• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

2017 General Election thread

Im sure even without those cuts we would be seeing the army on the streets.

Its less to do with capacity and more to do with making a statement.
we have had attacks before though and not seen the army on our streets for ten years. For that to be the case people will ask why now - the election, reduced police numbers, to send a message?

Personally I'm not convinced it's a good move. We preach that these attacks won't stop us from carrying on going to work, going to gigs, using public transport, and then we have soldiers on the street. For me that is a visual message that these attacks effect us and make us live in fear. Personally I would play down any symbolism that makes the terrorists think they are having a effect on our way of life.
 
On a slightly different note, is there any policies that are not run of the mill, slightly off the wall that could work. I don't mean the usuals as in NHS, economy and policing. To give an example: I would like to see around 100 seats in the house of lords be available to normal members of the public. A bit like jury service, but obviously with Lords pay and no fear of losing your job whilst being seconded for a year. I think this will allow the public to understand better the way Westminster functions through both houses and also giving them some influence, all be it in a very small way.

Obviously I haven't thought it through but just an idea. Anybody else have suggestions that are a bit off the wall?
 
Anybody else have suggestions that are a bit off the wall?

A coalition government like we saw in the 1940's.

We need the best brains to steer us through Brexit and beyond, I don't see Theresa ' strong and stable' May and the Tories up to the task.
 
A coalition government like we saw in the 1940's.

We need the best brains to steer us through Brexit and beyond, I don't see Theresa ' strong and stable' May and the Tories up to the task.

Best of a bad bunch. I'm not sure that senile old simpleton would be a better option for leading Brexit talks. I strongly believe we'd leave Europe with a truly terrible deal.
 
We certainly will if team May have anything to do with it.

How so? Corbyn has already laid his cards out on the table and said he wont leave without a deal. This immediately advertises our hand to the EU and gives them carte blanche to do whatever they please, probably ensuring that we either a) leave with a poor deal or b) leave with something that resembles what we already had and voted out of. Neither is any good for us. I don't give a flying **** about what is good for the EU, nor do I care where it leaves them.
 
Best of a bad bunch. I'm not sure that senile old simpleton would be a better option for leading Brexit talks. I strongly believe we'd leave Europe with a truly terrible deal.

Really? Mrs May seems to wilt under a bit of pressure from what I have seen. She is always changing her mind. She doesn't appear to be the strong and stable leader she portrays herself as.
 
Really? Mrs May seems to wilt under a bit of pressure from what I have seen. She is always changing her mind. She doesn't appear to be the strong and stable leader she portrays herself as.

I think attacking people for "changing their mind" is about as childish as you can possibly get. We live in a dynamic changing world and I think it is important to be open minded and flexible.

Have you never changed your mind on something? Or a number of things for that matter?
 
Locally, Southend West, there are two independents standing; a Jason Pilley & a Tino Callaghan.
Can anyone tell me anything about these two?

And does Julian Gabriel St. John WARE-LANE (Labour) have the poshest name ever?
 
On a slightly different note, is there any policies that are not run of the mill, slightly off the wall that could work. I don't mean the usuals as in NHS, economy and policing. To give an example: I would like to see around 100 seats in the house of lords be available to normal members of the public. A bit like jury service, but obviously with Lords pay and no fear of losing your job whilst being seconded for a year. I think this will allow the public to understand better the way Westminster functions through both houses and also giving them some influence, all be it in a very small way.

Obviously I haven't thought it through but just an idea. Anybody else have suggestions that are a bit off the wall?

I like. £240 quid and I get to sleep all day. Where do I sign up?
 
Yeah I know, what a promise! We'll make you richer by working one day less a week. I think they've taken political bull **** to a whole new level!.... & i'm guessing they must have hired Diane Abbott to do the number crunching for that policy! :smile:
 
On a slightly different note, is there any policies that are not run of the mill, slightly off the wall that could work. I don't mean the usuals as in NHS, economy and policing. To give an example: I would like to see around 100 seats in the house of lords be available to normal members of the public. A bit like jury service, but obviously with Lords pay and no fear of losing your job whilst being seconded for a year. I think this will allow the public to understand better the way Westminster functions through both houses and also giving them some influence, all be it in a very small way.

Obviously I haven't thought it through but just an idea. Anybody else have suggestions that are a bit off the wall?
I like the sound of this. The House of Lords has a lot of ex MPs, legal experts, business leaders - who have a wealth of experience who 'could' be a useful safety net, and also has a load of mates of a recent PM, party fundraisers, a load of people who were born into a title. Ordinary members of the public would be a much better gauge of the feel of the public than them.


Any way that gets the public to have a better understanding of what governments do should be encouraged and anything that makes people want to engage in the process should be encouraged.


I would also suggest that manifesto pledges should be irreversible. Obviously when in government there are changes in circumstances that need to be reacted to so some leeway can be factored in but with boundaries. And parties could have a second document of work towards policies, but core policies should become law if elected.


I would also like much stricter rules on expenses and on conflict of interest so any second job but not be influenced by your role as an MP and there must be a minimum working week as an MP so any extra job has to be proven to not effect time available as an MP.


Also all Parliamentary candidates to be selected by their local party membership after each term - so a safe Tory or Labour seat doesn't mean a crap MP can know they are safe in their job.
 
I think attacking people for "changing their mind" is about as childish as you can possibly get. We live in a dynamic changing world and I think it is important to be open minded and flexible.

Have you never changed your mind on something? Or a number of things for that matter?
being open to reasoned argument is a good thing, I think Theresa's record on mind changing in the last 12 months has been bad policy that has had to be watered down or dropped - and that isn't really a positive. The u-turn on a manifesto policy before the election has even happened is unheard of - there is no positive spin to put on that.
 
I think attacking people for "changing their mind" is about as childish as you can possibly get. We live in a dynamic changing world and I think it is important to be open minded and flexible.

Have you never changed your mind on something? Or a number of things for that matter?

Not in the way she has, no. But I am not trying to get elected as the Prime Minister. And why is childish to point out what I see as her faults? Is she beyond criticism?

Mrs May keeps going on about being strong and stable, but I see little evidence of this.

You will also note that I am careful to state that everything I say is my opinion. I do not claim my opinions as facts and I don't resort to name calling like say, this quote from earlier in the thread "I'm not sure that senile old simpleton would be a better option for leading Brexit talks."

Whoever typed that was being childish IMO.
 
I like the sound of this. The House of Lords has a lot of ex MPs, legal experts, business leaders - who have a wealth of experience who 'could' be a useful safety net, and also has a load of mates of a recent PM, party fundraisers, a load of people who were born into a title. Ordinary members of the public would be a much better gauge of the feel of the public than them.


Any way that gets the public to have a better understanding of what governments do should be encouraged and anything that makes people want to engage in the process should be encouraged.


I would also suggest that manifesto pledges should be irreversible. Obviously when in government there are changes in circumstances that need to be reacted to so some leeway can be factored in but with boundaries. And parties could have a second document of work towards policies, but core policies should become law if elected.


I would also like much stricter rules on expenses and on conflict of interest so any second job but not be influenced by your role as an MP and there must be a minimum working week as an MP so any extra job has to be proven to not effect time available as an MP.


Also all Parliamentary candidates to be selected by their local party membership after each term - so a safe Tory or Labour seat doesn't mean a crap MP can know they are safe in their job.

You're right about the experience and knowledge and I just feel it would give the general public the understanding of legislation and a say. Though when I say like jury service I don't mean enforced but maybe by a yearly ballot, counter terrorism checks withstanding.

I kind of agree on the manifesto part though there could be issues with a change in World circumstances though this would stop parties making outlandish promises within their manifestos.

On the last point I think I would go one step further and say the candidates must reside in their constituency to stop the parachuting of prospective mp's into safe seats.

Anyway our manifesto seems to be coming along nicely and shows different people can work together.
 
The best way is to let the people decide who represents them for Brexit. we all have that chance in a few weeks. I certainly don't want the Lords anywhere near it.
 
The best way is to let the people decide who represents them for Brexit. we all have that chance in a few weeks. I certainly don't want the Lords anywhere near it.

Well it's a popular misconception that the Lords can stop legislation, yes they can delay but they can't stop. What they do is ask further questions that are very difficult to do in the commons due time constraints etc. Also whilst there are party whips it is more relaxed plus there a very large number of independents which can give a balanced view.
 
Back
Top