***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 15 *****
As above.*
* this site does not endorse any political party in any shape or form. Any posts/links deemed offensive by moderators will be removed
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 1 Sep 14 at 10:16
|
Nowadays I struggle to find any front page of newspapers without mentioning something about UKIP.
But as we know, any publicity is good publicity :)
|
"But as we know, any publicity is good publicity :)"
Not necessarily - I didn't think much to Louise Bours' performance on QT last night. After 5 minutes of her and Joey Barton, I switched the tv off and went to sleep.
|
I thought her remark about footballer's brains in their boots was a classic!
Pat
|
So well done all you UKIP voters in the North West. Going by last night's Question Time, you've sent a really worthwhile, sensible, likeable, thoughtful, intelligent MEP to Brussels, from a party with great depth to their policies across the board.
Not.
I didn't get AC's habit of calling Nigey Farridge "Mr Vuvuzela" until I heard that woman last night. She certainly sounded like one.
Anyone else see the "performance"? She even managed to make Piers Morgan and Joey Barton sound reasonable.
|
She has learnt , from watching the program's style, that as a UKIP panellist on BBCQT, one HAS to shout and hold one's ground to avoid being shouted over by the other panellists.
She did well in a hostile environment
We don't NEED "charming" politicians - we need politicians who actually believe in what they say.
|
>> She has learnt , from watching the program's style, that as a UKIP panellist on
>> BBCQT, one HAS to shout and hold one's ground to avoid being shouted over by
>> the other panellists.
>> She did well in a hostile environment
>> We don't NEED "charming" politicians - we need politicians who actually believe in what they
>> say.
>> Well that included Pol Pot so not a very good criterion to choose your political leader..(s)
|
It does annoy me when people get shouted down on these shows. I recall the time Nick Griffin appeared on QT, and the audience and other panellists heckled and shouted every time he spoke.
People should be always be allowed their say, out of courtesy, out of respect for freedom of speech, and best of all because it's actually the best way to deal with extremists. The old adage of giving people rope and watching them hang themselves.
|
|
But the point is she was allowed her say from the start and was not shouted down. However, she just hollered and ranted in the most vacuous way. Empty vessels.
|
|
I should add, I didn't see the show.
Last edited by: DP on Fri 30 May 14 at 11:49
|
I didn't either, but headline news in the DM regarding Barton's UKIP comment and QT hitting 'new low' (link to slightly less hysterical BBC report/clip):
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27631525
|
|
Thing is, it's a pretty sad outlook for UKIP if their representative has to be so shrill and ranty to make their point against such intellectual heavyweights as Piers Morgan and Joey Barton. The Labour and Tory representatives were beacons of sanity and composure in comparison.
|
Actually the panel was such a bunch of deadbeats that Piers Morgan stood out as pleasant, reasonable and articulate.
What was that Barton doing there? I thought he was in permanent disgrace. Is he a boozing buddy of the Dimblebys?
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Fri 30 May 14 at 13:14
|
>> What was that Barton doing there?
Barton is a prominent user of Twitter, with over two million followers as for April 2013. Commenting on figures from Friedrich Nietzsche and George Orwell to Isambard Kingdom Brunel and Morrissey, his eclectic tweets have resulted in him being described by the BBC as "as a philosophical sportsman to rival Eric Cantona in his heyday"
Lots of other less savoury stuff on Wiki:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joey_Barton
|
Off to Newark this afternoon, to listen to Nigel F. & Roger H. speak.
Regrettably, these days, due to the need for security, pre-booked tickets only, so there'll be a large number of the converted there, rather than floaters.
Still, it will nice to hear them both, live.
|
Most people will have seen the report that according to a survey, 72% of UKIP voters in the Euros say that they will vote UKIP again in the general election.
Will they really? If they do, then UKIP will have changed the political landscape a bit.
Guh...
|
>> Most people will have seen the report that according to a survey, 72% of UKIP
>> voters in the Euros say that they will vote UKIP again in the general election.
>>
>>
>> Will they really? If they do, then UKIP will have changed the political landscape a
>> bit.
>>
>> Guh...
>>
YAY!
|
>> YAY!
Don't get too excited Rastaman. They aren't going to win. Indeed probably, thanks to them, no one will win.
Guh...
|
They aren't going to win. Indeed probably, thanks to them, no one will win.
No it's not the fault of the UKIP. It's the fault of the majority who voted to keep our antiquated first past the post system.
While I don't support the UKIP,it is reasonable to suppose they might have elected the odd MP with PR since if for example you put the UKIP first, Conservative second you'd not be electing the Labour party and that is what might happened with first past the post.
Much good it did, but I voted for PR.
Last edited by: Slidingpillar on Sun 1 Jun 14 at 10:51
|
|
Virtual certainty of a coalition next election either way (with PR, absolute certainty). If it floats your boat...
|
Virtual certainty of a coalition next election either way (with PR, absolute certainty). If it floats your boat...
Actually it does! There is not so much wrong with the country that a myriad of new laws requires, and a lurching to left or right.
|
>> a lurching to left or right.
Lurching is no good. But a sinuous snaking from left to right, and back of course, not very far either way, is quite a good idea as well as being what we are more or less used to.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Sun 1 Jun 14 at 19:36
|
|
If UKIP win lots of votes at the next GE, PR will be decades away.
|
Of course we won't WIN outright - but we may gather enough seats to have some influence!
The Newark meeting with NF & RH was standing room only. (At a guess 7-800 people). The audience was largely made up of UKIP members, so a bit of preaching to the converted.
Both our blokes gave really good speeches and there was a Q & A session afterwards. Several of our newly elected MEPs were there, including our openly gay MEP for Scotland. (Homophobic party - really?)
It's seems to be a two horse race; us and the Tories.
According to polls on Friday (always to be taken with a pinch of salt) we are not that far behind on voting intentions.
We shall see.
|
>> >> Indeed probably, thanks to them,
>> no one will win.
The UKIP vote is the left-behind vote and the fed-up protest vote, drawn mainly from labour but also conservative.
The conservatives will drift back to Cameron if he plays his cards right, but not the labour vote because Milliband has thrown his cards away.
|
>> >> >> Indeed probably, thanks to them,
>> >> no one will win.
>>
>>
>> The UKIP vote is the left-behind vote and the fed-up protest vote, drawn mainly from
>> labour but also conservative.
>> The conservatives will drift back to Cameron if he plays his cards right, but not
>> the labour vote because Milliband has thrown his cards away.
>>
Mine ain't!
|
>> Will they really? If they do, then UKIP will have changed the political landscape a
>> bit.
Gillian Duffy did her bit as well.
|
Undoubtedly some of the mud unjustifiably thrown at UKIP over the last few weeks has stuck. That is in the nature of things, as was once said, by an expert (!) (paraphrased) "Tell the people enough lies and they will eventually believe them".
There has been an unprecedented attack on UKIP, largely based on its people, not its policies. The media, no doubt prompted by their cosy relationship with the old parties, on whom they have traditionally relied for entrée to the corridors of power, have been unremitting in their assault on UKIP people, while conveniently largely ignoring far worse offences by candidates and elected officials of the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties.
I think it is fair to say that some of us in UKIP are a tad disappointed with the Newark result, as some expectations were that we would get around 27% to 28% of the vote and whittle the Tory majority to 5000 or less.
The all out desperate assault by the whole of the Tory party machine, complete with mandatory visits to Newark by ALL the party hierarchy and under threat, most of their MPs and candidates, plus up to 1000 (!) activists shows that the fear is with them.
Thankfully at the G.E. of 2015 they will not be able to do this blanket coverage, while it is likely that UKIP's activists will concentrate efforts on the carefully selected seats where we think we have a chance of winning.
Now at local and national level we start planning for 2015, not only for the G.E., but also for the many local authorities where local council seats are up for grabs.
|
>> "Tell the people enough lies and they will eventually believe them".
UKIP would know all about that. Happily it doesn't look like enough of us are buying it.
|
>> the carefully selected seats where we think we have a chance of winning.
Not much chance of overtime then?
|
Why don't UKIP choose the party that is closest to their beliefs ..then have an electoral pact with that one and agree not to run against their candidates in seats they can win?
That way they can have some MP's elected, yet still have the country run by an outfit closest to their goals.
|
UKIP believe that we should leave the EU now with no discussion.
With whom could they align themselves?
|
>> UKIP believe that we should leave the EU now with no discussion.
>>
>> With whom could they align themselves?
It doesn't take a lot of imagination to work out that a lot of the Tory vote think likewise.
|
|
Perhaps, but the Tory party, at least at the moment, do not. They have merely committed to a referendum in a year or two, which suits me, but seemingly not UKIP.
|
Oh honestly Wp... All the mainstream parties are committed to Europe. So we are already in Europe, quite rightly. Referendums are neither here nor there. If they take place, their verdicts can still be ignored.
Saying it will take us out is the only thing UKIP has. But it's whistling in the wind if that's the expression.
|
>> Oh honestly Wp... All the mainstream parties are committed to Europe. So we are already
>> in Europe, quite rightly. Referendums are neither here nor there. If they take place, their
>> verdicts can still be ignored.
>>
>> Saying it will take us out is the only thing UKIP has. But it's whistling
>> in the wind if that's the expression.
>>
Yes.
The mainstream parties have their ideas...
.. but..
...quite a large chunk of the Tory vote thinks similarly to UKIP voters on Europe.
So why doesn't UKIP align itself to its closest political party to get nearer to what it wants?
|
>> why doesn't UKIP align itself to its closest political party
The 'conservative quartile' you mean Wp? They are already aligned, up to a point, along with others they won't feel comfortable with. But that's politics.
:o}
|
AC,
You are an intelligent man. You know exactly what I mean. You are avoiding the point.
|
>> You are avoiding the point.
That's unfair. I was saying the Conservatives and kippers occupy the same quarter politically, and as you point out there are many Tories with anti-European views. OK, there isn't an official linkage. But that would make all sorts of problems for both parties, so there won't be one.
I don't see what's so evasive about that.
|
>> >> You are avoiding the point.
>>
>> That's unfair.
Yes, it was. Have an apology.
Good example of why you shouldn't post when you've been out for a good sherbert for your birthday.
|
>> shouldn't post when you've been out for a good sherbert for your birthday.
Heh heh... Many more Wp...
|
Westpig I think is ignoring that politics is a supreme example of "nudge theory" in operation.
No mainstream party wants to leave the EU, and hardly any supporters actually want to leave. They say they do, because the only way to shift a party in a particular direction is to nudge, or in this case shove, by applying pressure from one side. Often threatening the ultimate is the only way of making a modest shift.
UKIP is just part of the same process but from a position that is actually off the Conservative scale. The merit, probably the only merit, of UKIP is to nudge the Conservatives into adopting a more robust negotiating position. They have nothing more in common than a tug has with an ocean liner, so any kind of pact would be pointless.
Paradoxically UKIP's other policy appeals to exactly the opposite end of the spectrum, to the left-behind labour voters with no or disappearing jobs, the poor whites. That is not "nudge" territory, because they are left behind by history, and no one is interested in changing the march of economic change.
As I said before, the Conservative deserters will drift back when the nudge has succeeded, but the disillusionment of the labour supporters ought to be a greater worry to Labour, because the leaders have boxed themselves into a corner by refusing to countenance any shift.
Last edited by: Cliff Pope on Sat 7 Jun 14 at 08:40
|
>> So why doesn't UKIP align itself to its closest political party to get nearer to
>> what it wants?
In what sense might it align itself?
Although some Tory voters are anti EU plenty others are not. A relative handful of their MPs, Rees-Mogg and Raab for example, are committed 'outers'. Most, including the PM, are committed to reform from within. The party is tied to business most of which believes in remaining in.
Any link to UKIP would send the Tory party back to the internecine squabbling that led to IDS as leader and years of being unelectable.
|
A UKIP pre-election link to the Tories would be anathema to many UKIP members and voters who have come to us from Labour. We would lose both members and votes.
Tory central office know this full well, which is why their Fifth Columnists in the shape of their tame so-called "Eurosceptics" are suggesting it!
A post election pact - IF we have enough clout, (yes - I said IF) is a horse of a different colour.
|
>>[attacks] largely based on its people, not its policies.
You can't attack the UKIP policies as it only has one (or was it four?! as Stu proved last week).
Meanwhile, if you watched question time last week, (I didn't) apparently attacking the people is an open goal. :)
|
4?
Immigration, EU and....?
|
"Immigration,….."
Ah, yes, that'll be the elephant……….
|
|
so you don't know the other two either?
|
"so you don't know the other two either?"
Well, actually, I disagree with the other utterings that I've heard, i.e. re energy/wind turbines and doing away with anti-smoking legislation. However, give UKIP their due, they have spotted the elephant - which is more than the other popular parties seems to have done. And, it is a big elephant!
|
>>give UKIP their due, they have spotted the elephant
I don't think I'd like Farage in person, but he's nobody's fool.
And I think the elephant is wider, there is clearly a huge lump of resentment looking for an outlet. And currently he seems to be the only one suggesting one.
But it won't last. UKIP would have been better off long term if they'd taken a caning in the Euro elections.
|
>> And,
>> it is a big elephant!
>>
But it's an elephant that has been with us for decades, if not centuries, and somehow we always seem to get used to it. It used to be about Normans, then French, then Jews, then Spaniards, then Hugenots, then Jews again, then West Indians, then Ugandan Asians, then second-generation West Indians, then south Asians in general, then Moslem south Asians, then Poles, then second generation Moslems, then Bulgarians,and so it goes on. The elephant changes its colour, but never actually seems to matter very much.
Some of the earlier incarnations are indistinguishable now. We are all elephants now, a vast herd which is trampling the ground we need to grow food or build houses on.
|
"We are all elephants now, a vast herd which is trampling the ground we need to grow food or build houses on."
Correct, Cliff, you have identified over-population as 'the elephant'; the spread of an aggressive religion is a mere hippopotamus in comparison. As crises go, the world's financial mess-up was nothing more than a pygmy shrew.
I was down at the cathedral last night listening to the Bach Choir singing Faure's Requiem, and I couldn't help thinking that cultural changes will evolve as you observed but, when the choirs and orchestras fall silent and the cathedrals become mosques, I cannot regard it as 'progress'. But then, maybe our great, great grandchildren won't even notice.
|
Sooner than that maybe: it has been reckoned, I don't know how accurately though, (rebutted here blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-will-britain-have-a-muslim-majority-by-2050/13690) that by 2050 or so Islam will be in the majority in the UK.
Not in my lifetime any way, but maybe my grand-children's, or their children's time.
Islam is a politically charged proselytising faith,- there is not too much argument about that, surely?
|
I doubt very strongly that Islam will ever be the majority religion in this country. Extrapolating immigration and birth rates simply gives a wildly misleading and inaccurate picture of the likely social reality.
Indeed Roger your own religion of Rastafarianism might be in with a chance, if you play your cards right. It's a bit more user-friendly than Islam although the theology can get a bit puzzling. It contains Christian and Judaic elements, and Rastas don't eat pork.
:o}
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Sun 8 Jun 14 at 17:34
|
>> I doubt very strongly that Islam will ever be the majority religion in this country.
>> Extrapolating immigration and birth rates simply gives a wildly misleading and inaccurate picture of the
>> likely social reality.
>>
Presumably there exists the phenomenon of secularism amongs peoples of moslem origin?
One might have looked at the UK population in say 1850 and extrapolated the growth rate and predicted 60 million Christians by 2014.
Perhaps a combination of economic growth, increasing trivialisation and dumbing down of civilisation, and its replacement by the pursuit of sport, games shows and the worship of celebrities, will infect other religions too, not just Christianity?
|
>> Perhaps a combination of economic growth, increasing trivialisation and dumbing down of civilisation, and its
>> replacement by the pursuit of sport, games shows and the worship of celebrities, will infect
>> other religions too, not just Christianity?
>>
Turkey tried secularism: enforced by Ataturk.. They seem to be in the process of rejecting it..
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 9 Jun 14 at 10:18
|
>> Turkey tried secularism: enforced by Ataturk.. They seem to be in the process of rejecting
>> it..
Secularism, a complete divorce of state from religion including education is something with which I'd broadly agree. It's only possible though if it has public support and and application to ALL faith. I doubt that will be forthcoming while we have an established religion.
Far too many of those currently advocating it will still want a place for Christianity on grounds of 'tradition' and are frankly not too bothered about Judaism either. Secularism is too often called up as a cover for Islamophobia - not just in UK but France too.
|
"Secularism is too often called up as a cover for Islamophobia - not just in UK but France too. "
I try hard, but fail to understand why a sensitive, educated human being would want to act as an apologist for a bunch of vile, medieval sky-fairy worshipers.
|
>> I try hard, but fail to understand why a sensitive, educated human being would want
>> to act as an apologist for a bunch of vile, medieval sky-fairy worshipers.
I could try and explain but as your true colours are now in display I'll not waste electrons.
|
"I could try and explain"
No, I can't explain religion either. You obviously get it, but I don't - although I can, from a biological point of view, see why it might have evolved.
Even Dawkins gives up eventually, you know.
|
>> "I could try and explain"
>>
>> No, I can't explain religion either. You obviously get it, but I don't - although
>> I can, from a biological point of view, see why it might have evolved.
FWIW I've no time for religion and certainly don't believe in any of the sky fairies myself. I will not however dismiss a creed that guides a massive chunk of the world's population as vile or medieval.
Islam's underlying creed is not that different to Christianity. Like Christianity it's easily harnessed to justify war of one form or another by people who's real motivations are suspect. I'ts observance or variants upon it , eg Shia/Sunni, is often a defining characteristic between people in conflict. But of course that's not unique to Islam either as exemplified by differing versions of Christianity defining who you are in the North of Ireland.
|
"I will not however dismiss a creed that guides a massive chunk of the world's population as vile or medieval."
That's the bit I don't get - but then, I can't explain why I like modern jazz.
|
I wasn't advocating state-enforced secularism. I meant that the natural advance of the consumer society might tend to turn people away from religion, at least its fanatical varieties, as people find other baser but more interesting things to do.
At least I think that's what Mary Whitehouse was getting at.
|
>> I wasn't advocating state-enforced secularism. I meant that the natural advance of the consumer society
>> might tend to turn people away from religion, at least its fanatical varieties, as people
>> find other baser but more interesting things to do.
>> At least I think that's what Mary Whitehouse was getting at.
That's pretty much my view. That's pretty much thee way liberal secularism came to Western Society. There's no reason to assume same process would not apply in other stable societies where living standards are advancing.
Contrariwise, witch hunts and talk of 'draining the swamp' are likely to drive some into the hands of the extremists.
The issue in Birmingham has moved on from extremists in schools to conservative Islam and a charge of 'being insufficiently vigilant' in looking out the odd extremist who might be around. There are echoes of Stalin there - not looking hard enough for plots was a consistent reason for rounding up and purging.
|
>>
>> That's pretty much my view. That's pretty much thee way liberal secularism came to Western
>> Society. There's no reason to assume same process would not apply in other stable societies
>> where living standards are advancing.
On that basis, the richer Islamic societies should become more liberal..
Let's see: defence.pk/threads/10-richest-muslim-countries-in-the-world-by-yahoo-finance.254614/
I see NO signs of liberalism there.. unless Qatar is changing:
"Most Qataris belong to the strict Wahhabi sect of Islam.[9][10][11] Qatar has the most conservative society in the GCC after Saudi Arabia.[12][13] "
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar
|
Sorry AC - I love pork, so I don't qualify for Rasta-whatsit-ism
|
The fact check conclusion is that FactCheck wouldn’t bet on the British Muslim population ever topping 10 per cent, let alone 50 per cent.
Islam is certainly a proselytising faith but then so is Christianity. Politically charged? well a lot og politically charged parts of the world (Mid East, sub Saharan Africa etc are in areas where Islam is dominant religion.
