|
Post by spyros on Nov 13, 2019 8:23:45 GMT
i know of many Labour voters who cannot vote for Corbyn, Abbott, McDonnell and Thornberry. Me and me Mum and me Dad and me Gran We'll all be voting blue.
|
|
|
Post by Jerry1971 on Nov 13, 2019 9:51:20 GMT
It probably wont surprise anyone on here to learn that I shall be voting Conservative, and to be completely transparent I have been a member of the party for the past 33 years too. I was therefore, one of those who had the vote in the recent leadership election, and I voted for Boris then. Nothing since has made me believe I made a mistake and that Hunt would have served us better - ultimately the need was for leadership, and love him or loathe him Boris is a leader.
What I do find most sad though is that the state of Parliament prior to this election was so depressingly poor, and I think that is why many long-time Labour voters are deserting them and voting for Johnson. We really do not have, and have not had, an effective opposition for some time, certainly since Corbyn became Labour's leader. Whilst I am biased, and freely admit that, Corbyn is the closest politician we've had to 'un-electable' since Michael Foot. A bitter and twisted old fashioned Marxist. A jealousy politician of the worst order, surrounded by fools galore in his front bench team. I'd always admired Diane Abbot until she was elevated beyond her capabilities, now she, and others such as Thornberry are frankly making Labour look a laughing stock. Sadly, the Libs have missed their own opportunity by electing Screechy Swinson (I'll scweem and scween until I'm sick) as their own leader, and by so overwhelmingly wanting to stop Brexit, without even so much as a second referendum. They've lost the democracy plot well and truly.
Cambridge City is normally a two way fight between Labour and LD. In Daniel Zeichner we have a good MP who cares deeply for the City, and is also a U. Under normal circumstances, that would be enough for me to put aside party loyalties and vote for him, simply to keep the screeching bicycle mad Libs out, but in these times I simply cannot vote tactically and would rather waste my vote by supporting my own party which really has little chance in a manically remain City. A Corbyn government would be an unmitigated disaster. Eventhough I won't vote Lib under any circumstances owing to their anti-democracy message, I'm secretly hoping they'll take Cambridge off Labour simply to reduce the chances of a Labour majority government on the 12th December.
|
|
cambsno
Youth team star
Posts: 1,031
|
Post by cambsno on Nov 13, 2019 12:41:28 GMT
It probably wont surprise anyone on here to learn that I shall be voting Conservative, and to be completely transparent I have been a member of the party for the past 33 years too. I was therefore, one of those who had the vote in the recent leadership election, and I voted for Boris then. Nothing since has made me believe I made a mistake and that Hunt would have served us better - ultimately the need was for leadership, and love him or loathe him Boris is a leader. What I do find most sad though is that the state of Parliament prior to this election was so depressingly poor, and I think that is why many long-time Labour voters are deserting them and voting for Johnson. We really do not have, and have not had, an effective opposition for some time, certainly since Corbyn became Labour's leader. Whilst I am biased, and freely admit that, Corbyn is the closest politician we've had to 'un-electable' since Michael Foot. A bitter and twisted old fashioned Marxist. A jealousy politician of the worst order, surrounded by fools galore in his front bench team. I'd always admired Diane Abbot until she was elevated beyond her capabilities, now she, and others such as Thornberry are frankly making Labour look a laughing stock. Sadly, the Libs have missed their own opportunity by electing Screechy Swinson (I'll scweem and scween until I'm sick) as their own leader, and by so overwhelmingly wanting to stop Brexit, without even so much as a second referendum. They've lost the democracy plot well and truly. Cambridge City is normally a two way fight between Labour and LD. In Daniel Zeichner we have a good MP who cares deeply for the City, and is also a U. Under normal circumstances, that would be enough for me to put aside party loyalties and vote for him, simply to keep the screeching bicycle mad Libs out, but in these times I simply cannot vote tactically and would rather waste my vote by supporting my own party which really has little chance in a manically remain City. A Corbyn government would be an unmitigated disaster. Eventhough I won't vote Lib under any circumstances owing to their anti-democracy message, I'm secretly hoping they'll take Cambridge off Labour simply to reduce the chances of a Labour majority government on the 12th December. Interesting you call the LD anti-democracy (they do support a 2nd referendum) while Boris has: - Shut down Parliament illegally - Not giving the public the chance to vote on his deal - Not giving the public the chance to give THEIR preferred Brexit solution - Withholds (or tries to) information around Brexit/Russia (aside from lying in the past about Brexit) Do you not think he has been acting un-democratically? He will screw up negotiations which mean at the end of the transition we leave on no deal and screw the country over. And this is from someone who thinks Thatcher was a great leader, was a member of the Tory party, voted leave and hated the EU with a passion!!! Boris & co have turned that person into someone who if given the choice of Boris in charge or rejoin and take the Euro would choose the later!!
|
|
|
Post by Jerry1971 on Nov 13, 2019 13:57:12 GMT
As far as I understand the Libs position, they do not support the idea of a second referendum if they win a majority in parliament - rather they will simply revoke Article 50 altogether. Even Caroline Lucas of the Green Party sounded off about this yesterday, stating in 'The New European' Newspaper 'If the Lib Dems don't give a f**k what 17.4m people said, just say so'.
As for Boris, the Supreme Court, headed by the hardly impartial Lady Hale made its judgement. This was after the English High Court refused to intervene, and the case was taken by the awful Gina Miller (she certainly isn't a democrat) to be heard in the Scottish Appeal Court. As we all know, Scotland is hardly a Conservative sympathising County. As it is, the anti-democracy argument could well apply to the Supreme Court too, given that it is appointed, and not elected. We even elect Police and Crime Commissioners, so why not the most senior judges in the land?
FWIW, I am a 'reluctant' and quite soft leaver. I voted to leave not through any anti-European or immigrant stance, (I am half Austrian and the majority of my family still live in Vienna - I feel as much a European as a Brit) but actually from an anti-EU perspective. I was very much in favour of the common market. I'd have been happy had we left the EU whilst remaining in the Customs Union and the Single Market, and also had we allowed continued free movement of EU citizens to facilitate that. What I was never comfortable with was the need for a European Parliament, and other hugely expensive and politically damaging offices and commissions, dragging us towards a federalism which would have been utterly disastrous for the Continent as a whole and may well have led to civil or military unrest in the long run. The promoted concept of EU harmonisation has failed in my opinion. The fact that the UK is the second largest net contributor to the EU budget should say something about what it doesn't deliver to us, apart from layers of expensive civil servants in Brussels, doing what exactly? The pointless legal challenge relating to the £350m/week figure on Boris's leave bus, seen by remainers as a lie, was proven not to be and actually the judgement stated that the amount saved could well be higher.
The UK will still be a major part of Europe post Brexit - the geography will see to that, but what we won't be is subservient to unelected masters such as Van Der Weyen, or Juncker. To answer the point about whether we should have been given a choice on how we left the EU is that no choice could be given ahead of a negotiation, and the negotiation has been compromised at every step by those MP's representing leave constituencies putting their own preference ahead of their own constituents. That is in itself far more un-democratic than allowing Parliamentary sovereignty (the system we follow here) to create and pass a withdrawal bill, having been mandated to do so by the electorate in the Referendum.
As for Russia? Who knows. Corby and his mates are all hot under the collar peddling the outright lie that Johnson and Farage will sell the NHS to the Americans, which is garbage however you look at it. Maybe the donations received (allegedly) by the Conservative Party from Russian donors will prove to be wholly above board and legitimate? Again, until there is evidence to the contrary, there is really no story.
|
|
cambsno
Youth team star
Posts: 1,031
|
Post by cambsno on Nov 13, 2019 15:24:08 GMT
As far as I understand the Libs position, they do not support the idea of a second referendum if they win a majority in parliament - rather they will simply revoke Article 50 altogether. Even Caroline Lucas of the Green Party sounded off about this yesterday, stating in 'The New European' Newspaper 'If the Lib Dems don't give a f**k what 17.4m people said, just say so'. As for Boris, the Supreme Court, headed by the hardly impartial Lady Hale made its judgement. This was after the English High Court refused to intervene, and the case was taken by the awful Gina Miller (she certainly isn't a democrat) to be heard in the Scottish Appeal Court. As we all know, Scotland is hardly a Conservative sympathising County. As it is, the anti-democracy argument could well apply to the Supreme Court too, given that it is appointed, and not elected. We even elect Police and Crime Commissioners, so why not the most senior judges in the land? FWIW, I am a 'reluctant' and quite soft leaver. I voted to leave not through any anti-European or immigrant stance, (I am half Austrian and the majority of my family still live in Vienna - I feel as much a European as a Brit) but actually from an anti-EU perspective. I was very much in favour of the common market. I'd have been happy had we left the EU whilst remaining in the Customs Union and the Single Market, and also had we allowed continued free movement of EU citizens to facilitate that. What I was never comfortable with was the need for a European Parliament, and other hugely expensive and politically damaging offices and commissions, dragging us towards a federalism which would have been utterly disastrous for the Continent as a whole and may well have led to civil or military unrest in the long run. The promoted concept of EU harmonisation has failed in my opinion. The fact that the UK is the second largest net contributor to the EU budget should say something about what it doesn't deliver to us, apart from layers of expensive civil servants in Brussels, doing what exactly? The pointless legal challenge relating to the £350m/week figure on Boris's leave bus, seen by remainers as a lie, was proven not to be and actually the judgement stated that the amount saved could well be higher. The UK will still be a major part of Europe post Brexit - the geography will see to that, but what we won't be is subservient to unelected masters such as Van Der Weyen, or Juncker. To answer the point about whether we should have been given a choice on how we left the EU is that no choice could be given ahead of a negotiation, and the negotiation has been compromised at every step by those MP's representing leave constituencies putting their own preference ahead of their own constituents. That is in itself far more un-democratic than allowing Parliamentary sovereignty (the system we follow here) to create and pass a withdrawal bill, having been mandated to do so by the electorate in the Referendum. As for Russia? Who knows. Corby and his mates are all hot under the collar peddling the outright lie that Johnson and Farage will sell the NHS to the Americans, which is garbage however you look at it. Maybe the donations received (allegedly) by the Conservative Party from Russian donors will prove to be wholly above board and legitimate? Again, until there is evidence to the contrary, there is really no story. I agree about not wanting to a EU superstate, but we had vetos on these things like an EU army etc... (something that if we suffer with no deal, we ill end up in 10 years rejoining the EU but on worse terms and no vetos) The 350m is a complete lie - that the the supposed fee but we get rebates etc... If the TV in John Lewis is up for £500 and is 50% off the cost is £250 not £500! As for the court... we have to respect the law. I think though you prove how undemocratic Boris is - the biggest change to the UK for years and a lasting impact... and he pretty much alone decides what Brexit it! Seems more like a dictatorship!!! At the very least he should reach out to Parliament and the SNP, Labour etc... and agree what Brexit should be, as it will impact us for decades to come and they Tories will not govern for those. Really, he should let the people decide the form of brexit seeing as he is so keen on doing what the people want.
|
|
cambsno
Youth team star
Posts: 1,031
|
Post by cambsno on Nov 13, 2019 15:25:46 GMT
To answer the point about whether we should have been given a choice on how we left the EU is that no choice could be given ahead of a negotiation, and the negotiation has been compromised at every step by those MP's representing leave constituencies putting their own preference ahead of their own constituents. That is in itself far more un-democratic than allowing Parliamentary sovereignty (the system we follow here) to create and pass a withdrawal bill, having been mandated to do so by the electorate in the Referendum. Where was the mandate to leave the single market, customs union etc??? The mandate was to leave the EU. The Norway modeal would have done that and had a mandate.
|
|
habbinboy
Youth team star
Posts: 1,903
Favourite CUFC player: Number 11 Courtney Pitt
|
Post by habbinboy on Nov 13, 2019 15:59:46 GMT
A 97.1% mandate from postal workers counts for nothing, I bet Boris Johnson can't wait to scrap the workers' rights that we got under the EU. Shame on our High Court.
|
|
|
Post by kentishu on Nov 13, 2019 16:02:39 GMT
Hi Jerry, interesting posts.
It sounds like you are in favour of the sort of soft Brexit that Labour would negotiate so perhaps that's a tick in Labour's box on that issue.
As for being a Tory, I am not going to dissuade you after 33 years of membership, but don't you think the country has been so starved of investment for so many years, it's actually quite embarrassing.
I live in Spain for much of the time, and the infrastructure is vastly superior, I am always appalled when I return home to see how shabby everything is - and I live in a so-called leafy part of Kent!
Kentish
|
|
martin018
Youth team substitute
Posts: 589
Favourite CUFC player: Michael Heathcote
Favourite CUFC match: U's 4 - 0 against Sheff. Wed FA Cup 1990
|
Post by martin018 on Nov 13, 2019 16:30:17 GMT
Thank you Jerry for some sensible balanced posts. Corbyn is the worst Labour leader since Foot and have to agree about Swinson as well.
|
|
|
Post by Jerry1971 on Nov 13, 2019 16:31:58 GMT
Hi Jerry, interesting posts. It sounds like you are in favour of the sort of soft Brexit that Labour would negotiate so perhaps that's a tick in Labour's box on that issue. As for being a Tory, I am not going to dissuade you after 33 years of membership, but don't you think the country has been so starved of investment for so many years, it's actually quite embarrassing. I live in Spain for much of the time, and the infrastructure is vastly superior, I am always appalled when I return home to see how shabby everything is - and I live in a so-called leafy part of Kent! Kentish Except, Kentish, the issue with a Labour soft Brexit is that they would try to negotiate such a deal (if the EU are open to another negotiation, but if the concept of Customs Union and Single Market is dangled they probably would be), but as Emily Thornberry and others have said (Rebecca Wrong-Daily springs to mind) they would then put that deal to a referendum with the choice of vote for it or revoke A50, and many of them would campaign against their own deal. That is less of a policy and more of a statement that they too want to remain against the wishes of the Referendum result. I completely agree with you on the infrastructure issue, and investment. Part of the problem is that we make a mountain out of a mole hill when it comes to major investment projects. Cambridge North rail station is a good example. It took thirty years to build from when it was first proposed, and ran way over budget, coming in at £30m or so. It looks great. It has a large car park, a busway and a strategic position to appeal to the North of the City. Only real problems are that it has been vastly over-engineered - huge platforms (big enough for a Eurostar, so overkill for the three car local services it generally serves) and it actually doesn't seem to have many trains or passengers as a result. Most of that £30m probably went on working parties, consultants, public inquiries, consultations, more reports and working parties...... and that seems to be a uniquely British thing. Elsewhere, they just get on with it whilst we procrastinate endlessly. We have a largely broken set of priorities in our public sector, where backside covering eclipses the need for the delivery of services and infrastructure. The Greater Cambridgeshire Partnership (formerly the City Deal) was given £1 Billion to improve public transport, almost ten years ago. What has it done so far? A few bike lanes and endless consultation exercises. The Metro probably wont open in our lifetimes if they follow the same route. The Busway took forever, and has been an abject failure as consultants ended up writing what the County Council bus lover told them to write - a stitch up of epic proportions locally. And then there is HS2. Critical infrastructure, dragging on, and on, and on. One day it could well be magnificent, if it ever opens, and could revitalise the Northern Powerhouse, but Labour seem to want to cancel it, alongside the Oxford/Cambridge Expressway project which could open up cheaper housing and jobs to millions of people. I drove this time last year from Malaga Airport to Marbella, and then on to Gibraltar. The motorway was absolutely fabulous, and if I remember correctly was a toll road operated by a private company!
|
|
|
Post by kentishu on Nov 13, 2019 17:30:24 GMT
Hi Jerry
I bow to your superior knowledge of local issues in Cambridge, and you are right that three short stretches of motorway between Málaga and Gibraltar are peaje. That's quite unusual in Spain by the way, if you had gone up the coast in the other direction the road is just as good but it would have been free, and there is a perfectly good free dual carriageway route through to Gibraltar from Málaga too. Anyhow, the point is that all the roads are government operated, and shows how government investment can make a real difference.
Kentish
|
|
Mark of Carnage
Reserve team substitute
Responsibility, Resilience, Respect
Posts: 2,558
|
Post by Mark of Carnage on Nov 13, 2019 20:01:37 GMT
I completely agree with you on the infrastructure issue, and investment. Part of the problem is that we make a mountain out of a mole hill when it comes to major investment projects. Cambridge North rail station is a good example. It took thirty years to build from when it was first proposed, and ran way over budget, coming in at £30m or so. It looks great. It has a large car park, a busway and a strategic position to appeal to the North of the City. Only real problems are that it has been vastly over-engineered - huge platforms (big enough for a Eurostar, so overkill for the three car local services it generally serves) and it actually doesn't seem to have many trains or passengers as a result. Most of that £30m probably went on working parties, consultants, public inquiries, consultations, more reports and working parties...... and that seems to be a uniquely British thing. Elsewhere, they just get on with it whilst we procrastinate endlessly. We have a largely broken set of priorities in our public sector, where backside covering eclipses the need for the delivery of services and infrastructure. The Greater Cambridgeshire Partnership (formerly the City Deal) was given £1 Billion to improve public transport, almost ten years ago. What has it done so far? A few bike lanes and endless consultation exercises. The Metro probably wont open in our lifetimes if they follow the same route. The Busway took forever, and has been an abject failure as consultants ended up writing what the County Council bus lover told them to write - a stitch up of epic proportions locally. And then there is HS2. Critical infrastructure, dragging on, and on, and on. One day it could well be magnificent, if it ever opens, and could revitalise the Northern Powerhouse, but Labour seem to want to cancel it, alongside the Oxford/Cambridge Expressway project which could open up cheaper housing and jobs to millions of people. Agree with you about the silly amount of time and wasted money on working parties, consultants etc. The thing is that a Conservative win is not going to change any of that and inevitably there would be more money leaking away to people who like to move money about for the sake of lining their own pockets and produce nothing. The difference that the Labour government that will be elected will bring is to cut out all the inefficient and pointless layers of duplication of bureaucracy the private sector brings to the table and get the tax payer real value for money through the public sector. The last decade of Tory waste and the Blairite years before that had been focussed on this daft idea that the private sector's pursuit of profit will provide value for money to the tax payer and the opposite is well proven as you described. The private sector will have plenty of opportunity to earn money from Labour's infrastructure program and the contracts will be lucrative but if we are to get the job done it should not be the tail wagging the dog.
|
|
cambsno
Youth team star
Posts: 1,031
|
Post by cambsno on Nov 13, 2019 23:37:09 GMT
I completely agree with you on the infrastructure issue, and investment. Part of the problem is that we make a mountain out of a mole hill when it comes to major investment projects. Cambridge North rail station is a good example. It took thirty years to build from when it was first proposed, and ran way over budget, coming in at £30m or so. It looks great. It has a large car park, a busway and a strategic position to appeal to the North of the City. Only real problems are that it has been vastly over-engineered - huge platforms (big enough for a Eurostar, so overkill for the three car local services it generally serves) and it actually doesn't seem to have many trains or passengers as a result. Most of that £30m probably went on working parties, consultants, public inquiries, consultations, more reports and working parties...... and that seems to be a uniquely British thing. Elsewhere, they just get on with it whilst we procrastinate endlessly. We have a largely broken set of priorities in our public sector, where backside covering eclipses the need for the delivery of services and infrastructure. The Greater Cambridgeshire Partnership (formerly the City Deal) was given £1 Billion to improve public transport, almost ten years ago. What has it done so far? A few bike lanes and endless consultation exercises. The Metro probably wont open in our lifetimes if they follow the same route. The Busway took forever, and has been an abject failure as consultants ended up writing what the County Council bus lover told them to write - a stitch up of epic proportions locally. And then there is HS2. Critical infrastructure, dragging on, and on, and on. One day it could well be magnificent, if it ever opens, and could revitalise the Northern Powerhouse, but Labour seem to want to cancel it, alongside the Oxford/Cambridge Expressway project which could open up cheaper housing and jobs to millions of people. Agree with you about the silly amount of time and wasted money on working parties, consultants etc. The thing is that a Conservative win is not going to change any of that and inevitably there would be more money leaking away to people who like to move money about for the sake of lining their own pockets and produce nothing. The difference that the Labour government that will be elected will bring is to cut out all the inefficient and pointless layers of duplication of bureaucracy the private sector brings to the table and get the tax payer real value for money through the public sector. The last decade of Tory waste and the Blairite years before that had been focussed on this daft idea that the private sector's pursuit of profit will provide value for money to the tax payer and the opposite is well proven as you described. The private sector will have plenty of opportunity to earn money from Labour's infrastructure program and the contracts will be lucrative but if we are to get the job done it should not be the tail wagging the dog. Meanwhile Brexit was the main reason Tesla are building their new plant in Germany not the UK!
|
|
|
Post by Jerry1971 on Nov 14, 2019 9:16:31 GMT
Berlin is welcome to Elon's Ego. Tesla's are undoubtedly fine motor cars, but given that they've not made a bean in profit so far is it properly sustainable? If I had a spare £100k to drop on a motor (I don't!) would I buy one from a manufacturer who are probably wobbly financially and haven't answered the key environmental question about how the used battery packs will be disposed of or recycled? At present, it seems the old fashioned tyre mountains are about to be replaced with battery mountains instead!
|
|
cambsno
Youth team star
Posts: 1,031
|
Post by cambsno on Nov 14, 2019 10:47:00 GMT
Berlin is welcome to Elon's Ego. Tesla's are undoubtedly fine motor cars, but given that they've not made a bean in profit so far is it properly sustainable? If I had a spare £100k to drop on a motor (I don't!) would I buy one from a manufacturer who are probably wobbly financially and haven't answered the key environmental question about how the used battery packs will be disposed of or recycled? At present, it seems the old fashioned tyre mountains are about to be replaced with battery mountains instead! Its more around the commercials in investing in the UK. If I was looking around to build a factory, I would prefer an EU country. How much investment will we miss out on?
|
|