Don't know who to vote for? How about RESPECT?
Discussion
Still reading all their manifesto garb, but largely seem pretty refreshing. As ever, I can;t agree on it all, but they mostly seem to have a *better* take on things:
http://www.therespectparty.net/manifesto.php
Of course, you do wonder with all their talk of public services revamps, where all the money is going to come from. If they think it is the rich people/businesses, then I think that's going to fail as the rich, unlike the poor, always have the power to leave...
http://www.therespectparty.net/manifesto.php
Of course, you do wonder with all their talk of public services revamps, where all the money is going to come from. If they think it is the rich people/businesses, then I think that's going to fail as the rich, unlike the poor, always have the power to leave...
k would anyone want Goerge Galloway involved with our government?
essexplumber said:
Not too keen on George Galloway. Where do they stand on green issues?
George Galloway is a far left loony...And he believes in manmadeup global warming...
If you want to feel pain, listen to his shows on Talksport Radio, Fridays and Saturdays from 22.00 hours..
Having said that, it does have its moments...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5b9H7iujrvM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KNgCBZNahY&fea...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqpqI6pqQw4&fea...
mybrainhurts said:
essexplumber said:
Not too keen on George Galloway. Where do they stand on green issues?
George Galloway is a far left loony...And he believes in manmadeup global warming...
If you want to feel pain, listen to his shows on Talksport Radio, Fridays and Saturdays from 22.00 hours..
Having said that, it does have its moments...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5b9H7iujrvM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KNgCBZNahY&fea...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqpqI6pqQw4&fea...
Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons is about as good as democratic humans get...
mattikake said:
The understanding may be questionable, but the motives - to move to entirely renewable energy source [and remove our dependance on oil] are sound.
Their stated policy is fantasy. Reduction in fossil fuel usage of 60 percent, without nuclear, by 2050 is entirely impossible unless they intend to shoot half of the population. hairykrishna said:
mattikake said:
The understanding may be questionable, but the motives - to move to entirely renewable energy source [and remove our dependance on oil] are sound.
unless they intend to shoot half of the population. mattikake said:
The understanding may be questionable, but the motives - to move to entirely renewable energy source [and remove our dependence on oil] are sound.
Cut solar, wind and wave out then yes. Invest in research for renewable energies, and don't set a date for a specific target. As this is something that is not achievable. Close all nuclear plants?!
Where will our energy be coming from?! There is not enough space to put up turbines for that amount of energy required for the UK population.
Thinking you can get all your energy from that is not a sound motive, it is a delusional goal.
If they want to change recycling values, then they should pass a bill to say only biodegradable or reusable materials can be used in packaging.
I don't need to read the policies.Gorgeous George is my local MP and I can tell you he is a one policy politician.
That policy is what can I do or say that can get me back on the gravy train.
I know its not entirely his remit but I haven't seen any improvments for the ward he represents, if anything the infrastructure has grown worse and race relations are probably more strained. Useful as a chocolate tea pot, him and his party.
That policy is what can I do or say that can get me back on the gravy train.
I know its not entirely his remit but I haven't seen any improvments for the ward he represents, if anything the infrastructure has grown worse and race relations are probably more strained. Useful as a chocolate tea pot, him and his party.
mattikake said:
Still reading all their manifesto garb, but largely seem pretty refreshing. As ever, I can;t agree on it all, but they mostly seem to have a *better* take on things:
http://www.therespectparty.net/manifesto.php
Of course, you do wonder with all their talk of public services revamps, where all the money is going to come from. If they think it is the rich people/businesses, then I think that's going to fail as the rich, unlike the poor, always have the power to leave...
A mixed bag, I agree with them on animal rights, disagree on energy policy. Crime and the other things have good points and bad points for me.http://www.therespectparty.net/manifesto.php
Of course, you do wonder with all their talk of public services revamps, where all the money is going to come from. If they think it is the rich people/businesses, then I think that's going to fail as the rich, unlike the poor, always have the power to leave...
AndrewW-G said:
Like many others who are active in the motorsports section, I'm waiting for Matt to publish a collection of video clips to "prove" his point, although I am disapointed he hasnt taken this as an opportunity to slate michael Schumacher
Ha. Nico and Schumi are doing more for that than I ever could this season. 
Anyway, OT I'm probably for Nuclear power - progress and all that - but have no problems with a party that intends to abolish their use. The Sun bombards this planet with all the energy we could ever need every second, all we need to do is harness that. Not just solar arrays and solar towers, but wind and waves that are also powered by the Sun.
It's not like they're going to remove nuclear power first and leave the country in a perpetual state of brown-out (of the non-political kind!). It would undoubtably be a case of *proper* investment in alternative energy to progress toward this.
Personally though I can't wait for Fusion power to take off.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff