Poll: Poll: UK General Election 2017 - Mk II

Who will you vote for?

  • Total voters
    1,453
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lartyconshayo said:
some interesting reading on Corbyn and May's voting record on terrorism legislation for that last 17 years:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40111329

since 2000, Theresa May has voted against or been absent from votes on:
  • The Terrorism Act 2000.
  • The Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001.
  • Fourteen-day detention.
  • Control Orders.
  • ID cards.
  • Ninety-day detention.
  • The Counter-Terrorism Act 2008.
Click to expand...

Corbyn's anti-terror voting record :- (he voted against ...)

1984 Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act: Outlawed NI terror groups.
1985 Updating the Prevention of Terrorism Act 1974: Gave emergency powers to police forces to quiz terror suspects travelling between Northern Ireland and Great Britain
1989 Elected Authorities (Northern Ireland) Act 1989: Law that requires candidates for election in local and Northern Ireland Assembly to declare they will never support terrorism
1989 Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act: Banned support for the IRA and Irish National Liberation Army
1989 Security Service Act: Established legal basis of the UK Security Service for the first time – giving security services the function of protecting the UK from terrorism
1991 Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions): Allowed police to search sites for weapons and arms
1996 Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act: Banned possession of items for terrorists
1998 Criminal Justice (Terrorism and Conspiracy) Act: Stricter punishment for being a member of terror group following the Omagh bombing
2000 Terrorism Act: Redefined terrorism and gave police stop and search powers
2001 The Terrorism Act 2000 (Proscribed Organisations) (Amendment) Order: Statutory instrument banning Al-Qa’ida in a statutory instrument, 6 months before 9/11
2001 Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act: Following 9/11, indefinite holding without charge of suspects who cannot be deported.
2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act: Gave the Home Secretary the power to impose control orders on terror suspects
2006 Terrorism Act: Outlawed the “glorification” of terror following 7/7 bombings
2008 Counter-Terrorism Act: Banned communication of sensitive details about Armed Forces
2011 Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act: Replaced control orders with new powers to restrict the movement of suspects who could not be prosecuted or deported
2013 Justice and Security Act: Allowed secret hearings in courts on issues of national security
2014 Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act: Gave police emergency access to phone and internet records

And the two he abstained on:

2003 Criminal Justice Act: Modernising the criminal justice system, allows offences to be tried by a judge sitting alone without a jury
2016 Investigatory Powers Bill: To allow the bulk interception of communications, equipment interference, subject to certain safeguards.
 
Another Labour bungle - corbyn is not fit to govern this country...

Tories respond to Sir Keir Starmer's misstep on Jeremy Corbyn's anti-terror voting record
The shadow Brexit secretary faced embarrassment this morning after trying to defend Mr Corbyn’s record on terror by suggesting the Labour leader had supported the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 when in fact he did not vote for it.

Priti Patel, the International Development Secretary, said: "Kier Starmer has unwittingly highlighted what Labour are desperate to hide: Jeremy Corbyn’s record of undermining the safety and security of Britain.

"Corbyn has boasted about voting against every piece of anti-terrorist legislation in the past thirty years, he has sided with Britain’s enemies and he has shared platforms with speakers who espouse hatred and views that have no place in our society.

"The first duty of a Prime Minister is to keep the country safe and act in the national interest, it’s simply not good enough to refuse to give the police the powers they need or to go missing in action like his shadow home secretary Diane Abbott.”
 
n111ck said:
Another Labour bungle - corbyn is not fit to govern this country...

Tories respond to Sir Keir Starmer's misstep on Jeremy Corbyn's anti-terror voting record
The shadow Brexit secretary faced embarrassment this morning after trying to defend Mr Corbyn’s record on terror by suggesting the Labour leader had supported the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 when in fact he did not vote for it.

Priti Patel, the International Development Secretary, said: "Kier Starmer has unwittingly highlighted what Labour are desperate to hide: Jeremy Corbyn’s record of undermining the safety and security of Britain.

"Corbyn has boasted about voting against every piece of anti-terrorist legislation in the past thirty years, he has sided with Britain’s enemies and he has shared platforms with speakers who espouse hatred and views that have no place in our society.

