# General Election 8th June 2017



## stockwellcat.

Which Party are you going to vote for?

To not cause any friction you do not have to disclose publicly on here who you are voting.


----------



## Happy Paws2

I've no idea, it's just another Fine Mess we are in, who ever wins.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Voter apathy springs to mind. Another year another friggin vote. Just as it looked like we're all systems go it's all left up in the air for a few weeks.

Frankly I no longer give a flying monkey's anymore and probably won't even bother to vote. I understand why she's done it though.


----------



## Creativecat

Wow I didn't see tht coming . I guess Jeremy Corbin will will either have to put up or shut up. Go Jeremy tee he he


----------



## Honeys mum

Sorry, but I never tell anyone except my OH who I vote for in a General Election.
It will be very interesting though.


----------



## Bisbow

I think everyone should vote whatever colour they are
If apathy wins out we will be in an even bigger mess than we already are
I will be voting anyway, then I can moan if it turns out badly


----------



## ForestWomble

Here we go again! 


I have no idea, just hope that whatever the outcome, whoever becomes PM will be able to make the right decisions for everyone.


----------



## Honeys mum

Bisbow said:


> I will be voting anyway, then I can moan if it turns out badly


That's what my family always tell me Bisbow.


----------



## labradrk

I'm a Labour voter as are most of my family. However I don't think they'll get in for one minute, so don't really see the point in another general election....


----------



## Arnie83

In my constituency the Tory candidate will get in, so my vote - for Lib Dem - won't matter and my view will not be reflected in the make-up of the Westminster Parliament.

Democracy my bottom.


----------



## CRL

Arnie83 said:


> In my constituency the Tory candidate will get in, so my vote - for Lib Dem - won't matter and my view will not be reflected in the make-up of the Westminster Parliament.
> 
> Democracy my bottom.


ours is very similar. i always vote labour, yet the area i live in a a huge conservative area, and is guaranteed a conservative win. my vote probably wont matter, but im going to vote anyway.


----------



## Bisbow

CRL said:


> ours is very similar. i always vote labour, yet the area i live in a a huge conservative area, and is guaranteed a conservative win. my vote probably wont matter, but im going to vote anyway.


That, in my opinion, is the right attitude
Every vote counts whether your choice wins or not
People who don't vote then moan about the result annoy me
I vote for whoever I think is the right person for the job whatever their party is
I don't vote for labour/tory just because my parents did (I don't know who they voted for anyway}
I am not true blue or bright red, I suppose I can be called a floating voter but vote I will when I know who is standing and see what their policies are
I still want out of the EU so we will see


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

We needed an option of "undecided" as per usual I don't make my mind up until the last minute depending on what issues are the most important to me at the time.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> We needed an option of "undecided" as per usual I don't make my mind up until the last minute depending on what issues are the most important to me at the time.


I'll put undecided on.


----------



## stockwellcat.

stockwellcat said:


> I'll put undecided on.


It's on there now.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> It's on there now.


Thank you - have selected undecided.


----------



## Jesthar

stockwellcat said:


> I'll put undecided on.


How about "Anyone but Tory!" too


----------



## noushka05

I'm a proud member of the Green Party but they have never fielded a candidate in my constituency at a general election & are unlikely to this time.

So i'll be taking David Schneiders advice;

_People saying there's no-one they can vote for. That's what Tories want.
Vote for whoever has best chance of defeating the Tory candidate_

_ETA: _excludes ukip!
_

._


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> I'm a proud member of the Green Party but they have never fielded a candidate in my constituency at a general election & are unlikely to this time.
> 
> So i'll be taking David Schneiders advice;
> 
> _People saying there's no-one they can vote for. That's what Tories want.
> Vote for whoever has best chance of defeating the Tory candidate
> 
> ._


Its called tactical voting and has been going on for more years than I've been alive.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Its called tactical voting and has been going on for more years than I've been alive.


Absolutely. And in this election more is at stake then ever before.


----------



## kimthecat

F or the first time ever , Im abstaining . I've got to the point where I don't frigging care anymore . 

Ours is a safe seat and its not likely Labour will win it .


----------



## noushka05

*This is no general election, it's a coup - MPs have a duty to stop Theresa May *https://www.theguardian.com/comment...eral-election-coup-mps-theresa-may?CMP=twt_gu


----------



## MollySmith

I will,as I always do,read through the manifestos and see. It's very unlikely to be Tory as they are usually against my environmental and animal welfare ethics. But I always remain open minded. 

The point is that we should vote. I detest with a passion, the apathy party who could have made a huge difference and believe that there should be a tailor-made manifesto for them - impossible you have to go with what is overall best. However there ought to be an option to say 'you're all a bit crap' on the voting paper!


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> To not cause any friction you do not have to disclose publicly on here who you are voting.


@stockwellcat: the person who started the referendum thread last May said that people should not have to justify their choice, and we all know what happened there!! :Arghh


----------



## Arnie83

Bisbow said:


> That, in my opinion, is the right attitude
> Every vote counts whether your choice wins or not
> People who don't vote then moan about the result annoy me
> I vote for whoever I think is the right person for the job whatever their party is
> I don't vote for labour/tory just because my parents did (I don't know who they voted for anyway}
> I am not true blue or bright red, I suppose I can be called a floating voter but vote I will when I know who is standing and see what their policies are
> I still want out of the EU so we will see


I'll certainly vote, because I think it's my duty to do so, but I can't see how my vote will count.

In a PR system it would count because it would influence the make-up of a representative Parliament. It would be added to all the other votes for the party I vote for, and the percentage of votes received from the country's voters would match the percentage of seats in the Commons.

But in this GE it won't count for anything. The Tory will win, regardless of how - or if - I cast my vote. How is that counting? Surely to count is has to matter?


----------



## MollySmith

And actually I don't want to tell you even if I did! The sheer amount of clique back biting and lack of worthwhile evidence based discussion on Brexit on PF is like a giant playground so nope, not telling this time.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MollySmith said:


> I will,as I always do,read through the manifestos and see. It's very unlikely to be Tory as they are usually against my environmental and animal welfare ethics. But I always remain open minded.
> 
> The point is that we should vote. I detest with a passion, the apathy party who could have made a huge difference and believe that there should be a tailor-made manifesto for them - impossible you have to go with what is overall best. However there ought to be an option to say 'you're all a bit crap' on the voting paper!


Ah but you get slaughtered if you admit to doing that - recall the last election thread, I was undecided until a couple of days before then went Tory because although there was many things I didn't agree with there were more that I did and more than with the other parties. I still get called out on that and told I can't pick and choose the bits I voted for.


----------



## MollySmith

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Ah but you get slaughtered if you admit to doing that - recall the last election thread, I was undecided until a couple of days before then went Tory because although there was many things I didn't agree with there were more that I did and more than with the other parties. I still get called out on that and told I can't pick and choose the bits I voted for.


Oh yes, that's true!

It does beg the question why some people on here aren't setting up their own parties...  Imagine that... actually I'd rather not!


----------



## Dr Pepper

MollySmith said:


> The point is that we should vote. I detest with a passion, the apathy party who could have made a huge difference and believe that there should be a tailor-made manifesto for them - impossible you have to go with what is overall best. However there ought to be an option to say 'you're all a bit crap' on the voting paper!


I agree, I've voted in every general and local election since I was eighteen. But seriously another one just two years in. Thought we now voted parties in for five years. I don't want to be apathetic but it's getting to the "what's the point if the goal posts keep moving" state of mind.


----------



## noushka05

Brexit aside, I always think this Irvine Welsh quote is worth thinking about before casting a vote. 
_
When you're not doing so well, vote for a better life for yourself. 
If you are doing quite nicely, vote for a better life for others._


----------



## Jesthar

kimthecat said:


> F or the first time ever , Im abstaining . I've got to the point where I don't frigging care anymore .
> 
> Ours is a safe seat and its not likely Labour will win it .


The thing is, that's what Theresa May is hoping for. Usually even 'safe' seats are only won by a relatively small percentage of the total voting population of an area, so if everyone decided to turn out to vote, anything could happen!


----------



## Lurcherlad

I'm so far undecided.

I hate my local Tory MP with a passion and we disagree on many things, however, it is a safe seat so he will probably win anyway.

Whether I can trust that my vote won't actually make any difference and, for my own conscience, choose another party based on their manifesto as I did last time and voted Green, I shall decide nearer the time.

I don't want a Labour Government, that's for sure!


----------



## Smuge

UKIP got what 4 million votes last time? They don't make the list but the Greens do? lol


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Absolutely. And in this election more is at stake then ever before.


Sorry about that. UKIP has now been added on.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty

I'm another in a safe Tory seat, so unless I vote Tory my vote will likely have no influence on the final result. It will be swallowed up in Tory votes and not count towards the national outcome.

It's a stupid and frustrating system.

I'll still vote though, in case something unexpected happens (Brexit and Trump par example) and because I am pretty fierce about having and utilising a right to vote.


----------



## MollySmith

Dr Pepper said:


> I agree, I've voted in every general and local election since I was eighteen. But seriously another one just two years in. Thought we now voted parties in for five years. I don't want to be apathetic but it's getting to the "what's the point if the goal posts keep moving" state of mind.


I have a generally dislike about the voting system to be honest. I think voting, as it is in Australia (I think?), needs to be compulsory and also adopt a single winning to stop tactical voting. But as a woman whose great great grandmother was a hard worn suffragette, I vote. Abstaining doesn't necessary show an objection or give a meaning. As the voting public we have to make contact with our MP's and lend our voices, it's why I protest and campaigned for my MP to remain true in the House of Commons vote on the EU and over NHS funding for infertility. We cannot expect to improve politics by not being involved and by waffling on PF.

Note that with Brexit if you put the apathy party and the remainers together then we'd either still be in the EU or we'd have a bigger and more clear picture of the desire to leave - it is too close to say it's a majority - (What has been largely ignored are the 12.9 million who did not vote, Source LSE).


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Smuge said:


> UKIP got what 4 million votes last time? They don't make the list but the Greens do? lol


Be interesting to see if Nigel comes back for another go to get a seat - interesting given Douglas Carswell their only MP resigned from UKIP to sit as an independent. Will UKIP lose votes now Brexit is underway? If so will those voters vote Tory?


----------



## Smuge

Personally I didn't vote in the last NI election - they are all morons (or worse, terrorists). I probably wont bother in this one either.

Extremely proudly voted for Brexit tho - for once everyones vote actually mattered.

At the end of the day May will and should win. Have you seen the mess Labour are in? Corbyn couldn't run a bookclub never mind a country


----------



## Lurcherlad

I agree with Mollysmith on the need for all eligible people to vote. Women died so that I could and those that don't would be among the first to complain if that right were taken away, I'm sure! 

It should be mandatory IMO.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Smuge said:


> Personally I didn't vote in the last NI election - they are all morons (or worse, terrorists). I probably wont bother in this one either.
> 
> Extremely proudly voted for Brexit tho - for once everyones vote actually mattered.
> 
> At the end of the day May will and should win. Have you seen the mess Labour are in? Corbyn couldn't run a bookclub never mind a country


I would imagine he would make a very good runner of book clubs  although I might nod off once or twice if he were reading.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty

I think if everyone who normally abstained attended the ballot and spoiled their paper instead, it could make them sit up and take notice.

I know there is always a proportion of spoiled papers, but if 34% of all papers (turnout in 2015 was 66%) were spoiled I think the media would pick up on that and give it leverage. Especially if we all wrote the same message. 

We need a national movement!

Westminster relies to a degree on our apathy. There is a 'no news is good news' sentiment... no vote to change must mean you're happy with the status quo. Of course that's not true in the case of many citizens, but the parties can use that angle to serve their political purposes.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Lurcherlad said:


> I agree with RPH on the need for all eligible people to vote. Women died so that I could and those that don't would be among the first to complain if that right were taken away, I'm sure!
> 
> It should be mandatory IMO.


I think it was @MollySmith not me


----------



## Smuge

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I would imagine he would make a very good runner of book clubs  although I might nod off once or twice if he were reading.


Quite - Stalin's autobiography wouldn't be my cup of tea.

Look I don't like Labour (or at least the 21st century version) but its disgraceful that we do not have an effective opposition - this is bad for everyone. This election is not even a contest, you may even see Tory gains in the North and further Labour losses in Wales. But Labour elected an unelectable leader - twice! This looming defeat is completely their own fault


----------



## Lurcherlad

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I think it was @MollySmith not me


Ooh yeah - soz!

Got confused, because you are into your family tree! :Wacky


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Lurcherlad said:


> Ooh yeah - soz!
> 
> Got confused, because you are into your family tree! :Wacky


 if only I had suffragettes in my family and not workhouse/syphilis :Hilarious:Hilarious


----------



## MollySmith

rottiepointerhouse said:


> if only I had suffragettes in my family and not *workhouse*/syphilis :Hilarious:Hilarious


I've a few of those too if that helps?


----------



## Ceiling Kitty

Is it true or an old wives' tale that having a shock of white hair is a sign of syphilis having been in the family?

I'm thinking it must be false.


----------



## MollySmith

Ceiling Kitty said:


> I think if everyone who normally abstained attended the ballot and spoiled their paper instead, it could make them sit up and take notice.
> 
> I know there is always a proportion of spoiled papers, but if 34% of all papers (turnout in 2015 was 66%) were spoiled I think the media would pick up on that and give it leverage. Especially if we all wrote the same message.
> 
> We need a national movement!
> 
> *Westminster relies to a degree on our apathy. There is a 'no news is good news' sentiment... no vote to change must mean you're happy with the status quo. Of course that's not true in the case of many citizens, but the parties can use that angle to serve their political purposes*.


Yes I agree,

The national movement should be that we all beat down the doors of our MP's surgeries. A movement is about engagement but that's not always easy with the sheer volume of dirty politics, fake news and media reporting. In PF it's easy to get lost in what is real and made up! The problem with stay at home apathy is that these people make no point and play into the hands of the voting system and we end up with MP's who do not represent the true portrait of the country in charge.


----------



## Siskin

Ceiling Kitty said:


> Is it true or an old wives' tale that having a shock of white hair is a sign of syphilis having been in the family?
> 
> I'm thinking it must be false.


Hope so, my hairs white


----------



## Ceiling Kitty

Siskin said:


> Hope so, my hairs white


I mean like one section of white hair, on hair of an otherwise darker colour.


----------



## Siskin

Ceiling Kitty said:


> I mean like one section of white hair, on hair of an otherwise darker colour.


Oh dear, it's just got worse then. My mum had two white wings of hair on each side by her temples


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Ceiling Kitty said:


> Is it true or an old wives' tale that having a shock of white hair is a sign of syphilis having been in the family?
> 
> I'm thinking it must be false.


Do you mean like the Mallen streak?

I can't say as I came across that in any of my research into Syphilis.


----------



## Goblin

Yet another U-turn by May. Wonder why.. Probably the fact that her promises are being shown to be false so she better do it now rather than later when everything is even more obvious. Then she'll say it's the will of the people, they know what they voted for.

We all know the conservatives are likely to win as there is no opposition. Therefore people who want to protest should do that by voting against May. Hard to say you have a mandate when you don't have the most votes even if your party has the most seats.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Yet another U-turn by May. Wonder why.. Probably the fact that her promises are being shown to be false so she better do it now rather than later when everything is even more obvious. Then she'll say it's the will of the people, they know what they voted for.
> 
> We all know the conservatives are likely to win as there is no opposition. Therefore people who want to protest should do that by voting against May. Hard to say you have a mandate when you don't have the most votes even if your party has the most seats.


Actually nothing to do with what you suggest. It's to do with getting Parliament behind the Government as there is alot of opposition at the moment. Conservatives will, if the polls are correct, win the General Election.






She has taken the right action calling for permission from Parliament to hold a GE.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Actually nothing to do with what you suggest. It's to do with getting Parliament behind the Government as there is alot of opposition at the moment. Conservatives will, if the polls are correct, win the General Election.


Stockwellcat.. you are really gullible if you believe someone who is constantly shown to be lying. Parliament is already behind the government, that's what party whips are for and why May doesn't allow free votes for policy decisions.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Stockwellcat.. you are really gullible if you believe someone who is constantly shown to be lying. Parliament is already behind the government, that's what party whips are for and why May doesn't allow free votes for policy decisions.


I am not allowing this thread to desend into pointless arguing like the other thread and it becoming a vicious circle of people being nasty towards each other.

Your allowed your say yes fair enough.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Simple. Lets have election before inflation and other consequences of Brexit kick in.


----------



## KittenKong

Goblin said:


> Yet another U-turn by May. Wonder why.. Probably the fact that her promises are being shown to be false so she better do it now rather than later when everything is even more obvious. Then she'll say it's the will of the people, they know what they voted for.
> 
> We all know the conservatives are likely to win as there is no opposition. Therefore people who want to protest should do that by voting against May. Hard to say you have a mandate when you don't have the most votes even if your party has the most seats.


Ideal distraction from May's hard Brexit plans isn't it? Brexit will even be out of the news over the next couple of months.

A victory for May will only give her more power at the end of the day. We've seen what's happened in Turkey.

And why the U turn? Opposition to her Brexit plans from opposition parties apparently. Did she really expect the entire Parliament and House of Lords to unite behind her?

Why are there opposition parties in the first place?

Extremely worrying.....


----------



## Honeys mum

This is the latest poll at the moment.


----------



## Siskin

The thing is, do we believe polls anymore? They don't seem to reflect what actually happens at the ballot box any more.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty

Siskin said:


> Oh dear, it's just got worse then. My mum had two white wings of hair on each side by her temples





rottiepointerhouse said:


> Do you mean like the Mallen streak?
> 
> I can't say as I came across that in any of my research into Syphilis.


It's probably a load of rubbish - someone just told me it once. No offence intended @Siskin!


----------



## Ceiling Kitty

stockwellcat said:


> I am not allowing this thread to desend into pointless arguing like the other thread and it becoming a vicious circle of people being nasty towards each other.
> 
> Your allowed your say yes fair enough.


Then am I allowed to request that the word 'remoaner' does not enter the thread? 'Remainer' is perfectly accurate and adequate. 

Of course people may say whatever they choose, but in the spirit of not being nasty to each other and all...


----------



## stockwellcat.

Ceiling Kitty said:


> Then am I allowed to request that the word 'remoaner' does not enter the thread? 'Remainer' is perfectly accurate and adequate.
> 
> Of course people may say whatever they choose, but in the spirit of not being nasty to each other and all...


I shall not be mentioning anything from the other thread as this is totally separate as it is a General Election we are talking about in this thread. Others may wish to tie it to the events on the other thread with the General Election happening on the cusp of one of the biggest events in recent UK history.

See I managed to string a paragraph together without mentioning that word that begins with B and ends in T and has an x in it.


----------



## Siskin

Ceiling Kitty said:


> It's probably a load of rubbish - someone just told me it once. No offence intended @Siskin!


Non taken.

I hadn't heard of it before, do think it's rather funny as my mum would be the last person in the world to have contracted syphilis, I'm amazed she even had me.


----------



## MollySmith

Honeys mum said:


> This is the latest poll at the moment.


Nobody asked me!


----------



## MollySmith

KittenKong said:


> Ideal distraction from May's hard Brexit plans isn't it? Brexit will even be out of the news over the next couple of months.
> 
> A victory for May will only give her more power at the end of the day. We've seen what's happened in Turkey.
> 
> And why the U turn? Opposition to her Brexit plans from opposition parties apparently. Did she really expect the entire Parliament and House of Lords to unite behind her?
> 
> Why are there opposition parties in the first place?
> 
> Extremely worrying.....


Presumably it's entirely about a show of strength over Brexit, ensuring (in her opinion), that the country and the world are clear this is a done deal. Because even if Labour did win (and let's face it stranger things have happened this past year) they can't undo the policy because of the House of Commons vote. And we already know it's a done deal because this is vote number 3..or 4? I've lost count completely. But unless the 12.9m and the rest of the non voters turn out and bloody_ do something_, the results are predictable. It's entirely tactical and money wasting. Note that the pound has gained some strength at last.

In fact... (maybe I've been watching too much crime thrillers and Broadchurch) but if she did lose then she can leave Brexit to another poor sod to deal with, either in her party or another party.... in a repeat of the plotline from series 2016 where that villain Cameron ran off a cliff..


----------



## KittenKong

Still trust a word she says? I wouldn't even if I supported Brexit.

Certainly no, "This lady's not for turning".


----------



## LinznMilly

I'll probably spoil my ballot.


----------



## Jesthar

LinznMilly said:


> I'll probably spoil my ballot.


Why not vote for a random independent instead? Might help them get their deposit back


----------



## noushka05

Words of wisdom from a 94 year old war veteran & survivor of the Great depression.

Harry* Leslie Smith*‏Verified account

Like the EU referendum this *General Election* was called by
*Theresa May* not for the good of Britain but the good of the Tory Party


----------



## Colliebarmy

The Bookies view
 

*Ukip to fail to win a single seat 1/3 
 Labour to win fewer than 200 seats 1/2 

 Lib Dems to win more votes than Labour 100/30 

 Lib Dems to win more than 50 seats 4/1 

 Lib Dems to win more seats than Labour 8/1 

 SNP to win all 59 Scottish seats 8/1 

 Labour to win fewer than 100 seats 9/1 

 Green Party to win more votes than Labour 100/1 

** Labour to fail to win a single seat 1000/1* 

* Most Seats *
 Conservatives *1/12* 
Labour *9/1* 
Liberal Democrats *25/1* 
 UKIP *80/1* 
Any Other Party *100/1* 
Green Party *250/1*

* Overall Majority *
 Conservative Majority *1/5* 
No Overall Majority *4/1* 
Labour Majority *16/1* 
 Liberal Democrat Majority *40/1* 
Any Other Party Majority *50/1* 
UKIP Majority *150/1* 
 Green Party Majority *1000/1*


----------



## noushka05

Honeys mum said:


> This is the latest poll at the moment.


Terrifying if this comes to pass. No hope whatsoever of saving our NHS, foxes, nature, environment............


----------



## LinznMilly

Jesthar said:


> Why not vote for a random independent instead? Might help them get their deposit back


Because I've decided what I'm going to write on the ballot. 

Nothing's written in stone, so I might be swayed one way or another, but it certainly won't be red or blue.

Eta: and definitely NOT Purple.


----------



## Colliebarmy

noushka05 said:


> Terrifying if this comes to pass. No hope whatsoever of saving our NHS, foxes, nature, environment............


----------



## stockwellcat.

Colliebarmy said:


> The Bookies view
> 
> 
> *Ukip to fail to win a single seat 1/3
> Labour to win fewer than 200 seats 1/2
> 
> Lib Dems to win more votes than Labour 100/30
> 
> Lib Dems to win more than 50 seats 4/1
> 
> Lib Dems to win more seats than Labour 8/1
> 
> SNP to win all 59 Scottish seats 8/1
> 
> Labour to win fewer than 100 seats 9/1
> 
> Green Party to win more votes than Labour 100/1
> *
> * Labour to fail to win a single seat 1000/1*
> 
> * Most Seats *
> Conservatives *1/12*
> Labour *9/1*
> Liberal Democrats *25/1*
> UKIP *80/1*
> Any Other Party *100/1*
> Green Party *250/1*
> 
> * Overall Majority *
> Conservative Majority *1/5*
> No Overall Majority *4/1*
> Labour Majority *16/1*
> Liberal Democrat Majority *40/1*
> Any Other Party Majority *50/1*
> UKIP Majority *150/1*
> Green Party Majority *1000/1*


Not much returns then if Conservatives win. Paddy power 1/7 Conservatives win well if you put £10 on you win £1.43 so get £11.43 back. Rigged.


----------



## Colliebarmy

MollySmith said:


> Presumably it's entirely about a show of strength over Brexit


er, no... she sees the gap (twixt Tory+Labour) knows Labour + SNP is the only possible coalition and then not with much chance and decided now is the moment

I forecast a landslide, if thats possible with an already majority

Corbyn will resign (hoorrah)


----------



## Colliebarmy

stockwellcat said:


> Not much returns then if Conservatives win. Paddy power 1/7 Conservatives win well if you put £10 on you win £1.43 so get £11.43 back. Rigged.


Nice 10% earner.......... get £100K on it


----------



## noushka05

Colliebarmy said:


>


I'm sure you can't depend on the NHS & I know you don't care about green issues, so you'll be ok.


----------



## noushka05

The real reason for this snap election May 'promised' wouldn't be happening?

*Michael Crick*‏Verified [email protected]*MichaelLCrick* 4h4 hours ago

Election could put CPS in difficulty over whether to prosecute MPs & 
agents over 2015 election expenses. 
Deadlines late May, early June!


----------



## Jesthar

LinznMilly said:


> Because I've decided what I'm going to write on the ballot.
> 
> Nothing's written in stone, so I might be swayed one way or another, but it certainly won't be red or blue.
> 
> Eta: and definitely NOT Purple.


Just don't draw a - er - male appendage in the box for the party you hate. Chap did that in the last General Election, and it was counted as a vote for that candidate


----------



## LinznMilly

Jesthar said:


> Just don't draw a - er - male appendage in the box for the party you hate. Chap did that in the last General Election, and it was counted as a vote for that candidate


I'm not that vulgar.... :Angelic

(And if I was, it wouldn't fit into any particular box :Hilarious )


----------



## Jesthar

LinznMilly said:


> I'm not that vulgar.... :Angelic
> 
> (And if I was, it wouldn't fit into any particular box :Hilarious )


We believe you, thousands wouldn't!

(and you're supposed to do a _drawing_, not a _tracing..._  )


----------



## Calvine

MollySmith said:


> It does beg the question why some people on here aren't setting up their own parties...


Dear God, @MollySmith: please don't give them ideas...they have enough already!:Arghh


----------



## LinznMilly

Jesthar said:


> We believe you, thousands wouldn't!
> 
> (and you're supposed to do a _drawing_, not a _tracing..._  )


Only thous ...... :Jawdrop ?

Ahem.


----------



## MilleD

noushka05 said:


> Words of wisdom from a 94 year old war veteran & survivor of the Great depression.
> 
> Harry* Leslie Smith*‏Verified account
> 
> Like the EU referendum this *General Election* was called by
> *Theresa May* not for the good of Britain but the good of the Tory Party


How can this be the case when they didn't want the leave camp to win?


----------



## MilleD

Jesthar said:


> (and you're supposed to do a _drawing_, not a _tracing..._  )


Fnarrr


----------



## Satori

Honeys mum said:


> This is the latest poll at the moment.


I wonder though. What if Brexit is the key issue? Then the Tories campaign on full steam ahead, Labour campaign on some wishy-washy compromise and the Lib Dims campaign on revoking article 50 and staying in the EU. Wouldn't that give the Lib Dims loads of seats from remainer votes and result in a coalition government?


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> I shall not be mentioning anything from the other thread as this is totally separate as it is a General Election we are talking about in this thread. Others may wish to tie it to the events on the other thread with the General Election happening on the cusp of one of the biggest events in recent UK history.


Yet another total error. This everything to do with the current governmental direction which includes brexit. I'm not shunning away pretending it's something different. This is the only chance people have to hold the government to account for years, not simply for the shoddy handling of brexit, which they can still retreat from but also all the other poor decisions which are penalising the poorer members of the UK.


----------



## Satori

Well I selected Tory and will vote Tory. I know that before even reading the manifesto. But my vote will have no effect on the outcome; Labour will win the seat again.

I'll up my party donation though. Every little helps. @noushka05 , @KittenKong here's the link if you want to do the same....

https://www.conservatives.com/donate


----------



## Dr Pepper

Calvine said:


> Dear God, @MollySmith: please don't give them ideas...they have enough already!:Arghh


I wouldn't worry about a remainer's party, when would they get the time? They are to busy posting their woes on internet forums, so no time to actually do something!


----------



## Honeys mum

Satori said:


> Wouldn't that give the Lib Dims loads of seats from remainer votes and result in a coalition government?


I did think that when I saw it on the news at lunchtime.


----------



## rona

Nige will be back on the Telly


----------



## MollySmith

Dr Pepper said:


> I wouldn't worry about a remainer's party, when would they get the time? They are to busy posting their woes on internet forums, so no time to actually do something!


Excuse me! Before you tar and feather a large percentage of the population, one of many reasons I haven't been around a lot is because the EU thread goes around in circles because no side can agree. It's cliquey, dull and I've yet to see one piece of evidence of any kind about anything positive from the leave party. It's been a year and I'm still waiting.

I've attended marches, assisted in setting up a helpline for people worried about the affect of the EU on their work and rescued one person on train who was being verbally abused by someone who told her to go back home, she should've left last June.. or less eloquent words to that effect. So sod off, some of us have been busy and we've been doing a lot of good. Yes this is the slope to doom as far as I'm concerned but I can't change that but I can make it a little less stressful for others whilst considering moving to Scotland.


----------



## Happy Paws2

rona said:


> Nige will be back on the Telly


Please don't say that


----------



## cheekyscrip

One is sure: This lady is for turning.
The effects of Brexit will be felt pretty soon.


Then dear public will turn too.
May wants to grab as many seats as possible.
Before the proverbial hits the fan.
Before her "Brexit non plan" bluff is called.

People are starting to ask questions now, that Article 50 is evoked...
What NOW?
Where is it taking us, now that bunting is taken down?
What about Scotland, NI, Gibraltar?
Where is the money for farmers or NHS?
Why curtail our right ls to our pensions?
Why more taxes?
Why cuts on education?
If we do not want professionals from abroad should we not invest in training our own?
How universities will survive without those immigrants foreign students?
It will bring immigration down, but at what cost?

How we will protect the rights of EU nationals, because we are being really unfair to those people, who now are second class non citizens?

Election has to happen before mass exodus old financial sector to EU takes place.


Anyone from Leave campaign has feeling that it is something very, very fishy behind it?

Support for Trump in the war with North Korea or Syria, or both?


Or you have total faith in Mrs May even if she resembles a windmill?


----------



## MollySmith

Colliebarmy said:


> er, no... she sees the gap (twixt Tory+Labour) knows Labour + SNP is the only possible coalition and then not with much chance and decided now is the moment
> 
> I forecast a landslide, if thats possible with an already majority
> 
> Corbyn will resign (hoorrah)


Eh? It's all tactical and playing us for idiots.

Take North Herts which is a 'solid' Tory seat with 55% of the vote last time and even UKIP getting around 12% too... And yet North Herts voted Remain! How on earth does that work in this election?

We really do need another voting system so we can actually make a meaningful vote....


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> Well I selected Tory and will vote Tory. I know that before even reading the manifesto. But my vote will have no effect on the outcome; Labour will win the seat again.
> 
> I'll up my party donation though. Every little helps. @noushka05 , @KittenKong here's the link if you want to do the same....
> 
> https://www.conservatives.com/donate


----------



## MollySmith

cheekyscrip said:


> One is sure: This lady is for turning.
> The effects of Brexit will be felt pretty soon.
> 
> Then dear public will turn too.
> May wants to grab as many seats as possible.
> Before the proverbial hits the fan.
> Before her "Brexit non plan" bluff is called.
> 
> People are starting to ask questions now, that Article 50 is evoked...
> What NOW?
> Where is it taking us, now that bunting is taken down?
> What about Scotland, NI, Gibraltar?
> Where is the money for farmers or NHS?
> Why curtail our right ls to our pensions?
> Why more taxes?
> Why cuts on education?
> If we do not want professionals from abroad should we not invest in training our own?
> How universities will survive without those immigrants foreign students?
> It will bring immigration down, but at what cost?
> 
> How we will protect the rights of EU nationals, because we are being really unfair to those people, who now are second class non citizens?
> 
> Election has to happen before mass exodus old financial sector to EU takes place.
> 
> *Anyone from Leave campaign has feeling that it is something very, very fishy behind it?*
> 
> Support for Trump in the war with North Korea or Syria, or both?
> 
> Or you have total faith in Mrs May even if she resembles a windmill?


Tut tut    You forget, we're all staunch remain or leave. It's akin to being dunked into the sacrificial waters of the English (oh yes, that green - red white and blue - and pleasant land) Channel to admit that one voted wrong around these parts.


----------



## Colliebarmy

Labour Spend, Tory mend

and..
If we can brush aside Corbyn the Socialist and dump the EU taskmasters we can be free again


----------



## stockwellcat.

.


----------



## Colliebarmy

MollySmith said:


> Eh? It's all tactical and playing us for idiots.
> 
> Take North Herts which is a 'solid' Tory seat with 55% of the vote last time and even UKIP getting around 12% too... And yet North Herts voted Remain! How on earth does that work in this election?


the Brexit vote wasnt about party politics, it was about the will of the people, quite obviously the leave vote was across party lines


----------



## Colliebarmy

stockwellcat said:


> Don't you see what's happening? She is putting Brexit in her parties manifesto


She doesnt have to, its law already Labour can adopt Brexit and article 50 if they wish..


----------



## stockwellcat.

Colliebarmy said:


> She doesnt have to, its law already Labour can adopt Brexit and article 50 if they wish..


I do believe they intend to if they win. But Labours version of leaving the EU is somewhat different than the Conservatives version.


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> I do believe they intend to if they win. But Labours version of leaving the EU is somewhat different than the Conservatives version.


Somewhat...;-) ....
Three line whip...

It is like asking the prisoner..what they rather have - gallows or firing squad?
The choice is all yours. ....

You know: Brexit means Brexit.
That is all you need to know.

Gibraltar is being sold down the river...but it seems we are not alone...with no paddle somewhat...

By comparison Erdogan suddenly sounds appealing...
Moving to Turkey anyone?

Does Corbyn see himself as next PM?
He actually BACKS snap election!!!

Which will half their seats and positively bury Labour.


----------



## 1290423

Our area is represented by a safe Tory seat, cannot see that altering, besides cannot even begin to think who the other parties will send to fight it.

I shall be voting, hell wind and high water wouldn't stop me but taking into account the above think our area is pretty safe, that said you know what the say about predictions polls etc? And that has been well proven as we all know.

Just one thing, have noticed a large group of females have been putting pressure onto their local MPs regarding their delayed pensions, it's a large group refusing to vote for a certain party, dispite their numbers very much doubt the will have much affect as countrywide they will be diluted.

One things for sure! We won't have to wait long before we know the result.


----------



## noushka05

..



MilleD said:


> How can this be the case when they didn't want the leave camp to win?


Because the only reason a referendum was on the cards was to appease the tory hard right & thwart the treat of UKIP. It backfired on Cameron.


----------



## noushka05

Colliebarmy said:


> *the Brexit vote wasnt about party politics, it was about the will of the people*, quite obviously the leave vote was across party lines


Yes it was & no it wasn't.


----------



## noushka05

I had to laugh at this from Hugo Rifkind:Hilarious





The Tories make me want to join Labour.
Labour makes me want to join the Lib Dems.
The Lib Dems make me want to join Dignitas.
What a world.


----------



## KittenKong

Sorry Mr Corbyn, you have as much chance of convincing me that Brexit will work for me as much as May does.

The only Brexit that will work for me is not to have Brexit at all.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MollySmith said:


> Yes this is the slope to doom as far as I'm concerned but I can't change that but I can make it a little less stressful for others whilst considering moving to Scotland.


So instead of attending marchers, signing petitions and trying to solve the problem one person at a time and posting on forums, you could have been out there setting up a pro-eu party that's ready to run just in case this general election was called, rather than buggering off (to Scotland) just like Mr Cameron. At least Mr Farage had the courage of his convictions. Seems to me the remain camp prefer the route of least resistance rather than what's best for the country.


----------



## Arnie83

Colliebarmy said:


> Labour Spend, Tory mend
> 
> and..
> If we can brush aside Corbyn the Socialist and dump the EU taskmasters we can be free again


England?! You federalists with your 'One Country' nonsense!

We call on you to throw off the yoke of the London taskmasters. We should go back to Wessex, Mercia, Northumbria, East Anglia, Essex, Kent and Sussex. That's what this land was meant to be!


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Will be interesting what you stance will be when the Conservatives walk through this General Election and win with more seats in Parliament.


Let's see. No opposition. No real plan for brexit.. People voting for what exactly?



> Don't you see what's happening? She is putting Brexit in her parties manifesto so no one can say it isn't in the Manifesto anymore and no one can say she is unelected when she wins.


I see quite clearly as I mentioned in my first post. She's recognised that she cannot fulfill her promises so she's called this election. That way she can have someone to blame when the effects hit. "will of the people" and all that. After all she can no longer easily blame the EU for her failures such as immigration.

No doubt she will win more seats, that's not the real indication though is it. It's how many people do not vote for her policies.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> At least Mr Farage had the courage of his convictions.


Setting up his bolt hole in america you mean.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Goblin said:


> Let's see. No opposition. No real plan for brexit.. People voting for what exactly?
> 
> I see quite clearly as I mentioned in my first post. She's recognised that she cannot fulfill her promises so she's called this election. That way she can have someone to blame when the effects hit. "will of the people" and all that. After all she can no longer easily blame the EU for her failures such as immigration.
> 
> No doubt she will win more seats, that's not the real indication though is it. It's how many people do not vote for her policies.


People will vote for " Brexit means Brexit"
As opposed to Corbyn's "Remain means Brexit".


----------



## Satori

cheekyscrip said:


> People will vote for " Brexit means Brexit"
> As opposed to Corbyn's "Remain means Brexit".


Or Farron's "Brexit means Remain".


----------



## noushka05

*BREAKING:* The CPS have told Channel 4 News tonight that they are considering charges against more than 30 individuals. #*electionexpenses*

Fingers crossed.


----------



## Calvine

Goblin said:


> Setting up his bolt hole in america you mean.


As I saw it, once NF had accomplished what he had been striving for for many years, he was told in no uncertain terms that he was not needed to assist in the actual Brexit process. And DC quit as he did not consider himself the right person to see Brexit thro'. So whether he sets up a ''bolt hole'' in America or anywhere else is irrelevant really.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Parliament have to give there permission yet for the GE by way of a motion vote that is taking place tomorrow. 433 MP's (2 3rds of MPs have to agree) have to vote in favour of TMs wish to have a GE on the 8th June 2017. If this amount isn't achieved there is no GE until 2020.

Labour and Lib Dems are voting in favour of the GE so that's let's see 170 odd Labour MP's and 9 Lib Dem MP's. Scottish MP's have yet to say if they are voting or not.


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> *BREAKING:* The CPS have told Channel 4 News tonight that they are considering charges against more than 30 individuals. #*electionexpenses*
> 
> Fingers crossed.


You give me the names,of 6 who have fiddle their expenses from one party noush, and ill give you half a dozen from another xxx


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> You give me the names,of 6 who have fiddle their expenses from one party noush, and ill give you half a dozen from another xxx


This isn't about fiddling expenses Sue. This is about gerrymandering.


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> As I saw it, once NF had accomplished what he had been striving for for many years, he was told in no uncertain terms that he was not needed to assist in the actual Brexit process. And DC quit as he did not consider himself the right person to see Brexit thro'. So whether he sets up a ''bolt hole'' in America or anywhere else is irrelevant really.


Totally agree Calvine, sadly though there are some terribly sad lite boring people who don't quite grasp and certainly cant visulise life after brexit x


----------



## noushka05

*Multiple Tory MPs face being prosecuted for electoral fraud during the upcoming general election campaign *http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...aign-result-overturn-battle-bus-a7689801.html


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> *Multiple Tory MPs face being prosecuted for electoral fraud during the upcoming general election campaign *http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...aign-result-overturn-battle-bus-a7689801.html


Oh will go looky noush, know for sure ours was investigated by the police, but no charges brought xx


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Oh will go looky noush, know for sure ours was investigated by the police, but no charges brought xx


I don't doubt they'll all get off. The tories are too rich & powerful to face any consequences.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Satori said:


> Or Farron's "Brexit means Remain".


Oh...I do like that...we can do it together...on 8th June...


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Will be interesting what you stance will be when the Conservatives walk through this General Election and win with more seats in Parliament.
> 
> Don't you see what's happening? She is putting Brexit in her parties manifesto so no one can say it isn't in the Manifesto anymore and no one can say she is unelected when she wins.


Yes, papers like the Sun back her, of course May will win. Like the EU referendum 95% of the press act as one huge advertisement for the Tories as they did for Leave.

Looking on the bright side, when Corbyn stands down as Labour leader on June 9th or shortly after they have five years in which to rebuild themselves and become a true party of opposition.

Let's hope so....

Oh yes, don't forget. Indyref will be in the SNP's manifesto again too!


----------



## Happy Paws2

I hope that the tories do win, then they make a mess of brexit and they have only got themself to blame. After all it's fault in the first place.


----------



## samuelsmiles

noushka05 said:


> *BREAKING:* The CPS have told Channel 4 News tonight that they are considering charges against more than 30 individuals. #*electionexpenses*
> 
> Fingers crossed.


Tony Blair and Labour escaped similar charges in 1997 so, of course, you would hope there is a level playing field. 

*Did Labour's Battlebus operation break the rules?*

_"I first reported the issue for a rival channel back in 1997, when I accused Tony Blair and New Labour of greatly exceeding the expenses' limits in several major by-elections, including Wirral South.

_
And both the old SDP and the Liberal Democrats were well-known in the 1980s and 1990s for leaving a lot of expenditure off their expenses returns."


----------



## MollySmith

Dr Pepper said:


> So instead of attending marchers, signing petitions and trying to solve the problem one person at a time and posting on forums, you could have been out there setting up a pro-eu party that's ready to run just in case this general election was called, rather than buggering off (to Scotland) just like Mr Cameron. At least Mr Farage had the courage of his convictions. Seems to me the remain camp prefer the route of least resistance rather than what's best for the country.


You missed a bit of my response. A large part. I'd hate to think that @stockwellcat and @suewhite were liking something factually incorrect



MollySmith said:


> Excuse me! Before you tar and feather a large percentage of the population, one of many reasons I haven't been around a lot is because the EU thread goes around in circles because no side can agree. It's cliquey, dull and I've yet to see one piece of evidence of any kind about anything positive from the leave party. It's been a year and I'm still waiting.
> 
> *I've attended marches, assisted in setting up a helpline for people worried about the affect of the EU on their work and rescued one person on train who was being verbally abused by someone who told her to go back home, she should've left last June.. or less eloquent words to that effect. So sod off, some of us have been busy and we've been doing a lot of good. Yes this is the slope to doom as far as I'm concerned but I can't change that but I can make it a little less stressful for others whilst considering moving to Scotland.*


Please at least keep this contextual.

And I'd rather chose to support an establised group, it's more effective than one person on a forum bleating or justifying why something happened- and alll their clique little mates liking it. As I've already said, I haven't been on here for that and other reasons. I'm suddenly reminded of what they are. Moving to Scotland - a joke. I'm very happy with the politics of where I live.

Some people are really upset and a bit ****ing stressed about this, there is a fallout. But I'm not going to debate Brexit again. It's utterly tedious. We have to make the best of it but that doesn't mean I agree with it.


----------



## mrs phas

for the first time in my life I will be voting labour
but for them to get in they have to come out with big bold statements and make the public believe theyll keep them
and
they have to make the 25 and unders feel valued and empowered again, they are the future we are putting our selves into after all
So to win, I believe his manifesto has to be 
he'll put money in nhs, 
stop targetting disabled,
revoke the bedroom tax, 
get rid of zero hours contracts, meaning that people can plan ahead with their lives
I believe zero hours contracts are the reason that, the majority of, our children will be the first not to become home owners, how can they save and be proud of their input, if they cannot be guaranteed an hours pay, let alone a 'proper' job
and
reform the benefit changes that have come in, at the beggining of this month, meaning that young people under the age of 25 cannt get hb or council tax benefit


----------



## Satori

KittenKong said:


> Looking on the bright side, when Corbyn stands down as Labour leader on June 9th or shortly after they have five years in which to rebuild themselves and become a true party of opposition.
> 
> Let's hope so....


Yes let's. For once I find myself in agreement with you. Labour's goal should be to become a true party of opposition.

(God forbid they should ever become a party of government.)


----------



## Pawscrossed

MollySmith said:


> You missed a bit of my response. A large part. I'd hate to think that @stockwellcat and @suewhite were liking something factually incorrect
> 
> Please at least keep this contextual.
> 
> And I'd rather chose to support an establised group, it's more effective than one person on a forum bleating or justifying why something happened- and alll their clique little mates liking it. As I've already said, I haven't been on here for that and other reasons. I'm suddenly reminded of what they are. Moving to Scotland - a joke. I'm very happy with the politics of where I live.
> 
> Some people are really upset and a bit ******* stressed about this, there is a fallout. But I'm not going to debate Brexit again. It's utterly tedious. We have to make the best of it but that doesn't mean I agree with it.


Good for you on being proactive. I agree. I don't want to say how I voted in June or may do this June - it seems an unwise thing to do reading though these threads. I'm genuinely surprised by the hatred on here and shame on @drpepper for partially and deliberatly removing your words. That concludes why I won't say.

But people are worried. I am. My partner (I met him after June last year!) is French and we are worried. His daughter is English. It's too many unknowns and I cannot think of anything more worthwhile than a helpline. to ring up and have someone listen is very important. I know I have rung one set up by my employers several times because I simply don't know. My MP doesn't. My mum who voted leave said marry but we don't want to yet.

I am furious that three members of this forum liked a post that seemed to critique this action. Shame on you @Dr Pepper @stockwellcat and @suewhite at least show some humanity regardless of vote. There is fall out and it affects people no matter how they voted.


----------



## Calvine

KittenKong said:


> 95% of the press act as one huge advertisement for the Tories as they did for Leave.


I refuse to be swayed by newspapers.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Calvine said:


> I refuse to be swayed by newspapers.


It's a shame, there aren't more people like you around.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bloody hell we are only a few hours in and already this thread is vicious. This is going to open up the divisions and hatred all over again


----------



## Calvine

KittenKong said:


> Yes, papers like the Sun back her,


As you are one of their ghost writers, you would know that!


----------



## Calvine

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Bloody hell we are only a few hours in and already this thread is vicious. This is going to open up the divisions and hatred all over again


Yep...but I bet the mods won't close it. I hope they don't as I think it is an important topic, but I also hope it does not end up like the referendum thread which I abandoned in despair!


----------



## Dr Pepper

Pawscrossed said:


> Good for you on being proactive. I agree. I don't want to say how I voted in June or may do this June - it seems an unwise thing to do reading though these threads. I'm genuinely surprised by the hatred on here and shame on @drpepper for partially and deliberatly removing your words. That concludes why I won't say.
> 
> But people are worried. I am. My partner (I met him after June last year!) is French and we are worried. His daughter is English. It's too many unknowns and I cannot think of anything more worthwhile than a helpline. to ring up and have someone listen is very important. I know I have rung one set up by my employers several times because I simply don't know. My MP doesn't. My mum who voted leave said marry but we don't want to yet.
> 
> I am furious that three members of this forum liked a post that seemed to critique this action. Shame on you @Dr Pepper @stockwellcat and @suewhite at least show some humanity regardless of vote. There is fall out and it affects people no matter how they voted.


Hmmm, what's the fall out then? NO ONE KNOWS, YOU SAID THAT YOURSELF. The "fall out" may well end up being freedom of movement within the EU still. So stop whining until negotiations actually start.

Edit

No hatred on my part at all. If Brexit crashes and burns then I'll get on with life quite happily. Try it.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Bloody hell we are only a few hours in and already this thread is vicious. This is going to open up the divisions and hatred all over again


Lines do tend to get crossed on such issues, things said which normally wouldn't I think the important thing to remember is what happens on these threads stays on these threads, dont take the bitterness outside and forget any differences, most of us, and certainly you I note, don't have a,problem with that xx


----------



## Pawscrossed

Dr Pepper said:


> Hmmm, what's the fall out then? KNOW ONE KNOWS, YOU SAID THAT YOURSELF. The "fall out" may well end up being freedom of movement within the EU still. So stop whining until negotiations actually start.
> 
> Edit
> 
> No hatred on my part at all. If Brexit crashes and burns then I'll get on with life quite happily. Try it.


Oh dear. Not lowering myself to reply any further.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Deleted


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Lines do tend to get crossed on such issues, things said which normally wouldn't I think the important thing to remember is what happens on these threads stays on these threads, dont take the bitterness outside and forget any differences, most of us, and certainly you I note, don't have a,problem with that xx


I don't know if you were around last general election thread but I was called some pretty unpleasant things for daring to say I voted Tory which did follow me around amongst other threads. I was told I was no better than a nazi, blamed for problems in the NHS and told I had the blood of foxes on my hands. I think this election is going to be even worse as there is so much bitterness about Brexit simmering away.


----------



## KittenKong

mrs phas said:


> for the first time in my life I will be voting labour
> but for them to get in they have to come out with big bold statements and make the public believe theyll keep them
> and
> they have to make the 25 and unders feel valued and empowered again, they are the future we are putting our selves into after all
> So to win, I believe his manifesto has to be
> he'll put money in nhs,
> stop targetting disabled,
> revoke the bedroom tax,
> get rid of zero hours contracts, meaning that people can plan ahead with their lives
> I believe zero hours contracts are the reason that, the majority of, our children will be the first not to become home owners, how can they save and be proud of their input, if they cannot be guaranteed an hours pay, let alone a 'proper' job
> and
> reform the benefit changes that have come in, at the beggining of this month, meaning that young people under the age of 25 cannt get hb or council tax benefit


With 18-25 year olds still entitled to vote, they probably won't be by
2022 I hope they use it wisely.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Pawscrossed said:


> Oh dear. Not lowering myself to reply any further.


Do not let this upset you. At least as you might see on Brexit thread this is the usual tune of that poster.
Not worth to bother with really. 
Shows certain mentality...very much like the mentality of May and her stooges.
May Britain crash and burn, but we will have Brexit.
Lets have election before the consequences of that stupidity are felt by the voters, because the rich who went for power grab with Corbyn's blessing, have minute % of the vote.


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> This thread was started in goodwill nothing else. I see know it is turning vicious.
> 
> If a mod crosses this thread please close it.
> 
> Thank you.


No point. This just reflects reality of Britain.


----------



## Pawscrossed

cheekyscrip said:


> Do not let this upset you. At least as you might see on Brexit thread this is the usual tune of that poster.
> Not worth to bother with really.
> Shows certain mentality...very much like the mentality of May and her stooges.
> May Britain crash and burn, but we will have Brexit.
> Lets have election before the consequences of that stupidity are felt by the voters, because the rich who went for power grab with Corbyn's blessing, have minute % of the vote.


Thank you, it won't. As you can probably tell I have more important real life worries as I'm sure you must too


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/this-is-how-you-should-vote-to-stop-the-tories-1-4980541


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I don't know if you were around last general election thread but I was called some pretty unpleasant things for daring to say I voted Tory which did follow me around amongst other threads. I was told I was no better than a nazi, blamed for problems in the NHS and told I had the blood of foxes on my hands. I think this election is going to be even worse as there is so much bitterness about Brexit simmering away.


Probably during my absence rottie, else no doubt I would have been subject to similar treatment. Not particulary behavour one would expect from such a 'compassionate' as they claim to be, body of people though! Sounds more like the rantings of a loony bunch of fruit loops who have obviously been targeted by one of the many daily comics available these days,  pretty outrageous really considering the society, we are 'supposed' to live in .


----------



## cheekyscrip

Pawscrossed said:


> Thank you, it won't. As you can probably tell I have more important real life worries as I'm sure you must too


I live in Gibraltar. Says it all.


----------



## 1290423

cheekyscrip said:


> Do not let this upset you. At least as you might see on Brexit thread this is the usual tune of that poster.
> Not worth to bother with really.
> Shows certain mentality...very much like the mentality of May and her stooges.
> May Britain crash and burn, but we will have Brexit.
> Lets have election before the consequences of that stupidity are felt by the voters, because the rich who went for power grab with Corbyn's blessing, have minute % of the vote.


Cheeky, you are never offensive, nor rude, your replies are always respectful towards others dispite your stance on brexit and the terrible uncertainty you are under at this time, maybe if everyone had your attitude and responded to others in the manner you do irrespective of their views there would be no nastiness!


----------



## Dr Pepper

Pawscrossed said:


> Oh dear. Not lowering myself to reply any further.


You miss the point, you claim all doom and gloom for your situation, but as of TODAY you don't know what the outcome may be, it could be in your favour. WAIT AND SEE, that's all. As I said I'll take whatever the result in the true spirit of the democracy we live in, perhaps you could do the same?

Fallout is always going to happen, whichever side of the discussion you are on. In a democracy the majority SHOULD always have the advantage.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> This thread was started in goodwill nothing else. I see know it is turning vicious.
> 
> If a mod crosses this thread please close it.
> 
> Thank you.


Won't run long, it's all be over soon xx


----------



## cheekyscrip

Dr Pepper said:


> You miss the point, you claim all doom and gloom for your situation, but as of TODAY you don't know what the outcome may be, it could be in your favour. WAIT AND SEE, that's all. As I said I'll take whatever the result in the true spirit of the democracy we life in, perhaps you could do the same?


Jump off the cliff? You might land on rainbow unicorn?
Sorry..
Seen enough of ultraright power grab govs to think this will be better.
Better for those who have plenty, Murdoch and Co.
No offence, but the majority, who needs state health care, state education, housing or state pension will lose out big time.
Our universities, hospitals, environment will not fare well under ultra right, it never happens.
Russia, Poland, Hungary, Spain, USA. ..
The rich persuaded the poor, using lies and manipulation, using scapegoats like EU nationals to be blamed for lack of money for NHS or schools! To hand them more power.
With support of leader of Labour Party and the Unions!!!!


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> Won't run long, it's all be over soon xx


Not if it's like the Brexit thread, trouble is there's now a general election thread, which by default includes Brexit, so it's the mother of all roundabout threads in existence!!


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> Not if it's like the Brexit thread, trouble is there's now a general election thread, which by default includes Brexit, so it's the mother of all roundabout threads in existence!!


Awh well, I'd best sharpen my claws then​


----------



## noushka05

Anyone else think May is too spineless to accept a tv debate?

*Caroline Lucas*‏Verified account

Hey @*jeremycorbyn*, @*timfarron*, @*NicolaSturgeon* & @*LeanneWood*. 
Up for a debate even if the PM chickens out?


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Won't run long, it's all be over soon xx


They'll just use the other thread I opened today to carry on the arguing.


----------



## Honeys mum

What the BBC has to say on the subject.
UK snap election: Five things you need to know - BBC News


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> Anyone else think May is too spineless to accept a tv debate?
> 
> *Caroline Lucas*‏Verified account
> 
> Hey @*jeremycorbyn*, @*timfarron*, @*NicolaSturgeon* & @*LeanneWood*.
> Up for a debate even if the PM chickens out?


pretty fed up with them over brexit myself, besides to moderated, and audiences hand picked. I went to several hustings noush, all questions were hand picked there too nothing was random, apart from the opening speeches of each candidate.


----------



## stockwellcat.

I have something to say and it is this. Theresa May in my honest opinion is taking a huge risk with the GE. Let me explain why, people may sway to Labour to get the Conservatives out of power and stop all the cuts the Conservatives have made. It happened before when Blair's labour government got elected in. People might have had enough of the Conservatives and vote Labour out of a protest vote against the Conservatives.

Yes things are going through my mind at the moment about this call for a GE. Making me think have I made the right decision, so I am going to sit back on the fence and do what others are doing, examine there manifestos when they are available. I cancelled my membership to the Conservatives this evening and have withdrawn my support.

Forgive me but I am now sitting on the fence again and evaluating things before making a decision of who I am going to vote in the GE.

Yes that's my huge U-turn today.

Some of you are also right. 
How can they be trusted when they do something major like this today?


----------



## noushka05

mrs phas said:


> for the first time in my life I will be voting labour
> but for them to get in they have to come out with big bold statements and make the public believe theyll keep them
> and
> they have to make the 25 and unders feel valued and empowered again, they are the future we are putting our selves into after all
> So to win, I believe his manifesto has to be
> he'll put money in nhs,
> stop targetting disabled,
> revoke the bedroom tax,
> get rid of zero hours contracts, meaning that people can plan ahead with their lives
> I believe zero hours contracts are the reason that, the majority of, our children will be the first not to become home owners, how can they save and be proud of their input, if they cannot be guaranteed an hours pay, let alone a 'proper' job
> and
> reform the benefit changes that have come in, at the beggining of this month, meaning that young people under the age of 25 cannt get hb or council tax benefit


Labours policies are really very good. They are standing up for social & environmental justice - as they should do. Its just a worry that many dislike Corbyn more than they love our NHS, welfare state, wildlife & environment & so on. Labour are the only real opposition to the tories we have - & I'm saying that as a member of the Green party. If there's a tory landslide (as I fear there will be) the vast majority of us are going to pay a terrible price, because these hard right tories will be unstoppable.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I have something to say and it is this. Theresa May in my honest opinion is taking a huge risk with the GE. Let me explain why, people may sway to Labour to get the Conservatives out of power and stop all the cuts the Conservatives have made. It happened before when Blair's labour government got elected in. People might have had enough of the Conservatives and vote Labour out of a protest vote against the Conservatives.
> 
> Yes things are going through my mind at the moment about this call for a GE. Making me think have I made the right decision, so I am going to sit back on the fence and do what others are doing, examine there manifestos when they are available. I cancelled my membership to the Conservatives this evening and have withdrawn my support.
> 
> Forgive me but I am now sitting on the fence again and evaluating things before making a decision of who I am going to vote in the GE.
> 
> Yes that's my huge U-turn today.
> 
> Some of you are also right.
> How can they be trusted when they do something major like this today?


Well my vote is going to be tactical. The one thing I wont be doing is voting for the party that has within their manifesto promises that would be most beneficial to me.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> pretty fed up with them over brexit myself, besides to moderated, and audiences hand picked. I went to several hustings noush, all questions were hand picked there too nothing was random, apart from the opening speeches of each candidate.


The brexit ones were pretty bad, I agree. Though probably for different reasons lol. There was hardly any focus on green issues & climate change barely got debated despite it being the most serious threat we are facing. That said, we need to see May & the others put on the spot. Its important for our democracy imo


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> The brexit ones were pretty bad, I agree. Though probably for different reasons lol. There was hardly any focus on green issues & climate change barely got debated despite it being the most serious threat we are facing. That said, we need to see May & the others put on the spot. Its important for our democracy imo


Not a lot of time though noushka x


----------



## cheekyscrip

Corbyn supported Brexit , tactically, he knows it is bad for " the people", he knew by 2020 cracks will be showing and he would have a chance...he has himself as next PM...
Outplayed.

Forced Labour into Brexit and destroyed his and party credibility.

I do hope that by next election new centre left will rise.
Untarnished by Corbyn, Blair or Clegg.
Like new party in France.

But the damage to Britain would be done. 
The education, the NHS will be doomed.
Green belts built over...small farms ...
Gibraltar will be traded to Spain.
For " best Brexit deal"...

British science and cultural institutions diminished....

You do not appreciate what you have until it is gone.

Germany will lead EU...
Great.


----------



## Goblin

Best thing to happen, although I don't expect it is that May is refused permission to hold an election and have to take personal responsibility for any EU deal before people vote.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> Labours policies are really very good. They are standing up for social & environmental justice - as they should do. Its just a worry that many dislike Corbyn more than they love our NHS, welfare state, wildlife & environment & so on. Labour are the only real opposition to the tories we have - & I'm saying that as a member of the Green party. If there's a tory landslide (as I fear there will be) the vast majority of us are going to pay a terrible price, because these hard right tories will be unstoppable.
> 
> View attachment 307102


Good god, I've landed back in the 70's  They need to add bringing back bell bottoms too.


----------



## KittenKong

Goblin said:


> Best thing to happen, although I don't expect it is that May is refused permission to hold an election and have to take personal responsibility for any EU deal before people vote.


I agree wholeheartedly.

Unfortunately Corbyn is just as keen so no doubt he'll whip his party in to line as he did with the Article 50.

Doesn't inspire confidence does it. A PM who lies and believes she's united the country but is upset by having any opposition, (and opposition parties), to her plans in Westminster.

Then there's Corbyn who seriously believes he can win the election.....


----------



## KittenKong

Be afraid, be very afraid.
Looks like what happened in Turkey over the weekend is likely to happen in the UK.
























Be careful who you vote for.


----------



## havoc

noushka05 said:


> If there's a tory landslide (as I fear there will be) the vast majority of us are going to pay a terrible price, because these hard right tories will be unstoppable


I agree - and up to now I've always voted conservative. They've hijacked leaving the EU as if it were their own policy rather than a referendum result and are using it to overshadow all else.


----------



## Lurcherlad

Happy Paws said:


> I hope that the tories do win, then they make a mess of brexit and they have only got themself to blame. After all it's fault in the first place.


I hope the Tories win because the rest aren't capable of running a school jumble sale, let alone a Country (and I don't agree with all their policies BTW). They are just the best of a bad bunch, sadly.

However, I hope TM does not make a mess of Brexit as we need it to work for all our benefits.


----------



## Lurcherlad

mrs phas said:


> for the first time in my life I will be voting labour
> but for them to get in they have to come out with big bold statements and make the public believe theyll keep them
> and
> they have to make the 25 and unders feel valued and empowered again, they are the future we are putting our selves into after all
> So to win, I believe his manifesto has to be
> he'll put money in nhs,
> stop targetting disabled,
> revoke the bedroom tax,
> get rid of zero hours contracts, meaning that people can plan ahead with their lives
> I believe zero hours contracts are the reason that, the majority of, our children will be the first not to become home owners, how can they save and be proud of their input, if they cannot be guaranteed an hours pay, let alone a 'proper' job
> and
> reform the benefit changes that have come in, at the beggining of this month, meaning that young people under the age of 25 cannt get hb or council tax benefit


Just look back at the results of the last time Labour had power and the mess they left..........?

They lie to get in. They all do.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Good god, I've landed back in the 70's  They need to add bringing back bell bottoms too.


Well that's miles better than the 1800s they tories are aiming for. With their austerity they've put millions into poverty, made thousands more homeless, welfare state in tatters, NHS going after 69 years. And they've still managed to triple UK debt.

We all need to remember this because this is where we're heading if we don't change course.


----------



## Lurcherlad

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Bloody hell we are only a few hours in and already this thread is vicious. This is going to open up the divisions and hatred all over again


Shame - there is no need


----------



## noushka05

Lurcherlad said:


> Just look back at the results of the last time Labour had power and the mess they left..........?
> 
> They lie to get in. They all do.


And things are better now LL?


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> Be afraid, be very afraid.
> Looks like what happened in Turkey over the weekend is likely to happen in the UK.
> 
> View attachment 307137
> View attachment 307138
> View attachment 307139
> 
> 
> Be careful who you vote for.


Very scary indeed. Do people really want to live in an autocracy?


----------



## noushka05

This makes real sense to me, I think a progressive alliance is the only way to have any sort of opposition now. Does anyone else agree? https://www.compassonline.org.uk/8454-2/


----------



## Lurcherlad

noushka05 said:


> And things are better now LL?


I didn't say they were.

However, I just don't believe Labour will make things better, only worse overall as they did before.


----------



## rona

Some people are never satisfied. She's wrong that she's not been elected as PM and now she's wrong if she is elected PM 

Nothing but the downfall of this country will satisfy some, so they can say I told you so


----------



## cheekyscrip

So May promised Corbyn she would call election unless he forces his party to support Brexit. He did.
She called election.

After he destroyed his and his party credibility.

What an alternative? A harpy or a fool?

If I could would have voted LibDem or SNP.

So runaway blue Brexit unstoppable.

Congratulations to Leave camp.
Just be careful what you wish for.


----------



## cheekyscrip

noushka05 said:


> This makes real sense to me, I think a progressive alliance is the only way to have any sort of opposition now. Does anyone else agree? https://www.compassonline.org.uk/8454-2/
> 
> View attachment 307142
> 
> 
> View attachment 307143


Impossible as Corbyn is proBrexit ( at least recently) and Farron is not ( though LibDem quickly adjusts in coalition).


----------



## KittenKong

Lurcherlad said:


> I hope the Tories win because the rest aren't capable of running a school jumble sale, let alone a Country (and I don't agree with all their policies BTW). They are just the best of a bad bunch, sadly.
> 
> However, I hope TM does not make a mess of Brexit as we need it to work for all our benefits.


Think about this for a minute. What has TM actually done over the past nine months? Brexit means Brexit, Red, White and Blue Brexit, sucking up to Trump and tyrants across the world.

Triggers Article 50 and without even starting negotiations calls a General Election before a word is spoken despite months saying this is not on the agenda, claiming she's up against opposition, (what are opposition parties for?).

Whether you believe in Brexit or not do you really trust this woman to deliver?

I wouldn't.


----------



## noushka05

cheekyscrip said:


> Impossible as Corbyn is proBrexit ( at least recently) and Farron is not ( though LibDem quickly adjusts in coalition).


Its all we have I'm afraid.


----------



## cheekyscrip

noushka05 said:


> Its all we have I'm afraid.


At least there is a chance of EU nationals fleeing...
But seriously unless Corbyn steps down...
Those who want Brexit will not vote for him.
Those who do not want Brexit will not vote for him either.
No Abbott is not a replacement.
David Miliband or RIP Labour.


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> This makes real sense to me, I think a progressive alliance is the only way to have any sort of opposition now. Does anyone else agree? https://www.compassonline.org.uk/8454-2/
> 
> View attachment 307142
> 
> 
> View attachment 307143


 A lunatics take over the asylum strategy. No thanks!


----------



## noushka05

Lurcherlad said:


> I didn't say they were.
> 
> However, I just don't believe Labour will make things better, only worse overall as they did before.


But they didn't make things worse for the majority before. Their social & environmental achievements, even under new labour, were really good. Even the economy was better. Since 2010 & austerity, things have gone backwards. We now have a bunch of hard right extremists at the helm. If you want an NHS, a protected environment & wildlife, action on climate change, this government is the worst of the worst.


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> A lunatics take over the asylum strategy. No thanks!


The lunatics are already in government


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> Think about this for a minute. What has TM actually done over the past nine months? Brexit means Brexit, Red, White and Blue Brexit, sucking up to Trump and tyrants across the world.
> 
> Triggers Article 50 and without even starting negotiations calls a General Election before a word is spoken despite months saying this is not on the agenda, claiming she's up against opposition, (what are opposition parties for?).
> 
> Whether you believe in Brexit or not do you really trust this woman to deliver?
> 
> I wouldn't.


Just remember, she didn't have to do this, she could have carried on, not listening to concerns for another 3 years. Brave woman


----------



## Lurcherlad

KittenKong said:


> Think about this for a minute. What has TM actually done over the past nine months? Brexit means Brexit, Red, White and Blue Brexit, sucking up to Trump and tyrants across the world.
> 
> Triggers Article 50 and without even starting negotiations calls a General Election before a word is spoken despite months saying this is not on the agenda, claiming she's up against opposition, (what are opposition parties for?).
> 
> Whether you believe in Brexit or not do you really trust this woman to deliver?
> 
> I wouldn't.


More likely and more capable then her opponents.

Not ideal, I agree.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Just remember, she didn't have to do this, she could have carried on, not listening to concerns for another 3 years. Brave woman


Brave woman my ass. She knows brexit is going to be a disaster, she wants an election now before it becomes apparent to all how disastrous brexit is. 
Also the tories are being investigated for fraud. She's completely untrustworthy.


----------



## noushka05

Lurcherlad said:


> More likely and more capable then her opponents.
> 
> Not ideal, I agree.


But capable of what? Shes ruining the economy, society, the environment. Shes aligned us with the most dangerous man on the planet.


----------



## cheekyscrip

noushka05 said:


> The lunatics are already in government


Thought he meant that very thing?


----------



## Lurcherlad

noushka05 said:


> But capable of what? Shes ruining the economy, society, the environment. Shes aligned us with the most dangerous man on the planet.


I just don't believe that Labour will make it better.


----------



## noushka05

Lurcherlad said:


> I just don't believe that Labour will make it better.


And that's your prerogative LL. We have a wealth of evidence proving the governments ideology is destructive & regressive & set to get worse , I personally would rather take a chance on an unknown.


----------



## havoc

KittenKong said:


> Whether you believe in Brexit or not do you really trust this woman to deliver?


Oh yes. She'll deliver exactly what I expect her to deliver and that's what worries me. I'm one of the 'haves' in this country and I'm not likely to suffer but I do fear for social justice. She'll get back in because there's no option. Give her a big majority and we'll really learn what right wing means.


----------



## cheekyscrip

I hope that now Leave supporters will take all the credit for what is coming to us all.
Unchecked government delivering unchecked, unopposed crash Brexit straight into hands of their donors.
Manifesto"Brexit is Brexit".

Then she will tell you that you asked for it.

Ultra right government. Just like Turkey and Russia.
Elected by the masses.
Who will be rewarded by more taxes, less social mobility, lees access to health care and education,more austerity etc...

Well...at least if you elect May you cannot blame EU for that?
Or immigrants?


----------



## noushka05

cheekyscrip said:


> Thought he meant that very thing?


lol Now you mention it, I bet that what he did mean Satori is no fan of this government, that's for sure


----------



## noushka05

I bet they fall for her trap & don't block it.


----------



## noushka05

I love David Schneider:Hilarious

Still, on the bright side, I've barely thought about Trump
and the impending nuclear apocalypse at all today.
#*GeneralElection*


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> Be afraid, be very afraid.
> Looks like what happened in Turkey over the weekend is likely to happen in the UK.
> 
> View attachment 307137
> View attachment 307138
> View attachment 307139
> 
> 
> Be careful who you vote for.


And David Schneiders response to the Mails disgusting headline:

Stalin killed millions by labeling people saboteurs and enemies of the people.
Literally the same words as the Mail.
Chilling


----------



## cheekyscrip

noushka05 said:


> I bet they fall for her trap & don't block it.


Oh...but Corbyn does not want to block it!!!!

He wants it now...because by 2020 he will be out.

I despair.

If we thought Red Ed was bad choice....


----------



## noushka05

Theresa May's statement on the General Election in full.


----------



## noushka05

cheekyscrip said:


> Oh...but Corbyn does not want to block it!!!!
> 
> He wants it now...because by 2020 he will be out.
> 
> I despair.
> 
> If we thought Red Ed was bad choice....


If Red Ed had won, there'd be non of this


----------



## Satori

cheekyscrip said:


> I hope that now Leave supporters will take all the credit for what is coming to us all.


Shucks. Ok then. You can thank me later.


----------



## 1290423

Satori said:


> Shucks. Ok then. You can thank me later.


Maybe you will get a knighthood one day lol


----------



## noushka05

Nuff said!


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> This thread was started in goodwill nothing else. I see know it is turning vicious.
> 
> If a mod crosses this thread please close it.
> 
> Thank you.


It certainly looks as tho' it is going the way of the referendum thread...I suspected it might. Are the ''usual suspects'' responsible??


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> It certainly looks as tho' it is going the way of the referendum thread...I suspected it might. Are the ''usual suspects'' respoinsible??


I aint dun nuffing.  yet


----------



## Calvine

KittenKong said:


> http://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/this-is-how-you-should-vote-to-stop-the-tories-1-4980541
> 
> View attachment 307090
> View attachment 307091


Do they really think we do not know how the system works...they are telling us to vote Labour if we don't want Conservatives in power. I find this terribly patronising to be honest: they must think we are totally thick.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Nuff said!
> 
> View attachment 307173
> 
> 
> View attachment 307169


Fantastic Mail headline, shows she's willing to take a gamble which, if it pays off, will enable her carry of the wishes of the majority with a clear mandate.

Didn't think you remainers believed anything the Mail says though? It's confusing.


----------



## 1290423

Satori said:


> Shucks. Ok then. You can thank me later.





DT said:


> Maybe you will get a knighthood one day lol


 Or a sainthood even
Then you can have a golden gun
A we really can
Rule the world


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> Do they really think we do not know how the system works...they are telling us to vote Labour if we don't want Conservatives in power. I find this terribly patronising to be honest: they must think we are totally thick.


Nah! They just think we are as stupid as they are


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> Red Ed


Thought he was the racehorse that won the Grand National a few times...one of Ginger McCain's horses?


----------



## Calvine

Dr Pepper said:


> Didn't think you remainers believed anything the Mail says though?


Selective in their reading!


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> Thought he was the racehorse that won the Grand National a few times...one of Ginger McCain's horses?


Yep, reckon you might be right, that names ringing bells her too,
Casting that aside its half a wonder some don't want to wheel out blair again!
Now that would be funny!


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> It certainly looks as tho' it is going the way of the referendum thread...I suspected it might. Are the ''usual suspects'' respoinsible??


Anyone would think you were trying to shut down debate Calvine

Rather like this government who are doing their utmost to shut down debate and dissent. All this proves is they have no confidence in their own position 



Dr Pepper said:


> Fantastic Mail headline, shows she's willing to take a gamble which, if it pays off, will enable her carry of the wishes of the majority with a clear mandate.
> 
> Didn't think you remainers believed anything the Mail says though? It's confusing.


Whipping up hatred is dangerous. The fact you think its a fantastic headline says it all.


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> Selective in their reading!


Well they are, so some believe, more educated! 
Think they mean they had a library in their town!


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> Anyone would think you were trying to shut down debate Calvine
> 
> Rather like this government who are doing their utmost to shut down debate and dissent. All this proves is they have no confidence in their own position
> 
> Whipping up hatred is dangerous. The fact you think its a fantastic headline says it all.


Morning noush lovely sunny morning here xxx
Im gonna play in my garden again, nice day for the allotment too x


----------



## 1290423

My predictions for today,
More doom and gloom
So off to decide, for the umptenth time what I am going to wear to my wedding a week on saturday xx
Be good xx


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Fantastic Mail headline, shows she's willing to take a gamble which, if it pays off, will enable her carry of the wishes of the majority with a clear mandate.


And all the things which aren't about Brexit? What about those? Is it the wish of the majority to run the NHS into extinction? If it turns out to be so then fair enough, just so happens I can manage without it just as my children could manage without a state education. I don't need to care but for some reason I do.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Whipping up hatred is dangerous. The fact you think its a fantastic headline says it all.


If that's what you think the headline is doing why on earth would you exasperate the issue on a public forum?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> Well that's miles better than the 1800s they tories are aiming for. With their austerity they've put millions into poverty, made thousands more homeless, welfare state in tatters, NHS going after 69 years. And they've still managed to triple UK debt.
> 
> We all need to remember this because this is where we're heading if we don't change course.
> 
> View attachment 307133


Now that is scare mongering and worthy of a gutter press headline.

Poverty in Victorian times was caused by so many things, not least of which was a lack of contraception that meant some people had more children than they could afford to look after.


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> And all the things which aren't about Brexit? What about those? Is it the wish of the majority to run the NHS into extinction? If it turns out to be so then fair enough, just so happens I can manage without it just as my children could manage without a state education. I don't need to care but for some reason I do.


Well you should be rejoicing as you have a chance to change our government three years earlier than thought.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Well you should be rejoicing as you have a chance to change out government three years earlier than thought.


Don't be silly. That's most unlikely to happen. What will happen if she gets what she wants is that she'll get increased power, voted for by many on a single issue, but that power will not be confined to that single issue.


----------



## KittenKong

Calvine said:


> Do they really think we do not know how the system works...they are telling us to vote Labour if we don't want Conservatives in power. I find this terribly patronising to be honest: they must think we are totally thick.


I don't agree as this is intended for people who don't wish to see the Tories remain in power. It's not telling people how to vote in general.

If, for argument sake I supported Labour but still lived in a place like Chippenham it's clearly a contest between Tory or Lib Dem so, as a vote for Labour is a wasted vote I would vote Lib Dem.


----------



## Lurcherlad

noushka05 said:


> And that's your prerogative LL. We have a wealth of evidence proving the governments ideology is destructive & regressive & set to get worse , I personally would rather take a chance on an unknown.


And that's your prerogative 

There is also a wealth of evidence that Labour is no better when given the power.

I wish we could all see into the future, unfortunately none of us can


----------



## havoc

Lurcherlad said:


> I wish we could all see into the future, unfortunately none of us can


So should nobody give a damn. Should nobody vote - ever? Surely the referendum showed that the electorate can change the future.


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> Nuff said!
> 
> View attachment 307173
> 
> 
> View attachment 307169


Indeed.

Hitler was also democratically elected. Look what happened to any opposition there....

It happened in Germany and in other countries, it could well happen here.


----------



## Lurcherlad

havoc said:


> So should nobody give a damn. Should nobody vote - ever? Surely the referendum showed that the electorate can change the future.


No, of course not! 

I shall be voting once I decide finally - but without the benefit of a crystal ball, just like everybody else.


----------



## DoodlesRule

KittenKong said:


> Indeed.
> 
> Hitler was also democratically elected. Look what happened to any opposition there....
> 
> It happened in Germany, it could well happen here.


Can't think of another way of putting it other than, what a load of tosh.
I was going to read through this thread but if thats an indication of the comments I will not bother!


----------



## 1290423

Lurcherlad said:


> No, of course not!
> 
> I shall be voting once I decide finally - but without the benefit of a crystal ball, just like everybody else.


Don't be daft
Who needs a crystal ball when we have kitten kongs very own daily comic updates,


----------



## Calvine

KittenKong said:


> I would vote Lib Dem.


Obviously.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Fantastic Mail headline, shows she's willing to take a gamble which, if it pays off, will enable her carry of the wishes of the majority with a clear mandate.


Not much of a gamble is it. Populace fed up with politics. No actual terms decided in the EU negotiations so people will accept empty promises. No effective opposition. Of course there's a reason why May is scared of TV debates etc where her current policies will be examined.



havoc said:


> Don't be silly. That's most unlikely to happen. What will happen if she gets what she wants is that she'll get increased power, voted for by many on a single issue, but that power will not be confined to that single issue.


Many will vote on a single issue, others will vote for May simply as there appears to be no credible opposition. One party state at the moment, a politicians dream. Wish the campaigning would actually focus on the current policies but that's the last thing May will want. She'll focus on more of her empty promises. She's already shown she doesn't care less about breaking manifesto promises.


----------



## KittenKong

DoodlesRule said:


> Can't think of another way of putting it other than, what a load of tosh.
> I was going to read through this thread but if thats an indication of the comments I will not bother!


Really? With headlines like killing off Labour and smashing "rebels" within her own party?

Makes you wonder why she's been visiting known tyrants around the world doesn't it.


----------



## Goblin

Lurcherlad said:


> I hope the Tories win because the rest aren't capable of running a school jumble sale, let alone a Country (and I don't agree with all their policies BTW). They are just the best of a bad bunch, sadly.


They'll win, the question is how many people vote against them, not the actual seats in parliament. Hard to say you really have a mandate when you don't have the majority of votes in absolute terms even though she will try regardless.


----------



## DoodlesRule

KittenKong said:


> Really? With headlines like destroying Labour and even "rebels" within her own party?
> 
> Makes you wonder why she's been visiting known tyrants around the world.
> 
> Takes one to know one.....


Oh sorry I didn't realise that we now take the Mails headlines as fact and clearly TM actually said it herself - obviously doing your very own U-turn here


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Indeed.
> 
> Hitler was also democratically elected. Look what happened to any opposition there....
> 
> It happened in Germany, it could well happen here.


More gutter press sensationalism - you really should spend less time reading the Mail and the Sun you know. Day 2 of the campaign and we are back to Victorian times and Hitler. What happened to progressive politics?



KittenKong said:


> Really? With headlines like killing off Labour and smashing "rebels" within her own party?
> 
> Makes you wonder why she's been visiting known tyrants around the world doesn't it.


She didn't write the headlines, you do know that don't you?


----------



## DoodlesRule

Come on KK fess up - you work for the Sun don't you


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> More gutter press sensationalism - you really should spend less time reading the Mail and the Sun you know. Day 2 of the campaign and we are back to Victorian times and Hitler. What happened to progressive politics?
> 
> She didn't write the headlines, you do know that don't you?


Really? Who on earth backed her as leader. People take these headlines seriously you know. They want to make her out to be tough to their readers who follow their advice like sheep.

Why waste millions on an election when the outcome has already been decided by Murdoch and co? You might think this is funny but never underestimate the power of these papers.

They can make or break you. May knows that.

Apparently May has "written" a long piece for the Sun today. No, I have not read it and have no wish to.


----------



## KittenKong

Love it.
Goes well with, "Whatever you do, don't vote Blue".


----------



## DoodlesRule

KittenKong said:


> Really? Who on earth backed her as leader. *I* take these headlines seriously you know. They want to make her out to be tough to their readers who follow their advice like sheep.
> 
> Why waste millions on an election when the outcome has already been decided by Murdoch and co? You might think this is funny but never underestimate the power of these papers.
> 
> They can make or break you. May knows that.
> 
> Apparently May has "written" a long piece for the Sun today. No, I have not read it and have no wish to.


There you go fixed it for you


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Really? Who on earth backed her as leader. People take these headlines seriously you know. They want to make her out to be tough to their readers who follow their advice like sheep.
> 
> Why waste millions on an election when the outcome has already been decided by Murdoch and co? You might think this is funny but never underestimate the power of these papers.
> 
> They can make or break you. May knows that.
> 
> Apparently May has "written" a long piece for the Sun today. No, I have not read it and have no wish to.


Who backed her as leader? The leadership selection process did. You remember, several people stood for leadership and one by one they got knocked out, fell or withdrew. I believe the Tory MPs voted in that process not the Sun or the Mail. Or are you saying these newspapers which we have already established ad nauseam have falling readership so actually have far less influence than the social media some of you love to follow and post somehow engineered Mrs May into power? So no I do not believe people take these headlines seriously as the only person I know in real life or forum land who takes them seriously is YOU. Again you call newspaper readers sheep but how about the followers of "names" on social media - are they not sheep? Or are they special snowflakes who have a superior intellect to the rest of us? By the way I don't think its funny I think its silly and daft.


----------



## kimthecat

It seems May is damned if she does and damned if she doesnt .
One of the biggest complaints on Twitter was that she wasn't a democratically elected PM so now she is having an election , if she wins then those people wont be able to complain about that anymore.


----------



## Satori

DT said:


> Or a sainthood even
> Then you can have a golden gun
> A we really can
> Rule the world


Can I just have a life peerage instead? I spend half the day on a comfy sofa falling asleep half-listening to political debates already so it would be nice to be handsomely paid for it.


----------



## DoodlesRule

@KittenKong - found very easily (on the Guardian) "_Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, May insisted there would "of course still be challenge, scrutiny and debate" about Brexit if she gets a mandate to carry out her plan. The prime minister also said she absolutely did not agree with a Daily Mail front page urging her to "crush the saboteurs" who voted remain."_


----------



## Satori

KittenKong said:


> Indeed.
> 
> Hitler was also democratically elected. Look what happened to any opposition there....
> 
> It happened in Germany and in other countries, it could well happen here.


Just when one thinks this thread can get no dafter. @noushka05 your Mini-Me is out of control!


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> Can I just have a life peerage instead? I spend half the day on a comfy sofa falling asleep half-listening to political debates already so it would be nice to be handsomely paid for it.


I reckon there's one going spare. Her tone of voice when referring to the 'unelected House of Lords' yesterday does rather imply she has no intention of joining them come the time - or are we meant to forget by then


----------



## kimthecat

@DoodlesRule Blimey , has the Daily mail be taken over by Kim Jong un !! 



> KittenKong said: ↑
> Indeed.
> 
> Hitler was also democratically elected. Look what happened to any opposition there....
> 
> It happened in Germany and in other countries, it could well happen here.


 As I said before in the other threads , Hitler murdered his opponents , I really don't think TM will get a way with that !!


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Not much of a gamble is it. Populace fed up with politics.


Wait, no, but but but, hang on...........

Yes I've checked, you've insisted many a time on another thread that despite the results of a non-binding poll the majority DON'T WANT BREXIT, and even more don't want Mrs May's "hard Brexit". So surely it's guaranteed that Mrs May will be leaving No.10 on the 9th June?

Unless you're not sure now.......


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> It seems May is damned if she does and damned if she doesnt .
> One of the biggest complaints on Twitter was that she wasn't a democratically elected PM so now she is having an election , if she wins then those people wont be able to complain about that anymore.


And one of the biggest complaints by some people on here who overlooked it when it was Brown/Blair of course.


----------



## simplysardonic

@stockwellcat do you still want this closed?

No reports so far & most people seem to be able to hold their own.

I'm on & off sporadically as I'm recovering from a minor op I had yesterday.

I'm voting Green.

*runs & hides*


----------



## stockwellcat.

simplysardonic said:


> @stockwellcat *do you still want this closed?*
> 
> No reports so far & most people seem to be able to hold their own.
> 
> I'm on & off sporadically as I'm recovering from a minor op I had yesterday.
> 
> I'm voting Green.
> 
> *runs & hides*


Leave it open please. Thank you.


----------



## 1290423

kimthecat said:


> @DoodlesRule Blimey , has the Daily mail be taken over by Kim Jong un !!
> 
> As I said before in the other threads , Hitler murdered his opponents , I really don't think TM will get a way with that !!


Know what I want to say, but for once I cant, or rather darent,


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Leave it open please. Thank you.


Good man stockwell good man x


----------



## simplysardonic

DT said:


> Good man stockwell good man x


Stockwellcat is a _man_?! :Jawdrop


----------



## Colliebarmy

back the Libs to slaughter Labour


----------



## LinznMilly

cheekyscrip said:


> I hope that now Leave supporters will take all the credit for what is coming to us all.
> Unchecked government delivering unchecked, unopposed crash Brexit straight into hands of their donors.
> Manifesto"Brexit is Brexit".
> 
> ?


This is the one thing I don't understand.

The Tories were in government before the referendum, so if the electorate had voted to remain, we'd have blue Cameron instead of blue May. What would have been so different?

The hard right would still have been in #10. 

And I say that as a Remain voter.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Leave it open please. Thank you.


Trouble is you can't really seperate the election from Brexit, because if wasn't for Brexit there would be no election. Hell, if it wasn't for Brexit we would still have, as we now known, a cowardly PM without the courage of his convictions.

And if that non-binding opinion poll was correct then surely most people will be voting for the strongest team to lead us out of the EU, I personally don't think any other issues are going to be a major consideration for the majority.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty

simplysardonic said:


> Stockwellcat is a _man_?! :Jawdrop


There was, like, a whole thread on it! :Hilarious


----------



## stockwellcat.

Ceiling Kitty said:


> There was, like, a whole thread on it! :Hilarious


Yep :Hilarious


----------



## Jesthar

LinznMilly said:


> This is the one thing I don't understand.
> 
> The Tories were in government before the referendum, so if the electorate had voted to remain, we'd have blue Cameron instead of blue May. What would have been so different?
> 
> The hard right would still have been in #10.
> 
> And I say that as a Remain voter.


I've been pondering this too, and personally I think the difference is that the Leave vote seems to have energised the hard right to the point where they feel it has given them the legitimacy to pursue the more draconion of their policies as being 'the will of the people' now.


----------



## kimthecat

Another contender for PM .....


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Yes I've checked, you've insisted many a time on another thread that despite the results of a non-binding poll the majority DON'T WANT BREXIT, and even more don't want Mrs May's "hard Brexit". So surely it's guaranteed that Mrs May will be leaving No.10 on the 9th June?



Maybe you've failed to notice how people are already separating the issues? Didn't take long before there was actual denial that this election had anything to do with Brexit in this thread.
Maybe you've failed to see that there is no real opposition. Given that in GE people really vote for only the main parties...
Maybe you've failed to notice how many people don't vote in general for policies but simply who gives the best impression. May lies well even for a politician. Especially when she cannot be questioned (hence no live debates).
Maybe you've failed to see or recognise the lie that article 50 is irreversible which is told and pushed? Instead people are told we have 2 options.. no deal or whatever is negotiated. Even then people are promised everything will be rosy.
Maybe you've failed to see people are fed up with politics. They don't have any "power" to hold the government to account. After all May's already ignored the majority.

Have to admit, I didn't expect May to call an election. It's a gamble for her. I do expect her to win but there's different levels of winning and I hope that people will look at what she does compared with what she says and vote elsewhere.


----------



## havoc

LinznMilly said:


> The Tories were in government before the referendum, so if the electorate had voted to remain, we'd have blue Cameron instead of blue May. What would have been so different?
> 
> The hard right would still have been in #10.


I think the difference is how emboldened they've become because of a change of leadership. I can't believe Ms May acted on her own to go off half cocked thinking she could ignore legal parliamentary process for example. The extreme right have her ear.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Well we are only 25 hours in and I'm sick to death of it already. I'm not having another news on for the next 2 months.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Happy Paws said:


> Well we are only 25 hours in and I'm sick to death of it already. I'm not having another news on for the next 2 months.


Have to agree, I've decided whom I going to vote for already, and not listening, reading or watching anything more on it, unless something momentous happens. Basically I'll keep an eye on the headlines and no more. Just switched Jeremy Vine off as it happens.


----------



## KittenKong

DoodlesRule said:


> @KittenKong - found very easily (on the Guardian) "_Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, May insisted there would "of course still be challenge, scrutiny and debate" about Brexit if she gets a mandate to carry out her plan. The prime minister also said she absolutely did not agree with a Daily Mail front page urging her to "crush the saboteurs" who voted remain."_


And you believe her do you?

She backed remain last year, now in power she's for Brexit.

No General Election 'til 2020? Said that several times.

Said the country's united behind her Brexit proposals? A simple Google search shows otherwise.

I don't believe in a word this vile woman says. I find it remarkable many still seem to.


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> Another contender for PM .....
> 
> Here's another from the Guardian and this great comment.


----------



## stuaz

Not sure if it's been posted but this is how a lot of the country probably reacted...

https://www.bristol247.com/news-and-features/news/youre-joking-not-another-one/

(Watch the video)


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Ceiling Kitty

I can see the Daily Mail's front page is going to become a meme we'll be seeing for a few weeks!

The Times's cover is more boring lol.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Now that is scare mongering and worthy of a gutter press headline.
> 
> Poverty in Victorian times was caused by so many things, not least of which was a lack of contraception that meant some people had more children than they could afford to look after.


The root cause was gross inequality. Even poor people without children suffered.

https://www.theguardian.com/society...-in-perfect-storm-inequality?CMP=share_btn_tw

_Britons are being caught in a "perfect storm" of rising living costs and falling incomes at a time of cuts to public services that threaten to return the country to levels of inequality not seen since Victorian times, a report by __Oxfam__ says_.



Lurcherlad said:


> And that's your prerogative
> 
> There is also a wealth of evidence that Labour is no better when given the power.
> 
> I wish we could all see into the future, unfortunately none of us can


I'd love to see evidence if you don't mind?

Here are some of their achievements;










We can't see into the future but we can know the ideology of the political parties. Supporters of Trump believed he would be better than Clinton. He has been the catastrophe experts predicted he would be. Trump voters have enabled the Republicans to do this: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...aska-ronald-young-environmental-a7673686.html
*Donald Trump makes it legal to shoot hibernating bears*
New laws should 'should shock the conscience of every animal lover in America', say conservationists

This government share the same ideology as the Republicans. If the tories sweep to power & annihilate the opposition how long do you think it will be before the hunting ban is repealed?. I wouldn't be surprised to see otter hunting making a comeback & our raptors & other protected species will be in great peril. I know you love animals LL, just think how dangerous it will be for animals with no progressive opposition to counter the hard right?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...aska-ronald-young-environmental-a7673686.html


----------



## 1290423

Noushka, I would love to think their was a party out there that could take on the conservatives I really do. Every reigning party needs a strong opposition waiting in the wings but sadly, I have to say I fear we are light years away from seeing one. Yes the conservatives a far from perfect, and yes each of the other parties may have the odd couple of decent MPs but between then they couldn't make a sandwich let alone anything even half workable, before they could even start to even think of doing anything they would all need a major clear out.


----------



## 1290423

Jesthar said:


> I've been pondering this too, and personally I think the difference is that the Leave vote seems to have energised the hard right to the point where they feel it has given them the legitimacy to pursue the more draconion of their policies as being 'the will of the people' now.


I don't know so much, I think it's more a case that they are sick to the back teeth of all the opposition that has been thrown at it, the attempts to try and stop it and the general nastiness that has evolved from it, add that to the fact everything in the world happening now is down to brexit in the eyes of many, I think it's more a case of they have dug their heels in and are getting stronger.


----------



## stockwellcat.

MP's are debating if an early General Election should be held. Voting to begin at 14:25.

The Election is not set in stone at the moment because of the fixed term Parliament act. 434 MP's have to vote to agree to an early General Election under the Fixed Term Parliament act. TM has to get permission to hold an early General election from Parliament first.


----------



## cheekyscrip

LinznMilly said:


> This is the one thing I don't understand.
> 
> The Tories were in government before the referendum, so if the electorate had voted to remain, we'd have blue Cameron instead of blue May. What would have been so different?
> 
> The hard right would still have been in #10.
> 
> And I say that as a Remain voter.


If Cameron was still in power the centre right not hard right will be ruling. No Brexit.
No extreme Brexit and no extreme Tory.
Tory light.
So May would be much, much worse.
Cameron was not even that keen on killing foxes or destroying environment.

Lesser evil.

Though Corbyn has lots to answer for. Like sabotaging Remain and as soon as reelected shown his true colour.
Labour pitched Ted Ed against Cameron.
David had much better chance.

Labour committed political harakiri betraying those the should have represented.

In fighting was more important than anything. Or hanging to the leadership at all costs.

They should quickly get rid of Corbyn and join forces with LibDem and Green.


----------



## 1290423

Well looks like one good thing has come from this if it's true!
George Osborne standing down as an MP no before time in my opinion, do wonder though if it's a case of jumping before he was pushed .


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Noushka, I would love to think their was a party out there that could take on the conservatives I really do. Every reigning party needs a strong opposition waiting in the wings but sadly, I have to say I fear we are light years away from seeing one. Yes the conservatives a far from perfect, and yes each of the other parties may have the odd couple of decent MPs but between then they couldn't make a sandwich let alone anything even half workable, before they could even start to even think of doing anything they would all need a major clear out.


Its impossible to make a bigger mess of this country, this government is the most incompetent, untrustworthy in modern history. Even the monster raving loony party could do a better job. Our NHS going after 69 years, poverty & homelessness through the roof, social care in tatters, the environment under grave threat now. Crisis after crisis. What sector isn't in crisis?

But you are missing the point Sue, if the tories sweep to victory & annihilate the opposition how will that benefit any of us?? Look across the pond at the Republicans, that could be us soon.


----------



## 1290423

cheekyscrip said:


> If Cameron was still in power the centre right not hard right will be ruling. No Brexit.
> No extreme Brexit and no extreme Tory.
> Tory light.
> So May would be much, much worse.
> Cameron was not even that keen on killing foxes or destroying environment.
> 
> Lesser evil.
> 
> Though Corbyn has lots to answer for. Like sabotaging Remain and as soon as reelected shown his true colour.
> Labour pitched Ted Ed against Cameron.
> David had much better chance.
> 
> Labour committed political harakiri betraying those the should have represented.
> 
> In fighting was more important than anything. Or hanging to the leadership at all costs.
> 
> They should quickly get rid of Corbyn and join forces with LibDem and Green.


There were some good lim dem MPs. Danny Alexander for starters, sad he lost his seat.


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> There were some good lim dem MPs. Danny Alexander for starters, sad he lost his seat.


Hope George Watson will be back.
Hope LibDem will be back.

Unless Corbyn steps down nothing can save Labour.

Corbyn is the best thing Tories could hope for.


----------



## DoodlesRule

DT said:


> Well looks like one good thing has come from this if it's true!
> George Osborne standing down as an MP no before time in my opinion, do wonder though if it's a case of jumping before he was pushed .


If it gets rid of Anna Soubry too then its all been worth it whoever wins the election - makes me want to throw the TV through the window whenever she appears.

Can any one explain why are so many Labour MPs are saying they are not going to stand?


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> If that's what you think the headline is doing why on earth would you exasperate the issue on a public forum?


Hate mongering should be exposed for what it is.

Surely you don't want this country to end up like some kind of dictatorship where dissent is treated like treason do you? Have we learned nothing from our past?


----------



## 1290423

cheekyscrip said:


> Hope George Watson will be back.
> Hope LibDem will be back.
> 
> Unless Corbyn steps down nothing can save Labour.
> 
> Corbyn is the best thing Tories could hope for.


They say many axtruecword spoken in jest. There could well be another side to that perhaps cheeky,
Not certain of how true it was, but when corbyn was standing for leadership didn't the labour membership increase by silly figures? 
And wasn't the amount of time you had to be a member of labour before you could vote somewhat shorter?
And finally, think I'm right when I say that if you are a member of a union that you automatically have a right to vote for the labour leadership?
Now erm,


----------



## Elles

Old chap in the pub. "If a vote really mattered, we wouldn't have one." I'm inclined to agree.


----------



## Calvine

havoc said:


> Surely the referendum showed that the electorate can change the future


It also showed perfectly that many people were unwilling to accept the result of a democratic vote. How will those same people behave if the results are not what they want on 8 June 2017? Watch this space (as they say).


----------



## 1290423

DoodlesRule said:


> If it gets rid of Anna Soubry too then its all been worth it whoever wins the election - makes me want to throw the TV through the window whenever she appears.
> 
> Can any one explain why are so many Labour MPs are saying they are not going to stand?


Omg you are so right! And don't forget her old doddering partner in crime! Kenneth Clarke!


----------



## noushka05

DoodlesRule said:


> If it gets rid of Anna Soubry too then its all been worth it whoever wins the election - makes me want to throw the TV through the window whenever she appears.
> 
> Can any one explain why are so many Labour MPs are saying they are not going to stand?


Haven't heard anything, but I do hope that dreadful Kate Hoey is one of them. She has no socialist values whatsoever, she loves fox hunting. Shes more akin to ukip & the tory right.


----------



## Calvine

KittenKong said:


> Apparently May has "written" a long piece for the Sun today.


Tell the truth, @KittenKong, you wrote it didn't you!!


----------



## stockwellcat.




----------



## 1290423

DoodlesRule said:


> If it gets rid of Anna Soubry too then its all been worth it whoever wins the election - makes me want to throw the TV through the window whenever she appears.
> 
> Can any one explain why are so many Labour MPs are saying they are not going to stand?


Well apart from them losing their deposit if the fail to p0ll 15% of the vote can't think! Assuming they still have to put that up seeing as it's not due


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> What sector isn't in crisis?


Construction, Engineering, Food & Drink, Luxury Goods, Manufacturing, Automotive, Financial, Advertising. ...........


----------



## 1290423

Wonder if david prescott will stand for labour now, got an inkling he will


----------



## 1290423

Satori said:


> Construction, Engineering, Food & Drink, Luxury Goods, Manufacturing, Automotive, Financial, Advertising. ...........


The sex trade


----------



## stockwellcat.

Ayes: 522
No's: 13
Majority: 509

MP's voted in favour for a General Election on 8th June 2017.


----------



## 1290423

Satori said:


> Construction, Engineering, Food & Drink, Luxury Goods, Manufacturing, Automotive, Financial, Advertising. ...........


Contraband


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Ayes: 522
> No's: 13
> Majority: 509
> 
> Election on 8th June 2017.


Do we have list of the na,s


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Do we have list of the na,s


Dennis Skinner,
Irish MP's
Few Labour MP's
A few have abstained from voting.

Just waiting for a list.


----------



## Goblin

Calvine said:


> It also showed perfectly that many people were unwilling to accept the result of a democratic vote. How will those same people behave if the results are not what they want on 8 June 2017? Watch this space (as they say).


Non-binding referendum you mean? It was accepted and as is the democratic right of people, they continue to campaign and seek to change the government direction of damaging the UK. Just as in a general election it's not a single election determining the path of the country for ever.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Possibly another by-election in Tatton as Osborne to quit as MP.

*George Osborne to quit as MP for Tatton at election*

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39643347


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Possibly another by election in Tatton as Osborne to quit as MP.
> 
> *George Osborne to quit as MP for Tatton at election*
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39643347


Hey, I posted that yesterday

Well, it seemed like yesterday read back lol


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Hey, I posted that yesterday
> 
> Well, it seemed like yesterday read back lol


Whoops. Sorry :Muted


----------



## Jesthar

DT said:


> I don't know so much, I think it's more a case that they are sick to the back teeth of all the opposition that has been thrown at it, the attempts to try and stop it and the general nastiness that has evolved from it, add that to the fact everything in the world happening now is down to brexit in the eyes of many, I think it's more a case of they have dug their heels in and are getting stronger.


With respect, _both_ sides have contributed equally to the general nastiness surrounding Brexit (overall in general in all areas of life, this is not a commentary on individuals or this forum).

It is the right of citizens to mount a legal challenge if they believe the authorities are acting contrary to the law of the land. It is then up to the judges to decide on the correct interpretation of the law. It should be noted that whilst some legal challenges have failed, others have been validated, such as the necessity for there to be a Parliamentary vote over triggering Article 50. The fact that the vote itself was overwhelmingly in favour has no bearing on the necessity for holding it in the first place, the critical factor is that trying to avoid having one was contrary to the law as it stands.

It is also the right of citizens to speak up on issues that concern them and ask for their viewpoints to be considered by the authorities. Indeed, it is worth noting that over the centuries the greatest drivers for social change for the better have usually begun at a much lower level that the House of Commons, and I, for one, would be very worried if people in general began to take the viewpoint that Government policy can only be challenged by opposition MPs, and therefore when there is no coherent Parliamentary opposition the Government is entitiled to do what it wants, when it wants to whom it wants. We pay their wages, MPs are supposed to represent the people, and I expect to be able to have more of a voice than one vote every few years. Therefore if a significant sector of society are unhappy with the way the Government are handling something, I will respect their right to protest about it - even if it is something contrary to my own standpoint.

The thing that the Government appear to be missing is that you don't unite a country by lecturing, haranguing, and implying that anyone who doesn't fall in and march the prescribed drum beat when ordered to do so is an enemy. Digging heels in ever more strongly and pretending everyone is united behind you when that is clearly not the case is not going to help, either. Equally, not being behind the Government doesn't mean someone is against Britain as a whole. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'll do an awful lot to support my country and stand united with my fellow countrymen, but I won't get behind a Government whose current policies are causing so many people unnecessary hardship.


----------



## Lurcherlad

Well, according to some woman on This Morning who predicts the future using a bunch of Asparagus, Theresa May will lead the Tories to a win at the Election.

So there you have it!


----------



## cheekyscrip

Labour want election hoping that at the very least Corbyn would have to resign.
He might not even be elected MP!!!

I am no fan of either extreme...commies just as bad as nationalists etc...Stalin even more deadly than Hitler.

No extremes are good . That includes extreme Brexit.
Best no Brexit at all.


----------



## Colliebarmy

MP's voted in favour of GE

522 votes to 13

Osborne is quitting as MP (hoorah!)


----------



## havoc

Calvine said:


> It also showed perfectly that many people were unwilling to accept the result of a democratic vote


I'm not quite sure what is meant by that. At every election a huge proportion don't get the result they'd prefer and continue to hold an opposing position. They're entitled to do so - at least so far.


----------



## Honeys mum

List of MPs who voted against an election.

_Labour_

Ronnie Campbell

Ann Clwyd

Paul Farrelly

Jim Fitzpatrick

Clive Lewis

Fional Mactaggart

Liz McInnes

Dennis Skinner

Graham Stringer

_SDLP_

Alasdair McDonnell

_Independent_

Lady Hermon

Natalie McGarry

Michelle Thomson


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Ayes: 522
> No's: 13
> Majority: 509
> 
> MP's voted in favour for a General Election on 8th June 2017.


That's all well and good, but where's Goblin? I need to know if it's legally binding.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> That's all well and good, but where's Goblin? I need to know if it's legally binding.



Might not be legally binding in @Goblin's eyes but according to the law makers (MP's) in Parliament it is.


----------



## Colliebarmy

Did the SNP vote FOR the GE?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Colliebarmy said:


> Did the SNP vote FOR the GE?


No they abstained from voting.

*General election 2017: SNP MPs abstain in Commons vote*
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39643126


----------



## Colliebarmy

stockwellcat said:


> No they abstained from voting.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39643126


So much for Wee Jimmies opposing it then


----------



## stockwellcat.

Colliebarmy said:


> So much for Wee Jimmies opposing it then


Well they have no right now opposing the GE as technically they chose not to have a say by abstaining.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> That's all well and good, but where's Goblin? I need to know if it's legally binding.





stockwellcat said:


> Might not be legally binding in @Goblin's eyes but according to the law makers (MP's) in Parliament it is.


So personal digs as you can't argue with facts like the referendum was not binding having seen it in black and white according to the constitution. Attacks supported by those who complain about harassment and personal attacks. Really.. shows the attitude doesn't it. Then again when you haven't got anything else.. The referendum was non-binding. Politicians lie and the general election is going ahead are all facts. I know that's inconvenient for you but then that's reality, something you obviously have little regard for.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> So personal digs as you can't argue with facts like the referendum was not binding having seen it in black and white according to the constitution. Attacks supported by those who complain about harassment and personal attacks. Really.. shows the attitude doesn't it. Then again when you haven't got anything else.. The referendum was non-binding. Politicians lie and the general election is going ahead are all facts. I know that's inconvenient for you but then that's reality, something you obviously have little regard for.


I was pointing a fact out. Those people you protest so much about in Parliament are law makers (MP's) and are employed by Joe Public via general elections to run this country, a job I would never like to have. Sorry you thought that was a dig it was a fact.

This GE will really show who the public back in Parliament. May well put the Labour party out of action as an opposition party for many years to come, well past the GE in 2022 at least. The Conservatives may well achieve a one party nation.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> So personal digs as *you can't argue with facts like the referendum was not binding having seen it in black and white according to the constitution*. Attacks supported by those who complain about harassment and personal attacks. Really.. shows the attitude doesn't it. Then again when you haven't got anything else.. The referendum was non-binding. Politicians lie and the general election is going ahead are all facts. I know that's inconvenient for you but then that's reality, something you obviously have little regard for.


Perhaps everyone is fed up of hearing this as it is now legally binding as it was voted democratically through both houses of parliament and is now enshrined in UK law. The Law makers made it so with a bit of guidance from the courts who corrected the lawmakers (MP's) mistake. People just want the Government to get on with Brexit now (Sky news have been interviewing people on the streets in various locations remainers and leavers alike who have voiced they want the Government to get on with there job of getting the UK out of the EU and who all believe the Conservatives will remain in Government).


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> This GE will really show who the public back in Parliament. May well put the Labour party out of action as an opposition party for many years to come, well past the GE in 2022 at least. The Conservatives may well achieve a one party nation.


Erm no, it will show no such thing unless there is a large turnout with a large majority voting for the conservatives and May. It will be interesting to see if she can manage over 50% of the electorate. I somehow doubt it.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> So personal digs as you can't argue with facts like the referendum was not binding having seen it in black and white according to the constitution. Attacks supported by those who complain about harassment and personal attacks. Really.. shows the attitude doesn't it. Then again when you haven't got anything else.. The referendum was non-binding. Politicians lie and the general election is going ahead are all facts. I know that's inconvenient for you but then that's reality, something you obviously have little regard for.


Just a bit of light hearted humour, because you have to admit you do keep on about the referendum being just an opinion poll 

Out of curiosity though, what makes this vote legally binding, but the MP's vote to proceed with Brexit non-legally binding?


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> Construction, Engineering, Food & Drink, Luxury Goods, Manufacturing, Automotive, Financial, Advertising. ...........


Perhaps sector wasn't the best choice of words How's about public services?.

Here's a list for starters. This is what happens when you impose austerity to shrink the state to subsidise the rich.

NHS in crisis
Social care in crisis
Prison crisis
School crisis
Housing crisis
Fire service crisis
Mental health crisis
Police crisis
Councils in crisis
Ambulance crisis


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Erm no, it will show no such thing unless there is a large turnout with a large majority voting for the conservatives and May. It will be interesting to see if she can manage over 50% of the electorate. *I somehow doubt it*.


Ok we'll see.
You doubted the UK would vote leave and the UK did vote to leave.


noushka05 said:


> Perhaps sector wasn't the best choice of words How's about public services?.
> 
> Here's a list for starters. This is what happens when you impose austerity to shrink the state to subsidise the rich.
> 
> NHS in crisis
> Social care in crisis
> Prison crisis
> School crisis
> Housing crisis
> Fire service crisis
> Mental health crisis
> *Police crisis*
> Councils in crisis
> Ambulance crisis


Really.

Police in crisis. That's new.

The police did a massive recruiting drive recently to employ more fire arms officers and increase street bobby's and Special Constables or Community police officers.

Have you ever thought that due to the amount of crime being commited is the reason why you don't see them as often on the beat as they have to fill out paperwork to keep the criminals arrested in custody? So some regions have issued police officers with PDAs so they can stay on the beat and deal with non serious crimes at the scene.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Just a bit of light hearted humour, because you have to admit you do keep on about the referendum being just an opinion poll
> 
> Out of curiosity though, what makes this vote legally binding, but the MP's vote to proceed with Brexit non-legally binding?


Maybe that's because it was non-binding. As such the government had so many possibilities to listen to the public short of a full brexit. Referendums are supposed to be used as opinion polls so the government can address issues of concern, not steer the country on a course set to damage it long term. Simply using the rules allowed for within the "freedom of movement" rules to control immigration for example. Instead many leavers push it as "democracy", which at 37% of the electorate, it isn't.

As for what makes this vote legally binding, like the referendum is non-binding, it's due to something called the constitution.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Ok we'll see.
> You doubted the UK would vote leave and it


Yes and wilders was going to win wasn't he and prove once and for all that popularism is the voice of the people and the EU is going to fail. Or was that Austria, I cannot remember.

Of course it does make life interesting doesn't it. Here's May with polls showing nobody else has a chance..

Will Maybe May convince people to listen to her lies or will common sense prevail?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Maybe that's because it was non-binding. As such the government had so many possibilities to listen to the public short of a full brexit. Referendums are supposed to be used as opinion polls so the government can address issues of concern, not steer the country on a course set to damage it long term. Simply using the rules allowed for within the "freedom of movement" rules to control immigration for example. Instead many leavers push it as "democracy", which at 37% of the electorate, it isn't.
> *
> As for what makes this vote legally binding, like the referendum is non-binding, it's due to something called the constitution.*


But the law makers (MP's) don't think so. The law makers (MP's) have passed the motion and now you're saying it isn't legal as it is non-binding in your eyes. I think you will be told differently from the law makers (MP's). They have operated within the Fixed Term Parliament Act and given TM permission to hold a GE. Next you will be saying the GE isn't legal.

Hmmm. No winning is there.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Yes and wilders was going to win wasn't he and prove once and for all that popularism is the voice of the people and the EU is going to fail. Or was that Austria, I cannot remember.
> 
> Of course it does make life interesting doesn't it. Here's May with polls showing nobody else has a chance..
> 
> Will Maybe May convince people to listen to her lies or will common sense prevail?


Still on about the past I see @Goblin. Everyone else has moved on.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> But the law makers (MP's) don't think so. The law makers (MP's) have passed the motion and now you're saying it isn't legal as it is non-binding. I think you will be told differently from the law makers (MP's). They have operated within the Fixed Term Parliament Act and given TM to hold a GE. Next you will be saying the GE isn't legal.
> 
> Hmmm. No winning is there.


You forget (actually ignore most likely) that May used that defence when she pushed the royal perogative argument to bypass parliament when it came to article 50. It was rejected twice by judges including the supreme court. MP's decided and voted for a non-binding referendum although they could have made it binding at the time. They simply didn't.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Will Maybe May convince people to listen to her lies or will common sense prevail?


Hmmm.
We'll see if the polls are right in less than 7 weeks time won't we or do you have a time machine and can enlighten us about the future 

If you look at the state of the other parties:
Labour 175 MP's - Rubbish Leader
Lib Dems 9 MP's - Already been in a coalition
SNP 56 MPs - we don't vote for them in England or Ireland or Wales.

So where's the opposition party?

Corbyn would have to do something very drastic. Today a Conservative MP said to Corbyn when Corbyn laid out what he was fighting for in the GE "Is that it?".


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> You forget (actually ignore most likely) that May used that defence when she pushed the royal perogative argument to bypass parliament when it came to article 50. It was rejected twice by judges including the supreme court. MP's decided and voted for a non-binding referendum although they could have made it binding at the time. They simply didn't.


Please don't trash this thread about the Referendum, you have the other thread to do that on.

Thank you.


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Please don't trash this thread about the Referendum, you have the other thread to do that on.
> 
> Thank you.


He did not start trashing about referendum, but got called up by another pf poster having a go at him, in which you happily joined.
That is for the record. Keep class Hobbity, do not jump on bandwagon of someone's else's issues.

One party nation? Really, really want it?
Move to China. Or North Korea and then we will be talking.


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> One party nation? Really, really want it?
> Move to China. Or North Korea and then we will be talking.


Well please tell me who is going to stop the Conservatives if they win and get a massive majority as forecasted? The UK doesn't currently have an effective opposition party. So yes a one party nation is perhaps the correct phrase to use.


----------



## rona

I think the Labour party will now be sighing with relief that Corbyn is leader, it makes them so unelectable that they don't have to worry too much about having a plan for brexit


----------



## Jonescat

stockwellcat said:


> Well please tell me who is going to stop the Conservatives if the win and get a massive majority as forecasted? The UK doesn't currently have an effective opposition party. So yes a one party nation.


So true, so sad


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Well please tell me who is going to stop the Conservatives if the win and get a massive majority as forecasted? The UK doesn't currently have an effective opposition party. So yes a one party nation is perhaps the correct phrase to use. The Conservatives have the biggest majority since 1983 at the moment hence why a GE was called.


Which is a good thing in your opinion?
No opposition ?
No criticism?
No brakes?


----------



## rona

Goblin said:


> or will common sense prevail


Who do we vote for to make common sense prevail pray tell


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Corbyn would have to do something very drastic. Today a Conservative MP said to Corbyn when Corbyn laid out what he was fighting for in the GE "Is that it?".


 It would be good if he resigned but perhaps at this late stage probably wouldn't make any difference.


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> Which is a good thing in your opinion?
> No opposition ?
> No criticism?
> No brakes?


I didn't say it was my opinion did I?
It's an observation.


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> I didn't say it was my opinion did I?
> It's an observation.


I asked a question. It ends with"?".
So it is a question about your opinion. Not statement.
Punctuation matters.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Ok we'll see.
> You doubted the UK would vote leave and the UK did vote to leave.
> 
> Really.
> 
> Police in crisis. That's new.
> 
> The police did a massive recruiting drive recently to employ more fire arms officers and increase street bobby's and Special Constables or Community police officers.
> 
> Have you ever thought that due to the amount of crime being commited is the reason why you don't see them as often on the beat as they have to fill out paperwork to keep the criminals arrested in custody? So some regions have issued police officers with PDAs so they can stay on the beat and deal with non serious crimes at the scene.





stockwellcat said:


> Ok we'll see.
> You doubted the UK would vote leave and the UK did vote to leave.
> 
> Really.
> 
> Police in crisis. That's new.
> 
> The police did a massive recruiting drive recently to employ more fire arms officers and increase street bobby's and Special Constables or Community police officers.
> 
> Have you ever thought that due to the amount of crime being commited is the reason why you don't see them as often on the beat as they have to fill out paperwork to keep the criminals arrested in custody? So some regions have issued police officers with PDAs so they can stay on the beat and deal with non serious crimes at the scene.


Do you dispute the other services aren't in crisis? *

Watchdog says police cuts have left forces in 'perilous state' *

*Government austerity blamed in report, which shows stretched forces downgrading calls and leaving suspects at large *

Policing in England and Wales is in a "potentially perilous state" as government cuts lead to investigations being shelved, vulnerable victims being let down and tens of thousands of dangerous suspects remaining at large, a watchdog has warned.

In a report on effectiveness in policing, Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) uncovered a range of "dangerous" and "disturbing" practices that have arisen out of police forces' approach to dealing with budget cuts in excess of 20%.

Some police staff are deliberately downgrading emergency calls in order to justify a slower response when there is a shortage of officers, HMIC said, while others are reclassifying high-risk domestic abuse victims to a lower level of concern.

Police officers are being assigned to investigations that they are not qualified to conduct, the watchdog found, while forces are struggling to get to grips with the volume of wanted suspects - including murderers, rapists and violent offenders.

*

*
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ngerous-practices-austerity-cuts-diane-abbott


----------



## Pawscrossed

stockwellcat said:


> Well please tell me who is going to stop the Conservatives if they win and get a massive majority as forecasted? The UK doesn't currently have an effective opposition party. So yes a one party nation is perhaps the correct phrase to use.


https://www.gofundme.com/whats-best-for-britain


----------



## stockwellcat.

Pawscrossed said:


> https://www.gofundme.com/whats-best-for-britain


Oh is she moaning again.

The courts have to accept her case first. They have rejected a couple lately.

She forgets she isn't an MP/Law maker. She is Joe Public like you and me.

Good luck to her.

The following parties have said they have different versions of brexit, so technically the UK is leaving the EU still:
1) Conservatives.
2) Labour.
3) Lib Dems (They want a soft Brexit now from what TF said earlier).


----------



## rona

Well this should kill off any hope the Lib Dems had
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...neral-election-2017-theresa-may-a7689926.html

*"Tony Blair could work alongside Lib Dems in anti-Brexit election campaign"*


----------



## Elles

My area's a bit weird. We are a tiny dot of red in a sea of blue, so tiny you have to zoom in the map to see it. Labour mp, labour council who increased their majority last vote and the majority voted to remain in the Eu. All surrounding areas are conservative and voted to leave. I wonder why we're so different. We have the same news channels as the rest of the local counties and the same newspapers.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I was pointing a fact out. Those people you protest so much about in Parliament are law makers (MP's) and are employed by Joe Public via general elections to run this country, a job I would never like to have. Sorry you thought that was a dig it was a fact.
> 
> This GE will really show who the public back in Parliament. May well put the Labour party out of action as an opposition party for many years to come, well past the GE in 2022 at least. The Conservatives may well achieve a one party nation.





stockwellcat said:


> I was pointing a fact out. Those people you protest so much about in Parliament are law makers (MP's) and are employed by Joe Public via general elections to run this country, a job I would never like to have. Sorry you thought that was a dig it was a fact.
> 
> This GE will really show who the public back in Parliament. May well put the Labour party out of action as an opposition party for many years to come, well past the GE in 2022 at least. The Conservatives may well achieve a one party nation.


You know what, when Cameron first suggested that he would offer a once in a lifetime, straight forward in or out referendum if he were re elected I never for one moment thought we would ever see that day!
But, the real shock was yet to come! Waking up that friday morning to the fact that the country had voted to exit the eu!
And you know what, I never accepted it just thought it would be overturned ignored, gone away!
We would have just settled back into life waiting for the next chance! I really think that is what we expected.
But, and I bet I am not alone here is the behavoiur and attitude towards us of those that voted different to us has now made me more determined and adamant to support whichever party offers the,most likely chance of this, irrespective of the cost now!


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> Well this should kill off any hope the Lib Dems had
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...neral-election-2017-theresa-may-a7689926.html
> 
> *"Tony Blair could work alongside Lib Dems in anti-Brexit election campaign"*


Note it said, "could".

Besides whatever you think of Blair he's one example of a person who hasn't changed his stance on Brexit unlike someone I could mention.


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> Note it said, "could".
> 
> Besides whatever you think of Blair he's one example of a person who hasn't changed his stance on Brexit unlike someone I could mention.


No he,s much better then may isnt he! 
George bush tony blair bell!


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> No he,s much better then may isnt he!
> George bush tony blair bell!


Corbyn and Blair...what could go wrong?

Except
Trump May bell!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Seriously now.

If I was judge the Conservatives for what they have done to the UK in the last 7 years with all the cuts I wouldn't vote them in the GE.

Then again I wouldn't vote Labour in the GE either.

Yet again I wouldn't even dream of voting for the Lib Dems either.

Yes I have ruled out the smaller parties.

The SNP aren't for me either.

So where does this leave me...

If I take them factors into consideration I would vote:


----------



## stockwellcat.

I have received my resignation email this evening from the Conservative Party so I am now an Independent voter sitting on the fence.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> No he,s much better then may isnt he!
> George bush tony blair bell!


Yes, lets not forget how well it went the last time a power mad UK PM & an imbecilic US president teamed up. And this moron is completely unhinged


----------



## Happy Paws2

What is TM frightened of

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39633696


----------



## noushka05

Happy Paws said:


> What is TM frightened of
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39633696


Being exposed as the liar she is


----------



## KittenKong

Happy Paws said:


> What is TM frightened of
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39633696


Indeed. If she believes she has the support of the entire population surely they'll applaud her in a sea of hero worship????


----------



## noushka05

He's got a point.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> He's got a point.
> 
> View attachment 307329


I am trying to remain impartial from here on in.

It does make you think why TM won't debate on TV about things. I was a bit surprised she refused to have a live TV debate.


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> He's got a point.


..and if he only had 21 more points he could catch up May in the polls.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> ..and if he only had 21 more points he could catch up May in the polls.


That's true to.


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> ..and if he only had 21 more points he could catch up May in the polls.


*HaveIGotNewsForYou*‏Verified account

Jeremy Corbyn admits he has plenty to do in June,
as both courgettes and radishes need planting.

:Hilarious

You've gotta laugh or you'd cry.
(not you! - remoaning socialists like me)


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> I am trying to remain impartial from here on in.
> 
> It does make you think why TM won't debate on TV about things. I was a bit surprised she refused to have a live TV debate.


Her record is so dreadful shes afraid of scrutiny. Look how she always evades a straight answer or tells blatant lies at PMQs SWC.


----------



## simplysardonic

Ceiling Kitty said:


> There was, like, a whole thread on it! :Hilarious


Knowing me, I probably even participated in it as well:Facepalm


----------



## noushka05




----------



## 1290423

cheekyscrip said:


> Corbyn and Blair...what could go wrong?
> 
> Except
> Trump May bell!


Well seeing the damage the Blair X X Bush liaison created, we should have learnt!


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> Yes, lets not forget how well it went the last time a power mad UK PM & an imbecilic US president teamed up. And this moron is completely unhinged
> 
> View attachment 307312


I'm still learning from the Blair bush liaison.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I have received my resignation email this evening from the Conservative Party so I am now an Independent voter sitting on the fence.


Hope that fence is stable


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> View attachment 307332


Mistake number one, NEVER underestimate your opponents! . I was leaning towards the greens until then! Oh ok back to the board


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I am trying to remain impartial from here on in.
> 
> It does make you think why TM won't debate on TV about things. I was a bit surprised she refused to have a live TV debate.


Ok, so that means I can take my gloves ! Right


----------



## 1290423

Right! I have made a decision, that decision has been based on a very selfish fact! One I swore would never make a decision because of!
Im NOT voting tory!


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> Right! I have made a decision, that decision has been based on a very selfish fact! One I swore would never make a decision because of!
> Im NOT voting tory!


Not UKiP again?


----------



## Mirandashell

I'm voting Labour cos my local Labour MP is a good bloke, for a politician. So I want to keep him. The Tories are going to win overall anyway so what the hell. I'm going to be parochial for once.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Mirandashell said:


> I'm voting Labour cos my local Labour MP is a good bloke, for a politician. So I want to keep him. The Tories are going to win overall anyway so what the hell. I'm going to be parochial for once.


Well you never know.

It depends if people weigh up how the Conservatives have been in the last 7 years, snipping away at everything, austerity etc and judge the conservatives on this. People thought Labour wouldn't get in, in the late 1990's and they did, everyone thought the Tories where going to win then.

Do people want a change is the question or do they want to carry on with the endless austerity measures and cuts until 2022 or longer?

I am leaving Brexit out of the question when I make my decision on which party I am going to vote for and look at how each party has performed in the last 7 years and judge them on this. I know that it won't leave much choice.

The reason why I u-turned is because May is doing what Cameron and Osborne done and is lying and making herself look untrustworthy. She blew it for me yesterday when she called the GE she said wasn't going to happen until 2020. Remember which ever party gets elected is in until June 2022 as they aren't obliged to call a General Election until then under the Fixed Term Parliament Act.

I am staying impartial for now until closer to the time.


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> I am going to vote for and look at how each party has performed


mmm lets see

Labour, a totally ineffective leader who has only the support of a few of his party and a deputy with a chip on her shoulder the size of the ice berg that sunk Titanic

The Greens with an hysterical shrill woman at it's leader with a few good policies and quite a few fruit loop ones

UKIP........a totally dead party with no policies at all

Lib Dems.. Who even knows who their leader is or what they even stand for. They change their minds so much

The rest........


----------



## 1290423

cheekyscrip said:


> Not UKiP again?


Duh! The raving loony party!


----------



## KittenKong

https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## stuaz

rona said:


> mmm lets see
> 
> Labour, a totally ineffective leader who has only the support of a few of his party and a deputy with a chip on her shoulder the size of the ice berg that sunk Titanic
> 
> The Greens with an hysterical shrill woman at it's leader with a few good policies and quite a few fruit loop ones
> 
> UKIP........a totally dead party with no policies at all
> 
> Lib Dems.. Who even knows who their leader is or what they even stand for. They change their minds so much
> 
> The rest........


A pretty accurate view of the opposition parties. Our politics really are in a sorry state at the moment.


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> mmm lets see
> 
> Labour, a totally ineffective leader who has only the support of a few of his party and a deputy with a chip on her shoulder the size of the ice berg that sunk Titanic
> 
> The Greens with an hysterical shrill woman at it's leader with a few good policies and quite a few fruit loop ones
> 
> UKIP........a totally dead party with no policies at all
> 
> Lib Dems.. Who even knows who their leader is or what they even stand for. They change their minds so much
> 
> The rest........


Lol that is so funny, and sadly accurate, shame the old rep button is redundant


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> mmm lets see
> 
> Labour, a totally ineffective leader who has only the support of a few of his party and a deputy with a chip on her shoulder the size of the ice berg that sunk Titanic
> 
> The Greens with an hysterical shrill woman at it's leader with a few good policies and quite a few fruit loop ones
> 
> UKIP........a totally dead party with no policies at all
> 
> Lib Dems.. Who even knows who their leader is or what they even stand for. They change their minds so much
> 
> The rest........


This is a very good summary of the political parties in the UK at the moment.

That leaves us with the Looney Party and the Conservatives


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> That leaves us with the Looney Party and the Conservatives


And the 
Bnp


----------



## stuaz

For Me personally, against all my better judgment will likely not vote this time. I live in the part of the country where we only have the Green Party as a choice, the other being the speaker of the house who doesn't take part in parliamentary votes and debates so thus does not represent, in my opinion, the constituencies as he is not able to voice our opinion. 

It's very frustrating tbh but sadly how it works.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> This is a very good summary of the political parties in the UK at the moment.


Oh you mean there is a difference?


----------



## 1290423

Me! I'm with the elvis bus spass party


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Oh you mean there is a difference?


Not really no.

It is a sorry state of affairs the political parties are in at the moment.


----------



## 1290423

Might look at forming a new party
How does the Benidorm swingers sound


----------



## stockwellcat.

I don't want to abstain because then I have no right to complain as I chose not to vote.

It probably is inevitable that the Conservatives will win the GE.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> mmm lets see
> 
> Labour, a totally ineffective leader who has only the support of a few of his party and a deputy with a chip on her shoulder the size of the ice berg that sunk Titanic
> 
> The Greens with an hysterical shrill woman at it's leader with a few good policies and quite a few fruit loop ones
> 
> UKIP........a totally dead party with no policies at all
> 
> Lib Dems.. Who even knows who their leader is or what they even stand for. They change their minds so much
> 
> The rest........


Yeah, makes much more sense to stick with the party that has lied, cheated, stolen. Crippled our NHS. Almost tripled UK debt. Cut public services & the welfare state to the bone. Whilst giving tax breaks to the rich.

Now here are some words of wisdom 
*
Dr Ben White*‏Verified account

Dont forget, in the General Election, you'll be voting for the future of your national health service

4,761 retweets 4,313 likes

If May wins, that's it for our NHS.


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Well you never know.
> 
> It depends if people weigh up how the Conservatives have been in the last 7 years, snipping away at everything, austerity etc and judge the conservatives on this. People thought Labour wouldn't get in, in the late 1990's and they did, everyone thought the Tories where going to win then.
> 
> Do people want a change is the question or do they want to carry on with the endless austerity measures and cuts until 2022 or longer?
> 
> I am leaving Brexit out of the question when I make my decision on which party I am going to vote for and look at how each party has performed in the last 7 years and judge them on this. I know that it won't leave much choice.
> 
> The reason why I u-turned is because May is doing what Cameron and Osborne done and is lying and making herself look untrustworthy. She blew it for me yesterday when she called the GE she said wasn't going to happen until 2020. Remember which ever party gets elected is in until June 2022 as they aren't obliged to call a General Election until then under the Fixed Term Parliament Act.
> 
> I am staying impartial for now until closer to the time.


You noticed she lied? What about her support for Remain?
Very convincing speech why we should stay. ..


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> You noticed she lied?


 Yes I did.


> What about her support for Remain?
> Very convincing speech why we should stay. ..


No I didn't see that.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> mmm lets see
> 
> Labour, a totally ineffective leader who has only the support of a few of his party and a deputy with a chip on her shoulder the size of the ice berg that sunk Titanic
> 
> The Greens with an hysterical shrill woman at it's leader with a few good policies and quite a few fruit loop ones
> 
> UKIP........a totally dead party with no policies at all
> 
> Lib Dems.. Who even knows who their leader is or what they even stand for. They change their minds so much
> 
> The rest........


But at General Elections we vote the party in, Party leaders come and go and so do Prime Minister's so which ever party gets elected it doesn't mean that the current leader will stay as Prime Minister.


----------



## Colliebarmy

Like any great General she has chosen a battle at a time an place with a 80% chance of winning, wouldnt we all do that?

William Hill

Tories to win 1/6 on
Labour to win 16/1
LibDems 25/1

The best result Labour could have is Corbyn resigns after a crushing defeat


----------



## Honeys mum

cheekyscrip said:


> You
> noticed she lied


Yes she did, how can she be trusted now.





Then there is this.


----------



## Colliebarmy

They wont bomb us then


----------



## Mirandashell

Well, have to say I Am Brenda on this one.


----------



## Elles

Colliebarmy said:


> They wont bomb us then


Or Europe, he likes cheese. Maybe he'll send someone with an umbrella to visit Trump.


----------



## Dr Pepper

What's all this tosh about Mrs May lying about not having a election before 2020. She simply changed her mind, haven't we all done that many times? Doesn't make your original decisions lies, just a change in circumstances. Especially as _"a weeks a long time in politics"_, let alone the seven months since @Honeys mum video clip was broadcast.

Saying that, I could still really do without another election.


----------



## Elles

We've got local council elections at the beginning of may too, so our lot have already been knocking on doors. It's worse than trick or treat.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> But at General Elections we vote the party in, Party leaders come and go and so do Prime Minister's so which ever party gets elected it doesn't mean that the current leader will stay as Prime Minister.


I think she'll stay for a long time in a one person government where the views of others are supressed, even within her own party.

There's limits to how long this will be tolerated, as Thatcher found out.


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> As I said before in the other threads , Hitler murdered his opponents , I really don't think TM will get a way with that !!


More like hard Labour (forgive the pun) I would imagine. Then she's friends of a President who openly approves of torture....

Still, as a matter of interest I wonder what views May has on the Death Penalty?


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> Just remember, she didn't have to do this, she could have carried on, not listening to concerns for another 3 years. Brave woman


What makes you think she's listening to concerns? As far as May is concerned she's converted the entire UK to her way of thinking, yet she refuses to "take this praise" in public debates.

Perhaps she doesn't want to find out the truth or can not take criticism from the public. She does come across as being on a short fuse at times.

Her problem is the inability to unite Westminster.

Well, in a democracy every government past or present has had an opposition. What are the opposition benches for?


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> What's all this tosh about Mrs May lying about not having a election before 2020. She simply changed her mind, haven't we all done that many times? Doesn't make your original decisions lies, just a change in circumstances. Especially as _"a weeks a long time in politics"_, let alone the seven months since @Honeys mum video clip was broadcast.
> 
> Saying that, I could still really do without another election.


She's a pathological liar. Wake up.


----------



## noushka05

*Dr David Wrigley*‏

The future of a publicly provided, free at the 
point of use NHS will be decided on 
June 8th #*GE17*


----------



## KittenKong

Lurcherlad said:


> Just look back at the results of the last time Labour had power and the mess they left..........?
> 
> They lie to get in. They all do.


The only mess from what I remember was the result of the global economic crisis which the media appeared to blame Brown personally for.

Yes, Labour certainly had their faults but my quality of life certainly improved under Blair's administration.



noushka05 said:


> This makes real sense to me, I think a progressive alliance is the only way to have any sort of opposition now. Does anyone else agree? https://www.compassonline.org.uk/8454-2/
> 
> View attachment 307142
> 
> 
> View attachment 307143


This is certainly the way forward in the future. I would be all for that.


----------



## Calvine

havoc said:


> I'm not quite sure what is meant by that


It's not difficult to understand.


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> Hate mongering should be exposed for what it is.
> 
> Surely you don't want this country to end up like some kind of dictatorship where dissent is treated like treason do you? Have we learned nothing from our past?


You missed the point of Dr Pepper's post I'm thinking.


----------



## stockwellcat.

So last night the GE has been the topic of conversation between my friends and family all of whom have said they are voting to get the Conservatives out of power. The question now is which party is going to stand up against the Conservatives?


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...rivacy-investigatory-powers-act-a7426461.html


----------



## cheekyscrip

KittenKong said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...rivacy-investigatory-powers-act-a7426461.html
> 
> View attachment 307418


As you know it is double edged sword ...


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Yes I did.
> No I didn't see that.


There you are...now you know.







Easy to find.
She can be our new source of green energy...a windmill.


----------



## Honeys mum

Dr Pepper said:


> , let alone the seven months since @Honeys mum video clip was broadcast.


Fair point, but I think we all know she has been saying this all the time, in fact ever since she took over as PM.



stockwellcat said:


> The question now is which party is going to stand up against them?


Thats the problem ,I wonder is this the reason we are having this election. Because ther is no opposition.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Honeys mum said:


> Fair point, but I think we all know she has been saying this all the time, in fact ever since she took over as PM.
> 
> Thats the problem I wonder, is the reason we are having this election.


No. The reason for election is..May wants no opposition.
No uncomfortable questions asked.
Why? Because it is more and more obvious where she leads us and that Brexit, pardon my French, will Leave us poorer and diminished.

With the same problems, but no EU and immigrants to blame.

Plus many more problems Brexit ( sorry) creates.
In two years the lies would be totally exposed and effects felt by the poorest the most.


----------



## Honeys mum

cheekyscrip said:


> No. The reason for election is..May wants no opposition.


Sorry if i didn't make my self clear cheekyscrip.But that's exactly what I meant , there is no opposition.
So for the meantime I shall sit on the fence, then chose very carefully who to vote for.


----------



## stockwellcat.

The decision my family, friends and I are making are not based on the Referendum, the results of the Referendum or Brexit. It is based on the performance of the party in power over the last 7 years which is what GE's are about. In the conservatives case it is about all the austerity, cuts, people using food banks, people on zero hours contracts etc, etc.


----------



## Creativecat

Just heared a sound bite of Jeremy in our town yesterday he seemed really energised and pumped up to give the concervatives a run for there money .. Personally think its a little to late to be fair . When he's not even made it clear what his opinion on brexit is .so confusing on many levels I feel . But really am impressed by the information and links provided by fellow PF members that have been on top of this debate . Which is more informative than what we are getting from our local mp. May it continue


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> What's all this tosh about Mrs May lying about not having a election before 2020. She simply changed her mind, haven't we all done that many times? Doesn't make your original decisions lies, just a change in circumstances. Especially as _"a weeks a long time in politics"_, let alone the seven months since @Honeys mum video clip was broadcast.
> 
> Saying that, I could still really do without another election.


It was a only a few weeks ago her spokesperson stated categorically there would be no election - _'There isn't going to be one. It isn't going to happen. There is not going to be a general election.
_

You don't think it might be because wants to get an election out of the way before the consequences of Brexit start to become apparent?

And I'm sure this is just coincidence.


----------



## noushka05

I missed this program.

(words of a psychiatrist)

I hope #*ConfessionsOfAJuniorDoctor* encourages people to think
seriously about the #*NHS* whilst voting in #*GE2017*
The *NHS* is being destroyed


----------



## noushka05

I'm interested to hear what you think about Owen Jones views @stockwellcat , @Honeys mum , @Creativecat ?


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> So last night the GE has been the topic of conversation between my friends and family all of whom have said they are voting to get the Conservatives out of power. The question now is which party is going to stand up against the Conservatives?


There isn't one,


----------



## MilleD

I'll be voting Conservative. 

I can see the good in some of Labour's policies, but I can't see how they can be fulfilled without completely knackering the economy.

And a protest vote for Lib Dems/Green et al just isn't in me.


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> I'm interested to hear what you think about Owen Jones views @stockwellcat , @Honeys mum , @Creativecat ?


Oh! Has he left school yet noush! Last I saw owen he had just starting shaving


----------



## KittenKong

Creativecat said:


> May it continue


May not continue!


----------



## noushka05

MilleD said:


> I'll be voting Conservative.
> 
> I can see the good in some of Labour's policies, but I can't see how they can be fulfilled without completely knackering the economy.
> 
> And a protest vote for Lib Dems/Green et al just isn't in me.


You're not aware the tories have almost tripled UK debt then? The tories lost us our AAA rating, have borrowed more & accumulated more debt than every labour government combined.

This is worth a watch


----------



## KittenKong

Wow! I've clicked on the link:


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> I'm interested to hear what you think about Owen Jones views @stockwellcat , @Honeys mum , @Creativecat ?


Nice speech.

Problem I have is I am still a Brexit supporter, just because I chose to resign as a conservative supporter does not mean my views on the UK leaving the EU have changed.

I agree with Owen Jones about the Lib Dems and I personally will not be taking them into consideration when I cast my vote in less than 7 weeks time.

Already this morning Sky News have put people on the news saying Labour don't stand a chance because the polls say so. But let's rewind here the polls said that Donald Trump wouldn't get in, in America as president, the polls said that the UK wouldn't vote to leave the EU, the polls said that the Conservatives wouldn't win the last GE in 2015. So I am keeping an open mind and ignoring the polls and the press as it seems the press have already decided who is going to win even though we are less than 24 hours into the campaigning.

I am still reserving my vote until closer to Election day so I am sitting on the fence so to speak.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Nice speech.
> 
> Problem I have is I am still a Brexit supporter, just because I chose to resign as a conservative supporter does not mean my views on the UK leaving the EU have changed.
> 
> I agree with Owen Jones about the Lib Dems and I personally will not be taking them into consideration when I cast my vote in less than 7 weeks time.
> 
> Already this morning Sky News have put people on the news saying Labour don't stand a chance because the polls say so. But let's rewind here the polls said that Donald Trump wouldn't get in, in America as president, the polls said that the UK wouldn't vote to leave the EU, the polls said that the Conservatives wouldn't win the last GE in 2015. So I am keeping an open mind and ignoring the polls and the press as it seems the press have already decided who is going to win even though we are less than 24 hours into the campaigning.
> 
> I am still reserving my vote until closer to Election day so I am sitting on the fence so to speak.


Pretty much the same here stockwell


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> I am leaving Brexit out of the question when I make my decision on which party I am going to vote for and look at how each party has performed in the last 7 years and judge them on this. I know that it won't leave much choice.
> 
> The reason why I u-turned is because May is doing what Cameron and Osborne done and is lying and making herself look untrustworthy. She blew it for me yesterday when she called the GE she said wasn't going to happen until 2020. Remember which ever party gets elected is in until June 2022 as they aren't obliged to call a General Election until then under the Fixed Term Parliament Act.
> 
> I am staying impartial for now until closer to the time.


It might surprise you to hear I'm leaving Brexit out of the question for the moment too.

I have given this some serious thought. Our local Labour MP is well respected in an area that could fall to the Tories.

So, for that reason I'm voting tactically, so Labour it is.


----------



## Satori

Nobody can call this. I don't see why the media sees it as a forgone conclusion. I think people will turn out in low numbers, still making their minds up on the way to the ballot box. The confusion in this thread is likely in the population at large too.

To generalise, the Brexit vote was largely carried by working class Northern thickos who generally hate the Tories. But only Theresa May will deliver their Brexit. Hmmm, what to do? Meanwhile the Tory heartlands in the Home Counties voted to remain.... gosh, which way to go? They can maintain the value of their continental holiday bolt holes but at the cost of letting the oiks back in power. Damn.

It seems only very few people can have the Government they want *and* the relationship with EU they want.


----------



## havoc

cheekyscrip said:


> Plus many more problems Brexit ( sorry) creates.
> In two years the lies would be totally exposed and effects felt by the poorest the most.


Whereas it suits her to move the next election away from the results of negotiations that isn't what's going to affect us most or first. If she gets in with an increased majority in the house there will be plenty of time in the intervening two years for the tories to make life utterly miserable for the poor and vulnerable. We don't need to leave the EU for that. It's a smokescreen.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Nice speech.
> 
> Problem I have is I am still a Brexit supporter, just because I chose to resign as a conservative supporter does not mean my views on the UK leaving the EU have changed.
> 
> I agree with Owen Jones about the Lib Dems and I personally will not be taking them into consideration when I cast my vote in less than 7 weeks time.
> 
> Already this morning Sky News have put people on the news saying Labour don't stand a chance because the polls say so. But let's rewind here the polls said that Donald Trump wouldn't get in, in America as president, the polls said that the UK wouldn't vote to leave the EU, the polls said that the Conservatives wouldn't win the last GE in 2015. So I am keeping an open mind and ignoring the polls and the press as it seems the press have already decided who is going to win even though we are less than 24 hours into the campaigning.
> 
> I am still reserving my vote until closer to Election day so I am sitting on the fence so to speak.


Dennis Skinner for example is for Brexit too, as Tony Benn would have been if he was still with us!


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> I think people will turn out in low numbers,


I think so too.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Nice speech.
> 
> Problem I have is I am still a Brexit supporter, just because I chose to resign as a conservative supporter does not mean my views on the UK leaving the EU have changed.
> 
> I agree with Owen Jones about the Lib Dems and I personally will not be taking them into consideration when I cast my vote in less than 7 weeks time.
> 
> Already this morning Sky News have put people on the news saying Labour don't stand a chance because the polls say so. But let's rewind here the polls said that Donald Trump wouldn't get in, in America as president, the polls said that the UK wouldn't vote to leave the EU, the polls said that the Conservatives wouldn't win the last GE in 2015. So I am keeping an open mind and ignoring the polls and the press as it seems the press have already decided who is going to win even though we are less than 24 hours into the campaigning.
> 
> I am still reserving my vote until closer to Election day so I am sitting on the fence so to speak.


Thank you for your response SWC. I know you're a brexit supporter & labour are honouring the referendum result. One of the reasons I wanted you to see the video. I don't for a second believe labour have a hope in hells chance of winning the election myself. My fear is people wont vote for them because of that even though they are our only hope of stopping this hard right government running amok. If the tories win by a landslide they will be able to get away with anything.


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> But only Theresa May will deliver their Brexit.


Not so sure she can. I reckon whatever Brexit we get will be much the same whoever is in power.


----------



## noushka05

*D Psychiatrist*‏@*Le* 20m20 minutes ago

This.







Please consider the future health of this country and your
children & grandchildren when voting in #*GE2017*


----------



## 3dogs2cats

havoc said:


> I think so too.


Likewise, everyone I have spoken to since the GE was announced have said they will probably not bother voting.


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> Nobody can call this. I don't see why the media sees it as a forgone conclusion. I think people will turn out in low numbers, still making their minds up on the way to the ballot box. The confusion in this thread is likely in the population at large too.
> 
> To generalise, the Brexit vote was largely carried by working class Northern thickos who generally hate the Tories. But only Theresa May will deliver their Brexit. Hmmm, what to do? Meanwhile the Tory heartlands in the Home Counties voted to remain.... gosh, which way to go? They can maintain the value of their continental holiday bolt holes but at the cost of letting the oiks back in power. Damn.
> 
> It seems only very few people can have the Government they want *and* the relationship with EU they want.


:Hilarious


----------



## Odin_cat

Not sure who I'll vote for...probably whoever is most likely to beat the Tories.
For me, as a.British immigrant in the EU, there is one major issue. However, I hope the rest of the country considers the bigger picture. I was shocked at the level of homelessness after returning to the UK after 15 months and know far too many people on zero hour contracts who don't know if they'll be able to eat next week.

What a mess!


----------



## Happy Paws2

Sutton Coldfield is a tory strong hold, no one else stands a chance here, so it will just be a protest vote who ever i decide to vote for.


----------



## KittenKong

KittenKong said:


> Dennis Skinner for example is for Brexit too, as Tony Benn would have been if he was still with us!


And a quote from the Socialist Labour Party's manifesto, Labour's own UKIP if you like.

Note I do not support this lot in any way.

Support for Brexit certainly isn't restricted to May and others of the far right!


----------



## havoc

Happy Paws said:


> Sutton Coldfield is a tory strong hold, no one else stands a chance here, so it will just be a protest vote who ever i decide to vote for.


I'm in the same position. The only reason I'll even be able to cast a protest vote is because Labour stand in every constituency, nobody else bothers here.


----------



## Creativecat

Thankyou noush for including me in your distinguished panel of observers . Tongue firmley in
My cheek lol .The guy does speak alot
Of sense no dought about it . It's funny I never really followed politics in all fairness . But these threads have got me wanting more insight into how the country is being run and by who. I really want the conservatives to bring us thru these unsettled times . And only a few years back me like a lot of people were dismissive of them But I'm becoming more sceptical as the weeks progress. Jeremy Corbin seems like a nice enough guy but I just can't see it myself with him on the world stage representing the uk. Going to have talks with that lunatic in North Korea . Then seeing his head on a sushi conveyor belt the next day . With all the will in the world I just can't see him leading labour to victory . With a stronger charasmatic non dithering person in charge they might just of had a chance . So I'm really torn to what I think now which is a shame ;0(


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Dr Pepper

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 307433


Yes, but unlike Mr Kenobi Mr Corbyn has already proved he's unwilling to make the ultimate sacrifice for the greater good!!

"Mr Kenobi", just doesn't sound right does it


----------



## Calvine

3dogs2cats said:


> Likewise, everyone I have spoken to since the GE was announced have said they will probably not bother voting.


Fine: it is not a legal obligation to vote, and the same thing happened re. the referendum you will recall. Many ''could not be bothered'' to get their arses to the polling stations. Let us hope that there is not the same whingeing and whining when the results come out as there was from many remainers after the referendum result. I sometimes wonder why the Suffragettes bothered to chuck themselves under racehorses to get a vote for everyone, I really do.


----------



## KittenKong

Some Facebook comments:


----------



## Goblin

rona said:


> Who do we vote for to make common sense prevail pray tell


Well I could easily say tactical voting for whoever could potentially beat the tory candidate in the local area. Failing that vote for someone like the greens who have no chance to get in normally BUT voting for someone is important. Hard to say you have a mandate when the majority of people are shown not to support you when voting and only the election system of seats puts you in power. The general election is your only way to hold a government to account.

For anyone self employed.. just consider what May will do with NI contributions when she can get it through parliament easily despite backbencher rebels? She's already tried once but been thwarted pretending it was all Hammond's fault for suggesting it rather than her as a leader.


----------



## LinznMilly

Happy Paws said:


> What is TM frightened of
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39633696





> Mrs May has promised a "strong and stable leadership" if she wins


  

Funniest thing I've read in ages.


----------



## Colliebarmy

Dont forget also....................the Brexit negotiations might run till 2020, the same year and maybe clash with, the planned next GE, it makes sense to clear the table now, then draw up the battlelines to face the EU on solid ground without any distractions...


----------



## Colliebarmy

LinznMilly said:


> Funniest thing I've read in ages.


Funnier than Corbyn thinking he might win?


----------



## Goblin

Colliebarmy said:


> Dont forget also....................the Brexit negotiations might run till 2020, the same year and maybe clash with, the planned next GE, it makes sense to clear the table now, then draw up the battlelines to face the EU on solid ground without any distractions...


But May's already stated it wouldn't run over and no deal is fine if not. Wait.. you mean she's changed her mind...


----------



## stockwellcat.

Colliebarmy said:


> Funnier than Corbyn thinking he might win?


2,400+ new members in the last 24 hours and half a million existing members and still growing.

Corbyn said Labour defeat not a foregone conclusion.

I have listened to his speech just now.

Still reserving my vote until closer to the general election.


----------



## LinznMilly

Satori said:


> Nobody can call this. I don't see why the media sees it as a forgone conclusion. I think people will turn out in low numbers, still making their minds up on the way to the ballot box. The confusion in this thread is likely in the population at large too.
> 
> *To generalise, the Brexit vote was largely carried by working class Northern thickos who generally hate the Tories.* But only Theresa May will deliver their Brexit. Hmmm, what to do? Meanwhile the Tory heartlands in the Home Counties voted to remain.... gosh, which way to go? They can maintain the value of their continental holiday bolt holes but at the cost of letting the oiks back in power. Damn.
> 
> It seems only very few people can have the Government they want *and* the relationship with EU they want.


Oh, really? Largely carried by a "bunch of working class northern thickos, eh?"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu_referendum/results

What part of England do you consider "Northern"? Anything above Exeter, maybe?

See that tiny yellow dot in a sea of blue in the North East? That's Newcastle. How did they vote? Looks like Remain to me.


----------



## LinznMilly

Colliebarmy said:


> Funnier than Corbyn thinking he might win?


Yes, actually.


----------



## kimthecat

Nothing is a certainty, recent events have proved that !


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> But May's already stated it wouldn't run over and no deal is fine if not. Wait.. you mean she's changed her mind...


That's the part that actually makes common sense with having a election now. I would have thought everyone can see the very last thing we need come 2019 is to be pissing about with a general election. Whatever the outcome of the election and Brexit negotiations, come 2019 we need to be getting on, undistracted, with making our way in the world EU free.


----------



## Colliebarmy

Goblin said:


> But May's already stated it wouldn't run over and no deal is fine if not. Wait.. you mean she's changed her mind...


No, shes realised the EU are gonna try to stretch it out and demand money off the UK


----------



## Colliebarmy

Dr Pepper said:


> That's the part that actually makes common sense with having a election now. I would have thought everyone can see the very last thing we need come 2019 is to be pissing about with a general election. Whatever the outcome of the election and Brexit negotiations, come 2019 we need to be getting on, undistracted, with making our way in the world EU free.


Free of the shackles of slavery to a corrupt and wasteful private club..


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.conservatives2017.com/


----------



## Elles

LinznMilly said:


> Oh, really? Largely carried by a "bunch of working class northern thickos, eh?"
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu_referendum/results
> 
> What part of England do you consider "Northern"? Anything above Exeter, maybe?
> 
> See that tiny yellow dot in a sea of blue in the North East? That's Newcastle. How did they vote? Looks like Remain to me.


Yeah, those northern thickos get everywhere. Apart from Exeter and the south hams, they've heavily infiltrated the south west. Build a wall I say.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Calvine said:


> Fine: it is not a legal obligation to vote, and the same thing happened re. the referendum you will recall. Many ''could not be bothered'' to get their arses to the polling stations. Let us hope that there is not the same whingeing and whining when the results come out as there was from many remainers after the referendum result. I sometimes wonder why the Suffragettes bothered to chuck themselves under racehorses to get a vote for everyone, I really do.


The referendum was different to a GE, obviously for a lot of people the choice was easy, firmly in, firmly out, but there was an awful lot of people who felt undecided and unable to vote because they did not feel equipped to do so. I went to debates, when asked by show of hands who was still undecided an awful lot of hands went up. I should imagine there were similar debates all around the country with people attending who felt undecided. Come voting day some of those people would have not felt qualified or comfortable enough to be a putting a cross in either box therefore abstained, very different thing to `could not be bothered to get their arses to the polling stations` .

In GE there are people and polices to vote for. People may vote with the party they would like in power i and I suspect most voters do, or if they consider all parties as utterly crap as each other then vote for the candidate that seems to have the best manifesto. You can meet or contact your candidates and ask questions, people should know if they consider the incumbent MP good or not and if standing again if they would give them their vote, if not then surely there must be another candidate that seems like they would do a better job, vote for them, if they turn out useless vote them out next time. I do think there is a lot of apathy with elections, especially in strongholds like mine, people think they can`t make a difference so don`t bother.

I am not sure how I am voting just yet, apart from my MP who has declared they are standing again I don`t think any other candidates have yet been declared. I will not be voting for my current MP that is for sure, I will take a good look at the other candidates manifestos when they arrive and ask any questions I may have, I am still in the process of deciding how to vote in next months locals!!

I wonder how many people will get the two mixed up, last year I took my mum to vote for the police commissioner, a lady came in clutching her polling card saying she had come to vote all them foreigners out. The officials told me they`d had several thinking it was the referendum, I saw on the news that night a lot of polling stations reporting the same thing, people turning up to vote in the referendum Having locals in some areas closely followed by GE is sure to cause some confusion


----------



## Jesthar

Happy Paws said:


> Sutton Coldfield is a tory strong hold, no one else stands a chance here, so it will just be a protest vote who ever i decide to vote for.





havoc said:


> I'm in the same position. The only reason I'll even be able to cast a protest vote is because Labour stand in every constituency, nobody else bothers here.


Thing is, the only reason it IS a stronghold is because people _think_ it is and don't bother voting as a result. If everyone who said 'My place is a XXX stronghold so there's no point in voting even though I don't support them' actually _went _and voted, then that stronghold is very much under threat, if not demolished


----------



## Calvine

3dogs2cats said:


> I am not sure how I am voting just yet


Fine, but at least you will vote. I know loads of people too who never do (intelligent people with responsible jobs).


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> That's the part that actually makes common sense with having a election now. I would have thought everyone can see the very last thing we need come 2019 is to be pissing about with a general election. Whatever the outcome of the election and Brexit negotiations, come 2019 we need to be getting on, undistracted, with making our way in the world EU free.


Obviously you don't believe in accountability then. Come 2019 people will have realised they've been sold a load of horse.... With May's detailed plan which she obviously has provided she knows we'll never get what she keeps promising.



Colliebarmy said:


> No, shes realised the EU are gonna try to stretch it out and demand money off the UK


No, she knew this before when she was stating no snap election. Try again.


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> Likewise, everyone I have spoken to since the GE was announced have said they will probably not bother voting.


You have a right not to vote, but its your right also to vote if you want a change. Abstaining means you refuse to exercise your democratic right and then you shouldn't really complain if the GE goes the way you don't want it to as you decided to abstain.

If you want a change to this Government exercise your democratic right on polling day and vote as your vote could make all the difference even though you may feel it won't right now.

You have to remember whoever is voted in on 9th June 2017 will be in power until 2022 and possibly beyond. Do you want more cuts? Do you want more people driven into poverty? Etc, etc.

I am not trying to influence you to change your mind as it is your free will to abstain from voting, but it is also your free will to make a choice and change the party running this country.


----------



## havoc

Jesthar said:


> Thing is, the only reason it IS a stronghold is because people _think_ it is and don't bother voting as a result


There does have to be an alternative candidate to vote for. None of the minor parties bother here so I'll be voting Labour as the only alternative. It will be pointless but I can't not vote.


----------



## Elles

Who will look after the NHS? Successive governments have dragged it down. People these days don't want to work long hours with sick people, they want to earn the same as the private sector. It's why it's so hard to find a nhs dentist. The majority went private when the government fixed their NHS fees too low for them.

My local gp practice only employ part time gps who work a couple of hours 3 days a week and make sure one works late on a Friday to get the late opening funds. You can't get an appt. They no longer do normal appointments, they book a month in advance, you have to go to the walk in centre instead for illness and injury and then wait 4+ hours they're so overworked.

We start kicking out health workers from other countries and all we'll have left are highly paid U.K. born management and the private sector. I'd guess what most people were fed up with was what they saw as beggars, homeless and scroungers and wanted them gone, not nurses and skilled hard workers. Even ukip didn't threaten to chuck them out, but this government seems to be on the warpath already. Are they making a point? Wanting to make brexit as tough as possible to prove their remain stance was right? I don't know. I'm glad I'm old and will be leaving you young 'uns to it before too much longer. The world is steadily going crazier. I'll switch off my lights, but I don't see the rich and powerful making much of a contribution, viva Las Vegas.

/rant


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Jesthar said:


> Thing is, the only reason it ID a stronghold is because people _think_ it is and don't bother voting as a result. If everyone who said 'My place is a XXX stronghold so there's no point in voting even though I don't support them' actually _went _and voted, then that stronghold is very much under threat, if not demolished


Exactly this! Looking at the stats for my constituency the increase in % of vote for the `ruling party` did not increased as much as the other parties . The turnout is staying the same. If those that didn`t vote because they `can`t make a difference in a stronghold` changed that view and got out and voted regardless they really could make a difference. Because their votes would most likely be split between Lib Dem, labour and Green then we would still return the same party but if our MP felt under threat rather than untouchable he would actually have to work a bit harder for us all not just those who support him, that has got to be a good thing surely and worth bothering to vote for.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Calvine said:


> Fine, but at least you will vote. I know loads of people too who never do (intelligent people with responsible jobs).


I will always vote, I can`t imagine there being absolutely no candidate I wish to give my vote too. The only reason I would not vote is if the incumbent MP was the only candidate then I would still go and write ` No bloody way I am voting for him`


----------



## Jesthar

havoc said:


> *There does have to be an alternative candidate to vote for*. None of the minor parties bother here so I'll be voting Labour as the only alternative. It will be pointless but I can't not vote.


Indeed. I think another area where people can get hung up is "I want to vote against XXX as I want them out, but I'm not 100% keen on any of the alternatives..." (not that there's any such thing as a perfect candidate, of course!)

In that case, the decision becomes "Do I want the current candidate OUT to the extent it outweights my concerns about having YYY in?" If the answer is yes, vote for YYY. If the answer is no, you may as well vote for XXX, or abstain.


----------



## Colliebarmy

Elles said:


> Who will look after the NHS? Successive governments have dragged it down. People these days don't want to work long hours with sick people, they want to earn the same as the private sector. It's why it's so hard to find a nhs dentist.


NHS Dentist, means zilch........... they must all be NHS registered to offer dental attention but forget anything approaching free

who qualifies for free treatment?


----------



## Elles

Colliebarmy said:


> who qualifies for free treatment?


No idea. Bleddy foreigners probably. ompus

Should be like the old days when everyone could easily access free dental care. At least the basics anyway.


----------



## Jesthar

Elles said:


> No idea. Bleddy foreigners probably. ompus
> 
> Should be like the old days were everyone could easily access free dental care. At least the basics anyway.


Problem is, that would involve funding the NHS properly, including the creation of enough training places to meet the increased demand of an ever increasing population. We haven['t even had enough to cover the retirement rate for a long time, and not only does the Government know this but they still talk of making further training cuts.


----------



## Elles

There's plenty of money in the country. Trouble is I want to hang onto mine and so do the billionaires. Governments keep robbing Peter to pay Paul, maybe it's time Paul took a pay cut.

This election seems to be more about voting against what you don't want, than voting for what you do, but it never seems to matter either way.


----------



## havoc

Jesthar said:


> Indeed. I think another area where people can get hung up is "I want to vote against XXX as I want them out, but I'm not 100% keen on any of the alternatives..


Elections used to be more fun before they changed the system and made it too expensive for ordinary mortals to stand. I'd vote on the basis of the most entertaining nutter in an animal costume this time if I only had the chance


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> Some Facebook comments:
> View attachment 307437
> View attachment 307438
> View attachment 307439
> View attachment 307440
> View attachment 307441
> View attachment 307442
> View attachment 307443
> View attachment 307444


In answer to your first question, both my father and uncle loathed being in the eu grandfather fought in ww1 father in ww2. Both would, obviously never lived to see this day


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Has it even been announced who is standing in each constituency? Can't find anything for my area yet so how do people know what alternatives there will be? Until manifestos are also drawn up and released how do people know who they will be voting for? I do wish everyone would calm down, watch, read and make their minds up when all of the information is available.


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Can't find anything for my area yet so how do people know what alternatives there will be?


I'll come back and let you know for my constituency. If it's more than a two horse race here it will be the first time in decades.


----------



## Elles

Ben Bradshaw is standing for Exeter again. He's been our mp for about 20 years, but Exeter voted labour and remain, when the rest of the region didn't, so I don't know what'll happen this time. He's the mp responsible for the ban on tail docking, one of the first openly gay MPs and the first in a civil partnership, so he's not one of your run of the mill MPs. I guess Exeter don't have too many sun readers, or thicko northerners.


----------



## Colliebarmy

Our MP has increased his majority each election... 238 in 1997 to 4,426 in 2001, 7,080 in 2005, 17,683 in 2010, and 18,189 in 2015.

Hope has a best ever this time


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> Yeah, those northern thickos get everywhere


Satori's terminology does leave a little to be desired but analysis has shown that the less educated and unskilled were heavily represented in the leave vote. It is unskilled jobs which were seen to be 'stolen' or at risk because of immigration. Only time will tell if they wish to fill those vacated positions.


----------



## Elles

Given that it was nearly 50/50 I expect they were heavily represented in the remain vote too.


----------



## Jesthar

havoc said:


> Elections used to be more fun before they changed the system and made it too expensive for ordinary mortals to stand. I'd vote on the basis of the most entertaining nutter in an animal costume this time if I only had the chance


I was gutted when the Monster Raving Loony Pary candidate didn't run last time around in our area


----------



## cheekyscrip

Jesthar said:


> I was gutted when the Monster Raving Loony Pary candidate didn't run last time around in our area


But we have Corbyn????


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> Given that it was nearly 50/50 I expect they were heavily represented in the remain vote too


Er ... no. The higher educated and more skilled were over represented in the remain vote. Basically people voted where they believed they had least to lose and most gain - as people usually do.


----------



## Elles

People vote the way they do for all kinds of different reasons. Generalisations are rarely accurate, but often insulting. 

That's by the by. This is the GE thread and so far it seems to be about voting for nothing in particular.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> *This is the GE thread and so far it seems to be about voting for nothing in particular.*


And it has already made it to page 25, it might get interesting when the various parties issue there party pledges, manifestos etc.


----------



## Jesthar

Elles said:


> People vote the way they do for all kinds of different reasons. Generalisations are rarely accurate, but often insulting.
> 
> That's by the by. This is the GE thread and so far it seems to be about voting for nothing in particular.


The majority of responses I have encountered here and elsewhere (so far) lead me to conclude that more people are talking about voting _against_ things than _for_ things at the moment.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Obviously you don't believe in accountability then. Come 2019 people will have realised they've been sold a load of horse.... With May's detailed plan which she obviously has provided she knows we'll never get what she keeps promising.


Why aren't you off sunning yourself on your private exotic island you purchased with your multiple lottery wins. Your crystal ball is on fire right now, not only do you know the result of the election you also know the outcome of the Brexit negotiations.

I totally believe in accountability, a general election straight after Brexit wouldn't hold anyone to account because we wouldn't kown how it was panning out (bar more speculation).


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> Ben Bradshaw is standing for Exeter again. He's been our mp for about 20 years, but Exeter voted labour and remain, when the rest of the region didn't, so I don't know what'll happen this time. He's the mp responsible for the ban on tail docking, one of the first openly gay MPs and the first in a civil partnership, so he's not one of your run of the mill MPs. I guess Exeter don't have too many sun readers, or thicko northerners.


Sounds like a nice chap, seriously unfortunately they are a little thin on the ground, I can tell you now if there was a strong party that certainly looked at halal slaughter, and lets not forget conventional slaughter houses to I would certainly be interested.
Hence my interest in the awp. Sadly I dont think ill ever live to see them become a prominent party


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> halal slaughter,


It beats me why the RSPCA don't do something about it (but I can guess).


----------



## 1290423

Dont know how accurate this is

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....017-who-is-standing-george-osborne-nick-clegg

But anyone know if the candidates still have to put up their deposits bearing in mind the GE has been called early?

Only this could well put some of the smaller parties off taking into account that candidates would have to poll 15% of the vote or lose it

Interested to know?


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> It beats me why the RSPCA don't do something about it (but I can guess).


Conservations definitely wont, cant imagine labour would, ukip wont, only party I ha e heard say the would is the bnp and we all know why they would, now the awp mentioned it but are so new I wont ever live to see it.


----------



## cheekyscrip

havoc said:


> Satori's terminology does leave a little to be desired but analysis has shown that the less educated and unskilled were heavily represented in the leave vote. It is unskilled jobs which were seen to be 'stolen' or at risk because of immigration. Only time will tell if they wish to fill those vacated positions.


Oh...they would have to....Brexit may create new jobs in customs but otherwise?

It is really not important if we have blue, purple or red Brexit, it is possibly just as bad as going to jump off the cliff and thinking how should you dress for that.

If Corbyn did not sabotage Remain, but stepped down if he did not want to support it as his party did?
Then got himself reelected on hopes of Remain..new members?
Then three line whip for Brexit?

Knowing fully well how bad it would be even for the "Nothern Thickos".
It was all about staying in power. Suck up to the " Thickos", ditch the "students".

That is why this election is really quite meaningless.
Unless we elect LibDems and stop that malarkey.
Not that I have high hopes for it.


----------



## Satori

Elles said:


> Given that it was nearly 50/50 I expect they were heavily represented in the remain vote too.


Then perhaps do a bit less expecting and a bit more looking at the data and statistics if you want to know what you are talking about. But to save you the trouble; if you don't understand the data, chances are very high you voted leave . Just saying. The correlation is extraordinary.


----------



## leashedForLife

QUOTE, Ceiling Kitty:

I mean like one section of white hair, on hair of an otherwise darker colour, [indicates syphilis in their ancestry].

/QUOTE
.
.
It's an Old Husband's tale.  Hair can grey all over, can shade [go silver in one area while another section is pepper-&-salt, or white in one area & pewter in another, etc], or can go grey or white in abrupt patches.
.
my older bro-in-law had skunk-stripes in his beard - as a young adult, the hair of his head was near-black brunette, but his beard was reddish; 2 distinct white stripes popped out in his mid-50s, one on his right jaw, the other on his left upper-lip. :Hilarious Interesting look.
His temples also went silver, while individual grey hairs showed in his dark hair - he said it looked "distinguished" on him, while 20-years earlier, when his wife's brunette hair began to show single grey hairs, he threw a fit & insisted she color her hair... it made him "look old" to have a wife with a few grey hairs.

Sexist, much?...
.
.
.


----------



## Honeys mum

stockwellcat said:


> Problem I have is I am still a Brexit supporter





stockwellcat said:


> I agree with Owen Jones about the Lib Dems and I personally will not be taking them into consideration when I cast my vote in less than 7 weeks time.


Have to say I agree with these comments.

Also thanks for counting me in noush, I will reply more on him later.x

.


----------



## Elles

Satori said:


> Then perhaps do a bit less expecting and a bit more looking at the data and statistics if you want to know what you are talking about. But to save you the trouble; if you don't understand the data, chances are very high you voted leave . Just saying. The correlation is extraordinary.


I didn't vote. Couldn't find my way to the polling station.

As the country isn't split 50/50 between the well educated and the less well educated, both groups were represented in both leave and remain camps. When it came to the Eu no-one was particularly well educated in my opinion. We had to run with what we were given and only time will tell who was right. Probably only the cynics, skeptics and unbelievers. This is politics.

Even Margaret Thatcher is now proven to be right taking free milk away from the classrooms. Humans drinking cow's milk is bad for us, bad for the environment and bad for cows. 

Be careful what you vote for, you might just get what you want.


----------



## stockwellcat.

.


----------



## havoc

DT said:


> But anyone know if the candidates still have to put up their deposits bearing in mind the GE has been called early?


They will and calling a snap election like this does catch out the smaller parties. The way it was put on radio 4 was that Labour can afford an election and the Conservative party can call upon funds from wealthy supporters.


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> Conservations definitely wont, cant imagine labour would, ukip wont, only party I ha e heard say the would is the bnp and we all know why they would, now the awp mentioned it but are so new I wont ever live to see it.


UKIP promised quite a few animal welfare improvements in the election, not least cctv in all abattoirs. Probably one of their members sells cctv cameras, but it's the thought that counts.


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> I didn't vote. Couldn't find my way to the polling station.


Oh for goodness sake it doesn't mean people voted leave because they're thick. The analysis showed that different things were important to different people.


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> It beats me why the RSPCA don't do something about it (but I can guess).


 About halal , they try along with others but there is nothing they can do , Its not their fault. 
do you know that that don't even have to label halal meat ? if you eat meat , its very likely you have eaten it .
Most school dinners are halal .

There was petition for halal meat to label but it failed 

https://www.rspca.org.uk/adviceandwelfare/farm/slaughter/religiousslaughter


----------



## 1290423

kimthecat said:


> About halal , they try along with others but there is nothing they can do , Its not their fault.
> do you know that that don't even have to label halal meat ? if you eat meat , its very likely you have eaten it .
> Most school dinners are halal .
> 
> There was petition for halal meat to label but it failed
> 
> https://www.rspca.org.uk/adviceandwelfare/farm/slaughter/religiousslaughter


Yes I know
And yes I know
And i also know that david camaron did say words to the effect of

Whilst my watch halal.is safe, hence my dislike of the cons even more
But! I want to exit the eu, so basically im stuffed! Unless ukip rose from the dead


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

My MP's response on cameras in slaughterhouses - bog standard party line response I would imagine

*CCTV in Slaughterhouses*
The Government shares my own commitment to maintaining high standards of animal welfare at slaughter, and there are strict legal requirements in place. In slaughterhouses, these requirements are monitored and enforced by Official Veterinarians of the Food Standards Agency to ensure that animals are spared unnecessary suffering, distress or pain during the slaughter process.

CCTV, as with other monitoring methods, does have limitations and relies on businesses to monitor their operations appropriately. The Government is unconvinced of the need for further legislation at this time, but is keeping the need for CCTV under review.

As part of this ongoing consideration the committee that advises the Government on farm animal welfare has reviewed the effectiveness of CCTV in verifying the welfare of animals in slaughterhouses.

The committee reported earlier this year and while it did not recommend legislation to make CCTV mandatory, it did express the view that CCTV can be beneficial to animal welfare at slaughter. It further recommended that all assurance scheme operators, food retailers and others in the food chain should require that CCTV be installed in slaughterhouses associated with them. I can assure you that the Government will give this report full consideration.


----------



## havoc

DT said:


> But! I want to exit the eu, so basically im stuffed! Unless ukip rose from the dead


Do you believe Labour won't continue to take us out?


----------



## Elles

It was a joke, aimed at satori. Of course people voted for different reasons. There should be no such thing as less well educated in the uk today. The taxpayer has been paying for education for donkeys' years. I could agree that the less well off are more likely to vote for change than the well off, but it could be that the poor made the right decision and the wealthy were crippled by fear. 

If you've got nothing to lose, you have more freedom to choose. 

Of course gibraltar voted remain, they're afraid of becoming a small part of Spain.

And I'm a poet. :Hilarious

I'm looking forward to seeing what happens. I'm not overly keen on May. To go from a staunch supporter of remaining in the Eu to a hard Brexiteer seems a bit odd to me. I expect conservatives will get what they want. I wonder if they'll turn again when they know they're in for 5 years regardless and there's still the wider world issues that might mean we won't get to see another election. :Nailbiting


----------



## mrs phas

Lurcherlad said:


> Just look back at the results of the last time Labour had power and the mess they left..........?
> They lie to get in. They all do.


i know they all lie, its in the job description I think
and 
as I pointed out in my post, 
I have never, ever, voted Labour in my life, so the last labour government was not of my making
However, who else, honestly and without living in a blue sky dream, has the amount of followers to even give a slight opposition to the whitewash that is being predicted?
Certainly not the libs, they tarnished their honesty and integrity when they became tory light
Id love to see the greens get in, but not going to happen


----------



## Colliebarmy

Where do the "thick northereners" border start? To the Southern nancy boy shandy drinkers Watford is far enough to start nose bleeds...


----------



## Colliebarmy

havoc said:


> Er ... no. The higher educated and more skilled were over represented in the remain vote. Basically people voted where they believed they had least to lose and most gain - as people usually do.


ACTUALLY...................I didnt realise the voters in the referendum wre obliged to tell of thier skills levels before (or after) voting so all these "facts" are actually.......................BULLSHIT


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> Do you believe Labour won't continue to take us out?


No, I believe they will, but I don't think mr corbyn could negotiate his way out of a paper bag, let alone,his own drive, so we would d be,well And truly cream crackered


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Colliebarmy said:


> Where do the "thick northereners" border start? To the Southern nancy boy shandy drinkers Watford is far enough to start nose bleeds...


No idea but my OH is southern born and bred, went to public school, has a degree and is a professional but voted to leave the EU :Hilarious:Hilarious He doesn't fit the stereotype at all.


----------



## leashedForLife

QUOTE, simplysardonic:

Stockwellcat is a _man_?! :Jawdrop
_____________

QUOTE, Ceiling Kitty:

There was, like, a whole thread on it! :Hilarious
_________

QUOTE, stockwellcat:

Yep :Hilarious
__________________________________
.
.
there was speculation on that thread, IIRC, that - along with being male - StockwellCat is a hobbit. 
Extremely conservative, traditional, suspicious of outsiders & non-Hobbits, clannish, parochial, intolerant, etc.
.
.
.


----------



## Colliebarmy

rottiepointerhouse said:


> No idea but my OH is southern born and bred, went to public school, has a degree and is a professional but voted to leave the EU :Hilarious:Hilarious He doesn't fit the stereotype at all.


Does he realise hes odd?


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> they try along with others but there is nothing they can do , Its not their fault.


It's a multi-million pound industry, of course...


----------



## havoc

mrs phas said:


> I have never, ever, voted Labour in my life,


Neither have I but I can't see any choice this time other than not vote at all. The small parties have been caught out and I can't believe it isn't a deliberate ploy to exclude them. I don't for one moment believe the decision to hold a snap election was made so recently as claimed. May is ready and set to campaign, mainly on an issue which was never Tory policy whilst everyone else is still reeling from the shock. It's the worst sort of politicking and doesn't sit well with my sense of fair play.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Colliebarmy said:


> Does he realise hes odd?


Oh yes, he always has been. Not many anti blood sport, animal rights activist, vegetarians hanging around at his school in the 60's/70's.


----------



## havoc

Colliebarmy said:


> ACTUALLY...................I didnt realise the voters in the referendum wre obliged to tell of thier skills levels before (or after) voting so all these "facts" are actually.......................BULLSHIT


Do you believe your vote is actually anonymous? It isn't.


----------



## mrs phas

havoc said:


> Neither have I but I can't see any choice this time other than not vote at all. The small parties have been caught out and I can't believe it isn't a deliberate ploy to exclude them. I don't for one moment believe the decision to hold a snap election was made so recently as claimed. May is ready and set to campaign, mainly on an issue which was never Tory policy whilst everyone else is still reeling from the shock. It's the worst sort of politicking and doesn't sit well with my sense of fair play.


exactly and i would never not vote,


----------



## cheekyscrip

leashedForLife said:


> QUOTE, simplysardonic:
> 
> Stockwellcat is a _man_?! :Jawdrop
> _____________
> 
> QUOTE, Ceiling Kitty:
> 
> There was, like, a whole thread on it! :Hilarious
> _________
> 
> QUOTE, stockwellcat:
> 
> Yep :Hilarious
> __________________________________
> .
> .
> there was speculation on that thread, IIRC, that - along with being male - StockwellCat is a hobbit.
> Extremely conservative, traditional, suspicious of outsiders & non-Hobbits, clannish, parochial, intolerant, etc.
> .
> .
> .


But they make good robbers!  Keep their pantry full , always have clean hanky and make good pet owners.


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> It beats me why the RSPCA don't do something about it (but I can guess).


Yep!
I had the mother of all arguements about it some years ago, and I mean mother.
My arguement was it is an offence to cause unnecessary suffering to an animal, if I went out said a prayer whilst facing in the ,right direction I would be prosecuted right?
So if some one who supports it would like to explain the difference to me i'm all ears!

But just to add, no slaughter is nice.


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> Do you believe your vote is actually anonymous? It isn't.


Course its not, thats why you are advised to make a note of the number on you corresponding voting form they give you!
I tried to take a photo once, opps


----------



## Happy Paws2

Jesthar said:


> Thing is, the only reason it IS a stronghold is because people _think_ it is and don't bother voting as a result. If everyone who said 'My place is a XXX stronghold so there's no point in voting even though I don't support them' actually _went _and voted, then that stronghold is very much under threat, if not demolished


I didn't say I wasn't going to vote,I i'm not really sure who to vote for.


----------



## Colliebarmy

havoc said:


> Do you believe your vote is actually anonymous? It isn't.


Come on, tell all

My voting card has my name/address on it, the voting slip+voting card arent linked and there was no spy camera above me nor magic pen to grass me up


----------



## havoc

Colliebarmy said:


> Come on, tell all


There's no secret to it CB. You must know that when you go in and vote your paper is marked with a number to identify you.


----------



## 1290423

Colliebarmy said:


> Come on, tell all
> 
> My voting card has my name/address on it, the voting slip+voting card arent linked and there was no spy camera above me nor magic pen to grass me up


When you go to sign in, they give you you voting form, the number printed on the reverse corresponds with your polling no.


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> No, I believe they will, but I don't think mr corbyn could negotiate his way out of a paper bag, let alone,his own drive, so we would d be,well And truly cream crackered


We are already. There is no such thing as "good, nice crash Brexit" as there is no "nice fatal car accident".
Anyhow she is not a good negotiator at all.Guaranteed rights for EU nationals already living in UK was the right way to rub EU.

If we want to stay on decent terms and avoid politically motivated trade wars.
Her stooges are no better. Fox,Davies,Johnson...all of them are ridiculous in their own way..
Then we have Corbyn.

Or Farage.

British political scene is a freak show.


----------



## havoc

Colliebarmy said:


> My voting card has my name/address on it, the voting slip+voting card arent linked and there was no spy camera above me nor magic pen to grass me up


There is no spy camera, you're right. The rules say you get to *cast* your vote in secret. Nothing more.


----------



## leashedForLife

Quote, @noushka05:

It's impossible to make a bigger mess of this country... Our NHS going after 69 years, poverty & homelessness through the roof, social care in tatters, the environment under grave threat now. Crisis after crisis. *What sector isn't in crisis?*
/Quote

QUOTE, @DT:

The sex trade
_________________________________
.
.
Well, yes - when work is unavailable, poorly paid, or the unemployed aren't well-educated or trained, sex work is an option.
A rather desperate option, true, but needs must.
.
If the UK didn't have such a cr*p climate, praps they could reinvent themselves as a sex-tourist destination to rival Thailand or Cambodia - they service the entire Asian sector, plus the western Pacific / Australia. But it's a bit far to go for UK sex-tourists.
And it's important to bear in mind, STDs are such a drag on one's fun. :Meh

*Unexpectedly high HIV prevalence among female sex workers in ...*
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23512512
by C Manopaiboon - ‎2013 - ‎Cited by 14 - ‎Related articles
May 6, 2013 - 
_Unexpectedly high HIV prevalence among female sex workers in Bangkok, Thailand in a respondent-driven sampling survey. Manopaiboon ..._

_*Sex workers, HIV and AIDS | AVERT*_
https://www.avert.org › Professionals › Social issues › Key affected populations
_*Mar 16, 2017* - _
_Sex workers are *12 times more likely to be living with HIV* than the general population. ... India and Thailand, where reductions in national HIV prevalence .... the median percentage of sex workers who had tested for HIV in the ..._


So if becoming a sex-market is an appealing prospect, U might want to keep the N.H.S. very, umm, healthy.  Especially regarding research & treatment of, harrumph, social diseases.
.
.
.


----------



## Colliebarmy

havoc said:


> There's no secret to it CB. You must know that when you go in and vote your paper is marked with a number to identify you.


Course!... actually i confessed


----------



## Honeys mum

DT said:


> Unless ukip rose from the dead


He is thinking about standing.
Nigel Farage to consider standing in general election 2017 after Theresa May announcement | UK | News | Express.co.uk


----------



## Colliebarmy

If this country is so bad why are they queueing up to get in here?


----------



## Arnie83

Colliebarmy said:


> ACTUALLY...................I didnt realise the voters in the referendum wre obliged to tell of thier skills levels before (or after) voting so all these "facts" are actually.......................BULLSHIT


I believe they did extensive polling after the event and extrapolated the results. Of course polls have a margin of error, perhaps greater in recent experience, but it probably isn't as easily dismissed as you suggest.


----------



## Colliebarmy

If the GE was like the EU vote - just a majority of votes needed to win - UKIP would have had 40 seats last time


----------



## Colliebarmy

Arnie83 said:


> I believe they did extensive polling after the event and extrapolated the results. Of course polls have a margin of error, perhaps greater in recent experience, but it probably isn't as easily dismissed as you suggest.


The poll was of 13,000 people

Outside wine bars and universities and London banks


----------



## leashedForLife

QUOTE, Mirandashell:

Well, have to say I Am Brenda on this one.

/QUOTE
.
.
*Video: Brenda From Bristol, Outraged by U.K. Snap Election, Is a ...*
https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/british-woman-outraged-snap-election/
2 days ago - 
_British woman stupefied by surprise U.K. election becomes national hero ... I am Brenda from Bristol rn pic.twitter.com/suuD597Mmm ... To be fair, the British public has had their fair share of divisive political debate in the last ..._


*Brenda From Bristol reacts to general election news - Esquire*
www.esquire.co.uk/culture/news/.../brenda-from-bristol-general-election-reactions/
1 day ago - 
_"There's too much politics going on at the moment" ... I am Brenda from Bristol today and every day until 8 June #GeneralElection https://t.co/ ..._
_._
_._
_._


----------



## havoc

Colliebarmy said:


> If this country is so bad why are they queueing up to get in here?


Who is 'they'? Currently EU citizens don't need to queue up. It's non EU nationals who do.


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> Who is 'they'? Currently EU citizens don't need to queue up. It's non EU nationals who do.


Oooo facetious now


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> Oooo facetious now


Really not intending to be. Honestly trying to understand what people want and what they think they'll achieve by voting this or that way.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Colliebarmy said:


> ACTUALLY...................I didnt realise the voters in the referendum wre obliged to tell of thier skills levels before (or after) voting so all these "facts" are actually.......................BULLSHIT


Absolutely, they don't know who voted for what. It's all speculation and assumptions.



havoc said:


> Do you believe your vote is actually anonymous? It isn't.


Of course it is. I've never seen anyone marking down ballot paper numbers next to names, simply the names being crossed off to prevent multiple votes. And even it wasn't anonymous what did they then do for the referendum, check everyone's work history, P60's, education results, mortgage and credit history, pop down the newsagents and find out what papers we read?


----------



## rona

I'll vote Conservative this time though my heart is with Jeremy Corbyn. I cannot see anyone else being able to handle getting us out of the EU. Once we are and it's sorted though, my vote will go elsewhere.

The conservatives are far too interested in feathering their own nests at any ones expense, but by doing that they will fight tooth and nail to make sure this country succeeds


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Of course it is. I've never seen anyone marking down ballot paper numbers next to names,


Take a bit more notice next time


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> Absolutely, they don't know who voted for what. It's all speculation and assumptions.
> 
> Of course it is. I've never seen anyone marking down ballot paper numbers next to names, simply the names being crossed off to prevent multiple votes. And even it wasn't anonymous what did they then do for the referendum, check everyone's work history, P60's, education results, mortgage and credit history, pop down the newsagents and find out what papers we read?


Well check next time you go into the polling booth! I can assure you it is correct,


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> Take a bit more notice next time


I have, they don't. Not round here anyway.


----------



## havoc

DT said:


> Well check next time you go into the polling booth! I can assure you it is correct,


Apparently not where Dr Pepper votes


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> Well check next time you go into the polling booth! I can assure you it is correct,


As I said, not round here anyway. Maybe certain constituencys do? But not long to wait now so I can have a good nosey at what they do just to be sure. I'll report back in six and a bit weeks.


----------



## Vanessa131

Dr Pepper said:


> I have, they don't. Not round here anyway.


Here all they do is tick you off the list, then a second person gives you a polling card. Until recently you were ticked off and then helped yourself to a card.


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> I have, they don't. Not round here anyway.


Odd that our area certainly does.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Vanessa131 said:


> Here all they do is tick you off the list, then a second person gives you a polling card. Until recently you were ticked off and then helped yourself to a card.


Same here.


----------



## 1290423

I cannot actually remember if is it written on or lightly printed, I was closely involved one year, we were advised to make a not of that number, I tried to take a photo and was stopped, i was also asked why I was writing it down.


----------



## havoc

Those ballot papers have to be identifiable against an individual as a fraud prevention measure. If you go to a polling station which doesn't do so you should report it.


----------



## Elles

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Oh yes, he always has been. Not many anti blood sport, animal rights activist, vegetarians hanging around at his school in the 60's/70's.


I'd say every one of the above I knew in the 70s/80s were public school educated, so were my Greenham Common friends.


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> Those ballot papers have to be identifiable against an individual as a fraud prevention measure. If you go to a polling station which doesn't do so you should report it.


The poll station handbook does state that you vote is known only to you, but we were certainly told it was to prevent fraud.

They claim it is for them to be able who verify who has actually been to vote. Although they cannot identify for whom.

I am going to pay very close attention again this time as it was some time since we were told


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> Those ballot papers have to be identifiable against an individual as a fraud prevention measure. If you go to a polling station which doesn't do so you should report it.


That is what we were told, and to note that number


----------



## mrs phas

Many of you know I campaign on LGBTQI [etc] issues

Over the last week or so, the newspapers in Britain have questioned whether Lib Dem leader Tim Farron thinks homosexuality is a sin.
Well this is our present PM Theresa May's voting record on Homosexuality /LGBTQI/ Lesbianism issues. seems the papers are swerving her on these issues though
1998:
Theresa May voted against reducing the age of consent for homosexual acts from eighteen to sixteen bringing equality to the the law affecting heterosexual and homosexual acts.
2002:
Theresa May voted no on _Adoption and Children Bill - Suitability Of Adopters_ [ gay couples* jointly* adopting children]
2003:
Theresa May was absent for a vote on _Local Government Bill - Maintain Prohibition on Promotion of Homosexuality (Section 28)_
2004:
Theresa May was absent for a vote on _Gender Recognition Bill - Allow Marriages to Remain Valid If They Become a Same Sex Marriage_
2007:
Theresa May was absent for a vote on _Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations_
2008
voted in favour of a bill [eventually defeated] that said that those applying for IVF must include a male role model

However she did vote yes in regards to civil partnerships, allowing same sex marriage, on allowing same sex marriage to be available to armed forces personnel outside the UK, and, to enable the courts to deal with proceedings for the divorce of, or annulment of the marriage of, a same sex couple

Edit to add for @noushka05 [although I bet she already knows]

Teresa May almost always votes no on hunting ban bills but yes for amendments re hunting with dogs
On 18 Mar 2002
Theresa May voted yes on _Hunting with Dogs: Self-Supervision Scheme_
On 18 Mar 2002: 
Theresa May voted yes on _Hunting with Dogs: Hunting Under Licence_ 
On 18 Mar 2002:
Theresa May voted no on _Hunting with Dogs: Ban_ 
On 30 Jun 2003: 
Theresa May voted yes on _Hunting Bill - New Clause 6 - Use of Dogs Below Ground (No. 2)_On 30 Jun 2003:
Theresa May voted no on _Hunting Bill - New Clause 11 - Registration in Respect of Hunting of Foxes_
On 30 Jun 2003:
Theresa May voted no on _Hunting Bill - New Clause 14 - Registration in Respect of Hunting of Mink_ 
On 15 Sep 2004: 
Theresa May was absent for a vote on _Hunting B_


----------



## havoc

DT said:


> They claim it is for them to be able who verify who has actually been to vote. Although they cannot identify for whom


Well they can of course if they wanted though that isn't the stated aim. If electoral fraud is suspected then the aim is to check that each ballot paper was issued against someone entitled to vote and importantly, only once against each voter.


----------



## 1290423

But that information is never used unless there is an accusation of fraud. If there was then your vote can be traced back


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> Well they can of course if they wanted though that isn't the stated aim. If electoral fraud is suspected then the aim is to check that each ballot paper was issued against someone entitled to vote and importantly, only once against each voter.


Thats what I said, just didn't put it like you, almost every bit of information, including the handbook allocated to poll staff denies it


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> The poll station handbook does state that you vote is known only to you, but we were certainly told it was to prevent fraud.
> 
> They claim it is for them to be able who verify who has actually been to vote. Although they cannot identify for whom.
> 
> I am going to pay very close attention again this time as it was some time since we were told


Well I'm wrong, yup it happens sometimes 

A quick bit of googling and they can theoretically trace back the paper to a person via a number on the paper.

There you go, bit of history there, a person on the internet admitting they are wrong, and also very unobservant 

Apologies.


----------



## Arnie83

Colliebarmy said:


> The poll was of 13,000 people
> 
> Outside wine bars and universities and London banks


There was only one poll?


----------



## Phoenix Rising

I voted Labour but I don't expect they will win as the Tories win by cheating if they can't win fairly!


----------



## cheekyscrip

Phoenix Rising said:


> I voted Labour but I don't expect they will win as the Tories win by cheating if they can't win fairly!


They win by lying ... They are politicians after all...


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> There you go, bit of history there, a person on the internet admitting they are wrong, and also very unobservant


You are far from alone in believing your vote is anonymous. We're brought up to believe so. In theory it would only be checked if fraud was suspected. I can think of situations where that would be trumped and we'd never know.


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> Well I'm wrong, yup it happens sometimes
> 
> A quick bit of googling and they can theoretically trace back the paper to a person via a number on the paper.
> 
> There you go, bit of history there, a person on the internet admitting they are wrong, and also very unobservant
> 
> Apologies.


Well, just occasionally , once actually I had to be right!
Law of averages I guess 20/1 to you
Besides, you are so polite I don't mind


----------



## Lurcherlad

DT said:


> Odd that our area certainly does.


So does ours.

Quote
Each voter is then given a ballot paper on which to mark their vote. The paper bears an alphabetical list of all the candidates standing in that constituency.

In addition to your elector number, your ballot paper will carry an "official mark" which should be visible from both sides of the paper. This will usually be stamped with a special instrument immediately before it is given to you; but some papers may have a pre-printed mark or barcode instead.

It is thought that pieces of paper were first used for voting in Rome in 139 BCE.

Today, to prevent fraud, every ballot paper carries a Serial number as well as a unique official mark. This means that, although the ballot in UK elections is supposed to be secret, it is theoretically possible to trace each vote to the voter who cast it. It is, however, illegal to do so.

All ballot papers, counterfoils and related paperwork are sealed and stored securely for one year after the election. They are then destroyed.
Unquote


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ition-theresa-may-conservatives-a7692691.html


----------



## stockwellcat.

.


----------



## Calvine

mrs phas said:


> However, who else, honestly and without living in a blue sky dream, has the amount of followers to even give a slight opposition to the whitewash that is being predicted?


It appears to be a one-horse race...but stranger things have happened. My family talked me out of betting on a) Brexit and b) Tump, both of which I wanted to do, and, had I done so, would have pocketed a few quid!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Phoenix Rising said:


> I voted Labour but I don't expect they will win as the Tories win by cheating if they can't win fairly!


Don't you think Labour ever lie? Do you remember Mr Blair and his weapons of mass destruction that could supposedly reach the UK?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> .


Why do you keep editing your posts and leaving blank areas?


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Why do you keep editing your posts and leaving blank areas?


Sorry about that. Was going to say something but decided not to.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Sorry about that. Was going to say something but decided not to.


Don't apologise, I just came in and was catching up on the thread and noticed you'd done it a few times so wondered if something was wrong.


----------



## KittenKong

L


rottiepointerhouse said:


> Don't you think Labour ever lie? Do you remember Mr Blair and his weapons of mass destruction that could supposedly reach the UK?


Indeed, but where did the lie originate from? GW Bush no doubt.

Gotta keep their number one ally happy....

I don't think anyone has anything to worry about in that respect from Corbyn!


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> L
> 
> Indeed, but where did the lie originate from? GW Bush no doubt.
> 
> Gotta keep their number one ally happy....
> 
> I don't think anyone has anything to worry about in that respect from Corbyn!


Well more fool tony blair then! Would be the same as any of us believing the comical headlines you post! We'd be labelled stark raving bonkers


----------



## Calvine

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Don't you think Labour ever lie? Do you remember Mr Blair and his weapons of mass destruction that could supposedly reach the UK?


Yes, we all remember that, certainly we do, and are well aware that Blair must (rather should, tho' he won't) take a load of responsibility for the current instability in the Middle East; but he's earning mega-£millions doing after dinner speeches despite Dr David Kelly's mysterious death. Consequently he doesn't give a schyt! Of course he doesn't. Why would he?
.


----------



## rona

Calvine said:


> Yes, we all remember that, certainly we do, and are well aware that Blair must (rather should, tho' he won't) take a load of responsibility for the current instability in the Middle East; but he's earning £millions doing after dinner speeches despite Dr David Kelly's mysterious death. Consequently he doesn't give a schyt!
> .


And he laughingly became.............MIDDLE EAST PEACE ENVOY.....................you couldn't make it up could you?


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> Yes, we all remember that, certainly we do, and are well aware that Blair must (rather should, tho' he won't) take a load of responsibility for the current instability in the Middle East; but he's earning £millions doing after dinner speeches despite Dr David Kelly's mysterious death. Consequently he doesn't give a schyt!
> .


Didn't they return a verdict of suicide, despite claims,he had enough evidence in his research to cause A lot of questions to be asked?
Very ood!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> L
> 
> Indeed, but where did the lie originate from? GW Bush no doubt.
> 
> Gotta keep their number one ally happy....
> 
> I don't think anyone has anything to worry about in that respect from Corbyn!


Doesn't matter where it originated from, he perpetuated it and drew up a great big dossier which I have somewhere to back up the lies. I've used this source as its one of the papers you approve of

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...n-to-gain-approval-for-iraq-war-a6713401.html


----------



## Calvine

rottiepointerhouse said:


> great big dossier


I do recall that at the time it was said that the ''fabricated dossier on WMD'' was ...er...''sexed up''. Don't ask me! But I do remember that expression...''sexed up'', whatever that implies!


----------



## Calvine

rona said:


> And he laughingly became.............MIDDLE EAST PEACE ENVOY.....................you couldn't make it up could you?


Nope, @rona, you could not make it up!!


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Doesn't matter where it originated from, he perpetuated it and drew up a great big dossier which I have somewhere to back up the lies. I've used this source as its one of the papers you approve of
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...n-to-gain-approval-for-iraq-war-a6713401.html


Fair dos but it was Bush's war he activity got the UK involved in. Do you think May will say no to Trump if he does similar?

Has it occurred to anyone Bush might have lied to Blair about the WMDs to enhance his support for the war?

Anyway, Blair isn't standing for Labour this time. Corbyn has rightly condemned Blair's involvement in Iraq.


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> Nope, @rona, you could not make it up!!


Oh, depend that does, ive read a few fairy tales by some of late


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> Didn't they return a verdict of suicide, despite claims, he had enough evidence in his research to cause A lot of questions to be asked?
> Very ood!


And was sufficiently disabled that he could not have killed himself in the way the coroner specified he had done...


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Calvine said:


> I do recall that at the time it was said that the ''fabricated dossier on WMD'' was ...er...''sexed up''. Don't ask me! But I do remember that expression.


Yes I remember that expression being used too and wasn't it that sexing up that led to the "suicide" of Dr Kelly because he knew it not to be true and had whistle blowed to the BBC?

Found this - another paper @KittenKong approves of

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jul/16/david-kelly-death-10-years-on


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> Do you think May will say no to Trump if he does similar?


Hasn't she already turned down his call to arms?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Fair dos but it was Bush's war he activity got the UK involved in. Do you think May will say no to Trump if he does similar?
> 
> Has it occurred to anyone Bush might have lied to Blair about the WMDs to enhance his support for the war?
> 
> Anyway, Blair isn't standing for Labour this time. Corbyn has rightly condemned Blair's involvement in that war.


Indeed and I'm not blaming Corbyn for Blair's lies but was just making the point that Labour lie too.


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> Fair dos but it was Bush's war he activity got the UK involved in. Do you think May will say no to Trump if he does similar?
> 
> Anyway, Blair isn't standing for Labour this time. Corbyn has rightly condemned Blair's involvement in that war.


Oh we have nothing to worry they with the nice mr corbyn at the helm, we just sit hear whilst all the badies aim their weapons of mass destruction as us and wait

Not not saying I agreed that we have then, but for the person leading the country to say he wouldn't fight back makes me more then a little nervous


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> Hasn't she already turned down his call to arms?


I think may is a lot stronger then some give her credit for! I believe she has learnt by blairs mistakes, I certainly hope so.


----------



## Calvine

rottiepointerhouse said:


> "suicide"


or ''alleged suicide'' as some will have it.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes I remember that expression being used too and wasn't it that sexing up that led to the "suicide" of Dr Kelly because he knew it not to be true and had whistle blowed to the BBC?
> 
> Found this - another paper @KittenKong approves of
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jul/16/david-kelly-death-10-years-on


You'd think I backed the Iraq war the way some go on. I certainly did not!

This has little to do with today's Labour party under Corbyn who, I repeat, condemned this action before, during and after the war.

He's certainly no Tony Blair.


----------



## Colliebarmy

KittenKong said:


> You'd think I backed the Iraq war the way some go on. I certainly did not!
> 
> This has little to do with today's Labour party under Corbyn who, I repeat, condemned this action before, during and after the war.
> 
> He's certainly no Tony Blair.


 Not sure if thats a good or bad thing for Labour OR the country


----------



## Colliebarmy

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Indeed and I'm not blaming Corbyn for Blair's lies but was just making the point that Labour lie too.


Poli-Ticks

Ticks being...................


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> You'd think I backed the Iraq war the way some go on. I certainly did not!
> 
> This has little to do with today's Labour party under Corbyn who, I repeat, condemned this action before, during and after the war.
> 
> He's certainly no Tony Blair.


As I already said



rottiepointerhouse said:


> Indeed and I'm not blaming Corbyn for Blair's lies but was just making the point that Labour lie too.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> As I already said


Yes you indeed did. Saw your post after submitting mine.

Sorry!


----------



## KittenKong

Is it true ex News of the World and Cameron ally Andy Coulson now works for the Telegraph?










This is spot on!


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
.
http://www.esquire.co.uk/culture/a14331/times-theresa-may-said-no-early-election/
.
.
.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Don't you think Labour ever lie? Do you remember Mr Blair and his weapons of mass destruction that could supposedly reach the UK?


And don't forget that unlike Theresa May (& her front bench & most tory backbenchers) Corbyn & another 138 labour MPs had the courage & integrity to rebel against their own government & oppose the war on Iraq.

Theresa May also voted to attack Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, she backed the Saudis bombing of Yemen. The tories have made us the second biggest arms dealer in the world, flogging arms to despot regimes like Saudi. Like Blair, May & her government are warmongers.


----------



## Arnie83

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Don't you think Labour ever lie? Do you remember Mr Blair and his weapons of mass destruction that could supposedly reach the UK?


No I don't. When did Blair say that?


----------



## Calvine

Arnie83 said:


> No I don't. When did Blair say that?


Try Google...it's full of it. Plus I remember he said not long ago he ''found it hard to apologise'' for his actions as he thought the world was a safer (or better?) place without Saddam. Dreadful man responsible for much of the present instability in the Middle East. Practically a war criminal.


----------



## noushka05

Creativecat said:


> Thankyou noush for including me in your distinguished panel of observers . Tongue firmley in
> My cheek lol .The guy does speak alot
> Of sense no dought about it . It's funny I never really followed politics in all fairness . But these threads have got me wanting more insight into how the country is being run and by who. I really want the conservatives to bring us thru these unsettled times . And only a few years back me like a lot of people were dismissive of them But I'm becoming more sceptical as the weeks progress. Jeremy Corbin seems like a nice enough guy but I just can't see it myself with him on the world stage representing the uk. Going to have talks with that lunatic in North Korea . Then seeing his head on a sushi conveyor belt the next day . With all the will in the world I just can't see him leading labour to victory . With a stronger charasmatic non dithering person in charge they might just of had a chance . So I'm really torn to what I think now which is a shame ;0(


lol You're most welcome 

The one thing we know about the tories is that they serve themselves & big money & that is all. So any deal they make will never benefit the majority of us. You have to think do you or your loved ones depend on the NHS when you're ill? Because that will definitely be gone if the tories do sweep to power.

And Jeremy Corbyn's foreign policy is actually excellent. If governments had voted his way, the UK & the world would be far safer then they are now CC.

Peter Oborne is a journalist who has spent a lot of time reporting in the Middle East.

He is a lifelong Tory CC 












Colliebarmy said:


> Free of the shackles of slavery to a corrupt and wasteful private club..


Just wait till the government fully unshackle corporate interests. You'll find out the grass wasn't greener then.



rottiepointerhouse said:


> Has it even been announced who is standing in each constituency? Can't find anything for my area yet so how do people know what alternatives there will be? Until manifestos are also drawn up and released how do people know who they will be voting for? I do wish everyone would calm down, watch, read and make their minds up when all of the information is available.


Besides keeping their promise to kill badgers, are their actually any manifesto pledges the tories stuck to?


----------



## noushka05

mrs phas said:


> Many of you know I campaign on LGBTQI [etc] issues
> 
> Over the last week or so, the newspapers in Britain have questioned whether Lib Dem leader Tim Farron thinks homosexuality is a sin.
> Well this is our present PM Theresa May's voting record on Homosexuality /LGBTQI/ Lesbianism issues. seems the papers are swerving her on these issues though
> 1998:
> Theresa May voted against reducing the age of consent for homosexual acts from eighteen to sixteen bringing equality to the the law affecting heterosexual and homosexual acts.
> 2002:
> Theresa May voted no on _Adoption and Children Bill - Suitability Of Adopters_ [ gay couples* jointly* adopting children]
> 2003:
> Theresa May was absent for a vote on _Local Government Bill - Maintain Prohibition on Promotion of Homosexuality (Section 28)_
> 2004:
> Theresa May was absent for a vote on _Gender Recognition Bill - Allow Marriages to Remain Valid If They Become a Same Sex Marriage_
> 2007:
> Theresa May was absent for a vote on _Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations_
> 2008
> voted in favour of a bill [eventually defeated] that said that those applying for IVF must include a male role model
> 
> However she did vote yes in regards to civil partnerships, allowing same sex marriage, on allowing same sex marriage to be available to armed forces personnel outside the UK, and, to enable the courts to deal with proceedings for the divorce of, or annulment of the marriage of, a same sex couple
> 
> Edit to add for @noushka05 [although I bet she already knows]
> 
> Teresa May almost always votes no on hunting ban bills but yes for amendments re hunting with dogs
> On 18 Mar 2002
> Theresa May voted yes on _Hunting with Dogs: Self-Supervision Scheme_
> On 18 Mar 2002:
> Theresa May voted yes on _Hunting with Dogs: Hunting Under Licence_
> On 18 Mar 2002:
> Theresa May voted no on _Hunting with Dogs: Ban_
> On 30 Jun 2003:
> Theresa May voted yes on _Hunting Bill - New Clause 6 - Use of Dogs Below Ground (No. 2)_On 30 Jun 2003:
> Theresa May voted no on _Hunting Bill - New Clause 11 - Registration in Respect of Hunting of Foxes_
> On 30 Jun 2003:
> Theresa May voted no on _Hunting Bill - New Clause 14 - Registration in Respect of Hunting of Mink_
> On 15 Sep 2004:
> Theresa May was absent for a vote on _Hunting B_


Yes I did know lol. Her voting history is shocking. Where are these 'Christian values' of hers?

Like her record on social issues, her record on green issues is equally dire. The thought of her holding even more power frightens the life out of me.

Generally voted against measures to *prevent climate change* 


Consistently voted for selling England's state owned *forests* 


Has never voted on financial incentives for *low carbon* emission *electricity generation* methods

Generally voted for *culling badgers* to tackle bovine tuberculosis

Generally voted against greater regulation of *hydraulic fracturing (fracking)* to extract shale gas

Generally voted for reducing *housing benefit* for social tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (which Labour describe as the "bedroom tax") 

Consistently voted against raising *welfare benefits* at least in line with prices Show votes 0 votes for, 5 votes against, in 2013

Generally voted against paying higher benefits over longer periods for those unable to work due to *illness or disability* 

Generally voted for making local councils responsible for helping those in *financial need* afford their *council tax* and reducing the amount spent on such support 

Generally voted for a reduction in spending on *welfare benefits* 

Generally voted against spending public money to create *guaranteed jobs for young people* who have spent a long time unemployed


----------



## noushka05

Honeys mum said:


> Have to say I agree with these comments.
> 
> Also thanks for counting me in noush, I will reply more on him later.x
> 
> .


Thank you for taking the time HM x


----------



## Dr Pepper

KittenKong said:


> Fair dos but it was Bush's war he activity got the UK involved in. Do you think May will say no to Trump if he does similar?
> 
> .


Have you missed all the news on Mr Trump's MOAB bombing and hard talk against North Korea and Russia? Has to be said it's refreshing not to have our PM backing him up all the way and itching to join in.



KittenKong said:


> View attachment 307578
> 
> 
> Is it true ex News of the World and Cameron ally Andy Coulson now works for the Telegraph?
> 
> View attachment 307579
> 
> 
> This is spot on!


Who's that from then, anyone of note we should know?


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Yes I know
> And yes I know
> And i also know that david camaron did say words to the effect of
> 
> Whilst my watch halal.is safe, hence my dislike of the cons even more
> *But! I want to exit the eu, so basically im stuffed!* Unless ukip rose from the dead


And this is what May is hoping people will believe & vote tory, even though labour have clearly respected the 'will of the people' to leave the EU, Sue.


----------



## Satori

Colliebarmy said:


> ACTUALLY...................I didnt realise the voters in the referendum wre obliged to tell of thier skills levels before (or after) voting so all these "facts" are actually.......................BULLSHIT


ACTUALLY......... you don't have clue what you are talking about. Nobody mentioned 'facts' the discussion was about statistics. A group of statisticians collected polling data from nearly 1100 electoral wards and compared it to the demographic data from the 2011 Census. The data set was large and robust and the correlations highly significant.


----------



## Satori

rottiepointerhouse said:


> No idea but my OH is southern born and bred, went to public school, has a degree and is a professional but voted to leave the EU :Hilarious:Hilarious He doesn't fit the stereotype at all.


Statistics not Stereotypes.


----------



## noushka05

*Krishnan Guru-Murthy*‏Verified account

Tonight on #*c4news* one of the topics Theresa May doesn't want this election
to be about : the NHS. No Health Minister available


----------



## noushka05

Helpful flow chart if you're undecided how to vote lol


----------



## MilleD

noushka05 said:


> Helpful flow chart if you're undecided how to vote lol


So everyone that votes Tory is very rich and doesn't care about other people and wildlife?

Okay...


----------



## noushka05

MilleD said:


> So everyone that votes Tory is very rich and doesn't care about other people and wildlife?
> 
> Okay...


Well they're not a priority are they.

ETA plenty of people vote against their own interests. Just look across the pond at the millions who voted for Trump.


----------



## noushka05

*The NHA Party*‏@*NHAparty* 18h18 hours ago

If you want to see the end of the NHS story vote Tory.


----------



## rona

MilleD said:


> So everyone that votes Tory is very rich and doesn't care about other people and wildlife?
> 
> Okay...


Mmmm I'm very poor and care deeply about wildlife but can still see that there's no real alternative at this time.


----------



## rona

This election was bought on by the remainers, if that gives us 2 more years of conservative government, just remember, it's you that made her do this, she could have got us out of the EU and then it would have been easy to vote for someone else in 2020......................


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Mmmm I'm very poor and care deeply about wildlife but can still see that there's no real alternative at this time.


You've always been a staunch defender of the tory party on here Rona.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> This election was bought on by the remainers, if that gives us 2 more years of conservative government, just remember, it's you that made her do this, she could have got us out of the EU and then it would have been easy to vote for someone else in 2020......................


LOL That's right shove the blame on us when it all goes **** up.

Environmental & social justice are my priority so I would never vote to enable the Tories . When the NHS is gone, when the environment is trashed & plundered, hunting ban repealed you can own that.


----------



## Odin_cat

rona said:


> This election was bought on by the remainers, if that gives us 2 more years of conservative government, just remember, it's you that made her do this, she could have got us out of the EU and then it would have been easy to vote for someone else in 2020......................


But she said the country had united...


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> You've always been a staunch defender of the tory party on here Rona.


Maybe she does, maybe she does not but she always states the truth and not make up ridiculous stories to try to make her point


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Mmmm I'm very poor and care deeply about wildlife but can still see that there's no real alternative at this time.


How do you feel about government ministers having several meetings with the C***ryside Areliars but NO meetings with any environmental NGO?

By Miles King an expert you yourself validated - https://anewnatureblog.wordpress.co...-the-ministry-of-agriculture-and-fieldsports/

*Time to rename Defra the Ministry of Agriculture and Fieldsports*
Posted on April 10, 2017 by Miles King

no longer appropriate

While all talk of the Greenest Government Ever (anyone remember that?) has been quietly abandoned, another question arises.

Is the fieldsports lobby getting unprecedented access to ministers in the Environment department and are the Environment NGOs being squeezed out of ministerial access?

I have crunched the numbers for


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Maybe she does, maybe she does not but she always states the truth and not make up ridiculous stories to try to make her point


I can only go by Rona's past posts. Can you please tell me which ridiculous stories I've made up?


----------



## rona

Odin_cat said:


> But she said the country had united...


Did she though or was that the press changing the context of what she said.


----------



## rona

Bisbow said:


> Maybe she does, maybe she does not but she always states the truth and not make up ridiculous stories to try to make her point


My father was staunch Labour and strongly in favour of Unions, we used to have lively discussions with me giving the other side, giving the other side doesn't mean you are a supporter, and my father never felt the need to insult or threaten or belittle.


----------



## Odin_cat

rona said:


> Did she though or was that the press changing the context of what she said.


" The country is coming together but Westminster is not"


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> My father was staunch Labour and strongly in favour of Unions, we used to have lively discussions with me giving the other side, giving the other side doesn't mean you are a supporter, and my father never felt the need to insult or threaten or belittle.


Here we go again. No ones threatened anyone


----------



## noushka05

Trustworthy Theresa bleeding our country dry.

Theresa May's husband a senior executive at a $1.4tn investment fund that profits from tax avoiding corps

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...gle-capital-group-philip-morris-a7133231.html


----------



## 1290423

Odin_cat said:


> But she said the country had united...


The country will never unite, never as long as I have a hole in my bum will she or anyone else keep everyone happy.


----------



## Arnie83

Calvine said:


> Try Google...it's full of it. Plus I remember he said not long ago he ''found it hard to apologise'' for his actions as he thought the world was a safer (or better?) place without Saddam. Dreadful man responsible for much of the present instability in the Middle East. Practically a war criminal.


Hmm. Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong place. This is from the executive summary of the so-called "dodgy" dossier, describing the intelligence passed up the line ...



> We judge Iraq has constructed a new engine test stand for the development of missiles capable of reaching UK bases in Cyprus and Nato members Greece and Turkey as well as Iraq's Gulf neighbours and Israel.


That seems to me a bit different from lying about "weapons of mass destruction that could supposedly reach the UK".

Could you point me at Blair's quote that says the above?


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> This election was bought on by the remainers, if that gives us 2 more years of conservative government, just remember, it's you that made her do this, she could have got us out of the EU and then it would have been easy to vote for someone else in 2020......................


Are you blaming me personally for May's big lie not to hold an election?

Incredible!

I know you say you don't look at or read newspapers but I'd expect the Sun, Mail and Express to accuse me and the rest of the 48% of this, not someone on Pet Forums.


----------



## KittenKong

One for the Brexiteers!


----------



## noushka05

I'll play no party to this. When I or my loved ones need the NHS & its gone, at least i'll have a clear conscience.
*
Clive Peedell*‏@*cpeedell* 18 Jan 2015

As a cancer specialist with 20yrs NHS experience, it's my public duty to inform the public
that Tories are dismantling & privatising the NHS

13,913 retweets 5,230 likes

Tories on 48% in polls. If this remains the case on June 8th, then public must accept long term dire consequences for NHS & public services

*Alex Ashman*‏@*AlexAshman* 13h13 hours ago

As a junior doctor, I have a #*publicduty* to inform you that the Tories are gradually killing our NHS.
Please don't enable them. #*voteNHS*.

NHS funding is falling as a % of GDP,
and we're miles behind the EU average. #*voteNHS*










*Rachel Clarke*‏@*doctor_oxford* Apr 19

"The NHS is haemorrhaging its future: one in every 10 junior doctors is
currently quitting." #*VoteNHS* on June 8th.

Remember their track record on the NHS? Stand up on June 8th for keeping a
health service for ALL in need, not merely those who can pay.

*Dr David Wrigley*‏@*DavidGWrigley* Apr 18

The future of a publicly provided, free at the
point of use NHS will be decided on June 8th #*GE17*

*Dr Ben White*‏Verified [email protected]*drbenwhite* Apr 18

Dont forget, in the General Election,
you'll be voting for the future of your national health service


----------



## Odin_cat

DT said:


> The country will never unite, never as long as I have a hole in my bum will she or anyone else keep everyone happy.


Agree completely, it's another lie. But she did say it.


----------



## Gemmaa

I'm not sure at the moment.
I was leaning towards Labour, but they closed our A&E department and labour ward, then built a private hospital instead of the "super hospital" they promised.

anda


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Trustworthy Theresa bleeding our country dry.
> 
> Theresa May's husband a senior executive at a $1.4tn investment fund that profits from tax avoiding corps
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...gle-capital-group-philip-morris-a7133231.html


As long as it's tax avoidance rather than evasion he's doing nothing wrong. All businesses operate tax avoidance at some level, in fact Ltd companies have a duty to their share holders to do just that.


----------



## noushka05

*John Cosgrove‏@DrJohnCosgrove * *Apr 19* 

Will you vote to dismantle the NHS in *#generalelection* *#**ge17* *#ge2017** ? * 

_http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/views/b...ed-to-the-margins-this-election/20034260.blog_

*
Dr Shibley Rahman ❄‏@dr_shibley * *22h22 hours ago* 

'In the battle between the Establishment and the People,
it's our duty to make sure the People prevail.' @jeremycorbyn

*

Dr Shibley Rahman ❄*‏@*dr_shibley* 17 Jul 2016

I'm not a #*Corbynista*
I'm not a member of @*Momentum*
Been a @*uklabour* voter for 26 years
I'm a socialist I'll be voting for @*jeremycorbyn*


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> As long as it's tax avoidance rather than evasion he's doing nothing wrong. All businesses operate tax avoidance at some level, in fact Ltd companies have a duty to their share holders to do just that.


Individuals do it too - at the lowest level if you have an ISA then you are engaging in tax avoidance. Difference is the rules and mechanisms for doing it aren't the same for little people.


----------



## 1290423

May I ask a very serious question please?
If the nice mr Corbyn is such a respectful compassionate caring man then why is he the leader of the Labour Party?



Only the reason I ask he is, after all the conservatives most powerful weapon!


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> Individuals do it too - at the lowest level if you have an ISA then you are engaging in tax avoidance. Difference is the rules and mechanisms for doing it aren't the same for little people.


Yes! And there are a fair few on the fiddle ,


----------



## 1290423

Anyway, I reckon it's time we had a sing song
How about we start with some election leader signature tunes

I suggest we start with a tune for the lovey mr corbyn


----------



## noushka05

*PulseToday*‏Verified accoun[email protected]*pulsetoday* Apr 19

'The public need to be in no doubt the future of the NHS is on the ballot paper'
May's snap election is an opportunity to reset the NHS

http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/views/b...an-opportunity-to-reset-the-nhs/20034254.blog

Here we go again. Two years since the last general election, the Prime Minister has announced another national ballot. I do not want to get into party politicking here, but suffice to say the stakes could not be higher for the NHS.

We are just emerging from a nail-biting winter, with reports of patients dying on trolleys and ambulances queueing at the gate of A&E. For general practice the column inches may be thinner, but we know the situation is equally bad. GP practice closures are at a record high, waiting times are up while overall numbers of GPs are falling. It is - to use an overused phrase - a perfect storm.

Theresa May likes to close down this debate by trumpeting the £10bn additional funding she has promised the health service in England, but this is spread over six years and has been comprehensively undermined by large cuts in other areas, such as training, social care and public health budgets. Looking closely at the actual numbers reveals that the amount spent per patient in the NHS will actually fall next year by 0.6%

(etc)


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> One for the Brexiteers!
> View attachment 307601


Problem is he needs to do something drastic to get the support he needs to win the General Election.

Corbyn's 10 GE Pledges:
1 - *Full Employment* - a publicly-owned National Investment Bank and regional banks will back up £500bn of investment across energy, transport and housing.

2 - *A Secure Homes Guarantee* - over a million new homes in five years will be built, with at least half a million council homes, through its public investment strategy.

3 - *Security at work* - people will have stronger employment rights "from day one in a job", an end to "exploitative zero hours contracts" and the creation of new sectoral collective bargaining rights.

4 -* A secure NHS and social care* - an end to any NHS services being outsourced to private health providers.

5 - *A National Education Service* - universal childcare to give all children a good start in life, allowing greater sharing of caring responsibilities and removing barriers to women participating in the labour market.

6 - *Action to secure our environment *- an expansion of green industries, using the National Investment Bank to invest in public and community-owned renewable energy.

7 - *Put the public back into our economy* - people will have "a real say in their local communities with increased local and regional democracy".

8 - *Cut inequality in income and wealth*- the tax system will become "more progressive" so higher earners are "fairly taxed" and people on lower incomes will have their pay boosted through a higher minimum wage of £10 an hour.

9 - *Action to secure an equal society* - Labour will take action to tackle violence against women and girls, racism and discrimination on the basis of faith, and secure real equality for LGBT and disabled people.

10 - *Peace and justice at the heart of foreign policy* - human rights and social justice will be built into trade policy, while international treaty obligations on nuclear disarmament will be honoured as it encourages others to do the same.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/inew...neral-election-2017-labour-party-pledges/amp/


----------



## 1290423

Odin_cat said:


> Agree completely, it's another lie. But she did say it.


Awh a bit like clegg and the student fees you mean!
Fraid to say finding a politician that has NEVER said anything that has never come to fruition is harder then finding rocking horse shitte


----------



## noushka05

910000 people now exist in a Zero Hours Job in Tory UK. Labour will guarantee all who works regular hours a contract https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/articles/contractsthatdonotguaranteeaminimumnumberofhours/mar2017


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> This election was bought on by the remainers, if that gives us 2 more years of conservative government, just remember, it's you that made her do this, she could have got us out of the EU and then it would have been easy to vote for someone else in 2020......................


You also forgot TM was also a remainer.

Perhaps she brought this election on herself!


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> You also forgot TM was also a remainer.
> 
> Perhaps she brought this election on herself!
> View attachment 307605


Urm! Now please remind me where the honerable mr corbyn stood on the eu ?


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Awh a bit like clegg and the student fees you mean!
> Fraid to say finding a politician that has NEVER said anything that has never come to fruition is harder then finding rocking horse shitte


Caroline Lucas has cast iron integrity. And Corbyn, for all his faults is a man of principle too. Neither of them are part of the establishment & in the thrall of big money.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Urm! Now please remind me where the honerable mr corbyn stood on the eu ?


Hes a Eurosceptic & I think when he said he was 7 out of 10 for the EU he was being honest. Like many he probably took into account the hard right tories in government.


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> Caroline Lucas has cast iron integrity. And Corbyn, for all his faults is a man of principle too. Neither of them are part of the establishment & in the thrall of big money.


Maybe so noush, dont disagree, but your little kitty friend seems,to keep pointing out uturns by the cons, yet doesnt seem to be aware of any from the other side, maybe shes, reading the wrong newspapers


----------



## Odin_cat

DT said:


> Awh a bit like clegg and the student fees you mean!
> Fraid to say finding a politician that has NEVER said anything that has never come to fruition is harder then finding rocking horse shitte


I don't agree it's the same but anyhow the Libdems received their punishment, I hope the same happens to Mrs May.


----------



## 1290423

Odin_cat said:


> I don't agree it's the same but anyhow the Libdems received their punishment, I hope the same happens to Mrs May.


Oh, so we have difference degrees of broken promises then!


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> 910000 people now exist in a Zero Hours Job in Tory UK. Labour will guarantee all who works regular hours a contract https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/articles/contractsthatdonotguaranteeaminimumnumberofhours/mar2017
> 
> View attachment 307606


No such thing as a zero hours job, that's called unemployment!!


----------



## KittenKong

DT said:


> Urm! Now please remind me where the honerable mr corbyn stood on the eu ?


Don't dispute that, indeed as you know I'm solidly anti Brexit myself, but I'm putting that aside for the moment.

Corbyn belongs to the "Anti Marketeer" side of the Labour Party. Ironically withdrawal from the EEC was in Micheal Foot's manifesto!

Corbyn has never pretended to be a solid remainer, or a remainer at all. He rated the EU 7/10. He accepted the Labour In campaign as that represented the majority of the party. Did he look enthusiastic? Far from it.

The morning after the referendum he was one of the first to "accept the will of the people" and would not challenge Brexit.

It was this clearly reluctant performance during the referendum campaign that led to the leadership challenge from remainers in the party.

Conversely May was happy to speak out as very pro EU, posed happily with "I'm in" banners. By becoming PM she's moved further to the right of Nigel Farage.

Perhaps you can find Corbyn speeches where he's overwhelmingly supporting the EU? We found one from May.

One Corbyn comment I recall was his objection to the austerity in Greece as a condition of an EU bailout a couple of years back.


----------



## 1290423

Gemmaa said:


> I'm not sure at the moment.
> I was leaning towards Labour, but they closed our A&E department and labour ward, then built a private hospital instead of the "super hospital" they promised.
> 
> anda


Nah! Labour wouldn't have done that


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> No such thing as a zero hours job, that's called unemployment!!


Quoted from the link below:

*Zero hour contracts*

Zero hour contracts are also known as casual contracts. Zero hour contracts are usually for 'piece work' or 'on call' work, eg interpreters.

This means:


they are on call to work when you need them
you don't have to give them work
they don't have to do work when asked
Zero hour workers are entitled to statutory annual leave and the National Minimum Wage in the same way as regular workers.

You can't do anything to stop a zero hours worker from getting work elsewhere. The law says they can ignore a clause in their contract if it bans them from:


looking for work
accepting work from another employer
You are still responsible for health and safety of staff on zero hour contracts.

https://www.gov.uk/contract-types-and-employer-responsibilities/zero-hour-contracts

Edited:
Many companies take on zero hours workers and these workers have no job security and aren't even offered regular work, so end up struggling to live. As a zero hours worker you are not guaranteed work or regular work, some zero hours employers only employ zero hours workers for 2 hours a day with no guarantee of work the next day.


----------



## KittenKong

Reminds me of the days I did casual work, before the days of statutory annual leave and indeed the minimum wage.

It's true those on such contracts can not be prevented from taking on other "jobs" but availability can become complicated and cause conflict.

One place could give you two hours, then another place a full eight hours but within the two hours you already agreed to do!

I don't look back at those days with pleasure at all.

Of course zero hour contracts may suit some people, but it shouldn't be accepted as a normal way of employing people.

It's completely unacceptable people classed as being in employment suffering great hardship because their place of work are not giving them guaranteed work.

Anything to reverse this trend would be most welcome.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> And don't forget that unlike Theresa May (& her front bench & most tory backbenchers) Corbyn & another 138 labour MPs had the courage & integrity to rebel against their own government & oppose the war on Iraq.
> 
> Theresa May also voted to attack Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, she backed the Saudis bombing of Yemen. The tories have made us the second biggest arms dealer in the world, flogging arms to despot regimes like Saudi. Like Blair, May & her government are warmongers.
> 
> View attachment 307587


As I've said twice already I don't dispute that Corbyn is anti war and was not involved in the Blair/Bush/Iraq fiasco. I made the comment simply to point out to another poster that Labour have lied in the past too and I note you are calling Blair a warmonger too.



Arnie83 said:


> No I don't. When did Blair say that?


I'm pretty sure it was in the dossier was about 50 pages long. I will try to find it but I only had a hard copy and I'm not sure what I did with it.



stockwellcat said:


> Quoted from the link below:
> 
> *Zero hour contracts*
> 
> Zero hour contracts are also known as casual contracts. Zero hour contracts are usually for 'piece work' or 'on call' work, eg interpreters.
> 
> This means:
> 
> 
> they are on call to work when you need them
> you don't have to give them work
> they don't have to do work when asked
> Zero hour workers are entitled to statutory annual leave and the National Minimum Wage in the same way as regular workers.
> 
> You can't do anything to stop a zero hours worker from getting work elsewhere. The law says they can ignore a clause in their contract if it bans them from:
> 
> 
> looking for work
> accepting work from another employer
> You are still responsible for health and safety of staff on zero hour contracts.
> 
> https://www.gov.uk/contract-types-and-employer-responsibilities/zero-hour-contracts
> 
> Edited:
> Many companies take on zero hours workers and these workers have no job security and aren't even offered regular work, so end up struggling to live. As a zero hours worker you are not guaranteed work or regular work, some zero hours employers only employ zero hours workers for 2 hours a day with no guarantee of work the next day.


I think you will find he was disputing that a zero hours job exists not a zero hours contract.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Quoted from the link below:
> 
> *Zero hour contracts*
> 
> Zero hour contracts are also known as casual contracts. Zero hour contracts are usually for 'piece work' or 'on call' work, eg interpreters.
> 
> This means:
> 
> 
> they are on call to work when you need them
> you don't have to give them work
> they don't have to do work when asked
> Zero hour workers are entitled to statutory annual leave and the National Minimum Wage in the same way as regular workers.
> 
> You can't do anything to stop a zero hours worker from getting work elsewhere. The law says they can ignore a clause in their contract if it bans them from:
> 
> 
> looking for work
> accepting work from another employer
> You are still responsible for health and safety of staff on zero hour contracts.
> 
> https://www.gov.uk/contract-types-and-employer-responsibilities/zero-hour-contracts
> 
> Edited:
> Many companies take on zero hours workers and these workers have no job security and aren't even offered regular work, so end up struggling to live. As a zero hours worker you are not guaranteed work or regular work, some zero hours employers only employ zero hours workers for 2 hours a day with no guarantee of work the next day.


I get what a zero hours contract is, but I was quoting a "zero hours job" statement.

There's also no reason someone can't take on multiple zero hours contracts with different companies. I do agree they are not ideal, but they can work. My son-in-law is on one, but he's a grafter (nothing else much going for him though!) and as such is always first on the list and works between forty and sixty hours a week. The shirkers will only be called in when the management are desperate. You need to be flexible (which is the whole point of why companies have to use these contracts) and hard working.


----------



## KittenKong

Dr Pepper said:


> There's also no reason someone can't take on multiple zero hours contracts with different companies. I do agree they are not ideal, but they can work. My son-in-law is on one, but he's a grafter (nothing else much going for him though!) and as such is always first on the list and works between forty and sixty hours a week. The shirkers will only be called in when the management are desperate. You need to be flexible (which is the whole point of why companies have to use these contracts) and hard working.


As I mentioned above conflicts can arise during a "lull" period, then someone offers you two hours which is agreed (little money is better than no money). A few hours later someone else could offer you eight hours but in conflict within the two hours already agreed to!

Very much like self employment I would imagine.

I was fortunate to work a 60hr week one week, then be offered absolutely nothing else the following two weeks on occasions.

As I said these "contracts" work for some, but it should not become a standard way of employing people which is certainly what appears to be happening.


----------



## Lurcherlad

stockwellcat said:


> Problem is he needs to do something drastic to get the support he needs to win the General Election.
> 
> Corbyn's 10 GE Pledges:
> 1 - *Full Employment* - a publicly-owned National Investment Bank and regional banks will back up £500bn of investment across energy, transport and housing.
> 
> 2 - *A Secure Homes Guarantee* - over a million new homes in five years will be built, with at least half a million council homes, through its public investment strategy.
> 
> 3 - *Security at work* - people will have stronger employment rights "from day one in a job", an end to "exploitative zero hours contracts" and the creation of new sectoral collective bargaining rights.
> 
> 4 -* A secure NHS and social care* - an end to any NHS services being outsourced to private health providers.
> 
> 5 - *A National Education Service* - universal childcare to give all children a good start in life, allowing greater sharing of caring responsibilities and removing barriers to women participating in the labour market.
> 
> 6 - *Action to secure our environment *- an expansion of green industries, using the National Investment Bank to invest in public and community-owned renewable energy.
> 
> 7 - *Put the public back into our economy* - people will have "a real say in their local communities with increased local and regional democracy".
> 
> 8 - *Cut inequality in income and wealth*- the tax system will become "more progressive" so higher earners are "fairly taxed" and people on lower incomes will have their pay boosted through a higher minimum wage of £10 an hour.
> 
> 9 - *Action to secure an equal society* - Labour will take action to tackle violence against women and girls, racism and discrimination on the basis of faith, and secure real equality for LGBT and disabled people.
> 
> 10 - *Peace and justice at the heart of foreign policy* - human rights and social justice will be built into trade policy, while international treaty obligations on nuclear disarmament will be honoured as it encourages others to do the same.
> 
> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/inew...neral-election-2017-labour-party-pledges/amp/


But, why didn't Labour do all these things during their last two terms in power?

Instead, they brought the country to it's knees, and we are still suffering for that.


----------



## KittenKong

Lurcherlad said:


> But, why didn't Labour do all these things during their last two terms in power?
> 
> Instead, they brought the country to it's knees, and we are still suffering for that.


Wasn't that due to the global economic crisis? I wonder how the Tories who've increased the deficit despite austerity would have handled it?

My memories of Major's government were interest rates in double figures causing much hardship to those with mortgages. That never happened under Labour.

One of Brown's first achievement's as Chancellor was giving the responsibility of setting Interest rates from the government to the Bank of England. These are currently 0.25%!


----------



## Bisbow

Lurcherlad said:


> But, why didn't Labour do all these things during their last two terms in power?
> 
> Instead, they brought the country to it's knees, and we are still suffering for that.


Exactly, people on here keep moaning that the tories are ruining us and should do this and that but none of them condemn labour for not doing what they now want whilst they were in power
But then. labour are the bees knees and can do no wrong, ever

Edit
Didn't Brown sell all our gold at give away prices


----------



## Lurcherlad

KittenKong said:


> Wasn't that due to the global economic crisis? I wonder how the Tories who've increased the deficit despite austerity would have handled it?
> 
> My memories of Major's government were interest rates in double figures causing much hardship to those with mortgages. That never happened under Labour.
> 
> One of Brown's first achievement's as Chancellor was giving the responsibility of setting Interest rates from the government to the Bank of England.


I know there are always other factors involved, but Labour like to spend money the country does not have.

When they are in opposition, they have all the answers (don't they all? ).

They couldn't organise a p*ss up in a brewery at the moment - so handing the country over to them would be a big mistake imo


----------



## Arnie83

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm pretty sure it was in the dossier was about 50 pages long. I will try to find it but I only had a hard copy and I'm not sure what I did with it.


I'm pretty sure it isn't, having just checked the PDF. There's the executive summary mention that I quoted above, and the body of the dossier contains the following ...



> Intelligence has confirmed that Iraq wants to extend the range of its missile
> systems to over 1000km, enabling it to threaten other regional neighbours. This
> work began in 1998, although efforts to regenerate the long-range ballistic
> missile programme probably began in 1995. Iraq's missile programmes employ
> hundreds of people. Satellite imagery (Figure 6) has shown a new engine test
> stand being constructed (A), which is larger than the current one used for al-
> Samoud (B), and that formerly used for testing SCUD engines (C) which was
> dismantled under UNSCOM supervision. This new stand will be capable of
> testing engines for medium range ballistic missiles (MRBMs) with ranges over
> 1000km, which are not permitted under UN Security Council Resolution 687.
> Such a facility would not be needed for systems that fall within the UN
> permitted range of 150km. The Iraqis have recently taken measures to conceal
> activities at this site. Iraq is also working to obtain improved guidance
> technology to increase missile accuracy.


1000 km doesn't reach the UK, so, as far as I am aware, what you quoted was never claimed by Blair.

Lot's of people call him a liar, citing the claims regarding Iraqi WMD, and even cleverly misspell his name to prove it, but I like to see facts before I accept that an accusation is proven.

Having said that of course, he was a politician, and I've never come across one who was not "economical with the actualite" when it suited them.


----------



## DoodlesRule

Lurcherlad said:


> So does ours.
> 
> Quote
> Each voter is then given a ballot paper on which to mark their vote. The paper bears an alphabetical list of all the candidates standing in that constituency.
> 
> In addition to your elector number, your ballot paper will carry an "official mark" which should be visible from both sides of the paper. This will usually be stamped with a special instrument immediately before it is given to you; but some papers may have a pre-printed mark or barcode instead.
> 
> It is thought that pieces of paper were first used for voting in Rome in 139 BCE.
> 
> Today, to prevent fraud, every ballot paper carries a Serial number as well as a unique official mark. This means that, although the ballot in UK elections is supposed to be secret, it is theoretically possible to trace each vote to the voter who cast it. It is, however, illegal to do so.
> 
> All ballot papers, counterfoils and related paperwork are sealed and stored securely for one year after the election. They are then destroyed.
> Unquote


I have read that they used to pass on your details to MI5 if you had voted communist - don't know if its true but wouldn't surprise me!


----------



## KittenKong

Lurcherlad said:


> I know there are always other factors involved, but Labour like to spend money the country does not have.


To a point, you are right but with around 2% of the population owning the majority of the UK's wealth I'm sure they wouldn't mind paying a bit more tax which wouldn't affect their lifestyles' one bit? Billionaires' for example.

Gordon Brown did at least try something akin to this with his Windfall tax on the profits from the privatised utilities, but it wasn't enough.

I promised to put Brexit aside for the moment, but have you considered how much the government are spending on that not forgetting pointless matters such as £500m to change the colour of a UK passport for example? Just one example....

Yes, they accuse Labour of spending money the country doesn't have yet the Tories spend it in a way that benefits only them such as the reduction of tax rates for millionaires' for another example.

While austerity and hardship is reserved for the rest of us.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Lurcherlad said:


> But, why didn't Labour do all these things during their last two terms in power?
> 
> Instead, they brought the country to it's knees, and we are still suffering for that.


I am remaining impartial at the moment. I have not made a firm decision yet who I am voting for although the choices are extremely slim.

You're right in saying why haven't Labour done this in there last two terms in power.


----------



## Bisbow

stockwellcat said:


> Problem is he needs to do something drastic to get the support he needs to win the General Election.
> 
> Corbyn's 10 GE Pledges:
> 1 - *Full Employment* - a publicly-owned National Investment Bank and regional banks will back up £500bn of investment across energy, transport and housing.
> 
> 2 - *A Secure Homes Guarantee* - over a million new homes in five years will be built, with at least half a million council homes, through its public investment strategy.
> 
> 3 - *Security at work* - people will have stronger employment rights "from day one in a job", an end to "exploitative zero hours contracts" and the creation of new sectoral collective bargaining rights.
> 
> 4 -* A secure NHS and social care* - an end to any NHS services being outsourced to private health providers.
> 
> 5 - *A National Education Service* - universal childcare to give all children a good start in life, allowing greater sharing of caring responsibilities and removing barriers to women participating in the labour market.
> 
> 6 - *Action to secure our environment *- an expansion of green industries, using the National Investment Bank to invest in public and community-owned renewable energy.
> 
> 7 - *Put the public back into our economy* - people will have "a real say in their local communities with increased local and regional democracy".
> 
> 8 - *Cut inequality in income and wealth*- the tax system will become "more progressive" so higher earners are "fairly taxed" and people on lower incomes will have their pay boosted through a higher minimum wage of £10 an hour.
> 
> 9 - *Action to secure an equal society* - Labour will take action to tackle violence against women and girls, racism and discrimination on the basis of faith, and secure real equality for LGBT and disabled people.
> 
> 10 - *Peace and justice at the heart of foreign policy* - human rights and social justice will be built into trade policy, while international treaty obligations on nuclear disarmament will be honoured as it encourages others to do the same.
> 
> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/inew...neral-election-2017-labour-party-pledges/amp/


It all sounds lovely
But where is the money coming from

I Know, fleece the rich

But what happens when the rich leave the sinking ship and run off with all their money or puts it in offshore accounts

That will leave the rest of us in very deep, you know what

Wish I was rich enough to go if Mr Corbin wins


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> I am remaining impartial at the moment. I have not made a firm decision yet who I am voting for although the choices are extremely slim.
> 
> You're right in saying why haven't Labour done this in there last two terms in power.


Indeed but recalling the last two terms of the Tories in power resulted in the Poll Tax, "Employment Training" (paying dole+£10 for full time work), their often forgotten contribution to Bush Snr's Gulf War, interest rates in double figures and their objection to the minimum wage when Labour proposed this, saying it would result in job losses.

Yes, Labour's last two terms in government were far from perfect but compared to the above......


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> Problem is he needs to do something drastic to get the support he needs to win the General Election.
> 
> Corbyn's 10 GE Pledges:
> 1 - *Full Employment* - a publicly-owned National Investment Bank and regional banks will back up £500bn of investment across energy, transport and housing.
> 
> 2 - *A Secure Homes Guarantee* - over a million new homes in five years will be built, with at least half a million council homes, through its public investment strategy.
> 
> 3 - *Security at work* - people will have stronger employment rights "from day one in a job", an end to "exploitative zero hours contracts" and the creation of new sectoral collective bargaining rights.
> 
> 4 -* A secure NHS and social care* - an end to any NHS services being outsourced to private health providers.
> 
> 5 - *A National Education Service* - universal childcare to give all children a good start in life, allowing greater sharing of caring responsibilities and removing barriers to women participating in the labour market.
> 
> 6 - *Action to secure our environment *- an expansion of green industries, using the National Investment Bank to invest in public and community-owned renewable energy.
> 
> 7 - *Put the public back into our economy* - people will have "a real say in their local communities with increased local and regional democracy".
> 
> 8 - *Cut inequality in income and wealth*- the tax system will become "more progressive" so higher earners are "fairly taxed" and people on lower incomes will have their pay boosted through a higher minimum wage of £10 an hour.
> 
> 9 - *Action to secure an equal society* - Labour will take action to tackle violence against women and girls, racism and discrimination on the basis of faith, and secure real equality for LGBT and disabled people.
> 
> 10 - *Peace and justice at the heart of foreign policy* - human rights and social justice will be built into trade policy, while international treaty obligations on nuclear disarmament will be honoured as it encourages others to do the same.
> 
> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/inew...neral-election-2017-labour-party-pledges/amp/


He left off a holiday cottage by the sea for every family and free ice cream at weekends.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Wasn't that due to the global economic crisis? I wonder how the Tories who've increased the deficit despite austerity would have handled it?
> 
> My memories of Major's government were interest rates in double figures causing much hardship to those with mortgages. That never happened under Labour.
> 
> One of Brown's first achievement's as Chancellor was giving the responsibility of setting Interest rates from the government to the Bank of England. These are currently 0.25%!


Yes I remember Black Wednesday well and you should also remember it was caused by us entering the ERM (European Exchange Rate Mechanism)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/september/16/newsid_2519000/2519013.stm

All member countries agreed to keep their currency value within set limits linked to the German mark.

As a consequence they were forced to adopt the anti-inflation policies of the German Bundesbank.

Membership of the ERM has become a Brussels-imposed condition to joining the Euro - Europe's single currency.

Britain did not rejoin after 16 September 1992 - a day which became known as "Black Wednesday".

*1992: UK crashes out of ERM*
The government has suspended Britain's membership of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism.

The UK's prime minister and chancellor tried all day to prop up a failing pound and withdrawal from the monetary system the country joined two years ago was the last resort.

Chancellor Norman Lamont raised interest rates from 10% to 12%, then to 15%, and authorised the spending of billions of pounds to buy up the sterling being frantically sold on the currency markets.

But the measures failed to prevent the pound falling lower than its minimum level in the ERM.

The second rise in the interest rate was reversed by the beleaguered chancellor soon after the withdrawal from the ERM, setting it at 12%.



Arnie83 said:


> I'm pretty sure it isn't, having just checked the PDF. There's the executive summary mention that I quoted above, and the body of the dossier contains the following ...
> 
> 1000 km doesn't reach the UK, so, as far as I am aware, what you quoted was never claimed by Blair.
> 
> Lot's of people call him a liar, citing the claims regarding Iraqi WMD, and even cleverly misspell his name to prove it, but I like to see facts before I accept that an accusation is proven.
> 
> Having said that of course, he was a politician, and I've never come across one who was not "economical with the actualite" when it suited them.


Sorry haven't managed to find my copy of the dossier yet and if I'm wrong I will be more than happy to apologise. The bit you've quoted isn't the bit I was remembering though which had some reference to how many minutes (15 or 20 springs to mind) it would take for a weapon to reach us (although if I'm wrong it might have been to reach other bases).


----------



## 1290423

Bisbow said:


> It all sounds lovely
> But where is the money coming from
> 
> I Know, fleece the rich
> 
> But what happens when the rich leave the sinking ship and run off with all their money or puts it in offshore accounts
> 
> That will leave the rest of us in very deep, you know what
> 
> Wish I was rich enough to go if Mr Corbin wins


well i have come to a very important decision, i am going to base my vote on the party that pledges to every single one of us the gift of unicorn in order to stamp out emissions . Well, SERIOUSLY, let's face it sounds about as likely as some of the policies i have seen.


----------



## Satori

KittenKong said:


> I wonder how the Tories who've increased the deficit despite austerity.....


More lies.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> I am remaining impartial at the moment. I have not made a firm decision yet who I am voting for although the choices are extremely slim.
> 
> You're right in saying why haven't Labour done this in there last two terms in power.


Do you know who your candidates are yet? Apart from the incumbent MP who has declared he will be standing again we have no other candidates as of yet. I think the normal procedure for selection has been changed to allow for candidates to be put in place quickly but they can`t be declared until parliament has been dissolved? I should imagine parties in some constituencies had already their potential candidate for 2020 already lined up so can hit the ground running. Mine will probably still be mulling it over the day before the deadline!!


----------



## noushka05

Lurcherlad said:


> But, why didn't Labour do all these things during their last two terms in power?
> 
> Instead, they brought the country to it's knees, and we are still suffering for that.


When labour left power the economy was growing, millions were lifted out of poverty, the NHS achieved its greatest record of satisfaction. The tories have now borrowed more than every labour government combined & nearly tripled UK debt. Tory austerity has stifled our economy. Created the crisis our NHS, social care, mental health, fire service - all public services are now in crisis. They have created a homeless crisis, pushed millions of people into poverty with their changes to the benefits system. Labour for all their faults did a great many good things for society & for the environment.

Our society is breaking down, the country is in chaos - things have got far worse under the Tories.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

DT said:


> well i have come to a very important decision, i am going to base my vote on the party that pledges to every single one of us the gift of unicorn in order to stamp out emissions . Well, SERIOUSLY, let's face it sounds about as likely as some of the policies i have seen.


Didn`t Al Murray ( The Pub Landlord, in case I`ve got his name wrong!) pledge a free dog for everyone in his manifesto. He should have gone for unicorns cos dogs aren`t very environmentally friendly and at least the promise of a free unicorn would have given him something in common with the `real candidates` making pledges they can`t keep


----------



## rona

Bisbow said:


> Didn't Brown sell all our gold at give away prices


Had to pay the EU bill somehow


----------



## Lurcherlad

If we look hard enough we can find "evidence", " facts" and "figures" to back up pretty much any argument and viewpoint tbh

Within just a few seconds I found some to back up the Tories, and another to back up Labour 

I remain unconvinced by any Politicians - or anybody else either at the moment 

Roll on Election Day - let's get it over with :Yawn


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> When labour left power the economy was growing, millions were lifted out of poverty, the NHS achieved its greatest record of satisfaction. The tories have now borrowed more than every labour government combined & nearly tripled UK debt. Tory austerity has stifled our economy. Created the crisis our NHS, social care, mental health, fire service - all public services are now in crisis. They have created a homeless crisis, pushed millions of people into poverty with their changes to the benefits system. Labour for all their faults did a great many good things for society & for the environment.
> 
> Our society is breaking down, the country is in chaos - things have got far worse under the Tories.


You seem to have forgotten all about the global economic crisis which kicked off in 2008 and really began to bite in 2009/10. That was the reason for all this austerity in the first place. I doubt Labour would have managed any better, probably worse actually, than the coalition and the conservatives governments.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> As I've said twice already I don't dispute that Corbyn is anti war and was not involved in the Blair/Bush/Iraq fiasco. I made the comment simply to point out to another poster that Labour have lied in the past too and I note you are calling Blair a warmonger too.
> 
> I'm pretty sure it was in the dossier was about 50 pages long. I will try to find it but I only had a hard copy and I'm not sure what I did with it.
> 
> I think you will find he was disputing that a zero hours job exists not a zero hours contract.


I have always called Blair out for what he is - a warmonger. I'll never be an apologist for him or for anyone who engages in acts of barbarity. May too is a warmonger as her foreign policy proves.

Looking at her shameful voting record & her arms dealing how do you reconcile your support for her RPH?

Britain is now the second biggest arms dealer in the world - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...iggest-arms-dealer-in-the-world-a7225351.html


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> You seem to have forgotten all about the global economic crisis which kicked off in 2008 and really began to bite in 2009/10. That was the reason for all this austerity in the first place. I doubt Labour would have managed any better, probably worse actually, than the coalition and the conservatives governments.


Actually the economy was recovering when the tory coalition came to power.

Austerity soon put paid to that. It was a con to transfer public money into private pockets. Our NHS & public services cut to shreds. Whilst the poorest, ordinary workers suffered the wealth of the richest doubled. 'We're all in it together' my ass. We were conned.

Here, watch it from the horses mouth if you don't believe me.


----------



## noushka05

Lurcherlad said:


> If we look hard enough we can find "evidence", " facts" and "figures" to back up pretty much any argument and viewpoint tbh
> 
> Within just a few seconds I found some to back up the Tories, and another to back up Labour
> 
> I remain unconvinced by any Politicians - or anybody else either at the moment
> 
> Roll on Election Day - let's get it over with :Yawn


If you want to be informed, why not see what respected NGOs say & the consensual position of trusted experts LL.

The NHA Party for example was set up by professionals in the NHS to save it from destruction. If the NHS is something you feel strongly about you could check out what they are saying  Likewise Green NGOs. They have the facts about green issues & expose scandals & hold politicians to account.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Nah! Labour wouldn't have done that


Labour did bad things theres no denying it. I'll never be an apologist for anything bad they have done. But the Tories are modelling our NHS on the dire American health service. Where 3/4 of people with health insurance go bankrupt paying for health care. Corbyn wants to take our NHS back into public ownership. If the tories sweep to power who will stop them?


----------



## Honeys mum

noushka05 said:


> I'm interested to hear what you think about Owen Jones views @stockwellcat , @Honeys mum , @Creativecat ?


Well noush, I can agree with what he says about the Lib Dems, also some about the NHS.
Unfortunatley it will take a miracle whoever gets in to sort the NHS out. I just hope it's some one who can make a difference.
Our NHS is very precious


----------



## noushka05

Honeys mum said:


> Well noush, I can agree with what he says about the Lib Dems, also some about the NHS.
> Unfortunatley it will take a miracle whoever gets in to sort the NHS out. I just hope it's some one who can make a difference.
> Our NHS is very precious


Thank you for your thoughts HM. If you go on twitter you can check out what the NHS professionals are saying. There is hope but if the tories sweep to power with a landslide - theres no hope.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Actually the economy was recovering when the tory coalition came to power.
> 
> Austerity soon put paid to that. It was a con to transfer public money into private pockets. Our NHS & public services cut to shreds. Whilst the poorest, ordinary workers suffered the wealth of the richest doubled. 'We're all in it together' my ass. We were conned.
> 
> Here, watch it from the horses mouth if you don't believe me.


Not sure what point your making with the video, it's just Mr Osbourne being questioned about austerity measures and, as with all politicians, avoiding direct answers.

Genuine question because I can't remember, what did Labour do in it's last two years in response to the economic crisis?


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Not sure what point your making with the video, it's just Mr Osbourne being questioned about austerity measures and, as with all politicians, avoiding direct answers.
> 
> Genuine question because I can't remember, what did Labour do in it's last two years in response to the economic crisis?


No, that's not what it shows at all It shows Osborne _admitting_ UK had lowest debt in the G7 after the global banking crisis (thanks to labour). The tories have now increased debt to £1.7 Trillion

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ramesh-patel/growth-cameron-austerity_b_2007552.html


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> Labour did bad things theres no denying it. I'll never be an apologist for anything bad they have done. But the Tories are modelling our NHS on the dire American health service. Where 3/4 of people with health insurance go bankrupt paying for health care. Corbyn wants to take our NHS back into public ownership. If the tories sweep to power who will stop them?


Awh bless you noush xx
I know how much you care, and how you just want to fix everything, I so so so wish I could see it your way, I really do. But on the bright side noush, I havn,t decided how to vote yet. Xxxxxxx


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Awh bless you noush xx
> I know how much you care, and how you just want to fix everything, I so so so wish I could see it your way, I really do. But on the bright side noush, I havn,t decided how to vote yet. Xxxxxxx


I'll keep plugging away then:Hilarious


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> Where are these 'Christian values' of hers?


Why are you so obsessed with her Christianity? Would you be the same if she happened to be Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim or Hindu? We know her father was a clergyman...so what? You manage to mention it every day for some reason.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> I have always called Blair out for what he is - a warmonger. I'll never be an apologist for him or for anyone who engages in acts of barbarity. May too is a warmonger as her foreign policy proves.
> 
> Looking at her shameful voting record & her arms dealing how do you reconcile your support for her RPH?
> 
> Britain is now the second biggest arms dealer in the world - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...iggest-arms-dealer-in-the-world-a7225351.html
> 
> View attachment 307625


I don't know, I'll get back to you on that :Hilarious:Hilarious but plenty of people also carried on voting for Labour/Blair after Iraq, electing him/them for their 3rd term, Sometimes you have to go for a party/pm despite not agreeing with some/or even a lot of what they stand for because the alternative seems even worse. Seriously though I have said several times I'm undecided, more so than at the last election. I'm waiting to hear what they all have to say and will make my mind up then. Do you have any links to the NHA party you mentioned? I don't do twitter but would be interested to hear what they have to say although not in short tweets or memes but proper information/statistics.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> Genuine question because I can't remember, what did Labour do in it's last two years in response to the economic crisis?


First off they bailed out the banks, without which action things would have been a whole lot worse than they were, and were a leading voice in most western economies doing the same. (The Tories were calling for the banks to be allowed to fail for some inexplicable reason; but then they'd been calling for reduced regulation in the run-up to the crash.)

As @noushka05 says, they carried on boosting the economy and by 2010 had it growing at nearly 3% p.a. The plan was to halve the deficit during the 2010-15 parliament by 50% largely through that economic growth, which brings in more tax revenue and obviates the need for tax rises and / or public spending cuts.

Osborne said that he would eradicate the deficit in the same period through austerity measures, targeting the welfare state as what he saw as a win/win for Tory ideology. And of course he promptly strangled the economic growth to zero. Tax revenue slowed down, so he ended up delivering the same sort of deficit reduction that Labour had targeted. But he had managed to start dismantling the welfare state, so I expect he was jolly happy.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> No, that's not what it shows at all It shows Osborne _admitting_ UK had lowest debt in the G7 after the global banking crisis (thanks to labour). The tories have now increased debt to £1.7 Trillion
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ramesh-patel/growth-cameron-austerity_b_2007552.html


Well darn, didn't know what I was looking for so watched the whole thing!!

Yes I'm aware of the level of debt. Not particularly worried by it either at the moment.


----------



## leashedForLife

QUOTE, KittenKong:

Reminds me of the days I did casual work, before the days of statutory annual leave and indeed the minimum wage.

It's true those on such contracts can not be prevented from taking on other "jobs" but availability can become complicated and cause conflict.
One place could give you two hours, then another place a full eight hours but within the two hours you already agreed to do! I don't look back at those days with pleasure at all.

Of course zero hour contracts may suit some people, but it shouldn't be accepted as a normal way of employing people.

It's completely unacceptable - people classed as being in employment suffering great hardship, because their place of work are not giving them guaranteed work.
Anything to reverse this trend would be most welcome.

/QUOTE
.
.
in the U-S, "unlimited part-time" jobs are in this category - WalMart, CostCo, & other massive retail chains are notorious for underpaying & unfair labor practices, with a strict limit of 35-hrs per week, minimum wage, 'on call' with a specified time that U must arrive within being called [or U risk being fired!  ], etc.
.
one woman i knew in her 40s worked for a national retail chain - she lived 40-mins away, but was required to REPORT TO WORK within 30-mins if they called her to cover someone who didn't show / was sick, etc.  She had 2 children under school-age - how the H*** do U arrange child-care AND get dressed, atc, AND shave 10-mins off the driving time? 
She often drove halfway & waited, fully dressed, with her neighbor doing draft child-sitting, "in case". That's crazy.
.
.
"Right to work" states are another trial - U can be fired at any time, with no cause whatever, & no appeal. 
.
.
.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> First off they bailed out the banks, without which action things would have been a whole lot worse than they were, and were a leading voice in most western economies doing the same. (The Tories were calling for the banks to be allowed to fail for some inexplicable reason; but then they'd been calling for reduced regulation in the run-up to the crash.)
> 
> As @noushka05 says, they carried on boosting the economy and by 2010 had it growing at nearly 3% p.a. The plan was to halve the deficit during the 2010-15 parliament by 50% largely through that economic growth, which brings in more tax revenue and obviates the need for tax rises and / or public spending cuts.
> 
> Osborne said that he would eradicate the deficit in the same period through austerity measures, targeting the welfare state as what he saw as a win/win for Tory ideology. And of course he promptly strangled the economic growth to zero. Tax revenue slowed down, so he ended up delivering the same sort of deficit reduction that Labour had targeted. But he had managed to start dismantling the welfare state, so I expect he was jolly happy.


Personally I'm with the school of thought that the banks in need of bailout should have been allowed to fail. The bailout then goes to the UK individuals and businesses that were victims of the failed banks.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> Personally I'm with the school of thought that the banks in need of bailout should have been allowed to fail. The bailout then goes to the UK individuals and businesses that were victims of the failed banks.


Interesting notion. You'd have reimbursed the deposits of the individuals and businesses who were customers of RBS, Lloyds, Northern Rock, B&B ...

With a liquidity ratio in operation that would have cost several times more than the actual bail-out and wouldn't have included loans, so would have landed the government or the tax-payer with a bill of several trillion pounds.

Probably a good job Gordon Brown was in charge and not you!


----------



## 1290423

Arnie83 said:


> Interesting notion. You'd have reimbursed the deposits of the individuals and businesses who were customers of RBS, Lloyds, Northern Rock, B&B ...
> 
> With a liquidity ratio in operation that would have cost several times more than the actual bail-out and wouldn't have included loans, so would have landed the government or the tax-payer with a bill of several trillion pounds.
> 
> Probably a good job Gordon Brown was in charge and not you!


Pretty much agree as the individuals would have by law been covered by the fs .
But out of interest do you think perhaps there should have been some arrangement made whereby perhaps the government could have stated a future claim over any profits once those businesses had recovered.
Think some people do tend to choke about the amount of bonuses paid, albeit do appreciate that these bankers won't work for a pittance.
Asking as I am genuinely interested to hear another spin of this on.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> Interesting notion. You'd have reimbursed the deposits of the individuals and businesses who were customers of RBS, Lloyds, Northern Rock, B&B ...
> 
> With a liquidity ratio in operation that would have cost several times more than the actual bail-out and wouldn't have included loans, so would have landed the government or the tax-payer with a bill of several trillion pounds.
> 
> Probably a good job Gordon Brown was in charge and not you!


No what you do is pay back individual and businesses deposits. Loans/mortgages would be collected by the administrator and paid back to the government to cover the deposits paid. The cost to the tax payer would have been minimal - relatively, not minimal to the likes of you and I !!

Not sure Mr Brown was that great a chancellor, he did sell off half the UK's gold at rock bottom price, did help him reduce borrowing for a while. Bit short term though.


----------



## Arnie83

DT said:


> Pretty much agree as the individuals would have by law been covered by the fs .
> But out of interest do you think perhaps there should have been some arrangement made whereby perhaps the government could have stated a future claim over any profits once those businesses had recovered.
> Think some people do tend to choke about the amount of bonuses paid, albeit do appreciate that these bankers won't work for a pittance.
> Asking as I am genuinely interested to hear another spin of this on.


Well there has been a bank levy in operation since the crash, and that is supposed to be replaced by an 8% profit surcharge in 2021 (unless things have changed since the 2015 budget).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33444127

I guess the question you have to ask is what the government then do with the money they get from the banks. They don't seem to have used it to help those on benefits, while the top rate of tax has been reduced. You could argue that they've taxed the banks and then given the money raised straight back to the bankers!


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> No what you do is pay back individual and businesses deposits. Loans/mortgages would be collected by the administrator and paid back to the government to cover the deposits paid. The cost to the tax payer would have been minimal - relatively, not minimal to the likes of you and I !!
> 
> Not sure Mr Brown was that great a chancellor, he did sell off half the UK's gold at rock bottom price, did help him reduce borrowing for a while. Bit short term though.


Sounds a little to straightforward that, but liking the sound of it.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> No what you do is pay back individual and businesses deposits. Loans/mortgages would be collected by the administrator and paid back to the government to cover the deposits paid. The cost to the tax payer would have been minimal - relatively, not minimal to the likes of you and I !!
> 
> Not sure Mr Brown was that great a chancellor, he did sell off half the UK's gold at rock bottom price, did help him reduce borrowing for a while. Bit short term though.


What I mean is that the bail-out to the banks didn't have to cover anywhere near the actual level of deposits that showed on people's statements, but rather just enough to make the banks solvent. If the banks had been allowed to fail and those deposits were individually covered in full by the government the cost would have been astronomic. I suspect it would have been impossible by any means other than printing the stuff.

To quote the National Audit Office


> We reported in 2009 that "if the support measures had not been put in place, the scale of the economic and social costs if one or more major UK banks had collapsed is difficult to envision.


The gold sale story has almost reached mythical status and there's a lot of mitigation that is conveniently overlooked, but I'm not going to go into that here.


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> Sounds a little to straightforward that, but liking the sound of it.


Well yes, I'm sure that it'd be more complicated in practice but the principle is sound, I think!



Arnie83 said:


> What I mean is that the bail-out to the banks didn't have to cover anywhere near the actual level of deposits that showed on people's statements, but rather just enough to make the banks solvent. If the banks had been allowed to fail and those deposits were individually covered in full by the government the cost would have been astronomic. I suspect it would have been impossible by any means other than printing the stuff.


You are forgetting the loans/mortgages etc. And if they had far more on deposit than debit then the crisis wouldn't have occured (again I'm being simplistic).

I believe they did print more of the stuff anyway!!


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> Your forgetting the loans/mortgages etc. And if they had far more on deposit than debit then the crisis wouldn't have occured.


The point is that they didn't actually have it on deposit. Banks lend money they don't have on the assumption that people are not going to draw it all out; that's how banks work.

Google "fractional reserve banking" to see how it works.

That's why it's cheaper - much cheaper - to bail out (refloat) a bank than to reimburse all its depositors. Suffice it to say that the economy would have collapsed if the banks had failed, as per the National Audit Office conclusion.

But it isn't a topic for the 2017 election so I'll leave it there.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> The point is that they didn't actually have it on deposit. Banks lend money they don't have on the assumption that people are not going to draw it all out; that's how banks work.
> 
> Google "fractional reserve banking" to see how it works.
> 
> That's why it's cheaper - much cheaper - to bail out (refloat) a bank than to reimburse all its depositors. Suffice it to say that the economy would have collapsed if the banks had failed, as per the National Audit Office conclusion.
> 
> But it isn't a topic for the 2017 election so I'll leave it there.


That's exactly why it would be more beneficial to let them fold than bailout. More going out than coming in.


----------



## Guest

Here are a couple of examples of the best way to deal with recession:

Swedes borrow money to create jobs and ensure social welfare will be still there in bad times, when people really need it. Even conservatives do that.
Finns try to cut down as much as they dare.

Quess which nation get faster out of a recession and ends up with better economy? Yes, not us, but the Swedes. Thanks for them, our govermment don´t dare to make all the cuts they want to, as we know that is not the way out.
A nation´s economy just doesn´t work the same way as one´s Private financies.

Guess what happened to the latest "ideas" of our populist party (getting rid of Euro and EU) - 80% of people thought they were pure lunacy and commented that we already know what they can achieve if they have power. FA. 

One thing that is always puzzling many Nordic people about Britain. Britain is a rich country, (richer than Finland e.g) but the money doesn´t seem to go back to people. Why aren´t the schools better funded, or NHS or roads or social welfare? You have more money than we, but where does it go and why? Don´t be taken for a ride, demand better goverment than what you got now. You deserve it.


----------



## Honeys mum

noushka05 said:


> If you go on twitter you can check out what the NHS professionals are saying.


Thanks for that noush, but I'm afraid I don't do twitter.x


----------



## Happy Paws2

_"Theresa May has ruled out cuts to the UK foreign aid budget if she wins the election but doubts have been cast on other existing Conservative pledges._
*But she declined to guarantee existing spending on state pensions which ensures a minimum 2.5% annual increase.*
_So she'll look after other but doesn't care about pensioners"_

*Such a lovely lady, cares about others but to hell with her own.*


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> That's exactly why it would be more beneficial to let them fold than bailout. More going out than coming in.


Okay.


----------



## Elles

I think too many workers just don't get paid enough. Too many successful, wealthy companies paying minimum wage, or sneaking in these zero hours, or self employment that isn't, and the tax payer subsidising it with tax credits etc.


----------



## 1290423

Well six more weeks to go, but at this moment in time I adamant that the conservatives will NOT get my vote, that decision was made purely because she has pledged to continue with foreign aid. Whichever way it goes will not affect me, but that has gone against the grain x


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Well six more weeks to go, but at this moment in time I adamant that the conservatives will NOT get my vote, that decision was made purely because she has pledged to continue with foreign aid. Whichever way it goes will not affect me, but that has gone against the grain x


I am determined to not give my vote to the Conservatives because they are prepared to send millions/billions abroad (to some countries that don't need it) and let our NHS and this country go to ruin.


----------



## samuelsmiles

Well, after much naval gazing, I've decided to vote for Labour. I'm just so worn down by the uppity, angry, morally superior leftie's continual whining that I think they deserve to have a crack at it.

When I'm sitting in my little cottage, lit by candle light, and only the dogs to keep me warm, I'll be content in the knowledge that I've 'done the right thing.'

It's Corbyn for me. (Genuinely)


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> I am determined to not give my vote to the Conservatives because they are prepared to send millions/billions abroad (to some countries that don't need it) and let our NHS and this country go to ruin.


Just out of interest why did you join the Conservative Party? They had the policy for foreign aid in place then so why is it now a deal breaker for you?


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Just out of interest why did you join the Conservative Party?


 I suppose I got sucked in because at the time the Conservatives where the only party willing to honour the EU referendum results.


> They had the policy for foreign aid in place then so why is it now a deal breaker for you?


 It's not so much this policy it's several things that I am no longer comfortable about. Joining and resigning from Political parties is personal choice of those doing it.

This is probably the only chance the UK public will have to get them out of power until after 2022.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Deleted.


----------



## Satori

@noushka05 you seem to have recruited a second Mini-Me. What's the qualification? I am guessing it is anyone with a feline reference in their name?

@Creativecat , just in case, I hope that's a tinfoil hat your avatar wears. You might think you are immune but just look what happened. You don't want to end up like SC and KK.

It's a cult I tell you. A cult.


----------



## Satori

...---...


----------



## havoc

I'm beginning to think the Brexit negotiations were going even more badly than admitted and Ms May actually wants to lose so it isn't her problem any more. So far today she's upset pensioners and her chancellor has suggested he's up for a tax hike. There's only the poor, vulnerable and disabled left to piss off - ah no, already done so that's most of the electorate accounted for.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> @noushka05 you seem to have recruited a second Mini-Me. What's the qualification? I am guessing it is anyone with a feline reference in their name?
> 
> @Creativecat , just in case, I hope that's a tinfoil hat your avatar wears. You might think you are immune but just look what happened. You don't want to end up like SC and KK.
> 
> It's a cult I tell you. A cult.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> View attachment 307677
> 
> View attachment 307678
> 
> 
> So....
> View attachment 307680


Oh my word that is some U turn :Jawdrop


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> *...---...*


Goodie. Morse code. I'll get my morse code book out


----------



## stockwellcat.

havoc said:


> Ms May actually wants to lose


I have that feeling as well.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I suppose I got sucked in because at the time the Conservatives where the only party willing to honour the EU referendum results. It's not so much this policy it's several things that I am no longer comfortable about. Joining and resigning from Political parties is personal choice of those doing it.
> 
> This is probably the only chance the UK public will have to get them out of power until after 2022.


Tell you where I am stockwell
I want out the eu more the anything
But, I guess either way its not going to really have an impact with me.
But at think moment in time I dont like the way that may is talking.
Yet in the same breathe I dont want corbyn because, compassionate as he may be think its unfair that the idle, and I mean idle not ill get a free ticket, also don't think those who have worked hard and achieved should have to pay more and I think those working hard should get a fair wage not propped up by handouts.
Basically im lost, but don't want to waste my vote.


----------



## 1290423

This decision of who to vote for is far harder then the eu in out vote, that would still be early by comparison


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Basically im lost, but dont want to waist my vote.


You and me both.

I to don't like the way May is conducting herself at the moment and I still want out of the EU more than ever.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> You and me both.
> 
> I to don't like the way May is conducting herself at the moment and I still want out of the EU more than ever.


Think we had better get out thinking caps on stockwell.


----------



## Creativecat

havoc said:


> I'm beginning to think the Brexit negotiations were going even more badly than admitted and Ms May actually wants to lose so it isn't her problem any more. So far today she's upset pensioners and her chancellor has suggested he's up for a tax hike. There's only the poor, vulnerable and disabled left to piss off - ah no, already done so that's most of the electorate accounted for.


I'm so glad I wasn't the only one thinking that .. When I heared DC had congratulated her I thought something didn't sit right with me .
I just thought maybe she has offered a GE so in a twisted way let some other party deal with this mess.
Maybe I'm wrong and reading to much into it . But the way cameron got it so breathtakingingly wrong . I'm not so sure . And to find myself hoping that the Tories win and do the uk good . its so sad
Like hoping for the best team to emerge from the tunnel representing your local club but getting a load of beer bellied sunday afternoon slobs
With no intentions of winning !


----------



## FeelTheBern

Satori said:


> @noushka05 you seem to have recruited a second Mini-Me. What's the qualification? I am guessing it is anyone with a feline reference in their name?
> 
> @Creativecat , just in case, I hope that's a tinfoil hat your avatar wears. You might think you are immune but just look what happened. You don't want to end up like SC and KK.
> 
> It's a cult I tell you. A cult.


I will not be indoctrinated into this cult you speak of.


----------



## havoc

Creativecat said:


> I just thought maybe she has offered a GE so in a twisted way let some other party deal with this mess


The only part of her announcement I believed was that she wanted more power, never did think it was about more power for Brexit negotiations and I said straight away that was a smokescreen. A GE frees her from previous election promises and if they're making such admissions at this stage I have a nasty feeling we may be in for some tough times.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> Goodie. Morse code. I'll get my morse code book out


It is the distress signal SOS*

*[Save Our Stockwell]


----------



## Zaros

I think it has now reached the point where we have to be very careful of who we put our trust in.


----------



## Guest

DT said:


> Tell you where I am stockwell
> I want out the eu more the anything But, I guess either way its not going to really have an impact with me.
> But at think moment in time I dont like the way that may is talking.
> Yet in the same breathe I do want corbyn because, compassionate as he may be think its unfair that the idle, and I mean idle not ill get a free ticket, also don't think those who have worked hard and achieved should have to pay more and I think those working hard should get a fair wage not propped up by handouts.
> Basically im lost, but don't want to waste my vote.


I believe Labour will continue with Brexit, but have the "soft approach" . And trust me, even with Labour governments there will never be a free ticket, unless it saves money. We had many labour governments and it has never been a free ticket. Now we are experimenting "a free ticket" / social benefits for free for some people. Naturally the amount they get is little, (about 700€/month), you barely exist with that in Finland (and will need support for housing etc) but you don´t have to sign in and look for a job. The purpose is to cut down red tape, and believe that those, who want to look for work, will, and those who are not interested or cannot get a job, won´t burden the system.

I´d also think that changing Corbyn will be easier than changing May and hard Brexit terms.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> You and me both.
> 
> I to don't like the way May is conducting herself at the moment and I still want out of the EU more than ever.


I with you on the first bit and back to the apathy stage and don't really care who gets in.

Even beginning to not give a monkey's on leaving the EU now as well. A few months ago I thought politics was getting interesting, now it seems dull as ditchwater and repetitive.


----------



## havoc

MrsZee said:


> I believe Labour will continue with Brexit, but have the "soft approach"


I honestly don't think it will make a blind bit of difference whether whoever is in power claims a hard or soft approach. We'll get the Brexit we get. It's 27 to 1. There's a saying which goes something like "The race doesn't always go to the fleet or the fight to the strong - but it's sure as hell the way to bet".


----------



## 3dogs2cats

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 307693


Has there ever been a comprehensive study done on the reasons people don`t vote? They know who hasn`t voted, have they ever sent questionnaires out to the none voters? Most people I know who don`t vote say it`s because they think they are all the same so doesn`t matter who you vote for, or due to the majority the incumbent MP has the result is a forgone conclusion.


----------



## Satori

3dogs2cats said:


> Has there ever been a comprehensive study done on the reasons people don`t vote? They know who hasn`t voted, have they ever sent questionnaires out to the none voters? Most people I know who don`t vote say it`s because they think they are all the same so doesn`t matter who you vote for, or due to the majority the incumbent MP has the result is a forgone conclusion.


There has in the U.S. were the top reasons were... can't be bothered to register, can't be bothered going to the polling station, don't understand the policies, no single party fully fits with my views. By far the biggest factor was social status though; old educated and rich people vote, young uneducated and deprived peopled don't vote... generally. It likely the same in the U.K. I would guess.


----------



## Guest

havoc said:


> I honestly don't think it will make a blind bit of difference whether whoever is in power claims a hard or soft approach. We'll get the Brexit we get. It's 27 to 1. There's a saying which goes something like "The race doesn't always go to the fleet or the fight to the strong - but it's sure as hell the way to bet".


That could be so, as this is all a gamble now. I believe that at least with Labour you won´t so easily sacrifice the needy and nature. It will boil down to the question what matters most? Tax cuts and little limits for big companies or rights for animals/ workers and support for needy. Numbers and details matter, as behind each number and deal there will be thousands of people being affected by them. But what a gamble - like in the middle age, when a tyrant good gamble "a kingdom for a horse" . Madness, utter madness the way both brexit and elections are being handled.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 307693


I can assure you that I won't be under the finger pointing to Did Not Vote. I am undecided at the moment but red does seem like a colour that would suit me (but I am waiting to see what happens in the next few weeks), I have definitely gone off the tory bIue colour.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I can assure you that I won't be under the finger pointing to Did Not Vote. I am undecided at the moment but red does seem like a colour that would suit me (but I am waiting to see what happens in the next few weeks), I have definitely gone off the tory bIue colour.


Tell you what might, only might I add swing me, 
hypocrite diane abbot standing down, well that would be a big temptation


----------



## havoc

MrsZee said:


> I believe that at least with Labour you won´t so easily sacrifice the needy and


We've got a choice of hard right or hard left, neither of which is attractive. Basically we're up that dirty creek with no paddles in sight


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Tell you what might, only might I add swing me,
> hypocrite diane abbot standing down, well that would be a big temptation


I agree.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Satori said:


> There has in the U.S. were the top reasons were... can't be bothered to register, can't be bothered going to the polling station, don't understand the policies, no single party fully fits with my views. By far the biggest factor was social status though; old educated and rich people vote, young uneducated and deprived peopled don't vote... generally. It likely the same in the U.K. I would guess.


Yes I can imagine the same sort of reasons apply in the UK. The young seem to be either very keen on politics or have no interest at all. If they have no interest or feel they don`t fully understand they don`t vote, the elderly will vote regardless of interest or not.


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> We've got a choice of hard right or hard left, neither of which is attractive. Basically we're up that dirty creek with no paddles in sight


Lol sounds as bad as hobsons choice


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I agree.


Well, im the bearer of bad news mate!
Seems you n me cant change our mind, well least that's what someone on another thread hinted at! Looks like we are stuck with the cons, as we both know we cant waste our vote


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Well, im the bearer of bad news mate!
> Seems you n me cant change our mind, well least that's what someone on another thread hinted at! Looks like we are stuck with the cons, as we both know we cant waste our vote


I replied to the said thread


----------



## Happy Paws2

If they had a box on the voting form for "NONE OF THE ABOVE" I'm sure it would win.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I replied to the said thread


Duh! I know, but we need to make others aware, we don't want them breaking unmade laws do we now  other wise they,ll be telling us the outcome wasn't valid and dont know about you but I :Yawn dont think I can stand another twelve month of that


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

I've got nothing against people changing their minds, I might change mine too but only when the manifestos are out and I've heard what they all have to say and done my own research. @stockwellcat it does seem a bit drastic to swing in the space of one week from being a member of the Tory party (which isn't all about Mrs May anymore than it was all about Cameron) to posting memes calling for their downfall.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I've got nothing against people changing their minds, I might change mine too but only when the manifestos are out and I've heard what they all have to say and done my own research. @stockwellcat it does seem a bit drastic to swing in the space of one week from being a member of the Tory party (which isn't all about Mrs May anymore than it was all about Cameron) to posting memes calling for their downfall.


Well it's been a dramatic week in Politics. TM made a drastic decision and changed her mind about holding a GE, so I am not the only one to have made such a drastic U-turn this week. Many believe TM's decision to u-turn showed she is lying, but people are allowed to change there minds, TM did.


----------



## rona

DT said:


> Tell you what might, only might I add swing me,
> hypocrite* diane abbot* standing down, well that would be a big temptation


Urgh, can't stand that woman, even worse the Nicola.....

Deputy head is more a handicap to the Labour party than their leader, I actually quite like Jeremy and do have a sneaky respect for him. 
Pity I don't think he could lead our country out of the EU 

If it was a bog standard Election, I'd vote for him no problem


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> Urgh, can't stand that woman, even worse the Nicola.....
> 
> Deputy head is more a handicap to the Labour party than their leader, I actually quite like Jeremy and do have a sneaky respect for him.
> Pity I don't think he could lead our country out of the EU
> 
> If it was a bog standard Election, I'd vote for him no problem


I'm no fan of Diane Abbott myself but as regards Corbyn taking the UK out of the EU I'm sure he'll be as keen to do this, more so now that Trump has gone back on his word to put the UK first in trade deals.


----------



## Happy Paws2

rona said:


> Urgh, can't stand that woman, even worse the Nicola.....
> 
> Deputy head is more a handicap to the Labour party than their leader, *I actually quite like Jeremy and do have a sneaky respect for him.
> Pity I don't think he could lead our country out of the EU *
> 
> If it was a bog standard Election, I'd vote for him no problem


I may still give him a chance.


----------



## Honeys mum

Found this today, that's quite a few times to promise your not going to do something. Then go and do it.!
How many times did Theresa May promise not to call a #GeneralElection? | Leadership | Business Grapevine


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Well it's been a dramatic week in Politics. TM made a drastic decision and changed her mind about holding a GE, so I am not the only one to have made such a drastic U-turn this week. Many believe TM's decision to u-turn showed she is lying, but people are allowed to change there minds, TM did.


But May shouldn't have repeatedly said she would not hold an election then suddenly change her mind when the party is ahead in the opinion polls.

Whether a big lie or not this is a sign of someone very indecisive.

Not a sign of a good leader in my view.


----------



## Honeys mum

Could this be the reason for her big turnaround, who knows.
Theresa May and the Tories are putting party political interests above the interests of the nation as a whole


----------



## havoc

KittenKong said:


> this is a sign of someone very indecisive


Depends how recently she changed her mind


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Well it's been a dramatic week in Politics. TM made a drastic decision and changed her mind about holding a GE, so I am not the only one to have made such a drastic U-turn this week. Many believe TM's decision to u-turn showed she is lying, but people are allowed to change there minds, TM did.


Yes of course they are allowed to change their minds, I suspect many PM's over the years have done so, either because they have seen an opportunity (weak opposition) and decided to try and capitalise on it or because events force them to reassess situations (such as Cameron not getting his way with the referendum so deciding to quit early). I'm just struggling to understand how you can be posting pro Tory, pro May things and be a member of the party one minute and then posting anti May memes the next when we haven't seen the manifestos for any of the parties yet.


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> But May shouldn't have repeatedly said she would not hold an election then suddenly change her m
> 
> Whether a big lie or not this is a sign of someone very indecisive.
> .


Oh heck, I must have said over a hundred times, I would not eat chocolate until after the wedding next week!
Oh well, I can live with being a,liar
It was good


----------



## Honeys mum

Sounds like more broken promises.
General Election 2017: Tories deny tax hike claims if Theresa May wins election

Theresa May won't rule out tax rises after election
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/general-election-2017-tories-deny-084500853.html


----------



## Honeys mum

If you like having the NHS carved up and given away to the Tories' corporate - go ahead and vote Tory , but if you actually think it should be run as a not for profit public service, you really shouldn't.


----------



## Lurcherlad

Just learned that our local Tory won't be standing for re-election in June.

Interested to know who will replace him and how they roll.


----------



## KittenKong

This sudden General Election has certainly resulted in one thing not envisaged by TM. It has brought some Remainers and Brexiteers together but not in the way May had hoped for!


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> This sudden General Election has certainly resulted in one thing not envisaged by TM. It has brought some Remainers and Brexiteers together but not in the way May had hoped for!


Very true kittenkong


----------



## davidc

I will be voting Labour. If you are unsure of Corbyn's policies but considering voting for them, read them here: http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/how-many-of-jeremy-corbyns-policies-do.html?m=1


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> As long as it's tax avoidance rather than evasion he's doing nothing wrong. All businesses operate tax avoidance at some level, in fact Ltd companies have a duty to their share holders to do just that.


Its immoral & Governments should crack down on it. Obviously given her conflict of interests May wont be doing any cracking down.












DT said:


> Maybe so noush, dont disagree, but your little kitty friend seems,to keep pointing out uturns by the cons, yet doesnt seem to be aware of any from the other side, maybe shes, reading the wrong newspapers


Yes,KK is my friend so be nice!

I think they must hold the record for u-turns thought Sue:Hilarious

They've been forced to U-turn on some really destructive polices, if labour seats are cut -who will stand in their way? Look how they treat the poor & the vulnerable, that's how the tories would treat you if they could get away with it. They represent the greedy - & their greed is insatiable.



Bisbow said:


> Exactly, people on here keep moaning that the tories are ruining us and should do this and that but none of them condemn labour for not doing what they now want whilst they were in power
> But then. labour are the bees knees and can do no wrong, ever
> 
> Edit
> Didn't Brown sell all our gold at give away prices


I have never been an apologist for labour. I have condemned them for plenty of things Bisbow. Can you say the same about the Conservatives? How do you feel about their attacks on the disabled & the poorest in our society? The crisis now facing our NHS & in our public services? Their attacks on wildlife & the environment?



Bisbow said:


> It all sounds lovely
> But where is the money coming from
> 
> I Know, fleece the rich
> 
> But what happens when the rich leave the sinking ship and run off with all their money or puts it in offshore accounts
> 
> That will leave the rest of us in very deep, you know what
> 
> Wish I was rich enough to go if Mr Corbin wins


You're happy with tories fleecing the poor? Those who are least able to shoulder it? Its the offshore accounts progressive parties want to clamp down on. The tories want to turn this country into a tax haven. How then will we be able to fund a health service & public services?



Calvine said:


> Why are you so obsessed with her Christianity? Would you be the same if she happened to be Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim or Hindu? We know her father was a clergyman...so what? You manage to mention it every day for some reason.


I don't care what her religion. If shes spouting about religious values of kindness & compassion then being a total hypocrite I would call her out. She doesn't practice what she preaches, does she Calvine?



rottiepointerhouse said:


> I don't know, I'll get back to you on that :Hilarious:Hilarious but plenty of people also carried on voting for Labour/Blair after Iraq, electing him/them for their 3rd term, Sometimes you have to go for a party/pm despite not agreeing with some/or even a lot of what they stand for because the alternative seems even worse. Seriously though I have said several times I'm undecided, more so than at the last election. I'm waiting to hear what they all have to say and will make my mind up then. Do you have any links to the NHA party you mentioned? I don't do twitter but would be interested to hear what they have to say although not in short tweets or memes but proper information/statistics.


LOL.

But this is where I struggle. All evidence proves the tories are worse for wildlife, the environment, the majority of citizens, public services the NHS & even the economy. So answer me this then - what positives actually are there?:Hilarious

Heres the link to the NHA Party, RPH  http://nhap.org/

Here's their latest tweet.

*The NHA Party*‏@*NHAparty* 15m15 minutes ago

A vote for the Tories really is a vote for massive queues and
massive bed shortages as they complete their run down and sell off of our NHS.



Dr Pepper said:


> Well darn, didn't know what I was looking for so watched the whole thing!!
> 
> *Yes I'm aware of the level of debt. Not particularly worried by it either at the moment*.


Thought not












Satori said:


> @noushka05 you seem to have recruited a second Mini-Me. What's the qualification? I am guessing it is anyone with a feline reference in their name?
> 
> @Creativecat , just in case, I hope that's a tinfoil hat your avatar wears. You might think you are immune but just look what happened. You don't want to end up like SC and KK.
> 
> It's a cult I tell you. A cult.


I've got a new recruit & there's no cat references with this one:Hilarious I had a call the other night from a lovely pf member with very similar views to yourself. But she swore on her honour she would definitely not be voting tory - she was now voting for labour  Not to sound cultish or anything but I intend to hold her to her word. I'm considering drawing up a contract:Hilarious Any chance you could be tempted to step away from the dark-side?



Satori said:


> ...---...


...- --- - . / --. .-. . . -.

--- .-. / .-.. .- -... --- ..- .-.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes of course they are allowed to change their minds, I suspect many PM's over the years have done so, either because they have seen an opportunity (weak opposition) and decided to try and capitalise on it or because events force them to reassess situations (such as Cameron not getting his way with the referendum so deciding to quit early). I'm just struggling to understand how you can be posting pro Tory, pro May things and be a member of the party one minute and then posting anti May memes the next when we haven't seen the manifestos for any of the parties yet.


But the evidence is there for all to see. They've been in power now since 2010. Look at the rise in homelessness, poverty, foodbanks etc. Look at the state our NHS is in now. And our collapsing public services. Look how much UK debt has spiralled. Imagine what they will get away with if labour are obliterated?


----------



## noushka05

*Andrew Scattergood‏@**pr 20* 

As a firefighter, it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 Tory years,
the UK fire service has been decimated.
You are now less safe

Retweets 6,760

*Steph Varle‏@stephvarle * *20h20 hours ago* 

As a criminal #lawyer, it's my duty to inform you that 7 years of #Tory rule
have decimated #justice and made all of us more vulnerable.

*Michael Goulden‏@mikegoulden **Apr 21* 


It is my duty as a doctor to tell you and your family that after 7 years the NHS
is being systematically destroyed by this Tory government

*Chris Hill‏@HillyChris **Apr 21* 

As a teacher it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 Tory years schools
are on their knees. Your child's education is at stake
Retweets *5,478*

*Patti Russell*‏@*Patti_Russell1* Apr 21

As a lawyer it is my duty to inform the public that after
7 Tory years #*accesstojustice* is almost extinct #*legalaid*

*Joanne Harris‏Verified [email protected] * *Apr 21* 

As a writer it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 Tory years, libraries are
on their knees. Your children's dreams are at stake

*Jo*‏@*Joupnorth* Apr 21

As A Nurse it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 yrs #*Tory* Govt the
#*NHS* is on its knees. #*VoteLabour* #*NHSCrisis* #*GE2017*

*Kerry Flett*‏@*kerryflett* Apr 21

As a trainee NHS librarian, it's my duty to inform you that Jeremy Hunt's 7-day NHS
scheme is not backed up by the research.

*Barbara Campbell*‏@*militantbarb* Apr 20

As a nurse it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 Tory years the NHS has been decimated.
You and your children's health is at risk


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> Any chance you could be tempted to step away from the dark-side?


Easily. Like everyone I am not epistemically rational but economically rational. My deepest beliefs are yours for the purchase. Please send £1m in used notes.


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> Its immoral & Governments should crack ]
> 
> I've got a new recruit & there's no cat references with this one:Hilarious I had a call the other night from a lovely pf member with very similar views to yourself. But she swore on her honour she would definitely not be voting tory - she was now voting for labour  Not to sound cultish or anything but I intend to hold her to her word. I'm considering drawing up a contract:Hilarious Any chance you could be tempted to step away from the dark-side?
> 
> ...- --- - . / --. .-. . . -.
> 
> --- .-. / .-.. .- -... --- ..- .-.


Oh heck
That could be me but thought what I said was

I was indecided
But
50% the elvis bus pass party
50% the man with the red nose, green hair and big feet:Bawling

Oh ha.g on a minute, think that is labour


----------



## Satori

Happy Paws said:


> I may still give him a chance.


You won't be the only one. His campaign so far has been sparkling and May's rather lacklustre. He has been a long time preparing for the moment she calls a GE and left her in the dust out of the gate. I wonder if he has enough up his sleeve to last through to June? Could be an upset on the cards..


----------



## Satori

DT said:


> Oh heck
> That could be me but thought what I said was
> 
> I was indecided
> But
> 50% the elvis bus pass party
> 50% the man with the red nose, green hair and big feet:Bawling
> 
> Oh ha.g on a minute, think that is labour


I guessed as much. I'll be watching for you to start posting celebrity tweets; then I'll know the process is complete.


----------



## MilleD

noushka05 said:


> *Andrew Scattergood‏@**pr 20*
> 
> As a firefighter, it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 Tory years,
> the UK fire service has been decimated.
> You are now less safe
> 
> Retweets 6,760
> 
> *Steph Varle‏@stephvarle * *20h20 hours ago*
> 
> As a criminal #lawyer, it's my duty to inform you that 7 years of #Tory rule
> have decimated #justice and made all of us more vulnerable.
> 
> *Michael Goulden‏@mikegoulden **Apr 21*
> 
> It is my duty as a doctor to tell you and your family that after 7 years the NHS
> is being systematically destroyed by this Tory government
> 
> *Chris Hill‏@HillyChris **Apr 21*
> 
> As a teacher it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 Tory years schools
> are on their knees. Your child's education is at stake
> Retweets *5,478*
> 
> *Patti Russell*‏@*Patti_Russell1* Apr 21
> 
> As a lawyer it is my duty to inform the public that after
> 7 Tory years #*accesstojustice* is almost extinct #*legalaid*
> 
> *Joanne Harris‏Verified [email protected] * *Apr 21*
> 
> As a writer it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 Tory years, libraries are
> on their knees. Your children's dreams are at stake
> 
> *Jo*‏@*Joupnorth* Apr 21
> 
> As A Nurse it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 yrs #*Tory* Govt the
> #*NHS* is on its knees. #*VoteLabour* #*NHSCrisis* #*GE2017*
> 
> *Kerry Flett*‏@*kerryflett* Apr 21
> 
> As a trainee NHS librarian, it's my duty to inform you that Jeremy Hunt's 7-day NHS
> scheme is not backed up by the research.
> 
> *Barbara Campbell*‏@*militantbarb* Apr 20
> 
> As a nurse it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 Tory years the NHS has been decimated.
> You and your children's health is at risk


Phew, having no children it appears that most of these won't affect me


----------



## noushka05

[QUOTE="Satori, post: 1064841360, member: 1366180"]Easily. Like everyone I am not epistemically rational but economically rational. My deepest beliefs are yours for the purchase. Please send £1m in used notes.[/QUOTE]

You are so shamelessly mercenary:Hilarious I wish I was a trillionaire so I could bribe people to get out & vote for a progressive party lol. I'd give it to the poor & the disaffected though - do some good - TWICE.



DT said:


> Oh heck
> That could be me but thought what I said was
> 
> I was indecided
> But
> 50% the elvis bus pass party
> 50% the man with the red nose, green hair and big feet:Bawling
> 
> Oh ha.g on a minute, think that is labour**




OMG You know what you said missis This better not another u-turn:Hilarious

More words of warning ........................................................................................................................................................................................................
*
Andy Conway Morris*‏@*andymoz78* Apr 21

As a doctor it is my duty to confirm to the public that after 7 Tory years the
NHS has been decimated. Everyone's health is at risk

*Dancing Psychiatrist*‏@*Lollindialogue* 12h12 hours ago

As a doctor it is my duty to let public know that #*NHS* is being destroyed under this govt
The health of entire country= at stake in #*GE2017*

*Dr Dominic Pimenta*‏@*juniordrblog* Apr 21

It's my duty as a doctor to tell you that the #*NHS* is dying under this govt.
Please register to vote & do so wisely. https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote…

*Cllr Chris Goodwin*‏@*ChrisGoodwin73* 12h12 hours ago

As a Councillor it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 Tory years Councils are on their knees.
Your local services are at risk.

*Hannah Davis_*‏@*HannahDavis__*

As A Nurse, It's My Duty To Inform The Public That After 7 *Tory* Years,
The #*NHS* Has Been Decimated. Cancer Waiting Times Are Getting Longer.

*Prison_Recovery*‏@*Prison_Recovery* 2h2 hours ago

As a prison gov its my duty to inform public, after 7 *Tory* yrs prisoners are at at risk
in custody & public are at serious risk on release!

*Didji-aye*‏@*johnnyf50* 7h7 hours ago

As a Scot who has lived in Australia for 7 years, it is my duty to inform the public that if you vote *Tory*, you're completely f*****d

*Kayleigh Kavanagh*‏@*kayleigh_kav* 8h8 hours ago

As a disabled person in Britain I ask you watch #*IDanielBlake* before the #*GeneralElection*
see the reality of the *Tory* cuts on the vulnerable

*Helen Robinson*‏@*HelenRobinson67* 8h8 hours ago

As a disability and welfare benefits caseworker it is my duty to inform
that after 7 *Tory* years the welfare system has been decimated

*haron Taylor*‏@*SharonStevenage* 21h21 hours ago

As a local government leader it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 Tory years
local public services have been decimated

*Saroop Moughal*‏@*poeticallytold* 9h9 hours ago

As a student it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 *Tory* years my bank account is on its knees.
Your child's loans are at stake

*Peter Kirkham*‏@*Peter_Kirkham* 12h12 hours ago

As a former cop, it is my duty to inform the public that after seven Tory years policing is on its knees.
Public safety is at stake.


----------



## MilleD

Jezza says we should have 4 more bank holidays. Although some of them are already bank holidays in some parts of the UK.


----------



## noushka05

Look who's out campaigning for Labour @stockwellcat! Captain Picard!!

Patrick Stewart is such a lovely man. My Grandad was like his father, this is where mine & my cousins values come from, he was a huge influence on our lives.

_
"My father was a very strong trade unionist and those fundamental issues of Labour were ingrained into me"_


----------



## stockwellcat.

Imagine it's 9th June 2017 Corbyn has won the UK General Election with a shocking landslide victory even though the polls where against him. How would you feel?

_James Whale
Sky News
23/04/2017_


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> Imagine it's 9th June 2017 Corbyn has won the UK General Election with a shocking landslide victory even though the polls where against him. How would you feel?
> 
> _James Whale
> Sky News
> 23/04/2017_


Worried.............


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Imagine it's 9th June 2017 Corbyn has won the UK General Election with a shocking landslide victory even though the polls where against him. How would you feel?
> 
> _James Whale
> Sky News
> 23/04/2017_


Scared.


----------



## kimthecat

Anxious.


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> Imagine it's 9th June 2017 Corbyn has won the UK General Election with a shocking landslide victory even though the polls where against him. How would you feel?
> 
> _James Whale
> Sky News
> 23/04/2017_





rona said:


> Worried.............


If it was 2022 though I'd feel quite optimistic. However, at his age I'm not sure he'll be fit enough or even here in 2022


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> She doesn't practise what she preaches


Not many politicians do.


----------



## stockwellcat.

stockwellcat said:


> Imagine it's 9th June 2017 Corbyn has won the UK General Election with a shocking landslide victory even though the polls where against him. How would you feel?
> 
> _James Whale
> Sky News
> 23/04/2017_


I would feel anxious, worried and scared.

Anxious because I don't know what to expect.

Worried for many reasons

Scared that the UK may have made the wrong decision.

My position is still the same about who I am going to vote for, that is undecided.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I've got nothing against people changing their minds, I might change mine too but only when the manifestos are out and I've heard what they all have to say and done my own research. @stockwellcat it does seem a bit drastic to swing in the space of one week from being a member of the Tory party (which isn't all about Mrs May anymore than it was all about Cameron) to posting memes calling for their downfall.


I have deleted the memes in post 706.

I am remaining impartial from now on until I have made my decision, as even I don't know which way I am voting yet.

Hopefully the election pledges and manifestos will help me decide from all parties?


----------



## davidc

The newspaper polls may have Theresa May in the lead for next prime minister but an ITV poll (which more people will have seen) has Corbyn well in the lead. It's almost as if the newspapers want another Tory goverent...

http://www.itv.com/thismorning/hot-topics/poll-who-do-you-want-to-be-the-next-prime-minister


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> Scared that the UK may have made the wrong decision.


But my guess is that you would not spend the next year whingeing, whining and bellyaching about it, @stockwellcat, no matter how shocked or disappointed you were.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Imagine it's 9th June 2017 Corbyn has won the UK General Election with a shocking landslide victory even though the polls where against him. How would you feel?
> 
> _James Whale
> Sky News
> 23/04/2017_


Hopeful, I feel scared about my family's future under the current government. I'm not sure about labour, but I am sure about the Tories...


----------



## Happy Paws2

noushka05 said:


> Look who's out campaigning for Labour @stockwellcat! Captain Picard!!
> 
> Patrick Stewart is such a lovely man. My Grandad was like his father, this is where mine & my cousins values come from, he was a huge influence on our lives.
> 
> _
> "My father was a very strong trade unionist and those fundamental issues of Labour were ingrained into me"_
> 
> View attachment 307913


I knew there was I good reason apart from him been John Luc Picard why I love this man.


----------



## stuaz

I am thinking at the moment we are heading towards another coalition government. I am not convinced the Tories are going to get a landslide...


----------



## stockwellcat.

stuaz said:


> I am thinking at the moment we are heading towards another coalition government. I am not convinced the Tories are going to get a landslide...


May and Corbyn in a coalition maybe?


----------



## stuaz

stockwellcat said:


> May and Corbyn in a coalition maybe?


Now that would be a sight to see!

Although I am thinking more Lib-Lab coalition.

The liberal democrats I don't think will go with the tories again.


----------



## stockwellcat.

stuaz said:


> Now that would be a sight to see!
> 
> Although I am thinking more Lib-Lab coalition.
> 
> The liberal democrats I don't think will go with the tories again.


The Tories won't have Lib Dems again I don't think.

That would be interesting Lab-Lib as libs want to remain and labour are siding with leave.


----------



## Happy Paws2

stockwellcat said:


> Imagine it's 9th June 2017 Corbyn has won the UK General Election with a shocking landslide victory even though the polls where against him. *How would you feel?*
> 
> _James Whale
> Sky News
> 23/04/2017_


Much better than I have over the last few years.


----------



## Guest

stockwellcat said:


> May and Corbyn in a coalition maybe?


We have had lots of time social democrats and conservatives in the same government - as a result politics is dull, but effective... Usually the biggest problem for journalist have been how to spot the differences with party policies... but now after having three conservative parties, the result was disastrous, so we really need some sort of socialist influence in politics, with lots of green ideas backed up with people with economical sense. Maybe next time we´ll get that.

It was interesting to read how Daili Mail twisted the message by Sampo Terho/ populist party member, who is campaigning to take lead. Terho is trying desperately to suggest we should get out of EU and euro and forecasted that this could happen. Just about everybody else but the minority of populist party thought he was an idiot living in a never never land. Daily Mail said "Finland likely to quit euro", lawmaker says... (lawmaker means he is part of this committee as one of the many MPs, which is dealing with legislation, he himself doesn´t make any laws)

No wonder Brits are in trouble, if news are just like this, another piece of fake news. Did anyone even question that? But then I wonder why they need to resorty to fake news, doesn´t Daily Mail have any real news to back up it´s policies? Looks like it doesn´t.


----------



## Happy Paws2

stockwellcat said:


> May and Corbyn in a coalition maybe?


Bl**dy hell, the stuff of nightmares.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stuaz said:


> I am thinking at the moment we are heading towards another coalition government. I am not convinced the Tories are going to get a landslide...


I think you might be right - not the foregone conclusion people were predicting I don't think.


----------



## havoc

There's a way to go yet. The winners will be whoever manages best to keep their mouths closed rather than opening up only to stick feet in. So far Corbyn is doing OK but the Trotskyite cabal won't be able to help themselves.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Imagine it's 9th June 2017 Corbyn has won the UK General Election with a shocking landslide victory even though the polls where against him. How would you feel?
> 
> _James Whale
> Sky News
> 23/04/2017_


In need of alcoholic beverages.


----------



## Arnie83

When Labour eventually publish their manifesto - and currently they're still asking for suggestions; you can contribute here if you like - and someone asks them how they're going to pay for it all, I suspect any narrowing of the polls will shift double quick to a widening .


----------



## Team_Trouble

I have joined the Labour Party.

My constituency was lib dem from 1992 until 2015, when the tories won. If the lib dem MP stands again, I will probably vote for him as the most likely majority against the tories, but I'll wait and see how the land lies.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Imagine it's 9th June 2017 Corbyn has won the UK General Election with a shocking landslide victory even though the polls where against him. How would you feel?
> 
> _James Whale
> Sky News
> 23/04/2017_


I'd feel hopeful for the first time in years. Hopeful we could save our NHS, our badgers, our environment. And hopeful we could help the millions pushed into poverty by the tories.

More words of warning -
*
jayne cameron*‏@*jaynecameron2* Apr 22

As a nurse I have a #*publicduty* to tell you the Tories are destroying the NHS
I see the effects every day

*Ritson*‏@*JoRitson* Apr 21

as a welfare advisor it is my duty to tell you that after 7 tory years disabled ppl are denied rights, independence & dignity

*Swerdna*‏@*SwerdnaKi* 18h18 hours ago

As a social worker it's my #*publicduty* to inform you that 7 Tory years has
stripped funding of services & children's safety is at stake

*Jane Darling*‏@*janeydarling1* 22h22 hours ago

As a care worker I have a #*publicduty* to tell you Tory cuts
are putting vulnerable people's lives at risk every day

*Philip Lee*‏@*drphiliplee1* 15h15 hours ago

As a consultant physician/geriatrician, I have a duty to inform you that after 7yrs of Tories,
the #*NHS* is in a critical condition #*GE2017*

*Staircase2* 2h2 hours ago

As a musician it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 Tory yrs music education has been decimated Your child's education is at risk


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> May and Corbyn in a coalition maybe?


That will never happen, the Labour party is the official opposition party. Plus May & Corbyn are poles apart. Check out their voting histories SWC. May represents big business & the elite, while Corbyn represents ordinary people.



stuaz said:


> Now that would be a sight to see!
> 
> Although I am thinking more Lib-Lab coalition.
> 
> The liberal democrats I don't think will go with the tories again.





stockwellcat said:


> The Tories won't have Lib Dems again I don't think.
> 
> That would be interesting Lab-Lib as libs want to remain and labour are siding with leave.


I think the libs dems would team up the tories again. Sadly.


----------



## noushka05

Arnie83 said:


> When Labour eventually publish their manifesto - and currently they're still asking for suggestions; you can contribute here if you like - and someone asks them how they're going to pay for it all, I suspect any narrowing of the polls will shift double quick to a widening .












The media will never treat labour fairly whatever their policies. If they held the government to account instead of the opposition the public might see how bad the tories really are.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> Not many politicians do.


And not many politicians take £3Billion from the disabled either. What a lovely vicars daughter...


----------



## cheekyscrip

Think...only think...we could have had David.
Maybe no Cameron, no referendum, no Brexit , no Corbyn....


Britain great and strong.


Why, why just looking after their own butt and not seeing beyond that Labour grandees went for unelectable Ed?


Weird and plastic ED?


Why three line whip for Brexit if Corbyn is supposed to represent" the people"?
Because May threaten him with snap election!!! 
He could have allowed his MPs free hand...and let her call the election if she pleases....

Sadly, I do not see anyone fit to lead the nation except Nicola Sturgeon.


Sadly...Scotland seem to have much more sensible policies that any big English party.


----------



## noushka05

Vote UKIP & lets bring back the guillotine Wow.


----------



## stockwellcat.

I have made my decision. I am voting Labour.


----------



## noushka05

These are the cuts Theresa May has planned for our already struggling fire services.


----------



## Colliebarmy

noushka05 said:


> Vote UKIP & lets bring back the guillotine Wow.
> 
> View attachment 307968


Not a bad idea


----------



## Colliebarmy

noushka05 said:


> These are the cuts Theresa May has planned for our already struggling fire services.
> 
> View attachment 307969


There have been big improvements in fire prevention and furnishing standards, smoke detectors too...........


----------



## Colliebarmy

noushka05 said:


> I'd feel hopeful for the first time in years. Hopeful we could save our NHS, our badgers, our environment. And hopeful we could help the millions pushed into poverty by the tories.
> 
> More words of warning -
> *
> jayne cameron*‏@*jaynecameron2* Apr 22
> 
> As a nurse I have a #*publicduty* to tell you the Tories are destroying the NHS
> I see the effects every day
> 
> *Ritson*‏@*JoRitson* Apr 21
> 
> as a welfare advisor it is my duty to tell you that after 7 tory years disabled ppl are denied rights, independence & dignity
> 
> *Swerdna*‏@*SwerdnaKi* 18h18 hours ago
> 
> As a social worker it's my #*publicduty* to inform you that 7 Tory years has
> stripped funding of services & children's safety is at stake
> 
> *Jane Darling*‏@*janeydarling1* 22h22 hours ago
> 
> As a care worker I have a #*publicduty* to tell you Tory cuts
> are putting vulnerable people's lives at risk every day
> 
> *Philip Lee*‏@*drphiliplee1* 15h15 hours ago
> 
> As a consultant physician/geriatrician, I have a duty to inform you that after 7yrs of Tories,
> the #*NHS* is in a critical condition #*GE2017*
> 
> *Staircase2* 2h2 hours ago
> 
> As a musician it is my duty to inform the public that after 7 Tory yrs music education has been decimated Your child's education is at risk
> 
> View attachment 307956


Posting the wrong picture

Born into wealth..................Viscount Stansgate

Gave up his title, kept the money


----------



## noushka05

Colliebarmy said:


> Posting the wrong picture
> 
> Born into wealth..................Viscount Stansgate
> 
> Gave up his title, kept the money


Who cares if he had money, he fought for a better life for those who didn't & that's all that matters to me. You can be rich & still have social values you know.


----------



## noushka05

Junior Dr blog >>>

WATCH & SHARE please.
Do you understand what is happening to the *NHS*? 
#*GE2017*


----------



## Arnie83

noushka05 said:


> View attachment 307960
> 
> 
> The media will never treat labour fairly whatever their policies. If they held the government to account instead of the opposition the public might see how bad the tories really are.


Interesting, but there is plenty to argue about in there should one feel the urge.

The first one - and there are others which follow the same logic - increases Corporation Tax and claims a £64 billion saving to the taxpayer. Are companies not taxpayers too? And would they not recover their costs by increasing prices or reducing staff numbers?

The third one - a £10 per hour minimum wage (which I like) - paid for by 'private sector bosses'. Does that apply to public sector pay too? Are private sector bosses not tax payers? Would they not pass on the costs in increased prices or lower workforce numbers?

etc.

No matter how laudable the intentions and the help for the less well off, there are consequences to all the suggestions, which are not very well examined and which cost money. E.g. saying that re-nationalisation won't cost the tax-payer anything is making some pretty heroic assumptions about how it will operate once it's under public control. In the past nationalisation wasn't exactly synonymous with leanness and efficiency!

And local authorities borrowing money? No dangers there as they try to spend their way to success in the next council election and let future administrations pay for it!

And there isn't anything there about the half a _*trillion*_ pounds that Corbyn intends to borrow centrally for infrastructure investment. Are the electorate going to be in favour of that after 7 years of austerity to pay off (some of) the last borrowing spree, however necessary it may have been.

As I say, I like a lot of the ideas, but there are big costs involved, some of which are hidden, some consequential, and some downright scary. I don't think the voters will risk it.


----------



## KittenKong

KatieandOliver said:


> I have joined the Labour Party.
> 
> My constituency was lib dem from 1992 until 2015, when the tories won. If the lib dem MP stands again, I will probably vote for him as the most likely majority against the tories, but I'll wait and see how the land lies.


https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...SbID4eRKwztzY9KSI_2BMaI1bU8/htmlview?sle=true










I'm voting Labour for tactical reasons as I don't want the Tories winning in my area.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...SbID4eRKwztzY9KSI_2BMaI1bU8/htmlview?sle=true
> 
> View attachment 307979
> 
> 
> I'm voting Labour for tactical reasons as I don't want the Tories winning in my area.


have you ever had a virus on your machine or been hacked?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Withdrawn this comment and decision.


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> I think the libs dems would team up the tories again. Sadly.


Well, unless Farron becomes a hard Brexiteer overnight I can't see him going in to coalition with TM.

Besides, I want the Lib Dems to do well in those areas, mostly in the South of England, where a vote for Labour is a wasted vote.

It was the collapse in support for the Lib Dems in those areas which resulted in the majority Tory victory in 2015.


----------



## Odin_cat

KittenKong said:


> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...SbID4eRKwztzY9KSI_2BMaI1bU8/htmlview?sle=true
> 
> View attachment 307979
> 
> 
> I'm voting Labour for tactical reasons as I don't want the Tories winning in my area.


Any ideas how they work it out? It tells me to vote labour but labour only came 2nd because the Libdems lost 20% of their votes. The area was very pro remain so I think they will regain a significant amount of that...interesting stuff!


----------



## noushka05

Arnie83 said:


> Interesting, but there is plenty to argue about in there should one feel the urge.
> 
> The first one - and there are others which follow the same logic - increases Corporation Tax and claims a £64 billion saving to the taxpayer. Are companies not taxpayers too? And would they not recover their costs by increasing prices or reducing staff numbers?
> 
> The third one - a £10 per hour minimum wage (which I like) - paid for by 'private sector bosses'. Does that apply to public sector pay too? Are private sector bosses not tax payers? Would they not pass on the costs in increased prices or lower workforce numbers?
> 
> etc.
> 
> No matter how laudable the intentions and the help for the less well off, there are consequences to all the suggestions, which are not very well examined and which cost money. E.g. saying that re-nationalisation won't cost the tax-payer anything is making some pretty heroic assumptions about how it will operate once it's under public control. In the past nationalisation wasn't exactly synonymous with leanness and efficiency!
> 
> And local authorities borrowing money? No dangers there as they try to spend their way to success in the next council election and let future administrations pay for it!
> 
> And there isn't anything there about the half a _*trillion*_ pounds that Corbyn intends to borrow centrally for infrastructure investment. Are the electorate going to be in favour of that after 7 years of austerity to pay off (some of) the last borrowing spree, however necessary it may have been.
> 
> As I say, I like a lot of the ideas, but there are big costs involved, some of which are hidden, some consequential, and some downright scary. I don't think the voters will risk it.


Austerity didn't pay off any of the borrowing spree though, the tories borrowed even more & tripled the debt. Where has all that money gone from their imposed austerity? I wonder. They are the ones we should be concerned about with the economy.

Privatisation usually costs us a lot more for worse services Arnie. Look at our railways & our NHS as examples. Our taxes are now going into private pockets instead of directly where they're needed. Both services are in crisis.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> Interesting, but there is plenty to argue about in there should one feel the urge.
> 
> The first one - and there are others which follow the same logic - increases Corporation Tax and claims a £64 billion saving to the taxpayer. Are companies not taxpayers too? And would they not recover their costs by increasing prices or reducing staff numbers?
> 
> The third one - a £10 per hour minimum wage (which I like) - paid for by 'private sector bosses'. Does that apply to public sector pay too? Are private sector bosses not tax payers? Would they not pass on the costs in increased prices or lower workforce numbers?
> 
> etc.
> 
> No matter how laudable the intentions and the help for the less well off, there are consequences to all the suggestions, which are not very well examined and which cost money. E.g. saying that re-nationalisation won't cost the tax-payer anything is making some pretty heroic assumptions about how it will operate once it's under public control. In the past nationalisation wasn't exactly synonymous with leanness and efficiency!
> 
> And local authorities borrowing money? No dangers there as they try to spend their way to success in the next council election and let future administrations pay for it!
> 
> And there isn't anything there about the half a _*trillion*_ pounds that Corbyn intends to borrow centrally for infrastructure investment. Are the electorate going to be in favour of that after 7 years of austerity to pay off (some of) the last borrowing spree, however necessary it may have been.
> 
> As I say, I like a lot of the ideas, but there are big costs involved, some of which are hidden, some consequential, and some downright scary. I don't think the voters will risk it.


Labour don't think things through, just promise lots of lovey dovey ideas. Take his extra four days of bank holidays a year, a small business employing just ten people suddenly has to pay forty days more holiday pay and pay overtime or take on more staff to fulfill the lost days. It'll finish a lot of businesses and create more unemployment and more state borrowing.

People may not like the conservatives looking after businesses (they don't so much anymore anyway), but looking after businesses looks after the workers and in turn produces tax revenues and decreases government expenditure.


----------



## stuaz

noushka05 said:


> And not many politicians take £3Billion from the disabled either. What a lovely vicars daughter...


Why do you keep making references to May's religion? Seen you do it quite a bit in the form of various remarks and I don't understand the relevance?


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> Well, unless Farron becomes a hard Brexiteer overnight I can't see him going in to coalition with TM.
> 
> Besides, I want the Lib Dems to do well in those areas, mostly in the South of England, where a vote for Labour is a wasted vote.
> 
> It was the collapse in support for the Lib Dems in those areas which resulted in the majority Tory victory in 2015.


And the reason the lib dems collapsed in the first place was because they teamed up with the tories. They were complicit in many of the tories destructive austerity policies & the sell off of our NHS. They were punished. Listen to the shift in tone from the lib dems - they've gone from 'we'll stop brexit' to 'we will stop a hard brexit'. They are positioning themselves for another coalition with the tories.


----------



## noushka05

stuaz said:


> Why do you keep making references to May's religion? Seen you do it quite a bit in the form of various remarks and I don't understand the relevance?


The relevance is this -


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Labour don't think things through, just promise lots of lovey dovey ideas. Take his extra four days of bank holidays a year, a small business employing just ten people suddenly has to pay forty days more holiday pay and pay overtime or take on more staff to fulfill the lost days. It'll finish a lot of businesses and create more unemployment and more state borrowing.
> 
> People may not like the conservatives looking after businesses (they don't so much anymore anyway), but looking after businesses looks after the workers and in turn produces tax revenues and decreases government expenditure.


We have the lowest number of Public Holidays of any country in the G20.


----------



## Arnie83

noushka05 said:


> Austerity didn't pay off any of the borrowing spree though, the tories borrowed even more & tripled the debt. Where has all that money gone from their imposed austerity? I wonder. They are the ones we should be concerned about with the economy.


I don't disagree, but perception is all, and many people believe the blame for the crash lies squarely with Labour overspending. It's the easiest thing in the world for the Tories to point at half a trillion of extra borrowing and claim it's the same old Labour; can't trust them with the economy, especially with Brexit coming and a steady hand needed etc etc.



noushka05 said:


> Privatisation usually costs us a lot more for worse services Arnie. Look at our railways & our NHS as examples. Our taxes are now going into private pockets instead of directly where they're needed. Both services are in crisis.


I think I'd have to look up the figures to see, something that most voters don't do.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> We have the lowest number of Public Holidays of any country in the G20.
> 
> View attachment 307981


Now show me a graph with statutory annual leave not just bank holidays (I'm on a mobile so can't do it!). Looks a lot different.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> Labour don't think things through, just promise lots of lovey dovey ideas. Take his extra four days of bank holidays a year, a small business employing just ten people suddenly has to pay forty days more holiday pay and pay overtime or take on more staff to fulfill the lost days. It'll finish a lot of businesses and create more unemployment and more state borrowing.
> 
> People may not like the conservatives looking after businesses (they don't so much anymore anyway), but looking after businesses looks after the workers and in turn produces tax revenues and decreases government expenditure.


I agree.

While I have a healthy cyncism regarding trickle-down economics, I don't go as far as the current Labour leadership who obviously think they can squeeze the private sector with economic impunity. Especially when Brexit is looking likely to depress the economy significantly.


----------



## noushka05

*Dr Alex Gates*‏@*dr_alex_gates* 51m51 minutes ago

As a junior Dr I've seen 1st-hand the Tories' damaging attacks on the NHS.
I've protested & striked.
They just don't care. #*notanother5years*

My article explained why NHS is not safe in Theresa May's hands.

Now YOU have chance to stop the Tories from doing more damage #*GE2017*

*Crisis means crisis, Theresa May - and it's caused by underfunding and ignorance.*

Dr Alex Gates, an NHS doctor from Bath, says chronic underfunding and wilful ignorance are at the heart of the genuine crisis facing the NHS

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/crisis-means-crisis-theresa-its-9615405#ICID=sharebar_twitter


----------



## noushka05

Arnie83 said:


> I agree.
> 
> While I have a healthy cyncism regarding trickle-down economics, I don't go as far as the current Labour leadership who obviously think they can squeeze the private sector with economic impunity. Especially when Brexit is looking likely to depress the economy significantly.


We know its even more crippling austerity with the tories. Ramped up privatisation of our NHS & sell off of our cash generating public assets. I'm sure there will always be privatisation even under Corbyn, there aren't that many to left of the party.

We know trickle down economics was just a con by the neoliberals.


----------



## stockwellcat.

I have sent Labour some great ideas to help form there manifesto including:

Stop making cuts to NHS and invest more money into the NHS.
Reopen some of the closed A&E departments.
Offer Nurses a worthy pay rise.
Offer an alternative Brexit plan to the Conservatives plan for Brexit.
Increase the amount of armed forces personnel.
Protect animal welfare rights during and after Brexit.
Give more money to local councils instead of cutting there services.
Give a guarantee to protect the environment and improve environmental standards in the UK.
Help tackle the homeless problem and housing crisis.
The pledge I have asked them to put on the pledge card is this:
Stop NHS cuts, invest more money into the NHS and offer nurses a worthy pay rise.

I could only submit one pledge as it will only let you submit one.

You don't have to be a Labour member to submit you manifesto ideas, have ago:
http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php/shapeourmanifesto/

I believe the Labour party want our input so they can say they are the party that listens to the people of the UK.


----------



## Team_Trouble

stockwellcat said:


> I have sent Labour some great ideas to help form there manifesto including:
> 
> Stop making cuts to NHS and invest more money into the NHS.
> Reopen some of the closed A&E departments.
> Offer Nurses a worthy pay rise.
> Offer an alternative Brexit plan to the Conservatives plan for Brexit.
> Increase the amount of armed forces personnel.
> Protect animal welfare rights during and after Brexit.
> Give more money to local councils instead of cutting there services.
> Give a guarantee to protect the environment and improve environmental standards in the UK.
> Help tackle the homeless problem and housing crisis.
> The pledge I have asked them to put on the pledge card is this:
> Stop NHS cuts, invest more money into the NHS and offer nurses a worthy pay rise.
> 
> I could only submit one pledge as it will only let you submit one.
> 
> You don't have to be a Labour member to submit you manifesto ideas, have ago:
> http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php/shapeourmanifesto/
> 
> I believe the Labour party want our input so they can say they are the party that listens to the people of the UK.


I gave them some good ideas too! My priorities are housing, NHS and schools.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> I have sent Labour some great ideas to help form there manifesto including:
> 
> Stop making cuts to NHS and invest more money into the NHS.
> Reopen some of the closed A&E departments.
> Offer Nurses a worthy pay rise.
> Offer an alternative Brexit plan to the Conservatives plan for Brexit.
> Increase the amount of armed forces personnel.
> Protect animal welfare rights during and after Brexit.
> Give more money to local councils instead of cutting there services.
> Give a guarantee to protect the environment and improve environmental standards in the UK.
> Help tackle the homeless problem and housing crisis.
> The pledge I have asked them to put on the pledge card is this:
> Stop NHS cuts, invest more money into the NHS and offer nurses a worthy pay rise.
> 
> I could only submit one pledge as it will only let you submit one.
> 
> You don't have to be a Labour member to submit you manifesto ideas, have ago:
> http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php/shapeourmanifesto/
> 
> I believe the Labour party want our input so they can say they are the party that listens to the people of the UK.


Where's the free holiday home and free ice cream at weekends? Obviously the ice cream would have to exclude bank holidays if we are having more of them.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> I have sent Labour some great ideas to help form there manifesto including:
> 
> Stop making cuts to NHS and invest more money into the NHS.
> Reopen some of the closed A&E departments.
> Offer Nurses a worthy pay rise.
> Offer an alternative Brexit plan to the Conservatives plan for Brexit.
> Increase the amount of armed forces personnel.
> Protect animal welfare rights during and after Brexit.
> Give more money to local councils instead of cutting there services.
> Give a guarantee to protect the environment and improve environmental standards in the UK.
> Help tackle the homeless problem and housing crisis.
> The pledge I have asked them to put on the pledge card is this:
> Stop NHS cuts, invest more money into the NHS and offer nurses a worthy pay rise.
> 
> I could only submit one pledge as it will only let you submit one.
> 
> You don't have to be a Labour member to submit you manifesto ideas, have ago:
> http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php/shapeourmanifesto/
> 
> I believe the Labour party want our input so they can say they are the party that listens to the people of the UK.





KatieandOliver said:


> I gave them some good ideas too! My priorities are housing, NHS and schools.


I sent my ideas too. Tackling climate change, protecting the environment for future generations & saving the NHS were my priorities.


----------



## noushka05

Building a Progressive Alliance. This is really helpful  http://www.progressivealliance.org.uk/


----------



## Honeys mum

noushka05 said:


> These are the cuts Theresa May has planned for our already struggling fire services.


----------



## Honeys mum

noushka05 said:


> These are the cuts Theresa May has planned for our already struggling fire services.


They have already reduced them in our area. Last year they reduced the number of fire fighters and also reduced the number of fire engines from two to one.


----------



## Honeys mum

'Selling off NHS for profit': Full list of MPs with links to private healthcare firms - Mirror Online


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> Offer Nurses a worthy pay rise.


I'll go along with this as long as it means nurses get paid to nurse and whole tiers of 'middle management' are removed from the NHS.


----------



## rona

Honeys mum said:


> They have already reduced them in our area. Last year they reduced the number of fire fighters and also reduced the number of fire engines from two to one.


Have they replaced it with a light rescue pump, many stations are getting these because the bigger engines are having trouble getting into congested streets. 
Some don't always look like a fire engine


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> I have sent Labour some great ideas to help form there manifesto including:
> 
> Stop making cuts to NHS and invest more money into the NHS.
> Reopen some of the closed A&E departments.
> Offer Nurses a worthy pay rise.
> Offer an alternative Brexit plan to the Conservatives plan for Brexit.
> Increase the amount of armed forces personnel.
> Protect animal welfare rights during and after Brexit.
> Give more money to local councils instead of cutting there services.
> Give a guarantee to protect the environment and improve environmental standards in the UK.
> Help tackle the homeless problem and housing crisis.
> The pledge I have asked them to put on the pledge card is this:
> Stop NHS cuts, invest more money into the NHS and offer nurses a worthy pay rise.
> 
> I could only submit one pledge as it will only let you submit one.
> 
> You don't have to be a Labour member to submit you manifesto ideas, have ago:
> http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php/shapeourmanifesto/
> 
> I believe the Labour party want our input so they can say they are the party that listens to the people of the UK.


Have you given them a clue how to pay for all that too?


----------



## noushka05

America is the richest country on the planet with the worse health service in the western world @Arnie83 . The tories are modelling our NHS on their far more expensive privatised health service.








Honeys mum said:


> They have already reduced them in our area. Last year they reduced the number of fire fighters and also reduced the number of fire engines from two to one.


That is disgusting. And even more cuts to come.

This is shocking - *Cuts blamed as London fire deaths rise by 20 per cent*

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...or-rise-in-fire-deaths-in-london-a3257496.htm


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Have you given them a clue how to pay for all that too?


Literally trillions sat in off shore accounts.


----------



## stuaz

noushka05 said:


> The relevance is this -
> 
> View attachment 307980


Which is just one person opinion of Christianity. Some of the worlds greatest (and worst) leaders have had there own religious views or none at all.

It's highly likely that TM (if she is a practising Christian, I don't know) believes she is being Christian like others before her.

Personally in my view, to keep making references to it, just devalues the point your trying to make @noushka05.


----------



## Arnie83

noushka05 said:


> *We know its even more crippling austerity with the tories.* Ramped up privatisation of our NHS & sell off of our cash generating public assets. I'm sure there will always be privatisation even under Corbyn, there aren't that many to left of the party.
> 
> We know trickle down economics was just a con by the neoliberals.


Agreed, again. But it's amazing how many people will vote for the hair-shirt, even those who are already wearing it.

Which means that there won't be privatisation under Corbyn, 'cos Corbyn won't be in a position to privatise or nationalise anything! I'm beginning to think that Labour will do better than the current polls predict, but the result will still be an increased Tory majority. More's the pity; and the danger.


----------



## stockwellcat.

If Corbyn listens to what people are telling him from the members of public to his own party members I reckon he can turn things around, make himself electable and win. If he doesn't win it will be a very close election. Corbyn said back in October 2016 that if a snap election was called he could win it, he now needs to prove what he said.


----------



## rona

http://www.london-fire.gov.uk/fire-facts.asp

The number of fire deaths in London have been falling steadily since the late 1980s.

In 1987, there were 28.5 fire deaths per million of the resident population compared to just 3.4 per million in 2014.

http://www.london-fire.gov.uk/news/...-deaths-down-over-five-years.asp#.WPztCYmELrc

The total numbers of fires and fire deaths are down by over 20 per cent over the last five years new figures reveal.

Last year, a total of 36 people died from fire in the capital compared with 47 five years ago.

There were 20,770 fires in London last year down by a quarter on 2011/12.

However, London Fire Commissioner Ron Dobson has warned against complacency.

Despite the downward five year trend, fire deaths are up on last year's record low of 30 with deaths as a result of deliberate fires, which includes suicide, up to 11 this year compared with three in 2014/15.

As more and more people are old and infirm, I should imagine that deaths requiring you to move fast to escape will be up


----------



## noushka05

stuaz said:


> Which is just one person opinion of Christianity. Some of the worlds greatest (and worst) leaders have had there own religious views or none at all.
> 
> It's highly likely that TM (if she is a practising Christian, I don't know) believes she is being Christian like others before her.
> 
> Personally in my view, to keep making references to it, just devalues the point your trying to make @noushka05.


I always believed Christian values meant you should threat the needy with kindness & compassion not crush them into the ground. But hey ho.



Arnie83 said:


> Agreed, again. But it's amazing how many people will vote for the hair-shirt, even those who are already wearing it
> 
> Which means that there won't be privatisation under Corbyn, 'cos Corbyn won't be in a position to privatise or nationalise anything! I'm beginning to think that Labour will do better than the current polls predict, but the result will still be an increased Tory majority. More's the pity; and the danger.


Can't disagree with any of this Arnie. At least when things get so much worse the tories wont be able to pin the blame on labour or any other scapegoat.


----------



## havoc

Arnie83 said:


> I'm beginning to think that Labour will do better than the current polls predict, but the result will still be an increased Tory majority. More's the pity; and the danger.


I'm living in hope that the balance will stay pretty much the same. Nothing can undo the fact that an election has released the Tories from any previous manifesto promises though which is what they were after.


----------



## Colliebarmy

noushka05 said:


> Who cares if he had money, he fought for a better life for those who didn't & that's all that matters to me. You can be rich & still have social values you know.


"i'll say it again--it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God!"


----------



## Colliebarmy

KittenKong said:


> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...SbID4eRKwztzY9KSI_2BMaI1bU8/htmlview?sle=true
> 
> View attachment 307979
> 
> 
> I'm voting Labour for tactical reasons as I don't want the Tories winning in my area.


Good luck


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> If Corbyn listens to what people are telling him from the members of public to his own party members I reckon he can turn things around, make himself electable and win. If he doesn't win it will be a very close election. Corbyn said back in October 2016 that if a snap election was called he could win it, he now needs to prove what he said.


I don't think he has a hope in hells chance myself. I live in a labour stronghold & he doesn't seem very popular round here. People don't even seem to realise how close to collapse our NHS is. The media are letting us down big time.


----------



## Colliebarmy

Tories 1/14 to win

Labour 14/1 to win

Liberals 66/1 to win


----------



## Colliebarmy

noushka05 said:


> I don't think he has a hope in hells chance myself. I live in a labour stronghold & he doesn't seem very popular round here. People don't even seem to realise how close to collapse our NHS is. The media are letting us down big time.


In 12 months Ive been in hospital 3 times, had 9 clinic appointments 4 scans and 3 outpatient appointments, all brilliant ........... where is this crumbling NHS?


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> http://www.london-fire.gov.uk/fire-facts.asp
> 
> The number of fire deaths in London have been falling steadily since the late 1980s.
> 
> In 1987, there were 28.5 fire deaths per million of the resident population compared to just 3.4 per million in 2014.
> 
> http://www.london-fire.gov.uk/news/...-deaths-down-over-five-years.asp#.WPztCYmELrc
> 
> The total numbers of fires and fire deaths are down by over 20 per cent over the last five years new figures reveal.
> 
> Last year, a total of 36 people died from fire in the capital compared with 47 five years ago.
> 
> There were 20,770 fires in London last year down by a quarter on 2011/12.
> 
> However, London Fire Commissioner Ron Dobson has warned against complacency.
> 
> Despite the downward five year trend, fire deaths are up on last year's record low of 30 with deaths as a result of deliberate fires, which includes suicide, up to 11 this year compared with three in 2014/15.
> 
> As more and more people are old and infirm, I should imagine that deaths requiring you to move fast to escape will be up


Rona however you spin it, Tory cuts have devastated our fire service. (like they have everything else) 
*
Cuts undermining fire services, says Fire Brigades Union

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38278596*


----------



## Honeys mum

rona said:


> Have they replaced it with a light rescue pump, many stations are getting these because the bigger engines are having trouble getting into congested streets.
> Some don't always look like a fire engine


Not to my knowledge rona, If they had I'm sure the Cllrs would have mentioned it at the council meeting we had.


----------



## noushka05

Colliebarmy said:


> In 12 months Ive been in hospital 3 times, had 9 clinic appointments 4 scans and 3 outpatient appointments, all brilliant ........... where is this crumbling NHS?


So 'you're alright Jack'? (for now) It will affect everywhere soon.


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> What a lovely vicars daughter...


As you said about a million times already...:Yawn


----------



## Honeys mum

Colliebarmy said:


> In 12 months Ive been in hospital 3 times, had 9 clinic appointments 4 scans and 3 outpatient appointments, all brilliant ........... where is this crumbling NHS?


You are very lucky then, hope everything is sorted for you and you are now better.
Last year I was in hospital, was in for three days just waiting for a scan. Was sent home in bad pain with galllstones and put on a waiting list.In the end I went private and had to pay. I saw a consultant on a Thurs., had my op the next day .

This year, my husband has had scans done at the heart hospital, where they were very good.When the paramedics came out to him, they told us the NHS is in chaos, and has been for a couple of years.

He also needs a hernia op, been waiting now 18 weeks, can't wait any longer so he now is going private and having to pay.
So yes, I'd say the NHS is crumbling. Its the paramedics, nurses & doctors I feel sorry for, they try so hard and are really struggling to do their job, and get very little for it.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## rona

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/cabinetpapers/alevelstudies/politics-health.ht

. The new Chancellor, Hugh Gaitskell, capped NHS expenditure and introduced charges for dentistry and ophthalmology through the National Health Service Amendment Act of 1951.
*Hugh Gaitskell*
Labour MP from 1945-1951, holding various government posts, including Chancellor of the Exchequer from 1950-1951. Elected Labour leader, defeating Bevan, in 1955. Opposed Eden over Suez and refused to accept as binding Labour's conference resolution in favour of unilateral nuclear disarmament in 1960. Died in 1963

If you read through this you will realise that the NHS has had a funding crisis since it's inception


----------



## cheekyscrip

Honeys mum said:


> You are very lucky then, hope everything is sorted for you and you are now better.
> Last year I was in hospital, was in for three days just waiting for a scan. Was sent home in bad pain with gorlhstones and put on a waiting list.In the end I went private and had to pay. I saw a consultant on a Thurs., had my op the next day .
> 
> This year, my husband has had scans done at the heart hospital, where they were very good.When the paramedics came out to him, they told us the NHS is in chaos, and has been for a couple of years.
> 
> He also needs a hernia op, been waiting now 18 weeks, can't wait any longer so he now is going private and having to pay.
> So yes, I'd say the NHS is crumbling. Its the paramedics, nurses & doctors I feel sorry for, they try so hard and are really struggling to do their job, and get very little for it.


Plus with those immigrants leaving NHS...


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

10.35 this morning you were saying this



stockwellcat said:


> I have deleted the memes in post 706.
> 
> I am remaining impartial from now on until I have made my decision, as even I don't know which way I am voting yet.
> 
> Hopefully the election pledges and manifestos will help me decide from all parties?


By this afternoon you have changed to this



stockwellcat said:


> I have made my decision. I am voting Labour.


Talk about flip flop back and forth.

Anyhow UK polling report

http://opinium.co.uk/political-polling-19th-april-2017/

The Conservative lead has increased to 19 points in our latest voting intention poll in the 48 hours after the election was announced. The Conservatives are on 45% (up 7 points from last week), while Labour is on 26% (down 3 points).

UKIP has fallen into fourth place on 9% (down 5 points), with the Lib Dems back in third place on 11% (up 4 points).


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Talk about flip flop back and forth.


Bit like the leaders of the Conservatives then. Cameron U-turned I have forgotten how many times and Theresa May is taking a leaf out of his book u-turning and Philip Hammond has already u-turned. Thought I'd join in to


----------



## KittenKong

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...abroad-denied-uk-general-election-vote-tories


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> https://www.theguardian.com/politic...abroad-denied-uk-general-election-vote-tories
> 
> View attachment 307998
> View attachment 307999


It's perhaps because they aren't registered in the UK any more. If I remember rightly the election rules are you have to be resident in the UK and be on the Electrol roll register at a UK address.

General Election Rules:

In order to vote in the general election, one must be:

on the Electoral Register,
aged 18 or over on polling day,
a British, Irish or Commonwealth citizen,
a resident at an address in the UK (or a British citizen living abroad who has been registered to vote in the UK in the last 15 years), _and_
not legally excluded from voting (for example a convicted person detained in prison or a mental hospital, or unlawfully at large if he/she would otherwise have been detained, or a person found guilty of certain corrupt or illegal practices).
Individuals must be registered to vote by midnight twelve working days before polling day (22 May 2017). Anyone who qualifies as an anonymous elector has until midnight on 31 May 2017 to register. A person who has two homes (such as a university student who has a term-time address and lives at home during holidays) may be able to register to vote at both addresses as long as they are not in the same electoral area, but can vote in only one constituency at the general election.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Anyhow UK polling report
> 
> http://opinium.co.uk/political-polling-19th-april-2017/
> 
> The Conservative lead has increased to 19 points in our latest voting intention poll in the 48 hours after the election was announced. The Conservatives are on 45% (up 7 points from last week), while Labour is on 26% (down 3 points).
> 
> UKIP has fallen into fourth place on 9% (down 5 points), with the Lib Dems back in third place on 11% (up 4 points).


Yet the Sunday Mail claim support for the Tories has dropped!

Here's the Sabre Roads own poll. Quite different to the one here!
https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=37516&start=400


----------



## Colliebarmy

Meanwhile...........over in France

*Summary*

French voters have voted in the first round of a tight presidential election
Emmanuel Macron to face Marine Le Pen in run-off, according to projections
Turnout is about 80%, roughly the same as in 2012
About 50,000 police and 7,000 soldiers were deployed across the country
The extra security follows the killing of a police officer in Paris on Thursday


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Bit like the leaders of the Conservatives then. Cameron U-turn I have forgotten how many times and Theresa May is taking a leaf out of his book u-turning and Philip Hammond has already u-turned. Thought I'd join into


Yes but not usually in the space of a few hours 

Labour doing a bit of their own flip flopping too

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/jeremy-corbyn-casts-doubt-labour-101610432.html

At Corbyn's campaign launch event on Thursday, both he and the shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, appeared to refuse to rule out backing a referendum on the final Brexit deal. But the party later issued a statement saying a second referendum would not be in the manifesto.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> It's perhaps because they aren't registered in the UK any more. If I remember rightly the election rules are you have to be resident in the UK and be on the Electrol roll register at a UK address.


True, but since the EU referendum the government have promised to repel the 15+ year rule, allowing British citizens abroad the right to vote regardless of how long they've lived abroad.

Still, it could be complicated unless they based the constituency in question in the area of birth, eg: Someone born in Brighton has the right to vote for a candidate in Brighton, even if they've lived in Spain for 20 years.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Colliebarmy said:


> Meanwhile...........over in France
> 
> *Summary*
> 
> French voters have voted in the first round of a tight presidential election
> Emmanuel Macron to face Marine Le Pen in run-off, according to projections
> Turnout is about 80%, roughly the same as in 2012
> About 50,000 police and 7,000 soldiers were deployed across the country
> The extra security follows the killing of a police officer in Paris on Thursday












*Live: Macron at 23.7%, Le Pen at 21.7%, Fillon at 19.5% and Mélenchon at 19.5%, according to early results*

*http://m.france24.com/en/20170423-f...tial-election-first-round-results-follow-live*


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Speaking to Andrew Marr on BBC One, Mr Corbyn - a long-standing opponent of nuclear weapons - said he would never launch a "first strike" attack as prime minister and wanted to de-escalate global tensions, working with other countries including the US, Russia and Iran.

Pressed on whether a commitment to renew Trident would be in Labour's election manifesto, he replied: "We are having that discussion within the Labour Party and we will publish our manifesto in May.

*Mr Corbyn is the first Labour leader to support unilateral nuclear disarmament since Michael Foot in 1983 *- a stance which puts him at odds with the bulk of his party.

Most of his MPs, including his deputy and defence spokeswoman, back the "continuous-at-sea deterrent" while unions say scrapping it would be bad for jobs.

MPs overwhelmingly voted earlier this year to build four new submarines to carry missiles armed with nuclear warheads. They are intended to replace the existing Vanguard fleet from the early 2030s at an estimated cost of £31bn.

Several hours after Mr Corbyn's interview, Labour released a statement saying "the decision to renew Trident has been taken and Labour supports that".

So Labour supports Trident but Mr Corbyn doesn't


----------



## cheekyscrip

Meanwhile French got new centre party and Marcon is winning the first round ..
Britain needs just that: New, modern centre party not choice between two extremes and LibDems are not filling that position...but who knows?No extremes are good , both commies and nationalists proved to be disastrous to their own.
Anyhow..the disaster is coming regardless who delivers it...


----------



## Lurcherlad

stuaz said:


> Now that would be a sight to see!
> 
> Although I am thinking more Lib-Lab coalition.
> 
> The liberal democrats I don't think will go with the tories again.


They will all sell their souls to the devil if they think it will be in their favour


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> Yet the Sunday Mail claim support for the Tories has dropped!
> 
> Here's the Sabre Roads own poll. Quite different to the one here!
> https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=37516&start=400
> 
> View attachment 308001


Who are they?

Our very own PF vote stands at
*Conservatives 31.6%*
*Labour 25.0%*
*Green Party 6.6%*
*Lib Dems 3.9%*

We all know how useful Polls are


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Speaking to Andrew Marr on BBC One, Mr Corbyn - a long-standing opponent of nuclear weapons - said he would never launch a "first strike" attack as prime minister and wanted to de-escalate global tensions, working with other countries including the US, Russia and Iran.
> 
> Pressed on whether a commitment to renew Trident would be in Labour's election manifesto, he replied: "We are having that discussion within the Labour Party and we will publish our manifesto in May.
> 
> *Mr Corbyn is the first Labour leader to support unilateral nuclear disarmament since Michael Foot in 1983 *- a stance which puts him at odds with the bulk of his party.
> 
> Most of his MPs, including his deputy and defence spokeswoman, back the "continuous-at-sea deterrent" while unions say scrapping it would be bad for jobs.
> 
> MPs overwhelmingly voted earlier this year to build four new submarines to carry missiles armed with nuclear warheads. They are intended to replace the existing Vanguard fleet from the early 2030s at an estimated cost of £31bn.
> 
> Several hours after Mr Corbyn's interview, Labour released a statement saying "the decision to renew Trident has been taken and Labour supports that".
> 
> So Labour supports Trident but Mr Corbyn doesn't


Because Mr Corbyn generally does not support Labour I am afraid...three line whip to support ultra right wing ?
Corbyn&May would be another hands holding moment....what a coalition that would be....


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> Meanwhile French got new centre party and Marcon is winning the first round ..


Marcon (Centrist) and Le Penn (Far Right) are through to the second round of voting in France. Fillon and Melenchon have conceded defeat.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

The NHS is a massive issue and one I'm sure we will all be taking into account when deciding who to vote for. However I was hoping the links provided by Noush to NHA party would actually tell me something new, show me some facts and figures to back up the tweets of a few words long that also don't actually tell us anything. The page doesn't seem to have been updated since January though unless I have missed something. I'm not really interested in reading a few tweets, anyone can tweet saying its my duty to tell you the NHS is xyz but where is the information to back up those statements?

I found this quite interesting - click the link to see the graphs. It analyses spending and some of the problems faced by the NHS and some of the questions we need to be asking going forwards.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38887694

The NHS faces unrelenting pressure despite funding rising. Why?

The sheer scale of the NHS can take the breath away. Every 24 hours it sees one million patients, and with 1.7 million staff it's the fifth biggest employer in the world.

This vast enterprise absorbs eye-watering amounts of money.

*1. We spend more on the NHS than ever before*
Last year £140bn was spent on health across the UK - more than 10 times the figure that was ploughed in 60 years ago.

*2. A bigger proportion of public spending goes on health*
Governments over the years have had to invest more and more of the public purse into it. Today 30p out of every £1 spent on services goes on health.

Even during the years of deep austerity, extra money has been found for the health service - £8bn more this Parliament in England alone.

*3. Key A&E targets are being missed*
The best barometer of this is the four-hour A&E target. We often think of it as an indication of how good an emergency department is. But it's not. It doesn't tell you about the quality of care - how quickly you get pain relief or whether the unit is good at spotting the signs of a heart attack.

Instead it's a sign of whether the system is under stress - both in the community and in the hospital.

Which local services are under threat?

Upfront charges for foreign patients

When there's perfect harmony between the numbers arriving and leaving 95% of patients will be dealt with in four hours.

But this isn't happening. You have to go back to the summer of 2015 for the last time it was met in England, with performance deteriorating markedly year on year.

*4. The UK's population is ageing*
The ageing population is certainly a major factor - and it's one that all health systems in the world are struggling with. Medical advances have meant that people are living longer. When the NHS was created, life expectancy was 13 years shorter than it is now.

This is something to celebrate. Infectious diseases are no longer a significant threat. Heart attacks do not claim the lives of people early in the same numbers. Even cancer is not the death sentence it once was - half of people now survive for a decade or more.

But this progress has come at a cost. People are living with a growing number of long-term chronic conditions - diabetes, heart disease and dementia. These are more about care than cure - what patients usually need is support. By the age of 65, most people will have at least one of these illnesses. By 75 they will have two.

*5. Care for older people costs much more*
The average 65-year-old costs the NHS 2.5 times more than the average 30-year-old. An 85-year-old costs more than five times as much.

As the numbers continue to rise so does the cost to the NHS. This is compounded by the rising cost of new drugs. The health service is currently considering capping the amount it will pay for new drugs at £20m each a year. A fifth of new treatments coming on stream cost more than this.

Then there's obesity. A third of adults are so overweight they are risking their health significantly.

All this contributes to what health economists call health inflation - the idea that the cost of providing care outstrips the normal rise in the cost of living across the economy.

This is why health has tended to get more generous rises than other areas of government spending.

Over the years this has been achievable through a combination of economic growth, which brings in more money through tax, and reducing spending in areas such as defence, which has led to the NHS taking an ever-greater share of the public purse.

*6. Increases in NHS spending have slowed*
But, of course, the economy goes through cycles and over the years governments have varied the amount they were willing or able to give.

Since the NHS was created in 1948, the average annual rise has been just over 4%. During the Labour years under Blair and Brown this was closer to 7%.

As you can see the period since 2010 has seen the tightest financial settlements. What is more, the spending squeeze is continuing during this Parliament at almost exactly the same rate, even with England's extra £8bn going in.

Ministers in England are right to say they are increasing funding - it's been frozen in Wales and Scotland - but it's just that it doesn't compare favourably with what the NHS has traditionally got.

Indeed, the Institute for Fiscal Studies believes over the 10 years to 2020, the NHS budget across the UK will not have increased enough to keep pace with the ageing and growing population.

*7. The UK spends a lower proportion on health than other EU countries*
But is it just a matter of more money? Would an extra few billion make all the problems go away? If you look at other European nations the UK is certainly spending less as a proportion of GDP, which is a measure of the size of the economy.

The result, as you would expect, is fewer beds, doctors and nurses per patient in the UK than the big spenders.

But a number of these countries achieve that by taxing more. Would the UK public stomach that? If a poll by Ipsos MORI for the BBC this week is anything to go by, they are pretty split - 40% would back a rise in income tax and 53% would support National Insurance going up.

Nor does it seem there's appetite for a change in the system. A majority were against charging for services or moving to an insurance-based model like some of our European neighbours do.

But even if more money was spent or raised, that would not lead to an overnight improvement. More doctors and nurses would need training and that takes time and, crucially, there is not a flood of people wanting to work in key posts.

Trainee posts for GPs are being increased, but the NHS cannot fill them all.

There also remain big questions over whether the structure of the NHS is right for 21st Century healthcare.

The NHS is still centred on the network of district general hospitals that emerged during the hospital building boom of the 1960s.

But in an era where people are struggling with those chronic illnesses, what they really need is support in the community.

The problem is there's a serious shortage of this. The number of district nurses in England has been cut by 28% in the past five years, while getting a GP appointment is becoming increasingly difficult.

*8. Demand for A&E is rising*
The result is that people end up going to hospital. The numbers visiting A&E have risen by a third in 12 years.

Not all of this is down to people with these chronic conditions, but they tend to be the cases that take the most care. Two-thirds of hospitals beds are occupied by the one-third of the population with a long-term condition.

There are attempts to change this. To place more emphasis on care outside hospital. NHS England chief executive Simon Stevens has set out a five-year plan to create more integrated care, which involves hospital services working more closely with their local community teams. Similar moves are being made in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

There also an emphasis on prevention - getting people to be more active, eat better diets and drink less.

*9. Fewer older people are getting help with social care*
But perhaps the biggest problem is council-run social care. This encompasses day centres, help in the home for tasks such as washing and dressing, and good quality care in care homes during the final years of life. It is seen as essential to keep people well and living independently - and out of hospital.

In an era when the population is ageing you would expect more people to be getting help from the state.

However, the opposite is true. In England over the past four years, the number of older people getting help has fallen by a quarter. The result is large numbers going without care or having to pay for it themselves.

The other parts of the UK can make a case for being more generous in this respect - home care is capped at £60 a week in Wales and free for the over-75s in Northern Ireland, while Scotland provides free personal care (washing and dressing) in both care homes and people's own homes.

*10. Much more is spent on front-line healthcare than social care*
But none of them has cracked it. Indeed, if you were setting up a health and care service today, ask yourself this - how would it be done?

Would you separate medical care from personal care? Give one service to a national institution and the other to local councils? Would you provide one free at the point of need and charge for the other? Would you increase the budget of one, but cut the other?

Would you build more than 200 hospitals and spend over half of your budget on them when the biggest users of care are people with long-term illnesses that need care rather than medical intervention?

But as that is the system we have got at a time when money is limited, we are falling back on a typical British trait - making do.


----------



## cheekyscrip

No matter what party promises anything..Brexit means inflation, falling wages, custom tariffs and job loss...
Election is just nice diversion..


----------



## Happy Paws2

cheekyscrip said:


> No matter what party promises anything..Brexit means inflation, falling wages, custom tariffs and job loss...
> *Election is just nice diversion..*


*exactly...*


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> The NHS is a massive issue and one I'm sure we will all be taking into account when deciding who to vote for. However I was hoping the links provided by Noush to NHA party would actually tell me something new, show me some facts and figures to back up the tweets of a few words long that also don't actually tell us anything. The page doesn't seem to have been updated since January though unless I have missed something. I'm not really interested in reading a few tweets, anyone can tweet saying its my duty to tell you the NHS is xyz but where is the information to back up those statements?
> 
> I found this quite interesting - click the link to see the graphs. It analyses spending and some of the problems faced by the NHS and some of the questions we need to be asking going forwards.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38887694
> 
> The NHS faces unrelenting pressure despite funding rising. Why?
> 
> The sheer scale of the NHS can take the breath away. Every 24 hours it sees one million patients, and with 1.7 million staff it's the fifth biggest employer in the world.
> 
> This vast enterprise absorbs eye-watering amounts of money.
> 
> *1. We spend more on the NHS than ever before*
> Last year £140bn was spent on health across the UK - more than 10 times the figure that was ploughed in 60 years ago.
> 
> *2. A bigger proportion of public spending goes on health*
> Governments over the years have had to invest more and more of the public purse into it. Today 30p out of every £1 spent on services goes on health.
> 
> Even during the years of deep austerity, extra money has been found for the health service - £8bn more this Parliament in England alone.
> 
> *3. Key A&E targets are being missed*
> The best barometer of this is the four-hour A&E target. We often think of it as an indication of how good an emergency department is. But it's not. It doesn't tell you about the quality of care - how quickly you get pain relief or whether the unit is good at spotting the signs of a heart attack.
> 
> Instead it's a sign of whether the system is under stress - both in the community and in the hospital.
> 
> Which local services are under threat?
> 
> Upfront charges for foreign patients
> 
> When there's perfect harmony between the numbers arriving and leaving 95% of patients will be dealt with in four hours.
> 
> But this isn't happening. You have to go back to the summer of 2015 for the last time it was met in England, with performance deteriorating markedly year on year.
> 
> *4. The UK's population is ageing*
> The ageing population is certainly a major factor - and it's one that all health systems in the world are struggling with. Medical advances have meant that people are living longer. When the NHS was created, life expectancy was 13 years shorter than it is now.
> 
> This is something to celebrate. Infectious diseases are no longer a significant threat. Heart attacks do not claim the lives of people early in the same numbers. Even cancer is not the death sentence it once was - half of people now survive for a decade or more.
> 
> But this progress has come at a cost. People are living with a growing number of long-term chronic conditions - diabetes, heart disease and dementia. These are more about care than cure - what patients usually need is support. By the age of 65, most people will have at least one of these illnesses. By 75 they will have two.
> 
> *5. Care for older people costs much more*
> The average 65-year-old costs the NHS 2.5 times more than the average 30-year-old. An 85-year-old costs more than five times as much.
> 
> As the numbers continue to rise so does the cost to the NHS. This is compounded by the rising cost of new drugs. The health service is currently considering capping the amount it will pay for new drugs at £20m each a year. A fifth of new treatments coming on stream cost more than this.
> 
> Then there's obesity. A third of adults are so overweight they are risking their health significantly.
> 
> All this contributes to what health economists call health inflation - the idea that the cost of providing care outstrips the normal rise in the cost of living across the economy.
> 
> This is why health has tended to get more generous rises than other areas of government spending.
> 
> Over the years this has been achievable through a combination of economic growth, which brings in more money through tax, and reducing spending in areas such as defence, which has led to the NHS taking an ever-greater share of the public purse.
> 
> *6. Increases in NHS spending have slowed*
> But, of course, the economy goes through cycles and over the years governments have varied the amount they were willing or able to give.
> 
> Since the NHS was created in 1948, the average annual rise has been just over 4%. During the Labour years under Blair and Brown this was closer to 7%.
> 
> As you can see the period since 2010 has seen the tightest financial settlements. What is more, the spending squeeze is continuing during this Parliament at almost exactly the same rate, even with England's extra £8bn going in.
> 
> Ministers in England are right to say they are increasing funding - it's been frozen in Wales and Scotland - but it's just that it doesn't compare favourably with what the NHS has traditionally got.
> 
> Indeed, the Institute for Fiscal Studies believes over the 10 years to 2020, the NHS budget across the UK will not have increased enough to keep pace with the ageing and growing population.
> 
> *7. The UK spends a lower proportion on health than other EU countries*
> But is it just a matter of more money? Would an extra few billion make all the problems go away? If you look at other European nations the UK is certainly spending less as a proportion of GDP, which is a measure of the size of the economy.
> 
> The result, as you would expect, is fewer beds, doctors and nurses per patient in the UK than the big spenders.
> 
> But a number of these countries achieve that by taxing more. Would the UK public stomach that? If a poll by Ipsos MORI for the BBC this week is anything to go by, they are pretty split - 40% would back a rise in income tax and 53% would support National Insurance going up.
> 
> Nor does it seem there's appetite for a change in the system. A majority were against charging for services or moving to an insurance-based model like some of our European neighbours do.
> 
> But even if more money was spent or raised, that would not lead to an overnight improvement. More doctors and nurses would need training and that takes time and, crucially, there is not a flood of people wanting to work in key posts.
> 
> Trainee posts for GPs are being increased, but the NHS cannot fill them all.
> 
> There also remain big questions over whether the structure of the NHS is right for 21st Century healthcare.
> 
> The NHS is still centred on the network of district general hospitals that emerged during the hospital building boom of the 1960s.
> 
> But in an era where people are struggling with those chronic illnesses, what they really need is support in the community.
> 
> The problem is there's a serious shortage of this. The number of district nurses in England has been cut by 28% in the past five years, while getting a GP appointment is becoming increasingly difficult.
> 
> *8. Demand for A&E is rising*
> The result is that people end up going to hospital. The numbers visiting A&E have risen by a third in 12 years.
> 
> Not all of this is down to people with these chronic conditions, but they tend to be the cases that take the most care. Two-thirds of hospitals beds are occupied by the one-third of the population with a long-term condition.
> 
> There are attempts to change this. To place more emphasis on care outside hospital. NHS England chief executive Simon Stevens has set out a five-year plan to create more integrated care, which involves hospital services working more closely with their local community teams. Similar moves are being made in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
> 
> There also an emphasis on prevention - getting people to be more active, eat better diets and drink less.
> 
> *9. Fewer older people are getting help with social care*
> But perhaps the biggest problem is council-run social care. This encompasses day centres, help in the home for tasks such as washing and dressing, and good quality care in care homes during the final years of life. It is seen as essential to keep people well and living independently - and out of hospital.
> 
> In an era when the population is ageing you would expect more people to be getting help from the state.
> 
> However, the opposite is true. In England over the past four years, the number of older people getting help has fallen by a quarter. The result is large numbers going without care or having to pay for it themselves.
> 
> The other parts of the UK can make a case for being more generous in this respect - home care is capped at £60 a week in Wales and free for the over-75s in Northern Ireland, while Scotland provides free personal care (washing and dressing) in both care homes and people's own homes.
> 
> *10. Much more is spent on front-line healthcare than social care*
> But none of them has cracked it. Indeed, if you were setting up a health and care service today, ask yourself this - how would it be done?
> 
> Would you separate medical care from personal care? Give one service to a national institution and the other to local councils? Would you provide one free at the point of need and charge for the other? Would you increase the budget of one, but cut the other?
> 
> Would you build more than 200 hospitals and spend over half of your budget on them when the biggest users of care are people with long-term illnesses that need care rather than medical intervention?
> 
> But as that is the system we have got at a time when money is limited, we are falling back on a typical British trait - making do.


They aren't over spending on the NHS. Funding isn't rising. The NHS is being deliberately _underfunded_ & privatised

You didn't see this on the link I provided? http://nhap.org/the-nhs-needs-an-ur...o-leader-of-the-national-health-action-party/

*National Health Action Party press release 8 January 2017*

*Dr Alex Ashman, newly elected co-leader of the NHA, statement on the Red Cross' humanitarian intervention*

"There are calls for funding for the NHS from every direction right now, as a result of the Red Cross interventions and the deaths in Worcestershire. But they are met with questions as to how the tax is to be raised to pay for it. The one thing that every doctor and member of NHS staff knows is that when you are treating a patient in need of urgent care here in the UK you don't check for their credit card first.

When the stability of the banking sector was threatened in 2008 there was hardly time to draw breath before £375bn of quantitative easing was created to restore order. The Treasury and the Bank of England put in extensive contingency planning to ensure that there was no excessive market reaction after the EU referendum. Yet for our health and other support services there's no new money, just existing budgets being cannibalised. Money is taken from hospital budgets in an unsuccessful attempt to plug the social care gaps. Public health budgets for long term preventative strategies are being pillaged to prop up the NHS in the short term.
So I want to put the question: which do you think matters most, the figures on a balance sheet or the lives of patients which are literally hanging in the balance from a lack of facilities to care for them properly

The collapse of the NHS is a crisis of the same magnitude as the financial crises. We cannot wait for a Budget Statement or a decision about taxation - that can come later when the government assesses its accounts. *Action is needed, immediately, to safeguard our nation's health.*

As a doctor I am writing a prescription for Theresa May, Jeremy Hunt and Simon Stevens:


*Halt the Sustainability and Transformation Plans* and the 5 Year Forward View immediately. The shrinking of the NHS that will result from their implementation will worsen the current crisis.
*Stop the closure of A&Es and hospitals across the country*. If the pressure on existing services is unbearable, how could cutting services make it any better?
*Authorise the Treasury to issue funds to cover the immediate financial crisis*, sufficient to stabilise the existing services. Instruct the Clinical Commissioning Groups to make clinical decisions for the benefit of patients, rather than financial decisions for the benefit of the private sector.
*Tackle the real humanitarian crisis that your policies have brought about* first, and sort out the tax regime you think necessary to keep the NHS publicly funded later. It can wait. Lives can't.
*Start reversing the three decades of marketisation and privatisation of the NHS*. Spending billions hiring bureaucrats to run tenders and write contracts is a terrible waste of NHS funds.
*Be honest with the public about current events*. We know that a political and ideological decision has been made to reduce the NHS to a second class service for those who can't afford to pay. We are calling you out on it. People are dying because of your political choices. It's time to face the consequences.
_*- ends -*_
*Notes:
Dr Ashman is a surgical registrar who joined the NHA in 2012 having seen first hand the effects of marketisation and privatisation on the NHS. He has been on the NHA national executive committee since 2013. At the 2016 AGM of 17 December he was elected to one of the party co-leader roles*


----------



## stuaz

Tbh there is literally no point throwing endless amounts of money at the NHS if the money is not being used or managed properly.


----------



## noushka05

stuaz said:


> Tbh there is literally no point throwing endless amounts of money at the NHS if the money is not being used or managed properly.


They're not throwing endless money at it - they're deliberately underfunding it to make if fail.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stuaz said:


> Tbh there is literally no point throwing endless amounts of money at the NHS if the money is not being used or managed properly.


Exactly, the last thing the NHS needs is more money, what it needs is proper management, and to be fair that would come from private sector management where every penny is accountable. Every government has chucked endless amounts of cash at it, something needs to change and that is probably taking it out of the hands of civil servants.


----------



## Odin_cat

stuaz said:


> Tbh there is literally no point throwing endless amounts of money at the NHS if the money is not being used or managed properly.


When countless doctors and nurses claim the nhs is underfunded I am inclined to believe them. Poor management may be partially responsible, but it's also an easy scapegoat.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> Exactly, the last thing the NHS needs is more money, what it needs is proper management, and to be fair that would come from private sector management where every penny is accountable. Every government has chucked endless amounts of cash at it, something needs to change and that is probably taking it out of the hands of civil servants.


I don't know about that. I've worked as a nurse in both the private sector and the NHS in hospitals and in nursing homes and been in a patient in both the NHS and private sector. There are only certain things I would rely on or trust the private sector with and for other more critical/life threatening I would go NHS. It needs a good shake up for sure but I'm not sure going down a business model is the right direction. Personally I would prefer to see care back in the hands of doctors and nurses and not managers who haven't got a clue what is needed or what the word caring actually means.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Odin_cat said:


> When countless doctors and nurses claim the nhs is underfunded I am inclined to believe them. Poor management may be partially responsible, but it's also an easy scapegoat.


To be fair though doctors and nurses have always complained about the NHS being underfunded, there will never be enough money or enough staff or enough equipment.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Exactly, the last thing the NHS needs is more money, what it needs is proper management, and to be fair that would come from private sector management where every penny is accountable. Every government has chucked endless amounts of cash at it, something needs to change and that is probably taking it out of the hands of civil servants.


The NHS was in surplus until the Tories trashed it with their Health & social care Act 2012.

Its been deliberately underfunded & understaffed, that, along with the increased privatisation is destroying it. If the tories get in with a big majority the NHS is over for the majority of us.


----------



## stuaz

Odin_cat said:


> When countless doctors and nurses claim the nhs is underfunded I am inclined to believe them. Poor management may be partially responsible, but it's also an easy scapegoat.





noushka05 said:


> They're not throwing endless money at it - they're deliberately underfunding it to make if fail.
> 
> View attachment 308010


But people go to the arguement of giving more money to the NHS as a means that it will fix it. Not saying money doesn't help, but it's like having a water leak. You can keep pushing water through and yes some will make it to the end of the pipe, but if you don't fix the leak, your forever fighting an up hill battle and will lose water bu the leak is still there and the leak will just get worse and so you need to use more water..... and so on and so on.


----------



## Odin_cat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> To be fair though doctors and nurses have always complained about the NHS being underfunded, there will never be enough money or enough staff or enough equipment.


Maybe it's time someone listened to them. Sorting out social care would be a huge help to the nhs too.


----------



## stuaz

Odin_cat said:


> Maybe it's time someone listened to them. Sorting out social care would be a huge help to the nhs too.


Agree. Social care is a big issue causing strain on the NHS at the moment.


----------



## noushka05

stuaz said:


> But people go to the arguement of giving more money to the NHS as a means that it will fix it. Not saying money doesn't help, but it's like having a water leak. You can keep pushing water through and yes some will make it to the end of the pipe, but if you don't fix the leak, your forever fighting an up hill battle and will lose water bu the leak is still there and the leak will just get worse and so you need to use more water..... and so on and so on.


People fighting to save the NHS, argue about giving more money because the government are deliberately starving it of money & forcing it to make £22Billion in cuts. They are making it fail, they are remodelling our NHS on the dire American health service. Don't let them fool you Stuaz.

Have you heard about STPs? the next phase of their plans to dismantle our NHS . https://nh-space.com/2016/08/28/5-things-you-should-know-about-stp/

*5 Things You Should Know About STP*

*The Sustainability and Transformation Plans have divided the NHS in England into 44 local areas, and each has been told to cut services as part of a nationwide 'financial reset'. But what's actually going on, and how much of the government's reasoning is just spin? NHSpace brings you a handy myth-busting guide.*

*1 - NHS Trusts aren't overspending*
The narrative of STPs is that our hospitals are in debt due to overspending. That would be true if the government had matched the NHS budget to the actual healthcare needs of our country, but they haven't.
The cost of healthcare increases by 4% each year. In the UK, this is referred to as 'NHS inflation'. If NHS funding doesn't keep pace with this inflation, then services have to be cut or closed.

David Nicholson and Simon Stevens have both used their time as NHS England CEO to implement austerity measures, leading to a cumulative shortfall in funding of at least £35bn per year by 2020:

The NHS is underfunded, and is actually spending less than it should on healthcare. That's quite the opposite of an 'overspend'!

*2 - The NHS isn't unaffordable*
Pundits love to tell us about the new challenges facing the NHS, claiming that we now cannot afford universal healthcare. We are told that hospitals are overspending and that they are in debt.

In fact, the NHS is extremely affordable. Here's a list of healthcare spending in several westernised countries in 2014:

As the table shows, the UK could easily choose to dedicate an extra percent of its GDP to healthcare, providing the NHS with the funds needed to sustain a modern health service.

*3 - Hospitals aren't overstaffed*
The 'financial reset' planned for the NHS includes a limit on staff recruitment, the implication being that hospitals need to cut back on excessive hiring of permanent staff. Considering the billions spent on hiring agency staff to fill rota gaps, this is certainly not true.

The underlying issue here is safety. Following the Francis Report into the Mid Staffs scandal, hospital managers decided that they would rather exceed their budgets and hire more staff, than be guilty of manslaughter. Fed up with being ignored, the DoH is now coming down on managers with an iron fist. Anyone caught protecting staffing levels by overspending will be subject to a 'failure regime'

*4 - This Isn't About Centralisation *
Centralisation of specialised services can improve outcomes for patients with specific illnesses. But trauma, cardiac and stroke services have already become centralised. For many other illnesses, and for maternity and step-down care, it's important to have smaller District General Hospitals (DGHs) and Community Hospitals. These provide care closer to home and take the pressure off the big, specialised centres.

So don't be fooled. Closing A&Es and taking services away from local hospitals isn't centralisation. It's un-evidenced vandalism in the name of cost savings

*5 - This Is About Creating A Two Tier System*
The level of cuts and closures required by the STPs is such that the NHS will become unable to provide a universal service. Rationing will increase, so that most routine procedures will be refused funding. Once various DGHs have closed, the hospitals still standing will struggle with their increased catchment areas and will be forced to provide essentials only.

This was already envisaged by Simon Stevens, who is keen to separate emergency care from routine care. Emergencies will be handled in NHS hospitals, whilst the routine work will be handled by the private sector. Patients wishing to undergo non-essential procedures will find themselves needing to pay to have their cataracts and hernias treated or their tonsils removed


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Odin_cat said:


> Maybe it's time someone listened to them. Sorting out social care would be a huge help to the nhs too.


I started nursing in 1979 and staff were complaining about underfunding back then. Someone has to be brave enough to really look at the NHS and decide what its purpose should be, what it should offer and what it can no longer provide/offer. The information I posted earlier is something else that we really need to address because unless we do address social care properly the NHS will never be able to cope/function.

Would you separate medical care from personal care? Give one service to a national institution and the other to local councils? Would you provide one free at the point of need and charge for the other? Would you increase the budget of one, but cut the other?









Would you build more than 200 hospitals and spend over half of your budget on them when the biggest users of care are people with long-term illnesses that need care rather than medical intervention?


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> Who are they?
> ]












Like PF they have a General Chat section under the banner, "Sabristi Unleashed"


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I started nursing in 1979 and staff were complaining about underfunding back then. Someone has to be brave enough to really look at the NHS and decide what its purpose should be, what it should offer and what it can no longer provide/offer. The information I posted earlier is something else that we really need to address because unless we do address social care properly the NHS will never be able to cope/function.
> 
> Would you separate medical care from personal care? Give one service to a national institution and the other to local councils? Would you provide one free at the point of need and charge for the other? Would you increase the budget of one, but cut the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would you build more than 200 hospitals and spend over half of your budget on them when the biggest users of care are people with long-term illnesses that need care rather than medical intervention?


When the tories came to power our NHS was the fairest, most efficient & cost effective health service in the world.

What happened?


----------



## Odin_cat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I started nursing in 1979 and staff were complaining about underfunding back then. Someone has to be brave enough to really look at the NHS and decide what its purpose should be, what it should offer and what it can no longer provide/offer. The information I posted earlier is something else that we really need to address because unless we do address social care properly the NHS will never be able to cope/function.
> 
> Would you separate medical care from personal care? Give one service to a national institution and the other to local councils? Would you provide one free at the point of need and charge for the other? Would you increase the budget of one, but cut the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would you build more than 200 hospitals and spend over half of your budget on them when the biggest users of care are people with long-term illnesses that need care rather than medical intervention?


My gut would be not to separate the two, but as I have no experience in either field I would listen to what people such as yourself had to say.


----------



## stuaz

noushka05 said:


> People fighting to save the NHS, argue about giving more money because the government are deliberately starving it of money & forcing it to make £22Billion in cuts. They are making it fail, they are remodelling our NHS on the dire American health service. *Don't let them fool you Stuaz*.
> 
> Have you heard about STPs? the next phase of their plans to dismantle our NHS . https://nh-space.com/2016/08/28/5-things-you-should-know-about-stp/
> 
> *5 Things You Should Know About STP*
> 
> *The Sustainability and Transformation Plans have divided the NHS in England into 44 local areas, and each has been told to cut services as part of a nationwide 'financial reset'. But what's actually going on, and how much of the government's reasoning is just spin? NHSpace brings you a handy myth-busting guide.*
> 
> *1 - NHS Trusts aren't overspending*
> The narrative of STPs is that our hospitals are in debt due to overspending. That would be true if the government had matched the NHS budget to the actual healthcare needs of our country, but they haven't.
> The cost of healthcare increases by 4% each year. In the UK, this is referred to as 'NHS inflation'. If NHS funding doesn't keep pace with this inflation, then services have to be cut or closed.
> 
> David Nicholson and Simon Stevens have both used their time as NHS England CEO to implement austerity measures, leading to a cumulative shortfall in funding of at least £35bn per year by 2020:
> 
> The NHS is underfunded, and is actually spending less than it should on healthcare. That's quite the opposite of an 'overspend'!
> 
> *2 - The NHS isn't unaffordable*
> Pundits love to tell us about the new challenges facing the NHS, claiming that we now cannot afford universal healthcare. We are told that hospitals are overspending and that they are in debt.
> 
> In fact, the NHS is extremely affordable. Here's a list of healthcare spending in several westernised countries in 2014:
> 
> As the table shows, the UK could easily choose to dedicate an extra percent of its GDP to healthcare, providing the NHS with the funds needed to sustain a modern health service.
> 
> *3 - Hospitals aren't overstaffed*
> The 'financial reset' planned for the NHS includes a limit on staff recruitment, the implication being that hospitals need to cut back on excessive hiring of permanent staff. Considering the billions spent on hiring agency staff to fill rota gaps, this is certainly not true.
> 
> The underlying issue here is safety. Following the Francis Report into the Mid Staffs scandal, hospital managers decided that they would rather exceed their budgets and hire more staff, than be guilty of manslaughter. Fed up with being ignored, the DoH is now coming down on managers with an iron fist. Anyone caught protecting staffing levels by overspending will be subject to a 'failure regime'
> 
> *4 - This Isn't About Centralisation *
> Centralisation of specialised services can improve outcomes for patients with specific illnesses. But trauma, cardiac and stroke services have already become centralised. For many other illnesses, and for maternity and step-down care, it's important to have smaller District General Hospitals (DGHs) and Community Hospitals. These provide care closer to home and take the pressure off the big, specialised centres.
> 
> So don't be fooled. Closing A&Es and taking services away from local hospitals isn't centralisation. It's un-evidenced vandalism in the name of cost savings
> 
> *5 - This Is About Creating A Two Tier System*
> The level of cuts and closures required by the STPs is such that the NHS will become unable to provide a universal service. Rationing will increase, so that most routine procedures will be refused funding. Once various DGHs have closed, the hospitals still standing will struggle with their increased catchment areas and will be forced to provide essentials only.
> 
> This was already envisaged by Simon Stevens, who is keen to separate emergency care from routine care. Emergencies will be handled in NHS hospitals, whilst the routine work will be handled by the private sector. Patients wishing to undergo non-essential procedures will find themselves needing to pay to have their cataracts and hernias treated or their tonsils removed


Don't worry @noushka05 no one is fooling me, I make my own mind up just like you do when presented with different information, we just maybe come to different conclusions


----------



## stockwellcat.

Corbyn has put me off Labour. Here's why:

He is willing to put the security of this country at risk.

His party are now contridicting itself as Labour say that trident is needed and Corbyn wants to scrap it. Corbyn also wants to sit down and talk to terrorists, what planet is he on?


----------



## Happy Paws2

....


----------



## Happy Paws2

stockwellcat said:


> Corbyn has put me off Labour. Here's why:
> 
> He is willing to put the security of this country at risk.
> 
> His party are now contridicting itself as Labour say that trident is needed and Corbyn wants to scrap it. Corbyn also wants to sit down and talk to terrorists, what planet is he on?


I really don't the of the party would let that happen, but he did say he would talk about all seruity matters once in power.

I'm more worried in the short term of what the tories are going to do to us.


----------



## noushka05

stuaz said:


> Don't worry @noushka05 no one is fooling me, I make my own mind up just like you do when presented with different information, we just maybe come to different conclusions


I'd be intrigued to know if your conclusion is different from the health professionals fighting to save our NHS?





















stockwellcat said:


> Corbyn has put me off Labour. Here's why:
> 
> He is willing to put the security of this country at risk.
> 
> His party are now contridicting itself as Labour say that trident is needed and Corbyn wants to scrap it. Corbyn also wants to sit down and talk to terrorists, what planet is he on?


Its a travesty the media aren't holding this government to account on their shocking foreign policy which puts us all in danger. They are selling arms to despotic regimes, UK weapons are in the hands of terrorists. The only way to end conflict is by negotiation not by exacerbating it.

Labour will never ditch Trident even though Trident is obsolete, dangerous & makes us less safe. Corbyn has been a lifelong CND supporter but the labour party are in support of Trident.

*UN nuclear disarmament talks: UK Government not attending discussions labelled 'reckless and irresponsible' *http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...s-mp-reckless-irresponsible-123-a7631546.html


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Labour will never ditch Trident even though Trident is obsolete, dangerous & makes us less safe. Corbyn has been a lifelong CND supporter but the labour party are in support of Trident.
> 
> *UN nuclear disarmament talks: UK Government not attending discussions labelled 'reckless and irresponsible' *http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...s-mp-reckless-irresponsible-123-a7631546.html


Trident has been an effective nuclear deterrent and it has worked all these years as a deterrent as we have never had to use it. They have started building the the new class of nuclear submarines.

Corbyn has put Labour at logger heads with himself as he is anti nuclear.


----------



## KittenKong

Happy Paws said:


> I really don't the of the party would let that happen, but he did say he would talk about all seruity matters once in power.
> 
> I'm more worried in the short term of what the tories are going to do to us.


Me too.

In the aftermath of the EU referendum I vowed never to vote Labour but had to ask myself what I would prefer.

The choices are Brexit with no NHS under the Tories or Brexit with a NHS under Labour!



stockwellcat said:


> Trident has been an effective nuclear deterrent and it has worked all these years as a deterrent as we have never had to use it. They have started building the the new class of nuclear submarines.
> 
> Corbyn has put Labour at logger heads with himself as he is anti nuclear.


Corbyn is indeed anti nuclear but the majority of his party is not. I don't think Parliament would vote for unilateral nuclear disarmament.

I agree Trident has been an effective nuclear deterrent in the past.

Nowadays I'm more worried about what Trump might do.....


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Corbyn has put me off Labour. Here's why:
> 
> He is willing to put the security of this country at risk.
> 
> His party are now contridicting itself as Labour say that trident is needed and Corbyn wants to scrap it. Corbyn also wants to sit down and talk to terrorists, what planet is he on?


Corbyn said he would have a defence review- seems fair for a new government. He also said he wouldn't order a nuclear first strike- thank God, I don't want a leader who would be happy to kill thousands of innocent people in the most horrific way possible!

He said he wouldn't rule out air strikes on the leader of ISIS.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Trident has been an effective nuclear deterrent and it has worked all these years as a deterrent as we have never had to use it. They have started building the the new class of nuclear submarines.
> 
> Corbyn has put Labour at logger heads with himself as he is anti nuclear.


Trident is really dangerous. A hell of a lot of Scottish people don't want it on their doorstep.

Military 
*Trident nuclear missiles are £20bn waste of money, say generals *

Britain's nuclear submarines are "completely useless" against modern warfare, and the £20bn spent on renewing them is a waste of money, retired senior military officers said yesterday.

Have a read at this SWC - https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jan/16/trident-is-20bn-waste-say-generals


----------



## noushka05

Happy Paws said:


> I really don't the of the party would let that happen, but he did say he would talk about all seruity matters once in power.
> 
> I'm more worried in the short term of what the tories are going to do to us.


NHS is screwed, public services are screwed, environment screwed. I couldn't care less about Trident. How many will die without health care & social care? I'd rather they spend the TRILLIONS Trident costs us on those. If theres a nuclear war we're all doomed anyway. Trident wont save us it makes us a target.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Corbyn also wants to sit down and talk to terrorists, what planet is he on?


Clearly, military action in places like Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria has only fueled terrorism, not reduced it.

Equally, GW Bush's "War on terror" has been equally unsuccessful.

I take my hats off to Corbyn for suggesting this different approach. It might not work of course but if negotiations are not attempted how would anyone know?

I don't intend to compare this to NI but what Major and Blair did towards the peace process there was to be applauded.


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...gle-capital-group-philip-morris-a7133231.html


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> Corbyn has put me off Labour. Here's why:
> He is willing to put the security of this country at risk.
> His party are now contridicting itself as Labour say that trident is needed and Corbyn wants to scrap it. Corbyn also wants to sit down and talk to terrorists, what planet is he on?


To what extent is Trident useful? In what circumstances would we use it and how likely are they? It's meaningless to me in terms of the security of this country because it's completely outside my understanding. In my limited world the security of this country is about terrorist and cyber threats. I never do understand why Trident is trundled out as some sort of political issue because I can't honestly believe the majority of the electorate can have a knowledgeable view on the matter.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## stockwellcat.

Thanks for your replies.

Can I ask, do you honestly believe Corbyn could run this country and be an effective leader? He is very unsure of himself let alone his party and dragged the Labour party down to the point they cannot offer an opposition to the Conservatives.


----------



## KittenKong

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/arch...licies-british-national-party-manifesto-2005/


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Corbyn has put me off Labour. Here's why:
> 
> He is willing to put the security of this country at risk.
> 
> His party are now contridicting itself as Labour say that trident is needed and Corbyn wants to scrap it. Corbyn also wants to sit down and talk to terrorists, what planet is he on?


Sorry stockwellcat but he is on the same planet as he always has been. I don't think he has changed his policy on Trident so I can only assume you hadn't properly researched his views before declaring yesterday that you were voting labour.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Thanks for your replies.
> 
> Can I ask, do you honestly believe Corbyn could run this country and be an effective leader? He is very unsure of himself let alone his party and dragged the Labour party down to the point they cannot offer an opposition to the Conservatives.


I'm not exactly a fan of Corbyn as you know but from when I'm standing he certainly appears to have more of a mandate than May, who comes over as either a first class liar or someone who cannot make up her mind by calling an election she said she never would to distract from the Brexit negotiations.

As RPH has said above Corbyn's on the same planet he's always been on.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> I'm not exactly a fan of Corbyn as you know but from when I'm standing he certainly appears to have more of a mandate than May.


Why?


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> he certainly appears to have more of a mandate than May.


I disagree with that. He hasn't got a mandate yet, he's asking for people to give him ideas of how to form a mandate.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Why?


His stance on Brexit, but I'm putting that aside for the moment. His respect for the "will of the people" will either work or go against him.



stockwellcat said:


> I disagree with that. He hasn't got a mandate yet, he's asking for people to give him ideas of how to form a mandate.


In doing that, is that not showing he's prepared to listen to the public, rather than assume the public are very wrongly united behind them regardless like May?


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Thanks for your replies.
> 
> Can I ask, do you honestly believe Corbyn could run this country and be an effective leader? He is very unsure of himself let alone his party and dragged the Labour party down to the point they cannot offer an opposition to the Conservatives.


I'm not sure...but I don't think he is unsure of himself, he just isn't very good at expressing him. I don't really see him as a strong leader but I see May as far weaker; I can't imagine Corbyn holding hands with Trump!


----------



## havoc

Odin_cat said:


> I see May as far weaker


In their different ways both of them just aren't very good at politics. May came charging in convinced she could ride roughshod over parliamentary process and has seemed completely lost since being shown she can't. Instead of knuckling down and getting on with the job within the rules she's called an election. I don't know who she's using as a writer but if the content really is what she wants to say they aren't working to her style and she always seems uncomfortable when reading prepared statements and speeches. It doesn't come across as strong and committed at all.
Corbyn does come across as an ineffectual character and at least we know which dark forces want to pull his strings. What we don't know is how willing a puppet he'd be.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> His stance on Brexit, but I'm putting that aside for the moment. His respect for the "will of the people" will either work or go against him.


Having respect for the will of the people doesn't give you a mandate in parliament though. Corbyn is in the very odd situation of being loved by many grass roots party members and some of the unions but not by many labour MP's who lets face it have tried to oust him twice already. May on the other hand was elected by her own MP's and has the backing of the vast majority of them. Therefore I can't see how you can say he has a mandate and she doesn't??


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> May on the other hand was elected by her own MP's and has the backing of the vast majority of them.


To be fair she did sort of slide into the role by default in the end. I do wonder if this is what's made her lack confidence.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> To be fair she did sort of slide into the role by default in the end. I do wonder if this is what's made her lack confidence.


Not how I remember it.

1st ballot 
May - 50% (out of 5 candidates)
Leadsom 20.1 %
Gove 14.6 %
Crabb 10.2 %
Fox 4.9 %

Fox eliminated.
Crabb withdrew

2nd ballot
May 60.5 %
Leadsom 25.5%
Gove 14.0%

Gove eliminated
Leadsom withdrew

Pretty convincing lead I would say.


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> I'd rather they spend the TRILLIONS Trident costs us ....


LOL - you couldn't make it up. Oh, wait a minute; you just did.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Having respect for the will of the people doesn't give you a mandate in parliament though. Corbyn is in the very odd situation of being loved by many grass roots party members and some of the unions but not by many labour MP's who lets face it have tried to oust him twice already. May on the other hand was elected by her own MP's and has the backing of the vast majority of them. Therefore I can't see how you can say he has a mandate and she doesn't??


By doing that it could be argued he is listening to the people as the 52% of leave voters would say by blocking Brexit he would be against the democratic process.

Hardly ideal but what's the alternative? A far right government using Brexit as a smokescreen for the mandate to dismantle the entire public sector including the NHS and probably tax increases too.

No doubt the early days of a May led government would see the increase in VAT (or Purchase Tax post Brexit?), their favourite form of taxation.


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not how I remember it.
> 
> 1st ballot
> May - 50% (out of 5 candidates)
> Leadsom 20.1 %
> Gove 14.6 %
> Crabb 10.2 %
> Fox 4.9 %
> 
> Fox eliminated.
> Crabb withdrew
> 
> 2nd ballot
> May 60.5 %
> Leadsom 25.5%
> Gove 14.0%
> 
> Gove eliminated
> Leadsom withdrew
> 
> Pretty convincing lead I would say.


Problem is, percentages are only part of the story. Having a convincing lead in something doesn't necessarily mean you are brilliant at whatever it is, only that the opposition is significantly worse.

Or, to put it another way, I am a _supremely _successful 100m runner - providing I'm racing against primary school level opposition


----------



## Arnie83

stockwellcat said:


> Corbyn has put me off Labour. Here's why:
> 
> He is willing to put the security of this country at risk.
> 
> His party are now contridicting itself as Labour say that trident is needed and Corbyn wants to scrap it. Corbyn also wants to sit down and talk to terrorists, *what planet is he on? *


I suspect his answer would be 'The only one we've got.'


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> LOL - you couldn't make it up. Oh, wait a minute; you just did.


No I didn't, I made a genuine mistake That's what not fact checking does to you. It should be BILLIONS not trillions lol


----------



## stuaz

noushka05 said:


> I'd be intrigued to know if your conclusion is different from the health professionals fighting to save our NHS?


Yep my conclusion is different, in fact it is also in line with Health Professionals as well, as I get my information first hand 

I am not disputing the fact the NHS maybe in crisis, i am merely pointing out that more money is not necessarily the ONLY solution. Its combination of that and proper management of it. Basically the whole system needs a good shake up and look at.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> By doing that it could be argued he is listening to the people as the 52% of leave voters would say by blocking Brexit he would be against the democratic process.
> 
> Hardly ideal but what's the alternative? A far right government using Brexit as a smokescreen for the mandate to dismantle the entire public sector including the NHS and probably tax increases too.
> 
> No doubt the early days of a May led government would see the increase in VAT (or Purchase Tax post Brexit?), their favourite form of taxation.


This is a general election though and people should vote on all the issues not just on Brexit so I'm not sure why you come up with Corbyn having more of a mandate than May. The Conservatives already have a mandate as they are the current elected government and if they win the election then they still have a mandate. How on earth does Corbyn who has never been PM and never fought an election as leader have more mandate than she does?



Jesthar said:


> Problem is, percentages are only part of the story. Having a convincing lead in something doesn't necessarily mean you are brilliant at whatever it is, only that the opposition is significantly worse.
> 
> Or, to put it another way, I am a _supremely _successful 100m runner - providing I'm racing against primary school level opposition


I wasn't saying she is brilliant but replying to the poster who said

"To be fair she did sort of slide into the role by default in the end."

which I don't think is a fair representation of how she became leader.


----------



## noushka05

stuaz said:


> Yep my conclusion is different, in fact it is also in line with Health Professionals as well, as I get my information first hand
> 
> I am not disputing the fact the NHS maybe in crisis, i am merely pointing out that more money is not necessarily the ONLY solution. Its combination of that and proper management of it. Basically the whole system needs a good shake up and look at.


So what do you think about the biggest shake up in the history of the NHS? Do you think its made things better?

ETA Could you provide references please?


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> This is a general election though and people should vote on all the issues not just on Brexit so I'm not sure why you come up with Corbyn having more of a mandate than May. The Conservatives already have a mandate as they are the current elected government and if they win the election then they still have a mandate. How on earth does Corbyn who has never been PM and never fought an election as leader have more mandate than she does?
> 
> I wasn't saying she is brilliant but replying to the poster who said
> 
> "To be fair she did sort of slide into the role by default in the end."
> 
> which I don't think is a fair representation of how she became leader.


We all know May's mandate. More austerity for the poor & ordinary people. Corbyns failings pale into insignificance compared to this malignant government. How much more can the poor & the vulnerable take? How much longer can our NHS hang on before it collapses completely?


----------



## noushka05

Not excusing his failings, but I think its worth remembering the media bias towards Corbyn.


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Leadsom withdrew
> 
> Pretty convincing lead I would say.


I did include the words 'in the end' quite deliberately


----------



## noushka05

Oncologist Clive Peedell >

It's odds on that Tories will increase their majority, so it's
also odds on that our public services will continue to deteriorate. #*yourcall*


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Why?


Oh mr corbyn, sadly, he is the conservatives most deadly weapon x


----------



## noushka05

*Dr Alex Gates*‏@*dr_alex_gates* 15h15 hours ago

The NHS under the Tories: Unaccountable. In denial. But their eyes are wide open.
5 more years of this will be catastrophic #*VoteNHS*


----------



## stuaz

noushka05 said:


> So what do you think about the biggest shake up in the history of the NHS? Do you think its made things better?
> 
> ETA Could you provide references please?


No, I don't think it has made things better because it is being done in a fragmented manner, the whole system needs reviewing but at this stage I run the risk of derailing this thread into one based on the NHS which is IMO a whole other topic in its own right.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Just curious, anyone else fed up to the back teeth with the NHS constantly being used as a political football. Every general election the opposition parties come up with "facts" and figures to show it's never been in a worse state. Every election.

There's two things I'm totally ignoring when June 8th comes, that's the NHS and Brexit. Take those two out of the equation and hopefully an informed decision can be made on the remainder of their mandates, if they cobble them together in time that is.


----------



## 1290423

Right, views please from all, both sides more then welcome.

And im just looking at all the angles

So the conservatives are late putting in their proposals , saying it cant be dont prior to the ok?

The is talk , only talk that the cons could be about to upset white van man, yes?

Do you think it is possible that she may be intending to slap more duty onto diesel after the GE?

I know many of you dont like diesel but let me remind you that it was, a government, cant remember which, that encouraged and offered incentives on diesel vehicles .


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> Just curious, anyone else fed up to the back teeth with the NHS constantly being used as a political football. Every general election the opposition parties come up with "facts" and figures to show it's never been in a worse state. Every election.
> 
> There's two things I'm totally ignoring when June 8th comes, that's the NHS and Brexit. Take those two out of the equation and hopefully an informed decision can be made on the remainder of their mandates, if they cobble them together in time that is.


Yep


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I wasn't saying she is brilliant but replying to the poster who said
> 
> "To be fair she did sort of slide into the role by default in the end."
> 
> which I don't think is a fair representation of how she became leader.


Hmm, we'll have to agree to disagree on that one. It's one thing to win by a huge margin against high quality opposition. It's quite another to win by a huge margin against poor quality opposition


----------



## noushka05

stuaz said:


> No, I don't think it has made things better because it is being done in a fragmented manner, the whole system needs reviewing but at this stage I run the risk of derailing this thread into one based on the NHS which is IMO a whole other topic in its own right.


Its been a catastrophe. Even Cameron admitted so when he feared he wouldn't be re-elected in 2015. Once back in power they carried on destroying it. The very future of our NHS is at stake so of course its going to be a big issue in this election (or at least it should be!). I want the NHS to continue free at the point of need for all. I do not want it sold off & Americanized. Millions of lives depend on our NHS. It belongs to all of us. The tories promised it was safe in their hands. They are liars.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Just curious, anyone else fed up to the back teeth with the NHS constantly being used as a political football. Every general election the opposition parties come up with "facts" and figures to show it's never been in a worse state. Every election.
> 
> There's two things I'm totally ignoring when June 8th comes, that's the NHS and Brexit. Take those two out of the equation and hopefully an informed decision can be made on the remainder of their mandates, if they cobble them together in time that is.


You don't think the NHS is an important issue? Maybe you & your loved ones are wealthy enough to fund your own health care but millions aren't as fortunate. The NHS matters.


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> No I didn't, I made a genuine mistake That's what not fact checking does to you. It should be BILLIONS not trillions lol
> 
> View attachment 308091


Thought so really. Bought you something anyway....


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> Thought so really. Bought you something anyway....
> 
> View attachment 308098


Funny:Hilarious


----------



## noushka05

These 'shake ups' by the government seem to be making things worse, @stuaz 

*NHS gains 4,000 more managers but loses GPs *https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/apr/15/nhs-managers-grow-gps-fall?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

*Doctors say ministers' 'bureaucracy busting' shakeup has failed*

The number of NHS managers has grown by almost 18% in the four years since the government introduced a "bureaucracy-busting" shakeup of the health service, according to the latest official data.

The rise of about 4,650 in total management posts since April 2013, when the controversial Health and Social Care Act came into force, contrasts with an alarming fall in the number of GPs over recent months at a time of unprecedented demand for health care. The figures have drawn criticism from the British Medical Association (BMA), who say ministers are failing in their central objective of shifting more resources and manpower from back-office posts to the front line


----------



## Satori

DT said:


> I know many of you dont like diesel but let me remind you that it was, a government, cant remember which, that encouraged and offered incentives on diesel vehicles .


It was Blair/Brown and they KNEW about the dangers. Bent.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jesthar said:


> Hmm, we'll have to agree to disagree on that one. It's one thing to win by a huge margin against high quality opposition. It's quite another to win by a huge margin against poor quality opposition


Well we will soon find out in June although even if she wins by a huge majority people will still be saying the opposition was not strong for it to be a real test. That of course is true, the opposition is poor, even Andy Burnham is not standing, not that I rate him anyway but he is one of the last ex cabinet ministers left standing.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## stuaz

noushka05 said:


> These 'shake ups' by the government seem to be making things worse, @stuaz
> 
> *NHS gains 4,000 more managers but loses GPs *https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/apr/15/nhs-managers-grow-gps-fall?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
> 
> *Doctors say ministers' 'bureaucracy busting' shakeup has failed*
> 
> The number of NHS managers has grown by almost 18% in the four years since the government introduced a "bureaucracy-busting" shakeup of the health service, according to the latest official data.
> 
> The rise of about 4,650 in total management posts since April 2013, when the controversial Health and Social Care Act came into force, contrasts with an alarming fall in the number of GPs over recent months at a time of unprecedented demand for health care. The figures have drawn criticism from the British Medical Association (BMA), who say ministers are failing in their central objective of shifting more resources and manpower from back-office posts to the front line


Exactly, and more money just goes into all these managers pockets. Which is why simply giving the NHS more money is not the absolute answer if the money is going to mis-used or mis-managed.


----------



## noushka05

stuaz said:


> Exactly, and more money just goes into all these managers pockets. Which is why simply giving the NHS more money is not the absolute answer if the money is going to mis-used or mis-managed.


But the government have created this mess with their 'top down reorganisation' they promised wouldn't happen. So how can we save the NHS if they get into power with a bigger majority?.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> You don't think the NHS is an important issue? Maybe you & your loved ones are wealthy enough to fund your own health care but millions aren't as fortunate. The NHS matters.


Nope, shouldn't make presumptuous.


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Well we will soon find out in June although even if she wins by a huge majority people will still be saying the opposition was not strong for it to be a real test. That of course is true, the opposition is poor, even Andy Burnham is not standing, not that I rate him anyway but he is one of the last ex cabinet ministers left standing.


Exactly. For some reason, the old adage "In the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king" keeps coming to mind...


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Nope, shouldn't make presumptuous.


Well you don't seem very concerned our NHS is teetering on the brink of collapse.


----------



## Odin_cat

Dr Pepper said:


> Just curious, anyone else fed up to the back teeth with the NHS constantly being used as a political football. Every general election the opposition parties come up with "facts" and figures to show it's never been in a worse state. Every election.
> 
> There's two things I'm totally ignoring when June 8th comes, that's the NHS and Brexit. Take those two out of the equation and hopefully an informed decision can be made on the remainder of their mandates, if they cobble them together in time that is.


I'm absolutely fed up of it being used as a political football. There have been numerous calls on the government to create a cross-party commission to explore the future of the NHS, most notably from the Libdems. They have been ignored.


----------



## Arnie83

Satori said:


> It was Blair/Brown and they KNEW about the dangers. Bent.


Interesting. Do you have a source to back that up?


----------



## Honeys mum

DT said:


> Do you think it is possible that she may be intending to slap more duty onto diesel after the GE?


It stated on the news this lunchtime that the Goverment have said they will not be doing any thing about pollution until afterthe election.
What a suprise.!!


----------



## stuaz

noushka05 said:


> But the government have created this mess with their 'top down reorganisation' they promised wouldn't happen. So how can we save the NHS if they get into power with a bigger majority?.


How do "we" stop it? The best option available at the moment is for people to make there voice heard at the next election and if they believe that the Conservatives are not good for the NHS then they will vote against them.

I said it earlier in the thread and I do believe it is not going to be a landslide for the Conservatives as some are predicting.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Odin_cat said:


> I'm absolutely fed up of it being used as a political football. There have been numerous calls on the government to create a cross-party commission to explore the future of the NHS, most notably from the Libdems. They have been ignored.


I agree. I don't think any one political party will ever be brave enough to really look at all the issues and carry out proper reform because they are too worried about losing votes so one party tinkers with this and the next change it and tinker with something else. I think a cross party management combined with some NHS staff would be far better.


----------



## rona

Odin_cat said:


> I'm absolutely fed up of it being used as a political football. There have been numerous calls on the government to create a cross-party commission to explore the future of the NHS, most notably from the Libdems. They have been ignored.


There is a cross party commission, what they are calling for is a national convention on the NHS


----------



## noushka05

stuaz said:


> How do "we" stop it? The best option available at the moment is for people to make there voice heard at the next election and if they believe that the Conservatives are not good for the NHS then they will vote against them.
> 
> I said it earlier in the thread and I do believe it is not going to be a landslide for the Conservatives as some are predicting.


Are we talking about the 8th of June or the one after that? Bit confused, sorry

If you mean the one after this one - the NHS will be gone.

The media are hammering Corbyn & labour whilst giving the May & the tories an easy ride. I fear they will win by a landslide.


----------



## Honeys mum

Just found this,don't know anything about the man who wrote it, but hope theres nothing in what he is saying.
Theresa May's secret plans to replace NHS England with private US healthcare system Kaiser Permanente | Pride's Purge


----------



## noushka05

Honeys mum said:


> It stated on the news this lunchtime that the Goverment have said they will not be doing any thing about pollution until afterthe election.
> What a suprise.!!


Indeed! We'll be a toxic slag heap once they get full control.


----------



## noushka05

Honeys mum said:


> Just found this,don't know anything about the man who wrote it, but hope theres nothing what he is saying.
> Theresa May's secret plans to replace NHS England with private US healthcare system Kaiser Permanente | Pride's Purge


Jeremy hunt has clearly stated this is their plan for the NHS. I have to go out now but will find you the video when I get home HM x


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Honeys mum said:


> Just found this,don't know anything about the man who wrote it, but hope theres nothing what he is saying.
> Theresa May's secret plans to replace NHS England with private US healthcare system Kaiser Permanente | Pride's Purge


He is a political blogger.


----------



## samuelsmiles

Honeys mum said:


> Just found this,don't know anything about the man who wrote it, but hope theres nothing what he is saying.
> Theresa May's secret plans to replace NHS England with private US healthcare system Kaiser Permanente | Pride's Purge


Yes, a blogger - not to be taken too seriously (or at all.)

He, himself, says his blogs are "sarcastic, cynical, petty, vindictive and paranoid." Very left wing then.


----------



## stuaz

noushka05 said:


> Are we talking about the 8th of June or the one after that? Bit confused, sorry
> 
> If you mean the one after this one - the NHS will be gone.
> 
> The media are hammering Corbyn & labour whilst giving the May & the tories an easy ride. I fear they will win by a landslide.


This election


----------



## cheekyscrip

Why worry? NHS will get 350 mln a week after Brexit.
Didn't Leave promise ?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

I hear a lot of positive feedback about Kaiser Permanente from my friends in the plant based nutrition world, they appear to be quite progressive in terms of health prevention and education. Obviously I'm not in the US and don't fully understand their system but I would like to see our NHS put far far more emphasis on preventative medicine and really getting people to understand how diet/exercise/lifestyle have such a huge impact on health. In some ways I wonder if having to pay something towards the costs of medication and procedures would be the incentive that forces people to address these issues but it doesn't seem to have been in the US. For me it is no great ambition to want to spend as much on healthcare as the US or other countries do - they have to spend that much because they have so many sick people, I want to see less sick people and far more healthy people so that there is less demand for NHS services not more. Of course there will always be a need for emergency care, for care of the elderly and for the illnesses that occur despite a healthy lifestyle but we absolutely have to start making people take responsibility for their own health more before our NHS sinks under the demand from largely preventable diseases of affluence.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I hear a lot of positive feedback about Kaiser Permanente from my friends in the plant based nutrition world, they appear to be quite progressive in terms of health prevention and education. Obviously I'm not in the US and don't fully understand their system but I would like to see our NHS put far far more emphasis on preventative medicine and really getting people to understand how diet/exercise/lifestyle have such a huge impact on health. In some ways I wonder if having to pay something towards the costs of medication and procedures would be the incentive that forces people to address these issues but it doesn't seem to have been in the US. For me it is no great ambition to want to spend as much on healthcare as the US or other countries do - they have to spend that much because they have so many sick people, I want to see less sick people and far more healthy people so that there is less demand for NHS services not more. Of course there will always be a need for emergency care, for care of the elderly and for the illnesses that occur despite a healthy lifestyle but we absolutely have to start making people take responsibility for their own health more before our NHS sinks under the demand from largely preventable diseases of affluence.


Totally one hundred per cent agree
To the point where one has to be responsible for their own help I mean!
Have,you ever entered a hospital and seen all the patients huddled together in their nightwear having a *** and,coughing their lungs,up?


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I hear a lot of positive feedback about Kaiser Permanente from my friends in the plant based nutrition world, they appear to be quite progressive in terms of health prevention and education. Obviously I'm not in the US and don't fully understand their system but I would like to see our NHS put far far more emphasis on preventative medicine and really getting people to understand how diet/exercise/lifestyle have such a huge impact on health. In some ways I wonder if having to pay something towards the costs of medication and procedures would be the incentive that forces people to address these issues but it doesn't seem to have been in the US. For me it is no great ambition to want to spend as much on healthcare as the US or other countries do - they have to spend that much because they have so many sick people, I want to see less sick people and far more healthy people so that there is less demand for NHS services not more. Of course there will always be a need for emergency care, for care of the elderly and for the illnesses that occur despite a healthy lifestyle but we absolutely have to start making people take responsibility for their own health more before our NHS sinks under the demand from largely preventable diseases of affluence.


I don't think anyone would disagree that prevention is better than cure. 

The main problem the NHS is having is that there isn't enough money to resource care for those who are already ill, and in many cases old age is the biggest factor in the cause of illness - which, ironically, is because people are living a lot longer due to being healthier... I can't remember the exact figures, but I think over three times as much NHS funding is spend of over 60's compared with under 60s.


----------



## 1290423

Jesthar said:


> I don't think anyone would disagree that prevention is better than cure.
> 
> The main problem the NHS is having is that there isn't enough money to resource care for those who are already ill, and in many cases old age is the biggest factor in the cause of illness - which, ironically, is because people are living a lot longer due to being healthier... I can't remember the exact figures, but I think over three times as much NHS funding is spend of over 60's compared with under 60s.


In the same vein, pound for pound they could possibly have paid three times as much in, taking into account half of them never even visited a doctor when they were working or during their childhood etc


----------



## Jesthar

DT said:


> In the same vein, pound for pound they could possibly have paid three times as much in, taking into account half of them never even visited a doctor when they were working or during their childhood etc


It's statistically very unlikely, though. Plenty of people who don't make it much past retirement age, or who die tragically young, are relatively healthy, worked all their lives and rarely visited a doctor too.


----------



## havoc

Honeys mum said:


> It stated on the news this lunchtime that the Goverment have said they will not be doing any thing about pollution until afterthe election.


Is that how it was put? As far as I knew this morning they said they won't be *publishing* their plans until after the election. The deadline for doing so was looming and now they don't have to on time. For those worried about the price of everything affected by the price of diesel - be afraid.


----------



## 1290423

Jesthar said:


> It's statistically very unlikely, though. Plenty of people who don't make it much past retirement age, or who die tragically young, are relatively healthy, worked all their lives and rarely visited a doctor too.


My partner 69, was in bupa, due to his job had to have blood tests every 12 weeks, all done privately. Very very fit, still working, never smoked odd whiskey! Pays for dental etc, but heck, he,s just had his first nhs eye test this last week and,his first ever pair of specs


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jesthar said:


> I don't think anyone would disagree that prevention is better than cure.
> 
> The main problem the NHS is having is that there isn't enough money to resource care for those who are already ill, and in many cases old age is the biggest factor in the cause of illness - which, ironically, is because people are living a lot longer due to being healthier... I can't remember the exact figures, but I think over three times as much NHS funding is spend of over 60's compared with under 60s.


Yes I mentioned that in an earlier post . I realise the NHS doesn't currently have the money to spend on prevention but unless someone does start spending money on it the endless cycle of ill health and the need for medication/treatment for diseases which are preventable will continue.

*4. The UK's population is ageing*
The ageing population is certainly a major factor - and it's one that all health systems in the world are struggling with. Medical advances have meant that people are living longer. When the NHS was created, life expectancy was 13 years shorter than it is now.

This is something to celebrate. Infectious diseases are no longer a significant threat. Heart attacks do not claim the lives of people early in the same numbers. Even cancer is not the death sentence it once was - half of people now survive for a decade or more.

But this progress has come at a cost. People are living with a growing number of long-term chronic conditions - diabetes, heart disease and dementia. These are more about care than cure - what patients usually need is support. By the age of 65, most people will have at least one of these illnesses. By 75 they will have two.

*5. Care for older people costs much more*
The average 65-year-old costs the NHS 2.5 times more than the average 30-year-old. An 85-year-old costs more than five times as much.

As the numbers continue to rise so does the cost to the NHS. This is compounded by the rising cost of new drugs. The health service is currently considering capping the amount it will pay for new drugs at £20m each a year. A fifth of new treatments coming on stream cost more than this.

Then there's obesity. A third of adults are so overweight they are risking their health significantly.

All this contributes to what health economists call health inflation - the idea that the cost of providing care outstrips the normal rise in the cost of living across the economy.


----------



## 1290423

Jesthar said:


> It's statistically very unlikely, though. Plenty of people who don't make it much past retirement age, or who die tragically young, are relatively healthy, worked all their lives and rarely visited a doctor too.


Besides, my point was, many people are healthy all their working life, , we all get old eventually, sooner or later those under 60 will be over 60, circle of life, yes we are living longer but I bet there are a,heck of a lot of people out there who have never needed .or visited a doctor during there working life or childhood.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes I mentioned that in an earlier post . I realise the NHS doesn't currently have the money to spend on prevention but unless someone does start spending money on it the endless cycle of ill health and the need for medication/treatment for diseases which are preventable will continue.
> 
> *4. The UK's population is ageing*
> The ageing population is certainly a major factor - and it's one that all health systems in the world are struggling with. Medical advances have meant that people are living longer. When the NHS was created, life expectancy was 13 years shorter than it is now.
> 
> This is something to celebrate. Infectious diseases are no longer a significant threat. Heart attacks do not claim the lives of people early in the same numbers. Even cancer is not the death sentence it once was - half of people now survive for a decade or more.
> 
> But this progress has come at a cost. People are living with a growing number of long-term chronic conditions - diabetes, heart disease and dementia. These are more about care than cure - what patients usually need is support. By the age of 65, most people will have at least one of these illnesses. By 75 they will have two.
> 
> *5. Care for older people costs much more*
> The average 65-year-old costs the NHS 2.5 times more than the average 30-year-old. An 85-year-old costs more than five times as much.
> 
> As the numbers continue to rise so does the cost to the NHS. This is compounded by the rising cost of new drugs. The health service is currently considering capping the amount it will pay for new drugs at £20m each a year. A fifth of new treatments coming on stream cost more than this.
> 
> Then there's obesity. A third of adults are so overweight they are risking their health significantly.
> 
> All this contributes to what health economists call health inflation - the idea that the cost of providing care outstrips the normal rise in the cost of living across the economy.


But that 35 year old will be 65 one day, and then 85, the government know thats how it works, unless we start putting the old folk to sleep that is.


----------



## 1290423

To be honest im sick to the back teeth of hearing of the aging population and how we are living longer. Thats how it works, they knew it was coming! What do some of you/them want? Do you want each person nominated a specific amount and when that used up you get zilch?
The health service has never been a kevel playing field and never will be!


----------



## 1290423

And just a reminder, ma.y of these old people needing the nhs now didn't get the health and safety at work as many today, working down the mines, with asbastos, dangerous chemicals etc. And to add when I was at school you never saw a fat child!


----------



## Honeys mum

havoc said:


> Is that how it was put? As far as I knew this morning they said they won't be *publishing* their plans until after the election. The deadline for doing so was looming and now they don't have to on time. For those worried about the price of everything affected by the price of diesel - be afraid.


It just stated that the goverment have said because of the election they won't be doing anything about pollution until afterwards.
How very convieniant for them. So Iwould think we will be paying more for our diesel after the 8th June.


----------



## 1290423

Honeys mum said:


> It just stated that the goverment have said because of the election they won't be doing anything about pollution until afterwards.
> How very convieniant for them. So Iwould think we will be paying more for our diesel after the 8th June.


Well maybe if the nice mr corbyn wins all those who were persuaded to by diesel will be given nice fat cheques to replace them with


----------



## Jesthar

DT said:


> My partner 69, was in bupa, due to his job had to have blood tests every 12 weeks, all done privately. Very very fit, still working, never smoked odd whiskey! Pays for dental etc, but heck, he,s just had his first nhs eye test this last week and,his first ever pair of specs


Good for him, to have so few health issues is a big blessing  As is being able to afford Bupa (or have it provided through work) - many don;t have this option, though.



DT said:


> To be honest im sick to the back teeth of hearing of the aging population and how we are living longer. Thats how it works, they knew it was coming! What do some of you/them want? Do you want each person nominated a specific amount and when that used up you get zilch?
> The health service has never been a kevel playing field and never will be!


I think you misunderstand me, I'm people shouldn't get the care they need when they need it. The point is the same one that you are making - that an aging population is a side effect of improvements in prevention, and that even healthy older people need a lot more healthcare.

I've been blessed with three grandparents that made their 80s (two made it to 90+), and although they were relatively healthy and very active for a very long time, they spent a lot more time in healthcare in the decade or two of life than they ever needed during their lives (despite one being born with a hole in the heart). They were most definitely of the generation that hesitated to call the doctor, too. I also have two doctors in the family and my Dad was a hospital architect before he retired, so as a family we have very many reasons to fight for proper funding of the NHS - we ALL want to see people getting the care they need when they need it. Which means we want them to get the funding they need to treat people of all ages properly.  Sorry if I implied otherwise at any point


----------



## 1290423

Jesthar said:


> Good for him, to have so few health issues is a big blessing  As is being able to afford Bupa (or have it provided through work) - many don;t have this option, though.
> 
> I think you misunderstand me, I'm people shouldn't get the care they need when they need it. The point is the same one that you are making - that an aging population is a side effect of improvements in prevention, and that even healthy older people need a lot more healthcare.
> 
> I've been blessed with three grandparents that made their 80s (two made it to 90+), and although they were relatively healthy and very active for a very long time, they spent a lot more time in healthcare in the decade or two of life than they ever needed during their lives (despite one being born with a hole in the heart). They were most definitely of the generation that hesitated to call the doctor, too. I also have two doctors in the family and my Dad was a hospital architect before he retired, so as a family we have very many reasons to fight for proper funding of the NHS - we ALL want to see people getting the care they need when they need it. Which means we want them to get the funding they need to treat people of all ages properly.  Sorry if I implied otherwise at any point


Sorry if you thought I was aiming at you also, I did think after I had posted, to both you and,rottie. Sadly I have a terminal illness though , its called foot in mouth and there is no cure.
No, my point was, we will always, hopefully have an aging population, and I honestly do believe when our now elderly were younger they didn't use it as much as the young do today., 
But another big factor too is life has changed, drastically, families no longer live in the areas they were born, us they have to work to survive, not by choice, years ago it was pretty much down to families to look after and care for older relatives, this I think too has been a big factor.


----------



## 1290423

Jesthar said:


> Good for him, to have so few health issues is a big blessing  As is being able to afford Bupa (or have it provided through work) - many don;t have this option, though.
> 
> I think you misunderstand me, I'm people shouldn't get the care they need when they need it. The point is the same one that you are making - that an aging population is a side effect of improvements in prevention, and that even healthy older people need a lot more healthcare.
> 
> I've been blessed with three grandparents that made their 80s (two made it to 90+), and although they were relatively healthy and very active for a very long time, they spent a lot more time in healthcare in the decade or two of life than they ever needed during their lives (despite one being born with a hole in the heart). They were most definitely of the generation that hesitated to call the doctor, too. I also have two doctors in the family and my Dad was a hospital architect before he retired, so as a family we have very many reasons to fight for proper funding of the NHS - we ALL want to see people getting the care they need when they need it. Which means we want them to get the funding they need to treat people of all ages properly.  Sorry if I implied otherwise at any point


 I think when you read between the lines we are perhaps on the same side. They knew it was coming, they need to be prepared.
They being whichever government


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> But that 35 year old will be 65 one day, and then 85, the government know thats how it works, unless we start putting the old folk to sleep that is.





DT said:


> And just a reminder, ma.y of these old people needing the nhs now didn't get the health and safety at work as many today, working down the mines, with asbastos, dangerous chemicals etc. And to add when I was at school you never saw a fat child!


Of course the 35 year old will be 65 one day and then hopefully 85 but there is no getting away from the fact that right now with the current system the 65 year old and then the 85 year old will cost the NHS a lot more money especially if the rates of chronic/expensive illnesses continue to increase. I don't think anyone (least of all me who as always championed the rights of our elderly population who paid in to the welfare state in the belief it would look after them ) wants to ration the care they receive but I would dearly hope we can find a way to stop todays youngsters suffering from the same levels of heart disease, high blood pressure, obesity, type 2 diabetes and many cancers by teaching them that there is an alternative. Just think how much money we could save the NHS if we prevented even half of those illnesses and didn't see people like my Mum who has been on blood pressure medication most of her adult life - dose creeping up, number of drugs creeping up, complications from those drugs creeping up, more drugs needed to counteract the effect of the first drugs etc etc. She was recently sent to see a specialist because of visual disturbances which were suspected to be a stroke, as it was over the lunch time and she is a diabetic I told her to take a snack to eat - do you know what she took? bloody crisps. I cried at the image of a stroke specialist coming into the waiting room to call in a patient who has the grease and salt from crisps on her mouth and hands


----------



## noushka05

Honeys mum said:


> Just found this,don't know anything about the man who wrote it, but hope theres nothing in what he is saying.
> Theresa May's secret plans to replace NHS England with private US healthcare system Kaiser Permanente | Pride's Purge


I've found the video HM. Anyone in any doubt the Tories aren't deliberately destroying our NHS really need to see this.


----------



## havoc

DT said:


> years ago it was pretty much down to families to look after and care for older relatives


Expectations are different now. Years ago many women didn't work so could take on that care. Our economy relies on consumerism fed by double income households these days.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes I mentioned that in an earlier post . I realise the NHS doesn't currently have the money to spend on prevention but unless someone does start spending money on it the endless cycle of ill health and the need for medication/treatment for diseases which are preventable will continue.
> 
> *4. The UK's population is ageing*
> The ageing population is certainly a major factor - and it's one that all health systems in the world are struggling with. Medical advances have meant that people are living longer. When the NHS was created, life expectancy was 13 years shorter than it is now.
> 
> This is something to celebrate. Infectious diseases are no longer a significant threat. Heart attacks do not claim the lives of people early in the same numbers. Even cancer is not the death sentence it once was - half of people now survive for a decade or more.
> 
> But this progress has come at a cost. People are living with a growing number of long-term chronic conditions - diabetes, heart disease and dementia. These are more about care than cure - what patients usually need is support. By the age of 65, most people will have at least one of these illnesses. By 75 they will have two.
> 
> *5. Care for older people costs much more*
> The average 65-year-old costs the NHS 2.5 times more than the average 30-year-old. An 85-year-old costs more than five times as much.
> 
> As the numbers continue to rise so does the cost to the NHS. This is compounded by the rising cost of new drugs. The health service is currently considering capping the amount it will pay for new drugs at £20m each a year. A fifth of new treatments coming on stream cost more than this.
> 
> Then there's obesity. A third of adults are so overweight they are risking their health significantly.
> 
> All this contributes to what health economists call health inflation - the idea that the cost of providing care outstrips the normal rise in the cost of living across the economy.


The tories have slashed almost £5bn from the adult social care budget.


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> Expectations are different now. Years ago many women didn't work so could take on that care. Our economy relies on consumerism fed by double income households these days.


Yep, that's what I said, 
But what really winds me up is the elderly getting the blame for the crisis.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> The tories have slashed almost £5bn from the adult social care budget.


Yes I understand that - see below which I already posted many pages back. I've also suggested we need to look at social care and how to fund it much more carefully. I'd like to see big incentives for families to help out with their own relatives be that grants to build a granny annexe or pay for carers so that they can work less to help care for a relative. How we pay for that I have no idea but if we can practice more prevention and save costs on care of preventable illnesses that might help.










The other parts of the UK can make a case for being more generous in this respect - home care is capped at £60 a week in Wales and free for the over-75s in Northern Ireland, while Scotland provides free personal care (washing and dressing) in both care homes and people's own homes.

*10. Much more is spent on front-line healthcare than social care*
But none of them has cracked it. Indeed, if you were setting up a health and care service today, ask yourself this - how would it be done?

Would you separate medical care from personal care? Give one service to a national institution and the other to local councils? Would you provide one free at the point of need and charge for the other? Would you increase the budget of one, but cut the other?









Would you build more than 200 hospitals and spend over half of your budget on them when the biggest users of care are people with long-term illnesses that need care rather than medical intervention?

But as that is the system we have got at a time when money is limited, we are falling back on a typical British trait - making do.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Of course the 35 year old will be 65 one day and then hopefully 85 but there is no getting away from the fact that right now with the current system the 65 year old and then the 85 year old will cost the NHS a lot more money especially if the rates of chronic/expensive illnesses continue to increase. I don't think anyone (least of all me who as always championed the rights of our elderly population who paid in to the welfare state in the belief it would look after them ) wants to ration the care they receive but I would dearly hope we can find a way to stop todays youngsters suffering from the same levels of heart disease, high blood pressure, obesity, type 2 diabetes and many cancers by teaching them that there is an alternative. Just think how much money we could save the NHS if we prevented even half of those illnesses and didn't see people like my Mum who has been on blood pressure medication most of her adult life - dose creeping up, number of drugs creeping up, complications from those drugs creeping up, more drugs needed to counteract the effect of the first drugs etc etc. She was recently sent to see a specialist because of visual disturbances which were suspected to be a stroke, as it was over the lunch time and she is a diabetic I told her to take a snack to eat - do you know what she took? bloody crisps. I cried at the image of a stroke specialist coming into the waiting room to call in a patient who has the grease and salt from crisps on her mouth and hands


Goes back to what I said, and totally agree.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Yep, that's what I said,
> But what really winds me up is the elderly getting the blame for the crisis.


But I don't think anyone is blaming them DT, just explaining why things have reached a crisis.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> But I don't think anyone is blaming them DT, just explaining why things have reached a crisis.


Well whoever wins the GE needs to know, the elderly aren't going away neither are they a problem, the problem lays with them, them being the government, all of them.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> But I don't think anyone is blaming them DT, just explaining why things have reached a crisis.


And there are some younger ones who blame the older generations, you do hear it, some resent pension rises, fuel allowances, why some even blamed the older generation for the vote to leave the eu.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> But I don't think anyone is blaming them DT, just explaining why things have reached a crisis.


Don't you think the massive cuts and the biggest 'shake up' in our NHS's history might have more to do with the crisis? Don't you find it a bit funny that change of fortune in the NHS coincides exactly with the introduction of the Health and Social Care Act 2012 ?


----------



## noushka05

*NHS Million*‏@*NHSMillion* 19h19 hours ago

This is the real cost of privatising health services.
Pls RT if you'll do what it takes to stop this happening in the UK #*VoteNHS*


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*1. We spend more on the NHS than ever before*
Last year £140bn was spent on health across the UK - more than 10 times the figure that was ploughed in 60 years ago.









And that's after you adjust it for inflation.

*2. A bigger proportion of public spending goes on health*
Governments over the years have had to invest more and more of the public purse into it. Today 30p out of every £1 spent on services goes on health.

Even during the years of deep austerity, extra money has been found for the health service - £8bn more this Parliament in England alone.









Yet it seems no matter how much is invested, it's still not enough. The NHS is creaking at the seams.


----------



## samuelsmiles

This article is from 2007 when Labour was in government. Sometimes I think it would be good if the Left wing conspiracy theorists had their wings clipped just a little.

The Guardian 2007

_"It might surprise many British people who see the film to know that, for example, the British government has for years been in contact with Kaiser Permanente, one of the big US healthcare corporations, and is actively trying to remodel the NHS along American lines. All the reforms carried out by the government over the past few years have been aimed at that."_


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Going back to my Mum who is treated very well by the NHS - this year alone she has received

Out patient appointment with cancer specialist - now discharged after 5 years of myeloma remaining inactive.

Two visits to a diabetic consultant and two to a specialist diabetic nurse for more diet counselling.

One visit to a specialist for suspected stroke which involved a brain scan.

One visit to a cardiologist and a 24 hr tape for her high blood pressure.

Specialist eye test for diabetic damage.

Numerous GP visits, numerous drugs supplied - 4 for BP, one diuretic, one for diabetes plus insulin x 2 types plus monitoring equipment and sharp boxes, loads of gaviscon.

Last night she was poorly and pressed her lifeline and had two paramedics there within 10 minutes who spent over an hour with her and this was followed up by a GP phone call this morning.

We had a similar discussion after the last GE in 2015 when some people were telling us that was the end of the NHS, it wasn't.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> *1. We spend more on the NHS than ever before*
> Last year £140bn was spent on health across the UK - more than 10 times the figure that was ploughed in 60 years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And that's after you adjust it for inflation.
> 
> *2. A bigger proportion of public spending goes on health*
> Governments over the years have had to invest more and more of the public purse into it. Today 30p out of every £1 spent on services goes on health.
> 
> Even during the years of deep austerity, extra money has been found for the health service - £8bn more this Parliament in England alone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet it seems no matter how much is invested, it's still not enough. The NHS is creaking at the seams.


And therein lies the heart of the problem, the NHS has never been accountable for the money spent, successive governments just chuck more money at to keep the public happy. More money isn't the answer as that chart proves.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> *1. We spend more on the NHS than ever before*
> Last year £140bn was spent on health across the UK - more than 10 times the figure that was ploughed in 60 years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And that's after you adjust it for inflation.
> 
> *2. A bigger proportion of public spending goes on health*
> Governments over the years have had to invest more and more of the public purse into it. Today 30p out of every £1 spent on services goes on health.
> 
> Even during the years of deep austerity, extra money has been found for the health service - £8bn more this Parliament in England alone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet it seems no matter how much is invested, it's still not enough. The NHS is creaking at the seams.


The increased marketization is wasting money, the NHS has been forced to make £20billion efficiency savings & now the tories are forcing it to make £22billion more. Its not sustainable.

NHS funding is falling as a % of gdp, we're way behind the EU average.










Please watch this video on the challenges facing our NHS as a result of sustained underfunding by government.


----------



## Arnie83

My thoughts, for what they're worth ...

We are of course living longer and the costs for health and care - naturally higher for the higher age groups - are increasing proportionately. Our taxes were supposed to pay for the NHS but cannot realistically do so for much longer, and that's assuming, somewhat generously, that they do now. The only way to give the elderly of the future the health support they need and deserve is for them to contribute, according to means, in health insurance, from the day they start work, and to provide a joint public / private service at no cost extra to those contributions.

Unfortunately it is too late to do that for the current and soon-to-be elderly, and we have to find a lengthy and expensive transitional arrangement. Unfortunately, again, we have recently made that transition more problematic by voting to restrain the number of young workers who would come here to boost the taxes that would have gone a long way to facilitate it. But that's for another thread.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Going
> 
> *We had a similar discussion after the last GE in 2015 when some people were telling us that was the end of the NHS, it wasn't.[/*QUOTE]
> 
> .


Everything we were warned in 2015 is coming to pass. This crisis we're seeing right across our health service is what all those Junior Doctors tried to warn us about. Our NHS has never been in such crisis


----------



## havoc

The simple answer is for everyone to pay a *lot *more council tax. Social care sorted, bed blocking ended.


----------



## rona

DT said:


> when I was at school you never saw a fat child!


Do you know, even the farm workers are getting fat these days......go figure that!!

We only have to worry about this generations elderly, there won't be many in the next generation


----------



## noushka05

We're one of the richest countries on planet. This is shameful.


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> We only have to worry about this generations elderly, there won't be many in the next generation


It is expected to self correct rona. Unfortunately the effects of obesity are going to cost a fortune until it does.


----------



## Jesthar

Arnie83 said:


> My thoughts, for what they're worth ...
> 
> We are of course living longer and the costs for health and care - naturally higher for the higher age groups - are increasing proportionately. Our taxes were supposed to pay for the NHS but cannot realistically do so for much longer, and that's assuming, somewhat generously, that they do no*The only way to give the elderly of the future the health support they need and deserve is for them to contribute, according to means, in health insurance, from the day they start work*, and to provide a joint public / private service at no cost extra to those contributions.w.
> 
> Unfortunately it is too late to do that for the current and soon-to-be elderly, and we have to find a lengthy and expensive transitional arrangement. Unfortunately, again, we have recently made that transition more problematic by voting to restrain the number of young workers who would come here to boost the taxes that would have gone a long way to facilitate it. But that's for another thread.


We already do. It's called "National Insurance"


----------



## Arnie83

Jesthar said:


> We already do. It's called "National Insurance"


Well yes; that was what I meant by "Our taxes were supposed to pay for the NHS".


----------



## Jesthar

Just seen this on FB:










"My kids have a variety of ongoing health needs. Three days before a consultant appointment we waited 6 months for, we received this letter. I called the hospital who refused to speak to me. They just told me to speak to Virgin Care. You can't speak to Virgin Care. Only leave voice mails to which they don't respond. I wrote a letter to which they responded. I got an initial assessment appointment and again have heard nothing since. I still haven't seen a consultant. In all since seeking a referral from my GP it has been 18 months. This is the new Tory Health care. And it is targeted at your children. If you want this for your babies. Carry on and vote Tory in June. My child is in pain, bleeding and she is ignored because we are poor. We have no NHS to go to anymore. This is your UK if you want to save our NHS. Do something"

Link to original post: https://www.facebook.com/Squiglet/posts/10154595358257525?pnref=story.unseen-section


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> The increased marketization is wasting money, the NHS has been forced to make £20billion efficiency savings & now the tories are forcing it to make £22billion more. Its not sustainable.
> 
> NHS funding is falling as a % of gdp, we're way behind the EU average.
> 
> View attachment 308112
> 
> 
> Please watch this video on the challenges facing our NHS as a result of sustained underfunding by government.


Nothing in that video I didn't already know. I'm not interested in what % of GDP other countries spend on health - as I said earlier many spend more on health because their populations are unhealthy and I think there is a better way. There is a saying in the plant based nutrition world

Countries who do small poos need big hospitals :Woot

*Famous Quotes by Denis Burkitt, MD *

Diseases can rarely be eliminated through early diagnosis or good treatment, but prevention can eliminate disease.

If people are constantly falling off a cliff, you could place ambulances under the cliff or build a fence on the top of the cliff. We are placing all too many ambulances under the cliff.

The frying pan you should give to your enemy. Food should not be prepared in fat. Our bodies are adapted to a stoneage diet of roots and vegetables.

The only way we are going to reduce disease, is to go backward to the diets and lifestyles of our ancestors.

Western doctors are like poor plumbers. They treat a splashing tub by cleaning up the water. These plumbers are extremely apt at drying up the water, constantly inventing new, expensive, and refined methods of drying up water. Somebody should teach them how to close the tap.

America is a constipated nation.... If you pass small stools, you have to have large hospitals.

Western diets are so low on bulk and so dense in calories, that our intestines just don't pass enough volume to remain healthy.


----------



## havoc

So the answer to all NHS woes is to ban meat and dairy? I'm not arguing the benefits of a plant based diet RPH, especially in the longer term, but it can't sort the current problems. I'll go along with taxing the bejesus out of high sugar and high fat foodstuffs.


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Nothing in that video I didn't already know. I'm not interested in what % of GDP other countries spend on health - as I said earlier many spend more on health because their populations are unhealthy and I think there is a better way. There is a saying in the plant based nutrition world
> 
> Countries who do small poos need big hospitals :Woot
> 
> *Famous Quotes by Denis Burkitt, MD *
> 
> Diseases can rarely be eliminated through early diagnosis or good treatment, but prevention can eliminate disease.
> 
> If people are constantly falling off a cliff, you could place ambulances under the cliff or build a fence on the top of the cliff. We are placing all too many ambulances under the cliff.
> 
> The frying pan you should give to your enemy. Food should not be prepared in fat. Our bodies are adapted to a stoneage diet of roots and vegetables.
> 
> The only way we are going to reduce disease, is to go backward to the diets and lifestyles of our ancestors.
> 
> Western doctors are like poor plumbers. They treat a splashing tub by cleaning up the water. These plumbers are extremely apt at drying up the water, constantly inventing new, expensive, and refined methods of drying up water. Somebody should teach them how to close the tap.
> 
> America is a constipated nation.... If you pass small stools, you have to have large hospitals.
> 
> Western diets are so low on bulk and so dense in calories, that our intestines just don't pass enough volume to remain healthy.


Stone age had the average life span of about 30..so.many diseases like cancer, hearth conditions, arthritis just did nit get much chance to develop.

If we eliminate anyone past say 40 we will need fewer hospitals indeed...
But I agree that obesity and binge drinking causes lots of expenses for our health care...easily avoided if people were just less greedy and careless.

Obviously some cases of obesity have underlying causes, so one should not judge...as to binge drinking...one should learn their capacity...


----------



## Happy Paws2

cheekyscrip said:


> Stone age had the average life span of about 30..so.many diseases like cancer, hearth conditions, arthritis just did nit get much chance to develop.
> *If we eliminate anyone past say 40 we will need fewer hospitals indeed...*
> But I agree that obesity and binge drinking causes lots of expenses for our health care...easily avoided if people were just less greedy and careless.
> Obviously some cases of obesity have underlying causes, so one should not judge...as to binge drinking...one should learn their capacity...


Maybe at my age and all the tablets I have to take to stay alive, I should just top myself and save the NHS some money.


----------



## havoc

Happy Paws said:


> Maybe at my age and all the tablets I have to take to stay alive, I should just top myself and save the NHS some money


I take no prescription medicines but I am ready to top myself come the day. Having had experience of an NHS hospital recently with my aged father I have an absolute horror of ever ending up in that situation.


----------



## Happy Paws2

havoc said:


> I take no prescription medicines but I am ready to top myself come the day. *Having had experience of an NHS hospital recently with my aged father I have an absolute horror of ever ending up in that situation*.


I've been in and out of hospital over the last 4 years and I can honestly say, the tratment and the staff (although they are very short staffed) has been brilliant, I have nothing to complain about. I just feel sorry for how hard they work and the long hours they have to work.


----------



## Satori

havoc said:


> The simple answer is for everyone to pay a *lot *more council tax. Social care sorted, bed blocking ended.


Bring back the poll tax!


----------



## cheekyscrip

Satori said:


> Bring back the poll tax!


I have total trust in May and Brexit to deliver just that...no matter what is "the name of rose"...
Poll tax and privatisation of NHS...
What could be better?
Only corporate tax cuts....
No more environment protection costs...

The brave new world of postBrexit England&Wales....


----------



## Colliebarmy

Happy Paws said:


> I've been in and out of hospital over the last 4 years and I can honestly say, the tratment and the staff (although they are very short staffed) has been brilliant, I have nothing to complain about. I just feel sorry for how hard they work and the long hours they have to work.


Ill second that

and mum n dads care home was brilliant

(must not let facts sour a good story though)


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> I have total trust in May and Brexit to deliver just that...no matter what is "the name of rose"...
> Poll tax and privatisation of NHS...
> What could be better?
> Only corporate tax cuts....
> No more environment protection costs...
> 
> The brave new world of postBrexit England&Wales....


Thanks for the heads up on Brexit


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Thanks for the heads up on Brexit


You will need that to keep your Hobbity head above the water....


----------



## stockwellcat.

Happy Paws said:


> I've been in and out of hospital over the last 4 years and I can honestly say, the tratment and the staff (although they are very short staffed) has been brilliant, I have nothing to complain about. I just feel sorry for how hard they work and the long hours they have to work.


I agree with you. My experience with the NHS here has been good.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Happy Paws said:


> I've been in and out of hospital over the last 4 years and I can honestly say, the tratment and the staff (although they are very short staffed) has been brilliant, I have nothing to complain about. I just feel sorry for how hard they work and the long hours they have to work.


Agree, if you are unfortunate enough to really need the NHS they are there without fail.

To many people wasting their time these days which just adds to the bad management who are to PC and fall over themselves so as not to offend anyone.


----------



## Odin_cat

Council tax is already ridiculously high in the UK. Young people renting can't afford for it to increase.


----------



## havoc

Happy Paws said:


> I've been in and out of hospital over the last 4 years and I can honestly say, the tratment and the staff (although they are very short staffed) has been brilliant


4 years is exactly the gap between my previous and current experiences with relatives in the same hospital. The difference was astounding. I had no reason to know it had been run down so badly so had no worries about my father being taken there. Those in the know insist on going elsewhere.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> So the answer to all NHS woes is to ban meat and dairy? I'm not arguing the benefits of a plant based diet RPH, especially in the longer term, but it can't sort the current problems. I'll go along with taxing the bejesus out of high sugar and high fat foodstuffs.


Did I say that? It would go a long way to relieving the strain on the NHS if everyone made their lifestyle as healthy as possible so I would start with reducing red meat, banning processed meats, reducing high fat dairy products such as cheese, reducing processed foods and refined carbohydrates/sugars,oils and salt. There is plenty of research to show that the more fibre, fruit, vegetables and wholegrains you eat the healthier you will be. I'm reading a book at the moment called the seven day rescue plan and it shows amazing reductions in cholesterol and blood pressure levels from just 7 days of following a wholefood plant based diet so actually it could save the NHS a lot of money very quickly with an accumulative effect over the longer term on many other illnesses too.



cheekyscrip said:


> Stone age had the average life span of about 30..so.many diseases like cancer, hearth conditions, arthritis just did nit get much chance to develop.
> 
> If we eliminate anyone past say 40 we will need fewer hospitals indeed...
> But I agree that obesity and binge drinking causes lots of expenses for our health care...easily avoided if people were just less greedy and careless.
> 
> Obviously some cases of obesity have underlying causes, so one should not judge...as to binge drinking...one should learn their capacity...


He says our *ancestors* not the stone age.

There is evidence to show that children as young as 10 already have fatty streaks in their arteries - the first stage of atherosclerosis. 300 autopsies carried out on American casualties of the Korean War with an average age of 22 showed 77% had visible evidence of coronary atherosclerosis, some had arteries with 90% blockage by that age. Contrast that with the rural chinese who ate a primarily plant based diet (before the arrival of western junk food) and in one province with more than a million people there was not a single death over a 3 year period from heart disease.

The US spend approx $3.8 trillion per year on health care but the centre for disease control and prevention recently noted "More Americans than ever are taking cholesterol lowering medications. More than a quarter of adults over 40 are taking statins". The statin Lipitor is the best selling drug of all time with more than $140 billion in sales. Why eat healthy when you can order a double quarter pounder, a shake and a side order of Lipitor?


----------



## davidc

According to an ITV poll, in which there were over 165,000 votes, 68% want Jeremy Corbyn as the next prime minister whilst only 19% want Theresa May.

http://www.itv.com/thismorning/hot-topics/poll-who-do-you-want-to-be-the-next-prime-minister


----------



## KittenKong

FB comment on May and the election:


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> In the same vein, pound for pound they could possibly have paid three times as much in, taking into account half of them never even visited a doctor when they were working or during their childhood etc


I didn't see my GP for about 20 years...so they kept ringing/writing saying that I should. So I assumed they had to account for all the patients on their books and I rang to tell them that I was still alive; nor had I moved out of the area and enlisted with another GP. Still they kept on writing to me.


----------



## noushka05

Colliebarmy said:


> Ill second that
> 
> and mum n dads care home was brilliant
> 
> (must not let facts sour a good story though)


So you trust them with your loved ones lives, but you don't trust them when they're telling you the Tories are deliberately destroying the NHS

‏@*NHSMillion* 22h22 hours ago

NHS staff do an incredible job despite limited support. Imagine what could be achieved with a Govt. that support the NHS? #*VoteNHS*.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Labour on Brexit General Election:

*General election 2017: Labour pledge to wipe Brexit slate clean - politics live*

Keir Starmer to announce that guaranteeing rights of EU nationals and keeping benefits of the single market will be priorities if Labour wins snap election.

http://theguardian.com/politics/liv...edge-to-wipe-brexit-slate-clean-politics-live

This news will probably delight remainers to an extent.

Personally this is where I stand with Brexit at the moment, I don't care what happens as long as we leave the EU. The whole thing is doing my head in now. I agree that an alternative Brexit plan needs to be on offer and did share this with the Labour party in my suggestions for the Manifesto. I suppose siding with Labour I am willing to accept a softer kind of Brexit as opposed to an extreme hard Brexit.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Nothing in that video I didn't already know. I'm not interested in what % of GDP other countries spend on health - as I said earlier many spend more on health because their populations are unhealthy and I think there is a better way. There is a saying in the plant based nutrition world
> 
> Countries who do small poos need big hospitals :Woot
> 
> *Famous Quotes by Denis Burkitt, MD *
> 
> Diseases can rarely be eliminated through early diagnosis or good treatment, but prevention can eliminate disease.
> 
> If people are constantly falling off a cliff, you could place ambulances under the cliff or build a fence on the top of the cliff. We are placing all too many ambulances under the cliff.
> 
> The frying pan you should give to your enemy. Food should not be prepared in fat. Our bodies are adapted to a stoneage diet of roots and vegetables.
> 
> The only way we are going to reduce disease, is to go backward to the diets and lifestyles of our ancestors.
> 
> Western doctors are like poor plumbers. They treat a splashing tub by cleaning up the water. These plumbers are extremely apt at drying up the water, constantly inventing new, expensive, and refined methods of drying up water. Somebody should teach them how to close the tap.
> 
> America is a constipated nation.... If you pass small stools, you have to have large hospitals.
> 
> Western diets are so low on bulk and so dense in calories, that our intestines just don't pass enough volume to remain healthy.


No doubt you'd be interested if it was labour presiding over the demolition of our NHS

Of course we should eat a healthier diet. But how would you feel if one of your loved ones was seriously i'll & denied treatment because they were overweight or smoked?

My Mum had serious heath issues, she didn't smoke, she ate healthily & wasn't overweight. Apart from her death it was the most traumatic time of my life but I knew she was getting first class care by the fantastic Drs & Nurses & no expense was spared on trying to make her better. My lovely Mum had major heart surgery to replace her mitral & aortic valves & repair an aneurysm. A few days after her heart surgery she had a cardiac arrest & so they fitted her with a defibrillator. When that went wrong 6yrs later they planned to remove it & fit her with a top of the range defib which would have cost a fortune. She died before the op from aortic dissection while she was in hospital. I can't begin to imagine how much the ops & all her care & treatment cost. But it was free to my Mum & that is the principles of our amazing NHS. Free to all at the point of need.

I can imagine the horror people with seriously ill loved ones will be feeling right now knowing the tories are systematically destroying our NHS to Americanize it.


----------



## noushka05

Think about animals under a hard right tory government with big majority. If labour are decimated, as is increasingly looking likely, who will defend them then?


----------



## stockwellcat.

I am not trying to change the minds of those abstaining from voting but:


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> Labour on Brexit General Election:
> 
> *General election 2017: Labour pledge to wipe Brexit slate clean - politics live*
> 
> Keir Starmer to announce that guaranteeing rights of EU nationals and keeping benefits of the single market will be priorities if Labour wins snap election.
> 
> http://theguardian.com/politics/liv...edge-to-wipe-brexit-slate-clean-politics-live
> 
> This news will probably delight remainers to an extent.
> 
> Personally this is where I stand with Brexit at the moment, I don't care what happens as long as we leave the EU. The whole thing is doing my head in now. I agree that an alternative Brexit plan needs to be on offer and did share this with the Labour party in my suggestions for the Manifesto. I suppose siding with Labour I am willing to accept a softer kind of Brexit as opposed to an extreme hard Brexit.


 Brexit means Brexit!


----------



## noushka05




----------



## Satori

davidc said:


> According to an ITV poll, in which there were over 165,000 votes, 68% want Jeremy Corbyn as the next prime minister whilst only 19% want Theresa May.
> 
> http://www.itv.com/thismorning/hot-topics/poll-who-do-you-want-to-be-the-next-prime-minister


Lol. On a more serious note....

http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2017-04-24/draft-not-for-publication-the-end-of-labour-wales/


----------



## Dr Pepper

KittenKong said:


> FB comment on May and the election:
> 
> View attachment 308188


Does it ever occur to you to look at both sides of a debate? You've got yourself into a very skewed position by surrounding yourself with anti conservative media. To get the full picture, and be able to make an unbiased decision you need ALL the information. Your pointless quotes from nobodies on social media doesn't make your one sided opinions correct.

How do you feel about Labour today saying if they win they will let EU nationals stay in the UK even the EU don't reciprocate? Surely that's not right and just?


----------



## Honeys mum

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm reading a book at the moment called the seven day rescue plan and it shows amazing reductions in cholesterol and blood pressure levels from just 7 days of following a wholefood plant based diet so actually it could save the NHS a lot of money very quickly with an accumulative effect over the longer term on many other


Have you a link for that book please RPH, would be very intersted in reading it.
Have just googled the title and quite a few things came up.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Does it ever occur to you to look at both sides of a debate? You've got yourself into a very skewed position by surrounding yourself with anti conservative media. To get the full picture, and be able to make an unbiased decision you need ALL the information. Your pointless quotes from nobodies on social media doesn't make your one sided opinions correct.
> 
> How do you feel about Labour today saying if they win they will let EU nationals stay in the UK even the EU don't reciprocate? Surely that's not right and just?


Are you looking at both sides of the debate? We have concrete evidence the tories have created crisis after crisis with their toxic policies. Have _you_ compared May & Corbyns voting histories?


----------



## rona

Dr Pepper said:


> How do you feel about Labour today saying if they win they will let EU nationals stay in the UK even the EU don't reciprocate? Surely that's not right and just?


If those EU nationals already live here it will be the right thing to do, it will then be the EU not being just


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Are you looking at both sides of the debate? We have concrete evidence the tories have created crisis after crisis with their toxic policies. Have _you_ compared May & Corbyns voting histories?


Absolutely I am, still swaying between who to vote for, or if to even vote at all. Although Labours announcement today on EU nationals has me swaying towards conservatives.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rona said:


> If those EU nationals already live here it will be the right thing to do, it will then be the EU not being just


Agreed, but by saying that Labour are effectively saying "tough luck, your on your own" to our expats. The right thing to do is negotiate a reciprocal deal, and only announce EU nationals can stay when/if no deal can be reached.


----------



## rona

Dr Pepper said:


> Agreed, but by saying that Labour are effectively saying "tough luck, your on your own" to our expats. The right thing to do is negotiate a reciprocal deal, and only announce EU nationals can stay when/if no deal can be reached.


that's what the Conservatives are doing. I don't think we should stoop to the lowest common denominator but lead by example


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> So the answer to all NHS woes is to ban meat and dairy? I'm not arguing the benefits of a plant based diet RPH, especially in the longer term, but it can't sort the current problems. I'll go along with taxing the bejesus out of high sugar and high fat foodstuffs.


Love it
*Denis Burkitt, For prime minister*


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Did I say that? It would go a long way to relieving the strain on the NHS if everyone made their lifestyle as healthy as possible so I would start with reducing red meat, banning processed meats, reducing high fat dairy products such as cheese, reducing processed foods and refined carbohydrates/sugars,oils and salt. There is plenty of research to show that the more fibre, fruit, vegetables and wholegrains you eat the healthier you will be. I'm reading a book at the moment called the seven day rescue plan and it shows amazing reductions in cholesterol and blood pressure levels from just 7 days of following a wholefood plant based diet so actually it could save the NHS a lot of money very quickly with an accumulative effect over the longer term on many other illnesses too.
> 
> He says our *ancestors* not the stone age.
> 
> There is evidence to show that children as young as 10 already have fatty streaks in their arteries - the first stage of atherosclerosis. 300 autopsies carried out on American casualties of the Korean War with an average age of 22 showed 77% had visible evidence of coronary atherosclerosis, some had arteries with 90% blockage by that age. Contrast that with the rural chinese who ate a primarily plant based diet (before the arrival of western junk food) and in one province with more than a million people there was not a single death over a 3 year period from heart disease.
> 
> The US spend approx $3.8 trillion per year on health care but the centre for disease control and prevention recently noted "More Americans than ever are taking cholesterol lowering medications. More than a quarter of adults over 40 are taking statins". The statin Lipitor is the best selling drug of all time with more than $140 billion in sales. Why eat healthy when you can order a double quarter pounder, a shake and a side order of Lipitor?


Too many people have a love affair with food, 
As my gran would have said
Eat to live
Dont live to eat

I will say
Food is fuel, nothing more
Why do we want to buy and use excess food, we dont do that with fuel.


----------



## Arnie83

stockwellcat said:


> I don't care what happens as long as we leave the EU.


Not, I suspect, a particularly unusual view, but it does beg a rather depressing question about the continuing role of primitive motivations in our society.


----------



## Goblin

rona said:


> If those EU nationals already live here it will be the right thing to do, it will then be the EU not being just


You forget rona, rights of UK nationals living in the EU are already protected. May wants to abandon the protections those UK nationals in the EU enjoy. Only the Tory government thinks using lives as a bargaining chip is acceptable and strategically important. She doesn't care about the people involved.

Don't have the same access to the media over there. My impression however is Labour = talk about policies. Tory = tell people that Corbyn is a danger. One has to wonder why the Tory's cannot actually show how effective they have been and list their achievements since being in power. Oh we have May saying "we've been effective" and talking about strong leadership. Like white papers however, details which are so important are blatantly missing as she talks about top level things people can get behind, ignoring the reality and her actual record.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Absolutely I am, still swaying between who to vote for, or if to even vote at all. Although Labours announcement today on EU nationals has me swaying towards conservatives.


And that outweighs the destruction of our NHS & environment, all millions pushed into poverty, the massive rise in homelessness ? EU nationals are vital for our public services and economy.












rona said:


> that's what the Conservatives are doing. I don't think we should stoop to the lowest common denominator but lead by example


Are you serious? The tories are using EU nationals as bargaining chips.


----------



## Lurcherlad

Calvine said:


> I didn't see my GP for about 20 years...so they kept ringing/writing saying that I should. So I assumed they had to account for all the patients on their books and I rang to tell them that I was still alive; nor had I moved out of the area and enlisted with another GP. Still they kept on writing to me.


I believe they are paid by the NHS for 4 appointments per year per patient as a minimum, so they will want to keep you on their books to qualify (especially if you rarely use the facility - you are good value ).

Our surgery has recently changed as the original Partners have retired and the new ones have taken on a huge number of new patients, presumably to secure those guaranteed payments?

Whereas it was possible to get an appointment within a day or two, it now takes over two weeks to see a GP there.


----------



## 1290423

Just caught the tail end of something on TV , I was too busy preparing my breakfast, think it may have been something about wilkipedia,.ot sure, it was relating to something to do with expert views I think anyone catch it.?


----------



## Goblin

Satori said:


> Lol. On a more serious note....


Oh look people abandon UKIP to vote Tory. Maybe they see there is no real difference with the Tory's pushing the same right wing policies.

As another point about ex-pats. Isn't it amazing. May pushed the fact that her hands were tied, she couldn't evict people and "control" immigration within the EU as people were protected with rights, by the european court of justice. Her argument of reciprical arrangement suggests that only the UK apparantly is under the jurisdiction of the ECJ and human rights.


----------



## Satori

Goblin said:


> Oh look people abandon UKIP to vote Tory. Maybe they see there is no real difference with the Tory's pushing the same right wing policies.
> 
> As another point about ex-pats. Isn't it amazing. May pushed the fact that her hands were tied, she couldn't evict people and "control" immigration within the EU as people were protected with rights, by the european court of justice. Her argument of reciprical arrangement suggests that only the UK apparantly is under the jurisdiction of the ECJ and human rights.


Good response. Sadly not to my post.


----------



## 1290423

Goblin said:


> Oh look people abandon UKIP to vote Tory. Maybe they see there is no real difference with the Tory's pushing the same right wing policies.
> .


Many may put that differently, UKIP achieved for MANY What it set out to do, it got us the vote on the EU, some achievement that
There is no longer a need for ukip.


----------



## Satori

DT said:


> Too many people have a love affair with food,
> As my gran would have said
> Eat to live
> Dont live to eat
> 
> I will say
> Food is fuel, nothing more
> Why do we want to buy and use excess food, we dont do that with fuel.


You need to change restaurants.


----------



## 1290423

Satori said:


> You need to change restaurants.


Just enjoying my breakfast, exactly the same every single morning


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> You forget rona, rights of UK nationals living in the EU are already protected. May wants to abandon the protections those UK nationals in the EU enjoy. Only the Tory government thinks using lives as a bargaining chip is acceptable and strategically important. She doesn't care about the people involved.
> 
> Don't have the same access to the media over there. My impression however is Labour = talk about policies. Tory = tell people that Corbyn is a danger. One has to wonder why the Tory's cannot actually show how effective they have been and list their achievements since being in power. Oh we have May saying "we've been effective" and talking about strong leadership. Like white papers however, details which are so important are blatantly missing as she talks about top level things people can get behind, ignoring the reality and her actual record.


We need to also in the UK look at the bigger picture and not judge who we are voting for just on Brexit. What I mean by the bigger picture is what the Conservatives have done in the last 7 years to various services in the UK including NHS, Schools, Local Councils services (Some parts of the country have 3 weekly bin collections and the councils waste money on buying new chairs for libraries they intend on closing instead of spending the money on essential services they would rather cut), homeless crisis (I went up to Manchester recently and the homeless crisis is terrible), housing crisis, environmental standards are getting worse (pollution levels in London are terrible), cuts to the armed forces and police services as all the u-turns and lies we have been fed. I am sure there are many other things I have missed off and apologise if I have.

I want to make it clear that I am not and have not made my decision on one single factor (Brexit) it is many factors combined.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Just enjoying my breakfast, exactly the same every single morning
> View attachment 308214


That's healthier than the breakfast I have.


----------



## Goblin

Satori said:


> Good response. Sadly not to my post.


Actually is was.. maybe you should look at the contents of the link you provided.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> We need to also in the UK look at the bigger picture and not judge who we are voting for just on Brexit. What I mean by the bigger picture is what the Conservatives have done in the last 7 years to various services in the UK including NHS, Schools, Local Councils services (Some parts of the country have 3 weekly bin collections and the councils waste money on buying new chairs for libraries they intend on closing instead of spending the money on essential services they would rather cut), homeless crisis (I went up to Manchester recently and the homeless crisis is terrible), housing crisis, environmental standards are getting worse (pollution levels in London are terrible), cuts to the armed forces and police services as all the u-turns and lies we have been fed. I am sure there are many other things I have missed off and apologise if I have.
> 
> I want to make it clear that I am not and have not made my decision on one single factor (Brexit) it is many factors combined.


Maybe you think May's only achievement could be about Brexit. I don't consider that an achievement. She seems to be unable to detail any.


----------



## Odin_cat

Dr Pepper said:


> Does it ever occur to you to look at both sides of a debate? You've got yourself into a very skewed position by surrounding yourself with anti conservative media. To get the full picture, and be able to make an unbiased decision you need ALL the information. Your pointless quotes from nobodies on social media doesn't make your one sided opinions correct.
> 
> How do you feel about Labour today saying if they win they will let EU nationals stay in the UK even the EU don't reciprocate? Surely that's not right and just?


As a British national living in the EU, I am 99% sure the deal would be reciprocated, the EU want to be seen as the good guys.

And regardless, these are people we are talking about, they have as much right to security as I do.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Maybe you think May's only achievement could be about Brexit. I don't consider that an achievement. She seems to be unable to detail any.


Well I have u-turned in case you missed my post and have decided to vote Labour. Regarding Brexit again incase you missed my post I am sick of it at the moment and perhaps labours less tough stance on Brexit is right instead of an extreme hard Brexit on offer from the Conservatives. I suggested to Labour to include an alternative plan to Brexit in there manifesto.

Labour are offering guaranteed rights to EU citizens living in the UK and want to retain access to the single market.


----------



## Odin_cat

Dr Pepper said:


> Agreed, but by saying that Labour are effectively saying "tough luck, your on your own" to our expats. The right thing to do is negotiate a reciprocal deal, and only announce EU nationals can stay when/if no deal can be reached.


And the Tories are saying that to both British and EU nationals. May hasn't given us any guarantees, and my Tory MP doesn't even respond to my emails. My family and I are already unsupported by our own government.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> And the Tories are saying that to both British and EU nationals. May hasn't given us any guarantees, and my Tory MP doesn't even respond to my emails. My family and I are already unsupported by our own government.


Well my Conservative Party representative responded in less than 24 hours when I resigned my membership. Sorry to read your Conservative MP is not as responsive.

My local area seat is currently held by Kate Hoey MP who is a Labour Brexit supporter.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> We need to also in the UK look at the bigger picture and not judge who we are voting for just on Brexit. What I mean by the bigger picture is what the Conservatives have done in the last 7 years to various services in the UK including NHS, Schools, Local Councils services (Some parts of the country have 3 weekly bin collections and the councils waste money on buying new chairs for libraries they intend on closing instead of spending the money on essential services they would rather cut), homeless crisis (I went up to Manchester recently and the homeless crisis is terrible), housing crisis, environmental standards are getting worse (pollution levels in London are terrible), cuts to the armed forces and police services as all the u-turns and lies we have been fed. I am sure there are many other things I have missed off and apologise if I have.
> 
> I want to make it clear that I am not and have not made my decision on one single factor (Brexit) it is many factors combined.


Well I've just had a epiphany, maybe. Perhaps we should all be putting Brexit at the forefront of our minds for this election and simply go with who you think will get the best deal.

In five years time the NHS will still be there, no doubt in some crisis or other. Every public service will be under one pressure or another. There will still be homeless people, animal cruelty, food banks and huge national debt etc. None of that will vastly change in just five years no matter which government we get landed with. But in five years time you get another vote on all those issues. However, June 8th 2017 is your one and only chance to decide who is best to lead Brexit. And that'll be of consequence for a lifetime.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Odin_cat said:


> And regardless, these are people we are talking about, they have as much right to security as I do.


Exactly, which is why it needs to be a reciprocal deal. We can't have Mr Corbyn leaving UK expats with no security from the 9th June.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Well I've just had a epiphany, maybe. Perhaps we should all be putting Brexit at the forefront of our minds for this election and simply go with who you think will get the best deal.
> 
> In five years time the NHS will still be there, no doubt in some crisis or other. Every public service will be under one pressure or another. There will still be homeless people, animal cruelty, food banks and huge national debt etc. None of that will vastly change in just five years no matter which government we get landed with. But in five years time you get another vote on all those issues. However, June 8th 2017 is your one and only chance to decide on who is best to lead Brexit.


Have you been to Manchester city centre recently? I was gob smacked. All the parks in the city centre and underneath the Arndale Centre there are people sleeping rough with tents up or sleeping under cardboard shelters. What are the Conservatives doing about it? That's right nothing except making it worse. Each homeless person has a story which ranges from relationship breakups, to being kicked out of house shares to mental health issues.

Edited: Regarding May, I have lost all confidence in her. She is starting to remind me of Cameron and Osborne with the u-turns she is doing. Remember they lied, lied and kept on lying. May is heading down the same road.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Exactly, which is why it needs to be a reciprocal deal. We can't have Mr Corbyn leaving UK expats with no security from the 9th June.


Maybe a start would be for the UK to guarantee rights of EU nationals living in the UK to a baseline of what the EU provides to all. Nope, bargaining chips more important although more like scapegoats knowing May. She's always looking for something else to blame.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Honeys mum said:


> Have you a link for that book please RPH, would be very intersted in reading it.
> Have just googled the title and quite a few things came up.


Here is a link to Rip Esselstyn's (the author) website. Don't be put off by the "Engine 2" as that refers to his days as a fire fighter when he started to get involved in trying to help people improve their health. There is a short video to watch which pretty much explains it all. Unfortunately they are in the US and we don't yet have many practitioners offering this sort of programme over here but its easy to follow and the book is available from Amazon. Sorry I think I gave the title slightly wrong in my earlier post.

https://engine2diet.com/7-seven-day-rescue/

Rip Esselstyn is the son of a famous surgeon called Caudwell Esselsyn who ran a programme to reverse heart disease - here is a short video of one of his lectures

http://nutritionstudies.org/dr-caldwell-esselstyn-at-tedx-making-heart-attacks-history/

If you want any other information or links to lectures/books just shout.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Maybe a start would be for the UK to guarantee rights of EU nationals living in the UK to a baseline of what the EU provides to all. Nope, bargaining chips more important although more like scapegoats knowing May. She's always looking for something else to blame.


One of the first things Mrs May suggested to the EU was a reciprocal agreement for expats. They refused. It's the EU that's put people as bargaining chips as this could have been put to bed months ago.


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> Have you been to Manchester city centre recently?


I have. I go a few times a year and it's heartbreaking. One of my children does the sleep out at the cathedral for the Booth centre, she does raise a fair bit of money but maybe even more valuable, it reinforces for her how frightening it is to be on the streets - and that's in a controlled and protected setup. Every MP should be made to it at least once.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> No doubt you'd be interested if it was labour presiding over the demolition of our NHS
> 
> Of course we should eat a healthier diet. But how would you feel if one of your loved ones was seriously i'll & denied treatment because they were overweight or smoked?
> 
> My Mum had serious heath issues, she didn't smoke, she ate healthily & wasn't overweight. Apart from her death it was the most traumatic time of my life but I knew she was getting first class care by the fantastic Drs & Nurses & no expense was spared on trying to make her better. My lovely Mum had major heart surgery to replace her mitral & aortic valves & repair an aneurysm. A few days after her heart surgery she had a cardiac arrest & so they fitted her with a defibrillator. When that went wrong 6yrs later they planned to remove it & fit her with a top of the range defib which would have cost a fortune. She died before the op from aortic dissection while she was in hospital. I can't begin to imagine how much the ops & all her care & treatment cost. But it was free to my Mum & that is the principles of our amazing NHS. Free to all at the point of need.
> 
> I can imagine the horror people with seriously ill loved ones will be feeling right now knowing the tories are systematically destroying our NHS to Americanize it.


My views on the NHS would be the same whoever was in power, you forget I have worked in the NHS under both the Tories and Labour (and for social services providing homecare) so I have experience of both.

To be absolutely clear I am not and never have said that all health issues are caused by diet, please give me credit for being a qualified nurse and having studied nutrition, I am not stupid. I am well aware that many heart conditions are not caused by lifestyle but I'm also aware of the huge drain on the NHS from illnesses that are largely preventable. I am really sorry to hear about what happened with your Mum, as I'm sure you remember my own Mum has many health problems (the major one of which is insulin dependent diabetes caused by the accidental removal of most of her pancreas during surgery for something else) and my Dad died of bowel cancer aged 46. I do not have good genes with a lot of cancer and heart disease in both sides of my family which is why I take lifestyle medicine so seriously.

Please watch this short link from a film I would love you to watch

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/what-the-health-movie-film#/

and this one








DT said:


> Love it
> *Denis Burkitt, For prime minister*


Sadly he died in 1993 DT.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> I suggested to Labour to include an alternative plan to Brexit in there manifesto.


And Keir Starmer launched exactly that this morning, just a couple of days after you suggested it.

Can't be a co-incidence that.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> One of the first things Mrs May suggested to the EU was a reciprocal agreement for expats. They refused. It's the EU that's put people as bargaining chips as this could have been put to bed months ago.


No, UK nationals already have rights protected by the EU constitution backed by the European Court of Justice. After all isn't that why May couldn't control EU immigration? That's why she wants to get rid of ECJ oversight. EU nationals in the UK will have no such protection after Brexit. What May says and reality are not always the same.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> No, UK nationals already have rights protected by the EU constitution backed by the European Court of Justice. After all isn't that why May couldn't control EU immigration? That's why she wants to get rid of ECJ oversight. EU nationals in the UK will have no such protection after Brexit. What May says and reality are not always the same.


You may have missed it but come 2019 UK expats will no longer be EU citizens and not covered by the the EU Constitution or ECJ. They are in the same boat as EU expats in the UK.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> You may have missed it but come 2019 UK expats will no longer be EU citizens and not covered by the the EU Constitution or ECJ. They are in the same boat as EU expats.


Maybe you should check your information. All immigrants have basic protection within the EU such as not being discriminated against. The ECJ is not simply for EU nationals.


----------



## Odin_cat

I believe the EU nations are covered by ECJ, not just EU nationals.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Maybe you should check your information. All immigrants have basic protection within the EU such as not being discriminated against. The ECJ is not simply for EU nationals.


Doesn't mean they'll be allowed to stay, they'll have to fulfill a criteria, just as everyone else from outside the EU has to.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Doesn't mean they'll be allowed to stay, they'll have to fulfill a criteria, just as everyone else from outside the EU has to.


What like 5 year pemanent residency available for both EU and non-EU nationals? Residency even with free movement and for EU nationals still had criteria or maybe you missed that. Simple things like not being a public security risk or a public health risk. You also have to be able to support yourself financially (including where appropriate medical insurance) or have employment. Good old classic EU human rights also come into play.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Well my Conservative Party representative responded in less than 24 hours when I resigned my membership. Sorry to read your Conservative MP is not as responsive.
> 
> My local area seat is currently held by Kate Hoey MP who is a Labour Brexit supporter.


That doesn't surprise me! Funnily enough my MP was a remainer but he's been whipped!

There are good Brexiteers and bad ones, to me a bad one is one who replies to his constituents concerns with a one line email telling them to respect the 'will of the people'...


----------



## Goblin

Still applies:


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> What like 5 year pemanent residency available for both EU and non-EU nationals? Residency even with free movement and for EU nationals still had criteria or maybe you missed that. Simple things like not being a public security risk or a public health risk. You also have to be able to support yourself financially (including where appropriate medical insurance) or have employment. Good old classic EU human rights also come into play.


Your just selectively picking certain bits and taking them out of context, just like you do on the Brexit thread. Even Labour admit that UK expats need to have their security and rights guaranteed.

Anyhow that's for the Brexit thread and not for derailing this one.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Your just selectively picking certain bits and taking them out of context, just like you do on the Brexit thread. Even Labour admit that UK expats need to have their security and rights guaranteed.


Maybe you can explain how they are out of context. I'm a UK national in the EU who has an vested interest in the matter under discussion  May is using EU nationals in the UK as bargaining chips as well as jumping on immigrants as a scapegoat for her own party's shortcomings. She's lied about being unable to control immigration from the EU due to free movement. Controls exist, simply never used by the government. This is the person who wants to be elected as PM, someone willing to lie and scapegoat to cover her own (and her party's mistakes). Someone not afraid to use people for personal political gain.

She keeps going on about leadership. Effective leadership to me is about being a leader, to get the best out of people, to actually listen and unite those under them. Leadership is about stating the buck stops here, I'm the one responsible. May isn't a leader, she simply wants people to do what she says. If things go wrong, it's her underlings fault not hers. National Insurance rise for the self-employed was Hammond's fault, not hers, besides it will not be legislated upon until later this year.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Well I've just had a epiphany, maybe. Perhaps we should all be putting Brexit at the forefront of our minds for this election and simply go with who you think will get the best deal.
> 
> In five years time the NHS will still be there, no doubt in some crisis or other. Every public service will be under one pressure or another. There will still be homeless people, animal cruelty, food banks and huge national debt etc. None of that will vastly change in just five years no matter which government we get landed with. But in five years time you get another vote on all those issues. However, June 8th 2017 is your one and only chance to decide who is best to lead Brexit. And that'll be of consequence for a lifetime.


No the NHS wont be here in 5 years time, its at breaking point now!. Do you know what STPs are? Just wait till they get pushed through.

Public services are collapsing as the tories shrink the state, things are going to get much worse. The tories have created the homelessness crisis with their policies - you're happy to enable more of the same? More animal cruelty? I want a government that prioritises & tackles these issues not creates them.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Here is a link to Rip Esselstyn's (the author) website. Don't be put off by the "Engine 2" as that refers to his days as a fire fighter when he started to get involved in trying to help people improve their health. There is a short video to watch which pretty much explains it all. Unfortunately they are in the US and we don't yet have many practitioners offering this sort of programme over here but its easy to follow and the book is available from Amazon. Sorry I think I gave the title slightly wrong in my earlier post.
> 
> https://engine2diet.com/7-seven-day-rescue/
> 
> Rip Esselstyn is the son of a famous surgeon called Caudwell Esselsyn who ran a programme to reverse heart disease - here is a short video of one of his lectures
> 
> http://nutritionstudies.org/dr-caldwell-esselstyn-at-tedx-making-heart-attacks-history/
> 
> If you want any other information or links to lectures/books just shout.


Im all for keeping fit, we only have one body and need to look after it!


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> My views on the NHS would be the same whoever was in power, you forget I have worked in the NHS under both the Tories and Labour (and for social services providing homecare) so I have experience of both.
> 
> To be absolutely clear I am not and never have said that all health issues are caused by diet, please give me credit for being a qualified nurse and having studied nutrition, I am not stupid. I am well aware that many heart conditions are not caused by lifestyle but I'm also aware of the huge drain on the NHS from illnesses that are largely preventable. I am really sorry to hear about what happened with your Mum, as I'm sure you remember my own Mum has many health problems (the major one of which is insulin dependent diabetes caused by the accidental removal of most of her pancreas during surgery for something else) and my Dad died of bowel cancer aged 46. I do not have good genes with a lot of cancer and heart disease in both sides of my family which is why I take lifestyle medicine so seriously.
> 
> Please watch this short link from a film I would love you to watch
> 
> https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/what-the-health-movie-film#/
> 
> and this one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly he died in 1993 DT.


I think you would condemn Labour for creating the chaos in the NHS. You rightly condemned them for the Mid Staffs crisis. Now we're seeing a crisis right across the country - silence.

I agree people should take better care of themselves, I would love everyone to go vegan. For the sake of the planet & the animals as much as anything else. But it still wouldn't solve the crisis in our NHS. The tories are making it fail so they can offer up full privatisation as the only solution. They are putting millions of lives at risk.
Thank you about my Mum, I'm sorry about your parents too. I owe our NHS so much & I'm doing all I can to fight to save its life, before its gone forever.

(by the way I have just ordered that book you keep spouting on about )


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> No the NHS wont be here in 5 years time, its at breaking point now!. Do you know what STPs are? Just wait till they get pushed through.
> 
> Public services are collapsing as the tories shrink the state, things are going to get much worse. The tories have created the homelessness crisis with their policies - you're happy to enable more of the same? More animal cruelty? I want a government that prioritises & tackles these issues not creates them.





Goblin said:


> Still applies:
> 
> View attachment 308227​


Fraid that applies whatever you vote!


----------



## 1290423

Sorry noush, didnt mean. To quote you, I had read you post wrong, didnt have my specs on, thought you asked dr pepper if they had heard of STD,S.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Fraid that applies whatever you vote!


No it doesn't Sue. Some parties care about social & environmental justice.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Sorry noush, didnt mean. To quote you, I had read you post wrong, didnt have my specs on, thought you asked dr pepper if they had heard of STD,S.


I wondered what you were on about. Ignore my last post

You have a very dirty mind:Hilarious


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> I have. I go a few times a year and it's heartbreaking. One of my children does the sleep out at the cathedral for the Booth centre, she does raise a fair bit of money but maybe even more valuable, it reinforces for her how frightening it is to be on the streets - and that's in a controlled and protected setup. Every MP should be made to it at least once.


There should not be ONE Single person in the country who has to sleep on the streets! Not one!
The fact is that there are didn't just happen overnight, its been creeping up on us for years! So every party needs to take some responsibility, And every single politician out the needs needs to address this, and irrespective of their party needs to unite to stamp this out!


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> No it doesn't Sue. Some parties care about social & environmental justice.


They may noush, but they may still be a muppet on other issues xxxxx


----------



## 1290423

I have a challenge for you noush, you show me a perfect 100% squeeky clean politician. xx


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> I wondered what you were on about. Ignore my last post
> 
> You have a very dirty mind:Hilarious


. I so do not, my mind is lily white mrs! Sometimes I think I should have been a nun!

Well lets,face it, they need someone to liven up the nunery, opps I mean monastery opps I mean convent.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> I have a challenge for you noush, you show me a perfect 100% squeeky clean politician. xx


This one for starters -


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> I think you would condemn Labour for creating the chaos in the NHS. You rightly condemned them for the Mid Staffs crisis. Now we're seeing a crisis right across the country - silence.
> 
> I agree people should take better care of themselves, I would love everyone to go vegan. For the sake of the planet & the animals as much as anything else. But it still wouldn't solve the crisis in our NHS. The tories are making it fail so they can offer up full privatisation as the only solution. They are putting millions of lives at risk.
> Thank you about my Mum, I'm sorry about your parents too. I owe our NHS so much & I'm doing all I can to fight to save its life, before its gone forever.
> 
> (by the way I have just ordered that book you keep spouting on about )


Which one - the Seven Day Rescue? Please have a look at the film links too - I know you would like them as they both have quite a lot about the environment and eating you alive has a section on farm animals which I have to admit I shot out of the chair and turned off as it upset me so much.

I think you will find I only ever condemn labour when someone else is trying to say these things don't happen when labour are in power. I've already said I'm undecided about who to vote for, nearer the time I will draw up a list of which issues are the most important to me now (some have changed since the last election) and which policies are not acceptable to me and try and balance it all out. 
When you say I'm silent about the current situation you are wrong - I do write to my MP and have supported some local campaigns but I think I have a very different vision to you about what the NHS can and should be in the future.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> . I so do not, my mind is lily white mrs! Sometimes I think I should have been a nun!
> 
> Well lets,face it, they need someone to liven up the nunery, opps I mean monastery opps I mean convent.


You've got nuns on the brain!

Filth!!:Hilarious


----------



## Satori

DT said:


> I have a challenge for you noush, you show me a perfect 100% squeeky clean politician. xx


----------



## 1290423

Satori said:


> View attachment 308236


I might declare you the winner satori, noush will never top that


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Have you been to Manchester city centre recently? I was gob smacked. All the parks in the city centre and underneath the Arndale Centre there are people sleeping rough with tents up or sleeping under cardboard shelters. What are the Conservatives doing about it? That's right nothing except making it worse. Each homeless person has a story which ranges from relationship breakups, to being kicked out of house shares to mental health issues.
> 
> Edited: Regarding May, I have lost all confidence in her. She is starting to remind me of Cameron and Osborne with the u-turns she is doing. Remember they lied, lied and kept on lying. May is heading down the same road.


Actually I have, my daughter live's twenty odd miles north of the city. If I get the train up I have to change from Piccadilly to Victoria so regularly walk through the centre and past the Arndale. To be fair it's always been a problem as it is in many cities.

Isn't Manchester council Labour contolled and has been for decades? I could be wrong but if not Manchester isn't a good example of Labour's commitment to the homeless no matter who's in government.


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> View attachment 308236





DT said:


> I might declare you the winner satori, noush will never top that


I think I can:Smuggrin












Dr Pepper said:


> Actually I have, my daughter life's twenty odd miles north of the city. If I get the train up I have to change from Piccadilly to Victoria so regularly walk through the centre and past the Arndale. To be fair it's always been a problem as it is in many cities.
> 
> Isn't Manchester council Labour contolled and has been for decades? I could be wrong but if not Manchester isn't a good example of Labour's commitment to the homeless no matter who's in government.


I think you'll find council budgets have been slashed too. Homelessness has doubled under the tories. Sharpest rise in child poverty.

Foodbanks up by a staggering 700% since 2010.

*The Trussell Trust*‏@*TrussellTrust* 6h6 hours ago

Trussell Trust #*foodbank* use is just the tip of the iceberg - full scale of emergency food provision in UK is not known. #*StopUKHunger*


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Isn't Manchester council Labour contolled and has been for decades? I could be wrong but if not Manchester isn't a good example of Labour's commitment to the homeless no matter who's in government.


I wonder, how many are Mancunian? How many suffer from problems which could be prevented prior to them becoming homeless to start with? Problems which the government could directly alleviate.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Which one - the Seven Day Rescue? Please have a look at the film links too - I know you would like them as they both have quite a lot about the environment and eating you alive has a section on farm animals which I have to admit I shot out of the chair and turned off as it upset me so much.
> 
> I think you will find I only ever condemn labour when someone else is trying to say these things don't happen when labour are in power. I've already said I'm undecided about who to vote for, nearer the time I will draw up a list of which issues are the most important to me now (some have changed since the last election) and which policies are not acceptable to me and try and balance it all out.
> When you say I'm silent about the current situation you are wrong - I do write to my MP and have supported some local campaigns but I think I have a very different vision to you about what the NHS can and should be in the future.


I so find your posts interesting, I also find you very informative so much as to say when you have made your mind up you as to whom you consider best for the task i would definitely take on board your reasons.


----------



## 1290423

Goblin said:


> I wonder, how many are Mancunian? How many suffer from problems which could be prevented prior to them becoming homeless to start with? Problems which the government could directly alleviate.


What like alcohol and drug abuse , which both come hand in hand with being homeless. Yes many are homeless because of it, but also many that are homeless turn to it.


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> You've got nuns on the brain!
> 
> Filth!!:Hilarious


Lol, ive only just cottoned on! 
Heck, im slow today
Wears the soap
Opps, pardon me, I mean where's the soap?


----------



## Goblin

DT said:


> What like alcohol and drug abuse , which both come hand in hand with being homeless. Yes many are homeless because of it, but also many that are homeless turn to it.


These are the main reasons for homelessness (according to shelter):

*individual factors* including lack of qualifications, lack of social support, debts - especially mortgage or rent arrears, poor physical and mental health, relationship breakdown, and getting involved in crime at an early age
*family background* including family breakdown and disputes, sexual and physical abuse in childhood or adolescence, having parents with drug or alcohol problems, and previous experience of family homelessness 
*an institutional background* including having been in care, the armed forces, or in prison.
How many can be helped prior to living on the streets with the right support structures in place?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> I so find your posts interesting, I also find you very informative so much as to say when you have made your mind up you as to whom you consider best for the task i would definitely take on board your reasons.


Thank you DT. If you are interested in finding out more about plant based nutrition and for anyone else interested there is a free summit of very interesting speakers starting on Sat 29 April and running for a week (3 speakers per day). I've watched a similar one before and learnt so much from it. You can register for it here - I will probably start a separate thread about it at the weekend

https://www.foodrevolutionsummit.org/soon-vid/?orid=1138964&opid=235

this is the schedule of speakers and their subjects

https://www.foodrevolutionsummit.org/assets/resources/food-revolution-summit-2017-schedule.pdf


----------



## 1290423

Goblin said:


> These are the main reasons for homelessness (according to shelter):
> 
> *individual factors* including lack of qualifications, lack of social support, debts - especially mortgage or rent arrears, poor physical and mental health, relationship breakdown, and getting involved in crime at an early age
> *family background* including family breakdown and disputes, sexual and physical abuse in childhood or adolescence, having parents with drug or alcohol problems, and previous experience of family homelessness
> *an institutional background* including having been in care, the armed forces, or in prison.
> How many can be helped prior to living on the streets with the right support structures in place?


Wouldn't mind betting that many many people in the uk have been subject to at least one maybe two of those issues during their lifetime.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Thank you DT. If you are interested in finding out more about plant based nutrition and for anyone else interested there is a free summit of very interesting speakers starting on Sat 29 April and running for a week (3 speakers per day). I've watched a similar one before and learnt so much from it. You can register for it here - I will probably start a separate thread about it at the weekend
> 
> https://www.foodrevolutionsummit.org/soon-vid/?orid=1138964&opid=235
> 
> this is the schedule of speakers and their subjects
> 
> https://www.foodrevolutionsummit.org/assets/resources/food-revolution-summit-2017-schedule.pdf


Thank you for the link, unfortunately, I leave home friday lunch , my daughter gets married this saturday, I am away until around 12th may, but am in the uk and shall have my phone, so will look at whats involved.


----------



## Honeys mum

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Here is a link to Rip Esselstyn's (the author) website. Don't be put off by the "Engine 2" as that refers to his days as a fire fighter when he started to get involved in trying to help people improve their health. There is a short video to watch which pretty much explains it all. Unfortunately they are in the US and we don't yet have many practitioners offering this sort of programme over here but its easy to follow and the book is available from Amazon. Sorry I think I gave the title slightly wrong in my earlier post.


Thanks for that RPH, I saw that one on Amazon, and wondered if that was the one you mentioned.
I will look at it later today when i have more time. time.


----------



## Goblin

DT said:


> Wouldn't mind betting that many many people in the uk have been subject to at least one maybe two of those issues during their lifetime.


Isn't that a sobering thought and something to consider when voting. Just what will the government be doing if you are placed in that position.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Thank you for the link, unfortunately, I leave home friday lunch , my daughter gets married this saturday, I am away until around 12th may, but am in the uk and shall have my phone, so will look at whats involved.


Oh yes I remember now. Hope you all have a lovely day and a good holiday too. I've paid to buy the summit so I can keep the videos rather than have to watch within a set time period so I might be able to link them on here too which if I can I will do in a separate thread.


----------



## 1290423

Goblin said:


> Isn't that a sobering thought and something to consider when voting. Just what will the government be doing if you are placed in that position.


 I don't believe they do though goblin, any of them, and believe you me if I was going to cast my vote to the party I felt would benefit me the most there would be no contest, but fact is I am seriously trying to come to my decision, without letting brexit influence that decision, nor what would benefit me, and I am, I admit struggling and I would never ever waste my vote.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Oh yes I remember now. Hope you all have a lovely day and a good holiday too. I've paid to buy the summit so I can keep the videos rather than have to watch within a set time period so I might be able to link them on here too which if I can I will do in a separate thread.


That is very kind, I have had a quick look, I am interested in nutrition and preventive illness, I leave here friday lunch (im at the hotel three days) then I am home two, but then away for another eight, house sitting the naughty spaniel and two teenagers, shall have my phone so shall have internet but can never seem to link to their wifi so only have that to rely on.


----------



## Goblin

DT said:


> I am seriously trying to come to my decision, without letting brexit influence that decision, nor what would benefit me, and I am, I admit struggling and I would never ever waste my vote.


If you believe in Brexit, then it should be part of the decision. Do you believe for example that May actually has a decent plan for leaving? Do you agree with hard Brexit? What about the NI/Ireland issue? What about Gibraltar (have labour even mentioned that)? Why isn't May being truthful about the consequences and preparing people for what will come? On the flip side for labour.. just what are their soft brexit plans? Easy enough to make sweeping statements (for both sides), it's the details that count.


----------



## 1290423

Goblin said:


> If you believe in Brexit, then it should be part of the decision. Do you believe for example that May actually has a decent plan for leaving? Do you agree with hard Brexit? What about the NI/Ireland issue? What about Gibraltar (have labour even mentioned that)? Why isn't May being truthful about the consequences and preparing people for what will come? On the flip side for labour.. just what are their soft brexit plans? Easy enough to make sweeping statements (for both sides), it's the details that count.


Of course I am for brexit, but that is not the be all and end all for me, and yes I look at everything, sometimes a little after the issus I admit, but I look. Arnie I find most unbiased I add, but because I chose to respond to threads as I do does not mean my mind is made up! Nor! More importantly that I am right!


----------



## havoc

Goblin said:


> I wonder, how many are Mancunian? How many suffer from problems which could be prevented prior to them becoming homeless to start with


There are loads of paths to homelessness. I don't think we can prevent family break ups for example. I do know that walk from Piccadilly to Victoria very well and I do know that when I did it last week not one of those on the street were the cliched version of a drug addled bum people imagine. They do exist but they weren't on the street at that point. Yes, they asked for change as I passed but not a one was in any way threatening or even close to impolite.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Of course I am for brexit, but that is not the be all and end all for me, and yes I look at everything, sometimes a little after the issus I admit, but I look. Arnie I find most unbiased I add, but because I chose to respond to threads as I do does not mean my mind is made up! Nor! More importantly that I am right!


Ok then 
Take Brexit out of the question in this GE. Let's pretend Brexit isn't happening.

Who would you vote for?

Hope that helps you make your decision?


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Wouldn't mind betting that many many people in the uk have been subject to at least one maybe two of those issues during their lifetime.


Well a recent study (which was mentioned on the news not long ago) showed that the average person in the UK is one small life crisis away from being homeless. Nothing to do with drugs or alcohol.


----------



## Jesthar

Satori said:


> View attachment 308236


In what way has he given up his billionaire lifestyle, though? Just to pick out one aspect, I seem to recall him ripping into Obama for playing golf during the election campaign, and stating that if he was elected he'd be too busy working for the people, not off playing golf. Lastest statistics are that he's played 16 rounds (that we know of) since becoming president, which is a teeing off rate far higher than Obama's...


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Which one - the Seven Day Rescue? Please have a look at the film links too - I know you would like them as they both have quite a lot about the environment and eating you alive has a section on farm animals which I have to admit I shot out of the chair and turned off as it upset me so much.
> 
> I think you will find I only ever condemn labour when someone else is trying to say these things don't happen when labour are in power. I've already said I'm undecided about who to vote for, nearer the time I will draw up a list of which issues are the most important to me now (some have changed since the last election) and which policies are not acceptable to me and try and balance it all out.
> When you say I'm silent about the current situation you are wrong - I do write to my MP and have supported some local campaigns but I think I have a very different vision to you about what the NHS can and should be in the future.


Yes that one. I don't eat meat & dairy & only occasionally eggs which we have given, but I still don't eat as healthily as I should so thought I'd take up on your recommendation  I've seen plenty on the horrors of farming animals so might give the videos a miss & George Monbiot et al keeps me up to date on the environmental impact of livestock farming.

Yes labour did some bad things, but it should never be used to excuse what the tories are doing now. The tories must be held to account. This is the worst crisis in the history of our NHS - and a manufactured crisis at that. If we don't all stand up & fight for it it wont be here next election its as simple as that.



DT said:


> Lol, ive only just cottoned on!
> Heck, im slow today
> Wears the soap
> Opps, pardon me, I mean where's the soap?


I thought the penny would drop eventually


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> What is the current Government doing about this


ANY government SWC. It needs a total rethink and it isn't as simple as building houses. Homelessness isn't only about not having somewhere to live.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Wouldn't mind betting that many many people in the uk have been subject to at least one maybe two of those issues during their lifetime.


Number one cause of food poverty is low wage. Millions of people are now working for their poverty & cant even afford to feed themselves properly.


----------



## noushka05

*David Schneider*‏Verified [email protected]*davidschneider* 17h17 hours ago

_"Only Theresa May can offer the strong, stable leadership _
_we need to ensure that millions of kids continue to starve"_


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> *David Schneider*‏Verified [email protected]*davidschneider* 17h17 hours ago
> 
> _"Only Theresa May can offer the strong, stable leadership _
> _we need to ensure that millions of kids continue to starve"_
> 
> View attachment 308257


But I don't think we should have free school meals


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Actually I have, my daughter live's twenty odd miles north of the city. If I get the train up I have to change from Piccadilly to Victoria so regularly walk through the centre and past the Arndale. To be fair it's always been a problem as it is in many cities.
> 
> Isn't Manchester council Labour contolled and has been for decades? I could be wrong but if not Manchester isn't a good example of Labour's commitment to the homeless no matter who's in government.


You are probably wondering why I picked on Manchester?

Well I used to live there over a decade ago and the homeless problem then was not as evident as it is now in Manchester. I was absolutely gob smacked coming down from Manchester Piccadilly Station, through Piccadilly Gardens, down Market Street and through the back streets and up in Sackville Gardens how many people I saw begging next to what was left of there worldly possessions. In Sackville Gardens hidden under the trees was a row of tents not with campers in them but homeless people.

Even 5 years ago I did not see this amount of homeless people in Manchester. Jeremy Kyle even done a one off show on homelessness not long ago featuring Manchester in it. It is absolutely shocking how bad it is.

Next time you go past a person on the street who asks you for change get them a hot cup of tea or sandwich if you can afford it and spend five minutes of your time to speak to them, each person has a different story.

Your right @havoc any Government that gets into power needs to rethink it's strategy on homelessness and it isn't about just giving someone a home it's the after care/support afterwards to help that person get back on there feet and prevent them from becoming homeless again.


----------



## Jesthar

DT said:


> But I don't think we should have free school meals


Curious, why not?


----------



## stockwellcat.

stockwellcat said:


> You are probably wondering why I picked on Manchester?
> 
> Well I used to live there over a decade ago and the homeless problem then was not as evident as it is now in Manchester. I was absolutely gob smacked coming down from Manchester Piccadilly Station, through Piccadilly Gardens, down Market Street and through the back streets and up in Sackville Gardens how many people I saw begging next to what was left of there worldly possessions. In Sackville Gardens hidden under the trees was a row of tents not with campers in them but homeless people.
> 
> Even 5 years ago I did not see this amount of homeless people in Manchester. Jeremy Kyle even done a one off show on homelessness not long ago featuring Manchester in it. It is absolutely shocking how bad it is.
> 
> Next time you go past a person on the street who asks you for change get them a hot cup of tea or sandwich if you can afford it and spend five minutes of your time to speak to them, each person has a different story.
> 
> Your right @havoc any Government that gets into power needs to rethink it's strategy on homelessness and it isn't about just giving someone a home it's the after care/support afterwards to help that person get back on there feet and prevent them from becoming homeless again.


Sorry one last thing. The reason why I am focusing on this is because the Conservatives are quite happy to remove the support needed for people that need help like homeless people, sick, disabled and elderly. That's is why I bought this subject up. I'll be quiet about this now.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> But I don't think we should have free school meals


Many children are malnourished now, for many a school dinner the only meal they get. On the radio today there was an interview from the head of this school in Barnsley where they were feeding children in the holidays.



stockwellcat said:


> You are probably wondering why I picked on Manchester?
> 
> Well I used to live there over a decade ago and the homeless problem then was not as evident as it is now in Manchester. I was absolutely gob smacked coming down from Manchester Piccadilly, through Piccadilly Gardens, down Market Street and through the back streets and up in Sackville Gardens how many people I saw begging next to what was left of there worldly possessions. In Sackville Gardens hidden under the trees was a row of tents not with campers in them but homeless people.
> 
> Even 5 years ago I did not see this amount of homeless people in Manchester. Jeremy Kyle even done a one off show on homelessness not long ago featuring Manchester in it. It is absolutely shocking how bad it is.
> 
> Next time you go past a person on the street who asks you for change get them a hot cup of tea or sandwich if you can afford it and spend five minutes of your time to speak to them, each person has a different story.
> 
> Your right @havoc any Government that gets into power needs to rethink it's strategy on homelessness and it isn't about just giving someone a home it's the after care/support afterwards to help that person get back on there feet and prevent them from becoming homeless again.


We went to the theatre with our friends a couple of weeks ago & I was so shocked to see the number of homeless in Sheffield. It gets worse every time we go, they are everywhere . We gave all the change we had to homeless people with dogs, I ruined my night seeing one really old dog out there in the cold. My youngest lives in Sheffield, he gives loads to the homeless.

.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Sorry one last thing. The reason why I am focusing on this is because the Conservatives are quite happy to remove the support needed for people that need help like homeless people, sick, disabled and elderly. That's is why I bought this subject up. I'll be quiet about this now.


What are they doing today that they weren't doing last week when you were a member of the conservative party?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> But I don't think we should have free school meals


I don't think we should have free school meals for all children only for those in real need. Can't understand Labour policy to give free dinners to all children - why waste the money providing dinners to children who's parents are well able to afford them when that money could be better spent elsewhere? I do however think there should be free dinners for the poorer families. However again I think everyone but particularly parents need educating about how to provide dinners on a tight budget. I know the Trussell Trust are trying to do that in some areas.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> What are they doing today that they weren't doing last week when you were a member of the conservative party?


Perhaps I woke up and smelt the coffee and didn't like the brand (so to speak)? Perhaps I wasn't comfortable about being a member of this party? Perhaps I wasn't happy about what has been done by this party? Perhaps I am not happy with the direction things are going? Perhaps I acted in haste joining a the Conservative Party as they where the only party backing Brexit at the time? Lastly have you ever changed your mind?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Perhaps I woke up and smelt the coffee and didn't like the brand (so to speak)? Perhaps I wasn't comfortable about being a member of this party? Perhaps I wasn't happy about what has been done by this party? Perhaps I am not happy with the direction things are going? Lastly have you ever changed your mind?


Yes I have - we had this discussion already but its one thing to vote for a party in an election and have changed to another five years later but you actually joined the party not that long ago (after Brexit I think) and have been posting lots of memes praising them right up until the election was called. Again fair enough to stand down and wait to consider your options but no you jumped in with memes calling for their downfall, announced you were voting labour then only 2 days ago said you had changed your mind again and were undecided/on the fence. Seriously you make me dizzy. What is in the Labour manifesto that you like or are drawn to? What is in the Conservative manifesto that you don't like?


----------



## suewhite

No Government has ever cared very much about the homeless, I sleep out one night every year for the homeless charity and have done so for at least 20years and it has been the same story from them that the Government doesn't care who ever has been in power. x


----------



## 1290423

Jesthar said:


> Curious, why not?


Sorry, but i will probably sound really hard and nasty, im not, but i,ve always been a firm believer that if you have children then you and you alone are responsible for them. Ive no problem with the absolute poorest having them, but to give the to all children no! 
Why dont we make supermarkets give all adults a free food vOucher so we all eat well.? 
There is lots I dont agree with either, another thing I dont think the seriously long term, and I mean the lazy those who dont want to work unemployed either should be paid benefits if they smoke either as it happens.

There ya go everyone, bet you all wihed the red rep button still worked


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Talking about the homeless people might remember this thread and this wonderful idea to set up shelters in double decker buses

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/ne...rmed_into_a_20_bed_shelter_for_the_homeless/#


----------



## Arnie83

noushka05 said:


> Number one cause of food poverty is low wage. Millions of people are now working for their poverty & cant even afford to feed themselves properly.
> 
> View attachment 308256


I know it's serious, and I know I shouldn't and would certainly go to hell if there was one ...

... but I really wanted the last reason to be "Waitrose was shut".


----------



## 1290423

Arnie83 said:


> I know it's serious, and I know I shouldn't and would certainly go to hell if there was one ...
> 
> ... but I really wanted the last reason to be "Waitrose was shut".


Ok so we give all school children free meals, then can we give all adults a waitrose food voucher, problem solved


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Ok then
> Take Brexit out of the question in this GE. Let's pretend Brexit isn't happening.
> 
> Who would you vote for?
> 
> Hope that helps you make your decision?


Ive taken brexit out!


----------



## 1290423

Arnie83 said:


> I know it's serious, and I know I shouldn't and would certainly go to hell if there was one ...
> 
> ... but I really wanted the last reason to be "Waitrose was shut".


If you go to waitrose late at night you can get a loaf of bread for 5p

Nought wrong wiff bread n dripping.

Half the population look as though they have been brought up on it anyway.


----------



## 1290423

Ps arnie, iwas only joking about the bread and dripping


----------



## Satori

rottiepointerhouse said:


> What are they doing today that they weren't doing last week when you were a member of the conservative party?


It is Tuesday.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I don't think we should have free school meals for all children only for those in real need. Can't understand Labour policy to give free dinners to all children - why waste the money providing dinners to children who's parents are well able to afford them when that money could be better spent elsewhere? I do however think there should be free dinners for the poorer families. However again I think everyone but particularly parents need educating about how to provide dinners on a tight budget. I know the Trussell Trust are trying to do that in some areas.


This is where a problem could occur. When I was at school in the '70s those on free dinners were often singled out and picked on by others. It shouldn't happen of course and can't speak for how things are nowadays.

At least by offering free dinners for all this stigma wouldn't happen and pupils would be more likely to eat a decent meal rather than go to one of those hideous fattening MuckFries or whatever in their lunch break.

It would also reduce friction between those who qualify for free dinners and those who don't due to earning 30 bob more than the other parent.

It would be a win win situation all round and improve the health of children in later life.


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> This is where a problem could occur. When I was at school in the '70s those on free dinners were often singled out and picked on by others. It shouldn't happen of course and can't speak for how things are nowadays.
> 
> At least by offering free dinners for all this stigma wouldn't happen and pupils would be more likely to eat a decent meal rather than go to one of those hideous fattening MuckFries or whatever in their lunch break.
> 
> It would also reduce friction between those who qualify for free dinners and those who don't due to earning 30 bob more than the other parent.
> 
> It would be a win win situation all round and improve the health of children in later life.


So a family with one child gets around £20 family allowance I guess, add to that the cost of a weeks meals at least another tenner!
Good god! Thirty quid, i could feed a small army on that


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> This is where a problem could occur. When I was at school in the '70s those on free dinners were often singled out and picked on by others. It shouldn't happen of course and can't speak for how things are nowadays.
> 
> At least by offering free dinners for all this stigma wouldn't happen and pupils would be more likely to eat a decent meal rather than go to one of those hideous fattening MuckFries or whatever in their lunch break.
> 
> It would also reduce friction between those who qualify for free dinners and those who don't due to earning 30 bob more than the other parent.
> 
> It would be a win win situation all round and improve the health of children in later life.


Life is full of problems that "could occur" but we can't legislate and use the public's hard earned taxes for every one of those possible problems. I was also at school in the 60's and 70's and for the last couple of years was a "free school dinners kid" after my parents split up. I wasn't picked on and there was no stigma, I don't even think any of the other kids knew and why would they? I'm sure in this digital day and age schools can manage to keep a record of who is free and relate that information to the canteen without the whole school knowing about it. The best way to improve the health of children in later life is to teach their parents what is healthy and what isn't and to teach them how to cook instead of opening cardboard boxes or sending for yet more takeaway or packets of crisps


----------



## rona

I was in a very small school, just 4 classrooms and I didn't know who was on free meals, let alone pick on them......hell, I might have been a free mealer and not known


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Life is full of problems that "could occur" but we can't legislate and use the public's hard earned taxes for every one of those possible problems.


Cough cough
Isnt it just! Im just waiting for some muppet MP to suggest we issue all s hool children with a pair or designer trainers and the latest iphone


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> I was in a very small school, just 4 classrooms and I didn't know who was on free meals, let alone pick on them......hell, I might have been a free mealer and not known


Wow, that was a big school,
I was at north mushkam school in 1960. Three classes three teachers, and that was infants and juniors,think there were 37 of us and we all stayed dinners, like you I didnt have a clue who was free who wasn't.

Besides, many authorities do a moneyless system whereby its done on line , so no need for anyone to know.


----------



## rona

DT said:


> Wow, that was a big school,
> I was at north mushkam school in 1960. Three classes three teachers, and that was infants and juniors,think there were 37 of us and we all stayed dinners, like you I didnt have a clue who was free who wasn't.


Mine might have been that small at that time but I went a few years later


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> Mine might have been that small at that time but I went a few years later


 not that many


----------



## rona

DT said:


> not that many


Enough for two more babies to be born in my family. So many children born then, the pill wasn't for our parents. School pupil numbers expanded fast


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> Enough for two more babies to be born in my family. So many children born then, the pill wasn't for our parents. School pupil numbers expanded fast


I didn't know the pill was so freely available then rona.


----------



## rona

DT said:


> I didn't know the pill was so freely available then rona.


No it wasn't, not until 1967, that's why one of those babies in my family was my niece, the other was my little sister


----------



## cheekyscrip

What about free pill ?I have read about free slippers...those where provided for elderly in need of slippers...
In my student years we had free soup in canteen..with a piece of free bread...excellent idea...
state universities were and are free...

Maybe what UK really need is to allow young people who are capable of decent A levels to study for free?
So we can have enough doctors, nurses, engineers, accountants etc...
I am sure there are many young people with talent and will to study, who cannot afford it.

I cannot forgive LibDems and TORIES the rise in uni fees.

Not investing in own children is a crime...wasting their potential is a crime...
Education should not be just for the well off, but al who are talented and willing to make an effort.


----------



## Dr Pepper

cheekyscrip said:


> What about free pill ?I have read about free slippers...those where provided for elderly in need of slippers...
> In my student years we had free soup in canteen..with a piece of free bread...excellent idea...
> state universities were and are free...
> 
> Maybe what UK really need is to allow young people who are capable of decent A levels to study for free?
> So we can have enough doctors, nurses, engineers, accountants etc...
> I am sure there are many young people with talent and will to study, who cannot afford it.
> 
> I cannot forgive LibDems and TORIES the rise in uni fees.
> 
> Not investing in own children is a crime...wasting their potential is a crime...
> Education should not be just for the well off, but al who are talented and willing to make an effort.


University is free unless you get a halfway decent job at some point in the future. Why the hell should those on minimum wage pay, through their taxes, for people to go to university? Very odd concept that the poorer should contribute to the future solicitors, medical consultants, architects etc etc.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Dr Pepper said:


> University is free unless you get a halfway decent job at some point in the future. Why the hell should those on minimum wage pay, through their taxes, for people to go to university? Very odd concept that the poorer should contribute to the future solicitors, medical consultants, architects etc etc.


because they need doctors? nurses? Vets? Because poorer people also have gifted children>???? Even people with very few academic qualifications have talented kids and many would love to see them use their talents?

In my experience of many years students from less privileged background work really hard and appreciate more their university than the rich kids.


----------



## Dr Pepper

cheekyscrip said:


> because they need doctors? nurses? Vets? Because poorer people also have gifted children>???? Even people with very few academic qualifications have talented kids and many would love to see them use their talents?
> 
> In my experience of many years students from less privileged background work really hard and appreciate more their university than the rich kids.


Yes and that's the joy of student loans, anyone can go to university and if they do well and get a job they pay back the cost. If they fail they don't. University is open all via this scheme.

The low paid still pay for the university failures. Is that right?


----------



## cheekyscrip

Dr Pepper said:


> Yes and that's the joy of student loans, anyone can go to university and if they do well and get a job they pay back the cost. If they fail they don't. University is open all via this scheme.


Too expensive, too much debts. on one hand UK has to import doctors and after brexit will have to replace some staff from EU by non EU..on the other no help for students? Do you realise how much is medicine which is about six years in comparison to junior doctor earnings? How much is PhD? How much research assistant earns? Or primary school teacher? Degree with Masters is four years of hard work.. hardly time for extra part time working,

You are kidding, or are really ignorant...


----------



## Dr Pepper

cheekyscrip said:


> Too expensive, too much debts. on one hand UK has to import doctors and after brexit will have to replace some staff from EU by non EU..on the other no help for students? Do you realise how much is medicine which is about six years in comparison to junior doctor earnings? How much is PhD? How much research assistant earns? Or primary school teacher? Degree with Masters is four years of hard work.. hardly time for extra part time working,
> 
> You are kidding, or are really ignorant...


Neither, however you are obviously not kidding so that makes you ignorant.

There is nothing wrong with those going to university paying for their further education when then get the higher paid jobs. And those that chose to go straight into tax paying work should not be paying for those that want to give university a bash.

Frankly to many people go to university these days, so obviously cost isn't the issue.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Sorry one last thing. The reason why I am focusing on this is because the Conservatives are quite happy to remove the support needed for people that need help like homeless people, sick, disabled and elderly. That's is why I bought this subject up. I'll be quiet about this now.


Dont be quiet! If you go quiet then the forum will break


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Dont be quiet! If you go quiet then the forum will break


Glad I keep you entertained


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

cheekyscrip said:


> Too expensive, too much debts. on one hand UK has to import doctors and after brexit will have to replace some staff from EU by non EU..on the other no help for students? Do you realise how much is medicine which is about six years in comparison to junior doctor earnings? How much is PhD? How much research assistant earns? Or primary school teacher? Degree with Masters is four years of hard work.. hardly time for extra part time working,
> 
> You are kidding, or are really ignorant...


http://media.slc.co.uk/sfe/1718/ft/sfe_terms_and_conditions_guide_1718_d.pdf

If you're a full-time student you'll be due to start repaying your loan in the April after you finish or leave your course. If you're a part-time student you'll be due to start repaying your loan in the April after you finish or leave your course or the April four years after the first day of your course (even if you're still studying), whichever comes first. *You'll only start making repayments when your income is over the current UK repayment threshold of £404 a week, £1,750 a month or £21,000 a year*.* If your income falls below the repayment threshold, repayments will stop *and *only re-start when your income is over £21,000*. You can also make additional voluntary repayments to SLC at any time.

Repayments are based on your income, not what you borrow. You should let your employer know which repayment plan applies to you so the correct repayments can be taken.

Repayment plan 2 
You'll repay 9% of your income over £404 a week, £1,750 a month or £21,000 a year. If your income changes, either rising or falling, your repayment amounts will automatically change to reflect this. Income each year before tax Monthly salary Monthly repayment

£21,000 £1,750 £0 
£22,000 £1,833 £7 
£23,500 £1,958 £18 
£25,000 £2,083 £29 
£27,000 £2,250 £45 
£30,000 £2,500 £67

Basic salary for junior doctors starts at about £23,000 but increases in the second year to about £28,000 (Pay for doctors - NHS Careers). This is from 2015 though so may have gone up slightly since. Therefore a junior doctor would only have to pay £18 pcm towards the cost of their student loan. Teachers appear to earn a similar amount.


----------



## Colliebarmy

How many living on streets are migrants though?

London has a huge problem with this

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/65...-rough-homeless-London-doubles-migrant-crisis


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Life is full of problems that "could occur" but we can't legislate and use the public's hard earned taxes for every one of those possible problems. I was also at school in the 60's and 70's and for the last couple of years was a "free school dinners kid" after my parents split up. I wasn't picked on and there was no stigma, I don't even think any of the other kids knew and why would they? I'm sure in this digital day and age schools can manage to keep a record of who is free and relate that information to the canteen without the whole school knowing about it. The best way to improve the health of children in later life is to teach their parents what is healthy and what isn't and to teach them how to cook instead of opening cardboard boxes or sending for yet more takeaway or packets of crisps


Every Monday we had to pay for our weekly dinners at 60 New Pence. We were called one by one to pay.

