Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login

TUC Congress: Public will back us against cuts - Barber

last reply
278 replies
7.8k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Quote by essex34m

Ahh now that explains why my ex was stopped and questioned when he was taking photos of an oil refinery. It was night time and the smoke was billowing, the lights looked fantastic against the nights sky and it was a picture just waiting to be taken. He did get a few but his efforts were soon curtailed.

Photographers are an easy target, and far too often terrorism is the reason the authorities (not just Police, but private security companies too) use to attempt to stop people doing something which is not against the law.
I am known to both civilian and MOD Police, for taking pictures of military aircraft both in the air and on airbases, and am also involved in helping with setting up a scheme in conjunction with MOD Police and USAF Police as a way of involving people on both sides of the fence, to act as eyes and ears, and to also prove to them we are not a threat, just people who have varying interests in aviation.
Sadly, not everybody is that understanding about the freedoms that photographers have, or the fact they are not a threat.
Are you aware of this site? could be helpful
Quote by Bluefish2009
Are you aware of this site? could be helpful

Yes I am, bookmarked and often passed on.
But thank you.
Quote by kentswingers777
This is the mad world of the Unions Blue.
A lot of the unions are funded by the taxpayer, that being me and you.
Then the Unions can spend some of that money on backing a new Labour leader, as is what is happening now.
So the taxpayers money can directly affect a possible Labour leader, that could go on to be PM.
Or like Unite who are currently doing everything in their power to bring havoc to the general public....again, are the Labour partys biggest financial contributor.
I know this is how it is done, but what a bloody crazy system.
You bet he is another union leader taking on the Tories.....remember though, history has a very funny way of repeating itself.

In what way are unions funded by you Ken?
Hello Google.
I do not pay the unions out of my pay packet but as a taxpayer....
Anyway this should make things a bit clearer...

Hope you had a really nice day, and have a very nice week too. wink
It doesn't make things clearer, since the TPA take the Joseph Goebbels approach to almost everything they do.
All employers have to allow trades union reps reasonable time off to do their work where a recognition scheme exists. So the situation in the public sector is no different to the situation in the private sector. The costs involved are a legal duty in many cases - unless of course you plan to abolish all workers rights in the workplace. In which case, bring it on comrade :-).
The TPA sent 1253 FoI requests in the compilation of the biassed, skewed and unreliable briefing note you quote. Do you also object to subsidizing the cost of their ideological attack on workers rights?

Just some more info about the financial study the TUC have commissioned.
Quote by awayman
It doesn't make things clearer, since the TPA take the Joseph Goebbels approach to almost everything they do.
All employers have to allow trades union reps reasonable time off to do their work where a recognition scheme exists. So the situation in the public sector is no different to the situation in the private sector. The costs involved are a legal duty in many cases - unless of course you plan to abolish all workers rights in the workplace. In which case, bring it on comrade icon_
The TPA sent 1253 FoI requests in the compilation of the biassed, skewed and unreliable briefing note you quote. Do you also object to subsidizing the cost of their ideological attack on workers rights?

So after all that.....the taxpayer does fund the unions.
I said that at the beginning.
Quote by kentswingers777
It doesn't make things clearer, since the TPA take the Joseph Goebbels approach to almost everything they do.
All employers have to allow trades union reps reasonable time off to do their work where a recognition scheme exists. So the situation in the public sector is no different to the situation in the private sector. The costs involved are a legal duty in many cases - unless of course you plan to abolish all workers rights in the workplace. In which case, bring it on comrade icon_
The TPA sent 1253 FoI requests in the compilation of the biassed, skewed and unreliable briefing note you quote. Do you also object to subsidizing the cost of their ideological attack on workers rights?

So after all that.....the taxpayer does fund the unions.
I said that at the beginning.
Ah, but it's the way you say it that counts....
Quote by foxylady2209
s3xyl3xy wrote:
How on earth did they figure his attending such a demo would constitute an act of terrorism?
Boy!!!......What short memories!!!.......Don't you remember some of the antics from the 'authorities' during the national miners strike????.......Regardless of your politics that should have made people aware of the true nature of our 'security forces'!!!
I got quite a few bruises for simply standing in the wrong place.........and was stopped altogether from travelling to Yorkshire and the Midlands.......All within a 'free' state!!

And the 'antics' of some of the flying pickets. Well, some of them were simply travelling thugs looking for a fight and nothing to do with the miner's fight for jobs.
Since I'm one of those people do you have any evidence for the assertion about my motives?
Quote by kentswingers777
It doesn't make things clearer, since the TPA take the Joseph Goebbels approach to almost everything they do.
All employers have to allow trades union reps reasonable time off to do their work where a recognition scheme exists. So the situation in the public sector is no different to the situation in the private sector. The costs involved are a legal duty in many cases - unless of course you plan to abolish all workers rights in the workplace. In which case, bring it on comrade icon_
The TPA sent 1253 FoI requests in the compilation of the biassed, skewed and unreliable briefing note you quote. Do you also object to subsidizing the cost of their ideological attack on workers rights?

So after all that.....the taxpayer does fund the unions.
I said that at the beginning.
Only if you take the Josef Goebbels approach of claiming that if the state complies with its legal duties it's the same as the taxpayer funding the unions.
Well, there's a turn up for the books...
Bob Crowe (RMT) being praised by Jon Gaunt this morning on Sky News paper review for suggesting civil disobedience!!
Sit downs on motorways. A wave of crippling strikes, Spiderman climbing the walls of Buck House.
Those are just a few of the ways union leader Bob Crow suggests for dealing with the economic black hole his Labour pals landed us in.
Let's hope this weeks TUC meeting gets the message....There will be misery enough without letting the left-wing crazies loose again!!
Quote by kentswingers777
Sit downs on motorways. A wave of crippling strikes, Spiderman climbing the walls of Buck House.
Those are just a few of the ways union leader Bob Crow suggests for dealing with the economic black hole his Labour pals landed us in.
Let's hope this weeks TUC meeting gets the message....There will be misery enough without letting the left-wing crazies loose again!!

Meeting??? it's Congress brother....
Quote by Kaznkev
s3xyl3xy wrote:
How on earth did they figure his attending such a demo would constitute an act of terrorism?
Boy!!!......What short memories!!!.......Don't you remember some of the antics from the 'authorities' during the national miners strike????.......Regardless of your politics that should have made people aware of the true nature of our 'security forces'!!!
I got quite a few bruises for simply standing in the wrong place.........and was stopped altogether from travelling to Yorkshire and the Midlands.......All within a 'free' state!!

And the 'antics' of some of the flying pickets. Well, some of them were simply travelling thugs looking for a fight and nothing to do with the miner's fight for jobs.
Since I'm one of those people do you have any evidence for the assertion about my motives?
Perhaps they object to all forms of accapella singing? :giggle:
Ok i'll assume the position
:laughabove:
I really don't fancy a trip back to the 70s, with power cuts, no bread, sugar, and other essentials caused by constant strike action.
I am in a category that will be amongst the worst effected, my eldest daughter is a single parent, yet I have no fear of these cuts. I still feel much of this is scare mongering and point scoring for their mates in the labour party
Quote by Bluefish2009
I really don't fancy a trip back to the 70s, with power cuts, no bread, sugar, and other essentials caused by constant strike action.
I am in a category that will be amongst the worst effected, my eldest daughter is a single parent, yet I have no fear of these cuts. I still feel much of this is scare mongering and point scoring for their mates in the labour party

i feel with the last decades performance of local councils and general mistakes like council tax demands when not owed etc etc
there will be very little public support for council workers dunno
Quote by Bluefish2009
I really don't fancy a trip back to the 70s, with power cuts, no bread, sugar, and other essentials caused by constant strike action.

There may well be another winter of discontent on the horizon, and if this country isn't bought to it's knees by the unions, it will be by the Government, struggling to reverse the problems this country is in, bought about by both world economy and politics, as well as reckless disregard by the previous Government.
Quote by essex34m
I really don't fancy a trip back to the 70s, with power cuts, no bread, sugar, and other essentials caused by constant strike action.

There may well be another winter of discontent on the horizon, and if this country isn't bought to it's knees by the unions, it will be by the Government, struggling to reverse the problems this country is in, bought about by both world economy and politics, as well as reckless disregard by the previous Government.
I am confused though Essex, The last government tried the spend, spend, spend, and that has left the country bankrupt. Now the new government is trying a different approach which so many are saying is wrong also, including the unions. so what is the answer?
Foxy wrote:
old_arse wrote:
s3xyl3xy wrote:
How on earth did they figure his attending such a demo would constitute an act of terrorism?
Boy!!!......What short memories!!!.......Don't you remember some of the antics from the 'authorities' during the national miners strike????.......Regardless of your politics that should have made people aware of the true nature of our 'security forces'!!!
I got quite a few bruises for simply standing in the wrong place.........and was stopped altogether from travelling to Yorkshire and the Midlands.......All within a 'free' state!!
And the 'antics' of some of the flying pickets. Well, some of them were simply travelling thugs looking for a fight and nothing to do with the miner's fight for jobs.
Foxy.........you don't know me......and I admit to some left wing tendencies.....but PLEASE don't label ALL protestors as the media would have you believe!!....YES...there were thugs.....but a small minority!!....MOST of the violence was perpetrated BY the 'security foeces'........and, since I was actually there to witness it......I think I'm in a better position to judge!
I'll leave it at that as I have NO intention of diverting the original thread
Not even room for a quip! :sad:
Quote by old_arse
Foxy wrote:
old_arse wrote:
s3xyl3xy wrote:
How on earth did they figure his attending such a demo would constitute an act of terrorism?
Boy!!!......What short memories!!!.......Don't you remember some of the antics from the 'authorities' during the national miners strike????.......Regardless of your politics that should have made people aware of the true nature of our 'security forces'!!!
I got quite a few bruises for simply standing in the wrong place.........and was stopped altogether from travelling to Yorkshire and the Midlands.......All within a 'free' state!!
And the 'antics' of some of the flying pickets. Well, some of them were simply travelling thugs looking for a fight and nothing to do with the miner's fight for jobs.
Foxy.........you don't know me......and I admit to some left wing tendencies.....but PLEASE don't label ALL protestors as the media would have you believe!!....YES...there were thugs.....but a small minority!!....MOST of the violence was perpetrated BY the 'security foeces'........and, since I was actually there to witness it......I think I'm in a better position to judge!
I'll leave it at that as I have NO intention of diverting the original thread
Not even room for a quip! :sad:

You may find this thread of interest
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/320034.html
Quote by Bluefish2009
I really don't fancy a trip back to the 70s, with power cuts, no bread, sugar, and other essentials caused by constant strike action.

There may well be another winter of discontent on the horizon, and if this country isn't bought to it's knees by the unions, it will be by the Government, struggling to reverse the problems this country is in, bought about by both world economy and politics, as well as reckless disregard by the previous Government.
I am confused though Essex, The last government tried the spend, spend, spend, and that has left the country bankrupt. Now the new government is trying a different approach which so many are saying is wrong also, including the unions. so what is the answer?
You can't please all the people....
Yes, many are saying what is discussed and planned is wrong, but lets face it, when things go bad, how many don't want to deal with it, and would rather bury their heads and pretend there is no problem?
There are a number of answers, but ones that a significant amount of vocal people do not want. I think the Government are right to try and take away the thought that living on benefits for many can be a lifestyle choice, we need to focus on those that actually need it, and be tougher on those that know how to play a system thats in drastic need for overhaul.
Control immigration, kick out the ones who genuinely do not need help,for example there was a time when Tony Blair said what a good job we had done with the Balkan states, so if we did such a good job, then surely those that came here seeking our help can go home and be less of a burden on our infrastructure.
Stop blindly following the U.S. into conflict. The presence the UK has in Afghanista, Iraq etc is far to excessive for a country in our position, We are members of NATO and the UN, we should be ensuring other partner nations are providing support, a case of all in or we are out. This would save billions on defence spending, especially at a time when we are struggling to financially support the armed forces as it is.
Introduce import taxes. With the amount of goods that are imported to this country due to the need bought about by our manufacturing industry being hurt by imports, even a 0.5% import tax would bring in a substantial amount of money, without making too much of an impact on the consumer. This country is too significant for manufacturers to consider not exporting to the UK if such a tax was introduced.
The above, IMO would bring drastic changes to our economy, but sadly we do not have a Government, or suitable opposition to implement any changes similar to the above.
Remember 2005 anyone?
Then check this website....

In the article is says...
" Labour’s first term saw Brown continue the reformist policies of the previous Conservative government and hold to a restrained new Labour tack when it came to spending ".
“When the Chancellor inherited the economy from the Conservatives he was a very lucky Chancellor indeed and his fiscal policy was, initially, very sound,” says Ruth Lea, director of the Centre for Policy Studies. But that was then and this is now. Old Labour allegiances have crept to the fore and, concludes Lea, “under his stewardship economic and productivity growth have slowed, the balance of payments figures have worsened, private-sector employment growth has fallen, the fiscal situation has deteriorated and international competitiveness has fallen”.
Whatever happened to Browns " prudent spending " policies ?
He and he alone stand out as the most useless of chancellors I think this country has ever seen. The guy even sold our gold reserves at possibly the lowest price, now they are sky high, and the left whinge about Thatcher selling off things we owned.loon
He was chancellor for years in charge of the countries finances, and then PM, who was also pulling Darlings strings.
Now look at the state we find ourselves in.
Yes it is a global problem but we are in a far worse predicament than we should now find ourselves in.
Now we find that the unions are hell bent of heaping more problems on an already unstable economy, just to purely satisfy their own lust for power.
IF the unions succeed in bringing about untold strikes, the country wil be paying for it for generations to come.
Brown could not run a bath....he has proved that beyond any shadow of a doubt.
Quote by awayman
s3xyl3xy wrote:
How on earth did they figure his attending such a demo would constitute an act of terrorism?
Boy!!!......What short memories!!!.......Don't you remember some of the antics from the 'authorities' during the national miners strike????.......Regardless of your politics that should have made people aware of the true nature of our 'security forces'!!!
I got quite a few bruises for simply standing in the wrong place.........and was stopped altogether from travelling to Yorkshire and the Midlands.......All within a 'free' state!!

And the 'antics' of some of the flying pickets. Well, some of them were simply travelling thugs looking for a fight and nothing to do with the miner's fight for jobs.
Since I'm one of those people do you have any evidence for the assertion about my motives?
Just to clarify - I wasn't talking about 'your' motives. I have no idea if you were of that mind-set and no reason to assume anything other than what you have said about yourself. I said 'some' of the flying pickets. 'Some' does not mean either 'all' or 'you'.
There is a vast difference between the situation in the 1970s and what is happening now.
Most of the walkouts then were around pay and conditions of staff, so there was little public sympathy.
This time it is about huge cuts to services.
Cuts which could see things that people are used to receiving day in, day out - and that they value - completely wiped out.
In your local area, it is things such as:
Libraries
Leisure centres
Events
Parks and gardens
Highways
Medical centres
Dentists
Schools
Sure Start
After school clubs
Voluntary organisations
Social care
So far, it hasn't really dawned on the public what is going to happen.
Instead, they have been tut-tutting at the slew of stories about how apparently bloated, wasteful and overpaid the public sector is.
They've read shock horror headlines about skilled Chief Executive and Directors responsible for thousands of staff and a budget of hundreds of millions of pounds having the audacity to earn more than the PM.
And they've talked in pubs up and down the land about the man with nine kids who's earning £30k on the dole, and how the welfare budget can be slashed by billions because it must mean most claimants are on the fiddle.
But it is slowly dawning on ministers that there isn't that much excess to cut.
That some quangos do actually perform a useful function.
That councils employ far fewer people than they used to.
That 95 pence in every pound spent on the NHS goes on medical treatment and equipment and just five pence on management.
But far more worrying than this is the fact that people are contradictory.
They say they don't mind cuts.
In truth, they mean they don't mind cuts that don't affect them.
Make no mistake, there is going to be a battle royale between ministers as they fight to prevent their budgets from being completely decimated.
Andrew Rawnsley wrote yesterday that some ministers fear lynch mobs when the scale of what is going to happen finally dawns on Joe Public.
Polling shows that people think the emergency budget was the extent of the cuts.
In truth, it was only the start.
Just so that I am clear on what is happening here?.............
The Unions fight an election and yet fail to get their choice of government elected because the rest of the country see's the need for change. Now that the scale of the previous governments disastrous policies which failed miserably by "spending" have been exposed, the new government is faced with the reality of making very harsh cuts. The Union bosses see an opportunity to take on a weak government and re-instate themselves as the force that they once were in the 1970's when they all but destroyed the UK manufacturing industry.
If this is the case then I see clearly that the Union bosses who are paid 6 figure salaries and who will not lose a penny will probably revell in the chance to take on the government and bring the country to its knees by calling ridiculous and iappropriate strikes in the name of the public sector workforce.
Bollocks - wake up and smell the coffee - when the going gets tough the tough get going and we are in very tough times.
Quote by Too Hot
Just so that I am clear on what is happening here?.............
The Unions fight an election and yet fail to get their choice of government elected because the rest of the country see's the need for change. Now that the scale of the previous governments disastrous policies which failed miserably by "spending" have been exposed, the new government is faced with the reality of making very harsh cuts. The Union bosses see an opportunity to take on a weak government and re-instate themselves as the force that they once were in the 1970's when they all but destroyed the UK manufacturing industry.

This is a global crisis and the UK is not alone in pursuing these policies. Obviously you must know better than many of the best economic brains around the world!
The fact is that if the government hadn't bailed the banks out, by pumping billions of pounds in, the banking system would have gone into meltdown. The UK was hours away from shutting down its network. That would have meant people would have gone unpaid, unable to buy fuel and food. There would have been major civil unrest which would have made the fuel crisis pale into insignificance.
Many of the billions poured in haven't gone to waste - they are now publicly owned assets which we as taxpayers will probably see a profit from in future years as share prices rise again.
Much of the spending actually kept people employed by the private sector - major construction projects such as schools, hospitals. What's more these are public facilities that benefit us all.
And the Tories never saw the crisis coming either, and didn't offer up any alternative.
They wanted more deregulation, not less.
Quote by flower411
This is a global crisis and the UK is not alone in pursuing these policies. Obviously you must know better than many of the best economic brains around the world!

Just to clarify .... Are these the economic brains that caused the crisis in the first place and are still receiving millions in bonuses and pay offs or are they a new lot of economic brains that`ll be receiving bonuses and payoffs in the future ?
The economic brains that are richer beyond most peoples imagination while many are having their homes reposessed because of their policies ?
Are they the economic brains that had their jobs preserved (despite demonstrating clearly that they are only out for themselves) while millions of people are struggling to survive ?
The economic brains that have successfully conned a whole bunch of self serving apologists into speaking on their behalf, telling us how clever they are ?
Are they the "economic brains" you are referring to ? Cos if they are ....I`ll take me chances with Too Hots analysis !!
I think you are confusing bankers with economists!
I am talking about the huge number of independent economists who agree with the strategy.
Quote by Stevie J
.........snip
Much of the spending actually kept people employed by the private sector - major construction projects such as schools, hospitals. What's more these are public facilities that benefit us all.

I think you will find that many of these schemes were actually financed by PRIVATE money under the Private Finance Initiative and therefore the debt is "off-balance sheet" and not included in the Government's deficit.
Quote by foxylady2209
s3xyl3xy wrote:
How on earth did they figure his attending such a demo would constitute an act of terrorism?
Boy!!!......What short memories!!!.......Don't you remember some of the antics from the 'authorities' during the national miners strike????.......Regardless of your politics that should have made people aware of the true nature of our 'security forces'!!!
I got quite a few bruises for simply standing in the wrong place.........and was stopped altogether from travelling to Yorkshire and the Midlands.......All within a 'free' state!!

And the 'antics' of some of the flying pickets. Well, some of them were simply travelling thugs looking for a fight and nothing to do with the miner's fight for jobs.
Since I'm one of those people do you have any evidence for the assertion about my motives?
Just to clarify - I wasn't talking about 'your' motives. I have no idea if you were of that mind-set and no reason to assume anything other than what you have said about yourself. I said 'some' of the flying pickets. 'Some' does not mean either 'all' or 'you'.
So how do you know if any of my friends, relatives and marras had the motives you impute to them?
Quote by Stevie J
There is a vast difference between the situation in the 1970s and what is happening now.
Most of the walkouts then were around pay and conditions of staff, so there was little public sympathy.
This time it is about huge cuts to services.
Cuts which could see things that people are used to receiving day in, day out - and that they value - completely wiped out.
In your local area, it is things such as:
Libraries
Leisure centres
Events
Parks and gardens
Highways
Medical centres
Dentists
Schools
Sure Start
After school clubs
Voluntary organisations
Social care
So far, it hasn't really dawned on the public what is going to happen.
Instead, they have been tut-tutting at the slew of stories about how apparently bloated, wasteful and overpaid the public sector is.
They've read shock horror headlines about skilled Chief Executive and Directors responsible for thousands of staff and a budget of hundreds of millions of pounds having the audacity to earn more than the PM.
And they've talked in pubs up and down the land about the man with nine kids who's earning £30k on the dole, and how the welfare budget can be slashed by billions because it must mean most claimants are on the fiddle.
But it is slowly dawning on ministers that there isn't that much excess to cut.
That some quangos do actually perform a useful function.
That councils employ far fewer people than they used to.
That 95 pence in every pound spent on the NHS goes on medical treatment and equipment and just five pence on management.
But far more worrying than this is the fact that people are contradictory.
They say they don't mind cuts.
In truth, they mean they don't mind cuts that don't affect them.
Make no mistake, there is going to be a battle royale between ministers as they fight to prevent their budgets from being completely decimated.
Andrew Rawnsley wrote yesterday that some ministers fear lynch mobs when the scale of what is going to happen finally dawns on Joe Public.
Polling shows that people think the emergency budget was the extent of the cuts.
In truth, it was only the start.

Your all forgeting the most important thing !!! The Tories will want to be re-elected in 2015 !!!
The cuts will be massive and deep in the short term..........The Gov. will plan this so things start getting better in say 3 - 4 years cos after all they want a chance of being re-elected don't they??
I'd suggest the Lib-Dem party will implode when their own party members realise that THEY are being blamed for the hardship faced by ordinary people. The Conservatives have previous form when it comes to destroying lives and communities, its in their nature, but the Lib-Dems will be shocked by public reactions, possibly riots, which are being caused by policies which the Labour Party will pin on Lib-Dem MPs.
So for the CONSERVATIVES to win again in 2015, they need a weakened Labour party, cos who would vote Lib-Dem again? A vote for Lib-Dem? Could be a vote for either Labour or Tories, so why bother?
Hence the Tories will write off any Labour strongholds, keep the pain to a minimum in safe Tory seats and be real nice to marginal seats which are held by Lib-Dems. Maybe a bit of redrawing boundries might help.
All the above assumes that there will not be civil disobediance on a large scale. Personally I think there might well be.
John
Am I the only one who's willing to consider that this global financial fiasco has been deliberately engineered??
Following the logic that Trades Union leaders are hell bent on promoting their own hidden agendas at the expense of their memberships and the more general community.......is it TOO big a leap to believe that such economic chaos can be engineered by the global powers......very few of whom are identifiable as individuals??
It's only relatively recently I've become interested in anti-capitalism........so I have a lot to learn yet on the subject but my experience of 'government interest' and 'national interest' leads me to be extremely sceptical that the crisis could have reached the point it did without major warnings being heard for many years beforehand.
When you take the international scale of things into account.......it makes for sobering thoughts.......just WHO could plot such a disaster.......and to what ends???......economic or political??
Before you dismiss the thought......consider how governments throughout the world routinely misdirect and misinform their populaces, often for their own agendas.......more often because THEIR strings are being pulled by economic powerhouses within the financial and business sectors.
Sobered ME up anyway!!!!.........and I was getty nicely pissed!! :twisted:
Quote by awayman

Just to clarify - I wasn't talking about 'your' motives. I have no idea if you were of that mind-set and no reason to assume anything other than what you have said about yourself. I said 'some' of the flying pickets. 'Some' does not mean either 'all' or 'you'.

So how do you know if any of my friends, relatives and marras had the motives you impute to them?
The motives of the pickets that killed a taxi driver going about his lawful job could be brought to the fore, as can the security forces who hit out indiscriminately.
There were terrible scenes during that time and history shows neither side can take the moral highground.
Dave_Notts