"The first duty of a Prime Minister is to keep the country safe and act in the national interest, it’s simply not good enough to refuse to give the police the powers they need or to go missing in action like his shadow home secretary Diane Abbott.”
Click to expand...

On 7 Jun 2016: Priti Patel was absent for a vote on Investigatory Powers Bill — Clause 78 — Powers to Require Retention of Information on People's Internet Use
On 7 Jun 2016: Priti Patel was absent for a vote on Investigatory Powers Bill — Third Reading — Mass Surveillance

Those in glass houses etc.
 
b0redj0rd said:
Corbyn's anti-terror voting record :- (he voted against ...)

1984 Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act: Outlawed NI terror groups.
1985 Updating the Prevention of Terrorism Act 1974: Gave emergency powers to police forces to quiz terror suspects travelling between Northern Ireland and Great Britain
1989 Elected Authorities (Northern Ireland) Act 1989: Law that requires candidates for election in local and Northern Ireland Assembly to declare they will never support terrorism
1989 Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act: Banned support for the IRA and Irish National Liberation Army
1989 Security Service Act: Established legal basis of the UK Security Service for the first time – giving security services the function of protecting the UK from terrorism
1991 Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions): Allowed police to search sites for weapons and arms
1996 Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act: Banned possession of items for terrorists
1998 Criminal Justice (Terrorism and Conspiracy) Act: Stricter punishment for being a member of terror group following the Omagh bombing
2000 Terrorism Act: Redefined terrorism and gave police stop and search powers
2001 The Terrorism Act 2000 (Proscribed Organisations) (Amendment) Order: Statutory instrument banning Al-Qa’ida in a statutory instrument, 6 months before 9/11
2001 Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act: Following 9/11, indefinite holding without charge of suspects who cannot be deported.
2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act: Gave the Home Secretary the power to impose control orders on terror suspects
2006 Terrorism Act: Outlawed the “glorification” of terror following 7/7 bombings
2008 Counter-Terrorism Act: Banned communication of sensitive details about Armed Forces
2011 Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act: Replaced control orders with new powers to restrict the movement of suspects who could not be prosecuted or deported
2013 Justice and Security Act: Allowed secret hearings in courts on issues of national security
2014 Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act: Gave police emergency access to phone and internet records

And the two he abstained on:

2003 Criminal Justice Act: Modernising the criminal justice system, allows offences to be tried by a judge sitting alone without a jury
2016 Investigatory Powers Bill: To allow the bulk interception of communications, equipment interference, subject to certain safeguards.
Click to expand...


yes this is my point that half of those May has also abstained on or voted against - as someone else has just posted glass houses and stones
 
Glaucus said:
you know what the human rights are yeah? perhaps you should go do some reading and yes, it very much protects everyone. It is mind boggling dumb to throw away human rights for some minor terrorist attacks that in the grand scheme of things aren't even rounding errors in death tolls.

it is unacceptable to go after judges like that, that is what happens in a dictatorship and is exactly what the nazi party did. It really should trump freedom of press. Freedom of press is not totally free, nor should it be. They do and can be sued and punished for telling lies.

unfortunately due to party whip you are very much voting for the party and not a local mp.
Click to expand...

Yes I know what they are and I know they protect everyone which is why I asked what human rights will be torn up? All of them? Specific ones? Parts of some of them?
How easy is it do to? Would if go right through the commons and the lords with no objections?
If the conservatives are truly evil how easy would it be to reverse?

Freedom of press is freedom of opinion and expression which is a human right.
It is not totally free which is why they can be punished and sued but that doesn't mean the PM has to have an opinion on everything they do and say. We all know which papers are trash and what to do if we don't like what they say.

I realise I am voting for a party
 
FuriousGeorge said:
On 7 Jun 2016: Priti Patel was absent for a vote on Investigatory Powers Bill — Clause 78 — Powers to Require Retention of Information on People's Internet Use
On 7 Jun 2016: Priti Patel was absent for a vote on Investigatory Powers Bill — Third Reading — Mass Surveillance

Those in glass houses etc.
Click to expand...
That doesn't make Corbyn's history when it comes to anti terror votes any better does it?
 
