U.K. Politics: Nadine Dorries resigns her post as MP - or does she?

[SeeForever]

I've never voted Labour and still won't with that awful leader, as said before they picked the wrong brother, like him or loath him Tony Blair was popular with a lot of the people but they have failed to pick a leader who can connect with the people since then IMO

Overall I can't stand politics all they do is say they'll do this and that to get your vote then they don't do it and hope you'll forget about it, and it's laughable when they ask a politician a direct question and they don't answer and just quote of load of rubbish instead, I wish more politicians would speak their mind instead of towing the party line

I will vote as a no vote is a wasted vote though for now I'm not decided who to vote for, but UKIP wouldn't get my vote as I want us to stay in Europe though we do need to change some of the agreements we have there

[ShayLaB]

Another nice graphic...



Shows that UK is paying about £50 billion a year in interest. That's an enormous amount of money going out of our coffers simply to service a debt. The total debt is still rising so it's important that we at least balance the budget.

There is a limit to what a government can do to reduce the burden while the economy of our largest trading partner (EU) is still struggling. However, the wrong policy can do a lot of damage and everytime the opposition parties open their mouths it is always talk of more spending and less cuts...promises of riches without any explanation of how to pay for it. I didn't vote Conservative last time but I have been converted by the improvent in the economy and I want that to continue.

Economics and monetary policy can be complicated but it still boils down to that you can't spend what you do not have.

[Rihab]

Nigel Farage is like the face of British politics here in Germany. lol

uhm no

and while I'm at it, Germans still hate Putin, AFD isn't happening and the € isn't dying

[UKMusicLova]

You're so off the mark it's unreal, Stevyy

I really am unsure who I will be voting for, I need some more time to think about it.

I'm part of a generation (as many of us are) who feels like we've been let down time and time by politics. It is a vicious cycle really - young people don't vote so politicians create policies that benefit people who do vote (generally the older generations), thus leaving more young people disillusioned and not voting. Doesn't help when you have people like Russell Brand who does have influence saying we shouldn't vote.
We have so many young people who are unemployed, and many of those who technically "aren't" are on zero hour contracts. Nick Clegg somehow managed to get young people interested in politics last time around and then shitted on people who voted for him creating an even bigger disillusionment than there was before.

The Greens were on a roll, but I think Natalie Portman's fluff up will have really damaged them. I've always prefered Caroline Lucas. My problem with the Greens is I like most of their policies except their policies on the environment which is pretty ironic

[Plym]

Nigel Farage is like the face of British politics here in Germany. lol

uhm no

i didnt think so. stevyy has been on this "the uk is anti-europe" rant for a while now.

[stevyy]

if the UK is pro european integration, then i'm relieved, if you say it is so.

[4warduntodawn]

I wish I could vote for the Conservatives but I'm from Northern Ireland and all our party's are sectarian and shite so I'll not be voting

[Marius]

Tories: economically, they are most in sync with my views (low taxes, strong property rights, small public sector, low welfare spending, high defence spending). However, the impression i get is that in their view it is perfectly right to be rich, as long as your grandparents were also rich, but not otherwise. This is because of their obsession with maintaining the well-being of the buy-to-let landlords, landowners and pensioners (credit facilities for home buying which push prices into stratosphere, zoning and planning restrictions which reduce the potential stock of housing, ridiculous benefits for pensioners at the expense of employees, students etc).

Labour: while Conservatives are the party of rich landowners, Labour is the party of benefit recipients and public sector unions. Since i have a very low opinion of unions and of most welfare recipients, i have a low opinion of Labour, too. In addition, the hypocrisy of a man who lives in a £2.3m house in Primrose Hill yet goes on and on about inequality is breathtaking. I really liked Tony Blair, but the current Labour lot deserve nothing but contempt.

LIbDems: I don't really get what this party stands for (presumably some centre-ground between the Tories and Labour), but what i like about them is their focus on staying in the EU. I personally would leave the UK if it were to withdraw from the EU, so obviously we have some common ground there. With someone like Danny Alexander or David Laws in charge rather than the Cameron-clone Clegg and the old Marxist Cable, they could be ok. As it is now, they aren't, which is currently well reflected in the polls.

