money we owe is 240 times Iceland's debt.

Brown has managed to run up a national debt that is already more than £913,000,000,000, and it is shooting up. It's over £14,600 for every man, woman and child in the UK. The annual interest on that debt is nearly £43,000,000,000. Even with 2 wars to fight that's still more than the defence budget, and very nearly the entire education budget.

As a matter of principle I do not want the country to be run by two Old Etonians. Furthermore I could never bring myself to vote for a party that included such "luminaries" as M Thatcher and N Tebbit. All this is rather unsuprising as I am paid up member of the Labour Party. Enough said.

As a matter of principle I do not want the country to be run by two Old Etonians. Furthermore I could never bring myself to vote for a party that included such "luminaries" as M Thatcher and N Tebbit. All this is rather unsuprising as I am paid up member of the Labour Party. Enough said.

How did you feel about Blair being a product of Oxbridge ?

^That he went to Fettes is surely more germane?

^That he went to Fettes is surely more germane?

Fuck off you devil.

As a matter of principle I do not want the country to be run by two Old Etonians.

As Bryan Ferry once said, "Why not? It's a good school."

Mind you, look how his son turned out.

Greece - The economic joke Europe for the past fuck knows how long, and Iceland, a pissant hole of 300,000 people, with Kerry Katona as it's PM.

Great basis of comparison for a country that used to be compared with the US, Germany, France and Japan.

It's as if Man U were playing on Hackney Marshes.

I find that baffling in so many ways; we're a declining nation in a declining area of the world. We've had our time and we did very well out of painting the rest of the world pink on maps. When did we last hold strong international political influence? Surely that all went with our "special relationship" status and then the iraq farce?

Anyway, from the last Tory conference, the party elders apparently seemed quite happy with the narrowing margins - it will prompt their activitists into panic stations that some of the previous lead has been lost and will drum up more votes.

The swinging New Labour voters are more likely to be apathetic, and the danger for Labour is that these people will simply not vote, causing a '97 type landslide.

I think Nick Clegg is probably grinning like a Cheshire Cat until some day in May, when he'll go back to whatever he was doing before his 15 minutes arrived.

I've found out via a leaflet that my ward is one of the 117 swing wards that the tories are specifically targeting. They even state that if they just secure these 117 wards that they win the election with a solid majority. This explains the full colour leaflets every week for the past several weeks. I'm going to be inundated, I just know it.

It also means that they don't give a fuck about the rest of you suckers ;)