Politics, politics, politics

[Gilzeantoscore]

On one level, productivity is high. Real wages are falling, the share of wages to profits as part of GDP are in free fall. People are at the very least producing the same level of goods and services at falling levels of income.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Economies need to find ways of investing so as to provide the multiplier effect.

Not if your ambition is to cut production (and consumption). New efficiencies are good, but growth isn't. The whole capitalist paradigm needs changing.

 

[Gilzeantoscore]

Not if your ambition is to cut production (and consumption). New efficiencies are good, but growth isn't. The whole capitalist paradigm needs changing.

That's not going to happen any time soon.

 

[Gutter Boy]

That's not going to happen any time soon.

The only alternative is gated communities of super rich, deperate poverty for the 99% and a dying earth (basically the world of the - not otherwise great - film Elysium)

There's not enough earth to support the current consumption, let alone the rest of the world catching up to western levels. And automisation will take all the white collar jobs soon too. Humanity needs to revolutionise or die out.

 

[scaramanga]

There's not enough earth to support the current consumption, let alone the rest of the world catching up to western levels.

Only if the anti-GMO nuts win.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Only if the anti-GMO nuts win.

Food you can maybe sort with vertical farming into the skies.

But all non-organic resources are finite (e.g. plastics). We currently consume what 1.5 earths could sustain. The world at western standards would need 7 earths. We'd literally need to colonise and harvest the resources 6 other planets to sustain our species. That's not a good position.

 

[scaramanga]

Food you can maybe sort with vertical farming into the skies.

But all non-organic resources are finite (e.g. plastics). We currently consume what 1.5 earths could sustain. The world at western standards would need 7 earths. We'd literally need to colonise and harvest the resources 6 other planets to sustain our species. That's not a good position.

Or technology.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Or technology.

Technology should be what frees us from consumption and the need to work, not what propagates them.

 

[scaramanga]

Technology should be what frees us from consumption and the need to work, not what propagates them.

At pretty much any time in history we were incapable of coping with the population 50 years into the future.

There's no good reason to think that technology will just stop.

 

[the dza]

I thought the BBC was supposed to be all left-wing bias?

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...bb-named-as-theresa-mays-communications-chief

...Gibb takes over from Katie Perrior, the previous director of communications, who quit before the election. The job was held by Craig Oliver and Andy Coulson under David Cameron. Gibb’s brother is Nick Gibb, the junior education minister.

Gibb, who edits the Daily and Sunday Politics programmes, was one of two senior BBC staffers up for the job. He saw off competition from James Landale, the diplomatic editor.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Labour dangling the unfundable £100b historic student debt clearance carrot again: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40547740

Marr had a good line of questioning for Rayner, pointing out that it would actually be a tax break on the middle classes at the expense of the working classes.

 

[the dza]

Be interesting to see if anything comes of this:

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ge-crowdfunded-campaign-good-friday-agreement

A crowdfunding campaign has been launched to raise funds for a potential legal challenge to Theresa May’s parliamentary deal with the Democratic Unionist party, on the grounds that it breaches the Good Friday agreement.


Ciaran McClean, the son of one of the founders of Northern Ireland’s civil rights movement, Paddy Joe McClean, is spearheading the challenge of the arrangement through which the DUP gained a £1bn aid package for the region.


The Green party activist believes the deal, which sees the Conservatives granted an overall majority with the support of the DUP’s 10 MPs, breaches both the landmark 1998 Good Friday agreement and the Bribery Act.


The confidence-and-supply arrangement, signed in Downing Street on 26 June, granted £1bn more funding for hospitals, schools and roads in Northern Ireland in return for DUP support in key Commons votes.

Carwyn Jones, then the first minister of Wales, described the cash as a “straight bung to keep a weak prime minister and a faltering government in office”. The Scottish first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, characterised it as a “grubby, shameless” deal.


McClean is represented by Dominic Chambers QC of Maitland Chambers. Chambers was involved in the successful supreme court challenge to the government’s attempts to trigger article 50 without a Commons vote.


McClean told the Guardian on Sunday that the government “has obligations under international law which are not being observed in this deal with the DUP”. He also argued that the arrangement could be construed as “a bribe to patch together a parliamentary majority”.


McClean, the Green candidate for West Tyrone in the last general election, denied that there would be major benefits to the region from the £1bn deal the DUP extracted from the Tories.


“The £1bn bribe actually threatens the institutions in Northern Ireland. How can there be impartiality when one of the executive parties has the UK government over a barrel?

“This case is not being taken for nostalgia value. The DUP deal threatens to undermine our democracy in Northern Ireland, so it is important that citizens can challenge it,” he said.


The legal team aim to issue high court proceedings this week and will push for the case to be heard as early as possible. The judges, bruised by their experience over the Brexit case, are unlikely to welcome such a sensitive, political challenge but may be forced to deal with the claim. There has already been an exchange of letters over the issue between McClean’s lawyers and the government.


The basis of McClean’s claim is that any deal between the government and DUP is in breach of the 1998 Good Friday agreement, under which the government undertook to exercise its power in Northern Ireland “with rigorous impartiality on behalf of all the people in the diversity of their identities and traditions”. The government is trying to act as an honest broker in re-establishing the collapsed power-sharing executive at Stormont.


A letter from Edwin Coe solicitors argues that any agreement between the DUP and the Conservatives would compromise the government’s independence and breach the reasonable expectation of the citizens of Northern Ireland, including McClean, that the government will act with rigorous impartiality.


McClean writes on the action’s CrowdJustice webpage: “My claim is that as a citizen I expect my government to honour its obligations under the Good Friday agreement and not to bribe others with money so that it can stay in power. My lawyers have put these points to the government. They eventually responded, failing to meet deadlines they set themselves. Nothing they said addresses the fundamental issues behind this corrupt deal.”


David Greene, a senior partner at Edwin Coe, said: “This case is of huge public importance and demonstrates that individuals can call governments to account and the importance of that capability in a democracy.”


Crowdfunding is becoming an increasingly significant means of subsiding legal actions since deep cuts were introduced to legal aid in 2012.


Joanna Sidhu, a former City litigation lawyer who now works for CrowdJustice, said: “Having campaigned for peace in Northern Ireland for most of his life, Ciaran McClean is bringing this legal challenge to hold the government to account. By launching a crowdfunding campaign to support this challenge, Ciaran is giving everyone the opportunity to be part of the fight to preserve our democratic values.”


The initial aim is to raise £20,000 for legal fees but more will be needed if the case progresses to a full hearing in the high court. CrowdJustice has so far helped individuals and organisations raise more than £3m to fund more than 160 cases, three of which have reached the supreme court.

 

[scaramanga]

Be interesting to see if anything comes of this:

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ge-crowdfunded-campaign-good-friday-agreement

A crowdfunding campaign has been launched to raise funds for a potential legal challenge to Theresa May’s parliamentary deal with the Democratic Unionist party, on the grounds that it breaches the Good Friday agreement.


Ciaran McClean, the son of one of the founders of Northern Ireland’s civil rights movement, Paddy Joe McClean, is spearheading the challenge of the arrangement through which the DUP gained a £1bn aid package for the region.


The Green party activist believes the deal, which sees the Conservatives granted an overall majority with the support of the DUP’s 10 MPs, breaches both the landmark 1998 Good Friday agreement and the Bribery Act.


The confidence-and-supply arrangement, signed in Downing Street on 26 June, granted £1bn more funding for hospitals, schools and roads in Northern Ireland in return for DUP support in key Commons votes.

Carwyn Jones, then the first minister of Wales, described the cash as a “straight bung to keep a weak prime minister and a faltering government in office”. The Scottish first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, characterised it as a “grubby, shameless” deal.


McClean is represented by Dominic Chambers QC of Maitland Chambers. Chambers was involved in the successful supreme court challenge to the government’s attempts to trigger article 50 without a Commons vote.


McClean told the Guardian on Sunday that the government “has obligations under international law which are not being observed in this deal with the DUP”. He also argued that the arrangement could be construed as “a bribe to patch together a parliamentary majority”.


McClean, the Green candidate for West Tyrone in the last general election, denied that there would be major benefits to the region from the £1bn deal the DUP extracted from the Tories.


“The £1bn bribe actually threatens the institutions in Northern Ireland. How can there be impartiality when one of the executive parties has the UK government over a barrel?

“This case is not being taken for nostalgia value. The DUP deal threatens to undermine our democracy in Northern Ireland, so it is important that citizens can challenge it,” he said.


The legal team aim to issue high court proceedings this week and will push for the case to be heard as early as possible. The judges, bruised by their experience over the Brexit case, are unlikely to welcome such a sensitive, political challenge but may be forced to deal with the claim. There has already been an exchange of letters over the issue between McClean’s lawyers and the government.


The basis of McClean’s claim is that any deal between the government and DUP is in breach of the 1998 Good Friday agreement, under which the government undertook to exercise its power in Northern Ireland “with rigorous impartiality on behalf of all the people in the diversity of their identities and traditions”. The government is trying to act as an honest broker in re-establishing the collapsed power-sharing executive at Stormont.


A letter from Edwin Coe solicitors argues that any agreement between the DUP and the Conservatives would compromise the government’s independence and breach the reasonable expectation of the citizens of Northern Ireland, including McClean, that the government will act with rigorous impartiality.


McClean writes on the action’s CrowdJustice webpage: “My claim is that as a citizen I expect my government to honour its obligations under the Good Friday agreement and not to bribe others with money so that it can stay in power. My lawyers have put these points to the government. They eventually responded, failing to meet deadlines they set themselves. Nothing they said addresses the fundamental issues behind this corrupt deal.”


David Greene, a senior partner at Edwin Coe, said: “This case is of huge public importance and demonstrates that individuals can call governments to account and the importance of that capability in a democracy.”


Crowdfunding is becoming an increasingly significant means of subsiding legal actions since deep cuts were introduced to legal aid in 2012.


Joanna Sidhu, a former City litigation lawyer who now works for CrowdJustice, said: “Having campaigned for peace in Northern Ireland for most of his life, Ciaran McClean is bringing this legal challenge to hold the government to account. By launching a crowdfunding campaign to support this challenge, Ciaran is giving everyone the opportunity to be part of the fight to preserve our democratic values.”


The initial aim is to raise £20,000 for legal fees but more will be needed if the case progresses to a full hearing in the high court. CrowdJustice has so far helped individuals and organisations raise more than £3m to fund more than 160 cases, three of which have reached the supreme court.

All the government needs to do is offer the same deal to the bomby tacos too. They won't swear allegiance to the queen though so they'll just have to endure the cost of being so petty.

 

[the dza]

All the government needs to do is offer the same deal to the bomby tacos too. They won't swear allegiance to the queen though so they'll just have to endure the cost of being so petty.

I'm no lawyer, but I dunno if that would stand up to scrutiny when the history of Sinn Fein is taken into account. If it is that simple, then I'm surprised they are bothering to try and raise a case.

Interesting that the QC here was involved in the successful challenge over the Article 50 vote.

 

[scaramanga]

I'm no lawyer, but I dunno if that would stand up to scrutiny when the history of Sinn Fein is taken into account. If it is that simple, then I'm surprised they are bothering to try and raise a case.

Intelligent people can be pretty dumb when faced with emotive subjects.

Interesting that the QC here was involved in the successful challenge over the Article 50 vote.

Attention seeking is as attention seeking does.

 

[the dza]

Also, the deal could only be the same deal if the votes from Sinn Fein had equal sway to those of the DUP, which isn't the case as the DUP have more seats, meaning the potential votes of Sinn Fein could still be ignored, which voids the deal. Or something.

 

[scaramanga]

Also, the deal could only be the same deal if the votes from Sinn Fein had equal sway to those of the DUP, which isn't the case as the DUP have more seats, meaning the potential votes of Sinn Fein could still be ignored, which voids the deal. Or something.

The government only need to treat them equally.

I'm sure they'll quite happily offer them £1bn in return for them guaranteeing their votes to the government. It's an easy answer because the government knows they're too petty and small-minded to go for it.

 

[the dza]

The government only need to treat them equally.

I'm sure they'll quite happily offer them £1bn in return for them guaranteeing their votes to the government. It's an easy answer because the government knows they're too petty and small-minded to go for it.

If it is that easy then the court should be able to throw it out fairly quick. I dunno how long it will take to get to that stage though -- how long did the article 50 case take to get to court? It wasn't that long iirc.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/challenge-dup-deal/

That's their crowd-fund page -- when I looked earlier, their target was 20k, they've seemingly exceeded that and now want to hit 100k. I guess it will take a fair bit of dough to take on the government...

 

[Rorschach]

The deal is also being challenged as a breach of the Bribery act. So bribing another party will hardly play well and especially if it is Sinn Fein, who will reject it out of hand and scream blue bloody murder. And where does that leave the smaller parties? What do they get to balance things up?
On the face of it this has a chance of success or they wouldn't be even attempting it. Considering the difficulties ahead relating to the border with the Republic then this is an ill conceived move at best by May.

 

[scaramanga]

The deal is also being challenged as a breach of the Bribery act. So bribing another party will hardly play well and especially if it is Sinn Fein, who will reject it out of hand and scream blue bloody murder. And where does that leave the smaller parties? What do they get to balance things up?
On the face of it this has a chance of success or they wouldn't be even attempting it. Considering the difficulties ahead relating to the border with the Republic then this is an ill conceived move at best by May.

You mean a law firm that will gain massively in publicity and a member of the Green Party (once you're that low you really have nothing to lose)?

The bribery claim is ridiculous, it won't even get started. The money has gone to Northern Ireland, not the DUP. If anything, the DUP are getting the worst if the deal because Sinn Fein don't even need to give their votes for NI to receive extra funding.

In terms of favouring one party over the other, those bringing the claim will need to do a lot more than they currently have done to show some kind of harm being done. The courts can't take action on the basis of "something bad might happen some time in the future because some reason that we haven't properly fleshed out"