Messages

I assume you're just poking at the hive, because it's pretty clear the SNP's 'power' is being massively overplayed anyway. Yes, they would have influence in a Lab/SNP deal, but not to the degree the shrieking 'papers are making out. (And, frankly, why shouldn't 50+ democratically elected MPs supporting the government have influence of some kind?) It's hardly likely that the SNP would red-line to the point of bringing down the government and ushering in the Tories again—it would absolutely destroy their credibility and any hope they'd have of getting anywhere near the same vote levels again in subsequent elections.

This is of course what Miliband is relying on, but it seems spiteful and just plain dishonest to attempt to pretend the SNP doesn't exist and assume it will or should nod through Labour policy. Funny how 'better together' has turned into 'better together... but only if you elect the 'right' MPs'...

I agree entirely with the sentiments of our own Mr Clements over on Twitter: a Labour leader who would rather see the Tories in power than work with a left-of-centre party should be run out of office.

I suspect, despite his claims to the contrary, that he's petrified of the press and (likely wrongly) thinks he'd lose a ton of seats if he suggested a Lab/SNP government, coalition or even confidence & supply arrangement. It's stupid, really, because plenty of Labour voters would be happy with a party that might nudge Labour leftwards again. And even Trident wouldn't be under threat, given that Lab and Con whips would ensure it got through the house.

It really does look like he's playing a dangerous game, in betting on the SNP 'supporting' Labour regardless, because otherwise they would also be complicit in enabling the Tories to rule again. It's a bad move, and after he'd been improving somewhat of late in many people's eyes.

I think that, in principle, the House of Lords is a good idea. When it works as intended, as a collection of apolitical experts and "wise heads," it should stop any purely political bad legislation making it onto the statute books. However, it rarely seems to work that way and should ideally be abolished with the rest of our antiquated and self-serving government.

If we're going to have a government, we need a second house as a sanity check, and the theory of unelected experts is fine; but the reality is too many of them have fingers in business pies, are out of touch and/or corrupt, and aren't accountable to anyone. The Lords is also rammed full of London-centric members, and there are currently a mammoth 783(!) seats, which is crazy.

The Greens, Labour and SNP have suggested the idea of a regional senate, and that seems more sensible. There's a danger of US-style gridlock, but we get that anyway now and again; at least rethinking the second chamber as a properly regional assembly would reduce the emphasis on London-focussed policy. (And STV for the Commons, too, please.)

I keep reading stories about whom the various parties are willing to make deals. Doesn't give me a great deal of faith in democracy. [...]  The notion of a minority party being kingmakers is bunk. The libdems proved that.

Well, we have one of two options: we can hope the small parties vanish into the ether and lurch between Con and Lab every election or two, despite Con and Lab both shifting right; or we can recognise the fact politics has finally shifted in the UK towards the kinds of systems enjoyed elsewhere. Germany's a country of coalition, and seems to do fine. Scandinavian/Nordic countries also.

But judging by recent events, it looks like Labour's position is to rather dangerously call the SNP's bluff while simultaneously hoping the Lib-Dems will back it and that the numbers won't be there for Con/LD/DUP.

It's like it doesn't matter who we vote for, the government we will get shall be hashed out in backroom deals.

In terms of voting this time round, the bigger problem is that it's a lottery. FPTP is too unpredictable in the current climate, meaning whatever happens, we're going to end up with huge discrepancies between vote share and MP numbers—even more so than last time round, where if seats had been allocated on a broadly proportional manner, British politics would be very different.

We're almost certainly going to see two parties—the Greens and the SNP—have roughly the same national vote share, but the former will be fortunate to retain a single MP while the latter will likely have between 30 and 59. UKIP will probably get between zero and a half-dozen seats, despite securing 15% of the vote. The Lib-Dems may cling on to about half of their seats, having 30 with about 8%. Con and Lab will approach half the seats in the Commons with a third of the vote. It's a mess and it needs fixing, along with replacing the Lords.

Here are the three together.
Also, Judge Fire's chest lights up.

Fire looks properly horrific and nasty. Good job!

the change in volume numbers was down to a shuffling of the collection contents by Matt Smith between the cancellation of the test run and the launch of the full run

Which I imagine in part was due to the run being bumped up from 60 to 80 books.

Mrs G used to work for a place that manufactured industrial ovens. One day, they had a major fast-food chain in, and nipped out to a supermarket to get some chicken to mess about with. The chain noted that while the ovens were good, they'd need to do the tests again, because the "wrong calibre of chicken" had been bought.

You also see similar in Nando's, which hand-wrings statements about animals by arguing people have a certain expectation regarding costs. If only the west could be encouraged to eat bugs. That'd solve a lot of problems.

Interesting order with the Devlin book—I guess not trampling over the recent trade is a smart idea. (Still odd to see it so early in the schedule though.)

"Peas and rice!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9k18Q_63KpE

Yeah, it's going to be fun finding the space, but at least I don't have 60 volumes of the Marvel collection that I recently picked up cheap on eBay, too.

*glances around office*

Oh.

Well, bear in mind her own commitments are about a return to 1920s family living (MEN should provide MONEY, and women should stay in the kitchen), yet she's trying to be an MP. So if she were elected, presumably she'd have to immediately resign and have a man take her job. Or something.

If nothing else, this last week has been a revelation regarding NI. I never realised quite the level of crazy there when it comes to politics. The UK's own little slice of Tea Party in action (and, as it turns out, with laws that even make it so the UK's recent changes to satire/fair use are essentially meaningless because NI didn't go for them).

I imagine there's some added in there for the licence required from Dan Dare Corp.

1. RaggedMan - Newspaper Strips
2. Banners: Hi-Ex!
3. Andy Lambert: Damp Justice

HM: IAMTHESYSTEM: Robo-Hunter

He always reminded me of McMahon in the sense of dynamism his strips portrayed. He was perfectly suited to Transformers at the time, given the angular nature of his work, and I'd love to see him on 2000 AD. Thinking about it: Geoff Senior doing an action-packed arc on ABC Warriors would be something. (His Dredd annual story way back was pretty good too.)

I wonder why she wants CCTV in all slaughterhouses.

As proof they're not using halal methods, presumably. She's a nutcase, but as others have been saying, the DUP often think similarly, but just aren't stupid enough to state all these things outright. The UK's own little Tea Party (even more so than UKIP).

Huh. I thought it'd be a 4, but was expecting Film4 rather than C4. Wider audience potential on terrestrial. Good.