UK Politics Mega-thread - Page 33

On September 26 2013 17:51 adwodon wrote:
Sweden was actually in trouble until it embraced a bit more capitalism, it also has some of the most forward thinking unions in the world, the accept that layoffs and downsizing are part of a healthy economy and try to work with business as opposed to against it to ensure prosperity.

They have a pretty good balance in my opinion.

On September 26 2013 17:51 adwodon wrote:
Don't read Atlas Shrug.

On September 26 2013 22:07 GhastlyUprising wrote:
They also have some pretty robust labour laws and -- most crucially -- a society that works with unions rather than against them. Hardly a day goes by over here when the unions aren't smeared by Tory press and politicians.

I don't think anyone on the left is arguing against balance. We're all believers in a mixed-market economy. People like Zaros, who would like to privatize almost everything and hand unlimited power to employers, are the ones who don't believe in balance. (He will go through the motions of denying this, but I'm not going to continue to play his games.)

Yes, I was being sarcastic. I have no intention of ever reading that social Darwinian horseshit.

Jacob Rees-Mogg has risked causing disquiet among Conservative ranks by once again suggesting the party should allow Ukip to win parliamentary seats in order to avoid splitting the right-wing vote.

Speaking on Channel 4, the Tory backbencher suggested striking a deal with Nigel Farage’s party, for which the Ukip MEP would expect to gain some members of Parliament. Rees-Mogg added that such an arrangement was “likely” to be discussed in 2014.

"I'm not going to say which of my friends I think should make way for Ukip," he told the broadcaster on Friday evening.

"Potentially some, some... Ukip would expect to get some Members of Parliament out of this, yes, yes, of course. My view is that it is likely that there will be some discussions about how to do a deal in a year from now."

Earlier this year, Rees-Mogg mooted the notion of a grand alliance between Ukip and the Conservative in order to retain a right-wing hold on government.

In perhaps the least surprising revelation of the Tory Party conference, David Cameron has expressed his desire to serve a second term as prime minister and this time without Nick Clegg.

Speaking on Tuesday, Cameron said that his policy returning Britain to a surplus meant that there was no room for a "spending splurge" should the Tories be returned to government following the 2015 vote. But he denied that the self-imposed constraint - announced yesterday by Chancellor George Osborne - would necessarily mean more reductions in spending on public services, and hinted that there could be more tax cuts in the offing.

There has been much speculation in Westminster that the Conservative leader might stand down half-way through a second term as Prime Minister - possibly after the 2017 referendum which he has promised on the UK's membership of the European Union. But asked about his plans during a round of TV interviews at the Conservative conference in Manchester, Cameron told ITV News: "When it comes to the next election, I will be putting myself forward for a full term - that's what I will do."

Cameron said that the Tories were "only just beginning the work" of putting the British economy back on a stable footing. "Mending what was broken is only half the job," he said. "The real job I am committed to is building a recovery and an economy for all, so that everyone benefits as the economy starts to grow and we start to turn that corner. That's what really fires me up, rather than just getting us out of the mess we were left... We are only just beginning the work. I don't want to quit half way through that. I want to get that done and get it done properly."

Osborne's announcement that the Conservatives will aim to deliver a surplus - spending less as a Government than they take in from taxes and other revenues - even if they succeed in eliminating the deficit in 2018 as planned has led to predictions of seven more years of austerity economics.

Former cabinet minister Liam Fox successfully claimed 3p of taxpayers' money for a car journey of about 100 metres, expenses documents reveal.

The Tory MP made the claim after travelling 0.06 miles, or approximately 96.5 metres, within his North Somerset constituency from a concrete firm to a constituency surgery in Yatton in October 2012.

The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) notes the claim was paid last December.

Mr Fox also had another 15 claims of under £1 for car travel approved in 2012/13.

These included 24p for a 0.54-mile journey from a constituency surgery to a school competition in Clevedon and 44p for a 0.98-mile journey from a meet your MP event at Winford Manor to Winford School.

MPs can claim 45p per mile.

Ipsa paperwork shows Mr Fox claimed £3,866.31 in travel expenses in 2012/13, which includes rail fares.

On October 04 2013 21:25 Jockmcplop wrote:
And from question time last night, regarding the Daily Mail. This guy tells it how it is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73ZCrDtAC7A

On October 07 2013 08:58 jello_biafra wrote:

Yeah I read about that earlier today, who the hell takes a car for a 100 metre journey and surely he could afford 3p?

On October 07 2013 08:58 jello_biafra wrote:

Yeah I read about that earlier today, who the hell takes a car for a 100 metre journey and surely he could afford 3p?

Downing Street was thrown into panic last night by a rebel Tory bid to force an early referendum on quitting the EU.
In a direct challenge to the Prime Minister’s authority, Conservative MP Adam Afriyie said people did not trust David Cameron’s pledge to hold a vote on Europe in 2017.

Backed by Tory and Labour Eurosceptics, he is set to force a Commons vote on the issue in five weeks’ time.

If he wins, it would mean Parliament had ruled that the referendum should be fast-forwarded to next October.

George Osborne has risked public controversy by starting the process to break up the Royal Bank of Scotland early in order to avoid tough EU rules, such as a £471,000 executive pay cap.

The Chancellor filed papers in July informing the European Commission of his plans to split RBS into a "good bank" and "bad bank", which could involve extra state funding, just days before the new EU rules for state-backed banks came into effect. The government currently has a stake of around 80% in the bank.

Senior executives at state-backed banks cannot earn more than 15 times the national average salary or 10 times the wages of the average bank staff member under the EU's new rules. If the rules came into effect, new RBS chief executive Ross McEwan would be forced to accept half of his current £1 million salary.

Osborne's latest move comes less than a fortnight after he lodged a legal challenge against the European Union's planned bank bonus cap.

On October 08 2013 06:08 KwarK wrote:
By what right does the EU impose wage restrictions within the UK? Presumably something to do with state backed banks getting an effective subsidy in the free market but even so I think that is outside their jurisdiction. I don't especially care about that issue but it seems odd.

The police will have greater powers to restrict the freedom of any individual they suspect of being a potential sex offender, under government proposals.

The restrictions - which could be used against a person never convicted - include limiting internet use and preventing travel abroad.

Breaching a sexual risk order could lead to a five-year jail sentence.

The government said the police will have greater powers to restrict "any person they judge to be a risk".