Snap uk election..

[dandelion]

Really??? Then perhaps you might to dwell on the FACT that the Conservatives didn't '..win Brexit'

of course they did! conservatives led both the leave and remain groups. if you argue both sides you cannot lose. (or that was the idea, anyway. The risk is being found out as simply a self serving troublemaker)

 

[chrisrobin]

Are you serious? Did no one tell you they have a power sharing executive in N Ireland and the opposed leaders have become the greatest of chums. They are all perfectly aware that each side has in the past tried to kill the other.

May wants the DUP on board because they will help her sell soft brexit or no brexit to former UKIP.

well if the dup get power sharing Corbyn had better get used to the idea that terrorist friends might suddenly have friends in high places - but that ok as he can always host a dinner in parliament for them...
Leopards don't loose their spots and Corbyn wont change his basis beliefs - regardless of how many times he changes his hair style.

 

[Chrysippus]

Former Ukip leader Nigel Farage says Theresa May is in a weak position as she enters Brexit talks.
http://www.cityam.com/266621/former-ukip-leader-nigel-farage-says-theresa-may-weak

Question: then why is Nigel still wearing Theresa's teddy?

 

[dandelion]

Corbyn wont change his basis beliefs

well thats good. I gather he is a pacifist and a socialist, who believes in redistributive polices from the rich to the poor. Something the world desperately needs. It is interesting that there is quite a bit of online debate about how the conservatives can now throw away austerity and adopt some socialist policies themselves, but manage to persuade anywon they actually believe in them.

A truth to be remembered about the conservatives is that they do not believe in cutting government services because of lack of money, but they believe that cutting government services is always a good thing. The current bad economic situation is merely a plausible (but false) excuse for doing what they wanted to do anyway. In fact they seem to have deliberately kept taxes low so as to deliberately maintain the budget deficit. Yep, they are deliberately growing debt.

R4 has now resumed its lunchtime series about UK involvement in war, and just discussing how Iraq has never recovered from our invasion. Corbyn was right to oppose us getting involved.

 

[chrisrobin]

well thats good. I gather he is a pacifist and a socialist, who believes still believing that the IRA are a good thing, that HAMAS are nice people, who doesn't believe our police should shoot to kill in an emergency situation - imagine London Bridge if they hadn't_ who would welcome with open arms a Russian invasion because he' wouldn't press the "red button", who believes that a nuclear deterrent is a bad thing - who wants to wipe of student debt, give free university education to ALL, want to borrow borrow borrow because he has no idea how to raise the money to fund his grandiose promises, tax the rich till they bleed, put an extra council tax on properties worth more the one million (that's a pretty big chunk of London), and he'll wonder why the brains in organisations leaves the country in a rush.
in redistributive polices from the rich to the poor. Something the world desperately needs. It is interesting that there is quite a bit of online debate about how the conservatives can now throw away austerity and adopt some socialist policies themselves, but manage to persuade anywon they actually believe in them.

A truth to be remembered about the conservatives is that they do not believe in cutting government services because of lack of money, but they believe that cutting government services is always a good thing. The current bad economic situation is merely a plausible (but false) excuse for doing what they wanted to do anyway. In fact they seem to have deliberately kept taxes low so as to deliberately maintain the budget deficit. Yep, they are deliberately growing debt.

R4 has now resumed its lunchtime series about UK involvement in war, and just discussing how Iraq has never recovered from our invasion. Corbyn was right to oppose us getting involved.

 

[halcyondays]

Really??? Then perhaps you might to dwell on the FACT that the Conservatives didn't '..win Brexit' it was a vote offered to the British people in the form of a referendum,both Cameron and May voted to 'remain' You clearly need to follow British politics more closely....!

The referendum was the centerpiece of the Tory manifesto for the 2015 election! It got Cameron reelected with a majority but took his head off. HIs gamble was as stupid as May's. That's two Tory debacles in a row.

I need to follow British politics more closely? Do me a lemon.

 

[chrisrobin]

well thats good. I gather he is a pacifist and a socialist, who believes in redistributive policies from the rich to the poor. Something the world desperately needs. It is interesting that there is quite a bit of online debate about how the conservatives can now throw away austerity and adopt some socialist policies themselves, but manage to persuade anywon they actually believe in them.

A truth to be remembered about the conservatives is that they do not believe in cutting government services because of lack of money, but they believe that cutting government services is always a good thing. The current bad economic situation is merely a plausible (but false) excuse for doing what they wanted to do anyway. In fact they seem to have deliberately kept taxes low so as to deliberately maintain the budget deficit. Yep, they are deliberately growing debt.

R4 has now resumed its lunchtime series about UK involvement in war, and just discussing how Iraq has never recovered from our invasion. Corbyn was right to oppose us getting involved.

 

[superbot]

The referendum was the centerpiece of the Tory manifesto for the 2015 election! It got Cameron reelected with a majority but took his head off. HIs gamble was as stupid as May's. That's two Tory debacles in a row.

I need to follow British politics more closely? Do me a lemon.

Er,again .. the referendum was a free vote...it was given to the people as such.The Conservatives did tell anyone how they should vote and for your information Cameron didn't have to resign ,he did so on a principal.I know your murican but attempt to at least get the basics right.

 

[chrisrobin]

With respect the referendum to leave the EU was a totally free vote - mainly brought about due to Cameron's inability to secure any sort of deal with the EU which could have averted the catastrophe he oversaw.
Both parties, plus the peripherals spouted and pontificated about the do and don'ts but in the end it was down to individuals to vote according to their own beliefs.
The biggest mistake, which really miss fired, was getting the results out in an area by area way - this turned out to be totally divisive.
We are where we are, and 52% of us want out, want out of the EU dictating our laws, who we can expel who we have to let it. The sooner we get out of this folly organisation the better.
If it costs us it will be down to us as a nation, currently it costs us to prop up the EU folly schemes, double parliaments, unchecked expenses and grandiose receptions - and mainly by propping up those in the middle and the newcomers while the originators of the EU languor in poverty and broken dreams.
Till Europe - that's the EU - gets itself together and creates a level playing field with retirement ages, pension rights an income tax there will always be dissent. Germany as the power horse of the EU will continue to dominate and play the tune while France hovers round its skirts like another virgin wanting to join the big boys games, and then there are the newly elected countries who want more for nothing while being totally undemocratic in their almost dictatorial outlook and behaviour.
So yes, we had a free vote and chose to leave.
Ireland had a vote and chose to stay out as well but had to vote again to get it right.
So much for freedom of individual choice.

 

[Drifterwood]

Here is the demographic analysis of the election by yougov.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election/

It would be fascinating to extrapolate out to a 100% turnout.

 

[dandelion]

I gather there is a suggestion that a tory minister rejected proposals to investigate the fire safety of the type of tower block which just burned down?

The thing bout spending yur time worrying about terrorists is that you can then miss simpler threats which ar easier to fix, at least if you rcognise a problem early and don

It would be fascinating to extrapolate out to a 100% turnout.

The figures ignore the 'dont knows'. The most likely interpretation of the views of those who do not vote is they do not suport anyone. This Brexi farce was only supportd by 1/3 of voters. It should not be happening because it has no suppirt.

 

[Jason]

I gather there is a suggestion that a tory minister rejected proposals to investigate the fire safety of the type of tower block which just burned down?

Has Labour stooped this low? Has Labour become the party that sees a disaster only as a political opportunity? Does the Labour Party of Hardy, Bevan, Blair and Brown even exist anymore, or do we just have the Momentum cancer?

Proposals were scrutinised by all-party parliamentary committees. In the light of this disaster it is certainly appropriate to review. Maybe they got it wrong. However all outcomes are possible from a review, including the outcome that the all-party committee got it right. For example the "stay in your flat" policy is almost certainly right.

I've recently looked at fire alarms in a block of flats. If they are too sensitive (so they keep going off) and too loud they cause such irritation that they are vandalised. There is a (complex) code of practice around a correct fire alarm system. It is not as simple as saying fire alarms should be ever-more sensitive and ever louder. I've also looked at a sprinkler system. A requirement is that there is an adequate mains water supply to make it work. Flats have a water supply that assumes that only a very few flats will have taps running at one time. The sort of water needed for a sprinkler system often isn't available. Within most of our cities there's a limit to what is in the pipes in each neighbourhood. One answer is to use tank storage on the roof, but this requires a roof that is strong enough to support water tanks. In effect its an option for newly-built blocks and cannot be fitted on all old blocks.

I don't know the issues of this tragedy, but Labour needs to wake up to the possibility that the system in place may have been in compliance with the all-party committee of which they were part.

Attention is focusing on the insulating cladding. It may be that there is a fault with the cladding itself or a fault with the way in which it was fitted. It may be that some sort of building regulation change is needed. If this is the case it is a great pity that no-one of any party suggested it.

 

[chrisrobin]

One can only ever expect the Socialist and other low politicians to make capital of a disaster even then the results are still raw. David Lammy is a typical scum back trying to make capital of peoples misery and loss - a few days waiting wouldn't have hurt but been more acceptable.

 

[Jason]

There's an issue in the Foyle constituency in Northern Ireland (ie Derry/Londonderry), where there are allegations of voter fraud. Sinn Fein won by 169 votes (from SDLP). If there is a formal complaint which is upheld there will be a new election in this constituency.

There's a similar case in NE Fife where SNP won by 2 votes (from LibDems). Again no formal complaint yet. However surely LibDems must be looking very closely at this, as the allegation is that SNP managed to have some of their supporters voting twice, and even three proved to have done this would have changed the outcome. The sense that the SNP star is waning would suggest a new election would see a LibDem victory.

 

[Jason]

Just heard there are two, separate sections to the Con-DUP deal.

Part one is an agreed Queens Speech. This was agreed last Saturday. It's not problematic.

Part two is what is being called a "wider pact". This is where it gets really interesting. It's not going to be a coalition (so no DUP ministers) but in other respects could be very similar indeed. It could be a programme for either two or five years. The idea seems to be something that will take parliament past the Brexit negotiations.

