British Politics Thread.

[Psychosplodge]

Anybody could become an associate member with a vote for something like £2 I think. There were certainly people that took the opportunity to skew the vote. Whether they did it in large enough numbers is debatable.

[Mr Mystery]

Yet since he clinched it, numbers of Party Members has only gone up. No has the party lost a seat....

This whole 'split the voter base' just isn't bearing out.

[Psychosplodge]

Only been in relatively safe seats so for hasn't it?

We've literally just had someone on the radio saying anyone who'd spent the last six weeks campaigning in Chesterfield wouldn't question Corbyn having lost the support of the voters.

[Denzark]

Ah yes.mquote Thatcher. Because she most definitely didn't balls things up at all. Oh no. Mass unemployment? A myth. The industry of entire communities asset stripped? A myth.

If as you claim Government budgets are always based on 'worst case scenario', that must be why the NHS, Police, Armed Forces etc are so very well funded and not at all somehow run on a shoe string...

Sort of not. We say 'we need X' - the budgeteers say 'raise a business case' so we do, and then someone says 'do without - take it at risk' which means if it goes wrong in the course of their 2 year tour, its their fault.

What I mean by worst case is, when you say 'I need 5 places on this course' you have to budget for 5 places. Doesn't matter if only 3 are taken up and one cancels last minute - the gap in your financial planning is for 5 places. If you have 2 posts where you need sergeants, even though you know one is L2 pay grade and one is a corporal given acting rank - you have to budget for 2 x L8 - the highest grade -in case you get one in.

Similarly, I assume on this basis, that if you put forward the fair and equal proposal that 'everyone can get a degree at the cost to the government' - the government must be able to carry that forward for everyone. Probably even those already with a first degree - why should Bloggs get something for free that Smith paid for? I entirely agree a reasonable follow on cost estimate is number of Students per year currently starting degrees, x£27k - no problem with that. But if you say everyone is entitled to something, that's what you budget for.

So then minus the people who can't get the grades from the cost, and add the amount of extra lecturers, infrastructure, administrators, exam writers, invigilators etc.

I'm sorry but I don't think the cost is viable. Its similar to why the NHS can screen out some more expensive drug costs on the basis of scale of
economy. Risk basis. You say graduates are cheaper, earn more, contribute more and therefore are more value to the economy. That may be but the risk that this doesn't pan out to be true especially as numbers of graduates go up (meaning their claim to special wages goes down) versus the 'risk' of not universally funding degree level education - I can see how they consider one to make economic sense.

For me its not ideological - its financial. I quit university after a year and have a chip on both shoulders from the university of life - I couldn't give arats arse if everyone got degrees - I just don't see the sums adding up.

[grimmas]

I did post some of this Data earlier for men going to university isn't really economically viable we tend to earn the same either way (it might have been in the EU thread to be fair)

[Psychosplodge]

we're now up to 27 shadow cabinet resignations. How big is the shadow cabinet?

[Denzark]

we're now up to 27 shadow cabinet resignations. How big is the shadow cabinet?

If its 27 it would be as big as the EU commissioners without the UK one there...

- - - Updated - - -

Even better, an extract from the DT. Yes they are biased, sure - but it is direct quotes from Chris Bryant MP (Labour):

Did Jeremy Corbyn vote to leave the EU?
A senior Labour MP says he suspects that Jeremy Corbyn voted for Brexit after the party leader declined to tell him which way he cast his ballot.

Chris Bryant said he posed the question directly as he warned Mr Corbyn he would "destroy" the party unless he stepped aside and did not seek re-election, but received no answer.

"Jeremy's management of the campaign for the referendum left many voters on polling day not even knowing which way Jeremy himself was going to vote," he told BBC News.

"I suspect that Jeremy may have voted to leave.

"Not only is that a betrayal of Labour's historic position on the European Union - a fundamental economic and foreign policy objective of ours - but also it means that if he were to lead is into a general election, the latest poll shows we would lose 150 seats, we would be a rump of 75 Members of Parliament.

[grimmas]

It should have been no surprise if he did, he voted against all the other treaties. In fact he shared a stage with Enoch Powell in the EEC referendum so he must have been very against it.

He had no chance really. All those traditional labour types weren't even listening he is just another London type telling them what to do an doc course they were too busy think about how they were gong to stick their leave vote right up Cammeron. His big error was slipping into "it's not the EUs faults it's the Tory's" because right or wrong that's just the same old bumf.

[daboarder]

I love how all these blokes who lied to you lot about the benefits of leaving are now turning around and admitting they lied utterly, from farrage's NHS BS to the no more free movement.

you poor fools really are screwed and this has been nothing but an utter cluster on your politicians part's. I mean hell, this looks like the end of the UK rather than britain leaving the EU

[Psychosplodge]

If they don't reduce our payments and remove free movement it would go against why a significant number voted leave and render the entire exercise completely pointless. What that would mean for their political futures who the **** knows?