And Another Thing…

Nicky:

LauraK is a tory through and through, I “followed” her on Twitter for a bit.

Did you know that BBC Breakfast has some sort of comms station for ‘visiting’ commenters?

Looks likely that such as Andrew Pierce can use it to assess the response to their first round salvo to adjust in detail for the later ‘opinion piece” and I doubt the vaguely non tory folk have such a facility.

Good one Tom.

I also liked Micheal Winners this week.

I have been reading a fantasic book about glue.

Its so good I just cant put it down.

The changes made to the postal vote system after 1997 made it open to abuse on a grand scale.

As a political party volunteer, who also used the old system, I can see exactly how easy it is to ‘create’ votes nowadays:

you know that the old lady at 42 Acacia Avenue is now in a home 30 miles away, but is still registered to vote in your constituency so you get her a postal vote rerouted to your address;

you know that Mr Ali and his family has just moved in to 44 Acacia Avenue, but has not removed his vendors’ names from the new registers, so Mr and Mrs Smith can be allocated proxy votes that you will fulfil;

your friend Mr Russell has two lads at University at the other end of the country, but they are still registered to vote at home, so you sort out proxies for them too …..

and the EROs don’t have the resources to check all this out.

“You believe your great, great, great….grandparents were swinging through trees and that they in turn were descended from slime swishing around a lake.

If you’re going to believe such ridiculous fairytales that actually defy logic, reason and scientific evidence then you will be confused.”

For a few minutes there, I actually thought you were serious. You let slip with this one, though.

Funny Take @10:24pm

You wrote “… took my card, proceeded to go down a list of names – this list of names had what looked like a number written against my name – that number was then written on the top of my ballot paper.

At that time I thought it strange, but as I was not astute enough to carry an eraser with me, there was nothing I could do about it.”

Had you used your eraser (even if it removed ink) to remove the unique identifying ID/number then your ballot would have been counted as a SPOILT BALLOT paper and your vote could NOT be counted. Yes that is a trap for those people wishing to try and keep their votes anonymous.

To make it possible for computer systems to more easily read the completed ballot papers then YES, bar codes can be used as well. Such bar codes are harder to alter, since of course human readable unique IDs/numbers can be altered (e.g. a 1 is made a 6) by persons who don’t wish their vote to be “tracked”. However again I should state that such altered ballot papers will be counted in the SPOILT BALLOTS pile.

Cost to process ballot papers so that voters are “tracked” as to who they voted for, is not much as you may think, especially since it is widely known that the infrastructure exists anyhow, namely that the UK government has several sites for opening postal mail, scanning it in and then resealing the envelopes for final delivery to the addressee. Matter of fact. Ask the civil servants who work at such places. A FOI request might flush it all out and perhaps even before the coming UK general election.

Last night I watched the 2006 film called Man of the Year staring Robin Williams. It’s about an election electronic voting system which has a software fault such that the results are incorrect.

It’s worth watching. It is so true of software and databases. Rubbish in, then rubbish out. Votes cast, votes electronically counted with ease….. Anyone doubt me. Check out portable paper ballot counting machines. You know, then ones used to check the number of votes cast for candidates. Neat for such machines to also be able to process unique identification numbers and bar codes.

Think about it.

ref:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_the_Year_%282006_film%29

It made me laugh anyway.

You accuse Silent Hunter of having a “patronising and offensive view of the working class”

Would that the denizens of Glasgow NE were “working” class!

Silent Hunter is right on the demographics – Ds and Es traditionally vote Labour (if they vote at all), or recently, BNP (which says a it all)

The C2s are the ones to watch, people who are scarce in this battleground. It is generally held that skilled manual workers assuaged your “disappointment” in 1997, and will bring back the discomfort in 2010.

Accordingly, given the depressing lack of people with any kind of job in Glasgow NE (the highest rate for jobseekers allowance in Scotland), let alone a skilled one, together with a low turn out, this is not going to be a portent of a general election result.

There is nothing offensive about telling it how it is:

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland/Glasgow-North-East-byelection-Decision.5816985.jp

however unpalatable the truth may be.

Tom,

A very well reasoned post until your last paragraph where tribalism has intruded. Your evidence for this comment is?

A pity.

What logical reason would the Tories have to be unhappy about a strike that passengers are likely to blame on Labour?

Indeed, which is why any rubbing of hands will be done behind closed doors.

I think in fact the most political aspect is the RMT (and TSSA) electing to have the first day of the strike on the day GB is likely to be off to the Palace asking for the dissolution. I don’t believe Bob Crowe does anything without assessing the political consequenses.

“As for the reasons behind the strike, I’m extremely dubious at claims – frequently made – that Network Rail management are at all complacent about safety. Britain’s railways today are safer than they have been at any time in their history. Privatisation did not signal the start of a decline in safety – the historic improvement in safety has continued its upward trajectory in the past 15 years.”

I quote from Hansard -

“Mr. Bradshaw: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what the annual average figure was of serious injuries and deaths on the railways per passenger mile travelled in the two decades preceding privatisation; and what has been the annual average figure since privatisation. [144823]

Mr. Hill: This information can be provided only at disproportionate cost. Death and injury rates for passengers on Britain’s railways can be found in the Chief Inspector of Railways’ Annual Reports on railway safety, copies of which are held in both Libraries of the House. The tables list these rates, which were first published in the 1994-95 Annual Report and date back to 1989. But due to the various changes in accident reporting arrangements over the years, comprehensive data on serious injury rates have not been available since 1996-97.”

16 Jan 2001 : Column: 189W”

How do you justify your statement that safety has improved?.

Over many years government has managed to “improve” whatever figures they wish by the trick of changing the method of counting.

For example does anybody honestly believe that only 2.whatever million are unemployed. Of course not but if you discount massive groups of people for various reasons then you can arrive at any figure you want to.

Every government does this no matter which party and looking from the outside the only reason I can see for it is to hide something you don’t want the public to see.

Immediately after privatisation massive numbers of highly skilled and experienced railway employees lost there jobs and some were rehired by the various infrastructure companies. However instead (for example) of having a P way gang of experienced people who were empowered to make decisions (especially regarding safety) gangs were then made up of a single experienced leader and the rest made up of cheap unskilled labour.

There are many reasons for rail accidents, a lot of them outside the control of the operators, but it is very difficult to substantiate a claim that rail safety has increased year on year since privatisation. There hasn’t been any serious decline in safety but from what I have seen margins of safety have got smaller and corners are frequently being cut.

I think an anti-union sentiment might help encourage the Conservative core vote, but the polls suggest that this isn’t really true. Conservative voters need more of a reason to get off their backsides that a set of strikes that are no more or less annoying than previous strikes.

I can well imagine it’s true that many Tories will privately react with glee at this news, just as Labour party members are known to have punched the air with delight on hearing the news of the collapsed “Scottish” banks.

Labour and Tory are two heads of the same beast.

Conservative voters need more of a reason to get off their backsides that a set of strikes that are no more or less annoying than previous strikes.

True. The narrative that’s being pushed by the Tory cheerleaders in the right-whinge press is that it’s a Spring of Discontent – which doesn’t exactly have the same ring as the Winter of Discontent, which swept Margaret Thatcher to power. And Willie Walsh (evil twin of Louis Walsh?) isn’t impressing the general public with his aggressive and uncompromising attitude.

One of the reasons this isn’t a re-run of 1978/79 is because two-thirds of members of Unite aren’t in fact Labour supporters. When Thatcher took on the unions she could be confident that they were overwhelmingly Labour supporters – and since they’d never vote for her anyway, it didn’t matter to her how angry she made them. By way of contrast, as Snowflake5 in her blog points out:

Tory union bashers should ask themselves why Tory and LibDem voters have voted in favour of this strike: and the answer is that they have a predatory employer, they don’t want a pay cut and they are frightened.

The 31% Tory Unite members on the receiving end of the Tory venom (probably for the first time in their lives) will also be rethinking their vote. Nobody likes being singled out and attacked by a political party when all you are doing is legally defending your job.

http://snowflake5.blogspot.com/

@Nicky

“because two-thirds of members of Unite aren’t in fact Labour supporters”

…but Labour gets 100% of Unite’s party political funding.

