Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiss)
    Why isn't there a model BNP party? That would make things a lot more interesting.
    There was originally and people have tried to create some since. It tended to attract trolls and racists.
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    There was originally and people have tried to create some since. It tended to attract trolls and racists.
    An accurate portrayal of the real life BNP one might say

    Also a question, as an MP now, am I entitled to vote on everything in the division lobby straight away?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DivinityA)

    Also a question, as an MP now, am I entitled to vote on everything in the division lobby straight away?
    Yes.
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Alright, thank you meenu
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DivinityA)
    An accurate portrayal of the real life BNP one might say

    Also a question, as an MP now, am I entitled to vote on everything in the division lobby straight away?
    Yes, but the only thing open at the moment is the Democracy in Africa Motion.
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Indeed, was just making sure o/
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Out of curiosity, what's everyone's thoughts about the recent Grangemouth dispute? It seems to me that both Ineos and Unite have acted deplorably, giving very little thought to the workers who would be affected - and the community at large which could have been devastated.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blue Meltwater)
    Out of curiosity, what's everyone's thoughts about the recent Grangemouth dispute? It seems to me that both Ineos and Unite have acted deplorably, giving very little thought to the workers who would be affected - and the community at large which could have been devastated.
    I think Unite have themselves to blame. It was a business that was losing millions of pounds a year, and yes despite the fact it has a parent company which can absorb those losses, why on earth they thought that meant it wouldn't be closed just beggars belief.

    I was truly astonished at how ignorantly they acted, happy to risk the jobs of 800 people for the sake of an internal investigation. The company I don't think is significantly in the wrong here; they're investing millions whilst trying to turn it into a profitable site, which when they have hundreds of workers on archaic, yesteryear union contracts is not easy.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    It's easy to blame Unite for not accepting the new conditions despite the fact that the plant was losing ten million a year, but we don't know the full story behind it. According to this, there are 1370 staff, but also 2000 contractors employed. From what I am aware of, which may be wrong, the proposed changes only affected staff, not contractors. Well, if I was staff I'd also be pretty pissed if my salary and pension had to be cut but the contractors, who can make between two to three times as much as they would if they were staff and pay less tax too, didn't have their rates cut either.

    I am not saying that the above is definitely true, but it's something to consider. And, of course, the unions may have also just been greedy and thought they could bully Ineos into continuing to run a loss-making facility.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blue Meltwater)
    Out of curiosity, what's everyone's thoughts about the recent Grangemouth dispute? It seems to me that both Ineos and Unite have acted deplorably, giving very little thought to the workers who would be affected - and the community at large which could have been devastated.
    The staff were offered a very simple choice, accept a cut to pay and pensions in return for the company making a £0.3bn investment which would effectively guarantee their jobs until 2025 or they would leave. While i can understand how people would be aggrieved at taking a cut in pay and pensions Ineos were actually quite transparent and clear in what they would do depending on the decision of the employees. Unite in a typical display of trade union arrogance believed that they knew best and they paid the price, as a result of saving the plant after the decision to shut it down the new agreement has measures in it to significantly weaken the unions position.

    Ineos were certainly not the good guys in all of this however the decision to reject the deal and strike was certainly reckless and irresponsible.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Melancholy)
    I love listening to the Assassin's Creed II soundtrack while I study.
    Why? I don't remember what it sounds like.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    The staff were offered a very simple choice, accept a cut to pay and pensions in return for the company making a £0.3bn investment which would effectively guarantee their jobs until 2025 or they would leave. While i can understand how people would be aggrieved at taking a cut in pay and pensions Ineos were actually quite transparent and clear in what they would do depending on the decision of the employees. Unite in a typical display of trade union arrogance believed that they knew best and they paid the price, as a result of saving the plant after the decision to shut it down the new agreement has measures in it to significantly weaken the unions position.

    Ineos were certainly not the good guys in all of this however the decision to reject the deal and strike was certainly reckless and irresponsible.
    I'd mostly agree with that. I just take issue with a situation where you have a minute number of incredibly wealthy people making decisions which could utterly destroy the lives of hundreds of those less well-off. But I suppose that's how unregulated capitalism works.

    It was interesting, I was at this talk earlier featuring Iain Macwhirter, and Grangemouth came up. He argued that it would have been unlikely that a deal could have been reached without the intervention of the Scottish Government, considering how little this breached the Westminster bubble, not even being mentioned in Prime Minister's Questions. If this is true, I think it would be a good argument in favour of a more decentralised, perhaps federal form of government in the UK, where each local region/country has a body defending local interests that has real political influence.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Blue Meltwater)
    I'd mostly agree with that. I just take issue with a situation where you have a minute number of incredibly wealthy people making decisions which could utterly destroy the lives of hundreds of those less well-off. But I suppose that's how unregulated capitalism works.

    It was interesting, I was at this talk earlier featuring Iain Macwhirter, and Grangemouth came up. He argued that it would have been unlikely that a deal could have been reached without the intervention of the Scottish Government, considering how little this breached the Westminster bubble, not even being mentioned in Prime Minister's Questions. If this is true, I think it would be a good argument in favour of a more decentralised, perhaps federal form of government in the UK, where each local region/country has a body defending local interests that has real political influence.
    What role did the Scottish government play in this? As far as I am aware it was solely a spat between Ineos and Unite. Salmond threatened to nationalise it should it be close, which would have been silly as politicians haven't a clue about how to run a petrochemicals plant, especially one that's losing over a hundred million a year, but I am not aware of any intervention by them.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blue Meltwater)
    I'd mostly agree with that. I just take issue with a situation where you have a minute number of incredibly wealthy people making decisions which could utterly destroy the lives of hundreds of those less well-off. But I suppose that's how unregulated capitalism works.

    It was interesting, I was at this talk earlier featuring Iain Macwhirter, and Grangemouth came up. He argued that it would have been unlikely that a deal could have been reached without the intervention of the Scottish Government, considering how little this breached the Westminster bubble, not even being mentioned in Prime Minister's Questions. If this is true, I think it would be a good argument in favour of a more decentralised, perhaps federal form of government in the UK, where each local region/country has a body defending local interests that has real political influence.
    True but the beauty of the capitalist system is that if people like you are unhappy then there's nothing to stop you and your friends forming a grand co-operative petrochemicals plant, ultimately my approach is that if you actively choose to work for somebody then you accept the consequences of that action which may be being made unemployed.

    I do indeed support a more locally orientated political system.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    If anyone is interested in a bit of nerdy HOC trivia, I've updated my spreadsheet on MPs through the years. Enjoy!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birchington)
    If anyone is interested in a bit of nerdy HOC trivia, I've updated my spreadsheet on MPs through the years. Enjoy!
    Audi and Vionar are no long MPs, they have been replaced by 002 and DivinityA Didn't realise I'd been around quite so long though! Scary...
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I have noticed that I am beginning to develop a vague northern accent which comes out when I'm drunk. This is most bizarre...
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    Audi and Vionar are no long MPs, they have been replaced by 002 and DivinityA Didn't realise I'd been around quite so long though! Scary...
    Cheers, I'll get that updated.

    And yes, it's a little scary for us veterans! All good fun though.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birchington)
    If anyone is interested in a bit of nerdy HOC trivia, I've updated my spreadsheet on MPs through the years. Enjoy!
    Minor niggles here. Moleman was elected in the 14th, exactly the same time as me, not the 16th. Qwertish was elected in the by-election of the 16th parliament.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    I have noticed that I am beginning to develop a vague northern accent which comes out when I'm drunk. This is most bizarre...
    Mine comes out when i'm drunk :lol: I have to talk 'proper' english around my friends here though or they don't understand a word.
 
 
 
Poll
Were you ever put in isolation at school?

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.