Jump to content

The six page limit, baaaaaa, the CA continued!


Recommended Posts

Dear Peter,

 

It’s in their manifesto. Not of course that that means much given the fact that we've all seen manifestos not exactly manifest themselves in the past if you get my drift? But let’s look at the possibilities shall we?

 

Now say the Tories "win" the next GE? I feel we can all be pretty certain that such an event won't come via a landslide vote? More perhaps the even handed affair we used to get at election time? Anyway, a Tory victory would definitely mean the loss of many marginally held seats held by labour. Bye bye Mr Salter. Bye bye a lot of other anti-hunt MP's as well.

 

So when the Tories go for a reversal of the hunting bill the vote would almost certainly go a different way. And if the Tories won a landslide victory the bill would get reversed quite easily. However, what ever the political situation regarding the Tories getting back into power, I'm fairly sure any reversal of this bill would involve the type of legislation that some advocated previously in there being provisions made to "licence" the sport in a way so it could at least be regulated. That would mean of course that types like Blair would be sitting pretty because that’s what his crew advocated all along?? Vote abstention is a comfortable way of paving a path for personal agendas? Then there’s always the possibility of the bill being outlawed anyway if one or both of the future hearings rule against the ban? In that case we would see the bill get repealed anyway and the labour government would have the devils own job getting the law passed again. Or even new legislation passed which included previous lines of hunting under licence? In their rush to get hunting banned, the labour back benchers missed a golden opportunity to control hunting forever!!

 

As for the GE?

 

Tony Blair is going to pay a high price over the "weapons of mass destruction" issue. Especially the way he’s handled his own role "AFTER" it’s been conclusively proven that there were none.

 

Blair’s EU path is littered with failures and deep doubts that even the French people want no part of. A united Europe and complete single currency won't be happening because no one, outside of a few thousand with their hands in the sweetie jar, actually want it. As is always the case, no one thought about actually asking the people until it were too late to convince them it was a good idea. The French will reject the idea in their referendum. We won't then be having our own because there’s no point and Mr Blair will go out under a shroud of great doubt. I personally feel he’s finished now and only the calling of an early election saved him. After the election either way of a win, I feel the labour wolves will gather for his throat.

 

Britain’s are always one thing. Steadfastly patriotic. Ok, perhaps beneath the surface as against our American cousins who are fiercely open about their patriotism but never the less, we rally around our countrymen when the crunch comes.

 

Britain’s don’t like bullies and especially don’t like being told what to do. Blair’s idea of a "nanny state" for Britons flies straight in the face of what our islanders are all about. Frankly Peter, he has failed dismally to accurately gauge public opinion as he wanders from one direction to another on what’s "supposed" to be best for us Brits.

 

Remember the Mori poll that predicted a labour landslide when infact John Major romped home for the Tories? No one, and I mean NO ONE inside the political forecasting business gave the Tories a chance.

 

Can the Tories win? What if they do win?

 

Peter, the Countryside Alliance is forging ahead. Its strong, it’s staunch and it’s totally 100% united. It is well structured, well run and well funded by its own membership. The whole nation KNOWS who the Countryside Alliance is. The whole country Peter.

 

What does the Countryside Alliance actually say about what is does for angling?

 

“We are campaigning for the interests and rights of anglers and angling across the whole spectrum, from coarse fishing to game angling and sea fishing.

 

The Countryside Alliance's mission with this campaign is to preserve this beautiful sport for generations to come. We aim to promote the huge contribution that angling and anglers make to the health, beauty, and prosperity of Britain's waterways. We also seek to protect angling and anglers from the increasing propaganda, threats and intimidation coming from animal rights groups. Especially, we aim to inspire young people to take up angling and thus to ensure its future contribution to our culture and countryside."

 

What’s wrong with that Peter? The CA is working for angling. The CA remains 100% united. The CA has brilliant PR. The CA has a strong self funded structure. It has both independent and group membership, has a website, weekly e mail grass root communications, quarterly news magazine, insurance package with membership, hot lines, advice lines with someone ALWAYS on the end of a telephone or email address.

 

What does FACT have? Participating orgs with a history of falling out with each other. NO FUNDING. NO INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS. No website. No magazine. No newsletters. No structure that I've heard about. No prospect for self sustained funding.

 

By coming out publicly in support of a marginal labour MP, two inside FACT have placed the org in between a rock and a hard place. A move that will no doubt have marginalized its chances in future cross party negotiations. Certainly marginalized itself by its openly backing a specific labour MP within a labour government. To make such a blunder, so early on in FACT's existence, surely presents angling with a damning future?

 

And you Peter, constantly slake the Countryside Alliance for hi-jacking angling for "its own ends"???

 

I rather feel its starting to look like it’s the other way around don't you?? I mean, who would seriously back your mobs efforts given their history for unification failure and total failure at getting itself funded properly. As for crunch time?? Dismal.

 

Presently, the massive majority that make up Britain’s “angling community” remain untargeted by anyone seeking to represent their interests. Can you imagine a drive by Countryside Alliance to win these anglers Peter? I mean an all out determined drive? I bet you can.

 

And I’d bet a gold clock that you can’t imagine the FACT doing the same thing???!!!

 

So what is it going to be for angling at the end of the day Peter on the representational front? Detrimental, or Determined?

 

Regards,

 

Lee.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 234
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Peter Waller:

Lee, can you be sure that the Tories will revoke the Hunting Bill? No guess work, no opinions, just fact, please!

The Conservatives will 'try' to revoke the Hunting Bill, but they have promised a free vote so nothing is certain.

It may not go right back to how it was, completely.

 

I've now got the new scope to go on my new fox rifle. Just got to sight it in!

http://www.d-das.com/

Lower South Buckland Farm Campsite DT3 4BQ
http://www.campingandcaravanningclub.co.uk/campsites/uk/dorset/weymouth/southbucklandfarm
Pisces mortui solum cum flumine natant

You get more bites on Anglers Net

 

http://www.fishingtails.co.uk

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a 'free vote' that got fox hunting banned in the first instance.

 

Their status as an MP doesn't require consultation of their constituency prior to a 'free vote' so your MP can excercise their own bigotries. This is dangerous and has been for almost 150 years - they can follow the party line and to quote Gilbert & Sullivan 'Always voted at my party's call and never thought of thinking for myself at all'.

 

Give them a free vote and you can bet they get it wrong, and the likes of Tony Banks win the day on a specious argument.

This is a signature, there are many signatures like it but this one is mine

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan Stubbs:

It was a 'free vote' that got fox hunting banned in the first instance.

 

Their status as an MP doesn't require consultation of their constituency prior to a 'free vote' so your MP can excercise their own bigotries. This is dangerous and has been for almost 150 years - they can follow the party line and to quote Gilbert & Sullivan 'Always voted at my party's call and never thought of thinking for myself at all'.

 

Give them a free vote and you can bet they get it wrong, and the likes of Tony Banks win the day on a specious argument.

Very confusing post, Alan.

 

You seem to be condemning them when they follow the party line and also when they vote purely according to their own beliefs. Damned if they do and damned if they don't.

 

What would you like to see?

Bleeding heart liberal pinko, with bacon on top.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Chaps,

 

That’s one of the problems you see. A newbie MP can scrape home and win a seat in the house supposedly there representing the actual voters who put him/her there in the first place. Then for some its lets go wandering off to pursue personal agendas and stuff me constituents.

 

I quite like Peter Waller’s claim that the Countryside Alliance is "high-jacking angling". He should be looking a bit closer to home methinks.

 

What does he think the labour party are doing?

 

Is the labour party making sure it gets its slippers underneath angling's bed? Not to win votes surely?? And what was that "lets side with Martin cos he’s a nice bloke and does oodles for us" trot that the FACT 2 came out with?? Talk about high-jacking angling? Let’s talk about angling getting kidnapped shall we?

 

No. It’s not the Countryside Alliance that’s high-jacking angling. Not the Countryside Alliance that’s causing splits in angling. That’s been going on for year’s way before the CA was ever dreamed about.

 

Regards,

 

Lee.

Link to post
Share on other sites

'Then for some its lets go wandering off to pursue personal agendas and stuff me constituents.'

 

What, like the way constituents in Finchley had the Poll tax inflicted on them Lee?

 

Tell you what, why not leave the domestic politics out of your crusade to drum up support for the CA? Your perrenial armchair canvassing might be the one issue that sees me ignore the appeal of the Alliance out of hand. If I thought support for them would put the Tories in with a shout I'd rather support PETA! Besides, it'd take an act of faith the like of which saw the Red Sea parted, for anyone to seriously think that bunch stood even the remotest chance of being re-elected in May.

 

All you are doing is alienating a large proportion of anglers that might otherwise consider offering support to the CA. Stick to angling issues!

 

That should see us hit the six page limit tonight...

Slodger (Chris Hammond.)

 

'We should be fishin'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Slodge,

 

Supporting PETA rather than see a Tory government return to power kind of puts you in the anti-Tory seats then?

 

An angling issue I've been sticking to is the one where certain labour supporters claim the CA is up to all sorts of tricks.

 

 

Regards,

 

Lee

Link to post
Share on other sites

GlennB:

[Very confusing post, Alan.

 

You seem to be condemning them when they follow the party line and also when they vote purely according to their own beliefs. Damned if they do and damned if they don't.

 

What would you like to see?

My point is that having got themselves elected they are lobby fodder - and presumably vote the party line because it was the party line that got them elected.

 

When they are given a 'free vote' they can vote for their own conscience - which is patently not what got them elected and do they consult their entire constituency over such matters? Do they hell.

 

An MP is elected as a representative for a constituency, not as the representative of a constituency, and that is a huge difference which can only be resolved every five years.

 

A 'free vote' is a dangerous weapon - an abrogation of a party manifesto. I'd argue that it shouldn't to be given to many of the professional politicians of today who have done the university / research assistant / one term as councillor / no hope candidate / safe seat candidate route to parliament - who have little or no comprehension of an 'honest day's work'.

This is a signature, there are many signatures like it but this one is mine

Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't see anything wrong with the Poll Tax!

We were told it was going to be £157 before the local council got the idea that they had to make sure they were on the safe side.

The leader of the Labour controlling group in Weymouth openly admitted "We can charge what they like and there's nothing they can do about it"

When the rates were set, they were all about double what we were told to expect.

How does a persons ability to consume local government services relate to the value of the house they live in?

http://www.d-das.com/

Lower South Buckland Farm Campsite DT3 4BQ
http://www.campingandcaravanningclub.co.uk/campsites/uk/dorset/weymouth/southbucklandfarm
Pisces mortui solum cum flumine natant

You get more bites on Anglers Net

 

http://www.fishingtails.co.uk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...