1 Like
An interesting point from Prof Phil Scruton.
The Hillsborough Project, of which I was the director, was based at what is now Edge Hill University, then a college of higher education. We wrote two substantial reports, in 1990 and 1995. We worked with Jimmy McGovern on his award-winning drama-documentary, Hillsborough, first broadcast in late 1996. I accompanied many families to the Stuart-Smith scrutiny of new evidence and wrote three submissions. In 1999 I published the first edition of Hillsborough: The Truth. It was widely publicised and serialised in the Sunday Mirror. A year later the prosecutions of the two senior officers at Hillsborough were held in Leeds. Towards the end of 2000 I published the second edition of the book. The coverage, especially in the North West, was extensive. We hosted meetings with families and survivors at Edge Hill. Paul Nuttall studied History at the College. Our Centre was in the heart of the campus. We must have passed each other on numerous occasions – on the pavements, corridors, coffee bar and so on. He would have walked past our Centre many times. During that period, given the massive publicity our work received, Paul Nuttall could not have failed to know about the Project, its work with the bereaved and survivors. Yet he never approached us, never shared his experiences. I understand fully there were many people who were, and have remained, unable to talk about what they witnessed on the day. What is not so readily explained is why Paul Nuttall did not drop by for even a confidential conversation, why he held back on disclosure until the Hillsborough Independent Panel was in session and why he chose national television as the forum to break his silence? These are questions of timing and context that, alongside the questions regarding the details of his experiences on the day, require explanation.
3 Likes
5 Likes
UKIP did not win Stoke Central.
Labour ended up winning there, but lost Copeland to the Tories by less than 2k votes.
The problem being the incumbent party should never have lost what was the turnout less than 40 %
The first time the ruling party has gained a by election seat since 1982 when If I remember corrrectly the Labour Party was in turmoil with Aledgedly unelectable leaders in charge.
80 years of labour paliamentry representation gone
Who would have thought it?
2 Likes
I can already hear the sound of sharpening knives
1 Like
Plenty in Copeland. Outgoing MP was a massive Corbyn critic, the town relies on the industry and the Tories hit the place with everything, the kitchen sink and a visit from Theresa May.
It’s an impressive victory, but one they won’t have the manpower or situational circumstances to repeat on a wider scale.
This is an utter disaster. As I said before he was elected, the Tories have always needed a competent opposition to reign them in. The back benchers must be looking at this, and the fact they have got right wing May in, and just think they can do whatever they want.
I think history will end up showing that Corbyn is one of, if not the worst leader of the opposition of all time.
2 Likes
Labour could / should have done the same - after all a 2000+ majority is not exactly a safe seat.
one interesting point was the Libs didnt hoover up all of the remain vote - Should Fallon be rethinking his strategy on a second refrendum.
They’ve been noisy for some time.
2 Likes
Make no mistake these were awful results for UKIP & Labour. If labour can not even defend somewhere like Copeland after nearly 7 years in opposition, theyve absolutely no chance at a GE.
As for UKIP, this was a must win and Nuttell needs to go. The problem they’ve got is by ruling out membership of the SM the PM has made them irrelevant when it comes to Europe . We’re having a UKIP Brexit, so what’s their role? I honestly thought there would be a Brexit fudge and we’d need UKIP to keep pushing. But Mays speech setting out her Brexit vision could have been writern by Nigel. They need to forget Europe & concentrate on the other great constitutional unfairness, the English question. They need to regroup & rebrand and come back as an English nationalist party. But they need to field local candidates and lose the toxicity. There were enough anti labour votes in Stoke , but Tories voted Tory, rather than tactically. Until UKIP work out why & change that, they’re finished .
2 Likes
Upvoted for the candour on UKIP. Labour need to start putting candidates up that reflect the leadership. Someone fully bought into the Corbyn policy platform could have effectively sold the proposed National Education Service and national infrastructure investment to a community like Copeland, calming fears about job losses of any kind.
I find it almost impossible to believe a scouser would use Hillsborough for their own advantage or to make people feel sorry for them. Completely unbelievable, what scum.
Glad he lost and glad Liverpool fc banned the sun and everything connected with them from Anfield. I look forward to seeing them on sky soon.
1 Like
May setting out her Brexit vision! Don’t make me laugh. May is a remainer, always has been. Bends with the wind. Six months down the line when Trump arrives for his ‘State Visit’, at which time he will be a pariah with the rest of the civilised world, our country will be seriously embarrassed, a laughing stock. All down to her, her desperation to be the first world leader to grovel at his feet, mouth open, because every other world leader took a step back, (apart from Israel), realising what a joke he is. Theresa May is a lightweight, she will drag this country into the gutter. She is the political equivalence of a Sun reader. God help us all.
3 Likes
That is exactly what Labour don’t need to do. Instead of putting up candidates that reflect the leadership, they need a leadership that reflects the candidates.
What is it going to take for you to realise that he doesn’t work at the upper echelons of Government, and that as a country we are too right wing for him to work?
That strategy has been losing votes since 2005.
Because they went with Brown and Special Ed, not because of policy.
Don’t forget most people in this country want someone impressive, a statesman, combined with a non-offensive policy structure. It’s why if David Milliband got in ahead of Ed he would have won the last election.
Corbyn has two main failings:
-
He’s not a statesman.
-
He’s not right wing enough for the British public.
This is a dangerous combination and is why Labour are haemorrhaging votes at an alarming rate.
What I am interested to know is what in your eyes would make Corbyn a failure?
Gentlemen and Ladie’s,
What you need is a party that will actuallly state a set of goals that it aims to achieve when it is elected and then issue a paper on how it will ensure those aims are achieved when it is elected into power.
The basic Manifesto that all party’s put out is simply not good enough, these are just bribes to the uneducated masses.
Then when the party is elected it needs to ensure that the set of goals is forthcoming, If they do not deliver X % in a given time frame as laid out in the original paper the election should be declared null and void and another carried out.
Promise the earth and deliver nothing is the present form of Government in the UK.
1 Like
You can’t do that as most policies are based on funding, and finding is based on an economy that is too reliant on external factors.
However, a ‘spell it out’ for the common man manifesto would be a very good idea (IE. This means x for your income etc).
To be honest this should all be in the Labour thread as it’s more about them than UKIP.