A brief review of the year; the Coalition has stumbled
along, the UK economy has effectively flat-lined, Europe is still clinging on
to its lower regions, the US is still coming to terms with itself, as China
appears to continue its rise and the developing world is continues to develop,
rapidly… And all the while the Labour Party are still spewing out the same s**t
they have been for past two years, well actually the past 20 years.
The Left haven’t changed, they never do, occasionally they
grow up, but… Anyway, is the Occupy Movement still going…? ‘UK Uncut’ is still
kicking about and some of the UK Left’s hypocrisy and idiosyncrasy were
recently exposed within their protests… (The tax avoiding Guardian newspaper giving significant coverage to UK Uncut’s campaign against
tax avoidance, “Anarchists” opposed
to Government joined in with the protests, demanding a bigger state (though
they claimed a means to an end…) and all of this was
seen as it turned out that Starbucks were pretty much the biggest tax avoiders
of all… Haha!)
And Argentina is still banging on about a ridiculous claim
on the Falklands Islands, no less ridiculous than Britain’s…
Obama and Kirchner get close?
'They're thousands of miles away and it's not like they're hot...'
Like Hawaii.
Like Hawaii.
So yes nothing new, I’ll just pick it up where I left off; the
Coalition have had a ‘mid-term review’
Cameron leaves Clegg behind?
And Labourites were spouting the same old propaganda at
the Fabian Society last weekend, so I will review the relatively unaltered British political landscape; the
Coalition are roundly criticised for everything they do, often rightly so, but
Labour can say anything they like, with few picking them up on their hypocrisy,
(so is the nature of the Liberal-Left…) and they have remained around 10 or
more points ahead in the opinion polls.
How that translates to the ballot box is another thing and
that was part of the last post, nothing much has changed since… There were
by-elections, a Mayoral election and Police Commissioner (PCC) Elections
in November (ridiculous timing) and again the results highlighted how misleading opinions
polls can be and how empty Labour’s rhetoric always is, it showed the true
state of British politics, quite far removed from Labour’s fantastical proclamations.
There was no way that even Labour could try to spin the PCC
results, so they focussed on the low turnout, instead of John Prescott
humiliation to a Tory in Humberside,
funny that…
I bet there were some aides running for cover when the
result was announced...
John Prescott might get handy?
His wife would have taken the brunt of it, one way or the other…
Prescott's finest moment?
.jpg)
There was an apparent anti-Labour vote in the
only Mayoral election in Bristol and they were always going to keep that on the down low… And what resulted from
that loss was a reaction from Labour HQ which showed a glimpse of the truly offensive side of
Labour’s politics and philosophy, the aspects that we will all suffer if things
run their present course; their use of manipulation and their desire to control. But I'll come back to that.
So Labour put their energies into spinning the three
by-elections results and cranked up the bullshit production to overdrive. Three
safe Labour seats Croydon North, Middlesbrough and Rotherham, so safe that even
at their ‘lowest’ in 2010 in the midst of economic crisis with Gordon Brown in
power, they still voted Labour in their droves in these constituencies… To put
it into context, even at their very lowest in 1983, in Middlesbrough and Rotherham, they still won by some
margin. The common phrase for this is they ‘could put up a pig’ and enough
numbskulls would still scrawl a cross on the ballot paper, just fortunate
enough not to dribble too much and spoil the paper… Ah it sounds harsh, but
come on where is the self-respect…?
That’s not to denigrate everyone in these constituencies, far
from it, only 25-33% of the electorate turned out to vote; the total percentage
of the electorate voting for Labour barely rising above 15%.
Yet Ed Miliband saw fit to translate the results as an
endorsement of “One Nation Labour” (the s**t he’d been spouting a few weeks
earlier and again at the Fabian Society last weekend)… 15%?!!
One f**king Nation?!!
Miliband - A face you'd like to slap?
All this talk of 'One Nation', almost makes you think Ed might be worried about Scottish Independence...
