RugbyRebels

Which Tyler wrote:And poof in a cloud of blue smoke, TM reveals her very own secret Money Tree

Will TM kindly explain to us why in the name of austerity there has been a necessary public sector pay freeze, swathing cuts to welfare and disability benefits and a slashing of funding to schools and hospitals but she can suddenly find £1bn from a cocoa tin under her bed to bribe 10 rabid loonies for their votes in parliament to shore up her weak and feeble government and overcome the calamity of a totally unnecessary election that was her and only her decision to call?

Probably not, it will be arrogantly brushed off as in the national interests

....and the rest as she will undoubtedly have to stump up more to calm everyone else down. At the same time as the Queen gets an 8% increase in spend- which may be 'justifiable', but really...

They really think that they can continue to treat us as fools.

(in the scheme of things £1bn isn't a huge amount of money, but the messaging is ridiculous)

Banquo wrote:They really think that they can continue to treat us as fools.

They can, it's (in their opinion) 5 years before we can do anything about it; and by then we'll have all forgotten about this; and even if we haven't it'll be as nothing compared to everything else going on over the next 5 years.

Which Tyler wrote:

Banquo wrote:They really think that they can continue to treat us as fools.

They can, it's (in their opinion) 5 years before we can do anything about it; and by then we'll have all forgotten about this; and even if we haven't it'll be as nothing compared to everything else going on over the next 5 years.

Don't think there is a cat in hells chance of 5 years. Only takes an MP or two to die or rebel (can see a tory or two going LibDem; can see Ruth Davidson going UDI).....

I also think there is a genuine chance of serious civil disobedience with what's being revealed and with McDonnell agitation agenda.

Banquo wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Banquo wrote:They really think that they can continue to treat us as fools.

They can, it's (in their opinion) 5 years before we can do anything about it; and by then we'll have all forgotten about this; and even if we haven't it'll be as nothing compared to everything else going on over the next 5 years.

Don't think there is a cat in hells chance of 5 years. Only takes an MP or two to die or rebel (can see a tory or two going LibDem; can see Ruth Davidson going UDI).....

I also think there is a genuine chance of serious civil disobedience with what's being revealed and with McDonnell agitation agenda.

Its going to be interesting and there is no way it will be a 5 year parliament.

How successful anything can be will probably depend on Labour. If Scottish Conservatives, Liberal conservatives from England and Wales and the DUP force a move away from the hardest of Brexit, can May find enough support to overcome the 50 or so right wing MPs in her party who just want to walk away from the EU with nothing? It will need a lot of cross party support to get any deal through (assuming one is on the table, but I think its in everyones best interest for a deal to be available). The Lib Dems may support a deal that keeps some of the current trading benefits, but will they demand a second referendum for their support? How many Labour MPs will support a compromise deal? Does Labour even have a policy yet and can Corbyn overcome his life long opposition to the EU to accept something other than hard brexit?

Meanwhile, I quite agree that McDonnell will be stirring things up with the party's activist base which will be interesting, even if the Tories had a majority.

Will the Queen's Speech pass? That would be interesting...

This is how negotiations work. When the Lib Dems got their free school meals and raising of the personal allowance was it portrayed as a bribe or was it spun as the lovely Lib Dems doing nice things for kids and the working poor. It was the latter, of course, and rightly so. When the evil DUP want extra money for the NHS and infrastructure projects (things Corbyn put front and centre of his plan for the country) it's a cash bribe.......

Defending the DUP, eeeerrrrgggghhhh.

Stom wrote:Will the Queen's Speech pass? That would be interesting...

There is absolutely no desire within the Conservative party for another election. The DUP may taste bad to many a Conservative MP but a Corbyn government would give them food poisoning.

Mellsblue wrote:This is how negotiations work. When the Lib Dems got their free school meals and raising of the personal allowance was it portrayed as a bribe or was it spun as the lovely Lib Dems doing nice things for kids and the working poor. It was the latter, of course, and rightly so. When the evil DUP want extra money for the NHS and infrastructure projects (things Corbyn put front and centre of his plan for the country) it's a cash bribe.......

Defending the DUP, eeeerrrrgggghhhh.

Exactly. If Labour needed another 10 or so votes to form a feasible government then they would be promising all sorts to the Lib Dems or SNP. Going back to 2010 and the rainbow coalition including the SNP, Lib Dems, Greens and Plaid would have had a fair old shopping list of demands for their continued support of a Brown government. This horse trading is perfectly common in many countries - we just aren't as used to it here.

Are the complaints around the compromise or the scale of the compromise?

I thought it was clearly the latter.

Stom wrote:Will the Queen's Speech pass? That would be interesting...

why not?

jared_7 wrote:Are the complaints around the compromise or the scale of the compromise?

I thought it was clearly the latter.

I seem to recall complaint about the Conservatives even taking to the DUP. As for the scale, do you think the SNP or PC would be less ambitious in their demands?

Sandydragon wrote:

jared_7 wrote:Are the complaints around the compromise or the scale of the compromise?

I thought it was clearly the latter.

I seem to recall complaint about the Conservatives even taking to the DUP. As for the scale, do you think the SNP or PC would be less ambitious in their demands?

Thats not the point I made. Someone pointed out people were whinging about compromises being made, saying it was standard practice in negotiating to form a government - I don't think I've seen people arguing that point at all.

What I've read is the view £1bn is an awful lot of concessions for 8 MPs, especially against a backdrop of supposed austerity (which Fallon reemphasised the need for today, nonetheless). So there is money when its needed. In 2010, the Lib Dems brought almost 60 MPs to the table, an additional fifth on top of what the Tories had so its no surprise if they were to get more concessions.

I don't blame the DUP for ambition, that would be dumb. Once again, the discussion is over what the Tories gave them. I'm sure the EU are quaking in their boots after seeing what 8 unknown MPs from Northern Ireland were able to squeeze out of May.

Strong and Stable.

jared_7 wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

jared_7 wrote:Are the complaints around the compromise or the scale of the compromise?

I thought it was clearly the latter.

I seem to recall complaint about the Conservatives even taking to the DUP. As for the scale, do you think the SNP or PC would be less ambitious in their demands?

Thats not the point I made. Someone pointed out people were whinging about compromises being made, saying it was standard practice in negotiating to form a government - I don't think I've seen people arguing that point at all.

What I've read is the view £1bn is an awful lot of concessions for 8 MPs, especially against a backdrop of supposed austerity (which Fallon reemphasised the need for today, nonetheless). So there is money when its needed. In 2010, the Lib Dems brought almost 60 MPs to the table, an additional fifth on top of what the Tories had so its no surprise if they were to get more concessions.

I don't blame the DUP for ambition, that would be dumb. Once again, the discussion is over what the Tories gave them. I'm sure the EU are quaking in their boots after seeing what 8 unknown MPs from Northern Ireland were able to squeeze out of May.

Strong and Stable.

If what the DUP is bad but is going to happen there was nothing to stop Corbyn delivering 20 Labour votes for the Tories. Then the same things would happen, other than the DUP wouln't have gotten cash which isn't going to Cornwall or Wales or Scotland.

But the Tories accept doing the deal to secure their minority status, and Labout accept a deal being done they can score political points off.

jared_7 wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

jared_7 wrote:Are the complaints around the compromise or the scale of the compromise?

I thought it was clearly the latter.

I seem to recall complaint about the Conservatives even taking to the DUP. As for the scale, do you think the SNP or PC would be less ambitious in their demands?

Thats not the point I made. Someone pointed out people were whinging about compromises being made, saying it was standard practice in negotiating to form a government - I don't think I've seen people arguing that point at all.

What I've read is the view £1bn is an awful lot of concessions for 8 MPs, especially against a backdrop of supposed austerity (which Fallon reemphasised the need for today, nonetheless). So there is money when its needed. In 2010, the Lib Dems brought almost 60 MPs to the table, an additional fifth on top of what the Tories had so its no surprise if they were to get more concessions.

I don't blame the DUP for ambition, that would be dumb. Once again, the discussion is over what the Tories gave them. I'm sure the EU are quaking in their boots after seeing what 8 unknown MPs from Northern Ireland were able to squeeze out of May.

Strong and Stable.

Well, WT called it a bribe and my response, in the main, was to that. I was just pointing out that is how these things work and that, as I remember, nobody called the coalition deal a bribe. The Lib Dems may have brought more seats but then concessions to them cost a lot more than £1billion. All of those concessions were made based on a conservative manifesto based heavily on austerity.
The extra £1billion will be going to the NI assembly to spend, not just the 8 DUP MP's, to implement policies I'd assume you'd advocate for the 1.8 million people who live there. So, rather than be indignant about it, look at it as a win against the tyranny of austerity. The coalition government and the conservative majority govt both rowed back on the pace of austerity, because of concessions to Lib Dems and the Conservative back benches (and a few cabinet members), and nobody moaned about it then. The moans now are because it's the DUP - understandable - and because it props up a conservative government.

The DUP propping up a Conservative government. Wow.
It's amazing how the economic imperative of greed will justify just about anything........and if uncontested can continue for centuries.

'History is bunk' said Henry Ford,......but he's another that propped up a Nazi regime to make vast amounts of money.

Coming quick on the heels of Labour confirming their assurances they'd clear student debt actually meant they didn't know how big the debt was and they wouldn't do any such thing the team of all the talents surrounding Labour's Glorious Leader™ are busy now deleting previous posts praising Venezuela for showing that wealth can be shared and the poor matter, this after Venezuela spent the weekend killing some poor people and approving a more totalitarian approach.

Digby wrote:Coming quick on the heels of Labour confirming their assurances they'd clear student debt actually meant they didn't know how big the debt was and they wouldn't do any such thing the team of all the talents surrounding Labour's Glorious Leader™ are busy now deleting previous posts praising Venezuela for showing that wealth can be shared and the poor matter, this after Venezuela spent the weekend killing some poor people and approving a more totalitarian approach.

You think? There's still plenty who regard Chavez's model as the one to aim for; its all just gone a bit wrong. The really sad thing is that unlike many countries where socialism has been tried and failed, which have few natural resources and might have failed anyway, Venezuela has one of the most profitable natural resources going and its current problems are largely self inflicted.

Sandydragon wrote:

Digby wrote:Coming quick on the heels of Labour confirming their assurances they'd clear student debt actually meant they didn't know how big the debt was and they wouldn't do any such thing the team of all the talents surrounding Labour's Glorious Leader™ are busy now deleting previous posts praising Venezuela for showing that wealth can be shared and the poor matter, this after Venezuela spent the weekend killing some poor people and approving a more totalitarian approach.

You think? There's still plenty who regard Chavez's model as the one to aim for; its all just gone a bit wrong. The really sad thing is that unlike many countries where socialism has been tried and failed, which have few natural resources and might have failed anyway, Venezuela has one of the most profitable natural resources going and its current problems are largely self inflicted.

I don't doubt there are people who think Chavenomics remains a workable model, and if you have to kill a few people in the process, well they don't call them militant for no reason

Both the Soviet Union and Communist China killed millions so I don't think a dozen or so deaths here or there will register on their conscience. What is amazing is that so many people still hold to those ideals no matter how many times they fail.

I'd back aims to bring about less divergence in the allocation of resources, but I'd do that within a regulated market economy not much different to what we have now.

Corbyn showing like many of the greats he doesn't do, or at least get, irony. He's not wrong that Trump's comments on his naziesque supporters were woeful, but after his Corbyn's own piss weak comments on Venezuela he'd do better to keep his trap shut. The defence of the Glorious Leader™ is the specific actions in Venezuela and the USA aren't identical, and so require a different level of condemnation, and to a degree he's right, Venezuela is worse as it's the Venezuela State doing it.

Did May go far enough in failing to actually criticise Trump, instead saying simply there was no equivalency between the two groups?

Also whilst we've seemingly seen Trump's state visit to the UK kicked into the long grass its a little odd that's not being thrown in the government's face, you'd look an imbecile to stand up this week and say a man who at the very least gives the impression of supporting facism and racism warrants a visit, and a state visit would be even worse.

Corbyn could have made his attack on Trump at the governement's expense tbh rather than get charged himself with being a hypocrite.

Digby wrote: Also whilst we've seemingly seen Trump's state visit to the UK kicked into the long grass its a little odd that's not being thrown in the government's face, you'd look an imbecile to stand up this week and say a man who at the very least gives the impression of supporting facism and racism warrants a visit, and a state visit would be even worse.

Macron beat us to it.

Digby wrote:Did May go far enough in failing to actually criticise Trump, instead saying simply there was no equivalency between the two groups?

Also whilst we've seemingly seen Trump's state visit to the UK kicked into the long grass its a little odd that's not being thrown in the government's face, you'd look an imbecile to stand up this week and say a man who at the very least gives the impression of supporting facism and racism warrants a visit, and a state visit would be even worse.

Corbyn could have made his attack on Trump at the governement's expense tbh rather than get charged himself with being a hypocrite.

She is walking a tightrope with needing to keep the US onside whilst choking down the perfectly normal desire to call trump an utter cock.

Sandydragon wrote:

Digby wrote:Did May go far enough in failing to actually criticise Trump, instead saying simply there was no equivalency between the two groups?

Also whilst we've seemingly seen Trump's state visit to the UK kicked into the long grass its a little odd that's not being thrown in the government's face, you'd look an imbecile to stand up this week and say a man who at the very least gives the impression of supporting facism and racism warrants a visit, and a state visit would be even worse.

Corbyn could have made his attack on Trump at the governement's expense tbh rather than get charged himself with being a hypocrite.

She is walking a tightrope with needing to keep the US onside whilst choking down the perfectly normal desire to call trump an utter cock.

Such is diplomacy. We do comes across as pathetic in this instance, though I've little sympathy for May given how quickly we fawned and offered up a state visit.