Just £2.5bn of public money, apparently - a bargain if you've got your hands on the public purse strings and the opportunity to bribe a few MPs representing a tiny portion of the country. Of course the political cost in NI is yet to become aparent.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40403434

its the right deal because it was the only deal, it's not going in to NI Politicians pockets, they are doing what they are elected to do and the NI population will be very pleased with the outcome that 2 months ago was never envisaged.

For me, the alternative would have been terrible for the country and had the silly Tories not shot themselves in the foot at the last minute with their manifesto then there would have been no need for the DUP but it's happened and I hope some people who are there have learned a hard lesson going forward.

Are you linking the wrong article? That one says the deal is worth £1 billion. Still may be dodgy, but you can complain more effectively if you complain about the right amount - £0.5 billion is money already pledged to be spent in Northern Ireland, so that can't be considered part of the deal, and as for the other £1 billion, have you perhaps taken £1 billion over two years to mean £2 billion total?

'THERE IS NO MAGIC MONEY TREE'

Theresa May - June 2017.

dsr wrote:Are you linking the wrong article? That one says the deal is worth £1 billion. Still may be dodgy, but you can complain more effectively if you complain about the right amount - £0.5 billion is money already pledged to be spent in Northern Ireland, so that can't be considered part of the deal, and as for the other £1 billion, have you perhaps taken £1 billion over two years to mean £2 billion total?

How much did the election cost the taxpayer?

dsr wrote:Are you linking the wrong article? That one says the deal is worth £1 billion. Still may be dodgy, but you can complain more effectively if you complain about the right amount - £0.5 billion is money already pledged to be spent in Northern Ireland, so that can't be considered part of the deal, and as for the other £1 billion, have you perhaps taken £1 billion over two years to mean £2 billion total?

Should have been clearer. £1bn additional spending plus the removal of the cost saving measures from their manifesto (triple lock on pensions and winter fuel allowance) will in total cost more like £2.5bn. Should also be noted that the £1bn in additional spending is over the next two years only - so they'll need to come up with another bribe to get the next Queen's speech through the commons. So, all in all, a big hole in the public finances just to keep the Tories in power.

KateR wrote:its the right deal because it was the only deal, it's not going in to NI Politicians pockets, they are doing what they are elected to do and the NI population will be very pleased with the outcome that 2 months ago was never envisaged.

For me, the alternative would have been terrible for the country and had the silly Tories not shot themselves in the foot at the last minute with their manifesto then there would have been no need for the DUP but it's happened and I hope some people who are there have learned a hard lesson going forward.

It wasn't the only possibility. They could have tried to find common ground with other parties or they could have attempted to govern as a minority and if that failed called another general election. Suddenly finding large sums of public money to pour into a small part of the country as a way of clinging to power is a kick in the face for Scotland & Wales who won't get any increase in their funding and it's a kick in the face for the every single person who has been on the wrong end of budget cuts over the past few years.

Let's not even consider what this might do to the finely balanced peace that exists in NI - power sharing doesn't look very equitable when one party is effectively holding the UK government to ransom.

you misunderstand. It was the only political deal that TM and the Tories could go with, hopefully you can understand that, Wales/Scotland red herrings. You can throw the NI peace in there all you want, did you also forget the homosexuality bit or deliberately (sensibly) leave that out.

I consider everything (she hopes) and there was only one path forward for them, they had to make it work, DUP in the right place at the right time.

The DUP believe in the sort of stuff that means they should never be the right place or the right time.

I agree that the only other alternative would have been another election, but the Tories would lose that so they'd never risk it.

Remember, they always put the country first.....

Much cheaper and far more practical than any deal Corbyn would have had to put together with the SNP, PC, the Lib undemocrats, Greens AND the DUP.

Time for everyone to get behind David Davies so he can get the best possible deal for the whole of the UK from the EU.

Lancasterclaret wrote:The DUP believe in the sort of stuff that means they should never be the right place or the right time.

I agree that the only other alternative would have been another election, but the Tories would lose that so they'd never risk it.

Remember, they always put the country first.....

You're certainly riding the galactic winds my friend, because you have no concept of reality whatsoever!

What's the price of being a Labour MP in Rotherham?

Insitutional silence and inaction.

When 1400 innocent children were raped , abused and even f**** branded, yes branded. By Pakistani racist grooming gangs, were allowed to avoid justice. In the name of "social cohesion" and "cultural sensitivities" In order for the understanding that the PakistanI vote would be a Labour vote.

The same in Rochdale.

When it comes to accusations of buying votes. Labour should wind their necks in.......

I'm not fine with the Conservatives using the DUPs perverse beliefs on stuff to keep hold of power.

If you want to call that "no concept of reality" then I'm perfectly fine with that.

KateR wrote:you misunderstand. It was the only political deal that TM and the Tories could go with, hopefully you can understand that, Wales/Scotland red herrings. You can throw the NI peace in there all you want, did you also forget the homosexuality bit or deliberately (sensibly) leave that out.

I consider everything (she hopes) and there was only one path forward for them, they had to make it work, DUP in the right place at the right time.

With respect, I don't think I'm misunderstanding anything. The DUP were the only party that would do a deal with the Tories, that's true. That doesn't make it the only course of action though, just the only course of action that would see them remain in power. That, of course, is all that matters to them - that this deal literally kicks sand in the face of everybody else in the country, that it puts a party with hugely questionable values representing a tiny portion of the population in a position of completely unwarranted power and that it risks the stability of Northern Ireland after all the progress that has been made there is deemed irrelevant.
The Tory party looks after the Tory party first, and the country a very distant second. See the last 2 years for all the evidence you could ever wish for to support that assertion.

Lancasterclaret wrote:I'm not fine with the Conservatives using the DUPs perverse beliefs on stuff to keep hold of power.

If you want to call that "no concept of reality" then I'm perfectly fine with that.

It's cool Lancaster. We all have to have Glastonbury beliefs at this time of year. I admire your hippy attitude. All very 60's of you. It's quite the fashion to believe in fantasy.

well you are obviously misunderstanding so much more than I originally thought and with a blinkered bigotry view so it seems. The people of NI elected 10 MP's, they have a right to representation, because some of their values don't meet yours, you now wish to degenerate everything to do with them and the Tories, perhaps we should all look to you solely for what we should and shouldn't be doing, make it simple and cheap.

I don't agree with you, I have looked at what politicians have done for the last 50 years, I have not just started with this election, you can throw darts at all parties and all leaders, yet this Labour party led by JC frightens me far more than anything I have ever imagined before and we are better of with DUP and the status quo right now, IMO. It's frightening that TM and the Tories managed to so effectively drag a huge majority from the jaws of winning to the state we have ended in so it's not that I think they are wonderful, far from it, but the alternative is frightening.

You are merely scare mongering regarding NI much as the remain cult do regarding Bretix. It's done get over it and move forward instead of forever trying to change.

so we will agree to disagree

George Osborne keeping himself amused.

KateR wrote:well you are obviously misunderstanding so much more than I originally thought and with a blinkered bigotry view so it seems. The people of NI elected 10 MP's, they have a right to representation, because some of their values don't meet yours, you now wish to degenerate everything to do with them and the Tories, perhaps we should all look to you solely for what we should and shouldn't be doing, make it simple and cheap.

I don't agree with you, I have looked at what politicians have done for the last 50 years, I have not just started with this election, you can throw darts at all parties and all leaders, yet this Labour party led by JC frightens me far more than anything I have ever imagined before and we are better of with DUP and the status quo right now, IMO. It's frightening that TM and the Tories managed to so effectively drag a huge majority from the jaws of winning to the state we have ended in so it's not that I think they are wonderful, far from it, but the alternative is frightening.

You are merely scare mongering regarding NI much as the remain cult do regarding Bretix. It's done get over it and move forward instead of forever trying to change.

so we will agree to disagree

That was quite awe inspiring! Have you thought of becoming a politician? I'd vote for you

Nothing to do with fantasy EW.

But hey, its not me whose going to have the reality check with the election comes later this year.

JohnMcGreal wrote:'THERE IS NO MAGIC MONEY TREE'

Theresa May - June 2017.

"This is a ******* omnishambles."

Malcolm Tucker

KateR wrote:The people of NI elected 10 MP's, they have a right to representation, because some of their values don't meet yours, you now wish to degenerate everything to do with them and the Tories, perhaps we should all look to you solely for what we should and shouldn't be doing, make it simple and cheap.

I don't agree with you, I have looked at what politicians have done for the last 50 years, I have not just started with this election, you can throw darts at all parties and all leaders, yet this Labour party led by JC frightens me far more than anything I have ever imagined before and we are better of with DUP and the status quo right now, IMO.

Not only do I disagree with these homophobic, bigoted, climate change denying loonies, I also hope that they soon cease to hold any power in our supposedly liberal, forward thinking country.

Nigel Dodds just said in the interests of transparency, maybe he should publish his discussions with Labour in 2010 and 2015, and the SNP in 2015, maybe all the faux outrage will stop now.

Also in 2008, labour made a substantial payment to the DUP in order to secure their votes for 42 days detention, hypocrisy of the highest order.

KateR wrote:well you are obviously misunderstanding so much more than I originally thought and with a blinkered bigotry view so it seems. The people of NI elected 10 MP's, they have a right to representation, because some of their values don't meet yours, ....

Do they meet yours? ..... because their views are abhorrent to the vast majority, inc. - (in the interests of balance and fairness) the majority of Tories.
To follow up on your original point. The DUP have consistently voted with the Conservatives since 2010, so why was it necessary for there to be a formal agreement, backed up with a bribe that potentially breaches the Good Friday agreement and further divides the Union that they purport to stand for?
Do you actually think that as loyalist and Unionists the DUP would have voted down the Queen's speech?
A Conservative minority government was the other option, and would have made a lot more sense, and - arguably - been more effective.

I don't know what it cost for May to become PM but the haggard old cow has robbed us blind.

So are the DUP Anti Gay Anti Abortion Anti Green Pro Hanging and have links with Loyalist Paramilitaries?

And if they are then are you happy that a party like that are propping up the Tories and it's costing us £1Bn

It's amazing how they found the magic money tree when it suited them and keeps them in power at least for now

I wouldn;t bother arguing wiht KateR if I were you n-d. She's thinks jeremy corbyn's labour Party is the most frightening thing she's ever seen. Ever.

So she's either stupid or isn't old enough to remember the cold war and a bunch of other key political crises that threatened to tip the world over the edge.

I don't agree with all their views on somethings, the same as I don't agree with everything Tories, Labour, Green, LibDem, etc. policies but we have to pick/chose whichever party we feel is best with what is on offer. Also the choice is, 1) is it best for me 2) is it best for the country and perhaps not best for me. So many people make knee jerk decisions on voting that might help them in the short term but hurt them in the long term of there family members, it is not in my opinion a simple easy choice yet I know for some it is. There thoughts on homosexuality for example, is for now of no consequences as it will not permeate into the government now.

I believe it was needed, we are moving in to lots of negotiations regarding our exit, Labour/SNP would have continually put stumbling blocks in the way, and still will so they need some form or assurances from DUP

claretandy wrote:Also in 2008, labour made a substantial payment to the DUP in order to secure their votes for 42 days detention, hypocrisy of the highest order.

Different times, different circumstances, and according to Peter Robinson no they didn't.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... 31/42-days

KateR wrote:
I believe it was needed, we are moving in to lots of negotiations regarding our exit, Labour/SNP would have continually put stumbling blocks in the way, and still will so they need some form or assurances from DUP

But you still haven't answered my question - and that of others.
Why was a formal agreement needed when the DUP invariably vote with the Tories anyway? Theresa May has actually weakened her position rather than strengthening it by offering a bribe. This means she is from now at the mercy of the DUP - who can come back and ask for more.
In a minority govt situation the DUP would have had to continue to vote with the Tories or face the consequences.

The DUP believe in the sort of stuff that means they should never be the right place or the right time.

This.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7520856.stm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Speculation that the DUP supported Labour over the 42 day detention of terrorist suspects, in return abortion legislation wouldn't be extended to N.Ireland.

Sidney1st wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7520856.stm

Speculation that the DUP supported Labour over the 42 day detention of terrorist suspects, in return abortion legislation wouldn't be extended to N.Ireland.

