DEM not gonna CON dis NATION: Rolling UK politics in the short-lived Cleggeron era

I reckon the government may be forced to backtrack on NHS reform as well, if only to scale down some of its plans. The same happened with Gove and schools. The same with child benefit. They're not thinking things through properly and the voters will start to see a pattern imagining. Most of this is probably down to inexperience.

― Matt DC, Monday, February 21, 2011 9:46 AM (32 minutes ago) Bookmark

well, there is the small matter of their election pledge not to fuck with the nhs so

Has there been a single major British privatisation that hasn't been a disaster? Electricity's been okay, I suppose. No one really objects to BT but they still dominate the fixed-line landscape and it's hardly led to genuine competition. Everything else = steel, coal, railways, gas, kinda lol but mostly sad.

well, there is the small matter of their election pledge not to fuck with the nhs so

Wonder if they can blame that one on being part of a coalition? Probably unlikely.

I imagine that most of this, if it goes through, will be irreversible, bar the occasional forced Network Rail moment. Labour won't have the appetite to do anything about it. In opposition they should just repeat the word "privatisation" as much as possible, it has such negative connotations in this country, which is why NuLab never used it if they could possibly avoid it.

What a bunch of fucking cunts.

"Instead of having to justify why it makes sense to introduce competition in individual public services – as we are now doing with schools and in the NHS – the state will have to justify why it should ever operate a monopoly."

They think 'social' is an invalid construct arising out of the reality of 'economic', that's all kinds of brainwrong. And these privatisations are in political terms near enough irreversible, which is utterly depressing. Not a single lesson learned.

Now what lesson is this? I'm sure all of Camewrong's friends made lashings of cash through privatisation.

Now what lesson is this? I'm sure all of Camewrong's friends made lashings of cash through privatisation.

― anna sui generis (suzy), Monday, 21 February 2011 10:43 (3 minutes ago)

Well, yeah. The general 'false economy' thing, esp in the case of rail privatisation.

http://davidcameronpretendingtobecommon.tumblr.com/

"I was in Egypt recently and a 82-year-old Muslim man, who said, 'I was appointed when I was 53, I was re-elected by referendum for 30 years, I'm incredibly proud of my country.'"

He was in a 82yr old Muslim man?

Blimey, he's in Egypt NOW.

Remember, this government is not about PR and spin.

"I was in Egypt recently and a 82-year-old Muslim man, who said, 'I was appointed when I was 53, I was re-elected by referendum for 30 years, I'm incredibly proud of my country.'"

― James Mitchell, Monday, 21 February 2011 11:31 (23 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

And your point is...?

Blimey, he's in Egypt NOW.

― Matt DC, Monday, 21 February 2011 11:40 (15 minutes ago) Bookmark

@paulwaugh PM's spokeswmn ducks point made at Lobby that PM's MEast trip orginally designed to sell arms is turning into "democracy tour"

seamless!

And your point is...?

It'll make a nice anecdote for the party conference.

one of the daily mail's readers OTM for a change:

Marvellous - look how well the energy companies serve the public with efficient support services and low costs; look how well rail privatisation has served the public with cheap fares, safe infrastructure, and clear accountability; look how well private health insurance covers non-profitable services like A&E and emergency cardiac care; look how well rural communities are served by private bus companies who want to slash services even further. These reforms will allow financially aggressive large companies to cherry-pick the profitable sectors; they will reduce accountability; and they won't function in true markets (when were we ever able to choose a state school for our children, or have free healthcare choice - the infrastructure to make this possible doesn't exist, and won't under these reforms). This is driven by ideology and the commercial interests of the Tories backers, and we will pay for their profits.

He was in a 82yr old Muslim man?

Could this be the gaffe that brings down the government?

Was he hanging out the mubarek of him?

coincidentally well-timed find on the topic of privatisation

In 2007, the National Audit Office conducted an inquiry into the privatisation of Qinetiq to determine whether UK taxpayers got good value for money from the sale. The NAO inquiry looked at the following issues:
choice of privatisation strategy;
management of the process (the split of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency into two, the sale to Carlyle and the flotation);
costs incurred and the proceeds achieved; and,
whether the deal met its objectives.[24]
In November 2007, the NAO reported that taxpayers could have gained "tens of millions" more and was critical of the incentive scheme given to Qinetiq managers, the 10 most senior of whom gained £107.5m on a total investment of £540,000 in the company's shares. The return of 19,990% on their investment was described as "excessive" by the NAO. The role of Qinetiq's management in negotiating terms with the Carlyle Group, while the private equity company was bidding for the business, was also criticised by the NAO. Carlyle bought a third of the business for £42m which grew in value to £372m in less than four years.[25] However, the Ministry of Defence defended the sale:
"It has delivered excellent value for money, generating more than £800m for the taxpayer, while protecting UK defence and security interests," said Baroness Taylor, Minister for Defence Equipment and Support.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qinetiqhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qinetiq

aaargh fix link pls kind mods

Delingpole, one of the few writers in the mainstream media to talk any sense about climate change, was featured in a recent telly documentary which extracted an unflattering segment from a three-hour interview in order to ridicule him. He then suffered an colossal barrage of abuse from, as he would put it, Warmist eco-loons who seized the opportunity to clobber him around the head on a public platform. (Judging by their tweets, many of them would like to have done it in real life, too.)

But why are bullying and death threats now considered a socially acceptable way to express disagreement with someone in a public forum? And how come it always seems to be the Left doing the shouting?

Delingpole is pestilence

In fairness, "people are nasty twats on the internet" is both non-revelatory and true.

Sad Delingpole will never get over lack of admission to Bullingdon Club.

We need a Delingpole ridicule thread really. His music reviews alone are solid gold.

That Telegraph piece is amazing. Nothing like someone throwing their toys out of the pram to complain about people "throwing their toys out of the pram".

"At least with the "Have your say" section, the non-loony-left get a right to represent their fair-minded and rational views"

Moir wrote a piece that asked tough but pertinent questions about a gay culture that may have contributed to Stephen Gately's death...But why are bullying and death threats now considered a socially acceptable way to express disagreement with someone in a public forum?

I'm a right winger - in that I voted Tory and hold a majority of right wing views - but even I cracked a smile seeing you being made a fool of on the 10 o'clock show.

And yet here I see you brush off the criticism with a comment that implies you're not wrong at all - people just dislike you because of your political ideologies. You've managed to genuinely wind me up a bit with this attitude, and whereas before I cracked a smile, next time you make a tit of yourself I'll probably be laughing about it on Twitter. Which in turn will highlight your arrogance to others. And so the cycle of hate continues... IMO, completely of your own making.

So Milo, is it at all possible that people just don't particularly like you, regardless of their political persuasion? Have you even considered that? Maybe people just dislike your attitude, or think you write with the arrogance of someone that thinks they're better than most. Just a thought.

^^^ I like this dude.

Good of Milo to raise the tenor of internet discourse and show us the way forward

hideous mob mentality
Lefty bullies
the offence brigade
warmist eco-loons
The growing intolerance of any dissenting opinion - a hallmark of the Left
activist thugs
violent threats and smug jokes
this congealed clump of morons

Milo Yiannopoulos is to technology journalism what Delingpole is to climate research.

i'd like to clobber them both around the head with a stick

^ just kidding
(it wasn't in capital)

i was terribly confused by this bit though:

So while the spectacularly posh Tamsin Omond, against whom I had been pitted, may only have garnered 0.2 per cent of the vote when she stood as an independent candidate for Parliament, she definitely won the Twitter election.

surely this is still consistent with the election results (0.2% of vote vs 0% of vote?)??

Complaining about another commentator's poshness in the TELEGRAPH? No wonder you were confused.

I watched the discussion when it was on television. Tamsin Omond (who seems cool whatever her background) slaughtered him.

The problem with the Delingpole school of climate change scepticism is that "the evidence is inconclusive so I don't see why we should do anything about it" which is a lame argument even without the "and those who disagree are FASCISTS" addendum. If the evidence is inconclusive then there's a responsiblity to prepare for the worst.

I don't know what his posh point was. Posh people can't be left-wing? Twitter should treat all posh people equally regardless of their personality or politics? He's not as posh as he sounds but wishes he was and is bitter about it? I have no idea.

I went and watched the debate on 4OD after reading this and he comes across as a petty, vindictive cunt regardless of his politics. If he honestly believes he's being picked on for his views rather than his snide, aggressive manner then he's deluded. It's the Delingpole problem again: actual cunt or just pretending to be a cunt for pageviews and £££? Not that it makes any practical difference.

If the evidence is inconclusive then there's a responsiblity to prepare for the worst.

Really? Even if it means chewing up resources that could be better spent mitigating what we *know* about? Do you think we should have spent another few £billions on the Millennium Bug, just in case?

If the evidence is inconclusive there's a responsibility to keep gathering and analysing evidence and acting on what we find. If the balance of evidence suggests immediate action is necessary then by all means fuck the sceptics and get on with the job but "preparing for the worst" isn't scientific at all. Even the most ardent climate change (uh what's the opposite of sceptics?) activists disagree on what the worst actually is.

Environmental stewardship is a small-C conservative principle so I have no idea - besides what has to be a cynical connection to vested interests - how yr average Tory could argue against conservation and/or minimizing the impact of our energy needs on an already scarred planet. The reason the forest sale collapsed (and we really need a 'Curses! Foiled Again!' thread at this point) is because the trad Tory base still understands this.

Honestly, I think the 'that isn't conservatism' meme might work on whatever they manage to puke up and call policy next. Besides, if they dismantle the NHS in the way they'd like, we'll have the same problems as America - 65 million people with inadequate medical treatment options and no extra cash to put it right.

if they dismantle the NHS in the way they'd like, we'll have the same problems as America - 65 million people with inadequate medical treatment options and no extra cash to put it right.

Yeah but someone will be making money.

millennium bug barely analogous because it wasn't potentially being made worse all the while no?

xposts

If the evidence is inconclusive there's a responsibility to keep gathering and analysing evidence and acting on what we find. If the balance of evidence suggests immediate action is necessary then by all means fuck the sceptics and get on with the job but "preparing for the worst" isn't scientific at all. Even the most ardent climate change (uh what's the opposite of sceptics?) activists disagree on what the worst actually is.

Yeah I'd agree with this, but that isn't what the Delingpoles of this world are arguing.

Barely analogous, agreed - point is preparing for the worst = keep throwing scarce resources at something. In the case of climate change I think "the worst" is something close to "we're all fucked and it's too late" so I dunno how we prepare for that.

I'm all for working to reduce the effects of climate change and preparing for what might come, I just think it needs to be more balanced and nuanced than taking a worst case scenario and throwing money at it.

xpost well there was some pointless typing :)

iirc there are some things the deniers don't deny, like the badness of burning rainforests...?

I think "the worst" is something close to "we're all fucked and it's too late" so I dunno how we prepare for that.

a big party !

In the case of climate change I think "the worst" is something close to "we're all fucked and it's too late" so I dunno how we prepare for that.

privatise the climate?

Can I buy a nice warm bit?

They'll put a fence round the nice bits and you'll have to pay to use them

this already happens i think

Words fail me

So yeah, after years of 'IMMIGRANTS MUST LEARN ENGLISH' and just a couple of weeks after Cameron's "oh hey Muslims you must adapt to our way of life" they're cutting their English lessons. FFS.