GizF1 said:
Yes I know what they are and I know they protect everyone which is why I asked what human rights will be torn up? All of them? Specific ones? Parts of some of them?
How easy is it do to? Would if go right through the commons and the lords with no objections?
If the conservatives are truly evil how easy would it be to reverse?

Freedom of press is freedom of opinion and expression which is a human right.
It is not totally free which is why they can be punished and sued but that doesn't mean the PM has to have an opinion on everything they do and say. We all know which papers are trash and what to do if we don't like what they say.

I realise I am voting for a party
Click to expand...
shes talking about the main human rights atc, which is most of them, `
  • Article 2 Right to life
  • Article 3 Freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment
  • Article 4 Freedom from slavery and forced labour
  • Article 5 Right to liberty and security
  • Article 6 Right to a fair trial
  • Article 7 No punishment without law
  • Article 8 Respect for your private and family life, home and correspondence
  • Article 9 Freedom of thought, belief and religion
  • Article 10 Freedom of expression
  • Article 11 Freedom of assembly and association
  • Article 12 Right to marry and start a family
  • Article 14 Protection from discrimination in respect of these rights and freedoms
  • Protocol 1, Article 1 Right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
  • Protocol 1, Article 2 Right to education
  • Protocol 1, Article 3 Right to participate in free elections
  • Protocol 13, Article 1 Abolition of the death penalty
Click to expand...


once we have left the eu, fairly easy if she has a majority. These things are very hard to reverse once implemented. let alone the other rights she has already expressed interest in tearing up. Tories have allready messed up workers rights a fair bit, just think what will happen once we leave the safety of the uk.

no she doesnt need to have an opinion on everything, but she should absolutely have a opinion on what happened, again that was a direct attack on democracy and pulled out of the nazi hand book, this is actually what the nazis did. Unsurprisingly she didn't, why because she was already trying to get rid of democracy which is why she went to court in the first place, even though it was always going to fail.
 
Voting against terror legislation doesn't mean you 'support terror'... it means it's because you thought the legislation itself was ineffective, otherwise total ass and/or was unbalanced in the sense that it infringed human rights.
 
Can't see a way to search threads on this new forum so can't find my post where I said the only issue with voting Labour is Abbott.

No longer an issue so vote away :)
 
n111ck said:
Another Labour bungle - corbyn is not fit to govern this country.........”
Click to expand...

He is better placed than May.

If we had credible Tory leadership like Cameron again then the anti Labour rhetoric may have more stall.

Unfortunately it's irrelevant as for every slight on Labour there is equal back at Tory. The difference is May has a proven track record in failing this country on security. Labour is only hypothetical what ifs.
 
I tell you what a labour win would be a massive **** you to many of the news outlets who've tried their hardest to smear Corbyn in any way possible. It's already hilarious how he's came back from disaster despite their efforts, I think it shows social media has a much bigger effect on voting now than anything you see in the papers.
 
It really depresses me that the media peddle these lies and the agenda and the vast majority of the population lap it up, I swear people should not just have a right to vote and there should be some form of competence test to obtain a vote.
 
antijoke said:
It really depresses me that the media peddle these lies and the agenda and the vast majority of the population lap it up, I swear people should not just have a right to vote and there should be some form of competence test to obtain a vote.
Click to expand...
push it the other way, competence in the field to be in parliament. rather than commissioning reports(that they then ignore), the scientists and other experts should be the ones in power and voting should be for things that fall outside of known quantities.
 
Glaucus said:
push it the other way, competence in the field to be in parliament. rather than commissioning reports, the scientists and other experts should be the ones in power and voting should be for things that fall outside of known quantities.
Click to expand...

You'll not hear an arguement from me on that either.
 
I know everyone is thinking about the bigger picture here, but I'm listening to LBC and a lot of people on there, and here, want change from voting Corbyn. However, in my town there are 4 private schools (Radley, Abingdon Boys, St Helen's, OLA) and my mother-in-law works in one of them. She says, the number of children signed up for moving from junior to senior school is the lowest its ever been due to fear over the VAT on school fee's (6 have signed up, usually 20 by now). So if, say, 50% drop out if Labour get in due to not being able to afford the fee's, will having and additional 2 school's worth of pupils to educate help the children already in local state schools? Will this policy not hurt the education of our children? So why should people in my town vote Labour?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom