|
|
Post by Lord Twaddleford on Feb 21, 2017 22:13:15 GMT
..and an owl for everyone Now that's a hoot! |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Feb 21, 2017 22:15:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Copeland
Feb 21, 2017 22:47:08 GMT
via mobile
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Feb 21, 2017 22:47:08 GMT
..and an owl for everyone Now that's a hoot! Another about-face from Labour! |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,138 
|
Post by Foggy on Feb 21, 2017 22:58:25 GMT
You misunderstand my point. I have no specialist knowledge of Huddersfield and Halifax but we need a mature debate on the balance between speed of access v quality of care when you get there v cost v practicality. For example, some of my background reading on the Whitehaven issue suggests that it's not just a question of cost-efficiency, it's an issue of recruiting staff to work there. Three rugby league teams in one post! Three rugby league towns, at any rate. The teams would be the Giants, Blue Sox, and, er... Whitehaven RLFC. |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,021
|
Post by Khunanup on Feb 22, 2017 1:15:37 GMT
Three rugby league teams in one post! Three rugby league towns, at any rate. The teams would be the Giants, Blue Sox, and, er... Whitehaven RLFC. Fax haven't been the Blue Sox for 15 years! |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,138
|
Post by Foggy on Feb 22, 2017 1:21:00 GMT
Three rugby league towns, at any rate. The teams would be the Giants, Blue Sox, and, er... Whitehaven RLFC. Fax haven't been the Blue Sox for 15 years! I'm deep inside union country here. It should be astonishing enough that I know they ever were called Blue Sox for a bit. (Terrible nickname, to be fair... says the guy who's flying to Boston in 5 weeks time.) |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Copeland
Feb 22, 2017 6:47:40 GMT
via mobile
Post by neilm on Feb 22, 2017 6:47:40 GMT
Isn't threatening voters like that in violation of electoral laws? Vote for us, or we close your hospital? Not at all, why would that be against the law? |
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,312
|
Post by maxque on Feb 22, 2017 7:27:43 GMT
Isn't threatening voters like that in violation of electoral laws? Vote for us, or we close your hospital? Not at all, why would that be against the law? Well, spiritual intimidation is against the law, I would assume intimidation is too. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,807
|
Post by right on Feb 22, 2017 9:52:23 GMT
Well, spiritual intimidation is against the law, I would assume intimidation is too. It isn't directed at an individual for starters. If you followed your argument to its logical conclusion, politicians would never be able to warn of the dangers of other parties policies, even if it were in entirely good faith. Except when BABIES WILL DIE |
|
johnr
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 1,944
|
Post by johnr on Feb 22, 2017 10:01:09 GMT
It isn't directed at an individual for starters. If you followed your argument to its logical conclusion, politicians would never be able to warn of the dangers of other parties policies, even if it were in entirely good faith. Except when BABIES WILL DIE That was a quote by the local medical staff made to the local newspaper and printed on their front page. Surely its not a problem if a political party highlights an actual newspaper headline that supports their case? Again, I've seen all parties do it, so the moral high ground from some people on this is a bit rich. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Feb 22, 2017 10:15:55 GMT
Well, spiritual intimidation is against the law, I would assume intimidation is too. The type of intimidation which is illegal is physical intimidation of voters. The law is set at a very high level. I would remind you that despite considerable evidence of large, threatening mobs at polling stations in the Tower Hamlets Mayoral election, the allegation of intimidation was one on which the petition failed - see paragraphs 575-624 in the judgment www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2015/1215.html especially para 619. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,807
|
Post by right on Feb 22, 2017 10:41:52 GMT
Meanwhile, up in Copeland  That shows that the delivery teams are doing their job. (When I started seeing this about the Tories in a marginal in 2010 it was the first time I thought we could win). |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,807
|
Post by right on Feb 22, 2017 10:46:57 GMT
Except when BABIES WILL DIE That was a quote by the local medical staff made to the local newspaper and printed on their front page. Surely its not a problem if a political party highlights an actual newspaper headline that supports their case? Again, I've seen all parties do it, so the moral high ground from some people on this is a bit rich. That's fine, I'm just waiting for a new understanding when Pro Lifers point out that babies die from abortion. Of course that won't happen as (1) babies actually do die and often in really horrible and painful ways and (2) pro lifers are well below the salt. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Feb 22, 2017 11:28:47 GMT
That was a quote by the local medical staff made to the local newspaper and printed on their front page. Surely its not a problem if a political party highlights an actual newspaper headline that supports their case? Again, I've seen all parties do it, so the moral high ground from some people on this is a bit rich. That's fine, I'm just waiting for a new understanding when Pro Lifers point out that babies die from abortion. Of course that won't happen as (1) babies actually do die and often in really horrible and painful ways and (2) pro lifers are well below the salt. Lots of us who are pro-choice understand perfectly well that abortion isn't very nice, you know. |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Copeland
Feb 22, 2017 11:53:15 GMT
via mobile
Post by neilm on Feb 22, 2017 11:53:15 GMT
Abortion isn't relevant here. This is about the suggestion that babies, born or not, will die due to NHS expenditure reductions.
We'll know how desperate Labour are if they put out a leaflet referring to 'the hated bedroom tax.'
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Feb 22, 2017 12:16:54 GMT
That is a suggestion from medical staff, as mentioned above. And we aren't talking about generic "expenditure reductions" but a specific proposal.
I don't normally use the "its a bit rich" card, but given that the Tories tried to scare voters witless before the 2010 GE with Labour's supposedly planned "death tax"......
|
|
|
|
Post by mrpastelito on Feb 22, 2017 12:23:27 GMT
With some 'expenditure reductions' on abortions, fewer babies will die.
|
|
johnr
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 1,944
|
Post by johnr on Feb 22, 2017 13:17:28 GMT
That is a suggestion from medical staff, as mentioned above. And we aren't talking about generic "expenditure reductions" but a specific proposal. I don't normally use the "its a bit rich" card, but given that the Tories tried to scare voters witless before the 2010 GE with Labour's supposedly planned "death tax"...... And scared voters with the idea that Alex Salmond would be pulling Ed Miliband's strings... using scare tactics isnt nice. But the work, which is why they get used. Sometimes, they have a grain of truth in them - as here. The "scare" in Copeland is from the fears of the medical staff (midwives) currently based in the constituency. If you have a beef with the idea- take it up with them. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,807
|
Post by right on Feb 22, 2017 14:01:22 GMT
That is a suggestion from medical staff, as mentioned above. And we aren't talking about generic "expenditure reductions" but a specific proposal. I don't normally use the "its a bit rich" card, but given that the Tories tried to scare voters witless before the 2010 GE with Labour's supposedly planned "death tax"...... And scared voters with the idea that Alex Salmond would be pulling Ed Miliband's strings... using scare tactics isnt nice. But the work, which is why they get used. Sometimes, they have a grain of truth in them - as here. The "scare" in Copeland is from the fears of the medical staff (midwives) currently based in the constituency. If you have a beef with the idea- take it up with them. I don't doubt it's effective, just that when saying BABIES WILL DIE that Labour looks a bit desperate and moronic. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Feb 22, 2017 14:07:32 GMT
Labour is quoting other people who have said babies will die. Subtle but important difference.
|
|
