• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

UK PoliGaf: The Sun's headline today

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mr. Sam said:
The Independent tells me both Labour and the Tories are planning to cut off the Beeb? What in the blue fuck? What, just so they can suck Rupert Murdoch's dick some more?
I know some people love a good conspiracy story involving Murdoch, but actually it is not just Murdoch, who's influence in British media is assured anyway, both ITV and Channel 4 have also strongly criticised BBC's monopoly. I don't really understand why people are making a big fuss about leveling the playing field so that other channels can compete effectively against the BBC. At the moment, the BBC has a massive advantage by being funded by the TV licence and facing favourable OFCOM rules allowing the BBC have a finger in every pie.

Cerebral Assassin said:
Thatchers policies caused the recession in the 90's(a real recession), and GDP is fairly meaningless to tell the health of a country(also most of the credit for the rise in GDP is/was down to Brown he is the Chancellor with the most periods of continuous growth in the last 100 years). I agree the country needed reform at the end of the 70's but it didn't need its heart ripped out(which is New Labours greatest failing, they did little to repair the social damage she caused)
The ends justifies the means.

Diablos said:
So Cameron has no specific policies he'd like to promote? Only that he's not Gordon Brown?

http://www.conservatives.com/Policy.aspx
 
Diablos said:
What are his top priorities though? Obama always talked about fixing health care, putting an end to "politics as usual", ending the war, etc.
Well a couple of days ago he published his 10-point plan for power in, incidentally, the sun newspaper.

CAMERON'S 10-POINT PLAN

1. Freeze council tax for two years, saving typical families £200;

2. Re-assess 2.6m people on Incapacity Benefit in a welfare clampdown;

3. Replace Human Rights Act with a Bill of Rights:

4. Reduce number of MPs by 10 per cent, ministers pay by 5 per cent, cut quangos;

5. Honour the Military Covenant and ensure troops are properly equipped;

6. Cut corporation tax to create jobs, reform inheritance tax to encourage saving, reward marriage and families via tax and benefits;

7. Sort out national debt and public spending;

8. Give head teachers the final say on exclusions to restore discipline in schools;

9. Suspend ratification of the Lisbon Treaty if it is not in force and hold a referendum;

10. Double magistrates' sentencing powers from six months to a year, harsher penalties for knife crime, cut police paperwork so more are on the beat.
Unfortunately I can't find the original source so I am forced to quote the Daily Hate in this instance. Sorry!
 
blazinglord said:
I know some people love a good conspiracy story involving Murdoch, but actually it is not just Murdoch, who's influence in British media is assured anyway, both ITV and Channel 4 have also strongly criticised BBC's monopoly. I don't really understand why people are making a big fuss about leveling the playing field so that other channels can compete effectively against the BBC. At the moment, the BBC has a massive advantage by being funded by the TV licence and facing favourable OFCOM rules allowing the BBC have a finger in every pie.

It's a big fuss because Channel 4 and ITV are in the shit totally of their own making. They are asking the government to gut the greatest broadcaster in the world just because they overspent on stealing the rights to every sport the BBC had and put all their eggs in the reality TV basket and now that the money has dried up, they can't line their pockets as they'd like to.
 
Diablos said:
What's wrong with your human rights act?
Some people feel that the European Human Rights act gives more rights to offenders than to the victims. It's debatable, but in recent years there have been high profile cases where immigrants who have broken the law in this country cannot be deported back to their country of origin due to it allegedly being a breach of their 'human right'. Also the act strengthens Britain's already stringent libel laws, as in the case where Max Moseley won damages from the News of the World newspaper for breaching his 'human right' to privacy.

I'm sort of on the fence personally and would want to see the new bill of rights before passing a judgment. However, the new bill of rights would not be a guaranteed safeguard as parliament would not legally be able to bind its successors to it and therefore it could be repealed at a future date leaving us with no rights at all.

