Promote your events and press releases in Bromley for FREE! Forgotten Password? | Register | Login

Explore Shopping

Talked About

Contribute +

Weather

Fri

Thick Cloud

4°C (39°F)
0°C (32°F)

Sat

Sunny

4°C (39°F)
2°C (36°F)

Sun

Heavy Rain

8°C (46°F)
5°C (41°F)

Add Review

Bromley Business Reviews

Latest Reviews for Bromley

Showing page 4 of 4 pages   
Rate 0

Review by Ram

Rating:

Added On:
26th, Jun 2013

Business:
21st Century Cars

This is the ideal answer. Evyeonre should read this

Rate 0

Review by Cebin

Rating:

Added On:
26th, Jun 2013

Business:
21st Century Cars

Compass are a moderate orgisanation. can you honestly say that you have read the stuff they have put out in any detail, as I have Progress? From your comments, it seems not... I mean look at Compass compared to the old labourites in the Campaign Group. we have environmentalism, radical new, untried ideas on taxation, the society we want to live in, and many other areas. they have 1982. Surely, though it does not suit your purposes, you would agree with this observation?Compass is not dogmatically statist, but pragmatic. It is not vying to bring back failed policies of the past, but invent more radical ones for the future.Labour is meant to be a democratic socialist party (and also social dfemocratic). That means everything from the centre to the most trotty campaign groupers.But it does not mean centre-right neoliberal policies, owing more to Hayek than Giddens... but that is what we are getting. Labour can't contain the left and the slightly right of centre at the same time, or even the left and the dead centre. the differences are too big, unless we all compr**ise. That could result in a split like in germany happening (in which case, we would probably get the unions).would you prefer that, or should we just know when to shut up and continue to be ignored? would you like to be the new SDP? That's the reductio absurdam result of what you argue for.we can't do 'everyone is included, but only us get influence', basically. it won't last. because people want to know what they get for their dues.compass gets no movement.you don't join a party just to go along with every populist demand of those you oppose, be they 'the public' or not. it is a compromise between progressive principle and power. Foot was all principle, no power. Blair is all power, no principle. compass is about maximising both, in equalibrium. Most labourites understand that, at least. Sounds pretty representative.I think Progress do a fine job by promoting Compass, and I think Compass do a fine job by promoting Progress.I am not trying to excuse public calls for a change of leadership, at least, from those in a position of some influence. but by the same token, for the right-wing of the party to call for a group to be marginalised panders to the language of division and warfare, as do calls for boycotts and refusals to debate! So that's a broad church, eh? How immature.The party comes first, and that means unity, debate, and compr**ise; not intra-party sectarianism that you seem to encourage here.you are effectively de-dummying the pram because you don't like what someone else is doing. I would respectfully suggest that you do something yourself, and if people don't like it as much as Compass, quite frankly, tough.furthermore, you claim that compass is unrepresentative. well, we are linked to the unions through catalyst, have support from a third of labour members and at the very least 80 MPs, as well as councillors and normal activists throughout the country such as myself. Then there is a largeish section of uberlefts and entrists in the campaign group.So you can hardly say that Progress represents any mainstream bulk of the party. actually, it is a grassroots orgisanation for the leader above: Mr Blair.Compass on the other hand stretches from avowedly new Labour Brownites, such as Ed Balls (and to an extent me: hence why I find your remarks so offensive... I mean, I agree with Crosland for christ's sake!) through to the soft left and tribune (also like me!), ie. critical supporters of the government.we are a broad coalition against blairism, not necesarily new Labour, though some Compassites plainly are. Thus, we are, once again, as representative as any sectional group (a charge to which progress also pleds guilty) could be. our backing is certainly wider than progress's.'what's labour for? to keep the tory acheivements of the 1980s in place forever! comrades, we must sell the NHS/Schools/Transport, lock up the innocent, bomb the poor for freedom and institutionalise the class system through educational selection!'nah.it's for equality, democracy, freedom and change. Values Blair has lost touch with.We must be that change.On that basis sir, I challenge you to a duel.

Rate 0

Review by Open

Rating:

Added On:
24th, Jun 2013

Business:
Ann Harvey

, we all know we can't get everything we ask for. That's life.In that way, I'd say that Compass and Progress aultalcy have a slight overlap.My problem with Compass is that Neal Lawson keeps using it as a platform to attack Tony Blair.I'd agree with that statement. I think Lawson severely lacks tact, but he's been getting a lot of flack for the things he says, not least from adele and I. Like I said, the party comes first, and that means compr**ise.when I was talking about principle, I was talking about socialist principle... respect for Labour values. I don't agree that Iraq was in touch with them.you don't spread democracy by bombing it into people, especially when they live in a fractured country where everybody owns firearms. and is nextdoor to Iran.Nor do I believe that blair went to war to free Iraq, because the reason kept on conveniently changing every time it was proven to be unfounded or was too unpopular. I believe Blair wanted a war from the start. And I'm not even a crazed SWPer, a lot of people, mainstream people, think this. especially those my age.Now we have this bush doctrine of pre-emptive invasion, as riddled with uncertainty in application as pre-emptive self defence in the cr**inal law. We also have as a result a license to invade a country and kill innocent people to spread democracy.I agree with spreading democracy, and despise this insurgency; indeed i signed euston. But I don't believe in that, and naither does the vast bulk of labour. it's not principle, it is a backfired opportunism.I agree in being an allie with the US, as wel as europe etc. But, I would take the Labour position on Vietnam as the correct template, not the current ones. I also think we should take them on on the environment, aids, and global neoliberalism/IMF/WTO/G8 issues. We should aim for the right kind of globalisation, not the american whim.That doesn't mean we shouldn't be the strongest allies in other areas, particularly in defence (not offence!) and Human rights (outside of guantanamo/eastern europe). For example, the US has a superior position to us on China, we should recognise that.I can get on with the traditional, croslandite right; indeed, that is why Blair was right when he first came in, and deserved to have his praises sung.Power without principle. What, excepting Warwick, has Blair done since 2001 that Ted Heath could not have endorsed? where's the principle gone? it was there in the early years of new Labour, and even then, it came mainly from Brown, e.g. tax credits.I just think that he has changed away from the reality of modern life, rather than changing with it.My point about the SDP is this. the unions are to the left of the government, and critical. half of the party is the same, in the CLPs. neither constituency gets listened to. So what can it do? it can criticise, such as compass have done... or it can split. and if the left takes the unions, what would the right be? And if we, the left-ish, can't criticise or disent (just not cricket), or win power, through groups like your nemeses, the grassroots alliance (yes, I know you hate them...), what's in it for us? where are we to find representation?oh. we shouldn't. we should shut up, pay our dues, and learn how to take it.The difference between compass and Blair is that we will invite Oona King, listen, and mostly disagree. Blair shuns outside influence, makes poilicy without consultation, never responds to criticism, unless from the right-wing press,then ignores any dissent from parts of Labour. Compass listens and considers, even when it seems destined to disagree.I would love to take you up on that debate by the way ;o)Best wishes

Rate 0

Review by Merrily

Rating:

Added On:
23rd, Jun 2013

Business:
Ann Harvey

You bring up some good historical pontis. Being a woman I can only image what it was like to live in the modern era. I think about all the great women that I personally know that lived before the women coming of age. This article reminded me of those times when I think about what they would/could have accomplished if they had the resources that women had today. This is the best time in history to be a woman. We are seeing the glass ceiling being pushed higher and higher and I believe regardless of your views you have to realize that women can hold their own and even surpass many men. I am thankful for all the women that went before us. We no longer have to rely on others, but the commit ourselves to doing great things.

Rate 0

Review by Laura7

Rating:

Added On:
24th, Mar 2013

Business:
Junior Orcas

Amazing friendly atmosphere, my child loves their lessons!!

Rate 0

Review by Rebecca

Rating:

Added On:
2nd, Jan 2013

Business:
Turgoose & Turgoose Registered Osteopaths

Highly recommend - very professional service.

Rate 0

Review by juicy couture uk online

Rating:

Added On:
3rd, May 2012

Business:
21st Century Cars

WWW.Juicycoutures-uk.co.uk

Showing page 4 of 4 pages