May is in the past and Corbyn is the future

Mark 19 Comments

It seems as though this general election was set up to be a personality contest between Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn – that isn’t what it should be, but it might be an important part of people’s decision making.

May has looked anything but strong and stable whereas Corbyn has grown in stature through the campaign.

I honestly can’t imagine Theresa May being a good negotiator with the EU over Brexit – we have a crap hand and she will play it badly (as she has played this negotiation with the electorate badly).  Would Corbyn be better? I honestly think he would be – he is calm and reasoned, and principled. Not a bad start.

I have probably heard more words on the radio and TV from May than Corbyn but I haven’t heard her mention the environment whereas the Labour party sees environmental protection and human rights as being part and parcel of the same package, and both need to be maintained after Brexit.  That’s important to me.

But it’s the policies rather than the personalities that really matter, and here is my quick guide to the party manifestos’ environmental content (click on the party names for more information) so that you can read them all before you vote tomorrow:

Labour: B+

LibDems: B+

Greens: B+

UKIP: D

Conservative: D-

SNP: little environmental content as SNP Westminster MPs do not engage, no rating

Plaid Cymru: little environmental content as SNP Westminster MPs do not engage, no rating

DUP: little environmental content, DUP MPs tend to vote with the Conservatives, no rating

Other political parties are available.

 

So, that’s the last election-related blog here until Friday morning, not necessarily first thing, when I’ll attempt some comment on what the result means for the environment.

Tomorrow’s blogs will all be about nature and lovely things like that.

Remember to vote!

 

 

[registration_form]

19 Replies to “May is in the past and Corbyn is the future”

    1. Alan – you didn’t mention your political preference… I do, it’s on my website and mentioned often enough in blog posts. I am not the Labour Party but I am a member of the Labour Party. I’m not a ‘shy Labour’ voter. How about you?

        1. Alan – it’s not a bias, it’s an opinion. They are allowed – and you will get mine on my blog.

          2. Alan – yours is the only negative comment on this post.

            Have a go at correcting something if you like rather than just slagging me off.

          3. The observations from others are not on this post. I said blog.

            I’m not slagging you off, Mark. Perhaps you should stop being so defensive.

            People are allowed to disagree with you, you know.

            Don’t write a blog if that disagrees with you.

          4. Alan – I don’t mind people disagreeing with me. You called me biased which is different. And, kind of obviously, I am disagreeing with you disagreeing with me.

          5. Mark – I, like many others, find your bias (not opinion) of the Labour Party disagreeable. I think you also need to determine what exactly is defined by slagging off, as your definition appears to be different to most peoples’.

          6. Alan – this is my blog, you don’t have to read it. But if you are going to slag me off then you ought to do a bit better at coming up with some evidence.

        2. There’s that word again. I think you need to come up with the evidence to show how I am slagging you off exactly. Opening a dictionary might help your cause.

          1. Alan – the word ‘bias’ is one you should look up.
            But I’ve done it for you: inclination or prejudice for or against one person or group, especially in a way considered to be unfair.

        3. The BBC, as a national broadcaster funded by a compulsory licence fee, is under a legal duty to be balanced and politically neutral but there is no such stricture applying to other media outlets, particularly not personal blogs. Mark’s blog nails its colours pretty firmly to the mast, including his support for the Labour Party so there is no pretence at providing a neutral view or anything other than coming down firmly on one side or the other on any given issue.
          Having said that the allegation of bias doesn’t really stand up in relation to this post. You describe it as a party political broadcast in favour of the Labour Party but perhaps you did not notice that he rated the environmental content of all the major parties’ manifestos and actually gave the Green Party and the LibDems equally high scores to the one he gave the Labour Party (and gave none of them full marks) – hardly something you’d expect in a party political broadcast surely?
          Of course not all readers of the blog agree with Mark’s opinions, whether party or political or otherwise, but – as you have – they are given plenty of opportunity to argue their case in the comments. I must confess I am at a bit of a loss as to what exactly you would expect – that he should give an equal amount of space to bigging up the Conservative Party (I assume that as you object to bias you would not wish him to just favour the Green Party in his attempts to provide balance)?

  2. The prospect of May winning the election (it’s all about her, right?) fills me with gloom but although I would like to think you are right in describing her as the past, I fear that she will emerge from the election as the next Prime Minister. I hope that if she does, it will not be the landslide she was initially confident of winning and that there will at least be a strong and energized opposition in the Commons.

  3. Bias, what bias ? It’s a clear opinion – something that the conservatives and their fellow travellers – especially the Daily Mail – appear to be trying to eliminate as they move us towards a one party sate. Theresa May and her close association with the Mail seriously alarms me – remember, this is the paper that backed fascism in the 1930s and is almost as dangerous today as May and the Conservatives lead this country towards the cliff edge. Be in no doubt, they are telling us nothing for the simple reason they haven’t the faintest idea what happens next.

  4. DEFRA obviously judged this an appropriate day to update the code of practice for spreading sewage sludge on farmland – no-one will notice the smell. Ordure, Ordure

Comments are closed.