Burai said:
It's a big fuss because Channel 4 and ITV are in the shit totally of their own making. They are asking the government to gut the greatest broadcaster in the world just because they overspent on stealing the rights to every sport the BBC had and put all their eggs in the reality TV basket and now that the money has dried up, they can't line their pockets as they'd like to.
That still doesn't make it healthy for one organisation to have a monopoly. The Ofcom rules should at least be reformed so that other organisations, such as Sky, can compete in the same capacity. I think already we have seen evidence of complacency in BBC's output, which is what a lack of competition creates.

I still don't get the hate towards Sky, they have revolutionised television programming. As have Channel 4, which for the record, I think should have some of the licence fee cash.
 
Glad the plucky Irish ratified Lisbon. Now the Czech Twat has not got a leg to stand on and both the Polish and Czech's will approve. This will hopefully have Lisbon fully implemented before this country fails next May.

The nightmare scenario is the Czech prime minister holding out on bullshit reasons till Cameron gets into power and totally destroys Lisbon.

Not going to happen anymore. Progress.

Now the reason the EU was set-up was NOT economic co-operation. If you believe that you have a fundamental misunderstanding. The Treaty of Rome was signed under the pretence of economic co-operation but the underlying rationale by the original signatories was to stop the 1000 years of war amongst the nations of Europe.

The EU is 100% political. The end game is a Federal Europe because small states will not be able to survive.

The UK was dragged kicking and screaming into it, sold on it as a Economic union. Our politicians knew it wasn't just that. They had foresight. I applaud Ted Heath for what he did.
 
Diablos said:
So Cameron has no specific policies he'd like to promote? Only that he's not Gordon Brown?

He has specific policies, sure, but at the end of the day most people will vote for them simply because they aren't Labour.
 
Are those really his 10 priorities? Very vague, and i'm sure after 2 years he'll give the council tax a nice hike up. I'm leaning very far towards Labour at the moment.
 
I love to criticise the Tories to shit, but you guys have to remember that the ten point thing was written for the readers of The Sun.
 
1. Freeze council tax for two years, saving typical families £200;
Cool. Has this been costed?

2. Re-assess 2.6m people on Incapacity Benefit in a welfare clampdown;
If it was that easy surely it would have been done already.

3. Replace Human Rights Act with a Bill of Rights:
So either we lose rights, or there's no fucking point in changing that?

4. Reduce number of MPs by 10 per cent, ministers pay by 5 per cent, cut quangos;
I'm ambivalent here. Quangos can serve a purpose, and they can be pointless... but something tells me Tory party will still find a way to reward their chums out of the public purse.

5. Honour the Military Covenant and ensure troops are properly equipped;
Right. So you'll raise defence spending?

6. Cut corporation tax to create jobs, reform inheritance tax to encourage saving, reward marriage and families via tax and benefits;
Ahh, so big business gets a tax cut and the toffs don't have to pay so much tax on the million pound house grandmother leaves them. And what's this? A socially conservative push to reward marriage at the expense of those of us who opt out of it?

7. Sort out national debt and public spending;
Fuck me, why didn't I think of that?

8. Give head teachers the final say on exclusions to restore discipline in schools;
Cool, mix this rise in bored, stupid and most likely aggressive young kids with point ten and you've got a plan.

9. Suspend ratification of the Lisbon Treaty if it is not in force and hold a referendum;
I remember when the Tories were pro-Europe...

10. Double magistrates' sentencing powers from six months to a year, harsher penalties for knife crime, cut police paperwork so more are on the beat.
What paperwork? What are you going to do when criminals get off on technicalities because that paperwork wasn't done? How are you going to pay for these prison places?



So we've got a tonne of things listed there that either cut the revenue coming in or put new burden on the coffers... and the Tories say they're going sort out of debt and public spending? So we can pretty much assume that everthing above is bullshit, or we've got some major cuts to education and the NHS to [if worse comes to worse and they get elected] look forward to.
 
Sir Fragula said:
So we've got a tonne of things listed there that either cut the revenue coming in or put new burden on the coffers... and the Tories say they're going sort out of debt and public spending? So we can pretty much assume that everthing above is bullshit, or we've got some major cuts to education and the NHS to [if worse comes to worse and they get elected] look forward to.
They stated that they're going to increase public spending and decrease/hold back revenues in the same plan they go on about sorting public debt out. So like you said, this plan is either a load of bullshit lies, or they plan to make serious cut backs on the NHS and education.

I'm all for cuts in any department, so long as they're efficiency cuts. In good times and in bad times, efficiency should be up there with service quality, to free public money for better uses, or to lower taxes, or in this case, to lower public debt, which I think should be lowered to below 10% over the next 2 or 3 decades (would have been by sooner if it's wasn't for the current economy).
 
Completely random anecdote:

My Dad had a beer with the Shadow Foreign Minister William Hague. Apparently he was a really nice guy and was very polite and talkative.

Still voting Lib Dem. :)
 
Oh also, do you think that I should make a general UK poligaf thread with all of the main parties main policies and key politicians so that we don't have to keep posting off-topic stuff in this thread.
 
Meadows said:
Oh also, do you think that I should make a general UK poligaf thread with all of the main parties main policies and key politicians so that we don't have to keep posting off-topic stuff in this thread.
Yes.
 
Glad my fellow countrymen approved of the lisbon treaty.
So who do we think will win these us style debates in the next election.
 
operon said:
Glad my fellow countrymen approved of the lisbon treaty.
So who do we think will win these us style debates in the next election.

Clegg but nobody will notice it and declare Cameron the winner. Getting to work on that PoliGAF thread.
 
meadow is a illegal immigrant, job taking, benefit gaining, team rocket pokemon taking, black muslin - can we really trust him with our UK politics thread???
 
Meadows said:
Clegg but nobody will notice it and declare Cameron the winner. Getting to work on that PoliGAF thread.
I don't think listing policies alone will cut it. Like, for instance, with Labour, if the policy has been given before, but has been broken, it needs to mentioned that it's likely to be a phantom policy, unless it's reasonable for it to have taken so long or delay so long.

Also, pointing out any contradiction in policies too, like the contradictions in the Tories policies, or what can be extrapolated from said policies. Either, Tories have phantom policies, or they have a policy to make even larger cuts than necessary in public spending to reduce our deficit, because of tax reductions and freezes.

Not sure about anything to do with Lib Dems that needs to be more transparent than just a declared policy list.
Chinner said:
meadow is a illegal immigrant, job taking, benefit gaining, team rocket pokemon taking, black muslin - can we really trust him with our UK politics thread???
No, but we have no guns, so we can't do anything about it.
 
Chinner said:
meadow is a illegal immigrant, job taking, benefit gaining, team rocket pokemon taking, black muslin - can we really trust him with our UK politics thread???

Haha, I'll let you take care of the thread actually, I'm not great at thread creation
or posting
, so I'll leave it to someone more experienced.
 
nah dude you had dibs on it. tbh i was gonna wait untill way closer to the election anyway

i posted this awihle ago but anyone who is thinking about voting for lib dems should check out this hefty pamphlet released just before their conference. link
should be included in hte eventual uk poligaf as well
 
Yeah, I'll leave it to someone else, but it should probably wait until there is something newsworthy to base the thread off.
 
Meadows said:
What a load of bollocks....really!? Fucking hell mate, that's shite. Fuck it, we're re-invading Wales. Come on lads.

I've spent plenty of holidays down there to realise that the welsh are getting more and more hateful and spiteful every day. Which is funny because it's english money paying for all those fucking signs to be reprinted in welsh.
 
fizzelopeguss said:
I've spent plenty of holidays down there to realise that the welsh are getting more and more hateful and spiteful every day. Which is funny because it's english money paying for all those fucking signs to be reprinted in welsh.



They want total independance, which i think is fair in all honesty but they dont want it at the expense of westminster cash. Ho hum.
 
This Welshman says fuck you all.

