Welsh Senedd voted against giving Wales MP’s a pay rise.
2 Likes
I would support a pay rise for MPs, but only on the condition that they aren’t allowed another income or twelve from other companies like many of them do now.
2 Likes
Obviously the wrong thread but how do you propose that the US sorts its shit out?
i’m just disillusioned, i don’t mean to suggest i have any answers
Im guessing you would rather have had Clinton than Trump?
Erm yes. Obviously.
3 Likes
Pisses me off to and beyond the end of time that MPs (and it’s the least of their crimes) write columns in newspapers. Once heard an argument that all MPs should be paid a stupidly high wage to put them beyond corruption. I think it would actually encourage it.
Ultimately, it comes down to this:
The current situation is shit. How do we improve it? But you then sail down the rabbit hole. Who do you improve it for? Everybody? Now that’s more complicated than getting BREXIT done. As an example, I want the government to do X, you don’t. How is that decided on an issue by issue basis? A referendum? That went well.
Sorry for butting in but I think @Mascot’s suggestion of political reform addresses this. What you lose in parties winning large majorities is a parliament that is forced to work together and compromise. This would inevitably lead towards a more centrally based government and less opportunities for the plebs like Johnson and Farage to flourish.
1 Like
woof
3 Likes
There was one point where Starmer told Johnson to “Catch up!”
The manner in how he delivered that was more in line with an adult bollocking a young child.
1 Like
Haha. I’m not sure how that was meant but I’m reminded of the great Don Rickles who would regularly lampoon the slow-wittedness of his target… (George Schultz, Ronald Reagan and Dean Martin in the clips below) “am I going too fast for you?”
2 Likes
Having served for many years on various committees with differing opinions, it’s my humble opinion that the more chefs you have, the less and shittier food you produce.
1 Like
PR is not quite the magic bullet that it is made out to be by its proponents. One of the characteristics of PR systems is very strong party elites, logically enough because of the lists most such systems use. A perverse outcome is parties that are actually less responsive to voter preferences, because the most established and entrenched representatives are the least likely to be displaced.
So you might get a more centrally based government, but old boy networks and the like absolutely thrive.
1 Like
The funny thing is, even living in one of those paradisical multi-party PR systems, most people you’ll talk to still feel like all the choices are shit and still primarily vote against something (in my case mostly the AfD), than being in love with their choice.
As for the old boys network - I’m not sure that is necessarily worse in Germany than in the UK or the US for example. Maybe because we don’t really have these elite schools/universities which act as somewhat incestuous breeding grounds. What you get here more often is what is called a ‘party soldier’ - the kind of person that excels at navigating the party structure and slowly moves up the ladder.
3 Likes
Do they? Honestly I don’t know. Struggling to see how a minority view can thrive in an environment that needs cross party agreement.
Oh dear. Starmer’s being accused of misrepresenting the bit that preceeded his “keep up” remark.
1 Like
Fascinating and very unlike Starmer I think. I can only think that Greenhalgh said something that was enough for Starmer to quote it.
Amid the ranting at PMQ’s there’s a shed load in the details that’s really hard to grasp listening live.
From what I’ve read (and it’s only been a quick browse through various news media) is that Greenhalgh was one of the signatories to a letter from the councillors in Greater Manchester. That letter said “some of the council leaders supported tier 3 lockdown” (or words to that effect). It specifically didn’t say “all” because Greenhalgh didn’t support it and refused to sign the letter until that ammendment was made. Then Starmer specifically cited Greenhalgh as being among those who supported it. Oops. Seemingly a false assumption made by Starmer. Wouldn’t normally be so bad except that it was pivotal to his “keep up” remark. 
1 Like
Clinton was behind thousands of deaths and caused countless suffering for people all over the Middle East, Europe, and Northern Africa. Her policies, that were twice rejected by Obama until he finally caved, caused the European migrant crisis - the biggest displacement of people since WW2, Caused civil war in Libya, an escalation of conflict in Yemen and Syria and the political destabilisation of surrounding African countries Her actions brought about the conditions where Africans were openly being sold as slaves on the streets of Tripoli. This was all after NATO, of course led by the US had carpet-bombed Libya killing thousands of civillians. (Approx 40,000 deaths during the conflict so far. And all completely unnecessary.
Make no mistake all instigated by Hillary so that she could ride a triumphal wave to electoral victory. Her leaked emails show this to be the plan.
Imagine 4 years of that kind of thinking. The choice in 2016 was between a narcissistic racist or a psychopath.
Make your choice and put your name to it. .
2 Likes
As far as mistakes go, it’s quite an understandable one. You’d kind of expect the signatory of a letter to support the main thrust of it.
With a peg on your nose if necessary.