Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Izzy]

Talking of the Royal Wedding - fancy planning it for the same day as the FA Cup Final.

 

What on earth were they thinking FFS? 

[fuchsntf]

I cant be bothered with all, your gdp, bdp, stastics for this for that...And you still want to waffle

the next 1000 yrs over your leanings and yearnings to some left-right prehistoric politics.

Tell your gran-kids how great...May, Johnson, Grove, Corbyn, hunt,rhetoric and debate over Bshit lives,

made you better people...

 

Bumbling NHS, with bumbling incompetent organisation and management, where moral corruption dictates

the medical needs of Uk citizens..

That same bumbling corrupt  attitude is rife in Transport, Housing, Education..

Your not really bothered about Greenfell and the uttermost disgusting corruption of safety standards, in modern history.

Money talks....you pay the right people and price, you get what you want.

The honest backbenchers, are being ridiculed, by political whips and media, journalists abuse their strength of information,

on doorstep salesman politics.The political and business elite, are never effected, by the major financial clashes, and meltdowns

Austerity as been forced on the electorate, as a normal process and expectation.

Education through the society, at mid to avg levels has been let to wallow in its own mis-preconceptions.

 

Strange there is more money in the western society than ye, but we get told we must keep struggling,

because, fear, false shame, and another misconception of what is considered a good education for career,

society developement is...All finanze experts are masrerminds and our saviour.

Peoples that, protect, educate, take care of us, build, create redevelope, maintain are just unpiss worthy minions.

 

The electore, love to keep up with the joneses, blame everybody elase, pretend they understand the Stockmarkets,

fonds, shareholder bonds and securities...We have become too reliant on the experts of the stockmarkets,

and carpet-bagger finances.

fk-it we had great relevant life, engineering, arithmatic, fine-arts, physics, chemiie, allround-sciences,

something called common-sense, well before we had the "stockexchanges"

Though never an honest pay for honest days work....The abused promises has stayed, but recognition of

the needs for all workers, across all human society needs, has been forced a pathetical learning of discrimination,

by know-alls,and social engineering experts, an politicians have become tools for the powerfull money-makers,

and their incompetent ill-educated...experts.

 

I aint got the perfect answer, but we have all become too satisfied and accepted too willingly, our own perception

of how deep and allow we can we be pushed down, while contradictingly believing we all have a fair crack, cos we are

clap-happily believing its (what-ever it is)  worse in other lands...

One coupled fact...the NHS great and workable  , but is crap, its minister is crap, and is corruptly   administrated,

business wise, authority wise, organisation wise, and its real-workers, and good medical-admins, are being abused,

and shit on.... Times that Xmal across all proffessions and society infrastructal structures.

Experts have been shit, for well over half a century.

Honest politicians are being whipped out of power, and whipped out of representing their electorate.

Worse of the worse the electorate are too lazy or busy in their own survival, they couldnt give a shit..

Edited 3 January 2018 by fuchsntf

[Buce]

16 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

Talking of the Royal Wedding - fancy planning it for the same day as the FA Cup Final.

 

What on earth were they thinking FFS? 

 

The answer should be in the I'm old enough to remember thread: Remember when the whole country shut down for Cup Final day? When the build up was on the television from about 09.00? When we could all list the winners from years ago? And the goal scorers?

 

Fact is, Izzy, it just doesn't have the same allure any more - I honesty couldn't tell you who won last year (I assume it was one of the top four?).

[Facecloth]

36 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

The answer should be in the I'm old enough to remember thread: Remember when the whole country shut down for Cup Final day? When the build up was on the television from about 09.00? When we could all list the winners from years ago? And the goal scorers?

 

Fact is, Izzy, it just doesn't have the same allure any more - I honesty couldn't tell you who won last year (I assume it was one of the top four?).

Arsenal, who finished 5th 

[foxinexile]

4 hours ago, Webbo said:

Best growth per capita in the EU for an economy that's supposed to be a devastating failure? I just thought it was worth mentioning.

I think for this point it's also worth highlighting that for the period quoted (2012-2017), we've been a member of the EU. The "devastating failure" (which I acknowledge a lot of Remain supporters like to shout about) of our future might be worth reviewing with regards to growth per capita for 2021-2026, which will be over a same five year period following our full departure. I don't know anywhere near enough about economics to speculate any further (as no one does really regarding our future after the EU) but it will certainly be an interesting point to come back to and review for comparison in ten years' time (if the thread lasts that long!).    

[Buce]

31 minutes ago, foxinexile said:

I think for this point it's also worth highlighting that for the period quoted (2012-2017), we've been a member of the EU. The "devastating failure" (which I acknowledge a lot of Remain supporters like to shout about) of our future might be worth reviewing with regards to growth per capita for 2021-2026, which will be over a same five year period following our full departure. I don't know anywhere near enough about economics to speculate any further (as no one does really regarding our future after the EU) but it will certainly be an interesting point to come back to and review for comparison in ten years' time (if the thread lasts that long!).    

 

Really?

 

Don't worry, this thread is full of people who think they do - just stick around.

[Webbo]

1 hour ago, foxinexile said:

I think for this point it's also worth highlighting that for the period quoted (2012-2017), we've been a member of the EU. The "devastating failure" (which I acknowledge a lot of Remain supporters like to shout about) of our future might be worth reviewing with regards to growth per capita for 2021-2026, which will be over a same five year period following our full departure. I don't know anywhere near enough about economics to speculate any further (as no one does really regarding our future after the EU) but it will certainly be an interesting point to come back to and review for comparison in ten years' time (if the thread lasts that long!).    

Nobody can say for certain whether we'll be better off or not out of the EU, but it was about sovereignty and democracy. Personally I don't think we'll be much worse off if at all,.

 

Somebody will want to argue with me now but I can't be bothered so just take my word for it that I did it with the best of intentions  and time will tell who was right.

[foxinexile]

10 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Nobody can say for certain whether we'll be better off or not out of the EU, but it was about sovereignty and democracy. Personally I don't think we'll be much worse off if at all,.

 

Somebody will want to argue with me now but I can't be bothered so just take my word for it that I did it with the best of intentions  and time will tell who was right.

I think it will take at least ten (probably many more) years to know whether Brexit is a "success" or not - though the definition of success is going to be very different for lots of people, depending on the reasons for voting. As you mention, for a lot of people Leave was about sovereignty and democracy over economics so the moment of full departure will probably be considered a success by many. I know it's ground that's been turned over and over in the thread so no reason to dredge it up again but it'll be interesting to compare in the future if there's any noticeable difference. Personally I don't think it should be considered who was right or wrong - whichever way we all voted we have to hope it's a success (whatever yardstick it is we choose to measure that by).  

[Rogstanley]

We're already considerably worse off thanks to the crash in the value of the pound coupled with continuing poor wage growth.

 

Sincerely hope is does work out well since we are going down this path regardless, but the fact is that the early signs are all negative.

[Realist Guy In The Room]

4 hours ago, fuchsntf said:

I cant be bothered with all, your gdp, bdp, stastics for this for that...And you still want to waffle

the next 1000 yrs over your leanings and yearnings to some left-right prehistoric politics.

Tell your gran-kids how great...May, Johnson, Grove, Corbyn, hunt,rhetoric and debate over Bshit lives,

made you better people...

 

Bumbling NHS, with bumbling incompetent organisation and management, where moral corruption dictates

the medical needs of Uk citizens..

That same bumbling corrupt  attitude is rife in Transport, Housing, Education..

Your not really bothered about Greenfell and the uttermost disgusting corruption of safety standards, in modern history.

Money talks....you pay the right people and price, you get what you want.

The honest backbenchers, are being ridiculed, by political whips and media, journalists abuse their strength of information,

on doorstep salesman politics.The political and business elite, are never effected, by the major financial clashes, and meltdowns

Austerity as been forced on the electorate, as a normal process and expectation.

Education through the society, at mid to avg levels has been let to wallow in its own mis-preconceptions.

 

Strange there is more money in the western society than ye, but we get told we must keep struggling,

because, fear, false shame, and another misconception of what is considered a good education for career,

society developement is...All finanze experts are masrerminds and our saviour.

Peoples that, protect, educate, take care of us, build, create redevelope, maintain are just unpiss worthy minions.

 

The electore, love to keep up with the joneses, blame everybody elase, pretend they understand the Stockmarkets,

fonds, shareholder bonds and securities...We have become too reliant on the experts of the stockmarkets,

and carpet-bagger finances.

fk-it we had great relevant life, engineering, arithmatic, fine-arts, physics, chemiie, allround-sciences,

something called common-sense, well before we had the "stockexchanges"

Though never an honest pay for honest days work....The abused promises has stayed, but recognition of

the needs for all workers, across all human society needs, has been forced a pathetical learning of discrimination,

by know-alls,and social engineering experts, an politicians have become tools for the powerfull money-makers,

and their incompetent ill-educated...experts.

