Debate2010: To what extent will the General Election purge British politics?

Debate2010 is great stuff Mr Brogan, I’m enjoying it immensely despite its two flaws.

On the face of it a good idea. It’s success will rather depend on whether or not the DT responds with coverage which mirrors the views of it’s readers.
How many times have we seen stories which should have been front page relegated to the blogs?

Excellent idea. I just hope that the politicians and the civil servants understand that there is a tremendous amount to do to clean up British politics at all.

There will be many new MPs in the next government because of the number of sitting MPs standing down and that will create a breathing space.

The ripples of inequality and advantages taken by current and previous MPs together with inbalance in public sector pay and pensions means that there is need for a seismic shift in remuneration packages, expenses, and what is expected.

This requires a completely new addidood, and turkeys don’t vote for Christmas so it will need to be imposed on a very reluctant Westminster village which will grumble and moan thereby prolonging the agony for the incumbents and extending the time it takes for the electorate to even begin to trust them again.

An open debate, such as this, could make a difference if, and only if, the Westminster village inhabitants take notice of it and embrace the output.

What you describe is not new, and with all things, it is subject to censorship or bias reporting. One only has to watch BBC or Sky news for some good examples, or try press sites like Guardian. People, including myself, cannot even comment anymore because they don’t like what I say, and I wonder will Telegraph follow suit. Then of course there are sites like the British Democracy Forum, and what I joke that turned out to be. No sooner had I filed my own article for debate a trusted member started complaining. I seen what was coming and said as much on another site. The article was removed without grounds. Censorship and propaganda are rife. Anyway, what follows is my own article:

Tuesday, 23 March 2010
News or Propaganda

The media can and do influence the public on range of issues including how they vote. Many will have noticed the bias reporting across the board of which often conflict with public perception of what is and what is not, as can often been seen within the comment sections of many news articles. How often had the authors of such articles been criticised by their readers?

One such example is the EU propaganda machine, and yes, I am bias against the EU, but am I wrong. How many billions had been invested by the EU propaganda machine, and all at the tax payers expense. The tax payers are actually paying for this misinformation. A search on google will also reveal the great incentives offered journalist for writing articles with great cash prizes, and again, the tax payers are paying for it.

When reading articles, a number of which I even pasted within a number of debate forums, I also read the comment sections. For me they supply a wealth of information, and often include links to support their view points. People in any area are better informed about what is happening in their communities because they live in those communities. They report what they see every time they leave their home, and they report their experiences on range of issues, many of which commented sharing the same experiences and views.

Journalists are reminded that their job is to report the news not create it or report a bias view out of context with the facts.

Alas, the whole political system has become rotten, and we need a new start, with new people.

The colonists in America had it right when they first rebelled against the British monarchy.

In those early days, government by the people for the people really meant something, although they too have now lost their way.

The people of Britain and America must shake themselves out of apathy and take an interest in what politicians are doing to their country.

The country belongs to the people, not the politicians, and we need to remind them of it regularly, not just every few years at election time.

Freedom doesn’t come cheaply, sometimes it is only won in blood, therefore we should treasure every scrap that we hold.

Allowing politicians to give away our rights and freedom should have been cause for uproar, yet it all happened accompanied by a deafening silence.

Are we to sleepwalk into yet another period under evil government, until we awake to find that we have no rights and no freedoms left?

Our forefathers fought and bled to obtain the right to vote. Don’t disrespect them by staying at home on election day, USE IT!

owdal80 @ 9.52am

100% correct, sir. It would help in the runup to the election if the DT reminded voters of the MPs who abused expenses, flipped homes etc.

I would like to see every one of them banished. There is a lot of sh1t to be cleared from the stables.

The big question surely is whether we will ever be rid of this stinking Labour Party. The depressing polls and the rigged political system suggest that afetr everything we have suffered Brown will be back with the largest party.

This on a day when the Mail is running strories about new strike plans and old-fashioned communists infiltrating Unite and plotting to control Labour’s post-election agenda.

It is increasingly difficult to understand how the British people can continue to contemplate voting for this dangerous and disgraced marxist political clique when they can can see the consequences of their disastrous regime all around them.

Sadly we have perhaps underestimated the exrent of the 13 years educational brainwashing of a moronic,semi-literate generation brought up mouthing the platitudes of the left who cannot think for themselves or see beyond their own noses.

I n the end people will get the politicians and the government they deserve

Damocles on Mar 24th, 2010 at 9:11 am – I’m not sure what two flaws you are referring to – but could it be that it hasn’t put up the Manifesto’s for UKIP and the BNP – could they be afraid voters might actually prefer them over the LibLabCon.

McKeane on Mar 24th, 2010 at 10:47 am, Not it’s not that.

I’m sure someone can link up to the BNP’s manifesto, someone has already done that for YouKippers.

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Kate Day, Alex Clough and Debate2010, Benedict Brogan. Benedict Brogan said: Debate2010: To what extent will the General Election purge British politics? http://bit.ly/c30mDH [...]

Just hope that this new blog does not get censored and that minority parties get a look in without having their supporters comments chopped off by mass complaints from the sheeple party supporters.

Hi to all posters so far – have been a lurker on the Dan Han blogs for a fair while now and like what I see happening.

I’m another one who will not be supporting a NuBlu party just to kick out the Bruin – better CMD gets ousted for failure than we get son of Blair and a continuation of the control machine – because Bruin will be master of a hung parliament and will have nowhere left to run ! And so many new and inexperienced MP’s he’ll probably have to promote the Harridan to some important position and watch her incompetance shine through – Not for the first (or second or third) time !

UKIP – you know it makes sense !

Three issues now:

1. Logins don’t persist.
2. Look and Feel is inconsistent.
3. “Recent Replies” is pants. I click on recent replies as being 1 and 5 or so comments come up? Why?

Damocles on Mar 24th, 2010 at 10:50 am – no thank you for the BNP manifesto, my point was (as I am sure you were aware) that the all singing, all dancing site was missing fairly basic points down to political bias, after all in last years European elections UKIP trounced Labour.

Damocles 11.13

I am not au fait with all the modern terms, could you explain what that post was about please.?

Owd Al

@Damocles Thanks for your feedback.

When you say logins don’t persit – do you mean that your session times out and you are asked to login again? The problem with recent replies sounds like a bug. I’ll raise that with the tech team. Thanks again

McKeane on Mar 24th, 2010 at 12:17 pm, the site proposes debates and then allows people to offer ideas on how to address an issue. Anyone can raise an idea regardless of personal political bias.

Are you complaining that it didn’t come complete with ideas that manifested your own political bias? In which case why aren’t you raising such ideas now?

Kate Day on Mar 24th, 2010 at 12:23 pm, I mean that if I’m on this site (blogs) and I reboot my PC and then come back to it I’m still logged in. On debate 2010 I’m no longer logged in, cookies may be required, okay it’s only a few keystrokes and a click but this is the 21st century, that ain’t rocket science.

As regards look and feel, when your lads are fixing it can you have them add in a specific link to blogs please?

Despite opinion to the contrary from other posters, I believe that fairness dictates that the MSM should print the manifesto’s of ALL the lawful registered political parties.

Whether we like them or not doesn’t enter into the matter. I find modern socialism abhorrent, but respect their rights along with those of other parties.

Provided that all parties are treated equally, the electorate can decide for themselves.

Owd Al

Mr Brogan, the Debate2010 format is very good. However I have some suggestions.

1. Some time when it is practicable could not there be just one log-in to all comment feaures (i.e. main articles, this blog page and My Telegraph?

2. One’s avatar displayed in all.

3. Place a prominent link to current and past debates on the front page of “Comment”.

owdal80 on Mar 24th, 2010 at 12:23 pm, Yes, I can.

so far all the posts seem to be about the forum itself, rather than the actual question, so I’ll try and be the first to say something relevant.

No, the general election won’t purge British politics. To do this, we need;

(1) a reversion to selection of candidates by local constituencies. This probably means selection of candidates by people for whom elimination of homophobic bullying in schools, and selection of candidates for their impeccable homosexual or female credentials, isn’t a priority; but selection of candidates who actually represent their views, is.

(2) a reversion to the time-honoured doctrine that the function of government is to protect and promote the national interest, including security of borders and a constraint on the sheer numbers of aliens being allowed to flood in

(3) the recognition of the principle of equality before the law. This means that if a B&B owner can be threatened by the police for refusing accomodation to a homosexual couple, then so can every muslim imam in the land; that if homosexuals and women can be parachuted into safe constituencies with impunity, then the Islamic entryists at Tower Hamlets are in breach of the law for cutting support for non-Islamist groups, and suggesting that non-Muslims should observe Ramadan, and should be dealt with promptly and robustly

(4) a serious revision of the Human Rights Act. The current legislation was drafted with the intent of being so vague and comprehensive that it could be interpreted to mean almost anything you like, yet be incapable of being definitively in favour of any given thing when tested.

(5) an end to the systematic abuse of the Whips Office as a means of stifling independence of debate

I don’t see any reference to any of these things in anything said by any major party, hence the conclusion that the structure will remain as rotten and stinking as before seems inescapable

Damoclesm 12.57

I asked for that, didn’t I?

I should have asked, would you please explain it for me?

Owd Al

Damocles on Mar 24th, 2010 at 12:25 pm – I was pointing it out, not complaining – your assumption that I have a political bias is amusing given your moniker and ability to sit on the proverbial fence.

“your assumption that I have a political bias is amusing”, Really? Everyone has a political bias, I know I do.

“given your moniker”, I’d explain that my id has nothing to do with the Greek myth but no one listens to me.

“ability to sit on the proverbial fence”, there’s a good reason for that, which I’m not going to tell you.

owdal80 on Mar 24th, 2010 at 2:46 pm, OK. I’ve explained the login persistence to Kate. Recent replies, well take part and see, some things are best seen.

Look and Feel: Open the two sites (blogs and debate2010) in separate windows and use Alt-tab to flick between the two. You’ll see that the masthead position is inconsistent, the search is missing, the bar with Home, News, Sport etc is all highlighted whereas here only the relevant section is highlighted, the bar below it is missing, can you spot any more? It’s inconsistent, it’s a half implementation of the Telegraph.co.uk brand. Who QAed this? Who was the project lead? This isn’t a Six Sigma project, it’s a Two Sigma project.

Oh, FTLOG, Kate! I open another browser window and go to the site and I’m not logged in. It’s browser session based.

Cookies, woman, where are the damned cookies?

Sign this petition calling for a CAP on UK immigration.
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/CAPimmigration/

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by benedictbrogan: Debate2010: To what extent will the General Election purge British politics? http://bit.ly/c30mDH…

If labour or the conservatives win a clear majority or if either party forms a coalition with the Lib Dems, then there will be no purge.
Any of these outcomes will result in business as usual.

At stake is democracy itself and the idea that the politicians represent the people.
Take Europe as an example. The majority of the population are very unhappy with the Lisbon treaty and would like us to distance oursleves from Europe even without the Lisbon treaty.
None of the main parties offer us this option. That is a violation of the principle that they represent us.
In parliament, under the party system, individual MPs are expected to suspend their own viewpoint and vote the party line and that is what the whips are there for.
So it isn’t necessary that politicians should believe personally in any specific policy, but that they should support the parties policy. In theory, that policy will be the policy that won the party a mandate from the people.
Except here, no party is offering what the people want and they are unaccountable to the people.
Thus, the only desirable outcome is that UKIP holds the balancee of power or that Labour wins.
If UKIP are the power brokers their pricee must be exit from Europe and revision of the climate change policies.
The next best option is labour win.
Why?
Because only then will the Tories ditch Cameron and his solcialist policies and seek to offer the people what the people want.