Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 34544463)

RK, understand what you are saying, but the amount of additional support they are getting is minimal, but widely reported.

In the recent council elections, they gained 13 seats and lost 3, out of a total of 4000 (approx) seats fought.

This means they increased by 10 out 4000, which is 0.25% - I worry about their policies, but not about the fact they will be taking over the councils soon.

Originally Posted by Incognitas (Post 34544443)

Damn! How come when you want one there isn't a MOD around.:erm:

Originally Posted by Incognitas (Post 34544445)

Sorry some of trevs postings are hidden to me..but thanks for that..I was trying to see which post to report.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 34544460)

The London elections using a form of Proportional representation so smaller parties can get seats without ever having to win a area. So 5% is enough to win a seat, however in a general a party needs to get a majority of a consistency and thus it becomes much harder for smaller parties to enter parliament

Originally Posted by frogstamper (Post 34544631)

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]



Isn't it great to think that in the near future, the majority of any Tory government originated from such humble beginning's. And already one of the Bullingdon club now runs London, I can hardly wait for the rest of the Tory toffocracy to rule over us, what..what.;)

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 34544609)

so you some how find posts you cannot see offensive enough to report,how exactly does that system work?..oh and well done boris for winning what i can only assume was a one horse race .

Originally Posted by frogstamper (Post 34544631)

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]



Isn't it great to think that in the near future, the majority of any Tory government originated from such humble beginning's. And already one of the Bullingdon club now runs London, I can hardly wait for the rest of the Tory toffocracy to rule over us, what..what.;)

Originally Posted by frogstamper (Post 34544631)

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]



Isn't it great to think that in the near future, the majority of any Tory government originated from such humble beginning's. And already one of the Bullingdon club now runs London, I can hardly wait for the rest of the Tory toffocracy to rule over us, what..what.;)

Originally Posted by Ramrod (Post 34544662)

...and your point is what?.....Sounds like jealousy to me :D

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 34544666)

Yawn..... and all those New Labour ministers from 'humble' origins are so much better aren't they? :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by frogstamper (Post 34544671)

Jealously!,..I spent four years at a private school, and know full well the contempt most of these snobs view "ordinary" people with, I have absolutely no desire for these Eton toffs to represent me, jealousy... I should coco.:)

Originally Posted by frogstamper (Post 34544671)

Jealously!,..I spent four years at a private school, and know full well the contempt most of these snobs view "ordinary" people with

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 34544765)

Theres nothing wrong with being privileged and certainly I would want those who run the country to be intelligent so a good education is a plus. However I can understand why people would feel that they may not have the experience of a lot of the country and their wealth meant they led a very different life to the rest of us.

Of course, does that really matter?

Originally Posted by Ramrod (Post 34544763)

4 whole years? Well qualified to pass judgement....btw, which private school was it?...'cos at the last private school my two went to I was stood next to the owner of a chip shop and an insurance salesman at home time....ordinary people who simply don't want to have their kids exposed to the state sector.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 34544765)

Theres nothing wrong with being privileged and certainly I would want those who run the country to be intelligent so a good education is a plus. However I can understand why people would feel that they may not have the experience of a lot of the country and their wealth meant they led a very different life to the rest of us.

Of course, does that really matter?

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 34544891)

Problem appears to be most "professional" politicians have never had a "real" job - they tend to have been political aides, researchers, journalists, etc (imho).

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 34544885)

It matters if pongo, stinky and the rest of the tidily winkers are to far out of touch to effectively represent the people they speak for,

Originally Posted by Ramrod (Post 34544763)

4 whole years? Well qualified to pass judgement....btw, which private school was it?...'cos at the last private school my two went to I was stood next to the owner of a chip shop and an insurance salesman at home time....ordinary people who simply don't want to have their kids exposed to the state sector.

Originally Posted by RizzyKing (Post 34544854)

Personally where someone went to school doesn't really bother me all i want for a change is politicians that can do the job of running this country for the benefit of it's people how or where they were educated is neither here nor there.

Originally Posted by frogstamper (Post 34544781)

I'm not talking about the local private schools that people save to send their children to, I am referring to the likes of Eton and Harrow, the sort of place that takes names at birth. You mention chip shop owners and salesmen, I doubt very much either Eton or Harrow could boast their schools had many of their children. I'm not against the Tory party per say, but when you take out the likes of Hague and Davis, they are hardly representative of British society, as I said earlier I have no desire to be governed by a clique from the bullingdon club, but if you wish to aspire to that, obviously that's your choice, but not me.

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 34544891)

Problem appears to be most "professional" politicians have never had a "real" job - they tend to have been political aides, researchers, journalists, etc (imho).

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 34544892)

Current leader of the Tory party perhaps :D

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 34545055)

John Prescott was the son of a railway signalman and worked as a steward, a waiter and a trade union official before entering parliament. His humble origins, socialist beliefs and dislike of the privileged classes didn't stop him emulating some of the behaviour he so roundly condemned them for.

Originally Posted by Ramrod (Post 34545019)

Indeed, but you said that you spent four years at a private school, and "know full well the contempt most of these snobs view "ordinary" people with"......and made it sound like you rubbed shoulders with the 'toffs'. Now you say that you didn't go to a school like Eton or Harrow, so that implies that you don't "know full well the contempt most of these snobs view "ordinary" people with"....:confused:

Originally Posted by Incognitas (Post 34545232)

I think there is a danger in judging purely on appearances, after all that's how we got TB.:rolleyes:

Trouble is when picking whom to vote for you cannot always know what you are getting UNLESS the candidates have been much in the public eye and even then you have to wonder how much is spin these days.:erm:

Originally Posted by slowcoach (Post 34545383)

And as we have seen before, Murdoch will step in at the last moment and tell everyone who to vote for, as the average person has no brain of their own they will simply do it and then get back to watching the telly. :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Gavin (Post 34547004)

The poor sod is getting slaughtered left, right and centre for his first policy. Its all rather personal. The unions are complaining that staff now have to confront people drinking, but wouldn't they have to if passengers were smoking, trashing the carriages or otherwise being anti-social? I think they are jumping on him because:

a) they have to complain on behalf of their members whether they need to or not to justify their existance

b) He's Tory, posh, wealthy and eccentric.

He's pledging more PCSOs on transport but i'd rather see more BTPs instead. Still anything's better than nothing.

I think he's getting a really undeserved rough ride because of his character. That's really out of order. The guy hasn't done anything wrong and people have condemned him and are being extremely nasty. Still he has a great spirit and has pledged to plough on regardless. People wouldn't have responded this way to Red Ken, but then again the old lush wouldn't be able to go that long without a drink.

Originally Posted by Gavin (Post 34547004)

The poor sod is getting slaughtered left, right and centre for his first policy. Its all rather personal. The unions are complaining that staff now have to confront people drinking, but wouldn't they have to if passengers were smoking, trashing the carriages or otherwise being anti-social? I think they are jumping on him because:

Originally Posted by Gavin (Post 34547171)

You could easily have those problems with non-drunks though. You could say that the smoking ban is unenforcable but i've not seen anyone smoke on public transport for years.

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 34544891)

Problem appears to be most "professional" politicians have never had a "real" job - they tend to have been political aides, researchers, journalists, etc (imho).

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 34547862)

I dont know about my MP's history but I am not happy she has now employed by BT as a part time member of their board when she is still representing my area in parliament, in my opinion her pay justifies her MP role been a full time job.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 34548403)

useful site yeah, no info for her time before becoming a MP tho.

Originally Posted by Gavin (Post 34547004)

He's pledging more PCSOs on transport but i'd rather see more BTPs instead. Still anything's better than nothing.

Originally Posted by Gavin (Post 34549171)

Yes, of course, all the BTP do is sit around drinking tea in side offices :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Gavin (Post 34549171)

Yes, of course, all the BTP do is sit around drinking tea in side offices :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Stuart C (Post 34549177)

In fairness: They *do* check tickets at lewisham..

Think I am joking? Go there when a ticket check is happening.

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 34544205)

Of course they do - I've never said that politicians of any persuasion are perfect, quite the reverse in fact.

You've actually highlighted one of the reasons why I still haven't decided who I'll be voting for at the next election - none inspire me with great confidence right now.

However, in removing a truly odious little dictator from his grand palace, the electorate have shown they're waking up and have served notice that nobody is now safe. If that was all this election could be about it'd have been worth it and that should put the reigns on the sort of dodgy deallings and spin New/Old/NearlyNew/SameOld Labour had, under Bliar, come to believe they could get away with ad infinitum.

If all we get out of the next election is a new government who are under massive scrutiny and therefore try a bit harder that'll be enough justification to have got shot of Brown and his useless cohorts. We know what they're about and giving them another mandate by default would be the worst possible message to send them and would simply be rewarded with yet more lies, spin, dithering and ineptitude.

How bad a job Ken did or didn't do will no doubt become clearer with the results of the various enquiries and revelations which will follow his tenure. Yes he did do some good things but for me he was little more than London's Derek Hatton and will probably emulate his socialist soulmate with a lucrative career in the media, writing books and public speaking.

Oh and as I write I'm hearing Brown making yet more excuses for the massive mess he's created and claiming the election results were all about their failure to adequately get across their message. Yet more self-denial from a man who should serve as the dictionary definition of that term! It isn't the message which is to blame it's his policy and abject failure to govern!