Click here to register on OneGuyFromBarlick|2|1
Go to Page
  Previous Page    1  2  3  [4]  5  6   Next Page  Last Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted -  28/04/2011  :  07:37
Political comment is a high risk activity on the site these days so I thought I'd try again to give those who are interested in politics a safe haven!


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk
Replies
Author
Go to Page
  Previous Page    1  2  3  [4]  5  6   Next Page  Last Page
 
thomo
Barlick Born Old Salt


2021 Posts
Posted - 06/05/2011 : 13:00
Just seen the headline "Voters punish Nick Clegg" and I wonder, at what cost to themselves and their communities.


thomo Go to Top of Page
panbiker
Senior Member


2300 Posts
Posted - 06/05/2011 : 15:32
Results of the Borough Elections are out:

Coates Ward

Stephanie Clarke (Con) 593

Janine Tracey Throup (Lib Dem) 775

Ian William Tweedie (Lab) 336

Turnout:   41.7%


Craven Ward

Jennifer Purcell (Con) 768

William Edward Roberts (Lab) 321

David Ronald Stead (Lib Dem) 719

Turnout: 42.7%

Not a particularly high turnout, one Tory and One Lib Dem both new and first time runners. Will be interesting to see how the Town Council ends up.


Ian Go to Top of Page
panbiker
Senior Member


2300 Posts
Posted - 06/05/2011 : 18:22
It looks like the AV vote is being counted before the Town and Parish elections. Up to press there seems to have been an above 50% turnout for the AV vote with over 70% supporting no change to the electoral system. There has not been a single council so far reporting a yes vote.

The overall picture in Pendle is that the LibDems have lost 4 seats these have been taken by Labour (+3) and the Conservatives who are  (+1). the council remains at NOC.

Breakdown for Pendle here at the BBC website


Ian Go to Top of Page
thomo
Barlick Born Old Salt


2021 Posts
Posted - 06/05/2011 : 20:01
Well it loooks like good bye AV, for now. and it is now plainly obvious that many local elections are not about the community, but personal political choice. As a result of this many good local people who truly care and will work hard for their communities are being sacrificed on the anvil of national politics.


thomo Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 07/05/2011 : 06:35
Still trying to work out what the result was! Three different elections in fact. Scotland, Wales and England. Fascinating.... Only obvious provisional conclusion is that Liberals are not happy, Labour lost Scotland did well in Wales and better than expected in England. Tories lost ground in Wales and Scotland and are relieved about England because there was no disaster. That's as far as I have got!


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
panbiker
Senior Member


2300 Posts
Posted - 07/05/2011 : 11:02
Pendle have posted on their website that the Town & Parish results will not be out until Monday. What have they been doing? It is not uncommon to have more than 1ballot to count and it is not the first time that borough and parish elections have been on the same day. Counts always used to commence after the polls had closed and finish when they were done!

I can understand that the AV vote would take precedence over the parish council count but that vote was a simple yes/no and shoud have been easy and quick to deal with. The counts I have attended in the past usually had the borough declared somwehere around mindnight or 1 am and parish and town no later than midday on the Friday.

Maybe budget cuts mean they can't employ as many scrutineers and counters. If the normal contingency has been used I hope the ballots are in a safe place.

It is an interesting picture is'nt it Stanley. No doubt about the AV result, a very clear mandate there to retain FPTP. I do not accept the argument from the yes campaign that this was the only opportunity to change things, that was just scaremongering tactics which ultimately failed. Every person of electoral age has the chance to change things, it's called the right to vote and the freedom to say what you wan't. The swell of public opinion and relentless pressue can make goverments change their mind. Cameron has had to do it a number of times already and he has only had the job for a year. The withdrawal of support for the Lib Dems was predictable and I belive it will turn out to be the first crack in the co-alition. I indicated 12 months ago when they formed the pact that it would all and in tears 18 month's to 2 years down the line. These results only re-enforce my view.

Scotish and Welsh results are very interesting, I would imagine that the SNP wiil now wan't to go for full independence, now that will be interesting. I hope we will not fall out over Berwick again!

 

Update: Saw Jenny Purcell on town and she gave me a quick overview of the Town Council results. Unfortunately I can't remember all of them so I will not post a partial list that may confuse. Needless to say the ballot has been counted. It would seem that the delay on posting to the Pendle Council Website is just down to working patterns of employees able to modify the website. I wonder if they have been posted in the Council Shop, forgot to look when I was on town.

