Forum menu
You can’t judge an MPs character entirely on their voting record thanks to our party system. If instead of voting for the ridiculously outmoded notion of parties and thus MPs constrained by the whip system and instead voted for individuals at a local level who we thought best represented our constituency- then we would be able to judge their character purely from their voting record.
But that’s way to **** sensible for an entrenched polarised population that like to pigeon hole everyone that disagrees with them or find a reason to blame their shit futile meaningless lives on out groups.
he did't have to be a tory. No one forced him to vote for policies he must have known would cause tens of thousands of deaths and untold misery for millions. But he did.
He has blood on his hands as does every tory.
Should we write off the labour and snp MPs based on their voting records too?
Which ones voted for policies that they knew would cause tens of thousands of deaths? find me one who did and I will call them out as well
I was going to go for what Educator posted.
Also if you widened it to unpopular policies then there's tuition fees.
Yup - that will do. Blood on their hands and forever a stain on our country.
However that hardly in the same league as deliberately inflicting tens of thousands of deaths on the old, the sick and disabled in this country is it?
I have seen at first hand the damage, destitution and despair the tories deliberately inflicted on the UK population
However that hardly in the same league as deliberately inflicting tens of thousands of deaths on the old, the sick and disabled in this country is it?
Im sure you didnt mean it how that comes across.
#Blacklivesmatter
yes you are right!
My point being that being an ill advised junior partner in a war is somewhat different to killing tens of thousands of your own people deliberately - and deliberate it was because they were told deaths would result but still went ahead with the raft of policies that caused these deaths.
I'd say killing people in their own homes with hand grenades is worse than neglecting old people, unless you think people in Iraq are worth less than people in Britain which I hope you don't. So I'd turn it around and say that neglecting people isn't in the same league as starting a war and using a load of modern weapons against civilians.
My point being that being an ill advised junior partner in a war is somewhat different
That is a false idea only held by Brits, everywhere else Blair is considered the main villain as Bush couldn't have gone in without Blair and it was Blair's lies that enabled the Americans. Read Chirac's memoirs, it's a topical time to do so. I was hoping for Chirac RIP thread on here but given that Chirac and De villepin were the main opposers of the war they never get much press in the UK.
Edit to add:
After the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Stewart became the Coalition Provisional Authority Deputy Governorate Co-ordinator in Maysan and Deputy Governorate Co-ordinator/Senior Advisor in Dhi Qar in 2003, both of which are provinces in southern Iraq.[12] He was posted initially to the KOSB Battlegroup then to the Light Infantry.[14] His responsibilities included holding elections, resolving tribal disputes, and implementing development projects.[14] He faced growing unrest and an incipient civil war from his base in a Civil-Military Co-operation (CIMIC) compound in Al Amarah, and in May 2004 was in command of his compound in Nasiriyah when it was besieged by Sadrist militia.[12] He was awarded an OBE for his services during this period.[15]
While Stewart initially supported the Iraq War, the international coalition's inability to achieve a more humane, prosperous state led him in retrospect to believe the invasion had been a mistake.[1
One of the last colonials.
Also TJ, to argue against the core of your belief rather than a peripheral point;
Being Tory and believing in a smaller government doesnt mean they want to kill old people. It means they believe the way for a country to prosper is to reduce tax rates and encourage growth so that the gdp rises and tax income with it. c.f. the eu referendum, borris didnt lie and say we could save 350 million, he lied by infering that it was spent on needless beurocracy in the eu and and said we could spend it on the nhs instead.
Tory policy wasn’t driven because they deliberately wanted to kill people, it was driven because they are fiscal conservatives. Whether you like it or not, someone at some point has to decide how much money can be spent on public services. Labour under Milliband would have cut as well, just not to the same extent. If you are going to take issue with the conservatives, talk about policy, calling people vermin is dangerous.
The idea that Rory is somehow worse than the Blairites morally, is both hysterical and racist.
Whereas in reality for a country to really prosper you need a healthy well-educated population. You don't need that for a few wealthy mill owners to get stinking rich and build follies on hills.
Rory was a Blairite, Rayban.
Edit: in fact in many ways he still is. 🙂 Go on, read his Wiki page, he spent many years implementing the worst aspects of Blair's policy.
Labour Blairites Edukator - most of the Labour backbenchers voted in favour at the time as well. So it’s not exactly like it was just Blair and his cronies pushing us to war.
Whereas in reality for a country to really prosper you need a healthy well-educated population. You don’t need that for a few wealthy mill owners to get stinking rich and build follies on hills.
Theres two arguments against that, 1 they cut taxes for low incomes too. 2, top down vs bottom up arent nesicerily a rich vs poor argument unless badly implemented. Building a folly is a good example as it provides no benefit to the owner but probably employed several builders for several years on a completely pointless task (and preemptively that can be argued against by saying higher taxes could have spent that money on public services which is incorrect as thats a left vs right argument not up vs down, plenty of hospitals were built by rich philanthropists).
Just read that Wiki page and check out just whose policies he was working so passionately to implement in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's right, Blair's.
Whats that wooshing - the point going straight over your head.
the tory cut essential public services while also cutting taxes for the rich and enabling tax evasion on a massive scale.
They did this in the knowledge that their cuts would lead to tens of thousands of deaths. Its nothing about what is affordable, Its only about whats best for the rich and if the poor and disabled die well thats just too bad.
Nice whataboutery over Iraq - but yes Edukator your point has merit.
Calling me racist rayban just shows your true colours.
As I said - I have seen at first hand the damage the tories caused - and it was deliberate in that they knew the cuts would lead to deaths. For a government to enact policies for nothing but ideological reasons that led to untold death and misery on the population of the country is shameful and makes all tories complicit. Its as simple as that
Nice whataboutery over Iraq
Not whataboutery at all. Stuart's role in the occupation is well documented, to the point he got an OBE for it.
Building a folly is a good example as it provides no benefit to the owner but probably employed several builders for several years on a completely pointless task
When if the rich were taxed the money could be spent on the same builders building infrastructure which would benefit everybody. Try reading John Maynard Keynes or Thomas Picketty. The Hoover dam benefitted industry, the rich and the poor. Tax benefits everybody including the people who pay it, so I'm happy to live in one of the most taxed places on the planet because the benefits are enormous.
Keynesian economics works under the right circumstances. Like anything, it’s not a panacea or a silver bullet to develop a healthy economy.
And yes, I’d be happier to pay more tax. That doesn’t mean that I assume that all Tories are vermin.
As I said – I have seen at first hand the damage the tories caused – and it was deliberate in that they knew the cuts would lead to deaths. For a government to enact policies for nothing but ideological reasons that led to untold death and misery on the population of the country is shameful and makes all tories complicit. Its as simple as that
If we’d had our credit rating down rated we’d be Greece by now. Yes, I do not agree with the way the Tories balanced the taxation in terms of demographics or depth of the cuts. But they were right about needing to make cuts.
the tory cut essential public services while also cutting taxes for the rich and enabling tax evasion on a massive scale.
Do at least try to see the opposite oppinion.
The economic theory they followed was that without cuts the government would continue to borrow untill it became unsustainable and the economy would not recover and suppourt it as tax would have to rise and stifle growth. Eventually leading to............ the collapse of the economy, bankrupt public services and even more deaths.
I dont believe MPs on either side went to war to kill brown people or cut services to kill the proletariat. I believe they both believe that their decisions were the best way out of a bad situation and that they believe doing the alternative would have been worse.
Not whataboutery at all. Stuart’s role in the occupation is well documented, to the point he got an OBE for it.
If we can accept that opposition day motions and whipped votes arent a great representation of individual beliefs. Cant we accept that following orders in the army to the best of your ability is different from being Vald the Impaler?
Nope – as others have said, he’s just an Austerity Tory who fancies parachuting into another politics job.
With a huge salary and benefits which will nicely tide him over the Brexit fallout as millions of mear mortals loose their jobs and homes and incomes.
He did seem to be fairly upright citizen on the TV programmes he did, then fell into the Prisons job...
But no.
I’d rather some road sweeper from Clapham take the job before he does.
He was a civil servant in Iraq, not in the army so he didn't have to follow orders, he was free to quit at any point. He chose to be part of the occupation, an occupation that was very much a part of rise of IS.
He was a civil servant in Iraq, not in the army so he didn’t have to follow orders, he was free to quit at any point. He chose to be part of the occupation, an occupation that was very much a part of rise of IS.
And quitting sooner would have achieved?
Blaming a civil servant inbolved in attempting to rebuild iraq for the fallout of the iraq war is like blaming the fire brigade for a fire.
in attempting to rebuild iraq
Now you're rewriting history. Apart from doing what was necessary to get the oil flowing again could you point me to how much of what Britain destroyed it rebuilt. Sweet FA. But yes they got British companies to benefit from the oil spoils of war:
Rory does actually care about international development and rebuilding failed states. Would you rather that people like him, were not there to attempt to pick up the pieces of our misguided foreign adventures?
It's not like he was driving the political decision to invade, was it?
Now you’re rewriting history. Apart from doing what was necessary to get the oil flowing again could you point me to how much of what Britain destroyed it rebuilt. Sweet FA. But yes they got British companies to benefit from the oil spoils of war:
So appart from the major source of income for the country which perhapse naively might have been assumed would help them rebuild the country in the absence of corruption, what have the coalition ever done for Iraq?
Im not defending the iraq war, but blaming Rory Stewart for it or the aftermath is a stretch.
Most of Iraq's oil goes to China BTW, not the US or the UK. And for the most part wars in the middle east push prices up which harms western economies.
He was in favour of the war. I don't know why but his background and declared interests are very much centered on colonial culture (the picture of his fater on wiki is a clue). And he took part in the occupation following an invasion he approved of.
You want London run like a colony then vote Rory.
We aren't going to agree on this but thank for giving me the opportunity to present my views on him. I was curious when he ran for PM and looked into his background, as someone else said, a random council employee would be a wiser choice for London.
what have the coalition ever done for Iraq?
Destroyed it and created a power vacuum filled by ISIS.
One day Iraq will again be a powerful nation state to be reckoned with - no thanks to the "coalition". I hope they use their economic power wisely.
TJ can't be a racist, he never called me a Sassenach when I met him!
Anyway, when Stewart was justice secretary he said he'd resign the post if violence in HMPS didn't reduce within 12 (?) months. He didn't need to.
He is still a politician though, so should be shot anyway.
All politicians are the same, lying, hypocritical, self centred shits.
Destroyed it and created a power vacuum filled by ISIS.
REG: Oh. Yeah, yeah. They did give us that. Uh, that's true. Yeah.
COMMANDO #3: And the sanitation.
LORETTA: Oh, yeah, the sanitation, Reg. Remember what the city used to be like?
REG: Yeah. All right. I'll grant you the aqueduct and the sanitation are two things that the Romans have done.
MATTHIAS: And the roads.
REG: Well, yeah. Obviously the roads. I mean, the roads go without saying, don't they? But apart from the sanitation, the aqueduct, and the roads--
COMMANDO: Irrigation.
XERXES: Medicine.
COMMANDOS: Huh? Heh? Huh...
COMMANDO #2: Education.
COMMANDOS: Ohh...
REG: Yeah, yeah. All right. Fair enough.
COMMANDO #1: And the wine.
COMMANDOS: Oh, yes. Yeah...
FRANCIS: Yeah. Yeah, that's something we'd really miss, Reg, if the Romans left. Huh.
COMMANDO: Public baths.
LORETTA: And it's safe to walk in the streets at night now, Reg.
FRANCIS: Yeah, they certainly know how to keep order. Let's face it. They're the only ones who could in a place like this.
COMMANDOS: Hehh, heh. Heh heh heh heh heh heh heh.
REG: All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
XERXES: Brought peace.
REG: Oh. Peace? Shut up!
Rayban / tinas - they could have not cut tax for the rich, they could have stopped tax evasion / avoidance, they could have stopped spending billions on killing brown people. Instead they took money from the poorest ( an no bollox about cutting taxes for them - the poorest do not pay tax) they could have done a lot of other things including raise taxes to something near most civilized countries.
Instead the tories enacted policies that did nothing to reduce deficit or debt but instead caused the deaths of tens of thousands of british citizens and that caused misery for millions
So yes - they are lower than vermin every one of them
And intelligent guys like you should not be deceived.
Austerity was not needed at all. Its was an ideological policy designed to reduce the state for putely selfish reasons
lower than vermin every one of them
He is still a politician though, so should be shot anyway.
It's what Jo Cox would have wanted. A kinder, gentler politics.
Austerity was not needed at all. Its was an ideological policy designed to reduce the state for putely selfish reasons
I don't agree here, I do agree that they made cuts in the wrong places and didn't have to cut as deeply as they did.
Unfortunately TJ, try convincing middle England that raising taxes can work.
Ken Clarke kind of agrees with you on taxation TJ hahah 😀
The evil bastard 😛
I stand by my thoughts on this, your anger should be directed at the aspirational little Englanders who support people like Mark Francois.
It’s what Jo Cox would have wanted. A kinder, gentler politics.
Wrong turn of phrase on my part & apologies, but get the gist that I despise all politicans equally.
As I said. Lying, hypocritical, self centred shits. All of them.
Nope - its the tories.
I have worked in healthcare for 40 years and I have seen the damage they inflict deliberately. I have my disabled friend being forced to be incontinent because of the lack of support. I have seen people crying because they cannot feed their children. I have seen teh deliberate cruelty of benefits sanctions. I have seen the inhumae way refugees are treated caught in a catch 22 where its simply impossible to meet their legal obligations. You have no money, you have been housed in glasgow. You have a perverse decision that you know is wrong. to appeal it you have to go to liverpool. How the eff are you supposed to get there - walk?
Cutting spending as they did meant reduced tax income and did nothing to re-balance the economy
No other country instituted austerity like they did. No other country cut taxes for the rich while cutting services for the poor.
the bedroom tax COST money!
We are the 8th richest country in the world - why do we have people in such abject poverty
At best its callous disregard but I believe it to be calculated cruelty. Some of these things that have happened cannot be by chance or mishap.
Include in this the outright corruption and bribery of the tories by vested interests yes its dressed up and consultancy fees or whatever - but call it what it is - bribery
They are venal, corrupt and deliberately cruel and no member of the tory party escapes culpability
TJ can’t be a racist, he never called me a Sassenach when I met him!
Anyway, when Stewart was justice secretary he said he’d resign the post if violence in HMPS didn’t reduce within 12 (?) months. He didn’t need to.
You're correct, but not in the way you probably wanted to be.
• The rate of assaults per 1,000 prisoners in ten prisons dropped by 16%, from 42.9 in
June/August 2018 to 36.1 in April/June 2019
• The percentage of positive results from random mandatory drug tests (RDMT)
dropped between August 2018 and March 2019.
He is still a politician though, so should be shot anyway.
We are the 8th richest country in the world – why do we have people in such abject poverty
I would like homelessness ended - but unless you are talking about that it's not abject poverty when measured by developing world standards.
The R/P 20% (income inequality between top 20 percent and bottom 20 percent) is 5.4% and for one of those "Democratic Socialist" countries you like to talk about such as Sweden it is 4.6%
I'd wager if you closed that gap you wouldn't notice a blind bit of difference, you'd still be just as angry TJ.
They are venal, corrupt and deliberately cruel and no member of the tory party escapes culpability
https://www.politico.eu/article/ken-clarke-interview-brexit-populism-tories/
If Clarke was back in government he would be advocating the kind of reforms the Yellow Jackets forced upon Emmanuel Macron — tax breaks and welfare increases to ease people’s cost of living.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-45818770/john-major-urges-welfare-reform-rethink
But yes TJ, all evil bastards.
I like you TJ, because you obviously care for the welfare of others - that's a noble thing and part of the reason why I got into the pharmaceutical industry. I do think you are angry with the wrong people and that it's blinding you to how this country could heal in a bipartisan fashion.
TJ and a few others on here remind me very much of a man JB Priestley met in his seminal work, An English Journey:
"The world he lives in is not the sad muddle that most of us have begun to recognise, but is a
mysterious and melodramatic place of vast sinister conspiracies, in which capitalists and bosses and officials plot together to trick him and his mates. Thus, he grumbled and sneered because the concern that employs him has lately been spending money on a certain extension of its premises.
They could not spare money, he complained, to give their workpeople some decent wages, but they could throw it away— just to please a few officials — on these building operations. Now even I, who knew very little about the concern, did know this, that it was spending this money in a
last desperate attempt to get more business, and that the process of finding the money for this extension must have been like wringing blood out of a stone. But this is typical of his
attitude of mind. He did not make this an excuse to attack a muddled wasteful competitive system; which would have been legitimate enough. He saw it as one more example of the conspiracy of bosses and officials.
He thinks that most people are poor because a few are rich. Any man receiving more than a few pounds per week automatically becomes one of the sinister conspiring class. The modem world is to him simply a wicked place, and not, as it seems to many of us, a stupid place.
When he talks of his neighbours or the men he works with, he is a realist, quick to notice their many weaknesses; but when he argues, unconsciously he becomes an idealist and talks about “the workers” as if they were a race of bright beautiful beings incapable of selfishness, indolence, corruption. On the other hand, men of the employing or managing classes are never to him men very
much like himself who, though they may be the servants of a faulty and even cruel system, are honestly trying to do their duty and to be decent and kind and unselfish; they are always sneering cunning tyrants, to whom the very poverty and helplessness of the people are a source of deep satisfaction."
JP
The R/P 20% (income inequality between top 20 percent and bottom 20 percent) is 5.4% and for one of those “Democratic Socialist” countries you like to talk about such as Sweden it is 4.6%
Sorry, ratio - I shouldn't have placed a "%" on those.
Rayban - that just shows how little you know and how little you see and how little you want to understand.; I pity you
jjprestidge
That you can read what i wrote and see that shows just how out of touch you are. Thats just an ad hom attack presumably because it makes you feel uncomfortable to have your cosy assumptions challenged
I find it incredible that intelligent people swallow this sort of nonsense and are so willfully blind to the medacity, deliberate cruelty and corruption of the tories
Poverty in Glasgow
Poverty in the Philippines (Sorry for the bible bashers)
You don't know shit until you've seen it in person.
lets just take one deliberately cruel tory policy and dissect it
The "bedroom tax" ( I cannot remember what they called it)
In hull several tens of thousands of people were affected - mainly those in social lets ie council or housing association homes. These people according to the tories had two many bedrooms - mainly people in two bed social rent flats. How many one bed social rent flats were available - 6!
so that left tens of thousands of people facing sanctions but with no way out other than going into the private rented sector for a one bed flat - which cost more than the two bed social rented flat and of course was ( because of another tory policy) was an insecure let. so people were forced out of cheap secure lets into expensive insecure lets of given benefit sanctions that put them into such poverty the choice was heat the house or eat. - the net result - a larger benefits bill and also people being sanctioned pushing them into poverty.hey even used this to push disabled people out of their adapted homes and to make it impossible for elderly and disabled people to have carers there overnight on sleepovers
the tories were told of all this beforehand but did it anyway
Thats just one example of a self defeating deliberately cruel policy.
So this policy cost money to the taxpayer while forcing people into poor housing or debt
while that was happening they gave the rich tax cuts!
its disgusting and this is just one example.
As I said Rayban - your cosy little existence means all this is hidden from you and you deny it because the truth hurts.