Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Try it. Just try it.
Topic Started: Oct 3 2014, 04:22 PM (729 Views)
D-L
Member Avatar
Junior Member
[ *  * ]
First, it was Cameron's red lines and vetos. Then came May's demands. Now it's Grayling and his ultimatum to the ECHR.

The only language they seem to understand is the language of confrontation and threats. Think this is an effective approach to relationships? Well, try it out in your day-to-day life then. Instead of asking for things, demand them. Treat every single conversation as a zero-sum game. Instead of simply ordering a pint at the pub, say "If you don't get me that beer in 30 seconds flat, I'm never coming back here again.". Make sure to throw in lots of threats, ultimatums and red lines.

Report back in a month and tell us how successful that approach has proved for you.
Edited by D-L, Oct 3 2014, 04:23 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Marconi
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Oct 4 2014, 10:18 AM
Nope, he simply flat out denied that he had done anything wrong and insisted that I was the only one who had a problem with him, despite clear evidence to the contrary such as other members of the team crying at her desk. Had the rest of the team been there with me he couldn't have used that argument. I also tried speaking to his boss about it, he knew what he was like but being as he was only a couple of years away from retirement he thought that investment in training would be a waste of money so he was basically going to turn a blind eye until the guy retired.

I found a position elsewhere and last I heard nothing has changed at my old work place.
That's a pity, but well done for trying.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Thanks, it may sound simplistic or even unrealistic but I've always said that logically bullies only exist because we allow them to. If everyone stood up to bullies there wouldn't be any.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gand
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
If the intention is to do away with the European Convention on Human Rights along with EU Charter of Fundamental Rights in favour of a UK Bill of Rights, we will gain a Bill of Rights that is largely an unknown quantity, we may have some idea of what it may contain but it hasn’t been officially drawn up yet … I want to be able to read all the small print.

If we vote Conservative on this, we are voting for a legislation which we don’t fully know how it will impact on our lives, our privacy, our security, our jobs, employment rights, our basic freedoms and way of life … not just as a country, but personally as individuals. We need to remember that legislation on rights can affect us all and not just those we don’t like.

To vote for such an important peace of legislation without a fully comprehensive idea of what it contains or its possible consequences, is to me stupid.

This little turkey won’t be voting for Christmas.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stan Still
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Oct 3 2014, 06:39 PM
Stan Still
Oct 3 2014, 06:33 PM
There is no reason why we cannot draw up a similar bit of legislation that works for us and administered by us, we had one for years that was perfectly adequate until Labour ditched it.
What the Tories are neglecting to state is the at is out of over 600000 cases involving the EHRC and Britain only 8 have involved a decision the government is annoyed about.
The Tories are involved in a nasty exercise that would leave us all with less human rights than the population of North Korea.
It is impossible for any rational person to debate with you, you are so blinded by hate.

You cannot even begin to understand that many people in the UK do not like the fact that we cannot deport those who pose a threat to us, that abuse our hospitality time after time, that commit serious crime including murder and rape then use the very legal system that convicted them to stay here as a burden on the taxpayers for life.

Not only are you filled with hate but you are a hypocrite pretending one second to care for others IMO for political reasons and for your own welfare, but in the next breath you advocate and support the execution of a politician that is doing a job that many people want him to do and needs to be done.

As for Korea now that is a nasty far left country where nobody including their press dare say or do anything you would not last five seconds there one wrong word and one wrong post and you would be gone.

To compare a few changes in one bit of our legislation to that of a soul destroying state such as Korea or as the others of the left prefer Belarus, is sheer lunacy and devoid of any intelligence and not even one small portion of common sense or decency.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stan Still
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Oct 3 2014, 06:47 PM
Stan Still
Oct 3 2014, 06:33 PM
There is no reason why we cannot draw up a similar bit of legislation that works for us and administered by us, we had one for years that was perfectly adequate until Labour ditched it.


What did Labour ditch?

Why is this about "party politics" rather than "good politics"?

You are aware that we have been a signatory of the ECHR since 1950 (Convention came into power in 1953) and that British MP (Tory) and lawyer Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe was one of the principal architects of the ECHR.

This is knee-jerk Toryism for the moronic-masses.

You're smarter than that Stan.

All The Best
Yes I am smarter than that, that is why this is the only reply that your patronising post will get
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Stan Still
Oct 4 2014, 10:56 AM
Pro Veritas
Oct 3 2014, 06:47 PM
Stan Still
Oct 3 2014, 06:33 PM
There is no reason why we cannot draw up a similar bit of legislation that works for us and administered by us, we had one for years that was perfectly adequate until Labour ditched it.




This is knee-jerk Toryism for the moronic-masses.

You're smarter than that Stan.

All The Best
Yes I am smarter than that, that is why this is the only reply that your patronising post will get

We can see that is true ..... too smart to get further involved in an argument you cannot win.

How many times do the Conservatives have to renege on promised amendments to EU policy before you stop believing they ever can or will?


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Oct 4 2014, 12:33 AM
Heinrich
Oct 3 2014, 10:42 PM
You are missing my point. The two are necessarily linked in that Member states of the European Union are required to abide by the European Court of Human Rights. When England leaves the EU, taking Scotland and Wales with it, then it can join Belarus and do as the Tories wish, disregarding the the court but cannot do this as a Member and bound by the Lisbon Treaty.

Bearing this in mind, would it not indicate that when Cameron does go Brussels to negotiate new terms for Britain (his reforms and reclaiming of powers), it will be this sort of threat he uses?

More or less saying, 'if you don't give me what I want, then I'll produce the referendum and join the Brexit side'. The fly in the ointment for Cameron is that they are unlikely to believe him, and will ignore his threats - the UK State wants in, the CBI wants in, all of business including the FS sector want in. No Tory leader is going to swim against that tide.

I'm really looking forward to the shitty Tory party tearing itself apart at some point in the not to distant future, Cameron in my opinion has one of the most thankless jobs in politics, and shock horror I actually have a glimmer of respect for the bloke because of this.

On the one hand you have the Little Englander back bench Tories who essentially hate foreigners, still think the Empire means something and constantly hark back to a mythical past that never really existed, they want out of Europe primarily for emotional reasons, on the other hand we have the main sponsors of modern Conservatism, big business and the City, both know the financial carnage that would result from a Brexit, therefor conflict within Tory ranks is a given, pompous arses v realists is the battle here.

The rejection of the Human Rights Act is a pathetic attempt to win over the retarded back bench Tories and an increasingly gullible public.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Alberich
Member Avatar
Alberich
[ *  *  * ]
Heinrich
Oct 3 2014, 07:18 PM
The European Court of Human Rights is our European court (not a foreign court) which guarantees the rights of all European citizens and the Council of Europe requires Member states of the European Union to accept this court enshrined in the Charter of Human Rights. If England leaves the European Union, Westminster politicians can do what they like. Good luck.
This is palpable nonsense; even by your standard. If ever we were to leave the E.U. (and roll on the day, say I) are you really suggesting that the present separation that exists between our legislature and our courts, will somehow come to an end, and that westimster politicians will be able to "do what they like", as you put it? We have probably the fairest, most liberal, and fiercely independent justice system in the civilised world. Politicians can legislate with a majority in the House, but the role of the judiciary is to interpret and implement legislation, and they have shown over the years that they are not afraid to
ameliorate harsh legislation, and even strike it down if they consider it unjust. What the conservatives are suggesting is that they no longer be bound by the decisions of the ECHR in every case, but will "take note" of that court's decisions, with the final arbiter being our own Supreme court.

In other words, the vast majority of the decisions of the ECHR will not be questioned, but on those rare occasions when their decisions fly in the face of common sense, or are contrary to the will of Parliament, then their perverse decions will not be binding, as they are at present. So if we decide to proceed as has been suggested, and opt out of the ECHR, the sun will still rise the next morning, no-one will be disadvantaged at law, our courts will remain independent bastions of justice, and the only difference will be that the more ludicrous decisions that occasionally eminate from Europe will no longer give succour to the criminal, and the terrorist. It is a sensible move on the part of the coalition, and I hope to God they carry it through.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stan Still
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Affa
Oct 4 2014, 12:23 PM
Stan Still
Oct 4 2014, 10:56 AM
Pro Veritas
Oct 3 2014, 06:47 PM
Stan Still
Oct 3 2014, 06:33 PM
There is no reason why we cannot draw up a similar bit of legislation that works for us and administered by us, we had one for years that was perfectly adequate until Labour ditched it.




This is knee-jerk Toryism for the moronic-masses.

You're smarter than that Stan.

All The Best
Yes I am smarter than that, that is why this is the only reply that your patronising post will get

We can see that is true ..... too smart to get further involved in an argument you cannot win.

How many times do the Conservatives have to renege on promised amendments to EU policy before you stop believing they ever can or will?


Wrong its called can't be arsed to join in circular never ending regurgitated nonsense today, I am too busy doing my nails and washing my hair whilst waiting for some concrete to set. !jk!

If you had not noticed I don't want the EU regulations changed, I want England out of the EU completely we are quite capable of running our own country democratically we managed quite well for many years.

The EU is not a democratic organisation, I want no part of it, it is time we were asked what we think, Labour and the Liberals will not dare not even ask us
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Oct 4 2014, 12:55 PM


I'm really looking forward to the shitty Tory party tearing itself apart at some point in the not to distant future, Cameron in my opinion has one of the most thankless jobs in politics, and shock horror I actually have a glimmer of respect for the bloke because of this.


I have never underestimated him, but respect is too close to honour and so I do not use the word.
It is imo because the man has no honour that he is able to continue - Most people would have crumbled under the weight of hypocrisy and lies that Cameron has survived. He does so because he firstly has no conscience, and secondly because the Establishment need him and therefore do not hold him to account.
A thoroughly nasty man leading a thoroughly nasty party.

He has no lips ......... so "watch my lips" will never apply.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
Alberich
Oct 4 2014, 12:59 PM
Heinrich
Oct 3 2014, 07:18 PM
The European Court of Human Rights is our European court (not a foreign court) which guarantees the rights of all European citizens and the Council of Europe requires Member states of the European Union to accept this court enshrined in the Charter of Human Rights. If England leaves the European Union, Westminster politicians can do what they like. Good luck.
This is palpable nonsense; even by your standard. If ever we were to leave the E.U. (and roll on the day, say I) are you really suggesting that the present separation that exists between our legislature and our courts, will somehow come to an end, and that westimster politicians will be able to "do what they like", as you put it? ...
I am referring to the power of the ruling party's selected Cabinet to disregard the European Court of Human Rights and change English llaw to replace the Human Rights Act with a bill of selected rights which can be added to or amended if the English judiciary are not behaving as the ruling party wishes. That is pretty much doing what they like. This will get the Tories some votes at the next by-election. It is a popular move.
Edited by Heinrich, Oct 4 2014, 02:09 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jeevesnwooster
҈
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 4 2014, 09:07 AM
jeevesnwooster
Oct 4 2014, 01:50 AM
. .I've heard good things about Foster, but Sarah Owen is standing for Labour she's just as out of touch as Amber Rudd if you ask me (look at her 'cutesy selfie' to give a clue). That said she's arguably better, still won't be voting for her

Amber Rudd, that old girl:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/97b6f7e6-ad46-11e2-b27f-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3F8XJV3iE

"“Doesn’t it look a bit depressing?”


“I wanted to be within two hours of London and I could see we were going to win it.”"

Her expenses, her general conduct and her record at parliament leaves loads to be desired. Recently she was snapped at the food bank giving patronising advice to people forced to use the place, nothing annoys me more than that.

All in all, a complete buffoon of an MP.
Interesting FT article, ta. "Buffoon" is a bit harsh imho. She's just not a player and I'd want more than a pawn representing me.

Sad that the media always make sure they say bad things about Hastings. It has issues but it also has a lot of people working very hard to make it better and there are successes too.
Very much so, all in all a good town with a lot of good people I'd say
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Stan Still
Oct 4 2014, 01:01 PM


The EU is not a democratic organisation, I want no part of it, it is time we were asked what we think, Labour and the Liberals will not dare not even ask us


Don't you see that the Liberal's, Labour's position is more honourable?
Over these past few decades the Tories have gone from Euro-sceptic to being Euro-committed.
They are bandwagon jumping, and have no principles - will jump from one passing trend onto the next unhesitatingly.

W Haigue said this about Blair "In more than 20 years in politics, he has betrayed every cause he believed in, contradicted every statement he has made, broken every promise he has given and breached every agreement that he has entered into... There is a lifetime of U-turns, errors and sell-outs. All those hon. Members who sit behind the Prime Minister and wonder whether they stand for anything any longer, or whether they defend any point of principle, know who has led them to that sorry state"

Fitting that Blair Mrk II should take the model even further down the road to where politics, and politicians are universally despised as corrupt and deceitful.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stan Still
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
No I do not think its honourable at all far from it as many have voiced there concerns about the EU the honourable and democratic thing to do would be to ask the people what they want, and abide what the majority want be it stay in or pull out.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Stan Still
Oct 3 2014, 06:33 PM
There is no reason why we cannot draw up a similar bit of legislation that works for us and administered by us, we had one for years that was perfectly adequate until Labour ditched it.
Labour didn't ditch anything, you seem to have totally mistaken what the HRA is, how it takes effect and why it was necessary.




Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Stan Still
Oct 4 2014, 10:56 AM
Yes I am smarter than that, that is why this is the only reply that your patronising post will get
Where did I patronise you?

What did Labour abandon?

All The Best
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
jeevesnwooster
Oct 3 2014, 09:50 PM
Good on you both for wanting to spoil your ballot, I shall be doing just the same
Why spoilt he vote ? Just dont vote at all, for a spoilt vote is just binned and counts for nothing.
Be positive, not negative, and do your duty. Even fringe parties need votes to encourage them, for all new parties have to start somewhere.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Oct 4 2014, 10:30 AM
Thanks, it may sound simplistic or even unrealistic but I've always said that logically bullies only exist because we allow them to. If everyone stood up to bullies there wouldn't be any.
Take heart mate, I am known as a rebel at work as I speak my mind, notwithstanding that, management do not bother me much now. /8/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lewis
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Oct 4 2014, 11:05 PM
Happy Hornet
Oct 4 2014, 10:30 AM
Thanks, it may sound simplistic or even unrealistic but I've always said that logically bullies only exist because we allow them to. If everyone stood up to bullies there wouldn't be any.
Take heart mate, I am known as a rebel at work as I speak my mind, notwithstanding that, management do not bother me much now. /8/
To me the best way of dealing with bullies is to ignore them. They thrive on a reaction as they are typically attention seekers. This is what I tend to do as a rule with the bullies on this website. Mind to here, I do tend to play them up so as to elicit the childish insults, as such behaviour shows them up for what they are.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Oct 4 2014, 10:50 PM
jeevesnwooster
Oct 3 2014, 09:50 PM
Good on you both for wanting to spoil your ballot, I shall be doing just the same
Why spoilt he vote ? Just dont vote at all, for a spoilt vote is just binned and counts for nothing.
Be positive, not negative, and do your duty. Even fringe parties need votes to encourage them, for all new parties have to start somewhere.
We've done this before. Non votes are ignored just treated as not disapproving of whoever wins, voting for minor parties are treated as either supporting that view or being deranged or both.

If any real % of the non voters went in and actively spoilt their votes then they would get looked at, it is the right of the candidates agents to so look. Now if a Tory loses a marginal by 500 votes and his/her agent tells them "funny there were 1,000 spoilt votes with "don't fuck with Human rights" written on them" then they will very much get noticed.

Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jeevesnwooster
҈
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 5 2014, 11:46 AM
We've done this before. Non votes are ignored just treated as not disapproving of whoever wins, voting for minor parties are treated as either supporting that view or being deranged or both.

If any real % of the non voters went in and actively spoilt their votes then they would get looked at, it is the right of the candidates agents to so look. Now if a Tory loses a marginal by 500 votes and his/her agent tells them "funny there were 1,000 spoilt votes with "don't fuck with Human rights" written on them" then they will very much get noticed.

You probably put it more succinctly than I could /8/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
D-L
Member Avatar
Junior Member
[ *  * ]
Affa
Oct 4 2014, 12:33 AM
Bearing this in mind, would it not indicate that when Cameron does go Brussels to negotiate new terms for Britain (his reforms and reclaiming of powers), it will be this sort of threat he uses?
Cameron would do VERY well to get himself a copy of Dale Carnegie's seminal work How to win friends and influence people.
Edited by D-L, Oct 6 2014, 02:27 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply