Current Affairs 2025

[Mervyn and Trish]

That's like the football club chairman saying he has confidence in the manager one day and firing him the next.

Unless she pulls a very big rabbit out of the hat for the budget she's toast.

[Stephen]

They're all a bunch of back stabbers all jockeying for position. Wouldn't trust any of them as far as I could throw them.

[oldbluefox]

The ‘problem’ is that in order to find the solution you will inevitably make a few mistakes along the way….12 months as opposed to 13 year is a short time in politics…at the very least we appear to have a government that is working together in order to find the solutions, imo.

Yet they have had 14 years criticising the Tories and telling us all how it should be done especially after the Liz Truss fiasco that we could reasonably expect they would have all the answers and rectify the Tories policy mistakes.
Rachel from accounts is committed not to raise income tax or NI on the working man or those on moderate salaries (whatever that means) yet indirectly everyone is paying more due to her policies on NI for companies and rises in inflation rates. I wonder how those who have lost their jobs due to her policies feel. Meanwhile she seems to have plenty of money in her coffers for headline grabbing treats for certain sectors of society.
I'll not mention the amount of money being wasted through sheer incompetence, a criticism of which the Tories were also guilty..........a few million here down the drain and a couple of billion there........never mind!!!!

[Onelife]

Well, I have said on many occasions that our political system is broken so perhaps now you are all coming to realise that there is truth in what I say.

I think we should look at the positives of having a political party that hasn’t as yet torn itself apart from the inside as was the case with the conservative party…what a total disgrace/shambles they were.

As for Keir, it would appear he has done a good job in securing better relations with Donald

[towny44]

Well, I have said on many occasions that our political system is broken so perhaps now you are all coming to realise that there is truth in what I say.
probably because the system is not designed to cater for our current population of 70 million. Hence the exchequor income is not large enough to maintain social services for the increased population.
I think we should look at the positives of having a political party that hasn’t as yet torn itself apart from the inside as was the case with the conservative party…what a total disgrace/shambles they were.
you dont think the refusal of over 100 mps to adhere to the party whip on the PIP issue, shows a massive rupture in the party.?
As for Keir, it would appear he has done a good job in securing better relations with Donald

the problem is that his head is so far up Donalds a**e, that he is unable to see where he is going

[Stephen]

[Onelife]

the problem is that his head is so far up Donalds a**e, that he is unable to see where he is going


Just goes to prove how far he is prepared to go to put our country first…. the man deserves a year’s supply of wet wipes.

[Ray B]

Well done the young school girl in the Union flag dress.
Shame on those at the school.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Well, I have said on many occasions that our political system is broken so perhaps now you are all coming to realise that there is truth in what I say

Yes you've said it many many many times.

What you've never never never done is offer a viable alternative.

[Portsmouth]

Well done the young school girl in the Union flag dress.
Shame on those at the school.

Well said Ray B
Also the lad at the same school who dressed as a farmer and was refused entry

[Onelife]

Well, I have said on many occasions that our political system is broken so perhaps now you are all coming to realise that there is truth in what I say

Yes you've said it many many many times.

What you've never never never done is offer a viable alternative.

I think that comment is very unfair as I can’t imagine for one minute that I haven’t given sound (laypersons) reasons why I think our present political system isn’t working in the best interests of our country. I of course am not alone in thinking political reform is vital should we not want to keep going round in unproductive circles…a writen apology will suffice.

[oldbluefox]

I agree with you that our current political system has many faults and does not work in the best interests of (whole) of our country but OL you haven't said what your viable alternative is. We all know from our own experience and that of other countries that proportional representation does not work so what would be your solution?

[Onelife]

I agree with you that our current political system has many faults and does not work in the best interests of (whole) of our country but OL you haven't said what your viable alternative is. We all know from our own experience and that of other countries that proportional representation does not work so what would be your solution?

Hi Foxy, I’m not responding to that question until after the Norway vs Italy match…. and I get a full apology from Sir Merv.


I have however been looking through my “search user posts” (Onelife) and there are several references to how things could be changed.

Enjoy the match

[oldbluefox]

Your idea must have been so good nobody seems to have remembered it. Are you sure you're not a politician?

[Mervyn and Trish]

Well, I have said on many occasions that our political system is broken so perhaps now you are all coming to realise that there is truth in what I say

Yes you've said it many many many times.

What you've never never never done is offer a viable alternative.

I think that comment is very unfair as I can’t imagine for one minute that I haven’t given sound (laypersons) reasons why I think our present political system isn’t working in the best interests of our country. I of course am not alone in thinking political reform is vital should we not want to keep going round in unproductive circles…a writen apology will suffice.

I didn't say you'd never given reasons why you think the system isn't working. I said you'd never given a viable alternative. If you think you have copy and paste it here. The essential word is viable.

[Onelife]

Your idea must have been so good nobody seems to have remembered it. Are you sure you're not a politician?

If as you state members don’t remember any of my suggestions for a change, then I would suggest this is more a case of choice rather acknowledging what has been said.

I would like to start by saying any change can only come about if there is the will for change, and a platform from which change can take place. Under our present FPTP system things will never change because the power for change lies within the two-party system that controls it. I disagree with you that PR isn’t a viable option as there are many countries where coalition governments do work together. Yes’, there are those, who will argue that coalitions make it more difficult to reach collective decision making but under a well-designed coalition system for this country I can see a time when representative from several parties could work together in the best interests of our country.

We can of course carry on with our present two-party system where cohesion within the two parties is about as close together Willian and Harry... which as you rightly say results in the many failings within our present system…can you see anything in our present system which is going to change this, Foxy?

Voting for the lesser of two evils gives little choice other than the acceptance that things will never change.
Somehow, we need to break this cycle and replace it… or parts of it with systems that represent better value for money, better decision making and one that puts trust and integrity back into politics, failure to do so will eventually impact on every aspect of our lives. When a nation feels disenfranchised from its political system it goes into a spiral of apathy, this drives social distain to a point where people stop voting, stop caring and eventually lose faith in their country and its governance. While many may disagree, this is what is happening as we speak and will over the coming years show the ugly side of political incompetence and its reluctance to change its shortsightedness to where our country is heading.

There are several ways in which we could start to rebuild our political system, one of which would be the disbandment of our present House of Lords. A reformed house could work towards the inclusion of expertise from various professional institutions and from those who have a real grasp of how society works. In a nutshell we should be looking at new ways in-which decision making is made and scrutinised.

There are far too many career politicians who don’t measure up to their titles. When they are demoted, they then form the tribes that cause havoc within their respective parties, as was the case with the conservative party. The forming of a coalition government would negate this to a certain extent.

The thought of republicanism conjures up many misconceptions of how it would play out in reality, yes; it would mean getting rid of the freeloaders and the millions they will take with them - through the generosity of us tax payers, but rest assured we will get far more revenue back when we turn their our castles and thousands of acres of land into tourist attractions.

An elected head of state and a new national anthem + a coalition government would I believe be the first step in changing the political landscape of our country and in doing so give us the best chance of putting the Great back into our very sick country.

Good game last night foxy….

Come on the lionesses.

[Mervyn and Trish]

I don't disagree with reforming the House of Lords, but beyond that that's mostly just your usual anti Monarchist campaign. A new songbto solve all? Really?

You can't force a coalition government on anyone. That's the possible outcome of a democratic vote, not a new system.

An elected head of state getting rid of freeloaders and solving everything? Nope. Just look at the US. A system where money buys power, and an elected head of state out for himself and his mates. Far more unfettered power and far more corrupt than any monarch we've had in centuries. And a country more fractured politically than ours.

I said viable alternative and I rest my case that you don't have one. An alternative yes, but zero evidence it will work any better.

[Onelife]

I read this morning that Sir Keir has suspended four of his welfare reform rebels. This being the case it shouldn’t be long before the “whispers in corridors” start and new rebel alliances are formed. Nothing changes does it?

[david63]

In principle there is nothing wrong with the "system" it is the people within it that are the problem.

With our system you can literally have someone with no experience or qualifications who is on the dole one day and next day being an MP and being paid £94k (this is not a criticism of anyone on the dole). This is then compounded by appointing MPs to become ministers running multi billion pound departments covering an area that they have no experience in.

We then get the situation where if, as an MP, you do not toe the party line and stand up for what you believe is right that you get thrown out of the party (as was demonstrated yesterday).

Next there is a second chamber that has, in effect, no power other than to criticise (HoL cannot actually block legislation, they can only amend it)

My suggestion would be to have "professional" trained/qualified politicians (as opposed to career politicians who are in it for their own ends). These professional politicians would not be aligned to any political party and so at an election they would be elected on what they stood for. Once a parliament was elected then the members would select from themselves a PM (similar to electing a Pope) who would then build a team with experience in a particular areas.

There would be a natural grouping of MPs around various issues but those groups would change from issue to issue thus ensuring a better quality of governance and less reliance on a second chamber.

As for the second chamber basically leave it alone apart from drastically reducing its numbers but give it back the powers that it once had to block "bad" legislation.

[david63]

I thought when I read the headline that they were actually going to put coke back into coke

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czxe59zl8qzo

Forgive me for stating the obvious but doesn't POTUS have more important things to do - like starting another war?

[towny44]

I read this morning that Sir Keir has suspended four of his welfare reform rebels. This being the case it shouldn’t be long before the “whispers in corridors” start and new rebel alliances are formed. Nothing changes does it?

I would have thought that you would have applauded Keirs action in suspending the leading rebels, showing that he is being a strong leader.
As for rebel alliance's forming isn't your idea of a PR system a guarantee that this would be a major issue with any coalition govt.
As for the .Monarchy, I believe that King Charles has already started the process of opening many more royal residences, and wants to ensure that they become self sustaining, and has slimmed down the active Royals, reducing any perceived drain on the public purse.

[Onelife]

In principle there is nothing wrong with the "system" it is the people within it that are the problem.

With our system you can literally have someone with no experience or qualifications who is on the dole one day and next day being an MP and being paid £94k (this is not a criticism of anyone on the dole). This is then compounded by appointing MPs to become ministers running multi billion pound departments covering an area that they have no experience in.

We then get the situation where if, as an MP, you do not toe the party line and stand up for what you believe is right that you get thrown out of the party (as was demonstrated yesterday).

Next there is a second chamber that has, in effect, no power other than to criticise (HoL cannot actually block legislation, they can only amend it)

My suggestion would be to have "professional" trained/qualified politicians (as opposed to career politicians who are in it for their own ends). These professional politicians would not be aligned to any political party and so at an election they would be elected on what they stood for. Once a parliament was elected then the members would select from themselves a PM (similar to electing a Pope) who would then build a team with experience in a particular areas.

There would be a natural grouping of MPs around various issues but those groups would change from issue to issue thus ensuring a better quality of governance and less reliance on a second chamber.

As for the second chamber basically leave it alone apart from drastically reducing its numbers but give it back the powers that it once had to block "bad" legislation.

Hi David, you make some interesting points. The idea of having professional MP’s is something I have mentioned on this forum before, indeed, if I remember correctly, it was ‘Ken’ who first put this suggestion forward and it is something which in the right political climate could/should be considered.
It is however the case that any change would require the willingness to do things differently and as it stands there is no appetite to look beyond what we already have. The sensible way forward would be to draw together some eminent thinkers who could put together a road map of transition, this is is contrary to what normally happens whereby ploughing into things without carefully considering all the pitfalls which might make it fail.

If we started now using the same principles, we could in 4 years’ time have a working model of how a coalition government could actually work for this country.

Be prepared is my motto.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Meanwhile Labour are pressing ahead with giving the vote to 16 and 17 year old. Political manipulation if ever I saw it. As a group the majority are unlikely to be employed or householders and paying taxes. So of course who are they likely to vote for? The party most likely to tax and spend.

[david63]

Meanwhile Labour are pressing ahead with giving the vote to 16 and 17 year old. Political manipulation if ever I saw it. As a group the majority are unlikely to be employed or householders and paying taxes. So of course who are they likely to vote for? The party most likely to tax and spend.

Although that might just turn round and bite them if some/many/majority vote Reform - and I can see that as a strong probability.

It is however the case that any change would require the willingness to do things differently and as it stands there is no appetite to look beyond what we already have.

It is not that there is no appetite (although there may well be) to change it is those who would need to legislate the change are the very ones who would be falling off the gravy train, and that is where the impasse will always be.

[david63]

Oh dear, more bad news for Sir K - unemployment is up. Is there anything else that can go wrong?