http://aviewfromhamcommon.blogspot.co.uk...l.html?m=1

Old hat now, but still quite funny.

(27 May 2014, 10:26 pm)AdamY wrote Like Andreos, my parents allowed my brother and I to choose our own political and religious allegiances. My father, who comes from a middle-class background, is a Conservative while my mother, who comes from a working-class background, identifies herself as a Socialist. Despite their respective political dispositions, I don't recall any arguments or discussion about politics during my childhood. However, I was aware of the Miners Strike, Trade Unions and, of course, Picket Lines so I can only presume that this must have been talked about at some point. Religion never came up at all as we never to church as a family and neither my brother or myself are Christened or Baptised.

Aside from my mother and father, family members from both sides have been political participants in some way. My father's uncle (my Grandma's brother) has had an article written about him in the journal of the North East Labour History Society which can be accessed through the following link if you fancy a read: http://nelh.net/who-was-who/lionel-anwell/

Someone on my mothers side chained himself to the doors of Blaydon Council Offices during the Great Strike of 1926. Also, one of my cousins (on my dad's side) is the partner (not sure if they're married) of the UK head of a very well-known international lobby group. He has appeared on Newsnight on numerous occasions and apparently receives Christmas Cards from David Cameron. Although I've haven't met him, I get the impression that my mam and dad weren't impressed by him.

When it came to religion, it was never in our house, I have been christened as a baby and always identified as being CofE, but did not start regularly attending church till October last year, a pentecostal church in Sunderland

So voters across Europe have all submitted their ballot papers and we have decided on next EU Commission President!

(27 Jun 2014, 3:25 pm)Andreos Constantopolous wrote So voters across Europe have all submitted their ballot papers and we have decided on next EU Commission President!

Is it still looking lightly that Juncky dude or whatever his name is will win the ballot

(27 Jun 2014, 3:34 pm)marxistafozzski wrote Is it still looking lightly that Juncky dude or whatever his name is will win the ballot

Looks like a done deal.

Shows the EU to be the shambolic dictatorship it really is.

(27 Jun 2014, 3:41 pm)Andreos Constantopolous wrote Looks like a done deal.

Shows the EU to be the shambolic dictatorship it really is.

Do you think that alone will be the deciding factor for the in/out referendum to become a very real prospect should Dave get elected next

(27 Jun 2014, 3:45 pm)marxistafozzski wrote Do you think that alone will be the deciding factor for the in/out referendum to become a very real prospect should Dave get elected next

He was doing a live press conference on BBC just now and he seems to be using that as part of his rhetoric.

(27 Jun 2014, 4:06 pm)Andreos Constantopolous wrote He was doing a live press conference on BBC just now and he seems to be using that as part of his rhetoric.

What I find most amusing is the Juncky and The Tories where in the same alliance in the EU till recently...

I wonder if it will put the skids on big Nige at next year's General Election if Dave Gives an absolute cast iron guarantee for A referendum, not that I expected UKIP to cause a political earthquake mind

Love how one German paper describes Dave Cameron...

The Wayne Rooney of EU Politics

Some other commentator on the BBC described him as being like a footballer who dived in the area, got a penalty, missed and went to bite the keeper

I never realised his name was David Cameron Suarez

(27 Jun 2014, 9:12 pm)marxistafozzski wrote Love how one German paper describes Dave Cameron...

The Wayne Rooney of EU Politics

Some other commentator on the BBC described him as being like a footballer who dived in the area, got a penalty, missed and went to bite the keeper

I never realised his name was David Cameron Suarez

Haha - the two have a lot in common!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9Jckm3X5MXo

Although rambling, there are a lot of personal attacks on IDS and at times, Glenda hit the nail on the head with the work programme.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politi...me-3768403

An interesting read, although I don't think I'll ever understand Sir Brian's stance.

A major donor to the left wing SNP, who are in favour of mass renationalisation. Both the Railways and Royal Mail for a start. That doesn't half conflict with Sir Brian's views in Tyne and Wear...

Must be something in the air north of the border.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/pau...ng-4141637

Paul Heaton and his take on the miners strike of 84.

Lets talk politics here...

So now commentators are saying the Westminster System does not work, I wont dispute that, as I have said I am not well into Politics.

What is the solution, I am thinking of the West Lothian Question, there is talk of home rule or devolution for England, Aurelion has already explained in another thread why that is not so good.

Can we go down the Spanish Route, Automomous Communities with Self Governement or the American way, split England up into States with Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland run there own affairs with Westminster being the federal seat for the United States of Britain...

Chip in your political opinion, just dont start a war, lol...You may even learn me something

What is the real reason for Salmond stepping down as First Minster after Scotland voted No to independence?:

Is it really because he feels like he has had his finest hour and feels it is time for him to leave or is it just pure humiliation after his massive build-up to the referendum has gone up in smoke?
If the vote did go his way, would he have resigned? 

That is the big question that is coming into my mind at the moment. And i could have a simple answer for it (and the 2 sub-questions) and im sure its simple, he wants sympathy about not getting what he wanted and he knows that everybody will start to hate him. Feel free to disagree or agree with that but thats what i think.

Isn't there already a politics thread?

Anyway - I am all for the regions having a voice, particularly the NE (although biased), does seem to be 'left alone' under tory rule.
It happened under the last tory government and the current one too (no idea about previous ones prior to Thatcher).
When Labour got in last, it seemed the majority of the cabinet was from up here.
I was hoping for a massive swing in government spending, but it never really happened.
Guessing the change to New Labour and the constant appeasing of middle England saw the end to that - after all, why look after a guaranteed vote, when you can concentrate on fostering new links with new voters.

When Prescott put the idea forward in the past of a regional Government (was it him with elected mayors too), I was in two minds.
If it brought a greater voice and prosperity to the region - excellent.
If it created another layer of governmental talking shops - then it would never work.
There were powers devolved in Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast, but apart from creating another layer of politics, I am not sure anything has been achieved.

Something needs to be done and a radical shake up needs to take place within the political spectrum of the UK.
The Scottish vote has stirred something and whilst Cameron may have been blasé about it initially - hopefully it has given him an almighty kick up the backside!

(20 Sep 2014, 11:15 am)Robert wrote What is the real reason for Salmond stepping down as First Minster after Scotland voted No to independence?:

Is it really because he feels like he has had his finest hour and feels it is time for him to leave or is it just pure humiliation after his massive build-up to the referendum has gone up in smoke?
If the vote did go his way, would he have resigned? 

That is the big question that is coming into my mind at the moment. And i could have a simple answer for it (and the 2 sub-questions) and im sure its simple, he wants sympathy about not getting what he wanted and he knows that everybody will start to hate him. Feel free to disagree or agree with that but thats what i think.

It's not uncommon for leaders to do so. Kinnock in 1992, Major in 1997, Hague in 2001, Howard in 2005, Brown in 2010.

(20 Sep 2014, 11:30 am)Andreos1 wrote Isn't there already a politics thread?

Anyway - I am all for the regions having a voice, particularly the NE (although biased), does seem to be 'left alone' under tory rule.
It happened under the last tory government and the current one too (no idea about previous ones prior to Thatcher).
When Labour got in last, it seemed the majority of the cabinet was from up here.
I was hoping for a massive swing in government spending, but it never really happened.
Guessing the change to New Labour and the constant appeasing of middle England saw the end to that - after all, why look after a guaranteed vote, when you can concentrate on fostering new links with new voters.

When Prescott put the idea forward in the past of a regional Government (was it him with elected mayors too), I was in two minds.
If it brought a greater voice and prosperity to the region - excellent.
If it created another layer of governmental talking shops - then it would never work.
There were powers devolved in Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast, but apart from creating another layer of politics, I am not sure anything has been achieved.

Something needs to be done and a radical shake up needs to take place within the political spectrum of the UK.
The Scottish vote has stirred something and whilst Cameron may have been blasé about it initially - hopefully it has given him an almighty kick up the backside!

With the NE, we had the opportunity to go the devolution route I'm 2004, but it was overwhelming rejected. Many thinking, as you say, it'd be another talking shop. In essence we've now got this through the back door anyway, in the form of the undemocratic combined authority.

I'm not against a combined authority in principal, but it needs to be a democratic body, that we elect members to.

How would the assembly of 2004 have worked? I wanted something like Holyrood but was told it would have been nothing like that

(20 Sep 2014, 11:30 am)Andreos1 wrote Isn't there already a politics thread?

There is:
http://northeastbuses.co.uk/forum/showth...p?tid=1001

(20 Sep 2014, 12:30 pm)aureolin wrote It's not uncommon for leaders to do so. Kinnock in 1992, Major in 1997, Hague in 2001, Howard in 2005, Brown in 2010.