15% of those eligible to vote, this is the anger coursing
through our streets…? Oh it’s palpable, in the public sector… It just doesn’t
seem to be translating on election days. Because remember the country is on its
a**e, so it appears, and this Government is widely despised, so surely it
should be more than 15%? 40 plus percent of those polled, and then only 15% of
those registered, in Labour Heartlands…
Or is that just the system, it’s a safe seat so why go out
in the November rain…?
Whatever, it’s not a f**king endorsement of Miliband or
Labour, or any kind of clear signal to anyone, about anything...! But what the
f**k, the only result that matters is that Labour gain the seats, that’s First
Past the Post…
Some 65-75% of the electorate had enough self respect to
abstain, but what happens then? 15% of the electorate hold sway? How on earth
can that be ‘fair’? To use a Labourite sound-bite…
This Government is certainly unpopular and many more than
15% do not and would not support them, or are in outright opposition to them,
but they don’t necessarily support Labour. Yet that small percentage could see
Labour return to power without having to do anything, no reform, no clear and
effective policies, just the same old faces and ‘normal service’ resumed.
The Labour Cabinet - The Usual Suspects?
The Same Old Muppets...
People are angry at the Coalition Government; they should be
incandescent with rage how cheaply power may be given back to Labour! If only
they could do something about it… Like vote for a different party…? It doesn’t
have to be the Tories.
Do average people even consider how cheaply power is given
away in this country full-stop? Even at the height of their power New Labour
didn’t get the support of over 30% of the electorate, in 2005 they had a useful majority of seats with only 22% of the
electorate voting for them and how many of those voters were in Scotland and
Wales…?!
22% and a strong enough Government, stronger than Major’s in
1992, they
received the support of 19% of the electorate in 2010. Rock bottom with a
hugely unpopular Leader… Only 3% between strong Government and Opposition? How is
that right?
Not only that; more and more it’s looking like the same
people are voting for Labour, keeping the party’s share of the vote consistent,
and very little seems to effect their decision in placing their vote…
In my last post I looked at this situation, from the local
elections. Some 15% to 25% of any electorate could easily be made up from local
Public Sector workers, students and unionised private sector workers, or even Old
Labour, not to mention the odd Liberal Lefty making their weary way in the
Private Sector…
'What do we want? 'Fair Pensions!'
It’s an organised, vocal, minority, using their right
to vote effectively and with little opposition, getting their way. Ultimately
controlling the country; minority rule.
Becoming 40 plus percent when pressed in an opinion poll…
A lot of people don’t like either the Tories or Labour, but
forgetting the recent economic records of both parties, it’s in part because of
the similarities between them; from cut backs to benefits and pensions to the
deregulation and privatisation in the economy.
There is great disillusionment with politics and people feel
their votes are irrelevant. I think a lot of apathy does stem from some unrealistic
expectations, of Government and in general, but that’s too deep an issue to go
into now. Why though would people sit back and watch an unreformed Labour Party
walk back into power?
They may not blame Labour completely for the economic crisis
and of course the banks were more directly at fault, but Labour shouldn’t be
excused and ultimately they will not solve the country’s problems; economic and
social.
If they get back in with the support of their minority, with
a few floaters, what more do they have to do than appease those supporters…?
What more did they ever do???
And why would they change a system that can allow them
access to power so easily?
The modern Labour Party is all about control, in almost
every possible sense in fact; from controlling MPs and the party line to controlling the
population through surveillance. But in order to achieve their objectives they have to
maintain power and as I have pointed out the current system allows them easy
access to Government. The First Past the Post system is now weighted towards
them (though obviously the Tories still do ok…) and in what is supposed to be a
“progressive” party, so a large proportion of them want to keep the current and
would not consider Proportional Representation (they were divided over the Alternative
Vote, which was only a watered down version of FPTP, but possibly the ‘slippery
slope’ to PR…). This is the ultimate act of control from a party of progress,
retaining the system that can see them hold onto power with the support of a
minority.
Labour's No to AV Campaign - 'What do we want?'
For a clear illustration of the more despicable aspects of
Labour’s desire to control, we should return to look at what happened in
Bristol following the election of George Ferguson as Mayor.
Labour HQ put a stop to Local Labour Councillors joining in coalition with the
new Mayor, apparently due to some petty grievances, and this shows a clear
example of both their centralised control and their apparent aversion to
consensus.
The confrontational politics of the British Parliament are
archaic, yet Labour wants to keep it like that. PR would be a consensus
inducing mechanism, to bring about a new political culture, true representation
and a system fairer to every voter, but Labour wants FPTP to allow them to rule
alone…
One Electoral System To Rule Them All...?
Labour delegates leave the conference...
The move by Central Labour was quite significant and a
deliberate signal. The people of Bristol should be concerned, if Labour Councillors
are to act along the lines of the national political system by deliberately
opposing any actions of the Mayor, whether or not they will be on any benefit
to the city. The Mayor becomes a failure and Labour can regain power…? It’s
really not good…
But most people don’t notice these things and Labour get
away with it, time and again. For some it seems it’s almost become a case of
‘better the Devil you know’, perhaps recalling the days before the current
downturn and cutbacks, of course we don’t know what would have happened if
Labour had won the last election…
A lot of people must think they’ll be better off under
Labour, even if only in the short term; while Labour gives with one hand and
takes away with the other.
An example of this was raised again last week, as the Tories
removed Child Benefit from high earners, this was one of Labour’s
master-strokes giving a little back to everyone, including millionaires…! How
very fair of them, they taxed you more over £35k, but they gave you a few quid
back if you had kids and that’s always nice. You’ll remember that come election
time… They froze the personal allowance so hurting lower paid workers, but they kept shelling out child
benefit to millionaires.
Labour has decried the changes but they haven’t said they’ll
reverse it…
Miliband believes in “Universal benefits”, so every family
is dependent on, or feels indebted to, a Labour Government and low paid single
workers can help pay for it without a break (even if you’re saving to start a
family, but how could Labour legislate for that in the tax system and still
make them dependent on a handout…?)
Labour criticism has in part focussed on the application of
the changes and it does seem a bit of an odd set up by the Tories,
but Miliband is happy to keep shelling out to millionaires to save on back
office functions? Never bothered them before… A few extra public sector pen
pushers or hand outs to millionaires?? (They’ve changed…?)
But Labour do have more specific plans to take away with the
other hand from higher tax rate payers (>£150k), announcing a policy that
would reduce their pension tax relief.
Give with benefit, take away tax relief, but who will
remember their pension while they get a couple of extra quid in the pocket now;
it might win a few rich votes, but the key is apparent ‘fairness’ of benefits
for all, while also taxing the rich. It’s the middle income votes he wants; the
“squeezed middle”. So this is great, screw the top and bottom…!
Miliband has claimed there aren’t many millionaires as part
of his justification for universal benefits, but it’s everyone up to, you
f***ing kn*bhead… And part of it is the principle, normally Labour and the Left
are very particular about their principles…
A pair of Pragmatic Idealists?
Labour are so transparent, it’s astounding. Almost as
astounding as a family earning 50k+ making out they are being hard done by…
Depends how many kids you’ve got I suppose...?
The ‘all caring’, standing up for the working man or whoever
the f**k is relevant at the time, is what the New New Labour party are all
about. This is the angle they will take on issues like benefits, often emotive,
talking about ‘hard-working families’, patronising and contradictory, when they
also talk about taxing high earners. The ‘squeezed middle’ or ‘the rich’,
whichever is the appropriate sound-bite at the time…
As I have said it is easier for Labour in opposition, they
can say anything they like because they don’t have to back anything up, yet…
For various reasons and in these caring times…, Labour and the
Left have found it easier to control the prevailing political agenda in recent
times and push their point of view to the forefront of public consciousness, as
seen with the tax avoidance issue, where the Left (and Labour are happy to join
in) have tried to turn tax into a moral issue. As I remember from childhood,
the tax man was the one of the most hated in the land; Inland Revenue employees roundly jeered on the likes of Bull’s Eye…
Who wants to pay more tax than they have to? When an ISA is
tax free savings and the self employed actively work to reduce their tax
payments; at what point does avoiding tax become ‘immoral’?
Labour did nothing about tax avoidance in power, all of the
situations brought to light recently, from Starbucks to Vodafone, occurred under
Labour. Yet they have happily jumped on the moralising band wagon and few look
back at their record.
Convicted MPs - Labour taking the moral high ground?
Well it's not like they were cheating their taxes...!
The recent benefits cap is no surprising benefit to Labour,
but another example this week which plays well into the hands of Labour is news
such as high street chain Jessops going into administration. It’s incredible the number of people who directly blame
this Government, apparently ignoring competition from the internet and
supermarkets, the prevalence of camera phones and all the other factors
involved in a particular business model failing.
HMV followed Jessops, but that has
been coming for a long time and well documented, the whole music industry has been in
turmoil for years. And it turns out Blockbuster have quickly followed HMV, but who knew they were still kicking about...?
There is an underlying feeling that the situation would be
better if Labour was in power throwing some money around and perhaps more concerning it seems to be a belief that the Government should somehow support such companies, to
save their businesses and therefore the jobs. How is that ‘fair’? Forget the
banks being ‘bailed out’ for a moment; it would be unfair to the bailed out
company’s competitors, whether big or more strikingly, small; the independent
traders, who will never get such Government support.
If someone thinks Government is there to simply preserve the
high street and everything else as they remember it from childhood, then that
is a worrying outlook…
Newport's empty shops after the economic downturn.
Actually it was pretty much the same before the downturn...
The feeling is underlying in Britain and there are a lot of expectations, but there’s a subject to tackle another time, on too large a scale, one which I’ve baulked at for most of last year…
Newport's empty shops after the economic downturn.
The feeling is underlying in Britain and there are a lot of expectations, but there’s a subject to tackle another time, on too large a scale, one which I’ve baulked at for most of last year…
At the next election many voters will be swayed by a feeling that things could be
better under Labour and Labour are very could at propaganda, they learnt the
tricks up to 1997 and they have not laid off since. The rest of the electorate
will just stay at home; because they hate the Tories, might feel betrayed by
the Liberal Democrats and maybe see Labour as the patronising bunch of c***s
they are. Perhaps…
Cameron, Miliband and Clegg, all having a laugh?
There are other
parties and people should vote for them. Obviously UKIP are polling well at
the moment,
but the way that is panning out and with a poor turnout, a higher proportion of
the vote for UKIP will simply hand power to Labour, without a struggle.
I wouldn’t really advocate voting UKIP (certainly not in the
current circumstances) and definitely do not recommend voting for the BNP,
although far more people voted for these parties in the last election than the
Green Party and the Greens got most of their votes in one constituency, to get themselves
one voice in Parliament.
There are always other parties in every constituency and I
would still advocate voting for the LibDems, despite their decision to go into
Coalition, which was a mistake. But then it could be said that they have
tempered the Tory Government, who knows what it would have been like had the
Tories won a majority in 2010, raising the tax threshold was one of the
LibDems’ flagship policies, and Labour having regained power doesn’t even bear
thinking about…
Brown reflects.
A broad spread of votes with perhaps a few unusual MPs and
completely disproportionate numbers of seats in Parliament would have to give
weight to the argument for Proportional Representation. I’m not writing now specifically to make
the argument for it, I did bring it up in posts around the last election and I will make a case for it again. The fact is it would put an end to minority rule and parties
only concentrating on swing seats, MPs only have to actually promote the views
of certain vested interests.
We don’t need and shouldn’t have compulsory voting, but not
voting in the next election is not an option, it would be throwing power away,
giving it back too cheaply to the same old New Labour Party.
Miliband has tried to move Labour forward?
Brown and Kinnock catch up...?