The Tories are grasping onto whichever straw they can, including the entrapment of washed-up former Labour Ministers (no nor you Tom). See my blog on Hoon, Byers and Hewitt. An Everyday Betrayal. http://bit.ly/aFaRnn

@Stephen O’Donell

A very weak piece that completely ignores the core issue of former ministers and current MP’s (perhaps delusional) claims to be able to bring (and to have brought) influence to bear on government poicy in exchange for cash.

Couldn’t give a stuff if they all went for a job interview at McDonalds (which is probably about all Byers is qualified for now!)while they were still MP’s.

….but that wasn’t what this was about now was it?

It isn’t the Tories who are clutching at straws with this one methinks

I think the RMT strike may well be politically motivated against Labour.

I’m a trade unionist myself but I think Bob Crowe is a nutjob. His job as a union leader is to fight for higher wages and better working conditions. If he wants to enter the political arena then he should get himself elected as a politician not a trade union leader.

On the other hand the BA dispute is entirely genuine and should be supported by anyone who believs in the principles of trade unionism.

David Cameron’s call for people to cross picket lines, to try and make them out as heros, was a disgrace. He was lying and that lie was further compounded by the lies published in the Daily Torygraph and then blogged about by Iain Dale amongst others.

You should be nailing these people, showing them up for what they are – anti-working class.

But New Labour doesn’t do stuff like that.

@T2D
And why would anyone believe a “Former Minister” would have any influence at all? More fool anyone that does.
My view was on the awkward mechanics of anyone changing job, including these three. I have no real problem with what they did, but I certainly wouldn’t employ them.

@Stephen O’Donnell

I don’t necessarily believe they could deliver on what they were suggesting either – maybe they do, maybe they don’t believe what they were saying, but that’s not the point.

The point is these are elected (labour) representatives, Privy council members and former ministers for whom it is seemingly OK to either

a) Try & con some money out of a lobbying company by claiming you can do something you can’t – which would be fine behaviour for an MP doncha think?

or

b) Sell out/prostitute themselves and the positions to which the had been entrusted for personal gain – and indeed claimed to have already done just that! They were looking to take cash to change Government policy. That is not acceptable.

Like I said, this isn’t about just a “job interview” – and you know that as well as anyone else .

They can do all the job interviews they like, I could care less – but I don’t suppose they will get too many opportunities for same in the near future though!. (Having said that , Eurotunnel’s board has clearly lost its Marbles by appointing PH to its board just yesterday!)

Tom – the tories are NOT the only ones happy about a rail strike. Bob Crowe seems pleased enough to have a half-smirk on his face when being interviewed abaat the strike to protec werkers jobbs.

He’s like a dog with two ………… tails

Taxed to Death – I think you meant “I couldn’t care less”…

Taxed to death – according to Jim Murphy (the Scottish Secretary in case you have never heard of him) the euro tunnel is going to be privatised (I thought it already was) and the income from that is going to fund about 150,000 jobs in Scotland. That’s what it said in the Scotsman anyway.

Tom – have you seen the leaflet that these anti-ID and pro reform campaigners are putting out in your constituency (where I live)? They have got a good picture of you right under the WANTED sign.

You look handsome on it, well a bit.

You are just trying to hide the reality by posts like this. It is just following the normal pattern of a Labour government.Over spent big time. Do nothing about it. Unions start playing up as in this case. Its just the same as the run up to the winter of discontent.
You just cannot bring yourselves to face the reality of the situation. So you avoid doing anything but just have a pop at the Tories. You do it as so many are taken in by it. But you cannot go on with your head in the sand forever.
It a bit like being frighted to open your bank statements when you are overdrawn.

Tom, you have confused matters and received a number of well-deserved (at least in the blogger’s view) rebukes by trying to simplify.
No, the Tories are NOT happy about the rail strike because it worsens the economic mess that they will have to clear up. What they are happy about is the public reaction to the strike. Most people are not fooled by the claim that the strike is about safety – it is clearly seen to be about protecting jobs for rail employees when train drivers are paid a lot more than the average passenger (yes, I accept that maintenance workers are paid less than drivers but I work a lot harder for my money than they do so why should they be feather-bedded?)