Incidentally, those interested in Murdoch and politics—indeed, in newspapers and politics in general—should read Nicholas Coleridge's 'Paper Tigers', a set of biographical studies and interviews of the major proprietors: Murdoch, Maxwell, Black, Thomas, the Sulzbergers.
 
Meadows said:
Completely random anecdote:

My Dad had a beer with the Shadow Foreign Minister William Hague. Apparently he was a really nice guy and was very polite and talkative.

Still voting Lib Dem. :)

Just one of them, or fourteen?
 
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6860233.ece
DAVID CAMERON is to unveil a plan to get Britain back to work by forcing millions of welfare claimants into training.

The assault on the dependency culture is similar to programmes in America. Private firms that prepare people for employment and place them in jobs would be paid by results.

Most people who have been unemployed for more than six months, including the disabled and single mothers, would be required to join the new privatised schemes or see their payments cut.

The so-called Work Programme, to be unveiled at the party’s conference in Manchester tomorrow, coincides with the revelation that Iain Duncan Smith, the former party leader, would be Cameron’s adviser on “broken Britain” if the Tories win the election.

Duncan Smith, who is regarded as the Tories’ boldest thinker on social justice, would chair a cabinet committee in a future Conservative government looking at ways of improving the plight of the poorest Britons, The Sunday Times has learnt. It is not clear whether he would become a cabinet minister or be given a senior role outside the cabinet.

The moves by Cameron are designed to counter the Labour charge that the Conservatives would repeat the errors of the 1980s recession and leave the unemployed on the scrap heap. The detailed preparations would enable the Tories to avoid the paralysis that dogged Labour’s efforts at welfare reform when it was elected in 1997.

The welfare plan is the brainchild of Lord Freud, the former Labour adviser who defected to the Tories earlier this year. It would abolish the Labour government’s New Deal programme designed to get the long-term unemployed into work. It would also effectively mean the end of Jobcentre Plus, where bureaucrats design training programmes for the unemployed.
fucking tories
3025cwi.jpg
 
I love how the Tories plan to cut inheritance tax is classed as "done to encourage saving", when really its there so all the public schoolboy toff Tories get a bigger cut of mommy and daddies savings when they kick the bucket.
 
yeah welps all 2 million + people are unemployed because they're lazy, nothing to do with the fact that theres a recession or anything
hvv0hu.jpg


new labour has already done something like this, and all it resorts to is either temporarily shoving people into whatever job comes so that they claim or the money, or cherry picking the best and parking the rest to get the most profit. lets also ignore the issue of geographically placement. this is just a step to ditching the public side and turning everything to the private market.

then again, FREE MARKET EFFICIENCY will save us all!
 
blazinglord said:
That still doesn't make it healthy for one organisation to have a monopoly. The Ofcom rules should at least be reformed so that other organisations, such as Sky, can compete in the same capacity. I think already we have seen evidence of complacency in BBC's output, which is what a lack of competition creates.

I still don't get the hate towards Sky, they have revolutionised television programming. As have Channel 4, which for the record, I think should have some of the licence fee cash.

In what way does the BBC have a monopoly? They aren't the only broadcaster in town. If they do have any advantage it is, like I say, because the commercial broadcasters spent unwisely during the boom times and stagnated. Every time people ask for sympathy for ITV, I think about how much money they wasted on Friends Reunited, how they nearly bankrupted themselves with ITV Digital, how they spent far too much money on sports that nobody wanted to watch, how they spent far too much money on sports that people did want to watch, like Premier League football highlights, FA Cup football and motor racing and ran them into the ground so badly that the BBC practically got them back for free. How they spent massive amounts of money securing the "talents" of the likes of ex-Eastenders and Casualty "stars" to put into their once-great dramas.

You're asking for a public service to be neutered to allow commercial entities, that exist solely to line their own pockets to thrive, even though all of their problems are self-inflicted. Bring ITV up to the BBCs level, by all means, but please don't drag the BBC down just so the commercial broadcasters can compete. They don't deserve it.

And how in the name of shitting crikey have Sky revolutionised broadcasting? By getting people to pay £600 a year for 800 channels of shitty imports, music videos, phone-in competitions, infomercials and repeats of 80s and 90s shows sourced from the BBC, ITV and C4? Fantastic.
 
Diablos said:
What's wrong with your human rights act?

Prisoners can sue for compensation for having to spend time alone in their cells....... One got in one case £10000 compensation for having to clean his own shit bucket out. Bare in mind the fucker was a convicted murderer....
 
kitch9 said:
Prisoners can sue for compensation for having to spend time alone in their cells....... One got in one case £10000 compensation for having to clean his own shit bucket out. Bare in mind the fucker was a convicted murderer....
Link?
 
Chinner said:
yeah welps all 2 million + people are unemployed because they're lazy, nothing to do with the fact that theres a recession or anything
hvv0hu.jpg


new labour has already done something like this, and all it resorts to is either temporarily shoving people into whatever job comes so that they claim or the money, or cherry picking the best and parking the rest to get the most profit. lets also ignore the issue of geographically placement. this is just a step to ditching the public side and turning everything to the private market.

then again, FREE MARKET EFFICIENCY will save us all!

Not all, but a fucking lot want nothing more than to spawn more little workshy shits, whilst using the fact that they have 3-4 kids to sponge more of the state.....

Some of the council estates I work on are the fucking pits.....
 
God all of my UK news feeds are just gobbing Cameron shit everywhere. Such empty vapid policies being gobbed out by the Torys in the meantime, with things like "If everyone hasnt agreed to this thing we'll ask if we should but if everyone has its not an issue because this fence I am sitting on is really comfortable" and their brilliant "Get People Back to Work Through Training" is actually something that currently fucking exists (A4e up north, similar schemes down south) and it doesn't fucking work becuase it treats the unemployed like theyre on community service and criminals.

Arggggh, I can see it all going to shit before my eyes. Fucccckkk.
 
kitch9 said:
Strange, the top two do for me.....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4253661.stm

It was the BBC one that was playing up.
Something's cocked up with the Times one; it works 50% of the time, but otherwise returns a 404...

Still, while those sound somewhat absurd on first reading they're mostly based on legitimate concerns. From the Time article;

Payments included £72,000 to prisoners who had slipped, tripped or fallen; £3,000 to inmates who had a sports injury; £113,000 to those assaulted by staff; £76,000 to those unlawfully detained and £215,000 in medical negligence claims.
The only payment amount there that I'd question is the Sports Injury line, and even then I don't know the circumstances. Absolutely prisons should be safe; absolutely we should not allow staff to assault prisoners.

The £2.1 million for the guy who tried to kill himself? I don't know anything about that case as it was settled out of court. I imagine it's not a simple black and white matter though.

The slopping out stuff was tackled by the SNP and tories [at the time] as being a case of the prisons not changing procedure fast enough to avoid legitimate litigation, not that of claiming an abuse of HRA provisions.
 
Sir Fragula said:
Something's cocked up with the Times one; it works 50% of the time, but otherwise returns a 404...

Still, while those sound somewhat absurd on first reading they're mostly based on legitimate concerns. From the Time article;


The only payment amount there that I'd question is the Sports Injury line, and even then I don't know the circumstances. Absolutely prisons should be safe; absolutely we should not allow staff to assault prisoners.

The £2.1 million for the guy who tried to kill himself? I don't know anything about that case as it was settled out of court. I imagine it's not a simple black and white matter though.

The slopping out stuff was tackled by the SNP and tories [at the time] as being a case of the prisons not changing procedure fast enough to avoid legitimate litigation, not that of claiming an abuse of HRA provisions.

I agree about staff attacking inmates, as that would be a basic human right. They deserve to be fed, have relatively sanitary living quarters, and access to medical care. That should be about it.

Paying them money for falling over, or trying to top themselves should not be allowed to happen, its as simple as that.

Prison should be feared, at the minute crims try to get in there as they are better looked after than on the outside...... Its nuts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom