Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    IF ANYONE HAS ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE TRIDENT SYSTEM OR NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN GENERAL WHICH THEY WOULD LIKE ME OR TSR TORIES TO ANSWER COULD THEY PLEASE POST THEM IN THE PMQ THREAD.

    AS ME ANSWERING QUESTIONS IN HERE ISNT FAIR ON THE LABOUR PARTY.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    If I may, I will quote the TSR Labour Party's election manifesto:

    The TSR Labour Party is a democratic socialist party which takes pride in considering itself further left of the politics that New Labour advocates today. TSR Labour will work hard to create a society in which every child has fair and equal access to high standards of healthcare, education and local government services. Regardless of background, every person in a TSR Labour society is valuable and will be supported by the government.
    May I ask why then that the TSR Labour Party have seen fit to vote, en-masse, against two nationalisation bills which would provide everyone with cheaper travel and stop water being a commodity for the elite to make money with at the expense of the lower classes? I would also like to question the Democratic Socialist claim when mass nationalisation for the benefit of the workers is a Democratic Socialist ideal.

    Additionally, may I ask how on earth a party can claim to be left wing when they have MPs that openly declare their intent to vote Tory in the next election?

    Summing it up simply: How on earth can you claim to not only be left wing but also more left wing than the IRL Labour party with these numerous strikes against your supposed left wing ideals as laid out in your manifesto?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BruceTaylor)
    If I may, I will quote the TSR Labour Party's election manifesto:



    May I ask why then that the TSR Labour Party have seen fit to vote, en-masse, against two nationalisation bills which would provide everyone with cheaper travel and stop water being a commodity for the elite to make money with at the expense of the lower classes? I would also like to question the Democratic Socialist claim when mass nationalisation for the benefit of the workers is a Democratic Socialist ideal.
    I believe I've discussed the Water Bill with you in previous threads, so I'll focus on your most recent bill here.

    How can you expect me to vote for a bill when none of my concerns were addressed during the short discussion period? As I said in the thread, I am not opposed to the idea of nationalising the railways - you didn't need to convince me there. However, despite being asked repeatedly, you did not come up with a figure or even a rough estimate of how much this was likely to cost. Ideally, I would like to have a cinema in my basement, but I know I can't afford it. I may decide to work towards that goal but I am aware it may take a long time before I get one, if at all.

    I told Michael on MSN yesterday that we were undecided and could be swayed and yet you didn't appear to do anything. Do not blame us - it is your failure to defend the bill and decision to take this to vote after two days which has caused us to vote against it.

    (Original post by BruceTaylor)
    Additionally, may I ask how on earth a party can claim to be left wing when they have MPs that openly declare their intent to vote Tory in the next election?
    Cam you point me to the specific quote(s)?

    (Original post by BruceTaylor)
    Summing it up simply: How on earth can you claim to not only be left wing but also more left wing than the IRL Labour party with these numerous strikes against your supposed left wing ideals as laid out in your manifesto?
    These supposed strikes against our left-wing ideals are not because we fundamentally disagree with you but because we don't think what you are trying to achieve is realistic within the timeframes you are setting. Maybe we take this Model HoC more seriously than you do.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Metrobeans)
    I believe I've discussed the Water Bill with you in previous threads, so I'll focus on your most recent bill here.

    How can you expect me to vote for a bill when none of my concerns were addressed during the short discussion period? As I said in the thread, I am not opposed to the idea of nationalising the railways - you didn't need to convince me there. However, despite being asked repeatedly, you did not come up with a figure or even a rough estimate of how much this was likely to cost. Ideally, I would like to have a cinema in my basement, but I know I can't afford it. I may decide to work towards that goal but I am aware it may take a long time before I get one, if at all.

    I told Michael on MSN yesterday that we were undecided and could be swayed and yet you didn't appear to do anything. Do not blame us - it is your failure to defend the bill and decision to take this to vote after two days which has caused us to vote against it.
    Why vote against? If you support the principle and not the practice, you should surely abstain, rather than lend support to those who would put the interests of the private businesses before that of the people who use the services?!

    Cam you point me to the specific quote(s)?
    Certainly. In the thread she continues to defend her stance.

    These supposed strikes against our left-wing ideals are not because we fundamentally disagree with you but because we don't think what you are trying to achieve is realistic within the timeframes you are setting. Maybe we take this Model HoC more seriously than you do.
    It seems, nay it is obvious, that we take ideology more seriously than both your party as a whole and specific members. No one in the Socialists would vote Tory, especially not for a reason as absurd (at least in terms of British General Elections) as Zionism, especially when Labour does have a friends of Israel grouping.

