POLITICS CORNER

[Tardis]

But it's probably a Blue Party leaflet in Coates Ward that's put the cat amongst the pigeons this weekend. The Conservatives have been portraying their candidate as a home loving lad, with headlines like "Barnoldswick The Place I Love To Call Home". The BP flyer quotes a social network post from the candidate saying, "i live in barlick and its f**kin well sh*t".

I wonder how the Ashcroft paid professionals running the campaign in the Tory party will react to that.

Ha!

[Stanley]

Is that meant to be a rebuttal of the allegation that the Noble Lord secretly finances the Pendle CP? If so it's not very clear..... Some clarity needed, especially in an election week. We know how David produces his leaflets... old fashioned breeches arse steam.
See this Guardian REPORT on slavery. It's estimated that $150billion per annum is made globally from forced unpaid labour. Far higher than anyone thought it was and another sign of growing global inequality.

[Stanley]

I got the 'I Love Barlick' leaflet yesterday. I think the electors need a bit more information than that.... By the way, anyone reading the leaflet could be forgiven for thinking that Mike is an active councillor... Really?
See this REPORT for news about Lloyd's Bank imposing stricter conditions on mortgages. All this looks like wriggling to postpone the inevitable to me. The market solution to this problem of under-supply in the market is to raise prices which is what they are doing. The bank's response if they want to assure themselves that people can pay is to raise the bar on qualification for a mortgage and put their repayment rates up. None of this accords with Tory policy and it looks like an attempt to kick the inevitable collapse further down the road, perhaps beyond the next election?
See this REPORT for the latest on the polls and the Euro election. It's all a bit of a pantomime with Farage being the Teflon Kid, Milliband making a Horlicks of his supermarket prices and even steel bands refusing to play for a UKIP rally. All good entertainment but what's really going on? I'm too old a dog to make any forecasts but let's put it this way, a purge is often good for the moral of the troops and whatever the size of the UKIP vote, it will certainly affect the other parties and the Tories could be the big losers. Friday for local results and Sunday for EU results will be interesting and that in itself is a bit of an achievement!

[Tardis]

Is that meant to be a rebuttal of the allegation that the Noble Lord secretly finances the Pendle CP? If so it's not very clear..... Some clarity needed, especially in an election week. We know how David produces his leaflets... old fashioned breeches arse steam.

Not at all.

My comments are already on twitter and facebook. I don't do politics on here as I've always said

I shall pop over with the relevant paperwork

[Tardis]

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/ne ... ?ref=var_0

Shopped by their UKIP father?

[PanBiker]

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/ne ... ?ref=var_0

Shopped by their UKIP father?

So, you don't do politics?

[plaques]

My comments are already on twitter and facebook. I don't do politics on here as I've always said

I thought the all point have having a politics corner was to give people the opportunity to make their point. Without listening to differing opinions the debate becomes totally out of balance and loses its value. I don't think its necessary to quote Voltaire so if you would be kind enough to broaden the debate by adding your points of view I'm sure most of us would be happy to listen.
Being an old stick-in-the-mud I would never dream of reading twitter or facebook than I would reading comments on the toilet wall. Sad I know but there you are!

[Stanley]

I agree with P. Sounds like a cop out to me, Face book and Twitter don't count in my book, no apologies for that... As for 'popping over with the relevant paper work' don't bother, I'd rather not waste my time. You are wrong when you say you don't 'do politics on here'. Your posts are all politically slanted but you never engage with counter arguments, not surprising because anybody supporting the Tories is on very dodgy ground when it comes to any rational debate on past performance. Their present incumbency of government will be seen as a bigger national disaster than the Thatcher Era, austerity is the mistake the Tories made in the inter-war period and they are repeating all the mistakes now, you and they should read the history and do a complete reassessment of policies. But it won't happen and in the end their refusal to ditch their 19th century mentality will ensure oblivion. I shan't live to see it but there are going to be a lot of shocks and changes in the next twenty years and in the end, hopefully, the needs of the common people will prevail as they did from 1945 to 1980 and some of the ground lost will be regained. That's the pattern of history and I expect it to happen again, if I didn't, life would be very bleak! In the mean time, your party is ensuring the comfort and support of the wealthy and condemning the lower 90 percentile of the electors to falling incomes and increasing misery. Read Stiglitz and Piketty, clear your mind and recognise the force of simple political economics.
07:15. I've voted and pointed out to the staff that people were wandering round the front yard looking for the entrance, the first sign was inside the yard at the rear. I don't think they appreciated my input.... Told me the sign was out there. Ah well.....

[Tardis]

Yes, I do my local politics on Twitter & Facebook, they may not count to you, you have made that choice.

I will always point to hypocrisy and anyone who devalues the democratic principles

Surely, refusing to read the evidence is akin to saying "I'm always right and have nothing left to learn". Here's the mud and my stick is firmly planted in it. To constantly learn is to refresh your opinions and to come at things with an open mind ensures that things are best likely to be sorted out. If you have an agenda, then eventually your compromises will really question your ethics. See the latest quagmire of the EU and it's self enforced austerity and further creep into negative growth.

Debate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate

[Bruff]

''I will always point to hypocrisy''

Hmmm. With the proviso I imagine that the rightness or otherwise of a position is not invalidated by the inconsistency, or hypocrisy, of the person making it. Or the old tu quoque fallacy, better known nowadays as 'whataboutery' or as I once pretentiously argued, 'being demanding of an ultimately futile unilateral abdication as gesture' or something like that (I was probably about 6 pints the poorer at time). So, that Margaret Hodge castigates Amazon for their tax practices does not damage the rightness or otherwise of the basic premise, given there are mutterings about her tax arrangements.

Richard Broughton

[Thomo]

To some of we who are possibly regarded as academically challenged but have a basic understanding of how things work, it needs to be remembered that we still have our opinions and concerns. At times this can make a balanced and practical response to such matters as politics just a little difficult. For example, todays elections in our area. All of the local contenders have made their case, and if we disregard the fringe elements, who whilst being a bit more outlandish, still have ambitions reflected in the beliefs of many of our countrymen, but are not going to make a suitable impact, we are left with the three main contenders. The major concern with one of these, appears to be the impact here of what happens in Nelson, this I understand as Nelson has developed its own character. A vote in this direction may be valuable, but would be one less for those people here who work hard for this town in general and deserve support. A vote for the other contender is out of the question as it would bolster the ambitions of the Nelson regime.

[Stanley]

"Surely, refusing to read the evidence is akin to saying "I'm always right and have nothing left to learn"."
Quite, and that's why I take the trouble to read it. I reserve the right to choose who I trust and I'm afraid that party political writing isn't good evidence in my book as it is biased. I read historians who give references to hard evidence, that's why Piketty and writers like him get my vote. My problem is that if Tory 'evidence' is right the respected people I read and their allies are all wrong. Somehow I can't believe that. This, and my own experience is the base on which I stand and form opinion. I can do no other. If you want to impress me with counter argument do so from the basis of solid academic works properly supported by evidence. The bald fact is that too many people are prejudiced and refuse to look at the evidence. In the end this is laziness and fear of having their mistaken convictions challenged. They are the people who are saying "I'm always right and have nothing left to learn"
Richard, the thing that strikes me about the complaints that large corporations are using exotic methods to reduce their tax liability is the fact that the government made the rules which enable this to be done perfectly legally. Hence the statement 'we pay all taxes due under the regime in which we operate'. Perfectly true and legal, the problem is the regime, not the corporation. The question then arises why advantageous 'arrangements' are allowed, see Piketty for his explanation about tax avoidance....
Thomo, I agree. It's why I don't attempt to make a judgement about the MEP I should vote for beyond following party lines, I do not know enough about the EU to make a decision and I have to say that nobody has taken the trouble to help me. In local politics I do not vote on party lines, simply for the person I believe is most active in the town's interests, that's why although naturally a Labour man I voted for the Liberal, David Whipp. In a general election I would vote on the same principle and all I can say is that on present performance it wouldn't be for the Conservative.

[Thomo]

And that is just what I will be doing!

[Stanley]

Thomo, it's all we can do if we have insufficient information, better than wasting a vote.
News about the polls starts to trickle in. Too early for any definitive results but in the local elections it looks as though UKIP have taken seats off both Tories and Labour. The initial picture is that UKIP have done well, the Tories have lost out and Labour is treading water. Unfortunately it looks as though the Liberals are getting the dirty end of the stick and appear to have continued their long slide into oblivion. The overall picture at the moment is that UKIP will be the ones who will be crowing, the Tories will be most worried about UKIP while trying to put a brave face on it and Labour will concentrate on getting attention for the seats they have won. Jacob Rees Mogg is already advocating a pact with UKIP. Whichever way you cut it, UKIP have shaken the established parties up....
06:10. Latest results with only a third of results in show that UKIP has gained about 80 council seats, as well as even the most optimistic predicted, with more to come. Amazing.....

[Bruff]

But it seems that UKIP will not gain control of a Council. From which, two things occur.

First, it is a shame as the easy thing in politics is to sit around and snipe knowing that you'll never have to get into the messy business of making decisions. It would be very useful to see how UKIP would approach running a council which in large measure is about consensus building, explaining, negotiating, and balancing and managing expectations. How they would go about this I don't know, but in an off-the-cuff remark during his Today interview the other day Mr Farage noted that 'you don't get anywhere in Brussels without going in and wielding a big stick'. I actually don't think that's at all true (based on experience), but as a one with the 1950s-England (largely) view he seems to adopt - that is, the notion we can go around telling Jonny Foreigner what to do, helped along with a swift knock on the head with a Colonial-era knobkerri if they don't 'buck up'. This is so ludicrous a notion in the 21st Century as to be risible.

The second and rather more serious point is this. I would be amazed if at the general Election next year UKIP get the percentage vote they have in these elections. However, I do expect them to get well over 10%. I would expect the LDs to get over 10%. Which in effect means that if we have moved to a 4-party system (Lab/Con/UKIP/LD), it looks like 30% Lab, 30% Con and 30% UKIP/LD together. Which in our current First Past the Post system means that Lab could secure a majority in Parliament on a little over 30% of the vote (almost certainly, this level of support would never deliver a majority to the Conservatives), or given turnout trends, somewhat less than a quarter of eligible voters. Which I think is absolute madness and a democratic scandal. And it is no secret I am of the left.

Richard Broughton

[PanBiker]

Just had a look on the Pendle Council website for the results for Craven, Coates and Earby. There are no numbers yet but the site indicates:

Craven: Mike Thompson (Conservative Party) - Elected

Coates: Keiron Hartley (The Blue Party) - Elected

Earby: David Byrne (Labour Party) - Elected

I want to see the numbers.

[Bruff]

Who are The Blue Party?

Richard Broughton

[PanBiker]

Well, there's the thing Richard, one of the candidates formerly stood for the BNP and to all intents and purposes the "policies" are about the same.

[PanBiker]

EDL candidate has been elected in Brierfield

[Big Kev]

Just had a look on the Pendle Council website for the results for Craven, Coates and Earby. There are no numbers yet but the site indicates:

Craven: Mike Thompson (Conservative Party) - Elected

Coates: Keiron Hartley (The Blue Party) - Elected

Earby: David Byrne (Labour Party) - Elected

I want to see the numbers.

I believe the Pendle Council website is incorrect, unofficial word is David Whipp held onto Craven and Lyle Davy got Coates.

[PanBiker]

That's why I said I wanted to see the numbers. The Pendle site definitely had that information at 9.00 this morning, by which time the results should have been available providing the count was after the polls closed as it used to be when I was involved, understandable if they counted this morning. If that was the case there should not have been any elected candidates shown.

The actual result is a bit more like what would be expected with Labour not fielding credible candidates in Barlick or running an effective campaign.

[Stanley]

Here's the result as posted this morning. Blue 24, Labour 140, UKIP 261, Tory 352, David Whipp, Liberal, 761. That sounds more like the result I expected. Interesting that if UKIP and BLUE had voted Tory, David would still have won so let's not have any griping about the vote being split.
As for the spurious report about Mike Thompson, how could that happen when it must have been obvious at the count he was nowhere near even before the result was announced. Questions need to be asked....
Watched part of the coverage on BBC2. That bloke Dimbleby doesn't chair discussion he bullies informants as though he was elected and knew better than they do. They were all talking about the prospect of re-election (their own jobs) not policies, principles or ethics.
Here are two links to pieces in the New York Times, one about Europe and one about perceptions of WW1. Both short, accurate and worth a look.
Paul Krugman on Europe LINK
Perceptions of WW1 LINK

[David Whipp]

First off, thanks for the messages of support from various folk.

I did retain my Craven Ward seat with the numbers Stanley reports; in Coates Ward, my colleague Lindsay lost out to the Conservatives by just 49 votes. So, mixed fortunes for my lot.

The count started at 9.30am yesterday and it was a couple of hours before counting was completed in the first wards. These results weren't announced as the count went on, as the regional returning officer had decreed that no results should be declared until the verification for the European elections had been completed for each district.

We left at 1.30pm when there were still a couple of wards to be counted. I don't know when they actually got to announce the results.

Looks like the Pendle website was a complete cock-up!

[Stanley]

"Looks like the Pendle website was a complete cock-up!"
Agreed, but someone posted that lie. Question is who, why and how.
As for your colleague losing at Coates, no surprise, you know as well as I do that your Party is under the cosh at the moment for a variety of reasons. Like Labour they have weak leadership and a lack of the principled ethical outlook that served them so well in the glory days. It's as well to remember that the Liberals started to lose their grip long ago when they watered down their radical attitudes and started to play the Westminster game. There's a lesson there for both the LibDems and Labour. I really do believe that the electors are looking for a radical re-assessment of political policies. The Tories are locked into the 19th century and both the other parties aren't doing enough to differentiate themselves. Look at UKIP, with all their faults and no matter how flawed their policies, they have dared to be different. There is a lesson there.....

[PanBiker]

I agree entirely with your last post Stanley. I would add that one thing I picked up on during the day as the results were being released and discussed. No-one seemed to comment on the fact that apart from UKIP, Labour was the only party to make any gains, quite a lot in fact. The only thing that was played on was the negative side in that they had not done as well as expected and what that might mean for next years General Election.

Locally the result was more in keeping with the norm for our wards. David's vote is fairly solid and Coates swings depending on which party can get the electorate out. It was always the same through the 80's and 90's when I was involved when we had a fully functional and active local branch of the Labour Party which fielded credible candidates and put in the work to get them elected.

That of course all went to the bad when we managed to get Tony Blair elected who then set about disassociating the party from it's socialist heritage and at the same time alienating a lot of the grass roots activists that effectively made the party work. I still regard myself as a socialist and as such no longer have any party that supports the same views. I tend to vote tactically now, mainly in an attempt to keep out the worst of the far right and fascist elements. In the local elections I vote for whoever does the work. I live in Craven Ward so that is a no brainier.