UKIP: I am of Eastern European descent and also am (relatively) young, have a degree, can spell and put a few words together and don't think the world is stuck in the days when UK was a big empire and black people were sold as slaves. Hence, i cannot have any sympathy for a party of raving lunatics and xenophobes. Next.

Green As I am not interested in global warming, i'll pass on this lot too. Their recent swerve to the extreme left does not help either, and neither does the fact that their leader is a weirdo who has no clue what she is talking about.

SNP, Cymru, the Northern Irish parties: i don't live in their areas of "catchment" so i have no opinion on them. As a rule, i don't think they should vote on anything that does not affect their respective regions.

So, yeah, were i to vote it would be be either Tories or LibDems, but cannot say that any of the parties really represents me.

[Graham76man]

I think most politicians play around with things they don't understand. In doing so they back wrong ideas and thinking which supposedly benefits the groups of people that vote for them. They even convince them that it's good for them
Generally it doesn't and it isn't. We often find this out years later, perhaps after the politician has died.
For example:
ALL Politicians think that spending money on Education is a good thing. It's not! It has serious side effects that effects people and countries in different ways.
This election will see politicians of nearly all the main parties attacking the poor. But the government figures reveal that for every million people claiming Jobless benefits, there is another half a million that they say are entitled to it and yet are not claiming it.
The figures are even worse for pensioners who claim pension credit (money that tops up weak or small pensions to keep them out of poverty). For every pensioner that claims it there's another who is entitled to it (as I said on government figures) who does not. Yet all we here about is "benefit fraud" topped up with TV shows showing dodgy people on "benefit estates".
However when it comes down to it the Department of Work and Pensions causes three times the lost money than benefit fraud does, by simply getting the benefits payments wrong!
That figure however doesn't even match the level of Tax fraud and evasion!
If it was in terms of people the figures would look like this:
Benefit Fraud 1person
Benefit Error 3 people
Tax Fraud 32 people

Remember all the figures quoted here are from the current government, not some "left wing outfit".

Just something to think about when you vote or not

[Wayne]

^ your judgment of a wrong idea, the beautiful thing about a democracy is that everyone has the right to an opinion, an idea to buy into.

Who will you be voting for Graham?

[Brad]

Green As I am not interested in global warming, i'll pass on this lot too.

Um. Global warming isn't something any of us should be "interested" in but taking steps to combat/prevent.

Environmental issues are not the focus of the Green manifesto either. Like every other party, it's just one of the things in there with which they have policies on. In their case, it happens to be a green stance, which they rightly pride themselves upon. It's odd that people still think that's their only/primary focus. It's unfortunate for them.

I'm shocked that the Tories are currently leading the poll. Looks like southern folly but at least it's not UKIP. I won't be voting in the poll and I doubt I'll disclose who I vote for. Maybe after the election.

[Graham76man]

^ your judgment of a wrong idea, the beautiful thing about a democracy is that everyone has the right to an opinion, an idea to buy into.

Who will you be voting for Graham?

The General Election is nothing to do with democracy Being that most people who have voted didn't vote for the party that takes office. Your quite right it's my opinion, but since I'm not a member of Parliament mine can never be credited with being true or factual. That privilege goes to only those with the word Member of Parliament or those classed as advisors to them. Even when years after (in some cases) or soon after it is shown to be wrong, by most of the body that agreed with it. Especially members of Parliament.

In any case I didn't actually state any examples of wrong ideas. The only thing that I said was that Education, which is soon as positive by most MP's - isn't in reality.
Although the Education system has encouraged equality for sections of society. Those same sections have suffered like the rest of us from the negative effects which mostly outweigh the positive. And neither of the positive or negative effects are to do with exam results or the stuff that actually goes off in Education. There's no point having qualifications for jobs which because of the negative side effects have been done away with!

As for who I vote for that is always the Green Party. But that doesn't mean that I agree with everything they do. Indeed I think they are as bad as the rest, but are probably the best of a bad lot. :-?

[Wayne]

Tories hold narrow lead ahead of general election in latest ICM/Guardian poll

Conservatives remain on 36%, while Labour gains three points, Ukip are unchanged with 9%, Green party falls back and Lib Dems hit 25-year low

David Cameron’s Conservatives hold a slender one-point lead according to the latest Guardian/ICM poll, after Labour gained three points over the past month.

The Tories are unchanged on 36%, with Labour on 35% – while both Liberal Democrat and Green support has fallen away from recent surveys.

The Lib Dems plumb entirely new depths. Nick Clegg’s party sinks two points from an already miserable February score to stand at just 8%, which – with a general election just six weeks away – is their worst showing in the long-running Guardian/ICM series in a quarter of a century.

Ahead of them, in third place stands Ukip– unchanged at 9% – giving them a one-point lead over the junior partner in the coalition.



The Greens appear to have paid a price for poor performances by Natalie Bennett, their leader, in media interviews. This month her party sinks three points to 4%, less than half its January standing of 9%.

The poll also finds that there some public anxiety about the role the surging SNP could have in any future government at a time when the electoral arithmetic suggests that Labour would have to reply on SNP support to form a government.

Across the whole of Great Britain, 43% of voters say that they would be “worried about a separatist party deciding who runs the UK”, far more than the mere 14% who feel enthusiastic about “a different party shaking things up at Westminster”.

The potency of this attack line should not be overdone however – a substantial proportion of 37% say that they are “relaxed: Scottish National MPs have as much right to govern” as any other MPs.

ICM records the SNP on 5% overall. In Scotland, in a small sub-sample of the overall poll, their level of support is recorded at 56%.

With the race so close, George Osborne’s budget on Wednesday could be a make-or-break event for Cameron’s hopes of remaining in Downing Street.

Ahead of this, ICM tested voters’ financial mood using a tracker question about feelings about “the economy ... your financial position, and your ability to keep up with the cost of living”, which it has used regularly over the years, and confirmed a generally positive mood, with 61% of respondents reporting that they felt confident, as against just 38% who were not confident.

This is the exact reverse of the figures for the depths of the credit crunch, in July 2008, when by 61% to 38% voters said that they were not confident. It also represents a sharp turnaround from the long semi-slump under the coalition, in 2011/12, when more people than not gave the anxious answer to this same question.

When ICM asked what budget measures which the public would most like to see, raising the level of the personal tax allowance comes out top – the choice of 25%. Osborne has already promised to raise the £10,000-a-year allowance to £10,600 in April, but there is speculation that he may go higher.

There is less support for cutting petrol duty, the priority of just 6%, even though that is something Osborne has repeatedly done.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... rdian-poll

[Marius]

ALL Politicians think that spending money on Education is a good thing. It's not! It has serious side effects that effects people and countries in different ways.

What do you mean exactly? Do you mean policies like producing millions of graduates with Mickey Mouse degrees who then end up working in McDonalds or are you saying that the state making sure everyone gets a basic level of literacy (ie staying in school until 16-18) is bad?

LE: just read your other post, answering Wayne's. I am of the opinion that someone educated would be able to switch careers reasonably easily, should their current job be done away with. For example, i started working in accounting, moved into a type of job in the City which has long been off-shored, continued in a job that has been made uneconomical by new regulations and currently do a totally different job which involves lots of coding. Having a number of degrees and qualifications made these career changes much easier.

This election will see politicians of nearly all the main parties attacking the poor. But the government figures reveal that for every million people claiming Jobless benefits, there is another half a million that they say are entitled to it and yet are not claiming it.

I don't think many politicians attack the poor, generally right-wing politicians attack those perceived as lazy (and hence poor) and left-wing politicians attack rich people instead. No one (myself included) says that someone who is poor because of a permanent handicap which prevents them from holding a normal job should starve. However, many agree that someone with no qualifications and who refuses jobs like cleaning toilets should not receive benefits

I agree with you, however, that benefit fraud is a false issue and that it means almost nothing in the grand scheme of things when it comes to balancing the books. IMO the big problem is the very existence of some benefits, not the fact that 2-3% of the amount is fraudulently claimed. I doubt any sane person can seriously argue that people receiving housing benefit should live in areas like Kensington & Chelsea or that pensioners that own 2 London flats and rent them out for £2,000 a month each should receive free bus passes and heating subsidies. Or that people whose kids live in other countries should receive child benefit for them.

[oasisbobo]

Any thoughts on the budget?

[Marius]

Green As I am not interested in global warming, i'll pass on this lot too.

Um. Global warming isn't something any of us should be "interested" in but taking steps to combat/prevent.

OK, read that as I am less interested than most in combating / preventing it and hence the Greens are not my cup of tea. In any case, the fact that they are by far the most left-wing party around (beating even the SNP) would have made me not consider them even if i were a tree-hugger.

[Wayne]

Courtesy of the fabulous BBC, here's the highlights [or lowlights!] of this year's budget...

UK Budget - 2015

George Osborne has delivered his sixth Budget as chancellor, and the last of the current Parliament. Here is a summary of the key announcements in his statement.

The state of the economy

• UK grew 2.6% in 2014, faster than any other advanced economy but lower than 3% predicted in December[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• 2.5% growth forecast in 2015, up from 2.4% predicted in December, followed by 2.3%, 2.3%, 2.3% and 2.4% in the next four years[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Record employment in the UK, with jobless rate to fall to 5.3% this year[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Trade deficit figures "the best for 15 years"[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Living standards "higher" than in May 2010, according to OBR data, with households better off by an average of £900 in last five years[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Inflation projected to fall to 0.2% in 2015[/*:m:2ejxg11p]

Public borrowing/deficit/spending

• Borrowing set to fall from £97.5bn in 2013-14 to £90.2bn in 2014-15, £75.3bn in 2015-6, £39.4bn in 2016-7, £12.8bn in 2017-8 before reaching a £5.2bn surplus in 2018-9[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Debt as a share of GDP to fall from 80.4% in 2014 to 80.2% in 2015-16 before falling in every year, reaching 71.6% in 2019-20[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Additional £30bn savings needed in next Parliament[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Public spending squeeze to end a year earlier than planned in 2019-2020, with spending from then to grow in line with total economic growth [/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Welfare bills set to be an average of £3bn lower each year than predicted in December, and interest charges on government gilts £35bn lower[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Sale of £13bn Northern Rock and Bradford & Bingley mortgage assets[/*:m:2ejxg11p]

Pensions

• The lifetime allowance for pension savings that can be accumulated free of tax will be cut from £1.25m to £1m from April 2016, saving £600m annually[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Pensioners will be able to trade in their annuities for cash pots, with the 55% tax charge abolished and tax applied at the marginal rate[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Widows of police officers and firefighters who choose to marry again will have their existing pensions protected[/*:m:2ejxg11p]

Alcohol, tobacco and gambling and fuel

• Beer duty cut by 1p a pint and cider by 2p. 2% cut in excise duty on scotch whisky and other spirits while wine duty frozen[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• No changes to tobacco and gambling taxes, with tobacco duties set to rise by 2% above inflation, equivalent to 16p on a packet of 20 cigarettes. [/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• New "horse racing betting right" to replace the 50-year old horserace betting levy on British bookmakers[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Petrol duty frozen - September's planned increase cancelled[/*:m:2ejxg11p]

Personal taxation

• The tax-free personal allowance to rise from £10,600 in 2015-6 to £10,800 in 2016-7 and £11,000 in 2017-8[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• The threshold at which people start paying 40p income tax to rise by above inflation from £42,385 in 2014-5 to £43,300 in 2017-8[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Annual paper tax returns to be abolished, replaced by digital accounts. [/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Transferable tax allowance for married couples to rise to £1,100[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Class two national insurance contributions for self-employed to be abolished in next Parliament[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Review of inheritance tax avoidance through "deeds of variation"[/*:m:2ejxg11p]

Savings

• New personal savings allowance - first £1,000 interest on savings income to be tax-free for basic rate taxpayers and £500 allowance for 40p tax ratepayers.[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Annual savings limit for ISAs increased to £15,240[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• "Fully flexible" ISA will allow savers to withdraw money and put it back later in the year without losing any of their tax-free allowance[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• New "Help to Buy" ISA for first-time buyers will allow government to top up by £50 every £200 saved for a deposit[/*:m:2ejxg11p]

Armed forces

• A further £75m from Libor fines to go to charities for regiments which fought in Afghanistan and government to contribute towards permanent memorial to those who died in Afghanistan and Iraq and help renovate Battle of Britain memorials[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• £25m to support army veterans, including nuclear test veterans[/*:m:2ejxg11p]

Business

• Tax on "diverted profits" to come into effect next month, aimed at multinational firms moving profits "artificially offshore"[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Annual bank levy to rise to 0.21%, raising an extra £900m. Banks to be barred from deducting compensation for mis-selling from corporation tax[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Supplementary charge on North Sea oil producers to be cut from 30% to 20% while petroleum revenue tax to fall from 50% to 35%. New tax allowance to encourage investment in North Sea [/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Review of business rates[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Automatic gift aid limit for charities to be extended to £8,000[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Farmers allowed to average incomes for tax purposes over five years[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• New tax credit for orchestras and consultation on tax relief for local newspapers[/*:m:2ejxg11p]

Health and education

• Consultation on proposal to offer loans of up to £25,000 for UK students studying for PhDs and research-based master's degrees.[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Mental health services to get £1.25bn in extra funding[/*:m:2ejxg11p]

Housing/infrastructure/transport/regions

• £15m church repair roof fund to be trebled[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Up to £600m to clear new spectrum bands for auction to improve mobile networks: commitment to deliver ultra-fast broadband to all homes[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• New powers for Mayor of London over skills and planning[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• Greater Manchester councils to be allowed to keep 100% of growth in business rates[/*:m:2ejxg11p]
• New inter-city rail franchise for south west of England[/*:m:2ejxg11p]

UK Budget Calculator

[Graham76man]

ALL Politicians think that spending money on Education is a good thing. It's not! It has serious side effects that effects people and countries in different ways.

What do you mean exactly? Do you mean policies like producing millions of graduates with Mickey Mouse degrees who then end up working in McDonalds or are you saying that the state making sure everyone gets a basic level of literacy (ie staying in school until 16-18) is bad?

LE: just read your other post, answering Wayne's. I am of the opinion that someone educated would be able to switch careers reasonably easily, should their current job be done away with. For example, i started working in accounting, moved into a type of job in the City which has long been off-shored, continued in a job that has been made uneconomical by new regulations and currently do a totally different job which involves lots of coding. Having a number of degrees and qualifications made these career changes much easier.

This election will see politicians of nearly all the main parties attacking the poor. But the government figures reveal that for every million people claiming Jobless benefits, there is another half a million that they say are entitled to it and yet are not claiming it.

I don't think many politicians attack the poor, generally right-wing politicians attack those perceived as lazy (and hence poor) and left-wing politicians attack rich people instead. No one (myself included) says that someone who is poor because of a permanent handicap which prevents them from holding a normal job should starve. However, many agree that someone with no qualifications and who refuses jobs like cleaning toilets should not receive benefits

I agree with you, however, that benefit fraud is a false issue and that it means almost nothing in the grand scheme of things when it comes to balancing the books. IMO the big problem is the very existence of some benefits, not the fact that 2-3% of the amount is fraudulently claimed. I doubt any sane person can seriously argue that people receiving housing benefit should live in areas like Kensington & Chelsea or that pensioners that own 2 London flats and rent them out for £2,000 a month each should receive free bus passes and heating subsidies. Or that people whose kids live in other countries should receive child benefit for them.

On the two points you raised. First the education side effects are nothing to do with teaching, qualifications or who has them or not. They are caused by compulsory education of anyone aged between 12 and 18. Or should I say the mixing of this age group with only people of the same or similar age to them, especially during daylight hours. You see at that age Human Beings pass through puberty. In the development of people this helps shape them for the rest of their lives. In the distant past young people after the age of 12 were generally experiencing the wider world in which they lived, mixing with people of different ages and experiences. However when any country started to send children to school after this age, people started to develop personalities and experiences that are more in tune with what only young people will know. This has encouraged behaviour patterns that in the past affected only a very small percentage of the population, because we ALL have these things built into the human body. But thanks to the education "system" they are much more common.
These are just some of the side effects: Various religions do not know if they are coming or going, literally! Divorce figures have shot through the roof, crime has soared, a sex revolution. Single parents are now common; estates have more kids than adults, despite the pill. We have more teenage pregnancies. Marriage is most likely in decline. Abuse cases have increased, violence in relationships increased. Drink and drugs abuse, together with the dealing of drugs. Violent crime has increased, along with sexual crime, rape, of even elderly women. The breakdown of the family unit is all too common, together with massive levels of homeless and another class, the under class developed, in a supposedly class less society. We have poverty in a welfare state system that was to stop mass unemployment. Also we see politeness very much in decline, rudeness very much on the up. Racism and racial intolerance increases. Apathy over crime and the hard won vote, with people that don’t seem to care about others and feelings of being powerless. Women now work more than men do. Vandalism, litter and graffiti are everywhere. Farmers are leaving the Countryside and city dwellers are living in their homes, while decline of most cities sets in, despite attempts to control it. Others have the feeling to escape the modern society or to blow parts of it up.
On the other hand gains have been made such as: massive technological advance, urban sprawl, wealth, sexual liberation for women and children freed from working till at least 16, more broadminded people who tolerate and protect those who are different and many more.

Of course if you were to tell an MP that all this was caused by education, they would think you are bonkers. But since I am "bonkers" I can say that education is the cause of these things. At the moment it's only my theory. It's likely to stay that way too. Since I can't imagine some University department coming up with research that by definition will show that that institution they are connected with and those that feed them are the cause of problems!
But if anyone is interested I have put some of my work on my blog under the title Reflected People.
http://therealchart.blogspot.co.uk/p...ed-people.html

On the benefits issue. The UK Government is committed to the European Court of Human Rights. That states that people should have a "decent" income that will provide things for them to live on. This means that a safety net benefit HAS to be provided. This safety net benefit is by the Government considered to be JSA. However since JSA is linked to finding work and "actively" seeking work then it can be removed from a person, which can result in nothing for that person to live on. This by definition would therefore break the UK's agreement to the Human Rights.
The Employment Service often use the term "Hardship Payments", but there is no right to these for anyone.
Of course most people think that if a person doesn't apply for jobs, should have the benefit stopped. Thus saving taxpayers money. Apart from the fact that breaks the Human Rights thing, it doesn't do the Country that much good either. This can be proved too. Since the Tory party did away with the dole for everyone aged 16 to 18, some years ago. The Police figures for the period immediately after showed a rapid increase in crime for the 16 to 18 age group. So it would appear that if you have a home and some money or valuables, then doing away with dole money in this way means that you will pay from having things stolen for perhaps 5p off your tax, but that might be taken off to provide for the same people in prison, much more expensive.
Since all that is required to keep a person just out of being desperate is about £60 a week, is it too much to ask? You can have course have a higher rate for those who are needing to seek paid employment, with all the penalties that would go along with it for not doing it. But many people do some form of work anyway, in the form of volunteers, this can contribute a lot to the economy. But it is not recognised. In fact the Employment Service wants people to look only for paid work that often fills up the full day. I can tell you they look down their nose at people who do Voluntary work.
However a lot of benefit misuse is not by people who are not looking for work, it's by people who do have a job and either sign on or claim allowances they are not entitled too. But this also benefits employers, since they are not paying such people NI contributions, for if they did it would show up at the benefit agency and they would not get the benefits.
Even work has it's problems since most of what people do in work is bad for them. High levels of stress, accidents, even physical problems, such as back problems, muscle problems and joints caused by standing too long, working on keyboards etc. High Sickness benefits counts account for a great deal of the budget of welfare. Most caused by people who were in work and can no longer do so.

[Wayne]

The Queen has now dissolved parliament, meaning the campaigning really begins!

Come on you Tories!!

[stevyy]

i am very excited about the election.. (and i'm not even a british citizen, nor am i living in the UK hehe).

will the Queen go voting as well? (and the Royal Family)?

[Wayne]

Legally, she's allowed to vote. Though she [or her heir] wouldn't ever vote as it would be considered unconstitutional. She is after all the boss, and is the head of which ever government wins the election - so it wouldn't be right for her to vote.

[stevyy]

Legally, she's allowed to vote. Though she [or her heir] wouldn't ever vote as it would be considered unconstitutional. She is after all the boss, and is the head of which ever government wins the election - so it wouldn't be right for her to vote.

ah, okay. i sensed it would have been difficult for them to vote.

[Brad]

Ha. Someone get the idiot to read this.

[Wayne]

2005 though, pre-recession - we're 10 years down the line now.

It's not right that 900,000 people use food banks each year. And failing to prevent that is a failure of governing for both the Conservatives and Labour.

[Brad]

There's no excuse for the rise in people relying on food banks under the coalition. It's one of their many failures.