Political Islam in UK seems to be mainly about addressing local problems and issues that three main parties cannot or will not. The rise of Lutfur Rahman and his cronies in Tower Hamlets is one example. The education shenanigans in Birmingham etc is another.
|
|
I don't suppose you will mind the choirs and orchestras falling silent too much anyway what with you never listening to music. ;-)
|
|
Nothing good ever comes out of religion meeting politics. Ever.
|
tinyurl.com/otsupll
38 Degrees link re petition to invoke Article 50 of Lisbon Treaty.
|
Douglas Carswell MP has defected from Tories to UKIP. Furthermore, he's resigned his seat forcing a by-election at which he will stand for his new party. Clacton, Essex, must be the sort of place where he's in with a chance of winning.
www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/28/douglas-carswell-ukip-defects-tory-mp-byelection
The cockers will be kip a hoop!!!
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 28 Aug 14 at 12:03
|
The very last thing the UK needs is UKIP (IMHO).
Why does the resort's name of Clacton always make me want to burst out laughing...? :-)
|
We need UKIP as much as we need Rotherham.
But as we have Rotherham, we have UKIP.
But what a pilchard; if anything is likely to prevent an EU referendum, it's UKIP.
|
We need UKIP.
At the very least it will make the three other parties pull up their socks and remember what policies we voted them in for.
They have all got so complacent, it's time they had a shake up and remembered the electorate...UKIP will do this.
Pat
|
Just be careful of what you wish for; we might get it.
In some ways I don't disagree with you. Some friends and I looked quite carefully at UKIP a few years ago, with a view to talking about thinking about going to write some policies for them. And compared with standing for the Tory party it could have been a fast track to a decent political career. But whilst Farage is certainly charismatic, his chums are NOT.
Last edited by: Mapmaker on Thu 28 Aug 14 at 17:36
|
|
How much does it cost to run a by election? Surely he could have waited until May and saved US a job or two?
|
>> How much does it cost to run a by election?
Not as much as it costs to win one.
|
|
"I must now return to Clacton for what is to come" pure comedy gold.
|
|
Why does a by-election need to be called? One votes for an individual not a party (in theory). Plenty have crossed the house in the past and not gone for re-election.
|
|
I would think to win a UKIP victory, with someone standing from the beginning in that party. Like you say the theory is different but we know the media reality is somewhat different.
|
|
They are having the by election because Carswell wants one. So we the taxpayers via the council tax payers of Clacton are paying for his ego trip, IMO.
|
>> They are having the by election because Carswell wants one. So we the taxpayers via
>> the council tax payers of Clacton are paying for his ego trip, IMO.
A different form of ego trip to that practiced by those crossing the floor without a by-election then?
|
|
Yes, but crossing the floor wouldn't cost us anything. Could he not wait until May?
|
...and effectively support the conservatives which would be a lie.
Honesty in politics is rare enough.
Pat
|
>> Just be careful of what you wish for; we might get it.
>>
>> ....whilst Farage is
>> certainly charismatic, his chums are NOT.
Sums up my feelings too.
|
Mr. Carswell has, in fact, put his future where his mouth is.
It is unusual for an MP who changes political allegiance to resign his seat and invite his electors to deliver their verdict.
Many would consider this an honourable way to behave: some will seize upon everything they can imagine to belittle Mr Carswell.
Carping about the expense of a by-election demeans the purpose of the electoral system itself.
May I remind you that such expense is absolutely minimal compared with the millions wasted both by local and central government?
It will also cost UKIP an (un-budgeted) substantial sum: running a by-election costs us a huge amount for a party with our limited resources.
|
|
Good Matt cartoon on the front of today's comic. Sympathetic to Ukip without going so far as to take it seriously.
|
The main political cartoon on the Comment page is terrific too, in a circus-clown idiom. May perhaps not go down perfectly with Ukippers though... perhaps one would care to comment?
:o}
|
>>
>> Many would consider this an honourable way to behave:
May I remind forum members that not so very long ago it was customary for any MP being offered a government position to resign his seat and seek a new mandate from the electors.
Honour is a bit thin on the ground now - financial expediency normally rules.
|
>> May I remind forum members that not so very long ago it was customary for
>> any MP being offered a government position to resign his seat and seek a new
>> mandate from the electors.
>>
>> Honour is a bit thin on the ground now - financial expediency normally rules.
How long ago? Would it involve Churchill? Llloyd George? or further back then that?
Sir Thomas Dugdale's resignation over Crichel Down is oft quoted as mor or less the last example of political honour though I think Carrington's offer to go after Falkland's invasion was on same level.
|
>>
>>
>> How long ago? Would it involve Churchill? Llloyd George? or further back then that?
>>
>
I don't know. Wiki says "mid 20th century".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/By-election
|
Not getting at you Cliff, the reference to such 'confirmation' elections was new to me but.....
The wiki 'source' is a bit of a mish mash of UK and Commonwealth practice such that it's difficult to follow what refers to which country. It also makes clear that, while not universal, the general practice was for such by-elections to be unopposed.
|
|
Oh, I know, it's a bit vague. I came across a reference to the practice recently, but can't remember which book I read it in. It might have been in a book about Jock Colville and Churchill's group of anti-appeasers, and the reference was I think commenting on the recently lapsed practice. So 1930s perhaps.
|
"Sir Thomas Dugdale's resignation over Crichel Down is oft quoted as more or less the last example of political honour though I think Carrington's offer to go after Falkland's invasion was on same level."
Of course it's much easier to reach that decision if you own hefty chunks of the English countryside and have inherited a grand country house, as did both of these individuals I believe.
|
>>
>> Of course it's much easier to reach that decision if you own hefty chunks of
>> the English countryside and have inherited a grand country house, as did both of these
>> individuals I believe.
>>
That might be a good argument for not paying MPs.
Piper, tunes, etc. :)
|
>> Of course it's much easier to reach that decision if you own hefty chunks of
>> the English countryside and have inherited a grand country house, as did both of these
>> individuals I believe.
I'd forgotten that Carrington was actually Dugdale's junior at time of Crichel Down. On that occasion too he offered his resignation but it was declined.
|
Clacton is a very strange place.
Its almost entirely a mix of East Enders who sold up their council houses on the Barking and Becontree estates and moved there because they don't like living next to Pakis, (their words) and have fond memories of day trips there, or its full of ex RSM types, stalwarts of the Golf and Bowls club who's idea of European harmony is to drive back the Bosch again.
And then of course you have Jaywick - by far the most god awful place in England - Make Hull seem like DreamLand (not the Margate one)
Fortunately its really not a typical UK constituency, no working class - no middle class.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 31 Aug 14 at 13:31
|
|
Haven't been to Clacton for years. Used to go there as a kid when it was considered the up market alternative to Southend. Used to be a Big Dipper ride on the end of the pier. Shame how most of our seaside resorts have been allowed to deteriorate - French resorts like Le Touquet seemed to have fared a lot better.
|
>> French resorts like Le Touquet seemed to have fared a lot
>> better.
It did get run down and fly blown at one point tho.
|
Can't think of a French resort that gets anywhere near to the tattiness of places like Margate, Yarmouth, Ilfracombe, Blackpool, Skegness, lowewtoft etc
|
>> Can't think of a French resort that gets anywhere near to the tattiness of places
>> like Margate, Yarmouth, Ilfracombe, Blackpool, Skegness, lowewtoft etc
Agree, just saying that by the standard of French resorts Le Touquet went from chic, to shabby chic, to shabby and back again.
Having said that, most UK south coast resorts did much the same. However there has never been any hope for Bognor, Skegness, Yarmouth, Lowestoft.
(There is hope for Margate, it has an old part of town still left of interest, and of course the tate will drag it up market)
|
" Le Touquet went from chic, to shabby chic, to shabby and back again. "
I guess there's shabby and then there's Yarmouth. Strange though how the French value their resort more, and like you say Le Touquet is now chic agains and has had a lot of money invested in it. Ours are just left to decay and become homes for those at the bottom of the pile.
The place that upsets me the most is Ilfracombe as we used to spend our summer holiday there. As a location its great, surrounded by beautiful countryside but last time I went there about 5 years ago I couldn't believe what a state it was in. Don't suppose it has got any better.
|
|
I have been to Ilfracombe twice CGN. The first time was for a week in 1975, then in 2009 we were staying in Dawlish and went there for a day. Well that was the plan, we stayed for about an hour. What a crap hole it has become, though only the same as most seaside resorts I suppose as already said. It was full of scousers too which made it worse :-)
|
"And then of course you have Jaywick - by far the most god awful place in England - Make Hull seem like DreamLand (not the Margate one)"
I remember a colleague sending me a link to a You Tube clip about Jaywick. I was stunned, I had no idea that places like this existed in England - at least not in the south anyway.
|
Gawd...Jaywick makes Salford and Holyhead look almost inhabitable !
My only trip to Clacton was to deliver a 6R4 Metro to the BL dealers for display. I got there about 4am and slept in the cab of the truck until they opened for business. Nowhere did I see any signs of life.
I witnessed a fatal accident on the way down.......a curtainsider overturned on the Ai just after I had passed it. The driver died at the scene....I guess he nodded off, no-one else was involved.
|
www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMy4kqtPXlI
In short, Jaywick shouldn't really be there, its the nearest thing we have a South African township or Brazilian favela, appeared unofficially over time. Having "no official status" means it will never get any LA funding.
It doesn't have a future, it shouldn't be there as permanent housing, its in the wrong place (the sea will clearly take it again) it needs to be bulldozed.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 31 Aug 14 at 17:15
|
|
The smartest sea side town I have been to in the UK is Southwold.
|
>> The smartest sea side town I have been to in the UK is Southwold.
>
Indeed, very pleasant place indeed, with a good dog beach to the south - many fine doggie days spent there.
Another good place is Abersoch in Wales.
|
Southwold is pretty enough but the whole place is insufferably middle class and twee. Cromer is to me the perfect little seaside town. A nice beach, a pier, a lifeboat launched down a ramp, a Victorian lighthouse, home of Henry Blogg, " the bravest man who ever lived" and a thriving crab fishery and now a Surf School.
The place took a battering in the tidal surge last December but is now looking good again.
|
I like Cromer too. The windswept putting green is a tradition with us.
We were in Suffolk last week, didn't make it as far as Cromer but we did visit Southwold and Aldeburgh, which I prefer of the two - fish and chips from the Golden Galleon, eaten while sitting on the sea wall opposite.
I've never been to Jaywick, and thanks to this thread probably never will!
|
>> I like Cromer too. The windswept putting green is a tradition with us.
>>
>> We were in Suffolk last week, didn't make it as far as Cromer but we
>> did visit Southwold and Aldeburgh, which I prefer of the two - fish and chips
>> from the Golden Galleon, eaten while sitting on the sea wall opposite.
Was disappointed by the Fish and Chips at the Golden Galleon. They were good fish and chips, but not the best in England as reported in one of the newspapers.
I like Cromer too, I like its honesty - it doesn't try to be anything other than it is and does it well. I like Sheringham as well, It has (or had) an almost now unique pre superstore high street. The tesco was just nearing completion when I was there last.
|
>> It doesn't have a future, it shouldn't be there as permanent housing, its in the wrong place (the sea will clearly take it again) it needs to be bulldozed.
No offence Zero, but isn't that the sort of line the SA or Brazilian local authorities would take before bulldozing these informal agglomerations and rendering their inhabitants homeless once again? Neat and tidy of course, but a bit inhumane.
Nothing wrong with Jaywick judging by the pix. I've lived in worse places.
|
I'm still giggling at the image of a Proustian Zero, wearing a white suit and green lace-up bootees from the best cobbler in Paris, tiptoeing over the sands of Le Touquet during the, er, belle époque, with Nicole in a frilly dress with a frilly parasol trailing, outclassed, in his wake...
:o}
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Sun 31 Aug 14 at 18:40
|
>> www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2303489/East-Jaywick-Life-seaside-deprived-village-England.html
>>
Oh My God!!
A woman in a red coat waiting for for a bus!!
Well, if that doesn't prove that Jaywick is the most run down place in Essex, then I don't know what does?
|
>> Oh My God!!
>>
>> A woman in a red coat waiting for for a bus!!
>>
>> Well, if that doesn't prove that Jaywick is the most run down place in Essex,
>> then I don't know what does?
The bus indicated left to trick the lady in red, but then didn't stop and drove past.
|
UKIP Debate - Volume 14 - movilogo
