# Fees vote to take place on 9th december



## where to (Dec 1, 2010)

9 days.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 1, 2010)

kin ell, it never stops does it


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 1, 2010)

Assuming the vote is a 'yes' I think the 11th will be fun.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 1, 2010)

yea there's a demo on the 11th at scotland yard to ...


----------



## ska invita (Dec 1, 2010)

deliberately trying to get in there before the sat 11th which wouldve been the biggest action yet - running scared for sure, but its a real shame - heres hoping people get off work. 

*if only this had happened when labour brought in fees... 'labour scum' isnt as catchy as 'tory scum' but it has to be added to the songbook.


----------



## BigTom (Dec 1, 2010)

birmingham facebook page for the 9th:

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=164315326939499

already over 400 attending (I know these numbers are low compared to elsewhere, but bear in mind only 200 turned out on tuesday so this is huge progress) - this had been setup and decided on before they announced the vote on the 9th, so I imagine this will grow rapidly in numbers (the actions to take place have already been planned as well - the students in birmingham might not have the numbers, but what there are are fucking great at organising - so much better than I was when I was at uni, it's great to see and be a part of, even if I'm only able to be on the periphery due to work - looking forward to the 11th though)


----------



## ska invita (Dec 1, 2010)

dyou reckon the 11th will still be called even if they vote to introduce the rise on the 9th? I suppose people might come out in mourning...


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 1, 2010)

there's a protest against police brutality on the 11th so yes.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 1, 2010)

anticuts site has this:

*NUS HAVE CALLED A NATIONWIDE DAY OF ACTION FOR THE 8TH.*

*NCACF – THOSE BEHIND THE 24TH AND 30TH DAYS OF ACTION – HAVE CALLED FOR A MARCH ON PARLIAMENT ON THE 9TH ITSELF

ITS ALSO GOT TO BE BACK TO THE STREET THIS WEEKEND.  EVERYWHERE.  PROTESTS AROUND THE UK ALREADY PLANNED – DETAILS TO COME.*


----------



## Vintage Paw (Dec 1, 2010)

As expected, I believe the vote is only for lifting the cap, and not any of the 'progressive' measures that are trumpeted by Little Dave Clegg as being the reason why this proposal is so fair for poor old students. So we'll get the 9k but none of the 21k repayment threshold, etc. I believe that was how it was always going to be voted on, but still.

Thursday evening vote, suggestions that it's a cynical move to avoid smaller party MPs being present.


----------



## BigTom (Dec 1, 2010)

national facebook page for the 9th: 402 currently attending

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=173878782641548

March on Parliament page for the 9th: 1027 currently attending

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=136567579732280


----------



## tynusx (Dec 1, 2010)

general strike.


----------



## dylans (Dec 1, 2010)

Bodyhammer. Tactics and self defence for the modern protester

http://www.devo.com/sarin/shieldbook.pdf


----------



## BigTom (Dec 1, 2010)

general strike would be great. but the unions can't organise a demo less than 5 months away, I can't see them getting something together in 9 days  .. wildcat strikes maybe but I'm not sure many people will risk losing their jobs

march on parliament page up to nearly 1500 now - 20 minutes adds 500 people..


----------



## where to (Dec 1, 2010)

tynusx said:


> general strike.


 
lol


----------



## Prince Rhyus (Dec 1, 2010)

Given what's happened in recent weeks, does this one have "Poll Tax March" written all over it?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 1, 2010)

No, because there's fuck all community link up.

Here's a cart, here's a horse. Vote lib-dem.


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 1, 2010)

Prince Rhyus said:


> Given what's happened in recent weeks, does this one have "Poll Tax March" written all over it?


 
Nah, not broad enough yet. I went to a tube strike picket the other day. The few guys there were surprised someone non-RMT would turn up - puzzled even. At some point we got chatting about student protesters and their view of it all had come from newspapers, not from meeting students. I also went to the Camden protest tonight. Bugger all students there too. If they don't support other people, other people won't support them.


----------



## where to (Dec 1, 2010)

to be fair, some (prob very few) students did go to RMT pickets, and the FBU protest a week before i understand too.

also remember the students who probably tipped the balance in Lewisham on Monday.


----------



## where to (Dec 1, 2010)

dylans said:


> Bodyhammer. Tactics and self defence for the modern protester
> 
> http://www.devo.com/sarin/shieldbook.pdf


 
some kid on facebook was talking about getting 300 folk to dress as spartans


----------



## Balbi (Dec 2, 2010)

NUS being fucking cowards again. Calling for a demo on the 8th, ensuring headlines about 'student violence' flood the front pages on the day of the vote while the bill sails through with activists at home. Action on the 9th means that there would be an instant reaction to the vote passing.


----------



## love detective (Dec 2, 2010)

where to said:


> also remember the students who probably tipped the balance in Lewisham on Monday.


 
the support from the students from goldsmiths on monday was great and was very much welcomed by LACA and helped make the night even more powerful in terms of the lobby, but the balance was tipped a good few weeks previously at the mayor/cabinet meeting

we actually had some other stuff planned for monday in the council chamber itself which obviously was scuppered by events

(there was also a feeling amongst a few local protestors that once the students arrived they completely dominated the lobby, drowning out the various people/campaigns who had been doing months of practical unglamorous work against closures of local libraries, employment services centres, nurseries etc..)


----------



## TopCat (Dec 2, 2010)

Blockading parliament on the day of the vote would be much more productive than the NUS call out for the day before. Fuck the NUS.


----------



## where to (Dec 2, 2010)

the NUS callout does allow for two days of action (or 1.5 at least) before the vote though, i think it works quite well, whether by design or not


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Dec 2, 2010)

NUS = Gay I remeber them snowballing the fees in the first time around and all they did was one march and that was it. In any case did any one see Milband last time around joining the protest and making out that he's a Old Lobour man? Bollocks.


----------



## fractionMan (Dec 2, 2010)

Vintage Paw said:


> As expected, I believe the vote is only for lifting the cap, and not any of the 'progressive' measures that are trumpeted by Little Dave Clegg as being the reason why this proposal is so fair for poor old students. So we'll get the 9k but none of the 21k repayment threshold, etc. I believe that was how it was always going to be voted on, but still.
> 
> Thursday evening vote, suggestions that it's a cynical move to avoid smaller party MPs being present.


 
This deserves repeating


----------



## moon23 (Dec 2, 2010)

lopsidedbunny said:


> NUS = Gay I remeber them snowballing the fees in the first time around and all they did was one march and that was it. In any case did any one see Milband last time around joining the protest and making out that he's a Old Lobour man? Bollocks.


 
Of course, their resistance to fees was minimal when first introduced becuase it was a Labour government doing it. The NUS is good only for training the likes of Twigg et all.


----------



## dennisr (Dec 2, 2010)

frogwoman said:


> yea there's a demo on the 11th at scotland yard to ...


 
I think this one on the 9th will take priority


----------



## dennisr (Dec 2, 2010)

dylans said:


> Bodyhammer. Tactics and self defence for the modern protester
> 
> http://www.devo.com/sarin/shieldbook.pdf


 
love it


----------



## moon23 (Dec 2, 2010)

dennisr said:


> love it


 
It would make sky news more exciting that's for sure.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 2, 2010)

Balbi said:


> NUS being fucking cowards again. Calling for a demo on the 8th, ensuring headlines about 'student violence' flood the front pages on the day of the vote while the bill sails through with activists at home. Action on the 9th means that there would be an instant reaction to the vote passing.


 
Aaron has to do *something* to get himself back in the limelight, and if that means fucking over future generations of students, then so be it!


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 2, 2010)

Ive got 8 common friends with aaron porter


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 2, 2010)

aaron porter  doesn't have any common friends. Not now anyway.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 2, 2010)




----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 2, 2010)

moon23 said:


> Of course, their resistance to fees was minimal when first introduced becuase it was a Labour government doing it. The NUS is good only for training the likes of Twigg et all.



Equating the actions of the NUS at a national and policy level with the large amount of anti-fees protest that went on at the universities is extremely ignorant.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 2, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> aaron porter  doesn't have any friends..



Corrected for you.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 2, 2010)

ViolentPanda said:


> Equating the actions of the NUS at a national and policy level with the large amount of anti-fees protest that went on at the universities is extremely ignorant.


 
ah but all those were organised by "far-left stalinist trotskyites" at least they were according to some prannock i met on the oxford demo the other week!


----------



## where to (Dec 2, 2010)

NUS now supporting the march on Parliament on the 9th and seem to be abandoning the 8th.

In their own special way that is - by not mentioning the NCACF callout, by not mentioning NCACF at all, and by calling everything since Millbank "independent local student actions" that "have sprung up across the country".  

student meeting in london taking place right now.  hope they abandon this "student assembly" wank they'd had planned for this weekend.  total waste of time at this stage.

http://www.nus.org.uk/en/News/News/NUS-urges-students-to-lobby-as-date-of-fees-vote-is-set/


----------



## dennisr (Dec 2, 2010)

where to said:


> NUS now supporting the march on Parliament on the 9th and seem to be abandoning the 8th.
> 
> In their own special way that is - by not mentioning the NCACF callout, by not mentioning NCACF at all, and by calling everything since Millbank "independent local student actions" that "have sprung up across the country".
> 
> ...


 
all good


----------



## killer b (Dec 2, 2010)

coppers must be chuffed with all the overtime in the run-up to xmas eh?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 2, 2010)

frogwoman said:


> ah but all those were organised by "far-left stalinist trotskyites" at least they were according to some prannock i met on the oxford demo the other week!


 
You should have kicked the twat between the legs and shouted "there's no such thing as a Stalinist Trotskyite, you ahistoric fuckwit", then slit their throat for the good of the revolution tbf, froggie. They got off lightly.


----------



## magneze (Dec 2, 2010)

where to said:


> NUS now supporting the march on Parliament on the 9th and seem to be abandoning the 8th.
> 
> In their own special way that is - by not mentioning the NCACF callout, by not mentioning NCACF at all, and by calling everything since Millbank "independent local student actions" that "have sprung up across the country".
> 
> ...


That's good. The last thing needed was a split in which day to protest.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 2, 2010)

I was tempted


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 2, 2010)

killer b said:


> coppers must be chuffed with all the overtime in the run-up to xmas eh?


 
Overtime *and* the chance to take out their frustrations on the general public. result!!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 2, 2010)

frogwoman said:


> I was tempted


 
You were a model of self-restraint, froggie. A model of self-restraint.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2010)

Prince Rhyus said:


> Given what's happened in recent weeks, does this one have "Poll Tax March" written all over it?


 
which one? march 31, october 20, march 23 or october 19?


----------



## ferrelhadley (Dec 2, 2010)

Hey kids, gonna vote lib dem again?

(labour is almost as bad but not quite........ )


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 2, 2010)

If you have a libdem MP, write to it and then it you'll never vote for it again (pretend that you voted for it if you have to) if it does not vote against this.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 2, 2010)

If I have a tory MP shall I write to that as well?


----------



## Threshers_Flail (Dec 2, 2010)

frogwoman said:


> If I have a tory MP shall I write to that as well?


 
Post him some dog shit.


----------



## Prince Rhyus (Dec 2, 2010)

Surprised no one's done an analysis of the marginals & the non-lib dem university seats regarding protests.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 3, 2010)

.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 3, 2010)

I sent this one to my local MP (the other one was the MP where i used to go uni) too: 

Dear Sir, 

I am writing to tell you that I am extremely disappointed over Conservative policy on tuition fees. Having voted for you in the past, if you vote for this measure on the 9th of December I will not do so again. Many former students are facing large debts that they will struggle to pay off. For example, I myself am facing a debt of around £22, 000, and my sister will be saddled with an even larger sum. As you are no doubt aware, the ... area contains a large number of students and prospective students and so this is an extremely important electoral issue. Thus, as an ardent Conservative supporter, I am urging you to vote against a rise in tuition fees for the good of the party, as the loss of support which this may entail may be catastrophic. If you vote in favour of a rise in tuition fees I will not be voting for you again and will tell others not to do the same. 

Yours faithfully,

froggy


----------



## where to (Dec 3, 2010)




----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 3, 2010)

where to said:


>


 I like their list of demands on this leaflet. It has a no-fucking-about air to it


----------



## where to (Dec 5, 2010)




----------



## Threshers_Flail (Dec 5, 2010)

^^^ Very good.


----------



## ferrelhadley (Dec 5, 2010)

If the NUS had half a brain (they dont) they would have set up a student charity to help impoverished students and demanded any MP who votes for or individual who favours, the tuition fee hike should have to repay the cost of their university tuition into the charity.

Ok its more of a stunt than a real idea but it makes the point very clearly.


----------



## Bakunin (Dec 6, 2010)

ViolentPanda said:


> Aaron has to do *something* to get himself back in the limelight, and if that means fucking over future generations of students, then so be it!


 
Well, fair's fair, he has to do something to impress his political masters and try to continue climbing up the greasy pole to a safe seat at a future election. Although, to be fair, Porter would sell his soul to stay on the gravy train. Porter cares as much about representing the actual interests of the people who elected him as any other career politician. Which is not in the slightest unless it's to his personal advantage.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 6, 2010)

Fantastic stuff from the lib-dems here - a new split has taken place with a group of lib-dem MPs proposing not to either vote for against or abstain, but _call the vote off_ - what total amateurs.



> A final group of backbenchers are pushing a fourth option of calling off the vote, in order to allow a full public consultation to take place.
> 
> One of them, Greg Mullholland, told the Guardian: "Sometimes the most courageous thing to do is to admit you need a rethink. The best thing for higher education is not to force this vote through on Thursday."


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 6, 2010)

New Statesman say Lib-dem MP Mike Crockart has resigned over tuition fees. I don't think he's on the payroll so that might mean either resign as an MP, resign from the lib-dem whip, or what?

edit: ah, it's just from the govt.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 6, 2010)

it's fun to see them destroying themselves over this.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 6, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> Fantastic stuff from the lib-dems here - a new split has taken place with a group of lib-dem MPs proposing not to either vote for against or abstain, but _call the vote off_ - what total amateurs.


not sure why the new statesman has Greg Mullholland's name missing from the list of MP's who've stated they will vote against the fees increase.

