Hang Brown for Treason!!

Biohazard · 8 Mar 2008 at 00:52

jdickerson said:
Interesting question. Strikes seem to work for the French.... ish.

Imagine what would happen if people refused to go to work until he resigned. He'd have to resign that day even if say... 10% of the working class refused to go to work.

There is no right to strike in the UK, its something consecutive governments have failed to ratify after agreeing to do so.

Biohazard · 8 Mar 2008 at 00:53

mattyrigby00 said:
he would just sell off the remaining 50% of the gold reserves.

I thought he sold way more than 50% of our gold...

"The story starts on May 7, 1999. For all but the most eagle-eyed financial experts, it seemed like another dull Friday in parliament. The Treasury, however, hoped it would be the perfect moment to bury news that it was to launch an unprecedented sale of Britain’s gold reserves.

The news was slipped out by Patricia Hewitt, then a junior Treasury minister, in answer toa written parliamentary question placed by a Labour backbencher. “Today we are announcing a restructuring of the UK’s reserve holdings to achieve a better balance in the portfolio by increasing the proportion held in currency. This will involve a programme of auctions of gold,” she said.

“The Treasury intends to sell 125 tons of gold, 3% of the total reserves, during 1999-2000, with the Bank of England conducting five auctions on the Treasury’s behalf. Auctions will be held every other month starting in July.”

The answer was later shown to be wholly misleading as the government actually planned to sell 400 tons before 2002, representing more than half the country’s gold.

Hewitt’s figure of 3% referred to “total reserves” which, apart from gold, included tens of billions that the government borrows on the international currency markets, rather than the gold reserves actually owned outright by Britain."

Found on Timesonline for refference (edit)

meghatronic · 8 Mar 2008 at 00:55

Biohazard said:
There is no right to strike in the UK, its something consecutive governments have failed to ratify after agreeing to do so.

Indeed - I was supposing a hypothetical. It would cripple the country and force change.

Biohazard · 8 Mar 2008 at 01:08

jdickerson said:
Indeed - I was supposing a hypothetical. It would cripple the country and force change.

What we are facing isn't hypothetical. Its in the hands of the Irish now.

The unions have no power, mass strike is now or can be made practically illegal, and the public is far too flippant on the whole it seems.

Millions marched to 'Stop the War', it all falls on deaf ears.

Saberu · 9 Mar 2008 at 14:36

Gold is going to hit $10,000 an ounce (10x increase) within the next 2 decades. Brown was a fool to sell, but he didn't care because all that matters is winning the next election to them.

mattyrigby00 · 9 Mar 2008 at 15:33

clv101 · 9 Mar 2008 at 15:38

I think it's daft to have a referendum on a document that most people won't have read let alone understood. Voting from an ill informed position is a fundamentally bad idea.

The system we have now - of voting for parties and politicians we like the sound of - has its problems, but not as many problems as governance by referendum.

mattyrigby00 · 9 Mar 2008 at 15:49

Third Opinion · 9 Mar 2008 at 17:46

Gordon is a bottle job as a Prime Minister.

He has taken the PM position via a back room deal with Tony. We were promised Blair but got Brown.

We now have a PM with no mandate.

He has also bottled a general election because he knew he couldn't win it and now the same with the promised EU referendum.

This dour Scot becomes more like a dictator every day.

Naffa · 9 Mar 2008 at 18:12

Third Opinion said:
We now have a PM with no mandate.

Give me the name of one prime minister in the last hundred years that has had a mandate.

Puzzled · 9 Mar 2008 at 18:21

clv101 said:
I think it's daft to have a referendum on a document that most people won't have read let alone understood. Voting from an ill informed position is a fundamentally bad idea.

The system we have now - of voting for parties and politicians we like the sound of - has its problems, but not as many problems as governance by referendum.

This is true, but why haven't they made an effort to tell the public what the treaty really means.

All the public has to go on is what the media says, or the pro-treaty websites as the majority won't have the time or patience to read the full thing (myself included).
If they had a few clips on tv like they do during election time explaining the treaty and what it means for us then maybe people wouldn't feel so betrayed.

Instead they tell us nothing, as if its all far to complicated for us little people and push it through.

J.T · 9 Mar 2008 at 18:21

It's the only way forward.

Naffa · 9 Mar 2008 at 18:23

MonkeyMan said:
This is true, but why haven't they made an effort to tell the public what the treaty really means.

