Toriers & Lib Dems, deal by Monday morning?

[1%er]

You're getting confused between a lot of different things.

The budget deficit is the difference between what we spend and what we take in tax.

Balance of trade is the amount we sell to other countries compared to the amount we buy from them. If we buy more than we sell, there is a trade deficit.

Manufacturing jobs don't arise overnight. A weaker pound makes it economically viable to invest in more manufacturing industry in the UK because the goods we make become cheaper for other countries to buy,but that takes a while to actually happen. An increase in the value of the pound has a much quicker impact because they can just stop buying stuff as soon as it gets more expensive.

I am showing you how bad things are with 3 examples, worsted trade deficit in 17 months, the £ is at a 13-month low against the dollar and down against many of it major trading partners and also that the budget deficit is more than 11% of GDP.

On your 2nd point you seem to think the UK is a manufacturing economy, it isn't and the cost of labour will keep it that way, those days are gone

 

[ymu]

I am showing you how bad things are with 3 examples, worsted trade deficit in 17 months, the £ is at a 13-month low against the dollar and down against many of it major trading partners and also that the budget deficit is more than 11% of GDP.

On your 2nd point you see to think the UK is a manufacturing economy, it isn't and the cost of labor will keep it that way, those days are gone

And arguing that a stronger pound would help the trade deficit. Which is what makes me think you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[claphamboy]

Edit: so what did you mean about 'law in place'? As it stands, they can't offer to put the AV system into law.

Well, they are according to the BBC reports:

Labour are offering to put the AV system into law and then hold a referendum asking voters to approve it.

BBC source

 

[cesare]

Well, they are according to the BBC reports:



BBC source

I challenge you and the BBC to describe how Labour would put this 'into law' right now.

 

[1%er]

And arguing that a stronger pound would help the trade deficit. Which is what makes me think you have no idea what you're talking about.

No I'm not, I'm saying a low £ isn't good for the UK at the moment, the UK is no longer a manufacturing economy.

It is clear that it will help with the cost of exports, but that isn't the only thing in today's world, the price of everything we import that is praised in $ is more expensive as is everything else we buy from our major trading partner if the £ is down against their currency.

That is why importing so much more that exporting means it will cost the over all economy more. If the UK were a manufacturing economy I would agree with you

 

[belboid]

BBC source

The BBC understands, from Lib Dem sources, that the Labour offer is legislation to introduce AV, followed by a referendum on proportional representation.

as I said before.

Tho it does seem no one really has a fucking clue. You can't have a referendum and then the parliamentary debate on the same thing, parliament could jsut change it making the ref. totally irrelevant.

 

[cybertect]

I challenge you and the BBC to describe how Labour would put this 'into law' right now.

Do you mean would they have sufficient votes in the new Parliament to pass such legislation? Or are you merely saying they can't do it by executive order?

 

[belboid]

I challenge you and the BBC to describe how Labour would put this 'into law' right now.

They mean they'd get it passed in parliament before any other vote, fairly easy to do. The point being that if they do that immediately, even if the government falls the liberals would be slightly placated, and would pick up a couple of extra seats. Better than nowt

 

[Lo Siento.]

No I'm not, I'm saying a low £ isn't good for the UK at the moment, the UK is no longer a manufacturing economy.

It is clear that it will help with the cost of exports, but that isn't the only thing in today's world, the price of everything we import that is praised in $ is more expensive as is everything else we buy from our major trading partner if the £ is down against their currency.

That is why importing so much more that exporting means it will cost the over all economy more. If the UK were a manufacturing economy I would agree with you

Define "manufacturing economy", manufacturing still makes a substantial proportion of the UK economy (15% last I checked) and accounts for rather larger proportion of our balance of payments (incidentally, do economists still worry about BofP? It sounds like quite a 1950s thing to argue about...)

 

[cybertect]

as I said before.

Tho it does seem no one really has a fucking clue. You can't have a referendum and then the parliamentary debate on the same thing, parliament could jsut change it making the ref. totally irrelevant.

They did precisely that for Scottish devolution. The referendum came before the Act establishing it.

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/corporate/history/aDevolvedParliament/results.htm

The SCC report formed the basis of the devolution policy presented in the Labour Party manifesto for the May 1997 general election. The report was also supported by the Liberal Democrat Party. After election, the Labour government arranged for a referendum on its proposals, which were set out in a White Paper of July 1997, Scotland’s Parliament. Unlike 1979, this referendum was held before the relevant devolution Bill was introduced into Parliament, not after it had been enacted. This was to ensure that devolution was the expressed will of the people of Scotland and not simply a government policy. The referendum, held on 11 September 1997, produced clear majorities for the two propositions about the creation of a Scottish Parliament and its having certain tax-varying powers:

[emphasis added]

 

[ymu]

No I'm not, I'm saying a low £ isn't good for the UK at the moment, the UK is no longer a manufacturing economy.

It is clear that it will help with the cost of exports, but that isn't the only thing in today's world, the price of everything we import that is praised in $ is more expensive as is everything else we buy from our major trading partner if the £ is down against their currency.

That is why importing so much more that exporting means it will cost the over all economy more. If the UK were a manufacturing economy I would agree with you

How do you think we pay for cheap imports if we're not exporting anything?

 

[belboid]

'Unlike 1979' - so they can do it both ways.

Fair enough that the vote can come first, but tht seems pretty daft to me, but wtf.

 

[stupid kid]

The BBC quote makes it much clearer.

Labour, if they get the chance will bring AV. They will also hold a referendum on changing AV to PR.

 

[cesare]

They mean they'd get it passed in parliament before any other vote, fairly easy to do. The point being that if they do that immediately, even if the government falls the liberals would be slightly placated, and would pick up a couple of extra seats. Better than nowt

They haven't even drafted the legislation (with its disclaimer). The summer recess looms. Would anyone think that they could draft it, get it approved, consultation process and getting it through all these hoops of legislation passing before getting it 'in law' before the election issue is decided? It's an empty promise.

 

[belboid]

Legislation can be passed in days if necessary. It is already pretty much drafted, cos AV is super-simple. They just adapt the relevant part of the Londn Mayoral legislation. No need for a disclaimer, cos there is not going to be any referendum on that.

 

[cesare]

Do you mean would they have sufficient votes in the new Parliament to pass such legislation? Or are you merely saying they can't do it by executive order?

I'm saying that it's an empty promise whichever way you cut it. They can't promise that it will go 'into law'. All that they can promise is an intent.

 

[cesare]

Legislation can be passed in days if necessary. It is already pretty much drafted, cos AV is super-simple. They just adapt the relevant part of the Londn Mayoral legislation. No need for a disclaimer, cos there is not going to be any referendum on that.

When was the last time that legislation was passed in days? Passed in days with a hung Parliament?

 

[cybertect]

All that they can promise is an intent.

True.

But that's also true of any manifesto promise that any party makes. Sometimes they get defeated, or the Bill gets amended out of recognition, even when they have a significant majority.

TBH, if the LibDems could trust them (and other issues aside) the Tories are possibly in a better position to deliver any such statement of intent.

 

[belboid]

When was the last time that legislation was passed in days? Passed in days with a hung Parliament?

Dangerous Dogs Act, I imagine. And you're missing the point, which is that it is eminently possible. Sure it'd take a little longer than a few days, but it needn't take much more (just impose a guillotine on debate). Offer pissed off backbenchers a threeway referendum - full PR, AV, or a reversion to FPTP - next and, bingo.

 

[cesare]

True.

But that's also true of any manifesto promise that any party makes. Sometimes they get defeated, or the Bill gets amended out of recognition, even when they have a significant majority.

TBH, if the LibDems could trust them (and other issues aside) the Tories are possibly in a better position to deliver any such statement of intent.

These aren't manifesto promises. These are compromise on manifesto promises in order to get their Party in charge.

And making promises based on fast tracking legislation process through hung Parliament doesn't sound like a particularly likely promise to me.

 

[cesare]

Dangerous Dogs Act, I imagine. And you're missing the point, which is that it is eminently possible. Sure it'd take a little longer than a few days, but it needn't take much more (just impose a guillotine on debate). Offer pissed off backbenchers a threeway referendum - full PR, AV, or a reversion to FPTP - next and, bingo.

Yeah, Clegg might go for that

(Lol, he's probably entertaining it. Played again)

Edit: Brown's hoping he'll follow your train of thought.

 

[cybertect]

And making promises based on fast tracking legislation process through hung Parliament doesn't sound like a particularly likely promise to me.

As someone who voted Liberal (and not just as an anti-Tory tactical vote *ducks* ) I probably have to agree with you that it does seem like a tough proposition.

 

[cesare]

As someone who voted Liberal (and not just as an anti-Tory tactical vote *ducks* ) I probably have to agree with you that it does seem like a tough proposition.

He's actively watering down the opposition. And if the great day dawns when Clegg wants to cuddle up to him, he hasn't promised much more than he already had done, anyway.

 

[claphamboy]

I challenge you and the BBC to describe how Labour would put this 'into law' right now.

I am only repeating what the BBC is reporting that Labour has promised, you need to challenge Labour on how they would carry that promise out.

 

[claphamboy]

The BBC quote makes it much clearer.

Labour, if they get the chance will bring AV. They will also hold a referendum on changing AV to PR.

Which BBC quote, this one?

Originally Posted by that bbc source
The BBC understands, from Lib Dem sources, that the Labour offer is legislation to introduce AV, followed by a referendum on proportional representation.

If so, that was from LibDem sources, I think the confusion is that AV is being talked about as a form of PR - that is why Labour later came out 'to make it clear' (lol) they would introduce AV legislation and than ask for public approval of THAT.

The only system Labour seems to be talking about is AV, I've heard no mention of STV or anyother system last night nor am I hearing it this morning.

 

[ymu]

Which BBC quote, this one?



If so, that was from LibDem sources, I think the confusion is that AV is being talked about as a form of PR - that is why Labour later came out 'to make it clear' (lol) they would introduce AV legislation and than ask for public approval of THAT.

The only system Labour seems to be talking about is AV, I've heard no mention of STV or anyother system last night nor am I hearing it this morning.

The Guardian has it as AV and then a referendum on STV, but they appear to have watered down the wording of their report overnight to "a possible future referendum". Pretty sure it was just "AV and a referendum on STV" when I first read this. It's not clear, but AV is not PR.

Labour offer to Lib Dems

• Guaranteed alternative vote for elections to Commons

• Possible future referendum on "full PR" of single transferable vote

• Full coalition with cabinet seats

• Broad agreement on deficit reduction

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/10/gordon-brown-labour-leadership-resignation

 

[DexterTCN]

Telegraph is a little peeved that Clegg may not support tories...

"Lib Dems behaving like 'every harlot in history'"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/

 

[Kaka Tim]

Telegraph is a little peeved that Clegg may not support tories...

"Lib Dems behaving like 'every harlot in history'"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/

That quote is from David Blunkett though.

I actually think him and the equally repellant John reid have a point - a lib lab pact would be seriously lacking a democratci mandate and they could be punished at the next election (within 12 months) leading to a tory majority.

 

[fakeplasticgirl]

anyone going to place bets on what happens?!?!?!

i'm beginning to feel sorry for the lib dems they're fucked either way...

 

[Santino]

All this 'Labour should go into a honorouble opposition' is bullshit. It's a career politician's point of view - a few years cooling your heels on the opposition benches while the poor and sick have to make the best of a Tory government. Fuck that.