Edited by - panbiker on 07/05/2011 12:09:57


Ian Go to Top of Page
tripps
Senior Member


1404 Posts
Posted - 07/05/2011 : 18:59
" it would all and in tears 18 month's to 2 years down the line"

I agree, but I have just found out that if the "Fixed Term Parliament Bill" currently going through the house is passed, then it will be impossible to have an election before 7th May 2015.  It seems this measure was a consequence of the Coalition agreement .  Info from the Spectator blog. Sounds like a late April fool joke. Let's hope our unelected second chamber modifies it. 


Go to Top of Page
catgate
Senior Member


1764 Posts
Posted - 07/05/2011 : 19:50


quote:
tripps wrote:
" it would all and in tears 18 month's to 2 years down the line"

I agree, but I have just found out that if the "Fixed Term Parliament Bill" currently going through the house is passed, then it will be impossible to have an election before 7th May 2015.  It seems this measure was a consequence of the Coalition agreement .  Info from the Spectator blog. Sounds like a late April fool joke. Let's hope our unelected second chamber modifies it. 

Which ever way you look yo ucan see evidence of subterfuges and schemes which are wheedled in, often by sleight of hand, to give more troughing time to one party or the other. It is downright immoral, crimunal even, and yet the perpetrators are still walking about and not6 inside our corective institutions.


Every silver lining has a cloud.


Go to Top of Page
Anni
Regular Member


634 Posts
Posted - 07/05/2011 : 23:06
Ay yes - always read the small print!  While everyone is mithering about the money and the cuts, these "little things" are being brought in without anyone noticing.

That phrase "A good day to bury news" springs to mind. 

Never has a politician uttered a truer phrase.

And yes, I am fed up with them all.

Edited by - Anni on 07/05/2011 11:07:13 PM


Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 08/05/2011 : 06:30
You're right Ian and on the whole I agree with everything you say. I have never been able to understand how fixed term legislation works in practice. If a government completely loses the confidence of the house surely it can't function. I can understand that in say the case of New Labour, with a big majority and competent Whips it can be possible to carry on with a semblance of unity but how will that work with a coalition? It seems to me that the coalition now depends on what happens internally in the Liberal Party. On one hand you have the 'hold office at any cost' faction led by Clegg but it's quite obvious that there are a lot of activists out there who want to see the old style Liberal radicalism again. Worth remembering that it was the split after the LLoyd George coalition that threw the party into the political wilderness for almost a century.

As for any moves towards PR (I hate the way the debate was traduced by making it a vote for an inferior system) you only have to reverse the Tory argument and look at the countries still clinging on to FPTP, thin on the ground and often not a direct comparison with the UK. The US system in particular is a very bad comparator, their political system is quite different than ours. Read about Huey Long in the South and the shenanigans of Tammanny Hall in the NE and you begin to understand the differences. I doubt if that system could survive PR, our system could. As you say, there is an underying recognition of the flaws in FPTP and eventually constant gentle pressure will get us there. You are right about the YES campaign, they are wrong to say the question is dead. It will be back.

 Scotland is interesting. I've always thought that when James VI of Scotland made his lesurely journey south to take over the English throne he saw unification in terms of Scotland being the senior partner. Of course geography, economic, religion and cultural differences soon reduced Scotland to the status of a colony and what followed was repression and ethnic cleansing to break up the clan system. The best seminar I ever had on the Clearances of Scotland came when I spent an hour with a Navajoh Elder on a bench outside the store on a Reservation in Nevada. He illutrated his lecture on the destruction of the native tribes in the US by comparing it with the Clearances!  It was a revelation.

Wales is slightly different. Despite being administratively part of the UK it has always been a place apart, very largely because they have a distinctive culture and have preserved their language.  Devolution has, to a certain extent, emphasised the difference and whilst I don't expect a full-blown campaign for independence to succeed if ever it starts, I don't think we can ever go back to full control from Westminster. The clear blue water they have achieved in their internal social policies seem to me to have been of benefit to the voters.

The argument against devolution or even wose, independence, has always been based on economic power, defence and foreign policy. The argument being that England provides the umbrella under with devolution can  function. Looking at our recent track record in these areas I would hazard a guess that this is a very weak reed to depend on. One of the big questions that remains to be addressed by Westminster is whether our position in the world depends on armed might or rational co-existence. I'm afraid we are still pursuing 19th century gunboat diplomacy from the height of empire. It seems obvious to me that in the end this cannot be supported. Even a super-power like the US is having second thoughts. Consider the fact that the two great coming economic powers, China and India are pursuing far more rational policies.

Our biggest problem at the moment is that effective control of the UK is in the hands of a party whose DNA is inextricably intertwined with 19th cenury policies. We shall see no improvement until they are reformed and the only thing that is going to do that is complete failure of their present economic poilicies. Whether that becomes clear cut or not, it is the electorate who will pay the price. Yes, I'm a bit depressed about the direction of politices at the moment.....  Sorry Kids!


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
catgate
Senior Member


1764 Posts
Posted - 08/05/2011 : 10:56


quote:
Stanley wrote:
 I can understand that in say the case of New Labour, with a big majority and competent Whips it can be possible to carry on with a semblance of unity


When an MP is elected to carry out the wishes of his constituents then surely he does not need "whipping" (even if he is a bit bent). Surely all the expenses claimed for "Constituenct business" is used for finding out just way he should vote and so that should be the direction that his promises propel him. Anything else makes the the entire thing into a charade.


Every silver lining has a cloud.


Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 09/05/2011 : 07:13
Catty, you're right. In a perfect world this is how it should work. Thank goodness there are always the members of the 'Awkward Squad' who follow their conscience, Gordon Prentice was one of them, the only advancement he ever got was from his colleagues who voted him on to parliamentary committees, the management hated him!

We've seen some dirty politics lately and it looks as though it could get worse. Andrew Lansley could well be sacrificed in the turmoil about NHS reforms. Nick Clegg fights for credibility in his party by taking a stand on the reforms, a complete volte face. Cameron is going to have to square the circle somehow. The reforms are too important to his policy to drop but he needs the Liberal support to get them through. At the moment it looks as though he is fighting the Liberals, the madical profession and quite a few members of his own party. Bit of a problem. It raises the question as to whether the aim is to improve the NHS or score a political point. I wish I could believe it was the former.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 11/05/2011 : 07:24
Two Brains Willett caught my attention yesterday. One unguarded comment in the morng and a refusal to rule out availabilty of university places to wealthy kids if they paid the same level of fees as overseas studnts. A quick retraction at lunchtime and a vert spiky intervie by Nick Robinson of Cameron later. The upshot seems to be that the wealthy can get places as long as they are paid for by a corporation or charity. I don't think that will be an unsurmountable problem for a wealthy parent bent on getting a place. In practice it has always been the case that money could buy a place, albeit by roundabout routes like donation and the old boy's network but there was a natural cap on the number of such places. Will codifying the system increase or decrease the number? What does it say about government attitudes to access? Too many of the ConDem 'initiatives' and policies are producing unforseen effects and backfiring on them. It all sounded so sensible a year ago, even I approved of some of the policy direction. However, once they have descended ito the techicalities and consequences a lot of the legislation smacks too much of 'It seemed like a good idea at the time'. I can't think of a single area where they can legitimately claim an improvement.

I had to laugh when I heard Cameron denying that he had stirred up opposition by going beyond Thatcher. Really? I think he should go back and read some recent history. There is a growing opposition building a head of steam. It could be a rough ride for all of us.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 12/05/2011 : 06:43
A question for you. Am I alone in getting the impression that the ConDem coalition (or loose opportunistic association) believes its own publicity more than reality? Can they really be that stupid? Or are they callous, is the long term goal more about protecting the status quo of the establisjment rather than serving the electorate.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 18/05/2011 : 06:47
Can't help agreeing with Clegg's criticisms of Cameron on the health service. I wonder how much weight he carries in the coalition?


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Topic is 51 Pages Long:
Go to Page
  Previous Page    1  2  3  [4]  5  6   Next Page  Last Page
 


Set us as your default homepage Bookmark us Privacy   Copyright 2004-2011 www.oneguyfrombarlick.co.uk All Rights Reserved. Design by: Frost SkyPortal.net Go To Top Of Page

Page load time - 0.594