All the public has to go on is what the media says, or the pro-treaty websites as the majority won't have the time or patience to read the full thing (myself included).
If they had a few clips on tv like they do during election time explaining the treaty and what it means for us then maybe people wouldn't feel so betrayed.

Instead they tell us nothing, as if its all far to complicated for us little people and push it through.

At the end of the day, you've just said that you can't be bothered to go and read it. Then you get annoyed that the government have withdrawn it? In my eyes that seems somewhat hypocritical. If you really do care enough about the matter to be irritated at it, then it's up to you to research it. It's not up to the government.

Puzzled · 9 Mar 2008 at 18:30

naffa said:
At the end of the day, you've just said that you can't be bothered to go and read it. Then you get annoyed that the government have withdrawn it? In my eyes that seems somewhat hypocritical. If you really do care enough about the matter to be irritated at it, then it's up to you to research it. It's not up to the government.

You can't expect the public to read the whole thing (Have you read it?) and to actually understand it.

But they could listen to the concerns and actually show a public response as to why we do need this (or don't).

Yes we vote them in to make decisions for us, but when it causes such a public outcry then they should have the decency to explain what it means.

Naffa · 9 Mar 2008 at 18:42

MonkeyMan said:
You can't expect the public to read the whole thing (Have you read it?) and to actually understand it.

No, but have I complained about the fact we're not having a referendum? The referendum would have been totally pointless anyway. I've read parts of the constitution and it's very poorly written.

But they could listen to the concerns and actually show a public response as to why we do need this (or don't).

Again, I feel that if this is important enough to you, then I'm sure that you're more than capable enough of finding out what it would mean.

Yes we vote them in to make decisions for us, but when it causes such a public outcry then they should have the decency to explain what it means.

I totally understand what it would mean for our country, and I understand how it would effect us, how it would effect our trading, our immigration. I'm 17, and don't hold a vested interest in this, but I'm very aware of what the constitution would mean for our country.

Tefal · 9 Mar 2008 at 18:43

naffa said:
At the end of the day, you've just said that you can't be bothered to go and read it. Then you get annoyed that the government have withdrawn it? In my eyes that seems somewhat hypocritical. If you really do care enough about the matter to be irritated at it, then it's up to you to research it. It's not up to the government.

I bet you over half the politicians that voted for it neither read ir nor understood it, and just do as their told, or go on a nice basic summary they are given.

mattyrigby00 · 9 Mar 2008 at 18:46

Tefal said:
I bet you over half the politicians that voted for it neither read ir nor understood it, and just do as their told, or go on a nice basic summary they are given.

2/3 of the politicians probably dont read any bills at all and just vote the way their party leader does.

UnusualSuspect · 9 Mar 2008 at 19:10

Teki187 said:
The treaty will bring an end to Britain’s right to set its own laws in dozens of areas.

The EU will also get powers to define criminal offences and set minimum sentences in the UK. And British firms will be forced into adopting costly EU employment law.

Just some of the stuff.

And this is a bad thing? With all the laws that Labour seem to want to bring in, we're going to end up as a Police State within 5 years. Allowing the EU to step in and say no to some of this stuff sounds like a great idea. If the Queen was actually doing something besides taking in a massive amount of money, she might be able to do it instead.

Naffa · 9 Mar 2008 at 19:14

You do all realise that even if we did have a referendum, and 100% of the electorate voted in favour of the constitution, we wouldn't be able to implement it? France and Holland have voted against it, meaning that it cannot be implemented across the EU. So even if we did have a referendum on it, it would be totally pointless.

mattyrigby00 · 9 Mar 2008 at 19:14

UnusualSuspect said:
And this is a bad thing? With all the laws that Labour seem to want to bring in, we're going to end up as a Police State within 5 years. Allowing the EU to step in and say no to some of this stuff sounds like a great idea. If the Queen was actually doing something besides taking in a massive amount of money, she might be able to do it instead.

labour will hopefully be out by next year (if the gen. election is done at the same time as the EU parliament ones) and at the latest june 2010, although i cant imagine the tories or lib dems doing much different to labour. also im not 100% confident that labour will lose, even after all the disasters which have happened in the past 11 years :\

also dare i say it but the EU is even more likely to set police state laws than labour are, also most of the unelected eu commison have dodgy pasts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWSYMpuCFaQ