Jump to content


Rugby League World
League Express

Rugby League Yearbook 2014-15

Martyn Sadler

Member Since 23 Aug 2004
Offline Last Active Private
***--

#3122018 UKIPpery

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 13 May 2015 - 11:00 AM

 

Douglas Carswell is being disingenuous and quite selfish in refusing to take the money that UKIP (along with all the other elected parties) is entitled to.

 

 

UKIP is entitled to the money just as every other party is.
 
The allocation of funding is known as 'Short Money' (named after former MP Edward Short) and it is intended to help parties with their running costs.
 
The short money allocation for 2014 is £16.689 for every MP elected and £33.33 for every 200 votes, which for UKIP"s 3,8891.099 votes equates to £646,785, which is money for UKIP to establish and maintain a parliamentary office. It isn't intended for Carswell, who gets his own funding for his office costs, but for the party.
 
UKIP has effectively been given that money by the people who voted for it according to the rules laid down.
 
I can't imagine that the Greens or indeed the Tories, Labour or anyone else would reject that funding.
 
So why should UKIP?
 
If Carswell can't see this, he really should return to the Tories.
 
It's rather typical of the Telegraph (and no doubt a few other media outlets) not to reveal the full story.



#3121532 General Election 2015 - Poll & Discussion Thread

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 12 May 2015 - 09:35 AM

That was the point I was making on the last page. So many people just think it's an EU law when in fact it's 100% British. If we stepped away from the ECHR then we'd be the only country in mainland Europe to do so. For those who doubt it's values, I'd strongly suggest reading it's history and WHY it got everyone in Europe to sign up to it.

To walk away because it inconveniences politicians in their rush to look good on the front pages of newspapers is outrageous and shameful. For me, it should almost be a disqualifier from holding public office having that level of narcissism.

 

I don't think anyone has proposed withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights.

 

And if you have signed the convention, then you are subject to the European Court of Human Rights.

 

The question is whether the human rights outlined in the convention could be extended to include other rights that they currently don't encompass.

 

For example, one of the issues that directly impinges on human rights is the issue of extradition, particularly to the United States.

 

The USA spent several years trying to extradite Gary McKinnon, for example, who suffered from Aspergers Syndrome.

 

McKinnon appealed to the ECHR, but it didn't prevent his extradition.

 

Theresa May stepped in personally in 2012 to block his extradition on the basis that there was a very good chance that McKinnon would commit suicide in jail in the USA.

 

In my view it shouldn't have needed to go so far.

 

Along the same lines, there have been several cases of British people being extradited using European Arrest Warrants where the evidence has been patchy, to say the least.

 

I would hope that some of these issues, and no doubt some others, would find their way into a British Bill of Rights.

 

How the legislation would be enacted is, of course, the crux of the problem.




#3120808 General Election 2015 - Poll & Discussion Thread

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 10 May 2015 - 07:55 PM

From my experience, most independence supporters have a great deal of sympathy with Northerners. It's a bit of a nonsense but there is a petition on the go at the moment asking for the Scottish/English border to be redrawn south of Sheffield. It is being circulated amongst the online Scottish independence community, and signed enthusiastically, not through any expansionist sentiment but through a genuine sense of fellow feeling. People look at the vast swathe of non-Tory areas across the north and recognise a people in trouble.

But what do we do? Our votes almost never count. If the rest of the UK votes Labour, we get a Labour government. If rUK votes Tory, we get a Tory government even when we send just one MP to Westminster. IIRC I think there have been just two occasions since ww2 where we have made a difference 1964 and Oct 1974. And at this election we extended the hand of friendship to the party that represents most communities in the north, and it was rejected in the most ill-mannered way.

Should we give up the fight to govern ourselves because we can't affect the lives of people in other lands? Give us something to support, like the Catalans, and we will give help and show solidarity. As someone who is half-northern, part of my motivation for working for the independence/autonomy/self-determination of Scotland was to be an example of what a people could achieve. There is an alternative to Tory nihilism but it has to be fought for. Where Scotland stands today is the result of decades of hard work, campaigning, fighting. When do the people of England begin? When doe people in the north begin to think about taking control of their destiny.

We only hear snippets about what is going on south of the border, but certain groups have identified themselves to the self-determination community in Scotland. Groups like Yorkshire First, the North-East Party and the Northern Party sound very much like our Campaign for a Scottish Assembly and Scotland United of 20 to 30 years ago, or even like the early SNP. Ordinary people can change their political culture, can gain power and use it for the common good. It takes imagination, organisation, hard work, guts, resilience and time.

Don't rely on the Labour Party to do it for you, though. They are no longer agents of change.

 

What I struggle to understand about the Scottish independence campaign is not the wish for independence itself, which will happen if enough people want it.

 

I can't understand why some Scots are so keen to cast off the supposed tyranny of the United Kingdom, while wanting to embrace the European Union.

 

By definition you can't be an independent country if you're part of the EU, and of course that applies to the UK and to Scotland.

 

If you leave the UK but remain in the EU you'll find that most of your laws are made in Brussels, as indeed they are already.

 

Whatever that is, it isn't independence.




#3119755 General Election 2015 - Poll & Discussion Thread

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 09 May 2015 - 12:03 PM

This probably wins the prize for the most incorrect headline in the days leading up to the election.




#3119112 General Election 2015 - Poll & Discussion Thread

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 08 May 2015 - 10:38 AM

That's exactly the attitude that has brought the Labour party to where they are. Instead of addressing issues, however uncomfortable, it is easier to pretend they don't exist and ridicule those who raise them.

Take immigration as an example. Those who are most at risk from influx of eastern Europeans aren't those in cosy office based jobs. It is the cleaners, the labourers, the retail assistants that they pose an economic threat to. In other words your traditional Labour voter. Yet the Labour party seems unwilling or unable to face their concerns head on.

 

One of the things that is striking about some Labour figures is that they blame the electorate for being somehow scared into voting Tory by Cameron or the media or both.

 

Even if that were true, it sounds arrogant, and Labour would be better to take a step back and think hard about why they have lost so much support.

 

Having said that, in Scotland I think their candidates were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Whoever the leader was would have led them to defeat north of the border, regardless of the policies they might have adopted.

 

In England, on the other hand, they seem to find it much easier these days to connect with vacuous celebrities than with working people.

 

Miliband's 'interview' with Russell Brand was an example of that.

 

One final thought.

 

When I heard the exit poll result at 10.00pm last night, I thought there was no way the Tories would get to 316 seats.

 

What would we have thought if the exit poll had been even more accurate and predicted 330 seats?


  • ckn likes this


#3118284 General Election 2015 - Poll & Discussion Thread

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 07 May 2015 - 09:19 AM

It's true in many ways though.  None of Cameron, Clegg or Miliband wold stand a chance of bettering the likes of Thatcher, John Smith, Tony Blair, Heseltine, Ashdown and so on in a 1 on 1 debate.  Political pygmies compared to that of even 15 years ago.  The most telling example of this is how Labour have to keep pulling Gordon Brown back to fight their fights for them, in this election he seems to have declined the invitation though.  Even Cameron has to pull back John Major to have an elder statesman on his side.  Two unpopular and defeated prime ministers, one on either side, yet they still make Cameron and Miliband seem like lost little boys.

 

I don't agree with that.

 

Margaret Thatcher wasn't a great debater. She knew how to give a speech, but her debating successes were much rarer. She had a hectoring style that put people's backs up. Heseltine also couldn't stop his arrogance shining through.

 

Tony Blair was good at debating and at making speeches. He was a great politician for the modern age - too good, as it turned out, because he persuaded the Labour Party to back him when it should have put the brakes on him.

 

Yesterday I watched the BBC2 Daily Politics debate on Trust in Politics.

 

There were five politicians being interviewed by Andrew Neil and Jo Coburn and effectively debating with each other.

 

Sarah Grinton, the President of the Liberal Democrats, was outstanding. She is a far better debater than Nick Clegg and explained the LDs position in a clear, coherent style. I had never seen her before, but the LDs should roll her out more often.

 

William Hague was also excellent. He is a far better debater than all the politicians you cited, maybe even including Blair. The Tories will suffer a massive loss when he is no longer among them.

 

Alyn Smith of the Scot Nats and Diane James of UKIP also performed well. But the disappointment was Harriet Harman, who was all too easily tied in knots by Neil and Hague. I've never been too impressed by her, and the debate reinforced my doubts.




#3117439 General Election 2015 - Poll & Discussion Thread

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 05 May 2015 - 03:56 PM

The above is all Tory claptrap. Private participation may be 6% now but the Tories have set up their reforms so that they can really make privatisation crack should they get a majority.  As for the recovery, the reason our economy is doing better than most of Europe's is because Gordon Brown kept us out of the Euro. The only winners from the Euro are the Germans. It was set up to benefit Germany and it is doing so to the detriment of the rest of its member.   Had we stuck with Labour in 2010 our economy would be doing even better than it is today, but thanks to George's 2010 budget we had three years of stagnation.   As for the other points you've made them all before. Just because New Labour did it doesn't make it right.

Miliband is being attacked on this forum for being Tory "lite" and for being too left wing. Which is it?  Or is he just wrong whatever he does because basically he's Jewish and anti - Semitism is in bred in the UK press.

 

The only person who keeps mentioning that Miliband is Jewish seems to be you.




#3113081 Goldthorpe award Sympathy points

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 28 April 2015 - 08:21 AM

he's done it again this week, randomly giving peacock the 1 point, if you're giving points out for efforts then Sims had his best game by far, a Clark and asotasi, in a year and a half.

Its crazy

 

With respect, Phil Caplan had his Albert Goldthorpe points spot on for the Leeds-Warrington game this week.

 

If you look at the Opta stats that were printed on the same page, you'll see that Peacock made 46 tackles (only Stevie Ward made more in the game), while Sims made 19 and Asotasi made 13.

 

Peacock also made 147 metres, which was the highest figure for any player in the match. Sims made 92, Asotasi made 42 and Clark made 98.

 

Peacock also made five offloads, the highest figure of any player in the game.Clark made two, Asotasi one and Sims none.

 

And Peacock made nine passes, while Sims and Asotasi made one each.

 

Peacock also made the Opta Team of the Week, and was the highest scoring forward to do so with 772 Opta points.

 

In fact there was a strong correlation this week between the Opta Team of the Week and the Albert Goldthorpe points, as of course you would expect.

 

So I think your criticism of Phil Caplan is very hard to justify.




#3112548 General Election 2015 - Poll & Discussion Thread

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 27 April 2015 - 09:09 AM

I always thought "phobia" meant "hate."  Surely trying to get rid of hate for any section of society is a good thing. Many people share the view that Islam is "bad"  Ed has espoused an unpopular cause, which to me shows just how brave he would be as PM.

 

You often say on here that you hate the Tories.

 

So presumably, if you think that legislating against one sort of phobia is a valid political act, then you believe it should apply in all cases, and your stated hatred of the Tories should become illegal and you should be prosecuted for it.

 

Clearly that would be absurd, and likewise in the case of religion. We should all be free to express our feelings about all religions, whatever they are.

 

Is it brave of Miliband to give this interview to the Muslim News?

 

It certainly isn't an unpopular cause for the readership he was aiming at. He seems to me to be pandering to an interest group to win its votes. I don't think there's a great deal that is brave about that.




#3107432 General Election 2015 - Poll & Discussion Thread

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 17 April 2015 - 01:51 PM

Listening to the parties at lunchtime on Five Live selling there manifestos, they all seem hell bent on more of everything, when surely we just need less people consuming resources!  And no I don't mean from an imigration point of view as I'm sure our population would still be 4 million higher than now in 2037 than it is now with zero migration according to this study.

I have missed the debates so far, given that they have been held on Thursday nights, but it strikes me that almost all the parties, including UKIP and the Tories, believe they can only win by promising spending on a scale that will mortgage our future and that of our kids.

 

Earlier this month a certain lady by the name of Viv Nicholson died. She was the lady who won the pools in the 1960s and declared she was going to "spend, spend, spend".

 

She seems to be the role model for a whole generation of politicians.

 

The strange thing is that those politicians who claim to be opposed to "austerity" are those whose spending plans would guarantee it for future generations. Their selfishness knows no bounds.




#3095344 Union vs League commentators

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 26 March 2015 - 09:45 AM

There are two groups of people who relentlessly slag off Rugby League; people who hate the sport and people who support it. Everyone else is usually pretty positive.

Very tempted to make that the League Express Quote of the Week.

 

And it's true all too often.




#3083237 RIP Ray

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 05 March 2015 - 01:33 PM

I haven't been on the forum for a few days, and, like everyone else, I was shocked to see this thread and its incredibly sad content when I came to it just now.

 

As others have already said, Ray was an absolute gentleman on this forum, treating every other poster with great courtesy and always making his own points in a reasoned, articulate way. I can't imagine that anyone ever fell out with him.

 

This is a very difficult and sensitive time for his family, but I would hope we would be able to do something to acknowledge his contribution to this forum.

 

RIP, Ray!




#3067500 UKIPpery

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 06 February 2015 - 04:52 PM

First it's "apparently SWP members" now it's "whether it's the SWP or anyone else". Just typical of your sub-standard journalism Martyn. I suspect there were some SWP members there along with Left Unity, Socialist Party, Greens and many others, but if you think they have any truck with Rotherham Labour councillors the you are as politically ignorant as you are journalistically inept.

 

UKIP are currently pulling out all the stops to divert attention from the daily exposure of their councillors, officers and PPCs being made to resign or being expelled for disgusting racist, Islamophobic, sexist and homophobic views expressed when they though no one was looking.

 

Farage's visit was well timed for him to take advantage of a tragic and criminal situation and for the media and others to try and portray him as a victim. Fascism in action!

I didn't realise that posting on here was "journalism".

 

If it is, then quite a lot of us are sub-standard.

 

I'm afraid you are in denial just as much as the Labour councillors you profess to despise.

 

We have had one of the worst examples of child exploitation we have ever seen in this country, and yet you prefer to focus on UKIP councillors rather than demanding that those responsible for what has happened in Rotherham should be brought to book.

 

Whoever the people were who were outside the UKIP office in Rotherham, they would have been far better lobbying for justice for the victims of the appalling events there.




#3062324 Flags flying at half mast

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 28 January 2015 - 02:18 PM

And Saudi investment in this country. Read it is somewhere in the region of £65bn... ethics and morality are quickly forgotten about when economics are involved.

Nice to see Michelle Obama setting an example for other women visiting Saudi Arabia.

 

More power to her!




#3061666 Greece Election

Posted by Martyn Sadler on 27 January 2015 - 10:31 AM

Bloody democracy, people voting for a party which says it cares about people!!

 

That's rather a romanticised interpretation of what's happened.
 
The financial crisis in Greece comes mainly from previous governments' extraordinary generosity to public sector employees.
 
For example, civil servants employed before 1992 could retire at the age of 58 on 80 per cent of their final salary if they had completed 35 years service. I don't know any other country that is so generous with its former employees, although there may be one somewhere.
 
In far too many countries public sector pensions are based on a sort of Ponzi scheme, whereby current retirees draw their pensions from the taxation of current workers.
 
In the Greek economy there are now as many retirees with those pension rights as there are people working in the economy. 
 
Those retirees didn't want to give up their rights, no matter how damaging they are to the 50 per cent of young people in the country who can't get a job. They are prepared to sacrifice the young generation to preserve their own financial position, even though it is clearly unsustainable. They want the rest of the EU to pay for it.
 
It is hardly surprising that Greece's debt is 177 per cent of their GDP.
 
And yet the new government is promising to take on more workers in the public sector.
 
I'm afraid the circle can't be squared.
 
"Caring about people" means, in the first instance, not misleading them about the current state of affairs, or what is possible in terms of trying to address the problems they face.