Whether true or not in this case is largely irrelevant. Parties do deals with each other all the time over specific issues, but we are talking here about a party of government effectively paying another party a sum of money in exchange for their pretty much unconditional support throughout a Parliament.

Is a bad deal better than no deal? Hard to keep up with them.

Bordeauxclaret wrote:Is a bad deal better than no deal? Hard to keep up with them.

Brilliant concise post. Just wish I'd come up with it!

Not sure of the answer to the title question. However, once there, it costs you your dignity.

nil_desperandum wrote:Whether true or not in this case is largely irrelevant. Parties do deals with each other all the time over specific issues, but we are talking here about a party of government effectively paying another party a sum of money in exchange for their pretty much unconditional support throughout a Parliament.

So paying money to a party is worse than denying women the right to an abortion?
Ok cool, glad we cleared that up.

Labour, the people's party...

Sidney1st wrote:So paying money to a party is worse than denying women the right to an abortion?
Ok cool, glad we cleared that up.

Labour, the people's party...

Good point Sid, but I wonder to what extent the Labour party would have had much control over this issue? Would the English majority in the UK Parliament have enforced something on the Irish people that they were opposed to on supposed "moral grounds." ?
Would Stormont not have had the final say on this anyway? ( I genuinely don't know, but I wouldn't have thought that the UK Parliament could have forced this through).

They're opposed to it on religious grounds, lets correct that for you.

Why do people know about stuff like this? It just doesn't play any part in my life at all. Maybe it should, who knows?

Sidney1st wrote:They're opposed to it on religious grounds, lets correct that for you.

OK. I stand corrected, but I think my term "supposed moral grounds" amounts to pretty much the same thing

mkmel wrote:So are the DUP Anti Gay Anti Abortion Anti Green Pro Hanging and have links with Loyalist Paramilitaries?

How can it be abhorrent to be anti-abortion? There are three basic stances on abortion - that the tiny living creature that you're destroying isn't human; that it is human, but is life isn't worth anything; or that it is human and its life is valuable. I support the latter, as it happens; why is that so horrible?

Saxoman wrote:Why do people know about stuff like this? It just doesn't play any part in my life at all. Maybe it should, who knows?

Its part of the point about a forum.

We discuss and learn about things.
I know I learn a fair bit on here, something's I just happen to know a lot about.

Sidney1st wrote:Its part of the point about a forum.

We discuss and learn about things.
I know I learn a fair bit on here, something's I just happen to know a lot about.

You misunderstand, I have no problem with the topic.

dsr wrote:How can it be abhorrent to be anti-abortion? There are three basic stances on abortion - that the tiny living creature that you're destroying isn't human; that it is human, but is life isn't worth anything; or that it is human and its life is valuable. I support the latter, as it happens; why is that so horrible?

Well to my mind yes I do think that denying women the right to an abortion no matter what the circumstance and whether that's on religious grounds or moral grounds is abhorrent.
The woman's body the woman's choice.

Now I don't want to turn this thread into an abortion debate so I will say no more on the matter and you've given your opinion and I've given mine so can we leave it at that please dsr?

To me the point is this: would the DUP have propped up May's gov't had this money not been made available? If the answer is no, then our whole political system has been held to ransom by 10 politicians. this can't be right.

RingoMcCartney wrote:What's the price of being a Labour MP in Rotherham?

Insitutional silence and inaction.

When 1400 innocent children were raped , abused and even f**** branded, yes branded. By Pakistani racist grooming gangs, were allowed to avoid justice. In the name of "social cohesion" and "cultural sensitivities" In order for the understanding that the PakistanI vote would be a Labour vote.

The same in Rochdale.

When it comes to accusations of buying votes. Labour should wind their necks in.......

And there appears Racist Ringo spouting his predictable bile

If the Tories had got into bed with the SNP the price would've been independence for Scotland or a definite date for referendum.

Saxoman wrote:You misunderstand, I have no problem with the topic.

My point was we all learn things on here.

Take the time to have a look, read and learn something new.

Some people make it their lifes work to know all about politics and get all excited about it.
Personally I skirt round the edges of it, its safer that way.

Looks like they've opened a can of worms as well there possibly being even more concessions to the DUP

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... government" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;