The UK General Politics Thread Page 94

  • Page

    of 189 First / Last

  • cubbymoore 30 Apr 2013 19:07:22 36,468 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    darkmorgado wrote:
    Megapocalypse wrote:
    The real issue is the lack of rehabilitation provisions available, and this again is often due to length of sentences. Rehabilitation on the outside rarely works as they are constantly surrounded by associates/family who will try to drag them back on a criminal path and provide too much temptation.
    What about introducing a step-down system similar to that used for mental health patients being reintroduced to society after periods under Section? They'd need to stay in staffed house under supervision and with the same visiting rules as regular prison, but are reintroduced back into society in a controlled manner where they have limited exposure to any outside factors that could cause them to reoffend?
    That is kind of what happens now anyway. Prisoners move into different categories from A to D, and D prisoners can move to more open prisons, where they get better treatments and work. D category prisons give them a chance to go out occasionally. The thing is you have to be on a long stretch to get that opportunity.
  • spamdangled 30 Apr 2013 19:12:34 27,269 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    There's an interesting debate going on on http://www.lbc.co.uk at the moment about this.

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • Bremenacht 30 Apr 2013 23:34:55 17,598 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I thought the government -showing the wisdom for which it is now renowned- was in the process of dismantling the state probation service with the aim of handing the work over to those experts at A4E and other workfare type firms?

    On top of blowing 10s of mils on rubbish computers, of course.
  • spamdangled 30 Apr 2013 23:40:20 27,269 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Tomrrows front page on the Independent - the government plans to sell of parts of the Civil Service to private companies.

    Oh dear. It's like they're quite literally trying to privatise the entire fucking country.

    Edited by darkmorgado at 23:40:45 30-04-2013

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • cubbymoore 30 Apr 2013 23:42:59 36,468 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    It's amazing the shit that can be done in a coalition government that a majority government wouldn't be able to.
  • spamdangled 30 Apr 2013 23:48:29 27,269 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Indeed. Rather depressing, speaking as a member of the Lib Dems.

    Nick Clegg was saying yesterday that in the event of a hung parliament at the next election, he would open negotiations with Labour and be willing to form a centrist government with them.

    I'm sure the fact that the party membership and grassroots supporters (and large parts of the country) are screaming for his blood for going in with the Tories and not taking a stand against all this shit has nothing to do with it!

    And I think he'll get that chance in 2 years' time, though personally I seriously fucking hope he loses his seat and triggers a leadership contest (even though that would probably mean a single-party minority govt next time if it happened like that).

    Edited by darkmorgado at 23:54:16 30-04-2013

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • Bremenacht 30 Apr 2013 23:54:01 17,598 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Coalition with Labour. That'll be good eh? An enormous improvement on the current coalition?
  • RobTheBuilder 30 Apr 2013 23:54:42 6,521 posts
    Seen 8 months ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    @darkmorgado of course they are. They are desperately trying to flog it off as quickly as possible whilst leaving the next labour/lib government with such a weak economy that they won't be able to reverse it.
  • spamdangled 30 Apr 2013 23:55:50 27,269 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Bremenacht wrote:
    Coalition with Labour. That'll be good eh? An enormous improvement on the current coalition?
    Something a bit less "fuck the poor! fuck the public! fuck services!" and slightly more balanced wouldn't go amiss.

    And at least Milliband hasn't shown the authoritarian streak of the Blair/Brown era (yet).

    Hell, with someone as seemingly weak as Ed in charge of Labour, the LD's might actually be able to assert their authority a bit more and implement more of their policies.

    Edited by darkmorgado at 23:57:10 30-04-2013

    Edited by darkmorgado at 00:46:11 01-05-2013

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • Bremenacht 1 May 2013 00:03:20 17,598 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    It'll be just as bad. We'll have Nick and Ed telling us things are getting better, whilst things carry on as they are now. They'll toss a bone to the faithful of course, but that'll be that.
  • Khanivor 1 May 2013 02:33:25 40,347 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    What if we try offering prisoners with a decent length of sentence a new option: get out in half the time but we will move you to the opposite end of the country, away from old haunts and crowd. Stay there for the rest of your sentence length.

    I wonder what the reoffending rate would be for those folks.
  • spamdangled 1 May 2013 03:00:08 27,269 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Khanivor wrote:
    What if we try offering prisoners with a decent length of sentence a new option: get out in half the time but we will move you to the opposite end of the country, away from old haunts and crowd. Stay there for the rest of your sentence length.

    I wonder what the reoffending rate would be for those folks.
    Interesting idea. Sort of one step down from being given a new identity, but a step up from a halfway-house.

    Presumably you'd have a condition of release being no contact with past acquaintances.

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • Mr_Sleep 1 May 2013 11:03:33 16,838 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    glaeken wrote:
    @Mr_Sleep Doing what pressure groups want is not democracy. Why should the government take action based on a very small vocal minority of the electorate?

    Maybe I hate bees and my way of showing this was not to sign a petition or write a letter to my MP?

    Just because people can be bothered to get off their arse and get uppity about something is no reason to do what they say. Who is going to protect the rights of the apathetic majority?

    In actual fact I donít hate bees and I probably agree with the general aims of the campaign but if the government does change policy based on the actions of pressure groups itís not democratic itís the tyranny of listening to a loud minority.
    Sorry for the bump back to this but I was out yesterday and didn't have time to respond. My comments were a little bit exaggerated but I think there is a thrust to what I'm trying to say that sits somewhere a bit more moderately than what I posted.

    My point is that MPs should be approachable and should listen to their constituents' concerns. Perhaps there is a really good reason why they voted no, however, considering the large pressure the government is under this does strike me as a pretty easy win for them. I can't imagine anyone apart from lazy farmers and the chemical industry has any vested interest in this fertiliser's continued use. Does anyone really see a good reason not to ban it?

    I do agree that a fine line has to be tread between acting on the whim of a vocal minority and sticking to policy but in this case I feel like they have not listened to the voters or the science and have acted rather poorly.

    We do vote these people in but at the same time they should be held accountable and be concerned with what the public want. It's not that once you vote then you hand over all responsibility to the constituent.

    You are a factory of sadness.

  • RedSparrows 1 May 2013 11:10:48 21,960 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Khanivor wrote:
    What if we try offering prisoners with a decent length of sentence a new option: get out in half the time but we will move you to the opposite end of the country, away from old haunts and crowd. Stay there for the rest of your sentence length.

    I wonder what the reoffending rate would be for those folks.
    I am no expert, but removing support networks, if even defective, might be dangerous, no? It still requires the person concerned to 'sink or swim', and if sinking means resorting to crime...
  • glaeken 1 May 2013 11:39:52 11,083 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    @Mr_Sleep From what I understand on the bees issue specifically it's not as cut and dried as it was being made out to be. Were they not also saying the rather cool summers and lots of rain of the past couple of years have effected bee numbers? It's really not an issue I have been paying that much attention to but I did think scientific opinion was still divided on the causes.

    Of course pressure groups are going to present their case as strongly as they can because that is really a what pressure groups are all about. Just on casual thought about this I would imagine you have lot of people with green type beliefs that have just hoped on this band wagon due to it being against using nasty chemicals in the environment without any regard to if the actual claims are correct or not.

    Anyway specific issue aside I just donít like the way that a passionate minority can influence things. Being ambivalent enough about a subject not to want to do anything actively is I think a valid position in itself. Who is going to organise and present a petition representing the views of people who are not sure about a subject though? Those who attach themselves to a position with absolute commitment should not count more than those who are undecided or donít see an issue as important enough to even hold a position on it.

    Of course the truth is most people are not acting not through being undecided but through not giving a toss and being totally uninterested in the political process if whatever is under discussion does not actually affect them personally.
  • Mr_Sleep 1 May 2013 12:13:03 16,838 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    glaeken wrote:
    @Mr_Sleep From what I understand on the bees issue specifically it's not as cut and dried as it was being made out to be. Were they not also saying the rather cool summers and lots of rain of the past couple of years have effected bee numbers? It's really not an issue I have been paying that much attention to but I did think scientific opinion was still divided on the causes.

    The bee numbers have been on a pretty stark decline for a lot longer than the last two couple of years. I think the thing with this is that I'd much rather they do something about it now and try to mitigate any circumstances than sit on the fence and say things are inconclusive. It's like the climate change arguments. As in, there are certain groups that argue the science is inconclusive but there is not much harm in trying our best to avoid using too many fossil fuels and it could even be beneficial in the longer term regardless of the veracity of the science.


    Anyway specific issue aside I just donít like the way that a passionate minority can influence things. Being ambivalent enough about a subject not to want to do anything actively is I think a valid position in itself.

    I'm not sure how it is possible for there to be a representation of people who don't care about an issue. It's like people who don't go and vote out of protest, that's not a protest, going in and spoiling the ballot is a protest but just not bothering doesn't help or harm anyone. It just means you don't have a say in the democratic process.



    Who is going to organise and present a petition representing the views of people who are not sure about a subject though?

    Surely it's up to the individual to form their opinion based on the arguments of both sides? In this specific bee issue the argument, from what I understand, is that the science isn't robust enough and it may harm crop yields. The problem with that argument is that it's perfectly possible to work without these particular pesticides so where's the harm? I would be happy to hear the counter argument fully if anyone has it.

    You are a factory of sadness.

  • glaeken 1 May 2013 12:23:24 11,083 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    I guess on opinion forming I am of the opinion that I am not qualified to judge the worth of the two sides opinions. I know most people don't let that get in the way of picking a side :) If I picked a side I am sure I would just be doing it going along with which I would like to be true. You can boil lot of choices down to this of course but on a subject as complex as this you really would need to be an expert to really come up with a valid opinion in my view.

    The argument against changing would be presumably it involves change. If you don't believe the case against then that seems to justify itself.
  • Mr_Sleep 1 May 2013 12:30:56 16,838 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I would agree that it is a difficult thing to quantify which side to lean towards but the logic in this I've outlined above, I'm sure there's more to it but my gut suggests leaving things as they are is very rarely the right solution. If something appears broken you should try and fix it, it may not always work but it's better to try and fix something and break it for the worse than to just leave it being utterly useless and more damaging over time.

    You are a factory of sadness.

  • LeoliansBro 1 May 2013 12:37:31 43,132 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    darkmorgado wrote:

    Nick Clegg was saying yesterday that in the event of a hung parliament at the next election, he would open negotiations with Labour and be willing to form a centrist government with them.

    That smacks of a shamelessly saying something popular so people will like you / your party. Doubly so when you consider that if that's what he wants he could force a general election right now.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Bremenacht 1 May 2013 13:56:51 17,598 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    It may have something to do with tactical voting.

    Or it could be the Lib Dem's basically saying they'll coalesce with anything with a pulse - they're not fussy.
  • spamdangled 1 May 2013 23:00:24 27,269 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Tomorrow's papers:

    Guardian: Cameron is being dragged too far to the right, says Clegg. Basically, he is saying that Cameron's determination to halt the progress of UKIP is forcing him to move to the "extremes" of politics and that it is making the business of government difficult. Clegg says he is now going to dig his heels in and prevent Cameron from dragging the coalition away from center ground.

    This is basically seconding something I said in this thread yesterday, about UKIP causing a worrying shift to the far right. But to hear Clegg saying it, and for him to be saying it is making government difficult, shows signs of a huge rift developing. Will be very interesting to see where this goes in the near future.

    Financial Times: Osborne planning on selling off the nationalised banks by 2015 (potentially at a loss). Now this is crafty. Aside from the fact he is blatantly doing this to give the Tories a big election boost at the next GE, it will also wipe a huge amount off of the national debt (nationalising the banks cost approximately half a trillion GBP) and lower the deficit by a rather large amount overnight, regardless of whether he sells them off at a loss or not. A pretty transparent move, but one that is bound to grab a few votes from people who have been battered over the head with all the austerity rehetoric so much they've actually fallen for it.

    Daily Express: Whites to be a minority in the UK by 2066 (according to an "explosive" new study). It's the Daily Express, and to be honest not very many people care outside of a certain age bracket.

    Also in other news, the NHS have admitted that the move to the 111 service (the replacement of NHS Direct) has been a massive balls-up, with people waiting up to 30 minutes in some areas before even having their calls connected. Reminds me of an old scene in the Simpsons where they dial the emergency services only to be told to select from a huge number of options ending with "if you are being murdered, please stay on the line" followed by smooth jazz hold music).

    Edited by darkmorgado at 00:15:14 02-05-2013

    Edited by darkmorgado at 00:21:28 02-05-2013

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • RobTheBuilder 1 May 2013 23:05:19 6,521 posts
    Seen 8 months ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    If clegg actually took a stand and refused to cooperate with the terrible things the Tories are doing I'd have so much more respect for him. This is a start.

    What's going on in this country is shameful right now.

    Don't forget Royal Mail will be sold off soon too.
  • xuiton 1 May 2013 23:05:32 297 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    UKIP gets my vote
  • RobTheBuilder 1 May 2013 23:15:49 6,521 posts
    Seen 8 months ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    @xuiton I hope that's sarcasm
  • cubbymoore 1 May 2013 23:18:15 36,468 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Nigel Farage seems like an upstanding gent to me. And he's white, which is great.
  • Deleted user 1 May 2013 23:21:39
    darkmorgado wrote:
    Tomorrow's papers:

    Guardian: Cameron is being dragged too far to the right, says Clegg. Basically, he is saying that Cameron's determination to halt the progress of UKIP is forcing him to move to the "extremes" of politics and that it is making the business of government difficult. Clegg says he is now going to dig his heels in and prevent Cameron from dragging the coalition away from center ground.

    This is basically seconding something I said in this thread yesterday, about UKIP causing a worrying shift to the far right. But to hear Clegg saying it, and for him to be saying it is making government difficult, shows signs of a huge rift developing.

    Financial Times: Osborne planning on selling off the nationalised banks by 2015 (potentially at a loss). Now this is crafty. Aside from the fact he is blatantly doing this to give the Tories a big election boost at the next GE, it will also wipe a huge amount off of the national debt (nationalising the banks cost approximately half a trillion GBP) and lower the deficit by a rather large amount overnight, regardless of whether he sells them off at a loss or not. A pretty transparent move, but one that is bound to grab a few votes from people who have been battered over the head with all the austerity rehetoric so much they've actually fallen for it.

    Daily Express: Whites to be a minority in the UK by 2066 (according to an "explosive" new study). It's the Daily Express, and to be honest not very many people care outside of a certain age bracket.

    Also in other news, the NHS have admitted that the move to the 111 service (the replacement of 999) has been a massive balls-up, with people waiting up to 30 minutes in some areas before even having their calls connected. Reminds me of an old scene in the Simpsons where they dial the emergency services only to be told to select from a huge number of options ending with "if you are being murdered, please stay on the line" followed by smooth jazz hold music).
    Are you doing daily news summaries of the papers now for things we're supposed to be outraged by?

    Your comment on the financial times one is idiotic anyway. Any party in power would consider doing the same.
  • RobTheBuilder 1 May 2013 23:38:52 6,521 posts
    Seen 8 months ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    @cubbymoore I KNOW that's sarcasm...!
  • spamdangled 2 May 2013 00:22:01 27,269 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    RobTheBuilder wrote:
    @xuiton I hope that's sarcasm
    Sadly, I don't think it is given his history.

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • RightBean 2 May 2013 00:25:07 634 posts
    Seen 56 seconds ago
    Registered 1 year ago
    The way it's going I think prison life starts to look more and more attractive
  • 4gate 2 May 2013 00:35:18 362 posts
    Seen 10 months ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    BBC News pointed out the 'We'll all be foreign by 2066' is infact a rehash of a 2010 story, by a Migration Watch expert (ie a great big racist) and is really just Desmond trying get people to vote UKIP.
  • Page

    of 189 First / Last

Log in or register to reply