 

I aint got the perfect answer, but we have all become too satisfied and accepted too willingly, our own perception

of how deep and allow we can we be pushed down, while contradictingly believing we all have a fair crack, cos we are

clap-happily believing its (what-ever it is)  worse in other lands...

One coupled fact...the NHS great and workable  , but is crap, its minister is crap, and is corruptly   administrated,

business wise, authority wise, organisation wise, and its real-workers, and good medical-admins, are being abused,

and shit on.... Times that Xmal across all proffessions and society infrastructal structures.

Experts have been shit, for well over half a century.

Honest politicians are being whipped out of power, and whipped out of representing their electorate.

Worse of the worse the electorate are too lazy or busy in their own survival, they couldnt give a shit..

What the fook did you edit?

[fuchsntf]

23 minutes ago, Realist Guy In The Room said:

What the fook did you edit?

Thats funny, so I wont tell you...Guess!!

[fuchsntf]

6 hours ago, toddybad said:

Sounds like a lovely bloke

 

Windsor council leader calls for removal of homeless before royal wedding

Council’s Tory leader Simon Dudley is demanding police use legal powers to clear the area of homeless people by 19 May

 

St George’s chapel at Windsor Castle, where Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will marry in May. Photograph: Alastair Grant/AP

Harriet Sherwood

Published:15:06 GMT+00:00 Wed 3 January 2018

 Follow Harriet Sherwood

 

The leader of the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead – home to Windsor Castle, Eton College and Ascot racecourse – has demanded police use legal powers to clear the area of homeless people before the royal wedding in May.

Simon Dudley, the council’s Conservative leader, wrote to Thames Valley police this week seeking action against “aggressive begging and intimidation” and “bags and detritus” accumulating on the streets.

The letter, seen by the Guardian, follows a series of tweets sent by Dudley while on a skiing holiday in Wyoming over Christmas, in which he referred to “an epidemic of rough sleeping and vagrancy in Windsor” and said “residents have had enough of this exploitation of residents and 6 million tourists pa [per annum]”.

AdvertisementHide

 

He tweeted that he would write to Thames Valley police “asking them to focus on dealing with this before the #RoyalWedding”.

Tens of thousands of wellwishers and tourists are expected to descend on the picturesque town on the banks of the River Thames for the wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle on 19 May in St George’s chapel at Windsor Castle.

The castle, founded in the 11th century, is one of the royal family’s main residences and where the Queen spends most weekends. It is open to the public, attracting 1.36 million, visitors each year, with a family ticket costing £53.

Dudley’s letter, dated 2 January and addressed to Anthony Stansfield, the police and crime commissioner for Thames Valley, thanks the police for protecting the community and lists the council’s support services for vulnerable residents, including an emergency night shelter, a drug and alcohol support service, and a severe weather emergency protocol.

“Homelessness is completely unacceptable in a compassionate community such as ours,” he says.

However, he goes on to say that the council has evidence that “a large number of adults that are begging in Windsor are not in fact homeless, and if they are homeless they are choosing to reject all support services ... In the case of homelessness amongst this group, it is therefore a voluntary choice.”

Dudley also raised concerns about “the quantities of bags and detritus that those begging are accumulating and leaving on our pavements, at times unattended … this is a significant security concern, especially given the national importance of Windsor.

“Obviously, the level of tourist interest is set to multiply with the Royal Wedding in May 2018, and there are increased concerns from our residents about their safety. The whole situation also presents a beautiful town in a sadly unfavourable light.”

He suggests that Thames Valley police use their powers under existing laws – citing the 1824 Vagrancy Act and the 2014 Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act – “including implementing criminal behaviour orders for the numerous offenders”. The Vagrancy Act criminalises rough sleeping and begging.

Dudley’s letter is copied to Theresa May, who is MP for Maidenhead, and the home secretary, Amber Rudd.

Wisdom Da Costa, an independent councillor, said he disagreed with Dudley’s approach. “I don’t believe banging them [homeless people] up is the right thing to do,” he said. “What we need is a multi-agency approach, and that means putting money behind an effort to get people off the streets and dealing with the issues.”

Prince Harry a breath of fresh air? No, a chip off the old block | Catherine Bennett

Da Costa said homelessness had become “more visible and more persistent” in the town centre over the past year, but said he had not encountered harassment. “I’ve been delighted by the response of hundreds of people in Windsor, who have provided food and blankets, who care about these people and want decent solutions,” he said. Windsor was “a beautiful place, but there is poverty here, areas of deprivation. We are one people and we need to work together.”

Sam White, 18, who has lived in Windsor all his life, said he got to know most of the homeless people in the town centre over the past six months since starting work in the box office of the Theatre Royal. “There are quite a few now. If you walk down the High Street, you might see six or seven, but there are obviously more hidden away,” he said.

“They don’t cause a threat to anyone. I’ve never seen any of them being aggressive. Obviously some have issues like drug addiction, but they’re nice people at the absolutely lowest point in their lives.”

White, who doesn’t give money but buys food and essentials for homeless people, said some did not receive help from the authorities. Some, but not all, asked passing members of the public for cash donations, he said, “but they’ve got nothing”.

He objected to the idea of a police drive to clear people out for the royal wedding, saying: “I’m sure if the council offered homeless people food and shelter for the day, they would agree to take themselves off the streets.”

A great time for all  the homeless to descend down/up/over on this location..

[bovril]

8 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

Did nobody else have a say in it?

Webbo's to blame for everything. Brexit, inequality, Leicester City never winning the FA Cup...

[Nick]

https://metro.co.uk/video/blair-think-possible-brexit-doesnt-happen-1601188/?ito=vjs-link

 

 

[Alf Bentley]

18 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

https://metro.co.uk/video/blair-think-possible-brexit-doesnt-happen-1601188/?ito=vjs-link

 

 

 

Anything is still possible, but Blair seems to inhabit a Remain-supporting bubble. For Remain to come into play, there have to be significant developments - much clearer economic damage, a much bigger switch in public opinion and the political will in parliament.

 

The comments by Adonis were more perceptive. He foresaw Labour moving "crab-like" towards support for a second referendum on the negotiated terms for Brexit. 

I can see that happening as it becomes clearer that the EU isn't going to offer us a close and generous trading relationship AND the freedom to do our own thing on deregulation, external trade deals etc.

I think Corbyn (or, more likely, Starmer) is judging the political strategy of this better than Blair.

 

What I'm unclear about is which way the Tory Party will jump - or whether it will implode in civil war. I'm expecting the EU to effectively give us an ultimatum: EITHER (a) much greater freedom to deregulate and to do our own deals but a costly, massively disruptive arms-length relationship with the EU, OR (b) a reasonably generous trade deal and close relationship but limited power to do our own thing. If I'm right about that, will the Tory Remainers be prepared to stand firm and demand (b) or demand a referendum on the negotiated terms, even if the Govt makes it a confidence vote? Alternatively, will the Brexiteer wing be prepared to oppose the Govt if the UK capitulates and accepts something close to (b)?

 

A lot will presumably depend on the public reaction to the outcome of negotiations. All sides (Govt, opposition, Brexiteers, Remainers) will be carefully judging the numbers in terms of public opinion and of parliamentary numbers.

 

Politically, another fudge/impasse might suit the Govt: a deal on a 2-year transition period, another 2 years to negotiate over final terms and trade deal & to maintain Tory party unity.

But politically that doesn't suit the EU, does it? It's in their interests to avoid a fudge, surely? They'll want the UK to choose (a) or (b), won't they? And they'll be in a position to insist that the UK decides, surely?

There's also the matter of whether continued uncertainty suits the UK economically. If another 2 years of uncertainty is on the cards, will firms tolerate that and wait (a recipe for stagnation) or will they vote with their feet?

 

We could be heading for a massive political crisis later this year - maybe even a split in the Tory party. Alternatively, some of Gove's comments (as the Brexiteer with a brain) make me wonder if he's playing a longer game.

Does he see himself persuading the Brexiteer wing to accept a Soft Brexit deal (option (b)) to avoid the risk of a reversion to Remain, then becoming actual or de facto Tory leader and chiseling away at the deal over coming years to make it more "Hard Brexit"?

 

Interesting times ahead - and all the more reason why @Carl the Llama is right to say that we shouldn't close this thread - we should just learn to avoid petty partisanship and disrespect.

[Nick]

2 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Anything is still possible, but Blair seems to inhabit a Remain-supporting bubble. For Remain to come into play, there have to be significant developments - much clearer economic damage, a much bigger switch in public opinion and the political will in parliament.

 

The comments by Adonis were more perceptive. He foresaw Labour moving "crab-like" towards support for a second referendum on the negotiated terms for Brexit. 

I can see that happening as it becomes clearer that the EU isn't going to offer us a close and generous trading relationship AND the freedom to do our own thing on deregulation, external trade deals etc.

I think Corbyn (or, more likely, Starmer) is judging the political strategy of this better than Blair.

 

What I'm unclear about is which way the Tory Party will jump - or whether it will implode in civil war. I'm expecting the EU to effectively give us an ultimatum: EITHER (a) much greater freedom to deregulate and to do our own deals but a costly, massively disruptive arms-length relationship with the EU, OR (b) a reasonably generous trade deal and close relationship but limited power to do our own thing. If I'm right about that, will the Tory Remainers be prepared to stand firm and demand (b) or demand a referendum on the negotiated terms, even if the Govt makes it a confidence vote? Alternatively, will the Brexiteer wing be prepared to oppose the Govt if the UK capitulates and accepts something close to (b)?

 

A lot will presumably depend on the public reaction to the outcome of negotiations. All sides (Govt, opposition, Brexiteers, Remainers) will be carefully judging the numbers in terms of public opinion and of parliamentary numbers.

 

Politically, another fudge/impasse might suit the Govt: a deal on a 2-year transition period, another 2 years to negotiate over final terms and trade deal & to maintain Tory party unity.

But politically that doesn't suit the EU, does it? It's in their interests to avoid a fudge, surely? They'll want the UK to choose (a) or (b), won't they? And they'll be in a position to insist that the UK decides, surely?

There's also the matter of whether continued uncertainty suits the UK economically. If another 2 years of uncertainty is on the cards, will firms tolerate that and wait (a recipe for stagnation) or will they vote with their feet?

 

We could be heading for a massive political crisis later this year - maybe even a split in the Tory party. Alternatively, some of Gove's comments (as the Brexiteer with a brain) make me wonder if he's playing a longer game.

Does he see himself persuading the Brexiteer wing to accept a Soft Brexit deal (option (b)) to avoid the risk of a reversion to Remain, then becoming actual or de facto Tory leader and chiseling away at the deal over coming years to make it more "Hard Brexit"?

 

Interesting times ahead - and all the more reason why @Carl the Llama is right to say that we shouldn't close this thread - we should just learn to avoid petty partisanship and disrespect.

Great post.

 

I personally harbour similar suspicions regarding Gove’s ambitions but I feel his PM intentions may not be realised as he in my assessment has made too many enemies in his own party, centrists and the wider public service industry during spells in senior government roles.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Anything is still possible, but Blair seems to inhabit a Remain-supporting bubble. For Remain to come into play, there have to be significant developments - much clearer economic damage, a much bigger switch in public opinion and the political will in parliament.

 

The comments by Adonis were more perceptive. He foresaw Labour moving "crab-like" towards support for a second referendum on the negotiated terms for Brexit. 

I can see that happening as it becomes clearer that the EU isn't going to offer us a close and generous trading relationship AND the freedom to do our own thing on deregulation, external trade deals etc.

I think Corbyn (or, more likely, Starmer) is judging the political strategy of this better than Blair.

 

What I'm unclear about is which way the Tory Party will jump - or whether it will implode in civil war. I'm expecting the EU to effectively give us an ultimatum: EITHER (a) much greater freedom to deregulate and to do our own deals but a costly, massively disruptive arms-length relationship with the EU, OR (b) a reasonably generous trade deal and close relationship but limited power to do our own thing. If I'm right about that, will the Tory Remainers be prepared to stand firm and demand (b) or demand a referendum on the negotiated terms, even if the Govt makes it a confidence vote? Alternatively, will the Brexiteer wing be prepared to oppose the Govt if the UK capitulates and accepts something close to (b)?

 

A lot will presumably depend on the public reaction to the outcome of negotiations. All sides (Govt, opposition, Brexiteers, Remainers) will be carefully judging the numbers in terms of public opinion and of parliamentary numbers.

 

Politically, another fudge/impasse might suit the Govt: a deal on a 2-year transition period, another 2 years to negotiate over final terms and trade deal & to maintain Tory party unity.

But politically that doesn't suit the EU, does it? It's in their interests to avoid a fudge, surely? They'll want the UK to choose (a) or (b), won't they? And they'll be in a position to insist that the UK decides, surely?

There's also the matter of whether continued uncertainty suits the UK economically. If another 2 years of uncertainty is on the cards, will firms tolerate that and wait (a recipe for stagnation) or will they vote with their feet?

 

We could be heading for a massive political crisis later this year - maybe even a split in the Tory party. Alternatively, some of Gove's comments (as the Brexiteer with a brain) make me wonder if he's playing a longer game.

Does he see himself persuading the Brexiteer wing to accept a Soft Brexit deal (option (b)) to avoid the risk of a reversion to Remain, then becoming actual or de facto Tory leader and chiseling away at the deal over coming years to make it more "Hard Brexit"?

 

Interesting times ahead - and all the more reason why @Carl the Llama is right to say that we shouldn't close this thread - we should just learn to avoid petty partisanship and disrespect.

Good post. 

 

With labour I can absolutely see them going for a second referendum if public opinion moves. But you'd probably need to see a 60/40 split before they did so. I think they're just waiting and watching the numbers. If they don't move nor does their position. Just sensible strategy really.

 

 

[Guest]

'Fat Cat Thursday': top bosses earn workers' annual salary by lunchtime

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/04/fat-cat-thursday-top-bosses-earn-workers-annual-salary-by-lunchtime?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

[Guest]

Tory members 'a breed apart' from other main parties, study finds

Poll shows Conservative grassroots more supportive of the death penalty, obedience to authority and a hard Brexit

 

Delegates listen to Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May as she addresses the Conservative Party conference in Manchester.Photograph: Hannah Mckay/Reuters

Peter Walker Political correspondent

Published:00:01 GMT+00:00 Thu 4 January 2018

 Follow Peter Walker

 

Conservative members are “a breed apart” from members of the other main political parties, with much stronger tendencies towards socially illiberal and authoritarian attitudes and completely different views on Brexit, a study has found.

The biggest ever polling of party members’ opinions shows that Tories are half as likely to support gay marriage as members of Labour, the Lib Dems or the SNP and significantly more supportive of the death penalty, obedience to authority and censorship of the media “to uphold moral standards”.

The findings by academics at Queen Mary University of London could spell trouble for the chances of a more socially liberal candidate such as Ruth Davidson succeeding Theresa May as Tory leader, given that the final choice is made in a vote of party members.

AdvertisementHide

 

The study also shows that almost five years after David Cameron sought to move the party towards a more socially inclusive position by pushing through the gay marriage law, Tory members – 44% of whom are 65 or older – remain resistant.

The polling on social issues offers something of a clue as to why Jacob Rees-Mogg, the avowedly traditionalist backbencher who opposes gay marriage and abortion, has topped several polls of members by ConservativeHome on who should be the next Tory leader.

The study found that 41% of Conservatives backed gay marriage, compared to more than 80% of members of the other three parties. More than half of Tory members back the death penalty, 84% believe schools “should teach children to obey authority” and 44% support the censorship of films and magazines – significantly more than any other parties, although SNP members tended to be less liberal than their peers in Labour and the Lib Dems.

A team led by Tim Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary, began tracking the opinions of party members after the 2015 election. The latest figures come from polling of more than 1,000 members of each of the four parties following last June’s election.

The study found that the various party members’ opinions on leaving the EU were more divergent still, with only Conservatives supporting a harder Brexit. Around a quarter of Conservative members support the UK remaining in the EU’s single market or customs, while just 14% back a referendum on a final deal.

In contrast, there is overwhelming backing for these options among members of the other parties, even Labour, which under Jeremy Corbyn is occupying the middle ground over Brexit. Among Labour members, 87% want the UK to remain in the single market, 85% in the customs union, and 78% support a new referendum.

Similarly, on the economy there is what the authors describe as “a gulf between the Tory grassroots and the rest”: just 11% of Conservative members agree that austerity has been taken too far, against 98% for Labour, 93% in the SNP and 75% among Lib Dems.

Such divides can also be seen on issues such as income redistribution and the idea that working class people do not receive a fair share of the nation’s wealth.

Bale said party members were the footsoldiers of British democracy, but “that doesn’t necessarily mean they look like or think like their parties’ voters – or, indeed, look or think like each other”. 

He said: “The Tory grassroots in particular are something of a breed apart from their Labour, Lib Dem and SNP counterparts.”

These differences have sometimes been put down to a much older Conservative membership, and the party does have notably more members aged 65 or older than the other three parties. Nonetheless, the average age for members was remarkably similar, at 57 for Tories, 53 for Labour, 52 for the Lib Dems and 54 in the SNP.

The study found that while Labour had a higher proportion of members aged 25-44 than the Tories, it had a particular “bulge” of people aged from the mid-50s to early 60s, a phenomenon the authors suggest could be caused by older supporters who left during the Blair years returning under Jeremy Corbyn.

All four parties are overwhelmingly white and middle class in membership, with the Lib Dems having the highest proportion from the ABC1 social group, at 88%, against the Conservatives’ 86%.

The Tories are notably more imbalanced on gender, with 71% of the membership male, against 53% for Labour, 63% for the Lib Dems and 57% for the SNP.

[Buce]

2 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Tory members 'a breed apart' from other main parties, study finds

Poll shows Conservative grassroots more supportive of the death penalty, obedience to authority and a hard Brexit

 

Delegates listen to Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May as she addresses the Conservative Party conference in Manchester.Photograph: Hannah Mckay/Reuters

Peter Walker Political correspondent

Published:00:01 GMT+00:00 Thu 4 January 2018

 Follow Peter Walker

 

Conservative members are “a breed apart” from members of the other main political parties, with much stronger tendencies towards socially illiberal and authoritarian attitudes and completely different views on Brexit, a study has found.

The biggest ever polling of party members’ opinions shows that Tories are half as likely to support gay marriage as members of Labour, the Lib Dems or the SNP and significantly more supportive of the death penalty, obedience to authority and censorship of the media “to uphold moral standards”.

The findings by academics at Queen Mary University of London could spell trouble for the chances of a more socially liberal candidate such as Ruth Davidson succeeding Theresa May as Tory leader, given that the final choice is made in a vote of party members.

AdvertisementHide

 

The study also shows that almost five years after David Cameron sought to move the party towards a more socially inclusive position by pushing through the gay marriage law, Tory members – 44% of whom are 65 or older – remain resistant.

The polling on social issues offers something of a clue as to why Jacob Rees-Mogg, the avowedly traditionalist backbencher who opposes gay marriage and abortion, has topped several polls of members by ConservativeHome on who should be the next Tory leader.

The study found that 41% of Conservatives backed gay marriage, compared to more than 80% of members of the other three parties. More than half of Tory members back the death penalty, 84% believe schools “should teach children to obey authority” and 44% support the censorship of films and magazines – significantly more than any other parties, although SNP members tended to be less liberal than their peers in Labour and the Lib Dems.

A team led by Tim Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary, began tracking the opinions of party members after the 2015 election. The latest figures come from polling of more than 1,000 members of each of the four parties following last June’s election.

The study found that the various party members’ opinions on leaving the EU were more divergent still, with only Conservatives supporting a harder Brexit. Around a quarter of Conservative members support the UK remaining in the EU’s single market or customs, while just 14% back a referendum on a final deal.

In contrast, there is overwhelming backing for these options among members of the other parties, even Labour, which under Jeremy Corbyn is occupying the middle ground over Brexit. Among Labour members, 87% want the UK to remain in the single market, 85% in the customs union, and 78% support a new referendum.

Similarly, on the economy there is what the authors describe as “a gulf between the Tory grassroots and the rest”: just 11% of Conservative members agree that austerity has been taken too far, against 98% for Labour, 93% in the SNP and 75% among Lib Dems.

Such divides can also be seen on issues such as income redistribution and the idea that working class people do not receive a fair share of the nation’s wealth.

Bale said party members were the footsoldiers of British democracy, but “that doesn’t necessarily mean they look like or think like their parties’ voters – or, indeed, look or think like each other”. 

He said: “The Tory grassroots in particular are something of a breed apart from their Labour, Lib Dem and SNP counterparts.”

These differences have sometimes been put down to a much older Conservative membership, and the party does have notably more members aged 65 or older than the other three parties. Nonetheless, the average age for members was remarkably similar, at 57 for Tories, 53 for Labour, 52 for the Lib Dems and 54 in the SNP.

The study found that while Labour had a higher proportion of members aged 25-44 than the Tories, it had a particular “bulge” of people aged from the mid-50s to early 60s, a phenomenon the authors suggest could be caused by older supporters who left during the Blair years returning under Jeremy Corbyn.

All four parties are overwhelmingly white and middle class in membership, with the Lib Dems having the highest proportion from the ABC1 social group, at 88%, against the Conservatives’ 86%.

The Tories are notably more imbalanced on gender, with 71% of the membership male, against 53% for Labour, 63% for the Lib Dems and 57% for the SNP.

 

In other news, the Pope has confirmed he is a Catholic.

[Alf Bentley]

12 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

I personally harbour similar suspicions regarding Gove’s ambitions but I feel his PM intentions may not be realised as he in my assessment has made too many enemies in his own party, centrists and the wider public service industry during spells in senior government roles.

 

Gove also faces the "Robin Cook problem" - Cook famously commented that he could never be Labour leader as he was too ugly!

Might seem trivial, but probably does matter in this era of media image.

 

Gove certainly seems keen to make a splash as Environment Secretary, suggesting he harbours personal ambitions - though those ambitions might be unrealistic, as you say.

 

I was interested in his comments after May agreed Phase I of the Brexit negotiations. He seemed to suggest that Hard Brexit supporters might support a Soft Brexit deal - and then win support at the ballot box for policies to make Brexit harder in future.

I assume that May is still likely to go before the next election, so maybe Gove sees himself stepping into her leopard-print shoes (what an image!). Combining a pragmatic approach to Brexit with a few high-profile/progressive environmental policies could be a route to achieving that.

 

He may also have the sense to realise that the EU isn't going to allow us wide freedom to deregulate and do our own trade deals AND still get a nice EU-UK trade deal. Most of the other prominent Brexiteers still seem to assume that "have cake and eat it" is possible. Maybe Gove has calculated that, if/when we're given an ultimatum, it will be tactically wiser for the Hard Brexit crew to get out of the EU on Soft Brexit terms and then work to achieve greater "freedom" / deregulation over the coming years. Otherwise, from their perspective, there's a serious risk that the public could get alarmed at the likely impact and switch to Remain, leading to a second referendum - or the Tory Remainers could bring down the Govt and let Corbyn in? 

 

The Tory schism is surely likely to get worse in 2018, as negotiations reach a critical stage - and there seems to be a vacancy for leader of the Tory Brexit wing (possibly even for Tory leader within 1-2 years). Boris is no longer in the ascendant, Davis seems to lack the ambition/ability, Fox and Leadsom are surely sub-standard, and it sounds as if Grayling will be sacked. Hannan is the only other Brexiteer who comes across to me as a potential leader, and he's not in parliament.

 

This forthcoming cabinet reshuffle - and the reaction to it - will be interesting. Will May dare to move Boris and, if so, will he still have sufficient influence to kick up a fuss? 

[Webbo]

Members of different parties have different opinions its hardly a surprise. I'd guess that most labour members think that anyone who earns more than them is undeserving, any paper that doesn't support their opinion should be banned, anyone who voted for brexit is a racist. You can pick and choose which questions to ask to get the headline you want.

 

BTW I reckon traditional labour voters rather than member are more likely to support the death penalty.

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, toddybad said:

With labour I can absolutely see them going for a second referendum if public opinion moves. But you'd probably need to see a 60/40 split before they did so. I think they're just waiting and watching the numbers. If they don't move nor does their position. Just sensible strategy really.

 

 

 

I agree. Labour are actually in quite a cosy position on Brexit - provided that the Tory govt doesn't collapse in the next 9 months, triggering another election, power handover or referendum. That would be awkward!

 

Assuming the Tories remain in power, Labour can push the line of "Brexit for jobs, trade and rights" (Soft Brexit in practice) unless and until public opinion shifts and/or an unpopular final deal is negotiated.

They then have the flexibility to shift to calling for a second referendum. Because of the existential nature of their schism, the Tories don't have that flexilbility (except maybe Gove's long game, accepting a Soft Brexit deal in the short-term and seeking to erode it in future?).

[Nick]

6 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Members of different parties have different opinions its hardly a surprise. I'd guess that most labour members think that anyone who earns more than them is undeserving, any paper that doesn't support their opinion should be banned, anyone who voted for brexit is a racist. You can pick and choose which questions to ask to get the headline you want.

 

BTW I reckon traditional labour voters rather than member are more likely to support the death penalty.

Your 3 guesses would in my view all be wrong - although there may be something in your last comment.

[Buce]

5 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Members of different parties have different opinions its hardly a surprise. I'd guess that most labour members think that anyone who earns more than them is undeserving, any paper that doesn't support their opinion should be banned, anyone who voted for brexit is a racist. You can pick and choose which questions to ask to get the headline you want.

 

BTW I reckon traditional labour voters rather than member are more likely to support the death penalty.

 

I think you are probably right.

 

I also think that's why we'll never get a referendum on it, because the politicians fear the public making the 'wrong' decision, like they did with Brexit.