Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 54

Thread: Pearson wants deal with Tories

  1. #21
    Trusted Member SomersetYokel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    A Swindon Pub
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wilde View Post
    Good idea. Good.

    If you take a look at the many postings about the farcical burka ban, you'll see that Douglas Denny made clear that the rules were changed some time ago enabling the party leader to make whatever policy he feels like on the spur of the moment with no consultation. If he is having a good day, you'll get a good policy, like this one. If he is having a bad day, you'll get a burka ban. This needs fixing. Maybe one day he'll wake up convinced that the party needs a restoration of internal democracy and an enhanced role for the NEC. Who knows, it could happen.
    Barking mad I would say Mr Wilde. Why bother to have an NEC?

  2. #22
    Trusted Member SomersetYokel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    A Swindon Pub
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Allen View Post
    Geoffrey

    Lord Pearson has been quite clear that his strategy is to help force a hung parliament in the hopes that this will lead to a referendum on our relationship with the EU.

    If you want to criticise that stratgey fine (I agree it is doomed to failure) but don't waste your time criticising him for something which he isn't trying to do (help elect a Tory government).
    Trying or not trying the effect of what he is doing is to improve the Tory chances. Once a Tory always a Tory.

  3. #23
    Trusted Member Baron von Lotsov's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Victory Mansions
    Posts
    20,217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Allen View Post
    Whether you agree with this policy or not (I have serious reservations) we are not agreeing anything with Cameron and standing down in a tiny number of constituencies is neither capitulation or betrayal.
    That's sensible. Cameron is beyond help. We want to speak to the real Tories and help them to develop anti-EU credentials.
    MODERATION The ermine out of moderation never eats but once a day

  4. #24
    Gardening Leave
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,186

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Allen View Post
    Geoffrey

    Lord Pearson has been quite clear that his strategy is to help force a hung parliament in the hopes that this will lead to a referendum on our relationship with the EU.

    If you want to criticise that stratgey fine (I agree it is doomed to failure) but don't waste your time criticising him for something which he isn't trying to do (help elect a Tory government).
    Richard Allen: Do you seriously believe that UKIP will be any part of a 'hung parliament? Should the Conservatives win; that could be made possible be Northern Ireland MPs' in some form of coalition (formal/informal). Perhaps Lib-Dems, in exchange for electoral reform: which they will get, could ensure office for either Conservatives or Labour. UKIP can only affect voting patterns in a few constituencies; that will be their only contribution. That will be done in two ways; by not splitting the votes in certain constituencies by UKIP withdrawing completely from the electoral process. In others it will be sheer 'theatre'; UKIP candidates will not harm Labour; while they could assist the Conservatives in some constituencies. I have been preaching for years that the Conservatives are now a south of the M4 party. That is the same geographical area were UKIP is strong. UKIP should have shunned all arrangements with the Conservatives. This is gerrymandering at its most obscene. Should a hung parliament result in Labour constructing some kind of coalition, UKIP will have no moral authority or credibilty as future custodians of the cause. I can see how we can lose, but how can we possibly win?

  5. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Allen View Post
    Geoffrey

    Lord Pearson has been quite clear that his strategy is to help force a hung parliament in the hopes that this will lead to a referendum on our relationship with the EU.
    Richard, three or four seats could make the difference between a Tory outright majority or not, so I completely fail to see how giving up seats for the Tories forces a hung parliament. IF Pearson is serious about forcing a hung parliament then quite clearly UKIP should be fighting for EVERY seat REGARDLESS of the supposed EU credentials of the opposing Tory candidate.

  6. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey Collier View Post
    Richard Allen: Do you seriously believe that UKIP will be any part of a 'hung parliament? Should the Conservatives win; that could be made possible be Northern Ireland MPs' in some form of coalition (formal/informal). Perhaps Lib-Dems, in exchange for electoral reform: which they will get, could ensure office for either Conservatives or Labour. UKIP can only affect voting patterns in a few constituencies; that will be their only contribution. That will be done in two ways; by not splitting the votes in certain constituencies by UKIP withdrawing completely from the electoral process. In others it will be sheer 'theatre'; UKIP candidates will not harm Labour; while they could assist the Conservatives in some constituencies. I have been preaching for years that the Conservatives are now a south of the M4 party. That is the same geographical area were UKIP is strong. UKIP should have shunned all arrangements with the Conservatives. This is gerrymandering at its most obscene. Should a hung parliament result in Labour constructing some kind of coalition, UKIP will have no moral authority or credibilty as future custodians of the cause. I can see how we can lose, but how can we possibly win?
    As I said I disagree with the strategy.

  7. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AngusRunciman View Post
    Richard, three or four seats could make the difference between a Tory outright majority or not, so I completely fail to see how giving up seats for the Tories forces a hung parliament. IF Pearson is serious about forcing a hung parliament then quite clearly UKIP should be fighting for EVERY seat REGARDLESS of the supposed EU credentials of the opposing Tory candidate.
    The point is that as well as securing a hung parliament it is also important to have as many anti-EU MP's as possible in order to take advantage of the situation.

  8. #28
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    London.
    Posts
    7,047

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SomersetYokel View Post
    Barking mad I would say Mr Wilde. Why bother to have an NEC?
    Yes, I've been wondering that.

  9. #29
    Trusted Member douglas denny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    CHICHESTER
    Posts
    3,468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Allen View Post
    As I said I disagree with the strategy.
    The strategy is NOT necessarily to have a hung parliament, the latter is a by-product of the likely political situation as it happens to be presently with the polls.

    The strategy is to have as many committed anti-EU elements in parliament in the House of Commons as is possible. If you accept this premise, the rest follows logically.
    Hence there is no point in removing the handful of already committed anti-EU MPs who are already there; or removing with competition any fully committed anti-EU candidates of any party.

    Your comments are directed to the Conservatives: we are interested in Labour candidates too.

    I don't expect any Lib Dims to be involved as they are all fully committed to giving Britain away fully and completely over to the EU. In fact they have a bloody cheek standing at all - anywhere - as they are total hypocrites wanting to be in parliament as MPs when they want to give away all the powers of parliament to the EU.

    DED.

  10. #30
    Trusted Member douglas denny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    CHICHESTER
    Posts
    3,468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wilde View Post
    Yes, I've been wondering that.
    The NEC is to manage the best interests of the party: and to support the Leader; which is a part of that where they agree with the Leader.
    I should have thought that was blindingly obvious.

    DED

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •