tim cahill
Player Valuation: £50m
Fair enough.
2015 post UK election discussion
- Thread starter Groucho
- Start date
- Status
arminisgod
Player Valuation: £35m
I see that Andy Burnham is favourite to become the next labour leader. From liverpool, working class background and evertonian. Sounds ideal to me!
Missed the boat. Labour need a complete revamp. I will be voting for Dan Jarvis.
The Tories will be [Poor language removed] scared of him
Mrk
Player Valuation: £40m
I think Burnham would be a mistake for Labour. Regardless of his policies, he'd immediately be seen as to the left of Miliband due to his background and his past in government.
He'd be excellent for the core vote, but he wouldn't win back the marginals in the midlands/south that Labour need if they are to have any chance of forming a government within the next decade.
He'd be excellent for the core vote, but he wouldn't win back the marginals in the midlands/south that Labour need if they are to have any chance of forming a government within the next decade.
Seanjd
Player Valuation: £30m
It depends what you class as a real job, but hardly any MPs have. They leave uni and go into politics. By the way, being a politician is a real job, remember.
As for the next leader, I can't see Burnham connecting with 'middle England'. He would be great for us, and somebody you can connect with if you're from this part if the country, but not nation wide. It needs to be somebody relatively new to the game, somebody with a bit an air of arrogance about them- dare I say it, somebody like Cameron in 05 or Blair 97. From the limited interviews and television appearances I've seen, I can only think Chukka would offer that.
Seanjd
Player Valuation: £30m
Saying that though, although his name sounds like he could be in The Thick Of It, Dan Jarvis' military background could resonate with lots of people.
Clint Planet
Utter Cad.
From last October:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-plans-to-scrap-human-rights-act-9767435.html
A future Tory Government would scrap the Human Rights Act and replace it with a new Bill of Rights to give Britain more control over the laws that it implements, David Cameron said today.
Tories have long been opposed to the Human Rights Acts which came into force in 2000 and effectively codifies the protections in the European Convention on Human Rights of which Britain is a signatory.
Many in his party have called for a Tory Government to pull out of the ECHR altogether but Mr Cameron has not gone that far. Instead he said a Tory only Government would introduce a new British Bill of Rights.
However as long as Britain remains a signatory to the ECHR it would still be open to members of the public or group to directly petition the European Court of Human Rights in Strasburg to hear their case.
In fact Tony Blair introduced the Human Rights Acts in an effort to give UK court a greater role in deciding such cases without the need to recourse to Strasburg.
Mr Cameron said as long ago as 2006 that he wanted to "entrench" a British bill of rights, which would outline "core values" and responsibilities, in British law - so it could not be overturned in the Commons.
He said a "clear and codified" bill would allow the European Court of Human Rights to apply a “margin of appreciation” in its rulings - where judges are obliged to take into account the cultural, historic and philosophical differences between Strasbourg and the nation in question.
In his speech the Prime Minister cited the issue of prisoner voting to make the case for reform, and criticised the European Court of Human rights for a series of decisions that “are frankly wrong”.
“Rulings to stop us deporting suspected terrorists. The suggestion that you've got to apply the human rights convention even on the battlefields of Helmand.
“And now - they want to give prisoners the vote. No, I'm sorry, I just don't agree.
“Our Parliament - the British Parliament - decided they shouldn't have that right.
“This is the country that wrote Magna Carta, the country that time and again has stood up for human rights, whether liberating Europe from fascism or leading the charge today against sexual violence in war.
“Let me put it very clearly: We do not require instruction from judges in Strasbourg on this issue.
“So at long last, with a Conservative government after the next election, this country will have a new British Bill of Rights to be passed in our Parliament, rooted in our values.”
===============================================
Well, that's something to look forward to.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-plans-to-scrap-human-rights-act-9767435.html
A future Tory Government would scrap the Human Rights Act and replace it with a new Bill of Rights to give Britain more control over the laws that it implements, David Cameron said today.
Tories have long been opposed to the Human Rights Acts which came into force in 2000 and effectively codifies the protections in the European Convention on Human Rights of which Britain is a signatory.
Many in his party have called for a Tory Government to pull out of the ECHR altogether but Mr Cameron has not gone that far. Instead he said a Tory only Government would introduce a new British Bill of Rights.
However as long as Britain remains a signatory to the ECHR it would still be open to members of the public or group to directly petition the European Court of Human Rights in Strasburg to hear their case.
In fact Tony Blair introduced the Human Rights Acts in an effort to give UK court a greater role in deciding such cases without the need to recourse to Strasburg.
Mr Cameron said as long ago as 2006 that he wanted to "entrench" a British bill of rights, which would outline "core values" and responsibilities, in British law - so it could not be overturned in the Commons.
He said a "clear and codified" bill would allow the European Court of Human Rights to apply a “margin of appreciation” in its rulings - where judges are obliged to take into account the cultural, historic and philosophical differences between Strasbourg and the nation in question.
In his speech the Prime Minister cited the issue of prisoner voting to make the case for reform, and criticised the European Court of Human rights for a series of decisions that “are frankly wrong”.
“Rulings to stop us deporting suspected terrorists. The suggestion that you've got to apply the human rights convention even on the battlefields of Helmand.
“And now - they want to give prisoners the vote. No, I'm sorry, I just don't agree.
“Our Parliament - the British Parliament - decided they shouldn't have that right.
“This is the country that wrote Magna Carta, the country that time and again has stood up for human rights, whether liberating Europe from fascism or leading the charge today against sexual violence in war.
“Let me put it very clearly: We do not require instruction from judges in Strasbourg on this issue.
“So at long last, with a Conservative government after the next election, this country will have a new British Bill of Rights to be passed in our Parliament, rooted in our values.”
===============================================
Well, that's something to look forward to.
just on tv , spoke very well, dont know a lot about jarvis people are speaking about any background?
Last edited:
Mrk
Player Valuation: £40m
I've read up on Dan Jarvis and he has an extremely impressive CV and could reach out to a lot more more people than Burnham. Will the Unions give him their block votes though? I'm not sure.
Reidy's Bottle Of Grecian
The Unobstructed View
That drop in income to Maternity Pay may be a bit bigger of a drop thatn you firt than you first envisaged, now lets say that you'd done all your sums, consulted ovulation charts and set into motion your intentions, no sooner celebrated the 'pee on a stick' and this is announced....
They also included a benefit payments freeze, limiting payments to family size and even the abolition of statutory maternity pay.
Goalposts moved despite all of your planning, and all of a sudden you are x amount down on what you anticipated, off the income you talked about its quite possible that only a minor adjustment is required but for a great many it would be an amount that would then make it where they'd be in dire straits.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/pure-evil-bedroom-tax-hit-5670809#rlabs=1
They also included a benefit payments freeze, limiting payments to family size and even the abolition of statutory maternity pay.
Goalposts moved despite all of your planning, and all of a sudden you are x amount down on what you anticipated, off the income you talked about its quite possible that only a minor adjustment is required but for a great many it would be an amount that would then make it where they'd be in dire straits.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/pure-evil-bedroom-tax-hit-5670809#rlabs=1
Mrk
Player Valuation: £40m
The SNP were predicted to wipe the board in Scotland long before the election campaign started. They've had a huge lead since the referendum result.
daylightrobber
Player Valuation: £15m
Oh God yeah. Totally intentional. Nothing the Tories want more than to lose the Scottish seats at Westminster.
peteblue
Welcome back Wayne
A complete break is needed. Miliband and Balls were too close to the previous leadership and just could not put their hands up and say 'sorry we made a mistake'. We are a forgiving people but not a stupid one. Miliband took everyone for idiots. Get a new shiney leader in, do a 'mea culpa' and set out a proper aspiring agenda...........
Of course. Instead of the Scottish just hating the English, Cameron single handedly made it a two way war.
The union is finished due to one mans political games. The Scots played right into the Tory hands and sealed him the win, because without the "tail wagging the dog" rhetoric from the SNP the English wouldn't have been scared by the politics of fear from the Tories.
- Status