A Poll showing what the public think of our Politicians

Hi Panda

We'd be better off with the results of a poll showing whether or not we have any MP's

katertaif wrote:Hi Panda

We'd be better off  with the results of a poll showing whether or not we have  any MP's

Whatever happens next year , there will be another Coalition , that's if we have any MP's left with all the scandal going on. I think the House of Lords should be abolished ( but it won't) and with all the scandals going on , if a Minister is found guilty of fiddling expenses he/she should be expelled and a new MP for the area voted in.

I can see a poor turn-out for the next Election and will be surprised if Cameron lasts that long.

Good evening Panda

I hope you are wrong about there being another coalition. Certainly I doubt if we could survive another 5 years of this crew. any other coalition would simply show them up for the unprincipled blackguards they actually are. Willing to prop anyone up regardless of policies, as long as it means personal power, for them.

We have to start the process of retaking our country on a number of fronts. There isn't much time left and I do seriously believe that the forthcoming general election is crunch time. Our elected representatives have got to be made, by whatever means to actually start representing us. Something we would be hard put to find any MP's doing at this time.

That to me means at least a dozen, and possibly a score or more UKIP, with gains being made in once safe seats. Nothing frightens an MP more than that possibility of losing the comfortable living they all claim is so difficult. I think more than that would be unrealistic, and given that they have as yet no experience of governance more could be counter productive.

I would not even object to a handful of BNP getting in there. They can also be useful and voted out when they have served their purpose.

I agree the upper chamber should be cut in numbers and become an elected body. Too many party faithful are being er; elevated for little or no reason. Kinnock for example claimed the House of Lords were parasites, and said openly he would never take a seat in it. Not that is until he was offered one. The so called Lord Prescott is an adulterous thug no more, and why the mother of the Lawrence boy murdered so many years ago suddenly qualifies for a peerage is utterly beyond me. The ability to ride a racing bicycle is also to me at least not a recommendation to "the other place"

having said all that. The plain fact is that with some 80% of our legislation emanating from Brussels, this crew are in effect mostly redundant anyway.

Good Morning katerfail, Angela Merkel did not get a clear majority and has had to join forces with other Parties, look what a strong Leader she has been.!!! The latest Poll suggests it will be inevitable that another Coalition looms, the LibDems will lose some seats, UKIP pick them up , add a smattering of BNP, and maybe one voted in to protect immigrants and Britain will once again have weak Governance.

I agree, Ministers should not be elevated to the House of Lords, Tony Blair making Mandelson a Lord was a prime example of you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. He always reminds me of Svengali ,

I wouldn't be surprised if Cameron is ousted before the next Election in a similar way that Thatcher was, also, LibDems might want a new Leader Clegg has proved very weak and supported all the wrong proposals. Both will suffer from the gay marriage in church ruling which many people oppose. and we are still very much a Christian Country whose voters count.


cheerful soul aren't I  

Good morning Panda

I agree with much of what you say. The coalition has to say the least not proved a success. Whether that is because coalitions are inherently weak,, or it shows the class and character of the present inhabitants of the Houses of parliament (both of them) is another question.

In times of national emergency, historically, coalitions have proved themselves over and over, so I tend towards the latter reason.

In his head to heads with Farage, Cleggy baby hasn't much to lose. Even if he retains his own seat (and I believe he has his own agenda there) he will as you say, lose a number of seats, probably (hopefully) to UKIP. If the Lib. Dems don't replace him before, they certainly will afterwards. Unless he resigns and takes some dream job in Europe. That may very well be his intention.

The BNP may also pick up a handful of seats. I hope they do, because it will demonstrate without any shadow of doubt to Cameron and Milliband, and Clegg what the mood of the country is, and how disillusioned we are with them. Of course the BNP would have to go once they have served their purpose, but they can be used in the meanwhile.

As for even advocating the BNP, Things have reached a desperate stage when only the enemy can save us. Whatever the solution(s) we have a very limited time left to solve our problems by diplomatic, democratic means. After that there will be only one solution.

katertaif wrote:Good morning Panda

I agree with  much of what you say. The coalition has to say the least not proved a success. Whether that is because coalitions are inherently weak,, or it shows the class and character of the present inhabitants of the Houses of parliament (both of them) is another question.

In times of national emergency, historically, coalitions have proved themselves over and over, so I tend towards the latter reason.

In his head to heads with Farage, Cleggy baby hasn't much to lose. Even if he retains his own seat (and I believe he has his own agenda there) he will as you say, lose a number of seats, probably (hopefully) to UKIP. If the Lib. Dems don't replace him before, they certainly will afterwards. Unless he resigns and takes some dream job in Europe. That may very well be his intention.

The BNP may also pick up a handful of seats. I hope they do, because it will demonstrate without any shadow of doubt to Cameron and Milliband, and Clegg what the mood of the country is, and how disillusioned we are with them. Of course the BNP would have to go once they have served their purpose, but they can be used in the meanwhile.

As for even advocating the BNP, Things have reached a desperate stage when only the enemy can save us. Whatever the solution(s) we have a very limited time left to solve our problems by diplomatic, democratic means. After that there will be only one solution.

Morning katerfail

I think Politics is jaded in the U.K. and that's why pollsters don't bother to vote because they feel no matter what the people want, the Government ignores them and as you say, can find £50 million to donate to Syria, is very generous to other Countries in need yet mean enough to order tax on a second bedroom and keeps putting up prescription charges on the Patients who already pay for their health through tax on their earnings. We know that France gets a massive farming subsidy from the EU yet Britain grows . or did grow , far superior produce but is reduced to producing wine now and importing fruit and veg from other Countries. I read a while ago that some young U.K. Farmers are renting land from Russia and farming there , I havn't read anything about if they have done well.

Just reported, Cameron has ordered an investigation into Muslims calling themselves the Muslim Brotherhood. , what has happened to MI5 and the
Foreign Office that they are not guarding Britain ?

Hi Panda

Having supposedly and democratically voting in several members of the Muslim brotherhood, including their president. - Morsi, the Egyptians have now proscribed them as a terrorist movement, which of course the are. I personally would go further and say any activist and fundamentalist Muslim organisation, by whatever name is at least highly suspect. If not out and out terror driven and inspired. When you get down to it, conversion by terror and subjugation is all they know.

Look at the penalty for leaving Islam - Death. No arguments or other sanctions. Geert Wilders, and a few others, with Fatwas (death sentences) over them for disagreeing with them in any way.

You ask why our security forces are not guarding our country. A good question, and the answer is in two parts, both connected with this and previous governments. The security service budget is constantly under review, which is nothing more than a euphemism for being cut. It is inevitable that when you do not properly fund an organisation, any organisation, that organisation will inevitably become less effective. The security services are no different.

The second part is a little more complex. We have allowed them in without let or hindrance now for less than 50 years. They have already made huge strides, to the point where sharia law is about to become part of British law. That argues that this could not have come about naturally, or even by accident. there is a plan. Not just for Britain but for the world. It may not be all that detailed a plan, but nevertheless they have a goal. Our governments claiming that there are only a very small number of islamists is therefore complete nonsense. There are far more than we know about, and getting more with each day. remember it is the youth of Islam, brought up in this country. the very ones who should hold Britain and our traditional values dear to them, who are the most militant. It isn't the septuagenarians, and octogenarians going to Syria to fight and kill Christians. It's the youth.

I understand over 2,000 of them have returned, and are now regarded as "persons of interest" never mind the ones already here, or still there. How can our security forces keep an eye on them all. Simple, they cannot.