 

[dandelion]

Has Labour stooped this low?

I couldnt say Jason. The BBC is where I heard the story. Quite a few other people unhappy about cuts which might have had contributed to this. What struck me was that this block is probably in kensington and Chelsea, which just went labour despite all the posh people there. Maybe some conservatives fancied some ethnic cleansing? Another news story said something like you could get a flat in the block for £160,000 but add a nought for the same thing in a posh house not very far away.

No, I don't mean that about the ethnic cleansing by fire. Perfectly civilised people there. But it is the truth that posh london boroughs have been ethnically cleansing their neighbourhoods of poor people by knocking down council estates and redeveloping them with posh housing. Thereby getting rid of the riff raff. Lived near there once, might even have been inside that tower. I remember going up inside one of them once for the view.

I've recently looked at fire alarms in a block of flats.

I havnt.

I understand locals are complaining that they had asked for fire alarms in their flats, but the council decided to prettify the outside so the posh people had a nicer view.

It could be a programme for either two or five years.

Or perhaps three months?

 

[Jason]

I understand locals are complaining that they had asked for fire alarms in their flats, but the council decided to prettify the outside so the posh people had a nicer view.

There are rules and regs for fire alarms. They are available if you have a hunt for them. These are UK-wide rules.

Alarms inside flats are the responsibility of each individual flat. However the fire brigade will fit for free and puts a lot of energy into getting people to accept them. They are to alert people of a fire within the flat.

Alarms in the public areas are not designed to be heard within flats. The reality of an individual flat's closed front door (which may be a fire door and sound resistant) plus a closed internal door (say a bedroom door) is that of course they are unlikely to be heard. The function of public area fire alarms is solely to warn people in the public areas of a potential fire within those areas.

The building - like most blocks of flats - is designed on the concept that people should stay within their flat in the event of a fire. No large block of flats seeks to evacuate in the event of a fire. Most large blocks have frequent occasions when the alarm goes off, say half a dozen times in a year. Mostly residents don't even know these events have happened. The concept of elderly and infirm trying to evacuate (by stair) is pretty awful for them. It also stops the fire brigade getting up, and the whole point of this sort of block is that the fire brigade have to get to the fire.

These are the rules and regs approved over many years by numerous committees with people from all parties and lots of fire specialist advice. Any block of flats anywhere in the UK where the residents ask for a bell linked to the block fire alarm in their individual flats will have this request refused because this is what the rules say. It is dangerous.

************************************
So what went wrong? We're going to have to wait of course. However there is plenty of film of the fire and experts have looked at these, and the problem does seem to be the cladding. The cladding is designed so that it won't go up in flames. Basically you can put a blow-torch on it and it won't burn. A possible view is that the cladding put on the building wasn't in fact the cladding that should have been put on but an alternative (and cheaper) substance. Different types of cladding are produced for different uses. If this is the case, then we're presumably going to end up with a criminal trial. The fault in this case would presumably be with the contractor. There may be a problem with inspection also, but if the intent were to deceive it may be that the inspector couldn't reasonably pick up on the issue. Does any building inspector send an example of a building material to a lab for a test of what it is? I think the inspection would be to check the paper-work.

I understand the same contractor has clad at lest one other tower. This needs the promptest inspection, including tearing off a chunk and sending it to a lab to see just what it is.

If this is correct then the fault lies with the contractor - not with May, the "Tory Scum", Sadiq Khan (whose loyalty to leader Corbyn is in doubt, so he got heckled today), the council, the capitalists or anyone similar. Rather the fault is with a criminal, if this is what is proved.

 

[Drifterwood]

The figures ignore the 'dont knows'. The most likely interpretation of the views of those who do not vote is they do not suport anyone. This Brexi farce was only supportd by 1/3 of voters. It should not be happening because it has no suppirt.

So, if you don't know, you are disenfranchised?

Brexit does not now have the support of the British people.

 

[Jason]

So, if you don't know, you are disenfranchised?

Brexit does not now have the support of the British people.

What are you on about? The poll shows 70% now supporting, more if you take out the don't knows.

 

[dandelion]

What are you on about? The poll shows 70% now supporting, more if you take out the don't knows.

Which poll? The election shows 40% of the people voted labour against hard brexit and 40% voted tory for hard brexit. 10% voted for more remain parties. Not clear what happened to the remainder.

Turnout was 70%, so in reality only 40% of 70%= 30% voted for hard brexit. And then there are the ones not registered,not clear how many that is. All in all, about a quarter or less of the nation supported Theresa May in her call for hard brexit.

The conservatives were the only ones with a really clear platform, hard brexit. It got very little support. I posted the labour manifesto which called for putting the interests of the economy first, whereas the conservatives called for exit at any cost.

it is true there is a contradiction between safeguarding the economy and leaving the EU, but labour is pledged to support the economy. That means we are heading for soft brexit, or cancelling the whole thing. i recognise you believe soft brexit is worse than remaining a member, so I see consensus going that way.

Interesting Michel portillo just now on this week thinks hard brexit is dead dead dead and no longer has support from the cabinet, the conservative party, the commons, the lords, or the people.