Im not saying its not uncommon... Im simply asking the question which is if Scotland had voted Yes, would he have stepped down?

(20 Sep 2014, 4:48 pm)Robert wrote Im not saying its not uncommon... Im simply asking the question which is if Scotland had voted Yes, would he have stepped down?

I doubt it. At least not until the separation had fully completed, which would have been about 4-5 years iirc?

Both threads now merged by the way.

(20 Sep 2014, 4:48 pm)Robert wrote Im not saying its not uncommon... Im simply asking the question which is if Scotland had voted Yes, would he have stepped down?

Maybe he wouldn't then again, he may have done...maybe he got out before he was pushed out...He can still be proud of his campaign, he did a good job and has essentially got something he wanted included on the ballot sheet when the Edinburgh Agreement was signed, providing Westminster stay true there promise, they should get devo-max or close to it

(20 Sep 2014, 5:19 pm)aureolin wrote I doubt it. At least not until the separation had fully completed, which would have been about 4-5 years iirc?

Both threads now merged by the way.

Though I remember reading somewhere Independence Day would have been 2016 on the anniversary of Bannockburn

(20 Sep 2014, 7:11 pm)marxistafozzski wrote Maybe he wouldn't then again, he may have done...maybe he got out before he was pushed out...He can still be proud of his campaign, he did a good job and has essentially got something he wanted included on the ballot sheet when the Edinburgh Agreement was signed, providing Westminster stay true there promise, they should get devo-max or close to it
Though I remember reading somewhere Independence Day would have been 2016 on the anniversary of Bannockburn

He can be proud of everything he has achieved politically imo. He wasn't my cup of tea, but no one can argue with his record.

Maybe we can get Tommy Sheridan back into the Scottish Parliament instead.

(20 Sep 2014, 7:32 pm)aureolin wrote He can be proud of everything he has achieved politically imo. He wasn't my cup of tea, but no one can argue with his record.

Maybe we can get Tommy Sheridan back into the Scottish Parliament instead.

I dont think much of Salmond to be honest, but do have respect for him, he is the only Scot in modern history who nearly got independence, and a few people had campaigning went on a while and if Gordon Brown hadn't weighed in, Yes may have won. By all accounts Brown gave the speech of his political life earlier in the week.

One thing I do know, the next 6-12 months are going to be interesting for UK politics

(20 Sep 2014, 8:11 pm)marxistafozzski wrote I dont think much of Salmond to be honest, but do have respect for him, he is the only Scot in modern history who nearly got independence, and a few people had campaigning went on a while and if Gordon Brown hadn't weighed in, Yes may have won. By all accounts Brown gave the speech of his political life earlier in the week.

One thing I do know,  the next 6-12 months are going to be interesting for UK politics

Gordon Brown has wow'd me with his coming into the referendum debate. I've been a Labour supporter all my life, and a member for much of it too, but there were points in the last two years of his tenure, that I wanted Brown gone at all costs. Brown has shown this past fortnight what we really miss in the Labour party nowadays. A great public speaker, with enough passion to win people over. Blair was another one that was great at that, despite all his faults.

So do you think Mr Salmond could have had a better night had Gordon Brown not stepped in, it sounds like he saved better together. From what I read in papers and on the news a lot of people have said Salmond in mass-debating(sorry, my warped mind coming out)...

It is probably a bit of a lie to suggest one mans intervention swung it, but I bet it is not far from being true

(20 Sep 2014, 8:38 pm)marxistafozzski wrote So do you think Mr Salmond could have had a better night had Gordon Brown not stepped in, it sounds like he saved better together. From what I read in papers and on the news a lot of people have said Salmond in mass-debating(sorry, my warped mind coming out)...

It is probably a bit of a lie to suggest one mans intervention swung it, but I bet it is not far from being true

I wouldn't say he saved better together, as Alistair Darling is another strong personality. But I think Brown was a wildcard that was played at just the right time. 

(20 Sep 2014, 8:43 pm)aureolin wrote I wouldn't say he saved better together, as Alistair Darling is another strong personality. But I think Brown was a wildcard that was played at just the right time. 

Now theres a man I aint keen on, I am not keen on those whose eybrows are not the same colour as there hair

I think your right though, Better Together played there wildcard at the most crucial moment and it worked

You can tell Ed Miliband's desperate when he reels out the old 'We'll increase the NMW to £8 p/h if we get elected' line.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/...-labour-uk

As much as I'd like to see it happen; it won't - irrespective of whether Labour get in or not.