    Additionally, what we are doing is using the failures of unregulated capitalism which has been government policy for thirty years for the advantage of the people. We are taking the negatives to create positives. That is what a truly progressive, left wing party would do. So we are using this model HoC to make people's lives better. So do not tell me that you take it more seriously. We set out a sliding scale, we could easily have said all companies be bought out at once and all done at once, but we made a viable scheme for its introduction.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BruceTaylor)
    which would provide everyone with cheaper travel
    Rather the middle class alone, and that's assuming you can deliver on magicking 22 billion pounds out of thin air.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Rather the middle class alone, and that's assuming you can deliver on magicking 22 billion pounds out of thin air.
    Very well, so we propose tax rises for some sections of society, yet you would shoot that down too. You have to accept that you need to raise money to spend money.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BruceTaylor)
    Very well, so we propose tax rises for some sections of society, yet you would shoot that down too. You have to accept that you need to raise money to spend money.
    We're not the ones proposing a spend of £22 billion on something absolutely superfluous in the middle of a recession with national debt at its highest level ever. You'll never get a significant tax rise through the Commons either, that much is obvious. You're spending monopoly money.

    If you're so interested in the working classes, why exactly are you proposing a massively expensive reorganisation of a form of transport which is irrelevant to most of them?

    Moreover, do you not think sucking £22 billion from the well-off in this country will affect the poor? £22 billion! That's the entire business rates take for a year - a tax which I proposed a very, very modest reform to (amounting to a few hundred million rather than billions) and was told by the Socialists that it was unaffordable. That's the equivalent of writing off tobacco tax for just under four years, or writing off the council tax.

    Fiscal irresponsibility in the guise of being all caring and compassionate won't cut it.
    Offline

    13
    Is the Labour Party whipping on the Railways bill?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Yup.
    Offline

    13
    Out of curiosity, how is the whip decided in the Labour Party?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alasdair)
    Out of curiosity, how is the whip decided in the Labour Party?
    Normally, there's a discussion thread in our sub-forum and a vote. At the moment, we're working on codifying our procedures.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Metrobeans)
    Normally, there's a discussion thread in our sub-forum and a vote. At the moment, we're working on codifying our procedures.
    Good stuff - I'm happy to see the Labour Party has adopted democratic centralism.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BruceTaylor)
    Why vote against? If you support the principle and not the practice, you should surely abstain, rather than lend support to those who would put the interests of the private businesses before that of the people who use the services?!



    Certainly. In the thread she continues to defend her stance.



    It seems, nay it is obvious, that we take ideology more seriously than both your party as a whole and specific members. No one in the Socialists would vote Tory, especially not for a reason as absurd (at least in terms of British General Elections) as Zionism, especially when Labour does have a friends of Israel grouping.

    Additionally, what we are doing is using the failures of unregulated capitalism which has been government policy for thirty years for the advantage of the people. We are taking the negatives to create positives. That is what a truly progressive, left wing party would do. So we are using this model HoC to make people's lives better. So do not tell me that you take it more seriously. We set out a sliding scale, we could easily have said all companies be bought out at once and all done at once, but we made a viable scheme for its introduction.
    I refuse to accept that one can only vote against a bill if they disagree with the whole concept behind it. If I believe a bill will do more harm than good, I do not want it to pass, so I should vote no.

    With regards to Noemie, clearly Israel is a big issue for her. If voting Conservative is what she feels she needs to do in order to protect the country, no matter absurd you find the reasoning, I don't have an issue with it. Her political opinions are alligned with us and that matters far more.

    In closing, I would say that in general the bills your party submit to the house are too radical to be approved by us. It takes more than agreement in principle for us to vote yes, yet I have noticed this session we don't seem to be passing as many bills as before. I think on the whole, parties are being more rigourous in their analysis of bills.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Bump, dont want people forgetting about us.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    About who?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Indievertigo)
    About who?
    The pretend socialists.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paperclip)
    The pretend socialists.

    Oh. So they have two threads now? :confused:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Any questions or people who just want to make crap comments ?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 01kij114)
    Any questions or people who just want to make crap comments ?
    The house is suppose to be fun first and foremost. :p:

    Ok, if you insist, how does TSR Labour party propose to solve the problem of Iraq and the question of miliary withdrawal?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davireland)
    The house is suppose to be fun first and foremost. :p:

    Ok, if you insist, how does TSR Labour party propose to solve the problem of Iraq and the question of miliary withdrawal?
    The TSR Labour Party has never discussed the issue and as such, we don't have an official position. Personally, I think we should aim towards working with the Iraqi government and training their army/security services so that they can defend their own country.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 17, 2018
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.