He's the proposer of the EDM the new statesman article mentions, quoted below from his website FWIW



> The EDM:
> 
> That this House notes the proposal by the Leader of the House that a motion on Higher Education Higher Amounts be moved by the Government on Thursday 9 December; considers that the proposed motion should not be moved, as the Government has failed to convince many people that its proposals will be fair and sustainable; urges the Government to withdraw its proposed motion immediately and instead to undertake more public consultation on the issue of funding of higher education, including consultation with those future graduates and their families who did not contribute to the consultation over the Browne review; and further considers that the Government should come forward with a full White Paper on reform in 2011 and should allow time in this process for consultation and for alternative proposals to be properly considered to ensure a fair and sustainable solution for higher education funding.


The statement on his website seems pretty clear that he's planning to vote against the bill if it's introduced as well as proposing the EDM to ask for a delay...



> In light of the announcement that the vote on tuition fees will now take place on Thursday December 9th, *Greg Mulholland, who has made clear that he will oppose the governments plans to increase tuition fees*, has tabled an EDM, calling on the government to delay the vote and ensure the issue is subject to more public consultation before putting it to the vote.
> 
> The EDM states that the government have failed to convince many people that their proposals will be fair and sustainable and should therefore delay the vote and allow further consultation, including with future graduates and their families as well as a full White Paper on reform in 2011.
> 
> ...



eta - he's my local MP btw, in a consituency that includes most of the students from leeds and leeds met uni's, as well as most of the staff, so would be nuts to not vote against it.


----------



## gawkrodger (Dec 6, 2010)

it appears Brum students have started early and have just occupied the Brum Lib Dem office


----------



## moon23 (Dec 6, 2010)

Current breakdown of Lib Dem MP voting intentions

YES 21; NO 14; ABS 22.


----------



## moon23 (Dec 6, 2010)

gawkrodger said:


> it appears Brum students have started early and have just occupied the Brum Lib Dem office


 
They can sleep in a bed of Focus leaflets


----------



## Blagsta (Dec 6, 2010)

gawkrodger said:


> it appears Brum students have started early and have just occupied the Brum Lib Dem office



Good work


----------



## Blagsta (Dec 6, 2010)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-11928867


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Dec 6, 2010)

It's anyone touting Aaron Porter NUS members? If I was a NUS I would rip up my membership. Aside of all that, it's all go then Thursday then? What's happening to the day before protestor? I Are they going linger a slow careerist death over one selfish man like those gone before him?

Mutter


----------



## ymu (Dec 6, 2010)

moon23 said:


> Current breakdown of Lib Dem MP voting intentions
> 
> YES 21; NO 14; ABS 22.


With Sinn Fein, that's 27 abstentions.

(651-27)/2 = 312

307 Tories means 5 yesses from Lib Dems is enough, if they have no rebels of their own.

Anyone know:

1. How many Tory rebels (if any) are expected?

2. If all MPs from other parties intend to vote against?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 6, 2010)

This lib-dems can't get anything right - the lib-dem MP in brum whose office was occupied has said he's now definitely voting for the rise to punish the students 

They cannot help themselves digging the hole a little deeper each day...


----------



## BigTom (Dec 6, 2010)

John Hemmings blog post with his response to the occupation of his office.. feel free to comment 

Birmingham Post / Mail article


----------



## BigTom (Dec 6, 2010)

apparently the Tate has been occupied by students and arts against the cuts  (twitter from  Clare Solomon and others)


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 6, 2010)

good


----------



## stethoscope (Dec 6, 2010)

David Davies first Tory planning to vote against. No other Tories known to be doing so currently.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 6, 2010)

3 others promised to vote against, or at least signed the same NUS pledge the lib-dem swines did



> The Fees Three are: Ben Wallace (Wyre and Preston North), Lee Scott (Ilford North), Bob Blackman (Harrow East). Wallace has since claimed that the NUS "misinformed" people of his intentions but Scott (who is Philip Hammond's PPS) is still on record as opposing any rise in fees.


----------



## creak (Dec 6, 2010)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/dec/06/nus-demonstration-tuition-fee-hike

WTF are the NUS for anymore? This is fucking stupid..


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 6, 2010)

David Davis is first tory to say he will vote against.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 6, 2010)

He wants the leadership job tho no?


----------



## grogwilton (Dec 6, 2010)

Shameful actions by Porter and the NUS NEC. I'm not too fussed by it though, most students will see the importance of a national demo not some candlelit vigil and vote with their feet. I don't think Porter has much influence over anything not even himself anymore.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 6, 2010)

gw did you get my pm?


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 6, 2010)

Hah hah, a candlelit vigil


----------



## grogwilton (Dec 6, 2010)

frogwoman said:


> gw did you get my pm?


 
Just replied to it.


----------



## Sgt Howie (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> Current breakdown of Lib Dem MP voting intentions
> 
> YES 21; NO 14; ABS 22.


 
So basically when it matters the Lib Dem parliamentary party pretty much cancels itself out. They are, officially, a complete waste of space


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2010)

frogwoman said:


> He wants the leadership job the noo?


*corrected for you*


----------



## fractionMan (Dec 7, 2010)

Aaron Porter.  What a twat.


----------



## moon23 (Dec 7, 2010)

Sgt Howie said:


> So basically when it matters the Lib Dem parliamentary party pretty much cancels itself out. They are, officially, a complete waste of space



I think it gives you an idea of just how difficult an issue and problem this is for the Lib Dems.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> I think it gives you an idea of just how difficult an issue and problem this is for the Lib Dems.


 
Seems very easy to me. They all vote against, as they promised they would. What's hard about that?


----------



## stethoscope (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> I think it gives you an idea of just how difficult an issue and problem this is for the Lib Dems.


 
Yeah, it's really difficult making it look like you're devastated to have to vote for something you didn't agree with.

Ah wait...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2010)

Anyone who abstains on this vote should fucking well resign. Not acceptable not to hold an opinion about something like this.


----------



## moon23 (Dec 7, 2010)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Seems very easy to me. They all vote against, as they promised they would. What's hard about that?



The fact the party also signed up to a coalition with a shared governmental agenda which MPs have a duty to implement. We will see, moon has done all he can to get people to vote against now it is up to all the MPs who were elected in May.


----------



## moon23 (Dec 7, 2010)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Anyone who abstains on this vote should fucking well resign. Not acceptable not to hold an opinion about something like this.


 
It's not that they don't hold an opinion, but rather that the Coalition agreement only allows for abstention and they don't want to damage the government..


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2010)

MPs do not have a duty to implement the government's agenda. You appear not to understand what an MP's job is.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> It's not that they don't hold an opinion, but rather that the Coalition agreement only allows for abstention and they don't want to damage the government..


 
Well they shouldn't have signed the agreement, then, or they should withdraw from it now, bring down the government in order to stop it from wrecking our higher education system. It's cause enough.


----------



## moon23 (Dec 7, 2010)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well they shouldn't have signed the agreement, then, or they should withdraw from it now, bring down the government in order to stop it from wrecking our higher education system. It's cause enough.


 
I agree they shouldn't have signed the pledge if it couldn't have been kept. I suspect most Lib Dem MPs signed it in good faith and had no idea Clegg was secretly planning to compromise on it. Also the party shouldn't have agreed to a coalition agreement that broke pledges.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2010)

No it's not. Abstaining is breaking the pledge.







ETA: By your edit, I assume that you agree with me.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> I suspect most Lib Dem MPs signed it in good faith and had no idea Clegg was secretly planning to compromise on it.


 
If they signed it in good faith, there is nothing stopping them from sticking to it.


----------



## moon23 (Dec 7, 2010)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No it's not. Abstaining is breaking the pledge.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Yes, I realised I had made a mistake and edited out my statement that I thought abstaining was keeping the pledge.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2010)

It's really very very simple. MPs who are not in government are free to vote as they please. MPs who are in the government are free to resign from the government and vote as they please. No MP is obliged to vote yes.


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 7, 2010)

This illustrates one of the reasons why I think the coalition won't last; indiscipline. 6 months in, and the libdems are totally, utterly all over the shop


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> I suspect most Lib Dem MPs signed it in good faith and had no idea Clegg was secretly planning to compromise on it.


doesn't say much for the organisation and unity of the parly party, does it, if they had no idea their own leader was about to rat on 'em?


----------



## moon23 (Dec 7, 2010)

Latest news is that the NUS have formally backed Lib Dem MP Greg Mullhollands' EDM 1130 to call off fees vote & have emailed all MPs asking them to support.


----------



## ymu (Dec 7, 2010)

_Cancel the vote. Don't make me choose. Please don't make me choose._


----------



## stethoscope (Dec 7, 2010)

Sums up the NUS leadership.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2010)

Pathetic.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Dec 7, 2010)

Streathamite said:


> doesn't say much for the organisation and unity of the parly party, does it, if they had no idea their own leader was about to rat on 'em?


 
I like how despicable disingenuous wankers like moon23 want to us believe that the Lib Dems are superheroes courageously and intelligently sticking up for the working class against the evil Tories whilst at the same time utter retards who don't understand politics.


----------



## moon23 (Dec 7, 2010)

ymu said:


> _Cancel the vote. Don't make me choose. Please don't make me choose._


 
The plan is to delay the vote, and think up some new proposals.


----------



## moon23 (Dec 7, 2010)

Refused as fuck said:


> I like how despicable disingenuous wankers like moon23 want to us believe that the Lib Dems are superheroes courageously and intelligently sticking up for the working class against the evil Tories whilst at the same time utter retards who don't understand politics.


 
I don't think Lib Dems particular stick-up for any so called class interest. They do try to make society fairer and more liberal though.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Dec 7, 2010)

You can take your fucking proposals and stick them up your cunt.



moon23 said:


> I don't think Lib Dems particular stick-up for any so called class interest. They do try to make society fairer and more liberal though.



The first sentence is obvious, the 2nd a complete lie if your interpretation of "liberal" is favourable.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> The plan is to delay the vote, and think up some new proposals.


 
Why not have the vote, get these proposals defeated, and _then_ think up some new proposals?


----------



## moon23 (Dec 7, 2010)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Why not have the vote, get these proposals defeated, and _then_ think up some new proposals?


 
Becuase a govenment defeat would be awful for the prospects of the coalition and the implementation of Lib Dem Polices in government.


----------



## stethoscope (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> Becuase a govenment defeat would be awful for the prospects of the coalition and the implementation of Lib Dem Polices in government.


 
Oh noes!!!!!!


----------



## Refused as fuck (Dec 7, 2010)




----------



## Blagsta (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> I don't think Lib Dems particular stick-up for any so called class interest. They do try to make society fairer and more liberal though.


 
words fail me


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> Becuase a govenment defeat would be awful for the prospects of the coalition and the implementation of Lib Dem Polices in government.


 
what a shame


----------



## Balbi (Dec 7, 2010)

Basically this is the first big issue they've had to handle, the coalition. The budget and ISR were process matters, vote for and against but there has to be one. Tuition fees is a real nasty one for the poor dears to have to develop some vertebrae over.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> Latest news is that the NUS have formally backed Lib Dem MP Greg Mullhollands' EDM 1130 to call off fees vote & have emailed all MPs asking them to support.


 
Pair of cunts then.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 7, 2010)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's really very very simple. MPs who are not in government are free to vote as they please. MPs who are in the government are free to resign from the government and vote as they please. No MP is obliged to vote yes.


 
MPs in govt are also free to vote no without resigning.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> I agree they shouldn't have signed the pledge if it couldn't have been kept. I suspect most Lib Dem MPs signed it in good faith and had no idea Clegg was secretly planning to compromise on it. Also the party shouldn't have agreed to a coalition agreement that broke pledges.


 
You two faced cunt. Lib-dem oozing out of him - you can't have it every way.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> The fact the party also signed up to a coalition with a shared governmental agenda which MPs have a duty to implement. We will see, moon has done all he can to get people to vote against now it is up to all the MPs who were elected in May.


 
Fuck off - which duty? If you're talking about duty then you're putting your parties duty above your constituents, the ones who elected you on your lying manifesto and pledges. iI you're concerned about duty call on them all to resign and fight their seats. You exp-licitly pout your duty to the tories above those of your constituents here.

What was your degree in?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> I think it gives you an idea of just how difficult an issue and problem this is for the Lib Dems.


 
It give us an idea of what a fucking group of incompetent twats you are


----------



## moon23 (Dec 7, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> Fuck off - which duty? If you're talking about duty then you're putting your parties duty above your constituents, the ones who elected you on your lying manifesto and pledges. iI you're concerned about duty call on them all to resign and fight their seats. You exp-licitly pout your duty to the tories above those of your constituents here.
> 
> What was your degree in?



Incorrect, there is a duty to try and implement the entire manifesto not just one issue.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Dec 7, 2010)

That's not really fair. They're extremely competent at being the patsies of their Tory masters.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Dec 7, 2010)

I like you won't deny the Lib Dems are a bunch of incompetent twats and utter retards.


----------



## moon23 (Dec 7, 2010)

Refused as fuck said:


> I like you won't deny the Lib Dems are a bunch of incompetent twats and utter retards.


 
They are a political party, that is surley a given


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> Incorrect, there is a duty to try and implement the entire manifesto not just one issue.


 
What? By not doing it? Which duty are you on about? The coalition one which you say should not ever be broken - or the manifesto one which can and should  be broken to meet the duties of the coalition agreement? Which duty were your MPs elected on? Why are you now deciding that this duty doesn't count but a duty built around your parties self interest supercedes and takes precedence over the duties of the manifesto? Despise the electorate that much?

And on top of that explicit argument that the duties entailed in the manifesto should be disregarded you now argue that they should be fully met.

You are a fucking mess.


----------



## moon23 (Dec 7, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> What? By not doing it? Which duty are you on about? The coalition one which you say should not ever be broken - or the manifesto one which can and should  be broken to meet the duties of the coalition agreement? Which duty were your MPs elected on? Why are you now dciding that this duty doesn't count but a duty built around your parties self interest supercedes and takes precedence?
> 
> And on top of that explicit argument that the duties entailed in the manifesto should be disregarded you now argue that they should be fully met.
> 
> You are a fucking mess.



If you vote for a party you want to see their manifesto implemented. That’s why some people who voted for the Lib Dems feel angry that the party is now in a coalition that is going against some of the manifesto points. Any coalition is going to require either party to put aside some of their manifesto. In this case the Lib Dems have put aside their views on tuition fees.

There is a whole range of other manifesto points though that are being implemented as part of the coalition, if you throw away the coalition over one aspect of the manifesto then you lose the ability to implement any other bits. 

If you voted for a party that was against tuition fees then you have to accept that less MPs standing on that platform got elected into Parliament, as a result the dominant view within parliament is that tuition fees should be increased.  What the Lib Dems have done is worked hard to try and ensure that any policy the coalition (in which Conservative’s are the larger partner) is fairer and better represents the views of those who vote Lib Dem.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 7, 2010)

> If you vote for a party you want to see their manifesto implemented. That’s why some people who voted for the Lib Dems feel angry that the party is now in a coalition that is going against some of the manifesto points. Any coalition is going to require either party to put aside some of their manifesto. In this case the Lib Dems have put aside their views on tuition fees.



Think this through in terms of your justification of your actions in terms of _duty_ and my questioning of your use of _duty_. Go on.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 7, 2010)

Also, fuck off.


----------



## stethoscope (Dec 7, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> 3 others promised to vote against, or at least signed the same NUS pledge the lib-dem swines did
> 
> 
> 
> > The Fees Three are: Ben Wallace (Wyre and Preston North), Lee Scott (Ilford North), Bob Blackman (Harrow East). Wallace has since claimed that the NUS "misinformed" people of his intentions but Scott (who is Philip Hammond's PPS) is still on record as opposing any rise in fees.


 
Lee Scott now planning to abstain apparently - although originally was against.


----------



## treelover (Dec 7, 2010)

'At 1.30pm, students from the Royal College of Art will join political activist Hetty Brown, 105, to deliver a letter to Nick Clegg.' 


Apparently a 105 year old woman, Hetty Clark Brown will hand in a letter on behalf of the Royal College of Art students, While a 12 year old says ''we will never give in''. How moving and fantastic is that?


----------



## stethoscope (Dec 7, 2010)

stephj said:


> David Davies first Tory planning to vote against. No other Tories known to be doing so currently.


 
Julian Lewis - second Tory expected to vote against, and 'All Lib Dem ministers will back rise in tuition fees'



> All Liberal Democrat government ministers will vote to raise the cap on university tuition fees in England, party leader Nick Clegg has said.
> 
> There had been speculation some could abstain from a vote over the controversial policy, which has prompted weeks of student protests.
> 
> ...


----------



## free spirit (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> Incorrect, there is a duty to try and implement the entire manifesto not just one issue.


yes, yes there is isn't there... so why the fuck have they given up entirely on 90% of the manifesto and allowed themselves to be bought of instead with a few tit bits of stuff the tories don't really care about, and even then have ended up with some half arsed compromise that makes them look like fools and get's us nowhere closer to where we want to be (eg the AV vote).


----------



## free spirit (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> If you vote for a party you want to see their manifesto implemented. That’s why some people who voted for the Lib Dems feel angry that the party is now in a coalition that is going against some of the manifesto points. Any coalition is going to require either party to put aside some of their manifesto. In this case the Lib Dems have put aside their views on tuition fees.
> 
> There is a whole range of other manifesto points though that are being implemented as part of the coalition, if you throw away the coalition over one aspect of the manifesto then you lose the ability to implement any other bits.
> 
> If you voted for a party that was against tuition fees then you have to accept that less MPs standing on that platform got elected into Parliament, as a result the dominant view within parliament is that tuition fees should be increased.  What the Lib Dems have done is worked hard to try and ensure that any policy the coalition (in which Conservative’s are the larger partner) is fairer and better represents the views of those who vote Lib Dem.


actually, I think what we hoped for was a compromise on all the issues, not giving the tories free range on virtually everything in exchange for them letting us have a few lib dem policies that they weren't too bothered about.

If we vote for a party who's MP's have all pledged to scrap tuition fees, it's reasonable to expect that when in coalition that party will fight for a reasonable compromise between their policy of scrapping fees, and the other parties policy of rasing fees. A reasonable compromise would have been for fees to have been retained at the current level, or maybe to have risen slightly. A 3 fold increase in the level of fees is not a compromise, it is one of the worst sell out's I've witnessed any party make in my 33 years on this planet.

shame on you for defending these fuckers on this issue. There is no defence of what the lib dems are doing, it goes against all semblance of democracy in this country, and any lib dem MP who votes in favour of this should be deselected by their constituency party IMO.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 7, 2010)

> We are the only party that is committed to scrapping tuition fees





> Only the Liberal Democrats will cut debt by phasing out fees throughout the next Parliament





> Scrapping university tuition fees



the lib dem manifesto policy commitments on fees, signed by Nick Clegg less than a year ago.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Dec 7, 2010)

As moon23 has explained time and again, free spirit, you can't expect a bunch of incompetent retards to stand by their election pledges. They are after all, as moon23 states, incompetent and utter retards.


----------



## free spirit (Dec 7, 2010)

Refused as fuck said:


> As moon23 has explained time and again, free spirit, you can't expect a bunch of incompetent retards to stand by their election pledges. They are after all, as moon23 states, incompetent and utter retards.


it appears not.


----------



## dylans (Dec 7, 2010)

moon23 said:


> If you vote for a party you want to see their manifesto implemented. That’s why some people who voted for the Lib Dems feel angry that the party is now in a coalition WITH THE FUCKING TORIES that is going against some of the manifesto points. Any coalition is going to require either party to put aside some of their manifesto. In this case the Lib Dems have put aside their views on tuition fees.
> 
> There is a whole range of other manifesto points though that are being implemented as part of the coalition WITH THE FUCKING TORIES. if you throw away the coalition over one aspect of the manifesto then you lose the ability to implement any other bits.
> 
> If you voted for a party that was against tuition fees then you have to accept that less MPs standing on that platform got elected into Parliament, as a result the dominant view within parliament is that tuition fees should be increased.  What the Lib Dems have done is worked hard to try and ensure that any policy the coalition WITH THE FUCKING TORIES. (in which Conservative’s are the larger partner) is fairer and better represents the views of those who vote Lib Dem.



Here. Edited for you. Because this is the point isn't it. Your party can't honour it's manifesto promises because it threw away all principles and joined a coalition government WITH THE FUCKING TORIES. This is the cause of your mess. This is the real disgrace. They joined the tories and gave Cameron power and now they are allowing the tories to destroy the post war welfare state. You should hang your head in shame and if you had a shred of decency left in your bones you should throw  your lib dem membership card in the fire.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 7, 2010)

What views did the tories put aside then?


----------



## Prince Rhyus (Dec 8, 2010)

http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/passage-bill/ It's only 1st reading - lots of votes - & demos to follow.


----------



## creak (Dec 8, 2010)

Nick Clegg is holding a live phone in on Radio 5 for the next half hour, if anyone wants to pick up the phone


----------



## Vintage Paw (Dec 8, 2010)

Sarah Tether gets an unfortunate morning call from Sky News, where she speaks so eloquently (not) about why she's gone against her pledge: http://tinyurl.com/37ww7k6


----------



## DrRingDing (Dec 8, 2010)

Prince Rhyus said:


> http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/passage-bill/ It's only 1st reading - lots of votes - & demos to follow.


 
*Rubs hands with glee*


----------



## gawkrodger (Dec 8, 2010)

apparently some schools in London are starting to be occuipied now!


----------



## Threshers_Flail (Dec 8, 2010)

Vintage Paw said:


> Sarah Tether gets an unfortunate morning call from Sky News, where she speaks so eloquently (not) about why she's gone against her pledge: http://tinyurl.com/37ww7k6


 
Not a morning person is she.


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 8, 2010)

moon23 said:


> Incorrect, there is a duty to try and implement the entire manifesto not just one issue.


There's CERTAINLY a duty to not stamp it to pieces in return for ministerial office!


----------



## dennisr (Dec 8, 2010)

gawkrodger said:


> apparently some schools in London are starting to be occuipied now!


 
Copied:
Urgent, need everyone esp NUT down to camden school for girls at 1 today. They've occupied! Report from inside: Yes we have a blog https://camdenschoolsitin.wordpress.com/ we are in occupation about a 100. the school has barricaded the doors and only allowing people in if they can prove we are student. The heating is also getting turned off this evening, teachers are saying that they are unable to support!


----------



## revol68 (Dec 8, 2010)

dennisr said:


> Copied:
> Urgent, need everyone esp NUT down to camden school for girls at 1 today. They've occupied! Report from inside: Yes we have a blog https://camdenschoolsitin.wordpress.com/ we are in occupation about a 100. the school has barricaded the doors and only allowing people in if they can prove we are student. The heating is also getting turned off this evening, teachers are saying that they are unable to support!


 
those teachers should be ashamed, good luck to the kids.


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 8, 2010)

moon23 said:


> It's not that they don't hold an opinion, but rather that the Coalition agreement only allows for abstention and they don't want to damage the government..


 you mean, they'd rather damage the life chances of working class kids than their own poxy careers?


----------



## Ground Elder (Dec 8, 2010)

My local MP unexpectedly discovers his spine Lib Dem MP Andrew George to vote against fee rise


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 8, 2010)

moon23 said:


> I agree they shouldn't have signed the pledge if it couldn't have been kept. I suspect most Lib Dem MPs signed it in good faith and had no idea Clegg was secretly planning to compromise on it. Also the party shouldn't have agreed to a coalition agreement that broke pledges.


Hold it RIGHT THERE! The official line currently emanating from libdem central is that the mistake was in making the pledge in the first pledge as fulfilling it was a practical impossibility i.e. a non-starter.
So - either 1) they all signed a pledge without having done anything like due diligence on its' feasibility, or 2) they knew it wasn't possible/feasible to carry out and still went ahead and signed it anyway, to corner student votes.
ONE of these must be true, going by what clegg & co have been saying lately.
If 1) is true, they're too amateurish, incompetent and generally half-arsed to be entrusted with public office.
If 2) is true, they're too dishonest and cynical to hold public office.
So - which one is it?


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 8, 2010)

Ground Elder said:


> My local MP unexpectedly discovers his spine Lib Dem MP Andrew George to vote against fee rise


glad to hear that - good for him.


----------



## killer b (Dec 8, 2010)

they're making chris huhne come back from cancun to vote - is it really going to be that close?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

Streathamite said:


> glad to hear that - good for him.


 
Or, fuck him the cuts supporting face/seat saving rat.


----------



## Balbi (Dec 8, 2010)

BBC just said up to 10 Tory backbenchers set to vote against the government.

This could be ridiculously close.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

It won't be. It'll be easy.


----------



## SF-02 (Dec 8, 2010)

I'd expect quite a few lib dems backbenchers to back the bill under threats of the party falling apart and the coalition falling, thus meaning a new election where the Lib Dems are tounced. I believe Clegg has been using this scare tactic on them. 
Thing is it's obvious that even if they bottle it and support the leadership another very contentious issue will arise, and then another, and they will eventually get some bottle and refuse to keep supporting, but by then they would have been complicit in passing enough laws that go aginst their pledges and principles, and will have pretty much killed the party and their own continuation as MP's along the way.

That's why it is so important tomorrow to really make any MP backing Clegg through fear to step back from the brink with a massive protest that makes a bloody strong point.

Another issue of interest is the votes of Scottish/Welsh/N Irish MPs. If they are responsible for pushing this through when it doesn't even apply to their own nations and constituents, then I'd hope to see more protests calling for devolved power to England, and a truly federal UK. I read though that the nationalist parties are expected to oppose. Any news on their intentions?


----------



## where to (Dec 8, 2010)

Euston Station right now.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

killer b said:


> they're making chris huhne come back from cancun to vote - is it really going to be that close?


 
lIb-dems attack the environment.


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 8, 2010)

dylans said:


> Here. Edited for you. Because this is the point isn't it. Your party can't honour it's manifesto promises because it threw away all principles and joined a coalition government WITH THE FUCKING TORIES. This is the cause of your mess. This is the real disgrace. They joined the tories and gave Cameron power and now they are allowing the tories to destroy the post war welfare state. You should hang your head in shame and if you had a shred of decency left in your bones you should throw  your lib dem membership card in the fire.


seconded. Moon23 - where the hell is your conscience?


----------



## ymu (Dec 8, 2010)

killer b said:


> they're making chris huhne come back from cancun to vote - is it really going to be that close?


It's not impossible that some Tory rebels will follow Davis, but I doubt it will matter. It will be fairly close though.

They're trying to make a big deal out of Miliband refusing to pair him with a Labour MP, but that only makes Clegg look even more pathetic for not being able to pair him with one of his own rebels.


----------



## moon23 (Dec 8, 2010)

where to said:


> Euston Station right now.


 
That must be really annoying if you are trying to commute home! Still worth the hassle for democracy of course.


----------



## moon23 (Dec 8, 2010)

Streathamite said:


> seconded. Moon23 - where the hell is your conscience?


 
My conscience is fine thanks, I agree that we need to reduce the largest budget deficit we have had in peace time, and didn’t vote Tory. If people voted Tory and they were the largest party to form a coalition then so be it, that’s the democratic choice of the people.

Labour fucked things up big time, one things for certain the Lib Dems are not responsible for creating this massive economic problem.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Dec 8, 2010)

You are fucking pathetic.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

Now, onto the shit you are causing...


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

Refused as fuck said:


> You are fucking pathetic.


 
.


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 8, 2010)

moon23 said:


> Labour fucked things up big time, one things for certain the Lib Dems are not responsible for creating this massive economic problem.


Neither - for the UMPTEENTH FUCKING TIME - were labour, or _anybody else but the sodding banks_. This has been proven here beyond all doubt, figures and all. are you blind or bloody braindead.


----------



## magneze (Dec 8, 2010)

Streathamite said:


> Neither - for the UMPTEENTH FUCKING TIME - were labour, or _anybody else but the sodding banks_. This has been proven here beyond all doubt, figures and all. are you blind or bloody braindead.


What is fucking terrifying is that none of the mainstream parties are even approaching that subject in any meaningful way. It's nuts.


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Dec 8, 2010)

Now play nicely , just got the Evening Standard and it's map shows a "feeder march" coming in from the south from London South Bank University, Just a word of warning it's likely if it get a bit heated, the bridge will be blocked by the Police at some stage you best bet if you joining in the protest is to be on the north side of the thames before the march/protest starts. So if you ever wonder why anti-war demo get diverted across the London bridges now you know. To block you lot off. See you lot tomrrow good to see what's happening in Euston too. Can someone tweet this info to the people down south?


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 8, 2010)

moon23 said:


> My conscience is fine thanks, I agree that we need to reduce the largest budget deficit we have had in peace time, and didn’t vote Tory. If people voted Tory and they were the largest party to form a coalition then so be it, that’s the democratic choice of the people.


You 'agree'? Agree with WHO? Even those of us who do think so have shown a multitude of other ways of doing so - steeply progressive corporate and personal taxation and action othe tax gap, to name but two - but your party is complicit with precisely the opposite, an all-out attack on those who can least cope with it, and this is NOT the largest deficit we've ever had in peacetime - the deficit was larger, consistently, from 1945 to 1970. You do know that that period saw one of Britain's longest and biggest ever booms, yes?
Jesus, you're laughable.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Dec 8, 2010)

Streathamite said:


> are you blind or bloody braindead.



Brain dead, troll - both the same innit


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 8, 2010)

ymu said:


> They're trying to make a big deal out of Miliband refusing to pair him with a Labour MP, but that only makes Clegg look even more pathetic for not being able to pair him with one of his own rebels.


Why would they pair the leader of the Labour Party with one of his own MPs?


----------



## ymu (Dec 8, 2010)

Streathamite said:


> Why would they pair the leader of the Labour Party with one of his own MPs?


Where did I say they would? 

I was responding to a post about Huhne having to come back from the climate talks in Cancun. Clegg is trying to blame Miliband for refusing to pair him (Huhne) with a Labour MP to make this unnecessary.


----------



## killer b (Dec 8, 2010)

he won't be needed, so i can only assume they're bringing him back to strongarm wavering lib dem mps. fucking pathetic.


----------



## killer b (Dec 8, 2010)

(the act of bringing him back is the strong-arming btw - i don't really see huhne as the enforcement division of the liberal democrats)


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

killer b said:


> he won't be needed, so i can only assume they're bringing him back to strongarm wavering lib dem mps. fucking pathetic.


 
Nah, it's labour saying fuck you. Not a lib-dem thing.


----------



## killer b (Dec 8, 2010)

but they won't need him to make up numbers, so why bring him back?


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 8, 2010)

ymu said:


> Where did I say they would?
> 
> I was responding to a post about Huhne having to come back from the climate talks in Cancun. Clegg is trying to blame Miliband for refusing to pair him (Huhne) with a Labour MP to make this unnecessary.


ahh, sorry, seen it now, the wording confused me as to 'him' was.
glad millipede's refusing to oblige


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

killer b said:


> but they won't need him to make up numbers, so why bring him back?


 
To make him do it. Nothing else.


----------



## magneze (Dec 8, 2010)

killer b said:


> but they won't need him to make up numbers, so why bring him back?


Even if future generations can't afford to go to university, the LibDems can fuck the planet for everyone else too. Just to make sure.


----------



## killer b (Dec 8, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> To make him do it. Nothing else.


 
could you expand a little?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

killer b said:


> could you expand a little?


 
He could be paired off - i.e a labour/lib dem MP both agree to not be there - so they cancel each other out, that's the normal way they do things things. Labour have said that they they're not pairing with anyone. He has to be there to vote, no deals done. They dragged this scumbag back, not the lib-dems.


----------



## killer b (Dec 8, 2010)

but why does he need to be there to vote? isn't there another lib dem mp out there who they aren't bringing back?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

killer b said:


> but why does he need to be there to vote? isn't there another lib dem mp out there who they aren't bringing back?


 
To make sure. 

I really doubt it. That would be brilliant if true though.


----------



## Threshers_Flail (Dec 8, 2010)

killer b said:


> but why does he need to be there to vote? isn't there another lib dem mp out there who they aren't bringing back?


 
The lib dem they aren't bringing back has already stated that he is voting against the rise in fees. So both lib dems in cancun cancel each other out, the lib dems are trying to make labour look like the bad guys on this.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

Fantastic, they're not bringing back an MP whose voting against? 

They cannot not fuck shit up.


----------



## Threshers_Flail (Dec 8, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> Fantastic, they're not bringing back an MP whose voting against?
> 
> They cannot not fuck shit up.


 
That's what the Guardian say, 4th paragraph down. 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/dec/08/labour-force-chris-huhne-return-climate-talks


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

Threshers_Flail said:


> That's what the Guardian say, 4th paragraph down.
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/dec/08/labour-force-chris-huhne-return-climate-talks


 
Ta. That's genius.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

Nick Clegg has blamed the British public for his lies on the fees - geniuis! 

bbc1 news now


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

Huhne ain't coming back either.


----------



## where to (Dec 8, 2010)

tory 306 (290+ for)
libdem 57 (mix of for, against and abstain, ministers - of number around 20 - voting for)

*TOTAL VOTE FOR SHOULD BE AT LEAST 310+ *

- - - - - - - 

sinn fein 5 (abstain)

 - - - - - - - -

labour 258 (against)
dup 8 (voting against i understand)
snp 6 (voting against i understand)
sdlp 3 (voting against i understand)
plaid 3 (voting against i understand)
green 1 (against)
alliance 1 (against)
syvlia hermon 1 (against)

*TOTAL VOTE AGAINST = 281 + TORY AND LIBDEM REBELS (UNLIKELY TO HIT EVEN 20) = AROUND 300 MAX*

Unless a lot of Tories abstain its going to be straightforward for the Coalition


----------



## Prince Rhyus (Dec 8, 2010)

My localMP who is anti-fees confirmed tgat powers in the Higher Education Act 2004 confirmed that the fee rise will be implemented using secondary rather than primary legislation.


----------



## where to (Dec 8, 2010)

what does that mean?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

It might mean there's no vote, that there's orders-in-council used. Legislation passed through without a vote.,

To put it politely, it's bollocks. It's not going to happen. It's not happening.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2010)

Prince Rhyus said:


> My localMP who is anti-fees confirmed tgat powers in the Higher Education Act 2004 confirmed that the fee rise will be implemented using secondary rather than primary legislation.


 
Who is your mp and what did they 'confirm'?


----------



## gawkrodger (Dec 9, 2010)

Just got back from Uni. of W'ton who had a small (semi-sancitoned admittedly but heigh-ho) occupation. Got there after training around 10pm. Bought two bags of food with me as practical solidarity from the wobblies print union which went down well. There were about 50 people and I was the only non-student/academic staff there. 

Was quite inspirational - not many party politicals (few SWPies but they seemed quiet and seemed to stay in a corner, and a couple of Socialist Party people who seemed fairly clued up and +ive). It was good to see how many were open to new ideas and tactics. As well as a few speech contributions did a short chat on direct action etc which seemed to go down well. Also good to see how many believed the student movement had to be militant, and how the favourite liberal issue of 'violence' was largely brushed away.

Made a whole bunch of contacts as well, so hopefully will be able to build upon those in the near future


----------



## ymu (Dec 9, 2010)

Just sent this to every Lib Dem MP. It will make fuck all difference, of course, but whatever.



> *Nearly half of all UK graduate employment is in the public sector - they already make huge financial sacrifices*
> 
> What seems to have been missed in this debate is that almost half of UK graduates work in the public sector. I can't find a precise breakdown of graduate employment by sector, but using 'professionals' as a proxy measure:
> 
> ...


----------



## ymu (Dec 9, 2010)




----------



## shagnasty (Dec 9, 2010)

ymu said:


>


 
It looks like a steve bell creation superb .i'll check with the guardian


----------



## moon23 (Dec 9, 2010)

Streathamite said:


> ahh, sorry, seen it now, the wording confused me as to 'him' was.
> glad millipede's refusing to oblige


 
It's not uncommon for MPs to have to rush back to the Commons for votes that look close. Just shows the extent to which the Lib Dem leadership is worried over it's rebellion. They are trying everything they can, including trotting out Shirley Williams


----------



## moon23 (Dec 9, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> He could be paired off - i.e a labour/lib dem MP both agree to not be there - so they cancel each other out, that's the normal way they do things things. Labour have said that they they're not pairing with anyone. He has to be there to vote, no deals done. They dragged this scumbag back, not the lib-dems.


 
Pretty irresponsible of Labour if it means minister have to be drawn away from international business that is of huge environmental importance.


----------



## stethoscope (Dec 9, 2010)

moon23 said:


> Pretty irresponsible of Labour if it means minister have to be drawn away from international business that is of huge environmental importance.


 
It's nothing to do with Labour, but everything to do with Lib Dem.


----------



## Bakunin (Dec 9, 2010)

moon23 said:


> Pretty irresponsible of Labour if it means minister have to be drawn away from international business that is of huge environmental importance.


 
Hmmm, because the political establishment have such a great interest in environmental issues, don't they? Because the plethora of environmental summits where the political bigwigs queue up to play the green card while never actually accomplishing anything of any real importance are, of course, always intended to actually achieve something positive and something more than merely paying lip service to the environment, aren't they?

Bollocks are they. They're a figleaf to give the appearance of the political hacks actually giving a damn while they pose for their photo opportunities, make their bullshit speeches that positively reek of false sincerity, as they speechify and gladhand and pretend to give a shit while sneering silently at any meaningful efforts to challenge the environmental problems the world faces.

And don't try to use your previous post as a means of deflecting criticism away from the :ib Dems and their part in the coalition's woeful record in office, either. I accept that the Lib Dems are simply the rentboys of the Tories, but even though the Lib Dems might be happy to bend over for the Tories, that's nothing to the fucking that the country as a whole will be getting because of the policies so enthusiastically endorsed by the Lib Dems in their pathetically transparent efforts to grab some sort of power for themselves.


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Dec 9, 2010)

Reminds me the day that Gordan Brown forgot to vote because he was watching football the reason being he thought there will be enough people there to vote on his behalf.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2010)

moon23 said:


> Pretty irresponsible of Labour if it means minister have to be drawn away from international business that is of huge environmental importance.


 
Amazing, things the goct do are other peoples fault. This is the line Clegg has tried on the students -_ it's your fault that you have to protest against us. Because you don't understand just how good we are._

It's slipping.


----------



## where to (Dec 9, 2010)

vote set for 5.25pm according to Guardian.


----------



## belboid (Dec 9, 2010)

2 Liberal Scum PPS's quitting so they can vote against their government


----------



## ymu (Dec 9, 2010)

belboid said:


> 2 Liberal Scum PPS's quitting so they can vote against their government


 
That's quite important. Puts pressure on those that think they can get away with abstaining, anyway. There's a few Tory rebels who would love to show up the Lib Dems for the cowards that they are, too.

It won't be enough to change the outcome, but the closer it comes, the more power to our elbows. 5.25pm is the beginning, not the end.


----------



## ymu (Dec 9, 2010)

E-mail from Jo Swinson, Lib Dem MP.



> Many thanks for your email regarding higher education; I understand the strength of feeling on this matter in all parts of the country.  As representing 80,000 people in East Dunbartonshire takes up the vast majority of my time, I hope you will understand that I prioritise correspondence from my own constituents so this reply will be necessarily brief.  If you do live in my East Dunbartonshire constituency please do reply with your full name and address details and I will reply in more detail to the points you have raised.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's swinsonj@parliament.uk

I have responded.



> It is a lie that most voters agree. This policy did not appear in any manifesto.
> 
> Moreover, the students were the only electoral constituency where the Lib Dems attracted a majority of the vote. If you cannot stand up against this policy, you cannot claim to be doing anything other than lending the Tories enough votes to enact their policies despite the glaring lack of any mandate to do so.
> 
> Disgusting.


----------



## Cobbles (Dec 9, 2010)

moon23 said:


> Pretty irresponsible of Labour if it means minister have to be drawn away from international business that is of huge environmental importance.



Nah, it was just another "Global warming" wank-fest (as usual held at a nice beach resort so that all the committed environmentalists can jet off Business Class to top up their tans).


----------



## marty21 (Dec 9, 2010)

I hate the Lib Dems who abstained, more than the ones who broke their pledges and voted for, spineless fucks.


----------



## killer b (Dec 9, 2010)

marty21 said:


> I hate the Lib Dems who abstained, more than the ones who broke their pledges and voted for, spineless fucks.


 
yeah, me too. the worst kind of spineless fucks.


----------



## BigTom (Dec 10, 2010)

John Hemming, Lib Dem MP for yardley:



> The point about the system is that the payments only become due in the same was as other tax payments.
> 
> The pledge was quite clear. It talked about getting a fairer alternative. That fairer alternative is a graduate tax with a cap. For the majority of graduates the amount of the fee has no effect on their payments. Hence the system is in accordance with the pledge.



http://johnhemming.blogspot.com/2010/12/student-finance.html

see comments.. post (made after the vote last night) claims that tuition fees are really a tax liability, then in comments says the above.. 

I made a reply to him, kindly linking to the pledge and a couple of links of Nick Clegg saying they will break the pledge and in a pre-election video saying tuition fees are wrong, then explain why a debt is not the same as a tax liability and have a little rant about the lib dems collapsing nationally.
his reply? "Do get your facts right".  Asked him how a pledge that states "I pledge to vote against any increase in tuition fees" is not broken by voting for an increase in tuition fees, and to state exactly which facts I've got wrong, and to link to things to show me why I'm wrong but he's not answered it yet (it is fairly late though, he seems fairly decent about posting up comments on his blog and replying - the comments are all vetted, I presume he won't put one up that is insulting).

Do feel free to take him apart on either his claim not to have broken the pledge, or the claim that debts are really just a tax liability.


----------



## Blagsta (Dec 10, 2010)

Hemming's a prick, always has been


----------