Those entitled to free dinners didn't have to pay so everyone knew who they were. I'd like to think confidentiality would be more respected nowadays.


----------



## cheekyscrip

I


rottiepointerhouse said:


> http://media.slc.co.uk/sfe/1718/ft/sfe_terms_and_conditions_guide_1718_d.pdf
> 
> If you're a full-time student you'll be due to start repaying your loan in the April after you finish or leave your course. If you're a part-time student you'll be due to start repaying your loan in the April after you finish or leave your course or the April four years after the first day of your course (even if you're still studying), whichever comes first. *You'll only start making repayments when your income is over the current UK repayment threshold of £404 a week, £1,750 a month or £21,000 a year*.* If your income falls below the repayment threshold, repayments will stop *and *only re-start when your income is over £21,000*. You can also make additional voluntary repayments to SLC at any time.
> 
> Repayments are based on your income, not what you borrow. You should let your employer know which repayment plan applies to you so the correct repayments can be taken.
> 
> Repayment plan 2
> You'll repay 9% of your income over £404 a week, £1,750 a month or £21,000 a year. If your income changes, either rising or falling, your repayment amounts will automatically change to reflect this. Income each year before tax Monthly salary Monthly repayment
> 
> £21,000 £1,750 £0
> £22,000 £1,833 £7
> £23,500 £1,958 £18
> £25,000 £2,083 £29
> £27,000 £2,250 £45
> £30,000 £2,500 £67
> 
> Basic salary for junior doctors starts at about £23,000 but increases in the second year to about £28,000 (Pay for doctors - NHS Careers). This is from 2015 though so may have gone up slightly since. Therefore a junior doctor would only have to pay £18 pcm towards the cost of their student loan. Teachers appear to earn a similar amount.


what about the cost of accommodation and living while you study? If you have no uni near your family home?

you need about 1000 a month to live on? Plus 9 k fees? about 20 k a year? That makes 80k for four years of teaching degree. My stepgirl graduated few years ago....was teaching in UK and found out that cannot survive with her child on her teaching salary, even without debts to pay back.

Fees are not everything that students have to pay for. I understand Scotland can afford free uni? Correct me if I am wrong?
Recently on BBC presenters talked about shortage of teachers and necessity to recruit some from Poland.
In Poland teachers have free courses at state universities.. So even much poorer countries see education as their priority.
Poorer students receive help with accommodation fee and some allowance for bare necessities.
It is utterly ridiculous that UK cannot afford to train enough teachers or doctors, nurses etc...

It benefits whole society for generations.

But I think Tories are very happy to have education limited to elite and keep the rest at The Sun level.


----------



## Odin_cat

As a recent graduate, I can tell you that student loans chase you for money regardless of what you earn. And the interest is depressing!

Personally, I support a graduate tax- fairer, and easier and cheaper to administer.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

cheekyscrip said:


> what about the cost of accommodation and living while you study? If you have no uni near your family home?
> 
> you need about 1000 a month to live on? Plus 9 k fees? about 20 k a year? That makes 80k for four years of teaching degree. My stepgirl graduated few years ago....was teaching in UK and found out that cannot survive with her child on her teaching salary, even without debts to pay back.
> 
> Fees are not everything that students have to pay for. I understand Scotland can afford free uni? Correct me if I am wrong?
> Recently on BBC presenters talked about shortage of teachers and necessity to recruit some from Poland.
> In Poland teachers have free courses at state universities.. So even much poorer countries see education as their priority.
> it is utterly ridiculous that UK cannot afford to train enough teachers or doctors, nurses etc...


But this isn't about the salary that professionals earn, that is a whole different subject. I happen to agree qualified professionals such as doctors, nurses, teachers, vets, solicitors etc should earn more than they do but we are talking about whether it is fair for all tax payers to contribute to the cost of training those professionals or not. Perhaps I can see why it is in the interests of the country to train public sector workers such as doctors, nurses and teachers but only if they are tied in to stay in this country and work for the people who paid for their training for a set period of time such as 5 years after graduation but why on earth should the general public contribute towards the cost of people who will go into private industry or media studies etc?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Odin_cat said:


> As a recent graduate, I can tell you that student loans chase you for money regardless of what you earn. And the interest is depressing!
> 
> Personally, I support a graduate tax- fairer, and easier and cheaper to administer.


Then you should complain

If you're not satisfied about the way your repayments are being collected, you should contact SLC. 
You can register a complaint by calling 0300 100 0601, by writing to Customer Relations unit, Student Loans Company, 100 Bothwell Street, Glasgow, G2 7JD, or by emailing: [email protected], an Online Customer Complaints form is available to download at www.slc.co.uk
If, having used this procedure, you're still not satisfied, you can have your case independently reviewed. Independent reviews are usually dealt with by:
• the Student Loans Assessor for services provided by the Student Loans Company;
• the Adjudicator for services provided by HMRC;
• the Parliamentary Ombudsman for services provided by the government, such as the Department for Education (for details, see www.ombudsman.org.uk); 
• the Public Services Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales (see the contact details below) for services provided by government outside England;
or • the Local Government Ombudsman for services provided by local authorities (see: www.lgo.org.uk)


----------



## cheekyscrip

T


rottiepointerhouse said:


> But this isn't about the salary that professionals earn, that is a whole different subject. I happen to agree qualified professionals such as doctors, nurses, teachers, vets, solicitors etc should earn more than they do but we are talking about whether it is fair for all tax payers to contribute to the cost of training those professionals or not. Perhaps I can see why it is in the interests of the country to train public sector workers such as doctors, nurses and teachers but only if they are tied in to stay in this country and work for the people who paid for their training for a set period of time such as 5 years after graduation but why on earth should the general public contribute towards the cost of people who will go into private industry or media studies etc?


I see that too. To some point agree with you that it is in the intrest of the public sector to support the most needed professions, but also to have scholarships for good students in every sector, science, economy, law, arts Gifted students should have this chance , investing in talented young people is never a waste. That is the best use of public money imo.


----------



## Odin_cat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Then you should complain
> 
> If you're not satisfied about the way your repayments are being collected, you should contact SLC.
> You can register a complaint by calling 0300 100 0601, by writing to Customer Relations unit, Student Loans Company, 100 Bothwell Street, Glasgow, G2 7JD, or by emailing: [email protected], an Online Customer Complaints form is available to download at www.slc.co.uk
> If, having used this procedure, you're still not satisfied, you can have your case independently reviewed. Independent reviews are usually dealt with by:
> • the Student Loans Assessor for services provided by the Student Loans Company;
> • the Adjudicator for services provided by HMRC;
> • the Parliamentary Ombudsman for services provided by the government, such as the Department for Education (for details, see www.ombudsman.org.uk);
> • the Public Services Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales (see the contact details below) for services provided by government outside England;
> or • the Local Government Ombudsman for services provided by local authorities (see: www.lgo.org.uk)


I am aware of the procedure and currently in the middle of it.

None of it would be necessary with a simple graduate tax!


----------



## havoc

Colliebarmy said:


> How many living on streets are migrants though?
> 
> London has a huge problem with this


How can this be? I thought they were all given council houses the minute they arrived ahead of locals who have been waiting for years.


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Then you should complain
> 
> If you're not satisfied about the way your repayments are being collected, you should contact SLC.
> You can register a complaint by calling 0300 100 0601, by writing to Customer Relations unit, Student Loans Company, 100 Bothwell Street, Glasgow, G2 7JD, or by emailing: [email protected], an Online Customer Complaints form is available to download at www.slc.co.uk
> If, having used this procedure, you're still not satisfied, you can have your case independently reviewed. Independent reviews are usually dealt with by:
> • the Student Loans Assessor for services provided by the Student Loans Company;
> • the Adjudicator for services provided by HMRC;
> • the Parliamentary Ombudsman for services provided by the government, such as the Department for Education (for details, see www.ombudsman.org.uk);
> • the Public Services Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales (see the contact details below) for services provided by government outside England;
> or • the Local Government Ombudsman for services provided by local authorities (see: www.lgo.org.uk)


No point, they don't listen and whenever possible put the blame on you. I complained twice, the first time after they didn't send me a repayment pack for years after I started earning as they were supposed to, which cost me several hundred pounds in extra interest, and then twice failed to start taking repayments despite telling me they wre going to start - AFTER I phoned them to check when I spoke to work and they confirmed repayments weren't being taken. Apparently it was all my fault for not realising they should have sent me a repayment pack at graduation, and then for believing repayments would start when I was told they would and I should have been phoning regularly (on a pay-to-phone number) to check progress, so I was at fault and liable for the extra interest. So they got away with their incompetence and made a profit from it.

The second time I complained was when I was blatantly lied to by a staff member who claimed SLC hadn't received any communications from me, and kept me talking for ages whilst 'trying to find them' but completely failing to and implying I must not have sent it correctly and was trying it on. I only found out when I called the direct dial number she gave me back, she was at lunch so I spoke to a different advisor, and he found all the paperwork within seconds. I never even got a response to that complaint.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jesthar said:


> No point, they don't listen and whenever possible put the blame on you. I complained twice, the first time after they didn't send me a repayment pack for years after I started earning as they were supposed to, which cost me several hundred pounds in extra interest, and then twice failed to start taking repayments despite telling me they wre going to start - AFTER I phoned them to check when I spoke to work and they confirmed repayments weren't being taken. Apparently it was all my fault for not realising they should have sent me a repayment pack at graduation, and then for believing repayments would start when I was told they would and I should have been phoning regularly (on a pay-to-phone number) to check progress, so I was at fault and liable for the extra interest. So they got away with their incompetence and made a profit from it.
> 
> The second time I complained was when I was blatantly lied to by a staff member who claimed SLC hadn't received any communications from me, and kept me talking for ages whilst 'trying to find them' but completely failing to and implying I must not have sent it correctly and was trying it on. I only found out when I called the direct dial number she gave me back, she was at lunch so I spoke to a different advisor, and he found all the paperwork within seconds. I never even got a response to that complaint.


That is not on, did you take it up with your MP?


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> That is not on, did you take it up with your MP?


No, it was a long time ago and I hadn't a clue how to take things further. Nor the confidence to, really.

They try and get away with so much dodgy stuff, though. They regularly make the headlines for failing to stop taking repayments for months after the debt is cleared, and victims have to jump through all kinds of hoops to get their money back.

Hmm, can you tell I'm not a fan?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Odin_cat said:


> I am aware of the procedure and currently in the middle of it.
> 
> None of it would be necessary with a simple graduate tax!


Hope you get it sorted out.



Jesthar said:


> No, it was a long time ago and I hadn't a clue how to take things further. Nor the confidence to, really.
> 
> They try and get away with so much dodgy stuff, though. They regularly make the headlines for failing to stop taking repayments for months after the debt is cleared, and victims have to jump through all kinds of hoops to get their money back.
> 
> Hmm, can you tell I'm not a fan?


Just a bit  I can see why it they are playing silly games with people. I would make the old MP earn their keep and get involved to sort it out if it happens again.


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Just a bit  I can see why it they are playing silly games with people. I would make the old MP earn their keep and get involved to sort it out if it happens again.


Thankfully, it never WILL happen again - I finished paying it off last year, and I'm enjoying the extra £100+ a month that is now MINE, all MINE  (incidentally, that amount is for a salary well under the higher rate of tax)


----------



## noushka05

cheekyscrip said:


> because they need doctors? nurses? Vets? Because poorer people also have gifted children>???? Even people with very few academic qualifications have talented kids and many would love to see them use their talents?
> 
> In my experience of many years students from less privileged background work really hard and appreciate more their university than the rich kids.


I wish I could rep you Cheeky. Me & my hubby are just a pair of chippy oiks who wanted our children to have more opportunities than we had. So both our children went to uni, both had grants (now abolished by the tories I believe).

My eldest is now a fully qualified chartered accountant( promoted to senior auditor & accountant after he passed his last exam) and hes still only in his 20s. Unlike our eldest, our youngest is more creative than academic, he graduated with the equivalent of a Masters and didn't even have to search for a job he was head hunted by a company that visited the Uni to look at the students work. He now works for that media production company.

I'm very very proud of them both. Why shouldn't children like them have the same opportunities as those who have parents with more money?

As the great Bernie Sanders says about access to Health care & Education , they should be a right not a privilege .





















rottiepointerhouse said:


> But this isn't about the salary that professionals earn, that is a whole different subject. I happen to agree qualified professionals such as doctors, nurses, teachers, vets, solicitors etc should earn more than they do but we are talking about whether it is fair for all tax payers to contribute to the cost of training those professionals or not. Perhaps I can see why it is in the interests of the country to train public sector workers such as doctors, nurses and teachers but only if they are tied in to stay in this country and work for the people who paid for their training for a set period of time such as 5 years after graduation but why on earth should the general public contribute towards the cost of people who will go into private industry or media studies etc?


Do you think only those with privilege should have access to higher education unless the intend to be one of the category you mention above? Wouldn't you rather our taxes went on giving poorer children a chance then on wars or badger killing etc?

The tories are shafting less well off students -
Best of Money: *government sold millions a lie on student loans*

November 16, 2016
by: Martin Lewis

If you sign a contract, both sides should keep to it. If you advertise a loan, the lender should be held to the terms it was sold under. Thankfully in the UK we have laws and regulations to ensure this happens. With one exception - student loan contracts. Millions of students and parents have been told and sold a lie, and we need the law changed to stop it happening again
https://www.ft.com/content/0d434316-aa7d-11e6-ba7d-76378e4fef24


----------



## noushka05

havoc said:


> How can this be? I thought they were all given council houses the minute they arrived ahead of locals who have been waiting for years.


Touche !


----------



## Arnie83

Anyone who thinks that the prospect of being saddled with tens of thousands of pounds of debt, in addition to the cost of living while studying, does not have an effect on the decision to attend university is fooling themselves. And of course it is the poorer members of society who are most likely to forego further education for that very reason.

The argument that there are too many students going to university and that somehow fees therefore play a valuable role in restricting numbers is not only dubious in its basic assumption but very wrong in its conclusion. If numbers need to be restricted it should be via learning potential, not the ability to pay.


----------



## Calvine

Dr Pepper said:


> Isn't Manchester council Labour contolled and has been for decades?


Not just Manchester it's happening. Homelessness has been on the increase for ages so I don't think it is fair to point at any one party. In Richmond and Twickenham, whenever a shop becomes empty there's someone sleeping there each night (and much of the day as well). Also a couple of supermarkets have donation boxes for staple food items for ''needy'' causes. Last week people chucked in a load of Easter eggs which I found a bit odd.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> Not just Manchester it's happening. Homelessness has been on the increase for ages so I don't think it is fair to point at any one party. In Richmond and Twickenham, whenever a shop becomes empty there's someone sleeping there each night (and much of the day as well). Also a couple of supermarkets have donation boxes for staple food items for ''needy'' causes. Last week people chucked in a load of Easter eggs which I found a bit odd.


Homelessness has doubled since 2010 - http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ubled-theresa-may-conservatives-a7384476.html


----------



## noushka05

*Mark McInerney*‏@*DrMarkMcinerney* 8h8 hours ago

As an emergency medicine doctor I have a #*publicduty* to tell
you that Tories are closing departments & underfunding emergency care. #*NHS*


----------



## noushka05

*The NHA Party*‏@*NHAparty* 36m36 minutes ago

What we are now seeing is Tory end-game for our NHS.
Comprehensive, universal, accessible care will be gone by 2018.
We must say NO. #*STP*

*@johnpike1 **19h19 hours ago* 

As a GP, I have a #publicduty to inform you that the Tories
will destroy the #NHS beyond repair if re-elected.

*

Willow*‏@*willowtonks* 20h20 hours ago

As a nurse it is my #*publicduty* to inform you that the
Tories are destroying the NHS.
This is not an exaggeration.


----------



## Lurcherlad

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I don't think we should have free school meals for all children only for those in real need. Can't understand Labour policy to give free dinners to all children - why waste the money providing dinners to children who's parents are well able to afford them when that money could be better spent elsewhere? I do however think there should be free dinners for the poorer families. However again I think everyone but particularly parents need educating about how to provide dinners on a tight budget. I know the Trussell Trust are trying to do that in some areas.


Indeed.

When we were kids my parents were extremely short of money, but we never went hungry.

My parents used what money they had on essentials (not tv, phones, ****, etc.) even having beans on toast themselves so my sister and I had what we needed.

Mum cooked bog standard, nutritious meals from scratch - convenience food just wasn't on the menu.

Whilst there are some people doing the very best for their kids with what little they have and they absolutely should be helped, some parents are just sh*t parents.


----------



## Lurcherlad

DT said:


> Sorry, but i will probably sound really hard and nasty, im not, but i,ve always been a firm believer that if you have children then you and you alone are responsible for them. Ive no problem with the absolute poorest having them, but to give the to all children no!
> Why dont we make supermarkets give all adults a free food vOucher so we all eat well.?
> There is lots I dont agree with either, another thing I dont think the seriously long term, and I mean the lazy those who dont want to work unemployed either should be paid benefits if they smoke either as it happens.
> 
> There ya go everyone, bet you all wihed the red rep button still worked


Even that won't work because some sh*t parent would sell the child/food vouchers to some lag in the pub for half their value so they can buy alcohol, ****, etc. 

Abject poverty would never have seen my parents put themselves first, nor would they have continued to add to their family to make the matter worse.


----------



## noushka05

A choice of dangerous fracking and acidisation or clean renewable energy. A degraded environment and exacerbation of climate change or a healthy environment and hope for the future. Its a no brainer for me.


----------



## Lurcherlad

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Talking about the homeless people might remember this thread and this wonderful idea to set up shelters in double decker buses
> 
> http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/ne...rmed_into_a_20_bed_shelter_for_the_homeless/#


Excellent scheme. Much more does need to be done to tackle this issue at Central and Local Government level - not just left to charities to deal with.


----------



## noushka05

Lurcherlad said:


> Excellent scheme. Much more does need to be done to tackle this issue at Central and Local Government level - not just left to charities to deal with.


Council budgets have been slashed, only the government can solve this crisis of their making.


----------



## noushka05

Theresa May voted to block an investigation into Food Poverty . Yesterday, we learned it has hit a record high.


----------



## Lurcherlad

KittenKong said:


> This is where a problem could occur. When I was at school in the '70s those on free dinners were often singled out and picked on by others. It shouldn't happen of course and can't speak for how things are nowadays.
> 
> At least by offering free dinners for all this stigma wouldn't happen and pupils would be more likely to eat a decent meal rather than go to one of those hideous fattening MuckFries or whatever in their lunch break.
> 
> It would also reduce friction between those who qualify for free dinners and those who don't due to earning 30 bob more than the other parent.
> 
> It would be a win win situation all round and improve the health of children in later life.


These days the kids have no idea who is on free school dinners. Even kids having packed lunches have one made by the school, put into a lunchbox and put on the trolley outside, or in the dining hall along with everybody else's, while the kids are in class.


----------



## noushka05

*Hugh Pym*‏Verified [email protected]*BBCHughPym* Apr 24

NHS Eng stats set for publication on polling day - a last minute impact? My blog - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-39695598

Response to this news from a Dr:
*

Dr Taryn Youngste*

We should demand they are released before....there has been a masterful cover up of #*NHS* crisis
. Public need to know truth BEFORE voting.

.


----------



## noushka05

*Alex Gates*‏@*dr_alex_gates* Apr 25

The PM's 'strong & stable' leadership litmus test?
She kept Hunt.She lied about NHS crisis & funding.
STRONG LEADERS LISTEN TO THE EXPERTS

.


----------



## Lurcherlad

noushka05 said:


> Council budgets have been slashed, only the government can solve this crisis of their making.


I know. But they do have some choice where they spend what money they do have.

Our County Councillor's are entitled to a three course hot meal every day, so long as they sign into the Council offices and "have a meeting" that lasts 30 minutes(?). That money could be better spent IMO.

Councillor's might well deserve refreshment if attending long meetings, etc. but maybe coffee/tea/water and some biscuits, maybe a sandwich bought in/made by junior staff?

No need to fund hot meals and the facilities/staff required to provide them.

It's not just about more money - it's how we spend it.


----------



## noushka05

Lurcherlad said:


> I know. But they do have some choice where they spend what money they do have.
> 
> Our County Councillor's are entitled to a three course hot meal every day, so long as they sign into the Council offices and "have a meeting" that lasts 30 minutes(?). That money could be better spent IMO.
> 
> Councillor's might well deserve refreshment if attending long meetings, etc. but maybe coffee/tea/water and some biscuits, maybe a sandwich bought in/made by junior staff?
> 
> No need to fund hot meals and the facilities/staff required to provide them.
> 
> It's not just about more money - it's how we spend it.


Tory austerity polices have disproportionately affected the poorest people. I live in one of the countries most deprived areas, councils round here have had to cut back everywhere, including social care. Without proper funding its impossible to provide services for those who need it.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## Goblin

Colliebarmy said:


> How many living on streets are migrants though?


Interesting isn't it how this is brought up at this time for that paper. You do realise that these people have no right to stay in the UK even though from the EU. It's simply the government ignoring them.

@rottiehousepointer + others. Free meals and education. You've pointed out the need to be healthy. You really expect to change adult opinion and change society simply by getting up on a box and shouting "you need to be healthy and that includes eating healthy"? Will not work and neither will legislating it. Surely the best place to start is with the youth. To push things like healthy meals and the need to eat properly. To actually teach by example. Get the youth eating properly and the effect will ripple. You cannot force it.

We then come to education. It's interesting that this government is replacing bursaries for student loans for nurses. The idea stated is that more people will be able to get student loans and boost numbers going into nursing. Is it a coincidence that according to UCAS, there has been a drop of 23% for nursing related courses this year?


----------



## havoc

Goblin said:


> Is it a coincidence that according to UCAS, there has been a drop of 23% for nursing related courses this year?


No it flippin well isn't - you have no idea the language I really want to use here. We need more nurses ..................... so we'll make it financially more difficult for them to train. Who's the genius who thought that was logical?


----------



## Lurcherlad

noushka05 said:


> Tory austerity polices have disproportionately affected the poorest people. I live in one of the countries most deprived areas, councils round here have had to cut back everywhere, including social care. Without proper funding its impossible to provide services for those who need it.


Like I said, it's not just about more money but also how it is spent.


----------



## noushka05

Lurcherlad said:


> Like I said, it's not just about more money but also how it is spent.


But council budgets should never have been cut to the bone in the first place. Homelessness is up 50% since 2010, its driven by the Tories massive cuts council funding, cuts to housing benefit & other benefits, insecure private rental sector accommodation & fewer affordable homes. The government have no intention of solving these problems - only make them worse, so we can expect many more people living on the streets if they sweep to power.


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> No it flippin well isn't - you have no idea the language I really want to use here. We need more nurses ..................... so we'll make it financially more difficult for them to train. Who's the genius who thought that was logical?


It's an easy fix if any government could be bothered. Any one doing a medical degree gets free university on the understand they work within the NHS for fifteen years. If they leave the NHS early they pay back the full cost. This is paid for by increasing the fees for the meaningless media study type courses.


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> Homelessness has doubled since 2010 - http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ubled-theresa-may-conservatives-a7384476.html


I don't doubt that for a minute...it's shocking.


----------



## 1290423

Colliebarmy said:


> How many living on streets are migrants though?
> 
> London has a huge problem with this
> 
> http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/65...-rough-homeless-London-doubles-migrant-crisis





Dr Pepper said:


> It's an easy fix if any government could be bothered. Any one doing a medical degree gets free university on the understand they work within the NHS for fifteen years. If they leave the NHS early they pay back the full cost. This is paid for by increasing the fees for the meaningless media study type courses.


Don't be daft! That's far to simple a solution.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Lurcherlad said:


> I know. But they do have some choice where they spend what money they do have.
> 
> Our County Councillor's are entitled to a three course hot meal every day, so long as they sign into the Council offices and "have a meeting" that lasts 30 minutes(?). That money could be better spent IMO.
> 
> Councillor's might well deserve refreshment if attending long meetings, etc. but maybe coffee/tea/water and some biscuits, maybe a sandwich bought in/made by junior staff?
> 
> No need to fund hot meals and the facilities/staff required to provide them.
> 
> It's not just about more money - it's how we spend it.


Completely agree, locally we've had massive pay outs to outgoing senior staff such as £394,000 to one person which is obscene when they make cuts to social care and front line services

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/ne...ef_executive_s_redundancy_and___394k_payment/

and 1.5 million on an office refurb with roof garden

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/ne...d_roof_garden_when_they_re_cutting_services_/



noushka05 said:


> I
> 
> Do you think only those with privilege should have access to higher education unless the intend to be one of the category you mention above? Wouldn't you rather our taxes went on giving poorer children a chance then on wars or badger killing etc?
> 
> The tories are shafting less well off students -
> Best of Money: *government sold millions a lie on student loans*
> 
> November 16, 2016
> by: Martin Lewis
> 
> If you sign a contract, both sides should keep to it. If you advertise a loan, the lender should be held to the terms it was sold under. Thankfully in the UK we have laws and regulations to ensure this happens. With one exception - student loan contracts. Millions of students and parents have been told and sold a lie, and we need the law changed to stop it happening again
> https://www.ft.com/content/0d434316-aa7d-11e6-ba7d-76378e4fef24


Can you show me where I said only those with privilege should have access to higher education? Don't you think kids from well off families still have to balance their books and pay their bills or do you think anyone better off has a money tree in the back garden that rains down on them. My OH went to private school and had well off parents but they happened to believe that he had to learn to stand on his own two feet from an early age. He left school with O'levels and went into a low paid job for a couple of years (his choice because he wanted some money to buy a car etc) then went back to college to study for 6 years. He didn't get a grant because his parents were too well off but they didn't fund his studies other than an occasional bit of cash for car insurance. I supported him on my student nurse then staff nurse wages and he worked some weekends and during holiday. His parents even asked for money when his Mum made him food to take back to London and as I've said elsewhere 3% above the bank rate of interest for a loan to pay a deposit on our first home. Its very easy to make assumptions about other people's lives.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> It's an easy fix if any government could be bothered.* Any one doing a medical degree gets free university on the understand they work within the NHS for fifteen years*. If they leave the NHS early they pay back the full cost. This is paid for by increasing the fees for the meaningless media study type courses.


I'd have the payback on a sliding scale, reducing by one fifteenth for every year of service completed. Other than that I'm with you.


----------



## Lurcherlad

DT said:


> Don't be daft! That's far to simple a solution.


Same as cutting all the waste in public organisations and services.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> It's an easy fix if any government could be bothered. Any one doing a medical degree gets free university on the understand they work within the NHS for fifteen years. If they leave the NHS early they pay back the full cost. This is paid for by increasing the fees for the meaningless media study type courses.


Some people call that indentured servitude, a form of slavery banned by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN not EU policy).


----------



## Satori

Goblin said:


> Some people call that indentured servitude,


People who are in desperate need of a basic education themselves maybe.


----------



## havoc

Amortisation of training costs is perfectly normal, happening right now in many businesses and carried through under pretty simple contracts. It isn't considered indentured servitude and it's perfectly legal.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Completely agree, locally we've had massive pay outs to outgoing senior staff such as £394,000 to one person which is obscene when they make cuts to social care and front line services
> 
> http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/ne...ef_executive_s_redundancy_and___394k_payment/
> 
> and 1.5 million on an office refurb with roof garden
> 
> http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/ne...d_roof_garden_when_they_re_cutting_services_/
> 
> Can you show me where I said only those with privilege should have access to higher education? Don't you think kids from well off families still have to balance their books and pay their bills or do you think anyone better off has a money tree in the back garden that rains down on them. My OH went to private school and had well off parents but they happened to believe that he had to learn to stand on his own two feet from an early age. He left school with O'levels and went into a low paid job for a couple of years (his choice because he wanted some money to buy a car etc) then went back to college to study for 6 years. He didn't get a grant because his parents were too well off but they didn't fund his studies other than an occasional bit of cash for car insurance. I supported him on my student nurse then staff nurse wages and he worked some weekends and during holiday. His parents even asked for money when his Mum made him food to take back to London and as I've said elsewhere 3% above the bank rate of interest for a loan to pay a deposit on our first home. Its very easy to make assumptions about other people's lives.


Of course those with a privileged background generally have it easier. We couldn't have afforded private education for our children even if we had wanted them to go to private school. I believe all children should have the same opportunities no matter what their social background. Because my children had the opportunity to get higher qualifications they got good jobs they don't need benefits to help them out, like so many of their peers do. If more children were given the chance of better education so the chance of better more secure jobs, they could lift themselves out of poverty & less taxes would be needed for benefits. My children are paying their taxes now and they would prefer them to go to help wider society & to aid social mobility. They believe in a fairer society.


----------



## Goblin

havoc said:


> Amortisation of training costs is perfectly normal, happening right now in many businesses and carried through under pretty simple contracts. It isn't considered indentured servitude and it's perfectly legal.


Interesting that you use the phrase "isn't considered" isn't it. So please enlighten people with the difference.. Forcing people to work for you due to debts they acquired from you sounds like the definition of indentured servitude to me, especially when you control the terms and conditions of the work and can force them to accept "contract" changes including if they can have the ability to pay you back earlier.


----------



## Dr Pepper

It's perfectly legal in the UK and is common practice in many businesses.


----------



## havoc

It's simple contract and it's normal practice when an employer pays for training. If an employee leaves before the term then they are liable to pay the employer for the cost of that training. It is used mainly when the training leads to a recognised qualification.


----------



## kimthecat

Agree with havoc, my sister's DIl became a fully qualified accountant through her firm , she had to stay three years, i think but certainly worth it .


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> Agree with havoc, my sister's DIl became a fully qualified accountant through her firm , she had to stay three years, i think but certainly worth it .


I don't know if its the same for your Sister but my Son has to stay with his accountancy firm for 4 years only (unless he buys himself out) because the firm paid for his chartered accountancy exams.


----------



## havoc

Goblin said:


> Interesting that you use the phrase "isn't considered" isn't it


Well obviously it isn't or the courts would be full with cases. The only ones I've ever seen are when the employer is the plaintiff and wants repaid because an employee has left. I've never seen a defence of modern slavery offered, nor do I think it would be successful.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> I don't know if its the same for your Sister but my Son has to stay with his accountancy firm for 4 years only (unless he buys himself out) because the firm paid for his chartered accountancy exams.


We agree, had to happen but I'll be more careful in future 

Common practice in horse racing as well.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> Of course those with a privileged background generally have it easier. We couldn't have afforded private education for our children even if we had wanted them to go to private school. I believe all children should have the same opportunities no matter what their social background. Because my children had the opportunity to get higher qualifications they got good jobs they don't need benefits to help them out, like so many of their peers do. If more children were given the chance of better education so the chance of better more secure jobs, they could lift themselves out of poverty & less taxes would be needed for benefits. My children are paying their taxes now and they would prefer them to go to help wider society & to aid social mobility. They believe in a fairer society.


No of course about it Noush - you are generalising. Plenty of children who go to private schools are deprived - deprived of good parenting, of love and home comforts. They are handed over to strangers to bring them up in often austere settings. I wonder how many people you know who went to a private school? Many will tell you sad stories of young kids sobbing themselves to sleep at night because they want their mum, of kids left at school for the Christmas holidays because their parents are abroad or who only see their parents once a year. My BIL was boarded from the age of 8 and hated it, he ran away several times and eventually because his parents just kept sending him back he set fire to one of the buildings and got himself expelled. He spent his working life driving a lorry because that is what made him happy. Not all kids cope with the extreme pressure put on them to achieve, the deprivation of home comforts and the harsh discipline. My OH often tells me of his dorm master's wife doing the rounds at bedtime and catching him reading in bed aged about 10, she smacked him clean across the face and threw his book across the room. My point is that kids can be privileged or disadvantaged in many ways - it isn't all dependent on the bank balance of their parents or the school they go to. I went to one of the roughest comprehensive schools in my area but I still did OK for myself just like your kids have.


----------



## Elles

Private school doesn't mean boarding school. I paid for my eldest to go to private school and took him there daily on the back of my old motorbike. The largest classes had 11 children which is a lot better than the over 30 a class in normal schools.


----------



## kimthecat

DT said:


> Wow, that was a big school,
> I was at north mushkam school in 1960. Three classes three teachers, and that was infants and juniors,think there were 37 of us and we all stayed dinners, like you I didnt have a clue who was free who wasn't.
> .


There were 43 in my class in Junior school ! circa 1965.

@rottiepointerhouse my sister went to a Grammar school and I went to a rough comprehensive .
We had a good headmistress though and I think unusually for that time we were allowed to take O levels and in the end my sister and I both gained 5 O levels . The only difference was she learned Latin .


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> Private school doesn't mean boarding school. I paid for my eldest to go to private school and took him there daily on the back of my old motorbike. The largest classes had 11 children which is a lot better than the over 30 a class in normal schools.


Yes I appreciate it doesn't always mean boarding but most of the pupils in the bigger public schools do board - my OH's school only had a couple of forms for day pupils but he went to one of the big old fashioned stately home style schools with sleeping in dorms. No phone calls home either. I doubt they get away with that these days with kids having their own phones/internet.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> There were 43 in my class in Junior school ! circa 1965.
> 
> @rottiepointerhouse my sister went to a Grammar school and I went to a rough comprehensive .
> We had a good headmistress though and I think unusually for that time we were allowed to take O levels and in the end my sister and I both gained 5 O levels . The only difference was she learned Latin .


Same here, my sister went to Grammar school too. She was much brainier than me though and although I got 7 O'levels and started the 6th form/A'levels I bailed out and went to start nursing instead whereas she got 3 A'levels and went on to further education.


----------



## Goblin

havoc said:


> Well obviously it isn't or the courts would be full with cases. The only ones I've ever seen are when the employer is the plaintiff and wants repaid because an employee has left. I've never seen a defence of modern slavery offered, nor do I think it would be successful.


Funny, still can't provide a difference can you.

4 years vs 10 is a major difference don't you think? Can the boss change the contract whenever convenient and force it to be accepted?

So tell me, those years you are working, you are also reducing the debt if you have to leave aren't you in normal business practice.

Edit: What is accepted and legal practice does not always make it right does it, especially concerning people we need to be motivated and dedicated.


----------



## havoc

Goblin said:


> 4 years vs 10 is a major difference don't you think? Can the boss change the contract whenever convenient and force it to be accepted


Do you mean change the term? I'm honestly not sure exactly what part of the agreement you're referring to.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Funny, still can't provide a difference can you.
> 
> 4 years vs 10 is a major difference don't you think? Can the boss change the contract whenever convenient and force it to be accepted?
> 
> So tell me, those years you are working, you are also reducing the debt if you have to leave aren't you in normal business practice.
> 
> Edit: What is accepted and legal practice does not always make it right does it, especially concerning people we need to be motivated and dedicated.


Frankly it's a fantastic way to get your degree/training for free, gaining work experience as you do so, have a income whilst studying/training and to top it off a guaranteed job at the end of it. What's not to like.


----------



## havoc

Goblin said:


> Funny, still can't provide a difference can you.


Ok, nobody can be 'held' as the term meant. They're always free to leave.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Frankly it's a fantastic way to get your degree/training for free, gaining work experience as you do so, have a income whilst studying/training and to top it off a guaranteed job at the end of it. What's not to like.


That's what those indebted servants in the new world thought when they agreed to similar terms. Didn't turn out that way. Notice nobody is explaining how it is different from indentured servitude. Used to be companies cared enough about the people they trained they wouldn't want to leave.



havoc said:


> Ok, nobody can be 'held' as the term meant. They're always free to leave.


No they are not, they are held by what they owe. Solution isn't to trap them it's to provide enough incentives, not simply financial, that people want to stay.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> That's what those indebted servants in the new world thought when they agreed to similar terms. Didn't turn out that way. Notice nobody is explaining how it is different from indentured servitude. Used to be companies cared enough about the people they trained they wouldn't want to leave.


Have to wonder why it's so popular with employers and employees alike then.

Of course you could just admit you were wrong and move on.


----------



## havoc

Goblin said:


> No they are not, they are held by what they owe


They're no more held than if they'd taken out a loan from a finance house to fund their qualification. They can leave at any time. If the employee had chosen to take out a different type of loan they'd still have to pay it back if they left their job. Such agreements don't exist to motivate the lackadaisical, they're a mechanism whereby the well motivated can achieve their potential.


----------



## Honeys mum

Yet again another question she won't commit herself to a simple yes or no answer.

Stuttering Theresa May repeatedly refuses to commit to triple lock for pensioners | The Independent


----------



## Colliebarmy

Vote Labour, they are goona give money away!

kerching


----------



## stockwellcat.

Colliebarmy said:


> Vote Labour, they are goona give money away!
> 
> kerching


Don't forget more national/bank holidays 
St George's Day etc


----------



## stockwellcat.

Last PMQ's was held today until a new parliament is formed. MP's have finished in the House of Commons until 9th June 2017. Now the work begins to save their seats and for the parties to make themselves electable.


----------



## havoc

Honeys mum said:


> Yet again another question she won't commit herself to a simple yes or no answer.
> 
> Stuttering Theresa May repeatedly refuses to commit to triple lock for pensioners | The Independent


To be honest the triple lock is unsustainable in the long term - and I say that as someone who is on the right end of it. Do I think it was smart for the subject to come up within hours of her saying foreign aid was an untouchable issue? Made it seem she was prepared to take money from pensioners to send in overseas aid. Not the most politically savvy move I've ever seen.


----------



## Honeys mum

havoc said:


> ? Made it seem she was prepared to take money from pensioners to send in overseas aid. Not the most politically savvy move I've ever seen.


Have to agree with you on that one havoc.


----------



## noushka05

Colliebarmy said:


> Vote Labour, they are goona give money away!
> 
> kerching


They just have different priorities. And lets not forget who's _really_ better with the economy


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> They just have different priorities. And lets not forget who's _really_ better with the economy
> 
> View attachment 308406
> 
> 
> View attachment 308407


I wonder which party the NHS workers are going to vote for? I wonder if it will be Labour because Corbyn offered them a pay rise if Labour get into power.


----------



## havoc

Colliebarmy said:


> Vote Labour, they are goona give money away!
> 
> kerching


It's my money they'll be giving away - just as the Cons plan on taking more of it.


----------



## Arnie83

havoc said:


> To be honest the triple lock is unsustainable in the long term


What makes you say that?


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> I wonder which party the NHS workers are going to vote for? I wonder if it will be Labour because Corbyn offered them a pay rise if Labour get into power.


The junior doctors have screaming from the rooftops for years now about the tories plans to destroy our NHS. They knew what they had in store for our NHS when the tories revealed their Health & Social Care Act 2012.


----------



## havoc

Arnie83 said:


> What makes you say that?


An ever increasing aged population in the main coupled with a birth rate which is _likely_ to fall post brexit and it being a guaranteed minimum percentage. It isn't targeted at those in need and like the winter fuel payment you can't give it back. This was money thrown at all pensioners as a bribe - and it worked.


----------



## KittenKong

havoc said:


> It isn't targeted at those in need and like the winter fuel payment you can't give it back. This was money thrown at all pensioners as a bribe - and it worked.


The policy, as with the free off peak bus passes for pensioners was devised by Labour and have so far been retained by the current Tory administration.

The question is, will the next Tory government maintain these? Can we expect to see pensioners not able to afford to heat their homes be told to wrap up warm and wear wooly hats again?


----------



## havoc

KittenKong said:


> The question is, will the next Tory government maintain these? Can we expect to see pensioners not able to afford to heat their homes be told to wrap up warm and wear wooly hats again?


I hope those who need extra help will always get it but please remember this generation of pensioners include some of the best off ever. I'm one of them, as are some of the generation up from me. Don't get me wrong, I'll love it if it continues but I won't starve if it doesn't and there are plenty like me. There are also plenty who really need it and I'd be very happy to see it means tested.

eta: There's a HUGE difference between a free bus pass and a decent income. I don't have a single friend who has bothered to get a bus pass, I do know of one neighbour who has one but she's never driven and is (theoretically) reliant on public transport since her husband died. There are at least three of us living in the same street who take her wherever she wants to go at the drop of a hat.


----------



## suewhite

havoc said:


> I hope those who need extra help will always get it but please remember this generation of pensioners include some of the best off ever. I'm one of them, as are some of the generation up from me. Don't get me wrong, I'll love it if it continues but I won't starve if it doesn't and there are plenty like me. There are also plenty who really need it and I'd be very happy to see it means tested.


I certainly don't need the winter fuel payment and because it is automatic I give mine to a local charity that helps the elderly so maybe this should be means tested.


----------



## davidc

I don't know if Tories will cut the pensions (although I think they probably will), but I do know they have already cut pensions by thousands of pounds per new woman pensioner due to raising the age of women pensioners. Seems a sneaky way to cut them if you ask me.
Though what can we expect with the Tories who commit election fraud.
I'm not 100% certain on Jeremy Corbyn but will be giving him a chance. However, the media is like one big advert for Tories and is often unfair to him (for example he got slated for not going to some meeting while he was actually too busy helping people to name one of loads)but I am 100% certain I will not be voting for Theresa May's party.


----------



## Happy Paws2

havoc said:


> I hope those who need extra help will always get it *but please remember this generation of pensioners include some of the best off ever.* * I'm one of them, *as are some of the generation up from me. Don't get me wrong, I'll love it if it continues but I won't starve if it doesn't and there are plenty like me. There are also plenty who really need it and I'd be very happy to see it means tested.
> 
> eta: There's a HUGE difference between a* free bus pass *and a decent income. I don't have a single friend who has bothered to get a bus pass, I do know of one neighbour who has one but she's never driven and is (theoretically) reliant on public transport since her husband died. There are at least three of us living in the same street who take her wherever she wants to go at the drop of a hat.


Well I wish we were among them, we just about manage but have had to give up alot of the things we like as we can't afford it and OH small pension which has just over the amout to get any help, and as for the "buss pass" it's a life line to us, as we have had to give the car up, as we couldn't afford the to keep anymore.


----------



## Guest

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I don't think we should have free school meals for all children only for those in real need. Can't understand Labour policy to give free dinners to all children - why waste the money providing dinners to children who's parents are well able to afford them when that money could be better spent elsewhere? I do however think there should be free dinners for the poorer families. However again I think everyone but particularly parents need educating about how to provide dinners on a tight budget. I know the Trussell Trust are trying to do that in some areas.


We have had free school dinners for us all always, (well, since the 1920s) and the reason why we all want to keep them is simply that kids, who eat a healthy meal during the day, learn better and are healthier. And all parents want that for their kids, no matter how rich or poor they are. Naturally it benefits especially those, whose parents don´t provide good meals, but in real life at least here most teenagers would have just junk food for their dinners, if they had their way. It is also amazing with how little school cooks can provide a good meal for the kids. I´d never be able to do it.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> The policy, as with the free off peak bus passes for pensioners was devised by Labour and have so far been retained by the current Tory administration.
> 
> The question is, will the next Tory government maintain these? Can we expect to see pensioners not able to afford to heat their homes be told to wrap up warm and wear wooly hats again?


To be fair a lot of pensions don't use the allowance to pay for heating anyway. My Mum and most of her friends still won't turn it on much because of fear of big bills, even when I say I'll pay it she won't, she says years of scrimping and saving pennies is a hard habit to break. Our local council run a scheme for pensioners who don't need it to donate theirs to a fund for grants to other pensioners who need extra help.



MrsZee said:


> We have had free school dinners for us all always, (well, since the 1920s) and the reason why we all want to keep them is simply that kids, who eat a healthy meal during the day, learn better and are healthier. And all parents want that for their kids, no matter how rich or poor they are. Naturally it benefits especially those, whose parents don´t provide good meals, but in real life at least here most teenagers would have just junk food for their dinners, if they had their way. It is also amazing with how little school cooks can provide a good meal for the kids. I´d never be able to do it.


Unfortunately very few schools here still have proper canteens and cooks. I really don't see it as the responsibility of tax payers to provide food for children who have parents who are well able to pay for it themselves. Quite happy to pay for those who can't afford it but not all.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> We have had free school dinners for us all always, (well, since the 1920s) and the reason why we all want to keep them is simply that kids, who eat a healthy meal during the day, learn better and are healthier. And all parents want that for their kids, no matter how rich or poor they are. Naturally it benefits especially those, whose parents don´t provide good meals, but in real life at least here most teenagers would have just junk food for their dinners, if they had their way. It is also amazing with how little school cooks can provide a good meal for the kids. I´d never be able to do it.


Jesus, sorry, blasphemy. But did you get school dinners in the late 70's and 80's. Chips and cheese were the staple choice. And until my kids left school some ten years ago the options were far from healthy. Don't start your argument with UK school dinners are healthy, because I know different.

Granted they may have changed school lunches to the latest Jamie Oliver fad (actually didn't he fail at that,?) over the past few years, but with ever changing "expert" advice isn't it just better to go with what parents know their kids enjoy and thrive on?

Yes, there will always be bad parents, but they are the tabloid headline making vast minority.


----------



## cheekyscrip

How parents who are at work can provide hot meal at lunch?
I just cannot understand?
Most kids will something for dinner or tea..but about 6pm?
They need decent meal at 1pm!
One good meal a day is not ok.
We know how breakfast is when everyone is trying to get ready...

Yes, children eat badly, worse than in much poorer countries and raising healthy children will definitely provide relief for NHS later on...
Why UK has eruption of obesity among children?
Do you think letters from.nurses are enough?
It is in our very best interest and interest of our country to rise generation of healthy and well educated citizens, especially if we do not want to rely on immigrants.
This is what I call patriotism, not slogans and flag waving.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

cheekyscrip said:


> How parents who are at work can provide hot meal at lunch?
> I just cannot understand?
> Most kids will something for dinner or tea..but about 6pm?
> They need decent meal at 1pm!
> One good meal a day is not ok.
> We know how breakfast is when everyone is trying to get ready...
> 
> Yes, children eat badly, worse than in much poorer countries and raising healthy children will definitely provide relief for NHS later on...
> Why UK has eruption of obesity among children?
> Do you think letters from.nurses are enough?
> It is in our very best interest and interest of our country to rise generation of healthy and well educated citizens, especially if we do not want to rely on immigrants.
> This is what I call patriotism, not slogans and flag waving.


The parent doesn't have to provide the hot meal - they just have to pay for it. A packed cold lunch can be perfectly healthy too depending on what is in it.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> We agree, had to happen but I'll be more careful in future
> 
> Common practice in horse racing as well.


Wonders will never cease I don't think you're going to agree with the point I was trying to make though The firm my Son works for paid thousands to further his education so naturally they expect a return for their investment in him. I don't think this is comparable with medical students. The morale of Junior doctors is at an all time low. What incentive is there to work in our NHS? Forcing them to stay when they are so demoralised already will just put more off from bothering when we desperately need them. The reason so many are wanting out of the NHS is because of this governments treatment of them and our NHS.



rottiepointerhouse said:


> No of course about it Noush - you are generalising. Plenty of children who go to private schools are deprived - deprived of good parenting, of love and home comforts. They are handed over to strangers to bring them up in often austere settings. I wonder how many people you know who went to a private school? Many will tell you sad stories of young kids sobbing themselves to sleep at night because they want their mum, of kids left at school for the Christmas holidays because their parents are abroad or who only see their parents once a year. My BIL was boarded from the age of 8 and hated it, he ran away several times and eventually because his parents just kept sending him back he set fire to one of the buildings and got himself expelled. He spent his working life driving a lorry because that is what made him happy. Not all kids cope with the extreme pressure put on them to achieve, the deprivation of home comforts and the harsh discipline. My OH often tells me of his dorm master's wife doing the rounds at bedtime and catching him reading in bed aged about 10, she smacked him clean across the face and threw his book across the room. My point is that kids can be privileged or disadvantaged in many ways - it isn't all dependent on the bank balance of their parents or the school they go to. I went to one of the roughest comprehensive schools in my area but I still did OK for myself just like your kids have.


I cant think I know of anyone personally who went to private school but I've read George Monbiots account of his sad time at boarding school. TBH I would never have sent my children to private school, boarding or otherwise. My Auntie (my Dads sister) was a teacher all her adult life until she retired a few years ago. As is my cousin (her son), they don't believe in private schools. They believe in properly funded state schools where all children have the same opportunity.

Plenty of studies have been done on the subject of education and social background. Our country is one of the worst in the developed world for social mobility.

https://www.teachers.org.uk/edufacts/child-poverty

Poverty has a significant impact on the educational experience and attainment of many children growing up in the UK. The attainment gap between pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds and others reduced slightly in 2016, as it has in four of the last five years but the gap is only narrowing slowly and the position of disadvantaged pupils in 2016 is almost the same as in 2013. 6 Moreover, there is a stronger relationship between parental social background and children's test scores in England than in many other rich countries.7

The academic literature is very clear: differences in the social background of pupils are the primary factors causing inequality in educational outcomes. Studies looking at the influence that schools and other factors, such as family background, have on the educational attainment of children and young people have found that the majority of variation in attainment is attributable to the characteristics of school intakes rather than schools themselves.12 One statistical analysis found that only 20 per cent of variance in educational progress could be attributed to schools


----------



## Lurcherlad

rottiepointerhouse said:


> The parent doesn't have to provide the hot meal - they just have to pay for it. A packed cold lunch can be perfectly healthy too depending on what is in it.


Indeed.

Sending my son off to school with a cheap, quick, easy, nourishing and healthy breakfast in his stomach and a lunch box in his hand was really not that challenging. 

In fact, I'm still doing it now at 20 as he heads off to work!


----------



## noushka05

Nicola nails it. We should be very afraid.
_
The Tory vision should be ringing alarm bells loudly and clearly… Because make no mistake… the hard-liners have taken over the Tory Party. And now, those Tory hard-liners want to take over the country as well… It's no surprise that UKIP, right now, is losing support to the Tories. Because the Tories are now threatening to take the UK in a direction that, a few years ago, UKIP could only have dreamed about





_


----------



## noushka05

Hundreds of NHS staff sharing why they fear a tory victory -

*NHS Crisis: Medical Staff Share Fears Of Conservative 2017 General Election Victory*

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...305e4b0af6d7189aa3f?ncid=engmodushpmg00000004


----------



## noushka05

*Andrea Simpson‏@AndreaLSimpson * *23h23 hours ago*

I have a #publicduty to tell you that as a practice manager in the
NHS I have seen a massive deterioration in our NHS under Tories.

*Rebecca Dawber*‏@*rebecca_dawber* 18h18 hours ago

As an NHS doctor it is my #*publicduty* to inform you that Tory government underfunding
is collapsing the NHS.
Use your vote carefully

*Sara Caine*‏@*drscaine* 18h18 hours ago

As a GP, it is my #*publicduty* to tell anyone who will listen that the Tory govt is
destroying the NHS & esp primary care.
Don't let them.

*❄Julia Telfer❄*‏@*JuliaTelfer* Apr 25

As a nurse it is my #*publicduty* to inform you that your taxes are being used to fund profiteering contracts for private providers

*Jamie*‏@*JamPetal86* Apr 25

As a nurse working in A&E it's my #*publicduty* to inform you that our emergency services are at breaking point and the government don't care

1,613 retweets 1,280 likes

*Olivier Gaillemin*‏@*CoursOllyCours* 18h18 hours ago

As an acute medicine consultant I have a #*publicduty* to confirm that Tory policy on
NHS is harming vulnerable people. @*Jeremy_Hunt*

*
Sanjay Trivedi*‏@*strivedi17* 23h23 hours ago

As a GP, I have a #*publicduty* to inform you that the Tories will destroy
the #*NHS* beyond repair if re-elected publicduty

*Nicola Attoe‏@NicAtt *

As a doctor it is my duty to inform you that the current government
is dismantling our NHS. #publicduty

*
Sazzle13*‏@*SazzleC*

As a social worker, it's my #*publicduty* to inform U that Tories are putting yr grandparents at risk
with dangerously underfunded social care


----------



## noushka05

https://www.theguardian.com/society...due-to-staff-shortages?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
*

David Schneider*‏Verified account

"Only the Conservatives can provide the strong and stable government we'll need to finish off the NHS entirely"


----------



## noushka05

Fair dues to the Lib dems 

*Laura Kuenssberg*‏Verified [email protected]*bbclaurak*

Lib dems won't contest Brighton Pavillion ... more evidence of loose electoral pacts in play

Caroline Lucas's response to the news -

*Caroline Lucas*‏Verified [email protected]*Car*

A welcome move, for which much thanks.
Now leaders of Libdems and Labour must sit down with us for talks

,


----------



## noushka05

https://www.indy100.com/article/general-election-2017-tories-hashtag-publicduty-7703846


----------



## noushka05

Lurcherlad said:


> Indeed.
> 
> Sending my son off to school with a cheap, quick, easy, nourishing and healthy breakfast in his stomach and a lunch box in his hand was really not that challenging.
> 
> *In fact, I'm still doing it now at 20 as he heads off to work!*


Ditto!


----------



## noushka05

#PublicDuty
I've never seen anything like this. Just a taster of thee 1000's of health, social care, fire service and education workers telling you how badly their professions and your services have been affected by 7 years of crisis and chaos under the Tory Party's ideological, needless austerity.

Strong and stable? A clear and present danger more like

https://softwardiary.wordpress.com/2017/04/26/publicduty/

.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Wonders will never cease I don't think you're going to agree with the point I was trying to make though The firm my Son works for paid thousands to further his education so naturally they expect a return for their investment in him. I don't think this is comparable with medical students. The morale of Junior doctors is at an all time low. What incentive is there to work in our NHS? Forcing them to stay when they are so demoralised already will just put more off from bothering when we desperately need them. The reason so many are wanting out of the NHS is because of this governments treatment of them and our NHS.


But the joy of my suggestion is future doctors could get their loans and pay for their own education as they do now. Or they take the free option but can still leave the NHS whenever the like by paying back the loan. The sliding repayment scale would also give them more options. I really can't see any downsides compared to the current system.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> But the joy of my suggestion is future doctors could get their loans and pay for their own education as they do now. Or they take the free option but can still leave the NHS whenever the like by paying back the loan. The sliding repayment scale would also give them more options. I really can't see any downsides compared to the current system.


The only thing wrong with the current system is the tory governments deliberate destruction of our NHS.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## havoc

noushka05 said:


> The only thing wrong with the current system is the tory governments deliberate destruction of our NHS.


It isn't the *only* thing wrong with it Noush. You know I'm no fan of what the Tories have done but if we really want to fix it we need to be honest about everything that's wrong.


----------



## noushka05

havoc said:


> It isn't the *only* thing wrong with it Noush. You know I'm no fan of what the Tories have done but if we really want to fix it we need to be honest about everything that's wrong.


What I mean is whatever else could be improved in the NHS wont matter when the end game for the tories is the dismantling of it. They want to drive drs away so they can streamline the workforce and make it more attractive to private capital.


----------



## Satori

*As somebody who can think for themselves, I have a #publicduty to inform you that reading all these mind-numbingly banal loony-left tweets will cause your powers of reasoning to deteriorate even further.*


----------



## Odin_cat

Satori said:


> *As somebody who can think for themselves, I have a #publicduty to inform you that reading all these mind-numbingly banal loony-left tweets will cause your powers of reasoning to deteriorate even further.*


Mmm, nowadays it feels like anything left of Tory is 'loony left'!


----------



## havoc

Know thine enemy Satori


----------



## Satori

havoc said:


> Know thine enemy Satori


Lol. Why do you think I hang around here?


----------



## KittenKong

Satori said:


> *As somebody who can think for themselves, I have a #publicduty to inform you that reading all these mind-numbingly banal loony-left tweets will cause your powers of reasoning to deteriorate even further.*


Are people concerned about the future of the NHS really being labeled as "loony lefties"?

Incredible.......


----------



## Satori

KittenKong said:


> Are people concerned about the future of the NHS really being labeled as "loony lefties"?
> 
> Incredible.......


quod erat demonstrandum


----------



## havoc

Or maybe the hope
Forsan miseros meliora sequentur


----------



## Arnie83

havoc said:


> An ever increasing aged population in the main coupled with a birth rate which is _likely_ to fall post brexit and it being a guaranteed minimum percentage. It isn't targeted at those in need and like the winter fuel payment you can't give it back. This was money thrown at all pensioners as a bribe - and it worked.


I think you're right that it will be ditched by the next Tory government, though they'll replace it with something slightly worse and spin it like mad.

I think it would be sustainable if the will was there, though. It would need a change of priorities, though; increasing taxes or, as you imply, a continued healthy stream of young working migrants, neither of which are currently considered a good idea by (= for) the Tory party.

Sorry, no Latin. I only scraped a pass at 'O' Level!


----------



## Arnie83

.... though something tells me they won't go this far !

*UK should axe state pension for rich people, says OECD*

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/apr/27/uk-state-pension-rich-oecd


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> *As somebody who can think for themselves, I have a #publicduty to inform you that reading all these mind-numbingly banal loony-left tweets will cause your powers of reasoning to deteriorate even further.*


Anyone who chooses to ignore the warning of our most trusted loony lefties has no power of reasoning These loony lefties care for us when we are sick, save our lives, educate or children & defend our rights.

Who should I trust those lefties, or the rabid right with their silly vacuous slogans & most dangerous & deceitful government in history. Trumpton UK time.

"Strong Stable leadership":Hilarious


----------



## noushka05

*The Independent*‏Verified [email protected]*Independent* 16h16 hours ago

NHS staff are sharing their fear of a Conservative general election victory using the hashtag #*PublicDuty* http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ublic-duty-hashtag-twitter-tory-a7703986.html


----------



## noushka05

"Strong & stable leadership"

"A country that works for everyone"


----------



## havoc

It's Ok peeps - they've wheeled Boris out. At least there's a chance of some entertainment now


----------



## suewhite

havoc said:


> It's Ok peeps - they've wheeled Boris out. At least there's a chance of some entertainment now


He is a bit tied up at the moment.


----------



## havoc

Arnie83 said:


> .... though something tells me they won't go this far !
> 
> *UK should axe state pension for rich people, says OECD*


That would be more difficult. It's the equivalent of an insurer refusing to pay out on a claim because the insured could afford to sort it themselves.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> Wonders will never cease I don't think you're going to agree with the point I was trying to make though The firm my Son works for paid thousands to further his education so naturally they expect a return for their investment in him. I don't think this is comparable with medical students. The morale of Junior doctors is at an all time low. What incentive is there to work in our NHS? Forcing them to stay when they are so demoralised already will just put more off from bothering when we desperately need them. The reason so many are wanting out of the NHS is because of this governments treatment of them and our NHS.
> 
> I cant think I know of anyone personally who went to private school but I've read George Monbiots account of his sad time at boarding school. TBH I would never have sent my children to private school, boarding or otherwise. My Auntie (my Dads sister) was a teacher all her adult life until she retired a few years ago. As is my cousin (her son), they don't believe in private schools. They believe in properly funded state schools where all children have the same opportunity.
> 
> Plenty of studies have been done on the subject of education and social background. Our country is one of the worst in the developed world for social mobility.
> 
> https://www.teachers.org.uk/edufacts/child-poverty
> 
> Poverty has a significant impact on the educational experience and attainment of many children growing up in the UK. The attainment gap between pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds and others reduced slightly in 2016, as it has in four of the last five years but the gap is only narrowing slowly and the position of disadvantaged pupils in 2016 is almost the same as in 2013. 6 Moreover, there is a stronger relationship between parental social background and children's test scores in England than in many other rich countries.7
> 
> The academic literature is very clear: differences in the social background of pupils are the primary factors causing inequality in educational outcomes. Studies looking at the influence that schools and other factors, such as family background, have on the educational attainment of children and young people have found that the majority of variation in attainment is attributable to the characteristics of school intakes rather than schools themselves.12 One statistical analysis found that only 20 per cent of variance in educational progress could be attributed to schools


I believe in properly funded state schools too and the good ones achieve quite remarkable results. Bad ones are not always caused by lack of funding as can be seen when new head teachers are appointed, or vice versa. Its easy to blame schools for everything rather than get parents to take responsibility for feeding their children properly (and yes it can be done on a tight budget) and to interact with them - like read a book rather than stare at your phone or screen and ignore your child, talking is free. Education isn't just about what happens at school. When I was 15 after a few horrid years family wise I was thrown out of all the O'level classes at school and put in the bottom stream classes, my parents were told I would not achieve anything and I failed all of my mock exams because I quite simply had not put in any work. Between mocks and the actual exams I went back and taught myself what I needed to know to pass my exams and managed to get all of my O'levels whilst at a very large and rough comprehensive. Like I said before privilege comes in many forms not just the wages of parents.



Lurcherlad said:


> Indeed.
> 
> Sending my son off to school with a cheap, quick, easy, nourishing and healthy breakfast in his stomach and a lunch box in his hand was really not that challenging.
> 
> In fact, I'm still doing it now at 20 as he heads off to work!


Yep - I'm still doing it now for my OH and he is nearing retirement age :Hilarious:Hilarious Its just a bit more challenging now to do a vegan version.



Satori said:


> *As somebody who can think for themselves, I have a #publicduty to inform you that reading all these mind-numbingly banal loony-left tweets will cause your powers of reasoning to deteriorate even further.*


I couldn't agree more. They don't actually tell us anything. How many public service employees are there in this country who are busy getting on with their work and their lives and not tweeting catch phrases?


----------



## KittenKong

"Strong and stable" yet scared to say no to Trump???

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39730685


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> "Strong and stable" yet scared to say no to Trump???
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39730685
> View attachment 308484


Are you talking about Tony Blair and Bush again?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Latest YouGov Westminster voting intention figures*










The latest YouGov/Times voting intention figures sees a significant increase in voting intention for Labour who are up four points to 29%. The Conservatives meanwhile are on 45% (from 48% last week), giving the Tories a 16 point lead.










Elsewhere the Liberal Democrats are on 10% (from 12% last week), UKIP is on 7% (from 5%) and votes for other parties stand at 9% (from 10%).

Theresa May continues to be the favoured choice for best Prime Minister, although she has dropped six points since last week to 48%. Jeremy Corbyn is currently backed by 18% of voters, whilst 33% don't know.

Photo: PA

*See the full results here*


----------



## Rockingrobin

As I scrolled down for one moment I really thought that read Jeremy Clarkson.....:Muted


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Are you talking about Tony Blair and Bush again?


Partially yes and no. Shows they haven't learned from Iraq.

And without debating it in parliament?!

Makes you wonder what else they have planned without a parliamentary debate.....


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Partially yes and no. Shows they haven't learned from Iraq.
> 
> And without debating it in parliament?!
> 
> Makes you wonder what else they have planned without a parliamentary debate.....


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39730685

What he said

Mr Johnson claimed the Assad regime had "unleashed murder upon his own citizens with weapons that were banned almost 100 years ago".

And he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "I think it would be very difficult if the US has a proposal to have some sort of action in response to a chemical weapons attack.

"And if they come to us and ask for our support - whether it's with submarine-based cruise missiles in the Med... in my view - and I know it's also the view of the prime minister - it would be difficult for us to say 'no'."

Asked if the Commons would need to be consulted ahead of any military strike, Mr Johnson commented: "I think that needs to be tested."

Mr Corbyn, who was highly critical of the latest US missile strike against Syria, said if there was a US request for the UK to back military action "all parties would have to be consulted".

The Labour leader's stance puts him at odds with his deputy leader Tom Watson, who said earlier this month the US strikes appeared "to be a direct and proportionate response to a clear violation of international law by the Syrian regime".

This is a departure because until now overt UK military action in Syria has been focused on attacking the so-called Islamic State group.

MPs voted to allow this, after a debate in December 2015.

Since then, the Ministry of Defence says, UK warplanes operating out of Cyprus have carried out 90 air strikes against IS targets.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I believe in properly funded state schools too and the good ones achieve quite remarkable results. Bad ones are not always caused by lack of funding as can be seen when new head teachers are appointed, or vice versa. Its easy to blame schools for everything rather than get parents to take responsibility for feeding their children properly (and yes it can be done on a tight budget) and to interact with them - like read a book rather than stare at your phone or screen and ignore your child, talking is free. Education isn't just about what happens at school. When I was 15 after a few horrid years family wise I was thrown out of all the O'level classes at school and put in the bottom stream classes, my parents were told I would not achieve anything and I failed all of my mock exams because I quite simply had not put in any work. Between mocks and the actual exams I went back and taught myself what I needed to know to pass my exams and managed to get all of my O'levels whilst at a very large and rough comprehensive. Like I said before privilege comes in many forms not just the wages of parents.
> 
> Yep - I'm still doing it now for my OH and he is nearing retirement age :Hilarious:Hilarious Its just a bit more challenging now to do a vegan version.
> 
> I couldn't agree more. They don't actually tell us anything. How many public service employees are there in this country who are busy getting on with their work and their lives and not tweeting catch phrases?


The tories are destroying state education. My Cousins two children go to the same secondary school my children went to only the tories have turned it from a comprehensive school into an academy. Music scrapped, drama scrapped, languages scrapped. Schools hollowed out & tax payers money going into private pockets instead of paying for qualified teachers in these subjects.

They are not investing in our childrens future & they are failing poorer children most of all.










People are suffering & dying because of all the tory cuts - public services right across the board are now in crisis. The professionals warning us deserve our utmost respect & gratitude imo. If the tories do sweep back into power to finish off what they started at least these doctors & nurses, teachers & firemen will be able to sleep soundly knowing they did everything they could to get the message out.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## havoc

noushka05 said:


> The tories are destroying state education. My Cousins two children go to the same secondary school my children went to only the tories have turned it from a comprehensive school into an academy. Music scrapped, drama scrapped, languages scrapped. Schools hollowed out & tax payers money going into private pockets instead of paying for qualified teachers in these subjects.
> 
> They are not investing in our childrens future & they are failing poorer children most of all.


This is one I'm really torn on Noush. I benefited hugely from the *original* grammar school system when every area had one. I honestly believe back then it was responsible for the greatest shift in social mobility this country has ever known. It was the first time poor kids went to university. I should be in favour of May's wish to bring them back but I'm not. I think they'll miraculously appear in affluent areas and anyway wouldn't do the same good - you can't turn the clock back. Nowadays the entry requirements for university seem to be as low as a 25 metre swimming certificate.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Jesus, sorry, blasphemy. But did you get school dinners in the late 70's and 80's. Chips and cheese were the staple choice. And until my kids left school some ten years ago the options were far from healthy. _Don't start your argument with UK school dinners are healthy_, because I know different. Granted they may have changed school lunches to the latest Jamie Oliver fad (actually didn't he fail at that,?) over the past few years, but with ever changing "expert" advice isn't it just better to go with what parents know their kids enjoy and thrive on? Yes, there will always be bad parents, but they are the tabloid headline making vast minority.


I have no idea what is the quality of British school dinners, I`m sure you know what you ate. I just told the reasons we have free school dinners for all and those are the reasons, they are healthy and kids don´t have to go hungry, and that helps learning and keeps children healthier.

Why British school dinners have been or still are unhealthy I have no idea. I am sure British cooks are as good as ours, maybe it has something to do with traditions, expectations of what kids are supposed to eat etc. But like I said, I have no idea, I´m just guessing. You British know better. Pity, as all kids need nourishing meals, not junk food.

I had my school dinners around the 70´s and 80´s and they were always good. I didn´t like some dishes, but still they were good food. We never had chips, and cheese was an extra with some lighter meals. Usually we had boiled potatoes (with peels on them, so we had to peel them) with meat or fish, or soups. (again with meat or fish). For bread we had rye bread (ryvita type) and we drank milk. Now they have much more vegetarian dishes, many schools have "vegetarian" days even, which is brilliant, but still you won´t see chips or jellies etc. at school dinners. Menus rotate for six weeks.

In France they apparently have three course meals...but that is another story. In my dreams that should be our goal too, but I can´t see that happening for the next 30 years at least, if ever.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> I have no idea what is the quality of British school dinners, I`m sure you know what you ate. I just told the reasons we have free school dinners for all and those are the reasons, they are healthy and kids don´t have to go hungry, and that helps learning and keeps children healthier.
> 
> Why British school dinners have been or still are unhealthy I have no idea. I am sure British cooks are as good as ours, maybe it has something to do with traditions, expectations of what kids are supposed to eat etc. But like I said, I have no idea, I´m just guessing. You British know better. Pity, as all kids need nourishing meals, not junk food.
> 
> I had my school dinners around the 70´s and 80´s and they were always good. I didn´t like some dishes, but still they were good food. We never had chips, and cheese was an extra with some lighter meals. Usually we had boiled potatoes (with peels on them, so we had to peel them) with meat or fish, or soups. (again with meat or fish). For bread we had rye bread (ryvita type) and we drank milk. Now they have much more vegetarian dishes, many schools have "vegetarian" days even, which is brilliant, but still you won´t see chips or jellies etc. at school dinners. Menus rotate for six weeks.
> 
> In France they apparently have three course meals...but that is another story. In my dreams that should be our goal too, but I can´t see that happening for the next 30 years at least, if ever.


Sorry, thought you were commenting on British school dinners. Not an unreasonable assumption on a UK election thread though.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> The tories are destroying state education. My Cousins two children go to the same secondary school my children went to only the tories have turned it from a comprehensive school into an academy. Music scrapped, drama scrapped, languages scrapped. Schools hollowed out & tax payers money going into private pockets instead of paying for qualified teachers in these subjects.
> 
> They are not investing in our childrens future & they are failing poorer children most of all.
> 
> View attachment 308507
> 
> 
> People are suffering & dying because of all the tory cuts - public services right across the board are now in crisis. The professionals warning us deserve our utmost respect & gratitude imo. If the tories do sweep back into power to finish off what they started at least these doctors & nurses, teachers & firemen will be able to sleep soundly knowing they did everything they could to get the message out.


Of course they are - by the end of June this year there will be no state funded education and children will be sent up chimneys or out to pick potatoes in the fields. The NHS will have closed its doors and people will be dying in the street, the fire service will be disbanded and all our houses will burn down. As for the Tories turning schools into academies that was a policy introduced by Labour under Tony Blair.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> O As for the Tories turning schools into academies that was a policy introduced by Labour under Tony Blair.


I thought John Major's government introduced academies but you're right in saying Blair continued the policy when he became PM.


----------



## Colliebarmy

KittenKong said:


> I thought John Major's government introduced academies but you're right in saying Blair continued the policy when he became PM.


same with Private Hospital building thats crippling the NHS

http://www.nhsforsale.info/privatisation-list/surgery/the-great-pfi-swindle.html


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> I thought John Major's government introduced academies but you're right in saying Blair continued the policy when he became PM.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10161371

article from 2010

Academies are publicly funded schools which operate outside of local authority control. The government describes them as independent state-funded schools. Essentially, academies have more freedom than other state schools over their finances, the curriculum, and teachers' pay and conditions.

A key difference is that they are funded directly by central government, instead of receiving their funds via a local authority. In addition, they receive money which would previously have been held back by the local authority to provide extra services across all schools, such as help for children with special educational needs. This is estimated to range from 4 to 10% of the funds allocated to the school.

Academies do not have to follow the national curriculum. They can choose their own curriculum, as long as it is "broad and balanced".

*Don't academies exist already?*
Yes, there are more than 200 of them in England at the moment, all secondary schools. They were established by the* Labour government,* seen as a way of turning around the worst-performing schools and schools in disadvantaged areas.


----------



## KittenKong

Colliebarmy said:


> same with Private Hospital building thats crippling the NHS
> 
> http://www.nhsforsale.info/privatisation-list/surgery/the-great-pfi-swindle.html


Not a good policy agreed but this government have had 7 years so blaming Labour for the NHS' woes won't wash with many nowadays.

Certainly the NHS was in much better shape in 2010 then it is now.



rottiepointerhouse said:


> *Don't academies exist already?*
> Yes, there are more than 200 of them in England at the moment, all secondary schools. They were established by the* Labour government,* seen as a way of turning around the worst-performing schools and schools in disadvantaged areas.


I stand corrected. Since 2010 the Tories have extended academies.


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> *If* the tories do sweep back into power to finish off what they started


Surely you mean 'when'?


----------



## CRL

havoc said:


> This is one I'm really torn on Noush. I benefited hugely from the *original* grammar school system when every area had one. I honestly believe back then it was responsible for the greatest shift in social mobility this country has ever known. It was the first time poor kids went to university. I should be in favour of May's wish to bring them back but I'm not. I think they'll miraculously appear in affluent areas and anyway wouldn't do the same good - you can't turn the clock back. *Nowadays the entry requirements for university seem to be as low as a 25 metre swimming certificate*.


i do believe thats in relation to the idiots admitted into many colleges across the nation.
Take my level 3 diploma class for example. the youngest in the class is 17, the ages then range up to 21, with a 25 year old and me at 28. only 4 of us have a attendance over 95 percent, only 4 of us have 1 or zero alerts for bad behaviour, overdue assignments etc, the same 4 people also have no overdue assignments and are targeted to get distinctions across all units. these same people all got distinctions last year. the other 14 in the group have an average attendance of 55 percent, have an total of around 200 plus alerts between them and have an average of 5 assignments overdue, and will receive a pass, if that. 
These people chose to complete this course, and 1 of them is even paying 7.5 grand to do it. there excuse for bad behaviour is that a 19 year old is not expected to sit still and listen for 2 hours through a lecture. and these are the people who will then go on to uni. 
or not true in my classes case as only i have applied and been accepted with my distinctions. the rest will be jobless at the end of term as they havent applied for any animal related jobs or internships. what a waste of 2 years.


----------



## noushka05

havoc said:


> This is one I'm really torn on Noush. I benefited hugely from the *original* grammar school system when every area had one. I honestly believe back then it was responsible for the greatest shift in social mobility this country has ever known. It was the first time poor kids went to university. I should be in favour of May's wish to bring them back but I'm not. I think they'll miraculously appear in affluent areas and anyway wouldn't do the same good - you can't turn the clock back. Nowadays the entry requirements for university seem to be as low as a 25 metre swimming certificate.


I hear what you're saying. My Dads Sister is 73 she went to a grammar school & she was the first of my closer family to go to uni (some of their cousins did). But all evidence shows that a good comprehensive education is the best for social mobility now. I think of my two children; one exceptionally bright the other average. Would my youngest have been written off at 11 if he'd failed his 11 plus? He did very well with a good comprehensive education & got decent A level grades. And he did need more than a 25 metre swimming certificate to get on the course he wanted at uni:Hilarious He studied Digital Media. My eldest Macroeconomics.

Check out FullFacts on the subject Havoc - https://fullfact.org/education/grammar-schools-and-social-mobility-whats-evidence/



rottiepointerhouse said:


> Of course they are - by the end of June this year there will be no state funded education and children will be sent up chimneys or out to pick potatoes in the fields. The NHS will have closed its doors and people will be dying in the street, the fire service will be disbanded and all our houses will burn down. As for the Tories turning schools into academies that was a policy introduced by Labour under Tony Blair.


 Who said 'by the end of June this year'?? Your playing the gravity of what the tories are doing down again. Everything is in terrible crisis & is set to get much worse if they sweep back to power - fact.

How many people do you think have died already because of the cuts & privatisation? When STPs are pushed through, our health care will be like Americas. People _will_ be 'dying in the streets' because millions wont be able to afford to pay for their health care. Even people with gold plated health insurance can go bankrupt over there.

How many more?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ne-london-school-hygiene-martin-a7585001.html










Blair government did introduce academies. And the tories took them and ran with them as a way to privatise education.

How do you feel about our taxes going into private pockets instead of educating children?

This excellent.
*
The Great Academy Rip Off*

http://www.counterfire.org/articles/analysis/18818-the-great-academy-rip-off

My son is a pupil at Green Spring Academy Shoreditch. Last week the Chief Executive Officer and other senior leaders were suspended after allegations of cheating in GCSEs. I looked up academy schools online and was horrified by the sheer scale of the transfer of funds from children to corporations and individuals. Labour established the academy system but it really got going after 2010. We were promised private sponsorship, rising standards, freedom to flourish. The reality is very different. The government wants all schools to become academies. This is a truly terrifying prospect. Academies are a mechanism for syphoning off millions of pounds of public money into private bank accounts with little or no scrutiny, no investment and no risk - except to the children.


----------



## KittenKong

No mention yet of the Tories attempt at putting the running of a NHS hospital out to private tender.

It failed with the contractor pulling out. No profit to be made while an admission to hospital remains free at the point of need.

No doubt that will change once private insurance becomes a reality.


----------



## havoc

KittenKong said:


> No mention yet of the Tories attempt at putting the running of a NHS hospital out to private tender.


I have personal experience of that - truly horrendous.


----------



## noushka05

Colliebarmy said:


> same with Private Hospital building thats crippling the NHS
> 
> http://www.nhsforsale.info/privatisation-list/surgery/the-great-pfi-swindle.html












If you're angry about PFIs, you must be furious about this @Colliebarmy ??? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/h...ry-gp-infrastructure-jim-mackey-a7675751.html


----------



## noushka05

havoc said:


> I have personal experience of that - truly horrendous.


I'm so sorry to hear that. The worry of illness is bad enough even when you're getting the best care.


----------



## Arnie83

noushka05 said:


> Would my youngest have been written off at 11 if he'd failed his 11 plus?


My brother failed his 11-plus. He is now a PhD, and a university lecturer & researcher.

In my opinion a huge problem with dividing children of that age into such significantly different routes as 'comprehensive' and 'grammar' is that the former cannot avoid the conclusion that they are considered second rate. As you suggest; the implication is that they have been officially written off. My brother's case proves that the system was flawed, and we have to understand that before reinstating it.

Of the children who did not progress as my brother did, how much of that was down to an innate lack of ability, and how much was down to the mindset created by being directed down the fork in life's road marked "Also-rans"?


----------



## havoc

Arnie83 said:


> Of the children who did not progress as my brother did, how much of that was down to an innate lack of ability, and how much was down to the mindset created by being directed down the fork in life's road marked "Also-rans"?


There's a difference between an innate lack of ability and an innate lack of academic ability. Where the grammar school system failed was not the grammar schools, it was the failure to carry out the second part of the plan which was to have superb 'modern' schools for those with less academic talents. Nowadays we value those skills far more but we're still not pushing them as something to aim for because we're a class obsessed society and parents would prefer their child to be a lawyer rather than a plumber even though earnings can be similar.


----------



## Colliebarmy

I think the NHS is marvelous and well run, some people will moan and gripe about nothing.


----------



## Colliebarmy

havoc said:


> There's a difference between an innate lack of ability and an innate lack of academic ability. Where the grammar school system failed was not the grammar schools, it was the failure to carry out the second part of the plan which was to have superb 'modern' schools for those with less academic talents. Nowadays we value those skills far more but we're still not pushing them as something to aim for because we're a class obsessed society and parents would prefer their child to be a lawyer rather than a plumber even though earnings can be similar.


The UK has shipped manufacturing jobs (and skills) overseas, in some cases HMG should have stopped Germany, China and India buying our core businesses with the sole intention of harvesting order books and the land the factories stood on, the way to stop that is a 100% import tax not applicable to goods made here even when the parent company isntUK based...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...affic-jam-arrives-UK-maiden-voyage-China.html


----------



## Dr Pepper

Colliebarmy said:


> I think the NHS is marvelous and well run, some people will moan and gripe about nothing.


I have to agree. I think I said this before but if you need them, really need them the services and care is second to none. If you go to A&E with a splinter in your thumb it's only right you wait three and half weeks to be seen.

Many people's expectations are unrealistic these days, and that's not limited to the NHS but life in general.


----------



## noushka05

Colliebarmy said:


> I think the NHS is marvelous and well run, some people will moan and gripe about nothing.


Our NHS is marvellous. And that's why all those NHS Doctors & Nurses who LOVE our NHS are griping & moaning to warn people like you that the tories are destroying it.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Gosh that photo brings back memories of the good old days - Nightingale wards where Sister could see everything that was going on, nurses wearing proper uniforms not scrubs with stripes on their hats so you knew who the students were and how many years of training they had done. 

Still getting excellent service for my Mum from the NHS, I mentioned earlier in the week that she was poorly, pressed her lifeline and had paramedics there in 10 mins who spent over an hour with her. She didn't improve and ended up pressing lifeline again a couple of days later and this time the paramedics took her in to A & E where she was dealt with promptly, admitted to the assessment bay to wait for a bed on the wards, in the ward a few hours later and hopefully will be going home today having been assessed by physio for safety on stairs etc and with a district nurse to visit her at home.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 308585
> View attachment 308586
> View attachment 308587
> View attachment 308588


Is that a bit like Ed Milliband's election stone?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...placed-at-downing-st-if-he-wins-10221946.html









Labour leader Ed Miliband unveils Labour's pledges carved into a stone plinth in Hastings PA

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/03/ed-milibands-carved-pledges-could-sink-like-a-stone

In several thousand years' time, an archaeologist will uncover a 2.6 metre piece of stone that had been lying buried for hundreds of years. Scholars will spend just as long thereafter trying to interpret its meaning. Was it the centre of a hitherto unknown civilisation based around the sun god Ed? Will future transport ministers pledge billions of pounds of public money to build an underpass to protect this national monument?

Of all the stunts, in all the towns … In one of the tightest elections in 50 years, which looks set to be won by the party leader the public mistrusts the least, Ed Miliband has just raised the stupidity bar still higher. It makes Neil Kinnock's 1992 "We're all right" Sheffield rally moment look almost clever.

What possessed Miliband to imagine that carving a series of election pledges into an enormous slab of limestone that would be placed in the Downing Street garden were he to become prime minister on 8 May was a good idea? *There isn't a single sentient being with connecting synapses anywhere in any planet in any universe who could think that was a good idea*.


----------



## Goblin

Colliebarmy said:


> The UK has shipped manufacturing jobs (and skills) overseas, in some cases HMG should have stopped Germany, China and India buying our core businesses with the sole intention of harvesting order books and the land the factories stood on, the way to stop that is a 100% import tax not applicable to goods made here even when the parent company isntUK based...


So you want to start a trade war whilst not following little things like WTO rules. It's interesting that many more companies such as car manufacturers are looking at moving additional jobs overseas into the EU. Why.. UK always positioned themselves as the gateway to the EU. That may no longer be the case and May is pushing for it not to be.



rottiepointerhouse said:


> Is that a bit like Ed Milliband's election stone?


At least they couldn't pretend the election promises didn't exist. May's promises are on an etch a sketch.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Looks like JC was persuaded to drop this slogan

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ries-real-extremists-slogan-amid-fears-could/

22 APRIL 2017 • 10:06AM

Labour abandoned the slogan "The Tories are the real extremists" amid fears it would highlight Jeremy Corbyn's links to groups like Hamas and the IRA, sources have told _The Telegraph_.

The phrase was discussed at a meeting of the party's National Executive Committee as a way to counter Tory attacks against the party leader during the campaign.

But fears were raised that it would prompt questions about Mr Corbyn's views on terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, which he has previously declared "friends".

Earlier this week the party put out a document which sought to reassure voters that Mr Corbyn is not a "terrorist sympathiser".


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Goblin said:


> So you want to start a trade war whilst not following little things like WTO rules. It's interesting that many more companies such as car manufacturers are looking at moving additional jobs overseas into the EU. Why.. UK always positioned themselves as the gateway to the EU. That may no longer be the case and May is pushing for it not to be.
> 
> At least they couldn't pretend the election promises didn't exist. May's promises are on an etch a sketch.


The public thought so too. Not.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Gosh that photo brings back memories of the good old days - Nightingale wards where Sister could see everything that was going on, nurses wearing proper uniforms not scrubs with stripes on their hats so you knew who the students were and how many years of training they had done.
> 
> Still getting excellent service for my Mum from the NHS, I mentioned earlier in the week that she was poorly, pressed her lifeline and had paramedics there in 10 mins who spent over an hour with her. She didn't improve and ended up pressing lifeline again a couple of days later and this time the paramedics took her in to A & E where she was dealt with promptly, admitted to the assessment bay to wait for a bed on the wards, in the ward a few hours later and hopefully will be going home today having been assessed by physio for safety on stairs etc and with a district nurse to visit her at home.


What about all those who aren't so fortunate as your Mum? All the thousands suffering & dying because of the tories underfunding & privatisation of our health service, don't they matter? Will you only be bothered when it directly affects your loved ones? I'm really glad your Mum is still getting first class care RPH, but this is a controlled demolition, eventually it will affect everyone. Please wake up before its gone forever.



rottiepointerhouse said:


> Looks like JC was persuaded to drop this slogan
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ries-real-extremists-slogan-amid-fears-could/
> 
> 22 APRIL 2017 • 10:06AM
> 
> Labour abandoned the slogan "The Tories are the real extremists" amid fears it would highlight Jeremy Corbyn's links to groups like Hamas and the IRA, sources have told _The Telegraph_.
> 
> The phrase was discussed at a meeting of the party's National Executive Committee as a way to counter Tory attacks against the party leader during the campaign.
> 
> But fears were raised that it would prompt questions about Mr Corbyn's views on terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, which he has previously declared "friends".
> 
> Earlier this week the party put out a document which sought to reassure voters that Mr Corbyn is not a "terrorist sympathiser".


Corbyn is right, this hard right government are real extremists. The election, the tories 'great repeal bill' are quite clearly power grabs. When they have even more seats how long do you think it will be before they repeal the hunting ban RPH? How long before protection is removed from our raptors? God help our wildlife. God help elephants & other endangered species.

May is an arms dealing warmonger. Shes the danger not Corbyn.

Tory Peter Oborne


----------



## noushka05

Could not agree more -

It's everyone's #*publicduty* to call out the @*Conservatives* for systematically destroying our NHS and education services. #*GE2017*

.


----------



## Satori

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Looks like JC was persuaded to drop this slogan
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ries-real-extremists-slogan-amid-fears-could/
> 
> 22 APRIL 2017 • 10:06AM
> 
> Labour abandoned the slogan "The Tories are the real extremists" amid fears it would highlight Jeremy Corbyn's links to groups like Hamas and the IRA, sources have told _The Telegraph_.
> 
> The phrase was discussed at a meeting of the party's National Executive Committee as a way to counter Tory attacks against the party leader during the campaign.
> 
> But fears were raised that it would prompt questions about Mr Corbyn's views on terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, which he has previously declared "friends".
> 
> Earlier this week the party put out a document which sought to reassure voters that Mr Corbyn is not a "terrorist sympathiser".


Hilarious. I thought the website was a spoof but apparently not. They have closed it down though. This is the only content now....










Desperate stuff. I can't wait to see the campaign posters now... "Vote Corbyn! Because he isn't really that much of a terrorist sympathiser any more.... honestly. No really."

All May has to do is stand back and watch this bunch of clowns self-destruct.


----------



## noushka05

*DOCTOR EVIL*‏@*NeathMedic* 2h2 hours ago

As a Paramedic, it is my #*publicduty* to inform
you that the tories are demolishing our NHS
. #*TimeForChange*

*Kitkat*‏@*katc1984* 3h3 hours ago

As a nurse & patient it is my #*publicduty* to inform you that the tories
have underfunded mental health services that the vulnerable suffer!

*Chown*‏@*marcuschown* 7h7 hours ago

As an NHS user it is my #*publicduty* to point out the Tories have actually said their intention is to remove our NHS http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...n-nhs-will-not-exist-under-tories-731278.html


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> What about all those who aren't so fortunate as your Mum? All the thousands suffering & dying because of the tories underfunding & privatisation of our health service, don't they matter? Will you only be bothered when it directly affects your loved ones?
> 
> Corbyn is right, this hard right government are real extremists. The election, the tories 'great repeal bill' are quite clearly power grabs. When they have even more seats how long do you think it will be before they repeal the hunting ban RPH? How long before protection is removed from our raptors? God help our wildlife. God help elephants & other endangered species.
> 
> May is an arms dealing warmonger. Shes the danger not Corbyn.
> 
> Tory Peter Oborne
> 
> View attachment 308613
> 
> View attachment 308612


Seriously Noush get over yourself. Do you think I spent years working in the NHS and social services because I only care about my own loved ones? Remind me of when you last put in a shift on a NHS ward, when you last went home with vomit in your shoes and piss down your dress and got scratched and bitten and verbally abused. Remind me of when you last worked 7 12 hour night shifts on the trot as the only trained nurse for 30 patients. Remind me of how many A & E departments you have actually worked in, how many people you have comforted when their relative has died or when you last had to cross a picket line to deliver food to vulnerable clients because the unions had called a strike but couldn't given a flying fig who they left without food. You have so much talk but not much experience to back it up.

You can go back on ignore now before I say something that will get me banned


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Seriously Noush get over yourself. Do you think I spent years working in the NHS and social services because I only care about my own loved ones? Remind me of when you last put in a shift on a NHS ward, when you last went home with vomit in your shoes and piss down your dress and got scratched and bitten and verbally abused. Remind me of when you last worked 7 12 hour night shifts on the trot as the only trained nurse for 30 patients. Remind me of how many A & E departments you have actually worked in, how many people you have comforted when their relative has died or when you last had to cross a picket line to deliver food to vulnerable clients because the unions had called a strike but couldn't given a flying fig who they left without food. You have so much talk but not much experience to back it up.
> 
> You can go back on ignore now before I say something that will get me banned


Sorry if I've offended you, but you seem to be in denial about the state our NHS. This is the end game now RPH. whatever you choose to believe.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> when you last went home with vomit in your shoes and piss down your dress and got scratched and bitten and verbally abused.


Sorry, I agree with your post 100% so don't want to make light if it.

But that does sound like your average teenagers good night out!


----------



## noushka05

Our taxes are being used to pay people to destroy our NHS.


----------



## Goblin

Isn't it a shame that May and Co. are not able to actually push their own policies and record as part of their campaign having to rely on trying to belittle the opposition and come up with meaningless phrases they simply repeat again and again instead. Why is that? What is the current government's acutal record when it comes to everyday people? Why should we vote them in again? Maybe those so keen to support them can provide positive reasoning.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> What is the current government's acutal record when it comes to everyday people? Why should we vote them in again? Maybe those so keen to support them can provide positive reasoning.


Well they've only actually had two years in office as a one party government and most of that has unfortunately been taken up with Brexit. They've not had the chance to get on with anything yet, if (and yes it's Mrs May's fault) they had served the remaining three years we would have a clearer picture.


----------



## rona

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/sites/files/kf/field/field_publication_file/independent-audit-nhs-under-labour-1997-2005-sunday-times-march-2005.pdf
In 2003/04, the NHS cost £63.7 billion pounds.

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/nhs-in-a-nutshell/nhs-budget
The budget for the NHS in England for 2016/17 is £120 billion.

Anyone can see that this isn't sustainable. The Tories are really starving the NHS of money eh..............


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Well they've only actually had two years in office as a one party government and most of that has unfortunately been taken up with Brexit. They've not had the chance to get on with anything yet, if (and yes it's Mrs May's fault) they had served the remaining three years we would have a clearer picture.


Have you not checked their voting histories out yet?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Goblin said:


> Isn't it a shame that May and Co. are not able to actually push their own policies and record as part of their campaign having to rely on trying to belittle the opposition and come up with meaningless phrases they simply repeat again and again instead. Why is that? What is the current government's acutal record when it comes to everyday people? Why should we vote them in again? Maybe those so keen to support them can provide positive reasoning.


So you don't think the dropped slogan about the Tories being the "real extremists" is a meaningless phrase designed to belittle the opposition? Everyone who is eligible to vote can vote for whoever they like. There is no "should" about it. Free choice on the day and all that.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/sites/files/kf/field/field_publication_file/independent-audit-nhs-under-labour-1997-2005-sunday-times-march-2005.pdf
> In 2003/04, the NHS cost £63.7 billion pounds.
> 
> https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/nhs-in-a-nutshell/nhs-budget
> The budget for the NHS in England for 2016/17 is £120 billion.
> 
> Anyone can see that this isn't sustainable. The Tories are really starving the NHS of money eh..............


Off one of your links - (oh & lets not forget the *£22 BILLION* unsustainable 'efficiency savings' the government are forcing the nhs to make on top of the *£20 BILLION *its already been forced in to making)

Source: Department of Health annual report and accounts 2015-16. Real terms figures are in 2016/17 prices and adjust cash spending for inflation as measured by the HMT GDP deflators at market prices, and money GDP September 2016 .

The budget for the NHS in England for 2016/17 is £120 billion.

In the 2015 spending review the government announced that funding for the Department of Health would increase to £133 billion by 2020/21, a real increase of approximately £4.5bn once inflation is taken into account.*

Though NHS funding is growing, it is slowing considerably compared to historical trends. The Department of Health budget will grow by only 1.2% in real terms between 2009/10 and 2020/21. This is far below the long-term average annual increases in health spending since 1949/50 of 3.7% (in real terms).

Looking forward, between 2017/18 and 2019/20 the Department of Health budget will increase by less than 0.5% each year in real terms. This will place increasing pressure on the NHS, as demands for services are still projected to increase.

---

*This is significantly less than the funding the government claims it has given to the NHS over this period, mainly because ministers have chosen to highlight the funding provided to NHS England only rather than the Department of Health's total budget.


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> Anyone can see that this isn't sustainable. The Tories are really starving the NHS of money eh..............


Any money put in to the NHS will be to make it attractive for private buyers.

Remember the ads the government had for Gas, Electricity and Water when they were privatised?
Well I think we know where this government's priorties lie; More weapons of mass destruction, tax cuts for millionaires and the costs of Brexit.

And you think the government have no money???


----------



## noushka05

Repeat after Theresa;

*Strong* *and* *stable*"
"*Strong* *and* *stable*"
"*Strong* *and* *stable*"
"*Strong* *and* *stable*"
"*Strong* *and* *stable









*


----------



## noushka05

"How did this happen Dad?"

"They just kept saying *Strong* *and* *Stable* *Strong* *and* *Stable".








*


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> money put in to the NHS will be to make it attractive for private buyers.


There you go, damned if they do, damned if they don't.


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Do you think I spent years working in the NHS and social services because I only care about my own loved ones? Remind me of when you last put in a shift on a NHS ward, when you last went home with vomit in your shoes and piss down your dress and got scratched and bitten and verbally abused. Remind me of when you last worked 7 12 hour night shifts on the trot as the only trained nurse for 30 patients.


Why do you think people are not on your side? They are. Some of us may see a different solution but at no point is anyone attacking frontline staff.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> Why do you think people are not on your side? They are. Some of us may see a different solution but at no point is anyone attacking frontline staff.


 I didn't say they were and I didn't say people weren't on my side. I objected to one posters suggestion that I only care about what happens to my own loved ones.


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So you don't think the dropped slogan about the Tories being the "real extremists" is a meaningless phrase designed to belittle the opposition?


Haven't seen that one during the campaign. Heard it was suggested but rejected for the campaign.



> Everyone who is eligible to vote can vote for whoever they like. There is no "should" about it. Free choice on the day and all that.


So once again, unable to provide positive details based on what they have done. Sounds familiar and about what I expected. May cannot either apparantly. Oh look at UK growth figures out today, guess she cannot brag about those can she.


----------



## Happy Paws2

I think TM thnks, if she lies for longer enough we'll all believe her.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Have you not checked their voting histories out yet?


I prefer to wait for actual results and outcomes rather than what, if's and maybe's. Who knows, you don't and I don't, they may well be right on their "reported" plans for the NHS. Ask Goblin for his/her crystal ball. Oh and before that maybe look at some Facebook pages and Twitter threads that support the NHS.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Well they've only actually had two years in office as a one party government and most of that has unfortunately been taken up with Brexit. They've not had the chance to get on with anything yet, if (and yes it's Mrs May's fault) they had served the remaining three years we would have a clearer picture.


Plenty of time in reality to show the direction of the government. Even plenty of time for May since the referendum. Brexit does not stop other things happening at the same time. If it does, it shows how inept the party leadership is.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Ask Goblin for his/her crystal ball.


What crystal ball? I'm asking for positives on what she and the conservatives have done, past tense. How has she shown her "strong and stable leadership"? How has she pushed for a party that works for all? How has she shown herself capable of uniting the divisions in the country?


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I objected to one posters suggestion that I only care about what happens to my own loved ones.


In all honesty your experience is very different from mine in that respect. That doesn't mean I blame those who had a backlog -from the ambulance crew who we waited over four hours for whilst keeping a highly qualified paramedic from moving on to others in need to the 90 minute wait to book in at the hospital which kept that ambulance from handing over and being available to others. It wasn't their fault - I know that but I don't have to be happy about the situation.


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top...of-britain-today-1-4994534?platform=hootsuite


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> In all honesty your experience is very different from mine in that respect. That doesn't mean I blame those who had a backlog -from the ambulance crew who we waited over four hours for whilst keeping a highly qualified paramedic from moving on to others in need to the 90 minute wait to book in at the hospital which kept that ambulance from handing over and being available to others. It wasn't their fault - I know that but I don't have to be happy about the situation.


I expect every single user of the NHS has very different experiences as they always have. It always used to amaze me how on the same ward on the same day you could be the best thing since sliced bread, be showered with thank you cards and chocolates but at the same time other people were dissatisfied and unhappy with their care. I don't have a problem with different people having different experiences or views but I do have a problem with people who talk the talk all the time without any experience to back it up accusing me of only caring about my own loved ones. I care passionately about the health of our citizens which is why I'm constantly trying to get people to take more responsibility for their health and stop relying on the NHS for so much that could be prevented in the first place.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Goblin said:


> Haven't seen that one during the campaign. Heard it was suggested but rejected for the campaign.
> 
> So once again, unable to provide positive details based on what they have done. Sounds familiar and about what I expected. May cannot either apparantly. Oh look at UK growth figures out today, guess she cannot brag about those can she.


For the third time in this thread I have not made up my mind who I am voting for, I don't even know who is standing in my constituency and I haven't seen a manifesto yet. Why you think I should provide you with details about any party is beyond me. You can read just the same as I can and I am happy to let people make up their own minds who to vote for when the time comes.


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> It always used to amaze me how on the same ward on the same day you could be the best thing since sliced bread, be showered with thank you cards and chocolates


Are you seriously likening that to the situation I just described.



rottiepointerhouse said:


> I care passionately about the health of our citizens which is why I'm constantly trying to get people to take more responsibility for their health and stop relying on the NHS for so much that could be prevented in the first place


You're right. My father shouldn't have fallen and spent the night on the bathroom floor. He shouldn't have had the infection which caused the high fever which led to the fall. It was all his own fault and he was a burden the NHS shouldn't have to bother with.


----------



## Satori

Goblin said:


> Why should we vote them in again? Maybe those so keen to support them can provide positive reasoning.


Maybe we just think that the Tories are better choice on the whole? Maybe like this person....



Goblin said:


> There are no good answers but again we talk about personal opinion, my experience and belief is that labour would actually encourage and trap more people into welfare for the long term. Better or should I say fairer means testing (not trying to reach targets) is something I think most can agree on but you say you were riled up by people saying effectively that exact thing. It's not that people agree with the fact that those who need help aren't getting it.
> 
> *Now personally I believe the conservatives are a better choice than labour* but if you drag yourself through my earlier posts (although possibly in another thread thinking about it) you'll also see I said i almost wished for a minority government partly as this may have acted as a brake on excessive policies . I do not think a labour government would be could for the UK in general especially for the majority. I don't know any millionaires, most people I know work hard and try to support their families trying to juggle their finances. I'll argue against the fact that labour would fix everything.


----------



## Happy Paws2

_rottiepointerhouse said: ↑
I care passionately about the health of our citizens which is why I'm constantly trying to get people to take more responsibility for their health and stop relying on the NHS for so much that could be prevented in the first place.
_
It would be nice wouldn't it, but then no one knows when they are going to be sick or how to stop it.

I would have thought eating mainly healthly foods (not always ) walking miles everyday with my dog, I don't smoke and only have odd glass of wine, the last thing I expected was to have 2 strokes, So what should I have done, responsibility so I didn't have them, I really would like you to tell me.
_
_


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> Are you seriously likening that to the situation I just described.
> 
> You're right. My father shouldn't have fallen and spent the night on the bathroom floor. He shouldn't have had the infection which caused the high fever which led to the fall. It was all his own fault and he was a burden the NHS shouldn't have to bother with.


No I am not likening that to the situation you just described. I am saying that every single user of the NHS has a different experience and a different view of whether their care was good, bad or indifferent. What are you talking about? Where did I say your father shouldn't have fallen and shouldn't have spent the night on the floor or had an infection? Where did I say it was his own fault and he was a burden on the NHS. For pity's sake do you think I went around the wards pointing my finger at people and saying "your illness is self inflicted" "you ate yourself sick so go home and die" To be clear yet again I am talking about the illnesses that are largely preventable that require ongoing treatment and that are not only a drain on NHS but ruin the life of the person involved. How can you misinterpret me saying I care passionately about the health of our citizens to me saying your father shouldn't be bothered with?



Happy Paws said:


> _rottiepointerhouse said: ↑
> I care passionately about the health of our citizens which is why I'm constantly trying to get people to take more responsibility for their health and stop relying on the NHS for so much that could be prevented in the first place.
> _
> It would be nice wouldn't it, but then no one knows when they are going to be sick or how to stop it.
> 
> I would have thought eating mainly healthly foods (not always ) walking miles everyday with my dog, I don't smoke and only have odd glass of wine, the last thing I expected was to have 2 strokes, So what should I have done, responsibility so I didn't have them, I really would like you to tell me.


I'm not getting into that with you again - last time you threw a hissy fit. I can only tell you that doctors around the world do know what can be done to prevent disease, they do know that heart disease can largely be prevented by lifestyle changes and can also be reversed by the appropriate dietary changes. That does not mean ALL cases in EVERY person and I have never said it did. There are numerous risk factors for arterial disease - the intake of saturated fat being high on that list. Saturated fat and cholesterol damage the endothelial lining of the blood vessels and the cholesterol forms plaques that can rupture setting off an inflammatory/clotting process. Every fatty meal eaten slows down the blood flow making it more like sludge which makes it more prone to clotting. If you want to watch a video explaining it in more detail this is a good one

http://nutritionstudies.org/dr-caldwell-esselstyn-at-tedx-making-heart-attacks-history/

We also know a great deal about the risk factors for various cancers and for developing type 2 Diabetes .


----------



## Elles

So you're saying that the NHS gets enough money. Doctors, nurses etc are well enough paid and people need to live healthier lives, put down the cigarettes, Big Macs and pints of beer and let the NHS be available for genuine, unavoidable, unforseeable accident and illness? It's a point and a good one. Certainly health workers must get tired of dealing with drunks and fight injuries at weekends at least. 

It's still no excuse for running the NHS down though. We can't leave those suffering self inflicted harm out on the streets to die, so we need an NHS that's big and strong enough to deal with them, as well as the guy who fell off a ladder, or people end up waiting 4 hours for an ambulance and dying in need. It's how life is at the moment, so we have to just suck it up and hope it gets better in the future. Our politicians and those responsible for the NHS set a good example that we should all follow. Not. And they're the wealthy, educated who can more easily afford a healthy lifestyle and understand what it is.

It would be so interesting to come back in a few hundred years to see what now looks like then. If there is a then. Almost makes me want to pay to have my head frozen.


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> languages scrapped


@noushka05: whenever did this happen? I always thought a modern language was one of the core subjects at KS2? I'm not doubting what you say, just I wasn't aware it had happened.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> So you're saying that the NHS gets enough money. Doctors, nurses etc are well enough paid and people need to live healthier lives, put down the cigarettes, Big Macs and pints of beer and let the NHS be available for genuine, unavoidable, unforseeable accident and illness? It's a point and a good one. Certainly health workers must get tired of dealing with drunks and fight injuries at weekends at least.
> 
> It's still no excuse for running the NHS down though. We can't leave those suffering self inflicted harm out on the streets to die, so we need an NHS that's big and strong enough to deal with them, as well as the guy who fell off a ladder, or people end up waiting 4 hours for an ambulance and dying in need. It's how life is at the moment, so we have to just suck it up and hope it gets better in the future. Our politicians and those responsible for the NHS set a good example that we should all follow. Not. And they're the wealthy, educated who can more easily afford a healthy lifestyle and understand what it is.
> 
> It would be so interesting to come back in a few hundred years to see what now looks like then. If there is a then. Almost makes me want to pay to have my head frozen.


I don't believe I said the NHS gets enough money but I don't believe it is sustainable in its current form. I don't believe I said doctors and nurses are well enough paid either  But yes every person needs to take responsibility for their own health so that includes making all the lifestyle changes they can to prevent the onset of the chronic illnesses which we know are largely preventable. I believe more money should be spent on health education in schools and in every GP surgery and hospital outpatients department. Rather than providing drugs and procedures as the first line of treatment (high blood pressure pills, statins, drugs for type 2 diabetes) I believe lifestyle changes should always be tried first - when appropriate of course and that people taking drugs long term should be encouraged to look at how lifestyle changes may enable them to come off those drugs. I'm not suggesting we leave people with self inflicted harm on the streets, of course we must have hospitals but we must also have change and change starts from the bottom up - that is with us. Have a read of this

http://nutritionstudies.org/healthcare-in-crisis-rn-asks-whats-food-got-to-do-with-it/


----------



## Calvine

Colliebarmy said:


> I think the NHS is marvelous and well run, some people will moan and gripe about nothing.


I have no complaints about it either; but it does seem to depend on where you live. I hardly ever need to use the NHS ... but a friend of mine does; despite living only about four miles away (one side of Richmond Park to the other) she has the Devil's own job getting anything done. She's not a hypochondriac and she's not a moaner, but she has to wait ages to get the smallest thing done.


----------



## Elles

If people were generally healthier and didn't need to use the NHS so much, it could have enough money and there would be enough to pay health workers better? I.e. There's enough money in the NHS and for salaries for it to be fine, we could even afford more, if we weren't so irresponsible? Which is what I meant, though I put it badly. I watched the tv programme where they got people off their meds with lifestyle changes, I think you're absolutely right. I just don't think it's going to happen in the very near future, so we have to suck it up, or lose the NHS while we're waiting.

If people didn't commit crimes we wouldn't need to waste money building prisons, but they do so we do. 

If we didn't, decent folk would suffer and I don't see why they should. I get tired of decent, responsible people suffering because of the actions of the irresponsible, careless and criminal, (no, I don't mean the tories lol) but such is life and we have to deal with it.

I'm a vegetarian, have been since my early teens, I rarely drink and I exercise outside every day. Unfortunately I also suffer hayfever and allergies that I ignored as unimportant, which has left me with copd from working in unhealthy (for me) environments with the animals every day. I don't take medication for it, I changed how I do things and I'm ready to go once I'm too badly affected by it, which hopefully won't be for a while yet. My choice as far as I'm concerned. My tax/ni money can go to treating a binge drinker at the weekend. Better that than some of the crap it's spent on.


----------



## Goblin

Satori said:


> Maybe we just think that the Tories are better choice on the whole? Maybe like this person....


Strange how things have changed since 2015 isn't it or did you not notice. Things like lack of strong leadership for the current government. The abandonment of manifesto pledges. The fact they've lost all credibility of listening to people. You'll notice in this thread I haven't pushed for labour either. Just as last time, I want a government which cannot pass everything easily. I want them to actually be forced to listen, to compromise where necessary. May isn't capable of doing so, Corbyn, no idea. Then again at present it's not who can win, it's ensuring May get's a wake up call, to let her know that she doesn't simply have a free pass to do whatever she wants. That she has to actually work to unite the country. That simple phrases need to be backed up by actions which work for all.

The UK has no effective opposition at the moment. Without effective opposition democracy is weakened.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Just leave the ****ing NHS alone. It's a political football and nothing more or less. Trotted out by whoever the opposition may be at the time. The NHS will always be wanting for something, as will every other public organisation, come election time.

What were we taking about a month ago, you know before a general election was announced. It wasn't the terrible state of the NHS that's for sure..........

Stop talking this wonderful institution down just for political gain.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> Just leave the ******* NHS alone. It's a political football and nothing more or less. Trotted out by whoever the opposition may be at the time. The NHS will always be wanting for something, as will every other public organisation, come election time.
> 
> What were we taking about a month ago, you know before a general election was announced. It wasn't the terrible state of the NHS that's for sure..........


 You haven't been around here long enough to know its been a hot topic on this forum for years. After the last election we were told that was it, end of the NHS, I remember saying I was surprised to still see ambulances out and about a month later.



Elles said:


> If people were generally healthier and didn't need to use the NHS so much, it could have enough money and there would be enough to pay health workers better? I.e. There's enough money in the NHS and for salaries for it to be fine, we could even afford more, if we weren't so irresponsible? Which is what I meant, though I put it badly. I watched the tv programme where they got people off their meds with lifestyle changes, I think you're absolutely right. I just don't think it's going to happen in the very near future, so we have to suck it up, or lose the NHS while we're waiting.
> 
> If people didn't commit crimes we wouldn't need to waste money building prisons, but they do so we do.
> 
> If we didn't, decent folk would suffer and I don't see why they should. I get tired of decent, responsible people suffering because of the actions of the irresponsible, careless and criminal, (no, I don't mean the tories lol) but such is life and we have to deal with it.
> 
> I'm a vegetarian, have been since my early teens, I rarely drink and I exercise outside every day. Unfortunately I also suffer hayfever and allergies that I ignored as unimportant, which has left me with copd from working in unhealthy (for me) environments with the animals every day. I don't take medication for it, I changed how I do things and I'm ready to go once I'm too badly affected by it, which hopefully won't be for a while yet. My choice as far as I'm concerned. My tax/ni money can go to treating a binge drinker at the weekend. Better that than some of the crap it's spent on.


Yes I saw that programme too. The plant based doctors in the US achieve even more amazing results getting patients off high blood pressure meds, off statins, off antacids, off laxatives, off diabetic meds and even reductions in insulin doses for type 1 diabetics. Simple changes like encouraging oatmeal for breakfast, encouraging bean consumption and encouraging far more fruit and veg consumption whilst discouraging processed and red meat, high fat dairy and refined carbohydrates, salt/sugar/oils can make drastic improvements to health. Going forwards how do we fund the care for the ever increasing numbers of people suffering from these diseases?

http://www.diabetes.co.uk/diabetes-prevalence.html

*UK diabetes prevalence*
Currently, the number of *people diagnosed with diabetes in the UK is estimated to be 3.5 million*. [16]

It is predicted that up to *549,000 people* in the UK have diabetes that is yet to be diagnosed. This means that, including the number of undiagnosed people, there is estimated to be *over 4 million people living with diabetes in the UK *at present.

This represents 6% of the UK population or *1 in every 16* people having diabetes (diagnosed and undiagnosed).

The majority of these cases are of type 2 diabetes, which has been linked to increasing cases of obesity.

Statistics suggest that a slightly higher proportion of adult men have diabetes. Men account for 56 per cent of UK adults with diabetes and women account for 44 per cent.

*Life expectancy*
Diabetes is currently the fifth most common reason for death in the world.

Around 1 in 8 people between 20 and 79 years old have their death attributed to diabetes and it is expected to rise.

The life expectancy on average now is reduced by: [5]


More than 20 years for people with Type 1 diabetes
Up to 10 years for people with Type 2 diabetes
However, these figures are based on historical data, and with improvements in modern care taking place, the figures presented could be subject to change in the coming decades.

*The cost of increased diabetes prevalence*
It is currently estimated that around 10% of the NHS yearly budget is contributed to the treatment of diabetes. *This equates to nine billion a year or rather, £173 million a week.

file:///C:/Users/David/Downloads/bhf-cvd-statistics---uk-factsheet.pdf
*
Cardiovascular Disease (CVD; Heart and Circulatory Disease) Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is an umbrella term that describes all diseases of the heart and circulation. It includes everything from conditions that are diagnosed at birth, or inherited, to developed conditions such as coronary heart disease, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and stroke. 
• Cardiovascular (heart and circulatory) disease causes more than a quarter (26 per cent) of all deaths in the UK; that's nearly 160,000 deaths each year - an average of 435 people each day or one death every three minutes.
• Around 42,000 people under the age of 75 in the UK die from CVD each year. 
• Since the BHF was established the annual number of deaths from CVD in the UK has fallen by half.
• In 1961, more than half of all deaths in the UK were attributed to CVD (320,000 CVD deaths). 
• Since 1961 the UK death rate from CVD has declined by more than three quarters. Death rates have fallen more quickly than the actual number of deaths because people in this country are now living longer lives
• There are around 7 million people living with cardiovascular disease in the UK: 3.5 million men and 3.5 million women.

CVD's cost to the UK economy (including premature death and disability) is estimated to be over £15 billion each year. • Healthcare costs relating to CVD are estimated at up to* £11 billion *each year.

• More than one in six adults smoke cigarettes in the UK- that's around 9 million adults. 
• Nearly 100,000 smokers in the UK die from smoking-related causes each year. 
• Each year an estimated 20,000 UK deaths from cardiovascular disease can be attributed to smoking
• Over a quarter (27 per cent) of adults in the UK are obese and in addition more than a third are overweight (by BMI).
• It's estimated that nearly 30 per cent of children in the UK are overweight or obese. 
• Nearly two out of five adults in the UK do not achieve recommended levels of physical activity.
• Only a quarter of UK adults and one in five children consume the recommended minimum five portions of fruit and vegetables per day. 
• A quarter of adults in the UK exceed national guidelines for weekly alcohol intake; no level of use is without risk.


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> You haven't been around here long enough to know its been a hot topic on this forum for years. After the last election we were told that was it, end of the NHS, I remember saying I was surprised to still see ambulances out and about a month later.
> 
> Yes I saw that programme too. The plant based doctors in the US achieve even more amazing results getting patients off high blood pressure meds, off statins, off antacids, off laxatives, off diabetic meds and even reductions in insulin doses for type 1 diabetics. Simple changes like encouraging oatmeal for breakfast, encouraging bean consumption and encouraging far more fruit and veg consumption whilst discouraging processed and red meat, high fat dairy and refined carbohydrates, salt/sugar/oils can make drastic improvements to health. Going forwards how do we fund the care for the ever increasing numbers of people suffering from these diseases?
> 
> http://www.diabetes.co.uk/diabetes-prevalence.html
> 
> *UK diabetes prevalence*
> Currently, the number of *people diagnosed with diabetes in the UK is estimated to be 3.5 million*. [16]
> 
> It is predicted that up to *549,000 people* in the UK have diabetes that is yet to be diagnosed. This means that, including the number of undiagnosed people, there is estimated to be *over 4 million people living with diabetes in the UK *at present.
> 
> This represents 6% of the UK population or *1 in every 16* people having diabetes (diagnosed and undiagnosed).
> 
> The majority of these cases are of type 2 diabetes, which has been linked to increasing cases of obesity.
> 
> Statistics suggest that a slightly higher proportion of adult men have diabetes. Men account for 56 per cent of UK adults with diabetes and women account for 44 per cent.
> 
> *Life expectancy*
> Diabetes is currently the fifth most common reason for death in the world.
> 
> Around 1 in 8 people between 20 and 79 years old have their death attributed to diabetes and it is expected to rise.
> 
> The life expectancy on average now is reduced by: [5]
> 
> 
> More than 20 years for people with Type 1 diabetes
> Up to 10 years for people with Type 2 diabetes
> However, these figures are based on historical data, and with improvements in modern care taking place, the figures presented could be subject to change in the coming decades.
> 
> *The cost of increased diabetes prevalence*
> It is currently estimated that around 10% of the NHS yearly budget is contributed to the treatment of diabetes. *This equates to nine billion a year or rather, £173 million a week.
> 
> file:///C:/Users/David/Downloads/bhf-cvd-statistics---uk-factsheet.pdf
> *
> Cardiovascular Disease (CVD; Heart and Circulatory Disease) Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is an umbrella term that describes all diseases of the heart and circulation. It includes everything from conditions that are diagnosed at birth, or inherited, to developed conditions such as coronary heart disease, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and stroke.
> • Cardiovascular (heart and circulatory) disease causes more than a quarter (26 per cent) of all deaths in the UK; that's nearly 160,000 deaths each year - an average of 435 people each day or one death every three minutes.
> • Around 42,000 people under the age of 75 in the UK die from CVD each year.
> • Since the BHF was established the annual number of deaths from CVD in the UK has fallen by half.
> • In 1961, more than half of all deaths in the UK were attributed to CVD (320,000 CVD deaths).
> • Since 1961 the UK death rate from CVD has declined by more than three quarters. Death rates have fallen more quickly than the actual number of deaths because people in this country are now living longer lives
> • There are around 7 million people living with cardiovascular disease in the UK: 3.5 million men and 3.5 million women.
> 
> CVD's cost to the UK economy (including premature death and disability) is estimated to be over £15 billion each year. • Healthcare costs relating to CVD are estimated at up to* £11 billion *each year.
> 
> • More than one in six adults smoke cigarettes in the UK- that's around 9 million adults.
> • Nearly 100,000 smokers in the UK die from smoking-related causes each year.
> • Each year an estimated 20,000 UK deaths from cardiovascular disease can be attributed to smoking
> • Over a quarter (27 per cent) of adults in the UK are obese and in addition more than a third are overweight (by BMI).
> • It's estimated that nearly 30 per cent of children in the UK are overweight or obese.
> • Nearly two out of five adults in the UK do not achieve recommended levels of physical activity.
> • Only a quarter of UK adults and one in five children consume the recommended minimum five portions of fruit and vegetables per day.
> • A quarter of adults in the UK exceed national guidelines for weekly alcohol intake; no level of use is without risk.


----------



## Goblin

Someone else who knows what they are talking about:


----------



## Jobeth

Calvine said:


> @noushka05: whenever did this happen? I always thought a modern language was one of the core subjects at KS2? I'm not doubting what you say, just I wasn't aware it had happened.


It is still compulsory at KS2 and KS3.  At KS4 they must offer at least one subject from each of the following areas: MFL, DT, arts and humanities. Academies only have to teach a 'broad and balanced' curriculum that includes English, maths, science and R.E.


----------



## Happy Paws2

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm not getting into that with you again - *last time you threw a hissy fit. *
> .


Please don't speak to me like that, there is no need to be rude and please don't bother to answer me again as* I have put you on ignore* so I don't to keep reading your as self opinionated attitude any more.


----------



## rona

The old can't help being old and many people have lead a fairly healthy life and still become ill. No one knows what is going to affect them long term unless they are eating something excessively.
There's a load of older Vegans who are now crippled with osteoporosis because the information available at the time was lacking
What we do know that is self inflicted is those drunks that turn up in A&E on a weekend. I'm not talking the alcoholic with liver damage here. though some may start like that. 
It's like smoking related illness, if you are still smoking you get charged for treatment
You can't compare with those taking part in sport because generally sport improves health whereas drinking to excess and smoking never will 
https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/files/2017-01/alcohol-specific-activity-web-final.pdf


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> What were we taking about a month ago, you know before a general election was announced. It wasn't the terrible state of the NHS that's for sure..........
> 
> Stop talking this wonderful institution down just for political gain.


We weren't talking about a month ago because there wasn't the opportunity to change things then. Nobody is talking it down, being concerned about the future isn't bashing anything. It's pretty cynical to try and close down a topic by implying those who care are wrong for doing so.


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> We weren't talking about a month ago because there wasn't the opportunity to change things then. Nobody is talking it down, being concerned about the future isn't bashing anything. It's pretty cynical to try and close down a topic by implying those who care are wrong for doing so.


I think certain people, not just on this forum, care more about the Labour party than their pseudo fears for NHS.


----------



## Bisbow

Why is @rottiepointerhouse being shouted at for expressing her experiences and opinions when others are able to post tripe and silly pictures and no one says a word she speaks from the heart and knows what is what

Some people do not like to hear anything that they do not agree with

Stop being so rude and nasty to her telling what she knows

Some people ???????


----------



## noushka05

Please bear in mind our wildlife before casting your vote - us voters are the only hope they have.

The government are intent on killing tens of thousands of badgers. Hunting with hounds will back & there will be a crack down on sabs and monitors so nothing to stand in the way of the sadists. Buzzards, peregrine, sparrowhawk, red kite etc at grave risk of losing protected status.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> I think certain people, not just on this forum, care more about the Labour party than their pseudo fears for NHS.


Don't talk ridiculous. People are suffering & dying because of the underfunding & privatisation of our health service. How would you feel if it were one of your loved ones?


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> If people were generally healthier and didn't need to use the NHS so much, it could have enough money and there would be enough to pay health workers better? I.e. There's enough money in the NHS and for salaries for it to be fine, we could even afford more, if we weren't so irresponsible? Which is what I meant, though I put it badly. I watched the tv programme where they got people off their meds with lifestyle changes, I think you're absolutely right. I just don't think it's going to happen in the very near future, so we have to suck it up, or lose the NHS while we're waiting.
> 
> If people didn't commit crimes we wouldn't need to waste money building prisons, but they do so we do.
> 
> If we didn't, decent folk would suffer and I don't see why they should. I get tired of decent, responsible people suffering because of the actions of the irresponsible, careless and criminal, (no, I don't mean the tories lol) but such is life and we have to deal with it.
> 
> I'm a vegetarian, have been since my early teens, I rarely drink and I exercise outside every day. Unfortunately I also suffer hayfever and allergies that I ignored as unimportant, which has left me with copd from working in unhealthy (for me) environments with the animals every day. I don't take medication for it, I changed how I do things and I'm ready to go once I'm too badly affected by it, which hopefully won't be for a while yet. My choice as far as I'm concerned. My tax/ni money can go to treating a binge drinker at the weekend. Better that than some of the crap it's spent on.


Our NHS was the most cost effective, efficient, fairest health services in the world. Its perfectly affordable now, but the tories are deliberately forcing it to fail so they can offer up full privatisation as the only solution.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> @noushka05: whenever did this happen? I always thought a modern language was one of the core subjects at KS2? I'm not doubting what you say, just I wasn't aware it had happened.


I'll likely be seeing my Cousin later today so will just double check that Calvine.

You can check here how the tory cuts are affecting schools in your area.

http://schoolcuts.org.uk/#/

.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Just leave the ******* NHS alone. It's a political football and nothing more or less. Trotted out by whoever the opposition may be at the time. The NHS will always be wanting for something, as will every other public organisation, come election time.
> 
> What were we taking about a month ago, you know before a general election was announced. It wasn't the terrible state of the NHS that's for sure..........
> 
> Stop talking this wonderful institution down just for political gain.


Well you obviously didn't see all my threads on the subject then..


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Why is @rottiepointerhouse being shouted at for expressing her experiences and opinions when others are able to post tripe and silly pictures and no one says a word she speaks from the heart and knows what is what
> 
> Some people do not like to hear anything that they do not agree with
> 
> Stop being so rude and nasty to her telling what she knows
> 
> Some people ???????





Dr Pepper said:


> I prefer to wait for actual results and outcomes rather than what, if's and maybe's. Who knows, you don't and I don't, they may well be right on their "reported" plans for the NHS. Ask Goblin for his/her crystal ball. Oh and before that maybe look at some Facebook pages and Twitter threads that support the NHS.


Why don't you just let the Health Minster tell you himself the Tories plans for our NHS?

. Theresa May's preferred US system featured in the Nixon Watergate scandal. We know the NHS wont be here to save in four years time. Its the end game for it now. Have you done any research on STPs yet?


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Don't talk ridiculous. People are suffering & dying because of the underfunding & privatisation of our health service. How would you feel if it were one of your loved ones?


Sorry but I'm speaking from personal experience rather than other people's social media posts. As such I have found the NHS to be excellent and neither I, or my family (one of whom unfortunately spends a great deal of time in hospital due to kidney and other problems) have experienced any of the problems you suggest exist.

I may have missed it, in which case I apologise, but what have your experiences been? Maybe you're unlucky and have a poor local hospital, I do know some are better than others.


----------



## Jobeth

noushka05 said:


> I'll likely be seeing my Cousin later today so will just double check that Calvine.
> 
> You can check here how the tory cuts are affecting schools in your area.
> 
> http://schoolcuts.org.uk/#/
> 
> .


If you read my answer to Calvine - it will be because they are not in a state school. I assume it will be an academy (rather than a private or free one) as they don't have to follow the national curriculum. If they are in a state school they should complain as it is statutory.


----------



## Calvine

Jobeth said:


> It is still compulsory at KS2 and KS3. At KS4 they must offer at least one subject from each of the following areas: MFL, DT, arts and humanities. Academies only have to teach a 'broad and balanced' curriculum that includes English, maths, science and R.E.


 Thank you.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Sorry but I'm speaking from personal experience rather than other people's social media posts. As such I have found the NHS to be excellent and neither I, or my family (one of whom unfortunately spends a great deal of time in hospital due to kidney and other problems) have experienced any of the problems you suggest exist.
> 
> I may have missed it, in which case I apologise, but what have you experiences been? Maybe you're unlucky and have a poor local hospital, I do know some are better than others.


You're missing the point entirely. This is a demolition by stealth. Eventually it will affect all. Did you watch the Jeremy Hunt video?



Jobeth said:


> If you read my answer to Calvine - it will be because they are not in a state school. I assume it will be an academy (rather than a private or free one) as they don't have to follow the national curriculum.


Yes it is an Academy Jobeth. It was a comprehensive when my children went to that school, then a few years ago it was turned into an academy. The creative subjects have all been removed.


----------



## Jobeth

noushka05 said:


> Yes it is an Academy Jobeth. It was a comprehensive when my children went to that school, then a few years ago it was turned into an academy. The creative subjects have all been removed.


That link you provided about cuts also only applies to academies and free schools (based on certain assumptions/forecasts). I would personally challenge them on the basis that having no creative subjects does not meet the definition of 'broad and balanced'.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> I think certain people, not just on this forum, care more about the Labour party than their pseudo fears for NHS.


Everyone who isn't a floating voter is going to be biased to an extent. Tory diehards are convinced there aren't any problems in the NHS. They're just as wrong.


----------



## Bisbow

. Have you done any research on STPs yet?



Unlike you I don't have all day to troll the internet looking for derogatory thing to say about the tories or anyone else you don't like

I have better things to do with my time than sit here looking for silly quotes and cartoons to put other people off

When will you stop trying to brainwash everyone into your way of thinking

You believe what you want and let everyone else believe what they want to believe in


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Happy Paws said:


> Please don't speak to me like that, there is no need to be rude and please don't bother to answer me again as* I have put you on ignore* so I don't to keep reading your as self opinionated attitude any more.


Fine by me, I believe I have suggested you do so many times in the past. I'm afraid this attitude is exactly why many doctors say they do not offer lifestyle counselling to patients even though they know if could help them enormously. People take offence because food is a very "touchy" subject being routed in our cultures, family traditions, addictions to salt, oil and sugar and many more things besides health. You have demonstrated that perfectly by challenging me to tell you something and then reacting so badly when I attempted to. Don't suppose you bothered to watch the video either.



rona said:


> The old can't help being old and many people have lead a fairly healthy life and still become ill. No one knows what is going to affect them long term unless they are eating something excessively.
> There's a load of older Vegans who are now crippled with osteoporosis because the information available at the time was lacking
> What we do know that is self inflicted is those drunks that turn up in A&E on a weekend. I'm not talking the alcoholic with liver damage here. though some may start like that.
> It's like smoking related illness, if you are still smoking you get charged for treatment
> You can't compare with those taking part in sport because generally sport improves health whereas drinking to excess and smoking never will
> https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/files/2017-01/alcohol-specific-activity-web-final.pdf


Rona I have never complained about the elderly receiving care. I would love to see massive savings on the chronic illnesses which are affecting younger and younger people go towards providing better care for the elderly. You yourself stated that the current level of spending on the NHS is not sustainable, the demand created by more obesity and more sufferers of the largely preventable illnesses is going to get bigger and bigger unless we do something about it. Children now suffering from Type 2 Diabetes which used to be called "late onset" for a reason. I'm afraid it is possible to tell what is likely to affect people long term if they follow certain patterns and risk factors - that something is heart disease, diabetes and certain cancers. Again not all cases of those diseases are caused by lifestyle but many are and many are preventable. I would be very interested to see your evidence that many older vegans suffer from osteoporosis. Millions of meat and dairy eating people suffer from it of course and it is well known that calcium is not the only part of the equation in good bone health and that calcium is available from foods other than dairy. Anyone taking on a vegan diet needs to understand nutrition and understand how to get enough but that also applies to everyone.



Bisbow said:


> Why is @rottiepointerhouse being shouted at for expressing her experiences and opinions when others are able to post tripe and silly pictures and no one says a word she speaks from the heart and knows what is what
> 
> Some people do not like to hear anything that they do not agree with
> 
> Stop being so rude and nasty to her telling what she knows
> 
> Some people ???????


Thank you Bisbow, I appreciate your support.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> I may have missed it, in which case I apologise, but what have you experiences been?


They've been documented on here over the last few months and on this thread within the last 24 hours. It was a shock - I too thought there was a certain amount of hype until it happened. The hours of waiting for an ambulance meant a paramedic had to stay with the patient until one arrived. I asked if they were needed elsewhere and they couldn't leave until an ambulance arrived. It was such a waste of a precious resource. The ambulances arrive at the hospital and the crews have to wait to book their patient in - they can't leave until they've done an official handover and that can be hours. It was just over 90 minutes for my relative but I could see ambulances backing up even more while we were waiting and that time getting longer and longer. Meanwhile other people are presumably waiting for those ambulances and highly qualified paramedics are having to wait with them. It's a vicious circle and it *is* bad.


----------



## Goblin

rona said:


> It's like smoking related illness, if you are still smoking you get charged for treatment


Just a question... do you know of anyone who has done research into the cost of smoking.. taxes + die early for smokers vs long term health care for non-smokers. Isn't a dig, simply you could say smokers already pay for it through taxes and die earlier saving money.



Dr Pepper said:


> I think certain people, not just on this forum, care more about the Labour party than their pseudo fears for NHS.


You know you are right Dr Pepper. NHS will be saved. We've been told so. Brexit will save it...





Isn't this what we should believe.. Can you explain how looking at Mrs May's record? Evidence shows the opposite.


----------



## KittenKong

Slogans and more slogans. They're popular with people just as those used in years gone by such as, "Never go without a Capstan", "A Mars a day" and "Cool as a mountain stream" (Consulate cigarettes) were.

Here's some more appropriate to this election campaign


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> They've been documented on here over the last few months and on this thread within the last 24 hours. It was a shock - I too thought there was a certain amount of hype until it happened. The hours of waiting for an ambulance meant a paramedic had to stay with the patient until one arrived. I asked if they were needed elsewhere and they couldn't leave until an ambulance arrived. It was such a waste of a precious resource. The ambulances arrive at the hospital and the crews have to wait to book their patient in - they can't leave until they've done an official handover and that can be hours. It was just over 90 minutes for my relative but I could see ambulances backing up even more while we were waiting and that time getting longer and longer. Meanwhile other people are presumably waiting for those ambulances and highly qualified paramedics are having to wait with them. It's a vicious circle and it *is* bad.


Thanks Havoc, that's what we need first hand experiences so we can see how the NHS is actually working. Your experience obviously wasn't a good one, others here reported the opposite.

If only more people would tell of their experiences rather than posting meaningless anonymous social media twaddle then a proper and reasoned debate could take place.


----------



## Happy Paws2

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Fine by me, I believe I have suggested you do so many times in the past. I'm afraid this attitude is exactly why many doctors say they do not offer lifestyle counselling to patients even though they know if could help them enormously. People take offence because food is a very "touchy" subject being routed in our cultures, family traditions, addictions to salt, oil and sugar and many more things besides health. You have demonstrated that perfectly by challenging me to tell you something and then reacting so badly when I attempted to. Don't suppose you bothered to watch the video either.


*Haven't got round to pressing the ignore button yet. So I will answer your post.* 
Since having a stroke and talking to my Doctor.
1. I have changed my diet 
2. I always use low fat 
3. I always buy fresh food 
4. Don't use salt
5. I very rarely buy processed foods haven't really for years, I like to know what I'm eating
6. I do like the odd treat.
7. Hardly use salt
8. Never have caffeine
9. Never smoked, only have the odd glass of wine.
and *YES* I did watch the video.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Slogans and more slogans. They're popular with people just as those used in years gone by such as, "Never go without a Capstan", "A Mars a day" and "Cool as a mountain stream" (Consulate cigarettes) were.
> 
> Here's some more appropriate to this election campaign
> View attachment 308714
> View attachment 308715
> View attachment 308716
> View attachment 308717


How has "she" destroyed the country and its future since she took over less than a year ago?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Happy Paws said:


> *Haven't got round to pressing the ignore button yet. So I will answer your post.*
> Since having a stroke and talking to my Doctor.
> 1. I have changed my diet
> 2. I always use low fat
> 3. I always buy fresh food
> 4. Don't use salt
> 5. I very rarely buy processed foods haven't really for years, I like to know what I'm eating
> 6. I do like the odd treat.
> 7. Hardly use salt
> 8. Never have caffeine
> 9. Never smoked, only have the odd glass of wine.
> and *YES* I did watch the video.


Thank you for taking the time to watch the video. I'm glad that your doctor was able to help you make changes to your diet. My whole point in these discussions is that those changes need to be made before something like a stroke or heart attack or diabetes occur so that we can prevent them from happening.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Thank you for taking the time to watch the video. I'm glad that your doctor was able to help you make changes to your diet. My whole point in these discussions is that those changes need to be made before something like a stroke or heart attack or diabetes occur so that we can prevent them from happening.


I perfectly understand where you're coming from. Indeed a healthy lifestyle should be encouraged.

However, that doesn't explain why some are still prone to health problems, especially hereditary conditions where the healthiest of lifestyles will do nothing to prevent from happening.

I can understand why Happy Paws has been upset by your comments therefore even knowing it was unintentional on your part to blame her personally.

It does seem to be the new thing to do this however by some people, not suggesting anyone on the forum shares this point of view.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Thanks Havoc, that's what we need first hand experiences so we can see how the NHS is actually working. Your experience obviously wasn't a good one, others here reported the opposite.


There was a programme on TV this last week or so and a young A&E doctor arrived at work saying she looks for how the ambulances are backed up as she goes in to start her shift. I have no idea which hospital it was but I'm reasonably sure my experience wasn't unusual and I'm equally sure it's something which has got and is getting worse. I also see the other end of the process because my dad lives in a place which has an IC (interim care) wing. This is a few rooms/flats which are exactly what they say - an interim place for those which don't have any medical need to be in hospital but need somewhere while permanent care packages are put in place for them to return home. It's an obvious solution to bed blocking and there should be loads more. There has been a HUGE increase in 'failed discharges'. These are people who end up back in hospital because they weren't really well enough to leave. I do have a source inside one hospital to be sure these are failed discharges - the very term is one I've learned in the last few months. Used to be quite a thing to see a paramedic car or emergency ambulance outside the front of the building when I visit my dad which I do every day. It's now a familiar sight and almost always for the IC wing. How much pressure must be on the hospital staff to clear beds and how often are they making a decision they wouldn't otherwise make?


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> I perfectly understand where you're coming from. Indeed a healthy lifestyle should be encouraged.
> 
> However, that doesn't explain why some are still prone to health problems, especially hereditary conditions where the healthiest of lifestyles will do nothing to prevent from happening.
> 
> I can understand why Happy Paws has been upset by your comments therefore even knowing it was unintentional on your part to blame her personally.
> 
> It does seem to be the new thing to do this however by some people, not suggesting anyone on the forum shares this point of view.


@KittenKong have you ever studied nutrition? have you read any of the thousands of research papers? any books about preventative medicine? Do you know why I'm so passionate about preventative medicine? Firstly because my Dad was diagnosed with bowel cancer aged 42 and died of it aged 46, he was diagnosed in the late 70's and they knew back then and advised him and my Mum about the role of diet and eating too much meat and refined/processed foods in the development of his illness. My Mum recalls that my Dad's favourite food from when she met him was a mixed grill and he ate loads of salted peanuts. Secondly as you have mentioned genetics of course there are some genetic diseases but a family history of something doesn't mean its genetic as lifestyles and dietary choices tend to run in families too. You can carry a gene but in many cases all that means is that you have a genetic predisposition to a condition, your lifestyle choices then determine whether or not that gene is expressed or activated. Again I am not saying in ALL cases and I am not saying ALL illnesses. So I may well have a genetic predisposition to cancer as my Dad's Mum also died in her 40's of cancer and his Dad also in his 60's. My Mum has had kidney cancer, skin cancer and multiple myeloma (cancer of the blood cells arising in the bone marrow) and her mother died of breast cancer in her early 60's. So I could either hope for the best and carry on doing nothing about my risks or I can and have researched it thoroughly. I didn't set out wanting to go plant based, in fact I stopped reading the first book and put it away when I realised where it was going but in the end I had to read it. Still didn't believe it so read some more books by different doctors and watched hundreds of videos of them like the ones I post on here and hardly anyone bothers to watch.

Please show me where I blamed Happy Paws personally for anything? I have always tried to avoid a personal discussion about what one person eats and try to keep the information I offer general. So if I am talking about how heart disease/stroke/diabetes can be prevented that does not mean I am saying to every person reading that they caused their own illness (its not about blame its about empowerment) it just means I want to share the information that might help prevent it in others or might even help people reverse their conditions. They have done studies on people with coronary artery blockages and can prove with scans etc that a plant based diet can reverse some (not all and not in every person) of the blockage - surely its good to know that and to share that rather than have everyone have to resort to major surgery. They also know that some foods can help to inhibit angiongenesis (growing blood vessels) - tumours need blood supply to grow - food can act like chemotherapy in helping to inhibit the new blood supply and some of the modern cancer drugs are based on this process.

There are some very brief clips from a great film about the subject here


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Please show me where I blamed Happy Paws personally for anything?


Certainly wasn't my intention to suggest that you did. I said HP might have been under the impression you were so tried to see it from both sides.

Well, with my previously unhealthy lifestyle I'll put my hands up to the future for me looks pretty bleak! I gave up smoking 12 years ago yet I'll probably still die of a smoking related illness.

I'll accept full responsibility for that.


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So if I am talking about how heart disease/stroke/diabetes can be prevented that does not mean I am saying to every person reading that they caused their own illness (its not about blame its about empowerment) it just means I want to share the information that might help prevent it in others or might even help people reverse their conditions.


Which doesn't excuse government not doing anything to assist the current NHS and the problems does it? Then there's the social aspect.



> Health inequalities in the UK persist despite various attempts at tackling them. Data from Office for National Statistics (ONS) in March 2014 show males in the most advantaged areas can expect to live 19.3 years longer in 'good' health than those in the least advantaged areas. For females this was 20.1 years. The most deprived households in the UK spent almost a quarter of their income (23.8%) on food in 2012 compared with an annual spend of around 4% by the most affluent households (Centre for Economic and Business Research, 2013). Healthy eating costs three times as much as junk food - in 2012, the average price for 1,000 calories of healthy food was £7.49, whilst the same amount of unhealthy food was just £2.50 (Jones et al., 2014). The rising inflation of food, fuel and living costs - much higher in the UK than in other parts of Europe - has therefore translated into people cutting back on fresh fruit and vegetables and instead buying cheap, sweet, fatty, salty, processed foods, leading to people living in poverty often having worse diets and contributing to the rising rates of obesity, diabetes, and other dietary-related diseases, thus worsening pre-existing inequalities.


From : http://www.social-policy.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/33_garthwaite-bambra.pdf

So given this, what have the government done to correct this? Maybe people can provide evidence that shows an increase in effective workers wages since the tories came into power, how more people are now able to afford housing, show less children in poverty, demonstrate why food banks aren't needed and how disabled people can get necessary help and assistance. Maybe they can even show that the gap between rich and poor isn't increasing. May's stated "every vote for me is a vote for a strong economy with the benefits felt by everyone in the country".. is that her record so far? Maybe they can show how a hard brexit will benefit those who want to eat well when 47% of food stuffs including vegetables and fruit from abroad are likely to go up in price?

Why isn't she prepared to even discuss this relying on repetitions of the same meaningless phrases?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Certainly wasn't my intention to suggest that you did. I said HP might have been under the impression you were so tried to see it from both sides.
> 
> Well, with my previously unhealthy lifestyle I'll put my hands up to the future for me looks pretty bleak! I gave up smoking 12 years ago yet I'll probably still die of a smoking related illness.
> 
> I'll accept full responsibility for that.


Not so, as soon as you give up smoking your lungs start to recover, according to the American Cancer Society 20 minutes after quitting your heart rate and blood pressure drop. Within a few weeks your blood circulation and lung function improve, within a few months sweeper cells that help clean the lungs by removing mucous and reducing the risk of infection start to grow back. Within a year of quitting your smoking related coronary heart disease risk becomes half that of current smokers and within 10 years you risk of lung cancer becomes half that of smokers. It would be great if you could eat plenty of greens too 

From NHS Choices

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Cancer-of-the-lung/Pages/Prevention.aspx

However long you have been smoking, it's always worth quitting. Every year you don't smoke decreases your risk of getting serious illnesses, such as lung cancer. After 10 years of not smoking, your chances of developing lung cancer falls to half that of someone who smokes.

Research suggests that eating a low-fat, high-fibre diet, including at least five portions a day of fresh fruit and vegetables and plenty of whole grains, can reduce your risk of lung cancer, as well as other types of cancer and heart disease.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Goblin said:


> Which doesn't excuse government not doing anything to assist the current NHS and the problems does it? Then there's the social aspect.
> 
> From : http://www.social-policy.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/33_garthwaite-bambra.pdf
> 
> So given this, what have the government done to correct this? Maybe people can provide evidence that shows an increase in effective workers wages since the tories came into power, how more people are now able to afford housing, show less children in poverty, demonstrate why food banks aren't needed and how disabled people can get necessary help and assistance. Maybe they can even show that the gap between rich and poor isn't increasing. May's stated "every vote for me is a vote for a strong economy with the benefits felt by everyone in the country".. is that her record so far? Maybe they can show how a hard brexit will benefit those who want to eat well when 47% of food stuffs including vegetables and fruit from abroad are likely to go up in price?
> 
> Why isn't she prepared to even discuss this relying on repetitions of the same meaningless phrases?


Sighs. Where did I say it excused the government and where did I say they had done anything to correct it? When the manifestos are released one of the things I will be looking for it whether they (any party) have anything to say about preventative health care along with plans for improving social care for the elderly.

ETA A plant based diet is cheaper than buying meat and dairy and processed foods.


----------



## simplysardonic

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not so, as soon as you give up smoking your lungs start to recover, according to the American Cancer Society 20 minutes after quitting your heart rate and blood pressure drop. Within a few weeks your blood circulation and lung function improve, within a few months sweeper cells that help clean the lungs by removing mucous and reducing the risk of infection start to grow back. Within a year of quitting your smoking related coronary heart disease risk becomes half that of current smokers and within 10 years you risk of lung cancer becomes half that of smokers. It would be great if you could eat plenty of greens too
> 
> From NHS Choices
> 
> http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Cancer-of-the-lung/Pages/Prevention.aspx
> 
> However long you have been smoking, it's always worth quitting. Every year you don't smoke decreases your risk of getting serious illnesses, such as lung cancer. After 10 years of not smoking, your chances of developing lung cancer falls to half that of someone who smokes.
> 
> Research suggests that eating a low-fat, high-fibre diet, including at least five portions a day of fresh fruit and vegetables and plenty of whole grains, can reduce your risk of lung cancer, as well as other types of cancer and heart disease.


I have a friend who is in complete denial that her repeated chest infections, permanent cough & severe breathlessness are due to her constant smoking.

And those are just the obvious issues, she's got numerous other problems that are likely to be exascerbated by the ****.

She will complain & complain about how her life is affected but if I mention the 's' word she gets angry & defensive, saying she's smoked since she was a teenager & never had problems.

She can't accept there's a correlation, or that her health will massively improve if she quits.

On top of that her diet is appalling, but I won't even go there because it falls on deaf ears.

I'm sure she's not unique in her attitude, but how do you even begin to help people like this?


----------



## Happy Paws2

simplysardonic said:


> I have a friend who is in complete denial that her repeated chest infections, permanent cough & severe breathlessness are due to her constant smoking.
> 
> And those are just the obvious issues, she's got numerous other problems that are likely to be exascerbated by the ****.
> 
> She will complain & complain about how her life is affected but if I mention the 's' word she gets angry & defensive, saying she's smoked since she was a teenager & never had problems.
> 
> She can't accept there's a correlation, or that her health will massively improve if she quits.
> 
> On top of that her diet is appalling, but I won't even go there because it falls on deaf ears.
> 
> I'm sure she's not unique in her attitude, *but how do you even begin to help people like this?*


You can't, you have to want to give up or get a real shock nothing else will work.

OH use to work shifts that were all round the clock and smoked to keep himself going, sometime 60 a day. Then in 1997 on holiday in France he caught a bug that was going around, he was so ill I thought he was going to die so did he, we had the doctor come into to see him, who asked if he smoked answer "not any more" and he hasn't touch them since.


----------



## Happy Paws2

...... wrong thread.


----------



## simplysardonic

Happy Paws said:


> *You can't, you have to want to give up or get a real shock nothing else will work*.
> 
> OH use to work shifts that were all round the clock and smoked to keep himself going, sometime 60 a day. Then in 1997 on holiday in France he caught a bug that was going around, he was so ill I thought he was going to die so did he, we had the doctor come into to see him, who asked if he smoked answer "not any more" and he hasn't touch them since.


She's had that, one of her chest infections almost killed her


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

simplysardonic said:


> I have a friend who is in complete denial that her repeated chest infections, permanent cough & severe breathlessness are due to her constant smoking.
> 
> And those are just the obvious issues, she's got numerous other problems that are likely to be exascerbated by the ****.
> 
> She will complain & complain about how her life is affected but if I mention the 's' word she gets angry & defensive, saying she's smoked since she was a teenager & never had problems.
> 
> She can't accept there's a correlation, or that her health will massively improve if she quits.
> 
> On top of that her diet is appalling, but I won't even go there because it falls on deaf ears.
> 
> I'm sure she's not unique in her attitude, but how do you even begin to help people like this?


Unfortunately addiction overrides reason. I can highly recommend "The Pleasure Trap" Mastering the hidden force that undermines health & happiness by Doug Lisle & Alan Goldhamer. I got mine from Amazon.


----------



## Happy Paws2

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Sighs. Where did I say it excused the government and where did I say they had done anything to correct it? When the manifestos are released one of the things I will be looking for it whether they (any party) have anything to say about preventative health care along with plans for improving social care for the elderly.
> 
> ETA* A plant based diet is cheaper than buying meat and dairy and processed foods.*


I take you are a vegetarian or a vegan by that remake.


----------



## Goblin

Happy Paws said:


> I take you are a vegetarian or a vegan by that remake.


Some studies show a balanced diet including meat are better than vegetarian and vegan. Depends on your bias at a guess. People in the western world do eat too much meat.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Happy Paws said:


> I take you are a vegetarian or a vegan by that remake.


Yes, I'm what is known as "whole food plant based" or WFPB - the type of diet recommended by Dr Esselystyn in the video you watched. Since changing to this way of eating my OH's blood pressure has come down from 150/100 to 115/65 and mine wasn't as high as his to start with but has come down to a similar level although mine is much more subject to stress than his is so that is another area I am trying to work on (not getting stressed over work/timescales and nonsense). We've both had other benefits too , the main one for me being my painful swollen knees that were starting to restrict the length of my dog walks and the type of terrain I could walk on went away within a couple of weeks although I have had one flare up since which was my own fault for being too pig headed to let my OH take Arthur from me when he was pulling me down a steep tor on Dartmoor over very uneven ground because his harness was broken and I only had him on a collar - it settled down quite quickly though. OH had various long term aches & pains go and saw an improvement to his seasonal allergies.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Goblin said:


> Some studies show a balanced diet including meat are better than vegetarian and vegan. Depends on your bias at a guess. People in the western world do eat too much meat.


Also depends on what the vegetarian and vegans are eating  As I'm always saying vegans can still live on junk food - deep fried chips, cake made with vegan margarine, salted peanuts, sugar coated cereals etc etc. I am not suggesting that any old vegan diet is healthier than standard fayre but that a wholefood plant based diet is.

Also depends on who is funding the study. The egg and dairy industry are very worried by the huge turn away from their products on 3 fronts , health, animal welfare and the environment so they are hitting back by funding lots of research to try and prove their products are healthy and that we can't get by without them. It always pays to check who funded any study and what sort of studies that particular scientist has carried out in the past.


----------



## Happy Paws2

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes, I'm what is known as "whole food plant based" or WFPB - the type of diet recommended by Dr Esselystyn in the video you watched. .


I thought you were the way you keep going on about what everyone should be eating. I shall keep on the way I am thank-you there is no chance of me become a WFPB, veggy or vegin. Oh and my blood pressure is fine and I don't really have any pains.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Happy Paws said:


> I thought you were the way you keep going on about what everyone should be eating. I shall keep on the way I am thank-you there is no chance of me become a WFPB, veggy or vegin. Oh and my blood pressure is fine and I don't really have any pains.


No problem. I like to share the information so that people can at least make an informed choice, I'm not out to convert the world just to make sure they know what the alternatives are.


----------



## Happy Paws2

rottiepointerhouse said:


> No problem. I like to share the information so that people can at least make an informed choice, I'm not out to convert the world just to make sure they know what the alternatives are.


and you think we are that thick, that we can't find the information to make up our own minds up if we need to, instead of having it ramped down our throats at every chance.


----------



## KittenKong

Excellent!


----------



## Goblin

Still doesn't explain how the government is fixing things. They've had 7 years and done absolutely nothing. Waiting for manifesto.. well we've seen May break manifesto promises already. We can judge her and the government by her actual actions rather than her words.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Happy Paws said:


> and you think we are that thick, that we can't find the information to make up our own minds up if we need to, instead of having it ramped down our throats at every chance.


Why are you so rude and aggressive? I don't recall ramming anything down your throat or calling you or even implying you were thick. No I don't think many people will look up WFPB diets because most people, particularly in this country have never heard of them or heard about the pioneering work that hundreds of cardiologists in the US are doing, people like Dr Esselstyn, Dr Campbell, Dr Ornish, Dr Barnard, Dr Fuhrman, Dr McDougall who have years of experience and evidence to prove it works. I'm glad that by discussing it on the forum and offering links to some books, articles and videos others have expressed an interest, asked questions, ordered books or watched videos, I'm equally fine about people who don't want to know. I hope some people who are not interested right now might refer back to it in the future. Please feel free to put me on ignore as you said you were going to earlier if you find me so annoying


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Why are you so rude and aggressive? I don't recall ramming anything down your throat or calling you or even implying you were thick. No I don't think many people will look up WFPB diets because most people, particularly in this country have never heard of them or heard about the pioneering work that hundreds of cardiologists in the US are doing, people like Dr Esselstyn, Dr Campbell, Dr Ornish, Dr Barnard, Dr Fuhrman, Dr McDougall who have years of experience and evidence to prove it works. I'm glad that by discussing it on the forum and offering links to some books, articles and videos others have expressed an interest, asked questions, ordered books or watched videos, I'm equally fine about people who don't want to know. I hope some people who are not interested right now might refer back to it in the future. Please feel free to put me on ignore as you said you were going to earlier if you find me so annoying


You do seem to be preaching rottiepointerhouse, easy to do when passionate about something. I would suggest you start a new thread about it if you really wish to inform people 

How is the government dealing with eating habits? How is growing poverty helping people with diets? These questions, relevant to the thread you ignore.







​


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> . Have you done any research on STPs yet?
> 
> Unlike you I don't have all day to troll the internet looking for derogatory thing to say about the tories or anyone else you don't like
> 
> I have better things to do with my time than sit here looking for silly quotes and cartoons to put other people off
> 
> When will you stop trying to brainwash everyone into your way of thinking
> 
> You believe what you want and let everyone else believe what they want to believe in


Wanting to be informed isn't trolling. The NHS is facing the biggest crisis in its history - Fact. Schools, the fireservice, prisons, police, councils, social care & so on are all in crisis - fact This is the truth whatever you choose to believe.

There has been a massive rise in food banks, poverty, homelessness since the tories came to power. UK Debt almost tripled. Thousands of badgers have been culled & thousands more will be. You can disbelieve all you like it doesn't alter the facts. The evidence is there for all to see, you'd have to be wilfully blind not to.

I believe in evidence & facts, that's what I base my opinions on. Vacuous soundbites repeated over & over & over again are what you call brainwashing

(con man Lynton Crosby is the master.)

'Strong economic plan'. 'Coalition of chaos'. 'Strong and stable'












Dr Pepper said:


> Thanks Havoc, that's what we need first hand experiences so we can see how the NHS is actually working. Your experience obviously wasn't a good one, others here reported the opposite.
> 
> If only more people would tell of their experiences rather than posting meaningless anonymous social media twaddle then a proper and reasoned debate could take place.


This is a real doctor, are you telling me he doesn't know what he's talking about? And if you dispute what he's saying, can you please explain why hes wrong?


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> Excellent!


That is excellent! Its blindingly obvious this is a power grab. Hard to believe so many people are being fooled by this sinister woman.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Wanting to be informed isn't trolling. The NHS is facing the biggest crisis in its history - Fact. Schools, the fireservice, prisons, police, councils, social care & so on are all in crisis - fact This is the truth whatever you choose to believe.
> 
> There has been a massive rise in food banks, poverty, homelessness since the tories came to power. UK Debt almost tripled. Thousands of badgers have been culled & thousands more will be. You can disbelieve all you like it doesn't alter the facts. The evidence is there for all to see, you'd have to be wilfully blind not to.
> 
> I believe in evidence & facts, that's what I base my opinions on. Vacuous soundbites repeated over & over & over again are what you call brainwashing
> 
> (con man Lynton Crosby is the master.)
> 
> 'Strong economic plan'. 'Coalition of chaos'. 'Strong and stable'
> 
> View attachment 308761
> 
> 
> This is a real doctor, are you telling me he doesn't know what he's talking about? And if you dispute what he's saying, can you please explain why hes wrong?


LOL, that's ONE real doctor, with an agenda. The two doctors I know are happy in their work. Sure they say it could be improved but they don't think the end is near by any stretch.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> LOL, that's ONE real doctor, with an agenda. The two doctors I know are happy in their work. Sure they say it could be improved but they don't think the end is near by any stretch.


No its not ONE doctor. Didn't you see the huge mandate for the junior doctors strike?? Can you give your counter arguments why he is wrong then?


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> There was a programme on TV this last week or so and a young A&E doctor arrived at work saying she looks for how the ambulances are backed up as she goes in to start her shift. I have no idea which hospital it was but I'm reasonably sure my experience wasn't unusual and I'm equally sure it's something which has got and is getting worse. I also see the other end of the process because my dad lives in a place which has an IC (interim care) wing. This is a few rooms/flats which are exactly what they say - an interim place for those which don't have any medical need to be in hospital but need somewhere while permanent care packages are put in place for them to return home. It's an obvious solution to bed blocking and there should be loads more. There has been a HUGE increase in 'failed discharges'. These are people who end up back in hospital because they weren't really well enough to leave. I do have a source inside one hospital to be sure these are failed discharges - the very term is one I've learned in the last few months. Used to be quite a thing to see a paramedic car or emergency ambulance outside the front of the building when I visit my dad which I do every day. It's now a familiar sight and almost always for the IC wing. How much pressure must be on the hospital staff to clear beds and how often are they making a decision they wouldn't otherwise make?


I've learned something, thank you. I didn't know there was such a thing as a IC unit, it's something that makes total sense and should be readily available on the NHS. Perhaps we should be lobbying our MP for more of these to be built, it seems a inexpensive way to free up bed-blocking. If people started shouting about things like this that could be done, rather than moaning about what they think isn't being done, then change might actually happen. In my humble opinion.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> No its not ONE doctor. Didn't you see the huge mandate for the junior doctors strike?? Can you give your counter arguments why he is wrong then?


As I said earlier I'll base my opinion on my own experience and people I actually know in the NHS. If you want to believe total strangers that's your prerogative (I had to Google how to spell that!!).


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> That is excellent! Its blindingly obvious this is a power grab. Hard to believe so many people are being fooled by this sinister woman.


I am voting against Theresa May but still stand by voting leave.

I have many reasons why I am voting against her and it is nothing to do with the Referendum results. I want to set the record straight that I initially backed the Tory Blues because they were the only party offering to uphold the Referendum results but as everyone knows this has now changed as other parties are offering Brexit. My decision to vote against the Tories is more to do with why I make my decision everytime I cast a vote in a General Election, that is I judge the party in power on there performance. I'd prefer to wake up on the 9th June 2017 with Labour in power, I know some of you dread this thought but I'd prefer to wake up to Corbyn entering Downing Street than 5 more years of the Conservatives in power and Theresa May entering Downing Street. Imagine for a second what this country would be like in 5 years time with the Conservatives in power? I will leave that thought with you and just to let you know it is horrifying me just thinking for a split second what it would be like.

Many say wait for the Manifestos to be published before committing myself to this decision. I don't need a Manifesto to help make me make this decision, the evidence is all around us how the Conservatives have performed in the last 7 years. Don't forget Cameron and Osborne couldn't tell the truth and now Theresa May is doing the same.

This is the only chance we will have to get May and the Conservatives out of power in the next 5 years. Don't judge them on Brexit, judge them on there performance.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> I've learned something, thank you. I didn't know there was such a thing as a IC unit, it's something that makes total sense and should be readily available on the NHS. Perhaps we should be lobbying our MP for more of these to be built, it seems a inexpensive way to free up bed-blocking. If people started shouting about things like this that could be done, rather than moaning about what they think isn't being done, then change might actually happen. In my humble opinion.


Where have you been? lol People are shouting. Doctors have striked, thousands upon thousands have marched on numerous occasions to save our NHS.

Just a couple of weeks ago 250,000 marched on Westminster. The government aren't listening.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Goblin said:


> You do seem to be preaching rottiepointerhouse, easy to do when passionate about something. I would suggest you start a new thread about it if you really wish to inform people
> 
> How is the government dealing with eating habits? How is growing poverty helping people with diets? These questions, relevant to the thread you ignore.
> View attachment 308767
> ​


Thank you Goblin, I really appreciate your comments :Hilarious:Hilarious I'll start a new thread as and when I feel its appropriate, not when you tell me to  The NHS is being discussed a great deal on this thread and not just by me, preventative medicine is therefore very relevant as it could save the NHS billions. Do you not care about future generations of children becoming sick with Type 2 Diabetes and heart disease at younger and younger ages?

As for government policy on nutrition - no party has a proper policy to my knowledge although for the 4th time of saying it "when the manifestos are released it is something I will be looking for" Regrading how the government are dealing with eating habits I suppose the best they have come up with is the sugar tax

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35824071

not ideal, nowhere near far enough but better than a slap in the face with a wet fish.

This is all I could find from the Labour party dated 2015 although if you have more I would like to see/read it.

"We want every adult to be able to make informed, healthy choices that are right for them. Whether it is deciding to cycle to work, taking up a sport or quitting cigarettes, today we are setting a range of actions we will take to support people to achieve this.

"Alongside this, we are setting our clear intention to take robust action to protect children from harm where voluntary measures have failed including regulating to limit the amount of sugar, fat salt in food marketed substantially to children, introducing standardised packaging of tobacco that this Government has failed to achieve, and cracking down on the high-strength, low-cost alcohol products that fuel binge drinking and do most harm to health."


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> As I said earlier I'll base my opinion on my own experience and people I actually know in the NHS. If you want to believe total strangers that's your prerogative (I had to Google how to spell that!!).


Well when the NHS is gone, you can't say you weren't warned.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> I didn't know there was such a thing as a IC unit, it's something that makes total sense and should be readily available on the NHS.


Not quite sure how it works but these are NHS beds in a private sheltered housing complex - it isn't a care home as such. I liken it to when a builder has to build a few 'affordable' houses on a large housing estate though I'm sure it isn't really the same


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> Wanting to be informed isn't trolling. The NHS is facing the biggest crisis in its history - Fact. Schools, the fireservice, prisons, police, councils, social care & so on are all in crisis - fact This is the truth whatever you choose to believe.
> 
> There has been a massive rise in food banks, poverty, homelessness since the tories came to power. UK Debt almost tripled. Thousands of badgers have been culled & thousands more will be. You can disbelieve all you like it doesn't alter the facts. The evidence is there for all to see, you'd have to be wilfully blind not to.
> 
> I believe in evidence & facts, that's what I base my opinions on. Vacuous soundbites repeated over & over & over again are what you call brainwashing
> 
> (con man Lynton Crosby is the master.)
> 
> 'Strong economic plan'. 'Coalition of chaos'. 'Strong and stable'
> 
> View attachment 308761
> 
> 
> Contrary to what you believe we are not idiots on here and are quite capable of finding out for ourselves and do not need yot force feeding your "facts" down out throats
> 
> If we look hard enough we can find just the opposite to your views
> 
> As I said before, I have better things to do than spend hours on the internet as you do just to tell us things we already know or can find out and yes, I call what you are trying to do brainwashing but as I don't read all your articles etc, I am not being brainwashed


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Where have you been? lol People are shouting. Doctors have striked, thousands upon thousands have marched on numerous occasions to save our NHS.
> 
> Just a couple of weeks ago 250,000 marched on Westminster. The government aren't listening.
> 
> View attachment 308773
> 
> 
> View attachment 308777
> 
> 
> View attachment 308774
> 
> 
> View attachment 308775
> 
> 
> View attachment 308776
> 
> 
> View attachment 308778


Please don't take this the wrong way because it's a serious question. Do you have any real experience of the NHS or know people that work in it. Or do you just follow social media?


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Please don't take this the wrong way because it's a serious question. Do you have any real experience of the NHS or know people that work in it. Or do you just follow social media?


I've been on a protest march with Junior Doctors, nurses & other NHS workers


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> Not quite sure how it works but these are NHS beds in a private sheltered housing complex - it isn't a care home as such. I liken it to when a builder has to build a few 'affordable' houses on a large housing estate though I'm sure it isn't really the same


Actually it'd make total sense to be the same and a cracking idea with minimal costs.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> I've been on a protest march with Junior Doctors, nurses & other NHS workers


But what is your actual experience on the receiving end of the NHS, what treatment did you receive and how did it go? Have you spoken to doctors and nurses that didn't go on protest marches?


----------



## noushka05

@Bisbow So you can find opposing evidence the NHS, schools etc aren't in crisis? Badger cull never happened & wont be rolled out? Poverty, homelessness, foodbanks haven't massively increased?


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> As for government policy on nutrition - no party has a proper policy to my knowledge


I wish I could remember the details but wasn't there a discussion document, full of recommendations which somehow turned from a hefty tome to not much more than a leaflet by the time the government had finished with it. The only reason I know is because Jamie Oliver was on the committee (love him or hate him at least he was there) and was therefore the obvious person to go for to comment on what was actually published. The shock was very apparent when he realised months of work had been ignored - or at the very least overturned by powerful forces.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> But what is your actual experience on the receiving end of the NHS? Have you spoken to doctors and nurses that didn't go on protest marches?


Go on then, just show me some counter evidence to prove I'm wrong. I'm really not interested in anecdotes either. Just references please.


----------



## Elles

A problem with going by your own experience is it can depend on which department you have experience of. If it's a&e queues, the lack of available gps, erratic social care, long waits for an ambulance and sitting in walk in centres, you can easily think there's a crisis. If you've been sent for tests, are treated efficiently in and out in 30 minutes, attend a new purpose built diagnostic centre or clinic and are given access to the newest techniques and equipment, you can wonder what people are worried about.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Go on then, just show me some counter evidence to prove I'm wrong. I'm really not interested in anecdotes either. Just references please.


How can I give references for what I and my family have experienced? I didn't document it, film it, post it on social media or report it to the press. I'm just conveying my own experiences. Now perhaps you can do the same and a reasoned discussion can be had.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Actually it'd make total sense to be the same and a cracking idea with minimal costs.


It is staffed separately from the rest of the complex and I'm honestly not sure how it's funded.


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> It is staffed separately from the rest of the complex and I'm honestly not sure how it's funded.


It's the sort of issue that needs further investigation and support. Like the social housing if could be so beneficial and cost effective.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> I wish I could remember the details but wasn't there a discussion document, full of recommendations which somehow turned from a hefty tome to not much more than a leaflet by the time the government had finished with it. The only reason I know is because Jamie Oliver was on the committee (love him or hate him at least he was there) and was therefore the obvious person to go for to comment on what was actually published. The shock was very apparent when he realised months of work had been ignored - or at the very least overturned by powerful forces.


I can remember watching his very early shows about school dinners and successive meetings with different cabinet ministers. They pretty much all fobbed him off and watered down his recommendations.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> How can I give references for what I and my family have experienced? I didn't document it, film it, post it on social media or report it to the press. I'm just conveying my own experiences. Now perhaps you can do the same and a reasoned discussion can be had.


You're missing the point again. This is a demolition by stealth. Things are gradually being removed. As more & more services are scrapped. A&Es closed & downgraded. Hospitals closed the effects will be felt everywhere. If only you would research STPs.

You seem to believe the tories - well believe this one.


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I can remember watching his very early shows about school dinners and successive meetings with different cabinet ministers. They pretty much all fobbed him off and watered down his recommendations.


Follow the money - every time. How many of those ministers held directorships with food companies?


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Do you not care about future generations of children becoming sick with Type 2 Diabetes and heart disease at younger and younger ages?


Wow... continuing to preach then. Did you know at least one study (austrian I think) showed vegetarianism and veganism led to a rise in mental health issues? You have a 17 year study (11,000 people) which shows little difference between vegetarians and health concious people eating a standard diet. Simply eating fresh fuit daily decreased the risk of heart problems, not veganism. Mortality rate was the same. You have at least one study which shows a low carb, high fat diet actually outperforming a vegetarian diet for weight loss with additional more favorable overall metabolic effects. Another which shows a Mediterranean diet (not vegetarian) most effective in controlling diabetes over 2 years. Maybe you should get off your soapbox. Vegetarianism isn't the be all and end all. So you can take your preaching and I'll make my own decisions about health including for my daughter based on a wide range of information.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> I am voting against Theresa May but still stand by voting leave.
> 
> I have many reasons why I am voting against her and it is nothing to do with the Referendum results. I want to set the record straight that I initially backed the Tory Blues because they were the only party offering to uphold the Referendum results but as everyone knows this has now changed as other parties are offering Brexit. My decision to vote against the Tories is more to do with why I make my decision everytime I cast a vote in a General Election, that is I judge the party in power on there performance. I'd prefer to wake up on the 9th June 2017 with Labour in power, I know some of you dread this thought but I'd prefer to wake up to Corbyn entering Downing Street than 5 more years of the Conservatives in power and Theresa May entering Downing Street. Imagine for a second what this country would be like in 5 years time with the Conservatives in power? I will leave that thought with you and just to let you know it is horrifying me just thinking for a split second what it would be like.
> 
> Many say wait for the Manifestos to be published before committing myself to this decision. I don't need a Manifesto to help make me make this decision, the evidence is all around us how the Conservatives have performed in the last 7 years. Don't forget Cameron and Osborne couldn't tell the truth and now Theresa May is doing the same.
> 
> This is the only chance we will have to get May and the Conservatives out of power in the next 5 years. Don't judge them on Brexit, judge them on there performance.


I respect that even if I'm a solid EU supporter.

The link did come from the pro EU group Sixteen Million Rising. There's far more issues to consider in addition to Brexit of course, such as the NHS amongst other things.

As you rightly say, "Don't judge them on Brexit but their overall performance".


----------



## Elles

Maybe it's that I didn't follow the links, but I totally missed that rottiepointerhouse was promoting vegetarianism, or veganism.


----------



## Team_Trouble

Elles said:


> Maybe it's that I didn't follow the links, but I totally missed that rottiepointerhouse was promoting vegetarianism, or veganism.


I must have missed that too....


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> I respect that even if I'm a solid EU supporter.
> 
> The link did come from the pro EU group Sixteen Million Rising. There's far more issues to consider in addition to Brexit of course, such as the NHS amongst other things.
> 
> As you rightly say, "Don't judge them on Brexit but their overall performance".


Same here  We've all got to come together & unite to get this toxic government out.

This is a brilliant article by George Monbiot @stockwellcat. *If ever there was a time to vote Labour, it is now.* https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/25/vote-labour-jeremy-corbyn-theresa-may

These two sentences sum things up for me.

_I'd rather live with Jeremy Corbyn's gentle dithering in pursuit of a better world than give May a mandate to destroy what remains of British decency

I would love to elect a government led by someone both competent and humane, but this option will not be on the ballot paper. The choice today is between brutal efficiency in pursuit of a disastrous agenda, and gentle inefficiency in pursuit of a better world. I know which I favour_.

.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Same here  We've all got to come together & unite to get this toxic government out.
> 
> This is a brilliant article by George Monbiot @stockwellcat. *If ever there was a time to vote Labour, it is now.* https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/25/vote-labour-jeremy-corbyn-theresa-may
> 
> These two sentences sum things up for me.
> 
> _I'd rather live with Jeremy Corbyn's gentle dithering in pursuit of a better world than give May a mandate to destroy what remains of British decency
> 
> I would love to elect a government led by someone both competent and humane, but this option will not be on the ballot paper. The choice today is between brutal efficiency in pursuit of a disastrous agenda, and gentle inefficiency in pursuit of a better world. I know which I favour_.
> 
> .


In my personal view Labour is the only other party that stands a chance of being elected because look at the support Corbyn had last year in the leadership contest. Now if all those people that supported Corbyn last year voted this year then Labour may well be in with a chance of winning the GE.

Wouldn't it be funny that the GE back fires on TM.


----------



## stockwellcat.

*May says Corbyn election victory 'could happen' as she warns over voter complacency*

http://news.sky.com/story/may-says-...-as-she-warns-over-voter-complacency-10856500

Is May starting to worry?

*Jeremy Corbyn: 'Insecure' Theresa May will make damaging mistakes*
http://news.sky.com/story/jeremy-corbyn-insecure-theresa-may-will-make-damaging-mistakes-10855598


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Goblin said:


> Wow... continuing to preach then. Did you know at least one study (austrian I think) showed vegetarianism and veganism led to a rise in mental health issues? You have a 17 year study (11,000 people) which shows little difference between vegetarians and health concious people eating a standard diet. Simply eating fresh fuit daily decreased the risk of heart problems, not veganism. Mortality rate was the same. You have at least one study which shows a low carb, high fat diet actually outperforming a vegetarian diet for weight loss with additional more favorable overall metabolic effects. Another which shows a Mediterranean diet (not vegetarian) most effective in controlling diabetes over 2 years. Maybe you should get off your soapbox. Vegetarianism isn't the be all and end all. So you can take your preaching and I'll make my own decisions about health including for my daughter based on a wide range of information.


Why don't you grow up. Did you read what I said earlier - I have never claimed vegetarianism or even veganism is healthier than a standard healthy diet because vegetarians often eat a lot of eggs and cheese and plenty of vegans live on chips and veggie burgers. Read what I say not what you think I've said. I won't even bother to link you the studies or show you the lectures by cardiologists, cancer specialists, diabetic consultants etc etc. I will leave you to consider the implications for teenage girls of the Western diet which brings about early puberty, early menstruation and therefore a much higher risk of breast cancer in later life unlike girls in countries where they don't consume much meat and any dairy because I'm sure you have already studied it and know all about it. You do not have to read my posts, you can put me on ignore or just pass them by. I have no wish whatsoever to interact with you so please don't feel the need to interact with me


----------



## Theresa May

stockwellcat said:


> *May says Corbyn election victory 'could happen' as she warns over voter complacency*
> 
> Is May starting to worry?


I am starting to worry quite a bit Stockwell.

If one is absolutely honest, Jezza is no worry at all. One has to gee up the troops and all that, hence the falsely modest talk about complacency.

But when I heard that you were changing horses, well that's the giddy limit old chap. I hadn't posted so far because I rather assumed you would revert to being a true blue Tory by the weekend as usual. Evidently, it hasn't happened though. What's the problem old bean? You aren't letting the leftie mugwumps get you down are you?

Yours, rather worried - Theresa.


----------



## kimthecat

Goblin said:


> Wow... continuing to preach then. Did you know at least one study (austrian I think) showed vegetarianism and veganism led to a rise in mental health issues? .


 Really ? That's a surprise. I'd like to read that one . do you have a link ?


----------



## rona

mugwumps is or could be a term of respect
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Mugwump
A politically un-enslaved man. A man with high, definite principles

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mugwump
_Mugwump_ is an anglicized version of a word used by Massachusett Indians to mean "war leader." The word was sometimes jestingly applied in early America to someone who was the "head guy." The first political mugwumps were Republicans in the presidential race of 1884 who chose to support Democratic candidate Grover Cleveland rather than their own party's nominee. Their independence prompted one 1930s humorist to define a mugwump as "a bird who sits with its mug on one side of the fence and its wump on the other."

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=m.....69i57j0l5.4658j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
The Mugwumps were a 1960s folk rock band, based in New York City, that featured later members of the The Mamas & the Papas and The Lovin' Spoonful.


----------



## kimthecat

Dr Pepper said:


> . If you want to believe total strangers that's your prerogative (I had to Google how to spell that!!).


 i thought it was perogative. That's another word Ive been saying wrong .


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> In my personal view Labour is the only other party that stands a chance of being elected because look at the support Corbyn had last year in the leadership contest. Now if all those people that supported Corbyn last year voted this year then Labour may well be in with a chance of winning the GE.
> 
> Wouldn't it be funny that the GE back fires on TM.


Corbyn has all the charisma of a wet flannel !


----------



## stockwellcat.

Theresa May said:


> I am starting to worry quite a bit Stockwell.
> 
> If one is absolutely honest, Jezza is no worry at all. One has to gee up the troops and all that, hence the falsely modest talk about complacency.
> 
> But when I heard that you were changing horses, well that's the giddy limit old chap. I hadn't posted so far because I rather assumed you would revert to being a true blue Tory by the weekend as usual. Evidently, it hasn't happened though. What's the problem old bean? You aren't letting the leftie mugwumps get you down are you?
> 
> Yours, rather worried - Theresa.


How entertaining. But I am afraid I did not fall for you being the PM Theresa May. Your age is wrong on your profile. Theresa May is 61 not 47.








So hahaha. Plus I don't think for one second Theresa May would waste her time coming on a pet forum to defend herself.


----------



## rona

kimthecat said:


> Corbyn has all the charisma of a wet flannel !


And Theresa has charisma? Hahaha


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> Really ? That's a surprise. I'd like to read that one . do you have a link ?


I have some 

*Vegetarian diets are associated with healthy mood states: a cross-sectional study in Seventh Day Adventist* *adults* by Bonnie L Beezhold published in the June 2010 issue of the _Nutrition Journal_ found, "The vegetarian diet profile does not appear to adversely affect mood despite low intake of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids."1 Vegetarians reported significantly less negative emotion than omnivores, as measured by two tests of emotional state: the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS), and the Profile of Mood States (POMS) questionnaires. The authors note that, "Emerging evidence suggests that fish consumption has a protective effect on mental health due to the long-chain omega-3 fatty acid content." However, vegetarians have low intakes of these omega-3 fats (EPA and DHA) because they do not eat fish, and yet were found in this study to have better moods. But vegetarians do have a high intake of the basic omega-3 fat, alpha linolenic acid (ALA), which is the precursor to all of the long chain omega-3 fats, most important being eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA).

*Risks of Copper and Iron Toxicity during Aging in Humans* by George J. Brewer published in the February 2010 issue of _Chemical Research in Toxicology_ found that, "Diseases of aging, such as Alzheimer's disease, other neurodegenerative diseases, arteriosclerosis, diabetes mellitus, and more, may all be contributed to by excess copper and iron. A very disturbing study has found that in the general population those in the highest fifth of copper intake, if they are also eating a relatively high fat diet, lose cognition (brain function) at over three times the normal rate... both (minerals) contribute to the production of excess damaging oxidant radicals."

The author's recommendations are to:

Avoid almost all multivitamin/multi-mineral pills because they contain copper and/or iron.

Avoid eating all kinds of meats because they are plentiful in both minerals. Copper and iron are much more bio-available from meat than from vegetable foods. Liver and shellfish are particularly high in copper. Red meat is particularly high in bio-available iron.

*Vegetables Will Save Your Mind*

*Associations of vegetable and fruit consumption with age-related cognitive change *by Martha Clare Morris from the Rush Institute of Health and Aging, Chicago, IL, published in the October 2006 issue of the journal _Neurology _found, "High vegetable but not fruit consumption may be associated with slower rate of cognitive decline with older age."1 This six-year study of 65-year and older Chicago residents found a 35% slower decline in cognitive function each year for those who ate the most vegetables. In the entire group of people under study the average number of vegetable servings a day was 2.3, with a range from 0 to 8.2. Green leafy vegetables, summer squash, eggplant, and kale were some of the vegetables found to be valuable-however, this list should not be considered exclusively beneficial. The authors believe the benefits to the nervous system were from the antioxidants and other bioactive compounds (like flavanoid). Even though fruits are also rich in these bioactive substances, the researchers could not explain why their findings failed to support similar benefits from fruits.

_
Depression is a common psychiatric disorder, characterized by a depressed mood, loss of interest or pleasure, feelings of guilt or low self-worth, low energy, and poor concentration. Two studies using a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet with a primary intention of reversing cardiac disease have shown significant improvements in mental health and quality of life, as well as significant reductions in heart attack and stroke risk.7,8 One of these studies showed response rates of approximately 90% for clinical depression, 85% for stress, and 87% for mental health.7 Changes in brain chemistry account for these benefits. A meal high in carbohydrates increases the rate that an amino acid, tryptophan, enters the brain, leading to an increase in the level of the neurotransmitter serotonin that improves mood.9

7) Vizza J, Neatrour DM, Felton PM, Ellsworth DL. Improvement in psychosocial functioning during an intensive cardiovascular lifestyle modification program. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2007 Nov-Dec;27(6):376-83.

8) Weidner G, Connor SL, Hollis JF, Connor WE. Improvements in hostility and depression in relation to dietary change and cholesterol lowering. The Family Heart Study. Ann Intern Med. 1992 Nov 15;117(10):820-3.

9) Wurtman RJ. Effects of normal meals rich in carbohydrates or proteins on plasma tryptophan and tyrosine ratios. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003 Jan;77(1):128-32.

_


----------



## Theresa May

stockwellcat said:


> How entertaining. But I am afraid I did not fall for you being the PM Theresa May. Your age is wrong on your profile. Theresa May is 61 not 47.


Damn it all, that's what happens when one trusts Boris to do something. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt though; it must have been an attempt at flattery. You are an obvious genius though Stockwell, figuring that out all by yourself.

Toodle pip.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Theresa May said:


> Damn it all, that's what happens when one trusts Boris to do something. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt though; it must have been an attempt at flattery. You are an obvious genius though Stockwell, figuring that out all by yourself.
> 
> Toodle pip.


And you couldn't figure out your own age yourself? Hahaha

Off you go then :Troll


----------



## Dr Pepper

kimthecat said:


> i thought it was perogative. That's another word Ive been saying wrong .


Oh bollocks, well one of us is probably right!!!


----------



## kimthecat

rona said:


> And Theresa has charisma? Hahaha


 At least she got a bit if life in her.  I keep looking at Corbyn and wondering when he's going to wake up .


----------



## kimthecat

Dr Pepper said:


> Oh bollocks, well one of us is probably right!!!




Don't worry , you're right !


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I will leave you to consider the implications for teenage girls of the Western diet which brings about early puberty, early menstruation and therefore a much higher risk of breast cancer in later life unlike girls in countries where they don't consume much meat and any dairy because I'm sure you have already studied it and know all about it. You do not have to read my posts, you can put me on ignore or just pass them by. I have no wish whatsoever to interact with you so please don't feel the need to interact with me


Well you can put me on ignore as well if you don't like me answering. Diet is always subjective and even the experts cannot agree. You can also point to other factors such as exercise or lack of it in modern society. Of interest when looking at american studies and things like puberty: The livestock industry uses anabolic steroids testosterone to increase muscle mass in their cattle which boosts the production of male sex hormones in both girls and boys. American beef was found to contain up to 600 more times the levels of estrogen than Japanese beef which may facilitate estrogen accumulation in the body. Personally I find that frightening and something people need to consider when looking at trade deals with the states. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...n-doesnt-cause-damage/articleshow/6327021.cms is another worrying article. Think preventing these coming into the UK should be the government's responsibility, not the UK individual's diet. You can go on and on about prevention but the government is not responsible for the personal lives of people and should not legislate change (prohibition anyone). It should educate and push for change at the ground level. Easy way of doing this is by providing healthy school meals and educating kids. In my time it was called home economics, now I believe it's called food technology but it should be something which is pushed as an important subject. It's a social change, one of the hardest to implement. It's also one of the slowest which comes back once again to the fact the government needs to be doing something about the NHS now for the conditions which exist now and are likely in the next few years. The current government are not.



kimthecat said:


> Really ? That's a surprise. I'd like to read that one . do you have a link ?


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3917888/


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> At least she got a bit if life in her.  I keep looking at Corbyn and wondering when he's going to wake up .


At least Corbyn isn't in hiding. Unlike May he's not afraid to meet & speak to ordinary people.


----------



## noushka05

Goblin said:


> Of interest when looking at american studies and things like puberty: The livestock industry uses anabolic steroids testosterone to increase muscle mass in their cattle which boosts the production of male sex hormones in both girls and boys. American beef was found to contain up to 600 more times the levels of estrogen than Japanese beef which may facilitate estrogen accumulation in the body. Personally I find that frightening and something people need to consider when looking at trade deals with the states.


This worries me a lot.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> At least Corbyn isn't in hiding. Unlike May he's not afraid to meet & speak to ordinary people.


Theresa May is hiding away because she is so cocksure (cocksure means: confident in an excessive or arrogant way) that she will win the GE, she can't possibly lose according to the polls (which by the way have been so wrong in the past).


----------



## Odin_cat

I don't think there's any way that encouraging people to give up meat and dairy will help the Nhs, people will just ignore the advice.

I think the focus should be encouraging people to eat more fruit and veg. In my opinion the government should tax processed foods and use the money to subsidise fruit and vegetables.


----------



## havoc

kimthecat said:


> Corbyn has all the charisma of a wet flannel !


Agree 100%. Blair had plenty. Is individual charisma really one of the things we should put top of our list when deciding which policies we agree with? Maybe it wouldn't be such a bad thing if everyone tried a bit harder not to be taken in by the cult of personality.


----------



## Arnie83

havoc said:


> Agree 100%. Blair had plenty. Is individual charisma really one of the things we should put top of our list when deciding which policies we agree with? Maybe it wouldn't be such a bad thing if everyone tried a bit harder not to be taken in by the cult of personality.


Agreed, but it appears to be getting worse. I don't remember it in past GEs but Theresa May has taken to saying "A vote for _*me*_ ..." (and then some nonsense) rather than a vote for the _Tories_. We're not supposed to be voting for you, Theresa. You aren't going to be President.


----------



## KittenKong

This is very worrying, not only for the future of democracy but for the Conservative Party itself.

Apparently it's been reported the Conservative branding on banners in the North of England has been replaced by TM.

What is that telling you? The election being called soon after the events in Turkey doesn't sound like a co-incidence...


----------



## Dr Pepper

kimthecat said:


> Don't worry , you're right !


I was wasn't I, had to happen at some point. Had to double check though, because like you I thought it was "per..." not "pre..." which is why I couldn't spell it.


----------



## davidc

stockwellcat said:


> Theresa May is hiding away because she is so cocksure (cocksure means: confident in an excessive or arrogant way) that she will win the GE, she can't possibly lose according to the polls (which by the way have been so wrong in the past).


I don't think she will win, I think Labour will despite the media bias.
Thousands of young people have registered to vote recently and according to polls most young people actually like Jeremy Corbyn. Plus aren't Labour closing the gap in polls?
Plus our own pf one had them miles behind now they are 2 points behind (at time of posting). Lol


----------



## 3dogs2cats

rottiepointerhouse said:


> *Vegetables Will Save Your Mind*


No they won`t.


----------



## KittenKong

davidc said:


> I don't think she will win, I think Labour will despite the media bias.
> Thousands of young people have registered to vote recently and according to polls most young people actually like Jeremy Corbyn. Plus aren't Labour closing the gap in polls?
> Plus our own pf one had them miles behind now they are 2 points behind (at time of posting). Lol


Apparently the polls suggest May is the UK's most popular leader ever!

Either they've asked mainly far right activists or is clearly fake news in the hope of creating apathy in the sense of, "Voting is a waste of time as May's going to win anyway".

Let's prove them wrong!


----------



## Dr Pepper

KittenKong said:


> Let's prove them wrong!


No, let's not.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Arnie83 said:


> Agreed, but it appears to be getting worse. I don't remember it in past GEs but Theresa May has taken to saying "A vote for _*me*_ ..." (and then some nonsense) rather than a vote for the _Tories_. We're not supposed to be voting for you, Theresa. You aren't going to be President.


 When she says "vote for me" It sounds odd. I can`t remember hearing that from any other party leader in past GE`s. I think she needs to remember her name is not actually on every voting paper just those in her own constituency.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

3dogs2cats said:


> No they won`t.


To clarify that was the title of a study I linked to and not my words.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Political Polling - 25th April 2017*
*Tory leads slips slightly to 17 points as
both major parties consolidate their vote.*
Theresa May's poll lead has dropped back slightly to 17 points over Labour, as the two major parties take votes from the smaller parties.

The Conservatives are on 47% (up 2 points from last week), while Labour is on 30% (up 4 points).

UKIP remains in fourth place on 7% (down 2 points), with the Lib Dems just in third place on 8% (down 3 points).










This is the first poll where we have included a past vote weight in addition to our party propensity and EU referendum vote weights. For the most part our party propensity weighting helps to ensure the number of voters for each party in 2015 is accurately reflected in our sample. However, we have noticed some varied responses to our 2015 past vote question during the past couple of months, even after taking account of party propensity, so we have included this in our weighting targets to ensure this remains stable over the course of the campaign.

Leader Approval Ratings

After her strong figures last week, Theresa May's approval ratings have dropped slightly to net +17% this week. Currently almost half (48%) approve of the way she is handling her job and 31% disapprove.










Just over two in five (44%) think that Theresa May would be the best prime minister (down from her 49% immediately after the election was called). On the other hand Jeremy Corbyn has had one of his best scores, with 19% saying he would make the best prime minister.

A quarter (25%) said neither of them would be the best PM and 11% didn't know.


----------



## KittenKong

Comments following May's appearance on the Andrew Marr show earlier today.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

rottiepointerhouse said:


> To clarify that was the title of a study I linked to and not my words.


Yes I know it wasn`t you saying it RPH but the "Vegetables will save your mind£ really, really pissed me off. Too sensitive subject for me to get into, so sorry I should have not replied.


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-39758977


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

3dogs2cats said:


> Yes I know it wasn`t you saying it RPH but the "Vegetables will save your mind£ really, really pissed me off. Too sensitive subject for me to get into, so sorry I should have not replied.


Please don't apologise, would you like me to remove that headline to the study?


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...d-on-marr-not-to-use-soundbites-a7710021.html


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Odin_cat said:


> I don't think there's any way that encouraging people to give up meat and dairy will help the Nhs, people will just ignore the advice.
> 
> I think the focus should be encouraging people to eat more fruit and veg. In my opinion the government should tax processed foods and use the money to subsidise fruit and vegetables.


Some people will of course ignore the advice, just like some choose to ignore the advice to give up smoking but if the information isn't offered/shared how will things change? If I went to my doctors with chest pain I'd like to at least be told there are alternatives to drugs and surgery so that I can make an informed decision. However I agree we should be promoting eating more fruit and vegetables and heavily taxing the makers and suppliers of unhealthy foods with that money going straight back into the pot for preventative education and subsidising fruit & veg is a great idea.


----------



## KittenKong

?!?!?!????!!!!!!

Apparently she told Robert Peston's ITV programme she will not raise VAT soon after telling Andrew Marr raises in taxation couldn't be ruled out.

Clearly thinks ITV viewers are more stupid.

How can anyone still possibly believe a word that comes out of her mouth?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 308892
> 
> 
> ?!?!?!????!!!!!!
> 
> Apparently she told Robert Peston's ITV programme she will not raise VAT soon after telling Andrew Marr raises in taxation couldn't be ruled out.
> 
> Clearly thinks ITV viewers are more stupid.
> 
> How can anyone still possibly believe a word that comes out of her mouth?


I haven't seen either programme but perhaps she means they will not raise VAT but they can't rule out raising the other two?


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> I keep looking at Corbyn and wondering when he's going to wake up .


Sorry, @kimthecat, this has nowt to do with owt; but yesterday I discovered he is married. She keeps a low profile!


----------



## Calvine

KittenKong said:


> "Voting is a waste of time as May's going to win anyway''


This is the attitude that really infuriates me. So feeble and drippish.


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> Sorry, @kimthecat, this has nowt to do with owt; but yesterday I discovered he is married. She keeps a low profile!


She certainly does. I didnt know Boris was married with four children . They keep a low profile too.


----------



## kimthecat

Dr Pepper said:


> I was wasn't I, had to happen at some point. Had to double check though, because like you I thought it was "per..." not "pre..." which is why I couldn't spell it.


 How weird is that . I shall ask around and see if anyone else says it like that . 
I do get words muddled. I told Ian I'd seen a jack pussel ruppy on a walk ! he said is that a new breed?


----------



## kimthecat

Goblin said:


> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3917888/


 thanks for this . I found a link I wanted on it , the vegetarian diet and mental disorders study .
(mental disorders being ,e.g depression and anxiety)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3466124/

*<Conclusions*
In Western cultures vegetarian diet is associated with an elevated risk of mental disorders. However, there was no evidence for a causal role of vegetarian diet in the etiology of mental disorders. >

I found this a bit confusing , is this saying that that veg diet is associated with a high er risk depression etc and then saying there's no evidence to link it . ?

Anyway , this is way off topic now ,
if any one does suffer from depression and anxiety regardless of diet , perhaps consider having not only your B vits levels checked but also vit d too, as lack of these vits can contribute to depression.


----------



## Elles

I always knew I was bonkers, as for noush.. explains a lot. :Hilarious

Maybe the research will eventually prove that poor diet is linked, not a vegetarian one, seeing as many studies have found some vegetarians to be mind and body healthier than some meat eaters and now vice-versa.


----------



## Arnie83

kimthecat said:


> She certainly does. I didnt know Boris was married with four children . They keep a low profile too.


That's 4 children with his wife. There is another as the result of an affair.


----------



## kimthecat

Arnie83 said:


> There is another as the result of an affair.


Only one?


----------



## 3dogs2cats

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Please don't apologise, would you like me to remove that headline to the study?


Oh no it`s fine, don`t take any notice of me, I`m just being overly sensitive but thank you anyway


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> I always knew I was bonkers, as for noush.. explains a lot. :Hilarious
> 
> Maybe the research will eventually prove that poor diet is linked, not a vegetarian one, seeing as many studies have found some vegetarians to be mind and body healthier than some meat eaters and now vice-versa.


You speak for yourself lol

The thing that affects my sanity most of all is cruelty to animals, that & climate denial. I will never fathom people who get their kicks abusing & terrorising animals & people who argue against the climate science. Its this kind of ignorance that messes with my head not my diet.


----------



## noushka05

This is shameful. Some nurses are now so poor they're having to use food banks.


----------



## noushka05

Philip Collins of the Tory Times. Well this idiot wont be conned by the Cons - that's for sure.

*Philip Collins*‏Verified [email protected]*PCollinsTimes* Apr 28

_I am usually a strong defender of politics but this empty, choreographed, stale, boring Tory campaign essentially implies we are all idiots

_


----------



## Satori

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I haven't seen either programme but perhaps she means they will not raise VAT but they can't rule out raising the other two?


Well that's the plain English meaning. No logical inconsistency there at all. Perhaps the conspiracy theorist loony lefties don't use English as their primary language?


----------



## Satori

3dogs2cats said:


> When she says "vote for me" It sounds odd. I can`t remember hearing that from any other party leader in past GE`s. I think she needs to remember her name is not actually on every voting paper just those in her own constituency.


It is a sensible strategy. I expect that the 'Theresa May' brand is stronger than the 'Conservative Party' brand in many swing constituencies, especially in the labour heartlands. A naturally left leaning voter told me last week that he would most certainly vote for "Theresa May" because he couldn't forgive "Jeremy Corbyn" for not singing the national anthem !? It sounds scarcely believable but it shows that politicians who desire office must not forget how stupid the voters are.


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> didnt know Boris was married with four children


Ah well, yes, I knew that Boris was married as he was caught out fornicating, I believe more than once, and the papers (ever witty) referred to him as bonking Boris. Not sure if she's a lawyer.


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> It sounds scarcely believable but it shows that politicians who desire office must not forget how stupid the voters are.


Those who desire office get a vote too - which means they're part of that stupid electorate


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> You speak for yourself lol
> 
> The thing that affects my sanity most of all is cruelty to animals, that & climate denial. I will never fathom people who get their kicks abusing & terrorising animals & people who argue against the climate science. Its this kind of ignorance that messes with my head not my diet.


I kind of get that. Some people are cruel and sadistic and wrong in the head. What I don't get at all is how the majority of decent folk can eat animals. The very thought of killing some creature, it bleeding and dead and then slicing some part of its body and putting it into their mouth. It makes me shudder. I can no more understand it, than think Jeffrey Dahmer is normal for doing the same to human animals, yet some cannibal tribes would've probably thought he was fine.

Not only that, people have no respect. An animal died so you could throw that half eaten burger on the floor.

In the 70s and 80s I kept it to myself and just didn't go out for dinner with friends and their families, as I think if I'd said what I really thought, I would have been locked up. Crazy is sometimes in the mind of the observer and subject to change. 

So yes, if vegetarians and vegans are more likely to appear depressed, it's probably because they have a lot to appear depressed about. Were the researchers assessing the health of the 330 individuals they studied experts in mental health?

I still don't know who to vote for, or if it's worth bothering. I wouldn't want any of 'em running my household, much less the country.


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> The very thought of killing some creature, it bleeding and dead and then slicing some part of its body and putting it into their mouth.


Because most are so removed from where their food comes from. If they had to kill, prepare and cook from scratch, there would be very few meat eaters these days


----------



## samuelsmiles

I would be really interested to know which party the NHS staff will be voting for on June 8th. Because of all the negative news regarding the Conservatives' running of the NHS, I would assume the overwhelming majority will not be voting for them. Just 5 or 10% I would imagine?

Senior managers and GPs do earn a very good wage and have a marvelous pension so I could see one or 2 of these voting Conservative.

Has there been a poll done with NHS staff, I wonder?


----------



## havoc

samuelsmiles said:


> Senior managers and GPs do earn a very good wage and have a marvelous pension so I could see one or 2 of these voting Conservative.


I don't think pay is the issue there. GP surgeries are having a hard time recruiting and I think the comments of a few weeks ago about how they should be open 8-8, seven days a week will be fresh in their minds. There are practices struggling to stay open at all.


----------



## Goblin

rona said:


> Because most are so removed from where their food comes from. If they had to kill, prepare and cook from scratch, there would be very few meat eaters these days


And if people had to grow their vegetarian diet they wouldn't be able be able to do so. Look at those areas where people do have to kill, prepare and cook from scratch.. no shortage of meat eaters.


----------



## KittenKong

So much for going out and meeting people, unless they're activists of the Theresa May party.

https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/news/local/snp-accuses-theresa-may-hiding-away-middle-forest/

And what action does she plan against "extremists" whio want to break up her beloved country?.


----------



## stuaz

KittenKong said:


> So much for going out and meeting people, unless they're activists of the Theresa May party.
> 
> https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/news/local/snp-accuses-theresa-may-hiding-away-middle-forest/
> 
> And what action does she plan against "extremists" whio want to break up her beloved country?.
> View attachment 309100
> View attachment 309101


Not exactly unusual for a politician to surround themselves with people who are likeminded and of the same allegiance when on the campaign trail.


----------



## KittenKong

stuaz said:


> Not exactly unusual for a politician to surround themselves with people who are likeminded and of the same allegiance when on the campaign trail.


Of course, but has May actually gone out and met people she said she was going to?

Perhaps she's scared to discover the country isn't as united as she believes.

And refusing to take part in TV debates says it all really....


----------



## stuaz

KittenKong said:


> Of course, but has May actually gone out and met people she said she was going to?
> 
> Perhaps she's scared to discover the country isn't as united as she believes.
> 
> And refusing to take part in TV debates says it all really....


Tbh if I was her, I wouldn't take part in the TV debates ether. She is not a slick charismatic politician compared to Tony Blair or David Cameron and it would most likely blow up in her face as she would come across really badly.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Of course, but has May actually gone out and met people she said she was going to?
> 
> Perhaps she's scared to discover the country isn't as united as she believes.
> 
> And refusing to take part in TV debates says it all really....


Hasn't Corbyn said if May doesn't take part neither will he?


----------



## KittenKong

stuaz said:


> Tbh if I was her, I wouldn't take part in the TV debates ether. She is not a slick charismatic politician compared to Tony Blair or David Cameron and it would most likely blow up in her face as she would come across really badly.


If she believes she's the best thing for the country she should go out and face the public and be glad to appear on TV in a debate.

Not to do so is a sign of weakness in my view. The thought, "If you can't stand the heat, you shouldn't be in the kitchen", comes to mind.


rottiepointerhouse said:


> Hasn't Corbyn said if May doesn't take part neither will he?


Yes, I believe you're correct. They would be little point in Corbyn taking part in a TV debate if the other main candidate refuses to do so.


----------



## havoc

I can't stand the woman but if she stands firm on the TV debate thing I'll thank her from the bottom of my heart. They started as a pathetic copy of USA election debates and they don't work here.


----------



## KittenKong

havoc said:


> I can't stand the woman but if she stands firm on the TV debate thing I'll thank her from the bottom of my heart. They started as a pathetic copy of USA election debates and they don't work here.


The thing is, once something like televised debates start it's impossible to go back to the days before them whether people like them or not. Rather like the televising of parliament which was introduced as late as 1990.

The public deserve to see and hear who they're voting for. May thinks she'll win by hiding behind the right wing tabloids who do nothing but praise her and TM party activists...


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> If she believes she's the best thing for the country she should go out and face the public and be glad to appear on TV in a debate.
> 
> Not to do so is a sign of weakness in my view. The thought, "If you can't stand the heat, you shouldn't be in the kitchen", comes to mind.
> 
> Yes, I believe you're correct. They would be little point in Corbyn taking part in a TV debate if the other main candidate refuses to do so.


Why? Surely he will be trying to win seats from some of the other candidates too? Surely he needs to try and persuade voters to vote for him and not the Lib dems - they are making a strong play to be the official opposition party so why won't he debate with Tim? I'm not saying he should by the way as I'm another who hates the debates but you can't slate TM for not doing it whilst excusing Corbyn.



KittenKong said:


> The thing is, once something like televised debates start it's impossible to go back to the days before them whether people like them or not. Rather like the televising of parliament which was introduced as late as 1990.
> 
> The public deserve to see and hear who they're voting for. May thinks she'll win by hiding behind the right wing tabloids who do nothing but praise her and TM party activists...


The public will see and hear her - just not in a live debate. I believe she was on Andrew Marr on Sunday then on the ITV version which I think you quoted so she is getting around. Out of interest how many party leaders have you met before deciding which one to vote for?


----------



## havoc

KittenKong said:


> Rather like the televising of parliament which was introduced as late as 1990


Parliamentary proceedings existed before they were televised. They weren't invented for TV. Every party, every MP's voice is heard. Those contrived TV election debates are a format which is designed for a two horse race and completely unrepresentative of our system.They do however pander to the cult of celebrity so I can see why they'd be popular.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Why? Surely he will be trying to win seats from some of the other candidates too? Surely he needs to try and persuade voters to vote for him and not the Lib dems - they are making a strong play to be the official opposition party so why won't he debate with Tim? I'm not saying he should by the way as I'm another who hates the debates but you can't slate TM for not doing it whilst excusing Corbyn.
> 
> The public will see and hear her - just not in a live debate. I believe she was on Andrew Marr on Sunday then on the ITV version which I think you quoted so she is getting around. Out of interest how many party leaders have you met before deciding which one to vote for?


Being interviewed by a presenter on a Sunday morning when many potential viewers are still in bed is no substitute for taking questions from the general public and debating with other main party leaders on a peak time TV debate.

I disagree with your comment on Corbyn. After all it was May who was the first to refuse a TV debate. A debate without May would be pointless in my view.

Naturally it it was May wishing to take part with Corbyn refusing to do so would be another matter.

It would of course not be practical for party leaders to visit everyone. That's why a TV debate at peak viewing time would be the next best thing in this modern age.

What's TM scared of? She's the most popular UK leader ever according to her press. Surely the audience will erupt in standing ovations every time she says, "Strong and stable"?


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong




----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> Being interviewed by a presenter on a Sunday morning when many potential viewers are still in bed


Not heard of catch up tv?



KittenKong said:


> is no substitute for taking questions from the general public and debating with other main party leaders on a peak time TV debate.


Have you actually watched one of those debates?
Dumbed down or what?


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 309202
> View attachment 309203
> View attachment 309204
> View attachment 309205
> View attachment 309206
> View attachment 309207
> View attachment 309208


You've not heard that ATOS got sacked 2 years ago?


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> I kind of get that. Some people are cruel and sadistic and wrong in the head. What I don't get at all is how the majority of decent folk can eat animals. The very thought of killing some creature, it bleeding and dead and then slicing some part of its body and putting it into their mouth. It makes me shudder. I can no more understand it, than think Jeffrey Dahmer is normal for doing the same to human animals, yet some cannibal tribes would've probably thought he was fine.
> 
> Not only that, people have no respect. An animal died so you could throw that half eaten burger on the floor.
> 
> In the 70s and 80s I kept it to myself and just didn't go out for dinner with friends and their families, as I think if I'd said what I really thought, I would have been locked up. Crazy is sometimes in the mind of the observer and subject to change.
> 
> So yes, if vegetarians and vegans are more likely to appear depressed, it's probably because they have a lot to appear depressed about. Were the researchers assessing the health of the 330 individuals they studied experts in mental health?
> 
> I still don't know who to vote for, or if it's worth bothering. I wouldn't want any of 'em running my household, much less the country.


I wasn't specifically meaning the livestock industry Elles. Though there's no doubt animals are suffering on an epic scale within that industry. I'd like to hope that the majority of people who do deal with these creatures though, don't get their kicks making them suffer, though even allowing them to suffer through ignorance or indifference is still inexcusable imo. I feel for each & every species subjected cruelty and misery at the hand of man. And I see abuse & suffering on a daily basis in the booklets I get sent by the charities we support and on twitter where most of the people I follow and who follow me are a passionate animal lovers who are using twitter to raise awareness of animal cruelty and campaigning to stop it. I am haunted by what I've seen - it does affect my mind.

As for voting that's easy for me! lol Putting everything else aside. I could never support any party that supports the disgusting badger cull, wont ban circuses or the ivory trade, blocks the bill to increase sentencing for animal abusers & wants to repeal the hunting ban. Narrows things somewhat.


----------



## noushka05

samuelsmiles said:


> I would be really interested to know which party the NHS staff will be voting for on June 8th. Because of all the negative news regarding the Conservatives' running of the NHS, I would assume the overwhelming majority will not be voting for them. Just 5 or 10% I would imagine?
> 
> Senior managers and GPs do earn a very good wage and have a marvelous pension so I could see one or 2 of these voting Conservative.
> 
> Has there been a poll done with NHS staff, I wonder?


I'm pretty sure many senior managers will vote tory However I don't think GPs are thinking about their pensions - the morale of GPs is at rock bottom. The NHS is haemorrhaging GPs with almost half supporting mass resignation. http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/home/fi...tions-despite-rescue-efforts/20034194.article

Two in five GPs in the south-west plan to quit - https://www.theguardian.com/society...n-to-quit-survey-finds?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other











stuaz said:


> Not exactly unusual for a politician to surround themselves with people who are likeminded and of the same allegiance when on the campaign trail.


----------



## rona

My GP told me just a few weeks ago that he loved his job and will not be retiring anytime soon even though he could if he wanted 

That's first hand knowledge right there.......did you notice that?


----------



## noushka05

@*alicecrumbs* Apr 26

It's my #*publicduty* to say that my disabled child has had speech, physio, occupational therapy cut and his respite cut under a tory govt.

Sue Perkins response to this tweet -

*Sue Perkins*‏Verified [email protected]*sueperkins* Apr 28

Same story with friends of mine. A disgrace.
We can change this.

.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> My GP told me just a few weeks ago that he loved his job and will not be retiring anytime soon even though he could if he wanted
> 
> That's first hand knowledge right there.......did you notice that?


Anecdotal evidence for every occasion:Hilarious


----------



## Satori

rona said:


> Not heard of catch up tv?
> 
> Have you actually watched one of those debates?
> Dumbed down or what?


What you perceive as dumbed down may be the highest intellectual peak for some.


----------



## noushka05

What a disgrace May is, answering Marr's question on nurses being forced to use food banks with her usual vacuous slogans


----------



## samuelsmiles

noushka05 said:


> @*alicecrumbs* Apr 26
> 
> It's my #*publicduty* to say that my disabled child has had speech, physio, occupational therapy cut and his respite cut under a tory govt.
> 
> Sue Perkins response to this tweet -
> 
> *Sue Perkins*‏Verified [email protected]*sueperkins* Apr 28
> 
> Same story with friends of mine. A disgrace.
> We can change this.
> 
> .


A 3rd hand anecdote for every occasion?


----------



## noushka05

samuelsmiles said:


> A 3rd hand anecdote for every occasion?


Difference is all the evidence supports what they are all saying


----------



## noushka05

May is no different to Tump
*
Nicola Sturgeon*‏Verified [email protected]*NicolaSturgeon* 22h22 hours ago

Media made to submit questions in advance. Outrageous. Tories want no scrutiny at all. Let's make sure Scotland's voice is heard. #*VoteSNP*


Tories asked journalists to submit questions in advance and only selected ones they like! How is this acceptable?


----------



## rona

ANECDOTE..........

a short amusing or interesting story about a* real* incident or person.


----------



## KittenKong

Indeed. Amber Rudd was interviewed on BBC Breakfast re the disastrous Brexit negotiations.

Wanna know what she said?
"Strong and stable leadership in the best national interest"!

Good way to avoid answering the questions isn't it?!


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> ANECDOTE..........
> 
> a short amusing or interesting story about a* real* incident or person.


My mistake. I'll change it to Anecdotal evidence then. Of which you always seem to have an example of when you don't agree with real evidence.


----------



## rona

Difference is, mine is first hand, spoken to me personally which means I know the validity of the exchange

I actually believe I even mentioned it shortly after it happened. It's somewhere on here but not this thread


----------



## KittenKong

Perhaps May doesn't want to risk a repeat of this from 1983.

It's a classic thankfully preserved in the BBC archives.





"Nationwide" was axed soon after this broadcast.....


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Difference is, mine is first hand, spoken to me personally which means I know the validity of the exchange
> 
> I actually believe I even mentioned it shortly after it happened. It's somewhere on here but not this thread


Yes and as you are clearly biased, I would no sooner believe your anecdotal evidence as you would believe mine 

Those drs, nurses, teachers etc all have accounts. That's why I leave their twitter details on so people can check them out for themselves. Make up their own minds whether they think they're genuine professionals or not. I would never expect anyone to believe any of my personal anecdotes in a debate without being able to back them up with firm evidence.

Trump & May expect blind faith.


----------



## rona

You haven't given any, just third hand gossip


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> You haven't given any, just third hand gossip


Not gossip when its supported by sound evidence. Those are REAL NHS professionals Rona. All those junior doctors are real doctors. They are fighting to save YOUR NHS from the tories.

Can you refute anything these GPs says?


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Two in five GPs in the south-west plan to quit


Great news that. The majority of GP's have no plans to leave. Now out of the minority that are left you can probably bet most are planning to leave to go into the private sector or abroad, which would have been their career plan from the outset (or just reaching retirement age). Also more good news in that article is 70% of GP's are under fifty so still here for a while. The downside to in that story is younger GP's are workshy and want less contact with patients and work fewer hours, that's where any upcoming crisis will be. How can someone become a GP but not want to see patients?


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> Not heard of catch up tv?
> 
> Have you actually watched one of those debates?
> Dumbed down or what?


And let's not forget the live debates, audiences are hand picked, questions pre selected


----------



## 1290423

Fraid I'm either living in the past of have lost touch,

Sorry, but if the following is correct

Fully qualified nurses start on salaries of *£21,692* rising to *£28,180* on Band 5 of the NHS Agenda for Change Pay Rates. Salaries in London attract a high-cost area supplement. With experience, in positions such as nurse team leader on Band 6, salaries progress to £26,041 to £34,876.

THEN all I can say if nurses are in fact going to food banks then that's either because
They have never learnt to budget
Or 
Don't know where to shop


----------



## rona

Then there are the facts
http://www.gmc-uk.org/doctors/register/search_stats.asp

Interesting to see that the amount of doctors dipped sharply with the last Labour government and been increasing steadily since then.

For the last 60+ years the young have protested, it would seem wrong if they didn't.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Being interviewed by a presenter on a Sunday morning when many potential viewers are still in bed is no substitute for taking questions from the general public and debating with other main party leaders on a peak time TV debate.
> 
> I disagree with your comment on Corbyn. After all it was May who was the first to refuse a TV debate. A debate without May would be pointless in my view.
> 
> Naturally it it was May wishing to take part with Corbyn refusing to do so would be another matter.
> 
> It would of course not be practical for party leaders to visit everyone. That's why a TV debate at peak viewing time would be the next best thing in this modern age.
> 
> What's TM scared of? She's the most popular UK leader ever according to her press. Surely the audience will erupt in standing ovations every time she says, "Strong and stable"?


Why is a debate without May pointless? Doesn't Jeremy need to try and win back some seats in Wales and Scotland for instance? I didn't say party leaders could or should visit everyone but have you ever met one - gone to a rally so that you could see them in person to make your judgement or do you do what most of us do and read the manifesto and make a judgement based on that? These days I don't think most of the public have the staying power to watch a TV debate, they are so used to short tweets and memes and slogans that actually tell us nothing.


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> What you perceive as dumbed down may be the highest intellectual peak for some.


Too right. The 'empty chair' debate is more important to some than the job we're electing these people to do. Of course, as it's TV being snubbed they will give it far more coverage than it warrants and where they lead ................................


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> Then there are the facts
> http://www.gmc-uk.org/doctors/register/search_stats.asp
> 
> Interesting to see that the amount of doctors dipped sharply with the last Labour government and been increasing steadily since then.
> 
> For the last 60+ years the young have protested, it would seem wrong if they didn't.


They have to make the NHS look attractive to private buyers. Besides some doctors are from EU countries who've yet to have any reassurance they'll be allowed to stay post Brexit.

You're the only person I know of who seems convinced the NHS is safe in May and Hunt"s hands.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Why is a debate without May pointless? Doesn't Jeremy need to try and win back some seats in Wales and Scotland for instance? I didn't say party leaders could or should visit everyone but have you ever met one - gone to a rally so that you could see them in person to make your judgement or do you do what most of us do and read the manifesto and make a judgement based on that? These days I don't think most of the public have the staying power to watch a TV debate, they are so used to short tweets and memes and slogans that actually tell us nothing.


Good point, sounds like the perfect opportunity for him to steal back a few votes.


----------



## Dr Pepper

KittenKong said:


> They have to make the NHS look attractive to private buyers. Besides some doctors are from EU countries who've yet to have any reassurance they'll be allowed to stay post Brexit.
> 
> You're the only person I know of who seems convinced the NHS is safe in May and Hunt"s hands.


So those figures are made up then? I don't believe that. I can see we now have far doctors than we ever did under Labour. Odd that if the NHS is such a terrible place to practice.

But as I've said before, every election the opposition shamelessly deride the NHS for political gain.


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> Interesting to see that the amount of doctors dipped sharply with the last Labour government *and been increasing steadily since* then.


So is the population rona and it is an ever more needy population. Be it age related, complex conditions or lifestyles which give rise to avoidable illness simple numbers don't tell the whole story.


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> Then there are the facts
> http://www.gmc-uk.org/doctors/register/search_stats.asp
> 
> Interesting to see that the amount of doctors dipped sharply with the last Labour government and been increasing steadily since then.
> 
> For the last 60+ years the young have protested, it would seem wrong if they didn't.


Tbh Rona, I personally can't make head nor tail of what's gone wrong in our area, I'm still digging, but we did have a couple of really good hospitals in my town when I was in my teens, you could have a baby in the maternity wing, now you have to travel 25 miles on a bad road, much of it country lanes, you were treated for most injuries, albeit you were transferred if intensive care were required, pretty much the hospitals were well able to cope, THEN it our hospitals went under a trust and quickly it all went down hill, now you can't have a baby in our town, a heart attack a stroke and our hospital has been remained an injury unit. By the way this was a special new hospital built to cater for the growing township. But back to what I said to start with, the problems started when the trust took over just went from bad to worse to dire, would love one to explain to me why these trusts are needed as I wasn't aware that all hospitals are ran this way or are they?


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> So is the population rona and it is an ever more needy population. Be it age related, complex conditions or lifestyles which give rise to avoidable illness simple numbers don't tell the whole story.


What it does show is a rise in doctors per head of population. Between 2010 and 2016 the population has grown by approx' 4% and doctor numbers by approx' 15%. That has to be a good thing?


----------



## Jesthar

rona said:


> Then there are the facts
> http://www.gmc-uk.org/doctors/register/search_stats.asp
> 
> Interesting to see that the amount of doctors dipped sharply with the last Labour government and been increasing steadily since then.
> 
> For the last 60+ years the young have protested, it would seem wrong if they didn't.


It takes five years to train a doctor, though, and a further two years to become a GP/pharmacologist/other specialist roles.

So whilst I believe Mr Cameron likes to take credit for there being over 1,600 more GPs now that when he and the Conservatives came in to power in 2010, any doctor who has become a GP before the end of May 2017 will have begun their medical degree under Labour before the Conservatives took office. And _all _new doctors who graduated their five year basic medical degree before the summer of 2015 will have begun that degree under Labour, too.

The last generation of doctors who began their studies under the Conservatives would have graduated in 2002, and become specialists in 2004 at the earliest.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> What it does show is a rise in doctors per head of population.


Accepted but it doesn't show the rise in need of those services per head of population. If your practice catchment area is mainly young, professional, fit individuals living a healthy lifestyle then the call on the service is very different from a south coast town popular with retirees or a deprived area where takeaway is the staple diet.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> It takes five years to train a doctor, though, and a further two years to become a GP/pharmacologist/other specialist roles.
> 
> So whilst I believe Mr Cameron likes to take credit for there being over 1,600 more GPs now that when he and the Conservatives came in to power in 2010, any doctor who has become a GP before the end of May 2017 will have begun their medical degree under Labour before the Conservatives took office. And _all _new doctors who graduated their five year basic medical degree before the summer of 2015 will have begun that degree under Labour, too.
> 
> The last generation of doctors who began their studies under the Conservatives would have graduated in 2002, and become specialists in 2004 at the earliest.


Doesn't matter where or when they qualified. It shows doctors aren't deserting the NHS as some people are telling us.


----------



## KittenKong

More Facebook comments....


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> Doesn't matter where or when they qualified. It shows doctors aren't deserting the NHS as some people are telling us.


No, it doesn't. You have to be GNC registered to practice medicine in the UK full stop, whether through the NHS or privately. The statistics linked to do not break the number of registered doctors by employment sector as far as I can see, and so provide no insight into NHS staffing levels.

Incidentally, as a new medical degree graduate you can only apply to be fully registered as a UK doctor (as opposed to provisionally) after completing your foundation year of in hospital training. This is why training hospital places are so important.


----------



## havoc

Jesthar said:


> The statistics linked to do not break the number of registered doctors by employment sector as far as I can see, and so provide no insight into NHS staffing levels.


No they don't as I read them. The number of full time (salaried) GPs in my local surgery has declined. Staffing levels are being maintained by locums.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> You're the only person I know of who seems convinced the NHS is safe in May and Hunt"s hands.


Did I ever say that? *NO
*
I just can't stand this hysteria


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> More Facebook comments....
> 
> View attachment 309258
> View attachment 309259
> View attachment 309260
> View attachment 309261


Who is he please?


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> What a disgrace May is, answering Marr's question on nurses being forced to use food banks with her usual vacuous slogans


I must confess, I was shocked to hear about nurses using food banks. It is truly outrageous.

(Those food banks are supposed to be for poor folk).


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Did I ever say that? *NO
> *
> I just can't stand this hysteria


What you're doing is trying to play down the gravity of the crisis in our NHS. Drs are telling the truth, they are trying to warn us. The tories are deliberately running our NHS down putting millions of lives at risk - they need skewering on the issue not letting off the hook

. Just imagine how terrified you'd be feeling if your loved on had a serious illness knowing the NHS is being destroyed?

The doctors aren't whipping up hysteria, they want people to wake up before its too late.

This is a real life oncologist fighting to save our NHS. >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clive_Peedell

*Clive Peedell*‏@*cpeedell* Apr 29

If you vote Tory in June, then please don't moan about the collapse of our health and education systems in the next couple of years.

.
.


----------



## noushka05

A message from this young lady on twitter.


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> No they don't as I read them. The number of full time (salaried) GPs in my local surgery has declined. Staffing levels are being maintained by locums.


You're right, I make a presumption it was referring to the NHS alone. I had a quick Google and couldn't find any current figures, didn't try very hard it has to be said, but I did find that between 2010 and 2014 doctor numbers in the NHS increased by 3,600 (I think, it was a few hours ago!). Be interesting to see numbers for 2016.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> Incidentally, as a new medical degree graduate you can only apply to be fully registered as a UK doctor (as opposed to provisionally) after completing your foundation year of in hospital training. This is why training hospital places are so important.


And I believe these places are being increased by 25% either this year or next.


----------



## Guest

Is is true that May doesn´t want to have a public debate with Corbyn and the rest? Wow, I thought only Trump and Putin and some other "shadies" refuse to talk to journalists. But in Britain a candidate doesn´t want to show up on TV and _gets away_ with that? What next? A silent treatment? Pigeons carrying messages? Smoke signals?


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> Is is true that May doesn´t want to have a public debate with Corbyn and the rest? Wow, I thought only Trump and Putin and some other "shadies" refuse to talk to journalists. But in Britain a candidate doesn´t want to show up on TV and _gets away_ with that? What next? A silent treatment? Pigeons carrying messages? Smoke signals?


Mrs May is talking to journalist aplenty. The TV debates are a relatively new Americanism that are frankly a waste of time as there is nothing spontaneous about them.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MrsZee said:


> Is is true that May doesn´t want to have a public debate with Corbyn and the rest? Wow, I thought only Trump and Putin and some other "shadies" refuse to talk to journalists. But in Britain a candidate doesn´t want to show up on TV and _gets away_ with that? What next? A silent treatment? Pigeons carrying messages? Smoke signals?


It is the live TV debates in front of a studio audience where all the party leaders are lined up answering questions that she has refused to take part in, not speaking to journalists or being interviewed on TV.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Mrs May is talking to journalist aplenty. The TV debates are a relatively new Americanism that are frankly a waste of time as there is nothing spontaneous about them.


TV- debates are relatively new, true, only some 50 years old tradition, but then who misses the debate? Well, apart those, who´d like to see and hear how shell will defend her policies in a live discussion, where her answers will be compared with others. What does she have to hide I wonder, as Corbyn surely isn´t very charismatic and you´d think that was the reason in the first place she wanted to have elections so soon. Things must be pretty desperate for her, if she is afraid of Corbyn winning the debate?

Pity British people have not yet learned to be as obedient as e.g. the Russians and expect her to tell what she thinks, what are her plans so that they could decide is she the better choice for them or a ticket to ruin.


----------



## Guest

rottiepointerhouse said:


> It is the live TV debates in front of a studio audience where all the party leaders are lined up answering questions that she has refused to take part in, not speaking to journalists or being interviewed on TV.


I was a bit vague, sorry, but then I understood she chooses the questions now she answers beforehand? Hopefully that is not the case or happened only once? I always thought British are the most critical people in EU and thought that is something to be proud of. But May´s behaviour is so different to that. What has happened to sharp British people, who didn´t put up with all the bull politicians tried to tell them?


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> . What has happened to sharp British people, who didn´t put up with all the bull politicians tried to tell them?


We voted Brexit


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MrsZee said:


> TV- debates are relatively new, true, only some 50 years old tradition, but then who misses the debate? Well, apart those, who´d like to see and hear how shell will defend her policies in a live discussion, where her answers will be compared with others. What does she have to hide I wonder, as Corbyn surely isn´t very charismatic and you´d think that was the reason in the first place she wanted to have elections so soon. Things must be pretty desperate for her, if she is afraid of Corbyn winning the debate?
> 
> Pity British people have not yet learned to be as obedient as e.g. the Russians and expect her to tell what she thinks, what are her plans so that they could decide is she the better choice for them or a ticket to ruin.


I don't understand why you think it has to be a live TV debate for the British people to be able to decide who is the better choice for them. As already stated she has/is taking part in TV interviews where she gets quite a grilling. I'm not sure the schedules for TV debates/interviews have even been released yet and neither have the manifestos which should start coming out in the next couple of weeks. Things tend to hot up after that.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> TV- debates are relatively new, true, only some 50 years old tradition,


Not in the UK they haven't been. I have a feeling Mr Blaire started them over here.

Edit

Oh feck I'm wrong again today. It was apparently only as recently as 2010. Thanks @rottiepointerhouse.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MrsZee said:


> I was a bit vague, sorry, but then I understood she chooses the questions now she answers beforehand? Hopefully that is not the case or happened only once? I always thought British are the most critical people in EU and thought that is something to be prod of. But May´s behaviour is so different to that. What has happened to sharp British people, who didn´t put up with all the bull politicians tried to tell them?


Based on the total balls up Diane Abbot (the shadow home secretary) made of a radio interview at the weekend about the cost of increasing police numbers I doubt they have rehearsed all of the questions that get thrown at them, perhaps given a list of likely subjects to be covered.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39775693

She may well go on Question Time or other such programmes - its just the live debates she is not taking part in. They are rather "American" for the taste of most Brits I think.


----------



## Guest

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I don't understand why you think it has to be a live TV debate for the British people to be able to decide who is the better choice for them. As already stated she has/is taking part in TV interviews where she gets quite a grilling. I'm not sure the schedules for TV debates/interviews have even been released yet and neither have the manifestos which should start coming out in the next couple of weeks. Things tend to hot up after that.


I believe that in a debate people can compare what the candidates have to say and that way compare the answers. Naturally it is not enough to get information, but still important for democracy.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MrsZee said:


> I believe that in a debate people can compare what the candidates have to say and that way compare the answers. Naturally it is not enough to get information, but still important for democracy.


How on earth did we manage before they were introduced in 2010? Guess we just had to watch old fashioned TV and read. Next we will be demanding they square up on facebook or twitter.


----------



## Arnie83

MrsZee said:


> What has happened to sharp British people, who didn´t put up with all the bull politicians tried to tell them?





Dr Pepper said:


> We voted Brexit


We didn't 'put up with all the bull' that politicians told us in that case, we fell for it, hook,line and sinker.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

http://www.diabetes.co.uk/blog/2016/07/theresa-may-5-inspirational-people-diabetes-defied-condition/


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> We didn't 'put up with all the bull' that politicians told us in that case, we fell for it, hook,line and sinker.


Not really, the governing party of the time spent millions telling us we should stay (remember those leaflets sent to every household?) We didn't.

Anyhow let's not start all that again!!


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Not in the UK they haven't. I have a feeling Mr Blaire started them over here.


I didn´t know that, here we have had them since the 60´s. Here usually 4-6 biggest party leaders have a debate and then there is another for all parties (even the tiniest). The problem is that many don´t have anything to say and

In my opinion May should be more "presentable" than Corbyn, so I am quite surprised it is her, who doesn´t want the TV-debate That is why I think she has something to hide, and to me that would be that either she doesn´t know the facts, or doesn´t want to give clear answers. Both reasons why she should discuss openly with other party leaders.


----------



## Guest

rottiepointerhouse said:


> How on earth did we manage before they were introduced in 2010? Guess we just had to watch old fashioned TV and read. Next we will be demanding they square up on facebook or twitter.


Reading is always good, but how many read actually the long articles anymore. Pity, I agree with you. But aren´t your politicians on facebook? Ours are, have to be nowadays, as that is the way they get especially young people to join in. Why not on facebook or Twitter? You don´t have to be an idiot like Trump using it.


----------



## cheekyscrip

@MrsZee ...they have May, Johnson and Davies,on one side then maybe Nutall?
Or Corbyn & Abbot the Coward...
As their leaders...
Or Ed and his stone...

They voted Brexit.
They want custom tariffs. They do not want access to Single Market.

No matter what. They want yo be ruled by ultra Tories.

Cut corporate tax. Rise income tax. Get rid of EU doctors. Invite Indian doctors.
Fight for Marmite.

English. No one can understand them.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> We voted Brexit


So now you are happy to put up with the bull you get from politicians? Are you really happy with that?


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> I didn´t know that, here we have had them since the 60´s. Here usually 4-6 biggest party leaders have a debate and then there is another for all parties (even the tiniest). The problem is that many don´t have anything to say and
> 
> In my opinion May should be more "presentable" than Corbyn, so I am quite surprised it is her, who doesn´t want the TV-debate That is why I think she has something to hide, and to me that would be that either she doesn´t know the facts, or doesn´t want to give clear answers. Both reasons why she should discuss openly with other party leaders.


I don't think whether she knows the facts or not is an issue as they know the questions coming to them well in advance. From what I've seen they turn into pointless arguing with all sides trotting out their usual answers, which we've all heard a hundred times before.

Saying that, the USA presidential debates last year were pure entertainment!



MrsZee said:


> So now you are happy to put up with the bull you get from politicians? Are you really happy with that?


No, I just hope I'm savvy enough to weed out the bull (£350,000,000 a week for the NHS for example) from the facts and reach a reasoned decision.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Dr Pepper said:


> I don't think whether she knows the facts or not is an issue as they know the questions coming to them well in advance. From what I've seen they turn into pointless arguing with all sides trotting out their usual answers, which we've all heard a hundred times before.
> 
> Saying that, the USA presidential debates last year were pure entertainment!
> 
> No, I just hope I'm savvy enough to weed out the bull (£350,000,000 a week for the NHS for example) from the facts and reach a reasoned decision.


Yes you can!!!!

But....that proves my point, you are soooo not English.

I dare to assume you might not even blame immigrants for any shortcomings of your government?

So there.


----------



## noushka05

MrsZee said:


> Is is true that May doesn´t want to have a public debate with Corbyn and the rest? Wow, I thought only Trump and Putin and some other "shadies" refuse to talk to journalists. But in Britain a candidate doesn´t want to show up on TV and _gets away_ with that? What next? A silent treatment? Pigeons carrying messages? Smoke signals?


Worse than that she's doing everything she can to dodge questioning & avoid the public. She's even blocking the press. She doesn't want to be scrutinised & her supporters seem ok with that - even defending her They're not interested in holding the tories to account even though our society has never been in such a mess.

This happened in Cornwall today. (sorry if its already been shared.)










ETA Mind you, the only answer to questions shes got are flippin slogans


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> I don't think whether she knows the facts or not is an issue as they know the questions coming to them well in advance. .


So to get this straight,´you believe she knows the facts. So then she just doesn´t want to give clear answers to the questions. That would explain her behaviour pretty well too. Still, I thought the facts are not there at the moment, as EU negotiations haven´t even started, and the only answer she really has is I haven´t the foggiest. A bit of a gamble on people´s lives IMO.


----------



## noushka05

Even Osborne is ridiculing May for her stupid 'Strong & stable' slogan Talk about pot calling kettle though lol


----------



## cheekyscrip

noushka05 said:


> Worse than that she's doing everything she can to dodge questioning & avoid the public. She's even blocking the press. She doesn't want to be scrutinised & her supporters seem ok with that - even defending her They're not interested in holding the tories to account even though our society has never been in such a mess.
> 
> This happened in Cornwall today. (sorry if its already been shared.)
> 
> View attachment 309284
> 
> 
> ETA Mind you, the only answer to questions shes got are flippin slogans


Three minutes is more than enough for:
"Brexit is Brexit" and
" Strong and stable leadership".

Even I can do it!!!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MrsZee said:


> So ti get this straight,´you believe she knows the facts. So then she just doesn´t want to give clear answers to the questions. That would explain her behaviour pretty well too. Still, I thought the facts are not there at the moment, as EU negotiations haven´t even started, and the only answer she really has is I haven´t the foggiest. A bit of a gamble on people´s lives IMO.


Given the Labour party are supposed to be the opposition party and given that to mount any challenge to the Tories Corbyn needs to win not only some Tory seats but also from other smaller parties why are you not also slating him for saying he won't be taking part in a debate with those other leaders?


----------



## noushka05

cheekyscrip said:


> Three minutes is more than enough for:
> "Brexit is Brexit" and
> " Strong and stable leadership".
> 
> Even I can do it!!!


:Hilarious


----------



## Goblin

http://www.cornwalllive.com/prime-m...ral-election/story-30306323-detail/story.html


----------



## Happy Paws2

cheekyscrip said:


> Three minutes is more than enough for:
> "Brexit is Brexit" and
> " Strong and stable leadership".
> 
> Even I can do it!!!


and me


----------



## noushka05

cheekyscrip said:


> Three minutes is more than enough for:
> "Brexit is Brexit" and
> " Strong and stable leadership".
> 
> Even I can do it!!!





Happy Paws said:


> and me


Hey, look how many times you can say it in two minutes, never mind three:Hilarious


----------



## havoc

MrsZee said:


> In my opinion May should be more "presentable" than Corbyn, so I am quite surprised it is her, who doesn´t want the TV-debate


Me - less so. I made reference earlier on in this thread to her rather flat delivery of prepared statements and questioned whether she had the best of speech writers. To me she gives the impression of a kidnap victim reading out some forced demand. I don't think she'd cope well with having to explain things in any depth because they aren't actually her ideas which is why she's been given slogans such as 'strong and stable leadership' to trot out as the answer to everything.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> So to get this straight,´you believe she knows the facts. So then she just doesn´t want to give clear answers to the questions. That would explain her behaviour pretty well too. Still, I thought the facts are not there at the moment, as EU negotiations haven´t even started, and the only answer she really has is I haven´t the foggiest. A bit of a gamble on people´s lives IMO.


No, you misunderstood. What I'm saying is because they know the questions well in advance she'll have the answers on the night. As you say there are few facts at the moment regarding Brexit.

I wouldn't expect any PM, or opposition leader, to know everything about everything, that's why we have other ministers, and their departments of "experts", to advise the PM.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Dr Pepper said:


> No, you misunderstood. What I'm saying is because they know the questions well in advance she'll have the answers on the night. As you say there are few facts at the moment regarding Brexit.
> 
> *I wouldn't expect any PM*, or opposition leader, *to know everything about everything*, that's why we have other ministers, and their departments of "experts", to advise the PM.


It would be nice to know if she knew something about something all the same.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> No, you misunderstood. What I'm saying is because they know the questions well in advance she'll have the answers on the night. As you say there are few facts at the moment regarding Brexit.
> 
> I wouldn't expect any PM, or opposition leader, to know everything about everything, that's why we have other ministers, and their departments of "experts", to advise the PM.


This is what we need to find out >>

Tories almost tripled UK debt. Question we must ask them: If you've borrowed so much, WHAT HAVE YOU SPENT MONEY ON? 'Cos you've cut services

No wonder shes running scared.


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...respond-furiously-theresa-may-shuts-cornwall/

Have to give one of May's papers rare credit for this article.































Surely the bluest of Tory voters must believe this isn't right???


----------



## noushka05

Even Guy is mocking her lol She's an international joke!
*
Guy Verhofstadt*‏Verified [email protected]*GuyVerhofstadt* 24h24 hours ago

Any #*Brexit* deal requires a strong & stable understanding of the complex issues involved.The clock is ticking - it's time to get real.

,


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> I wouldn't expect any PM, or opposition leader, to know everything about everything, that's why we have other ministers, and their departments of "experts", to advise the PM.


Should they not have some grasp of everything having been 'advised'.


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39784170










How grown up. Pathetic.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Who is he please?


They are various posts from several people in response to articles from pro EU Facebook groups, one of which reported today, now having 100,000 followers'!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> They are various posts from several people in response to articles from pro EU Facebook groups, one of which reported today, now having 100,000 followers'!
> View attachment 309300


So they are just random people?


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...respond-furiously-theresa-may-shuts-cornwall/
> 
> Have to give one of May's papers rare credit for this article.
> 
> View attachment 309294
> View attachment 309295
> View attachment 309296
> View attachment 309297
> 
> 
> Surely the bluest of Tory voters must believe this isn't right???


And where did Helen Horton get that?

Helena Horton "trawling the depths of the internet so you don't have to."


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> They are various posts from several people in response to articles from pro EU Facebook groups, one of which reported today, now having 100,000 followers'!


Wow

100,000 out of 62 million........what a success and some of those probably aren't British


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> 100,000 out of 62 million........what a success and some of those probably aren't British


It's a Facebook group for goodness sake - how many FB groups have 62 million? It proves/disproves nothing - it just is.


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> It's a Facebook group for goodness sake - how many FB groups have 62 million? It proves/disproves nothing - it just is.


I don't do FB so no idea how many they have on their groups, but the way they and twitter get quoted on here


----------



## Dr Pepper

Happy Paws said:


> It would be nice to know if she knew something about something all the same.


I fully expect she does, just as Mr Corbyn does. But at these political debates (which she isn't doing) specifics are required which she will be advised upon. I don't think that's unreasonable.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> No, you misunderstood. What I'm saying is because they know the questions well in advance she'll have the answers on the night. As you say there are few facts at the moment regarding Brexit.
> 
> I wouldn't expect any PM, or opposition leader, to know everything about everything, that's why we have other ministers, and their departments of "experts", to advise the PM.


That is so true here too. No one can know everything on everything. Still May should know enough to be able to say something, when other party leaders are willing to do that, don´t you think? I mean she is supposed to be the prime minister ruling her ministers.. right? Also I wonder what happened to the "facts" about Brexit thrown about by e.g. UKIP - what happened to them? Or were they all just alternative facts for alternative reality? Maybe in a debate she would have to admit in public that _none_ of them were true?

Or she would have to answer some really awkward questions about NHS or social benefits or schools or pensions, like they do here and listen to other party leaders coming to totally different conclusion of what actually has been done and what might happen, if some of the plans come true. I would never trust a person, who has to hide like this.


----------



## Goblin

Interesting to see the news here. It's been pointed out that May's line of needing to strong mandate to strengthen her position in Brexit negotiations is simply false. Doesn't matter how many people vote for her, the EU knows what are acceptable terms and what are not. They will be looking at the EU and the best deal for the EU.


----------



## Goblin

MrsZee said:


> Or she would have to answer some really awkward questions about NHS or social benefits or schools or pensions, like they do here


You'll see another sound bite.. "you have to look at the broader picture" followed by "we need strong and stable leadership".


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> Wow
> 
> 100,000 out of 62 million........what a success and some of those probably aren't British


All the same it shows May is very wrong to believe (more like insist) everyone is behind her!


----------



## Guest

cheekyscrip said:


> Three minutes is more than enough for:
> "Brexit is Brexit" and " Strong and stable leadership". Even I can do it!!!


LOL, so could I. Strong and stable leadership my bummio. Sneeky and insecure if she is avoiding publicity and debate. How an earth will she be able to negotiate with EU? They will eat her alive.

This is the image I got of her now.. well, it is a he, but then, you get the image. A prime minister of Great Britain playing hide ho with journalists? Really?


----------



## Guest

havoc said:


> Me - less so. I made reference earlier on in this thread to her rather flat delivery of prepared statements and questioned whether she had the best of speech writers. To me she gives the impression of a kidnap victim reading out some forced demand. I don't think she'd cope well with having to explain things in any depth because they aren't actually her ideas which is why she's been given slogans such as 'strong and stable leadership' to trot out as the answer to everything.


I have never really listened to her, just read what she has said or done, and thought that Labour´s problem is mainly Corbyn. But if she is that bad no wonder they´d like to shut her down and keep hidden as much as possible. But a person like that as a Britain´s prime minister. _Really? _


----------



## KittenKong

MrsZee said:


> LOL, so could I. Strong and stable leadership my bummio. Sneeky and insecure if she is avoiding publicity and debate. How an earth will she be able to negotiate with EU? They will eat her alive.
> 
> This is the image I got of her now.. well, it is a he, but then, you get the image. A prime minister of Great Britain playing hide ho with journalists? Really?


If heaven forbid this vile woman is elected I wonder how long she'll last?

Can just hear her resignation speech, "This country needs strong and stable leadership".......


----------



## rona

MrsZee said:


> I have never really listened to her, just read what she has said or done, and thought that Labour´s problem is mainly Corbyn. But if she is that bad no wonder they´d like to shut her down and keep hidden as much as possible. But a person like that as a Britain´s prime minister. _Really? _


Don't give a stuff if she's charismatic or not as long as she can do the job.

Jeremy is very charismatic but I don't think he'd have a hope in hell at leading a country.
I've been informed that Blair was charismatic (I could never see it) and look what he's turned out to be.............two faced money grabbing little twerp


----------



## cheekyscrip

MrsZee said:


> I have never really listened to her, just read what she has said or done, and thought that Labour´s problem is mainly Corbyn. But if she is that bad no wonder they´d like to shut her down and keep hidden as much as possible. But a person like that as a Britain´s prime minister. _Really? _


Problem is the alternative...

Seen Diane Abbott today?
Seen Nutall? Nomen omen...

I can go to Cat Chat right now and put together better opposition...

I would have voted Green or SNP if I could.

One party a freak show, other a bunch of misfits..or the other way round?

How surreal...

May: Only her arogance matches her ignorance.


----------



## Goblin

rona said:


> Don't give a stuff if she's charismatic or not as long as she can do the job.


Can she? Other than soundbites, what has she actually done in her time in charge? Maybe you can talk up the positives of her career demonstrating she can do the job.


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> Don't give a stuff if she's charismatic or not as long as she can do the job.
> 
> Jeremy is very charismatic but I don't think he'd have a hope in hell at leading a country.


What gives you the impression May is up to the job? Putting politics aside for the moment I thought Gordon Brown was pretty useless yet he was an excellent chancellor.

May on the other hand was useless as a Home Secretary (as some under Labour were, yet Jacqui Smith didn't become party leader thank goodness).

What has she achieved in her 9 months? Slogans, sound bites yet little action. It took her over 6 months to trigger article 50, preachers immigration control she failed to achieve as HS in preference to the economy.

Then suddenly decides to call a general election she promised she wouldn't.

Now she can't bring herself to speak to the people she wants support from. 95% of the press are on her side which no doubt she thinks will be enough to secure a landslide.

In contrast, Corbyn is very thick skinned to have overcome opposition within his own party and much hatred towards him in the right wing press.

Who do you think would make a better leader for the country?


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> What gives you the impression May is up to the job?


Again, Where have I said this?



KittenKong said:


> In contrast, Corbyn is very thick skinned to have overcome opposition within his own party and much hatred towards him in the right wing press.


I admire him greatly for his tenacity


----------



## Colliebarmy

Diane Abbot home goal...

How much will 10,000 new coppers cost over 4 years Di?

lol


----------



## havoc

MrsZee said:


> I have never really listened to her


It's difficult to describe. To me her delivery is almost robotic with a dash of forced emphasis where she's been told to do so. The closest thing I can liken it to is when someone learns a short speech in a language they don't speak.


----------



## Colliebarmy

This is all Corbyn (and Labour) need right now (being the back half of a panto cow already)

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...nces-return-in-bid-to-influence-brexit-debate


----------



## rona

Colliebarmy said:


> Diane Abbot home goal...
> 
> How much will 10,000 new coppers cost over 4 years Di?
> 
> lol


http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presente...abbotts-agonising-interview-over-policy-cost/


----------



## cheekyscrip

May supported Remain, then Leave, then Brexit for everyone, then Brexit deal or no deal, then no election, then election...
" Strong and stable???".


----------



## KittenKong

Colliebarmy said:


> Diane Abbot home goal...
> 
> How much will 10,000 new coppers cost over 4 years Di?
> 
> lol


No fan of Abbott myself but at least she's only shadow HS and not the leader of the opposition!

How much is a hard Brexit going to cost? The government are already spending £500m to change the colour of the passport just to mention one thing.

I'm sure billionaires wouldn't starve if they had to pay a little more tax.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> All the same it shows May is very wrong to believe (more like insist) everyone is behind her!


Do you seriously think she believes that 100 % of the population are behind her? that all 9.3 million who voted labour have changed sides to vote for her? Of course she doesn't. Therefore I would imagine there are a few million labour voters hanging around on facebook posting every snippet of anti May information and memes they can find. My Auntie Vi thinks Jeremy Corbyn is a dangerous communist doesn't mean I would plaster her thoughts all over the internet though.



MrsZee said:


> LOL, so could I. Strong and stable leadership my bummio. Sneeky and insecure if she is avoiding publicity and debate. How an earth will she be able to negotiate with EU? They will eat her alive.
> 
> This is the image I got of her now.. well, it is a he, but then, you get the image. A prime minister of Great Britain playing hide ho with journalists? Really?


Is that Jeremy? She isn't avoiding publicity and debate. She is avoiding the live leaders debates which have only taken place at the last two elections only. They are not set in stone (like Ed Milliband's pledges) and to be frank I don't blame her. Who wants to stand at a podium and listen to the also rans droning on? I'm not particularly interested in what Nicola Sturgeon thinks given we can't vote for any members of her party if we live south of the border but I'm surprised Jeremy Corbyn won't debate with her although everyone here seems to think that is all fine and dandy  Double standards or what?


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> The government are already spending £500m to change the colour of the passport just to mention one thing.


I've already explained and given links to the error of this statement but hey, if you don't want facts and just spout paper headlines...............


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Do you seriously think she believes that 100 % of the population are behind her? that all 9.3 million who voted labour have changed sides to vote for her? Of course she doesn't. Therefore I would imagine there are a few million labour voters hanging around on facebook posting every snippet of anti May information and memes they can find. My Auntie Vi thinks Jeremy Corbyn is a dangerous communist doesn't mean I would plaster her thoughts all over the internet though.
> 
> Is that Jeremy? She isn't avoiding publicity and debate. She is avoiding the live leaders debates which have only taken place at the last two elections only. They are not set in stone (like Ed Milliband's pledges) and to be frank I don't blame her. Who wants to stand at a podium and listen to the also rans droning on? I'm not particularly interested in what Nicola Sturgeon thinks given we can't vote for any members of her party if we live south of the border but I'm surprised Jeremy Corbyn won't debate with her although everyone here seems to think that is all fine and dandy  Double standards or what?


Yes, it appears May does believe she has united the country behind her, or at least insists it must do.

You just have to listen to her speeches, "The country is coming together but Westminster is not".

She perhaps believes The Sun letters page represents the entire UK population.

And her threats to anyone who opposes her is not a cause for alarm?. You might think I'm talking nonsense but how else would you take threats to take action against "Extremists who want to break up the union" (or words to that effect), in other words Scottish people who want independence for example?

Very much from what I would expect from a dictator.

At least Millibands pledges were set in stone so people knew exactly what he stood for.


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> She isn't avoiding publicity and debate.


Really, obviously you haven't been reading the same things I have. Normally prospective PM's go out and actually are seen talking to people in the street who ask questions, not limit access and insist on minimal questions, insisting that they are given beforehand, preventing live coverage of her answering them. Is that the sound of someone who is confident in what they are offering and their existing achievements?


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> My Auntie Vi thinks Jeremy Corbyn is a dangerous communist doesn't mean I would plaster her thoughts all over the internet though


One chance of a bit of fun and you're depriving all of us. They appear to have bound and gagged Boris again so the entertainment factor needs a boost - go on


----------



## Jesthar

havoc said:


> It's difficult to describe. To me her delivery is almost robotic with a dash of forced emphasis where she's been told to do so. The closest thing I can liken it to is when someone learns a short speech in a language they don't speak.


In a marvellous twist of timing, a geeky friend of mine just posted this on FB:

_In honour of the 53rd anniversary of the BASIC programming language, I have written a prime minister simulator that I am confident would pass the Turing test:_

10 INPUT "Hello, my name is Theresa. What is your question? " q$
20 PRINT "The answer to " q$ " is..."
30 PRINT "Strong and stable government"
40 GOTO 30


----------



## KittenKong

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ocrats-defectors-south-west-stick-with-tories


----------



## KittenKong

From The Guardian.


----------



## kimthecat

Colliebarmy said:


> Diane Abbot home goal...
> 
> How much will 10,000 new coppers cost over 4 years Di?
> 
> lol


#*Dianeabbott*'s least favourite comedy sketch


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> One chance of a bit of fun and you're depriving all of us. They appear to have bound and gagged Boris again so the entertainment factor needs a boost - go on


Oh go on then, if you insist.

Auntie Vi was on the bus today and happened to look over the shoulder of the man in front of her and saw in The Sun that John McDonnell the shadow chancellor was giving a speech at a rally yesterday and was stood under a Stalin flag and she also mentioned something about Assad but she couldn't quite see what that was about. I told her not to be daft that Jeremy wouldn't put someone like that in charge of the country's finances but she insisted it was true so I looked it up to see what she was talking about and found this 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/34621...regime-flags-but-crops-them-out-of-his-tweet/










Crowds chanted "class against class" and called out "Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin!".

Auntie Vi asked what the women wanted with Corbyn but I couldn't answer and suggested she ask Diane Abbott


----------



## FeelTheBern

rottiepointerhouse said:


> what Nicola Sturgeon thinks


"Scottish independence and Scottish independence. What was that other thing? Oh, Scottish independence."


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## havoc

You lot have failed to recognise a far more pressing problem. Can you be given a minus score in the Eurovision Song Contest? I know we've been in training for null points for months but I think we've probably peaked too early.


----------



## KittenKong

From Facebook:


----------



## noushka05

A message from the National Health Action Party: The Tories won't tell you about their #*NHSbombshell* until after the election.
We think you should know before you vote. #*GE2017*


----------



## noushka05

Colliebarmy said:


> Diane Abbot home goal...
> 
> How much will 10,000 new coppers cost over 4 years Di?
> 
> lol





rona said:


> http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presente...abbotts-agonising-interview-over-policy-cost/


When Diane Abbott makes a small gaff the media goes into hysteria - the same day the story breaks that HSBC laundered £5Million donations to the tory party - tumble weed.

This story is HUGE! Can you imagine the uproar if it was to the Labour party?


----------



## Zaros

STRONG AND STABLE!
STRONG AND STABLE!
STRONG AND STABLE!​


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> STRONG AND STABLE!
> STRONG AND STABLE!
> STRONG AND STABLE!​


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> When Diane Abbott makes a small gaff the media goes into hysteria - the same day the story breaks that HSBC laundered £5Million donations to the tory party - tumble weed.
> 
> This story is HUGE! Can you imagine the uproar if it was to the Labour party?
> 
> View attachment 309348


Yep HSBC laundered £5 million pounds in donations to the Tory party so Theresa May can eat chips:


----------



## Happy Paws2

Strong and stable 

and now she says she will be a "bloody difficult woman" towards European 

That's really going to help us isn't it.


----------



## noushka05

Happy Paws said:


> Strong and stable
> 
> and now she says she will be a "bloody difficult woman" towards European
> 
> That's really going to help us isn't it.


It certainly isn't. The stupid woman is an all round liability!


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> A message from the National Health Action Party: The Tories won't tell you about their #*NHSbombshell* until after the election.
> We think you should know before you vote. #*GE2017*
> 
> View attachment 309347


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> View attachment 309357


Don't talk to me about debt & taxes lol


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> Don't talk to me about debt & taxes lol
> 
> View attachment 309358


Make your mind up. For weeks you have been repeating the obvious lie that the Tories have tripled the national debt. Now you post a huge meme saying they have doubled it. (Btw, neither number is correct).

Are you Diane Abbott?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> Make your mind up. For weeks you have been repeating the obvious lie that the Tories have tripled the national debt. Now you post a huge meme saying they have doubled it. (Btw, neither number is correct).
> 
> Are you Diane Abbott?


Chips









Sorry I forgot you prefer these chips...


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> Yep HSBC laundered £5 million pounds in donations to the Tory party so Theresa May can eat chips:


Well, lets just hope she doesn't give them up for lent, because if she does, chippies around the country will be shutting up shop for good.


----------



## samuelsmiles

Christ Almighty - Woman eats chips!!!

Hold the Front Phuqn Page!!!


----------



## KittenKong

samuelsmiles said:


> Christ Almighty - Woman eats chips!!!
> 
> Hold the Front Phuqn Page!!!


Look what eating a bacon sandwich did for Ed Miliband?

Definitely May's, "Bacon sandwich" moment.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> STRONG AND STABLE!
> STRONG AND STABLE!
> STRONG AND STABLE!​


Tasteless new low sunk to.



noushka05 said:


> View attachment 309352


It's catching. Disgraceful.



Happy Paws said:


> Strong and stable
> 
> and now she says she will be a "bloody difficult woman" towards European
> 
> That's really going to help us isn't it.


Of course she's going to be bloody difficult to the EU, just as they are being to her. Would you rather she just caved in and gave them everything they asked for?


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Who is he please?


Think that could be my next door neighbours cousin twice removed


----------



## Bisbow

Dr Pepper said:


> Tasteless new low sunk to.
> 
> It's catching. Disgraceful.
> 
> Of course she's going to be bloody difficult to the EU, just as they are being to her. Would you rather she just caved in and gave them everything they asked for?


Of course they would. It would give them something new to moan about instead of keep repeating themselves over and over again, and why shouldn't she eat a few chips if she wants to.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Would you rather she just caved in and gave them everything they asked for?


No. I'd rather she hadn't been so quick to set a bolshy and adversarial stance months ago. There was no need for it and it won't do us any good in the long run.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Bisbow

See what I mean by repetition, same old thing, time and time again


----------



## Zaros

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 309366


That's a very disconcerting image indeed. Perhaps this 'Strong & Stable' slogan/motto had been plagiarised after all.
Laying the country to rest.

But not so much in peace as in pieces.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Of course she's going to be bloody difficult to the EU, just as they are being to her. Would you rather she just caved in and gave them everything they asked for?


Difficult.. she can't be anything else considering she doesn't even know what she is doing. Not even knowing how the EU works springs to mind. She's promised what she can not deliver.

Then again this is someone who went to court with an argument blown out the water with simple logic.. When she lost she decided to be difficult, going to the supreme court using the same argument (obviously not reading the result of the previous loss and why) with the same result. This after trying to intimidate the court system and getting some of the media behind her. Too bad EU doesn't care about the UK media. They'll simply let her throw tantrums. What's the worst that can happen.. UK leaves the EU?


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> No. I'd rather she hadn't been so quick to set a bolshy and adversarial stance months ago. There was no need for it and it won't do us any good in the long run.


Because the EU were so ready to accommodate Mrs May weren't they. It's simply six of one and half a dozen of the other, and how negotiations start. Obviously the EU want the UK to pay them billions when we leave, we are one of the few net contributing members, without us they have to find more money to stay at their current level or make cutbacks. The EU were always going to make it difficult for that reason. Good on Mrs May for standing up to them from the off. Now negotiations can commence with no pussy-footing around.


----------



## Derby Dogwalking

Its important to realise that more people didn't vote for anyone in 2015 that voter for all of the parties combined. Not voting does not mean you're not politically engaged, you just have to accept the default.
search for "register to vote UK" and there is an official government site where you can register (or check your status) - all you need is your address and NI number.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Well I am disgusted by the example she is setting eating greasy saturated fat laden chips in full public view :Jawdrop My Auntie Vi has asked me to write her a letter to inform her that fried potato does not make up one of her 5 a day and to ask her when she intends to bring in a tax on junk food.

I'm not one for memes, I actually hate them but I promised Auntie Vi I would share this one with you


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Good on Mrs May for standing up to them from the off. Now negotiations can commence with no pussy-footing around.


Can they? Why has she called an election then?


----------



## Arnie83

Satori said:


> Make your mind up. For weeks you have been repeating the obvious lie that the Tories have tripled the national debt. Now you post a huge meme saying they have doubled it. (*Btw, neither number is correct*).
> 
> Are you Diane Abbott?


Can you tell us the correct figure please?


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> Can they? Why has she called an election then?


Obviously providing she's still PM on June 9th then yes. I believe the thinking behind the election was to give her clear support and a strong mandate, now we wait to see if that actually happens!


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> I believe the thinking behind the election was to give her clear support and a strong mandate,


She's already leader of the party in power with a majority. If she isn't one for pussyfooting around why can't she just get on with the job?


----------



## Happy Paws2

Dr Pepper said:


> Obviously providing she's still PM on June 9th then yes. I believe the thinking behind the election was to give her clear support and a strong mandate, now we wait to see if that actually happens!


Let her win and make a complete mess of things, then we really will know what Brexit means.


----------



## havoc

Happy Paws said:


> Let her win and make a complete mess of things, then we really will know what Brexit means


You don't think maybe that's about as petulant and pointless as those brexiteers who thought it would just be a case of sticking two fingers up to the EU the day after the referendum?


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> She's already leader of the party in power with a majority. If she isn't one for pussyfooting around why can't she just get on with the job?


Because negotiations can't start until the middle of June (I forget the exact date) so there's nothing to be getting on with hence the date of the election. It probably seemed like a good idea to strengthen her position before starting.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> Because negotiations can't start until the middle of June (I forget the exact date) so there's nothing to be getting on with hence the date of the election. It probably seemed like a good idea to strengthen her position before starting.


"Before May called the snap election, EU diplomats had expected to begin negotiations with the British in late May, but they now insist no talks will take place until after the vote on 8 June."

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...be-quick-or-painless-says-eu-chief-negotiator


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Because negotiations can't start until the middle of June (I forget the exact date) so there's nothing to be getting on with hence the date of the election. It probably seemed like a good idea to strengthen her position before starting.


If she wanted a mandate for bexit she should have had a second binding referendum rather than muddy the whole thing making it about government internal policies and brexit at the same time. The idea of making it about brexit is spin. This election isn't about brexit, it's about having a government in place which works for it's people, not simply the richest. May's record doesn't exactly show that does it. Maybe she should have worked on that instead of holding an election.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> "Before May called the snap election, EU diplomats had expected to begin negotiations with the British in late May, but they now insist no talks will take place until after the vote on 8 June."
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/politic...be-quick-or-painless-says-eu-chief-negotiator


Well that's at odds with this
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...art-until-june-eu-diplomats-reveal-article-50

I don't know because I don't read it usually, but are the guardian for or against Brexit/Mrs May?


----------



## rona

Dr Pepper said:


> Obviously the EU want the UK to pay them billions when we leave,


The chief negotiator for the EU has just stated on tv that this isn't true.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> Well that's at odds with this
> https://www.theguardian.com/politic...art-until-june-eu-diplomats-reveal-article-50


Things presumably changed during the 6 weeks between the articles.



Dr Pepper said:


> I don't know because I don't read it usually, but are the guardian for or against Brexit/Mrs May?


The Guardian were against Brexit but are now against a 'hard' Brexit. They are not in favour of May, but recognise that she will still be in power come June.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rona said:


> The chief negotiator for the EU has just stated on tv that this isn't true.


That's impressive, you'd think he had better things to do than read my posts on a pet forum


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> Things presumably changed during the 6 weeks between the articles.
> 
> The Guardian were against Brexit but are now against a 'hard' Brexit. They are not in favour of May, but recognise that she will still be in power come June.


I think more to the point nothing has changed and it was known before the election was even called negotiations wouldn't start until June.

Thanks for info' on where they stand, seems they are just trying to cause trouble for Mrs May in this instance. I always thought the Guardian was supposedly a quality paper, guess it depends on how low the bar is set to the quality you get!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-39758977

Negotiations have got off to a tough start, but former chancellor and Eurosceptic Lord Lawson puts it down to the EU being "scared stiff, particularly over money".

He says the only significant contributors to the EU budget are Germany and the UK, and when the latter leaves, there will be "a huge improvement in the UK budget and a hole in the EU budget".

Lord Lawson, chancellor from 1983 to 1989, agrees with Theresa May that no deal is better than a bad deal, adding: "I regret it looks as though we will have to settle for no deal."

He believes the UK should offer the EU a "very good deal - a free trade deal with no strings attached in both our interests".

"For political reasons, they may refuse it, in which case we wait patiently and we are out," he says.

We've learned that ITV plans to hold its election debate on Thursday 18 May. Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn have both ruled themselves out, so who does that leave?

Well, the list at the moment looks like UKIP's Paul Nuttall, Lib Dem leader Tim Farron, the SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon, Plaid Cymru's Leanne Wood and the Green Party co-leader Caroline Lucas.

Can we expect an empty chair - or even a handbag or tub of lard - in the place of those missing?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Greece’s former finance minister Yanis Varoufakis says the president of the European Commission is an “insignificant” figure and having him as an ally in discussions can actually be counter-productive.

Speaking to BBC Radio 5 Live, Yanis Varoufakis said Jean-Claude Juncker, above, was “not particularly competent” and German Chancellor Angela Merkel merely "tolerates him".

The worst moments of my short tenure during those negotiations as Greece's finance minister... were when Jean-Claude Juncker tried to help me... Do you know why these were really bad moments? Firstly, because he was not particularly competent in the way he was going about it. And secondly, because I knew every time he tried to help me, Wolfgang Schauble, the German Finance Minister, and Angela Merkel would hit me really hard in order to signal to Jean-Claude Juncker to stay out of it. You really do not want Jean-Claude Juncker to be on your side. You want Angela Merkel to be on your side.”


----------



## kimthecat

havoc said:


> She's already leader of the party in power with a majority. If she isn't one for pussyfooting around why can't she just get on with the job?


 Perhaps because of all the moaning minnies saying she wasn't an "elected" PM etc etc . and that shes a dictator. 
She can't win cos now it seems those moaning minnies are moaning because she *has* called an election.

Is she wins the election then she won't be a dictator and they wont have anything to moan about .
The weak opposition isn't her fault , it's the fault of the people who voted in Corbyn as leader.


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> Because the EU were so ready to accommodate Mrs May weren't they. It's simply six of one and half a dozen of the other, and how negotiations start. Obviously the EU want the UK to pay them billions when we leave, we are one of the few net contributing members, without us they have to find more money to stay at their current level or make cutbacks. The EU were always going to make it difficult for that reason. Good on Mrs May for standing up to them from the off. Now negotiations can commence with no pussy-footing around.


Lol, love him or hate him, reckon this chap was pretty accurate in his description


----------



## Dr Pepper

Mrs Sturgeon won't do it as it'd make her look like a lesser candidate than Mrs May or Mr Corbyn, her ego couldn't take it.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Happy Paws said:


> Let her win and make a complete mess of things, then we really will know what Brexit means.


It means Brexit.

You must have got it by now.

Brexit means Brexit.

No more questions.

You just being difficult.

It is May's prerogative.

And Henry VIII 's.

Who also had Brexit by the way and we all know what happened next...


----------



## kimthecat

havoc said:


> You lot have failed to recognise a far more pressing problem. Can you be given a minus score in the Eurovision Song Contest? I know we've been in training for null points for months but I think we've probably peaked too early.


:Hilarious I don't even know who is representing us this year !


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> :Hilarious I don't even know who is representing us this year !


The girl who lost out to Jedward on the X-factor a few years ago apparently. I saw a clip about it on Lorraine before I turned over


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> He believes the UK should offer the EU a "very good deal - a free trade deal with no strings attached in both our interests".


On purely economic grounds maybe. This is what the EU has stated again and again to be unacceptable, despite what May and Co. promise to deliver. You cannot have the perks of membership without being a member along with strings. The EU cannot allow it to happen if they want to keep the EU together.


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> The girl who lost out to Jedward on the X-factor a few years ago apparently. I saw a clip about it on Lorraine before I turned over


 Lost out to Jedward? They can't even sing ! I suppose they won it on the cute factor ! 
Well good luck to her , she'll need it .


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> I think more to the point nothing has changed and it was known before the election was even called negotiations wouldn't start until June.
> 
> Thanks for info' on where they stand, seems they are just trying to cause trouble for Mrs May in this instance. I always thought the Guardian was supposedly a quality paper, guess it depends on how low the bar is set to the quality you get!


Well that is of course your opinion, but I don't think we can say that nothing has changed when 6 weeks ago there was no chance of May calling an election before 2020, and now there is one on June 8th.


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-39758977
> 
> Negotiations have got off to a tough start, but former chancellor and Eurosceptic Lord Lawson puts it down to the EU being "scared stiff, particularly over money".
> 
> He says the only significant contributors to the EU budget are Germany and the UK, and when the latter leaves, there will be "a huge improvement in the UK budget and a hole in the EU budget".
> 
> Lord Lawson, chancellor from 1983 to 1989, agrees with Theresa May that no deal is better than a bad deal, adding: "I regret it looks as though we will have to settle for no deal."
> 
> He believes the UK should offer the EU a "very good deal - a free trade deal with no strings attached in both our interests".
> 
> "For political reasons, they may refuse it, in which case we wait patiently and we are out," he says.
> 
> We've learned that ITV plans to hold its election debate on Thursday 18 May. Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn have both ruled themselves out, so who does that leave?
> 
> Well, the list at the moment looks like UKIP's Paul Nuttall, Lib Dem leader Tim Farron, the SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon, Plaid Cymru's Leanne Wood and the Green Party co-leader Caroline Lucas.
> 
> Can we expect an empty chair - or even a handbag or tub of lard - in the place of those missing?


I have to say I'm sceptical that the EU will end up out of pocket on any deal agreed. We'll either have to pay significantly more than we do now to retain access to things, or we'll have to pay even more through other means on WTO - tarrifs, duties, customs inspections, import/export delays, price hikes etc. We don't produce anything that the EU can't do without or easily procure from other sources, after all. Sorry if that sounds pessimistic, but it's just a realistic assessment of where we are.

Of course, there is a chance that we will pull off some David vs Goliath style deal, but realisitically speaking there is a reason why that story is famous - such victories are a rarity, not the norm, and require an extraordinary and inspired person to be able to pull them off. On current evidence, I don't think Mrs May and her cohorts are in either of those categories, not by a long way.


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> Make your mind up. For weeks you have been repeating the obvious lie that the Tories have tripled the national debt. Now you post a huge meme saying they have doubled it. (Btw, neither number is correct).
> 
> Are you Diane Abbott?


It was the best I could find at the time lol

I love this embarrassing tweet by Tory MP Kawczynski. He tweeted it then deleted it when he realised it proved the massive rise in borrowing was actually down to the tories not labour. Thank god for screen shots


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Tasteless new low sunk to.
> 
> It's catching. Disgraceful.
> 
> Of course she's going to be bloody difficult to the EU, just as they are being to her. Would you rather she just caved in and gave them everything they asked for?


This is a right wing coup we're witnessing. I fear you'll only realise when its too late.


----------



## suewhite

noushka05 said:


> It was the best I could find at the time lol
> 
> I love this embarrassing tweet by Tory MP Kawczynski. He tweeted it then deleted it when he realised it proved the massive rise in borrowing was actually down to the tories not labour. Thank god for screen shots
> 
> View attachment 309397


Maybe he had been chatting to Diane Abbott think she is quite good at getting her sums wrong.:Smug


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> It was the best I could find at the time lol
> 
> I love this embarrassing tweet by Tory MP Kawczynski. He tweeted it then deleted it when he realised it proved the massive rise in borrowing was actually down to the tories not labour. Thank god for screen shots
> 
> View attachment 309397


You still haven't answered the question. Are you? Enquiring minds need to know.


----------



## Arnie83

noushka05 said:


> It was the best I could find at the time lol
> 
> I love this embarrassing tweet by Tory MP Kawczynski. He tweeted it then deleted it when he realised it proved the massive rise in borrowing was actually down to the tories not labour. Thank god for screen shots
> 
> View attachment 309397


It might also have been the 'We are determined to ensure Country gets back to balance asap' given that Osborne promised to eradicate the deficit by 2015, then pushed it back to 2016, then 2017, then promised a surplus by 2020, which is already a dead duck. So now there isn't even a date attached to it!


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-39758977
> 
> Negotiations have got off to a tough start, but former chancellor and Eurosceptic Lord Lawson puts it down to the EU being "scared stiff, particularly over money".
> 
> He says the only significant contributors to the EU budget are Germany and the UK, and when the latter leaves, there will be "a huge improvement in the UK budget and a hole in the EU budget".
> 
> Lord Lawson, chancellor from 1983 to 1989, agrees with Theresa May that no deal is better than a bad deal, adding: "I regret it looks as though we will have to settle for no deal."
> 
> He believes the UK should offer the EU a "very good deal - a free trade deal with no strings attached in both our interests".
> 
> "For political reasons, they may refuse it, in which case we wait patiently and we are out," he says.
> 
> We've learned that ITV plans to hold its election debate on Thursday 18 May. Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn have both ruled themselves out, so who does that leave?
> 
> Well, the list at the moment looks like UKIP's Paul Nuttall, Lib Dem leader Tim Farron, the SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon, Plaid Cymru's Leanne Wood and the Green Party co-leader Caroline Lucas.
> 
> Can we expect an empty chair - or even a handbag or tub of lard - in the place of those missing?


Nigel Lawson is looking after his own selfish interests, he wants out of the EU because he wants rid of legislation which protects our climate & environment.. The man is a dangerous climate change denier. We should all be very very afraid.

*Brexit Climate Deniers Launch Coordinated Attack Against Green Regulations Ahead of Election*
https://www.desmog.uk/2017/05/01/br...tack-against-green-regulations-ahead-election

.


----------



## noushka05

Arnie83 said:


> It might also have been the 'We are determined to ensure Country gets back to balance asap' given that Osborne promised to eradicate the deficit by 2015, then pushed it back to 2016, then 2017, then promised a surplus by 2020, which is already a dead duck. So now there isn't even a date attached to it!


Yep. Talk about removing the goal posts? They've ripped the goal posts up! Can you imagine the uproar if this was Labour? The tories are a disaster in every department.


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> The tories are a disaster in every department.


...

... except winning elections.


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> You still haven't answered the question. Are you? Enquiring minds need to know.


:Hilarious I prefer to keep my identity under wraps. Nosey!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Now let's sum things up so far:

Diane Abbott doesn't know how to do simple mathematics and made herself look so unprofessional yesterday.
Jeremy Corbyn scares me as he is planning to do all these things but has already ear market the money for this three times over from the same source.
Labour Supporters in Labour held territory are saying they are going to vote..... drum roll...... Conservative as they don't trust Jeremy Corbyn.
This is very worrying what the Labour Party are saying.

Meanwhile on the other side of this General Election:

Theresa May offers Brexit and that is clear.
Theresa May is acting very Priministial.
Theresa May said today that Brussels is trying to interfere with the UK General Elections.
Theresa May today said that there are only two people that could be in Downing Street on the 9th June 2017. Theresa May (with a majority) or Jeremy Corbyn (with a hung Parliament).
Do I still support Brexit? Yes, more than ever.

I need to rethink my position.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Plot thickens!!!
EU accused of interference with election.
By .....drum roll...
May!

Election they neither called or expected.

But how many Brits read foreign press?

Merkel stated that May is under illusion?

Oh, but Merkel & Co stated that many times before any sudden election?

According to May they should stop now being critical of her.
So unfair.

She could muzzle Lords, Commons, judges, British media to some extent...
Cannot muzzle Merkel....
Sad day for May.


----------



## Arnie83

stockwellcat said:


> Theresa May said today that Brussels is trying to interfere with the UK General Elections.


Theresa is lying in the hope that those who voted Leave for nationalistic reasons will now vote Tory for the same nationalistic reasons.

The result of the election will have no bearing whatsoever on the Brexit negotiations. Why on earth would it?


----------



## cheekyscrip

Arnie83 said:


> Theresa is lying in the hope that those who voted Leave for nationalistic reasons will now vote Tory for the same nationalistic reasons.
> 
> The result of the election will have no bearing whatsoever on the Brexit negotiations. Why on earth would it?


C'mon , our May feels so insecure and bullied by big bad EU.

Needs pat on the back and Parliament who ask no questions.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Who said Tories lie?
@noushka05 it is just the proof of how truthful and insightful they really are...new election poster for Tories 









So if you vote for anyone but May , then EU is behind it!!!
If Corbyn winS, EU is to blame!!!

Everytime I think May/Leave cannot come with anything more ridiculous , I am in for a surprise...


----------



## rona

If you actually go and read what is with that graph on borrowing/debt, you will notice it says that a good part of it is due to the bank bale-outs by Labour. Not all admittedly, some due to the mess we were in when the recession struck. probably due to having no Gold reserves etc. as backup 

It also says that if you look at it on a world or even EU platform, we are doing pretty well compared to most

It's on a very easily accessible site 
Just got to look for facts rather than propaganda


----------



## noushka05

suewhite said:


> Maybe he had been chatting to Diane Abbott think she is quite good at getting her sums wrong.:Smug


Except those sums are accurate hence why he delated How many people have been fooled into believing the tories are better with the economy?  Looks like even Daniel believed it.



cheekyscrip said:


> Who said Tories lie?
> @noushka05 it is just the proof of how truthful and insightful they really are...new election poster for Tories
> View attachment 309403


Tories telling the truth. Is this a first?


----------



## Jesthar

stockwellcat said:


> Now let's sum things up so far:
> 
> Diane Abbott doesn't know how to do simple mathematics and made herself look so unprofessional yesterday.
> Jeremy Corbyn scares me as he is planning to do all these things but has already ear market the money for this three times over from the same source.
> Labour Supporters in Labour held territory are saying they are going to vote..... drum roll...... Conservative as they don't trust Jeremy Corbyn.
> This is very worrying what the Labour Party are saying.


Diane Abbott should have been shelved years ago. Can't comment on the budgeting side if things as I haven't seen that stuff. The labour supportors threatning to vote tory sounds like standard pre-election bluster, though - I remember the "We're voting labour (but we don't trust Blair)" slogans from years ago. Jeremy doesn't have the same levels of charisma and doesn't indulge in the rhetoric that made Blair so popular, so I can understand those that prefer their labour as 'Tory Lite' will be put off him. You're always going to get people who change their vote because of who the current leader is.


stockwellcat said:


> Meanwhile on the other side of this General Election:
> 
> Theresa May offers Brexit and that is clear.
> Theresa May is acting very Priministial.
> Theresa May said today that Brussels is trying to interfere with the UK General Elections.
> Theresa May today said that there are only two people that could be in Downing Street on the 9th June 2017. Theresa May (with a majority) or Jeremy Corbyn (with a hung Parliament).
> Do I still support Brexit? Yes, more than ever.
> 
> I need to rethink my position.


Personally, that doesn't fill me with confidence either. Theresa May isn't offering a clear vision of what the plan Brexit is, and has pretty much confirmed that the negotiations will happen in secret anyway, and also that we the public won't get a say in whether or not we take Brussels final offer. Brexit will happen whatever happens in the election, so I'd hope she would have more to say than just offering Brexit.

I can't say I've been enjoying her interpretation of 'acting Priministerially' either - to take an American comparator, she seems to be channelling Donald Trump and taking the slogans and stomping about approach, as opposed to the measured thoughfulness generally employed by his predecessor. True, it appeals to the masses, but I prefer my politics intelligent. I also prefer someone who is supposed to be our main representative to the world to not be skulking around hiding from the press and refusing to answer anything other than scripted questions with scripted soundbytes. I don't know how it comes across to others, but it's starting to make me feel she's not really the one in control, and whoever is actually in control is keeping her out the way for fear her frequent ineptitude in live, non-controlled interviews will wreck their chances of winning. The upside for her of banning journalists from recording her answers, of course, is full deniability if they don't like what a reporter says, as no-one can prove exactly what WAS said - basically adopting the 'fake news' approach. Clever, and very sneaky.

The Brussels accusations are downright weird. The EU couldn't give two hoots as to who wins the election (and have repeatedly said so if memory serves), as it won't affect Brexit at all given that the EU gets to dictate the terms and we can only say yea or nay. Sounds more like an appeal to the nationalistic side of the vote to me, hoping to get the Brexit vote to translate into a Tory vote.

As to the result - well, accurate crystal balls appear to have been in short supply of late, so I don't expect she can see the future more clearly than anyone else.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> If you actually go and read what is with that graph on borrowing/debt, you will notice it says that a good part of it is due to the bank bale-outs by Labour. Not all admittedly, some due to the mess we were in when the recession struck. probably due to having no Gold reserves etc. as backup
> 
> It also says that if you look at it on a world or even EU platform, we are doing pretty well compared to most
> 
> It's on a very easily accessible site
> Just got to look for facts rather than propaganda


Here are the facts Rona 

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ramesh-patel/finally-the-overspending-_b_7591088.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

.


----------



## stockwellcat.

So it has boiled down to:









And....









Or this...









Or this....


----------



## rona

Paper talk again I see........I mean real facts and statistics........clue there for you 

Cherry picking can show anything you want. It was you that used that graph to back up your claim


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> So it has boiled down to:
> View attachment 309412
> 
> 
> But May will provide us with" deep and friendly relationship with EU"...
> Didn't she say so?
> And....
> View attachment 309413
> 
> 
> Or this...
> View attachment 309415
> 
> 
> Or this....
> View attachment 309416


Or this


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> Or this
> View attachment 309417


But don't you think the Conservatives are right? The poster couldn't be more spot on. But then again the Conservatives have not played there hand if there is going to be a rise in taxes and the question is will they be honest about it?


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Paper talk again I see........I mean real facts and statistics........clue there for you
> 
> y picking can show anything you want. It was you that used that graph to back up your claim


I've seen how good you are at evaluating evidence. You even thought you knew better than climate scientists:Hilarious

Anyways - straight from the horses mouth then  (again)


----------



## Happy Paws2

cheekyscrip said:


> It means Brexit.
> 
> You must have got it by now.
> 
> Brexit means Brexit.
> 
> No more questions.
> 
> You just being difficult.
> 
> It is May's prerogative.
> 
> .


I know what is should mean, but the way TM is carrying on, it's not going to mean what you want it to mean, it's going to be a right mess.


----------



## rona

Statistics cannot lie but you have to have all the statistics not just the ones you think shows your point of view. I have an open mind,
I don't go looking for a view one way or the other. Pointless that is cos you'll always find what you are looking for and miss the truth


----------



## noushka05

Are we the 5th or is it now 6th? richest country on our planet yet this is how shamefully broken our society is now. If these hard right wingers get back in how many more are going to suffer, how many more babies are going die ?

Scathing words from Professor Kate Pickett on the damage Tory welfare reforms are doing to our society.
_
"rise in infant mortality for the first time in dacades, we're seeing a rise in deaths among the frail & elderly: tens of thousands! Speaking as a citizen we should be outraged at the immorality of those reforms.

We should be piling up the body bags in those tiny infant coffins outside No 10 & No 11 Downing Street..."_


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Statistics cannot lie but you have to have all the statistics not just the ones you think shows your point of view. I have an open mind,
> I don't go looking for a view one way or the other. Pointless that is cos you'll always find what you are looking for and miss the truth


Hilarious coming from you

All the times you refuted climate science, hen harrier persecution by grouse moors etc. Deary me.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> So it has boiled down to:


It's actually boiled down to the same place it was when the election was called. The need to restrict May from being able to dictate policies affecting the majority of the country without oversight and being made to occasionally compromise. That's why people are saying people should vote tactically. Doesn't matter if May needs to agree with the Lib Dems, Greens or labour, so long as she cannot simply push everything through parliament as though it wasn't there. Last thing the UK needs is an unfettered Tory government, opposition is needed.

Edit: Interesting isn't it that May is hiding from her record of leadership pushing Brexit instead.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Statistics cannot lie but you have to have all the statistics not just the ones you think shows your point of view. I have an open mind,
> I don't go looking for a view one way or the other. Pointless that is cos you'll always find what you are looking for and miss the truth


Just a couple of questions then Rona. The tories promised to fix our 'broken economy'. They said we all had to tighten our belts. 7 years of austerity cuts, public services slashed to the bone, cash generating public assets sold off. The debt is spiralling. Where has all the money gone?


----------



## cheekyscrip

Happy Paws said:


> I know what is should mean, but the way TM is carrying on, it's not going to mean what you want it to mean, it's going to be a right mess.


As predicted. By experts. Whom we do not need. In May we trust. In Boris. In Davies. Amen. 
Our new found faith.
Zealots and proselytes alike.

It was to be a mess and a disaster, so it seems to be.
Brexit is Brexit ain't it?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Last thing the UK needs is an unfettered Tory government, opposition is needed.
> 
> Edit: Interesting isn't it that May is hiding from her record of leadership pushing Brexit instead.


Yes I agree opposition is needed, politics would be boring without it. But where is the opposition? Labour has a leader who doesn't know which way he swings, Lib Dems can't be trusted, UKIP is obsolete - well almost, Green Party don't have enough MP's. So as you can see it's very difficult in the UK to find someone who is going to have a party to oppose the Conservatives or should I say Theresa May.

Yes May is pushing Brexit as it is what the UK voted for in June 2016.

Probably the Manifestos will shed some light on a worthy and effective opposition.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Yes I agree opposition is needed, politics would be boring without it. But where is the opposition?


Opposition is not limited to a single party. If May only needs a couple of rebels to stop her policies in parliament she'll be more likely to ensure that policies are more carefully thought out and don't penalise the majority for the sake of the minority.


----------



## Happy Paws2

cheekyscrip said:


> As predicted. By experts. Whom we do not need. In May we trust. In Boris. In Davies. Amen.
> Our new found faith.
> Zealots and proselytes alike.
> It was to be a mess and a disaster, so it seems to be.
> *Brexit is Brexit ain't it*?


No it's a Bl**dy C**k up.


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> In May I trust. In Boris. In Davies. Amen.
> My new found faith.


@cheekyscrip you have finally seen the light and are now worshipping the UK's glorious leader and ruling party


----------



## noushka05

Here's what the IFS says is about to happen to average household incomes as a result of the tories tax & welfare plans. (no doubt another convenient scapegoat will found to let the government off the hook)

.


----------



## Goblin

Of course stockwellcat you can always consider that May's majority at the moment is what, 12 seats? She has 29 under investigation of electoral fraud results due on the 9th June. What do you think, only a coincidence? Think about things like the NI hike for self employed. Would this have been reversed with the tories having a large majority?


----------



## noushka05

Bloody hell Strong & stable my ass!

*Faisal Islam*‏Verified [email protected]*faisalislam* 3h3 hours ago

Wow. PM suggests that Brussels trying to interfere with the election:


----------



## KittenKong

She's hardly going to get the, "Best possible deal" by behaving like that.

Pure Donald Trump behaviour.


----------



## havoc

The only thing I'm 100% sure of is that this election is nothing whatsoever to do with brexit. It's all the tories want to talk about so that definitely isn't why it was called. I still can't get over the way they seem to be succeeding in giving the impression brexit was a tory policy but I guess they see it as popular so they'll take ownership - for now. Unshackling themselves from previous promises over tax and NI is probably on the list of real reasons after the embarrassment of the u turn after the budget. Things will start to warm up a bit now we're officially in to electioneering so time to start taking notice on the subjects they work hard to avoid.


----------



## stockwellcat.

havoc said:


> Things will start to warm up a bit now we're officially in to electioneering so time to start taking notice on the subjects they work hard to avoid.


I really do hope things heat up. I want to support an opposition party that stands a chance of defeating the Conservatives but I fear the opposite will happen.


----------



## KittenKong

KittenKong said:


> She's hardly going to get the, "Best possible deal" by behaving like that.
> 
> Pure Donald Trump behaviour.


I wasn't the only one to think that...
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...eneral-election-trumps-playbook-a7716166.html


----------



## Arnie83

havoc said:


> The only thing I'm 100% sure of is that this election is nothing whatsoever to do with brexit. It's all the tories want to talk about so that definitely isn't why it was called. I still can't get over the way they seem to be succeeding in giving the impression brexit was a tory policy but I guess they see it as popular so they'll take ownership - for now. Unshackling themselves from previous promises over tax and NI is probably on the list of real reasons after the embarrassment of the u turn after the budget. Things will start to warm up a bit now we're officially in to electioneering so time to start taking notice on the subjects they work hard to avoid.


17 million people voted for Brexit. That's more than ever vote in a new government.

The "No way would I vote for Corbyn" group already ensures they're going to win, so they may as well go for gold by pretending it's the Tories v. the evil EU empire.

I'm just waiting for the Mail or Express to reveal Brussels' fiendish plan to build a Death Star with the UK's €100 bn ...


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> I want to support an opposition party that stands a chance of defeating the Conservatives.


Well it's Hobson's choice. We can have Jeremy and the extremists who back him - at least we know who they are. Or we can have Teresa and whoever has her ear is pressing her buttons/pulling her strings but we'll never know names or faces there. Both lots are riddled with self-interest and pretty extreme views.

I'd love a strong and stable leader but there isn't one on offer.


----------



## KittenKong

havoc said:


> The only thing I'm 100% sure of is that this election is nothing whatsoever to do with brexit. It's all the tories want to talk about so that definitely isn't why it was called. I still can't get over the way they seem to be succeeding in giving the impression brexit was a tory policy but I guess they see it as popular so they'll take ownership - for now. Unshackling themselves from previous promises over tax and NI is probably on the list of real reasons after the embarrassment of the u turn after the budget. Things will start to warm up a bit now we're officially in to electioneering so time to start taking notice on the subjects they work hard to avoid.


Indeed. It's disguised as a red white and blue Brexit delivered by a strong and stable leadership to achieve the best possible deal in a Brexit means Brexit that works for everyone.

Some chance of that......


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> I'd love a strong and stable leader but there isn't one on offer.


W are in the same predicament that Americans were in a few months ago. Damned if we do, damned if we don't


----------



## Zaros

rona said:


> Statistics cannot lie


Statistics are like mini skirts; they tend to give you ideas, but always hide what's important!:Smug


----------



## Colliebarmy

Zaros said:


> Statistics are like mini skirts; they tend to give you ideas, but always hide what's important!:Smug


----------



## Zaros

Colliebarmy said:


>


Two words;

Hitler

Monorchism.

:Watching


----------



## rona

Colliebarmy said:


>


 That's why I said


rona said:


> but you have to have all the statistics


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> W are in the same predicament that Americans were in a few months ago. Damned if we do, damned if we don't


Makes a coalition of chaos look quite attractive doesn't it


----------



## Colliebarmy

Zaros said:


> Two words;
> 
> Hitler
> 
> Monorchism.
> 
> :Watching


actually, i think it means that, if you assume half the worlds population is male with a pair and the other half of the population are female without a pair then 1+1 = 2 and 2+0 = 2, divide A by B and the answer is 1

BUT, I know men with no balls, and women who seem to have balls, this would need a correction factor of +/- 00.731

Then there are small balls, big balls, dangly balls and empty balls, so lets introduce a "ball factor" of =/- 0.995

Im ignoring hairy balls as they only get in the way

then there are the extraordinary balls, like anyone telling Anthony Joshua hes not allowed to park his car somewhere

we cant count balls cut off or kneed in within the last 3 hours (how many worldwide have just met a fast moving knee i wonder)


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> W are in the same predicament that Americans were in a few months ago. Damned if we do, damned if we don't


Yes look how that's panning out with Trump.

We don't know whether Corbyn would make a good PM. He might well make a bad PM. Theresa May, however, we 'know' is an absolutely dreadful PM.

We would at least have the chance to save our NHS etc under Corbyn. Not a chance if the tories get back in.


----------



## Colliebarmy

noushka05 said:


> Yes look how that's panning out with Trump.
> 
> We don't know whether Corbyn would make a good PM. He might well make a bad PM. Theresa May, however, we 'know' is an absolutely dreadful PM.
> 
> We would at least have the chance to save our NHS etc under Corbyn. Not a chance if the tories get back in.


Corbyn could save the NHS

While he lets Iran, North Korea and Russia nuke us cos he doesnt want Trident............and Abbot puts 10,000 coppers on the street for £300K, er.........sorry, £80m?

(actually its £1,200,000,000 over 4 years Di)


----------



## Zaros

Colliebarmy said:


> actually, i think it means that, if you assume half the worlds population is male with a pair and the other half of the population are female without a pair then 1+1 = 2 and 2+0 = 2, divide A by B and the answer is 1
> 
> BUT, I know men with no balls, and women who seem to have balls, this would need a correction factor of +/- 00.731
> 
> Then there are small balls, big balls, dangly balls and empty balls, so lets introduce a "ball factor" of =/- 0.995
> 
> Im ignoring hairy balls as they only get in the way
> 
> then there are the extraordinary balls, like anyone telling Anthony Joshua hes not allowed to park his car somewhere
> 
> we cant count balls cut off or kneed in within the last 3 hours (how many worldwide have just met a fast moving knee i wonder)


Still talking complete and utter 80L0X then.:Wacky


----------



## noushka05

Colliebarmy said:


> Corbyn could save the NHS
> 
> While he lets Iran, North Korea and Russia nuke us cos he doesnt want Trident............and Abbot puts 10,000 coppers on the street for £300K, er.........sorry, £80m?
> 
> (actually its £1,200,000,000 over 4 years Di)


Typical right wing scaremongering.

How would starting a nuclear war help anyone? Trident doesn't make us more safe, its obsolete & dangerous, it makes us a target 

ETA Abbott made a gaff, but labours policy for the police is actually good. Not that you care to be informed like.


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> Yes look how that's panning out with Trump.
> 
> We don't know whether Corbyn would make a good PM. He might well make a bad PM. Theresa May, however, we 'know' is an absolutely dreadful PM.
> 
> We would at least have the chance to save our NHS etc under Corbyn. Not a chance if the tories get back in.


Indeed. I would have thought the strongest of Brexiteers would wish for mutual co-operation with the EU post Brexit as, after all there's the largest trade area to consider and the plight of ex-pats on both sides too.

May is attempting a pre war-like stance with them after promising to achieve the best possible deal!

Meanwhile Labour back Brexit too of course. The unilateral guarantee of allowing existing EU citizens to remain in the UK is a very good start in achieving a post Brexit deal with the EU.

I know who I think would achieve the best possible deal. It's not Theresa May that's for sure....


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Typical right wing scaremongering.
> 
> How would starting a nuclear war help anyone? Trident doesn't make us more safe, its obsolete & dangerous, it makes us a target


There's not many countries that have nuclear capabilities:








Map of nuclear-armed states of the world.

NPT-designated nuclear weapon states (China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States)

Other states with nuclear weapons (India, North Korea, Pakistan)

Other states presumed to have nuclear weapons (Israel)

NATO nuclear weapons sharing states (Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Turkey)

These states formerly possessed nuclear weapons:
Belarus,
Kazakhstan,
South Africa
Ukraine

The US have installed a missile defence shield in South Korea to protect that region from North Korea the world's biggest threat at the moment even though there rockets seem to explode shortly after take off. Trump has offered to speak to Kim Yung Un but not under the current circumstances, he wants him to de-esculate before he talks to him.


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> Indeed. I would have thought the strongest of Brexiteers would wish for mutual co-operation with the EU post Brexit as, after all there's the largest trade area to consider and the plight of ex-pats on both sides too.
> 
> May is attempting a pre war-like stance with them after promising to achieve the best possible deal!
> 
> Meanwhile Labour back Brexit too of course. The unilateral guarantee of allowing existing EU citizens to remain in the UK is a very good start in achieving a post Brexit deal with the EU.
> 
> I know who I think would achieve the best possible deal. It's not Theresa May that's for sure....


She's a liability Shes sabotaging any hope of a good deal,

Tim is spot on

*Tim Farron*‏Verified [email protected]*timfarron* 1h1 hour ago

Theresa May is turning our friends into enemies and putting the interests of the Conservative party ahead of the interests of our country.

..


----------



## stockwellcat.

Chip anyone...










Because that's all she is prepared to give you if you vote for her.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> There's not many countries that have nuclear capabilities:
> View attachment 309445
> 
> Map of nuclear-armed states of the world.
> 
> NPT-designated nuclear weapon states (China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States)
> 
> Other states with nuclear weapons (India, North Korea, Pakistan)
> 
> Other states presumed to have nuclear weapons (Israel)
> 
> NATO nuclear weapons sharing states (Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Turkey)
> 
> These states formerly possessed nuclear weapons:
> Belarus,
> Kazakhstan,
> South Africa
> Ukraine
> 
> The US have installed a missile defence shield in South Korea to protect that region from North Korea the world's biggest threat at the moment even though there rockets seem to explode shortly after take off. Trump has offered to speak to Kim Yung Un but not under the current circumstances, he wants him to de-esculate before he talks to him.


Have a read at this SWC - http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/dr-kate-hudson/trident_b_14636662.html


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> How would starting a nuclear war help anyone? Trident doesn't make us more safe, its obsolete & dangerous, it makes us a target .


The UK has been a target ever since the Americans set up THEIR military bases on OUR soil Noush'
That 'special' Anglo-American relationship really needs to be looked at more closely.:Watching


----------



## kimthecat

@Zaros

Don't the US and UK have bases in Germany?

I understand both countries tries have nuclear weapons at secret locations there.


----------



## stockwellcat.

*Frank Young: Next week's Conservative manifesto offers May's chance to support families*

In the coming weeks, the Prime Minister has an opportunity to set out a bold prospectus for a socially reforming Conservative government.

With an unprecedented lead in national opinion polls, and even higher personal approval ratings, she can afford to be bold.

When Theresa May first stood in front of the nation as Prime Minister she told us her Government would be committed to tackling 'burning injustice'. A manifesto with added 'burning injustice' needs to find its voice on family breakdown.

The costs of family breakdown fall disproportionality on poorer children. By the age of five, almost half of children in our poorest areas have seen their families break apart- compared to only 16 percent of children in middle class homes. Your chance of seeing your family break apart shouldn't be defined by birth or circumstance, but too often it is. This is one 'burning injustice' that May should address.

Almost every part of her ambition to be a social reformer comes back, one way or another, to stronger families. Government poverty statistics reveal that just under half of lone-parent families are workless, compared to around six per cent of couple families. Children in families that break apart are more than twice as likely to experience poverty as those whose families stay together and in our classrooms, the outcomes for children experiencing family breakdown are just as bad. All in all, it is hard to ignore family break up if you want to reform society.

If we want to tackle this injustice the current Prime Minister should be unafraid of finding a strong, confident voice on the family and articulating the important role of families in supporting her vision for a 'fairer society'.

It shouldn't be a political taboo to talk confidently about how we can support families to stay together, especially for those who have few other advantages in life. In a Centre for Social Justice survey, over 80 per cent of parents from social class DE (where levels of family breakdown are highest) agreed that the Government is right to say that stability matters for children. Even lone parents overwhelmingly agreed it was an 'important' message.

If the manifesto scribes are looking for an eye-catching family policy, they should set out a plan to reduce the so called 'couple penalty', by which it pays more for those in receipt of tax credits and benefits to live apart than together. When every penny matters,putting financial barriers in the way of forming a family makes little sense. Too often our welfare system does exactly that.

The Conservative Party should find room in the manifesto to focus the £400 million it spends on the Marriage Allowance to those who need it most.

The Marriage Allowance should automatically be paid to couples in receipt of Universal Credit, and the Chancellor should look at how it could be targeted to those on the lowest incomes to make the couple penalty a thing of the past. This would be a straightforward commitment without making additional demands on an already stretched Exchequer.

The Government is almost completely silent on marriage. A manifesto commitment to reform the Marriage Allowance would put this right. A UK child born to cohabiting parents is 94 per cent more likely to see their parents break up before they reach their 12th birthday, than a child born to married parents. If you are a teenager studying for your GCSEs and you have two parents at home, it is statistically almost certain they will be married.

Poorer children overwhelmingly miss out on the stability of marriage, with fewer than one in four low earning couples getting married, compared to almost nine out of ten couples earning over £43,000. It's hardly surprising couples on low incomes choose not to get together and get married if it ends up making them worse off. A strong, stable Government should be able to find the words to promote strong, stable families. In our poorest areas we could do with both.

http://www.conservativehome.com/pla...festo-is-mays-chance-to-support-families.html

So let's translate this.

Strong and Stable actually means what. Soundbites?


Families will be worse off.
Child poverty worse.
School closures
NHS renamed Theresa May Care and everyone has to pay for treatment.
Poor get taxed more.
Rich get richer.
College and University fees get increased.
Cost of living increased.
More food banks.
Protesting made illegal.
More Austerity.
More cuts.
Theresa May and the Government have more control over everyone's lives.
No MP dare oppose her.
Strong and Stable.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Chip anyone...
> 
> View attachment 309446
> 
> 
> Because that's all she is prepared to give you if you vote for her.


You won't even get an edible chip from her, only the casino type if you're not classed as British.

Always the food bank of course. A good example of how successful Cameron's "Big Society" is with Libraries run by unpaid volunteers and the likes.....


----------



## cheekyscrip

I am becoming convinced that Nutall is less dangerous that May.

Of course if Brexit is not a success than it is nasty, jealous EU to blame selfishly saying now : EU first!

Small matter that we pulled out first, left them in the lurch, accused of everything plus tempering with election and used their nationals as pawns in the game...

When British expats have to fill in 85 pages of legal documents in French, Spanish or Greek etc that would be fun to watch...


Plus exams to prove their knowledge of native language / history / culture if they apply for nationalisation....


----------



## stockwellcat.

Consider this when casting your vote on the 8th June 2017, Theresa May has given you the opportunity to get rid of her and the Conservative Government.

Let's look at the conservatives track record over the last 7 years:

In 2010 they promised they would not raise VAT from 17.5% - they raised it to 20%.
Austerity.
Cut after cut after cut.
Homelessness increased.
Total debt increased.
More people using food banks.
NHS cuts to the point it can't cope.
Armed forces cut.
Police forces cut.
Now they have started on schools.
Pollution levels in some parts of the country worse than Bejing.
Animal welfare rights side lined in a scheduled debated in Parliament and never been rescheduled (this was about changing sentencing structure for animal cruelty cases).
Cost of living increased.
Theresa May said there would be no General Election until 2020, there's one on the 8th June 2017.
Election expenses fraud investigations.
Housing crisis worse than ever.
Not willing to consider other Brexit options only the hardest of hardest brexits.
Sending people back to work that are dying from illnesses.
The lies just keep flowing.
Theresa May wants more power.
Theresa May wants no opposition.
I may have missed a few things off my list so feel free to add them on.

So just remember you aren't just voting for a party to lead us out of the EU, you are voting for a party leader who wants more power, no opposition parties and a one nation party who won't be told they are wrong in whatever they decide to do or have a debate on issues. Plus we will be stuck with the Conservatives until 2022.


----------



## KittenKong

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...accuses-eu-of-meddling-in-uk-general-election


----------



## Honeys mum

This may be a video I found on FB, but IMO it gives a good insight into the Torys track record.
https://www.facebook.com/pg/Another-Angry-Voice-185180654855189/videos/?ref=page_internal#


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...t-dubs-amendment-child-refugees-a7714961.html


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## stockwellcat.




----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Consider this when casting your vote on the 8th June 2017, Theresa May has given you the opportunity to get rid of her and the Conservative Government.
> 
> Let's look at the conservatives track record over the last 7 years:
> 
> In 2010 they promised they would not raise VAT from 17.5% - they raised it to 20%.
> Austerity.
> Cut after cut after cut.
> Homelessness increased.
> Total debt increased.
> More people using food banks.
> NHS cuts to the point it can't cope.
> Armed forces cut.
> Police forces cut.
> Now they have started on schools.
> Pollution levels in some parts of the country worse than Bejing.
> Animal welfare rights side lined in a scheduled debated in Parliament and never been rescheduled (this was about changing sentencing structure for animal cruelty cases).
> Cost of living increased.
> Theresa May said there would be no General Election until 2020, there's one on the 8th June 2017.
> Election expenses fraud investigations.
> Housing crisis worse than ever.
> Not willing to consider other Brexit options only the hardest of hardest brexits.
> Sending people back to work that are dying from illnesses.
> The lies just keep flowing.
> Theresa May wants more power.
> Theresa May wants no opposition.
> I may have missed a few things off my list so feel free to add them on.
> 
> So just remember you aren't just voting for a party to lead us out of the EU, you are voting for a party leader who wants more power, no opposition parties and a one nation party who won't be told they are wrong in whatever they decide to do or have a debate on issues. Plus we will be stuck with the Conservatives until 2022.


Who would you envisage from the Labour Party taking on the role of Brexit negotiations should they win? Who from the Labour Party would you trust as Health Secretary? Defence Secretary (bearing in mind we have no idea whether they are for Trident or against), Foreign Secretary? Education Secretary? Not forgetting Chancellor - are you seriously going to trust John McDonnell with the country's finances? What experience does he have? Do we want this man in charge

According to a report in _The Times_ published in November 2015, McDonnell in 1985 made similar comments at a Labour Committee on Ireland meeting, before the start of the Northern Ireland peace process. The _Deptford Mercury_ asserted at the time that McDonnell had suggested there was a role for "the ballot, the bullet and the bomb" in bringing about a United Ireland, and joked about "kneecapping" the "gutless wimp" Labour councillors who had declined to join the meeting.[17]

In September 2015, McDonnell apologised on _Question Time_ for any offence caused by his remarks on the IRA.[18]

In 2010, he said that if he could go back in time he would "assassinate Thatcher".

Challenged on this remark by a member of the audience, he said: "It was an appalling joke. It's ended my career in stand-up, let's put it that way, and I apologise for it as well."

If I gave offence, and I clearly have, from the bottom of my heart I apologise, I apologise
John McDonnell, Shadow chancellor
Mr McDonnell's remarks about the "bravery" of the IRA have been highlighted since his appointment to Mr Corbyn's shadow cabinet.

His remarks were made at a gathering in London in 2003 to commemorate IRA hunger striker Bobby Sands.

Mr McDonnell told the meeting: "It's about time we started honouring those people involved in the armed struggle.

"It was the bombs and bullets and sacrifice made by the likes of Bobby Sands that brought Britain to the negotiating table."


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## stockwellcat.

Well I am stuck to who to bl**dy vote for after Abbott's performance yesterday.

Back to the drawing board.


----------



## Goblin

kimthecat said:


> Don't the US and UK have bases in Germany?


Cannot talk about US bases but most UK bases have closed. Still a presence in North Rhine-Westphalia but I understand even that was due to be removed around 2020. I would imagine that may change at some point depending on tensions with Russia. Then again more likely to push more eastward with a country like poland as the "sacrificial lamb" rather than Germany itself.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 309479
> View attachment 309480
> View attachment 309481


Keep on posting that sort of thing you are doing wonders for the Tory campaign :Hilarious:Hilarious


----------



## Honeys mum




----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Keep on posting that sort of thing you are doing wonders for the Tory campaign :Hilarious:Hilarious


You really think people are going to fall for this Nationalist Trump like nonsense? No doubt many will unfortunately.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> You really think people are going to fall for this Nationalist Trump like nonsense? No doubt many will unfortunately.


No I think you are helping to persuade them to though


----------



## Goblin

So looking at May's latest outburst.. International press misrepresenting things. How come the international press is being told what is happening yet nothing coming out the UK side of negotiations? Why does May refuse to inform people what is actually happening?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Well I am stuck to who to bl**dy vote for after Abbott's performance yesterday.
> 
> Back to the drawing board.


Given that you voted for Brexit who do you tip from the Labour Party to hold their own in negotiations?


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Given that you voted for Brexit who do you tip from the Labour Party to hold their own in negotiations?


Depends on if you expect realistic terms instead of empty promises doesn't it. What May is saying she will get ignores the fact 27 countries (including sub divisions such as Wallonia) will have to agree, not simply by a majority. That's after the negotiations have taken place, negotiations which May has shown she has not prepared for adequately. She's fine at bluster. Have you forgotten Mr Davis's admission that they haven't even done an impact assessment of what "no deal" means for the UK? Bluster does not lead to good negotiations. EU are already starting to call her bluff.

Edit: Then again if this election was about Brexit, it would be a second referendum, not a GE which is about all the other government policies May is ignoring.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Given that you voted for Brexit who do you tip from the Labour Party to hold their own in negotiations?


May has already blown it so Labour have nothing to lose have they?


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Given that you voted for Brexit who do you tip from the Labour Party to hold their own in negotiations?


Well they have no alternative Brexit plan for a start considering they are offering Brexit as well.

But let's say May gets a disastrous deal putting the UK in the situation Greece was in? We cannot then go back to the EU and ask them to bail us out. The UK would be crippled financially, hard austerity, more taxes, huge rise in food prices as it becomes harder to get hold of. This is what would happen if the UK crashes out of the EU. Yes the UK would under WTO rules still trade with them, but with what money as financially the UK would be worse off. I am aware some believe an extreme hard Brexit is the only answer (that involves crashing out of the EU), but would this look attractive to others willing to offer trade deals? Would they see this as being attractive to them wanting to trade with us? There is going to a huge rise in the cost of living.

Yes I voted for Brexit, yes I want it to happen, no I don't want the UK to be worse off. Why can't an amicable deal be agreed to?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> May has already blown it so Labour have nothing to lose have they?





stockwellcat said:


> Well they have no alternative Brexit plan for a start considering they are offering Brexit as well.
> 
> But let's say May gets a disastrous deal putting the UK in the situation Greece was in? We cannot then go back to the EU and ask them to bail us out. The UK would be crippled financially, hard austerity, more taxes, huge rise in food prices as it becomes harder to get hold of. This is what would happen if the UK crashes out of the EU. Yes the UK would under WTO rules still trade with them, but with what money as financially the UK would be worse off. I am aware some believe an extreme hard Brexit is the only answer (that involves crashing out of the EU), but would this look attractive to others willing to offer trade deals? Would they see this as being attractive to them wanting to trade with us? There is going to a huge rise in the cost of living.
> 
> Yes I voted for Brexit, yes I want it to happen, no I don't want the UK to be worse off. Why can't an amicable deal be agreed to?


So who do you think Labour has in the party who can go and negotiate this?


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So who do you think Labour has in the party who can go and negotiate this?


I'm in all honesty lost with who would be up for the task to negotiate the UKs exit from the EU from Labour.

At the moment I don't know who to vote for either in this election ...


----------



## davidc

I realise Abbot has not helped by being ill prepared but will still be giving Labour a chance.
Theresa May is also ill prepared for questions but despite her diversion tactics when asked a question, it doesn't seem to do her any harm.


----------



## Jesthar

stockwellcat said:


> Yes I voted for Brexit, yes I want it to happen, no I don't want the UK to be worse off. Why can't an amicable deal be agreed to?


At the moment, mainly because our supposedly senior politicians are behaving in a manner more suited to a six year old.

As to not wanting the UK to be worse off, the UK NOT being worse off in the event of Brexit was never an option, and something we should all have been aware of before casting the referendum vote really - it was stated often enough for people not to be able to miss it. After all, any deal where you don't get any input into the terms and conditions is never going to be in your favour, is it? The best hope we had was for a respectful divorce and staying friends. With May and her cohorts chosing the handwringing, finger pointing, dirty-laundry-airing role, though, is it any wonder the EU is starting to get snippy back?

But remember - Brexit should (rightly) be a sideshow in this General Election. I'm going to be judging mainly on UK home policy and performance, and May and co are well behind in the running on those. Which is why they need to keep talking Brexit of course...


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So who do you think Labour has in the party who can go and negotiate this?





stockwellcat said:


> I'm in all honesty lost with who would be up for the task to negotiate the UKs exit from the EU from Labour.
> 
> At the moment I don't know who to vote for either in this election ...


Their shadow Brexit secretary has made a good start with unilaterally guaranteeing the rights of existing EU citizens the right to stay for a start. A good first impression can lead to sensible negotiations which will benefit the UK as well as the EU.

Of course there's always the risk of negotiations breaking down but I'm certainly more confident Labour can achieve something when compared to the Tories.

I never wanted any of this to start with of course.....

May has not unexpectedly failed before negotiations have really began. Her no compromise, "My way or no way" approach is doomed to see the UK crash out with no deal which now seems very likely.

So much for her promise to form a new working relationship with the EU, a very hostile one it's turning out to be.

Another clear lie from May to dismiss the reported disastrous negotiations as "Gossip". It clearly wasn't.

I repeat this comment from someone in Switzerland, a non EU county. It's spot on.


----------



## KittenKong

Guardian comments:


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/should-not-vote-conservative-29-10303180


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> The UK has been a target ever since the Americans set up THEIR military bases on OUR soil Noush'
> That 'special' Anglo-American relationship really needs to be looked at more closely.:Watching


USAs poodle we certainly are. We must be one of the most despised countries on the planet. :/

Now with brexit, even our European neighbours must hate us for our arrogance projected by our self serving PM.


----------



## noushka05

Honeys mum said:


> This may be a video I found on FB, but IMO it gives a good insight into the Torys track record.
> https://www.facebook.com/pg/Another-Angry-Voice-185180654855189/videos/?ref=page_internal#


Thank you for sharing HM. I've expanded the video for you  I noticed he _has _missed a couple of things out The tories refuse to ban the ivory trade & are desperate to repeal the hunting ban.

My god and how could I forget the disgusting badger massacre.






.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Who would you envisage from the Labour Party taking on the role of Brexit negotiations should they win? Who from the Labour Party would you trust as Health Secretary? Defence Secretary (bearing in mind we have no idea whether they are for Trident or against), Foreign Secretary? Education Secretary? Not forgetting Chancellor - are you seriously going to trust John McDonnell with the country's finances? What experience does he have? Do we want this man in charge
> 
> According to a report in _The Times_ published in November 2015, McDonnell in 1985 made similar comments at a Labour Committee on Ireland meeting, before the start of the Northern Ireland peace process. The _Deptford Mercury_ asserted at the time that McDonnell had suggested there was a role for "the ballot, the bullet and the bomb" in bringing about a United Ireland, and joked about "kneecapping" the "gutless wimp" Labour councillors who had declined to join the meeting.[17]
> 
> In September 2015, McDonnell apologised on _Question Time_ for any offence caused by his remarks on the IRA.[18]
> 
> In 2010, he said that if he could go back in time he would "assassinate Thatcher".
> 
> Challenged on this remark by a member of the audience, he said: "It was an appalling joke. It's ended my career in stand-up, let's put it that way, and I apologise for it as well."
> 
> If I gave offence, and I clearly have, from the bottom of my heart I apologise, I apologise
> John McDonnell, Shadow chancellor
> Mr McDonnell's remarks about the "bravery" of the IRA have been highlighted since his appointment to Mr Corbyn's shadow cabinet.
> 
> His remarks were made at a gathering in London in 2003 to commemorate IRA hunger striker Bobby Sands.
> 
> Mr McDonnell told the meeting: "It's about time we started honouring those people involved in the armed struggle.
> 
> "It was the bombs and bullets and sacrifice made by the likes of Bobby Sands that brought Britain to the negotiating table."


Tories are selling arms to despot regimes - innocent people are being murdered with our bombs & weapons. Labour would put a stop to it.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-arab-spring-yemen?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Tweet
*
The Observer view on Britain's shameful role in the arms trade
The government has an ethical duty to withdraw from this most abhorrent practice*

_Let us be plain. Britain should not be selling weaponry and equipment of any kind to Saudi Arabia or to any other undemocratic and autocratic regime that is likely to use such materiel in breach of international law and the universal human rights that Britain supposedly upholds. Britain should tell its Saudi ally that its military campaign in Yemen must be halted. Johnson should cease his __hypocritical hand-wringing about proxy wars __ and do what a diplomat is paid to do - secure a Yemen settlement. And as we have said before, __Theresa May should order a top-to-bottom review__ of Britain's relationship with Saudi Arabia, whose encouragement of religious extremism and intolerance, lack of respect for human and women's rights and use of judicial executions run contrary to British interests and values.

And if our prime minister thinks British people value __arms sales to a Turkish autocrat__ above respect for human life, she will soon discover her error. It is not about money. It is about our common humanity._

Unlike John McDonnell the tory government is quite literally responsible for thousands of deaths.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So who do you think Labour has in the party who can go and negotiate this?


How could any Labour minister possibly make a worse mess than this?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Local Elections for some parts of the UK today.


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Given that you voted for Brexit who do you tip from the Labour Party to hold their own in negotiations?


Abbott!!! We will pay EU 300 k or 80 mln over four years, or 250 k, whichever, but we will.Just after paying for NHS and policemen. And women.

I am sure after May EU will find Abbott most endearing.

In case of a decision she will have a cold.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> How could any Labour minister possibly make a worse mess than this?
> 
> View attachment 309502


That not an answer to the though question is it

In all your wisdom who would you suggest


----------



## Zaros

kimthecat said:


> @Zaros
> 
> Don't the US and UK have bases in Germany?


The UK have had military bases in Germany as an end result of WW2 and a symptom of the cold war.
British govt claims it will bring all UK forces back home by 2019 in order to cut defence spending.

As for the US, they appear to be a law unto themselves and do as they please whilst everybody else looks on......:Yawn


----------



## havoc

_That not an answer to the though question is it

In all your wisdom who would you suggest_

Who could make a worse job of it than at present? I can see why RPH asked the question but there will be able politicians in the commons on all sides and this is one thing I don't think the trotskyite element are particularly interested in influencing.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> That not an answer to the though question is it
> 
> In all your wisdom who would you suggest


I think the whole Labour Party believe in negotiation Bisbow. And labour do have many competent ministers. Keir Starmer, Barry Gardiner (I've met him at a hen harrier protest, hes lovely  ) , Cat Smith, John Trickett, Richard Burgeon spring to mind.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> So looking at May's latest outburst.. International press misrepresenting things. How come the international press is being told what is happening yet nothing coming out the UK side of negotiations? Why does May refuse to inform people what is actually happening?


Parliament's been dissolved, we have no MP's at the moment, they are now civil servants going through the basic motions of running the country. There is no one with the power to say how the negotiations WILL (as opposed to may) proceed.

Funny how the EU ramp-up all their public shouting and threats the day parliament is dissolved.


----------



## noushka05

*

HaveIGotNewsForYou*‏Verified [email protected]*haveigotnews* 15h15 hours ago

Now available in supermarkets:










*HaveIGotNewsForYou*‏Verified [email protected]*haveigotnews* 16h16 hours ago

Nation cheers as Theresa May makes a stand against foreigners interfering in elections.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Parliament's been dissolved, we have no MP's at the moment, they are now civil servants going the basic motions of running the country. There is no one with the power to say how the negotiations WILL (as opposed to may) proceed.


You're hillarious, scrabbling at straws. May has consistently sidelined parliament when it comes to negotiations. She is the one who apparantly can decide everything. Parliament does not even get a say on the final agreement... she decides. She doesn't ask, she tells which is why when things don't go her way she throws a hissy fit. She's wants to be able to dictate policy for the UK, not actually debate and where necessary compromise. That's what this election is all about, polls indicated she could enlarge her majority so she can dictate what happens even if a few MP's from her own party rebel. Also means those pesky 20 something MP's being investigated for electoral fraud can be hidden by the election news result.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> I think the whole Labour Party believe in negotiation Bisbow. And labour do have many competent ministers. Keir Starmer, Barry Gardiner (I've met him at a hen harrier protest, hes lovely  ) , Cat Smith, John Trickett, Richard Burgeon spring to mind.


To my mind none of them could organise a p... up in a brewery

And the snipe about the chips is totally uncalled for, are you against her eating as well as everything else


----------



## Satori

Goblin said:


> You're hillarious, scrabbling at straws. May has consistently sidelined parliament when it comes to negotiations. She is the one who apparantly can decide everything. Parliament does not even get a say on the final agreement... she decides. She doesn't ask, she tells which is why when things don't go her way she throws a hissy fit. She's wants to be able to dictate policy for the UK, not actually debate and where necessary compromise. That's what this election is all about, polls indicated she could enlarge her majority so she can dictate what happens even if a few MP's from her own party rebel. Also means those pesky 20 something MP's being investigated for electoral fraud can be hidden by the election news result.


All sounds good to me.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> You're hillarious, scrabbling at straws. May has consistently sidelined parliament when it comes to negotiations. She is the one who apparantly can decide everything. Parliament does not even get a say on the final agreement... she decides. She doesn't ask, she tells which is why when things don't go her way she throws a hissy fit. She's wants to be able to dictate policy for the UK, not actually debate and where necessary compromise. That's what this election is all about, polls indicated she could enlarge her majority so she can dictate what happens even if a few MP's from her own party rebel. Also means those pesky 20 something MP's being investigated for electoral fraud can be hidden by the election news result.


I'm hilarious, you seariously think that after the 2015 election, Brexit and USA election Mrs May would call an election based on polls?

Do you realistically think every item on the Brexit negotiations can be debated upon and voted through parliament before 2019? That would mean leaving the EU with no deal on anything. Is that what you want?


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> Yes I voted for Brexit, yes I want it to happen, no I don't want the UK to be worse off. Why can't an amicable deal be agreed to?


Because that would mean we follow all the EU rules and send them money without any of a say.

We need out, not half out.


----------



## stockwellcat.

So Theresa May is ahead in the polls, so are we back to believing in polls again? Obviously the polls are making it look that Theresa May will win the GE. But hang on a minute....

The last poll everyone believed in was the EU Referendum polls saying that remain would win no problem and without a doubt.

You are free to believe what you want but these polls only have a select amount of people take part in them and they do not represent a true reflection of how the rest of people feel that don't get the chance to take part in these polls and what they will do on polling day.

In my personal view I think this GE is going to be interesting and could be a shocker for Theresa May as I hope beyond all hope she loses.

Nothing to do with Brexit this General Election is it is to do with what every General Election is about, how that party has been during its term in office and should they be replaced with another party.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> Because that would mean we follow all the EU rules and send them money without any of a say.
> 
> We need out, not half out.


But the EU have said the UK will be paying into the budget well after Brexit day anyway. Didn't you hear the new figure they want the UK to agree to pay before talks take place, €100billion around £85 to £89 billion pounds. This isn't a punishment charge it is the UK's liabilities to come out of treaties the UK is tied into with the EU and other fees on top of the UK's membership fees we have to pay until 2020. This figure will go up the longer Brexit is delayed via negotiations and if the negotiations carry on. If the UK opts for a softer Brexit the divorce bill will decrease somewhat.

The UK is not pulling the strings the EU is. The EU tell the UK what deal is on the table not the other way around.

The negotiations have not started yet and it's already in a mess. The EU want EU and UK expat rights sorted first where they can enjoy there current rights that they have right now. The EU want the Irish border remaining as it is now or unification of Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland (they are not going to allow Ireland to be a bargaining chip) and integration into the EU painless for Northern Ireland.

Theresa May threw a strop and said the EU was inferring with the GE.


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> But the EU have said the UK will be paying into the budget well after Brexit day anyway. Didn't you hear the new figure they want the UK to pay before talks take place, €100billion around £85 to £89 billion pounds. This isn't a punishment charge it is the UK's liabilities to come out of treaties the UK is tied into with the EU and other fees on top of the UK's membership fees we have to pay until 2020. This figure will go up the longer Brexit is delayed via negotiations and if the negotiations carry on. If the UK opts for a softer Brexit the divorce bill will decrease somewhat.
> 
> The UK is not pulling the strings the EU is. The EU tell the UK what deal is on the table not the other way around.
> 
> The negotiations have not started yet and it's already in a mess. The EU want EU and UK expat rights sorted first where they can enjoy there current rights that they have right now. The EU want the Irish border remaining as it is now or unification of Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland (they are not going to allow Ireland to be a bargaining chip) and integration into the EU painless for Northern Ireland.
> 
> Theresa May threw a strop and said the EU was inferring with the GE.


You've been reading the propaganda again haven't you?


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> You've been reading the propaganda again haven't you?


No it was all over the news last night. Don't read the papers.

So explain then what strong and stable means? Theresa May doesn't know it's just a punch line/sound bite she likes the sound of.


----------



## Bisbow

stockwellcat said:


> In my personal view I think this GE is going to be interesting and could be a shocker for Theresa May as I hope beyond all hope she loses
> .


So do you want that idiot Corbyn leading the country
That's fine if you want this country destitute by this time next year
Or have you someone else in mind we don't know about yet


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> No it was all over the news last night. Don't read the papers.


propaganda isn't just in papers. You just have to look at the trash that some put on here to realise that 

If you watch Spring watch, you are open to propaganda............


----------



## stockwellcat.

Bisbow said:


> So do you want that idiot Corbyn leading the country
> That's fine if you want this country destitute by this time next year
> Or have you someone else in mind we don't know about yet


I don't know who to vote right now.

The same was said about Tony Blair before he came into power.


----------



## KittenKong

Seeing May has outfaraged Farage this Facebook photo had me laughing hysterically this morning!

So brilliantly done I would have thought it genuine had I not seen the original photo.

Edit- This is the original image with someone putting a cigarette in her mouth and replacing the cup of tea or coffee with a can of Special Brew.

Intended as a bit of fun but seeing it has caused offence I have removed it.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> propaganda isn't just in papers. You just have to look at the trash that some put on here to realise that
> 
> If you watch Spring watch, you are open to propaganda............


Don't watch spring watch either 

I don't get propaganda through my letter box, now I am feeling left out  but saying that it would probably end up put in the recycling bin .

I am interested in one piece of propoganda as you put it and that is the Parties Manifestos and wish they would hurry up and publish them.

I am getting fed up with Theresa May's sound bites.


----------



## Bisbow

KittenKong said:


> Seeing May has outfaraged Farage this Facebook photo had me laughing hysterically this morning!
> 
> So brilliantly done I would have thought it genuine had I not seen the original photo.
> View attachment 309509


That is downright outrageous, she should sue the perpetrator


----------



## havoc

Bisbow said:


> That is downright outrageous, she should sue the perpetrator


Oh for goodness sake - it's tasteless and stupid but to be 'outraged' at such a thing is a touch OTT. She's a big girl and she chose to put herself in the firing line when she chose to run for the leadership.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> propaganda isn't just in papers. You just have to look at the trash that some put on here to realise that
> 
> If you watch Spring watch, you are open to propaganda............


So your vote is going to May because your decision is based on Brexit and nothing else.

What about the cost of living, NHS, schools, the poor, economy, peoples finances being squeezed, taxes etc things that normally help a person make a decision on how they are going to vote in a GE. I don't see Theresa May speaking to many people and is instead avoiding the media whilst other parties are using the media and want a genuine debate on TV, Theresa May opted out of the debate and has said instead she will opt for a television interview in front of a select audience who can question her (obviously all going to be her supporters).

I am thinking this through very carefully at the moment who I am going to vote for and will not be influenced into making a decision because one party leader is going Brexit, Brexit, Brexit and Strong and Stable and spouting out meaningless sound bites at the moment which she will u-turn on at some point.


----------



## KittenKong

Bisbow said:


> That is downright outrageous, she should sue the perpetrator


Seeing you found it outrageous I have removed the photo.

No one classed it as genuine.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> I'm hilarious, you seariously think that after the 2015 election, Brexit and USA election Mrs May would call an election based on polls?


We are leaving the EU based on an opinion poll  Not the only reason. May cannot dictate policy in parliament. 9th June results of electoral fraud investigation for over 20 seats... For someone who is used to saying "do this", it cannot be comforting to find out that leadership is more than dictating what people do.



> Do you realistically think every item on the Brexit negotiations can be debated upon and voted through parliament before 2019?


Well you were the one involving parliament and saying negotiations couldn't go ahead as they are dissolved at the moment. You are correct, not everything can be debated. Like within the EU. Interesting to note the difference between the 2 sides though.. May... negotiations must be in secret.. EU no, we inform the people we answer to, the EU parliament as to what is happening thereby allowing the flow of the negotiations and terms to change as necesssary. May's response.. How dare the EU interfere in UK politics.


----------



## Goblin

Bisbow said:


> That is downright outrageous, she should sue the perpetrator


Far worst ones going around. Strong and Stable has unfortunate initials.


----------



## Bisbow

KittenKong said:


> Seeing you found it outrageous I have removed the photo.
> 
> No one classed it as genuine.


Thank you
I am sure you would not like to see one of your family belittled like that when they have no chance to reply


----------



## Bisbow

havoc said:


> Oh for goodness sake - it's tasteless and stupid but to be 'outraged' at such a thing is a touch OTT. She's a big girl and she chose to put herself in the firing line when she chose to run for the leadership.


Yes, it is tasteless and belittling, as I said to KK, who kindly removed the photo, would you like one of your family depicted like that when they had no chance to reply
I bet you would go mad


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> No it was all over the news last night. Don't read the papers.
> 
> So explain them what strong and stable means? Theresa May doesn't know it's just a punch line/sound bite she likes the sound of.


I would rather vote for the, admittedly boring now, "strong and stable" of Mrs May than the "I have no idea about the cost of anything because I've done a few interviews, got a cold and there's trolls on the internet" of Mrs Abbott, or the "there will be more police, the NHS saved, education system saved, extra four bank holidays and full employment, all paid with a 2% rise in corporation tax" of Mr Corbyn. Apparently there was going to be free fish and chips for all every Friday, but he ditched this for no apparent reason on Tuesday.

Actual with Abbot and Costello, sorry Corbyn, in government I think I've answered my previous question as to why the EU are being so verbal against Mrs May now parliament has been dissolved.


----------



## havoc

Bisbow said:


> would you like one of your family depicted like that when they had no chance to reply


If they had chosen to put themselves in the position where it was going to happen I wouldn't complain. If it were a zoom lens pap pic of her in her private life then it would be different - but it wasn't.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Far worst ones going around. Strong and Stable has unfortunate initials.


Unless it was intentional....


----------



## Bisbow

havoc said:


> If they had chosen to put themselves in the position where it was going to happen I wouldn't complain. If it were a zoom lens pap pic of her in her private life then it would be different - but it wasn't.


I am so pleased I am not a member of your family if you think so little of them


----------



## Colliebarmy

noushka05 said:


> Typical right wing scaremongering.
> 
> How would starting a nuclear war help anyone? Trident doesn't make us more safe, its obsolete & dangerous, it makes us a target
> 
> .


I didnt mention us starting a war, did i?.... no

you dont attack someone if they have a bigger cricket bat than you have.... kim jun song knows he will lose, only while we have the bigger bat

deterrent

noun: *deterrent*; plural noun: *deterrents
1*.
a thing that discourages or is intended to discourage someone from doing something.
"cameras are a major *deterrent to* crime"
synonyms: disincentive, discouragement, dissuasion, damper, brake, curb, check, restraint;More


----------



## Colliebarmy

Bisbow said:


> I am so pleased I am not a member of your family if you think so little of them


maybe she should keep covered up unless she wants £10 notes to have more than her face on them in 20 years


----------



## KittenKong

Bisbow said:


> I am so pleased I am not a member of your family if you think so little of them


I perfectly understand both points of view and in the firm belief what one finds amusing could cause offence to another.

Yet Havoc is right this being an unflattering photo depicted in several newspapers. No one seemed offended when someone doctored a photo of May dressed as a clown and dare I mention " Theresa May and her Daleks", on You Tube???

Personally speaking, if someone took an unflattering photo of myself and put in a *** and a can of Special Brew I would find it hilarious, then I'm able to laugh at myself.

Then, I understand where Bisbow is coming from too. Perhaps it wouldn't be nice to see a photo of a relative depicted in this manner.


----------



## Bisbow

KittenKong said:


> I perfectly understand both points of view and in the firm belief what one finds amusing could cause offence to another.
> 
> Yet Havoc is right this being an unflattering photo depicted in several newspapers. No one seemed offended when someone doctored a photo of May dressed as a clown and dare I mention " Theresa May and her Daleks", on You Tube???
> 
> Personally speaking, if someone took an unflattering photo of myself and put in a *** and a can of Special Brew I would find it hilarious, then I'm able to laugh at myself.
> 
> Then, I understand where Bisbow is coming from too. Perhaps it wouldn't be nice to see a photo of a relative depicted in this manner.


Photo of myself I don't care about but of my family without their knowledge would upset me

I didn't see any photos of her as a clown so I can't comment on them, or any darleks

Thank you for understanding, I hate to see anyone treated like that, no matter who they are


----------



## havoc

Bisbow said:


> Photo of myself I don't care about but of my family *without their knowledge* would upset me


This was a staged public appearance, an attempt to 'get down' with the unwashed masses by eating chips in the street. It wasn't without her knowledge at all.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> _That not an answer to the though question is it
> 
> In all your wisdom who would you suggest_
> 
> Who could make a worse job of it than at present? I can see why RPH asked the question but there will be able politicians in the commons on all sides and this is one thing I don't think the trotskyite element are particularly interested in influencing.


Usually I would agree about there being able politicians on all sides of the commons but seriously since the last unsuccessful coup to overthrow Corbyn there are very few experienced Labour MPs left apart from the likes of Abbott who I wouldn't trust to negotiate for a bag of spuds down the market. All of the experienced ex cabinet ministers from the Blair/Brown days seem to have disappeared. Even Andy Burnham is not standing this time. Do we seriously trust this lot to run the country and the Brexit negotiations?



stockwellcat said:


> So Theresa May is ahead in the polls, so are we back to believing in polls again? Obviously the polls are making it look that Theresa May will win the GE. But hang on a minute....
> 
> The last poll everyone believed in was the EU Referendum polls saying that remain would win no problem and without a doubt.
> 
> You are free to believe what you want but these polls only have a select amount of people take part in them and they do not represent a true reflection of how the rest of people feel that don't get the chance to take part in these polls and what they will do on polling day.
> 
> In my personal view I think this GE is going to be interesting and could be a shocker for Theresa May as I hope beyond all hope she loses.
> 
> Nothing to do with Brexit this General Election is it is to do with what every General Election is about, how that party has been during its term in office and should they be replaced with another party.


Its very much about which of the other parties are considered capable/fit to govern as well. I really don't want to vote Conservative but at this point I don't see an alternative.


----------



## Bisbow

havoc said:


> This was a staged public appearance, an attempt to 'get down' with the unwashed masses by eating chips in the street. It wasn't without her knowledge at all.


That was not the photo I am talking about and you know it, the one I am talking about was without her knowledge

KK kindly took down the offending photo

Stop trying to muddy the water


----------



## havoc

Bisbow said:


> That was not the photo I am talking about and you know it, the one I am talking about was without her knowledge


So you're only talking about the photoshop edit - not the photo? I've already said I think that was tasteless but it isn't unexpected. Like I said, she's a big girl. Would the outrage be as great if it had been Boris?


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Its very much about which of the other parties are considered capable/fit to govern as well. I really don't want to vote Conservative but at this point I don't see an alternative.


I guess you're right.

It boils down to better the devil you know than better the devil you don't (it is better to deal with a person or situation one knows than with a new person or situation that could be worse. In this case Theresa May and Brexit than Jeremy Corbyn and not knowing what he wants and chaos).

I will make my absolute decision after I have seen the Manifestos.


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Its very much about which of the other parties are considered capable/fit to govern as well. I really don't want to vote Conservative but at this point I don't see an alternative.


I've just been to vote for the local council and a mayor. So completely disenfranchised at the moment that I had no idea where I was going to place crosses. First elimination was as I arrived at the village hall as a candidate was stood with a couple of mates blocking the entrance to the car park causing me and two others to park in the street. Checked his rosette and knew the Lib Dems were out of the running. Got my two papers and immediately discounted UKIP candidates on both. Would have gone with an independent for the council but he was the one of two names I recognised and knew who he was so he was out of the running. Did go independent for Mayor but have heard nothing about any of them so could have voted for a serial killer for all I know. Put my second cross where I though it would do little harm. Ended up voting Green for local council because she was the other name I know, she has horses, is obsessed with keeping byeways and footpaths open .................. and I have a dog to walk.

I wish I could tell you I have more conviction to make more reasoned decisions come June 8th but I fear I won't.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Still not sure if I'm going to vote for a mayor, we didn't much information from them all to make a choice.


----------



## Zaros

Colliebarmy said:


> you dont attack someone if they have a bigger cricket bat than you have.... kim jun song knows he will lose, only while we have the bigger bat


Never heard of a Preemptive strike then?

It has always been a consideration that if America, or our very nice neighbours, the Russians didn't launch the first missiles in aggression, then it would be a smaller nation against a larger assumed aggressor in order to damage/destroy/reduce the enemy's capability to counter, thereby averting certain defeat.

When it comes to war, reason and logic are no longer the considerations of politicians or military minds.

War represents the supreme failure of nations to resolve whatever differences they had that ultimately engineered the wanton bloodshed.


----------



## Odin_cat

Colliebarmy said:


> I didnt mention us starting a war, did i?.... no
> 
> you dont attack someone if they have a bigger cricket bat than you have.... kim jun song knows he will lose, only while we have the bigger bat
> 
> deterrent
> 
> noun: *deterrent*; plural noun: *deterrents
> 1*.
> a thing that discourages or is intended to discourage someone from doing something.
> "cameras are a major *deterrent to* crime"
> synonyms: disincentive, discouragement, dissuasion, damper, brake, curb, check, restraint;More


But I believe Corbyn only.said that he wouldn't authorise a nuclear first strike. That would be starting a war.

I hope that this position regarding nuclear war is one the whole country agrees with.


----------



## Jesthar

Saw this on FB this morning. Whilst it is primarily (and ver accurately) applicable to personal relationships, I can't help thinking of the relationship between Mrs May (and her sidekicks) and the rest of the country...


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> Never heard of a Preemptive strike then?
> 
> It has always been a consideration that if America, or our very nice neighbours, the Russians didn't launch the first missiles in aggression, then it would be a smaller nation against a larger assumed aggressor in order to damage/destroy/reduce the enemy's capability to counter, thereby averting certain defeat.
> 
> When it comes to war, reason and logic are no longer the considerations of politicians or military minds.
> 
> War represents the supreme failure of nations to resolve whatever differences they had that ultimately engineered the wanton bloodshed.


Preemptive strike doesn't come into it. Whoever fired a nuclear weapon in our direction wouldn't be doing a preemptive strike because before it even got here a bigger one would heading back towards them. THAT'S the deterrent.

Back to the bat analogy, if you have a big bat and you're being threatened with a small bat you don't throw your bat away and leave yourself defenceless.


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> Preemptive strike doesn't come into it. Whoever fired a nuclear weapon in our direction wouldn't be doing a preemptive strike because before it even got here a bigger one would heading back towards them. THAT'S the deterrent.
> 
> Back to the bat analogy...


Really Strange how 'Preemptive strikes' are a strategic part of the continual theoretical war games the generals and the suited toy soldiers carry out.

However, a _preemptive strike_ or a _first launch attack_ would, without any question, represent/illustrate/demonstrate an act of sheer insanity and to retaliate, unbridled lunacy. Such an event would prove beyond all doubt that nuclear weapons were never a deterrent.
No weapon, no matter how heinous its design, is a deterrent against war.

As for your bat, this is not a game of cricket we're comparing a thermonuclear exchange to, there are no rules and the ashes are you, me, everyone about us and every other life form on this sorry little planet of ours.
No winners, just losers.

Personally, I firmly believe, the only thing that saves us from being annihilated, evaporated or vaporised is the plain and simple fact that a nuclear exchange would not be as profitable as conventional warfare. Not that today's wars can be considered _'conventional'_ by any understanding of the term, because the military already employs the use of _'Depleted Uranium weapons':Facepalm
_


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Usually I would agree about there being able politicians on all sides of the commons but seriously since the last unsuccessful coup to overthrow Corbyn there are very few experienced Labour MPs left


There may be able politicians emerge, I'm waiting to see. Being an experienced politician doesn't in itself impress me, I think the modern trend towards career politicians is a disaster. Big names and flamboyant personalities probably aren't what we need to rescue the situation. The best advocacy I've ever seen has been from people who can appear quiet, ineffectual even.


----------



## kimthecat

Zaros said:


> The UK have had military bases in Germany as an end result of WW2 and a symptom of the cold war.
> British govt claims it will bring all UK forces back home by 2019 in order to cut defence spending.
> 
> As for the US, they appear to be a law unto themselves and do as they please whilst everybody else looks on......:Yawn


 The British and US are cutting back on bases everywhere, In West london , an RAF base was closed and a US naval base was too., a couple of years ago Though why they had a naval base in West London , I do not know .


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> There may be able politicians emerge, I'm waiting to see. Being an experienced politician doesn't in itself impress me, I think the modern trend towards career politicians is a disaster. Big names and flamboyant personalities probably aren't what we need to rescue the situation. The best advocacy I've ever seen has been from people who can appear quiet, ineffectual even.


Oh I'm not writing them off and of course some of the cobbled together shadow cabinet may well prove to be able. I'm not talking about flamboyance and not everyone has to be experienced, but you do need a mix so that the less experienced can learn from the more experienced. It seems to me that in all the reshuffles Corbyn has done a lot of the more junior ministers have been promoted to positions beyond their wildest dreams. I don't much care for career politician either although I'm glad we have finally shaken off the slick brigade who all looked the same and pretty much said the same thing of a few years back, at least this time its easier to see what the differences between the parties are.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> Really Strange how 'Preemptive strikes' are a strategic part of the continual theoretical war games the generals and the suited toy soldiers carry out.
> 
> However, a _preemptive strike_ or a _first launch attack_ would, without any question, represent/illustrate/demonstrate an act of sheer insanity and to retaliate, unbridled lunacy. Such an event would prove beyond all doubt that nuclear weapons were never a deterrent.
> No weapon, no matter how heinous its design, is a deterrent against war.
> 
> As for your bat, this is not a game of cricket we're comparing a thermonuclear exchange to, there are no rules and the ashes are you, me, everyone about us and every other life form on this sorry little planet of ours.
> No winners, just losers.
> 
> Personally, I firmly believe, the only thing that saves us from being annihilated, evaporated or vaporised is the plain and simple fact that a nuclear exchange would not be as profitable as conventional warfare. Not that today's wars can be considered _'conventional'_ by any understanding of the term, because the military already employs the use of _'Depleted Uranium weapons':Facepalm_


Your first paragraph is pointless as we are talking nuclear.

So we've got this lovely nuclear warhead winging it's way to blow us off the face of the map. OK to late for most of us, but why is it lunacy to retaliate in kind and stop them bombing other more defenceless countries? Oh I see, that's the preemptive strike you were on about. you either hope that big bat won't bother, or you go for someone without a bat at all. Frankly any country that initiates a nuclear strike will be first, well maybe second, to be wiped off the planet. You don't see that as a deterrent?

The ideal scenario is total nuclear disarmament. That'll never happen though.


----------



## Zaros

kimthecat said:


> The British and US are cutting back on bases everywhere, In West london , an RAF base was closed and a US naval base was too., a couple of years ago Though why they had a naval base in West London , I do not know .


And Mildenhall and Lakenheath USAF airbases in Suffolk?

RAF? 

Are we really sure.

in 1956 Lakenheath became the site of a near nuclear catastrophe when an American nuclear bomber crashed into an atomic bomb store. The accident caused a mass exodus from the area. 
In order to save face and that 'special' relationship with the UK, Eisenhower ordered all mention of nuclear weapons be omitted from the accident report at that time. 
23 years later, it was discovered that part of eastern England almost became a nuclear desert.

Now what was it that Billy Cotton and his band sang....
_
'When you've got friends and neighbours'_ .:Nailbiting


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> Your first paragraph is pointless as we are talking nuclear.
> 
> So we've got this lovely nuclear warhead winging it's way to blow us off the face of the map. OK to late for most of us, but why is it lunacy to retaliate in kind and stop them bombing other more defenceless countries? Oh I see, that's the preemptive strike you were on about. you either hope that big bat won't bother, or you go for someone without a bat at all. Frankly any country that initiates a nuclear strike will be first, well maybe second, to be wiped off the planet. You don't see that as a deterrent?
> 
> The ideal scenario is total nuclear disarmament. That'll never happen though.


 Pointless. How?

America's top brass believes it can wage and win a limited thermonuclear war and wants to confine such an encounter in the European Arena.

As for counter strikes, it's commonly referred to as M.A.D.

*M*utually *A*ssured *D*estruction.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> Pointless. How?
> 
> America's top brass believes it can wage and win a limited thermonuclear war and wants to confine such an encounter in the European Arena.


Believe that if you wish, anyhow just because they might believe they could, doesn't mean they ever would for obvious reasons. You probably also believe there were nuclear weapons at Greenham Common in the 80's. One successful large red herring that was!!


----------



## cheekyscrip

Jesthar said:


> Saw this on FB this morning. Whilst it is primarily (and ver accurately) applicable to personal relationships, I can't help thinking of the relationship between Mrs May (and her sidekicks) and the rest of the country...


Good definition of a psychopath in action.

Psychopaths are often very successful in business and politics where empathy is a hindrance.

Theresa May , and I gave time before I judged her as PM, proved to be manipulative, clumsy and dishonest.

She will lead country right into the crash.

Time to stop her.


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> not everyone has to be experienced, but you do need a mix so that the less experienced can learn from the more experienced


Not everyone needs to be an experienced politician. Experience in other fields is what can make a very able politician


----------



## Jesthar

I've been seeing some people reporting on FB of inexplicably finding they are no longer registered to vote, despite being registered for years and not having changed circumstances/address etc.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> I've been seeing some people reporting on FB of inexplicably finding they are no longer registered to vote, despite being registered for years and not having changed circumstances/address etc.


Are they no longer registered to vote or their polling station has moved/been split. I turned up at the last election, and after a lot of confusion, found they had split the once one polling station into many and not told anyone this.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> Not everyone needs to be an experienced politician. Experience in other fields is what can make a very able politician


Yes thats why I said I don't much care for career politicians either but we do need some who are experienced and understand how things work. The experience in other fields can be useful but it all depends on what those other fields are. The worse scenario being career politicians who don't have any experience of anything much other than being a politician and sitting on the back benches for years.


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> Are they no longer registered to vote or their polling station has moved/been split. I turned up at the last election, and after a lot of confusion, found they had split the once one polling station into many and not told anyone this.


Nope, no changes of that kind as far as I am aware. Just deregistered. In one house, three family members were deregistered and a fourth wasn't!


----------



## Arnie83

Jesthar said:


> Nope, no changes of that kind as far as I am aware. Just deregistered. In one house, three family members were deregistered and a fourth wasn't!


It's probably the EU hacking our computer systems. :Shifty


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/labour-frontbencher-slammed-apos-shameful-134900353.html

A Labour frontbencher has come under fire for a "shameful" tweet about Prince Philip's retirement.

Chi Onwurah was slammed when she wrote that the Duke of Edinburgh would be retiring "in financial security at a time of his choosing."

Ms Onwurah, standing again to be MP for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and the former shadow minister for business, congratulated him - but what she said next sparked outrage on social media.

She wrote: "Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi."

Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi

- chi onwurah (@ChiOnwurah) May 4, 2017
The "waspi" hashtag refers to the Women Against State Pension Inequality campaign.

Many took to social media to vent their outrage at Ms Onwurah's response to Thursday morning's news.

Some people accused her of being "bitter" and asked whether or not she would still be working at the age of 95.

Another said: "I'd imagine he's done more for the UK than most MPs ever will."

Others wrote that Ms Onwurah was a "fool" for taking a "cheap shot" at the prince, and that she had a "chip on her shoulder."


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> https://uk.news.yahoo.com/labour-frontbencher-slammed-apos-shameful-134900353.html
> 
> A Labour frontbencher has come under fire for a "shameful" tweet about Prince Philip's retirement.
> 
> Chi Onwurah was slammed when she wrote that the Duke of Edinburgh would be retiring "in financial security at a time of his choosing."
> 
> Ms Onwurah, standing again to be MP for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and the former shadow minister for business, congratulated him - but what she said next sparked outrage on social media.
> 
> She wrote: "Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi."
> 
> Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi
> 
> - chi onwurah (@ChiOnwurah) May 4, 2017
> The "waspi" hashtag refers to the Women Against State Pension Inequality campaign.
> 
> Many took to social media to vent their outrage at Ms Onwurah's response to Thursday morning's news.
> 
> Some people accused her of being "bitter" and asked whether or not she would still be working at the age of 95.
> 
> Another said: "I'd imagine he's done more for the UK than most MPs ever will."
> 
> Others wrote that Ms Onwurah was a "fool" for taking a "cheap shot" at the prince, and that she had a "chip on her shoulder."


*WELL.........*lost for words and that doesn't happen often. What a stupid bitchy thing to say


----------



## Honeys mum




----------



## Honeys mum




----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> https://uk.news.yahoo.com/labour-frontbencher-slammed-apos-shameful-134900353.html
> 
> A Labour frontbencher has come under fire for a "shameful" tweet about Prince Philip's retirement.
> 
> Chi Onwurah was slammed when she wrote that the Duke of Edinburgh would be retiring "in financial security at a time of his choosing."
> 
> Ms Onwurah, standing again to be MP for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and the former shadow minister for business, congratulated him - but what she said next sparked outrage on social media.
> 
> She wrote: "Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi."
> 
> Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi
> 
> - chi onwurah (@ChiOnwurah) May 4, 2017
> The "waspi" hashtag refers to the Women Against State Pension Inequality campaign.
> 
> Many took to social media to vent their outrage at Ms Onwurah's response to Thursday morning's news.
> 
> Some people accused her of being "bitter" and asked whether or not she would still be working at the age of 95.
> 
> Another said: "I'd imagine he's done more for the UK than most MPs ever will."
> 
> Others wrote that Ms Onwurah was a "fool" for taking a "cheap shot" at the prince, and that she had a "chip on her shoulder."


Who is she anyway, never heard of her before? She really on the shadow front bench?

Good on Prince Philip after seventy years of service I think he's due a rest in his final years. I'll miss his unpolitical quips.


----------



## suewhite

Honeys mum said:


>


God help us!!!!:Wtf


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> What a stupid bitchy thing to say


It was wasn't it. Unpleasant and unnecessary.


----------



## Elles

She's got a point, just chose the wrong person to make her point with.


----------



## Arnie83

rottiepointerhouse said:


> https://uk.news.yahoo.com/labour-frontbencher-slammed-apos-shameful-134900353.html
> 
> A Labour frontbencher has come under fire for a "shameful" tweet about Prince Philip's retirement.
> 
> Chi Onwurah was slammed when she wrote that the Duke of Edinburgh would be retiring "in financial security at a time of his choosing."
> 
> Ms Onwurah, standing again to be MP for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and the former shadow minister for business, congratulated him - but what she said next sparked outrage on social media.
> 
> She wrote: "Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi."
> 
> Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi
> 
> - chi onwurah (@ChiOnwurah) May 4, 2017
> The "waspi" hashtag refers to the Women Against State Pension Inequality campaign.
> 
> Many took to social media to vent their outrage at Ms Onwurah's response to Thursday morning's news.
> 
> Some people accused her of being "bitter" and asked whether or not she would still be working at the age of 95.
> 
> Another said: "I'd imagine he's done more for the UK than most MPs ever will."
> 
> Others wrote that Ms Onwurah was a "fool" for taking a "cheap shot" at the prince, and that she had a "chip on her shoulder."


I guess you have to weigh up Phil working for so many years and the undoubted good that he's done in many areas against the unearned privilege of his position and the relative luxury & comfort of his personal circumstances.

Given the extreme differences in the various results of said weighing the only conclusion we can reach is that 'politician' doesn't describe Ms Onwurah very accurately !


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> She's got a point, just chose the wrong person to make her point with.


Don't see it at all. There appear to be three points to her tweet
1. Financial security - does he have personal wealth? 
2. At a time of his choosing - presumably a dig at the pension age being pushed back. He's 95 for goodness sake, well beyond any projected pension age.
3. From a job he enjoys - you have got to be bl**dy joking!


----------



## Elles

Yeah, the wrong person to make her point with. She probably needed to use a wealthy, retiring 40 or 50 year old who paid his employees minimum wage to make her point with, not a 95 year old royal.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> What about the cost of living, NHS, schools, the poor, economy, peoples finances being squeezed, taxes etc things that normally help a person make a decision on how they are going to vote in a GE.


What about people taking some responsibility for the course of their own lives and those of their dependants rather than relying on a nanny state to look after them?


----------



## noushka05

Honeys mum said:


>





suewhite said:


> God help us!!!!:Wtf


We're not safe now thanks to the tories massive cuts & they refuse to rule out further cuts - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...s-election-2017-labour-officers-a7712646.html

Since the tories capped their pay some police cant even afford to live - some are having to rely on food vouchers to get by

This is a tweet from the Chair of the Hampshire Police Force Federation. Police needing food vouchers, nurses relying on food banks. Has this country ever been in such a state.


----------



## rona

Oh for god sake, starting pay is £24,204. Not exactly paupers are they? 

The food vouchers were probably perks


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> What about people taking some responsibility for the course of their own lives and those of their dependants rather than relying on a nanny state to look after them?


Many cant afford rip off rents & the rise in the cost of living because they are low paid. Many others are ill or suffer disabilities. They need help, that's what are welfare state was supposed to be for. And our NHS is ours, it doesn't belong to the tories to flog off. It was cost effective & efficient before they trashed it.


----------



## MollySmith

My husband met Philip twice (spoke to him because he asked him a question about the printing press, and got told off by his bosses because he wasn't mean to talk ) and I have met him once, he groped the bottom of one of the sales girls. I have very little respect for anyone who does that.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Oh for god sake, starting pay is £24,204. Not exactly paupers are they?
> 
> The food vouchers were probably perks


Yeah course they were


----------



## rona

https://jobs.west-midlands.police.uk/rewards-benefits/

Over 8,500 different offers and discounts to provide savings and discounts on over 80% of a typical spend;* including supermarket shopping*, high street shopping, DIY and home entertainment.
High street discounts - employee discount scheme with up to 15% discount at over 130,000 UK stores
Cinema discounts - access to discounts on all ticket types at 480+ UK cinemas
Leisure discounts - major savings on leisure time, with up to 53% off family days out and discounts at many popular restaurant chains

Redeemable by Vouchers, re-loadable cards, online voucher codes, cash-back, and digital scan codes.
Accessible from any mobile device.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Oh for god sake, starting pay is £24,204. Not exactly paupers are they?
> 
> The food vouchers were probably perks


http://www.thelondoneconomic.com/mu...-cant-even-afford-buy-children-clothes/26/04/
*Police staff so badly paid they can't even afford to buy their children clothes*

A shocking GMB report has revealed that some civilian police staff are so badly paid they can't even afford to buy their children new clothes.

The poll, conducted by the GMB - the union for civilian police staff - also reveals 70 per cent are stressed at work, while 75 per cent are unhappy at the Government pay cap.

Members were very open about what caused their stress - excessive workloads and poor leadership and management.

More than half of GMB members blame stress on poor management and an absence of leadership, and many though management simply 'don't care'.

One member from Yorkshire, who asked to remain anonymous, said: "My parents still help out with my son's clothing and unexpected bills.

"I want to be able to live myself and not get handouts."

Another member from the North West said: "I am actually worse off, in terms of net pay, than I was 12 months ago."

GMB demands the Government and the police:

Stop further cuts to civilian staff and to recruit more staff to ease the workload and pressure;

Lift the 1% pay cap on civilian police staff pay and pay GMB members a proper wage

Take action to identify the causes of stress and take action to eliminate it;

Undertake a comprehensive programme of training management at all levels about the appropriate way to manage civilian staff.

Kevin Brandstatter, GMB Lead Officer for Police Staff, said: "This report is an utterly damning indictment of the way our members working for the police are being treated by their managers, many of whom are uniformed officers, and the way that austerity has hit them in the pocket.

"The Government has pinched enough of our members' pay - now they want it back.

"The hypocrisy of the Government, which gives handouts to private corporations, and allows others to pay minimal tax, stands in complete contrast to the Governments treatment of workers, cutting real wages and benefits and causing a leap in the number of working calls people struggling to make ends meet while in full time work.

"The levels of stress felt by these hard working public service workers are not acceptable and we want senior managers of the polices forces to address this now.

"Negotiations on pay begin soon. GMB will work hard to secure a decent outcome for members."


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> https://jobs.west-midlands.police.uk/rewards-benefits/
> 
> Over 8,500 different offers and discounts to provide savings and discounts on over 80% of a typical spend;* including supermarket shopping*, high street shopping, DIY and home entertainment.
> High street discounts - employee discount scheme with up to 15% discount at over 130,000 UK stores
> Cinema discounts - access to discounts on all ticket types at 480+ UK cinemas
> Leisure discounts - major savings on leisure time, with up to 53% off family days out and discounts at many popular restaurant chains
> 
> Redeemable by Vouchers, re-loadable cards, online voucher codes, cash-back, and digital scan codes.
> Accessible from any mobile device.


----------



## noushka05

MollySmith said:


> My husband met him twice (spoke to him because he asked him a question about the printing press, and got told off by his bosses because he wasn't mean to talk ) and I have met him once, he groped the bottom of one of the sales girls. I have very little respect for anyone who does that.


Who did Molly? The police chap? I'm confused, sorry.


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> https://uk.news.yahoo.com/labour-frontbencher-slammed-apos-shameful-134900353.html
> 
> A Labour frontbencher has come under fire for a "shameful" tweet about Prince Philip's retirement.
> 
> She wrote: "Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi."


He had a promising career in the Navy which he loved and he had to give it up when the King died and his wife became Queen , He really didn't love his job and it shows how ill informed Onwurah is.

There were a load of negative comments from Socialists on Twitter and one woman complaining about BBC bias by the amount of coverage the announcement was given when they could be covering austerity and Tory cuts . 

They just recently covered the state of the NHS , it was on every evening for a week .


----------



## rona

Firms are falling over themselves to offer discounts to police officers.
Interviewing any section of society about their pay and conditions would almost certainly come back as a majority not being satisfied.

Often not a reflection on pay but on their own aspirations


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> Prince Philip I'll miss his unpolitical quips.


So because of his nobility, he's entitled or allowed to make risque comments & remarks and everyone is supposed to find his sense of humour amusing are they? Including you.

In 1996, amid calls to ban firearms after the Dunblane shooting Philip made the following comment;

_'If a cricketer suddenly decided to go into a school and batter a lot of people to death with a cricket bat, which he could do very easily, are you going to ban cricket bats?'_

That's not humour, that's ignorance.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rona said:


> https://jobs.west-midlands.police.uk/rewards-benefits/
> 
> Over 8,500 different offers and discounts to provide savings and discounts on over 80% of a typical spend;* including supermarket shopping*, high street shopping, DIY and home entertainment.
> High street discounts - employee discount scheme with up to 15% discount at over 130,000 UK stores
> Cinema discounts - access to discounts on all ticket types at 480+ UK cinemas
> Leisure discounts - major savings on leisure time, with up to 53% off family days out and discounts at many popular restaurant chains
> 
> Redeemable by Vouchers, re-loadable cards, online voucher codes, cash-back, and digital scan codes.
> Accessible from any mobile device.


We used to have a few shops and were constantly being badgered to offer discounts to NHS and the Forces, all of whom were paid more than our staff, and in many cases us (Mrs Pepper and I). Why should certain public sector workers, with the guaranteed pay, pay rises, job security and pensions, be offered additional benefits to a bloke in McDonalds working seventy plus hours a week to make ends meet and support his family on far less wages?


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> So because of his nobility, he's entitled or allowed to make risque comments & remarks and everyone is supposed to find his sense of humour amusing are they? Including you.
> 
> In 1996, amid calls to ban firearms after the Dunblane shooting Philip made the following comment;
> 
> _'If a cricketer suddenly decided to go into a school and batter a lot of people to death with a cricket bat, which he could do very easily, are you going to ban cricket bats?'_
> 
> That's not humour, that's ignorance.


No that wasn't humour and nor was it intended to be. You magnificently missed the point. Apart from you I doubt anyone thought it was meant to be humourous. Speaks volumes about you.......


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> No that wasn't humour and nor was it intended to be. You magnificently missed the point. Apart from you I doubt anyone thought it was meant to be humourous. Speaks volumes about you.......


Actually, I didn't miss the point. Despite the man being a constant blundering fool, many royal supporters and followers think he is entertaining and funny, and just as many, if not more, openly guffaw and snigger at his socially awkward gaffes.

So, why will you miss his quips? Which says a lot about who you actually are.


----------



## Guest

stockwellcat said:


> But the EU have said the UK will be paying into the budget well after Brexit day anyway. Didn't you hear the new figure they want the UK to agree to pay before talks take place, €100billion around £85 to £89 billion pounds. This isn't a punishment charge it is the UK's liabilities to come out of treaties the UK is tied into with the EU and other fees on top of the UK's membership fees we have to pay until 2020. This figure will go up the longer Brexit is delayed via negotiations and if the negotiations carry on. If the UK opts for a softer Brexit the divorce bill will decrease somewhat.
> The UK is not pulling the strings the EU is. The EU tell the UK what deal is on the table not the other way around.
> The negotiations have not started yet and it's already in a mess. The EU want EU and UK expat rights sorted first where they can enjoy there current rights that they have right now. The EU want the Irish border remaining as it is now or unification of Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland (they are not going to allow Ireland to be a bargaining chip) and integration into the EU painless for Northern Ireland.
> Theresa May threw a strop and said the EU was inferring with the GE.


That is simply what happened. EU has been saying this from the beginning. For some reason May thought we didn´t mean that, and maybe realised on then that we mean it, UK pays (70-100billions), will not have inner market without free movement and the rights for EU citizens.



rona said:


> You've been reading the propaganda again haven't you?


 ?? propaganda?? There surely seems to be lots of propaganda and fake news going on, but the source is not EU, it is May and Brexit -campaigners.


----------



## rona

MrsZee said:


> ?? propaganda?? There surely seems to be lots of propaganda and fake news going on, but the source is not EU, it is May and Brexit -campaigners.


Or papers or tv or twitter or FB or or or............................How come the reports about the negative EU are wrong but all those on Mrs May are true?


----------



## samuelsmiles

noushka05 said:


> We're not safe now thanks to the tories massive cuts & they refuse to rule out further cuts - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...s-election-2017-labour-officers-a7712646.html
> 
> Since the tories capped their pay some police cant even afford to live - some are having to rely on food vouchers to get by
> 
> This is a tweet from the Chair of the Hampshire Police Force Federation. Police needing food vouchers, nurses relying on food banks. *Has this country ever been in such a state*.
> 
> View attachment 309562


Jeez, Noushka - you must be running out of victims.

Yes, I remember when the country was in a worse state. Vaguely. I was only a kid growing up in the seventies, but I do remember sitting in a room with one meagre gas fire and just candles lighting the house. No TV, no central heating, no.....no whining from mum and dad. Just making the best of it.

They weren't worse _times_, though. Didn't have to listen to the constant self pitying we are subjected to now. 
*
The inconvenient truth about food banks: The rich are getting richer - and so are the poor*


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> You probably also believe there were nuclear weapons at Greenham Common in the 80's. One successful large red herring that was!!


I always thought Thatcher was a lying 81tch out to dupe the public.:Facepalm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...-nuclear-protesters-were-an-eccentricity.html

https://www.wiseinternational.org/nuclear-monitor/456/1958-accident-greenham-common-covered

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/17/newsid_2514000/2514879.stm

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-berkshire-22066747

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/jul/12/freedomofinformation.military

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/sep/05/greenham5


----------



## MollySmith

noushka05 said:


> Who did Molly? The police chap? I'm confused, sorry.


Prince Philip.


----------



## rona

rona said:


> Oh for god sake, starting pay is £24,204. Not exactly paupers are they?
> 
> The food vouchers were probably perks


Just like to clarify. I have no objection to the police or firemen getting more pay than they do. The majority deserve decent pay


----------



## MollySmith

Sorry my internet access is crap tonight - we've had all sorts of issues and I'm probably posting more shite than usual.


----------



## MollySmith

Anyway at least we're talking about politics. "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is you end up being governed by your inferiors" - Plato


----------



## rona

MollySmith said:


> Sorry my internet access is crap tonight - we've had all sorts of issues and I'm probably posting more shite than usual.


Have you seen what DT posts sometimes when she's been at the bottle?


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Zaros said:


> Actually, I didn't miss the point. Despite the man being a constant blundering fool, many royal supporters and followers think he is entertaining and funny, and just as many, if not more, openly guffaw and snigger at his socially awkward gaffes.
> 
> So, why will you miss his quips? Which says a lot about who you actually are.


I'll miss them too. Perhaps because they are a reminder of days gone by, of a different generation who spoke first and thought about it later. When I was a young student nurse I could guarantee at least two elderly males on every shift would have a feel of my bottom and a crafty check the tops of my legs for suspenders - usually when we were rolling them onto their sides for washing or changing bed sheets. This was in the late 70's. I expect they would be hauled before the police for sexual harassment these days but those were different times and those men were probably the granddads of some of the people who are so outraged by Prince Philip. I think we have gone so far the other way that people are becoming almost afraid to speak in case they say something someone else will find offensive.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

samuelsmiles said:


> Jeez, Noushka - you must be running out of victims.
> 
> Yes, I remember when the country was in a worse state. Vaguely. I was only a kid growing up in the seventies, but I do remember sitting in a room with one meagre gas fire and just candles lighting the house. No TV, no central heating, no.....no whining from mum and dad. Just making the best of it.
> 
> They weren't worse _times_, though. Didn't have to listen to the constant self pitying we are subjected to now.
> *
> The inconvenient truth about food banks: The rich are getting richer - and so are the poor*


I think part of the problem is "expectations" , when we first got married we just accepted we had no money for furniture or for a washing machine or even for curtains so we had sheets up at the windows (feel sorry for our neighbours looking back) and did our weekly shop with a calculator and had to take stuff out if it exceeded our budget. We also kept our money issues to ourselves and wouldn't have dreamt of talking about them on social media or to the neighbours. My OH goes into a lot of properties being let to people on benefits - many are at high monthly rentals (£1200 for a 3 bed house) and they have better TVs than we do - the kids have phones and computers in their bedrooms and play stations and the parents offer them a wide choice of what they want to eat rather than dishing up one meal for everyone. I don't begrudge them those things at all but that is not my idea of poverty. This is poverty from the 70's.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-34593382


----------



## MollySmith

I do agree with expectation but I really really have to pick up that I honestly believe a lot of that comes from the 80s and the Thatcher years. I don't think that since at least WW2, there was any period of affluence until then, not that my dad recalls anyway in his lifetime.

My dad worked for British Rail and my mum didn't work as she had poor, untreated PND that has caused her lifelong problems. We had to live in our means and watched in amazement during the 80s when relations and friends got double glazing, extensions, new front doors and betamax. My dad refused to entertain the credit lifestyle. We still went to Cornwall on the train (a perk of his job and I can assure you the only one) until he was made redundant under privatisation and replaced by a manager who used to work at Tesco.


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> This is poverty from the 70's.





MollySmith said:


> I honestly believe a lot of that comes from the 80s and the Thatcher years.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/september/11/newsid_3037000/3037650.stm
*1969: Shelter exposes slum homelessness*
Up to three million people in Britain urgently need re-housing because they are living in damp, overcrowded slum conditions, according to housing charity Shelter.

Shelter was launched in December 1966 to publicise the housing crisis in Britain. It followed the BBC drama documentary "Cathy Come Home" which depicted the devastating effects of homelessness on a family's life.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> Actually, I didn't miss the point. Despite the man being a constant blundering fool, many royal supporters and followers think he is entertaining and funny, and just as many, if not more, openly guffaw and snigger at his socially awkward gaffes.
> 
> So, why will you miss his quips? Which says a lot about who you actually are.


Because he was amusing and wasn't bound by political correctness.



Zaros said:


> I always thought Thatcher was a lying 81tch out to dupe the public.:Facepalm
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...-nuclear-protesters-were-an-eccentricity.html
> 
> https://www.wiseinternational.org/nuclear-monitor/456/1958-accident-greenham-common-covered
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/17/newsid_2514000/2514879.stm
> 
> http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-berkshire-22066747
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/jul/12/freedomofinformation.military
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/sep/05/greenham5


There you go, totally taking in the propaganda which you so object to, Greenham Common wasn't, and never has been the nuclear weapon base reported. Look a little bit further afield, not far, just a tad.

CND and the "peace" CND campers were a joke to the locals who actually knew/know the facts.


----------



## MollySmith

rona said:


> http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/september/11/newsid_3037000/3037650.stm
> *1969: Shelter exposes slum homelessness*
> Up to three million people in Britain urgently need re-housing because they are living in damp, overcrowded slum conditions, according to housing charity Shelter.
> 
> Shelter was launched in December 1966 to publicise the housing crisis in Britain. It followed the BBC drama documentary "Cathy Come Home" which depicted the devastating effects of homelessness on a family's life.


Oh goodness yes, I am a huge supporter of Shelter and the Big Issue. I buy BI each week and buy the seller a coffee and a cake when I do.

I should clarify... again lost half my post again. That there is abject poverty and scant help (I'd recommend this as a read). I spent time in my life after my ex left me with nothing. And one night at Paddington station.

BUT, I still think that there needs to be a change in society. I still shop as cheap as I can which is always avoiding supermarkets. These past three weeks of having to ping a microwave have been miserable and I miss cooking. I miss the challenge of shopping on a budget but I only know that through past life experiences. I think it's too easy to be seduced into debt and bloody hard to get out of it. And the spiral is degrading and impossible. I genuinely think the greed of the Thatcher years and credit was so dangerous. London's Oxford Street was the most expensive street in the world then. It's also given this country a huge sense of self importance.


----------



## MollySmith

Dr Pepper said:


> Because he was amusing and wasn't bound by political correctness.
> 
> There you go, totally taking in the propaganda which you so object to, Greenham Common wasn't, and never has been the nuclear weapon base reported. Look a little bit further afield, not far, just a tad.
> 
> CND and the "peace" CND campers were a joke to the locals who actually knew/know the facts.


Oh how wrong and how right you are. "Greenham Common wasn't, and never has been the nuclear weapon base reported" yes that's true. A bunch of women sitting near a fence in middle England 30 years ago are rendered pretty much irrelevant by some including you may? Certainly my mum anyway!

But Greenham Common, like the suffragettes changed the face of protest. You forget that Government papers released by the National Archives in 2013, showed how senior Conservative ministers were worried that they were in danger of losing public opinion over the deployment of Cruise missiles.

It showed how creative women could be at protest. Just like the miners strikes and the women behind the men. Everything, from how to allocate donations to the distribution of cooking rotas was democratically decided. Who should speak, travel and represent the protest was a constant source of frustration to those from outside who demanded leaders while those within demanded that there should be none. They worked out how to care for the young, how to humiliate the authorities on the ground while arguing the case in the highest courts of the land, how to live with difference while living in a community that claimed one thing - the decommissioning of nuclear weapons - was more important than all other considerations. Greenham was a place where a generation of women found a public voice. It was a voice that was predicated on inclusion and difference, multiple perspectives not a single dominant view.

My mum watched the telly at the time and shuddered at the camp women, but I found it utterly inspiring. Many girls growing up did, I'm sure.


----------



## Zaros

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'll miss them too. Perhaps because they are a reminder of days gone by, of a different generation who spoke first and thought about it later. When I was a young student nurse I could guarantee at least two elderly males on every shift would have a feel of my bottom and a crafty check the tops of my legs for suspenders - usually when we were rolling them onto their sides for washing or changing bed sheets. This was in the late 70's. I expect they would be hauled before the police for sexual harassment these days but those were different times and those men were probably the granddads of some of the people who are so outraged by Prince Philip. I think we have gone so far the other way that people are becoming almost afraid to speak in case they say something someone else will find offensive.


It has nothing to do with being offended, but everything to do with decency and knowing when to keep your fool mouth shut.
Phil's remarks were often cruel but always very insensitive and without exception.

I'll wager that if I were to post equally cruel and insensitive comments in relation to some of the threads on this forum I wouldn't be very welcome at all around the place.

Quite evidently there's a law for us common folk and a law for those high in privileges.

However, here's one of Phil's prize comments I could never quite get my head around and is in connection to the Lockerbie tragedy.

'It's worse for the Americans'

Can someone please explain to me why Lockerbie was worse for the Americans?
Were the innocents at Lockerbie not their equals then?


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> Because he was amusing and wasn't bound by political correctness.
> 
> There you go, totally taking in the propaganda which you so object to, Greenham Common wasn't, and never has been the nuclear weapon base reported. Look a little bit further afield, not far, just a tad.
> 
> CND and the "peace" CND campers were a joke to the locals who actually knew/know the facts.


Put up or shut up!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Zaros said:


> It has nothing to do with being offended, but everything to do with decency and knowing when to keep your fool mouth shut.
> Phil's remarks were often cruel but always very insensitive and without exception.
> 
> I'll wager that if I were to post equally cruel and insensitive comments in relation to some of the threads on this forum I wouldn't be very welcome at all around the place.
> 
> Quite evidently there's a law for us common folk and a law for those high in privileges.
> 
> However, here's one of Phil's prize comments I could never quite get my head around and is in connection to the Lockerbie tragedy.
> 
> 'It's worse for the Americans'
> 
> Can someone please explain to me why Lockerbie was worse for the Americans?
> Were the innocents at Lockerbie not their equals then?


Different times Zaros, different age. If you were 95 and you made comments like Phillip then yes you would be picked up on some of them and admonished on some of his worst but I hope most people would accept that you had been brought up in a different era and be tolerant. Some of the things my 93 FIL came out with made me cringe and blush especially when said to young female carers but thankfully they didn't take it personally and admonished him gently. Unfortunately for Phillip his are broadcast to the world - even more so now we have social media.


----------



## Lurcherlad

I wonder if the results of yesterday's local elections are an indicator for the General Election?

Labour have major losses - Tories have major gains.

So far, more results to come.


----------



## stockwellcat.

So far in England...

Seats
Conservative 366 (Gained 104 seats)
Labour 60 (Lost 38 Seats)
Lib Dems 89 (Lost 11 Seats)
UKIP 0 (Lost 43 Seats)
Green 10 (Gained 5 Seats)
Other 33 (Lost 17 seats)

Local Councils
Conservatives 8 (Gained 4 Councils)
Labour 0 
Lib Dems 0
UKIP 0
Green 0
Other 1 (Lost 4 Councils)

West of England Mayor won by Conservatives.

Welsh Results so far....

Welsh Councils
Conservatives 1
Labour 3
Lib Dems 0
Green 0
UKIP 0
Other 5

Welsh Seats
Conservatives 71
Labour 219
Lib Dems 29
Plaid 40
UKIP 0
Other 121

Scotland no results yet

http://election.news.sky.com

Labour and UKIP are losing seats to Conservatives.

We had no local Election in my area yesterday ours is next year.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Zaros said:


> Actually, I didn't miss the point. Despite the man being a constant blundering fool, many royal supporters and followers think he is entertaining and funny, and just as many, if not more, openly guffaw and snigger at his socially awkward gaffes.
> 
> So, why will you miss his quips? Which says a lot about who you actually are.


I will sort of miss his quips!!!

Oh...... :|


----------



## bordie

stockwellcat said:


> Which Party are you going to vote for?
> 
> To not cause any friction you do not have to disclose publicly on here who you are voting.


voting


----------



## noushka05

samuelsmiles said:


> Jeez, Noushka - you must be running out of victims.
> 
> Yes, I remember when the country was in a worse state. Vaguely. I was only a kid growing up in the seventies, but I do remember sitting in a room with one meagre gas fire and just candles lighting the house. No TV, no central heating, no.....no whining from mum and dad. Just making the best of it.
> 
> They weren't worse _times_, though. Didn't have to listen to the constant self pitying we are subjected to now.
> *
> The inconvenient truth about food banks: The rich are getting richer - and so are the poor*


Victims? They're the tories victims not mine.

As are these.










I was also a child in the 70s from an ordinary working class family. We didn't have much but we didn't live in a slum, in a bed sit or on the streets. We lived in cheap social housing which was plentiful in those days, we had a functioning NHS, a welfare state. The tories are taking us much further back than the 70s, they're taking us back to a time when only those who could afford to pay for health care got treatment, where there was no safety net to help those who fell on hard times.

Ahh Daniel Hannan the caring face of conservatism This just shows how easily some people are sucked in by tory lies & deception. Climate 'sceptic' Hannan is a big fan of USAs Republicans, this tory government share pretty much the same ideology. The Republicans are trashing environmental & climate legislation, they have just taken away affordable health care for millions so they can use the savings to further enrich the wealthiest.

This one tweet sums it up.

*John Lewis*‏Verified [email protected]*repjohnlewis* 12h12 hours ago

_Never have I seen legislative action that reveals such clear disdain for the human dignity of the most vulnerable among us_

This is where we're heading. Right wing libertarianism. Health care for only those who can pay for it, no state help for anyone. No protection for wildlife, the environment, climate - profit comes first. This is their toxic ideology.

Back to Hannan's disingenuous article. People cant just use a food bank without official referral

Hes bang on about the rich but the poor _are_ getting poorer & they are going to get even poorer soon.

*Yvette Cooper*‏Verified [email protected]*YvetteCooperMP* May

_Never mind the posters & slogans, here's the facts. 
This is Tory Britain - the less you earn, the harder you are hit_
























View attachment 309570


----------



## noushka05

MollySmith said:


> Prince Philip.


Horrible man.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> It has nothing to do with being offended, but everything to do with decency and knowing when to keep your fool mouth shut.
> Phil's remarks were often cruel but always very insensitive and without exception.
> 
> I'll wager that if I were to post equally cruel and insensitive comments in relation to some of the threads on this forum I wouldn't be very welcome at all around the place.
> 
> Quite evidently there's a law for us common folk and a law for those high in privileges.
> 
> However, here's one of Phil's prize comments I could never quite get my head around and is in connection to the Lockerbie tragedy.
> 
> 'It's worse for the Americans'
> 
> Can someone please explain to me why Lockerbie was worse for the Americans?
> Were the innocents at Lockerbie not their equals then?


I can see why you are a expat, you don't like the government, you don't like (or understand) the monarchy and love the EU. Why are you bothering to post on a UK general election thread when you seem to despise everything about the UK?



Zaros said:


> Put up or shut up!


What's the point? You'd argue day is night before admitting you were wrong. The point I was making was you seem to believe everything you read. Do you really think we would know about it if the USA had designs on a nuclear war in Europe? Do you really think it would have been public knowledge where the nuclear arsenal was during the cold war?


----------



## noushka05

Goblin said:


> Far worst ones going around. Strong and Stable has unfortunate initials.


Like this? :Bag


----------



## Odin_cat

I'd quite like to know what it is that people feel ' political correctness' stops them from saying or doing.

As a young woman, I'm very glad it's no longer acceptable for old men to grope me!


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Like this? :Bag
> View attachment 309605


Excellent Noush'

Now you've lit the fuse stand well back and put on your life jacket, for there's bound to be a torrent of offended.:Hilarious


----------



## rona

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...leincomeandinequality/financialyearending2016

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...fitsonhouseholdincome/financialyearending2016

http://visual.ons.gov.uk/uk-perspectives-2016-personal-and-household-finances-in-the-uk/
*"Conclusion*
Overall, levels of income have risen since 1980, but the gap between the richest and poorest fifth of households has widened.

In recent years the percentage of the household population living in relative low income has fallen. In addition there has been a decrease in household spending after inflation is taken into account. This may be related to the growth in pay being below the inflation rate since the economic downturn, until more recently when an unusually low inflation rate has reversed this situation."

No time to look through these but hopefully they will have fuller facts, and possibly that graph too


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> Excellent Noush'
> 
> Now you've lit the fuse stand well back and put on your life jacket, for *there's bound to be a torrent of offended*.:Hilarious




I do hope not



Colliebarmy said:


> I didnt mention us starting a war, did i?.... no
> 
> you dont attack someone if they have a bigger cricket bat than you have.... kim jun song knows he will lose, only while we have the bigger bat
> 
> deterrent
> 
> noun: *deterrent*; plural noun: *deterrents
> 1*.
> a thing that discourages or is intended to discourage someone from doing something.
> "cameras are a major *deterrent to* crime"
> synonyms: disincentive, discouragement, dissuasion, damper, brake, curb, check, restraint;More












Didn't Fallon state May would make a preemptive strike? Wasn't this Russia's response? This warmongering government are the real threat to our safety not Corbyn..


----------



## 1290423

Bisbow said:


> To my mind none of them could organise a p... up in a brewery
> 
> And the snipe about the chips is totally uncalled for, are you against her eating as well as everything else


nor an orgy in a Brothel


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> So your vote is going to May because your decision is based on Brexit and nothing else.
> 
> What about the cost of living, NHS, schools, the poor, economy, peoples finances being squeezed, taxes etc things that normally help a person make a decision on how they are going to vote in a GE. I don't see Theresa May speaking to many people and is instead avoiding the media whilst other parties are using the media and want a genuine debate on TV, Theresa May opted out of the debate and has said instead she will opt for a television interview in front of a select audience who can question her (obviously all going to be her supporters).
> 
> I am thinking this through very carefully at the moment who I am going to vote for and will not be influenced into making a decision because one party leader is going Brexit, Brexit, Brexit and Strong and Stable and spouting out meaningless sound bites at the moment which she will u-turn on at some point.


Think ill keep my gob shut apart from saying wow!


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Goblin

rona said:


> https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...leincomeandinequality/financialyearending2016


So what's the difference between rich and poor? A billionaire doubling their money will have an adverse affect on the figures for example. The poorest fifth of society have only 8% of the total income, whereas the top fifth have 40%. Saw something recently were the top 1% consider themselves poor as they compare themselves with the top 0.1%. Most relevant to the discussion, are May's policies helping the UK to close the gap?

It's just not simply about money either. Consider things like http://www.bmj.com/content/356/bmj.j377/rr-1


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...e_election_win_to_push_for_new_Syria_strikes/


----------



## Dr Pepper

KittenKong said:


> http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...e_election_win_to_push_for_new_Syria_strikes/
> 
> View attachment 309621
> View attachment 309622


I don't get it, when did Mrs May say she would push for more strikes against Syria if she won a large majority?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Odin_cat said:


> I'd quite like to know what it is that people feel ' political correctness' stops them from saying or doing.
> 
> As a young woman, I'm very glad it's no longer acceptable for old men to grope me!


To be clear it was not "acceptable", none of us stood around saying "carry on dear" but it is possible to just remove a hand and say "no thank you" or "I don't think so" without making a huge big deal of it. In those days standard TV watching included things like the Carry On films, Benny Hill and Dick Emery. As times have changed so has acceptable language/behaviour but some people get left behind. I've just never felt it necessary to demonise them for it.


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> What's the point? You'd argue day is night before admitting you were wrong. The point I was making was you seem to believe everything you read. Do you really think we would know about it if the USA had designs on a nuclear war in Europe? Do you really think it would have been public knowledge where the nuclear arsenal was during the cold war?


I believe Zaros is merely pointing out that you have yet to provide any sources for _your _claims


----------



## Goblin

Quite sobering:




I guess it will save the NHS money though.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> I believe Zaros is merely pointing out that you have yet to provide any sources for _your _claims


I got that, but I haven't the time or inclination to try and find links for him/her to just argue against. I'm not even sure if it's general knowledge today where they are kept so there may not even be the info out there.

When you (not you personally Jesthar) have a conversation in a pub do you keep pulling out your phone and use Google to try and find fault in what someone says, or do carry on the discussion at face value? Why the obsession these days with people wanting a link to a supposed source? It's all a bit childish.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Why the obsession these days with people wanting a link to a supposed source? It's all a bit childish.


Same reason some people like to have expert opinion on things rather than any recruiting any person on the street. If I tell you pigs fly, are you going to believe me? I have proof, price of bacon is going up.


----------



## kimthecat

Goblin said:


> Same reason some people like to have expert opinion on things rather than any recruiting any person on the street. If I tell you pigs fly, are you going to believe me? I have proof, price of bacon is going up.


 Depends on the sources and who the expert witness is. you did give me a link about about vegetarianism and mental health which seemed to contradict itself , I'm none the wiser but maybe it was me .


----------



## kimthecat

some of the local election results were very close.

John Mcdonnell still blaming the press for Labour's failures and like his fellow Corbynites refusing to take the blame for the mess labour is in . Shameful.


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> I got that, but I haven't the time or inclination to try and find links for him/her to just argue against. I'm not even sure if it's general knowledge today where they are kept so there may not even be the info out there.
> 
> When you (not you personally Jesthar) have a conversation in a pub do you keep pulling out your phone and use Google to try and find fault in what someone says, or do carry on the discussion at face value? Why the obsession these days with people wanting a link to a supposed source? It's all a bit childish.


Yes, of course I use sources to support my views and check facts. I'm the one you'll find posting 'This is a hoax' on the latest FB scam/chain letter doing the rounds, complete with links to HoaxSlayer, Sophos, Snopes etc. I am a scientist (BSc and everything), and I like evidence to support my views, not just hearsay. Why would anyone not?


----------



## Happy Paws2

:Bored:Yawn


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 309626


Who is this please? Housing with mould and Victorian conditions? Does the writer even know what Victorian conditions were like for the poor? Does the writer know about the workhouses? Does the writer understand that most mould (not all but most) seen in our current housing stock is caused by condensation/lack of ventilation? How much does a bag of chips cost? In this area its about £1.90 whereas to make a chilli, 1 can red kidney beans =50p, 1 red pepper = 50p, 1 onion = 16p, 1 tin tomatoes = 34p, mushrooms = 79p for 250 g only need half that so 40p , chilli powder costs about 80 p for a whole bottle which would last months but say 10p. Total cost = £2.00 - that would make enough to serve 3 so 66p per portion and allow 30p for a jacket sized potato so just under £1. That leaves some over for a pudding 13p for a banana and 30p for 50g of blueberries (Tesco sell 400g for £2.65). This is based on Tesco standard prices, not value range and I have no doubt could be purchased cheaper elsewhere. So for the price of a bag of chips same child could go to school having eaten a very healthy and nutritious, not to mention filling, veggie chilli on a jacket potato with banana and blueberries for pudding at a cost of £1.43.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> Yes, of course I use sources to support my views and check facts. I'm the one you'll find posting 'This is a hoax' on the latest FB scam/chain letter doing the rounds, complete with links to HoaxSlayer, Sophos, Snopes etc. I am a scientist (BSc and everything), and I like evidence to support my views, not just hearsay. Why would anyone not?


I think that's quite sad if you can't have a conversation without doubting or believing what the others are saying.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Oh and no excuse for sending kids to school without breakfast - Tesco own brand porridge oats 75p for 1 kg which is 38p for a large serving, make it with water. Cheaper than a can of coke and enough left over from the money spent on the bag of chips the night before to cover it.


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> I think that's quite sad if you can't have a conversation without doubting or believing what the others are saying.


And I think it's dangerous to blindly accept everything you are told without question. Not so much on trivial issues, but when it comes to important issues like nuclear missiles etc. then you'd better believe I'm going to do my research.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> And I think it's dangerous to blindly accept everything you are told without question. Not so much on trivial issues, but when it comes to important issues like nuclear missiles etc. then you'd better believe I'm going to do my research.


And that's fair enough, if you have doubts yes do a bit of research to satisfy yourself one way or the other, I do the same. It's far more productive and polite than shouting "put up or shut up".


----------



## Odin_cat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Oh and no excuse for sending kids to school without breakfast - Tesco own brand porridge oats 75p for 1 kg which is 38p for a large serving, make it with water. Cheaper than a can of coke and enough left over from the money spent on the bag of chips the night before to cover it.


I completely agree with you in principle. However, there are practical issues;
Firstly, many people who find themselves struggling to feed themselves have no idea how to cook. It isn't taught in schools.

Secondly, to cook a meal, like chilli, you need electricity/ gas, pans, knives, chopping boards etc. Some people do not have these available.


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Oh and no excuse for sending kids to school without breakfast - Tesco own brand porridge oats 75p for 1 kg which is 38p for a large serving, make it with water. Cheaper than a can of coke and enough left over from the money spent on the bag of chips the night before to cover it.


also kids gong to school without coats, we used to have hand me downs and buy stuff from jumble sales for pennies.

@Odin_cat 


> I completely agree with you in principle. However, there are practical issues;
> Firstly, many people who find themselves struggling to feed themselves have no idea how to cook. It isn't taught in schools.


 good point. We did domestic science at school and also learned how to "cut our cloth "
which is a great help. 
though perhaps if your income is that low , it must be very difficult or perhaps impossible to stay out of debt.


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> some of the local election results were very close.
> 
> John Mcdonnell still blaming the press for Labour's failures and like his fellow Corbynites refusing to take the blame for the mess labour is in . Shameful.


TBF The press are extremely biased against Corbyn & also against the labour party in general. Even the BBC, our state broadcaster is, when its looked upon to be impartial. They are letting us down dreadfully.

Here is Tory Peter Oborne in respose to the shocking bias of BBCs Nick Robinson towards Corbyn. We're in strange times indeed when we've got tories like Oborne & Hitchens defending Corbyn from media bias.










https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...report-on-jeremy-corbyn-was-inaccurate-labour

I'll just repost this letter to the Guardian from Noam Chomsky (one of the worlds finest thinkers), John Pilger and a batch of Professors .










This is how labour politicians should stand up to our bias media. I admire Barry Gardiner so much.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> And that's fair enough, if you have doubts yes do a bit of research to satisfy yourself one way or the other, I do the same. It's far more productive and polite than shouting "put up or shut up".


Problem is when someone is unable to provide that evidence  Then they start getting all defensive and dismissive.


----------



## stockwellcat.

I see Labour are suffering heavy losses today.

I know where my vote is going on 8th June 2017 and Jeremy isn't getting it.

Here's to the strongest party winning on 8th June 2017 and they are definitely showing themselves to be the strongest party today so far. Even in Scotland the Conservatives are making gains.


----------



## Goblin

kimthecat said:


> Depends on the sources and who the expert witness is. you did give me a link about about vegetarianism and mental health which seemed to contradict itself , I'm none the wiser but maybe it was me .


Found it quite clear. What it did provide was arguments against itself for balance which something like that should do.


----------



## Goblin

kimthecat said:


> also kids gong to school without coats, we used to have hand me downs and buy stuff from jumble sales for pennies.


Those were the days when we didn't live in a disposable society. Hand me down school uniforms were common place. People actually learned to sew, to patch etc.

Will say domestic science was only for girls when I was at school. Boys weren't allowed to do it, they had to do metalwork instead. Times and expectations change.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Here's to the strongest party winning on 8th June 2017 and they are definitely showing themselves to be the strongest party today so far. Even in Scotland the Conservatives are making gains.


Strongest does not equal the best the for UK.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Odin_cat said:


> I completely agree with you in principle. However, there are practical issues;
> Firstly, many people who find themselves struggling to feed themselves have no idea how to cook. It isn't taught in schools.
> 
> Secondly, to cook a meal, like chilli, you need electricity/ gas, pans, knives, chopping boards etc. Some people do not have these available.


It really isn't cooking though and these days there are so many programmes on TV or videos on You Tube. The Trussel Trust run cookery classes, Jamie Oliver did a big TV campaign about it and opened pop up units in empty shops, lots of community centres offer them too.

https://ribblevalley.foodbank.org.uk/get-help/more-than-food/eat-well-spend-less/

Most families even those on benefits have pots and pans and knives, I'm not talking about the homeless that is a different issue altogether. The Chilli can be made quickly and easily on one ring and the jacket potato takes minutes in a microwave. Its easy to blame cookery not being taught in schools but shouldn't it be taught in the home by parents?


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Why the obsession these days with people wanting a link to a supposed source? It's all a bit childish.


I'd always prefer to see a source referenced on a forum like this. The source can be very important in detecting bias eg a cat vaccine manufacturer putting out figures supposedly showing an increase in incidence of disease. The other reason is that there are those who aren't above copying and pasting tracts of text to try and give the impression they're more knowledgeable than they really are when they should be at least admitting it isn't their work.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> I see Labour are suffering heavy losses today.
> 
> I know where my vote is going on 8th June 2017 and Jeremy isn't getting it.
> 
> Here's to the strongest party winning on 8th June 2017 and they are definitely showing themselves to be the strongest party today so far. Even in Scotland the Conservatives are making gains.


So you decide who to vote for based on who is doing the best rather than who has the policies you support the most?


----------



## Elles

My little area of Devon has declared. Labour won, lib dems second, conservatives third. We still have weekly bin collections.


----------



## rona

Dr Pepper said:


> I'm not even sure if it's general knowledge today where they are kept so there may not even be the info out there.


Is this it?
http://www.awe.co.uk/



Dr Pepper said:


> Why the obsession these days with people wanting a link to a supposed source? It's all a bit childish.


I'm childish then 



Dr Pepper said:


> I think that's quite sad if you can't have a conversation without doubting or believing what the others are saying.


After 60 years on this planet. I believe nothing anyone says 



Elles said:


> My little area of Devon has declared. Labour won, lib dems second, conservatives third. We still have weekly bin collections.


We are Conservative and have weekly bin collections


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So you decide who to vote for based on who is doing the best rather than who has the policies you support the most?


Be thankful the party you're backing is getting my vote.

People backed the Conservatives today because they don't trust Corbyn, nothing to do with Policies.


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> It really isn't cooking though and these days there are so many programmes on TV or videos on You Tube. The Trussel Trust run cookery classes, Jamie Oliver did a big TV campaign about it and opened pop up units in empty shops, lots of community centres offer them too.
> 
> https://ribblevalley.foodbank.org.uk/get-help/more-than-food/eat-well-spend-less/
> 
> Most families even those on benefits have pots and pans and knives, I'm not talking about the homeless that is a different issue altogether. The Chilli can be made quickly and easily on one ring and the jacket potato takes minutes in a microwave. Its easy to blame cookery not being taught in schools but shouldn't it be taught in the home by parents?


If you can afford a microwave, a TV and the internet. Even cleaper to buy a supermarket value pot noodle style thing.

Supermarket shopping can be cheap, but you have to be able to get there (especially if you want to buy reduced items) or pay to have it delivered. If you can only afford to buy small packets of things, not in bulk, that ramps costs up sharply too.

Is it so hard to believe that there really are people who are so hard up they are forced to make a choice between things like, say, food and, say, basic toiletries or a hot shower?


----------



## noushka05

Says it all. The tories have shifted so far to the right they're now UKIP.


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> Be thankful the party you're backing is getting my vote.
> 
> People backed the Conservatives today because they don't trust Corbyn, nothing to do with Policies.


I trust Corbyn over any other politician, I just don't agree with his vision of how things should be.
I really really wish I did, but the things I disagree with are too important to gamble with.


----------



## MollySmith

Zaros said:


> It has nothing to do with being offended, but everything to do with decency and knowing when to keep your fool mouth shut.
> Phil's remarks were often cruel but always very insensitive and without exception.
> 
> I'll wager that if I were to post equally cruel and insensitive comments in relation to some of the threads on this forum I wouldn't be very welcome at all around the place.
> 
> Quite evidently there's a law for us common folk and a law for those high in privileges.
> 
> However, here's one of Phil's prize comments I could never quite get my head around and is in connection to the Lockerbie tragedy.
> 
> 'It's worse for the Americans'
> 
> Can someone please explain to me why Lockerbie was worse for the Americans?
> Were the innocents at Lockerbie not their equals then?





rottiepointerhouse said:


> Different times Zaros, different age. If you were 95 and you made comments like Phillip then yes you would be picked up on some of them and admonished on some of his worst but I hope most people would accept that you had been brought up in a different era and be tolerant. Some of the things my 93 FIL came out with made me cringe and blush especially when said to young female carers but thankfully they didn't take it personally and admonished him gently. Unfortunately for Phillip his are broadcast to the world - even more so now we have social media.


I can't say that the girl whose arse was groped was feeling so generous about it and was really upset. This was about 20 years ago so at 75 it's still not right. It's not right at 95 either and I don't know what the company did about it, I suspect some gentle words of support but it's taking advange surely. My gran is the same age and is a very well travelled person who reads the news and tries so hard to educate herself with the boundaries of what she can afford to do. I'm not entirely sure what excuse can be made for a senior member of the royal family.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Be thankful the party you're backing is getting my vote.
> 
> People backed the Conservatives today because they don't trust Corbyn, nothing to do with Policies.


They backed fear over hope.



rona said:


> I trust Corbyn over any other politician, I just don't agree with his vision of how things should be.
> I really really wish I did, but the things I disagree with are too important to gamble with.


I'd love to know whats more important than our natural world, our NHS, social & environmental justice & our democracy?

Because these things will be under threat like never before if the tories win the GE with a landslide.

At least my conscience will be clear when the hard right have the unfettered power they are so desperate for.

.


----------



## MollySmith

Just look at this result and see the future. Just add together the Lab/LibDem/Green vote and see how it obliterates the Tory/UKIP vote. And yet, the Tory wins. Our democracy is failing us because our First Past The Post system does not truly reflect what the people want. We will never have genuine change until we have some form of proportional representation that would at least encourage real debate and real consensus. All we are going to end up with is a right wing coup masquerading as democracy. This is what really gets me more than any agenda. It makes a mockery of reading manifestos and a cause.

We're still waiting in Cambridgeshire to find out our mayor - this person who can really make a different to if we stay in our city or leave. It's a stupid election this mayoral one only designed to save cash. Peterborough is virtually the Midlands and has it's own set of issues that are completely different to those in Cambridge, socially and politically.


----------



## rona

MollySmith said:


> Just add together the Lab/LibDem/Green vote and see how it obliterates the Tory/UKIP vote


Don't know the relevance of this because the votes were for different parties. Do you want just 2 parties?
People usually vote for a party not against


----------



## Satori

rona said:


> *"Conclusion*
> Overall, levels of income have risen since 1980, but the gap between the richest and poorest fifth of households has widened.


Rona, while this is correct, it is necessary to consider the intervening years in order to understand the trend. The gap grew considerably between 1980 and 1990. *Since 1990 inequality has fallen steadily and continues to decline. *For the y/e 2016 it stood at exactly the same level as for the y/e 1986. (This using the widely accepted international measure of gini co-efficient based on equivalised income after direct taxes and transfers.)


----------



## noushka05

MollySmith said:


> Just look at this result and see the future. Just add together the Lab/LibDem/Green vote and see how it obliterates the Tory/UKIP vote. And yet, the Tory wins. Our democracy is failing us because our First Past The Post system does not truly reflect what the people want. We will never have genuine change until we have some form of proportional representation that would at least encourage real debate and real consensus. All we are going to end up with is a right wing coup masquerading as democracy. This is what really gets me more than any agenda. It makes a mockery of reading manifestos and a cause.
> 
> We're still waiting in Cambridgeshire to find out our mayor - this person who can really make a different to if we stay in our city or leave. It's a stupid election this mayoral one only designed to save cash. Peterborough is virtually the Midlands and has it's own set of issues that are completely different to those in Cambridge, socially and politically.
> 
> View attachment 309632


The Greens support proportional representation & it looks like its on the Labour party's agenda too.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-labour-manifesto-jeremy-corbyn-a7715786.html


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> I'd always prefer to see a source referenced on a forum like this. The source can be very important in detecting bias eg a cat vaccine manufacturer putting out figures supposedly showing an increase in incidence of disease. The other reason is that there are those who aren't above copying and pasting tracts of text to try and give the impression they're more knowledgeable than they really are when they should be at least admitting it isn't their work.


Oh there's absolutely a time and place for links. But not every time you don't believe someone.



rona said:


> Is this it?
> http://www.awe.co.uk/


No. Try RAF Welford. Now I'm not generally a conspiracy theorist but I've just had a look on Google earth and was genuinely surprised but what is there now and apparent quantity, but equally surprised by what isn't show but obviously has to be there and I know for fact is there.


----------



## Jesthar

rona said:


> I trust Corbyn over any other politician, I just don't agree with his vision of how things should be.
> I really really wish I did, but the things I disagree with are too important to gamble with.


I know what you mean. I don't share a lot of his more 'out there' viewpoints either. However, as you say at this juncture he is one of the most principled and trustworthy of the politicians out there, and that is a bit thing these days.

It may be worth bearing in mind that history shows very little precedent for the more outlandish of a party leaders _personal _beliefs ever coming to fruition. given that, I definitely favour Labour over Tory by a long way, as the path the Tories are currently plunging down is having horrible effects on many people I know...


----------



## rona

Satori said:


> Rona, while this is correct, it is necessary to consider the intervening years in order to understand the trend. The gap grew considerably between 1980 and 1990. *Since 1990 inequality has fallen steadily and continues to decline. *For the y/e 2016 it stood at exactly the same level as for the y/e 1986. (This using the widely accepted international measure of find co-efficient based on equivalised income after direct taxes and transfers.)


As I said, I hadn't had time to read the links. I just highlighted that to reassure Noushka that the government weren't in denial or covering up the issue of inequality


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> No. Try RAF Welford. Now I'm not generally a conspiracy theorist but I've just had a look on Google earth and was genuinely surprised but what is there now and apparent quantity, but equally surprised by what isn't show but obviously has to be there and I know for fact is there.


Why are you surprised? Do you think that Google Earth would be allowed to show sensitive or classified military information? Plus we've been practiced at aerial camoflage since it became essential in WW2 and the Cold War


----------



## rona

Jesthar said:


> I know what you mean. I don't share a lot of his more 'out there' viewpoints either. However, as you say at this juncture he is one of the most principled and trustworthy of the politicians out there, and that is a bit thing these days.
> 
> It may be worth bearing in mind that history shows very little precedent for the more outlandish of a party leaders _personal _beliefs ever coming to fruition. given that, I definitely favour Labour over Tory by a long way, as the path the Tories are currently plunging down is having horrible effects on many people I know...


If it wasn't for the fact that we were leaving the EU I would most certainly vote Labour and see how it went. However I truly believe the Conservatives are the best to get us out


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Be thankful the party you're backing is getting my vote.
> 
> People backed the Conservatives today because they don't trust Corbyn, nothing to do with Policies.


I have not decided who I am backing yet as I've said repeatedly I am waiting to read the manifestos and will weigh up which party I agree/disagree with the most before making my decision. I've also said I don't want to vote Conservative but at this stage really don't see a credible alternative. I will wait until the very last minute to 100% decide whether that is the case or not.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> Why are you surprised? Do you think that Google Earth would be allowed to show sensitive or classified military information? Plus we've been practiced at aerial camoflage since it became essential in WW2 and the Cold War


I was surprised at what it does actually show yet for some reason the main airstrip is missing! As you say probably a lot more missing as well.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> Be thankful the party you're backing is getting my vote.
> 
> People backed the Conservatives today because they don't trust Corbyn, nothing to do with Policies.


Looking forward to seeing the statistics on both elections.

Aside from the Corbyn factor I think what is happening is that many traditional Labour voters who voted Brexit and therefore want a government to execute the referendum results have voted Conservative 'just this one time'. In addition, UKIP voters who now have nobody to vote for (given that UKIP is irrelevant) had to land somewhere and the Tories are the answer this time around for the same reason.

I am sure that the Conservative government, if elected, will have an extremely tough five years and in 2022 voters will zero-base their decisions. If Labour get their act together for 2022 they are by no means a dead force. Many voters have just loaned their votes to Theresa May and may well take them back next time.


----------



## MollySmith

rona said:


> Don't know the relevance of this because the votes were for different parties. Do you want just 2 parties?
> People usually vote for a party not against


I said PR voting. The basic principles of proportional representation elections are that all voters deserve representation and that all political groups in society deserve to be represented by legislatures in proportion to their strength in the electorate. In other words, everyone should have the right to fair representation. PR uses multi-member districts. Instead of electing one person in each district, as we do here in the UK, several people are elected. These multi-member districts may be relatively small, with only three or four members, or they may be larger, with ten or more members.

The second characteristic of all PR systems is that they divide up the seats in these multi-member districts according to the proportion of votes received by the various parties or groups running candidates. Thus if the candidates of a party win 40% of the vote in a 10 member district, they receive four of the ten seats - or 40% of the seats. If another party wins 20% of the vote, they get two seats, and so on.

That, in a nutshell, is how proportional representation works. But while all PR systems have the same goals of ensuring that all voters receive some representation and that all groups are represented fairly, various systems do have different ways of achieving these goals.

Types of PR are Party list voting systems which is the most common form of proportional representation. Over 80% of the PR systems used worldwide are some form of party list voting. It remains the system used in most European democracies and in many newly democratized countries.

I'd be writing this reply until the GE after the next GE if I explained each one but there's a guide here. http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/proportional-representation

I just think that there has to be either a total shake up of political parties (impossible, never happened since Cromwell and I'd hardly say it was accountable or fair. Or that the voting system changed. In parts of Wales only 23% turned out to vote. Now I think yes we should all vote but I do understand that faced with bleak choices who would bother. A change to a different voting system may be the kick up the arse it needs. It can't get much more polarized.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jesthar said:


> If you can afford a microwave, a TV and the internet. Even cleaper to buy a supermarket value pot noodle style thing.
> 
> Supermarket shopping can be cheap, but you have to be able to get there (especially if you want to buy reduced items) or pay to have it delivered. If you can only afford to buy small packets of things, not in bulk, that ramps costs up sharply too.
> 
> Is it so hard to believe that there really are people who are so hard up they are forced to make a choice between things like, say, food and, say, basic toiletries or a hot shower?


I have no idea how much a supermarket pod noodle thing costs as I don't consider that to be food and have never even in my student days eaten one. My post was in response to someone complaining about children being sent to school on nothing but the previous nights bag of chips so my example was based on the cost of a very good meal with a pudding of fresh fruit and a breakfast the next morning. No it isn't that hard for me to understand because believe it or not most of us have been there. There is nothing wrong with having a strip down wash at the sink instead of a shower to save money (4 bars of shield soap for £1 so 25p a bar) but even more appropriate is to get rid of the mobile phone accounts, the sky TV and the takaways. My Mum manages on a basic pension topped up with pension credit to feed herself, pay her bills and save some money for her rainy day or funeral fund but she like many of her generation is careful about how long her heating is on for, not wasting food and has only free TV channels and no internet.



MollySmith said:


> I can't say that the girl whose arse was groped was feeling so generous about it and was really upset. This was about 20 years ago so at 75 it's still not right. It's not right at 95 either and I don't know what the company did about it, I suspect some gentle words of support but it's taking advange surely. My gran is the same age and is a very well travelled person who reads the news and tries so hard to educate herself with the boundaries of what she can afford to do. I'm not entirely sure what excuse can be made for a senior member of the royal family.


I didn't say it was right, just that he was born and raised in a different era. In twenty or thirty years time they might be slating us for our rude and inappropriate behaviours - particularly the use of mobile phones at the dinner table/in restaurants etc and this weird habit some youngsters seem to have of taking photographs of their private parts.


----------



## Odin_cat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> It really isn't cooking though and these days there are so many programmes on TV or videos on You Tube. The Trussel Trust run cookery classes, Jamie Oliver did a big TV campaign about it and opened pop up units in empty shops, lots of community centres offer them too.
> 
> https://ribblevalley.foodbank.org.uk/get-help/more-than-food/eat-well-spend-less/
> 
> Most families even those on benefits have pots and pans and knives, I'm not talking about the homeless that is a different issue altogether. The Chilli can be made quickly and easily on one ring and the jacket potato takes minutes in a microwave. Its easy to blame cookery not being taught in schools but shouldn't it be taught in the home by parents?


But if parents don't what happens? It's a vicious circle.

When we still lived in the UK ( 18 months ago) the food banks specifically asked for donations that could me eaten 'as is', suggesting a number of their users don't have a means of cooking.

It's very easy to blame people for the situations they find themselves in but often the problems are more complex than that.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Odin_cat said:


> But if parents don't what happens? It's a vicious circle.
> 
> When we still lived in the UK ( 18 months ago) the food banks specifically asked for donations that could me eaten 'as is', suggesting a number of their users don't have a means of cooking.
> 
> It's very easy to blame people for the situations they find themselves in but often the problems are more complex than that.


I think people have to take some responsibility for themselves and find out. Like I said plenty of You Tube demonstrations, internet blogs and TV shows or go to a charity shop and buy cheap second hand cook books or ask someone else like go on a forum or speak to a neighbour or a mum at the school gate.

Jack Monroe's for instance

https://cookingonabootstrap.com/


----------



## Jesthar

rona said:


> If it wasn't for the fact that we were leaving the EU I would most certainly vote Labour and see how it went. However I truly believe the Conservatives are the best to get us out


Going on the performance so far, I'd say the only thing the Conservatives have achieved so far is to put the EU's back up. I have cause to encounter a lot of EU and overseas people in my job (we need the specialists), and I have yet to encounter one who thinks TM and co are doing anything other that making things a lot worse for us. They see TM in partocular as a mini-Trump, who thinks she can get her own way by making demands and then pointing and shouting about how unfairly the EU is treating the UK when the EU points out that complying with those demands would not be legal...


----------



## DoodlesRule

Jesthar said:


> If you can afford a microwave, a TV and the internet. Even cleaper to buy a supermarket value pot noodle style thing.
> 
> Supermarket shopping can be cheap, but you have to be able to get there (especially if you want to buy reduced items) or pay to have it delivered. If you can only afford to buy small packets of things, not in bulk, that ramps costs up sharply too.
> 
> Is it so hard to believe that there really are people who are so hard up they are forced to make a choice between things like, say, food and, say, basic toiletries or a hot shower?


I took my grandson to visit my sister one day over Easter as I knew her grandchildren would be there and its nice the kiddies get together. She is soley reliant on benefits (full time carer) so I took 3 pizzas so she wasn't having to feed everyone (I do cook proper meals in my own home  ). I was mortified as it never entered my head she had no money for the gas meter, she said it was ok because she had £2 worth on the emergency level allowed so it would be just enough (luckily it was warm enough not to need the heating on). She literally did not have a single penny and had even run out of milk and loo roll.

She isn't in dire straits due to spending habits or inability to cook its how the benefit system works now - she used to get various payments at different times meaning some money came in every week. Without advance warning the changes meant she would only be paid monthly so basically had to go a whole month with no money but still had bills to pay, its impossible to budget for that when you have so little to start with.

Her youngest son is still at home, he had been doing some agency work but had to sign on when that ended - it was 6 weeks before he got paid anything (thats how long it takes) but he went to sign on the day I was there and was turned away - they said he should have been there at 9.30 am not 9.35 am, he told them that wasn't correct and showed them the text from them confirming 9.35. Oh well we are too busy now so you will have to come back next week. Result was the job seekers allowance was not paid, they had been waiting for that to buy the milk and loo roll. They were not even angry or upset, such arbitrary decisions are made so regularly the are simply resigned to it all

I couldn't cope having to live like that.


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I think people have to take some responsibility for themselves and find out. Like I said plenty of You Tube demonstrations, internet blogs and TV shows or go to a charity shop and buy cheap second hand cook books or ask someone else like go on a forum or speak to a neighbour or a mum at the school gate.
> 
> Jack Monroe's for instance
> 
> https://cookingonabootstrap.com/


But if people have already followed your other advice, they won't have mobile phones or the internet any more  And most TV shows only use expensive food.

Besides, plenty of people have done ALL that and still struggle. Try hanging out on the MSE Debt Free Wannabee forums sometime, just to read not post. It helps keep things in perspective. Yes, you have plenty of people on there due to silly spending, but you equally have many who ended up where they are despite their best efforts with the hand life dealt them.


----------



## suewhite

This what I heard from a neighbour of mine who has 7 children " the shite I got from the food bank! I told them my kids wont eat that" in the past I have lived on diddly squat and survived on a dozen eggs and a loaf of bread on tick from the milkman I am not saying that those days should come back, but when you walk around a supermarket and hear the mums asking there kids what they want for dinner and all choosing different things sorry I just don't get it.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Who is this please? Housing with mould and Victorian conditions? Does the writer even know what Victorian conditions were like for the poor? Does the writer know about the workhouses? Does the writer understand that most mould (not all but most) seen in our current housing stock is caused by condensation/lack of ventilation? How much does a bag of chips cost? In this area its about £1.90 whereas to make a chilli, 1 can red kidney beans =50p, 1 red pepper = 50p, 1 onion = 16p, 1 tin tomatoes = 34p, mushrooms = 79p for 250 g only need half that so 40p , chilli powder costs about 80 p for a whole bottle which would last months but say 10p. Total cost = £2.00 - that would make enough to serve 3 so 66p per portion and allow 30p for a jacket sized potato so just under £1. That leaves some over for a pudding 13p for a banana and 30p for 50g of blueberries (Tesco sell 400g for £2.65). This is based on Tesco standard prices, not value range and I have no doubt could be purchased cheaper elsewhere. So for the price of a bag of chips same child could go to school having eaten a very healthy and nutritious, not to mention filling, veggie chilli on a jacket potato with banana and blueberries for pudding at a cost of £1.43.


It was a comment found on Facebook.

You might believe comparisons made with Victorian times an exaggeration, indeed no TV, central heating or electricity in those days for instance.

You have to watch programmes like, "Nightmare Tenants and Slum Landlords" to see examples of what conditions some are living in. Don't get me started on key and card gas and electric meters that charge a lot more than the normal costs.

Won't be long before pensions and others are told to wrap up warm and wear wooly hats again.....


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jesthar said:


> But if people have already followed your other advice, they won't have mobile phones or the internet any more  And most TV shows only use expensive food.
> 
> Besides, plenty of people have done ALL that and still struggle. Try hanging out on the MSE Debt Free Wannabee forums sometime, just to read not post. It helps keep things in perspective. Yes, you have plenty of people on there due to silly spending, but you equally have many who ended up where they are despite their best efforts with the hand life dealt them.


Yes I'm sure some have done all that and still struggle but if you have children you have to learn to feed them cheaply and not bring out the "bag of chips" line when there is good food available for less than a bag of chips.


----------



## Odin_cat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I think people have to take some responsibility for themselves and find out. Like I said plenty of You Tube demonstrations, internet blogs and TV shows or go to a charity shop and buy cheap second hand cook books or ask someone else like go on a forum or speak to a neighbour or a mum at the school gate.
> 
> Jack Monroe's for instance
> 
> https://cookingonabootstrap.com/


I love Jack Monroe, she helped us through a very difficult financial time, but I'm lucky; I have a decent education and a loving upbringing.

Seeking help isn't always easy, it's hard to reach out if you're suffering from mental health issues and scared to death social services will take your kids. I have no real understanding of that situation so try not to judge those in it.


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes I'm sure some have done all that and still struggle but if you have children you have to learn to feed them cheaply and bring out the "bag of chips" line when there is good food available for less than a bag of chips.


Maybe someone else bought them the bag of chips. Or maybe it is more expensive to have a trip to the supermarket if it's too far to walk and you have to pay take yourself and all the kids on the bus, or get a taxi. Maybe your gas and/or electricity meter are both out of credit and you can't cook anyway. Maybe the parent (s) worked the previous evening and wasn't there to cook. There may be a dozen legitimate reasons as to why there was a bag of chips the night before and no food in the morning. Granted, it isn't ideal, but for some the situation is very real.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> I see Labour are suffering heavy losses today.
> 
> I know where my vote is going on 8th June 2017 and Jeremy isn't getting it.
> 
> Here's to the strongest party winning on 8th June 2017 and they are definitely showing themselves to be the strongest party today so far. Even in Scotland the Conservatives are making gains.


I have no sympathy for Labour in Scotland seeing it was reported they encouraged people to vote Tory in a tactical sense. They deserved to lose there if this is true.

Yes, a good day for the Tories but not as good as what they expected seeing May insists everyone is behind her. She has certainly gained support from UKIP and BNP supporters seeing the Tories are now UKIP/BNP in all but name.

My prediction that UKIP and probably the BNP and National Front too will dissolve into the Tory party looks likely to be coming true.

Let's say May does get re-elected. With her Trump like behaviour and pre war like stance towards Brussels (war with Spain won't be enough), how long do you think she'll last? I doubt very much she'll last a full term somehow.


----------



## kimthecat

kimthecat said:


> some of the local election results were very close.
> 
> John Mcdonnell still blaming the press for Labour's failures and like his fellow Corbynites refusing to take the blame for the mess labour is in . Shameful.


Look at the reply at I got from a Corbynite . he didn't even spell my name right ! :Hilarious

 *Joe*‏@*joeogun1* 3h3 hours ago

you are clearly deluded Allison, and severely demented u imbecile


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jesthar said:


> Maybe someone else bought them the bag of chips. Or maybe it is more expensive to have a trip to the supermarket if it's too far to walk and you have to pay take yourself and all the kids on the bus, or get a taxi. Maybe your gas and/or electricity meter are both out of credit and you can't cook anyway. Maybe the parent (s) worked the previous evening and wasn't there to cook. There may be a dozen legitimate reasons as to why there was a bag of chips the night before and no food in the morning. Granted, it isn't ideal, but for some the situation is very real.


OK so there is a chip shop but no shops that sell food and the parent was at work with no other responsible adult looking after the children. 


Odin_cat said:


> I love Jack Monroe, she helped us through a very difficult financial time, but I'm lucky; I have a decent education and a loving upbringing.
> 
> Seeking help isn't always easy, it's hard to reach out if you're suffering from mental health issues and scared to death social services will take your kids. I have no real understanding of that situation so try not to judge those in it.


Who is judging someone with mental health issues? We are discussing what some random person on facebook said about Victorian housing, mould and sending to kids to school with nothing in their belly but last nights chips. I'm pointing out that if you can afford a bag of chips you can afford to make a decent meal and if you don't know how to bloody well find out.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Who is judging someone with mental health issues? We are discussing what some random person on facebook said about Victorian housing, mould and sending to kids to school with nothing in their belly but last nights chips. I'm pointing out that if you can afford a bag of chips you can afford to make a decent meal and if you don't know how to bloody well find out.


That assumes they have enough money for the gas and/or electricity key/card meters in order to cook a meal or course.

Homes have to be heated too. Not everyone can afford to do both....


----------



## Goblin

Satori said:


> *Since 1990 inequality has fallen steadily and continues to decline. *For the y/e 2016 it stood at exactly the same level as for the y/e 1986. (This using the widely accepted international measure of gini co-efficient based on equivalised income after direct taxes and transfers.)


Interesting considering the UK has the 7th most unequal incomes of 30 countries in the developed world.

The Gini co-effecient isn't measuring the fact that the "middle class" are merging with the lower end of the scale. With the Gini index, a population where the lowest 50% of individuals have no income and the other 50% have equal income provides the same result as a population where the lowest 75% of people have 25% of income and the top 25% have 75% of the income.


----------



## cheekyscrip

KittenKong said:


> I have no sympathy for Labour in Scotland seeing it was reported they encouraged people to vote Tory in a tactical sense. They deserved to lose there if this is true.
> 
> Yes, a good day for the Tories but not as good as what they expected seeing May insists everyone is behind her. She has certainly gained support from UKIP and BNP supporters seeing the Tories are now UKIP/BNP in all but name.
> 
> My prediction that UKIP and probably the BNP and National Front too will dissolve into the Tory party looks likely to be coming true.
> 
> Let's say May does get re-elected. With her Trump like behaviour and pre war like stance towards Brussels (war with Spain won't be enough), how long do you think she'll last? I doubt very much she'll last a full term somehow.


War with Spain? Must be tomatina...
Seriously?
Spain: Main income: Tourism, main client: Brits.

No more said.

Enough if British people chose to holiday in Greece, Portugal etc..if Spaniards se ponen tontos .

We can also have oranges from Morocco and olives from Greece.

By the way- check fb page Gibraltar Espaniol....you will find who is cruising for bruising.

Spain is no problem, because they just need to sell to us.
Why Franco did not reach for Gibraltar during WWII?
Depended on importing grain from Britain.

For Spain the true worry is Catalonia, not Gibraltar etc...


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> OK so there is a chip shop but no shops that sell food and the parent was at work with no other responsible adult looking after the children.


Now you're getting there. You just described some sinkhole estates very well indeed. Don't forget, you get your benefits stopped these days if you don't take a job deemed suitable for you when it's offered...


----------



## KittenKong

cheekyscrip said:


> War with Spain? Must be tomatina...
> Seriously?
> Spain: Main income: Tourism, main client: Brits.


That's what they all say but Spain does well with tourism from other EU/EEA countries so the possible loss of UK tourism won't affect them too much.

You keep going on about Franco. He's part of Spain's past as Hitler was part of Germany's past.

Unfortunately TM is the present....


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> There is nothing wrong with having a strip down wash at the sink instead of a shower to save money (4 bars of shield soap for £1 so 25p a bar) but even more appropriate is to get rid of the mobile phone accounts, the sky TV and the takaways. My Mum manages on a basic pension topped up with pension credit to feed herself, pay her bills and save some money for her rainy day or funeral fund but she like many of her generation is careful about how long her heating is on for, not wasting food and has only free TV channels and no internet.


You can use the internet for free at libaries and keep warm at the same time.
save on using washing machine by hand washing smalls and wearing clothes like jumpers , shirts and blouses more than once.

I think that what we used to see as luxuries , people see nowadays as necessities.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> Don't forget, you get your benefits stopped these days if you don't take a job deemed suitable for you when it's offered...


Perfectly right that is as well.


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> Perfectly right that is as well.


Problem is, often it takes no account of whether or not you can afford to take the job after additional costs, such as childcare or travel, are factored in. If your new shelf stacking job leaves you, say £100 a week better off than on the benefits where you just about make ends meet, but then you have to find £50 a week childcare costs for two children, plus transport money for you (which may be expensive if they expect you to travel a long way) and them, then you can't really afford to take the job, can you?


----------



## Satori

Goblin said:


> Interesting considering the UK has the 7th most unequal incomes of 30 countries in the developed world.
> 
> The Gini co-effecient isn't measuring the fact that the "middle class" are merging with the lower end of the scale. With the Gini index, a population where the lowest 50% of individuals have no income and the other 50% have equal income provides the same result as a population where the lowest 75% of people have 25% of income and the top 25% have 75% of the income.


Yes I am perfectly well aware how it is calculated and that more than one set of income distribution data can produce the same coefficient. But just look at the trend. It is clearly and obviously down. The probability of the trend line being the result of this potential methodological weakness is infinitesimally small.

Facts is, inequality is reducing over time. You have no point to make (as usual) and so you clutch at straws (as usual). Worst of it all is that you know all of this. You are not as stupid as you pretend to be. You are tiresome in the extreme and this is the last response you will ever get from me.


----------



## Goblin

Satori said:


> Yes I am perfectly well aware how it is calculated and that more than one set of income distribution data can produce the same coefficient. But just look at the trend. It is clearly and obviously down. The probability of the trend line being the result of this potential methodological weakness is infinitesimally small.


Look at the trend in something which has faults in it's methodology, which you are aware of. Why, simply as it says what you want it to say. The rich getting richer whilst the number of people being poorer is not represented by your statistical method. Try again..



> You are tiresome in the extreme and this is the last response you will ever get from me.


Oops, forgot.


----------



## Odin_cat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> OK so there is a chip shop but no shops that sell food and the parent was at work with no other responsible adult looking after the children.
> 
> Who is judging someone with mental health issues? We are discussing what some random person on facebook said about Victorian housing, mould and sending to kids to school with nothing in their belly but last nights chips. I'm pointing out that if you can afford a bag of chips you can afford to make a decent meal and if you don't know how to bloody well find out.


And I'm simply pointing out that sometimes 'bloody well finding out' isn't that easy.


----------



## Odin_cat

cheekyscrip said:


> War with Spain? Must be tomatina...
> Seriously?
> Spain: Main income: Tourism, main client: Brits.
> 
> No more said.
> 
> Enough if British people chose to holiday in Greece, Portugal etc..if Spaniards se ponen tontos .
> 
> We can also have oranges from Morocco and olives from Greece.
> 
> By the way- check fb page Gibraltar Espaniol....you will find who is cruising for bruising.
> 
> Spain is no problem, because they just need to sell to us.
> Why Franco did not reach for Gibraltar during WWII?
> Depended on importing grain from Britain.
> 
> For Spain the true worry is Catalonia, not Gibraltar etc...


Stopping trade with Spain will only alienate normal Spanish people. They already hate their government, try to get them on your side


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jesthar said:


> Now you're getting there. You just described some sinkhole estates very well indeed. Don't forget, you get your benefits stopped these days if you don't take a job deemed suitable for you when it's offered...


Thanks I know what a sinkhole estate is - I used to cover several of them when I worked for social services but the world doesn't end at the edge of the estate, sometimes you have to walk a little bit further to get to the shops or club together with friends and share a taxi or a home delivery.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Odin_cat said:


> And I'm simply pointing out that sometimes 'bloody well finding out' isn't that easy.


Don't think we will ever agree on that one, are we supposed to believe this person has no internet on their phone? no access to internet at friend's houses? no access to a charity shop or a library? no access to a community centre? no TV? No friends or family or neighbours or community workers who would help by teaching them a few basic recipes? No way of finding out how to make a meal out of a jacket potato and a tin of bins and a banana?


----------



## Honeys mum

noushka05 said:


> Because these things will be under threat like never before if the tories win the GE with a landslide.


I have to agree with you on that one noush. The problem is Labour are not up to the job, IMO what our country needs is a complete change of goverment. But sadly, there just isn't one any more.


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Don't think we will ever agree on that one, are we supposed to believe this person has no internet on their phone? no access to internet at friend's houses? no access to a charity shop or a library? no access to a community centre? no TV? No friends or family or neighbours or community workers who would help by teaching them a few basic recipes? No way of finding out how to make a meal out of a jacket potato and a tin of bins and a banana?


I don't have internet on MY phone yet, and I'm well off. Going back to a basic PAYG call and text only mobile is often suggested for those on a budget. Libraries and community may have closed, or not be within walking distance, or may not be open at the right hours for someone to use. They may know HOW to make a meal, but have no gas or electricity to do that with. Good luck getting a community worker in some areas! Not to mention that even if they do have internet and friends, plenty of people who are in dire straits have no-one they feel they can turn to for fear of being judged as failures, not trying hard enough, unworthy of help etc.

But I'm not going to debate over details any more. The point is, it is perfectly possible to do all the right things, work your socks off at multiple low-wage jobs, make all the economies you can, be very good with money and budget for every single penny, never go out, buy Value everything, know how to cook for four on £2.50, don't buy presents for Christmas and birthdays, handwash everything since the washing machine broke, not put the heating on when it's freezing outside etc. - and it still not be enough to make ends meet. And you know what? Some people will _still _say it's all their fault.


----------



## Lurcherlad

suewhite said:


> This what I heard from a neighbour of mine who has 7 children " the shite I got from the food bank! I told them my kids wont eat that" in the past I have lived on diddly squat and survived on a dozen eggs and a loaf of bread on tick from the milkman I am not saying that those days should come back, but when you walk around a supermarket and hear the mums asking there kids what they want for dinner and all choosing different things sorry I just don't get it.


When my parents moved into their council house in the late 50's they had lino on the floor, 2 garden chairs and a milk crate in the lounge, a bed and lamp upstairs, and a secondhand cooker and fridge. Washing was done with a copper and mangle by hand.

They painted the walls with cheap emulsion and gradually added some bits of secondhand furniture.

Mum cooked wholesome food with the cheapest of ingredients, money went on essentials and they had no luxuries.

Their kept the house and garden clean and tidy. Slowly they improved their own standard of living by being sensible and frugal.

The family I saw last night were pleading poverty yet spent money on cigarettes, tattoos, toys had, two kids already and another on the way. 

They lived like pigs. The lino on the kitchen floor was covered in dirt and debris, the bedroom carpet was covered in cat sh*t, walls and doors were damaged and bare, there were 30 *** ends in the hearth, etc. the house was filthy! They didn't work so why don't they clean the house with all the spare time they have? A broom and a bucket don't cost the earth.

I can guarantee if you upped their benefits by £50 a week their quality of life would not improve, they would probably buy a new telly!


----------



## Calvine

Jesthar said:


> but then you have to find £50 a week childcare costs for two children


Ten years ago my neighbour was paying £70 A DAY for one child at the nearest nursery. That's £1400 a month! God knows what they charge now. Child minders near me charge between £8 and £10 an hour.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> Problem is, often it takes no account of whether or not you can afford to take the job after additional costs, such as childcare or travel, are factored in. If your new shelf stacking job leaves you, say £100 a week better off than on the benefits where you just about make ends meet, but then you have to find £50 a week childcare costs for two children, plus transport money for you (which may be expensive if they expect you to travel a long way) and them, then you can't really afford to take the job, can you?


But take into account working tax credit and child tax credit on top of your wage. So if your on a minimum wage job at thirty five hours a week, after tax you'll take home approx £12,500 plus child tax credit of £5,560 (presuming two kids) plus the working tax credit of £800 and you have a take home pay £18,860. More than sufficient to live on.


----------



## cheekyscrip

KittenKong said:


> That's what they all say but Spain does well with tourism from other EU/EEA countries so the possible loss of UK tourism won't affect them too much.
> 
> You keep going on about Franco. He's part of Spain's past as Hitler was part of Germany's past.
> 
> Unfortunately TM is the present....


Franco is still very much alive...his spirit is quite visible in governing PP. There is tourism from other countries too..but if you read Spanish press...which I do!...then PP and Rajoy are criticised heavily for messing around with Gibraltar? Britain.
Gibraltar wants to stay British, Spain ceded it in 1713, for Minorca, Cuba etc...the end of story. This not Britain or Gibraltar wanting a piece of SPAIN, for PITS SAKE!!!

Spanish press and ordinary Spanish people say: if Gibraltar wants to be Spanish then great...but if not...why force them? Ceuta, Mellila and Canaries want to stay Spanish? In Africa?

Ordinary Spanish people welcome happily British tourists and expats and need Gibraltar for nothing, except neofrankists...

War with Spain is totally absurd idea....
If you look at statistics -the largest number of tourists coming to Spain and the largest population of expats are Brits. Not Germans or French. Spain is very worried already and cutting prices for British market, to balance the fallen pound.

Have friends running villa rentals , etc in Spain..... Lowest prices ever....££££ taken of selling prices....

After recent frontier problems Spanish unions forced government to call off their dogs and make frontier passable for their workers, who suffered the worst.

Unions stress the importance of good relationship with UK and Gibraltar. Work for 10 k Spaniards, market for their products and clients for the Campo.

Spain is not North Korea...

But if their government bully us with support of EU, then we expect our people to side with us? Or you want us to surrender a, abandon our homes and go homeless to be burden for UK taxpayers?

We expect support from British public not just Spanish left.

If Spanish corrupt government gets it they will ruin it. Even Spanish say so, who live around. That will ruin Campo de Gibraltar...
About 100 k in surrounding towns will be affected...Ordinary people.


----------



## noushka05

Honeys mum said:


> I have to agree with you on that one noush. The problem is Labour are not up to the job, IMO what our country needs is a complete change of goverment. But sadly, there just isn't one any more.


We know the Tories agenda HM, we have nothing to lose voting labour but we'll lose everything voting tory. Our NHS wont survive till the next election.
So I don't know about you but I'm going down fighting - & so are the younger generation by the looks of things  They are the ones who will be disproportionately affected by a tory landslide, they will have to suffer the consequences the longest because these tories will do anything to stay in power & they have most of the media on side.

The NHS alone would make me throw my weight behind Corbyn & theres so many other things at stake besides it.








*The NHA Party*‏@*NHAparty* 7h7 hours ago

All over England people are fighting for hospitals & thinking it's a local problem.
It's not. It's NATIONAL GOVT policy to kill off our NHS.








*The NHA Party*‏@*NHAparty* 7h7 hours ago

Tens of millions left suffering without proper healthcare in US.
Don't for a moment think it couldn't happen here.
The Tories a lying to you

Brian May's rallying cry to the young 

*Dr. Brian May*‏Verified account@*DrBrianMay* 4h4 hours ago

Hey student folks !!! You can stop the madness.
Don't let Britain be fooled again. Register ! VOTE !! Bri

*Voter registration soars among students with 55% backing Labour*

Survey finds nine out of 10 students who are entitled to vote have now registered, in a potential boost for Jeremy Corbyn

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...n-general-election?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Tweet


----------



## KittenKong

Lurcherlad said:


> When my parents moved into their council house in the late 50's they had lino on the floor, 2 garden chairs and a milk crate in the lounge, a bed and lamp upstairs, and a secondhand cooker and fridge. Washing was done with a copper and mangle by hand.
> 
> They painted the walls with cheap emulsion and gradually added some bits of secondhand furniture.
> 
> Mum cooked wholesome food with the cheapest of ingredients, money went on essentials and they had no luxuries.
> 
> Their kept the house and garden clean and tidy. Slowly they improved their own standard of living by being sensible and frugal.
> 
> The family I saw last night were pleading poverty yet spent money on cigarettes, tattoos, toys had, two kids already and another on the way.
> 
> They lived like pigs. The lino on the kitchen floor was covered in dirt and debris, the bedroom carpet was covered in cat sh*t, walls and doors were damaged and bare, there were 30 *** ends in the hearth, etc. the house was filthy! They didn't work so why don't they clean the house with all the spare time they have? A broom and a bucket don't cost the earth.
> 
> I can guarantee if you upped their benefits by £50 a week their quality of life would not improve, they would probably buy a new telly!


No one can deny the above, we hear such stories in the press daily. Interesting they're 99% "British" so the excuse to target EU citizens is irrelevant.

In the '70s when I grew up it was unheard of to hear of an unemployed father. Come the '80s when Thatcher's policies destroyed traditional industries unemployment reached over 3million despite fiddling the figures so only those on Unemployment Benefit were included in the figures.

Families with no one at work suddenly became accepted as the norm during that time.

Of course those who lost their jobs were blamed for their predicament. 
Apart from being told by Tebbit to get on our bikes they introduced, "Employment Training" which entailed working full time for existing benefits plus £10 towards costs of travelling to "work".

Isn't Tory Britain wonderful?


----------



## Lurcherlad

KittenKong said:


> No one can deny the above, we hear such stories in the press daily. Interesting they're 99% "British" so the excuse to target EU citizens is irrelevant.
> 
> In the '70s when I grew up it was unheard of to hear of an unemployed father. Come the '80s when Thatcher's policies destroyed traditional industries unemployment reached over 3million despite fiddling the figures so only those on Unemployment Benefit were included in the figures.
> 
> Families with no one at work suddenly became accepted as the norm during that time.
> 
> Of course those who lost their jobs were blamed for their predicament.
> Apart from being told by Tebbit to get on our bikes they introduced, "Employment Training" which entailed working full time for existing benefits plus £10 towards costs of travelling to "work".
> 
> Isn't Tory Britain wonderful?


Would that family have lived any better under the last 3 labour governments though? I very much doubt it.


----------



## Zaros

KittenKong said:


> In the '70s when I grew up it was unheard of to hear of an unemployed father. Come the '80s when Thatcher's policies destroyed traditional industries unemployment reached over 3 million despite fiddling the figures so *only those on Unemployment Benefit were included in the figures.
> *
> Isn't Tory Britain wonderful?


I'm so bloody pleased you highlighted this deliberate distortion of reality, because when I happened to broach this very fact before, I was accused of talking absolute sh1te!

And no, Tory Britain wasn't wonderful back then and because they've only got better at what they do, I'm given to thinking it will be a lot phuqin' worse in the future.


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> Our NHS wont survive till the next election.


Oh, come on. That's only five weeks away.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Satori said:


> Oh, come on. That's only five weeks away.


On the plus side that free's up my diary for the 20th June when I was due to take my father for his bi-monthly hospital appointment. I might go to the pictures instead, anything good on?


----------



## Guest

rona said:


> Or papers or tv or twitter or FB or or or............................How come the reports about the negative EU are wrong but all those on Mrs May are true?


Isn´t that the question? We get the negative reports too, we always had, but then we also the good news and the results, and the balance was always positive. Also we understand what EU can and cannot decide or do, and in Britain EU was used as a scapegoat for everything British politicians failed to do, like "EU steals NHS" money, that is why we can´t fund it anymore like we used".

Now when you are losing the benefits, while you voted to leave, May is still expexting to keep all the benefits (only for business though), just like that, without any costs? I think she is mad, bad and has on morals at all, Trump in a skirt is my opionion of her.



samuelsmiles said:


> Yes, I remember when the country was in a worse state. Vaguely. I was only a kid growing up in the seventies, but I do remember sitting in a room with one meagre gas fire and just candles lighting the house. No TV, no central heating, no.....no whining from mum and dad. Just making the best of it. They weren't worse _times_, though. Didn't have to listen to the constant self pitying we are subjected to now.


Yes, you were a kid. You didn´t have to sustain a family, you did not think if that was fair or not, you were kid. Also, should´t there be some progress, even in Britain for ordinary people? As a comparison I bet Finns were poorer, we still have much less than rich Britain, but still we seem to have more for the poor. During all conservative goverment main cuts affected poorest, naturally, but then next govermet will have Labour in it too.

Coalition goverments seem to work best anyway, they are really stable, as they have to consider most aspects, Business have to work and make profit, but also the unemployd have to be taken care of etc. It just works better that one party goverments IMO.



MollySmith said:


> I genuinely think the greed of the Thatcher years and credit was so dangerous. London's Oxford Street was the most expensive street in the world then. It's also given this country a huge sense of self importance.


I agree, that is when the back bone of Britain was crushed, and people stopped believing in politics or society. Just the fact the Oxford Street was the most expensive street in the world, while miners were suffering speaks volumes. There was lots of money, but only for the few. I wonder has anything changed. 



MollySmith said:


> That, in a nutshell, is how proportional representation works. But while all PR systems have the same goals of ensuring that all voters receive some representation and that all groups are represented fairly, various systems do have different ways of achieving these goals. Types of PR are Party list voting systems which is the most common form of proportional representation. Over 80% of the PR systems used worldwide are some form of party list voting. It remains the system used in most European democracies and in many newly democratized countries.
> I'd be writing this reply until the GE after the next GE if I explained each one but there's a guide here. http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/proportional-representation
> .


I also believe that PR system is best, as you have listen to lots of different sides, and it certainly is most stable. Or have you hear dramatic stories of Swedish Finnish or Danish politics? We put up even with a populist party and nothing happened, (apart from they lost local elections, as they were so incompetent). The lowest voting % was just below 50,, the highest 90%, the avarage more that 70%. Most people feel their vote matters this way, which is important.


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> Oh, come on. That's only five weeks away.


touche:Finger



Dr Pepper said:


> On the plus side that free's up my diary for the 20th June when I was due to take my father for his bi-monthly hospital appointment. I might go to the pictures instead, anything good on?


The greatest weapon the tories have is disbelief. You don't believe they are selling our NHS off?


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> touche:Finger
> 
> The greatest weapon the tories have is disbelief. You don't believe they are selling our NHS off?
> 
> View attachment 309661


Adrian Lester, genuinely I'm a huge fan of his. He was particularly convincing in Hustle. Not sure what his qualifications on politics and the NHS are though.


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> In the '70s when I grew up it was unheard of to hear of an unemployed father.
> Come the '80s when Thatcher's policies destroyed traditional industries unemployment reached over 3million despite fiddling the figures so only those on Unemployment Benefit were included in the figures.


have you forgotten how bad the 70s was? How many strikes there were and Unions holding to ransom?
companies moved abroad to avoid all that , you can't blame that on Thatcher or Brexit for that matter .

These were the men in charge at the time.

Wilson Labour PM from 1964 to 70
Heath Conservative 1970 to 74
Wilson Labour 74 to 76
Callaghan Labour 1976 to 79

ETA on the estate where I lived , there were unemployed fathers , some couldn't hold down a job and some were in prison .


----------



## Dr Pepper

kimthecat said:


> have you forgotten how bad the 70s was? How many strikes there were and Unions holding to ransom?
> companies moved abroad to avoid all that , you can't blame that on Thatcher or Brexit for that matter .
> 
> These were the men in charge at the time.
> 
> Wilson Labour PM from 1964 to 70
> Heath Conservative 1970 to 74
> Wilson Labour 74 to 76
> Callaghan Labour 1976 to 79


Now now, don't let facts get in the way of a good argument.


----------



## kimthecat

@Dr Pepper 

That was a quick reply. I added an extra bit .


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Adrian Lester, genuinely I'm a huge fan of his. He was particularly convincing in Hustle.


I don't know him tbh, but you nicely evaded my question lol So. Do you believe the tories are selling off our NHS or not?


----------



## Dr Pepper

kimthecat said:


> @Dr Pepper
> 
> That was a quick reply. I added an extra bit .


I know, I'm stalking you 


noushka05 said:


> I don't know him tbh, but you nicely evaded my question lol So. Do you believe the tories are selling off our NHS or not?


I believe the NHS will be here in the form of "free at the point of treatment" (excluding dental) for many years to come be it "sold" off or not.


----------



## MollySmith

MrsZee said:


> I also believe that PR system is best, as you have listen to lots of different sides, and it certainly is most stable. Or have you hear dramatic stories of Swedish Finnish or Danish politics? We put up even with a populist party and nothing happened, (apart from they lost local elections, as they were so incompetent). The lowest voting % was just below 50,, the highest 90%, the avarage more that 70%. *Most people feel their vote matters this way, which is important.*


That's exactly it. We've had this conversation so often in GC threads as a group where we've maybe all wondered why on earth we vote and in my 'real life' I know friends who just turn off the news and don't engage at all with politics as they don't feel they matter. It's great to debate and to see and go on demonstration and see the sheer volume of people who turn out but life shouldn't be that way. Much much better to have politicians working for us as they should in a way that means they are voted in and have more accountability.


----------



## Goblin

kimthecat said:


> have you forgotten how bad the 70s was? How many strikes there were and Unions holding to ransom?
> companies moved abroad to avoid all that , you can't blame that on Thatcher or Brexit for that matter


Some unions are just as bad now as they were then, not looking after their members but their own leaders ego's. I don't support Labour. I do feel however that a government which can dictate policy affecting anyone without any limitations does nobody any good. Brexit is a smoke screen by May, it makes no difference to the negotiations. A GE result doesn't show support for Brexit.

This election comes back to a simple question.. who thinks May should be given a free hand to do whatever she wants without discussion? It's not a vote for a party at this GE, May will get in, the question is if your vote means she has to moderate her policies, she will be made to discuss them and convince others that they are a good idea. That's why, without a decent opposition people are looking at tactical voting. Not party, simply making sure May knows she can be held to account.


----------



## Zaros

MrsZee said:


> Isn´t that the question? We get the negative reports too, we always had, but then we also the good news and the results, and the balance was always positive. Also we understand what EU can and cannot decide or do, and *in Britain EU was used as a scapegoat for everything*.


In the corrupt world of politics you require a scapegoat, and anyone or anything will do just so long as you can deflect the blame of your failures on the unsuspecting convincingly.

Another thing you appear to have crucially forgotten or overlooked is the age old fact of life in Britain, the class system they fervently cling to. It used to be upper, middle and lower classes, but since the ever recurring cut backs there's just the haves and the have nots. 
The haves want more than they deserve and desire the have nots to have even less than they have for fear they won't get as much as their cold hearts crave.


----------



## Guest

MollySmith said:


> That's exactly it. We've had this conversation so often in GC threads as a group where we've maybe all wondered why on earth we vote and in my 'real life' I know friends who just turn off the news and don't engage at all with politics as they don't feel they matter. It's great to debate and to see and go on demonstration and see the sheer volume of people who turn out but life shouldn't be that way. Much much better to have politicians working for us as they should in a way that means they are voted in and have more accountability.


I totally agree. It is so odd to read about the "chaos" it would bring. I mean the most stable countries (Nordic) have a proportional election system, and there is nothing as boring as our politics really, but that is stability. It also works for both businesses and ordinary people. It brings out the best of each party. Boring politic rules!


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> I know, I'm stalking you
> 
> I believe the NHS will be here in the form of "free at the point of treatment" (excluding dental) for many years to come be it "sold" off or not.


Just to clarify - you don't believe we'll be left with a two tier system then? It will keep its core principles ?


----------



## MollySmith

kimthecat said:


> have you forgotten how bad the 70s was? How many strikes there were and Unions holding to ransom?
> companies moved abroad to avoid all that , you can't blame that on Thatcher or Brexit for that matter .
> 
> These were the men in charge at the time.
> 
> Wilson Labour PM from 1964 to 70
> Heath Conservative 1970 to 74
> Wilson Labour 74 to 76
> Callaghan Labour 1976 to 79
> 
> ETA on the estate where I lived , there were unemployed fathers , some couldn't hold down a job and some were in prison .


The 70s were not wonderful but there are some successes.

Heath won the 1970 election, and served his only term as Prime Minister during a time of strong industrial change and economic decline. He was elected on a manifesto to turn around the nation's fortunes and pursued a number of policies that would later become identified with 'Thatcherism'. Unemployment continued to rise which, combined with the strength of the trade unions, forced a famous U-turn on the government's economic policy. It was from this point that the trade unions sensed they could seize the initiative. Heath's attempts to weaken their power had failed, and when their pay demands were not met, they went out on strike. Particularly crippling were the miners' strikes of 1972 and 1974, the second of which led to the 3-day week, when electricity was limited to 3 consecutive days' use.

Wilson's government supported backbench MPs in liberalising laws on censorship, divorce, abortion, and homosexuality, and he abolished capital punishment. Crucial steps were taken towards stopping discrimination against women and ethnic minorities, and Wilson's government also created the Open University (yay - that's my uni!!) But he had to fundamentally reshape Britain's world role after inheriting an overstretched military and a £400 million balance of payments deficit, which caused successive sterling crises. He created the Department for Economic Affairs, which sought to implement an ambitious National Plan and was forced to devalue the pound in November 1967. Two months later, his government reluctantly announced Britain's gradual withdrawal from the strategically important East of Suez. Despite his initial hesitation, Wilson recognised the value of membership of the European Economic Community (EEC), but his 1967 application was unsuccessful.

Then came Sunny Jim. By 1976, inflation had hit almost 17% with 1.5 million (or around 5% of workers) unemployed. Callaghan's controversial decision to ask the International Monetary Fund for an emergency loan in 1976 created significant tensions within the Cabinet. His successful leadership during the Cabinet's careful consideration of this decision has earned him wide praise among later observers. Despite this success, further attempts by the government to reduce inflation through wage restrictions for public sector workers caused a wave of strikes across the winter of 1978 to 1979, which has become known as the 'Winter of Discontent'. Having been severely undermined by these events, a motion of 'no confidence' against the Callaghan government was called by opposition MPs in Parliament in March 1979. This motion was passed by 311 votes against the 310 MPs that opposed it.

I'm the one who posted here about Thatcher's greed. I think it went from the sublime to the madness. All Governments have contributed their own terrible crimes that have lead to where we are not. Not one party is excusable.


----------



## havoc

My biggest fear is that a Tory landslide this time leads to a kneejerk reaction in the opposite direction next time. Living standards are about to take a hit, things are about to get worse for a while and whilst there is still the opportunity to blame the EU for it all that excuse is going to disappear eventually. I've had enough of extremes and I'm worried by the number of xenophobic extremists we seem to have in this country. Who's next on the list to blame once we've rid our wonderful island of scrounging foreigners?


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> But take into account working tax credit and child tax credit on top of your wage. So if your on a minimum wage job at thirty five hours a week, after tax you'll take home approx £12,500 plus child tax credit of £5,560 (presuming two kids) plus the working tax credit of £800 and you have a take home pay £18,860. More than sufficient to live on.


What level of rent and childcare per month are _you _calculating on? My niece starts school soon, and it would have been cheaper for her mum to have not worked rather than pay for childcare and work, and she's on more than minimum wage


----------



## Guest

havoc said:


> My biggest fear is that a Tory landslide this time leads to a kneejerk reaction in the opposite direction next time. Living standards are about to take a hit, things are about to get worse for a while and whilst there is still the opportunity to blame the EU for it all that excuse is going to disappear eventually. I've had enough of extremes and I'm worried by the number of xenophobic extremists we seem to have in this country. Who's next on the list to blame once we've rid our wonderful island of scrounging foreigners?


There is time to change that. Young people don´t read papers, but they are all online. Join in, as this time it really matters. Times will be harder, that is a fact, but the question is how badly the ordinary people will suffer and is their still hope for the young generation? With May you will go back to 50´s, but with Labour & co parties Brexit hits you less and you can still have a future.


----------



## MollySmith

havoc said:


> My biggest fear is that a Tory landslide this time leads to a kneejerk reaction in the opposite direction next time. Living standards are about to take a hit, things are about to get worse for a while and whilst there is still the opportunity to blame the EU for it all that excuse is going to disappear eventually. I've had enough of extremes and I'm worried by the number of xenophobic extremists we seem to have in this country. Who's next on the list to blame once we've rid our wonderful island of scrounging foreigners?


Yes me too - but historically that's all we've done as a population. The Torys, just as Labour did in the 70's and as they did themselves under Thatcher, will take us to near rebellion and the public will vote the opposite way when they realise what they've unleashed. We pay such scant regard history yet it's there to remind us always.

It is very worrying, I've been anxious since last June. Seriously!


----------



## havoc

MrsZee said:


> With May you will go back to 50´s, but with Labour & co parties Brexit hits you less and you can still have a future.


Unfortunately Corbyn and his Trotskyite supporters have made that unlikely. Their success within their party has opened the door to a dark right wing world.


----------



## Guest

havoc said:


> Unfortunately Corbyn and his Trotskyite supporters have made that unlikely. Their success within their party has opened the door to a dark right wing world.


Don´t give up hope, party leaders are easy to change, whereas you are stuck with the deals you make for years. Have courage and change the current situation, which you know will end up in a disaster.


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> have you forgotten how bad the 70s was? How many strikes there were and Unions holding to ransom?
> companies moved abroad to avoid all that , you can't blame that on Thatcher or Brexit for that matter .
> 
> These were the men in charge at the time.
> 
> Wilson Labour PM from 1964 to 70
> Heath Conservative 1970 to 74
> Wilson Labour 74 to 76
> Callaghan Labour 1976 to 79
> 
> ETA on the estate where I lived , there were unemployed fathers , some couldn't hold down a job and some were in prison .


Funny to hear that. Some who voted for Brexit appear to blame the EU for the loss of traditional industries and believe all will return post Brexit.

Certainly, Thatcher never blamed the EEC at the time.


----------



## noushka05

havoc said:


> Unfortunately Corbyn and his Trotskyite supporters have made that unlikely. Their success within their party has opened the door to a dark right wing world.


I don't think Corbyn can be blamed for the tories lurch to the right. The rise of UKIP shifted the Overton window further to the right, in the same way that the Tea Party shifted the Republicans.

And Corbyn really isn't a Trotskyite. Hes just a regular social democrat like Bernie Sanders over in the USA is. The reason he seems so extreme over here is because new labour adopted Thatchers neoliberalism which shifted them to the right of the spectrum too.

In Norway Corbyn is just a mainstream socialist Havoc


----------



## KittenKong

Surprised to learn Labour have retained their Mayor in North Tyneside as that's gone to the Tories in the past. Tynemouth itself is a vulnerable constituency being solid blue Tory until 1992. Labour have won every time since then.

Bit surprised the Tories won Tees Valley though, yet it was reported the turnout was only 21%!


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> Funny to hear that. Some who voted for Brexit appear to blame the EU for the loss of traditional industries and believe all will return post Brexit.
> 
> Certainly, Thatcher never blamed the EEC at the time.


I said you cant blame Brexit for companies moving abroad. Brexit didnt exist then, i.e companies then didn't leave this country because we said we were leaving the EEC . While labour unionists did damage the industry so did the Common market too , e.g fishing . this has already been discussed.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> yet it was reported the turnout was only 21%!


About average for council elections then


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> eh ? I said you cant blame BREXIT for companies moving abroad. Brexit didnt exist then, i.e companies then didn't leave this country because we said we were leaving the EEC . While labour unionists did damage the industry so did the Common market too , e.g fishing . this has already been discussed.


Certainly didn't suggest you did but I've heard this from some people when interviewed on TV and to my face.

As if by magic the NCB, shipyards and steelworks closed under Thatcher will re-appear apparently!


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said: ↑
yet it was reported the turnout was only 21%!

Rona said About average for council elections then

That's shockingly low !


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> Certainly didn't suggest you did but I've heard this from some people when interviewed on TV and to my face.


oh I see , I misunderstood what you meant . 

Well coal mining certainly won't make a come back , that's for sure !


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Just to clarify - you don't believe we'll be left with a two tier system then? It will keep its core principles ?
> 
> View attachment 309664


No I don't believe that we'll be left with a two tier system, and yes it'll keep it's core principles. No FACTS to prove otherwise.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> That assumes they have enough money for the gas and/or electricity key/card meters in order to cook a meal or course.
> 
> Homes have to be heated too. Not everyone can afford to do both....


OK so on the occasions when you can't afford to do both go for a cold meal -

I'll go for a non vegan one this time in case I get accused of something

half a tin of tuna 50p, 1 bread roll 9p, 50g of sweetcorn 6p, serving of salad cream 6p, apple 32p, orange 30p - Total £1.32, no cooking, no electric or gas required, no saucepans and still cheaper and far more filling/nutritious than a bag of chips.



KittenKong said:


> No one can deny the above, we hear such stories in the press daily. Interesting they're 99% "British" so the excuse to target EU citizens is irrelevant.
> 
> In the '70s when I grew up it was unheard of to hear of an unemployed father. Come the '80s when Thatcher's policies destroyed traditional industries unemployment reached over 3million despite fiddling the figures so only those on Unemployment Benefit were included in the figures.
> 
> Families with no one at work suddenly became accepted as the norm during that time.
> 
> Of course those who lost their jobs were blamed for their predicament.
> Apart from being told by Tebbit to get on our bikes they introduced, "Employment Training" which entailed working full time for existing benefits plus £10 towards costs of travelling to "work".
> 
> Isn't Tory Britain wonderful?


I knew kids at school in the 70's with unemployed Dads and my own Dad lost his job mid 70's too, we had to move from one end of the country (far south east) to the south west as that was the only alternative job offered, uprooting two daughters from school and my Mum from all her family. Also remember the Winter of Discontent which was under a Labour government.


----------



## havoc

noushka05 said:


> And Corbyn really isn't a Trotskyite


I never said he was.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> OK so on the occasions when you can't afford to do both go for a cold meal -
> 
> I'll go for a non vegan one this time in case I get accused of something
> 
> half a tin of tuna 50p, 1 bread roll 9p, 50g of sweetcorn 6p, serving of salad cream 6p, apple 32p, orange 30p - Total £1.32, no cooking, no electric or gas required, no saucepans and still cheaper and far more filling/nutritious than a bag of chips.
> 
> I knew kids at school in the 70's with unemployed Dads and my own Dad lost his job mid 70's too, we had to move from one end of the country (far south east) to the south west as that was the only alternative job offered, uprooting two daughters from school and my Mum from all her family. Also remember the Winter of Discontent which was under a Labour government.


 That was the rise of the new towns, think that,s what they called them, places like corby


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> OK so on the occasions when you can't afford to do both go for a cold meal -
> 
> I'll go for a non vegan one this time in case I get accused of something
> 
> half a tin of tuna 50p, 1 bread roll 9p, 50g of sweetcorn 6p, serving of salad cream 6p, apple 32p, orange 30p - Total £1.32, no cooking, no electric or gas required, no saucepans and still cheaper and far more filling/nutritious than a bag of chips.
> 
> I knew kids at school in the 70's with unemployed Dads and my own Dad lost his job mid 70's too, we had to move from one end of the country (far south east) to the south west as that was the only alternative job offered, uprooting two daughters from school and my Mum from all her family. Also remember the Winter of Discontent which was under a Labour government.


One of my favourite lunches is mackeral in tomato sauce on toast, using wholemeal bread and topped with grated cheese no need to use fat but no good for vegetarians costs about the same as your tuna and its very filling. another favourite is corn chowder soup I can make a pan of that lasting Me 2 days for less than £1, I gave noushka the recipe and she loves it says suitable for vegetarian.


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> OK so on the occasions when you can't afford to do both go for a cold meal -
> 
> I'll go for a non vegan one this time in case I get accused of something


https://www.tesco.com/groceries/product/details/?id=292213929 40p
https://www.tesco.com/groceries/product/details/?id=258421636 50p
https://www.tesco.com/groceries/product/details/?id=257990562 75p
https://www.tesco.com/groceries/product/details/?id=282997799 69p
https://www.tesco.com/groceries/product/details/?id=262358089 40p
https://www.tesco.com/groceries/product/details/?id=258476148 1.00p
https://www.tesco.com/groceries/product/details/?id=250253536 1.00p

= £4.74 for 4 meals and a treat


----------



## rona

DT said:


> That was the rise of the new towns, think that,s what they called them, places like corby


Also Stevenage. My sister went there.


----------



## Honeys mum

DT said:


> One of my favourite lunches is mackeral in tomato sauce on toast, using wholemeal bread


I also have that sometimes for lunch, but use pilchards instead of mackeral, doesn't cost much at all.


----------



## Honeys mum

Did anyone watch Question Time last night, I found it very interesting.
For those who didn't, just spotted this.

Judging by last night's Question Time, it looks like the Tories will just lie to win the election [VIDEO] | The Canary


----------



## Colliebarmy

Well, thats the local elections over..

Conservatives even did well in Scotland, Sturgeon must be seething

Labour's next AGM will be held in the telephone box used last year by UKIP

The Greens party are sticking to cabbages and brussel sprouts

LibDems are happy...........but they always are



The Tories have complained about the amount of airtime Corbyn has been getting.............and demanded he gets a lot lot more


----------



## Zaros

Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o'clock at night, half an hour before I went to bed, drink a cup of sulphuric acid, work twenty-nine hours a day down mill, and pay mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad and our mother would kill us, and dance about on our graves singing 'Hallelujah.'


----------



## Lurcherlad

Zaros said:


> Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o'clock at night, half an hour before I went to bed, drink a cup of sulphuric acid, work twenty-nine hours a day down mill, and pay mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad and our mother would kill us, and dance about on our graves singing 'Hallelujah.'


And it never did us any harm!


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> No I don't believe that we'll be left with a two tier system, and yes it'll keep it's core principles. No FACTS to prove otherwise.


As I thought, you're in disbelief that the tories would possibly destroy our NHS leaving millions without health care. Even though there is a mountain range of evidence proving this is exactly what they are doing.

Even the Health Minister himself couldn't make in anymore clear for you.






Didn't you also defend Trump & believe he deserved a chance even though it was obvious to the critically minded he was going to be a disaster?

*Bernie Sanders*‏Verified [email protected]*SenSanders* May 4
If one person loses their insurance because of the Republican health care plan, that's too many.
But 24 million? That's an abomination.


----------



## noushka05

Colliebarmy said:


> Well, thats the local elections over..
> 
> Conservatives even did well in Scotland, Sturgeon must be seething
> 
> Labour's next AGM will be held in the telephone box used last year by UKIP
> 
> The Greens party are sticking to cabbages and brussel sprouts
> 
> LibDems are happy...........but they always are
> 
> The Tories have complained about the amount of airtime Corbyn has been getting.............and demanded he gets a lot lot more


Bet you can't wait till we're a one party state. Even though you & your loved ones depend on our NHS for health care?


----------



## noushka05

*The Labour Party*‏Verified [email protected]*UKLabour* Apr 27

Our commitment to NHS staff ↓







Scrap the unfair pay cap







Put safe staffing levels into law








Bring back bursaries & fully fund education


----------



## noushka05

There is no extra money to fund properly the NHS but plenty of it to bomb Syria.
#*VoteNHS*

#*GE2017*

Register to vote: https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote…


----------



## noushka05

Americans will scribbling us off this list soon.


----------



## noushka05

Cancer specialist Clive Peedell >>

_"Our parents and grandparents built the NHS and a welfare safety net for all of us,
but our selfish generation is destroying that net"

._


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> As I thought, you're in disbelief that the tories would possibly destroy our NHS leaving millions without health care. Even though there is a mountain range of evidence proving this is exactly what they are doing.
> 
> Even the Health Minister himself couldn't make in anymore clear for you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Didn't you also defend Trump & believe he deserved a chance even though it was obvious to the critically minded he was going to be a disaster?
> 
> *Bernie Sanders*‏Verified [email protected]*SenSanders* May 4
> If one person loses their insurance because of the Republican health care plan, that's too many.
> But 24 million? That's an abomination.


Interestingly you say "_*possibly *_destroy the NHS" so I'm happy they possibly won't. Sounds like your beginning to doubt your own propaganda.

Yes I did say Mr Trump should be given a chance. I still say give him a chance it's only been one hundred odd days he's been president. He might turn out to be a bigger disaster than his initial days suggest, but he does seem to be reigning it in a bit and becoming a bit more presidential like. Let's see what happens in the next couple of years before casting final judgement.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Interestingly you say "_*possibly *_destroy the NHS" so I'm happy they possibly won't. Sounds like your beginning to doubt your own propaganda.
> 
> Yes I did say Mr Trump should be given a chance. I still say give him a chance it's only been one hundred odd days he's been president. He might turn out to be a bigger disaster than his initial days suggest, but he does seem to be reigning it in a bit and becoming a bit more presidential like. Let's see what happens in the next couple of years before casting final judgement.


Wow talk about putting your own spin on what I actually meant. You could give May & Trump a run for their money If you are incapable of evaluating all the evidence then there's no hope, your mind is closed shut. Even the tories are spelling it out loud & clear what they're doing to our NHS . Jeremy Hunt co-wrote a book about replacing our NHS with an insurance based system. But lets not face facts, hey.










This happened the other day. He ran away from a VERY savvy member of the public. Wonder why?


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> OK so on the occasions when you can't afford to do both go for a cold meal -
> 
> I'll go for a non vegan one this time in case I get accused of something
> 
> half a tin of tuna 50p, 1 bread roll 9p, 50g of sweetcorn 6p, serving of salad cream 6p, apple 32p, orange 30p - Total £1.32, no cooking, no electric or gas required, no saucepans and still cheaper and far more filling/nutritious than a bag of chips.
> 
> I knew kids at school in the 70's with unemployed Dads and my own Dad lost his job mid 70's too, we had to move from one end of the country (far south east) to the south west as that was the only alternative job offered, uprooting two daughters from school and my Mum from all her family. Also remember the Winter of Discontent which was under a Labour government.


Lack of social housing, changes to benefits means thousands of people are struggling to pay rip off rents, they are forced to use food banks to get by.

400k children don't even have a bed of their own. Our society is in a mess.

Exclusive: *Four hundred thousand UK children without a bed, charity warns *https://www.tes.com/news/school-new...ed-thousand-uk-children-without-a-bed-charity


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> As I thought, you're in disbelief


I think it's called denial Noush'

But, often as not, we all learn when it's a little too late. When it's gone it's gone and I know not of one thief who has returned property taken from another.￼￼


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> Wow talk about putting your own spin on what I actually meant. You could give May & Trump a run for their money If you are incapable of evaluating all the evidence then there's no hope, your mind is closed shut. Even the tories are spelling it out loud & clear what they're doing to our NHS . Jeremy Hunt co-wrote a book about replacing our NHS with an insurance based system. But lets not face facts, hey.
> 
> View attachment 309745
> 
> 
> This happened the other day. He ran away from a VERY savvy member of the public. Wonder why?


Really? All I saw was someone, quite understandably, getting out of the way of a rude, ranting, ignorant savage. He had the commendable good grace not to retaliate to the slime-ball. If I had been in his position it wouldn't have gone down without the incident escalating.


----------



## rona

Colliebarmy said:


> The Tories have complained about the amount of airtime Corbyn has been getting.............and demanded he gets a lot lot more


Tories don't have to do anything, the others are doing it for them aren't they 

Such good examples of that on here 

PS. As a child we had 9 people in a 3 bed house, we used to top and tail until we managed to get hold of some bunk beds. I had an idyllic childhood


----------



## rona

Honeys mum said:


> Did anyone watch Question Time last night, I found it very interesting.
> For those who didn't, just spotted this.
> 
> Judging by last night's Question Time, it looks like the Tories will just lie to win the election [VIDEO] | The Canary


I know people who would be entitled to use food banks, they are disabled relatives, one is young and doesn't work, another has a partner that works and one is newly retired, they all offer us money when they think we are struggling but could still get free food. We've worked all our lives and are poor in comparison but have no access to food banks.
If you are the type to *expect* handouts then you are the type to use foodbanks even if you really have no need. There are just so many people now who expect


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> KittenKong said: ↑
> yet it was reported the turnout was only 21%!
> 
> Rona said About average for council elections then
> 
> That's shockingly low !


Perhaps it might be an idea to invalidate election results with such low turn outs as they've done with Union strike ballots?

Say 50+% with more effort in getting people to vote? Or in this instance scrap the post of Mayor in the area as people are clearly not interested.

I think that's the lowest turn out since the Police commissioners a few years back.


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> I think it's called denial Noush'
> 
> But, often as not, we all learn when it's a little too late. When it's gone it's gone and I know not of one thief who has returned property taken from another.￼￼


Yes, that's exactly what its called. And I put my money on it, when its gone, they'll find another scapegoat to blame. It wont be the tories fault or theirs for enabling them.



Satori said:


> Really? All I saw was someone, quite understandably, getting out of the way of a rude, ranting, ignorant savage. He had the commendable good grace not to retaliate to the slime-ball. If I had been in his position it wouldn't have gone down without the incident escalating.


People are terrified. Imagine having a seriously ill loved one knowing that man & his party are destroying the NHS they depend upon?.

Hes always running away. Because, like the rest of em, they don't think they should be held to account.

And it seems a fair few members on here don't think they should be either. No wonder the country is in the mess its in.


----------



## KittenKong

Colliebarmy said:


> Well, thats the local elections over..
> 
> Conservatives even did well in Scotland, Sturgeon must be seething


Hardly as the SNP are still by far the largest party, not the great Tory comeback they hoped for.

The Tories gained mainly at Labour's expense. Rumour has it they encouraged Scots to vote Tory tactically in some areas!

If this is true they deserved to lose there.


----------



## Honeys mum

rona said:


> If you are the type to *expect* handouts then you are the type to use foodbanks even if you really have no need. There are just so many people now who expect


Sorry rona, but i don't quite get what you are implying here. Ive never mentioned food banks, and we certainly don't have or expect hand outs. Don't want to appear rude, but maye it's me just being thick.?

I can see for myself this goverments track record over the past seven years, but i just find Question time a very intersting and informative rogramme.
Sorry for the rant.


----------



## rona

Honeys mum said:


> Sorry rona, but i don't quite get what you are implying here. Ive never mentioned food banks, and we certainly don't have or expect hand outs. Don't want to appear rude, but maye it's me just being thick.?
> 
> I can see for myself this goverments track record over the past seven years, but i just find Question time a very intersting and informative rogramme.
> Sorry for the rant.


Did you not read the article you linked too?

You didn't link to the programme just the propaganda about the programme


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> I think that's the lowest turn out since the Police commissioners a few years back.


But you are not comparing like with like, you are comparing an area with the country turnout which was somewhere near 30%.

What has turnout in that area been in the past?


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Wow talk about putting your own spin on what I actually meant. You could give May & Trump a run for their money If you are incapable of evaluating all the evidence then there's no hope, your mind is closed shut.


Are you being serious? What spin? You kept on and on asking the same question obviously hoping I'd say, well who knows. Just for you here's my thoughts on the NHS. Unlike you I've evaluated all sides of the debate and come to my conclusion with that information and my own personal experience. Unlike some who just read one sided drivel from a bunch of nobodies on social media and take it as gospel.

There is no two tier system in the NHS at point of treatment. If you turn up at A&E you'll be treated the same wether your a illegal immigrant who just arrived in the UK or Lord Bumble of Bumblerthope. If those that can afford private treatment pay for a quicker service then fair enough, those people also free up NHS beds and services for those that can't afford to go private. Win win.

IF certain parts of the NHS need to be privatised then so be it. Many parts of the NHS are already successfully run by private companies.

The NHS isn't about to collapse. Try looking at the positives and good within the NHS rather than actively seeking out the negatives.

Now I'm not saying it's all sunshine and puppies within the NHS. It certainly needs to change, restructure it's management and administration, and be more efficient. But I'll bet you £100 the NHS will still be here in 2022 whoever wins the election. I presume you'll take that wager as it's a easy and guaranteed £100, isn't it?

I hope that makes it clear on what my thoughts on the NHS are. It's not a debate I want to get into, particularly as it's being used for political gain at the moment. So I'm saying no more on the subject (probably ) but at least you can stop second guessing my reasoning


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> PS. As a child we had 9 people in a 3 bed house, we used to top and tail until we managed to get hold of some bunk beds.


But do you want to go back to that rona? Do you think that's what we should be striving for? There are reasons we think we had idyllic childhoods, mainly because we never knew we were poor. What we didn't have wasn't being thrust in our faces all the time so we were content. As children we weren't fed a constant diet of TV ads telling us what we should want for Christmas. We are now, as we weren't then, a consumerist society. Our economy relies on people buying things they can't afford and it's shoved in the faces of all through the media. Furnish your home with oak furniture for £x per month. Drive away in your new car for £x per month. Go into Argos to buy something (anything) and they try to get you to take out a credit account. You can't blame those at the bottom of the pile for their perception that everyone else seems to have it all. They don't see that it's all just debt, nobody does because it isn't viewed as debt these days until and unless the debt can't be paid.


----------



## Zaros

rona said:


> ￼As a child we had 9 people in a 3 bed house


In these so called 'modern times' (after all it is 2017, not 1917) I think you might find they now refer to this unfortunate predicament as_ 'overcrowding'_. 
Now I know and understand it's not that easy to simply up sticks and move into an adequately sized or satisfactory property more appropriate for the family unit because of the extortionately high rents private landlords impose, extremely long council waiting lists and the seemingly inescapable housing shortages.
This mentions nothing of the deplorable conditions some of these private landlords allow their properties to fall into and yet still rent them out to folks they know are desperate for a roof over their heads.
Exploitation at its finest and they're getting away with it because the Govt look the other way.

Decent, affordable and permanent housing. Is it really that much to ask in the 21st century?


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> But you are not comparing like with like, you are comparing an area with the country turnout which was somewhere near 30%.
> 
> What has turnout in that area been in the past?


I don't know what the usual turn out is. Most of the areas within the Tees Valley were Labour strongholds so it would seem Tory voters came out while Labour ones didn't bother.

In this instance I can understand the lack of interest in having an elected Mayor in this area, more bureaucracy like the Police commissioners are.

Appears to be an off shoot of the attempt to establish a regional base for the NE of England which went to a referendum with an unanimous No vote to the idea.

The situation in the Tees Valley area is a little puzzling. In 1974 the county of Cleveland was established yet Darlington remained in County Durham.

When Cleveland County was abolished, at the same time as Humberside and Avon, the districts remained. This was also the case when the GLC and the six Metropolitan County Councils were abolished in 1986. Counties like West Midlands and Tyne and Wear weren't abolished however, just the County Councils....

Yet with former Cleveland areas north of the River Tees like Stockton should revert back to County Durham with the South of the Tees like Middlesbrough reverting back to the North Riding of Yorkshire.

.....Then Darlington becomes a unitary authority outside County Durham!


----------



## KittenKong

havoc said:


> But do you want to go back to that rona? Do you think that's what we should be striving for? There are reasons we think we had idyllic childhoods, mainly because we never knew we were poor. What we didn't have wasn't being thrust in our faces all the time so we were content. As children we weren't fed a constant diet of TV ads telling us what we should want for Christmas. We are now, as we weren't then, a consumerist society. Our economy relies on people buying things they can't afford and it's shoved in the faces of all through the media. Furnish your home with oak furniture for £x per month. Drive away in your new car for £x per month. Go into Argos to buy something (anything) and they try to get you to take out a credit account. You can't blame those at the bottom of the pile for their perception that everyone else seems to have it all. They don't see that it's all just debt, nobody does because it isn't viewed as debt these days until and unless the debt can't be paid.


.....and of course those dreadful advertisement encouraging people to take out loans with APRs over 1,200%!!!


----------



## Dr Pepper

Satori said:


> Really? All I saw was someone, quite understandably, getting out of the way of a rude, ranting, ignorant savage. He had the commendable good grace not to retaliate to the slime-ball. If I had been in his position it wouldn't have gone down without the incident escalating.


Don't these people realise they lose whatever credibility they might have had when they resort to name calling. I'm all for free speech but do it with dignity.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## stockwellcat.

This is why Labour should not get in at this GE and why people voted the way they did yesterday in the Local Elections:





http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presente...abbotts-agonising-interview-over-policy-cost/


----------



## KittenKong

cheekyscrip said:


> But if their government bully us with support of EU, then we expect our people to side with us? Or you want us to surrender a, abandon our homes and go homeless to be burden for UK taxpayers?
> 
> We expect support from British public not just Spanish left.
> 
> If Spanish corrupt government gets it they will ruin it. Even Spanish say so, who live around. That will ruin Campo de Gibraltar...
> About 100 k in surrounding towns will be affected...Ordinary people.


If people showed their support for Gibraltar they wouldn't have voted for Brexit. I certainly didn't vote for Brexit so why should I turn against the EU for being on the side of Spain who are after all members of the EU?

If Gibraltar prefers to remain British they must be prepared to face the consequences of a hard Brexit with no deal which now looks like the likely outcome.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 309750


Well the EU aren't helping themselves they are coming across as bullys. One day they say the divorce bill is £84 billion and the next £92 billion and now they reckon over £100 billion. The irony of it all is this the UK does not have to pay a penny. Where in the article 50 treaty does it say there will be financial cost for leaving the EU? Theresa May is right to stand up to them and stand her ground on behalf of the UK (The country you live in btw).


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> This is why Labour should not get in at this GE and why people voted the way they did yesterday in the Local Elections:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presente...abbotts-agonising-interview-over-policy-cost/


I'm the first to agree Abbott is a liability and would likely to join the list of useless HS along with Jacqui Smith and Theresa May.

Abbott is not standing as a potential PM however, May and Corbyn are.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> I'm the first to agree Abbott is a liability and would likely to join the list of useless HS along with Jacqui Smith and Theresa May.
> 
> Abbott is not standing as a potential PM however, May and Corbyn are.


You are right she isn't standing as potential PM but she is on the front bench and represents the Labour party and should be thoroughly ashamed of herself embarrassing the Labour Party like this, but it proves that the Labour party is in chaos.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Well the EU aren't helping themselves they are coming across as bullys. One day they say the divorce bill is £84 billion and the next £92 billion and now they reckon over £100 billion. The irony of it all is this the UK does not have to pay a penny. Where in the article 50 treaty does it say there will be financial cost for leaving the EU? Theresa May is right to stand up to them and stand her ground.


Brexit is going to cost. Everyone knew that with their subsidies for farming etc. etc. To say the UK owe nothing is rubbish. That idea came from papers like the Mail and Express.

Still, if it's true it cost the UK £350m a week to be in the EU they'll retrieve the 1bn€ cost in no time!

It'll be a small price to pay for getting out of the EU surely as Britain can be British again with absolutely no connection with the rest of the hated Europe?

The problem with May and people like her is they believe they're so bloody superior to everyone else and expected the EU to grovel to their demands with all attempts at compromise refused.

Sorry like, May getting everything her own way isn't going to happen.

This spoof article seems so true:


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> You are right she isn't standing as potential PM but she is on the front bench and represents the Labour party and should be thoroughly ashamed of herself embarrassing the Labour Party like this, but it proves that the Labour party is in chaos.


I agree wholeheartedly but what makes you think Theresa May will be any more competent? She's shown the exact opposite to these eyes.

Abbott can be replaced far easier than May can....


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Brexit is going to cost and if the UK. What about the subsidies for farming etc. etc. To say the UK owe nothing is rubbish.
> 
> Still, if it's true it cost the UK £350m a week to be in the EU they'll repay the 1bn€ in no time!
> 
> It'll be a small price to pay for getting out of the EU surely as Britain can be British again with absolutely no connection with the rest of the hated Europe?
> 
> The problem with May and people like her is they believe they're so bloody superior to everyone else and expected the EU to grovel to their demands.
> 
> Sorry like, it isn't going to happen.
> This spoof article seems so true:
> View attachment 309753
> View attachment 309754
> View attachment 309755


Leaving the EU could cost this amount though, £0 zero. If the EU insists on being like bullies over this the UK can walk away with no deal. Not good option but what if there is no other choice? Poland are siding with Germany and France and insisting that the bill rises considerably (We haven't even entered into the negotiations yet and they insist on using bully tactics).

The EU forget France maybe ruled by Marine Le Pen tomorrow in which case France will get a Referendum to leave the EU as well. Who knows though what the election results will be in France tomorrow.

Back to your question. Yes I do think May has the right attitude for these crucial negotiations with the EU. Regarding the rest of the issues in the UK, I am unsure to be honest. Corbyn on the other hand I doubt very much he would handle the EU negotiations very well, and I worry about his predicted spending strategy so far, he has used corporation tax to pay for more Police, NHS, Schools and others things so has spent this money three times over if not more. I will read there manifesto as well as the Conservatives manifesto.


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> But do you want to go back to that rona? Do you think that's what we should be striving for? There are reasons we think we had idyllic childhoods, mainly because we never knew we were poor. What we didn't have wasn't being thrust in our faces all the time so we were content. As children we weren't fed a constant diet of TV ads telling us what we should want for Christmas. We are now, as we weren't then, a consumerist society. Our economy relies on people buying things they can't afford and it's shoved in the faces of all through the media. Furnish your home with oak furniture for £x per month. Drive away in your new car for £x per month. Go into Argos to buy something (anything) and they try to get you to take out a credit account. You can't blame those at the bottom of the pile for their perception that everyone else seems to have it all. They don't see that it's all just debt, nobody does because it isn't viewed as debt these days until and unless the debt can't be paid.


No we shouldn't go back to that, but as you say it's an illusion this society where everyone is getting on better and the haves have it probably because they are working 70 hours a week, never seeing their kids and having no time to actually enjoy the illusion of wealth. Many will fall flat on their faces because they want too much and then who is it that picks up the tab? Those poor that have acted frugally, not amassed debt and have manged to put aside a little savings, that's who......................

Want want wants and surface people are becoming the norm and it's so sad because they aren't happy

I'm actually stunned by the amount of people on here that believe that others shouldn't take responsibility for themselves. Surely in a free society they should be able to evaluate if they should buy that new something or not? It's not for all of us to pick up the pieces of greed and pride.

I'm all for helping the helpless but not the selfish


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Leaving the EU could cost this amount though, £0 zero. If the EU insists on being like bullies over this the UK can walk away with no deal. Not good option but what if there is no other choice? Poland are siding with Germany and France and insisting that the bill rises considerably (We haven't even entered into the negotiations yet and they insist on using bully tactics).
> 
> The EU forget France maybe ruled by Marine Le Pen tomorrow in which case France will get a Referendum to leave the EU as well. Who knows though what the election results will be in France tomorrow.
> 
> Back to your question. Yes I do think May has the right attitude for these crucial negotiations with the EU. Regarding the rest of the issues in the UK, I am unsure to be honest. Corbyn on the other hand I doubt very much he would handle the EU negotiations very well, and I worry about his predicted spending strategy so far, he has used corporation tax to pay for more Police, NHS, Schools and others things so has spent this money three times over if not more. I will read there manifesto as well as the Conservatives manifesto.


Do you think the EU are going to succumb to the demands of a delusional UK leader who's given notice to quit anyway? If she wasn't so hell bent in reducing immigration she failed to achieve as Home Secretary for six years and showed commitment for a Swiss/Norway like deal, (not asked on the referendum paper of course, then neither was complete isolation from the rest of Europe), that would have been a good start.

Thatcher was reported to be strong when dealing with the EEC. As a fully paid up and committed member others listened to her.

You believe the EU are bullies. I disagree. The remaining 27 states have to put themselves first so why should they succumb to the demands of a country that's leaving anyway?


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Do you think the EU are going to succumb to the demands of a delusional UK leader who's given notice to quit anyway? If she wasn't so hell bent in reducing immigration she failed to achieve as Home Secretary for six years and showed commitment for a Swiss/Norway compromise (not asked on the referendum paper of course, then neither was complete isolation from the rest of Europe), that would have been a good start.
> 
> Thatcher was reported to be strong when dealing with the EEC. As a fully paid up and committed member others listened to her.
> 
> You believe the EU are bullies. I disagree. The remaining 27 states have to put themselves first so why should they succumb to the demands of a country that's leaving anyway?


But the UK is a fully paid member now and has been since it joined the EU and will be until the day the UK leaves which ever way that maybe.

Regarding immigration a survey was done and European citizens aren't happy with the open borders and levels of immigration and the EU leaders acknowledged this yesterday. It isn't just the UK complaining about this.

Has the UK made any demands yet? All the UK has done is asked to leave and control immigration from the EU, I don't think that is unreasonable. Is there a list of official demands (not what the press have speculated on) been made from the UK Government to the EU outside of the negotiations which haven't even begun yet?


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> Do you think the EU are going to succumb to the demands of a delusional UK leader who's given notice to quit anyway?


I've not seen or heard anything that would indicate that she's delusional apart from in the press.

I've also not seen or heard anything detrimental coming from the EU either .................

In total opposite to the press, all I've heard are concerns, corrections (to press statements) and consolatory tones. The odd warning that it'll not be easy but I didn't take that as threatening


----------



## Happy Paws2

rona said:


> I've not seen or heard anything that would indicate that she's delusional apart from in the press.


She is delusional, she thinks she is going to get everything she demands from them when we leave.


----------



## KittenKong

Funny though isn't it. Those supporting a hard Brexit with May walking away from negotiations with no deal should surely rejoice at no longer having anything to do with their hated Europe. 

Their glorious nation will really be going it alone. Isn't that what they want?

Then, if it goes so horribly wrong they'll blame the EU for their predicament. Funny that seeing they'll no longer have anything to do with them!


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> I've not seen or heard anything that would indicate that she's delusional apart from in the press.
> 
> I've also not seen or heard anything detrimental coming from the EU either .................
> 
> In total opposite to the press, all I've heard are concerns, corrections (to press statements) and consolatory tones. The odd warning that it'll not be easy but I didn't take that as threatening


TM seems to believe everyone in the UK has united behind her. She probably thinks she's also assumed my support!

If that's not delusional......


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Sorry like, May getting everything her own way isn't going to happen.


What makes you think the EU will get there own way? Let's remember if they play the hard and tough card with the UK this will reflect on any country wishing to join the EU and any potential future trade deal.


----------



## Happy Paws2

KittenKong said:


> TM seems to believe everyone in the UK has united behind her. She probably thinks she's also assumed my support!
> 
> If that's not delusional......


She hasn't and never will get my support.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> What makes you think the EU will get there own way? Let's remember if they play the hard and tough card with the UK this will reflect on any country wishing to join the EU and any potential future trade deal.


It shouldn't be the case of who actually gets their own way. To negotiate means listening to others and willing to compromise where needed, not run away playing the victim by going on national television claiming they're influencing her election campaign!

It's absolutely pathetic.

Norway, Switzerland and Iceland are examples of none EU members who have a successful relationship with the EU. If they can do it why not the UK?

Labour promising unilateral guarantees for existing citizens the right to remain in the UK is an excellent start. I'm sure the other EU member states would be more likely to negotiate but nothing is guaranteed of course.



Happy Paws said:


> She hasn't and never will get my support.


Never in a million years with me either under any circumstances.


----------



## rona

Happy Paws said:


> She is delusional, she thinks she is going to get everything she demands from them when we leave.


What makes you think that?



KittenKong said:


> TM seems to believe everyone in the UK has united behind her.


Now now, she never actually said that did she, it's just the slant the press put on it


----------



## Lurcherlad

rona said:


> No we shouldn't go back to that, but as you say it's an illusion this society where everyone is getting on better and the haves have it probably because they are working 70 hours a week, never seeing their kids and having no time to actually enjoy the illusion of wealth. Many will fall flat on their faces because they want too much and then who is it that picks up the tab? Those poor that have acted frugally, not amassed debt and have manged to put aside a little savings, that's who......................
> 
> Want want wants and surface people are becoming the norm and it's so sad because they aren't happy
> 
> I'm actually stunned by the amount of people on here that believe that others shouldn't take responsibility for themselves. Surely in a free society they should be able to evaluate if they should buy that new something or not? It's not for all of us to pick up the pieces of greed and pride.
> 
> I'm all for helping the helpless but not the selfish


Just caught a little of a programme with a woman who has been on benefits for years said she didn't think anyone would employ her at her age (60 I think). She thought they might give her a job cleaning toilets, but she wasn't *prepared *to do that 

She was far fitter and more able to work than a few members on here who struggle to get the help they truly deserve, yet she seemed to manage to get what she "needed".

I did domestic cleaning when I needed to earn some money but fit a job round my son - I wasn't too proud (or lazy) 

She's pleading poverty yet saves £25 a week out of her benefits to spend at the boot sale every week as a treat 

No wonder so many people lose sympathy for some of those living off *their *hard earned taxes.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> Norway, Switzerland and Iceland are examples of none EU members who have a successful relationship with the EU.


Iceland decided they didn't want to join though didn't they? Decide that EU was too dictatorial

If we followed the Norway/Switzerland way we still be tied to the EU rules and be dictated to by them, which is what most of us that voted out want to avoid.

Those countries aren't doing what I would call free trade


----------



## KittenKong

Opinion from the Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/05/theresa-may-brexit-britain-uk-europe-liberal


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> Funny though isn't it. Those supporting a hard Brexit with May walking away from negotiations with no deal should surely rejoice at no longer having anything to do with their hated Europe.
> 
> Their glorious nation will really be going it alone. Isn't that what they want?
> 
> Then, if it goes so horribly wrong they'll blame the EU for their predicament. Funny that seeing they'll no longer have anything to do with them!


You surely can tell imaginative story


----------



## suewhite

Lurcherlad said:


> Just caught a little of a programme with a woman who has been on benefits for years said she didn't think anyone would employ her at her age (60 I think). She thought they might give her a job cleaning toilets, but she wasn't *prepared *to do that
> 
> She was far fitter and more able to work than a few members on here who struggle to get the help they truly deserve, yet she seemed to manage to get what she "needed".
> 
> I did domestic cleaning when I needed to earn some money but fit a job round my son - I wasn't too proud (or lazy)
> 
> She's pleading poverty yet saves £25 a week out of her benefits to spend at the boot sale every week as a treat
> 
> No wonder so many people lose sympathy for some of those living off *their *hard earned taxes.


Well she wasn't 60 when she first went on benefit, I have done my share of bog cleaning in the past to make ends meet, people like her make me so cross when people that need help don't get it.x


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Are you being serious? What spin? You kept on and on asking the same question obviously hoping I'd say, well who knows. Just for you here's my thoughts on the NHS. Unlike you I've evaluated all sides of the debate and come to my conclusion with that information and my own personal experience. Unlike some who just read one sided drivel from a bunch of nobodies on social media and take it as gospel.
> 
> There is no two tier system in the NHS at point of treatment. If you turn up at A&E you'll be treated the same wether your a illegal immigrant who just arrived in the UK or Lord Bumble of Bumblerthope. If those that can afford private treatment pay for a quicker service then fair enough, those people also free up NHS beds and services for those that can't afford to go private. Win win.
> 
> IF certain parts of the NHS need to be privatised then so be it. Many parts of the NHS are already successfully run by private companies.
> 
> The NHS isn't about to collapse. Try looking at the positives and good within the NHS rather than actively seeking out the negatives.
> 
> Now I'm not saying it's all sunshine and puppies within the NHS. It certainly needs to change, restructure it's management and administration, and be more efficient. But I'll bet you £100 the NHS will still be here in 2022 whoever wins the election. I presume you'll take that wager as it's a easy and guaranteed £100, isn't it?
> 
> I hope that makes it clear on what my thoughts on the NHS are. It's not a debate I want to get into, particularly as it's being used for political gain at the moment. So I'm saying no more on the subject (probably ) but at least you can stop second guessing my reasoning


Before I shake on this bet, & I'm not interested in hearsay, could you show me the references that you evaluated that swayed you to come to the conclusion the NHS is safe in this governments hands so I can evaluate them for myself please?

Privatisation takes money out of the NHS & puts in private pockets. PFIs & now this massive increase in privatisation are having a negative impact on services so could you please explain why parts of the NHS may 'need' privatising when it costs us more & delivers less efficient care?

As I said before the tories _have_ 'restructured it'. In 2012. It cost us billions. Cameron admitted it was the worst mistake the tories had made - yet they are carrying on with their 'restructuring'. You think May is going to stop?


----------



## Calvine

Zaros said:


> Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o'clock at night, half an hour before I went to bed, drink a cup of sulphuric acid, work twenty-nine hours a day down mill, and pay mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad and our mother would kill us, and dance about on our graves singing 'Hallelujah.'


Tha forgot scrubbing t'floor wi' t'toothbrush, tha daft bugger.


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> Iceland decided they didn't want to join though didn't they? Decide that EU was too dictatorial
> 
> If we followed the Norway/Switzerland way we still be tied to the EU rules and be dictated to by them, which is what most of us that voted out want to avoid.
> 
> Those countries aren't doing what I would call free trade


But they're not in the EU. That's the whole point. Isn't that what the referendum paper asked? Remain a member or leave the EU?

If it's true what you're saying why is the UK bothering to negotiate with the EU in the first place?


----------



## rona

https://fullfact.org/europe/norway-switzerland-eu-laws/
Norway
"An independent study commissioned by the Norwegian Government in 2012 calculated that, in return for its access to the EU market, Norway has had to incorporate approximately three-quarters of all EU laws into its own domestic legislation".

Switzerland
But instead of laws constantly flowing into its legal system, it negotiates new treaties or amends old ones in return for access to the single market and other EU activities.

Some of the important treaties are linked, so that if Switzerland or the EU pulls out of one, the others also collapse.

This has been criticised by the EU as against the rules of the treaty dealing with free movement of people, and led to the suspension of talks over cooperation in research funding.

Don't think we want either of these


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> No we shouldn't go back to that, but as you say it's an illusion this society where everyone is getting on better and the haves have it probably because they are working 70 hours a week, never seeing their kids and having no time to actually enjoy the illusion of wealth. Many will fall flat on their faces because they want too much and then who is it that picks up the tab? Those poor that have acted frugally, not amassed debt and have manged to put aside a little savings, that's who......................
> 
> Want want wants and surface people are becoming the norm and it's so sad because they aren't happy
> 
> I'm actually stunned by the amount of people on here that believe that others shouldn't take responsibility for themselves. Surely in a free society they should be able to evaluate if they should buy that new something or not? It's not for all of us to pick up the pieces of greed and pride.
> 
> I'm all for helping the helpless but not the selfish


Exactly, I do believe in helping the helpless and will put my hand in my pocket for anyone genuinely in need, I support/donate to food banks/homeless charities/The Salvation Army and a couple of family members when they need expensive one off items but what I can't abide is people trying to politicise hardship as if it is all down to the government and nothing to do with the individual. Some families are in debt because of genuine problems that steamrollered out of control but many are in debt because they spend money they haven't got especially at Christmas when all common sense seems to go out the window and they have to spend the next year paying it off at exorbitant interest rates . I blame the Beckhams myself as it seems everyone seems to want to emulate their lifestyle. I hate jealousy/envy and we could all fall into that trap whether poor, middle income or high income, we all have to learn to live within our means and not get dragged into keeping up with the Jones's or the Beckhams. No one wants to see a return to Victorian values and poverty but it is ridiculous to suggest people are living in Victorian style slums with no welfare safety net and those who keep posting such claims are doing a great disservice to the people they claim to want to help.



KittenKong said:


> TM seems to believe everyone in the UK has united behind her. She probably thinks she's also assumed my support!
> 
> If that's not delusional......


Now that is delusional :Hilarious:Hilarious Please show me where TM has said she believes that everyone in the UK *is *behind her, calling for everyone to unite behind you in the Brexit negotiations is not the same thing as believing everyone already *is *behind you I very much doubt that even if she knew who you were she would be remotely phased by hearing you will never support her.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> But they're not in the EU. That's the whole point. Isn't that what the referendum paper asked? Remain a member or leave the EU?
> 
> If it's true what you're saying why is the UK bothering to negotiate with the EU in the first place?


Because we need to extricate ourselves


----------



## Dr Pepper

KittenKong said:


> Then, if it goes so horribly wrong they'll blame the EU for their predicament. Funny that seeing they'll no longer have anything to do with them!


Why would you think that? Have you heard/read or seen any Brexit supporter saying they'll blame the EU for anything once we leave? I haven't.


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> https://fullfact.org/europe/norway-switzerland-eu-laws/
> Norway
> "An independent study commissioned by the Norwegian Government in 2012 calculated that, in return for its access to the EU market, Norway has had to incorporate approximately three-quarters of all EU laws into its own domestic legislation".
> 
> Switzerland
> But instead of laws constantly flowing into its legal system, it negotiates new treaties or amends old ones in return for access to the single market and other EU activities.
> 
> Some of the important treaties are linked, so that if Switzerland or the EU pulls out of one, the others also collapse.
> 
> This has been criticised by the EU as against the rules of the treaty dealing with free movement of people, and led to the suspension of talks over cooperation in research funding.
> 
> Don't think we want either of these


Well it seems to work for these countries and proves you don't have to be in the EU to benefit from membership, nor do you have to display (horror!) EU flags or have the symbol on your car number plates.

How do you think the UK would flourish and benefit from being an island politically isolated from the rest of Europe? Is closer ties to the U.S. and other non EU countries independent?

Surely Britain will flourish without the assistance from anyone!


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> Well it seems to work for these countries and proves you don't have to be in the EU to benefit from membership, nor do you have to display (horror!) EU flags or have the symbol on your car number plates.
> 
> How do you think the UK would flourish and benefit from being an island politically isolated from the rest of Europe? Is closer ties to the U.S. and other non EU countries independent?
> 
> Surely Britain will flourish without the assistance from anyone!


You haven't read that link have you?


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Now that is delusional :Hilarious:Hilarious Please show me where TM has said she believes that everyone in the UK *is *behind her, calling for everyone to unite behind you in the Brexit negotiations is not the same thing as believing everyone already *is *behind you I very much doubt that even if she knew who you were she would be remotely phased by hearing you will never support her.


She said 65 million back brexit. A grotesque & utterly shameless lie. Trump & May are cut from the same cloth.


----------



## Guest

stockwellcat said:


> Well the EU aren't helping themselves they are coming across as bullys. One day they say the divorce bill is £84 billion and the next £92 billion and now they reckon over £100 billion. The irony of it all is this the UK does not have to pay a penny. Where in the article 50 treaty does it say there will be financial cost for leaving the EU? Theresa May is right to stand up to them and stand her ground on behalf of the UK (The country you live in btw).


The reason for this is the now EU included support for the agriculture into it. There is no way UK can leave without paying and get any deal. Maybe May &co forgot to mention that UK also receives a lot of financial support from EU... can happen in these days of fake news.

Check the amount nations pay for EU: https://www.europaportalen.se/2016/03/svenskarna-har-nast-hogsta-eu-avgiften
It´s in Swedish, but you can work out the nations (Tyskland= Germany)

All nations love money, so I wonder why e.g. Dutch still want to be part of EU, despite that they pay most per person? Or Finns (even we pay more per person that UK). Have you ever thought why? Simply, we still gain much more of being part of EU. E.g inner market is very beneficial and people appreciate free movement as well as the way EU has defended little people over multinational companies. It´s bit like democracy, it has lots of faults, makes mistakes, but is always better than any dictatorship.



KittenKong said:


> Do you think the EU are going to succumb to the demands of a delusional UK leader who's given notice to quit anyway? If she wasn't so hell bent in reducing immigration she failed to achieve as Home Secretary for six years and showed commitment for a Swiss/Norway like deal, (not asked on the referendum paper of course, then neither was complete isolation from the rest of Europe), that would have been a good start.
> You believe the EU are bullies. I disagree. The remaining 27 states have to put themselves first so why should they succumb to the demands of a country that's leaving anyway?


That is what we think, spot on. We like British people, but can´t understand your politicians for giving promises they know cannot be kept. There is no way UK will get the same deal they had before for doing business. Why should you? You left EU and the fact that you were lied to about EU is your problem, not ours. Also it doesn´t win UK any favours, when May keeps on saying empty slogans like "we are hard and will get what we want, EU is a bully, when EU simply says that UK cannot pick cherry and expect to keep the same benefits as when you were in EU". Maybe you should have been informed of those benefits before... but then you would have voted no most likely.



stockwellcat said:


> What makes you think the EU will get there own way? Let's remember if they play the hard and tough card with the UK this will reflect on any country wishing to join the EU and any potential future trade deal.


Why? Doesn´t it work the opposite way? And remember that it is May&the gang, who wants to have a hard Brexit, she is the one, who says "UK won´t pay anything, UK can do without EU, EU is a bully". It was also May, who wanted to keep all this secret, whereas EU said that negotiations will be public. Now I wonder which side has something to hide?


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> You haven't read that link have you?


Why aren't the non member EEA countries not having referendums to leave the bloc and completely go it alone?


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Why would you think that? Have you heard/read or seen any Brexit supporter saying they'll blame the EU for anything once we leave? I haven't.


Yep, It's all about how those nasty EU people are ganging up the british wanting to punish them for leaving...


----------



## Zaros

Calvine said:


> Tha forgot scrubbing t'floor wi' t'toothbrush, tha daft bugger.


Aye well lass. It's all me bleedin' toothbrush is good for these days. Been poor an all, me teef have long gone. What wasn't knocked out wiv me streetfighting antics, fell out cos of me bad diet and poor oral hygiene.
But I was happy back then, cos the tax man never got his grubby, thieving little hands on me ill gotten gains, so there was always that much more to spend on ****, booze, mushy peas and chips, and once every fortnight I would visit a desperate little old lady under the railway bridge for a little light executive relief.

It was the only way the poor old dear could keep her hands warm.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> The reason for this is the now EU included support for the agriculture into it. There is no way UK can leave without paying and get any deal. Maybe May &co forgot to mention that UK also receives a lot of financial support from EU... can happen in these days of fake news.


We receive NO financial support from the EU, none at all. As one of the few net contributing countries we provide financial support to the EU. That's why they want billions from us on leaving to ease their financial burden when we're gone.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Well the EU aren't helping themselves they are coming across as bullys.


No the media, run by foreigners say they are bullies. Details change as negotiations haven't really started and the sums are being looked at. It's called preparation. Tell me, if you rent an apartment and leave it, do you still pay the rent you agreed to?

The other classic thing about the bullying line.. EU has been consistent. Now when it becomes apparant they meant what they said it's the EU wanting to punish the UK, not the UK expectations were false as their politicians lied to them and continue to do so.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Yep, It's all about how those nasty EU people are ganging up the british wanting to punish them for leaving...


But we've not left yet, have we?


----------



## kimthecat

Happy Paws said:


> She is delusional, she thinks she is going to get everything she demands from them when we leave.


I doubt very much if she really thinks she will get every she asks for, its about negotiating , you never get what you ask for so you aim high and end up with more than you would if you set the bar low.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> No the media, run by foreigners say they are bullies. Details change as negotiations haven't really started and the sums are being looked at. It's called preparation. Tell me, if you rent an apartment and leave it, do you still pay the rent you agreed to?
> 
> The other classic thing about the bullying line.. EU has been consistent. Now when it becomes apparant they meant what they said it's the EU wanting to punish the UK, not the UK expectations were false as their politicians lied to them and continue to do so.


But you have to aim high before negotiations take place to get some kind of outcome. I have never known anyone to aim low before negotiations take place, have you?

Plus you never agree to pay a bill before you see a break down of charges do you? The EU are wanting the UK to agree to the divorce settlement before seeing the break down of charges, screw us over is what it's called.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> We receive NO financial support from the EU, none at all. As one of the few net contributing countries we provide financial support to the EU. That's why they want billions from us on leaving to ease their financial burden when we're gone.


The benefits of the EU in terms of economy are more than contributions to the EU. Do you think Nissan etc being offered access to the EU had anything to do with building factories in the UK for example. Same can be said of a lot of firms.

I know you don't like facts, they twist your reality
https://www.cebr.com/reports/how-the-uk-economys-key-sectors-link-to-the-eus-single-market/


----------



## KittenKong

MrsZee said:


> That is what we think, spot on. We like British people, but can´t understand your politicians for giving promises they know cannot be kept. There is no way UK will get the same deal they had before for doing business. Why should you? You left EU and the fact that you were lied to about EU is your problem, not ours. Also it doesn´t win UK any favours, when May keeps on saying empty slogans like "we are hard and will get what we want, EU is a bully, when EU simply says that UK cannot pick cherry and expect to keep the same benefits as when you were in EU". Maybe you should have been informed of those benefits before... but then you would have voted no most likely.
> 
> Why? Doesn´t it work the opposite way? And remember that it is May&the gang, who wants to have a hard Brexit, she is the one, who says "UK won´t pay anything, UK can do without EU, EU is a bully". It was also May, who wanted to keep all this secret, whereas EU said that negotiations will be public. Now I wonder which side has something to hide?


A most brilliant post. Spot on!


----------



## Arnie83

kimthecat said:


> I doubt very much if she really thinks she will get every she asks for, its about negotiating , you never get what you ask for so you aim high and end up with more than you would if you set the bar low.


What _*is*_ she going to ask for?


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> But you have to aim high before negotiations take to get some kind of outcome. I have never known anyone to aim low before negotiations take place, have you?
> 
> Plus you never agree to pay a bill before you see a break down of charges do you? The EU are wanting the UK to agree to the divorce settlement before seeing the break down of charges, screw us over is what it's called.


The belief the UK can leave without paying a penny is laughable.

If you changed Gas/Energy suppliers you'll be charged an exit fee in addition to outstanding money owed.

Same with leaving the EU. Simple as that.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> But you have to aim high before negotiations take to get some kind of outcome. I have never known anyone to aim low before negotiations take place, have you?


So did you see an itemised breakdown? Who says they are aiming low, before negotiations? They simply provided the UK with warning so they could, in theory, prepare a reasoned response. Amount can grow as the web of responsibilities of what we have committed to is investigated.



Arnie83 said:


> What _*is*_ she going to ask for?


She want all the benefits with none of the restrictions. That's what the white paper said.


----------



## kimthecat

Arnie83 said:


> What _*is*_ she going to ask for?


 I have no idea but if she wants a rabbit , she needs to keep asking for pony and then a dog . That worked with my mum . !


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> So did you see an itemised breakdown? Who says they are aiming low, before negotiations? They simply provided the UK with warning so they could, in theory, prepare a reasoned response. Amount can grow as the web of responsibilities of what we have committed to is investigated.


Doesn't mean that these added fees need to be paid. This is where negotiations kick in. The EU at this stage can want what they like, doesn't mean they will get it. TM by the way has been consistent as well, we are leaving the EU.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> The benefits of the EU in terms of economy are more than contributions to the EU. Do you think Nissan etc being offered access to the EU had anything to do with building factories in the UK for example. Same can be said of a lot of firms.
> 
> I know you don't like facts, they twist your reality
> https://www.cebr.com/reports/how-the-uk-economys-key-sectors-link-to-the-eus-single-market/


That seems to be all about the single market, nothing to do with financial support. We all know the benefits of it and it's on the table for negotiations. If no deal is done it'll no doubt be WTO tariffs for the UK and EU to trade, effects them as much as us.

Nissan probably isn't the best example you could give to support your case!


----------



## Arnie83

kimthecat said:


> I have no idea but if she wants a rabbit , she needs to keep asking for pony and then a dog . That worked with my mum . !


She's said we are leaving the single market, leaving the customs union, not allowing freedom of movement, and not being subject to ECJ rulings.

She then wants to trade with the single market on the same terms as now (except for the ECJ rulings which we don't have to follow; oh and we're not paying a fee for doing so any more [because we want to spend it on the NHS instead]), and she doesn't want any customs checks or delays or anything, even though we've left the customs union so we can negotiate our own trade deals.

And if we only get a 'bad deal' then we'll walk away with 'no deal'. Except that neither of those is defined, (which doesn't stop people like @Satori from repeating May's mantra 'no deal is better than a bad deal').

And people say that the EU are bullies?

To keep it on the election; she is talking in meaningless soundbites and inciting nationalistic fervour by accusing the big bad EU of trying to affect the election, and people are falling for it.

Tell me: if we walk away with "no deal", what happens to UK citizens living in the EU and vice versa? What happens to the Irish border? What happens to air traffic control? What happens to the protection of human and animal health through the EU Medicines Agency? What happens to Gibraltar? etc. Of course there has to be a deal!

She's playing the electorate for fools, and getting away with it because she has no opposition worthy of the name.

Edit: Sorry Kim - that mini rant wasn't aimed at you specifically!


----------



## Arnie83

stockwellcat said:


> Doesn't mean that these added fees need to be paid. This is where negotiations kick in. The EU at this stage can want what they like, doesn't mean they will get it. TM by the way has been consistent as well, we are leaving the EU.


No-one in the EU has mentioned the €100 bn you quoted. It was the Financial Times, making various assumptions and including, among other things, guarantees of loans which will be paid back over time. Using different assumptions, the Breugel group had the lower end of the range at €42 bn.

As you say, negotiations haven't even started yet, so let's wait until they do before stating that the EU are bullies based on UK newspaper reports.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> We receive NO financial support from the EU, none at all. As one of the few net contributing countries we provide financial support to the EU. That's why they want billions from us on leaving to ease their financial burden when we're gone.


You still need to get your facts right: 

Did you know that e.g last year UK got back 5300 million euros? Even Greece paid 120 millions for you? (and every year before that)
Cornwall got hundreds of millions every year to build roads, improved internet connections, supported companies etc. Truron ja Falmouthi enjoyed most of the money. (EU suppor for poorer regions)
"Last year CAP payments to the UK totalled about £3bn, making up 55 per cent of farmers' incomes." (Financial Times) https://www.ft.com/content/df151906-6616-11e6-a08a-c7ac04ef00aa
To get the big picture for businesses in general from Financial Times: https://www.ft.com/content/202a60c0-cfd8-11e5-831d-09f7778e7377


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> You still need to get your facts right:
> 
> Did you know that e.g last year UK got back 5300 million euros? Even Greece paid 120 millions for you? (and every year before that)
> Cornwall got hundreds of millions every year to build roads, improved internet connections, supported companies etc. Truron ja Falmouthi enjoyed most of the money. (EU suppor for poorer regions)
> "Last year CAP payments to the UK totalled about £3bn, making up 55 per cent of farmers' incomes." (Financial Times) https://www.ft.com/content/df151906-6616-11e6-a08a-c7ac04ef00aa
> To get the big picture for businesses in general from Financial Times: https://www.ft.com/content/202a60c0-cfd8-11e5-831d-09f7778e7377


Nope, that's not financial support that's giving us back some of the money we paid, as I said we are one of the few net contributors. Do you see a homeless person and put a fiver in their pot but take out a tenner and say "there hope you appreciate the financial support I've just given you"?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> The belief the UK can leave without paying a penny is laughable.
> 
> If you changed Gas/Energy suppliers you'll be charged an exit fee in addition to outstanding money owed.
> 
> Same with leaving the EU. Simple as that.


Not when you have come to the end of your contract you don't


----------



## stockwellcat.

Arnie83 said:


> No-one in the EU has mentioned the €100 bn you quoted. It was the Financial Times, making various assumptions and including, among other things, guarantees of loans which will be paid back over time. Using different assumptions, the Breugel group had the lower end of the range at €42 bn.
> 
> As you say, negotiations haven't even started yet, so let's wait until they do before stating that the EU are bullies based on UK newspaper reports.


But @Goblin and the rest not long ago where claiming that the FT is telling everyone that voted remain facts, check the other thread if you can be bothered going through all those pages. I guess this has changed now 

Theresa May is the only person available at the moment strong enough to take on the task of leading the UK out of the EU as voted for in June 2016. Like it or not.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not when you have come to the end of your contract you don't


That might be true in some instances, such as internet providers offering a minimum term contract of say, 18months. If you choose to go elsewhere after the 18months it would indeed be free.

With energy suppliers it isn't that simple. Not only is there a withdrawal fee but sometimes a "connection" fee to the new provider in addition.

Withdrawal from the EU is often referred to a divorce.

In the UK's case they're the petitioner with the EU being the respondent.

So, who pays??? Think I know the answer to that one!


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> That seems to be all about the single market, nothing to do with financial support.


All part and parcel of being in the EU and why we were paying membership. You cannot argue it's not worth the money because I want to ignore half the benefits as it doesn't help my case.


----------



## havoc

Why is it that when a UK leader says there will be no compromise and we'll be doing x, y and z it's 'strong and stable' but any other leaders aren't allowed to stand up for their own without being called bullies. The first person to set the aggressive tone was TM. If she wants it to be aggressive and adversarial then that was her choice but she can't complain at similar response. If you want to have a reasoned discussion with someone you don't start by throwing punches and then moan if they hit you back.


----------



## Arnie83

stockwellcat said:


> But @Goblin and the rest not long ago where claiming that the FT is telling everyone that voted remain facts, check the other thread if you can be bothered going through all those pages. I guess this has changed now


Read the FT article and you'll see. They quote a range of payments and make clear that €100 bn is a gross figure - without repayment of loans - and is the upper end of that range. The pro-Brexit tabloids don't bother with such niceties.



stockwellcat said:


> Theresa May is the only person available at the moment strong enough to take on the task of leading the UK out of the EU as voted for in June 2016. Like it or not.


If Theresa May was strong she wouldn't have caved in to the Tory right wing and flip-flopped on the consequences of leaving the EU. Before the referendum she was telling us that it would cause economic damage. Now, for pity's sake, she's prepared to walk away with "no deal" and claims we'll be absolutely fine.

If people want to leave when they are in possession of the facts - and not just for primitive tribal reasons for which I have no respect - then fine, and a strong leader would give them those facts, instead of lying or talking in meaningless soundbites for the sole purpose of keeping the Tories in power.


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> The EU are wanting the UK to agree to the divorce settlement before seeing the break down of charges, screw us over is what it's called


So we leave with no deal. What's so wrong with that? It would please a great many of the electorate, at least in the short term. They're being whipped up into a right old frenzy over it all.


----------



## Colliebarmy

noushka05 said:


> Bet you can't wait till we're a one party state. Even though you & your loved ones depend on our NHS for health care?


We have been - and are - a 2 party state but under Blar's "New Labour" what was the difference between the 2 parties?


----------



## Colliebarmy

Why do WE need a Brexit deal when we IMPORT 50% more (in value) than we EXPORT (to the EU)

Best case in point... cars.

Where was your car made?


----------



## havoc

Isn't that what I just said. Real hard Brexit would be a clean break and no deal.

Oh - and my car was made in Germany. Where is it your Skoda (German owned company) was made? I'll still be able to afford a new BMW every three years no matter what tariffs we end up with so I don't need any deal.


----------



## KittenKong

havoc said:


> Why is it that when a UK leader says there will be no compromise and we'll be doing x, y and z it's 'strong and stable' but any other leaders aren't allowed to stand up for their own without being called bullies. The first person to set the aggressive tone was TM. If she wants it to be aggressive and adversarial then that was her choice but she can't complain at similar response. If you want to have a reasoned discussion with someone you don't start by throwing punches and then moan if they hit you back.





Arnie83 said:


> Read the FT article and you'll see. They quote a range of payments and make clear that €100 bn is a gross figure - without repayment of loans - and is the upper end of that range. The pro-Brexit tabloids don't bother with such niceties.
> 
> If Theresa May was strong she wouldn't have caved in to the Tory right wing and flip-flopped on the consequences of leaving the EU. Before the referendum she was telling us that it would cause economic damage. Now, for pity's sake, she's prepared to walk away with "no deal" and claims we'll be absolutely fine.
> 
> If people want to leave when they are in possession of the facts - and not just for primitive tribal reasons for which I have no respect - then fine, and a strong leader would give them those facts, instead of lying or talking in meaningless soundbites for the sole purpose of keeping the Tories in power.


Two more excellent spot on posts.
Thank you!


----------



## Colliebarmy

noushka05 said:


> Lack of social housing, changes to benefits means thousands of people are struggling to pay rip off rents, they are forced to use food banks to get by.


And how many spend the housing benefits that are now paid to claimants not to the landlords?


----------



## Colliebarmy

havoc said:


> Isn't that what I just said. Real hard Brexit would be a clean break and no deal.
> 
> Oh - and my car was made in Germany. Where is it your Skoda (German owned company) was made? I'll still be able to afford a new BMW every three years no matter what tariffs we end up with so I don't need any deal.


exactly.... France/Italy/Germany must supply the UK with 70% of new car sales

Isnt it odd that Japan, China and India build cars here while no EU country does...


----------



## Arnie83

Colliebarmy said:


> Why do WE need a Brexit deal when we IMPORT 50% more (in value) than we EXPORT (to the EU)


Because WE are one country, and our exports to the EU far outweigh any one EU country's exports to us. Tariffs would impact c.13% of EU exports and c.44% of ours.

And because WE are the ones who have chosen to leave.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> I know people who would be entitled to use food banks, they are disabled relatives, one is young and doesn't work, another has a partner that works and one is newly retired, they all offer us money when they think we are struggling but could still get free food. We've worked all our lives and are poor in comparison but have no access to food banks.
> If you are the type to *expect* handouts then you are the type to use foodbanks even if you really have no need. There are just so many people now who expect


How would you know they'd be entitled to use food banks? Are you their doctor or social worker or something? People are assessed by a third party, they have to be referred to a food bank & there's only one reason they're referred - poverty.



Zaros said:


> In these so called 'modern times' (after all it is 2017, not 1917) I think you might find they now refer to this unfortunate predicament as_ 'overcrowding'_.
> Now I know and understand it's not that easy to simply up sticks and move into an adequately sized or satisfactory property more appropriate for the family unit because of the extortionately high rents private landlords impose, extremely long council waiting lists and the seemingly inescapable housing shortages.
> This mentions nothing of the deplorable conditions some of these private landlords allow their properties to fall into and yet still rent them out to folks they know are desperate for a roof over their heads.
> Exploitation at its finest and they're getting away with it because the Govt look the other way.
> 
> Decent, affordable and permanent housing. Is it really that much to ask in the 21st century?


Good post!

Did you know that many Tory MPs are landlords, Zaros? And did you know last year tory MPs voted down a bill requiring landlords to make homes fit for human habitation. What kind of people are they?? Slum landlords are laughing all the way to the bank on the backs of tax payers.


----------



## Goblin

Colliebarmy said:


> Isnt it odd that Japan, China and India build cars here while no EU country does...


Isn't it odd that investment into the UK was made under the promise that the companies would have tariff easy access to the EU if they built up industry in the UK? Been the line of the UK since Thatcher. Any shock that car companies are making noises about moving jobs out of the UK without that easy access? Other EU countries would welcome the move, even encourage it.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> That might be true in some instances, such as internet providers offering a minimum term contract of say, 18months. If you choose to go elsewhere after the 18months it would indeed be free.
> 
> With energy suppliers it isn't that simple. Not only is there a withdrawal fee but sometimes a "connection" fee to the new provider in addition.
> 
> Withdrawal from the EU is often referred to a divorce.
> 
> In the UK's case they're the petitioner with the EU being the respondent.
> 
> So, who pays??? Think I know the answer to that one!


Lots of information available from Citizens Advice about switching supplier, explains how to even if you are in some debt or are a tenant and about those with meters. They even have template letters to help.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/c...better-energy-deal/switching-energy-supplier/

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/c...l/switching-energy-supplier-if-youre-in-debt/


----------



## Happy Paws2

havoc said:


> I'll still be able to afford a new BMW every three years no matter what tariffs we end up with so I don't need any deal.


Well aren't you the lucky one, not everyone can afford to do that.


----------



## havoc

Goblin said:


> Any shock that car companies are making noises about moving jobs out of the UK without that easy access?


There's much more which will limit car production in the future. Interesting that today the impact of PCP deals has hit the popular press. A few weeks ago the Bank of England said car finance could become the next equivalent of a sub-prime mortgage scandal. 80% of new car sales are done on this type of finance and most people who take it out don't understand it.


----------



## havoc

Happy Paws said:


> Well aren't you the lucky one, not everyone can afford to do that.


Well a combination of pure luck and the harder I worked the luckier I got. Makes you wonder why I give a damn about those who aren't so lucky - but I do.


----------



## Satori

Arnie83 said:


> She's said we are leaving the single market, leaving the customs union, not allowing freedom of movement, and not being subject to ECJ rulings.
> 
> She then wants to trade with the single market on the same terms as now (except for the ECJ rulings which we don't have to follow; oh and we're not paying a fee for doing so any more [because we want to spend it on the NHS instead]), and she doesn't want any customs checks or delays or anything, even though we've left the customs union so we can negotiate our own trade deals.
> 
> And if we only get a 'bad deal' then we'll walk away with 'no deal'. Except that neither of those is defined, (which doesn't stop people like @Satori from repeating May's mantra 'no deal is better than a bad deal').
> 
> And people say that the EU are bullies?
> 
> To keep it on the election; she is talking in meaningless soundbites and inciting nationalistic fervour by accusing the big bad EU of trying to affect the election, and people are falling for it.
> 
> Tell me: if we walk away with "no deal", what happens to UK citizens living in the EU and vice versa? What happens to the Irish border? What happens to air traffic control? What happens to the protection of human and animal health through the EU Medicines Agency? What happens to Gibraltar? etc. Of course there has to be a deal!
> 
> She's playing the electorate for fools, and getting away with it because she has no opposition worthy of the name.
> 
> Edit: Sorry Kim - that mini rant wasn't aimed at you specifically!


No deal is better than a bad deal.


----------



## Happy Paws2

havoc said:


> Well a combination of pure luck and the harder I worked the luckier I got. Makes you wonder why I give a damn about those who aren't so lucky - but I do.


We worked hard and we had a Mercedes for years, now we are retired and things haven't worked out as we hope. We can't afford to run the car any more so it's had to go. So you never know what the future holds.


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> No deal is better than a bad deal.


Probably true but why the determination to scupper any hope of a good deal before we even start?


----------



## Satori

havoc said:


> Probably true but why the determination to scupper any hope of a good deal before we even start?


My opinion. The deal was never going to happen and never will. It is all a charade.


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> My opinion. The deal was never going to happen and never will. It is all a charade.


Agree 100% and she's playing the electorate. What's more, they want to be played.


----------



## KittenKong

Colliebarmy said:


> exactly.... France/Italy/Germany must supply the UK with 70% of new car sales
> 
> Isnt it odd that Japan, China and India build cars here while no EU country does...


If the UK weren't so pig headed and learned something from countries like Germany it might have its own car industry today.


----------



## cheekyscrip

KittenKong said:


> If people showed their support for Gibraltar they wouldn't have voted for Brexit. I certainly didn't vote for Brexit so why should I turn against the EU for being on the side of Spain who are after all members of the EU?
> 
> If Gibraltar prefers to remain British they must be prepared to face the consequences of a hard Brexit with no deal which now looks like the likely outcome.


No. Is North Ireland ready for closed frontier?
So maybe if Spain decide to close the frontier and ruin Gibraltar..same as Franco tried before...Brits who supported Brexit can support Gibraltar by putting pressure on Spain.
Not by any military actions. But simply by eating oranges from Morocco?
Who attacks any British territory attacks Britain ?
Spain had Gibraltar for only 242 years , Moors built it and had it from 711 to 1462. 750 years...
Spain swapped Gibraltar for Minorca and Bourbon king. Are Bourbons to abdicate and return Minorca?

We are not taking about a piece of rock to be tossed about but about livehoods of 38 000 ordinary people, who did nothing to deserve it.

Voting for Remain does not mean you should side with EU in bullying Gibraltar.

Spain just wants a piece of Britain. You are lucky it is not your home.

Same as Russia wants a piece of Ukraine.

Spain will not concede even uninhabited little outcrop Isla de Perejil.

Sent all armada to defend it.

Why should Britain abandon theirs?

There are plenty of nice places to go for holidays and plenty of oranges, olives etc...elsewhere if Spanish Partido Popular wants to be bloody minded. 
We have rights to self determination and to be left to trade with neighbours in Campo in peace.

Why do you think Catalonia wants to go?
Basks? Even Andalusia?
Fed up with chorizos in Madrid.


----------



## Arnie83

Satori said:


> No deal is better than a bad deal.


That's very good, and I'll bet you can say 'strong and stable' too!

But I would like to see a definition of a bad deal that is worse than no deal, and I don't think you can provide one.


----------



## KittenKong

cheekyscrip said:


> No. Is North Ireland ready for closed frontier?
> So maybe if Spain decide to close the frontier and ruin Gibraltar..same as Franco tried before...Brits who supported Brexit can support Gibraltar by putting pressure on Spain.
> Not by any military actions. But simply by eating oranges from Morocco?
> Who attacks any British territory attacks Britain ?
> Spain had Gibraltar for only 242 years , Moors built it and had it from 711 to 1462. 750 years...
> Spain swapped Gibraltar for Minorca and Bourbon king. Are Bourbons to abdicate and return Minorca?
> 
> We are not taking about a piece of rock to be tossed about but about livehoods of 38 000 ordinary people, who did nothing to deserve it.
> 
> Voting for Remain does not mean you should side with EU in bullying Gibraltar.
> 
> Spain just wants a piece of Britain. You are lucky it is not your home.
> 
> Same as Russia wants a piece of Ukraine.
> 
> Spain will not concede even uninhabited little outcrop Isla de Perejil.
> 
> Sent all armada to defend it.
> 
> Why should Britain abandon theirs?
> 
> There are plenty of nice places to go for holidays and plenty of oranges, olives etc...elsewhere if Spanish Partido Popular wants to be bloody minded.
> We have rights to self determination and to be left to trade with neighbours in Campo in peace.
> 
> Why do you think Catalonia wants to go?
> Basks? Even Andalusia?
> Fed up with chorizos in Madrid.


I disagree. What makes you think Theresa May will not close the borders either? She's strongly committed to border controls and the ending of free movement.

Just as the UK itself will become isolated from the rest of Europe Gibraltar suddenly will too.

I sympathise with the situation believe me, either way it's not going to be a win win situation. I didn't vote for this and I'm still very angry at the state of affairs and for everyone caught up in the middle of it.

But I will not change sides by backing May over the EU under any circumstances.


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> How would you know they'd be entitled to use food banks? Are you their doctor or social worker or something? People are assessed by a third party, they have to be referred to a food bank & there's only one reason they're referred - poverty.


You'd be quite surprised, shocked even, by the number of people who actually believe you can just walk into a food bank, as though it was the local supermarket, and help yourself any time you like.
People are so out of touch with reality because, half the time they've never had to live it.



noushka05 said:


> Good post!
> *Did you know that many Tory MPs are landlords, Zaros?* And did you know last year tory MPs voted down a bill requiring landlords to make homes fit for human habitation. What kind of people are they?? Slum landlords are laughing all the way to the bank on the backs of tax payers.
> View attachment 309788


I did indeed Noush'

But let's be honest about it, life is _'complex'_ innit and surviving is even more _'complex'_. The needy and the greedy have to make up their short falls somewhere because there's phuq all money to be made in politics.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Colliebarmy said:


> Why do WE need a Brexit deal when we IMPORT 50% more (in value) than we EXPORT (to the EU)


And that's why there almost certainly will be a reasonable deal, because it's of more benefit to the EU than the UK. Particularly as our exports to the EU have been decreasing in recent years and our trade with the rest of the world increasing. With that trend looking to continue it makes absolute sense for us to leave the EU and trade with the rest of the world on our terms rather than the EU's, you'd think.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> With that trend looking to continue it makes absolute sense for us to leave the EU and trade with the rest of the world on our terms rather than the EU's.


Why will it necessarily be on 'our' terms rather than the rest of the world's? Will every other country be accused of bullying if the don't see it all our way?


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> And that's why there almost certainly will be a reasonable deal, because it's of more benefit to the EU than the UK. Particularly as our exports to the EU have been decreasing in recent years and our trade with the rest of the world increasing. With that trend looking to continue it makes absolute sense for us to leave the EU and trade with the rest of the world on our terms rather than the EU's, you'd think.


:Banghead


----------



## Zaros

Happy Paws said:


> Well aren't you the lucky one, not everyone can afford to do that.
> 
> We worked hard and we had a Mercedes for years, now we are retired and things haven't worked out as we hope. We can't afford to run the car any more so it's had to go. *So you never know what the future holds.*


That's very true HP. No one does. We can only appreciate what we have when we have it and when we don't, there's little point in mourning the loss of material possessions.
Once upon a time, through hard work, I had built quite a little empire for myself and my family, posh house, posh cars, holidays to America, always plenty of money to spend and then one night I went to sleep and by the time I woke up the next morning, everything I had strived to achieve was gone.

Finding yourself in leaner circumstances is no reason to be snappy with people.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Theresa May is the only person available at the moment strong enough to take on the task of leading the UK out of the EU as voted for in June 2016. Like it or not.


Do you not mean crashing out without a deal? How do you think that'll benefit the country?

May herself promised a close new working relationship with the EU post Brexit!



Satori said:


> My opinion. The deal was never going to happen and never will. It is all a charade.


You know something? I'm inclined to agree with you. Hats off for your honesty.


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> Why will it necessarily be on 'our' terms rather than the rest of the world's? Will every other country be accused of bullying if the don't see it all our way?


Sorry I didn't put it well. I should have said on our negotiated terms rather than the EU's negotiated terms.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> :Banghead


Careful, you'll hurt yourself.


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...of-residency-theresa-may-latest-a7721201.html

What on earth is wrong with that, not that I would expect May to agree.


----------



## havoc

Zaros said:


> Once upon a time, through hard work, I had built quite a little empire for myself and my family, posh house, posh cars, holidays to America, always plenty of money to spend and then one night I went to sleep and by the time I woke up the next morning, everything I had strived to achieve was gone.


I sympathise but so far that hasn't happened - that's the bit that I reckon has been pure luck. Stupid things such as getting increasingly uncomfortable with the way things were going in 2007 and cashing everything in early in 2008. Everyone told me I was nuts.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Do you not mean crashing out without a deal? How do you think that'll benefit the country?


Sure.
Saves us the tax payer billions  instead of paying it to the EU leaders who will use the money to line there pockets or some none EU project or bail out another struggling EU country.

So France wants the UK to pay more along with Germany. Well tomorrow the UK won't be dealing with Hollande anymore, so his demands on the UK are pointless as we'll be dealing with whoever wins the French Elections tomorrow. The UK might not be dealing with Merkel either soon when the German elections take place, so her demands are pointless as well. The French Elections tomorrow themselves may well reshape Europe without the UK even starting any negotiations with the EU if Le Pen wins.


----------



## havoc

Are you expecting any newly elected leaders to want to favour the UK over their own citizens?


----------



## stockwellcat.

havoc said:


> Are you expecting any newly elected leaders to want to favour the UK over their own citizens?


Le Pen is not talking about favours, she sympathies with the UK on Brexit and wants a Frexit and to crash out of the Euro currency. So if she wins tomorrow of course we'll have a friend around the negotiating table when they start and no doubt France's EU Referendum would be under way. But I am only speeking hypothetically as we don't know who will win the French Elections tomorrow yet. Don't forget you can't trust the polls.


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> So if she wins tomorrow of course we'll have a friend around the negotiating table when they start


Oh of course. A madly right wing, nationalistic French leader is going to favour anything the UK wants.


----------



## stockwellcat.

havoc said:


> Oh of course. A madly right wing, nationalistic French leader is going to favour anything the UK wants.


We'll see.


----------



## havoc

I'm the one here who likes our European neighbours and I'm having a problem visualising that one


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Sure.
> Saves us the tax payer billions  instead of paying it to the EU leaders who will use the money to line there pockets or some none EU project or bail out another struggling EU country.
> 
> So France wants the UK to pay more along with Germany. Well tomorrow the UK won't be dealing with Hollande anymore, so his demands on the UK are pointless as we'll be dealing with whoever wins the French Elections tomorrow. The UK might not be dealing with Merkel either soon when the German elections take place, so her demands are pointless as well. The French Elections tomorrow themselves may well reshape Europe without the UK even starting any negotiations with the EU if Le Pen wins.


So you're banking on Le Pen rescuing the UK from the clutches of the EU? Incredible.

A nationalist neighbouring another doesn't necessarily mean they'll become the best of friends. It could happen of course but what if it doesn't? They could become the worst of enemies as France and England argue who's better than the other. History will tell you where that could lead to.....

I think Le Pen will be putting the interests of her own country before considering others, especially the UK.


----------



## Zaros

havoc said:


> I sympathise but so far that hasn't happened - that's the bit that I reckon has been pure luck. Stupid things such as getting increasingly uncomfortable with the way things were going in 2007 and cashing everything in early in 2008. Everyone told me I was nuts.


I wasn't looking for sympathy chuck, and I certainly wasn't having a dig at anyone  I was simply illustrating to Happy Paws, that she was not alone in her unforeseen, yet dramatic change of circumstances, and being seemingly resentful of others who have achieved to maintain their good fortune, was a guaranteed method of making us feel even more bitter in life. 

I believe we all need and deserve a little luck, and not just from time to time either because, in this day and age of shaky political climates, our dreams can so easily be smashed to ruins.

And here's a little more of that luck to help you on your way...


----------



## havoc

Zaros said:


> I wasn't looking for sympathy chuck,


I definitely didn't intend to patronise. Hope beyond hope you know that.


----------



## Dr Pepper

KittenKong said:


> So you're banking on Le Pen rescuing the UK from the clutches of the EU? Incredible.
> 
> A nationalist neighbouring another doesn't necessarily mean they'll become the best of friends. It could happen of course but what if it doesn't? They could become the worst of enemies as France and England argue who's better than the other. History will tell you where that could lead to.....
> 
> I think Le Pen will be putting the interests of her own country before considering others, especially the UK.


What it would do is weaken the EU's position a hell of a lot.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> Careful, you'll hurt yourself.


Not nearly as much as hearing people repeating "They need us more than we need them" without considering things like, you know, facts.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> What it would do is weaken the EU's position a hell of a lot.


In which case we're back to the no deal situation which some of us suspect has been the intention all along. It doesn't make things all suddenly sunshine and rainbows.


----------



## Arnie83

KittenKong said:


> You know something? I'm inclined to agree with you. Hats off for your honesty.


We've got to get some sort of deal. It may not involve free trade or customs checks, but we can't wake up on the first post-Brexit Monday morning with no-one, for example, knowing what to do when they reach the Irish / NI border without a passport, or with planes unable to take off from Heathrow because the EU agency, with whom we have no agreed deal, regulates flights over Europe, or whether 3 million people are living in the UK illegally when on the Sunday evening they were just fine.

That's why, when May says "No deal is better than a bad deal" I want to know what the hell she's talking about! What does "No deal" mean?


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> So you're banking on Le Pen rescuing the UK from the clutches of the EU? Incredible.
> 
> A nationalist neighbouring another doesn't necessarily mean they'll become the best of friends. It could happen of course but what if it doesn't? They could become the worst of enemies as France and England argue who's better than the other. History will tell you where that could lead to.....
> 
> I think Le Pen will be putting the interests of her own country before considering others, especially the UK.


Well of course the UK will be putting its citizens first in the EU before the EU citizens over here like the Government is meant to. That isn't being cruel it's called looking after your own countries citizens. Of course a deal on this issue of UK/EU citizens rights is going to be negotiated on.

Back to the French Elections, no I am not banking on Le Pen rescuing the UK, the UK can look after itself just like France can. She might not win yet but if Le Pen wins it will serverly weaken the EU's negotiating hand.


----------



## Zaros

havoc said:


> *Hope beyond hope *you know that.


As far as my feet will carry me.


----------



## havoc

Arnie83 said:


> That's why, when May says "No deal is better than a bad deal" I want to know what the hell she's talking about! What does "No deal" mean?


It means it isn't her fault. She tried and tried to get them to see reason but they just wouldn't and she's completely in line with the 'two fingers up to johnny foreigner no matter what the consequences' which is the prevailing feeling in this country at the moment. It means being able to blame her failures on them for many years. You're right that it will never really be no deal but that she'll be able to put a bad deal forward as 'no deal' - because that's strong.


----------



## Goblin

KittenKong said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...of-residency-theresa-may-latest-a7721201.html
> 
> What on earth is wrong with that, not that I would expect May to agree.


EU residents in other countries may be forced to register. UK government never has and therefore does not have solid figures for numbers of official immigrants.



stockwellcat said:


> Le Pen is not talking about favours, she sympathies with the UK on Brexit and wants a Frexit and to crash out of the Euro currency. So if she wins tomorrow of course we'll have a friend around the negotiating table when they start and no doubt France's EU Referendum would be under way. But I am only speeking hypothetically as we don't know who will win the French Elections tomorrow yet. Don't forget you can't trust the polls.


Which is why for campaigning she has reversed her anti EU rhetoric as it was losing her votes.



Arnie83 said:


> That's why, when May says "No deal is better than a bad deal" I want to know what the hell she's talking about! What does "No deal" mean?


David Davis, in charge of negotiations has admitted they haven't a clue what it means. Great negotiation skills when you don't look at the options and what they actually mean. People voting for the Tories aren't voting for details, they are voting for spin when it comes to Brexit. Not that they are actually voting simply for Brexit. Despite May only pushing that, it's only part of the future government's responsibilities. The way people see the negotiations from outside will also make a difference long term in other potential situations.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Zaros said:


> I wasn't looking for sympathy chuck, and I certainly wasn't having a dig at anyone  I was simply illustrating to Happy Paws, that she was not alone in her unforeseen, yet dramatic change of circumstances, and being seemingly resentful of others who have achieved to maintain their good fortune, was a guaranteed method of making us feel even more bitter in life.
> 
> I believe we all need and deserve a little luck, and not just from time to time either because, in this day and age of shaky political climates, our dreams can so easily be smashed to ruins.
> 
> And here's a little more of that luck to help you on your way...


Thank you for posting that video, I think it serves to remind us all that no matter how wealthy we are we all still need "a bit of luck". So sad to see him with Linda and know what was to come for them. I'm sure most of us would sacrifice wealth for health and happiness.


----------



## Satori

Arnie83 said:


> That's very good, and I'll bet you can say 'strong and stable' too!
> 
> But I would like to see a definition of a bad deal that is worse than no deal, and I don't think you can provide one.


Strong and stable.


----------



## Satori

Arnie83 said:


> Not nearly as much as hearing people repeating "They need us more than we need them" without considering things like, you know, facts.


They need us more than we need them.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Well of course the UK will be putting its citizens first in the EU before the EU citizens over here like the Government is meant to. That isn't being cruel it's called looking after your own countries citizens. Of course a deal on this issue of UK/EU citizens rights is going to be negotiated on.
> 
> Back to the French Elections, no I am not banking on Le Pen rescuing the UK, the UK can look after itself just like France can. She might not win yet but if Le Pen wins it will serverly weaken the EU's negotiating hand.


My argument is the EU citizens and vice versa have legally entered the UK. I have relatives living in other EU countries even if I have to accept the desire to join them on retirement may not now be permitted.

So why punish those already here, many being in jobs and contributing to the economy? It's not their fault a narrow referendum vote might affect their long term future. They weren't even permitted to vote in the EU referendum.

A no deal could well result in EU citizens being classed as "illegals" overnight. Do you really want to see a situation where EU citizens face deportation with UK citizens deported back to the UK in a "tit for tat" fashion?

It might not stop at EU citizens. Many Jews forced to flee Germany were German born.....


----------



## KittenKong

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...er-hargreaves-rights-eu-nationals-theresa-may


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...nance-minister-yanis-varoufakis-a7721151.html


----------



## Colliebarmy

Labours promises keep on coming

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39829723


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...nance-minister-yanis-varoufakis-a7721151.html
> View attachment 309866
> View attachment 309868
> View attachment 309869


More wishes from the remain camp I see.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Colliebarmy said:


> Labours promises keep on coming
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39829723


Labours pipe dreams again.


----------



## MollySmith

A rather small but significant victory
https://thanetwatch.wordpress.com/2017/05/06/ex-asylum-seeker-beats-thanets-ukip-leader/


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> My argument is the EU citizens and vice versa have legally entered the UK. I have relatives living in other EU countries even if I have to accept the desire to join them on retirement may not now be permitted.
> 
> So why punish those already here, many being in jobs and contributing to the economy? It's not their fault a narrow referendum vote might affect their long term future. They weren't even permitted to vote in the EU referendum.
> 
> A no deal could well result in EU citizens being classed as "illegals" overnight. Do you really want to see a situation where EU citizens face deportation with UK citizens deported back to the UK in a "tit for tat" fashion?
> 
> It might not stop at EU citizens. Many Jews forced to flee Germany were German born.....


Remain supporters need to stop, calm themselves down, take a deep breathe and stop hyperventilating. We aren't even negotiating yet. May said she was going to make the UK/EU citizens rights issue a priority when the talks start the EU has agreed to this from what I am aware of. Let's get the GE out of the way, give TM the support she needs, give TM her mandate and get on with negotiating with the EU in June 2017. It's going to be hard enough for everyone over the coming 5 years let alone the next 2 years of negotiations. Let the new Government when it is elected on the 8th June 2017 get on with the mammoth task at hand and judge them in 2022.

In all honesty Jeremy Corbyn in my view isn't able to do this (that is my opinion).

Lib Dems have already said they want to be the opposition party and realise that TF won't be PM. That is a realistic outlook not like JC's dreams.

That leaves us with Theresa May who is of strong character and I believe can deliver Brexit.


----------



## cheekyscrip

KittenKong said:


> I disagree. What makes you think Theresa May will not close the borders either? She's strongly committed to border controls and the ending of free movement.
> 
> Just as the UK itself will become isolated from the rest of Europe Gibraltar suddenly will too.
> 
> I sympathise with the situation believe me, either way it's not going to be a win win situation. I didn't vote for this and I'm still very angry at the state of affairs and for everyone caught up in the middle of it.
> 
> But I will not change sides by backing May over the EU under any circumstances.


EU is not always right. Not when they go against human rights they says so much about. Britain never closed that frontier.Gibraltar NEVER made frontier queues or demanded Spain to give us a chunk of Spain.
Our Spanish workers are treated very well and paid much better than in their own country.
Believe me or not that I know it first hand.

EU is not always right and not all is good.
On balance it was better for us to stay in , and try to change it .

I understand why Brexit happened.
Sadly though it is bad for EU it is worse for Britain.
To cut your nose to spite your face.
Many other EU countries wanted less regulation, less " superstate" mentality and Britain let them down practically giving EU to German hegemony.
Heseltine is very right about that.

Really does not matter who May or Corbyn would get us down the abyss.
It will benefit. Russia, China, India USA but not us.
Britain will be impoverished.
Poor will get poorer and even Labour cannot pour from empty...

I still di not understand why EU has any right to give any veto about us to any third country?

What if France wants Channel Islands? They are near to France?
When Spain is giving back their colonies in Africa?


----------



## MollySmith

KittenKong said:


> My argument is the EU citizens and vice versa have legally entered the UK. I have relatives living in other EU countries even if I have to accept the desire to join them on retirement may not now be permitted.
> 
> So why punish those already here, many being in jobs and contributing to the economy? It's not their fault a narrow referendum vote might affect their long term future. They weren't even permitted to vote in the EU referendum.
> 
> A no deal could well result in EU citizens being classed as "illegals" overnight. Do you really want to see a situation where EU citizens face deportation with UK citizens deported back to the UK in a "tit for tat" fashion?
> 
> It might not stop at EU citizens. Many Jews forced to flee Germany were German born.....


I have a huge issue with EU citizens being declared illegal when they contribute so much. Living in Cambridge, a city that is diverse and, this city did overwhelming vote to staying the EU and so did our MP. We have wonderful people living here doing amazing work both in the University of Cambridge and Anglia Ruskin. Microsoft, Amazon and Apple are all resident here and how this pans out has a huge affect on science, research, medicine, arts.. it's a rather worrying prospect. And I'm far more likely to trust an academic than a politician for a sobering reality check. My p/t employer is the oldest publisher in the world and employs a global workforce. It doesn't take a genius to work out the implications of not being allowed to continue it's working practices (all with great welfare standards) and the cost implications to important academic and educational material if it cannot, never mind the training and employment opportunities lost to those living around the world.

And as you say, where does it stop? I was looking at some news footage from last year when Boris was comparing the EU to the Third Reich and thinking how obscene that comment was.


----------



## Satori

cheekyscrip said:


> To cut your nose to spite your face.


'tis now the fashion in these parts.



cheekyscrip said:


> Many other EU countries wanted less regulation, less " superstate" mentality and Britain let them down


Specifically Mr. Cameron.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Remain supporters need to stop, calm themselves down, take a deep breathe and stop hyperventilating. We aren't even negotiating yet. May said she was going to make the UK/EU citizens rights issue a priority when the talks start the EU has agreed to this from what I am aware of. Let's get the GE out of the way, give TM the support she needs, give TM her mandate and get on with negotiating with the EU in June 2017. It's going to be hard enough for everyone over the coming 5 years let alone the next 2 years of negotiations. Let the new Government when it is elected on the 8th June 2017 get on with the mammoth task at hand and judge them in 2022.
> 
> In all honesty Jeremy Corbyn in my view isn't able to do this (that is my opinion).
> 
> Lib Dems have already said they want to be the opposition party and realise that TF won't be PM. That is a realistic outlook not like JC's dreams.
> 
> That leaves us with Theresa May who is of strong character and I believe can deliver Brexit.


Bull***t!!

Theresa May will indeed deliver Brexit, that cannot be denied but the outcome's going to be as good as the UK being expelled from the block. The way May is behaving I wouldn't be surprised if they do.

Contributors to the leave campaign have criticised her anti immigration stance let alone remainers.

A strong leader would aim for the best deal, not throw a wobbler and go on national television playing the victim and accusing the EU of meddling in her election!

I wouldn't trust May to boil a kettle, let alone "lead" a country.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Deleted.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Theresa May will indeed deliver Brexit, that cannot be denied but the outcome's going to be as good as the UK being expelled from the block.
> 
> Contributors to the leave campaign have criticised her anti immigration stance let alone remainers.
> 
> A strong leader would aim for the best deal, not a crash out.


It's called hard talk.

It's called aiming high. You have to do this you know in negotiations, we might end up with remainers wishes yet we simply don't know yet as we aren't negotiating yet. It's the we don't know yet bit remain supporters don't like.

I know you don't like the Conservatives but what other option is there?

I explained why I think TM is the right person for this task but in 2022 my opinion may change. Whoever gets in on the 8th June 2017 will need a strong mandate to see Brexit through. Theresa May was constantly told she did not have this mandate well she called a GE to get this mandate in place so the likes of Sturgeon can no longer say TM has no mandate.


----------



## Jesthar

KittenKong said:


> Theresa May will indeed deliver Brexit


Brexit is just a distraction in this election, though. Whoever is in 10 Downing Street will deliver Brexit, and will deliver exactly the Brexit the EU hand to us - as that's all they CAN deliverr. _WE_ don't get a say in what they offer us, remember. That so far every time Theresa May opens her trap she ends up annoying, insulting or embarrassing those who dictate our leaving terms (which I'm sure that's doing wonders for the deal we're likely to get...) is pretty much the only part that matters in GE terms.

The GE topics that really matter are the ones we as a nation DO have control of, and that includes the NHS, schools, social issues etc. Which means for anyone with a social conscience, the Tories are not an option.


----------



## Elles

We all have access to the same public information and the same choices.

In the recent council elections

My area of Devon (Exeter) voted Labour, most of my family and friends live locally to me. My daughter's area of Devon voted lib dem and my one friend who doesn't live in Exeter, her area is Green Party. I don't know anyone irl who lives in an area where conservatives were voted into their local councils. We must all be a bunch of mavericks and ingrates. 

We'll all suffer the same if May's government are reelected and make a pig's ear of brexit. Of course the Eu don't want Britain to be better out, or it could collapse, there will be compromises whoever has to deal with it. Let's hope we at least get something decent on the home front outside of the brexit thing, regardless of who is voted in in June. We are leaving the Eu, I agree that it's other domestic policies we need to focus on, if we think our vote can make any difference.


----------



## Catharinem

Just to lighten the mood. And because it's nearly 4am, so officially silly time :


----------



## Happy Paws2

I wish they'd bring the Muppets back, it would be hilarious with todays politicians :Hilarious


----------



## stockwellcat.

The French put Le Pen to Le Paper to cast there votes in the French Elections today.


----------



## Calvine

Happy Paws said:


> I wish they'd bring the Muppets back, it would be hilarious with todays politicians :Hilarious


It surely would. Think I read somewhere that they were planning a Muppet Babies ''reboot'' which might be a laugh.


----------



## kimthecat

Happy Paws said:


> I wish they'd bring the Muppets back, it would be hilarious with todays politicians :Hilarious


and Spitting Image


----------



## kimthecat

John McDonnell still blaming the media on the Marr show this morning . 

TBH he is much more impressive than Corbyn, if he wasn't such a Marxist and IRA lover I would vote for him .


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Remain supporters need to stop, calm themselves down, take a deep breathe and stop hyperventilating. We aren't even negotiating yet. May said she was going to make the UK/EU citizens rights issue a priority when the talks start the EU has agreed to this from what I am aware of. Let's get the GE out of the way, give TM the support she needs, give TM her mandate and get on with negotiating with the EU in June 2017. It's going to be hard enough for everyone over the coming 5 years let alone the next 2 years of negotiations. Let the new Government when it is elected on the 8th June 2017 get on with the mammoth task at hand and judge them in 2022.
> 
> In all honesty Jeremy Corbyn in my view isn't able to do this (that is my opinion).
> 
> Lib Dems have already said they want to be the opposition party and realise that TF won't be PM. That is a realistic outlook not like JC's dreams.
> 
> That leaves us with Theresa May who is of strong character and I believe can deliver Brexit.


I sometimes wonder if you are more than one person. Only recently you were expressing concern for the NHS and criticised May for calling the election!

Your yo yo stance is beyond unbelievable. Even another Leaver said words to the effect of that.

I thought with the post quoted I've just read an editorial from the Daily Mail!


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Let's get the GE out of the way, give TM the support she needs


To underfund the NHS, to change education, to penalise the poor and middle classes all for the gain of the rich and multinationals.


> , give TM her mandate


Mandate for what? It's not Brexit as this is a general election and makes no real difference to the negotiations.



> Let the new Government when it is elected on the 8th June 2017 get on with the mammoth task at hand and judge them in 2022.


So no discussions or holding the government to account before 2022? Personally I would prefer a government to actually be forced to listen and inform the public throughout their term. Neither of which May desires to do. Do you like writing out blank cheques to people who have shown they are not to be trusted simply because they say what you want to hear`even when their actions contradict what they say?



> That leaves us with Theresa May who is of strong character and I believe can deliver Brexit.


Which is only part of what the general election is about.



stockwellcat said:


> The French put Le Pen to Le Paper to cast there votes in the French Elections today.


The Austrians and Dutch did too. Quite telling she's had to reign in talk about leaving the euro and EU in desparation to get votes isn't it.


----------



## KittenKong

Arnie83 said:


> We've got to get some sort of deal. It may not involve free trade or customs checks, but we can't wake up on the first post-Brexit Monday morning with no-one, for example, knowing what to do when they reach the Irish / NI border without a passport, or with planes unable to take off from Heathrow because the EU agency, with whom we have no agreed deal, regulates flights over Europe, or whether 3 million people are living in the UK illegally when on the Sunday evening they were just fine.
> 
> That's why, when May says "No deal is better than a bad deal" I want to know what the hell she's talking about! What does "No deal" mean?


I would predict May will storm off in a huff if the EU don't accept her ridiculous terms and come moaning on national television saying they've been nasty to her.

No wonder the UK is becoming a laughing stock and is no longer treated seriously.

Good smokescreen when a recession and worse hit. Can just hear it now, "Don't blame me, it's all their fault"


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> I sometimes wonder if you are more than one person. Only recently you were expressing concern for the NHS and criticised May for calling the election!


I do have concerns about the NHS but you tell me do you think Labour can cure the problems with the NHS when the NHS won't take responsibility for over spending and wanting an endless pot of money? They need to take responsibility as well you know. Labour isn't a cure to the NHS, they couldn't sort the NHS out the last time they where in power could they?


> Your yo yo stance is beyond unbelievable. Even another Leaver said words to the effect of that.


I had concerns and voiced them, so..


> I thought with the post quoted I've just read an editorial from the Daily Mail!


No not from the daily fail. I don't even read the newspapers don't need to, you plaster them all over the political threads in here because you don't have your own opinion and have to use the presses opinion.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> To underfund the NHS, to change education, to penalise the poor and middle classes all for the gain of the rich and multinationals.


Yes I know but Labour isn't the cure to these problems. I didn't say the Conservatives where either.


> Mandate for what? It's not Brexit as this is a general election and makes no real difference to the negotiations.


Your opinion. What opposition is there? The other parties apart from the Conservatives made heavy losses in the Local Elections. Is it a sign of what is to come in less than 5 weeks time?


> So no discussions or holding the government to account before 2022?


The House of Commons and House of Lords voted on this and any opposition party would have big problems over turning this. By the way the House of Coons and House of Lords will be voting on plenty more policies and bills before Brexit happens.


> Do you like writing out blank cheques to people who have shown they are not to be trusted simply because they say what you want to hear`even when their actions contradict what they say?


So you would like an opposition party to get into power and spend spend spend money the UK does not have and spend the money already earmarked for something else three fold which is what Labour have suggested doing.


> The Austrians and Dutch did too. Quite telling she's had to reign in talk about leaving the euro and EU in desparation to get votes isn't it.


She might have reigned these in but she got through the first round of voting didn't she. No I am not backing the far right I was just pointing out if she gets in today it will be a severe blow regarding the EU's negotiating hand as it will be weakened some what seeing as Le Pen is pretty anti EU and anti Euro currency to.

I am not to fussed who wins in France to be honest. The turn out of voters is expected to be low because of the choice available.


----------



## Odin_cat

KittenKong said:


> I would predict May will storm off in a huff if the EU don't accept her ridiculous terms and come moaning on national television saying they've been nasty to her.
> 
> No wonder the UK is becoming a laughing stock and is no longer treated seriously.
> 
> Good smokescreen when a recession and worse hit. Can just hear it now, "Don't blame me, it's all their fault"


Yep, Europe is laughing at her. I'm hoping they'll let us stay here out of pity!


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> I do have concerns about the NHS but you tell me do you think Labour can cure the problems with the NHS when the NHS won't take responsibility for over spending and wanting an endless pot of money? They need to take responsibility as well you know. Labour isn't a cure to the NHS, they couldn't sort the NHS out the last time they where in power could they?
> I had concerns and voiced them, so..
> No not from the daily fail. I don't even read the newspapers don't need to, you plaster them all over the political threads in here because you don't have your own opinion and have to use the presses opinion.


You honestly think the NHS is safe in Jeremy Hunt's hands. This government certainly have an endless pot of money it seems, £500m just to change the colour of a passport to name one example and tax cuts for people who can well afford it with austerity for the rest of us.

The NHS will certainly not be getting the £350m a week as promised on the red bus.

So, you're accusing me of not having my own opinion? Where do you get that from. If that was true I would have fallen for the Sun, Express and Mail editorials, backed Brexit and believe in Strong and stable leadership! Think about it. I'm often accused of being a Sun reader in these threads!

If you choose to be insulting may I remind you of your links to Daily Express articles earlier in the EU Referendum thread? Yes, you're entitled to agree with them and share them but you should look at yourself before slagging off others for doing that.

I quote newspaper sources if I agree with them, not because they tell me to.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> You honestly think the NHS is safe in Jeremy Hunt's hands.


Do you think the NHS is safer in Jeremy Corbyn's hands? Labour failed to cure the NHS's problems in there last term in Government.

Just for the record I don't like Jeremy Hunt myself and was furious that he got his job back, but what can I do about that I don't work in Government do I.


> This government certainly have an endless pot of money it seems, £500m just to change the colour of a passport to name one example and tax cuts for people who can well afford it with austerity for the rest of us.


This isn't policy though is it. It was something the press got hold of and thought they'd run a story on it. The money is not ear market for this is it at the moment and may well not be until after 2022.


> The NHS will certainly not be getting the £350m a week as promised on the red bus.


Probably not but the Tories did not make this promise did they so they aren't obliged to honour it. Remember the Tory Government of the day where remainers.


> So, you're accusing me of not having my own opinion? Where do you get that from. If that was true I would have fallen for the Sun, Express and Mail editorials, backed Brexit and believe in Strong and stable leadership.
> 
> If you choose to be insulting may I remind you of your links to Daily Express articles earlier in the EU Referendum thread? Yes, you're entitled to agree with them and share them but you should look at yourself before slagging off others for doing that.
> 
> I quote newspaper sources if I agree with them, not because they tell me to.


Touché


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Yes I know but Labour isn't the cure to these problems. I didn't say the Conservatives where either.


Thing is about UK parliament, it's not simply who is in power at the time. It's about actually having some opposition. At the moment and what is tying May in knots is that when the public actually voice opinion and a couple of Tory MP's rebel against her, she has to climb down. NI for self employed being a good example. That is what parliament is supposed to do, represent all sides of a debate. May was desparate to call the GE now as 29 MP's are under investigation for electoral fraud (result on the 9th) which, if found guilty would remove her majority. We need a voice of opposition in parliament. May will win, however it's important people are able to have a voice and where necessary have some ability to stop her. It's not about May vs Corbyn it's about people having a voice.


----------



## Happy Paws2

kimthecat said:


> and Spitting Image


That's the one I meant, I remember Ronald Reagan with a walnut for a brain just think what would make of Trump:Hilarious


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> It's about actually having some opposition.


Totally agree with you on this point but sadly the opposition is very weak.


> We need a voice of opposition in parliament.


 Totally agree with you but sadly there isn't a strong opposition at the moment.


> May will win, however it's important people are able to have a voice and where necessary have some ability to stop her.


True she probably will win. I don't know if that people voicing there opinion will work as an opposition unless there is a mass up rising and I can't honestly see that happening with the recent results so far. The only opposition I would say is across the border in Scotland but unfortunately no one in England, Wales, Northern Ireland or Gibralter can vote for them unless they move to Scotland.

Tim Farron/Lib Dems wants to become the opposition party to the next Government but I don't know if that will happen (just my opinion).


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> By the way the House of Coons and House of Lords will be voting on plenty more policies and bills before Brexit happens.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Tim Farron/Lib Dems wants to become the opposition party to the next Government but I don't know if that will happen (just my opinion).


Doesn't have to be a single party to be opposition. That is the key point you seem to be missing. It's not Labour vs Tory or Lib Dems vs Tory. It's Lib Dems + Labour + Greens + Monster Raving Looney Party. If they all say "that is wrong", they need to be able to reign in May. That is why people are talking about tactically voting. The fact that there is no single opposition party at present has highlighted a failure of UK democratic system. The system will not change but at this GE people can still ensure they have a voice speaking for them in parliament. Even May with loads of seats would have to consider things more carefully is she doesn't win the popular vote in absolute number terms.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> View attachment 309896


 
I didn't say that did I 
If I did it was a spell check error. Sorry  
Funny anyway


----------



## davidc

Doubt it means anything but Labour won the mayor election in my area by over 60%.
Anywsy, I don't think it's guaranteed the Tories will win, I just think the Tories want us to think that imo because then we might think "They're going to win, no point voting for the opposition."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-blasts-theresa-tories-10367457


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Doesn't have to be a single party to be opposition. That is the key point you seem to be missing. It's not Labour vs Tory or Lib Dems vs Tory. It's Lib Dems + Labour + Greens + Monster Raving Looney Party. If they all say "that is wrong", they need to be able to reign in May. That is why people are talking about tactically voting. The fact that there is no single opposition party at present has highlighted a failure of UK democratic system. The system will not change but at this GE people can still ensure they have a voice speaking for them in parliament. Even May with loads of seats would have to consider things more carefully is she doesn't win the popular vote in absolute number terms.


Thank you for explaining the tacticle voting thing as I honestly did not understand this as I thought it meant deliberately voting for an opposition party even if they are sh**e to just stop the Tories getting in again.  But I still can't see how tactical voting will make any difference if the Tories have the majority in Government, you would need the Tory party big donors to object to oust TM but then again if she was ousted the Tories would still be in power and would be until well after Brexit, 2022 as they aren't obliged to call another general election until then if they win this GE on 8th June 2017.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> But I still can't see how tactical voting will make any difference if the Tories have the majority in Government


At the moment May has a "slim" majority in parliament. Despite whips, if she has a policy which people are against, a handful of tory MP's may well rebel. In doing so there is no guarantee the policy will pass. This is what happened to May with NI changes for self employed. Enough tory MP's complained that she couldn't be sure it would get the necessary votes. Therefore Hammond had it all wrong and May wasn't responsible for the idea. It wasn't the will of the people and broke previous promises. Now if she had a larger majority in the government, you can guarantee that the policy would have now been voted on and passed even though public opposition would be the same.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> At the moment May has a "slim" majority in parliament. Despite whips, if she has a policy which people are against, a handful of tory MP's may well rebel.


Well at the moment no party members have any majority as Parliament has been dissolved until after the GE and technically there are no MP's they are just civil servants at the moment and all civil servants have to fight to retain there seats (Constituencies) as MP's after the GE.


> Now if she had a larger majority in the government, you can guarantee that the policy would have now been voted on and passed even though public opposition would be the same.


Theresa May is aiming to have a larger majority in Parliament by winning the GE.

Regarding Philip Hammond's policies on NI, how many times did Osborne U-turn so it's not a big deal that he u-turned. Yes Hammond may have broken party policies for 2015 and this is why he u-turned, mistakes happen, they are human just like you and me. The Manifestos will highlight what the new party policies will be and what each party intends to do over the next 5 years, these new policies will come into force on 9th June 2017 so the 2015 policies will be obsolete.


----------



## MollySmith

Goblin said:


> At the moment May has a "slim" majority in parliament. Despite whips, if she has a policy which people are against, a handful of tory MP's may well rebel. In doing so there is no guarantee the policy will pass. This is what happened to May with NI changes for self employed. Enough tory MP's complained that she couldn't be sure it would get the necessary votes. Therefore Hammond had it all wrong and May wasn't responsible for the idea. It wasn't the will of the people and broke previous promises. Now if she had a larger majority in the government, you can guarantee that the policy would have now been voted on and passed even though public opposition would be the same.


There's been a few snide remarks on PF from some less knowledgeable about oppositions and protest, and your posts sums up why it's important that we do protest. It's not about 'remoaning' it's about getting an opposition heard and making it clear that deals cannot just be made. In May's mind I'm sure that the GE is an apparent show of strength or unity if she wins but put together the non-voters and the vote for the opposition in a PR style of voting and it's a different outcome. Just like how the 12.9m who failed to vote in the EU referendum would have made critical difference last June.

Anyway dammit I started rant again! I wanted to say thank you, well put.


----------



## MollySmith

Happy Paws said:


> I wish they'd bring the Muppets back, it would be hilarious with todays politicians :Hilarious


Spitting Image, that has to come back!


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> I do have concerns about the NHS but you tell me do you think Labour can cure the problems with the NHS when the NHS won't take responsibility for over spending and wanting an endless pot of money? They need to take responsibility as well you know. Labour isn't a cure to the NHS, they couldn't sort the NHS out the last time they where in power could they?
> I had concerns and voiced them, so..
> No not from the daily fail. I don't even read the newspapers don't need to, you plaster them all over the political threads in here because you don't have your own opinion and have to use the presses opinion.


Still think cuts and austerity are worth it?

No one can argue this isn't unjust surely?
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/uk-has-more-billionaires-than-ever-before/ar-BBAP7M7


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Totally agree with you on this point but sadly the opposition is very weak. Totally agree with you but sadly there isn't a strong opposition at the moment. True she probably will win. I don't know if that people voicing there opinion will work as an opposition unless there is a mass up rising and I can't honestly see that happening with the recent results so far. The only opposition I would say is across the border in Scotland but unfortunately no one in England, Wales, Northern Ireland or Gibralter can vote for them unless they move to Scotland.
> 
> Tim Farron/Lib Dems wants to become the opposition party to the next Government but I don't know if that will happen (just my opinion).


Yes it's funny how the right wing media and general opinion is of Corbyn being "weak". I disagree as his performance in spite of the hatred shown towards him and the leadership challenge suggests he's anything but, which is what they're frightened of.

Has he gone on national television in a frenzy accusing others of plotting against him like May has? No!

If the media treated the "strong and stable" May in the way they've treated Corbyn how do you think she would have handled it?!


----------



## KittenKong

More passing the buck and blame everyone bar oneself for their failures from the much loved Jeremy Hunt.

EU will be to blame for the demise of the NHS!

And people will be stupid enough to believe that.....


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Still think cuts and austerity are worth it?
> 
> No one can argue this isn't unjust surely?
> http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/uk-has-more-billionaires-than-ever-before/ar-BBAP7M7
> View attachment 309898


I know, I saw this, this morning on the news 

Isn't having so many billionaires in the country a good thing as it brings business to the country and businesses want to setup here and bring jobs to the country and more people get into work?

The austerity period was hard for everyone but hasn't this ended for now? We have had record economic growth in the UK and record levels of employment. If the Government started raising taxes for the billionaires they would simply leave the UK and close there businesses over here, unemployment would rise again and the economy go into decline.

It is a difficult situation because yes the billionaires could plug some funding gaps via paying more tax but in doing so it would make the UK look less appealing for new businesses to setup over here and billionaires would not come over here. Without the rich billionaires over here this country would go to pot trust me.

There is no easy answer to this.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Thank you for explaining the tacticle voting thing as I honestly did not understand this as I thought it meant deliberately voting for an opposition party even if they are sh**e to just stop the Tories getting in again.  But I still can't see how tactical voting will make any difference if the Tories have the majority in Government, you would need the Tory party big donors to object to oust TM but then again if she was ousted the Tories would still be in power and would be until well after Brexit, 2022 as they aren't obliged to call another general election until then if they win this GE on 8th June 2017.


Well in many respects it does. If you want to vote tactically to keep May's majority low then you may have to vote for sh**e party. My area for instance has been a Lib Dem stronghold for many many years until 2015 when it went Tory with just over 50% of the votes. To stop the Tory getting this seat again I would have to vote Lib Dem as Labour came a pathetic 4th with less than 6% of the votes behind UKIP.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Yes it's funny how the right wing media and general opinion is of Corbyn being "weak". I disagree as his performance in spite of the hatred shown towards him and the leadership challenge suggests he's anything but, which is what they're frightened of.
> 
> Has he gone on national television in a frenzy accusing others of plotting against him like May has? No!
> 
> If the media treated the "strong and stable" May in the way they've treated Corbyn how do you think she would have handled it?!


But doesn't his own Parties MP's think he's weak? You'll find he hasn't got alot of support from his own party MP's, yes the press hasn't helped his cause or has Diane Abbott. You'll find he has complained recently (last few days), about the press to be precise.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 309900
> View attachment 309901
> View attachment 309902


The Tories are under no obligation to give £350 million pound to the NHS per week, they didn't make this pledge, so they don't have to honour this pledge.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Still think cuts and austerity are worth it?
> 
> No one can argue this isn't unjust surely?
> http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/uk-has-more-billionaires-than-ever-before/ar-BBAP7M7
> View attachment 309898


I agree with you it isn't unjust but I don't think that is what you meant. Why is having billionaires unjust? Would you like to see the National Lottery abolished for instance, or all sports stars and actors and crappy z list celebs put on a "maximum wage" or back to the good old labour days of super tax brackets explained in this old article. If so expect a mass exodus

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...s-haunted-by-the-sound-of-squeaking-pips.html

Ever since Labour lost the 1992 general election, it has sought to exorcise the high tax ghost that came to haunt the party when Denis Healey promised to "squeeze the rich until the pips squeak".

Under Labour in the Seventies, the top rate of income tax rose to 83 per cent and reached 98 per cent when an investment income surcharge was applied.

But while Healey is often remembered as the villain of the piece, it was Roy Jenkins who raised taxes on income to an all-time record of 136 per cent.

These penal rates were imposed on high earners during the 1968 economic crisis as a special income tax levy for one year only on "unearned income" or savings and investment returns.

John Whiting, a partner in accountants Price Waterhouse Coopers, said: "It meant a person with investment income of more than £6,000 would pay tax of 20 shillings and nine pence - or £1.04 today - for every £1 of income, while someone with investment income above £15,000 would pay total taxes of 27 shillings and three pence or £1.36 on every £1."

Britain's tax regime in the 1970s was one of the most punitive in the world and triggered an exodus of entrepreneurs and highly-paid stars such as David Bowie, who went to live in Switzerland, and the Rolling Stones, who left to record in the South of France.

When the Conservatives won the 1979 general election, Sir Geoffrey Howe cut the top rate of income tax from 80 per cent to 60 per cent - and the basic rate from 33 per cent to 30 per cent.

He reduced direct taxes by £4.5 billion and public spending by £4 billion in his first Budget. However, he raised an extra £4.2 billion in indirect taxes, including nearly doubling the rate of value added tax.

Cutting top-rate taxes to 40 per cent actually increased the revenue generated because people were less encouraged by the unfairness of the system to find ways to avoid paying.

Labour were slow to learn the lesson, however. In 1992, John Smith's "shadow Budget" - proposing increased NICs for people earning more than £21,000 a year and a new 50p income tax rate at above £40,000 a year - left the party wide open to Tory "tax bombshell" attacks.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Well in many respects it does. If you want to vote tactically to keep May's majority low then you may have to vote for sh**e party. My area for instance has been a Lib Dem stronghold for many many years until 2015 when it went Tory with just over 50% of the votes. To stop the Tory getting this seat again I would have to vote Lib Dem as Labour came a pathetic 4th with less than 6% of the votes behind UKIP.


Indeed. I'm voting Labour despite saying I wouldn't earlier following the Article 50 three line whip fiasco.

But I live in an area that could fall to the Tories.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> The Tories are under no obligation to give £350 million pound to the NHS per week, they didn't make this pledge, so they don't have to honour this pledge.


Really? Didn't Boris Johnson strongly predicted as the next PM at the time and Michael Gove not endorse words on the red bus????

Ok, you're right in the sense May herself never did.


----------



## Colliebarmy

BTW..........can we get out of Eurovision now too?


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Really? Didn't Boris Johnson strongly predicted as the next PM at the time and Michael Gove not endorse words on the red bus????
> 
> Ok, you're right in the sense May herself never did.


Both sides of the Referendum where a mixture of cross bench parties if I remember rightly so yes I am right in this instance. The Tories did not make this pledge. BTW Cameron and Osborne didn't make this pledge either.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Both sides of the Referendum where a mixture of cross bench parties if I remember rightly so yes I am right in this instance. The Tories did not make this pledge. BTW Cameron and Osborne didn't make this pledge either.


Of course they didn't. The NHS lie was one of many to entice Joe public to vote leave, which of course they did just as they're sleepwalking into an extreme right wing government.

If many of them realised voting leave would leave them poorer they wouldn't have done it.

Then, they'll probably be stupid enough to blame the EU when it all goes horribly wrong!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Really? Didn't Boris Johnson strongly predicted as the next PM at the time and Michael Gove not endorse words on the red bus????
> 
> Ok, you're right in the sense May herself never did.


The leave campaign was supported by these Labour MP's

Ronnie Campbell - Blyth Valley

John Cryer - Leyton and Wanstead

Frank Field - Birkenhead

Roger Godsiff - Birmingham Hall Green

Kate Hoey - Vauxhall

Kelvin Hopkins - Luton North

John Mann - Bassetlaw

Dennis Skinner - Bolsover

Graham Stringer - Blackley and Broughton

Gisela Stuart - Birmingham Edgbaston

and

*Other MPs backing Leave*
Gregory Campbell (Democratic Unionist Party - East Londonderry)

Douglas Carswell (UKIP - Clacton)

Nigel Dodds (DUP - Belfast North)

Jeffrey M. Donaldson (DUP - Lagan Valley)

Tom Elliott (UUP - Fermanagh and South Tyrone)

Ian Paisley (DUP - North Antrim)

Gavin Robinson (DUP - Belfast East)

Jim Shannon (DUP - Strangford)

David Simpson (DUP - Upper Bann)

Sammy Wilson (DUP - East Antrim)

Of the tory cabinet ministers or those attending cabinet meetings at the time of the campaign 24 supported remain and only 6 leave so how do you work out the the current PM who was actually one of the 24 who supported remain is responsible for the claims of the leave campaign? What she is responsible for is ensuring the results of that referendum are implemented and negotiating our exit.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> The leave campaign was supported by these Labour MP's
> 
> Ronnie Campbell - Blyth Valley
> 
> John Cryer - Leyton and Wanstead
> 
> Frank Field - Birkenhead
> 
> Roger Godsiff - Birmingham Hall Green
> 
> Kate Hoey - Vauxhall
> 
> Kelvin Hopkins - Luton North
> 
> John Mann - Bassetlaw
> 
> Dennis Skinner - Bolsover
> 
> Graham Stringer - Blackley and Broughton
> 
> Gisela Stuart - Birmingham Edgbaston
> 
> and
> 
> *Other MPs backing Leave*
> Gregory Campbell (Democratic Unionist Party - East Londonderry)
> 
> Douglas Carswell (UKIP - Clacton)
> 
> Nigel Dodds (DUP - Belfast North)
> 
> Jeffrey M. Donaldson (DUP - Lagan Valley)
> 
> Tom Elliott (UUP - Fermanagh and South Tyrone)
> 
> Ian Paisley (DUP - North Antrim)
> 
> Gavin Robinson (DUP - Belfast East)
> 
> Jim Shannon (DUP - Strangford)
> 
> David Simpson (DUP - Upper Bann)
> 
> Sammy Wilson (DUP - East Antrim)
> 
> Of the tory cabinet ministers or those attending cabinet meetings at the time of the campaign 24 supported remain and only 6 leave so how do you work out the the current PM who was actually one of the 24 who supported remain is responsible for the claims of the leave campaign? What she is responsible for is ensuring the results of that referendum are implemented and negotiating our exit.


Quite correct but didn't Labour in the main have their own Labour Leave group? With one or two exceptions, namely Stuart and Hoey, I don't recall Dennis Skinner emerging from the red bus standing alongside Boris Johnson and Michael Gove!

I hold May responsible for the claims of the leave campaign seeing she has changed her stance somewhat. If a Labour politician defected to the Tories and vice versa would you not say they wouldn't endorse the policies of their new party?

Also, had Boris Johnson become PM as was once widely predicted would you argue he wouldn't be responsible?


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I agree with you it isn't unjust but I don't think that is what you meant. Why is having billionaires unjust? Would you like to see the National Lottery abolished for instance, or all sports stars and actors and crappy z list celebs put on a "maximum wage" or back to the good old labour days of super tax brackets explained in this old article. If so expect a mass exodus
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...s-haunted-by-the-sound-of-squeaking-pips.html
> 
> Ever since Labour lost the 1992 general election, it has sought to exorcise the high tax ghost that came to haunt the party when Denis Healey promised to "squeeze the rich until the pips squeak".
> 
> Under Labour in the Seventies, the top rate of income tax rose to 83 per cent and reached 98 per cent when an investment income surcharge was applied.
> 
> But while Healey is often remembered as the villain of the piece, it was Roy Jenkins who raised taxes on income to an all-time record of 136 per cent.
> 
> These penal rates were imposed on high earners during the 1968 economic crisis as a special income tax levy for one year only on "unearned income" or savings and investment returns.
> 
> John Whiting, a partner in accountants Price Waterhouse Coopers, said: "It meant a person with investment income of more than £6,000 would pay tax of 20 shillings and nine pence - or £1.04 today - for every £1 of income, while someone with investment income above £15,000 would pay total taxes of 27 shillings and three pence or £1.36 on every £1."
> 
> Britain's tax regime in the 1970s was one of the most punitive in the world and triggered an exodus of entrepreneurs and highly-paid stars such as David Bowie, who went to live in Switzerland, and the Rolling Stones, who left to record in the South of France.
> 
> When the Conservatives won the 1979 general election, Sir Geoffrey Howe cut the top rate of income tax from 80 per cent to 60 per cent - and the basic rate from 33 per cent to 30 per cent.
> 
> He reduced direct taxes by £4.5 billion and public spending by £4 billion in his first Budget. However, he raised an extra £4.2 billion in indirect taxes, including nearly doubling the rate of value added tax.
> 
> Cutting top-rate taxes to 40 per cent actually increased the revenue generated because people were less encouraged by the unfairness of the system to find ways to avoid paying.
> 
> Labour were slow to learn the lesson, however. In 1992, John Smith's "shadow Budget" - proposing increased NICs for people earning more than £21,000 a year and a new 50p income tax rate at above £40,000 a year - left the party wide open to Tory "tax bombshell" attacks.


I certainly appreciate a lot of what you're saying but my argument is why the increase in billionaires when others are having to undergo cuts and other austerity measures?

Many are in employment and have been denied pay increases over the past 7 years so the argument about living of the state and being "spoon fed" doesn't apply.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Quite correct but didn't Labour in the main have their own Labour Leave group? With one or two exceptions, namely Stuart and Hoey, I don't recall Dennis Skinner emerging from the red bus standing alongside Boris Johnson and Michael Gove!
> 
> *I hold May responsible for the claims of the leave campaign seeing she has changed her stance somewhat. If a Labour politician defected to the Tories and vice versa would you not say they wouldn't endorse the policies of their new party?*
> 
> Also, had Boris Johnson become PM as was once widely predicted would you argue he wouldn't be responsible?


Sorry I don't understand why you blame Theresa May for the Brexit campaign, I know she decided to uphold the referendum result and promise to implement whatever the result was made by Cameron and promised in all the literature posted in peoples letter boxes from the remain campaigners, but also I didn't see her standing along the red bus you keep putting on here. She is honouring the promise Cameron made. Why would other MP's be to blame for defecting from Labour to the Tories or vice versa, to me that would suggest there is something wrong within that party eg poor leadership.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Quite correct but didn't Labour in the main have their own Labour Leave group? With one or two exceptions, namely Stuart and Hoey, I don't recall Dennis Skinner emerging from the red bus standing alongside Boris Johnson and Michael Gove!
> 
> I hold May responsible for the claims of the leave campaign seeing she has changed her stance somewhat. If a Labour politician defected to the Tories and vice versa would you not say they wouldn't endorse the policies of their new party?
> 
> Also, had Boris Johnson become PM as was once widely predicted would you argue he wouldn't be responsible?


I have no idea who emerged from the red bus as I didn't watch or read anything about the red bus when making my decision on how to vote and neither did a huge amount of other people. You keep posting clips from the Andrew Marr show this morning - did you also see the guy from Buzz feed (they monitor what is being talked about and shared by users of social media) who was explaining how much influence social media has these days. In case you hadn't noticed there was no Brexit party and no Remain party, just a group of people campaigning.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterso...ro-corbyn-news?utm_term=.mdOjZA5RZ#.ayYO8W678

Political debate on Facebook is being dominated by dozens of incredibly viral news stories in support of Jeremy Corbyn, despite the Conservatives holding a massive lead in national opinion polls, according to the first edition of the BuzzFeed News Social Barometer.

The most shared stories about the general election during the first fortnight of the campaign have been overwhelmingly positive about the Labour leader. By contrast, the only stories regarding Theresa May and the Conservatives which have gone viral are negative.

Many of the most viral stories are from non-mainstream sites, showing the growing influence of the new group of Alt-Left media outlets which have surged in popularity since the election of Corbyn as Labour leader.

However, it also suggests that many Conservative supporters are reluctant to publicly share positive articles about their party on social media - but are very happy to vote Tory in the privacy of the polling booth.

The most popular political article during the first two weeks of the election campaign was entitled "How many of Jeremy Corbyn's policies do you actually disagree with?" from the blog AnotherAngryVoice, which was shared almost 80,000 times.

This was closely followed by a guide to anti-Conservative tactical voting hosted on the image-sharing site infogr.am. A post on _The Canary_ with the headline "In only 72 hours, young people show they could have a nasty surprise in store for Theresa May" also made the top five, which was completed by two links - one liveblog and one comment piece - from _The Guardian_.

In total, six of the 20 most-shared election-related links on Facebook during the first fortnight of the election were from media sources which sit well outside the mainstream media.


----------



## KittenKong

SWC said (can't find your post here):









Indeed, but he didn't campaign with Johnson, Gove and Farage!

Perhaps you should see what the Socialist Labour Party say on EU membership. Labour's own UKIP if you like....


----------



## Dr Pepper

KittenKong said:


> Has he gone on national television in a frenzy accusing others of plotting against him like May has? No!


To be fair nobody needs to plot against him. His opponents just leave him and Mrs Abbott to get on with it themselves.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> SWC said (can't find your post here):
> View attachment 309909
> 
> 
> Indeed, but he didn't campaign with Johnson, Gove and Farage!
> 
> Perhaps you should see what the Socialist Labour Party say on EU membership. Labour's own UKIP if you like....
> View attachment 309910
> View attachment 309911


Well if we pulled out of the EU according to what labour have said above wouldn't it save the UK £55 million a day instead of paying into there money pot?
The finances the Tories are doing at the moment for the UK are before brexit happens we will save money after brexit has happened not before brexit so the UK doesn't have this money to spend at this present moment in time as it is being paid to the EU.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Colliebarmy said:


> BTW..........can we get out of Eurovision now too?


You'd think so, because just like the EU we are one of the few countries that bankroll the rest of Europe to take part, hence our "free pass" every year. Might also seem like we were siding with Mr Putin!!


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> However, it also suggests that many Conservative supporters are reluctant to publicly share positive articles about their party on social media - but are very happy to vote Tory in the privacy of the polling booth.


Reminds me of the early '80s anti Thatcher protest songs etc, such as The Beat's "Stand Down Margaret",. until the Falklands war changed her fortunes.

The Poll Tax saw a re-emergement of this activity. "There's ain't no way we're gonna pay, the Poll tax bill is on its way".....


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Well if we pulled out of the EU according to what labour have said above wouldn't it save the UK £55 million a day instead of paying into there money pot?
> The finances the Tories are doing at the moment for the UK are before brexit happens we will save money after brexit has happened not before brexit so the UK doesn't have this money to spend at this present moment in time as it is being paid to the EU.


I completely dismiss the policy as detailed in the Socialist Labour manifesto. I uploaded it to show it isn't just the far right who endorse Brexit.

Something I never will personally speaking.

Do you honestly believe the Tories are going to re-invest the money in to public services knowing their track record?

You might as well say you believe the words on the red bus if you do!


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> I completely dismiss the policy as detailed in the Socialist Labour manifesto. I uploaded it to show it isn't just the far right who endorse Brexit.
> 
> Something I never will personally speaking.
> 
> Do you honestly believe the Tories are going to re-invest the money in to public services knowing their track record?


Let me put it to you like this, at this moment in time I plan to vote Conservative for the simple reason that I believe May can pull this off, Brexit that is. Now it isn't going to be easy for her or her Government at all over the next 5 years, there are many hurdles for them to get across in the UK (debates need to take place and many new laws passed) and EU before Brexit is achieved. The Conservatives probably won't get in, in the next GE in 2022 due to the financial squeeze they do to pay for Brexit, so the post Brexit spending will be down to a new Government in 2022 so vice versa Labour gets into power on the 8th June 2017 they would get the blame. Don't you understand that the money won't be there to pay extra money to the NHS etc over the next 2 years and money will have to be found from other sources to carry on running the UK. Once the UK leaves the UK will probably go through a lull period as it adjusts its finances. If the Conservatives get in, in 2022 I honestly wouldn't like to be in there shoes as they are going to be judged on various issues. The spending from the money saved from leaving the EU will probably start 4 to 5 years time or possibly longer.

Of course this all depends on the deal the UK gets and as I said to you earlier the negotiations may go the way leavers want or remainers want it or a mixture of both, we simply do not know yet but there is going to have to be give and take on both sides of the negotiations, EU and UK. The way the Tories are being at the moment is them aiming high for the negotiations but they may not get these expectations which will reflect on how voters vote in 5 years time. This is hypothetically speaking of course as the Tories might not get in, in this GE on the 8th June 2017 but whoever does get in on the 8th June 2017 will be judge on how they delivered Brexit and this will be the main way people will vote in the GE in 2022.


----------



## Arnie83

stockwellcat said:


> The Tories are under no obligation to give £350 million pound to the NHS per week, they didn't make this pledge, so they don't have to honour this pledge.


Strictly speaking you are of course right, but the Tories are justifying their hard Brexit by saying it was the will of the people and they therefore have to deliver it.

Well the people wanted an extra 350m per week to go to the NHS as they were led to believe would happen if they voted to leave the EU.

It's just more proof that the Tories will deliver "the will of the people" only when it coincides with the will of the back bench Brexiteers who are pulling May's strings.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Let me put it to you like this, at this moment in time I plan to vote Conservative for the simple reason that I believe May can pull this off, Brexit that is. Now it isn't going to be easy for her or her Government at all over the next 5 years, there are many hurdles for them to get across in the UK and EU before Brexit is achieved. The Conservatives probably won't get in, in the next GE in 2022 due to the financial squeeze they do to pay for Brexit, so the post Brexit spending will be down to a new Government in 2022 so vice versa Labour gets into power on the 8th June 2017 they would get the blame. Don't you understand that the money won't be there to pay extra money to the NHS etc over the next 2 years and money will have to be found from other sources to carry on running the UK. Once the UK leaves the UK will probably go through a lull period as it adjusts its finances. If the Conservatives get in, in 2022 I honestly wouldn't like to be in there shoes as they are going to be judged on various issues. The spending from the money saved from leaving the EU will probably start 4 to 5 years time or possibly longer.
> 
> Of course this depends on the deal the UK gets and as I said to you earlier the negotiations may go the way leavers want or remainers want it or a mixture of both, we simply do not know yet but there is going to have to be give and take on both sides of the negotiations, EU and UK. The way the Tories are being at the moment is them aiming high for the negotiations but they may not get these expectations which will reflect on how voters vote in 5 years time. This is hyperthetically speaking of course as the Tories might not get in, in this GE on the 8th June 2017 but whoever does get in will be the party that will be judged in the GE in 2022.


Ahem, were you not hoping for May to walk away without a deal recently?

I get very confused by your posts sometimes.

You also said the general election wasn't all about Brexit, now you're saying it is!

I don't call throwing wobblers and claiming the EU are influencing the election aiming high at all.

You'd think she was preparing for war with this neurotic like behaviour.

Not a way to behave if you want the 27 member states to listen to her.

A year ago the EU were still our allies. Now they're sworn enemies of May's Britain.

So much for her vision of a strong and happy new working relationship with the EU!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> I certainly appreciate a lot of what you're saying but my argument is why the increase in billionaires when others are having to undergo cuts and other austerity measures?
> 
> Many are in employment and have been denied pay increases over the past 7 years so the argument about living of the state and being "spoon fed" doesn't apply.


So take the top two from your list

*The richest people are Sri and Gopi Hinduja, with £16.2bn.

The brothers, aged 81 and 77, are among 134 billionaires on the list and have made their fortune from investments in industries such as oil and gas, automotive, IT, energy, media, banking, property and healthcare sectors.

Their latest project is converting the Old War Office in London into a five-star hotel and luxury apartments.
*
Note that they make investments in other businesses and their latest project is to convert an old war office into a 5 star hotel. How many jobs do you think that has created? builders, decorators, carpet layers, with demand for products like carpets, furniture, computers etc. When the hotel is complete all the staff it will employ? the taxes they will be paying? Or what about Dyson who is somewhere on that list - how many jobs do you think he has created over the years and how much tax not only paid by him but by all the staff he employs?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Arnie83 said:


> Strictly speaking you are of course right, but the Tories are justifying their hard Brexit by saying it was the will of the people and they therefore have to deliver it.
> 
> Well the people wanted an extra 350m per week to go to the NHS as they were led to believe would happen if they voted to leave the EU.
> 
> It's just more proof that the Tories will deliver "the will of the people" only when it coincides with the will of the back bench Brexiteers who are pulling May's strings.


What evidence is there that the people who voted Brexit did so because of the red bus and the extra 350 m, most of us on here who voted Brexit have said that did not influence our decision.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> I don't call throwing wobblers and claiming the EU are influencing the election aiming high at all.


 Certain EU leaders have been throwing wobblers as you put it, what would you call Junkers behaviour then. Even Merkel has had a go at him.



> You'd think she was preparing for war


She isn't preparing for war she is preparing for one of the most difficult negotiations in recent history. I think the war statement is a bit far fetched.



> Not a way to behave


The press you mean not Theresa May. Alot of the recent tension has come from the press not the Government.



> A year ago the EU were still our allies.


They still are.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Ahem, were you not hoping for May to walk away without a deal recently?


 I didn't say that. I said a not so hard brexit deal or softer brexit deal which may happen yet, I did not say without a deal.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So take the top two from your list
> 
> *The richest people are Sri and Gopi Hinduja, with £16.2bn.
> 
> The brothers, aged 81 and 77, are among 134 billionaires on the list and have made their fortune from investments in industries such as oil and gas, automotive, IT, energy, media, banking, property and healthcare sectors.
> 
> Their latest project is converting the Old War Office in London into a five-star hotel and luxury apartments.
> *
> Note that they make investments in other businesses and their latest project is to convert an old war office into a 5 star hotel. How many jobs do you think that has created? builders, decorators, carpet layers, with demand for products like carpets, furniture, computers etc. When the hotel is complete all the staff it will employ? the taxes they will be paying? Or what about Dyson who is somewhere on that list - how many jobs do you think he has created over the years and how much tax not only paid by him but by all the staff he employs?


Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Dyson cease production in the UK and move it to China?

And I bet those the above will employ for minimum wage and probably zero hour contracts too.

It's obscene the few have so much money when there's people starving in some parts of the world.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Dyson cease production in the UK and move it to China?
> 
> And I bet those the above will employ for minimum wage and probably zero hour contracts too.
> 
> It's obscene the few have so much money when there's people starving in some parts of the world.


Yes sorry he did move production to the far east but his product is still sold here creating jobs for the people who sell it.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> You also said the general election wasn't all about Brexit, now you're saying it is!


I have tried looking at the GE without involving Brexit but you can't here is why, it is going to be the main thing for which ever Party is in Government from the 9th June 2017 to deal with and they won't have much time time deal with anything else or will Parliament. Parliament will be debating new laws and passing them and the Government will be in negotiations with the EU.

There you go. Hope that answers your question? 

I did try not to make my decision without Brexit as the deciding factor but I couldn't.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Nope, that's not financial support that's giving us back some of the money we paid, as I said we are one of the few net contributors. Do you see a homeless person and put a fiver in their pot but take out a tenner and say "there hope you appreciate the financial support I've just given you"?


Did you read the FT article? For some reason their conclusion was different to yours. But then, they are only from FT, what would they know. 
https://www.ft.com/content/202a60c0-cfd8-11e5-831d-09f7778e7377


----------



## Guest

stockwellcat said:


> Le Pen is not talking about favours, she sympathies with the UK on Brexit and wants a Frexit and to crash out of the Euro currency. So if she wins tomorrow of course we'll have a friend around the negotiating table when they start and no doubt France's EU Referendum would be under way. But I am only speeking hypothetically as we don't know who will win the French Elections tomorrow yet. Don't forget you can't trust the polls.


So this is where it has down to, finding friends in a nazi party. You really support what Le Pen wants to achieve? Is that what Brexit was then, nothing to do with getting a better life for British people and more money for NHS etc. Now when it looks there will be not more money, but less money, it boils down to immigration. That is the common team for Putin, Le Pen, Ukip, Trump, our Basic Finn Party, Erdogan etc. All nationalist bigots, without any plans to improve anyone´s lives apart from their own party members. Nice friends indeed.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> Did you read the FT article? For some reason their conclusion was different to yours. But then, they are only from FT, what would they know.
> https://www.ft.com/content/202a60c0-cfd8-11e5-831d-09f7778e7377


Well I scanned it. Had nothing to do with your claim we receive financial support from the EU, we don't. Every other country in the EU has access to the same benefits we do, we just subsidise many of their membership fees.

It also seems to be forgetting about the rest of the world out there we trade with, how much better might we have done outside the EU? The EU is mainly about trade within the EU and putting up borders to countries outside the EU. There's a whole world out there we can now trade with on terms the UK negotiations not the EU. Yes I'm sure without a doubt our trade within the EU has benefited by being a member. Our trade outside the EU, our growing market, hasn't. But that's not a debate for the general election thread.


----------



## Mirandashell

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes sorry he did move production to the far east but his product is still sold here creating jobs for the people who sell it.


Bit difficult to sell them to people who are out of work cos all the production has gone.


----------



## stockwellcat.

MrsZee said:


> So this is where it has down to, finding friends in a nazi party. You really support what Le Pen wants to achieve?


No not at all.


> Is that what Brexit was then, nothing to do with getting a better life for British people and more money for NHS etc. Now when it looks there will be no money, but less money, it boils down to immigration. That is the common team for Putin, Le Pen, Ukip, Trump, our Basic Finn Party, Erdogan etc. All nationalist bigots, without any plans to improve anyone´s lives apart from their own party members. Nice friends indeed.


Of course I support better lives for everyone after Brexit and more money for the NHS etc. I was making a hypothetical point that if and only if Le Pen gets in it would weaken the EU's negotiating hand somewhat. I do not support anything the Nazis or extremists do. The reality is there that she may win unless you can solidly prove she can't. France and the French people don't really have a good choice of potential President's to vote for today like we don't have a good choice for potential PM's in the UK for our General Election on the 8th June.


----------



## Arnie83

rottiepointerhouse said:


> What evidence is there that the people who voted Brexit did so because of the red bus and the extra 350 m, most of us on here who voted Brexit have said that did not influence our decision.


Polling showed 2 weeks before the referendum that 47% of people believed the bus. Internal polling by Vote Leave showed it to be a vote winner, so they kept pushing it. The leader of one of the Leave campaigns said afterwards that without that promise they would never have won.

Many people would have seen through the lies, especially when they were exposed as such, and it's good that most on here apparently did so, but many didn't. But we've gone over this many times in other threads and I'll leave it there.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Mirandashell said:


> Bit difficult to sell them to people who are out of work cos all the production has gone.


I'm not defending him for moving production abroad, I don't know enough about manufacturing costs to do that and yes it sounds like 800 jobs were lost when he did so which is not good but his product being sold still creates jobs as they remain one of the most popular cleaners in the UK.

http://www.euromonitor.com/vacuum-cleaners-in-the-united-kingdom/report

Dyson remained the leading player in vacuum cleaners in the UK in 2016. Its continued strong performance was largely owed to its robust and long-established brand equity and consumer perceptions about owning Dyson products as a status symbol. Ultimately, its products are seen as high quality with a design-led appeal and, despite the products' premium pricing, Dyson continued to lead by some margin.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Dyson cease production in the UK and move it to China?
> 
> And I bet those the above will employ for minimum wage and probably zero hour contracts too.
> 
> It's obscene the few have so much money when there's people starving in some parts of the world.


Sorry coming back to this again but you do realise that in some parts of the world your wealth is obscene. You didn't answer my earlier question about what should be done to "redistribute the wealth" do you think super tax brackets should be reintroduced or that certain people such as footballers and celebrities and inventors should have a maximum wage levels?


----------



## Guest

stockwellcat said:


> Le Pen is not talking about favours, she sympathies with the UK on Brexit and wants a Frexit and to crash out of the Euro currency. So if she wins tomorrow of course we'll have a friend around the negotiating table when they start and no doubt France's EU Referendum would be under way. But I am only speeking hypothetically as we don't know who will win the French Elections tomorrow yet. Don't forget you can't trust the polls.


You´d rather have Le Pen to win, just because that will weaken France and EU? Would you have thought two years ago that you will ever support her? Talk about spin doctors..



Dr Pepper said:


> Well I scanned it. Had nothing to do with your claim we receive financial support from the EU, we don't. Every other country in the EU has access to the same benefits we do, we just subsidise many of their membership fees.
> 
> It also seems to be forgetting about the rest of the world out there we trade with, how much better might we have done outside the EU? The EU is mainly about trade within the EU and putting up borders to countries outside the EU. There's a whole world out there we can now trade with on terms the UK negotiations not the EU. Yes I'm sure without a doubt our trade within the EU has benefited by being a member. Our trade outside the EU, our growing market, hasn't. But that's not a debate for the general election thread.


Looks like you missed the point that one reason it was so easy for any EU country to have business with Japanise, Chinese, US etc. countries, that they needed to do the paper work only once. One huge inner market. That was beneficial for UK, like for all EU countries.
Now there will be two market areas. One for UK and one for EU. Which area do you think is more lucrative to have one´s "basis"? Naturally all will do business with UK, the question is what is the price for that? And how much can small businesses to afford? Or even big businesses. UK will most likely lower business taxes to make it more lucrative investment are, but that means less money for British people. What is good about that? Rich don´t care, they like that, but poor and middle class people will pay the price.


----------



## stockwellcat.

MrsZee said:


> You´d rather have Le Pen to win, just because that will weaken France and EU?


Not really no.


> Would you have thought two years ago that you will ever support her?


 I don't support the woman.
Regarding "The Pen" I don't really give two bleeding hoots what happens in France. Wish I never said anything now.


----------



## Guest

stockwellcat said:


> Not really no. I don't support the woman.
> T Regarding "The Pen" I don't really give two bleeding hoots what happens in France. Wish I never said anything now.


Fair enough. And I am glad to know that, as I think you are way more sensible than that, and misunderstood you. She really doesn´t need any support, neither do her friends Putin and Trump.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Sorry coming back to this again but you do realise that in some parts of the world your wealth is obscene. You didn't answer my earlier question about what should be done to "redistribute the wealth" do you think super tax brackets should be reintroduced or that certain people such as footballers and celebrities and inventors should have a maximum wage levels?


So I'll answer that for you.

As regards footballers for example, yes their talent is recognised and would expect them to earn a great deal more than me, but why to the extent of what some are paid?

I'm all for compromise right, so why not a cap at £1bn?

Surely wealth of £100,000m will be more than enough to allow a luxury lifestyle?


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Not really no. I don't support the woman.
> Regarding "The Pen" I don't really give two bleeding hoots what happens in France. Wish I never said anything now.


Well I care very much. Le Pen is politically France's own Theresa May.

I have more faith in Europe than the UK if Holland and Austria have anything to go by. But too soon to predict the French result.

If the vile fascist La Theresa Trump Le Pen wins we'll immediately cancel our planned trip to Paris in September.

I'm sure others will follow suit.


----------



## Happy Paws2

KittenKong said:


> Well I care very much. Le Pen is politically France's own Theresa May.
> 
> I have more faith in Europe than the UK if Holland and Austria have anything to go by. But too soon to predict the French result.
> 
> If the vile fascist La Theresa Trump Le Pen wins we'll immediately *cancel our planned trip to Paris in September.
> 
> I'm sure others will follow suit.*


Wouldn't stop me going to France I'd rather be there than here.


----------



## Arnie83

KittenKong said:


> Well I care very much. Le Pen is politically France's own Theresa May.
> 
> I have more faith in Europe than the UK if Holland and Austria have anything to go by. *But too soon to predict the French result.*
> 
> If the vile fascist La Theresa Trump Le Pen wins we'll immediately cancel our planned trip to Paris in September.
> 
> I'm sure others will follow suit.


The odds have been shortening on Macron all day - generally 1/20 on now - and lengthening on Le Pen - generally 10/1 against.

They've been wrong before, but not that wrong, so it's looking good.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> So I'll answer that for you.
> 
> As regards footballers for example, yes their talent is recognised and would expect them to earn a great deal more than me, but why to the extent of what some are paid?
> 
> I'm all for compromise right, so why not a cap at £1bn?
> 
> Surely wealth of £100,000m will be more than enough to allow a luxury lifestyle?


I have no idea why footballers are paid what they are but I guess they might argue that their career is fairly short lived and so they make the money while they can to try and see them through their very long retirement years. I'm not sure anyone has to right to tell someone else they have enough money and set a cap on it. A lot of very wealthy people are workaholics and don't want to stop working and why should they have to because the amount of money they have upsets someone else? I'm not even sure it has to do with living a luxury lifestyle, for some the drive to keep working and keep making money is high and many then do a good deal of work - set up charities etc.


----------



## Satori

KittenKong said:


> Surely wealth of £100,000m will be more than enough to allow a luxury lifestyle?


A hundred billion? Should allow way beyond a mere luxury lifestyle.


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> You'd be quite surprised, shocked even, by the number of people who actually believe you can just walk into a food bank, as though it was the local supermarket, and help yourself any time you like.
> People are so out of touch with reality because, half the time they've never had to live it.
> 
> I did indeed Noush'
> 
> But let's be honest about it, life is _'complex'_ innit and surviving is even more _'complex'_. The needy and the greedy have to make up their short falls somewhere because there's phuq all money to be made in politics.


There's no excuse for ignorance imo. But its the wilful ignorance of the 'I'm alright jacks' that really galls me - the government apologists defending austerity.

Everyone should watch this video or watch the Ken Loach movie "I Daniel Blake" as recommended by SNPs Mhairi Black - I hope people will watch her fantastic speech to Parliament.

. These are desperate human beings not freeloaders. People can't just pop into food bank & help themselves fgs. There but for the grace of God, hey Zaros x When we have to pay for our own health care, many of these 'I'm alright jacks' may well find themselves in the shoes of our poorest - as indeed my any one of us bar the very wealthy. Who knows what's round the corner. 
'


----------



## stuaz

KittenKong said:


> Well I care very much. Le Pen is politically France's own Theresa May.
> 
> I have more faith in Europe than the UK if Holland and Austria have anything to go by. But too soon to predict the French result.
> 
> If the vile fascist La Theresa Trump Le Pen wins we'll immediately cancel our planned trip to Paris in September.
> 
> I'm sure others will follow suit.


I highly doubt the average person will cancel trips to France due to Le Pen winning.


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...nance-minister-yanis-varoufakis-a7721151.html
> View attachment 309866
> View attachment 309868
> View attachment 309869


I love Yanis Varoufakis. Hes a man of honour & integrity - plus he's super intelligent! (& good looking )

If only people would listen to what he has to say.

,


----------



## noushka05

@Dr Pepper, not sure if you missed this? I didn't want you to think I was welching out of a bet. Because I'm not, I just need to see your references first.


noushka05 said:


> Before I shake on this bet, & I'm not interested in hearsay, could you show me the references that you evaluated that swayed you to come to the conclusion the NHS is safe in this governments hands so I can evaluate them for myself please?
> 
> Privatisation takes money out of the NHS & puts in private pockets. PFIs & now this massive increase in privatisation are having a negative impact on services so could you please explain why parts of the NHS may 'need' privatising when it costs us more & delivers less efficient care?
> 
> As I said before the tories _have_ 'restructured it'. In 2012. It cost us billions. Cameron admitted it was the worst mistake the tories had made - yet they are carrying on with their 'restructuring'. You think May is going to stop?
> View attachment 309767


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> I doubt very much if she really thinks she will get every she asks for, its about negotiating , you never get what you ask for so you aim high and end up with more than you would if you set the bar low.


She seems to sabotaging any hope of a good deal. http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/theresa-may-eu-brexit-negotiations-a7718441.html

*Theresa May is destroying Britain's reputation in the EU and jeopardising negotiations*
The Prime Minister's rhetoric, and its enthusiastic reception on the British right, will make striking a beneficial deal with the EU so much harder


----------



## kimthecat

stuaz said:


> I highly doubt the average person will cancel trips to France due to Le Pen winning.


 i think people would be more put off by terrorist attacks.


----------



## stuaz

kimthecat said:


> i think people would be more put off by terrorist attacks.


Sad but true.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> You´d rather have Le Pen to win, just because that will weaken France and EU? Would you have thought two years ago that you will ever support her? Talk about spin doctors..
> 
> Looks like you missed the point that one reason it was so easy for any EU country to have business with Japanise, Chinese, US etc. countries, that they needed to do the paper work only once. One huge inner market. That was beneficial for UK, like for all EU countries.
> Now there will be two market areas. One for UK and one for EU. Which area do you think is more lucrative to have one´s "basis"? Naturally all will do business with UK, the question is what is the price for that? And how much can small businesses to afford? Or even big businesses. UK will most likely lower business taxes to make it more lucrative investment are, but that means less money for British people. What is good about that? Rich don´t care, they like that, but poor and middle class people will pay the price.


Unless we provide more favorable terms for both the UK and other countries than the EU has, and why couldn't we? As I said the EU is mainly interested about trade within the EU. Still waiting for how much financial support we get from the EU, you know Cornwall, farmers etc that you quoted compared to how much we pay in. I know the answer, have a quick Google and find out for yourself.



noushka05 said:


> @Dr Pepper, not sure if you missed this? I didn't want you to think I was welching out of a bet. Because I'm not, I just need to see your references first.


Didn't miss it thanks, but said I had no further comment - probably!! I never said it would be safer in anybody's hands, that was kinda the whole point, I said it would still be here whoever wins the election (or something like that I can't be bothered to go back and check my post word for word).


----------



## Arnie83

Looks like 65.5% Macron 35.5% Le Pen


----------



## kimthecat

Phew ! Thats a relief.
Le pen is making a speech now. 

Off topic : I find it annoying they keep mentioning that his wife is 24 years older . S o what !


----------



## stockwellcat.

Emmanuel Macron elected President with 65.1% of votes. Marine Le Pen has conceded with just 34.9% of votes.










Congratulations President Emmanuel Macron.

http://m.france24.com/en/


----------



## Odin_cat

Well done France!


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> .
> 
> Didn't miss it thanks, never said it would be safer in anybody's hands, that was kinda the whole point, I said it would still be here whoever wins the election (or something like that I can't be bothered to go back and check my post word for word).


You said you'd evaluated all sides of the debate & so have I, except, unlike you, I have seen nothing at all to make me feel confident the NHS will be here in 2022. Its not difficult to link references, I'd be very grateful to see them please.

You also didn't answer my question about privatisation. Why would we ever 'need' to privatise any part of our NHS?



Colliebarmy said:


> We have been - and are - a 2 party state but under Blar's "New Labour" what was the difference between the 2 parties?


Its true New labour adopted Thatchers neoliberalism albeit a far more humane version - but even I can accept it didn't prevent them making huge strides in furthering social & environmental progress. They may have been 'tory lite' but clearly there were big differences.

I know without checking that many of these are accurate, but I haven't fact checked the ones I don't know about.


----------



## noushka05

Thank goodness France had more sense than the USA did. Unfortunately, I don't think we will. I think we'll continue with our downward slide.


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> Thank goodness France had more sense than the USA did. Unfortunately, I don't think we will. I think we'll continue with our downward slide.


I had every faith in them as I did the Austrians and Dutch.

I feel a very proud European this evening.


----------



## stockwellcat.

The new figures are 65.5% to Macron and 34.5% to Le Pen.

Congratulations President Emmanuel Macron.

Will be interesting to watch what he does as he is an outsider to politics, a banker (that was his previous career) if I am not mistaken. Emmanuel Macron has no political experience like Donald Trump.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> You said you'd evaluated all sides of the debate & so have I, except, unlike you, I have seen nothing at all to make me feel confident the NHS will be here in 2022. Its not difficult to link references, I'd be very grateful to see them please.
> 
> You also didn't answer my question about privatisation. Why would we ever 'need' to privatise any part of our NHS?


ONCE AGAIN, I SAID THE NHS WILL STILL BE HERE IN 2022. That's my judgement based on the information out there that's available to all, plus my experience. To take on the bet you have to BE SURE your experience and take on TODAY'S politics say different. *That's the gamble, put your money where your mouth is.*

I did answer your questions on privatisation, I said something along the lines of "many sectors of the NHS have successfully been run by the private sector for many years", again I can't be bothered to look back for my exact quote.

You are not so confident on betting the NHS will NOT still be here in 2022, even if Mrs May wins are you?


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Still waiting for how much financial support we get from the EU, you know Cornwall, farmers etc that you quoted compared to how much we pay in.


You still haven't explained how you can dismiss the other advantages of things like the single market other than it doesn't serve your purposes. Then again you ignore inconvenient details like facts.


----------



## kimthecat

I wish we had a centralist party . good luck to him. 

Back to our Election. on the BBC news , some bloke said that raising income tax on incomes over £80.000 wont begin to cover all the things Labour promises to do and they will have to raise National insurance and VAT.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> You still haven't explained how you can dismiss the other advantages of things like the single market other than it doesn't serve your purposes. Then again you ignore inconvenient details like facts.


Yes I have. Read ALL my posts before making assumptions. But just for you, once again - I do not doubt for one minute the UK has benefited from trade within the EU thanks to being a EU member. Go on Goblin, go on, have a look back and you'll see I've already said this. BUT IT DOESN'T SERVE THE PURPOSE OF A TROLL TO DO SO, DOES IT


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> ONCE AGAIN, I SAID THE NHS WILL STILL BE HERE IN 2022. That's my judgement based on the information out there that's available to all, plus my experience. To take on the bet you have to BE SURE your experience and take on TODAY'S politics say different.
> 
> I did answer your questions on privatisation, I said something along the lines of "many sectors of the NHS have successfully been run by the private sector for many years", again I can't be bothered to look back for my exact quote.


Look, I wasn't rude to you, all I asked was for you wont provide the references that led you to your conclusion, whats so hard about that? I don't know what you've seen do I? so how am I supposed to find them myself?. You're so sure the NHS will still be here in 2022, you must have seen some pretty convincing information to override all the negative information out there.

You say you've evaluated the evidence yet say the NHS needs to be 'restructured', seemingly unaware of the massive FACT that the tories did restructure it in 2012 - it is the biggest 'restructure' in its entire history.. One of the Tories main election pledges was that there would be 'No top down reorganisation of the NHS'. Its this 'reorganisation' that has brought our NHS to its knees. It went from surplus to massive deficit.



















My FIL is getting good health care at the moment too, but have you considered the true level of the NHS crisis is being masked by the heroic efforts of staff trying to keep patients safe & prevent NHS services from collapsing?

There are huge numbers of NHS staff on social media desperately trying to get the masses to wake up to what the tories are doing. They're not scaremongering, they're at their wits end. The tories are treating them despicably, they are carrying the weight of this manufactured crisis. These are our most trusted professionals - we trust them with our lives. They're telling us the tories are destroying our precious NHS & replacing it with a two tiered system based on the failed American health service.

Don't you think the ramped up privatisation is draining our NHS of money & fragmenting services?. Private providers are there to make a profit first & foremost. Here are a few examples for you to evaluate..
*
NHS funds diverted to private sector*

https://www.ft.com/content/273f2126-0e51-11e7-b030-768954394623

Private providers can now SUE our NHS -
*Virgin Care sues NHS after losing Surrey child services deal 
Branson-run group disputes three-year contract worth £82m given to consortium*

https://www.ft.com/content/297e7714-089f-11e7-97d1-5e720a26771b










Noam Chomsky explains exactly what the tories are doing to our NHS.










STPs will be the final nail in the coffin of our NHS. More top down reorganisation! Please can I see your references which counter my information? Thanks.


----------



## noushka05

*Caroline Lucas*‏Verified [email protected]*CarolineLucas* 21h21 hours ago

_Simple question to Jeremy Hunt: how can you justify corporate tax cuts while our NHS_
_is starved of funds & people treated in corridors__?_

*Dr Kailash Chand OBE*‏@*KailashChandOBE* 21h21 hours ago

_A&E waits are almost 5 times higher than in 2010, &timely access to primary care has become difficult if not impossible under HUNT !_








*NHS Million*‏@*NHSMillion* 21h21 hours ago

_We can't allow all of these dangerous cuts to continue beyond 8th June_



















.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Yes I have. Read ALL my posts before making assumptions. But just for you, once again - I do not doubt for one minute the UK has benefited from trade within the EU thanks to being a EU member. Go on Goblin, go on, have a look back and you'll see I've already said this. BUT IT DOESN'T SERVE THE PURPOSE OF A TROLL TO DO SO, DOES IT


And once again, attack, call names as you don't have an answer... You keep calling for only the financial aspect for "proof" as you know very well when you pay for a service, you cannot judge the value by how much money you may potentially get back. Whilst acknowledging it exists, when forced, you totally ignore the service aspect if you care to go back and have a look. So instead of calling people a troll why not include the value of growth to the UK economy and all the other advantages given to the UK from the EU when judging EU membership's worth?


----------



## noushka05

School head teachers have just released this video. Absolutely shocking its come to this.

215811967[/MEDIA]]





215811967[/MEDIA]]School funding is in crisis from NAHT on Vimeo.


----------



## Goblin




----------



## noushka05

Goblin said:


>


Jonathan Pie is brilliant!


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> There's no excuse for ignorance imo. But its the wilful ignorance of the 'I'm alright jacks' that really galls me - the government apologists defending austerity.
> Everyone should watch this video


I've watched many quite harrowing poverty, homeless and hungry documentaries, Noush', this one included. But don't ask me why I deliberately subject myself to viewing such desperate misery because I think the only reasonable answer I could possibly give you is, to remind myself of the lucky little 845t4rd I truly am.

And you're absolutely right; There by the grace of God..... folks ought to remember that before loosely, carelessly and thoughtlessly condemning people far less fortunate than they themselves are.

Disgraceful isn't it, the 21st century and still we see the ghosts and images from Dickens'classics on our streets today. I guess Victorian Times never really went away, and like so many who have lost their goods and chattels through no fault of their own, they are isolated and left to wander life devoid of any great expectations.

Have you seen this?


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> I think we'll continue with our downward slide.


Na, uphill climb more like. But we'll get to a better place after the effort has been put in.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Zaros

Goblin said:


> And once again, attack, call names as you don't have an answer...


The incurable habit of a charlatan.


----------



## KittenKong

Here we go again, more xenophobia from the UK's own far right government.

Is it any wonder why I look to Europe for inspiration and reject the "British" label?


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> And once again, attack, call names as you don't have an answer... You keep calling for only the financial aspect for "proof" as you know very well when you pay for a service, you cannot judge the value by how much money you may potentially get back. Whilst acknowledging it exists, when forced, you totally ignore the service aspect if you care to go back and have a look. So instead of calling people a troll why not include the value of growth to the UK economy and all the other advantages given to the UK from the EU when judging EU membership's worth?


Look, I was responding to MrsZee who claimed the UK get financial support from the EU. She even went on to list how "much" certain countries give us and where this "financial support" went. That was what I was responding to when I said "the UK receive no financial support from the EU", and we don't. I also said, once again, I do believe we have benefited from EU membership with regards to trade within the EU. Hope that's clear enough.

As for other benefits our billions of net contributions bring, I can't really see any. I'm against freedom of movement as we are a overcrowded island, as an example France is nearly three times the size of the UK but has a similar population, so obviously for them it's not such a issue. I don't see going through a red channel as opposed to green on my way back from a European holiday an issue, neither am I concerned about having cheaper mobile phone calls whilst in the EU. As for the environment, animal, human and workers rights etc I believe the UK is more than capable of dealing with these without EU influence.


----------



## Goblin

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...eils-biggest-shake-up-mental-health-policies/

Sounds great doesn't it. Ten thousand more NHS staff will be assigned to mental health work in the next three years to boost treatment under the Tory plans. A teacher in every primary and secondary school will be trained in mental health first aid to identify signs that children are developing anxiety or depression. Discrimination laws will be toughened up to protect employees with mental health issues, while Samaritans charity helpline will be government funded until 2022.

So tell me where are these 10,000 more nurses going to come from? Who is paying for the training of teachers and are they going to be compensated for the additional responsibility?


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> So tell me where are these 10,000 more nurses going to come from? Who is paying for the training of teachers and are they going to be compensated for the additional responsibility?


Perhaps they've pinched Mr Corbyn's perpetually replenishing corporation tax pot.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Look, I was responding to MrsZee who claimed the UK get financial support from the EU. She even went on to list how "much" certain countries give us and where this "financial support" went. That was what I was responding to when I said "the UK receive no financial support from the EU", and we don't. I also said, once again, I do believe we have benefited from EU membership with regards to trade within the EU. Hope that's clear enough.


Between 2014 and 2020, both Cornwall and West Wales would have received over €1,000 (£800) per person from the EU Structural and Investment Fund - similar to that received by Romania and Bulgaria. The Scottish Highlands, East Wales and Tees Valley would have all received over €300 per person. GDP of local areas, as well as the proportion of people who are unemployed or claiming incapacity benefit are used to determine funding. So just who is going to pay for this instead? May's already confirmed they are not going to support places like Cornwall. Then you can look at research.. Government has stated it will replace EU funding for proposals already submitted when we leave but many of these projects will simply not be submitted due to the uncertainty with international collaboration threatened by lack of freedom of movement. So research damaged, damaging long term prospects in many fields. Let's have a look at UK's share of EU grants as they stand at the current time when it comes to 2020 (some negative impact and grant losses already noticed since referendum):

Edit: image in next post



> I'm against freedom of movement as we are a overcrowded island, as an example France is nearly three times the size of the UK but has a similar population, so obviously for them it's not such a issue.


So why not use the powers the EU provides? EU freedom of movement rules only apply to those who contribute to society providing a net benefit. People from the EU settling in the UK for more than 3 months must either have employment or be able to support themselves financially (including medical costs). How does leaving help control immigration? May could have already implented rules which already existed but she didn't.



> As for the environment, animal, human and workers rights etc I believe the UK is more than capable of dealing with these without EU influence.


So Ian Duncan Smith stating workers rights needs to be more "flexible" doesn't concern you? Leaving Euratom doesn't either.. we obviously can fund independent efforts even it duplicates others. We have examples on the priorities concerning environment https://www.theguardian.com/environ...pends-ban-pesticides-linked-serious-harm-bees and then there's the new Heathrow runway, despite already breaking EU pollution rules.

So tell me, when up against corporations, what is the conservatives record when it comes to things like workers rights and the environment? Which of the two is more important to them?


----------



## Goblin

Missing image from previous post


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Between 2014 and 2020, both Cornwall and West Wales would have received over €1,000 (£800) per person from the EU Structural and Investment Fund - similar to that received by Romania and Bulgaria. The Scottish Highlands, East Wales and Tees Valley would have all received over €300 per person. GDP of local areas, as well as the proportion of people who are unemployed or claiming incapacity benefit are used to determine funding. So just who is going to pay for this instead? May's already confirmed they are not going to support places like Cornwall. Then you can look at research.. Government has stated it will replace EU funding for proposals already submitted when we leave but many of these projects will simply not be submitted due to the uncertainty with international collaboration threatened by lack of freedom of movement. So research damaged, damaging long term prospects in many fields. Let's have a look at UK's share of EU grants as they stand at the current time when it comes to 2020 (some negative impact and grant losses already noticed since referendum):
> 
> Edit: image in next post
> 
> So why not use the powers the EU provides? EU freedom of movement rules only apply to those who contribute to society providing a net benefit. People from the EU settling in the UK for more than 3 months must either have employment or be able to support themselves financially (including medical costs). How does leaving help control immigration? May could have already implented rules which already existed but she didn't.
> 
> So Ian Duncan Smith stating workers rights needs to be more "flexible" doesn't concern you? Leaving Euratom doesn't either.. we obviously can fund indpendent efforts even it duplicates others. We have examples on the priorities concerning environment https://www.theguardian.com/environ...pends-ban-pesticides-linked-serious-harm-bees and then there's the new Heathrow runway, despite already breaking EU pollution rules.
> 
> So tell me, when up against corporations, what is the conservatives record when it comes to things like workers rights and the environment? Which of the two is more important to them?


You asked for my reasoning, I gave it. I've no desire to rehash the whole Brexit thread on a general election thread, all the arguments have already been done to death over there


----------



## Arnie83

noushka05 said:


> *Caroline Lucas*‏Verified [email protected]*CarolineLucas* 21h21 hours ago
> 
> _Simple question to Jeremy Hunt: how can you justify corporate tax cuts while our NHS_
> _is starved of funds & people treated in corridors__?_


The answer is that the corporate tax cuts 'will' stimulate business activity and investment, increase jobs and wages, make the economy stronger and more prosperous, thereby increasing the tax revenue and making more available for the NHS.

For 'will', however, you should probably read 'might, and historically hasn't'. Which, of course, is where it all falls down!


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Look, I was responding to MrsZee who claimed the UK get financial support from the EU. She even went on to list how "much" certain countries give us and where this "financial support" went. That was what I was responding to when I said "the UK receive no financial support from the EU", and we don't. I also said, once again, I do believe we have benefited from EU membership with regards to trade within the EU. Hope that's clear enough. .


Indeed I even went on publishing some numbers so you can compare how much Brits paid. Bad me, should have just said my opinions instead of posting these stupid facts. That is a difference between us I guess, I like numbers, statistics, facts, science and all that, and you like your opinions and beliefs.

Here is the list again.
https://www.europaportalen.se/2016/03/svenskarna-har-nast-hogsta-eu-avgiften

But isn´t it odd, how Dutch and French voted yes for EU, despite paying more than Brits. Same result in our local elections, populists lost. But what do we know, maybe Trump, Putin, May&Co, Le Pen and all the other populists are right, nationalism is the best way forwards. So far history has proved nationalists wrong every time, but maybe this time it is all different. Britain doesn´t need anybody else, it is bigger than the rest of the Europe, and Trump will help you because you have a special relationship.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> Indeed I even went on publishing some numbers so you can compare how much Brits paid. Bad me, should have just said my opinions instead of posting these stupid facts. That is a difference between us I guess, I like numbers, statistics, facts, science and all that, and you like your opinions and beliefs.
> 
> Here is the list again.
> https://www.europaportalen.se/2016/03/svenskarna-har-nast-hogsta-eu-avgiften
> 
> But isn´t it odd, how Dutch and French voted yes for EU, despite paying more than Brits. Same result in our local elections, populists lost. But what do we know, maybe Trump, Putin, May&Co, Le Pen and all the other populists are right, nationalism is the best way forwards. So far history has proved nationalists wrong every time, but maybe this time it is all different. Britain doesn´t need anybody else, it is bigger than the rest of the Europe, and Trump will help you because you have a special relationship.


My apologies I thought you understood what a net contributing country is. It's a country that pays more money into the EU than it recieves back. There are only about half a dozen of these countries in the EU. It's these countries that effectively subsidise the other twenty odd countries. As such we receive no financial assistance, as in hard cash, from the EU as it's less money than we pay every year for our membership.

So when the UK leaves the EU the EU will have less money to play with because we are one of the few who pay in more than we get back.

Hope that clears it up a bit for you because I'm commenting no further as this is a election thread


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> So when the UK leaves the EU the EU will have less money to play with because we are one of the few who pay in more than we get back.


Unless we buy our way back into the single market, which David Davis said we might ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38168942

And given that we're not going to have a better deal than EU members, and that we don't want free movement, the bill would likely end up considerably higher than the one we pay now, and there would be no refund, and the EU would be quids in. Sorry, euros in.


----------



## Zaros

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 310017


Because war is freedom.

Just look at all the 'Freedom' this multi billion dollar aircraft is carrying.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> Unless we buy our way back into the single market, which David Davis said we might ...
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38168942
> 
> And given that we're not going to have a better deal than EU members, and that we don't want free movement, the bill would likely end up considerably higher than the one we pay now, and there would be no refund, and the EU would be quids in. Sorry, euros in.


That's all to be negotiated and I would presume be the "no deal is better than a bad deal" scenario Mrs May goes on about. Which is why the conservatives will be getting my vote on June 8th. And there we are, back on topic


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> My apologies I thought you understood what a net contributing country is. It's a country that pays more money into the EU than it recieves back. There are only about half a dozen of these countries in the EU. It's these countries that effectively subsidise the other twenty odd countries. As such we receive no financial assistance, as in hard cash, from the EU as it's less money than we pay every year for our membership. So when the UK leaves the EU the EU will have less money to play with because we are one of the few who pay in more than we get back.
> Hope that clears it up a bit for you because I'm commenting no further as this is a election thread


Thank you for your explanation, but naturally I know what a net contributing country is, as Finland too is one. We pay even more per person than Brits, as you had a better deal than we have. You can see all than in the link, there were even different colours for net paying countries to make it easier to see.

But still we, the French and the Dutch have calculated that we still benefit from EU, like you have. What is the gross benefit, was explained e.g. in the Financial Times article (I posted that link too). Inner market and free movement of people, goods, money and the same requirements for goods etc, have genuily been good for both the business and people alike. Businesses have been able to create hard cash, which again has made it possible to provide jobs, which have made it possible for people to have hard cash and governments have been able to create hard cash through both By taxing them, and then provide health care etc for it´s people. How much they actually tax and give back and to whom is up to each nation. Maybe in Britain there has been something wrong in this distribution of wealth? Britain is a very rich country , which for some reason doesn´t provide the same quality of social care for it´s people, if I have understood correctly the messages and facts PF members have posted. But that is not up to EU, it is and always was up to Britain to decide.

And if we think of something else beside money, it is also nice to know that at the same time EU has helped little people and nature By providing better legislation for consumers and animals. Naturally nothings stops nations to provide even stricter legislation, but for some reason that doesn´t take Place in most countries. E.g EU managed to win cases against telephone operators about roaming prices, created better living standards fro chickens and provides even legal help for ordinary people. (e.g. we taxed too much for importing second hand cars and one guy took our customs to EU court and won. As a result we had to cange our legislation and give money back to people, who paid too much taxes).


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> Because war is freedom.
> 
> Just look at all the 'Freedom' this multi billion dollar aircraft is carrying.


Nice bit of kit, F-16 isn't it?


----------



## Odin_cat

Dr Pepper said:


> That's all to be negotiated and I would presume be the "no deal is better than a bad deal" scenario Mrs May goes on about. Which is why the conservatives will be getting my vote on June 8th. And there we are, back on topic


But that's the scariest part; you presume that's what she means, she hasn't said so.
'No deal is better than a bad deal' is a useless soundbite, May could say any potential deal is good or bad depending on how she feels on the day.

Strong and stable...


----------



## Dr Pepper

Odin_cat said:


> But that's the scariest part; you presume that's what she means, she hasn't said so.
> 'No deal is better than a bad deal' is a useless soundbite, May could say any potential deal is good or bad depending on how she feels on the day.
> 
> Strong and stable...


Absolutely, no one knows. But I have this feeling Mrs May and her team will negotiate better than Mr Corbyn's team.


----------



## Odin_cat

Dr Pepper said:


> Absolutely, no one knows. But I have this feeling Mrs May and her team will negotiate better than Mr Corbyn's team.


I was under the impression that the negotiating team has already been decided and will not change under a new government. Perhaps I'm wrong.


----------



## Bisbow

Mr Corbyn has not got a "team", just a bunch of know it all's that will cave in at the first bit of pressure put on them and land us in the "proverbial ???"


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 310018


See posts like this does not help your cause all they do is cause friction and then you say there has to be compromise like you keep saying in the EU thread. These kinds of posts will only put people's backs up.


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 310007


 How about doing funny without being nasty .
It is possible -


----------



## Jesthar

Bisbow said:


> Mr Corbyn has not got a "team", just a bunch of know it all's that will cave in at the first bit of pressure put on them and land us in the "proverbial ???"


We don't know that, though, as Mr Corbyn hasn't had any shot at negotiating.

May and her cohorts, on the other hand, have already repeated demostrated they seem to believe they can get whatever they want simply by demanding it, even if those demands are contrary to core EU principles and legislation they were warned there would be no compromise on. Then, when the EU unsurprisingly stick to those principles and reiterate that position, our primary negotiating tactic is to accuse them of unfairness and bullying. Call me cynical if you want, but I'm not convinced those are appropriate methodologies for securing a reasonable deal.

Oh, and of course any criticism of the way Brexit is being handled or the leadership in general seems to be considered as being 'against the will of the people' and something to be stamped out. I seem to recall the end result the last time(s) such rhetoric was widely deployed was exceptionally costly in terms of human life and world peace in general - and no, I'm not talking about the Third Reich here.


----------



## Arnie83

Jesthar said:


> We don't know that, though, as My Corbyn hasn't had any shot at negotiating.
> 
> May and her cohorts, on the other hand, have already repeated demostrated they seem to believe they can get whatever they want simply by demanding it, even if those demands are contrary to core EU principles and legislation they were warned there would be no compromise on. Then, when the EU unsurprisingly stick to those principles and reiterate that position, our primary negotiating tactic is to accuse them of unfairness and bullying. Call me cynical if you want, but I'm not convinced those are appropriate methodologies for securing a reasonable deal.
> 
> Oh, and of course any criticism of the way Brexit is being handled or the leadership in general seems to be considered as being 'against the will of the people' and something to be stamped out. I seem to recall the end result the last time(s) such rhetoric was widely deployed was exceptionally costly in terms of human life and world peace in general - and no, I'm not talking about the Third Reich here.


I'm afraid you are now in Mrs May's book under the heading "Saboteur".


----------



## Zaros

Just for laughs.....I think.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Dr Pepper

Bisbow said:


> Mr Corbyn has not got a "team", just a bunch of know it all's that will cave in at the first bit of pressure put on them and land us in the "proverbial ???"


That's exactly the trouble. I kinda like Mr Corbyn he seems like a decent enough chap. I'd rather have a chat over a pint with him than Mrs May any day of the week. But he's just doesn't have that "something" to be a PM, he comes across a bit wishy-washy and his shadow cabinet no better. Just can't imagine him having the backbone to hold his own in tough negotiations.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> See posts like this does not help your cause all they do is cause friction and then you say there has to be compromise like you keep saying in the EU thread. These kinds of posts will only put people's backs up.


If you believe a word TM says perhaps.

Didn't you put up some posts yourself some might have been referred to as "nasty and disrespectful" towards TM by some? I guess you'll have deleted them by now.

I'm a strong supporter of Nicola Sturgeon. I didn't find Tracy Ullman's perpetration of her offensive at all.

Just goes to show what your glorious Britain we could all look forward to if May gets back in if our opinions, already ignored, are suppressed.

Perhaps that's the kind of country you want to live in, I don't know.



kimthecat said:


> How about doing funny without being nasty .
> It is possible -


There was nothing nasty about my post, well I don't think so anyway.

Thought yours was quite funny actually!


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> But isn´t it odd, how Dutch and French voted yes for EU, despite paying more than Brits. .


Ok you've got me there as I honestly thought the French and Dutch hadn't had a EU referendum. I know the French had a general election yesterday though, did it include a "in/out" EU referendum as well? Or was it years ago like when we voted yes to the common market?


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> There was nothing nasty about my post, well I don't think so anyway.
> 
> Thought yours was quite funny actually!


well saying someones useless crap , I don't think is funny . if you'd said Corbyn was useless crap , although that's true I wouldn't find it that funny either .


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 310025
> View attachment 310026
> View attachment 310027
> View attachment 310028


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok you've got me there as I honestly thought the French and Dutch hadn't had a EU referendum. I know the French had a general election yesterday though, did it include a "in/out" EU referendum as well? Or was it years ago like when we voted yes to the common market?


Err, Le Pen said she´ll want to France out of EU, Marco said the opposite. That was the difference, so it was an election about pro or against EU. Pros won. The same it Dutch. One candidtate said we want to leave EU and the other said the opposite. Those , who wanted to stay in EU won.

So what is unclear in that? Usually a referendum is followed after a lenghty discussion about pros and cons, and even then the risks are considered very carefully, one risk being will people actually understand the consequences. In UK it was done differently and now no ones knows what are the consequences, and the original promises how everything will be so much better are broken one at a time, even before you have started to negotiate. That is unclear IMO, not the messages made By LePenn and Marco.


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> well saying someones useless crap , I don't think is funny . if you'd said Corbyn was useless crap , although that's true I wouldn't find it that funny either .


Odd how things can be looked at differently.

I took it to mean, "Useless crap in 2017 in an obsolete sense, not labelling her personally as that.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> Err, Le Pen said she´ll want to France out of EU, Marco said the opposite. That was the difference, so it was an election about pro or against EU. Pros won. The same it Dutch. One candidtate said we want to leave EU and the other said the opposite. Those , who wanted to stay in EU won.
> 
> So what is unclear in that? Usually a referendum is followed after a lenghty discussion about pros and cons, and even then the risks are considered very carefully, one risk being will people actually understand the consequences. In UK it was done differently and now no ones knows what are the consequences, and the original promises how everything will be so much better are broken one at a time, even before you have started to negotiate. That is unclear IMO, not the messages made By LePenn and Marco.


I would have thought in a general election many things are considered when voting, not just the EU. I'm pretty sure our 2015 election wasn't won solely of the back of a promised referendum. Maybe I'm wrong and the EU was the overriding factor for the French this time round. To be honest I've not taken much interest in Dutch politics so that was a genuine question about if they had had a referendum, I thought they hadn't but couldn't be sure.


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> Odd how things can be looked at differently.
> 
> I took it to mean, "Useless crap in 2017 in an obsolete sense, not labelling her personally as that.


oh come on !


----------



## Goblin

MrsZee said:


> Err, Le Pen said she´ll want to France out of EU, Marco said the opposite. That was the difference, so it was an election about pro or against EU. Pros won.


Wasn't quite that simple. Le Penn, moderated her views later in the campaign in an attempt to get more people voting for her as she recognised she was losing votes pushing the leave agenda.



Dr Pepper said:


> I would have thought in a general election many things are considered when voting, not just the EU.


Yet you only come up with stronger hand at brexit negotiations as a reason to vote for May.

You've listed immigration as one of the reasons for Brexit. So tell me, what is May's record like when it comes to controlling immigration?

You state the UK can hold it's own on things like protection of the environment yet support someone whose record is one of voting against policies which introduce measures against climate control, she's supported the cull on badgers, voted against tightening fracking rules and voted for selling UK's state owned forests...

In fact May's record when you look at the reality rather than the spin is hardly one which should inspire confidence.

I'm eager for you to demonstrate why you think she's "strong and stable" when her record isn't.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Wasn't quite that simple. Le Penn, moderated her views later in the campaign in an attempt to get more people voting for her as she recognised she was losing votes pushing the leave agenda.
> 
> Yet you only come up with stronger hand at brexit negotiations as a reason to vote for May.
> 
> You've listed immigration as one of the reasons for Brexit. So tell me, what is May's record like when it comes to controlling immigration?
> 
> You state the UK can hold it's own on things like protection of the environment yet support someone whose record is one of voting against policies which introduce measures against climate control, she's supported the cull on badgers, voted against tightening fracking rules and voted for selling UK's state owned forests...
> 
> In fact May's record when you look at the reality rather than the spin is hardly one which should inspire confidence.
> 
> I'm eager for you to demonstrate why you think she's "strong and stable" when her record isn't.


Have to agree with most of that. The upcoming election is a bit of a odd one as Brexit is the dominant feature (wrong word I know but the correct terminology escapes me!) and the election was called to strengthen Mrs May's hand. It's quite a different election than France's, and any other this country has ever experienced.

I've actually never said Mrs May is "strong and stable", I think I have acknowledged she's said it and I prefer it as a slogan than anything anyone else has come up with. How would describe the opposition parties? Labour "wishy-washy" ? UKIP " gone"? Lib Dems "who he" ? Unfortunately Mrs May does indeed seem the only person vaguely capable of negotiating us out of the EU. I would love to have a choice of capable leaders from three major parties.

I also said the UK is capable of sorting out our own environmental (and other) policies. Who'll be doing that, well it's those issues that will be at fore of the 2022 election.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> I would have thought in a general election many things are considered when voting, not just the EU. I'm pretty sure our 2015 election wasn't won solely of the back of a promised referendum. Maybe I'm wrong and the EU was the overriding factor for the French this time round. To be honest I've not taken much interest in Dutch politics so that was a genuine question about if they had had a referendum, I thought they hadn't but couldn't be sure.


You are quite right, I think general elections should be about many things, but to me it seems that at least in UK elections terms of Brexit are the main topic and reason for elections. Pity, like you said, this shouldn´t be the case. Dutch had no referendum, but the populists told there should be one, if they won. Odd times these, but then Trump got elected and you got Brexit without really understanding, what it means. Risky business, politics.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> ... the election was called to strengthen Mrs May's hand.


I think the election was called to strengthen the Tories and May's hand in Westminster. She is using the spurious idea that somehow a bigger Parliamentary majority will make any difference whatsoever to the rest of the EU so that she can play the 'patriotism' card for more votes.

Having a bigger majority won't make her any less of a supplicant in the reality of the Brexit negotiations. She's already said we're leaving everything. With a bigger majority back home, what more can she threaten?


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> You are quite right, I think general elections should be about many things, but to me it seems that at least in UK elections terms of Brexit are the main topic and reason for elections. Pity, like you said, this shouldn´t be the case. Dutch had no referendum, but the populists told there should be one, if they won. Odd times these, but then Trump got elected and you got Brexit without really understanding, what it means. Risky business, politics.


Agree, this election is certainly unique in as much as its pretty much a one topic manifesto, and Brexit being the reason for it being called. Not that we've actually had a manifesto as of yet!


----------



## KittenKong

Dear God.....


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> the election was called to strengthen Mrs May's hand.


So how will it strengthen her hand in negotiations? Makes no difference to the EU's position. Another smokescreen by May. This isn't about strengthening her hand in EU negotiations, it's about strengthening her hand for to be able to implement internal policies against the public's wishes without parliament opposition.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> Agree, this election is certainly unique in as much as its pretty much a one topic manifesto, and Brexit being the reason for it being called. Not that we've actually had a manifesto as of yet!


Actually, I'll amend what I said - it was called because of Brexit, but I think the reasoning is that if (when?) negotiations go pear shaped and we leave in 2019, there would have been only a year to recover the situation before the election was due. This way there's 3 years.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> Actually, I'll amend what I said - it was called because of Brexit, but I think the reasoning is that if (when?) negotiations go pear shaped and we leave in 2019, there would have been only a year to recover the situation before the election was due. This way there's 3 years.


I agree (don't worry I'll stop it in a minute!) it absolutely makes sense for the negotiating party to have a reasonable time in government post Brexit. It would be madness to be launching into a general election straight away however it turns out.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> I agree (don't worry I'll stop it in a minute!) it absolutely makes sense for the negotiating party to have a reasonable time in government post Brexit. It would be madness to be launching into a general election straight away however it turns out.


There is hope for you. Keep moving towards the light ... 

Seriously; if May could get a deal that would satisfy leavers of all sorts while retaining full access to the single market and no non-tariff trade barriers, she'd be a shoo-in whenever it was. But we both know that ain't gonna happen.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## havoc

Goblin said:


> So how will it strengthen her hand in negotiations? Makes no difference to the EU's position.


I've been waiting for someone to make this clear too. How does her majority here affect anything elsewhere?


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> I've been waiting for someone to make this clear too. How does her majority here affect anything elsewhere?


I'm guessing with a overwhelming majority behind her she's not going to be voted down, within parliament, on any negotiation specifics. That sends a clear message to the EU that she has the vast majority support of the country and doesn't have to worry about her position as PM, which equals a strong hand. If it'll actually make any difference at the end of the day who knows.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> If it'll actually make any difference at the end of the day who knows.


Macron got sixty odd percent of the vote in France - do you suppose that means May is going to treat him and any French negotiators with extra respect? Can't see how internal politics in any country will make a difference.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Or


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> I'm guessing with a overwhelming majority behind her she's not going to be voted down, within parliament, on any negotiation specifics.


May is not allowing parliament to have any say in negotiation specifics. She even pushed the idea that everything should be secret until the end. once a deal is reached parliament will not have any say in the result. EU has already stated that they believe in democracy and that people will be informed as to progress and terms as they go as they are the ones who will have the final say, not the negotiation team. Strange isn't it.. brexit campaign called the EU a dictatorship.


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> Macron got sixty odd percent of the vote in France - do you suppose that means May is going to treat him and any French negotiators with extra respect? Can't see how internal politics in any country will make a difference.


No, but he's not fighting his own corner but that of the EU with twenty seven countries backing. Mrs May is on her own, and if the EU made things difficult (shock, would that ever happen) then with a small majority her position as PM, and power to stick to her negotiations, could be in jeopardy.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> then with a small majority her position as PM, and power to stick to her negotiations, could be in jeopardy.


Surely it works the other way round. The more worried she is about her position back home the more she needs to stick to her guns in Europe. If she's so secure it doesn't matter she has more leeway.


----------



## Arnie83

stockwellcat said:


> View attachment 310049
> 
> View attachment 310050
> 
> Or
> View attachment 310052


What would be the difference in outcomes?


----------



## Arnie83

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 310040


I've long thought that it is only when we discover alien life forms that humans will look at other humans and not even notice their clothing or skin colour, or worry that they eat odd food.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> View attachment 310049
> 
> View attachment 310050
> 
> Or
> View attachment 310052


Both, are of course courtesy of the Tory party. I take it you've now re-joined?

I know who's now stronger and more stable after the terrific result in France yesterday.

It's not Theresa May however much you might believe that.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Mrs May is on her own, and if the EU made things difficult (shock, would that ever happen) then with a small majority her position as PM, and power to stick to her negotiations, could be in jeopardy.


Mrs May's position is she promises what the EU has said cannot happen. Benefits of being a member without the responsibilities. That's not the EU being difficult, that's common sense.


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> Surely it works the other way round. The more worried she is about her position back home the more she needs to stick to her guns in Europe. If she's so secure it doesn't matter she has more leeway.


No. If she had a weak position she would be open to influence to change tact. With a vast majority she's got the mandate to have the last word without worry.


----------



## KittenKong

Goblin said:


> Mrs May's position is she promises what the EU has said cannot happen. Benefits of being a member without the responsibilities. That's not the EU being difficult, that's common sense.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Mrs May's position is she promises what the EU has said cannot happen. Benefits of being a member without the responsibilities. That's not the EU being difficult, that's common sense.


Never said otherwise, Mrs May and the EU at this point are simply setting out their stalls. Negotiations haven't commenced yet.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> I take it you've now re-joined?


No. Just a voter like you.

So give me one good reason why I should vote Corbyn? Try and sway me and show me that I am voting wrongly if you can without newspaper clippings and tell me why Corbyn is better than May for the UK.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> View attachment 310049
> 
> View attachment 310050
> 
> Or
> View attachment 310052


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 310060


Still not influenced me. Is that the best you can come up with.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> No. If she had a weak position she would be open to influence to change tact. With a vast majority she's got the mandate to have the last word without worry.


... no matter how much damage it does to the country, as she foretold before the referendum.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> ... no matter how much damage it does to the country, as she foretold before the referendum.


......in your opinion, we don't know until the negotiations have taken place how it'll end up. You might even approve.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> No. Just a voter like you.
> 
> So give me one good reason why I should vote Corbyn? Try and sway me and show me that I am voting wrongly if you can without newspaper clippings and tell me why Corbyn is better than May for the UK.


Depends where you live of course. If I lived in one of those areas where the Lib Dems came second I would be voting for them, not Labour.

As I mentioned earlier I'm voting tactically, not because I support the Labour party.

During the last election Ed Miliband was given a hard time, now they're doing the same to Corbyn. Think about it, they're rubbishing people who've never had a chance to prove themselves. Of course they could have been disastrous but if not given a chance how does anyone know?


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> No. If she had a weak position she would be open to influence to change tact. With a vast majority she's got the mandate to have the last word without worry.


Any push to say "mandate" is invalidated by not including parliament in the negotiations and basing what she is saying on lies and threats.


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> No, but he's not fighting his own corner but that of the EU with twenty seven countries backing. Mrs May is on her own, and if the EU made things difficult (shock, would that ever happen) then with a small majority her position as PM, and power to stick to her negotiations, could be in jeopardy.


Thing is, though, the EU aren't being difficult or making things difficult. They're just following the proscribed rules. Rules Mrs May was _repeatedly _told would apply once Article 50 was triggered, no exceptions.

Mrs May also appears to have a very strange idea of how negotiations should be undertaken. She seems to think they should consist of her saying what she wants, and everyone else saying "Yes, m'lady!" and rushing to comply. She seems to forget that the remaining EU member states now have 100% total control over the negotiation process, that the UK has no right to any input, and that any concessions that are made are a bonus. And rather than graciously acknowledge the position she has put the UK in and curry favour with those who now hold our future relations with the EU in their hands, she believes that ranting and namecalling is the best tactic for endearing her to those people and nations.

A strange lady indeed...


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> So give me one good reason why I should vote Corbyn


Why on earth would you value the opinion of a faceless internet persona on a pet forum any more than they value yours? They aren't a journalist or a spin doctor.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 310066


That's quite good comeback. What's the source of you don't mind me asking


----------



## havoc

Jesthar said:


> She seems to think they should consist of her saying what she wants, and everyone else saying "Yes, m'lady!" and rushing to comply


That's only echoing the views of a great many who will vote for her. I don't think she believes it for one moment but she knows plenty think that way.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Depends where you live of course. If I lived in one of those areas where the Lib Dems came second I would be voting for them, not Labour.
> 
> As I mentioned earlier I'm voting tactically, not because I support the Labour party.
> 
> During the last election Ed Miliband was given a hard time, now they're doing the same to Corbyn. Think about it, they're rubbishing people who've never had a chance to prove themselves. Of course they could have been disastrous but if not given a chance how does anyone know?


My area is Kate Hoey MP - Labour/Brexit Supporter, but she wouldn't influence me to vote Labour one bit.

Corbyn has had chances to prove himself that's what an opposition leader is meant to do, prove himself that his party is worth voting for but Corbyn doesn't stand up for himself he just repeats the same old on PMQ's and even his parties MP's look dismayed behind him when he does repeat himself. Now if Andy Burnham was leader of the Labour Party I might sit up and pay attention. The Corbynites decided that Corbyn was to be leader and not his Parties MP's who wanted Corbyn out. Yes Corbyn is a nice old chap but he is not leadership material and I am sorry but I cannot get that interview out of my head with Diane Abbott last week. His front bench are meant to be united behind Corbyn and they aren't or are the rest of his parties MP's. I did consider voting him but then I thought how disfunctional Labour is under his leadership. I think Labours chances in all honesty of winning any GE went out the window the day Corbyn got re-elected last year. I am worrying with all the pledges Corbyn has made were the money is coming from to pay for all these reforms he keeps announcing? He must be planning one huge tax hike for the billionaires.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> That's quite good comeback. What's the source of you don't mind me asking


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 310070


So that's why you are voting Labour


----------



## Satori

.


kimthecat said:


> well saying someones useless crap , I don't think is funny . if you'd said Corbyn was useless crap , although that's true I wouldn't find it that funny either .


That's because you don't have a single digit mental age.


----------



## Jesthar

havoc said:


> That's only echoing the views of a great many who will vote for her. I don't think she believes it for one moment but she knows plenty think that way.


I wonder if they realise she also believes it should apply to _them_...


----------



## stockwellcat.

@KittenKong So why not vote Tim Farron/Lib Dems as he is doing everything to keep the UK in the single market and is pro EU?


----------



## Happy Paws2

havoc said:


> Why on earth would you value the opinion of a faceless internet persona on a pet forum any more than they value yours? *They aren't a journalist or a spin doctor.*


and who in their right mind would believe either of them!


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Still not influenced me. Is that the best you can come up with.


Corbyn promised FREE hospital parking for everyone.

If that will not sway you....


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> Corbyn promised FREE hospital parking for everyone.
> 
> If that will not sway you....


Free parking at hospitals, somewhere to park my car for free when I go to work  Nice one Corbyn. 

Still not influenced.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 310059


We want someone to stop posting inane bollocks.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> So that's why you are voting Labour


I'll vote for anyone but Tory (nor UKIP, BNP etc)



stockwellcat said:


> @KittenKong So why not vote Tim Farron/Lib Dems as he is doing everything to keep the UK in the single market and is pro EU?


I would if I lived in one of those places where the Lib Dems came second in a tactical sense. A vote for the Lib Dems here is a wasted vote, just as a Labour vote would be in many areas, mainly down South.

Having said that I couldn't bring myself to vote for Kate Hoey, so I probably would vote Lib Dem if I lived in Vauxhall.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> We want someone to stop posting inane bollocks.


Just a bit of fun. Sorry if you didn't see it that way.


----------



## havoc

Happy Paws said:


> and who in their right mind would believe either of them


Right mind has nothing to do with it. You don't have to be sane to be allowed a vote. Some are just desperate to be on the winning side no matter what and will go which ever way the wind blows.


----------



## Happy Paws2

havoc said:


> Right mind has nothing to do with it. You don't have to be sane to be allowed a vote. Some are just desperate to be on the winning side no matter what and will go which ever way the wind blows.


very true, that's how we got Brexit.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> I'll vote for anyone but Tory (nor UKIP, BNP etc)
> 
> I would if I lived in one of those places where the Lib Dems came second in a tactical sense. A vote for the Lib Dems here is a wasted vote, just as a Labour vote would be in many areas, mainly down South.
> 
> Having said that I couldn't bring myself to vote for Kate Hoey, so I probably would vote Lib Dem if I lived in Vauxhall.


Every vote counts regardless of how people vote in that area. I am not following the flow in my area I am voting the way I am voting (Conservatives), unfortunately Kate Hoey will most likely get in, in my area. I am not voting for Kate Hoey for different reasons than you probably wouldn't vote for her if you was in my area, my reason is she is in the opposition party and that is all, your reason is probably related to her being a Brexit supporter.


----------



## Happy Paws2

I shall vote Labour, although Andew Mitchell Conservative will win here, it's been tory since the year dot.


----------



## Bisbow

cheekyscrip said:


> Corbyn promised FREE hospital parking for everyone.
> 
> If that will not sway you....
> View attachment 310071


Used to be parking at our hospital until they realised all the commuters going to catch the train to London were parking there and there was no room for patients


----------



## havoc

Bisbow said:


> Used to be parking at our hospital until they realised all the commuters going to catch the train to London were parking there and there was no room for patients


Easy enough to deal with, just keep the barriers and give genuine hospital visitors a token to get out.


----------



## Team_Trouble

stockwellcat said:


> I have made my decision. I am voting Labour.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KatieandOliver said:


>


If you read on I posted Diane Abbott put me off with this interview. It just showed how chaotic Labour is:




Would you vote for this?
She claimed she was tired


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> Easy enough to deal with, just keep the barriers and give genuine hospital visitors a token to get out.


No no no no nooooo, that's far to easy and cost effective to implement.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> No no no no nooooo, that's far to easy and cost effective to implement.


And who's going to pay for it to be installed


----------



## cheekyscrip

havoc said:


> Easy enough to deal with, just keep the barriers and give genuine hospital visitors a token to get out.


Imagine token mafia buying tokens off carless pensioners...selling them to guys in suits...
Then patrols of token vigilantes ..
@Bisbow I meant it tongue- in- cheek
Somehow Marcon did not win on the offer of free parking pass!


----------



## Team_Trouble

stockwellcat said:


> If you read on I posted Diane Abbott put me off with this interview. It just showed how chaotic Labour is:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would you vote for this?
> She claimed she was tired


She isn't going to be the prime minister.


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> And who's going to pay for it to be installed


The system already exists in any hospital which uses barriers and for those that work on pay and display there's no need for anything - the pay machines just become obsolete.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KatieandOliver said:


> She isn't going to be the prime minister.


So... She represents her party and Jeremy Corbyn. She sits on the front bench don't she and she's in the shadow cabinet (what's left of it).


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> And who's going to pay for it to be installed


We have it here ... Simply you get the ticket, reception stamps it checkingin...you have two hours then...you show stamped ticket on your way out ..


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> We have it here ... Simply you get the ticket, reception stamps it checkingin...you have two hours then...you show stamped ticket on your way out ..


Sounds a good idea but what happens if the Consultant is running late and your appointment is delayed and takes longer than two hours which often happens over here. You said you only have two hours. Does your car get clamped and removed?


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Sounds a good idea but what happens if the Consultant is running late and your appointment is delayed which often happens over here. You said you only have two hours. Does your car get clamped and removed?


No. You get a note from reception. Parking can call them to confirm it.


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> No. You get a note from reception. Parking can call them to confirm it.


To much hassle. What happens if the reception staff are skiving or on lunch break or *** break?
Keep the current system


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> Sounds a good idea but what happens if the Consultant is running late and your appointment is delayed and takes longer than two hours which often happens over here


It doesn't have to be a two hour limit. There are variations on the system which already work perfectly well for certain patients and aren't limited to two hours.


----------



## cheekyscrip

This is why I would never vote Tory. No one who thinks that wild or any other animals should not killed for amusement can vote Tories and call themselves animal lovers.
Corrida, dog fights or fix hunting is essentially the same.
Killing beautiful, helpless being, maiming and torturing them un fight or chase for WHAT?
Are foxes different from dogs or cats?

Would you approve of pack of dogs savaging a cat?
Some do.
Smart clothes are no excuse.

@stockwellcat there are other parties than Labour or Tory.
There are Greens.
Certainly pro animal rights.


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> To much hassle. What happens if the reception staff are skiving or on lunch break or *** break?
> Keep the current system


Never had a problem? Reception is always manned. 
But I do not think it ever was in manifesto?


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> This is why I would never vote Tory. No one who thinks that wild or any other animals should not killed for amusement can vote Tories and call themselves animal lovers.
> Corrida, dog fights or fix hunting is essentially the same.
> Killing beautiful, helpless being, maiming and torturing them un fight or chase for WHAT?
> Are foxes different from dogs or cats?
> 
> Would you approve of pack of dogs savaging a cat?
> Some do.
> Smart clothes are no excuse.
> 
> @stockwellcat there are other parties than Labour or Tory.
> There are Greens.
> Certainly pro animal rights.
> View attachment 310086


Good point @cheekyscrip

You forgot Tim Farron/Lib Dems. Is there a reason why you didn't mention him? His NHS pledge got me thinking today that it could actually work if everyone paid an extra 1p on there income tax. Before you think if I would vote for him, the answer is no. Just wondering why you didn't mention him and only the Green Party?


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> If you read on I posted Diane Abbott put me off with this interview. It just showed how chaotic Labour is:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would you vote for this?
> She claimed she was tired


At least she tried to answer the question. May & her gang just tell blatant lies or evade answering all together. And how often to do you see the media grilling tory MPs like they do labour anyway? The reason so many are prepared to vote against their own best interests and vote tory is because they have no idea they are.the real problem in the UK, not the EU, not migrants. They are the reason our NHS is on its knees, public services all in crisis & so on.

And labours policy for the police is a good one.

But, anyway lets remind ourselves what's really important.


----------



## noushka05

cheekyscrip said:


> This is why I would never vote Tory. No one who thinks that wild or any other animals should not killed for amusement can vote Tories and call themselves animal lovers.
> Corrida, dog fights or fix hunting is essentially the same.
> Killing beautiful, helpless being, maiming and torturing them un fight or chase for WHAT?
> Are foxes different from dogs or cats?
> 
> Would you approve of pack of dogs savaging a cat?
> Some do.
> Smart clothes are no excuse.
> 
> @stockwellcat there are other parties than Labour or Tory.
> There are Greens.
> Certainly pro animal rights.
> View attachment 310086


Can you imagine any animal lover enabling this? I really hope people who are care about animals will use their votes wisely. The future existence on the elephant is also at stake.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Every vote counts regardless of how people vote in that area. I am not following the flow in my area I am voting the way I am voting (Conservatives), unfortunately Kate Hoey will most likely get in, in my area. I am not voting for Kate Hoey for different reasons than you probably wouldn't vote for her if you was in my area, my reason is she is in the opposition party and that is all, your reason is probably related to her being a Brexit supporter.


Kate Hoey is vile. What she's doing in the labour party I will never know - shes more akin to the hard right. TBH SWC, she may represent a progressive party but she is far from it, she would never get my vote - not for a million £££!

Hoey is one labour MP I would love to see lose their seat - obviously not to a tory or a kipper though


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Mr Corbyn has not got a "team", just a bunch of know it all's that will cave in at the first bit of pressure put on them and land us in the "proverbial ???"





Dr Pepper said:


> That's exactly the trouble. I kinda like Mr Corbyn he seems like a decent enough chap. I'd rather have a chat over a pint with him than Mrs May any day of the week. But he's just doesn't have that "something" to be a PM, he comes across a bit wishy-washy and his shadow cabinet no better. Just can't imagine him having the backbone to hold his own in tough negotiations.





Dr Pepper said:


> No. If she had a weak position she would be open to influence to change tact. With a vast majority she's got the mandate to have the last word without worry.


Do you honestly believe we're likely to get a good deal with May using hostile language?. I agree with this, we're in a much weaker position _*with*_ May.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Do you honestly believe we're likely to get a good deal with May using hostile language?. I agree with this, we're in a much weaker position _*with*_ May.


Do you honestly believe we're likely to get a good deal with Mr Corbyn rolling over like a puppy dog to their every whim? We'd be in a much weaker position with him.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Do you honestly believe we're likely to get a good deal with Mr Corbyn rolling over like a puppy dog to the every whim? We'd be in a much weaker position with him.


Yes I do. Corbyn, for all his faults, is a decent human being. You don't seem to realise, the EU hold ALL the cards.


----------



## noushka05

MrsZee said:


> Indeed I even went on publishing some numbers so you can compare how much Brits paid. Bad me, should have just said my opinions instead of posting these stupid facts. That is a difference between us I guess, I like numbers, statistics, facts, science and all that, and you like your opinions and beliefs.
> 
> Here is the list again.
> https://www.europaportalen.se/2016/03/svenskarna-har-nast-hogsta-eu-avgiften
> 
> But isn´t it odd, how Dutch and French voted yes for EU, despite paying more than Brits. Same result in our local elections, populists lost. But what do we know, maybe Trump, Putin, May&Co, Le Pen and all the other populists are right, nationalism is the best way forwards. So far history has proved nationalists wrong every time, but maybe this time it is all different. Britain doesn´t need anybody else, it is bigger than the rest of the Europe, and Trump will help you because you have a special relationship.


I think Brexit is serving as a cautionary tale to other countries. I wonder if its because they don't have our right wing tabloids to cloud their view & they can plainly see brexit for the shambles it is?.


----------



## noushka05

Imagine voting for a government that treats Drs like this?


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Do you honestly believe we're likely to get a good deal with Mr Corbyn rolling over like a puppy dog to the every whim?


Do you really feel it would make a difference either way? Whoever it is at the time, they can roll over like a puppy or stamp their feet and proclaim loudly that they're difficult. Neither one is going to change the stance of others who are also protecting their own interests which they're perfectly entitled to do.


----------



## Satori




----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> View attachment 310093


Unsurprising. They've been buying themselves wrap around cover of local & national papers to make it look as though the papers are endorsing them. They're using every trick in the book to wipe out any opposition. https://www.theguardian.com/politic...criticised-for-election-day-newspaper-adverts
_
He who controls the media_....


----------



## noushka05

Well who could have foreseen this?


_Since Tories removed student nurse bursary, there has been a 23% drop in applications for nursing courses._
_Manufactured NHS crisis _#*GE2017*


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...a-may-tory-landslide-repeal-ban-a7725346.html




































View attachment 310103


----------



## noushka05

If the tories sweep to power with a landslide, it will show just how much the British public really values wildlife & the environment.

*Why the environment must be at the heart of the UK general election *
Fears about climate change, air pollution, waste and possible changes to the Hunting Act concern readers from *Brian May *and *Ranulph Fiennes* to *James Marsden* of Much Marcle

We call on all party leaders not only to rule out any repeal, weakening or substitution of the Hunting Act but also to support its strengthening and enforcement.

The Hunting Act is one of the most popular pieces of legislation on the statute book today. We're asking party leaders to send a clear, unambiguous message at this election that they fully intend to preserve Britain's great natural heritage, and ensure that cruelty to animals in the name of "sport" remains firmly in the past.

*Eduardo Goncalves* _Chief executive, League Against Cruel Sports_, *Jeremy Cooper* _Chief executive, RSPCA_,* Anne Brummer *_CEO, Save Me Trust_,* Philip Mansbridge* _Director, IFAW-UK_, *Bill Oddie* _President, League Against Cruel Sports_,* Dr Brian May* _Founder, Save Me Trust_,* Chris Packham*,* Sir Ranulph Fiennes*,* Peter Egan*

• If there is one issue that should be at the heart of this election, it is climate change. When we next choose a government (in 2022), it's likely that global temperature will have risen 1.5C. That's the level that nations (including the UK) pledged at Paris in 2015 should not be breached to avoid dangerous climate change.

At current rates of burning coal, gas and oil, we are on track to put enough carbon in the atmosphere in the next five years to push us past that temperature increase.

...


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> Unsurprising. They've been buying themselves wrap around cover of local & national papers to make it look as though the papers are endorsing them. They're using every trick in the book to wipe out any opposition. https://www.theguardian.com/politic...criticised-for-election-day-newspaper-adverts
> _
> He who controls the media_....


Or it could just be the country uniting behind Theresa May's strong and stable leadership so she can deliver the best deal for a U.K. that works for everyone.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Yes I do. Corbyn, for all his faults, is a decent human being. You don't seem to realise, the EU hold ALL the cards.


Come on, let's be honest, Mr Corbyn couldn't negotiate a shadow cabinet in a opposition party.



havoc said:


> Do you really feel it would make a difference either way? Whoever it is at the time, they can roll over like a puppy or stamp their feet and proclaim loudly that they're difficult. Neither one is going to change the stance of others who are also protecting their own interests which they're perfectly entitled to do.


Yes the EU are intitled to protect their own interest, as are the UK which is what Mrs May is doing. Yes I do think it'd make a difference in as much as Mrs May will hopefully be negotiating hard (call it stamping your feet if you like), whereas Mr Corbyn would sat there with the cheque book out.


----------



## Bisbow

Mr Corbyn may be a decent human being, there are millions of decent human beings in the country but that does not mean they coukd lead the country

Mr Corbyn could not lead us out of a muddy puddle never mind the EU


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> The new figures are 65.5% to Macron and 34.5% to Le Pen.
> 
> Congratulations President Emmanuel Macron.
> 
> Will be interesting to watch what he does as he is an outsider to politics, a banker (that was his previous career) if I am not mistaken. Emmanuel Macron has no political experience like Donald Trump.


Unlike Trump he does have a brain & some common decency.

Nailed by Ann Applebaum; *The Tory party "defeated" populism by embracing it and embodying it. 
Macron defeated it by...defeating it. 
What a difference.*

Macron on Brexit. We're not 'Taking our country back' its servitude to the USA.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Yes I do think it'd make a difference in as much as Mrs May will hopefully be negotiating hard (call it stamping your feet if you like),


What exactly will she be negotiating and why will she have the wherewithal to negotiate hard. What will she have up her sleeve that won't be there for anyone else?


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Come on, let's be honest, Mr Corbyn couldn't negotiate a shadow cabinet in a opposition party.
> 
> Yes the EU are intitled to protect their own interest, as are the UK which is what Mrs May is doing. Yes I do think it'd make a difference in as much as Mrs May will hopefully be negotiating hard (call it stamping your feet if you like), whereas Mr Corbyn would sat there with the cheque book out.





Bisbow said:


> Mr Corbyn may be a decent human being, there are millions of decent human beings in the country but that does not mean they coukd lead the country
> 
> Mr Corbyn could not lead us out of a muddy puddle never mind the EU


You're still missing the massive point - we have NOTHING to negotiate with. We're at the mercy of the 27 member states, treating them like enemies is hardly going to do us any favours, is it?

May is leading this country to ruin. The only beneficiaries will be the multinational corporations & the elite who will asset strip our country.

.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> Unsurprising. They've been buying themselves wrap around cover of local & national papers to make it look as though the papers are endorsing them. They're using every trick in the book to wipe out any opposition. https://www.theguardian.com/politic...criticised-for-election-day-newspaper-adverts
> _
> He who controls the media_....
> 
> View attachment 310095
> 
> 
> View attachment 310094


Reminds me of this free paper's four page advertising feature a few days before the referendum as given away on buses and other forms of public transport.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> You're still missing the massive point - we have NOTHING to negotiate with. We're at the mercy of the 27 member states, treating them like enemies is hardly going to do us any favours, is it?
> 
> May is leading this country to ruin. The only beneficiaries will be the multinational corporations & the elite who will asset strip our country
> 
> .


No you are the one missing the point
Mr Corbyn will give in to them the moment they start giving him orders, he will go down like a deflated balloon, he has no oomph
At least Mrs May will stand up to the bullies to get what we want and need to be a self governing country again, she has the oomph he lacks


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> What exactly will she be negotiating and why will she have the wherewithal to negotiate hard. What will she have up her sleeve that won't be there for anyone else?


It's not "anyone else" though is it. It's Mrs May or Mr Corbyn.



noushka05 said:


> You're still missing the massive point - we have NOTHING to negotiate with. We're at the mercy of the 27 member states, treating them like enemies is hardly going to do us any favours, is it?
> 
> .


So EU resident's in the UK don't want to stay here after 2019?

The EU don't want to trade with the UK?

Irish and Gibraltar borders are of no interest to EU?

Apart from those, which are of equally importance to both sides, I for one can't think of anything else we want to keep from the EU which is why we are leaving.


----------



## Goblin

Satori said:


> Or it could just be the country uniting behind Theresa May's strong and stable leadership so she can deliver the best deal for a U.K. that works for everyone.


So yet another soundbite repetition. Where's the evidence from her actions of strong and stable leadership? Hint: Hissy fits when she doesn't get her own way do not count. Maybe it's the way she controlled immigration and reduced it for example...


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> It's not "anyone else" though is it. It's Mrs May or Mr Corbyn.
> 
> So EU resident's in the UK don't want to stay here after 2019?
> 
> The EU don't want to trade with the UK?
> 
> Irish and Gibraltar borders are of no interest to EU?
> 
> Apart from those, which are of equally importance to both sides, I for one can't think of anything else we want to keep from the EU which is why we are leaving.


So, EU residents held hostage, trade and borders.. You miss the point that no deal will hurt the UK far more than the EU. So what happens when EU calls UK's bluff, already started in some areas which is why May threw her hissy fit about EU interfering in election? EU actually have the facts and experts at hand and are going to use them. In addition, do you think Poland cares about the Irish border?

Trade will happen regardless, WTO trade regulations means EU countries such as Poland could well pinch business such as car manufacturers to their countries. Win for them.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> So EU resident's in the UK don't want to stay here after 2019?


You're suggesting that May uses EU citizens in the UK as bargaining chips?

Nice



Dr Pepper said:


> The EU don't want to trade with the UK?
> 
> Irish and Gibraltar borders are of no interest to EU?
> 
> Apart from those, which are of equally importance to both sides, I for one can't think of anything else we want to keep from the EU which is why we are leaving.


EU exports to UK = 13% of total. UK exports to EU = 47% of total. Equal?

What are we going to threaten to do with the Irish and Gibraltar borders that would put pressure on the EU? Close them? Or do we threaten to keep them open; that would show them.

As for all the things you can't think of; do we still want to be involved with the agencies that, for example, regulate air traffic safety in European skies? We can't fly there if we don't. And there are lots of other agencies like that if you care to google them.

As Noushka points out, we have very few cards to play. We've chosen to leave, and we're going to ask if we can keep all the benefits of membership. They'll say no. And we have nothing except 'please' no matter how big May's mandate might be.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> So, EU residents held hostage, trade and borders.. You miss the point that no deal will hurt the UK far more than the EU. So what happens when EU calls UK's bluff, already started in some areas which is why May threw her hissy fit about EU interfering in election? EU actually have the facts and experts at hand and are going to use them. In addition, do you think Poland cares about the Irish border?
> 
> Trade will happen regardless, WTO trade regulations means EU countries such as Poland could well pinch business such as car manufacturers to their countries. Win for them.


So we're holding EU citizens hostage, what are the EU doing with our citizens?

I don't understand, what "no deal" are you referring to? Freedom of movement, trade, borders? What no deal would be worse for us and why?


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> You're suggesting that May uses EU citizens in the UK as bargaining chips?
> 
> Nice
> 
> EU exports to UK = 13% of total. UK exports to EU = 47% of total. Equal?
> 
> What are we going to threaten to do with the Irish and Gibraltar borders that would put pressure on the EU? Close them? Or do we threaten to keep them open; that would show them.
> 
> As for all the things you can't think of; do we still want to be involved with the agencies that, for example, regulate air traffic safety in European skies? We can't fly there if we don't. And there are lots of other agencies like that if you care to google them.
> 
> As Noushka points out, we have very few cards to play. We've chosen to leave, and we're going to ask if we can keep all the benefits of membership. They'll say no. And we have nothing except 'please' no matter how big May's mandate might be.


Never said using EU citizens as bargaining chips, I said the issue is of equal importance to both sides.

Trade with the EU is diminishing year on year. The reason we have traded so much with them is because the trade tariffs are set up to encourage trade within the EU. We actually import more from the EU than we export (£ not %).


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

cheekyscrip said:


> This is why I would never vote Tory. No one who thinks that wild or any other animals should not killed for amusement can vote Tories and call themselves animal lovers.
> Corrida, dog fights or fix hunting is essentially the same.
> Killing beautiful, helpless being, maiming and torturing them un fight or chase for WHAT?
> Are foxes different from dogs or cats?
> 
> Would you approve of pack of dogs savaging a cat?
> Some do.
> Smart clothes are no excuse.
> 
> @stockwellcat there are other parties than Labour or Tory.
> There are Greens.
> Certainly pro animal rights.
> View attachment 310086


Do you have a reliable source for this please? I am about to email the current Tory MP for my area and I don't want to quote the Daily Mirror as a source.

Regarding your statement that no one who votes Tory can call themselves an animal lover - firstly I would suggest anyone who eats meat or consumes dairy products should get their own house in order and secondly see below

http://www.conservativesagainstfoxhunting.com/

*CONSERVATIVES AGAINST FOX HUNTING MANIFESTO 2017*
By CAFH
Posted May 3, 2017

*THE GENERAL ELECTION IS FAST APPROACHING AND THE PUBLIC FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT ANIMAL WELFARE MATTERS; THEY HAVE SIGNED PETITIONS, JOINED CAMPAIGNS AND SENT NUMEROUS LETTERS AND EMAILS TO MPS, WHO RECEIVE MORE MAIL REGARDING ANIMALS THAN ON ANY OTHER TOPIC.*
*WHILE CONCERN FOR ANIMALS IS A MAINSTREAM PRIORITY, THIS ISN'T REFLECTED IN THE POLICIES OF MOST UK POLITICAL PARTIES. IMPROVING ANIMAL WELFARE AND HOW WE VIEW ANIMALS IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF A CIVILISED SOCIETY. WE FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT ANIMAL WELFARE IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE TO MILLIONS OF PEOPLE
BLUE FOX HAS PRODUCED A MANIFESTO SETTING OUT ISSUES FOR ACTION. THE MANIFESTO AIMS TO GENERATE DEBATE AND ENCOURAGE THE PUBLIC AND POLITICIANS TO CONSIDER HOW THEY CAN IMPROVE ANIMAL WELFARE WITHIN THE PARTY.*


*Exclude any offer to hold a free vote on and omit any pledge to undermine the hunting ban

End the badger cull and to ensure that no expansion of the cull occurs

Introduce a statutory close season for hares which are a priority species

Introduce a ban on snares. Snares are prohibited in most of the EU and the UK are one of only five EU countries to still allow the free use of snares

Commit to a review of the industry of shooting live birds as targets for sport shooting, looking specifically at the animal welfare, economic and ecological impacts

Commit to long term funding of the National Wildlife Crime Unit

Introduce stronger sentencing for animal cruelty

Implement a central database for tracking racing greyhounds from birth to retirement, to death. Introduce a statutory requirement for tracks, trainers and owners to rehome all racing greyhounds and end industry self- regulation. Greyhound racing is only legal in eight countries, including the UK

Ban third party sale of dogs- Dogs should be only available from licensed regulated breeders or approved re-homing organisations

End all fur imports to the UK. The Government ordered the last UK fur farm to close its doors in 2003

Introduce mandatory method of production labelling on meat and dairy to show which system animals are
reared in. Labelling to show method of slaughter

Introduce mandatory CCTV in all slaughterhouses

Ban non-stun slaughter

End live animal transports from the UK and at least tougher regulations on animal transport, including a
maximum of eight hours

Phase out enriched cages for laying hens

Phase out farrowing crates for pigs. Replace with free farrowing systems

Ensure that all EU animal welfare legislation is protected and transferred into UK law

Implement the total ban on the use of wild animals in circuses

Action to end trophy hunting and the importation of wildlife trophies into the EU

Introduce a domestic ivory ban for all ivory, including antique ivory(with some specific exemptions)

Oppose commercial whaling worldwide

Actively oppose the dog meat trade

Government to increase funding directed towards developing and promoting human alternatives to animal
experiments. Stop the use of primates, cats and dogs in research. Put rules on the harm-benefit
assessment of animal experiments out to public consultation to prevent trivial research. Ban experiments
causing severe pain. Require animal research establishments to publish strategies for reducing the
numbers of animals used

We would welcome the creation of an Animal Protection Commission(APC) for animal welfare to be
factored into decisions on trade agreements. There is a fundamental weakness in the UK's approach to
animal welfare - the lack of any government body with a dedicated animal welfare remit. We visualise that
the APC would be led by a Board of 16 Commissioners representing a mixture of experts (in fields such
as veterinary & animal welfare science, law, ethics, public policy), stakeholders from animal protection
NGOs and industry

conservatives-against-fox-hunting-2017-manifesto-may3-4
*


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> So we're holding EU citizens hostage, what are the EU doing with our citizens?


UK citizens in the EU are already protected under the EU constitution with the right to appeal to the ECJ or didn't you realise that?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 310110


There you go again. What do you want to do to stop people being mega wealthy - throw them in jail and steal all their money. The politics of envy doesn't achieve anything, there will always be someone who has more than you do and others who have less. We are not all the same and this is something that really puts me off voting labour. I envy people who have more time to enjoy life and don't work stupid hours, I used to have far more free time and paid leave when I was nursing than I do running a small business, we haven't had a proper holiday in years - just a few days at a time and always have to be contactable by phone/email and constantly work to time deadlines.


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> So we're holding EU citizens hostage, what are the EU doing with our citizens?
> 
> I don't understand, what "no deal" are you referring to? Freedom of movement, trade, borders? What no deal would be worse for us and why?


I suggest you investigate the full impact of trading under WTO rules. NOT the tarriff part - that is only the tip of the iceberg. All the rest of the implications are what would really cost us.

Also bear in mind that this will also apply to every nation that the EU has a trade deal with, as we lose access to those too. Some nations have already announced that they won't be considering entering trade negotiations with us for at least 6 years after Brexit is finalised, so WTO is here to stay in those cases - unless we manage to strike a deal with the EU that lets us keep access to the existing trade deals (which we will have to pay for, of course). And that's before we start on the difficulties withdrawing from the customs union entails.



Dr Pepper said:


> Never said using EU citizens as bargaining chips, I said the issue is of equal importance to both sides.
> 
> Trade with the EU is diminishing year on year. The reason we have traded so much with them is because the trade tariffs are set up to encourage trade within the EU. We actually import more from the EU than we export (£ not %).


The EU can't use our citizens as bargaining chips, though, they are protected under the EU constitution as far as I understand it.

Back when the EU free trade area first began (don't ask me to remember what it was called then), the UK elected not to join. A few years down the line, we asked to join, a process which took 9 years of negotiations with the existing 7 countries in the area (if memory serves). Why did we ask to join? In simple terms, because their economies were prospering due to the ease of trade, whilst ours was struggling. And that was back in the days when we still had some of the Empire.

Personally, I can afford for imports to become much more expensive. Many can't. Personally, I'd probably be better off under Tory leadership. But my conscience won't let me vote for them because so many more _won't_ be. I'd rather lose out personally if it's going to get a better deal for the less fortunate.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> Never said using EU citizens as bargaining chips, I said the issue is of equal importance to both sides.


Noushka says we have nothing to bargain with and you respond with


Dr Pepper said:


> So EU resident's in the UK don't want to stay here after 2019?


and then claim you're not suggesting their use as bargaining chips?

I think that's quite a hard one to argue.



Dr Pepper said:


> Trade with the EU is diminishing year on year. The reason we have traded so much with them is because the trade tariffs are set up to encourage trade within the EU. We actually import more from the EU than we export (£ not %).


From Fullfact.org


> About 44% of UK exports in goods and services went to other countries in the EU in 2016. That share was declining until 2013, when exports to other countries increased at a faster rate. Since then the share has held steady.


And it really hasn't been enough of a decline to afford us the luxury of dismissing EU trade with a shrug.

And yes in monetary terms we import more from those 27 countries than they do from our 1. But however you look at it a reduction in trade would hit us much harder than any EU country.

From Fullfact.org


> Exports to the rest of the EU are worth about 13% of the UK's economy, and exports from other EU countries to the UK are worth about 3-4% of the value of those countries' economies taken as a whole.


https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/[/quote]


----------



## havoc

_We actually import more from the EU than we export (£ not %)._
We do right this minute but what are the forecasts going forward? In order for us to be an attractive market the EU needs so much we'd have to show that those imports won't shrink - will actually increase markedly. Why would that happen?


----------



## havoc

Jesthar said:


> Personally, I can afford for imports to become much more expensive.


Me too but it isn't a popular move saying so or caring about those who could struggle.


----------



## Goblin

When talking about May's mandate and what she is up against:

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-38707997

Winning a GE will make no difference in EU negotiations no matter how large a majority she has.


----------



## Jesthar

Goblin said:


> When talking about May's mandate and what she is up against:
> 
> http://www.bbc.com/news/business-38707997
> 
> Winning a GE will make no difference in EU negotiations no matter how large a majority she has.


Matches up very well with everything I'm hearing from our overseas contacts. Europe first, even if it means significant short term loss for longer term gain.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> There you go again. What do you want to do to stop people being mega wealthy - throw them in jail and steal all their money. The politics of envy doesn't achieve anything, there will always be someone who has more than you do and others who have less. We are not all the same and this is something that really puts me off voting labour. I envy people who have more time to enjoy life and don't work stupid hours, I used to have far more free time and paid leave when I was nursing than I do running a small business, we haven't had a proper holiday in years - just a few days at a time and always have to be contactable by phone/email and constantly work to time deadlines.


That's a rather unfair assumption if you don't mind me saying so. It was not Labour Party literature incidentally. Nothing I've uploaded has come from the Labour Party to the best of my knowledge.

I just find it incredible so few have that much money when there's hunger in the world. I wasn't intentionally saying this was exclusive to the UK.


----------



## havoc

Jesthar said:


> Matches up very well with everything I'm hearing from our overseas contacts. Europe first, even if it means significant short term loss for longer term gain.


Why does anyone think it would be any different?


----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> I suggest you investigate the full impact of trading under WTO rules. NOT the tarriff part - that is only the tip of the iceberg. All the rest of the implications are what would really cost us.
> 
> Also bear in mind that this will also apply to every nation that the EU has a trade deal with, as we lose access to those too. Some nations have already announced that they won't be considering entering trade negotiations with us for at least 6 years after Brexit is finalised, so WTO is here to stay in those cases - unless we manage to strike a deal with the EU that lets us keep access to the existing trade deals (which we will have to pay for, of course). And that's before we start on the difficulties withdrawing from the customs union entails.
> 
> The EU can't use our citizens as bargaining chips, though, they are protected under the EU constitution as far as I understand it.
> 
> Back when the EU free trade area first began (don't ask me to remember what it was called then), the UK elected not to join. A few years down the line, we asked to join, a process which took 9 years of negotiations with the existing 7 countries in the area (if memory serves). Why did we ask to join? In simple terms, because their economies were prospering due to the ease of trade, whilst ours was struggling. And that was back in the days when we still had some of the Empire.
> 
> Personally, I can afford for imports to become much more expensive. Many can't. Personally, I'd probably be better off under Tory leadership. But my conscience won't let me vote for them because so many more _won't_ be. I'd rather lose out personally if it's going to get a better deal for the less fortunate.


WTO was my point, it'll effect the EU as well as us so it's in their interest to get a deal done. As for getting agreements with the rest of the world that's going to have nothing to do with anything we agree, or don't, with the EU.

As for UK citizens in the EU are we sure they're protected when we leave? If they are why didn't the EU bite Mrs May's hand off months ago when she wanted to guarantee the rights of all expats before negotiations start? Wouldn't that have been totally to their advantage whist making no difference to us? I'll be honest I don't know guarantees the ECJ provides UK citizens, but why then are so many expats uncertain about their future in the EU?


----------



## Goblin

havoc said:


> Why does anyone think it would be any different?


Only have to look through the EU thread. People have been lied to and people like May are continuing to do so rather than prepare the country and it's people for the reality. Fact's aren't as nice as soundbites like "strong and stable", "need a mandate for negotiations". She already used the excuse "it's the EU's fault" and we'll see a lot more of it in the coming years.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> That's a rather unfair assumption if you don't mind me saying so. It was not Labour Party literature incidentally. Nothing I've uploaded has come from the Labour Party to the best of my knowledge.
> 
> I just find it incredible so few have that much money when there's hunger in the world. I wasn't intentionally saying this was exclusive to the UK.


Why is it an unfair assumption? If you keep posting about other people's wealth its a simple question to ask what you want to do about it?


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> As for UK citizens in the EU are we sure they're protected when we leave? If they are why didn't the EU bite Mrs May's hand off months ago when she wanted to guarantee the rights of all expats before negotiations start? Wouldn't that have been totally to their advantage whist making no difference to us? I'll be honest I don't know guarantees the ECJ provides UK citizens, but why then are so many expats uncertain about their future in the EU?


Any who have lived for 5 years or more have right to reside. Others come under the Vienna Convention of 1969, which says that the termination of a treaty "does not affect any right, obligation or legal situation of the parties created through the execution of the treaty prior to its termination." Now things like healthcare are something else entirely which could make a difference for retired UK citizens living in places like Spain and other countries.


----------



## havoc

Goblin said:


> People have been lied to


If I'm being kind I see it more that inconvenient truths were either swept under the carpet or ignored by those who didn't want to hear. There was always going to be a cost to leaving. This isn't something that was made up by the EU after the referendum but because they've dared to mention it it's seen as some sort of revenge.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Why is it an unfair assumption? If you keep posting about other people's wealth its a simple question to ask what you want to do about it?


I mentioned earlier perhaps a cap at £1bn?


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Any who have lived for 5 years or more have right to reside. Others come under the Vienna Convention of 1969, which says that the termination of a treaty "does not affect any right, obligation or legal situation of the parties created through the execution of the treaty prior to its termination." Now things like healthcare are something else entirely which could make a difference for retired UK citizens living in places like Spain and other countries.


Thank you for that.

So I would guess/hope the negotiations would be about EU citizens right to the NHS and such rather than if they can stay.

Edit
Actually of course they'd have rights to the NHS if they are/have been working and paying NI.


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> So EU resident's in the UK don't want to stay here after 2019?


If Noushka posts, 'W_e have NOTHING to negotiate with', _to which you respond with the above statement, I would certainly view your words with suspicion and regard the entire quote as an implied threat.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> If Noushka posts, 'W_e have NOTHING to negotiate with', _to which you respond with the above statement, I would certainly view your words with suspicion and regard the entire quote as an implied threat.


Of course you would.


----------



## davidc

I actually think Jeremy Corbyn *would* make a good leader. Just because the media says he wouldn't doesn't mean it's true. How many other politicians would stay after all the s##t thrown at Corbyn? Yet he has stayed no matter what gets thrown at him, even surviving a leadership challenge against him. Now *that's strong and stable. *However, Theresa May is far from strong and stable, and the evidence against her proves so. I really hope Labour wins otherwise the NHS is f#####. Same with the economy, cuts everywhere to the vulnerable yet the national debt increases. Election fraud. People relying more on food banks than ever before. Just to name a few. And I doubt May will really cap energy prices if she wins. No snap election, ring any bells?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> I mentioned earlier perhaps a cap at £1bn?


So like I asked before how does that work? You tell anyone with £1 billion they are not allowed to work anymore? what if they run a hugely successful business which employs thousands of people? do they have to stop? are they allowed to sell it or will the government confiscate it? Does the government steal anything that person earns that takes them over £1 billion? How is that going to encourage entrepreneurs and investors to come to this country?


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> WTO was my point, it'll effect the EU as well as us so it's in their interest to get a deal done. As for getting agreements with the rest of the world that's going to have nothing to do with anything we agree, or don't, with the EU.


But it won't affect the EU anywhere near as much as it will us. They have multiple trade agreements with multiple countries around the world, so anything they could get from us they can also source from elsewhere without too much hassle. We're no big loss to them.

Put simply, if we decide we don't want to take the deal they offer, they have lots of alternative options that will cost them relatively little to pursue, and can afford to go "Fair enough, good luck!" and walk away not much worse off. For us, though, trading on WTO rules leaves us at a serious disadvantage.

As to other countries, most of them already have extensive and comprehensive agreements with the EU and other major markets. The UK, outside of the EU trading block, is not a particularly major market, but also depends on imports to survive as a country, particularly food and energy. That puts those nations which supply us with those things at a serious advantage over us once we are outside of the EU deals. Personally, I would expect them to fully exploit those advantages - who wouldn't?


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> So I would guess/hope the negotiations would be about EU citizens right to the NHS and such rather than if they can stay.


Unfortunately not. For a start the UK want to abandon the EU mechanisms to uphold the rights of people in the EU, the European Court of Justice. It's inconvenient for May after all, these human right issues. Also there is nothing preventing a UK government from changing the rules outside the "created through the execution of the treaty". Remember the push May had for immigrants to be listed by companies? EU rules state those in employment are to be treated identically to "native" employees. EU rules are highly unlikely to change and certainly not to penalise those from the UK. That's not what people hear about the situation in the UK.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> But it won't affect the EU anywhere near as much as it will us. They have multiple trade agreements with multiple countries around the world, so anything they could get from us they can also source from elsewhere without too much hassle. We're no big loss to them.
> 
> Put simply, if we decide we don't want to take the deal they offer, they have lots of alternative options that will cost them relatively little to pursue, and can afford to go "Fair enough, good luck!" and walk away not much worse off. For us, though, trading on WTO rules leaves us at a serious disadvantage.
> 
> As to other countries, most of them already have extensive and comprehensive agreements with the EU and other major markets. The UK, outside of the EU trading block, is not a particularly major market, but also depends on imports to survive as a country, particularly food and energy. That puts those nations which supply us with those things at a serious advantage over us once we are outside of the EU deals. Personally, I would expect them to fully exploit those advantages - who wouldn't?


I was actually thinking of them selling to us rather than buying from us, and vice-a-versa. Or would they be happy to lose those billions of euros worth of sales?


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> I was actually thinking of them selling to us rather than buying from us, and vice-a-versa. Or would they be happy to lose those billions of euros worth of sales?


Those sales will broadly fall into two categories, though, as far as consumer sales go.

Firstly, the things the UK _needs_ to survive. Food, energy, that kind of thing. We'll still need to buy those, and the EU will still be in an excellent position to sell them to us. It will just cost us more to buy them than it does now, but I'm pretty sure Europeans are savvy enough business people to set prices that make them a competitive buying option in spite of all the extra fees we'll have to pay.

Secondly, the things we don't need to survive - luxuries, if you will. Everything from cheap flights to champagne, basically. Again, there will be plenty who can still afford them at higher prices. The rest will have to do without, or buy from elsewhere if we can.

Business sales and supply chain, of course, is slightly different. The first two categories still apply, but there is another option - move operations elsewhere. For any business that relies on 'just in time' resource supply, that will be an extremely attractive prospect, as operating on WTO rules outside of a customs union agreement automatically involves significant import/export delays due to mandatory customs processes, compliance testing, quarantine etc.,and such delays and processes significantly increase costs. That is likely to impact the food and manufacturing industries the most, I suspect, although there may be far wider reaching implications.

So yes, I think the EU is perfectly capable of absorbing any difference in sales patterns and adapting quite effectively. There will be some short term pain for them, obviously, but they have a lot more options at their disposal too, so for them the economic hit will be more of a speedbump.


----------



## Goblin

I think something people should be considering for this election is how is May preparing the population for the effects of Brexit and what is likely. Is she actually admitting problems will occur even if she gets everything she is asking for? Don't we need someone who hopes for the best but prepares for the worst?


----------



## Satori

Goblin said:


> So yet another soundbite repetition. Where's the evidence from her actions of strong and stable leadership? Hint: Hissy fits when she doesn't get her own way do not count. Maybe it's the way she controlled immigration and reduced it for example...


Hissy fits when she way she evidence from her own way she way she controng another own way do nothe do not controng and reduced it for example... So yet anothe way she way doesn't get her action. Where's the evidence from her action. Wher sount. Maybe it for example... So yet and reduced immigration. Where's ther own way she doesn't get and strong anot controng and stable leadership? Hint: Hint: Hint: Hissy fits when she evidence from her own way do not controlled it's the way she do nother actions


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Do you have a reliable source for this please? I am about to email the current Tory MP for my area and I don't want to quote the Daily Mirror as a source.
> 
> Regarding your statement that no one who votes Tory can call themselves an animal lover - firstly I would suggest anyone who eats meat or consumes dairy products should get their own house in order and secondly see below
> 
> http://www.conservativesagainstfoxhunting.com/
> 
> *CONSERVATIVES AGAINST FOX HUNTING MANIFESTO 2017*
> By CAFH
> Posted May 3, 2017
> 
> *THE GENERAL ELECTION IS FAST APPROACHING AND THE PUBLIC FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT ANIMAL WELFARE MATTERS; THEY HAVE SIGNED PETITIONS, JOINED CAMPAIGNS AND SENT NUMEROUS LETTERS AND EMAILS TO MPS, WHO RECEIVE MORE MAIL REGARDING ANIMALS THAN ON ANY OTHER TOPIC.*
> *WHILE CONCERN FOR ANIMALS IS A MAINSTREAM PRIORITY, THIS ISN'T REFLECTED IN THE POLICIES OF MOST UK POLITICAL PARTIES. IMPROVING ANIMAL WELFARE AND HOW WE VIEW ANIMALS IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF A CIVILISED SOCIETY. WE FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT ANIMAL WELFARE IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE TO MILLIONS OF PEOPLE
> BLUE FOX HAS PRODUCED A MANIFESTO SETTING OUT ISSUES FOR ACTION. THE MANIFESTO AIMS TO GENERATE DEBATE AND ENCOURAGE THE PUBLIC AND POLITICIANS TO CONSIDER HOW THEY CAN IMPROVE ANIMAL WELFARE WITHIN THE PARTY.*
> 
> 
> *Exclude any offer to hold a free vote on and omit any pledge to undermine the hunting ban
> 
> End the badger cull and to ensure that no expansion of the cull occurs
> 
> Introduce a statutory close season for hares which are a priority species
> 
> Introduce a ban on snares. Snares are prohibited in most of the EU and the UK are one of only five EU countries to still allow the free use of snares
> 
> Commit to a review of the industry of shooting live birds as targets for sport shooting, looking specifically at the animal welfare, economic and ecological impacts
> 
> Commit to long term funding of the National Wildlife Crime Unit
> 
> Introduce stronger sentencing for animal cruelty
> 
> Implement a central database for tracking racing greyhounds from birth to retirement, to death. Introduce a statutory requirement for tracks, trainers and owners to rehome all racing greyhounds and end industry self- regulation. Greyhound racing is only legal in eight countries, including the UK
> 
> Ban third party sale of dogs- Dogs should be only available from licensed regulated breeders or approved re-homing organisations
> 
> End all fur imports to the UK. The Government ordered the last UK fur farm to close its doors in 2003
> 
> Introduce mandatory method of production labelling on meat and dairy to show which system animals are
> reared in. Labelling to show method of slaughter
> 
> Introduce mandatory CCTV in all slaughterhouses
> 
> Ban non-stun slaughter
> 
> End live animal transports from the UK and at least tougher regulations on animal transport, including a
> maximum of eight hours
> 
> Phase out enriched cages for laying hens
> 
> Phase out farrowing crates for pigs. Replace with free farrowing systems
> 
> Ensure that all EU animal welfare legislation is protected and transferred into UK law
> 
> Implement the total ban on the use of wild animals in circuses
> 
> Action to end trophy hunting and the importation of wildlife trophies into the EU
> 
> Introduce a domestic ivory ban for all ivory, including antique ivory(with some specific exemptions)
> 
> Oppose commercial whaling worldwide
> 
> Actively oppose the dog meat trade
> 
> Government to increase funding directed towards developing and promoting human alternatives to animal
> experiments. Stop the use of primates, cats and dogs in research. Put rules on the harm-benefit
> assessment of animal experiments out to public consultation to prevent trivial research. Ban experiments
> causing severe pain. Require animal research establishments to publish strategies for reducing the
> numbers of animals used
> 
> We would welcome the creation of an Animal Protection Commission(APC) for animal welfare to be
> factored into decisions on trade agreements. There is a fundamental weakness in the UK's approach to
> animal welfare - the lack of any government body with a dedicated animal welfare remit. We visualise that
> the APC would be led by a Board of 16 Commissioners representing a mixture of experts (in fields such
> as veterinary & animal welfare science, law, ethics, public policy), stakeholders from animal protection
> NGOs and industry
> 
> conservatives-against-fox-hunting-2017-manifesto-may3-4
> *


It was in The Independent, The Mirror, plus @noushka05 also posted about it.

Emails were leaked that confirm it.

I am no Labour lover, you probably noticed, but I do care about animals and totally abhor any " sport" where animals are maimed or killed for amusement.

In any country, any party endorsing it will never get my support.


----------



## Jesthar

Satori said:


> Hissy fits when she way she evidence from her own way she way she controng another own way do nothe do not controng and reduced it for example... So yet anothe way she way doesn't get her action. Where's the evidence from her action. Wher sount. Maybe it for example... So yet and reduced immigration. Where's ther own way she doesn't get and strong anot controng and stable leadership? Hint: Hint: Hint: Hissy fits when she evidence from her own way do not controlled it's the way she do nother actions


Good grief, is it that time already? Dried frog pills, top pocket. Take two.


----------



## KittenKong

Goblin said:


> I think something people should be considering for this election is how is May preparing the population for the effects of Brexit and what is likely. Is she actually admitting problems will occur even if she gets everything she is asking for? Don't we need someone who hopes for the best but prepares for the worst?


I think May has already done so by blaming the EU for what lies ahead if they don't succumb to her no compromise, "my or no way" terms. Good way to pass the buck.

The UK chose to leave the EU, not the other way round.

The sooner people realise that the better.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

cheekyscrip said:


> It was in The Independent, The Mirror, plus @noushka05 also posted about it.
> 
> Emails were leaked that confirm it.
> 
> I am no Labour lover, you probably noticed, but I do care about animals and totally abhor any " sport" where animals are maimed or killed for amusement.
> 
> In any country, any party endorsing it will never get my support.


Thank you but I can't tell my MP that someone on a forum posted about it. The Mirror article wasn't very informative so will see if the Independent one is any better.

ETA Its OK, I've found the leaked email now so I can use that in my letter to my MP.


----------



## kimthecat

When do we get our polling card ? 
Apart from my current MP , I dont actually know who the other candidates are


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Notice Labour supporters have kept quiet about this - 3 party members expelled because they had joined forces to support an NHS doctor who they thought had the best chance of ousting Jeremy Hunt.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...te-townsend-jeremy-hunt-general-a7725446.html

Three members of the Labour Party have been expelled for aligning with other parties in a bid to oust Jeremy Hunt from his seat in the general election.

Steve Williams, who sits on the executive of the South West Surrey constituency party and has been a member of the Labour Party for 46 years, received a letter from the party's head office on Monday stating that he was "ineligible" to remain a member because he had "publicly stated support for a party that is standing against the Labour Party in the 2017 general election".

Kate Townsend, who is secretary on the executive committee of the constituency party, and Robert Park, who stood as a candidate in the constituency's local elections and has been a member of the party for 50 years, were also expelled with the same reasons given.

The letter Mr Williams received, which _The Independent_ has seen, cites as a reason for his expulsion his recent work for think tank Compass, which has been promoting and facilitating the 'Progressive Alliance' movement across the country.

Over the weekend, Mr Williams chaired a meeting on behalf of Compass and with the support of Ms Townsend and Mr Park, during which members of the South West Surrey Labour Party agreed to unite behind an NHS doctor and leader of the National Health Action party instead of the official Labour candidate standing in the constituency.

The letter, signed by the Labour Party's head of disputes Sam Matthews, states: "It has been brought to our attention with supporting evidence that you have publicly stated your support for a party that is standing against the Labour Party in the 2017 general election which is incompatible with membership of the Labour Party."

A "progressive forum" chaired by Mr Williams on Saturday saw the Green Party withdraw their candidate from the race completely, while Liberal Democrats and Labour members agreed not to campaign, after members from all four parties selected the leader of the National Health Action party as the best-placed candidate to oppose the Health Secretary.


----------



## KittenKong

Agreed, the above is not good.

Opposition parties really need to start working together, not expelling candidates like this.


----------



## Satori

Jesthar said:


> Good grief, is it that time already? Dried frog pills, top pocket. Take two.


Ooh, them's the good stuff.


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Thank you but I can't tell my MP that someone on a forum posted about it. The Mirror article wasn't very informative so will see if the Independent one is any better.
> 
> ETA Its OK, I've found the leaked email now so I can use that in my letter to my MP.


So glad. Then also ivory trade ban ...
Still do not understand how it could be allowed in any civilised country?

Natural furs and all animal " trophies" should be banned too.

Honestly it is time for Greens ..


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Notice Labour supporters have kept quiet about this - 3 party members expelled because they had joined forces to support an NHS doctor who they thought had the best chance of ousting Jeremy Hunt.
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...te-townsend-jeremy-hunt-general-a7725446.html
> 
> Three members of the Labour Party have been expelled for aligning with other parties in a bid to oust Jeremy Hunt from his seat in the general election.
> 
> Steve Williams, who sits on the executive of the South West Surrey constituency party and has been a member of the Labour Party for 46 years, received a letter from the party's head office on Monday stating that he was "ineligible" to remain a member because he had "publicly stated support for a party that is standing against the Labour Party in the 2017 general election".
> 
> Kate Townsend, who is secretary on the executive committee of the constituency party, and Robert Park, who stood as a candidate in the constituency's local elections and has been a member of the party for 50 years, were also expelled with the same reasons given.
> 
> The letter Mr Williams received, which _The Independent_ has seen, cites as a reason for his expulsion his recent work for think tank Compass, which has been promoting and facilitating the 'Progressive Alliance' movement across the country.
> 
> Over the weekend, Mr Williams chaired a meeting on behalf of Compass and with the support of Ms Townsend and Mr Park, during which members of the South West Surrey Labour Party agreed to unite behind an NHS doctor and leader of the National Health Action party instead of the official Labour candidate standing in the constituency.
> 
> The letter, signed by the Labour Party's head of disputes Sam Matthews, states: "It has been brought to our attention with supporting evidence that you have publicly stated your support for a party that is standing against the Labour Party in the 2017 general election which is incompatible with membership of the Labour Party."
> 
> A "progressive forum" chaired by Mr Williams on Saturday saw the Green Party withdraw their candidate from the race completely, while Liberal Democrats and Labour members agreed not to campaign, after members from all four parties selected the leader of the National Health Action party as the best-placed candidate to oppose the Health Secretary.


I have just read it.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

cheekyscrip said:


> So glad. Then also ivory trade ban ...
> Still do not understand how it could be allowed in any civilised country?
> 
> Natural furs and all animal " trophies" should be banned too.
> 
> Honestly it is time for Greens ..


I linked the Conservatives Against Hunting Manifesto that I pasted here earlier which outlined many of the animal welfare issues we are concerned about and asked him to read that too. I'm pretty sure I know what his response will be as I had a very curt response when I emailed him about it once before - If its as I suspect I will not be voting for him and doubt my OH will either.


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I linked the Conservatives Against Hunting Manifesto that I pasted here earlier which outlined many of the animal welfare issues we are concerned about and asked him to read that too. I'm pretty sure I know what his response will be as I had a very curt response when I emailed him about it once before - If its as I suspect I will not be voting for him and doubt my OH will either.


There are other parties than Tories or Labour, thanks God!


----------



## 3dogs2cats

kimthecat said:


> When do we get our polling card ?
> Apart from my current MP , I dont actually know who the other candidates are


Have you looked online? I googled my constituency GE 2017 and eventually found who is standing but nothing in local press at all nor a single campaign leaflet. Apart from name and party I have no idea what local issues they will be campaigning on. Maybe they will go more public next week, I`m hoping I get to met them I am most definitely an undecided voter this time around, apart from knowing I will not be voting for the incumbent MP, If he should show up on my doorstep I will be reminding him of his very dismissive replies he has sent to issues that have concerned me!


----------



## kimthecat

@3dogs2cats Thanks , 
I did a general google and it mentioned hustings taking place but no names, I'll try googling the name of my constituency and the GE 2017 and see what comes up. 
I have a postal vote so i have to send mine in a bit earlier. I'm undecided too but ours is a safe seat so don't know if my vote will make any difference .


----------



## Mirandashell

I think you should still vote as a lower majority still sends a message. As does a higher one.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...a-may-tory-landslide-repeal-ban-a7725346.html
> 
> View attachment 310097
> View attachment 310098
> View attachment 310099
> View attachment 310100
> View attachment 310101
> View attachment 310103


I am answering this post simply because this isn't the first time I have heard this today. I thought the Tories were against Fox Hunting. Terribly concerning if they are planning to do what the press are suggesting.

Is there any actual confirmed statements from the Tories on this, not newspaper clippings?

This is a very serious issue and something I am against.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> I am answering this post simply because this isn't the first time I have heard this today. I thought the Tories were against Fox Hunting. Terribly concerning if they are planning to do what the press are suggesting.


Well May's history is voting against the hunting ban. It's also for badger culling.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> I am answering this post simply because this isn't the first time I have heard this today. I thought the Tories were against Fox Hunting. Terribly concerning if they are planning to do what the press are suggesting.
> 
> Is there any actual confirmed statements from the Tories on this, not newspaper clippings?
> 
> This is a very serious issue and something I am against.


I will let you know what my MP says - if you follow the link on the Mirror article it shows the whole of the leaked email which is not necessarily their policy although it would tie in with what they have said in their previous 2, but we will see when the manifesto is released which I thought was supposed to be about now.


----------



## Guest

noushka05 said:


> I think Brexit is serving as a cautionary tale to other countries. I wonder if its because they don't have our right wing tabloids to cloud their view & they can plainly see brexit for the shambles it is?.


Both, as we like EU to stay strong and continue to make it better. We have those tabloids, but just not as many, and not as the main source of information. People are not so gullible, and demand progress, not just change at any cost.



havoc said:


> Do you really feel it would make a difference either way? Whoever it is at the time, they can roll over like a puppy or stamp their feet and proclaim loudly that they're difficult. Neither one is going to change the stance of others who are also protecting their own interests which they're perfectly entitled to do.


When times are bad, who will have people´s best interest in mind Labour or Conservatives? Who are more likely to favour people when choices are made? That is the choice you have now, not Brexit, as that will take it´s course are EU has said. 
Who will be winners or losers in Britain after Brexit? Big businesses or people and small businesses? Murdoch presents big corporations, and you trust his papers? Why? Most of what Sun has said has proven to be a lie so far. The same goes with Daily Mail. Even caught them lying about Finnish populist´s party´s plans for Finnish Brexit (which doesn´t exist, we want to stay in EU). You trust them? But you don´t trust your own nurses, doctors and people telling what doesn´t work and what is simply wrong? (like poor social care).

What are you real values and what is the world you want to bring your kids up?


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I will let you know what my MP says - if you follow the link on the Mirror article it shows the whole of the leaked email which is not necessarily their policy although it would tie in with what they have said in their previous 2, but we will see when the manifesto is released which I thought was supposed to be about now.


Just read it. Oh no I am not voting for the Tories to reintroduce fox hunting, no way. I will wait for the manifesto as according to the article it is meant to be in that. Yes you are correct the manifesto is meant to be out by now. I am not voting for the Conservatives to reintroduce blood sports like fox hunting, this is crossing the line in my opinion and over stepping the mark. So if this is in there manifesto they will lose alot of voters, fox hunting is an evil sport.

Please do let us know what your MP says. Thanks.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> Those sales will broadly fall into two categories, though, as far as consumer sales go.
> 
> Firstly, the things the UK _needs_ to survive. Food, energy, that kind of thing. We'll still need to buy those, and the EU will still be in an excellent position to sell them to us. It will just cost us more to buy them than it does now, but I'm pretty sure Europeans are savvy enough business people to set prices that make them a competitive buying option in spite of all the extra fees we'll have to pay.
> 
> Secondly, the things we don't need to survive - luxuries, if you will. Everything from cheap flights to champagne, basically. Again, there will be plenty who can still afford them at higher prices. The rest will have to do without, or buy from elsewhere if we can.
> 
> Business sales and supply chain, of course, is slightly different. The first two categories still apply, but there is another option - move operations elsewhere. For any business that relies on 'just in time' resource supply, that will be an extremely attractive prospect, as operating on WTO rules outside of a customs union agreement automatically involves significant import/export delays due to mandatory customs processes, compliance testing, quarantine etc.,and such delays and processes significantly increase costs. That is likely to impact the food and manufacturing industries the most, I suspect, although there may be far wider reaching implications.
> 
> So yes, I think the EU is perfectly capable of absorbing any difference in sales patterns and adapting quite effectively. There will be some short term pain for them, obviously, but they have a lot more options at their disposal too, so for them the economic hit will be more of a speedbump.


And why doesn't all that work the other way round as well? Ok, we currently rely on them buying from us more than they do selling to us. But....

.....when we do leave the EU we'll be trading with them a whole lot less as we do deals with cheaper countries that the EU has crippling tariffs on. The thing to remember is the single market is all about trade within the EU and creating barriers (tariffs) for trading outside. We will have the freedom to do our deals with whomever wants to. And with the EU economy only, what, 15% of the world economy, and still falling, there's a massive opportunity to get far better trade deals outside the EU trading block. With the EU's share of the world economy shrinking, and it'll obviously fall further when we leave, I'd have thought now is absolutely the right time to go it alone free of the tariff shackles of the EU.

Probably.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> And why doesn't all that work the other way round as well? Ok, we currently rely on them buying from us more than they do selling to us. But....
> 
> .....when we do leave the EU we'll be trading with them a whole lot less as we do deals with cheaper countries that the EU has crippling tariffs on. The thing to remember is the single market is all about trade within the EU and creating barriers (tariffs) for trading outside. We will have the freedom to do our deals with whomever wants to. And with the EU economy only, what, 15% of the world economy, and still falling, there's a massive opportunity to get far better trade deals outside the EU trading block. With the EU's share of the world economy shrinking, and it'll obviously fall further when we leave, I'd have thought now is absolutely the right time to go it alone free of the tariff shackles of the EU.
> 
> Probably.


Which crippling tariffs are you specifically thinking of?

EU average tariffs with, e.g. the US are 3%.

We have, through the EU, free trade agreements with 38 countries.

And as for the new trade agreements, it takes two to tango!


----------



## Arnie83

*Theresa May: I'm in favour of fox hunting*

Theresa May has indicated she will allow Conservative MPs a free vote on whether to bring back fox hunting.

The PM, who says she has always been in favour of fox hunting, said it was up to Parliament to take the decision.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39861011


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> So if this is in there manifesto they will lose alot of voters,


No they won't, at least not nearly as many as you think. The electorate are baying for blood already - they won't care if it's foreigners or foxes.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> Which crippling tariffs are you specifically thinking of?
> 
> EU average tariffs with, e.g. the US are 3%.
> 
> We have, through the EU, free trade agreements with 38 countries.
> 
> And as for the new trade agreements, it takes two to tango!


African countries for a start.

Yes it does take two to tango, much easier to do than a 28 to 1 tango!


----------



## stockwellcat.

It has been confirmed by Theresa May in the Evening Standard:

*General Election 2017: Theresa May confirms Conservative Party plans to vote on bringing back fox hunting*

Theresa May has confirmed the Conservative Party plans to vote on repealling the ban on fox hunting following the general election.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/general-election-2017-theresa-may-confirms-conservative-party-plans-to-bring-back-fox-hunting-a3534756.html?amp

She gets the finger :Finger on this from me. No way am I voting for this and I am so glad this has been found out before we all cast our votes and not after.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Just read it. Oh no I am not voting for the Tories to reintroduce fox hunting, no way. I will wait for the manifesto as according to the article it is meant to be in that. Yes you are correct the manifesto is meant to be out by now. I am not voting for the Conservatives to reintroduce blood sports like fox hunting, this is crossing the line in my opinion and over stepping the mark. So if this is in there manifesto they will lose alot of voters, fox hunting is an evil.
> 
> Please do let us know what your MP says. Thanks.


So lets hope she listens to this man

Sir Roger Gale, president of Conservative Animal Welfare, said he would oppose any attempt to repeal the Hunting Act.

He said he understood there were around 30 to 50 anti-hunt Conservative MPs in the last Parliament, with the potential for the 2017 intake to have similar views.

*"I cannot see many Conservative votes for fox hunting in marginal seats we are hoping to win," he said.*

He believed a "huge amount of parliamentary time and effort" had already been spent on the issue, with the existing law "probably as good as we can get" given the difficulty in satisfying everyone.

"We have more than enough to occupy parliamentary time with Brexit and all that follows," he said. "In my view, it'd be folly to waste further time on the issue."


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So lets hope she listens to this man
> 
> Sir Roger Gale, president of Conservative Animal Welfare, said he would oppose any attempt to repeal the Hunting Act.
> 
> He said he understood there were around 30 to 50 anti-hunt Conservative MPs in the last Parliament, with the potential for the 2017 intake to have similar views.
> 
> *"I cannot see many Conservative votes for fox hunting in marginal seats we are hoping to win," he said.*
> 
> He believed a "huge amount of parliamentary time and effort" had already been spent on the issue, with the existing law "probably as good as we can get" given the difficulty in satisfying everyone.
> 
> "We have more than enough to occupy parliamentary time with Brexit and all that follows," he said. "In my view, it'd be folly to waste further time on the issue."


I don't think she will though as she had confirmed it today. Check my evening standard post.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> No they won't, at least not nearly as many as you think. The electorate are baying for blood already - they won't care if it's foreigners or foxes.


We are in a marginal seat, went Tory last election but held by Lib Dems for years prior to that - I've made it quite clear to our MP that the two votes in this house will not be his if he supports this and I hope others in marginal seats will do the same.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> I don't think she will though as she had confirmed it today. Check my evening standard post.


Yes I read that and watched the video posted by @Arnie83 However I don't think she is a stupid woman and I hope that when she is made aware of the strength of feeling against this that she will drop it. If you read the leaked email it says despite it being in the manifesto in 2010 and 2015 to hold a free vote it never happened because they knew they couldn't win it.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> The thing to remember is the single market is all about trade within the EU and creating barriers (tariffs) for trading outside.


No, those barriers exist under International regulations, the EU doesn't create those barriers for trading outside. They seek to ease trade for those members around the world.. This is what brexit is giving up:










Picture of world after Brexit could well be the UK in red white and blue, the rest of the world white. This would be the case for a while, possibly a few years. We do have May courting places like Saudi Arabia, America, India and Australia. The latter 2 have already said relaxation of immigration requirements would be a condition. The american leader has pushed the idea of "America first" but I know our defence industry loves selling weapons etc to the middle east so that's okay. Put simply, just as the UK has a poor negotiating position with the EU, our position with other countries (many who are joining into blocks themselves) is weak.

Now how much of this is being discussed by May to prepare the country for what is coming?


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> It has been confirmed by Theresa May in the Evening Standard:
> 
> *General Election 2017: Theresa May confirms Conservative Party plans to vote on bringing back fox hunting*
> 
> Theresa May has confirmed the Conservative Party plans to vote on repealling the ban on fox hunting following the general election.
> 
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/general-election-2017-theresa-may-confirms-conservative-party-plans-to-bring-back-fox-hunting-a3534756.html?amp
> 
> She gets the finger :Finger on this from me. No way am I voting for this and I am so glad this has been found out before we all cast our votes and not after.


I despise fox hunting, I really do. But I'd, probably, vote for any party that had the guts to end the barbaric slaughter that is hala meat. Effects far more animals than fox hunting.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes I read that and watched the video posted by @Arnie83 However *I don't think she is a stupid woman *and I hope that when she is made aware of the strength of feeling against this that she will drop it. If you read the leaked email it says despite it being in the manifesto in 2010 and 2015 to hold a free vote it never happened because they knew they couldn't win it.


I think she already knows the strength of feeling on this, if she does have this vote in Parliament you do know she will party whip everyone into voting it through regardless of how they feel about it. I am disgusted she is even considering having a vote to lift the ban on fox hunting. I know it has been mentioned before and nothing happened but going off her recent behaviour she would more than likely be the one to actually follow this through. Now I will keep stum but this is very concerning in my point of view as there won't be much us the general public could do about this if it happens.

Please do let us know what your local Conservative MP says to your email. Thanks.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> I despise fox hunting, I really do. But I'd, probably, vote for any party that had the guts to end the barbaric slaughter that is hala meat. Effects far more animals than fox hunting.


Quick aside, not related to topic... http://www.businessinsider.de/belgi...ter-in-its-biggest-territory-2017-5?r=US&IR=T


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> I think she already knows the strength of feeling on this, if she does have this vote in Parliament you do know she will party whip everyone into voting it through regardless of how they feel about it. I am disgusted she is even considering having a vote to lift the ban on fox hunting. I know it has been mentioned before and nothing happened but going off her recent behaviour she would more than likely be the one to actually follow this through. Now I will keep stum but this is very concerning in my point of view as there won't be much us the general public could do about this if it happens.
> 
> Please do let us know what your local Conservative MP says to your email. Thanks.


No I believe it is supposed to be a free vote but of course I would prefer they don't have one at all.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Quick aside, not related to topic... http://www.businessinsider.de/belgi...ter-in-its-biggest-territory-2017-5?r=US&IR=T


Well done Belgium


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> I despise fox hunting, I really do. But I'd, probably, vote for any party that had the guts to end the barbaric slaughter that is hala meat. Effects far more animals than fox hunting.


I'm not sure any party will go there for fear of accusations of racism although I can't say for sure it isn't lurking in one of the manifestos but the whole intensive farming/slaughter issue is not one we should be proud of, many animals raised in intensive units suffer a whole lifetime of misery not just on the day of their death.


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> am answering this post simply because this isn't the first time I have heard this today. I thought the Tories were against Fox Hunting. Terribly concerning if they are planning to do what the press are suggesting.


Paper talk again, This subject gets bought up either when they are trying to cover something up or as negative press 

Just propaganda again. No government will ever do this, it's political suicide


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> No I believe it is supposed to be a free vote but of course I would prefer they don't have one at all.


Can I ask then if they have they vote in Parliament and it goes through because of a Tory majority voting in favour for it what can we the members of public do? The answer I am thinking to myself is nothing because the Tories informed us they intended to have this vote. Also the UK would look in the eyes of the world that it is taking a step backwards by reinstating fox hunting. Recent protests about NHS etc prove that the Government will not listen to any protests, plus TM will only say that we voted for it by voting the Conservatives in on 8th June 2017. What then because there will be nothing we can do about it. Now I know I am jumping forward here but I am not prepared to back anyone who intends lifting the ban on fox hunting.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Deleted.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm not sure any party will go there for fear of accusations of racism although I can't say for sure it isn't lurking in one of the manifestos but the whole intensive farming/slaughter issue is not one we should be proud of, many animals raised in intensive units suffer a whole lifetime of misery not just on the day of their death.


Yes I agree with all that. Racism shouldn't be a issue though and just because a animal has had a crap (sorry for foul language) life doesn't mean it's ok to let it know the pain and slow death that is hala.

I'm a meat eater, tried not being so years ago, so probably hypocritical.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> African countries for a start.
> 
> Yes it does take two to tango, much easier to do than a 28 to 1 tango!


I think the situation with Africa is a bit too complicated to cover here - not least because I don't know a lot of it! - but I wonder if, with us seeking cheap imports, an export surplus, and protecting our farmers, 'Africa' would get a better deal from us than from the EU.

And it is indeed easier to negotiate deals between 2 single nations, but on the other hand the EU has a lot of deals in place already that we would either have to renegotiate at our instigation, or try to keep them the same, with their agreement. The former would take some time, and the latter (which in itself would require more than just changing 'EU' to 'UK') would change nothing. So we are looking at a long term project to get anything, regardless of the assumption that the anything we do get would be better than we've got now!

Trying not to be 'black hat' about it all, but we really are looking decades to get this all done. We would do very well indeed to protect as much as we can of what we've already got with the EU.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> I am answering this post simply because this isn't the first time I have heard this today. I thought the Tories were against Fox Hunting. Terribly concerning if they are planning to do what the press are suggesting.
> 
> Is there any actual confirmed statements from the Tories on this, not newspaper clippings?
> 
> This is a very serious issue and something I am against.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39861011


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Possibly.
> 
> Let's see what @rottiepointerhouse Conservative MP has to say on this.
> 
> It could just be a story just to push negative press.


It is not. 
Unless you want to cheat your conscience.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> Paper talk again, This subject gets bought up either when they are trying to cover something up or as negative press
> 
> Just propaganda again. No government will ever do this, it's political suicide


Not sure it is paper talk Rona - she is on camera saying she is in favour of hunting and that she supports a free vote to let parliament decide whether the ban should be lifted or not. That was also in the 2010 and 2015 manifesto of course but they will only take it to a vote if they are pretty sure they can win which with the smallish majority they had in 2015 once the SNP said they would vote against it they didn't go ahead with the vote but if she gets a bigger majority this time and its in the manifesto I would think its highly likely they will go ahead with the vote.


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> It is not.
> Unless you want to cheat your conscience.
> View attachment 310156
> View attachment 310157
> View attachment 310157
> View attachment 310158
> View attachment 310159


I'll retract what I said as she was on camera saying it. Let me delete that post.


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not sure it is paper talk Rona - she is on camera saying she is in favour of hunting and that she supports a free vote to let parliament decide whether the ban should be lifted or not. That was also in the 2010 and 2015 manifesto of course but they will only take it to a vote if they are pretty sure they can win which with the smallish majority they had in 2015 once the SNP said they would vote against it they didn't go ahead with the vote but if she gets a bigger majority this time and its in the manifesto I would think its highly likely they will go ahead with the vote.


Ditto. 
Not all Tories support fox hunting, but few would vote against it. 
So with large Tory majority fixes would be ripped to pieces again as entertainment for the privileged baswsttds.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not sure it is paper talk Rona - she is on camera saying she is in favour of hunting and that she supports a free vote to let parliament decide whether the ban should be lifted or not. That was also in the 2010 and 2015 manifesto of course but they will only take it to a vote if they are pretty sure they can win which with the smallish majority they had in 2015 once the SNP said they would vote against it they didn't go ahead with the vote but if she gets a bigger majority this time and its in the manifesto I would think its highly likely they will go ahead with the vote.


My question would be would it actually be a free vote for MP's without party whips being involved?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

cheekyscrip said:


> Ditto.
> Not all Tories support fox hunting, but few would vote against it.
> So with large Tory majority fixes would be ripped to pieces again as entertainment for the privileged baswsttds.


The Conservatives Against Foxhunting said currently 30 -50 who would vote against the ban being lifted so very much depends on size of majority.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> My question would be would it actually be a free vote for MP's without party whips being involved?


http://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/free-vote/

A free vote - or unwhipped vote - in Parliament is one in which MPs or members of the Lords are not put under pressure to vote a certain way by their party leaders. Free votes have traditionally been allowed on ethical issues that are seen as a matter of conscience.


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Well done Belgium


They don't even label halal meat in this county , its very likely people have eaten halal meat without knowing.


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> A free vote - or unwhipped vote - in Parliament is one in which MPs or members of the Lords are not put under pressure to vote a certain way by their party leaders.


Depends what you mean by pressure. Unwhipped it may be but a gentle word in the ear that you're marked for office in the near future would be enough to swing the ambitious who don't care much about hunting one way or the other 

eta It wouldn't endanger the seat of my MP.


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> It is not.
> Unless you want to cheat your conscience.
> View attachment 310156
> View attachment 310157
> View attachment 310157
> View attachment 310158
> View attachment 310159


Deleted that post @cheekyscrip

Now I have found out TM has said this on camera I am not prepared to back someone that intends doing this. This isn't following the masses as some would think, certain things are a step to far and animal cruelty in any form is such and these types of blood sports are such as well. I cannot believe she is even considering having a vote on this, she won't listen as some hope she will, this woman should hang her head in shame.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39861011
> 
> View attachment 310155


Odd. Isn't that the same place where they said she was hiding from the press?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Deleted that post @cheekyscrip
> 
> Now I have found out TM has said this on camera I am not prepared to back someone that intends doing this. This isn't following the masses as some would think, certain things are a step to far and animal cruelty in any form is such and these types of blood sports are such as well. I cannot believe she is even considering having a vote on this, she won't listen as some hope she will, this woman should hang her head in shame.


But you do know that this was in the 2010 and the 2015 manifesto don't you? Did you think they were going to drop it this time around? There is a very good reason I keep saying wait for the manifesto to come out and see what they each say then weigh up which issues are the most important to you.


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Deleted that post @cheekyscrip
> 
> Now I have found out TM has said this on camera I am not prepared to back someone that intends doing this. This isn't following the masses as some would think, certain things are a step to far and animal cruelty in any form is such and these types of blood sports are such as well. I cannot believe she is even considering having a vote on this, she won't listen as some hope she will, this woman should hang her head in shame.


This woman does what is expected of her.
By her backers.
Fox hunting.
Hard Brexit 
Tax haven.
Privatisation of NHS.
Corporate tax cuts.
She is backed by those, whose donations are well thought of investment in their future gains.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> But you do know that this was in the 2010 and the 2015 manifesto don't you? Did you think they were going to drop it this time around? There is a very good reason I keep saying wait for the manifesto to come out and see what they each say then weigh up which issues are the most important to you.


I didn't vote Conservatives last time or the time before so didn't have an interest in there manifesto so sorry for not paying attention to the fact they had this in there manifesto in 2010 and 2015, plus if I remember rightly Labour was under different leadership then.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> , plus if I remember rightly Labour was under different leadership then.


Oh I think it's been a good few years since the Labour party had any leadership!!

I still quite like Mr Corbyn though.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Oh I think it's been a good few years since the Labour party had any leadership!!


Now, now no need for that. The best leader Labour had without a doubt was Blair but he made a big mistake involving the UK in Iraq which was his downfall as party leader but apart from this he was very good.


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Now, now no need for that. The best leader Labour had without a doubt was Blair but he made a big mistake involving the UK in Iraq which was his downfall as party leader but apart from this he was very good.


He also promised Gibraltar to Spain for help with formentioned war ... Which started our problems once again....
Do not forget Cherie and some problems with expenses....
Gordon Brown had some gravitas.
So did David Miliband. This when things fell apart...
If Blair let go earlier, or Ed did not oust David ...


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> He also promised Gibraltar to Spain for help with formentioned war ... Which started our problems once again....
> Do not forget Cherie and some problems with expenses....
> Gordon Brown had some gravitas.
> So did David Miliband. This when things fell apart...


Sorry @cheekyscrip I didn't know he done that back then about Gibraltar but back then I didn't really pay attention to politics.


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> He also promised Gibraltar to Spain for help with formentioned war ... Which started our problems once again....
> Do not forget Cherie and some problems with expenses....
> Gordon Brown had some gravitas.
> So did David Miliband. This when things fell apart...
> If Blair let go earlier, or Ed did not oust David ...


Yes dear old David would have been a good PM or even Andy Burnham who I was hoping would win the leadership contest in 2015. Andy has done well for himself in Manchester as he is now Mayor of Greater Manchester. Andy Burnham would have in my opinion given the Conservatives a harder time in Parliament than Corbyn has.





Edited: Yes he was my choice in 2015 at which stage I didn't even know who Corbyn was.


----------



## MollySmith

Please please bear in mind that this came out today when you cast your vote - May is in favour of the barbaric 'sport' of fox hunting

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39861011

Edited to say this has been noted already (PF seems to log me in at the page I last looked at) but I'm posting again. The more it's noted the better in my opinion.


----------



## stockwellcat.

MollySmith said:


> Please please bear in mind that this came out today when you cast your vote - May is in favour of the barbaric 'sport' of fox hunting
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39861011
> 
> Edited to say this has been noted already (PF seems to log me in at the page I last looked at) but I'm posting again. The more it's noted the better in my opinion.


Don't worry about posting it even though it has already been noted, this needs to get out and be heard or seen.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> And why doesn't all that work the other way round as well? Ok, we currently rely on them buying from us more than they do selling to us. But....
> .....when we do leave the EU we'll be trading with them a whole lot less as we do deals with cheaper countries that the EU has crippling tariffs on. The thing to remember is the single market is all about trade within the EU and creating barriers (tariffs) for trading outside. We will have the freedom to do our deals with whomever wants to. And with the EU economy only, what, 15% of the world economy, and still falling, there's a massive opportunity to get far better trade deals outside the EU trading block. With the EU's share of the world economy shrinking, and it'll obviously fall further when we leave, I'd have thought now is absolutely the right time to go it alone free of the tariff shackles of the EU. Probably.





Dr Pepper said:


> African countries for a start. Yes it does take two to tango, much easier to do than a 28 to 1 tango!


The statement of EU tariffs was already corrected, but I ´ll ask one thing? Who has a better chance of negotiation trade deals with other countries, EU or Britain alone? Who has more leverage? African countries, as great many of them are, don´t have one thing usually, and that is money. And that is what you are after, isn´t it? Some economies do pretty well in Africa too, but then you have China as a competition.

There is one country you will most likely do more business after Brexit, a as EU doesn´t do business with it now, and that is Russia. And that will take us back to the fact that Russian trolls have provided lots of fake news about EU too, as they would love May and conservatives to win. Anything goes policy suits them very well too. Do you ever wonder why? Is it just because they love Britain so much that they are willing to spend millions to support populist parties or is it that they thrive, when free world with human rights is getting weaker.



cheekyscrip said:


> This woman does what is expected of her.
> By her backers.
> Fox hunting.
> Hard Brexit
> Tax haven.
> Privatisation of NHS.
> Corporate tax cuts.
> She is backed by those, whose donations are well thought of investment in their future gains.


That is pretty accurate conclusion of May. Well said.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Just read it. Oh no I am not voting for the Tories to reintroduce fox hunting, no way. I will wait for the manifesto as according to the article it is meant to be in that. Yes you are correct the manifesto is meant to be out by now. I am not voting for the Conservatives to reintroduce blood sports like fox hunting, this is crossing the line in my opinion and over stepping the mark. So if this is in there manifesto they will lose alot of voters, fox hunting is an evil.
> 
> Please do let us know what your MP says. Thanks.


As much as we disagree over a lot of issues I like you Stockwellcat!


----------



## cheekyscrip

So once again:








Just to remind you: Those who voted for Brexit brought her into power.
On 8th June she might get all the power.
Her support for ripping innocent wild animals apart says it all.
If you are horrified when bunch of jobs rips apart a cat or torture a dog...why doing this to the fox is ok?
Because perpetrators are well dressed and rich?

No one who can think it is minor matter can call themselves a decent human being or nature and animal lover.

It is worse than corrida.
Hypocrisy.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

cheekyscrip said:


> So once again:
> View attachment 310185
> 
> Just to remind you: Those who voted for Brexit brought her into power.
> On 8th June she might get all the power.
> Her support for ripping innocent wild animals apart says it all.
> If you are horrified when bunch of jobs rips apart a cat or torture a dog...why doing this to the fox is ok?
> Because perpetrators are well dressed and rich?
> 
> No one who can think it is minor matter can call themselves a decent human being or nature and animal lover.
> 
> It is worse than corrida.
> Hypocrisy.


Hold on a minute. Those of us who voted for Brexit did not know that Cameron would run for the hills when he didn't get his own way, we did not know who would be elected as leader of the Tory party and we did not know said leader would call an early general election and we did not know the repeal of the hunting ban would again be in the manifesto. Unless you are a vegan Cheeky I think you should be careful who you call a decent human being or an animal lover. Its one thing to share information but quite another to accuse people of not being decent human beings


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Hold on a minute. Those of us who voted for Brexit did not know that Cameron would run for the hills when he didn't get his own way, we did not know who would be elected as leader of the Tory party and we did not know said leader would call an early general election and we did not know the repeal of the hunting ban would again be in the manifesto. Unless you are a vegan Cheeky I think you should be careful who you call a decent human being or an animal lover. Its one thing to share information but quite another to accuse people of not being decent human beings


Just my opinion. 
Torturing, maiming and killing animal for fun cannot be excused.
Cameron could not deliver Brexit , he hated it. He lost huge gamble on country future and had to go. 
He unfortunately wanted to appease some hard core backbenchers and donors. 
Shame because he was much better than May will ever be. IMO of course.
I could not deliver fox hunt. Would have resigned. 
Admire vegans and try to limit meat etc.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

cheekyscrip said:


> Just my opinion.
> Torturing, maiming and killing animal for fun cannot be excused.
> Cameron could not deliver Brexit , he hated it. He lost huge gamble on country future and had to go.
> He unfortunately wanted to appease some hard core backbenchers and donors.
> Shame because he was much better than May will ever be. IMO of course.
> I could not deliver fox hunt. Would have resigned.
> Admire vegans and try to limit meat etc.


OK I know it was just your opinion but it was a pretty inflammatory and harsh thing to accuse people of particularly if you still eat animals.


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> OK I know it was just your opinion but it was a pretty inflammatory and harsh thing to accuse people of particularly if you still eat animals.


I see some difference between using animals as food , hopefully raised in good conditions and killed humanely to ripping them apart as a "sport".
Fox hunting for me falls into the same category as dog fights, cock fights, corrida etc...
Again IMO.


----------



## kimthecat

is Corbyn going to resign if he loses the election? 

I think its too late for some else to take over the Brexit negotiations ; the thought of the Tories being in power for the next 5 years though


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

cheekyscrip said:


> I see some difference between using animals as food , hopefully raised in good conditions and killed humanely to ripping them apart as a "sport".
> Fox hunting for me falls into the same category as dog fights, cock fights, corrida etc...
> Again IMO.


"Hopefully raised in good conditions" 

but reared and controlled and killed for human benefit. I'm not knocking you or other meat eaters just saying be careful about throwing around such strongly worded accusations when sitting in a glass house.


----------



## Honeys mum

kimthecat said:


> is Corbyn going to resign if he loses the election?


I heard him say on a T.V. interview the otherday, that if he loses the election he will not be resigning.


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> "Hopefully raised in good conditions"
> 
> but reared and controlled and killed for human benefit. I'm not knocking you or other meat eaters just saying be careful about throwing around such strongly worded accusations when sitting in a glass house.


Stand corrected. I promise myself for long time to turn into veggie...but I have a cat and a dog....
Still hate ripping poor foxes apart wearing posh clothes and public school accent.
Maybe because I come from many generations of farming folk?
Animals were the source of sustenance and if killed nothing should be wasted.
Every bit was used.
Killing for amusement was sinful. Wasteful, cruel and wrong.


----------



## MollySmith

stockwellcat said:


> Don't worry about posting it even though it has already been noted, this needs to get out and be heard or seen.


Yes true 

Despite hating this and hating her for liking it, at least she was to the point with no doubt. She supports fox hunting. It's very risky - in 2015 numerous polls state that "Two years before the Commons vote, 400,000 people joined the 'Liberty and Livelihood' march in London, calling broadly on the then Labour government to recognise the needs of rural communities, but primarily to express opposition to the hunting ban. At the time of the vote in 2004, however, 61% supported Parliament's decision to outlaw fox hunting, while 30% opposed it." (source:YouGov).

It's not to say that the free vote will get through but I cannot imagine it'll endear her to anyone and remind everyone that the Tories haven't forgotten about this barbaric 'sport' even if they had.


----------



## kimthecat

Honeys mum said:


> I heard him say on a T.V. interview the otherday, that if he loses the election he will not be resigning.


 speechless for a change


----------



## MollySmith

cheekyscrip said:


> Stand corrected. I promise myself for long time to turn into veggie...but I have a cat and a dog....
> Still hate ripping poor foxes apart wearing posh clothes and public school accent.
> Maybe because I come from many generations of farming folk?
> Animals were the source of sustenance and if killed nothing should be wasted.
> Every bit was used.
> Killing for amusement was sinful. Wasteful, cruel and wrong.


Conversely I have a vegan friend on FB who was shocked that the Tories supported fox hunting and horrified that she voted for them last time


----------



## cheekyscrip

kimthecat said:


> speechless for a change


We will always have Corbyn...

Even if number of Labour members falls to 01.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Thought May wants to deliver " the will of the people"?.Obviously the right people then. .


----------



## Elles

Cameron was pro fox hunting. His father in law hunts.


----------



## Elles

cheekyscrip said:


> Stand corrected. I promise myself for long time to turn into veggie...but I have a cat and a dog....
> Still hate ripping poor foxes apart wearing posh clothes and public school accent.
> Maybe because I come from many generations of farming folk?
> Animals were the source of sustenance and if killed nothing should be wasted.
> Every bit was used.
> Killing for amusement was sinful. Wasteful, cruel and wrong.


So it's ok to rip poor foxes apart if you wear cheap clothes and have a common accent? On the whole in hunting it's not the people, posh or otherwise, killing the foxes, it's their hounds.

What about rats? And mice? Did you kill those and use every bit?

Sorry, but I don't like any animals killed and I really don't like many of the farming practises. I believe it is worse to keep animals confined and ship them off to the abattoir than it is to set the dogs onto wild animals. I'd prefer to see rational debate rather than the posh folk ripping foxes apart fallacy. There are plenty of people who wear posh clothes and speak with a public school accent (whatever that is) who are also anti fox hunting, as well as commoners who are pro. It's not about perceived wealth or class, it's about foxes and we still kill foxes.

It's absolutely ridiculous that this is still an issue. It's banned, leave it banned ffs.

What are they hiding now, that they need to faff about with something that the huge majority of the country want to stay banned whether they voted in or out of Europe? I dislike May more every time I see her. No wonder she didn't want tv debate. Such a shame that there's little real opposition and we don't have PR here.


----------



## Goblin

Elles said:


> It's banned, leave it banned ffs.


My understanding is that it was only banned by Labour exploiting loop holes in parliamentary methods but could easily be wrong about that.


----------



## Calvine

cheekyscrip said:


> hopefully raised in good conditions


_''Hopefully''_ being the operative word, @cheekyscrip. . Many animals now live (and die) in miserable and inhumane conditions.


----------



## Calvine

Honeys mum said:


> if he loses the election he will not be resigning.


I read that a couple of times as well.


----------



## noushka05

All the crisis, chaos & suffering in this country & fox hunting is top of their 'Strong & stable' agenda? Says it all.

And lets not forget the Hunting act protects other animals not just foxes.

Statement from the sadistic COUNTryside Areliars.

*Conservatives to make manifesto commitment to a vote on Hunting Act. * http://www.countryside-alliance.org/conservatives-make-manifesto-commitment-vote-hunting-act/

Vile Bonner in the Telegraph. What a nasty little liar he is.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> _''Hopefully''_ being the operative word, @cheekyscrip. . Many animals now live (and die) in miserable and inhumane conditions.


So are you a vegan then Calvine?


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> So it's ok to rip poor foxes apart if you wear cheap clothes and have a common accent? On the whole in hunting it's not the people, posh or otherwise, killing the foxes, it's their hounds.
> 
> What about rats? And mice? Did you kill those and use every bit?
> 
> Sorry, but I don't like any animals killed and I really don't like many of the farming practises. I believe it is worse to keep animals confined and ship them off to the abattoir than it is to set the dogs onto wild animals. I'd prefer to see rational debate rather than the posh folk ripping foxes apart fallacy. There are plenty of people who wear posh clothes and speak with a public school accent (whatever that is) who are also anti fox hunting, as well as commoners who are pro. It's not about perceived wealth or class, it's about foxes and we still kill foxes.
> 
> It's absolutely ridiculous that this is still an issue. It's banned, leave it banned ffs.
> 
> What are they hiding now, that they need to faff about with something that the huge majority of the country want to stay banned whether they voted in or out of Europe? I dislike May more every time I see her. No wonder she didn't want tv debate. Such a shame that there's little real opposition and we don't have PR here.


If it wasn't for the support of the wealthy though, it would have been banned decades before along with bear & badger baiting & dog fighting.

I try not to harm anything, I don't eat meat, but even I can see in a difference in hunting down animals out of sheer bloodlust & killing animals to eat or killing rodents which do a lot of damage to crops. Its a different mentality altogether.

I agree with most of your post though


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Odd. Isn't that the same place where they said she was hiding from the press?


Same place & hiding from the press so to speak. Everything is staged & controlled. She is terrified of being scrutinised & held to account.

Heres the reaction of SNPs John Nicolson: _Utterly revolting. Zero policies for two weeks. Hides from press. Finally emerges to say she wants to bring back blood sports_

Compare Corbyn in York to May? And she says Corbyns weak.


----------



## KittenKong

So I can't be accused of political bias I'll give discredit where it's due.

Vauxhall Labour MP Kate Hoey is reported to be pro Fox hunting.

I couldn't bring myself to vote for that vile woman even if I was a member of the Labour party.

I hope she loses, not to the Tories I hasten to add.

This from Wikipedia


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> So I can't be accused of political bias I'll give discredit where it's due.
> 
> Vauxhall Labour MP Kate Hoey is reported to be pro Fox hunting.
> 
> I couldn't bring myself to vote for that vile woman even if I was a member of the Labour party.
> 
> I hope she loses, not to the Tories I hasten to add.
> 
> This from Wikipedia
> View attachment 310202


My thoughts exactly. I could never vote for that awful woman, my conscience wouldn't allow it.

.


----------



## KittenKong

Two from The Independent this morning. Any surprises?
















With a specially selected and approved audience of mainly Tory activists I wonder.

If she believes she's strong and Corbyn is weak, why refuse to debate with him?

Makes you wonder doesn't it.....


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> My thoughts exactly. I could never vote for that awful woman, my conscience wouldn't allow it.
> 
> .


In just a few posts you've called people you don't even know "vile", "awful" and "c**ts'.

Personally I find it very distasteful and totally unnecessary. It also doesn't help your agenda one iota.

As someone else pointed out, this is a pet forum with children reading it. Perhaps you could keep that in mind?


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> So it's ok to rip poor foxes apart if you wear cheap clothes and have a common accent? On the whole in hunting it's not the people, posh or otherwise, killing the foxes, it's their hounds.
> 
> What about rats? And mice? Did you kill those and use every bit?
> 
> Sorry, but I don't like any animals killed and I really don't like many of the farming practises. I believe it is worse to keep animals confined and ship them off to the abattoir than it is to set the dogs onto wild animals. I'd prefer to see rational debate rather than the posh folk ripping foxes apart fallacy. There are plenty of people who wear posh clothes and speak with a public school accent (whatever that is) who are also anti fox hunting, as well as commoners who are pro. It's not about perceived wealth or class, it's about foxes and we still kill foxes.
> 
> It's absolutely ridiculous that this is still an issue. It's banned, leave it banned ffs.
> 
> What are they hiding now, that they need to faff about with something that the huge majority of the country want to stay banned whether they voted in or out of Europe? I dislike May more every time I see her. No wonder she didn't want tv debate. Such a shame that there's little real opposition and we don't have PR here.


I am afraid we will go back on farming practices too.
If fox hunting was not supported by the rich abs blue blood would have been abandoned long time ago.
Obviously you are right not everyone rich supports it, but if they do ?


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> In just a few posts you've called people you don't even know "vile", "awful" and "c**ts'.
> 
> Personally I find it very distasteful and totally unnecessary. It also doesn't help your agenda one iota.


Where have I called people c**ts?? If someone set a pack of dogs on a pet cat or dog would you pull me up for calling them 'awful' & 'vile'?

Oh yeah the COUNtryside Areliars. A much more fitting titles for those Apostles of cruelty.


----------



## Bisbow

Dr Pepper said:


> In just a few posts you've called people you don't even know "vile", "awful" and "c**ts'.
> 
> Personally I find it very distasteful and totally unnecessary. It also doesn't help your agenda one iota.
> 
> As someone else pointed out, this is a pet forum with children reading it. Perhaps you could keep that in mind?


I entirely agree

All the posts and bits and insults put on here have not changed my mind one bit, in fact has hardened my mind even more against what they are trying to tell me to do and vote for
But they are so desperate to prove they are right they don't care one bit if it is distasteful, but for the fact young people read it I would find their posts hilarious. They don't realise they are turning people against themselves


----------



## noushka05

]



Bisbow said:


> I entirely agree
> 
> All the posts and bits and insults put on here have not changed my mind one bit, in fact has hardened my mind even more against what they are trying to tell me to do and vote for
> But they are so desperate to prove they are right they don't care one bit if it is distasteful, but for the fact young people read it I would find their posts hilarious. They don't realise they are turning people against themselves


If the governments cruel policies aren't enough to turn you, nothing anyone says was ever likely to.

.


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> So are you a vegan then Calvine?


Is that any of your business? No, and I have never said that I was; I am a vegetarian; but this is just the sort of comment I expected from you.


----------



## stockwellcat.

The UK Political parties are due to publish there party manifesto's soon and I think I managed to find the links of were they will appear:

You can sign up here to get labours manifesto as soon as it becomes available: http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php/manifesto/2017

There is information here on the Conservatives manifesto there is no link to sign up for this: http://www.conservativehome.com/tag/tory-manifesto-2017

Lib Dems Manifesto Page: http://www.libdems.org.uk/read-the-full-manifesto

Sign up here to get the Green Party Manifesto: https://www.greenparty.org.uk/green-party-manifesto.html

SNP manifesto 2017 - no link available for this they are only displaying there 2016 manifesto: https://www.snp.org/manifesto

*These are the Parties Pledge tracker: *http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39844115


----------



## noushka05

What a lovely compassionate man Brian May is.

*Dr. Brian May*‏Verified [email protected]*DrBrianMay* 15h15 hours ago

It's official today. This awful woman will bring back blood sports unless we
mobilise and STOP HER. Bri


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> Is that any of your business? No, and I have never said that I was; I am a vegetarian; but this is just the sort of comment I expected from you.


Apologies if I got the wrong end of the stick. I thought you were trying excuse the government by engaging in whataboutery.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> If the governments cruel policies aren't enough to turn you, nothing anyone says was ever likely to.
> 
> .


It is not so much what you say but how you say it that is so bad
I can be led to change my mind but not bullied and you try the bulling way that makes me stick my heels in
If you were not so belligerent I might change my mind

You are getting more desperate by the day that anything you say is getting worse


----------



## Happy Paws2

noushka05 said:


> What a lovely compassionate man Brian May is.
> 
> *Dr. Brian May*‏Verified [email protected]*DrBrianMay* 15h15 hours ago
> 
> It's official today. This awful woman will bring back blood sports unless we
> mobilise and STOP HER. Bri
> View attachment 310209


Such a evil woman, the word demonic comes to mind,


----------



## rona

Bisbow said:


> It is not so much what you say but how you say it that is so bad
> I can be led to change my mind but not bullied and you try the bulling way that makes me stick my heels in
> If you were not so belligerent I might change my mind
> 
> You are getting more desperate by the day that anything you say is getting worse


Just wait for the threats to start..........disagree too much and it can turn truly ugly


----------



## Bisbow

rona said:


> Just wait for the threats to start..........disagree too much and it can turn truly ugly


I await that with bated breath


----------



## Happy Paws2

Bisbow said:


> I entirely agree
> 
> All the posts and bits and insults put on here have not changed my mind one bit,* in fact has hardened my mind* even more against what they are trying to tell me to do and vote for
> But they are so desperate to prove they are right they don't care one bit if it is distasteful, but for the fact young people read it I would find their posts hilarious. They don't realise they are turning people against themselves


Just because of a few remarks on here, I thought you were better than that. we are all grown up enough to make our own minds up.


----------



## KittenKong

Bisbow said:


> It is not so much what you say but how you say it that is so bad
> I can be led to change my mind but not bullied and you try the bulling way that makes me stick my heels in
> If you were not so belligerent I might change my mind
> 
> You are getting more desperate by the day that anything you say is getting worse


Respectfully no one is telling anyone how to vote or who to vote for, but I feel people need the facts and views from others whichever way you choose to vote.

I made my mind up a long time ago as who to vote for. As much as I'll listen to all points of view I will not change my mind. I guess it's the same for you.



rona said:


> Just wait for the threats to start..........disagree too much and it can turn truly ugly


Threats? Where did you get that from? Debates have become heated from time to time but no one is suggesting anyone is threatened for the crime of having a different point of view?

In the main we should congratulate ourselves for keeping things civil and hats off to the moderators here and on Sabre Roads too.

Most forums I'm on prohibit politics and religion. I can well understand why. For Pet Forums and Sabre Roads to allow it is very brave of them.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> Threats? Where did you get that from? Debates have become heated from time to time but no one is suggesting anyone is threatened for the crime of having a different point of view?


They go on where you can't see


----------



## stockwellcat.

So Theresa May won't do a debate but will appear on the One Show for an interview:




I am not having a dig but if she is so sure her party have a rock solid manifesto and they claim they are know what they are doing and we'll all be better off then why shy away from a debate?


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> So Theresa May won't do a debate but will appear on the One Show for an interview:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not having a dig but if she is so sure her party have a rock solid manifesto and they claim they are know what they are doing and we'll all be better off then why shy away from a debate?


These kind of "interviews" remind me of the old days where interviewers would not dare ask a politician a difficult question. I remember seeing an archive "interview" with Harold MacMillan like this.

Robin Day changed all that. Wish he was still with us.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Just wait for the threats to start..........disagree too much and it can turn truly ugly





Bisbow said:


> I await that with bated breath





rona said:


> They go on where you can't see


You've maliciously lied about me threatening you before Rona. I have never & would never threaten anyone. But 'when debate is lost ....


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> They go on where you can't see


Like where? Where is your evidence to back up this unsubstantiated claim. You did this before to get a thread closed when you lost the hen harrier argument.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> I am not having a dig but if she is so sure her party have a rock solid manifesto and they claim they are know what they are doing and we'll all be better off then why shy away from a debate?


Because it is generally believed that the TV debates serve the opposition parties more so than the incumbent. Her advisors have concluded that the net polling effect of refusing the debate will be positive.

(Btw, the link between the rock solid manifesto and willingness for TV debates is a false one. The TV debates are unlikely to focus on policy.)


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> I await that with bated breath


Don't worry Bisbow, much as we disagree I would never wish you any ill.


----------



## havoc

Looking through posts on here there are those of all views prepared to make it personal against forum members. There are also those determined to take things personally when that was obviously never the intention. It's bound to be a heated debate at times - no need for anyone to get offensive or defensive.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> Because it is generally believed that the TV debates serve the opposition parties more so than the incumbent. Her advisors have concluded that the net polling effect of refusing the debate will be positive.
> 
> (Btw, the link between the rock solid manifesto and willingness for TV debates is a false one. The TV debates are unlikely to focus on policy.)


Fair enough. But don't you think debates are good as members of the public can ask questions directly to the PM or any other party leader and it is good to test the leaders this way before a GE. Just my opinion and again I am not trying to cause friction from this.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> So Theresa May won't do a debate but will appear on the One Show for an interview:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not having a dig but if she is so sure her party have a rock solid manifesto and they claim they are know what they are doing and we'll all be better off then why shy away from a debate?


'Strong husband' 'stable upbringing'. Who'd have thought it?


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> The TV debates are unlikely to focus on policy.


Whereas knowing who takes the bins out is terribly important 
Did notice she said there are 'boy jobs' and 'girl jobs' - hope that only applies in her household


----------



## Bisbow

Happy Paws said:


> Just because of a few remarks on here, I thought you were better than that. we are all grown up enough to make our own minds up.


\yes, we are grown up enough to make up our own minds but some can't see that
And, yes, bulling tactics are being used to try to get the yet undecided to vote in a particular way

I am waiting for the literature from the candidates before I make a final choice and don't need all the piffle put on here to do that


----------



## havoc

Bisbow said:


> And, yes, bulling tactics are being used to try to get the yet undecided to vote in a particular way


I really don't see that. It's an internet forum and opposing views, however forcefully put, are not bullying. Nobody can be forced to vote any which way by anything posted here.


----------



## noushka05

To add a bit of light relief:Hilarious


----------



## Bisbow

havoc said:


> Whereas knowing who takes the bins out is terribly important
> Did notice she said there are 'boy jobs' and 'girl jobs' - hope that only applies in her household


I was waiting for someone to remark about that

No, it is not only her household that does that

We do as well and it works very well , thank you


----------



## havoc

Bisbow said:


> No, it is not only her household that does that
> 
> We do as well and it works very well , thank you


And do you carry over that philosophy into the outside world - which is the point. It was a bigger question than your household 

A perfect example of taking something personally.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> So Theresa May won't do a debate but will appear on the One Show for an interview:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not having a dig but if she is so sure her party have a rock solid manifesto and they claim they are know what they are doing and we'll all be better off then why shy away from a debate?


It wasn`t an interview on The One Show though was it? I didn`t see it only saw a clip on the news last night I thought it was a light hearted `meet the Mays` type of thing not an interview on her polices. Theresa May does not do well if put under unexpected pressure, in a live debate, while the audience is handpicked and the questions already put forward, she knows she will come under pressure from the other candidates and may not come out of it to well.


----------



## KittenKong

From Facebook. Shared link by an individual on, "Britain is the People"


----------



## havoc

3dogs2cats said:


> Theresa May does not do well if put under unexpected pressure, in a live debate,


I think you're right and I believe that's why she took the stance she did from the start over Brexit. It isn't her strong suit and she knows it so she goes in all guns blazing.


----------



## Bisbow

havoc said:


> And do you carry over that philosophy into the outside world - which is the point. It was a bigger question than your household
> 
> A perfect example of taking something personally.


Well, you must have taken it personally or you would not have put it on here


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> It wasn`t an interview on The One Show though was it? I didn`t see it only saw a clip on the news last night I thought it was a light hearted `meet the Mays` type of thing not an interview on her polices. Theresa May does not do well if put under unexpected pressure, in a live debate, while the audience is handpicked and the questions already put forward, she knows she will come under pressure from the other candidates and may not come out of it to well.


Perhaps interview was the wrong word to use to describe the One Show appearance last night by Theresa May and her husband.


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> Perhaps interview was the wrong word to use.


It's the word normally used when presenters have guests on a show SWC. Every chat show host ever will say they've interviewed their guests.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Fair enough. But don't you think debates are good as members of the public can ask questions directly to the PM or any other party leader and it is good to test the leaders this way before a GE. Just my opinion and again I am not trying to cause friction from this.


Indeed, I fail to understand how refusing to appear on a public debate could be seen as "positive". It gives me the impression they have something to hide or frightened of exposing themselves for what they are.

If they're seeking public support they should be prepared to meet the public. Don't expect everyone to agree but this is my own view on the matter.


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> Theresa May does not do well if put under unexpected pressure


Well god help us then when she enters into negotiations with the EU as there are going to be alot of unexpected pressures. I thought PM's were meant to be able to handle unexpected pressures?

I am not looking for an arguement it was just something I thought when I read back through your post.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Well god help us then when she enters into negotiations with the EU as there are going to be alot of unexpected pressures. I thought PM's were meant to be able to handle unexpected pressures?
> 
> I am not looking for an arguement it was just something I thought when I read back through your post.


Perhaps related, then perhaps not. Donald Trump sacking the director of the FBI which has risen doubts about the organisation's future impartiality.

As reported in The Guardian.


----------



## KittenKong

Wish they would hurry up.
The suspense is killing me!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39865801


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Perhaps related, then perhaps not. Donald Trump sacking the director of the FBI which has risen doubts about the organisation's future impartiality.
> 
> As reported in The Guardian.
> View attachment 310216


 I don't see it as related but others might some how.

Saying if the comment I highlight is correct in my previous post and you know I support Brexit, then if Theresa May can't handle unexpected pressure that is deeply worrying. I know she won't directly be doing the negotiations as she has minions that do this like the EU ambassador to the UK and David Davis and his team but the buck falls back to Theresa May to make some very important decisions without advisors and in certain situations she would have to make unexpected decisions. What if she can't handle this type of pressure, everyone will be waiting for a decision to be made and it will become increasingly frustrating for EU leaders and UK negotiators. There will be times she will have to make snap decisions as well. So is this Strong & Stable leadership? Just in case you missed it I do support Brexit and would like to see it happened preferably with some kind of deal on trade at least.

Again I am not looking to cause trouble or stir up ill feeling or arguements.


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> if Theresa May can't handle unexpected pressure that is deeply worrying


Hopefully the pressure is less unexpected now. It was very unexpected when she first became PM and, as I said in an earlier post, I believe that's why she went in with all guns blazing. For me it wasn't clever - you never look strong if you have to back pedal. Better to stay quiet and play the long game. For many however, it's exactly what they wanted to see and there are always 27 other countries to blame.


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> I've watched many quite harrowing poverty, homeless and hungry documentaries, Noush', this one included. But don't ask me why I deliberately subject myself to viewing such desperate misery because I think the only reasonable answer I could possibly give you is, to remind myself of the lucky little 845t4rd I truly am.
> 
> And you're absolutely right; There by the grace of God..... folks ought to remember that before loosely, carelessly and thoughtlessly condemning people far less fortunate than they themselves are.
> 
> Disgraceful isn't it, the 21st century and still we see the ghosts and images from Dickens'classics on our streets today. I guess Victorian Times never really went away, and like so many who have lost their goods and chattels through no fault of their own, they are isolated and left to wander life devoid of any great expectations.
> 
> Have you seen this?


Having actually worn those shoes, I bet you rarely take the lovely life you have now for granted Zaros x

Its utterly shameful.. Many people seem to be devoid of a social conscience, they would rather have this inexcusable poverty then tackle gross inequality. We live in a rigged economy where the money doesn't 'trickle down' it gushes up. One of the wealthiest countries on the planet, there should be no poverty. And were you aware of this? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37899305 How shameful is that? How many other western countries have been investigated by the UN for their shocking treatment of the disabled I wonder?

I've just watched a little bit of that video, aw those poor little mite growing up in those conditions. Its an absolute crime. I'll watch the rest of it later when I have more time x



Dr Pepper said:


> Na, uphill climb more like. But we'll get to a better place after the effort has been put in.


Like Trumps America?

I'm taking that bet. All you've given me is your own personal experience & a couple of drs you claim said the NHS was ok. No references, nothing. I'm not a gambler, I don't even buy a lottery ticket! lol But so confident am I that all those NHS professionals are telling the truth, I shake on the bet. And believe me when I say this is one bet I REALLY hope I lose, cos I'll lose so much more than £100. I'll lose the health security for me & my loved ones & so will millions of other people in this country.

This is what I bet is going to happen before 2022. https://nh-space.com/2016/08/28/5-things-you-should-know-about-stp/

.
*5 - This Is About Creating A Two Tier System*

The level of cuts and closures required by the STPs is such that the NHS will become unable to provide a universal service. Rationing will increase, so that most routine procedures will be refused funding. Once various DGHs have closed, the hospitals still standing will struggle with their increased catchment areas and will be forced to provide essentials only.

This was already envisaged by Simon Stevens, who is keen to separate emergency care from routine care. Emergencies will be handled in NHS hospitals, whilst the routine work will be handled by the private sector. Patients wishing to undergo non-essential procedures will find themselves needing to pay to have their cataracts and hernias treated or their tonsils removed.


----------



## Goblin

Satori said:


> The TV debates are unlikely to focus on policy.


Bit like the whole Tory campaign philosophy isn't it then. Soundbites like Strong and stable is the name of the game even when there is no evidence that May is. Repeat it enough and it has to be true.

As for interviews, can't help but think of the V series remake and the interview rules when the aliens first arrive.


----------



## Bisbow

I think a lot of these so called debates are staged
An invited audience that follows the directors side of his beliefs, whatever side that is
How can we be sure the audience is make up of people of all beliefs

An audience of ordinary working folk of all walks of life would be better, not those with an axe to grind and belittle the opposition just to make up viewing numbers

I am off out now for the rest of the day so will catch up later, I expect a lot will not agree with me


----------



## KittenKong

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...n-drives-her-popularity-further-into-the-mud/


----------



## Goblin

This was a comment for an article describing an american's introduction into the German health system. Well worth consideration in terms of the UK:



> I think the fundamental difference that I learned from living in US and now back in Berlin is this. European society has learned that each individual is a part of WE - The society. In the US, its argumented with individual freedom and "why should I pay for others" fairness crap. This is almost nonexistent in EU mostly because EU individuals know that if the WHOLE IS DOING BETTER, he as an individual DOES BETTER TOO! Curious... Prof.Nash equilibrium - US Nobel prise winner didnt found a resonance in the US... except Bernie Sanders so it would seem ;-)
> 
> Simply to put, I experienced more "why should I pay for some else", "Thats not fair", in US than I experience in EU. More to the point. Discussion like "Why should I pay for someone" belongs only to LePenn,Petry and other right wing extremists... most of the Europe is strong in Solidarity and understanding that TOGETHER works! Or as Angela Merkel said" WE are going to make it!" And thatst the European thing to do... I wish US finds its way to this mindset too.


----------



## KittenKong

Fascinating article from a Tory and Brexiteer!
https://peterreynolds.wordpress.com...shes-cowardly-evasive-and-weak-and-im-a-tory/


----------



## samuelsmiles

Goblin said:


> *Bit like the whole Tory campaign philosophy isn't it then*. Soundbites like Strong and stable is the name of the game even when there is no evidence that May is. *Repeat it enough and it has to be true.*
> 
> As for interviews, can't help but think of the V series remake and the interview rules when the aliens first arrive.


Labour is the same - just a different philosophy. I ain't voting at this election. 

*Why Corbyn's People v Elites narrative is nonsense*


----------



## havoc

noushka05 said:


> We live in a rigged economy where the money doesn't 'trickle down' it gushes up.


You have no idea how much I wish I could disagree with this comment but I can't. What's more, I wish I could tell you there's the will to change that within the current Conservative party but I can't. The vast majority of those who think they're doing OK are being conned. Debt isn't wealth and being able to furnish a lifestyle on cheap credit isn't building any sort of security. Something has to change.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

No charges over battle bus

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-2017-39839907

*Conservative response to CPS decision not to bring charges*
Posted at11:09

Conservative Party Chairman Patrick McLoughlin said:

We are pleased that the legal authorities have confirmed what we believed was the case all along: that these Conservative candidates did nothing wrong. These were politically motivated and unfounded complaints that have wasted police time. We are glad that this matter is finally resolved. A number of false and malicious claims continue to be spread on the internet. People should be aware that making false claims about a candidate's personal character and conduct is an electoral offence, as well as being defamatory. Notwithstanding these false claims, Conservatives want to strengthen election rules to safeguard electoral integrity - in light of the real and proven cases of electoral fraud exposed in Tower Hamlets in 2015."


----------



## Jesthar

havoc said:


> You have no idea how much I wish I could disagree with this comment but I can't. What's more, I wish I could tell you there's the will to change that within the current Conservative party but I can't. The vast majority of those who think they're doing OK are being conned. Debt isn't wealth and being able to furnish a lifestyle on cheap credit isn't building any sort of security. Something has to change.


I read that more as the wealth doesn't 'trickle down' from the rich to the poor, but rather the rich keep nicking more and more of the money _from_ the poor...


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Can someone please remind me of the website where I can check how my MP voted on issues like the badger cull. The site I've found lists all sorts of issues but none related to animals.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Decided to remove my comment.


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Can someone please remind me of the website where I can check how my MP voted on issues like the badger cull. The site I've found lists all sorts of issues but none related to animals.


https://www.theyworkforyou.com/ is one, don't know if it is the one you mean.


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> No charges over battle bus
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-2017-39839907
> 
> *Conservative response to CPS decision not to bring charges*


Phraseology is interesting. Doesn't mean they are not guilty, simply that the CPS is not going to bring charges. It's possible the crown prosecutor decides that there is a realistic prospect of conviction and yet they decide it is not in the public interest to prosecute the defendant. It could be argued that during an election it would not be.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Can someone please remind me of the website where I can check how my MP voted on issues like the badger cull. The site I've found lists all sorts of issues but none related to animals.


Could you not Google your MP, he or she probably has their own website?

Regardless of political attire it'll no doubt be one biased towards that politician and party they represent.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Bisbow said:


> I am off out now for the rest of the day so will catch up later, I expect a lot will not agree with me


Not me, I totally agree and believe you are out for the rest of the day. But there will be some that disagree and argue the point, just hope you have some evidence to back you up.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Goblin said:


> https://www.theyworkforyou.com/ is one, don't know if it is the one you mean.


Yes that is the one I was looking at but I couldn't find any animal related votes so possibly there haven't been any in the period it covers.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Can someone please remind me of the website where I can check how my MP voted on issues like the badger cull. The site I've found lists all sorts of issues but none related to animals.


A Google search revealed this report from The Independent, yet no link and so far been unable to find it on the Animal Aid site.

I note the Independent report dates from 2014.


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes that is the one I was looking at but I couldn't find any animal related votes so possibly there haven't been any in the period it covers.


Strange, I checked my last UK location and badger cull was listed in section Environmental Issues (Generally voted for *culling badgers* to tackle bovine tuberculosis). Conservative.. voted for it twice, absent twice. Voted against tightening fracking regulations and against measures to curb climate change. Says a lot really.


----------



## havoc

Jesthar said:


> I read that more as the wealth doesn't 'trickle down' from the rich to the poor, but rather the rich keep nicking more and more of the money _from_ the poor...


Exactly - who do you think is doing OK out of letting personal debt spiral out of control. Not the ordinary individuals. Short term they think they're doing fine but they aren't getting any wealthier. It's a complete con job called 'consumer confidence'.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Goblin said:


> Strange, I checked my last UK location and badger cull was listed under Environmental Issues, using the voting record tab.


Under Environmental Issues it gives 3 - climate change, fracking and high speed rail. Nothing about badger cull.


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Under Environmental Issues it gives 3 - climate change, fracking and high speed rail. Nothing about badger cull.


Dates listed are 2013-2014 so maybe that's the issue. You may want to look at http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/policy.php?id=6710


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Having actually worn those shoes, I bet you rarely take the lovely life you have now for granted Zaros x
> Its utterly shameful.. Many people seem to be devoid of a social conscience, they would rather have this inexcusable poverty then tackle gross inequality. We live in a rigged economy where the money doesn't 'trickle down' it gushes up. One of the wealthiest countries on the planet, there should be no poverty. And were you aware of this? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37899305 How shameful is that? How many other western countries have been investigated by the UN for their shocking treatment of the disabled I wonder?


Let's just say, I'm more than grateful for what I have Noush' 

Politicians were supposed to have declared a war on poverty, yet in reality the policy became a war on the poor. Just like the war on unemployment became a war on the unemployed and the war on Homelessness became a war on the Homeless etc, etc, etc...
Attitudes towards the poor have been warped and hardened just as the view of the unemployed has, and all this has been courtesy of a cold and callous media which failed to understand that, for the vast majority of these people, their position in life is degrading and undignified. 
But the media, without a care, deliberately pitched everyone in unfortunate circumstances into the same boiling pot because it wanted the rest of us to believe both the poor and the unemployed are little more than parasites and an unnecessary financial drain on society.
Poverty porn has become a new reality entertainment show, where those most often affected by govt' phuq ups are exploited and paraded before the camera, so that the viewer can boo and hiss at their TV screen after having first been duped into believing the featured characters are leeches and would probably rob you blind for your hard earned because they're too phuqin' lazy to go out and work for it themselves.

And yet no one bothers to look in the direction of the real parasites.
A politician's only objective is to make money. But who for?
Certainly not to the benefit or the advantage of the common people.
Does anyone here know of a poor politician or, at least, one who is struggling to make ends meet and exists from day to day like thousands upon thousands of other workers, below the bread line?

Personally, I believe the Govt, in all its failed endeavours of problem solving and twisting facts, truths and figures, have missed a prime opportunity to reduce the numbers of unemployed across Britain by 50% They could employ that percentage to follow the remaining unemployed and the poor around the streets whilst ringing a hand bell and calling out, Shame! Shame! Shame! TING-A-LING.....Shame! Shame! Shame! TING-A-LING.....



noushka05 said:


> And were you aware of this? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37899305 How shameful is that? How many other western countries have been investigated by the UN for their shocking treatment of the disabled I wonder?


Having lost a friend to these 'reforms Noush' I'm afraid I'm very aware. 

Shame! Shame! Shame! TING-A-LING.....Shame! Shame! Shame! TING-A-LING.....

In the following interview May is quoted as saying;

_'Politics is about people and improving peoples lives' _

Trouble is, she never actually said which people.


----------



## Jesthar

havoc said:


> Exactly - who do you think is doing OK out of letting personal debt spiral out of control. Not the ordinary individuals. Short term they think they're doing fine but they aren't getting any wealthier. It's a complete con job called 'consumer confidence'.


OK, just confused about which part of Nouh's post you disagreed with, as you seem to be saying the same things about 'trickle down' being a con?


----------



## havoc

Jesthar said:


> OK, just confused about which part of Nouh's post you disagreed with,


Sorry, didn't intend to confuse. As a lifelong tory voter I want to disagree with her but can't. Wealth does have to be created to trickle down and until recently I'd have stood by that as a reason to allow the rich to be rich. There will always be those who are natural wealth creators and I've never wanted to hammer them for that ability. What I see now is individuals *at all levels* hell bent on hanging on to everything they've got at any cost. I don't see that as a sustainable model.


----------



## kimthecat

trump has sacked james comey FBI for links to the Russians. is his named pronounced Commie?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Goblin said:


> Dates listed are 2013-2014 so maybe that's the issue. You may want to look at http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/policy.php?id=6710


Thanks - that explains it as he wasn't elected until 2015 so those votes took place before he was an MP.


----------



## Jesthar

havoc said:


> Sorry, didn't intend to confuse. As a lifelong tory voter I want to disagree with her but can't. Wealth does have to be created to trickle down and until recently I'd have stood by that as a reason to allow the rich to be rich. There will always be those who are natural wealth creators and I've never wanted to hammer them for that ability. What I see now is individuals *at all levels* hell bent on hanging on to everything they've got at any cost. I don't see that as a sustainable model.


Ah, I understand - thanks!

I think that may be an American influence. I read something recently by some chap who had lived extensively in the US and in Europe, and he commented that the US attitude can often be far more 'me, me, me' and 'why should I or my tax dollars help the less fortunate, they're obviously not trying hard enough or they'd be OK' than European countries, who tended to follow a more altruistic 'helping the less well off improves things for us all' mindset.

Having been over there recently, I can better appreciate this difference. For example, tipping in restaurants. Over here, tips are considered a perk. In the US, they are usually relied upon by the serving staff in order to make ends meet, as employers deliberately take the expected tip level off the wage of the job so they can pay their employees less and make more profit. Here, if you dont tip, the staff think you are a tightwad but not much more. There, if you don't tip, the staff might not be able to pay their bills.

Up until recent years I was a conservative voter too, but I can't vote for them any more even though I'd probably be better off under them. I have too much of a social conscience...


----------



## havoc

Jesthar said:


> Up until recent years I was a conservative voter too, but I can't vote for them any more even though I'd probably be better off under them


Me too. In my case it will be a pointless protest vote - round here the only threat to a Tory MP would be if the EDL fronted a candidate.


----------



## Goblin

Goblin said:


> Phraseology is interesting. Doesn't mean they are not guilty, simply that the CPS is not going to bring charges. It's possible the crown prosecutor decides that there is a realistic prospect of conviction and yet they decide it is not in the public interest to prosecute the defendant. It could be argued that during an election it would not be.


Following on from this... Statement from the CPS include:


> Although there is evidence to suggest the returns may have been inaccurate, there is insufficient evidence to prove to the criminal standard that any candidate or agent was dishonest...
> However, it is clear agents were told by Conservative Party headquarters that the costs were part of the national campaign and it would not be possible to prove any agent acted knowingly or dishonestly...
> Therefore we have concluded it is not in the public interest to charge anyone referred to us with this offence.


So the Tory party as a whole are not innocent. They've simply gotten away with it.


----------



## Goblin

havoc said:


> Me too. In my case it will be a pointless protest vote - round here the only threat to a Tory MP would be if the EDL fronted a candidate.


No vote is pointless. May will find it hard to say she has a mandate if the popular vote is against her even if she won all seats in parliament.


----------



## Jesthar

Goblin said:


> No vote is pointless. May will find it hard to say she has a mandate if the popular vote is against her even if she won all seats in parliament.


Indeed, the only pointless vote is one that is not cast...


----------



## cheekyscrip

kimthecat said:


> trump has sacked james comey FBI for links to the Russians. is his named pronounced Commie?


Interesting...sacking the guy responsible for the probing of ties between Putin, Trump and election?

Nixon comes to my mind....
Would everyone who can point to that be fired?

Bravo US democracy....

This for me is the best evidence if anyone still had doubts Trump had a bit of help from his friends....


----------



## Guest

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm not sure any party will go there for fear of accusations of racism although I can't say for sure it isn't lurking in one of the manifestos but the whole intensive farming/slaughter issue is not one we should be proud of, many animals raised in intensive units suffer a whole lifetime of misery not just on the day of their death.


I agree with that. But why can´t they do that the way they do it in Finland, the animals for Halal get stunned in the same way all animals get stunned before killing them. They don´t have to be conscious for them to bleed to death.


----------



## leashedForLife

kimthecat said,

Trump has sacked James Comey FBI for links to the Russians. is his named pronounced Commie? 
________________________
.
.
"COE-mee". 
.
It's a shame he wasn't let go when he made a public release on an ongoing investigation, contrary to all departmental policies.
The standard is [& has been] to make public statements AFTER the investigation reaches a conclusion - not "it might be...", "it could be...", "possibly..."
.
the FBI as an organization hates Hillary Clinton - not sure why they've got a specific beef with her. 
Comey's grandstanding is part of why His Orange Idiocy is in office.
.
.
.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MrsZee said:


> I agree with that. But why can´t they do that the way they do it in Finland, the animals for Halal get stunned in the same way all animals get stunned before killing them. They don´t have to be conscious for them to bleed to death.


This article is from 2014

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27324224

There is debate about elements of halal, such as whether stunning is allowed.

Stunning cannot be used to kill an animal, according to the Halal Food Authority (HFA), a non-profit organisation that monitors adherence to halal principles. But it can be used if the animal survives and is then killed by halal methods, the HFA adds.

*How widespread is stunning?*
The RSPCA says slaughter without pre-stunning causes "unnecessary suffering".

*Stunning of livestock*

Introduced in England in 1929 with mechanically operated stunner device
Mandatory in EU since 1979, but exemptions can be granted for religious slaughter
Method enables abattoirs to process animals more quickly
Mis-stuns involving captive bolt occur "relatively frequently", European Food Safety Authority report says - leaving animal conscious and in pain
Animals can also regain consciousness
UK Food Standards Agency figures from 2011 suggest 84% of cattle, 81% of sheep and 88% of chickens slaughtered for halal meat were stunned before they died.

Supermarkets selling halal products say they stun all animals before they are slaughtered. Tesco says the only difference between the halal meat it sells and other meat is that it was blessed as it was killed.

Stunning of livestock has been mandatory in the the EU since 1979, although member states can grant exemptions for religious slaughter.

Some countries, including Denmark, have opted to ban non-stunning slaughter altogether. The UK government says it has no intention of banning religious slaughter.

*Is it different from kosher meat?*
Kosher food complies with Jewish dietary law (kashrut), again governing what can and cannot be eaten by those practising the faith.

There are similarities in the method of slaughter in that both require use of a surgically sharp knife and specially-trained slaughtermen.

*Jewish law strictly forbids the use of stunning *and meats are not blessed in the same way.

Unlike for halal, kashrut does not require God's name to be said before every slaughter after an initial blessing.

Kashrut forbids the consumption of certain parts of the carcass, including the sciatic nerve and particular fats.

Halal also forbids consumption of some carcass parts including the testicles and bladder.


----------



## Guest

rottiepointerhouse said:


> This article is from 2014
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27324224
> 
> There is debate about elements of halal, such as whether stunning is allowed.
> Stunning cannot be used to kill an animal, according to the Halal Food Authority (HFA), a non-profit organisation that monitors adherence to halal principles. But it can be used if the animal survives and is then killed by halal methods, the HFA adds.


Here Evira (the organization, which provides permits to sell meat e.g.) requires that all animals must be stunned before killing. That´s it. Naturally the animal is still alive, not just conscious, so that way I presume HFA would approve of that too. So no need to kill an animal without stunning. Even Animalia (a pretty strict animal protection organization, which approves even attacks to protect animals) didn´t find that any worse than other ways to slaughter an animal.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> I agree with that. But why can´t they do that the way they do it in Finland, the animals for Halal get stunned in the same way all animals get stunned before killing them. They don´t have to be conscious for them to bleed to death.


Have to agree, it's just so unnecessary to let the animal experience a slow death and know it's dying.

I think that's twice we've agreed now


----------



## Satori

Goblin said:


> Bit like the whole Tory campaign philosophy isn't it then. Soundbites like Strong and stable is the name of the game even when there is no evidence that May is. Repeat it enough and it has to be true.
> 
> As for interviews, can't help but think of the V series remake and the interview rules when the aliens first arrive.


Tory campaign philosophy is. Repeat it help but there isn't it like Strong and then when the game even when think of that May isn't help but then. Soundbites like the name of then the isn't it help but there is no evidence think of the when whole Tory campaign philosophy is to be the when. Soundbites when whole Tory can't it then that it the when when when that May is to be the is. Repeat it enough and stable Tory campaign philosophy isn't it like aliens for interview rules whole Tory can't help but


----------



## Satori

havoc said:


> Whereas knowing who takes the bins out is terribly important
> Did notice she said there are 'boy jobs' and 'girl jobs' - hope that only applies in her household


One Show interview bad, not make TV debate good. TV debate bad, not make One Show interview good.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> Fair enough. But don't you think debates are good


No.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MrsZee said:


> Here Evira (the organization, which provides permits to sell meat e.g.) requires that all animals must be stunned before killing. That´s it. Naturally the animal is still alive, not just conscious, so that way I presume HFA would approve of that too. So no need to kill an animal without stunning. Even Animalia (a pretty strict animal protection organization, which approves even attacks to protect animals) didn´t find that any worse than other ways to slaughter an animal.


To be clear I don't agree with it one bit and in my animal rights days used to demonstrate at the markets in London, I just don't see any political party taking it on, even the animal rights/welfare organisations don't have much about it on their sites and you have to hunt around to find anything about it.


----------



## rona

Satori said:


> Tory campaign philosophy is. Repeat it help but there isn't it like Strong and then when the game even when think of that May isn't help but then. Soundbites like the name of then the isn't it help but there is no evidence think of the when whole Tory campaign philosophy is to be the when. Soundbites when whole Tory can't it then that it the when when when that May is to be the is. Repeat it enough and stable Tory campaign philosophy isn't it like aliens for interview rules whole Tory can't help but


Have you been on the bottle already?

I can't make head nor tail of that post...........I'm quite worried about you


----------



## Satori

rona said:


> Have you been on the bottle already?
> 
> I can't make head nor tail of that post...........I'm quite worried about you


What do you mean already? It is gone 5 o'clock.

Reading it back I can see that my post isn't the most legible of ramblings, but then neither was the post I responded to in fairness.


----------



## Guest

Here are some examples how May could have a debate, as she is scared of that. Even the strongest and stablest leaders must surrender to the most vicious and hardest of circumstances, like an open debate. Right. But as a helpful person I came up with solutions so that she need not to be so afraid. I´m sure all animal training experts will have even better ideas, but here are my modest suggestions:

have a discussion though a letter box - no physical contact needed
have a discussion with a wall between May and the opponents
have maybe 50 meters between Many and the opponents
use postics instead of saying her message aloud and the presented could read them to the opponents
get lots of practice first by just sitting close to opponents, but not say anything. Slowly progress to saying one word and get a lot of praisal from the presenter, and eventually to whole sentences. Then, at some point she could master answering real questions.
have someone to hold her hand, (is her mother alive by the way?)
just get pissed - you wouldn´t remenber a thing and might do wonders for the stiffness

But I´m sure you have better ideas for how your strong and stable leader, could handle open debates. After this we could think of ways how she could meet EU negotiators, as they will be even meaner, and she will need much more help. 
(reasons for editing= really bad sentences and grammar, sorry ,even I couldn´t stand them. If you want to see how bad errors, check Satori´s quote )


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

A bit more information on the RSPCA website

file:///C:/Users/David/Downloads/Slaughter%20without%20pre-stunning%20INFORMATION%20SHEET%20Mar16%20FINAL.pdf

NUMBER OF ANIMALS SLAUGHTERED BY RELIGIOUS METHODS In 2015, the Food Standards Agency (FSA) published an Animal Welfare Survey undertaken in abattoirs across Great Britain in a one week period in September 2013. The survey provided the numbers of animals slaughtered by the Shechita and Halal methods and reported that a low proportion of these animals were not stunned before slaughter during this period: 2% of cattle, 15% of sheep and goats, and 3% of poultry1 . The survey stated that around 84% of animals slaughtered by the Halal method were stunned before slaughter.

LAWS GOVERNING RELIGIOUS SLAUGHTER „The Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing Regulations 2015‟ set out specific requirements for the slaughter of animals by the Jewish and Muslim methods. These Regulations implement Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 on the protection of animals at the time of killing. The Regulations state that, amongst other things:
 The animal‟s throat must be cut by rapid, uninterrupted movements of a hand-held knife.
 Both carotid arteries and both jugular veins must be severed.
 The knife used to slaughter the animal must be inspected immediately before killing to ensure it is undamaged and of sufficient size and sharpness to kill that animal in the manner described in the first bullet point, above.
Further, religious slaughter can only take place in a licensed slaughterhouse. This requirement was initially added as an amendment to the previous slaughter legislation, following lobbying by the RSPCA.


----------



## Satori

MrsZee said:


> Here are some examples how May could have a debate, as she is scared of that. Even the strongest and stablest learders must surrender to the most vicious and hardest of circumstances, like an open debate. But as a helpful person I came up with solutions so that she could be so afraid. I´m sure all animal training experts will have even better ideas, but here is my modest suggestions:
> 
> have a discussion though a letter box - no physical contact needed
> have a discussion with a wall between May and the opponents
> have maybe 50 meters between Many and the opponents
> use postics instead of saying aloud and the presented could read them.
> get lots of practice first by just sitting close to opponents, but not say anything. Slowly progress to saying one word and get a lot of praisal from the presenter, and eventually to whole sentences. Then, at somepoint she could answer real questions.
> have someone to hold her hand, (is her mother alive by the way?)
> just get pissed - you wouldn´t remenber a thing and might do wonders for the stiffness
> 
> But I´m sure you have better ideas for your strong and stable leader, how she can handle this. After this we could think of ways how she could meet EU negotiators, as they will be even meaner.


Or...... Don't waste time on the debate and just get on with winning a landslide election with a crushing majority.

(Fwiw, I find that getting pissed does nothing to help my stiffness. Quite the reverse.)


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> A bit more information on the RSPCA website
> 
> file:///C:/Users/David/Downloads/Slaughter%20without%20pre-stunning%20INFORMATION%20SHEET%20Mar16%20FINAL.pdf
> 
> NUMBER OF ANIMALS SLAUGHTERED BY RELIGIOUS METHODS In 2015, the Food Standards Agency (FSA) published an Animal Welfare Survey undertaken in abattoirs across Great Britain in a one week period in September 2013. The survey provided the numbers of animals slaughtered by the Shechita and Halal methods and reported that a low proportion of these animals were not stunned before slaughter during this period: 2% of cattle, 15% of sheep and goats, and 3% of poultry1 . The survey stated that around 84% of animals slaughtered by the Halal method were stunned before slaughter.
> 
> LAWS GOVERNING RELIGIOUS SLAUGHTER „The Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing Regulations 2015‟ set out specific requirements for the slaughter of animals by the Jewish and Muslim methods. These Regulations implement Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 on the protection of animals at the time of killing. The Regulations state that, amongst other things:
>  The animal‟s throat must be cut by rapid, uninterrupted movements of a hand-held knife.
>  Both carotid arteries and both jugular veins must be severed.
>  The knife used to slaughter the animal must be inspected immediately before killing to ensure it is undamaged and of sufficient size and sharpness to kill that animal in the manner described in the first bullet point, above.
> Further, religious slaughter can only take place in a licensed slaughterhouse. This requirement was initially added as an amendment to the previous slaughter legislation, following lobbying by the RSPCA.


Genuinely sickening that anyone, in government, religion or otherwise finds this acceptable or worse thinks it's best for the animal.

I'm on your side @rottiepointerhouse but I can't "like" your post because there's nothing there I like.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Satori said:


> Tory campaign philosophy is. Repeat it help but there isn't it like Strong and then when the game even when think of that May isn't help but then. Soundbites like the name of then the isn't it help but there is no evidence think of the when whole Tory campaign philosophy is to be the when. Soundbites when whole Tory can't it then that it the when when when that May is to be the is. Repeat it enough and stable Tory campaign philosophy isn't it like aliens for interview rules whole Tory can't help but


Are you Yoda Gone To The Dark Side On Crack?
Rewind, please ...


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> Genuinely sickening that anyone, in government, religion or otherwise finds this acceptable or worse thinks it's best for the animal.
> 
> I'm on your side @rottiepointerhouse but I can't "like" your post.


*WARNING GRAPHIC DESCRIPTIONS SO SKIP IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW THIS INFORMATION
*
In June 2003, the Government‟s independent advisory body, the Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) published its report on the „Welfare of Farmed Animals at Slaughter or Killing - Part 1: Red Meat Animals‟. In undertaking a comprehensive review of all red meat slaughter methods, including religious slaughter practices, members of the FAWC considered evidence from many individuals and organisations, including religious and animal welfare groups, as well as observing the various methods of slaughter for themselves.

On the first of these issues, FAWC concluded that the level of restraint required to sufficiently expose the throat of the animal, perform an effective neck cut, and hold the animal still until it had bled out, was far greater than that needed for conventional slaughter. With regard to the potential for pain and distress, FAWC considered the representations it had received - some of which had argued that a neck cut is not painful provided it is performed as a rapid, uninterrupted movement with a sharp knife. FAWC came to the view, however, that when a large transverse incision is made across the neck a number of vital tissues are transected, including: skin, muscle, trachea, oesophagus, carotid arteries, jugular veins, major nerve trunks, plus numerous minor nerves. They concluded that such a drastic cut would inevitably trigger a barrage of sensory information to the brain in a sensible (conscious) animal. FAWC stated that: "we are persuaded that such a massive injury would result in very significant pain and distress in the period before insensibility supervenes".

Concerning the time taken to loss of brain responsiveness, FAWC considered the available evidence and concluded that adult cattle can take between 22 and 40 seconds to become insensible (unconscious) after neck cutting. FAWC also cited work on calves that had shown a variation in the period to insensibility from 10 to 120 seconds. The longer times were the result of occlusion of the carotid arteries. This issue is observed in a proportion of cattle, and particularly in calves, and occurs when the carotid arteries contract after the cut has been made thereby sealing the cut ends and thus maintaining blood pressure within the brain.

FAWC‟s recommendations on this issue were that, "Council considers that slaughter without pre-stunning is unacceptable and that the Government should repeal the current exemption," and that, "Until the current exemption which permits slaughter without pre-stunning is repealed, Council recommends that any animal not stunned before slaughter should receive an immediate post-cut stun"

In 2005, the Government issued its final response to the FAWC‟s 2003 report in the form of a consultation document. The accompanying statement indicated that the Government was not intending to adopt the FAWC‟s recommendation to repeal a current legal exemption allowing Halal and Kosher meat to be produced in the UK without the animals being stunned, but that it may consider the issue of labelling of meat (see below) from such slaughter methods - on a voluntary basis. The RSPCA responded to the Government‟s consultation, urging it to consider more carefully the animal welfare implications of allowing continuation of slaughter without pre-stunning, and pressed for the compulsory labelling of meat from animals slaughtered in this way. However, the Government again stated that it would not change the law and that slaughter without pre-stunning would continue to be permitted for Jewish and Muslim groups.

:Rage:Rage


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> You have no idea how much I wish I could disagree with this comment but I can't. What's more, I wish I could tell you there's the will to change that within the current Conservative party but I can't. The vast majority of those who think they're doing OK are being conned. Debt isn't wealth and being able to furnish a lifestyle on cheap credit isn't building any sort of security. Something has to change.


Like people actually thinking for themselves?


----------



## Satori

cheekyscrip said:


> Are you Yoda Gone To The Dark Side On Crack?
> Rewind, please ...


I knew someone would out me. Perspicacious one you are...


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Of course I should add the RSPCA report I've quoted about where the government refused to change the law was under a Labour government not a Tory one so it is a cross party issue. Will be interested to see if it gets a mention in any party manifesto when they eventually come out.


----------



## cheekyscrip

rona said:


> Like people actually thinking for themselves?


They voted for Brexit , Rona!...  and Trump....
People can believe ANYTHING! Ask Orson Welles.


----------



## Satori

cheekyscrip said:


> They voted for Brexit , Rona!...  and Trump....
> People can believe ANYTHING! Ask Orson Welles.


But does one vote based on what s/he believes or choose to believe what supports the vote cast?


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> But does one vote based on what s/he believes or choose to believe what supports the vote cast?


Recent activities suggest the latter in many cases


----------



## cheekyscrip

Satori said:


> But does one vote based on what s/he believes or choose to believe what supports the vote cast?


Choose to believe, known also as wishful thinking....
"It was on the buses, must be true"....
You can also disbelieve anything you chose...call it " Project Fear"....
Good German people simply wanted to believe that Hitler would make Germany great again and all warnings that he would push country into war was seen as scaremongering....

It is very important election if great unwashed do not want to loose grip on their country then should not give May any stronger mandate she already has.

Else we will have Little Trumpton, while Big Trumpton models themselves on Kremlin style plutocracy.

Since Brexit and even before we well advanced into plutarchy anyway...
Who do you think are party donors?

We have plutarchy and " panem et circenses" for the masses.


----------



## Satori

havoc said:


> Recent activities suggest the latter in many cases


It has always been thus but seems more obvious nowadays. I have watched numerous voters on the TV recently asked which party they would vote for and heard such things as "well I've bin a laberr supporta all mi life burramgonna vote fot torees this tarm cuz that Jeremy Corbyn ant got the carrismu fot be prime ministuh azzee?" They neglected to add "policies notwithstanding".


----------



## Satori

cheekyscrip said:


> Who do you think are party donors?


One does what one can.


----------



## KittenKong

cheekyscrip said:


> Choose to believe, known also as wishful thinking....
> "It was on the buses, must be true"....
> You can also disbelieve anything you chose...call it " Project Fear"....
> Good German people simply wanted to believe that Hitler would make Germany great again and all warnings that he would push country into war was seen as scaremongering....
> 
> It is very important election if great unwashed do not want to loose grip on their country then should not give May any stronger mandate she already has.
> 
> Else we will have Little Trumpton, while Big Trumpton models themselves on Kremlin style plutocracy.
> 
> Since Brexit and even before we well advanced into plutarchy anyway...
> Who do you think are party donors?
> 
> We have plutarchy and " panem et circenses" for the masses.


Absolutely, as this quote from a certain famous former German leader specifies.

Note the "Strong and stable" reference. Might be a coincidence?


----------



## KittenKong

Apparently leaked as reported by the BBC.

Sounds good to me!


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> "well I've bin a laberr supporta all mi life burramgonna vote fot torees this tarm cuz that Jeremy Corbyn ant got the carrismu fot be prime ministuh azzee


Uplifting isn't it - or maybe not so much. I'm sure traditional Tory supporters are delighted at the thought of rubbing shoulders with these new found zealots at Conservative club functions


----------



## Satori

^ this video shows what we are dealing with when we use the term voters. Don't know whether to laugh or cry......


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> I think a lot of these so called debates are staged
> An invited audience that follows the directors side of his beliefs, whatever side that is
> How can we be sure the audience is make up of people of all beliefs
> 
> An audience of ordinary working folk of all walks of life would be better, not those with an axe to grind and belittle the opposition just to make up viewing numbers
> 
> I am off out now for the rest of the day so will catch up later, I expect a lot will not agree with me


May prefers a staged event, shes afraid of scrutiny. Compare her with Corbyn, hes out in the crowd speaking to ordinary people while May is like Trump & Putin & other authoritarians - a control freak.

This is what you call staged. Shes sticking two fingers up at democracy again.

Channel 4s Michael Crick;
_"What shocks me is reporters collaborate with May press team by agreeing to reveal their questions to them in advance"_
_










_
This was Corbyn in York yesterday. Meeting real people. >>>












samuelsmiles said:


> Labour is the same - just a different philosophy. I ain't voting at this election.
> 
> *Why Corbyn's People v Elites narrative is nonsense*


CapX is funded by the shady right wing 'think tank' Centre for Policy Studies 












havoc said:


> You have no idea how much I wish I could disagree with this comment but I can't. What's more, I wish I could tell you there's the will to change that within the current Conservative party but I can't. The vast majority of those who think they're doing OK are being conned. Debt isn't wealth and being able to furnish a lifestyle on cheap credit isn't building any sort of security. Something has to change.


I agree with you too. The con is unravelling Havoc, even the IMF have now acknowledged neoliberalism is a disaster. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/31/witnessing-death-neoliberalism-imf-economists We desperately need a new economic model.

George Monbiot has done a lot on the subject mainly from the ecological perspective & the catastrophe to ecosystems deregulation has created . Its worth checking out his articles.

I've found a short video by George on the subject & how neoliberalism is responsible for the rise of Trump - & for brexit.








Jesthar said:


> I read that more as the wealth doesn't 'trickle down' from the rich to the poor, but rather the rich keep nicking more and more of the money _from_ the poor...


That's exactly what I meant  Sorry for posting memes. I'm not doing this to annoy people but they sum up neoliberal economics so well & (unlike me lol) the quotes are by two highly respected individuals.





















Zaros said:


> Let's just say, I'm more than grateful for what I have Noush'
> 
> Politicians were supposed to have declared a war on poverty, yet in reality the policy became a war on the poor. Just like the war on unemployment became a war on the unemployed and the war on Homelessness became a war on the Homeless etc, etc, etc...
> Attitudes towards the poor have been warped and hardened just as the view of the unemployed has, and all this has been courtesy of a cold and callous media which failed to understand that, for the vast majority of these people, their position in life is degrading and undignified.
> But the media, without a care, deliberately pitched everyone in unfortunate circumstances into the same boiling pot because it wanted the rest of us to believe both the poor and the unemployed are little more than parasites and an unnecessary financial drain on society.
> Poverty porn has become a new reality entertainment show, where those most often affected by govt' phuq ups are exploited and paraded before the camera, so that the viewer can boo and hiss at their TV screen after having first been duped into believing the featured characters are leeches and would probably rob you blind for your hard earned because they're too phuqin' lazy to go out and work for it themselves.
> 
> And yet no one bothers to look in the direction of the real parasites.
> A politician's only objective is to make money. But who for?
> Certainly not to the benefit or the advantage of the common people.
> Does anyone here know of a poor politician or, at least, one who is struggling to make ends meet and exists from day to day like thousands upon thousands of other workers, below the bread line?
> 
> Personally, I believe the Govt, in all its failed endeavours of problem solving and twisting facts, truths and figures, have missed a prime opportunity to reduce the numbers of unemployed across Britain by 50% They could employ that percentage to follow the remaining unemployed and the poor around the streets whilst ringing a hand bell and calling out, Shame! Shame! Shame! TING-A-LING.....Shame! Shame! Shame! TING-A-LING.....
> 
> Having lost a friend to these 'reforms Noush' I'm afraid I'm very aware.
> 
> Shame! Shame! Shame! TING-A-LING.....Shame! Shame! Shame! TING-A-LING.....
> 
> In the following interview May is quoted as saying;
> 
> _'Politics is about people and improving peoples lives' _
> 
> Trouble is, she never actually said which people.


I know x

We're a rich country, politicians could solve poverty if they wanted to, this is why Corbyn appeals to many disaffected people & people with social values - because he's not part of the establishment.

Pilger sums things up Zaros










Yes, the media is terrible, its being used as state tool to divide sectors. Look at the majority of the tabloids & tv stations like Channel 5 how they focus on 'freeloaders'. Jeezus, everytime I look on C5 theres a program demonising people on benefits - its a form of propaganda. They are just stereotyping people on benefits, this creates hostility towards lower classes to encourage people to get angry & this anger is then used by the government to justify the massive cuts to benefits. Poverty porn - I didn't know it was called that. Good title.

I'm so sorry to hear about your friend Zaros. I've heard lots of similar stories - it makes me feel sick. More & more people are slipping through the safety net, & when the tories get back in a lot more vulnerable people will suffer too. I don't think our welfare state will last very much longer. Its going to be survival of the fittest & the richest here

Mays appearance with Arthur Askey had me cringing I think we all know which set of people she represents


----------



## Honeys mum

Labour manifesto leak: Renationalise rail, buses, energy and Royal Mail

This has been on Skyenews.


----------



## noushka05

Honeys mum said:


> Labour manifesto leak: Renationalise rail, buses, energy and Royal Mail
> 
> This has been on Skyenews.


Wow this is good news.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> Apparently leaked as reported by the BBC.
> 
> Sounds good to me!
> View attachment 310280


If they can't even keep that safe how on earth could they run a country?


----------



## Goblin

Talk about pendulums if labour ever got in.. then next election the pendulum would swing the other way. Pit and pendulum by Edgar Alan Poe springs to mind with the body being the average person underneath.


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> If they can't even keep that safe how on earth could they run a country?


I don't believe that 'leak' has done them any harm at all. Have to wonder if it was ever meant to be kept safe.


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> I don't believe that 'leak' has done them any harm at all. Have to wonder if it was ever meant to be kept safe.


I did wonder that but it's so much pie in the sky that I thought it must have been....................


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> I did wonder


Well once you officially publish your manifesto you are stuck with it. Leak a 'draft' version and you can tweak it having checked the response.


----------



## Bisbow

rona said:


> If they can't even keep that safe how on earth could they run a country?


They will lead the country alright, straight into wrack and ruin, back into the hands of the union barons who will hold us to ransom at the slightest whim


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> If they can't even keep that safe how on earth could they run a country?


Even by your standards that's really desperate Rona:Hilarious Just look at the tories record - everything is in crisis. Our country has never been in such a state.

.

Leaks about the NHS, leaks about environmental issues. I've lost count of the leaks out of the tory party & non of them have been positive!
*
Leaked papers reveal that Tory MEPs were told to support a 'get-out clause' in proposed new air pollution laws - *https://www.theguardian.com/environ...-trying-to-undermine-eu-air-pollution-targets
*
Leak: Tories to reclassify **Fracking** as National Infrastructure Priority to sidestep local council & people debate

*


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> I did wonder that but it's so much pie in the sky that I thought it must have been....................


Why is it?

He has a point  -

*







mike galsworthy*‏@*mikegalsworthy* 10h10 hours ago

Obviously right-wing commentary will squeal about the cost of #*LabourManifesto*.

If they can afford Brexit adventure, Labour can afford this.

*mike galsworthy*‏@*mikegalsworthy* 10h10 hours ago

Quick glance at #*LabourManifesto* - despite my view of Corbyn, this targets the right areas. This'd 'take back control' more than any Brexit.

.

.


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> I know x
> We're a rich country, politicians could solve poverty if they wanted to, this is why Corbyn appeals to many disaffected people & people with social values - because he's not part of the establishment.
> 
> Pilger sums things up Zaros
> 
> View attachment 310291
> 
> 
> Yes, the media is terrible, its being used as state tool to divide sectors. Look at the majority of the tabloids & tv stations like Channel 5 how they focus on 'freeloaders'. Jeezus, everytime I look on C5 theres a program demonising people on benefits - its a form of propaganda. They are just stereotyping people on benefits, this creates hostility towards lower classes to encourage people to get angry & this anger is then used by the government to justify the massive cuts to benefits. Poverty porn - I didn't know it was called that. Good title.
> I'm so sorry to hear about your friend Zaros. I've heard lots of similar stories - it makes me feel sick. More & more people are slipping through the safety net, & when the tories get back in a lot more vulnerable people will suffer too. I don't think our welfare state will last very much longer. Its going to be survival of the fittest & the richest here
> Mays appearance with Arthur Askey had me cringing I think we all know which set of people she represents


I have a great deal of respect and admiration for John Pilger, Noush' It's such a pity there aren't more like him.
He's always been passionate about the truth and has always possessed the indefatigable conviction to seek it out, no matter where it might be found.

Incidentally, I've ordered _'I Daniel Blake'_ from Amazon after doing a little research on the film.

Poor Ken, I understand his work was condemned by the Government as a mere work of fiction not unlike that of Charles Dickens.

Now, if I were Ken, I'd consciously make sure that my next film fiercely broadsided the Government by producing something typically Dickens in style such as _'A Tale Of Two Britains' _

_(For the super rich elite and ruling classes) It was the best of times (for the vast majority) the poor, the sick, the unemployed and the homeless) it was the worst of times. 
The elite and ruling classes were all going direct to the restaurant, the poor and the downtrodden were all going direct to the food bank....

:Hilarious Arthur Askey_


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> ^ this video shows what we are dealing with when we use the term voters. Don't know whether to laugh or cry......


The one that doesn't know what way he voted probably ticked both boxes. Very funny though.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Has anyone found the leaked link for the draft Labour manifesto so we can all have a gander at it?


----------



## Dr Pepper

Honeys mum said:


> Labour manifesto leak: Renationalise rail, buses, energy and Royal Mail
> 
> This has been on Skyenews.


More pledges they couldn't possibly keep and certainly couldn't pay for. And to think Labour supporters keep banging on about the current level of debt.


----------



## samuelsmiles

I think this, maybe, is why some people find it hard to find sympathy with the Lefties. Brave guy standing up for free speech.

Ironic.

*"Antifa attack man and theaten me"*


----------



## Lurcherlad

Honeys mum said:


> Labour manifesto leak: Renationalise rail, buses, energy and Royal Mail
> 
> This has been on Skyenews.


Whilst I never thought selling off all our utilities and public services was a good idea, where on earth do Labour think the money will come from to fund this idea?

:Facepalm


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

samuelsmiles said:


> I think this, maybe, is why some people find it hard to find sympathy with the Lefties. Brave guy standing up for free speech.
> 
> Ironic.
> 
> *"Antifa attack man and theaten me"*


I'm no "leftie" (well not yet anyway :Hilarious:Hilarious) but Antifa are an anti fascist organisation and likely to be made up of more anarchists than labour supporters.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

I'm going to write to Theresa May about her lack of knowledge and silly "I eat meat" response to this lady asking about vegan school meals.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4493790/Theresa-gave-critics-straight-bat-QUENTIN-LETTS.html

I quite understand if a politician doesn't know anything about veganism but would have expected a response more along the lines of "thank you for raising this, its is not something I've been asked about before so I don't know much about it but I will find out" not a blank face, "its a personal choice" and "I eat meat" giggle giggle.


----------



## samuelsmiles

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm no "leftie" (well not yet anyway :Hilarious:Hilarious) but Antifa are an anti fascist organisation and likely to be made up of more anarchists than labour supporters.


I never mentioned the Labour Party. I do hear the word 'fascist' used a lot in these forum discussions, though.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

samuelsmiles said:


> I never mentioned the Labour Party. I do hear the word 'fascist' used a lot in these forum discussions, though.


Fair enough but you did say "lefties" and I would take a wild guess watching that video that those people are anarchists not lefties.


----------



## samuelsmiles

Yes, I stand corrected, RPH - I have found the true definition of ANTIFA.

antifa
Anti-capitalistic, anti-personal freedom (unless you agree with them) anti-spiritual, anti-point. Harbors a social superiority with lack of civility or natural intelligence. These dim bulbs (at best) can be characterized by, greasy hair, basement dwellings and being totally devoid of any style or attraction. Usually spotted lurking at night in large groups of marauding retards of like mind (or lack thereof) near a large University or College, anywhere they can find safety in shear numbers (because their pussy's) but has been known to venture out in the daylight to antagonize, mace women, light garbage cans and cop cars on fire at DJT rallies for money.


----------



## Jesthar

Bisbow said:


> They will lead the country alright, straight into wrack and ruin, back into the hands of the union barons who will hold us to ransom at the slightest whim


Speaking with my Union Rep hat on, you seem to have a very old fashioned view of us.  Unions these days are nothing like the 'everybody out!' years - and quite right, too, as they did nobody any favours. Yes, you heard me correctly, we want to be nothing like that. No-one except the most militant of Unions wants a return to those days. Plus you have to have a ballot on strike action now, anyway, you can't walk out on a whim.

These days we (the Unions) prefer to work on the German model, where employers and unions in the greater part work _together_ to achieve decent working conditions for the workforce. In Germany this is, of course, greatly helped by the fact that German employers are far more ready to acknowledge that a safe, healthy and content workforce is a much more productive workforce, and generally view the Unions as a way of helping a business thrive.

UK businesses on the other hand, still often regard us with suspicion and mistrust, which isn't helped by the fact a lot of our time is taken up protecting your average worker from abuse of policy by managers. For example, a lot of cases I have been involved with over my time as a rep have involved defending staff whose managers ware trying to use a period of genuine sick leave to put the employee on a disciplinery for poor attendance. I can't go into details, but this has included staff members who were in hospital (including for scheduled operations the manager knew about in advance) and/or had full medical notes from doctors backing them up. Had some pretty shocking cases of disability discrimination too.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Has anyone found the leaked link for the draft Labour manifesto so we can all have a gander at it?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/draft_manifesto_110517.pdf


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

samuelsmiles said:


> Yes, I stand corrected, RPH - I have found the true definition of ANTIFA.
> 
> antifa
> Anti-capitalistic, anti-personal freedom (unless you agree with them) anti-spiritual, anti-point. Harbors a social superiority with lack of civility or natural intelligence. These dim bulbs (at best) can be characterized by, greasy hair, basement dwellings and being totally devoid of any style or attraction. Usually spotted lurking at night in large groups of marauding retards of like mind (or lack thereof) near a large University or College, anywhere they can find safety in shear numbers (because their pussy's) but has been known to venture out in the daylight to antagonize, mace women, light garbage cans and cop cars on fire at DJT rallies for money.


Yes I saw that definition too but chose not to post it as I find some of the language unpleasant (retards) and if you click on some of the highlighted words to their definitions of say women I think that sums up whoever writes that site 

Female human. As intelligent as the male of the species though far more vicious. Usually physically inferior yet very easily enraged. Tend to shy away from physical violence, but they gladly practice mental and emotional abuse against both their male counterparts and their so called "sisters" (I.e. other women.). Likewise, while they are reluctant to partake in such physically violent crimes such as murder, assault and rape this is not because of their self proclaimed moral superiority but rather because most are extremely hesitant to get their handsdirty.

and follow the link from their definition of women to their definition of rape and you get

Rape. When they aren't kissing you. It takes two to tango.
Either he didn't brush his teeth, or she just got raped.


----------



## Bisbow

Jesthar said:


> Speaking with my Union Rep hat on, you seem to have a very old fashioned view of us.  Unions these days are nothing like the 'everybody out!' years - and quite right, too, as they did nobody any favours. Yes, you heard me correctly, we want to be nothing like that. No-one except the most militant of Unions wants a return to those days. Plus you have to have a ballot on strike action now, anyway, you can't walk out on a whim.
> 
> These days we (the Unions) prefer to work on the German model, where employers and unions in the greater part work _together_ to achieve decent working conditions for the workforce. In Germany this is, of course, greatly helped by the fact that German employers are far more ready to acknowledge that a safe, healthy and content workforce is a much more productive workforce, and generally view the Unions as a way of helping a business thrive.
> 
> UK businesses on the other hand, still often regard us with suspicion and mistrust, which isn't helped by the fact a lot of our time is taken up protecting your average worker from abuse of policy by managers. For example, a lot of cases I have been involved with over my time as a rep have involved defending staff whose managers ware trying to use a period of genuine sick leave to put the employee on a disciplinery for poor attendance. I can't go into details, but this has included staff members who were in hospital (including for scheduled operations the manager knew about in advance) and/or had full medical notes from doctors backing them up. Had some pretty shocking cases of disability discrimination too.


The militants are still there, hiding in the background awaiting their chance to rise again
They pop up on tv every so often to have their say, or have you not noticed or choose to pretend they are not there

Edited to add
The good union reps do a good job, the bad ones ruin everything the good do


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Here is the bit I've been waiting to see - waiting on the others to see what they say too. Still no reply from my MP about hunting. 

Animal Welfare Animals in our food chain need protection.
Domestic animals require stronger protection from cruelty.
Wild animals need a sustainable ecosystem.
Our stewardship of the environment needs to be founded on sound principle and based on scientific assessment. 
Labour’s vision is for the UK to lead the world with high animal welfare standards in the wild, in farming and with domestic animals.
We will cease the badger cull which spreads Bovine TB 
We will use reconfigured funding streams to promote cruelty free animal husbandry and consult on ways to ensure better enforcement of agreed standards 
We will prohibit the third party sale of puppies, introduce a total ban on ivory trading, and support the ban on wild animals in circuses. 
Labour banned fox hunting, Theresa May opposed it. Only a Labour government will maintain the ban.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Lurcherlad said:


> Whilst I never thought selling off all our utilities and public services was a good idea, where on earth do Labour think the money will come from to fund this idea?
> :Facepalm


As for the railways all the money they pay in subsidies would go a long way to buy them back.

I could never under stand how they privatized them and still pay large subsidies to run them and they are still paying their shareholders.

Surely that money would be better spent, put back into improving the railway and not disapearing into peoples pockets.


----------



## Jesthar

Bisbow said:


> The militants are still there, hiding in the background awaiting their chance to rise again
> They pop up on tv every so often to have their say, or have you not noticed or choose to pretend they are not there


We know they are there, and we know how little power (and support) they have. Quite frankly, the media only goes to them because they know they'd get a calm and reasoned answer from us, and that's not dramatic or agenda suiting enough for them.  They prefer the shouty hot air, it makes for better ratings.

To give an internal example, the militants in my company (yes, we have some, different Union, we have three main ones in my company) last year tried to hijack our pay talks and demand a stupidly massive pay rise. As in totally ridiculous. Went to internal membership vote, they got comprehensively squished. They then (as they always do) vanished and left all the actual hard work of negotiation to us, before trying to resurface to claim credit for the pretty good deal eventually agreed.

People soon get wise to them, though - we have lots of former members of their union now in ours after being let down by them and we picked up the pieces.


----------



## Happy Paws2

I think anyone who buys any newspaper from now to the election shouldn't believe anything they see in print, on FB or Twitter about any of the parties as most of it will be lies, or as someone once said "Fake News".


----------



## Bisbow

Jesthar said:


> We know they are there, and we know how little power (and support) they have. Quite frankly, the media only goes to them because they know they'd get a calm and reasoned answer from us, and that's not dramatic or agenda suiting enough for them.  They prefer the shouty hot air, it makes for better ratings.
> 
> To give an internal example, the militants in my company (yes, we have some, different Union, we have three main ones in my company) last year tried to hijack our pay talks and demand a stupidly massive pay rise. As in totally ridiculous. Went to internal membership vote, they got comprehensively squished. They then (as they always do) vanished and left all the actual hard work of negotiation to us, before trying to resurface to claim credit for the pretty good deal eventually agreed.
> 
> People soon get wise to them, though - we have lots of former members of their union now in ours after being let down by them and we picked up the pieces.


Pleased to hear you are one of the good ones and hope you keep te militants well and truly squished


----------



## Ceiling Kitty

Private Eye makes me laugh.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Well Mr Corbyn's car has just run over a cameraman's foot. That'll no doubt be front page tomorrow. Not his day really.


----------



## Jesthar

Bisbow said:


> Pleased to hear you are one of the good ones and hope you keep te militants well and truly squished


Most of us are 'the good one' these days  It takes something extraordinary to get near to strike action in pretty much any Union now, and we've certainly come nowhere near (or even had it mentioned in seriousness) in the 12+ years I've been working here.


----------



## KittenKong

Happy Paws said:


> As for the railways all the money they pay in subsidies would go a long way to buy them back.
> 
> I could never under stand how they privatized them and still pay large subsidies to run them and they are still paying their shareholders.
> 
> Surely that money would be better spent, put back into improving the railway and not disapearing into peoples pockets.


The Tyne and Wear Metro service has recently returned to public ownership after a troublesome privatisation attempt.


----------



## KittenKong

Ceiling Kitty said:


> Private Eye makes me laugh.
> 
> View attachment 310310


Another good 'un I saw on Facebook


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/draft_manifesto_110517.pdf


I have had a speed read of it and there seems to be alot of spending, I couldn't find how they intend to pay for all the spending so far except corporation tax rises. I will have a more thorough read of it when I get home.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Reply from my MP - will not be voting for him and neither will my husband. 



Thank you very much for your email about repeal of the hunting ban.


I am bound to say that this is not a priority, and there are many other challenges for us as a country in the coming years. However, my personal view is that I am in favour of hunting. I have supported hunting for a long time, and I have not changed my view. Many people accuse politicians of being duplicitous, but I believe it is better to be straight forward, even when we disagree.


I am sorry that our views differ on this issue, but I hope that we can agree that there are many other issues on which we agree, for example that it is imperative that Theresa May is returned as our Prime Minister.


Thank you again for your email and kind regards,


----------



## rona

An NHS falling apart

Go to doctor for lump, one week later a scan, one week after that a consultant appointment.......as strong indication of it being benign, the next appointment will take 4-6 weeks.

This is my first hand experience of our NHS over the last few weeks under the conservatives. Doesn't seem to be falling apart around here


----------



## Elles

Sadly around here it would take at least a month to get the appointment with the doctor. In my experience it's at a&e/ambulance services and gp surgeries where it's falling apart. It's not the whole thing.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> I have had a speed read of it and there seems to be alot of spending, I couldn't find how they intend to pay for all the spending so far except corporation tax rises. I will have a more thorough read of it when I get home.


Also increased income tax for those who earn over £80,000, and a decreased inheritance tax threshold, I believe.


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> Sadly around here it would take at least a month to get the appointment with the doctor. In my experience it's at a&e/ambulance services and gp surgeries where it's falling apart. It's not the whole thing.


Maybe it's the fault of the individual CCGs rather than the government. After all, it is up to them to organise the structure of care in each area


----------



## suewhite

A very good friend of mine runs an A&E and last Sunday on a 12 hour shift she had 8 toothaches 3 sore throats and 28 drunks all wasting her time and causing a back log for people who genuinely needed seeing, I just don't understand why people feel they can just pop along to A&E with the most minor complaints.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> Also increased income tax for those who earn over £80,000, and a decreased inheritance tax threshold, I believe.


Having a thorough read of it now. I did say and I quote it was a speed read as I was in the middle of doing something.


----------



## Elles

rona said:


> Maybe it's the fault of the individual CCGs rather than the government. After all, it is up to them to organise the structure of care in each area


Some of the care in our area is excellent. Going for a breast screening, you get a modern clinic, free coffee machines in every room, fast, efficient appointments and any referrals to a consultant in around a week, when you'll go back in, see two at once and get a personal advisor who is available at any time to address any concerns you might have. So even in the one area it seems to depend on your potential ailment as to whether it seems that the NHS is on its last legs or not. People shouldn't be waiting a month for a gp appointment, 3 hours for an ambulance or sitting outside queuing for 8 hours to get into hospital though. If reports are true, the NHS is failing more than it should.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Having a thorough read of it now. I did say and I quote it was a speed read as I was in the middle of doing something.


I know, I was just trying to be helpful


----------



## Elles

suewhite said:


> A very good friend of mine runs an A&E and last Sunday on a 12 hour shift she had 8 toothaches 3 sore throats and 28 drunks all wasting her time and causing a back log for people who genuinely needed seeing, I just don't understand why people feel they can just pop along to A&E with the most minor complaints.


Phone my gp and you will be told that they no longer deal with urgent appointments and to go to a&e. The next available appt with a gp will be around a month, which is no good if you have an acute ailment like a sore throat. A pharmacy might be able to advise, but most people think doctor when they have a sore throat. Toothache would also be a NHS problem, with dentists no longer readily available unless you can pay for it. It's one of those other knock on effects. Drunks aren't in their right mind, they'll always have to deal with drunks.


----------



## Arnie83

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Reply from my MP - will not be voting for him and neither will my husband.
> 
> Thank you very much for your email about repeal of the hunting ban.
> 
> I am bound to say that this is not a priority, and there are many other challenges for us as a country in the coming years. However, my personal view is that I am in favour of hunting. I have supported hunting for a long time, and I have not changed my view. Many people accuse politicians of being duplicitous, but I believe it is better to be straight forward, even when we disagree.
> 
> I am sorry that our views differ on this issue, but I hope that we can agree that there are many other issues on which we agree, for example that it is imperative that Theresa May is returned as our Prime Minister.
> 
> Thank you again for your email and kind regards,


"Dear Parliamentary Candidate

Regardless of any other issues, I could not in all conscience vote for anyone who thinks that the derivation of pleasure through killing animals is, in a civilized society, anything other than abhorrent.

Kind regards, Most of PF."


----------



## Jesthar

suewhite said:


> A very good friend of mine runs an A&E and last Sunday on a 12 hour shift she had 8 toothaches 3 sore throats and 28 drunks all wasting her time and causing a back log for people who genuinely needed seeing, I just don't understand why people feel they can just pop along to A&E with the most minor complaints.


Drunks notwithstanding, probably because you can't see a GP easily. Here if you need to try and get a GP appointment, you either have to wait a month+ or phone the appointment line as close to just-gone-midnight on the day you want to go and try and book a slot then - along with everyone else who is trying to do that.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Arnie83 said:


> "Dear Parliamentary Candidate
> 
> Regardless of any other issues, I could not in all conscience vote for anyone who thinks that the derivation of pleasure through killing animals is, in a civilized society, anything other than abhorrent.
> 
> Kind regards, Most of PF."


I sent

Thank you for taking the time to reply to our email. We quite understand that there are other challenges facing the country in the coming years which is why we had hoped there would be no plans to repeal the hunting ban. However as you and Theresa May have both made it clear that you support this barbaric and antiquated practice we will not be voting for you in June.


----------



## suewhite

Jesthar said:


> Drunks notwithstanding, probably because you can't see a GP easily. Here if you need to try and get a GP appointment, you either have to wait a month+ or phone the appointment line as close to just-gone-midnight on the day you want to go and try and book a slot then - along with everyone else who is trying to do that.


Gosh it must be different from area to area if I want an appointment tomorrow I could phone now and get one or ask for a doctor to phone to give me advise or if I wanted an appointment for later today it has to be a 5 minute emergency.x


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> I know, I was just trying to be helpful


It sounds quite good the draft manifesto, look forward to the finalised version. 

I do wonder why though how this got leaked? Was it intentional?


----------



## Elles

Jesthar said:


> Drunks notwithstanding, probably because you can't see a GP easily. Here if you need to try and get a GP appointment, you either have to wait a month+ or phone the appointment line as close to just-gone-midnight on the day you want to go and try and book a slot then - along with everyone else who is trying to do that.


We used to have to try to phone first thing in the morning, but that option has now gone, it's wait a month or nothing. They tell you on the phone to go to a&e if it's more urgent and to phone an ambulance if it's an emergency. They even tell you the number to call. 9 9 9. 

Over 25 years ago I switched surgery because of the phone first thing system. I had a young baby, no transport and no phone, so I walked to the phone box with my sick child every morning for 3 days to be told all appt were taken by the time I got through. In the end I took her to the surgery anyway, where they phoned for an ambulance. She had a nasty virus that had been killing young children and she ended up in hospital for weeks being ventilated and on strong doses of antibiotics. These days I would just go straight to a&e of course, there's no other option anyway.


----------



## Jesthar

stockwellcat said:


> It sounds quite good the draft manifesto, look forward to the finalised version.
> 
> I do wonder why though how this got leaked? Was it intentional?


Most leaks are intentional 

If I were a betting girl, my money would be on the Anti-Corbyn Tory-lite lite elements of the party, trying to undermine Corbyn. Not very rational to do in the middle of a GE, but given that many of those that way inclined probably prefer the Tory policies anyway, I wouldn't put it past them.

Just reaffirms my general belief that an honest politician is a rare thing indeed!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Can't believe I'm actually considering voting Lib dems but obviously will wait to see their manifesto. However they say this on their website - shame it doesn't mention hunting. Might email the prospective candidate and ask her views. Don't even know who the labour candidate is.

Liberal Democrats believe in the highest standards of animal welfare. We want to clamp down on illegal imports of pets and introduce mandatory licencing of puppy breeding. The use of animals in scientific experimentation should be minimised and we remain committed to the three Rs of humane animal research: Replace, Reduce, Refine.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I sent
> 
> Thank you for taking the time to reply to our email. We quite understand that there are other challenges facing the country in the coming years which is why we had hoped there would be no plans to repeal the hunting ban. However as you and Theresa May have both made it clear that you support this barbaric and antiquated practice we will not be voting for you in June.


Well said.


----------



## Elles

suewhite said:


> Gosh it must be different from area to area if I want an appointment tomorrow I could phone now and get one or ask for a doctor to phone to give me advise or if I wanted an appointment for later today it has to be a 5 minute emergency.x


The gps at our local surgery cover 16,000 patients, but are all part time, doing about 12 to 15 hours a week over 3 or 4 days, or less. Some of those hours are after 6pm to get the extended hour benefits. They used to be the appts you could get if you phoned in the morning, but it now says they are only available for pre arranged appointments i.e. the same as the rest and they no longer offer urgent appts.

I phoned for an appointment once last year, was told they were fully booked up to the end of the next month, didn't have the diaries yet for the following month and to call back in two weeks lol. The nurse at the asthma clinic I attended went to the reception with me and told them I had to have an appt within the week, they needed me to discuss the results from a blood test I'd had a month prior. It's bloody ridiculous.

I have no idea what the answer is, I doubt there are many unemployed gps who could be given a job if there was more money. More walk in and minor injury clinics covered by nurses maybe, to free up a&e and gp surgeries?


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> More walk in and minor injury clinics covered by nurses maybe


We have a minor injuries clinic and it's brilliant - earmarked for closure. Not sure if the ooh GP in the same building is going too. The document stated that extra savings would be made because the nearest option is an A&E 25 miles away and people either wouldn't want or be able to get there. No direct public transport, none at all outside business hours and a taxi is about £40.


----------



## Elles

So basically the best answer to an overstretched NHS is for people to drop dead asap and preferably unexpected.

Next time they knock on my door I think I'm going to be more specific in my NHS questions. Who will support more walk in centres and more gps in my area and aftercare to take some of the pressure off a&e and hospitals. I don't want a bunch of waffle about how much money, while they're closing down useful centres and refusing to admit health workers from other countries or talking about sending those already here away. IMO everyone should be able to access a gp within a day or two, not months, or be given a real alternative. Not go to hospitals with sore throats and bad teeth. :Rage


----------



## Jesthar

havoc said:


> We have a minor injuries clinic and it's brilliant - earmarked for closure. Not sure if the ooh GP in the same building is going too. The document stated that extra savings would be made because the nearest option is an A&E 25 miles away and people either wouldn't want or be able to get there. No direct public transport, none at all outside business hours and a taxi is about £40.


So... basically they are saving money by making it more difficult for people to access treatment?


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> Not go to hospitals with sore throats and bad teeth


Much as they annoy me too I'm not sure how the time wasters can be stopped. One person's 'emergency' is another's minor irritation.


----------



## havoc

Jesthar said:


> So... basically they are saving money by making it more difficult for people to access treatment


Not quite, they are saving money by closing the unit - they anticipate *extra* savings because it will be so difficult for people to access treatment elsewhere.


----------



## Jesthar

havoc said:


> Not quite, they are saving money by closing the unit - they anticipate *extra* savings because it will be so difficult for people to access treatment elsewhere.


Sorry, should have said saving _more_ money... 

And they actually put that as a supporting reason of why closing the centre is a good idea?!? Just when I thought I was getting unshockable...


----------



## rona

We have a minor injuries unit open 9-5 in our town, a walk in center in the next town open 7am-10pm and A&E in a nearby town. I can get a doctors appointment today if I want or at a time to suit me.

As I said, no sign of lack of money here. We do need a new hospital though, with all the houses being built and there's no sign of that


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> Going for a breast screening, you get a modern clinic, free coffee machines in every room, fast, efficient appointments and any referrals to a consultant in around a week,


That's a quicker than around here. It's about 6 weeks here, or it was last time I got called up.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Elles said:


> The gps at our local surgery cover 16,000 patients, but are all part time, doing about 12 to 15 hours a week over 3 or 4 days, or less. Some of those hours are after 6pm to get the extended hour benefits.


Therein lies the problem. To much money just chucked at GP's that they now work part time and "fiddle" the hours to get the extra benefits. If GP's, particularly in this case, worked a full week appointments would be readily available.

I'm sure there are some hard working GP's out there, but this just goes to show more money can actually make the situation worse.


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> The gps at our local surgery cover 16,000 patients, but are all part time, doing about 12 to 15 hours a week over 3 or 4 days, or less.


My surgery covers the same number with just 9 doctors, 3 of those PT. Why can mine cover that easily and yours can't?

Practice management maybe?


----------



## 3dogs2cats

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Can't believe I'm actually considering voting Lib dems but obviously will wait to see their manifesto. However they say this on their website - shame it doesn't mention hunting. Might email the prospective candidate and ask her views. Don't even know who the labour candidate is.
> 
> Liberal Democrats believe in the highest standards of animal welfare. We want to clamp down on illegal imports of pets and introduce mandatory licencing of puppy breeding. The use of animals in scientific experimentation should be minimised and we remain committed to the three Rs of humane animal research: Replace, Reduce, Refine.





rottiepointerhouse said:


> Can't believe I'm actually considering voting Lib dems but obviously will wait to see their manifesto. However they say this on their website - shame it doesn't mention hunting. Might email the prospective candidate and ask her views. Don't even know who the labour candidate is.
> 
> Liberal Democrats believe in the highest standards of animal welfare. We want to clamp down on illegal imports of pets and introduce mandatory licencing of puppy breeding. The use of animals in scientific experimentation should be minimised and we remain committed to the three Rs of humane animal research: Replace, Reduce, Refine.


I`ve emailed our candidates for their Foxhunting stance, I haven`t bothered asking our MP as I know exactly where he stands on the issue! I had to search online for which parties are standing and who the candidates are, talking to several people yesterday who said apart from current MP they have no idea who else is standing. There seems to be nothing in local press (except from the MP) no posters, no leaflet drops, no canvassing. I believe today is the deadline for declaring intention to stand? maybe campaigning proper will start now. Our polling cards came today, four weeks today and we will be voting!


----------



## havoc

Jesthar said:


> And they actually put that as a supporting reason of why closing the centre is a good idea?!? Just when I thought I was getting unshockable...


The document was leaked by an NHS whistle blower. Also stated that the decision was made, closure was inevitable but a consultation had to be seen to take place. Not their finest hour.


----------



## Goblin

OK.. some admittingly fake news



> Jeremy Hunt was doing an annual visit to a NHS hospital. As always he was looking for something to beat the NHS with to show how badly run and loss making things were.
> While Hunt was checking the books, he turned to the executive of the hospital and said "I notice you buy a lot of bandages. What do you do with the middle of the roll ?"
> "Good question," noted the executive. "We save them up and send them back to the bandage company and every once in a while, they send us a free roll. We recycle whenever possible"
> "Oh," replied Hunt,, somewhat disappointed that his unusual question had a practical answer. But on he went, in his obnoxious way. "What about all these coloured casts you dispense. Isn't it rather a waste of money?"
> "Ah, yes," replied the executive, realizing that Hunt was trying to trap him. "We ask that any patient wishing a coloured cast donates £1 which is far in excess of the 10p the colouring actually costs."
> Hunt asked a dozen or more questions with similar results. he was determined to fluster the know-it-all executive.
> "Well, What do you do with all the remains from the circumcision surgeries?"
> "Here, too, we do not waste," answered the executive. "What we do is save all the little foreskins and send them to government, and about once a year, at this time, they send us a complete prick."


----------



## Creativecat

Lib dems stating in there manifesto that the uk should be taking in 50 thousand refuges . Have I heared that right I'm sure the well informed PF members will fact check this out . If its true I think they have not only shot themselves in the foot but in the face


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Creativecat said:


> Lib dems stating in there manifesto that the uk should be taking in 50 thousand refuges . Have I heared that right I'm sure the well informed PF members will fact check this out . If its true I think they have not only shot themselves in the foot but in the face


I believe I read that on their website but their manifesto hasn't been released yet so not sure if it is in there or not.


----------



## Honeys mum

Creativecat said:


> Lib dems stating in there manifesto that the uk should be taking in 50 thousand refuges .


Found this Creativecat.
General election 2017: Lib Dems' 50,000 Syrian refugees pledge - Politics - NewsGra.com


----------



## leashedForLife

.
duplicate - sorry, no idea how that happened. 
.
.


----------



## leashedForLife

*havoc* said,

The document was leaked by an NHS whistle-blower.
Also stated that the decision was made, closure was inevitable, but a consultation had to be seen to take place. Not their finest hour.
______________________________
.
.
I sometimes think that were it not for whistle-blowers, no citizen worldwide would have accurate information on their Govt's activities whatever. 
Coming from designated spokesniks, it's nothing but spin, alternative facts, or outright falsehoods. Depressing - & worrying.
.
.
.


----------



## Dr Pepper

.,,


----------



## Elles

rona said:


> My surgery covers the same number with just 9 doctors, 3 of those PT. Why can mine cover that easily and yours can't?
> 
> Practice management maybe?


I don't know. If yours has six full time gps they probably do more hours than all twelve of ours put together. All bar two of ours are very part time, why one of them even bothers coming in for 2 hours once a week I can't guess. Pity the patients on his books, they're probably not sure he exists.


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> My surgery covers the same number with just 9 doctors, 3 of those PT. Why can mine cover that easily and yours can't?
> Practice management maybe?


It could be or it could be that different areas have different problems. Each surgery has to decide what services they offer and employ GPs and nurses qualified to carry them out. In one something like a contraceptive implant could be a routine appointment because all the doctors can do them, in another it's a three week wait for the part timer to have a spare appointment.


----------



## Odin_cat

Creativecat said:


> Lib dems stating in there manifesto that the uk should be taking in 50 thousand refuges . Have I heared that right I'm sure the well informed PF members will fact check this out . If its true I think they have not only shot themselves in the foot but in the face


Can I ask why?
I think most of their target voters would support that policy.


----------



## Elles

I think it's a terrible shame that terrorists, criminals and the press have made it so that genuine Syrian refugees, children, families, doctors, teachers etc. are now so unwelcome, not just here, but in very many places by so many people. 50,000 is a drop in the ocean.


----------



## Creativecat

Odin_cat said:


> Can I ask why?
> I think most of their target voters would support that policy.


I personally don't think it's a policy that's on people's concerns to be fair . Firstley they can't even say how it's gonna be paid for and Secondley where are they all gonna be dispersed to considering housing the national health schooling dental treatment . In a perfect world I think poeple would love to do more but realisticly when is enough enough


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...theresa-may-nicola-sturgeon-snp-a7729256.html


----------



## Arnie83

Creativecat said:


> Lib dems stating in there manifesto that the uk should be taking in 50 thousand refuges . Have I heared that right I'm sure the well informed PF members will fact check this out . If its true I think they have not only shot themselves in the foot but in the face





Creativecat said:


> I personally don't think it's a policy that's on people's concerns to be fair . Firstley they can't even say how it's gonna be paid for and Secondley where are they all gonna be dispersed to considering housing the national health schooling dental treatment . In a perfect world I think poeple would love to do more but realisticly when is enough enough


It's over the 5 years of the Parliament if I heard correctly.

And I don't think it's their main policy. If people aren't concerned, then for me that says more about the people than the policy.


----------



## MollySmith

Just in case it's needed.


----------



## Odin_cat

Creativecat said:


> I personally don't think it's a policy that's on people's concerns to be fair . Firstley they can't even say how it's gonna be paid for and Secondley where are they all gonna be dispersed to considering housing the national health schooling dental treatment . In a perfect world I think poeple would love to do more but realisticly when is enough enough


It's very much a concern for me. There are thousands of homes lying empty across the country because their owners don't want the hassle of renting them out- that's a start.

50,000 spread across the country really isn't many. As stated above, 1 gp surgery covers 12000, so only 4 new ones would be necessary.


----------



## MollySmith

Creativecat said:


> I personally don't think it's a policy that's on people's concerns to be fair . Firstley they can't even say how it's gonna be paid for and Secondley where are they all gonna be dispersed to considering housing the national health schooling dental treatment . In a perfect world I think poeple would love to do more but realisticly *when is enough enough*


When humanity stops caring about each other. A day I never want to see.


----------



## Elles

Even ukip agreed to genuine refugees being admitted to the country. Their bile was directed at what they called economic migrants or something like that. I suppose people have been so wound up about potential terrorists hiding in trucks from Europe and how poor the uk is supposed to be they wouldn't need that in their manifesto this time.


----------



## Creativecat

I think in some rural places surgery problems don't exist to the levels inner cities experience to be fair . 4 surgeries doesn't sound that many in all fairness . But the sheer logistics in getting these doctors might be a struggle . I totally agree about the housing there are sways of housing empty across the uk. But 
Wouldn't like to assume they could all cater for the need of the many considering the massive amounts already on housing lists . I know in croydon it's on tsunami levels and getting higher daily . I think we all wish we could wave a magic wand for all these problems to be taken away for us but realisticly it's a problem we all face on many levels with tragic circumstance


----------



## Elles

There'll probably be the odd doctor amongst them. There'll be plenty of space once we send those rotten Europeans back where they came from. In all seriousness I think we can make space for a mere 50,000 Syrians. It's nothing. Most would like to go back home if their country sorts itself out. It's the same as turning away and ignoring the persecuted in the Second World War imo. I want to live in a country that has more compassion than that for ordinary people.


----------



## Odin_cat

According to the charity Empty Homes, 200,000 homes in the UK have been empty for more than 6 months. Plenty to go around!


----------



## Happy Paws2

MollySmith said:


> Just in case it's needed.
> 
> View attachment 310346


The same for The Sun readers.


----------



## Creativecat

On a lighter note
If they offered in there manifesto all public buildings .
Library's . Leasure centres . Town halls . With easy access to warm areas. Nice old fashoned radiators with a bowl of water and dreamies for local cats in need they would get
My vote in an instant
Even flearoy would agree on that


----------



## Odin_cat

May's interview on lbc was utterly ridiculous, I don't care about how she cooks meat...I want to know her party's policies!


----------



## Honeys mum

Odin_cat said:


> According to the charity Empty Homes, 200,000 homes in the UK have been empty for more than 6 months. Plenty to go around


If that's the case, then why are so many of our own people homeless.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Got my polling card yesterday. Have without a doubt decided who I am voting for, part in protest against the rival party (Conservatives) and part because I like there draft manifesto. So good luck old chap I hope it works out for you. I really think that because the Conservatives have decided they are going to have this hunting ban vote in there manifesto Labour actually stand a chance now of winning.

That is my opinion.
So good luck Labour I am behind you.


----------



## Odin_cat

Honeys mum said:


> If that's the case, then why are so many of our own people homeless.


Our own people?

Because the houses are privately owned and neither councils nor the government currently have any power to force owners to sell/ let property.


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> So good luck Labour I am behind you.


until tomorrow


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> until tomorrow


No TM has crossed a red line so not until any tomorrow. I am against fox hunting full stop and she is planning to have a vote to lift the ban, that is it for me she gets this :Finger not once but twice :Finger:Finger I am not supporting anyone who intends to do this.


----------



## havoc

Honeys mum said:


> If that's the case, then why are so many of our own people homeless


Because there's more to being homeless than not having a place to call your own, because not all property owners are prepared to risk renting, because the empty properties are not where homes are needed, because many of them aren't the right type or in good enough condition, because of lots of things. It isn't as simple as plain numbers.


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> No TM has crossed a red line so not until any tomorrow. I am against fox hunting full stop and she is planning to have a vote to lift the ban, that is it for me she gets this :Finger not once but twice :Finger:Finger I am not supporting anyone who intends to do this.


But have you looked at the Greens or Lib Dems or.....................


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> until tomorrow


That long?


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> But have you looked at the Greens or Lib Dems or.....................


Said a while back Lib Dems would never be considered by me. Greens are a small party and would need to be in coalition with a bigger party to get into power.

Labour actually stand a chance of winning. Remember not to trust the polls as they are not accurate in this country.


----------



## stockwellcat.

havoc said:


> That long?


----------



## leashedForLife

*Odin_cat* said,

_According to the charity Empty Homes, *200,000 homes in the UK have been empty for more than 6 months*. Plenty to go around!_
_____________________________

*Honeys mum* said,

_If that's the case, then *why are so many of our own people homeless*._
__________________________________
.
.
after the mortgage-bubble collapsed in 2008, hundreds of thousands of U-S homes in excellent repair were left vacant - & many were vandalized, while they stood idle.
Even more were vacant & unsellable in 2009 & '10 - while literally millions of families & individuals were homeless, many of them working-poor.
Banks & other mortgage holders had no interest in renting them out, & no-one had the means to buy them - the market was saturated, home-loans were unavailable, & housing stock simply sat.
.
.
*[PDF] The Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress (2009)*
https://www.huduser.gov/publications/pdf/5thhomelessassessmentreport.pdf
Jun 18, 2010 - 
_U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Office of ... provide the total number of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a ..._
_._
*Homelessness in the United States - Wikipedia*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_States
*About 1.56 million people, or 0.5% of the U.S. population, used an emergency shelter or transitional housing program between Oct 1, 2008 & Sept 30, 2009. *
_Around 44% of homeless people were employed.
_____________________________________________________________
.
that does not count those homeless who do not use shelters or THPs - renting BnBs, hotel rooms, sublets, etc, or simply living in their cars, on the street, with relatives, etc.
.
.
________________________________________________________________


*Here's Why We Can't Just Put Homeless Families In Foreclosed Homes*
www.businessinsider.com/heres-why-we-cant-just-put-homeless-families-in-foreclose...
Jun 28, 2012 - 
_... *five vacant properties for every homeless person* in the U.S., many left ... There are some models for converting vacant housing into space for the homeless. ... JPMorgan Chase has donated roughly 3,300 homes to nonprofits or municipalities since 2009, according to a ... But no deals were ever made._


*Empty Homes Outnumber The Homeless 6 To 1, So Why Not Give ...*
www.mintpressnews.com/empty-homes-outnumber-the...6-to...homes/207194/
Jul 2, 2015 -
_A growing number of activists are calling for these empty spaces to be ... *3.5 million people in the U.S. are homeless*, many of them veterans._


*3.5 Million Americans are Homeless. 18.6 Million Homes are Empty ...*
https://trofire.com › Culture
Jul 21, 2015 - 
_*The ratio of empty homes to homeless people is still approximately six to one* ... The other part of the equation is the number of Americans who have fallen into ... _
_Not doing banksters a damned bit of good - but they could do some good for all of us._ .... January 2010 (29) · December 2009 (38) · November 2009 (40) ...


*Vacant Housing Units for the United States - FRED - Federal Reserve ...*
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/EVACANTUSQ176N
Housing Inventory Estimate: Vacant Housing Units for the United States .... 
_A housing unit is vacant if no one is living in it at the time of the interview, unless its ..._

*Cities with the most abandoned homes - USA Today*
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/...abandoned-homes/2447613/
Jun 22, 2013 - 
_*One in five homes in the foreclosure process stands vacant* after being ... level median home price for the total number of housing units in the area, ... But from the end of 2009 to the end of 2012, prices rose at a faster clip than ..._


*Nevada's boom and bust leaves 167,000 empty houses - USA Today*
www.usatoday.com/money/economy/housing/2011-03-26-nevada-real-estate.htm
Mar 27, 2011 - 
_The number of *vacant homes* represents *about one of every seven* ... Such complaints nearly doubled from 2008 to 2009, as the median price ..._
_____________________________________________
_._
_._
Meanwhile, 2 nights ago, PBS aired a documentary on the 8-billion-dollar-per-year "tax credit" Federal program intended to "build affordable housing", & the millions upon millions being siphoned off by profit-making "partners" in this classic PUBLIC / PRIVATE 'partnership'.
The program has been audited by the IRS [Fed tax authority] just 7 times, in 29 years. :Meh Needless to say, they think it's run in an efficient & trustworthy fashion.
Back at the ranch, in the real world... over $34-million was diverted from the tax-funds by ONE partnership in Miami county, Florida, over a 4-year period of construction. How many living units does $34M-usa represent? -- a lot. :Shifty
.
.
*Poverty, Politics and Profit: How We Did the Math - PBS*
www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/.../poverty-politics-and-profit-how-we-did-the-math/
2 days ago - 
_Poverty, Politics and Profit: How We Did the Math. In partnership ... We're also trying to do things like ending homelessness. And that simply ..._
.
there are many reasons that homeless ppl exist in wealthy nations - a sheer lack of affordable housing & the stagnation of real-wage purchasing power are just 2 factors. Lack of political will is another. 
McKinney, a neighborhood in North Dallas, TX, did not want "section 8" housing included in project to be built there, despite county & Federal approval, & many market-rate units in the project; violence, police blockades, county-level slowdowns on permits, a court case, & more, added staggering costs to what had been a very workable, reasonable-cost build.
.
.


----------



## Honeys mum

D.C. has joined the campaign trail today.
David Cameron Slams 'Extreme Brexit' Tories As He Wades Into 2017 General Election Campaign | HuffPost UK


----------



## MollySmith

Honeys mum said:


> If that's the case, then why are so many of our own people homeless.


Empty Homes website is here . It explain a little more about homelessness in the UK for our diverse communities.. "Latest Government data suggests that there are over 200,000 homes that have been empty for over six months. Some of these may not stay empty (if they are on the market, or are being renovated). But others are stuck empty, perhaps because of inheritance issues or because their owners are holding on to the property hoping for a rise in its value before selling it."

And the history of Shelter and it may give some context to 'our people' by which I hope you mean the world's people. We are all entitled to shelter.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> No TM has crossed a red line so not until any tomorrow. I am against fox hunting full stop and she is planning to have a vote to lift the ban, that is it for me she gets this :Finger not once but twice :Finger:Finger I am not supporting anyone who intends to do this.


I'm against hunting, drag hunting provides the same thrill for the horse riders. But for the majority it's not actually a issue as they never encounter it.

I'd also bet many a Labour and Lib' Dem' candidate would support fox hunting, so make sure who you are voting for and not just the headline.

What's YOUR conservative's stance on fox hunting? He/She may actually be against it and in a stronger position to veto it.

Remember, on June 8th you are not actually voting for Mrs May.


----------



## MollySmith

Dr Pepper said:


> I'm against hunting, drag hunting provides the same thrill for the horse riders. But for the majority it's not actually a issue as they never encounter it.
> 
> I'd also bet many a Labour and Lib' Dem' candidate would support fox hunting, so make sure who you are voting for and not just the headline.
> 
> What's YOUR conservatives stance on fox hunting? He/She may actually be against it and in a stronger position to veto it.
> 
> Remember, on June 8th you are not actually voting for Mrs May.


My Labour MP opposed. Our Lib Dem is openly against it too. I've checked a few postcodes and can't locate a Lab MP who did.

Theresa May has announced that she remains in favour of fox-hunting and if the polls are borne out and the Conservatives are given a thumping majority, fox-hunting will be back.

And

_On 15 September 2004, MPs supported the second reading of the Hunting Bill in a free vote by 356 to 166. _

*How they voted (Yes/No)*


_Conservative: 6/137_
_Labour: 318/3_
_Lib Dem: 32/16_
_Plaid Cymru: 0/4_
_Ulster Unionist: 0/4_
_Independent: 0/2_
_Source: publicwhip.org.uk_


----------



## stockwellcat.

Honeys mum said:


> D.C. has joined the campaign trail today.
> David Cameron Slams 'Extreme Brexit' Tories As He Wades Into 2017 General Election Campaign | HuffPost UK


Thought we got rid of him.
Can't keep his nose out can he.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Remember, on June 8th you are not actually voting for Mrs May.


Yes there's a visible difference:
One is male








And the other one is female and looks like this:









I know I am not voting May and I can live with that.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Said a while back Lib Dems would never be considered by me. Greens are a small party and would need to be in coalition with a bigger party to get into power.
> 
> Labour actually stand a chance of winning. Remember not to trust the polls as they are not accurate in this country.


We got a fantastic reply from the Lib Dem candidate here about hunting - totally opposed to it, would never vote to repeal the ban, thinks it should be strengthened, sickened by Theresa May thinking she can ignore the 84% who are against hunting etc etc.

I'm pretty sure she will be getting our vote as Labour only got 5% of the vote in our area last time so the only chance of stopping our Tory hunting fan in this area is to vote Lib Dem.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> We got a fantastic reply from the Lib Dem candidate here about hunting - totally opposed to it, would never vote to repeal the ban, thinks it should be strengthened, sickened by Theresa May thinking she can ignore the 84% who are against hunting etc etc.
> 
> I'm pretty sure she will be getting our vote as Labour only got 5% of the vote in our area last time so the only chance of stopping our Tory hunting fan in this area is to vote Lib Dem.


Labour banned fox hunting and according to there draft manifesto will maintain the ban and the will also ban badger culling.


----------



## Lurcherlad

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Reply from my MP - will not be voting for him and neither will my husband.
> 
> Thank you very much for your email about repeal of the hunting ban.
> 
> I am bound to say that this is not a priority, and there are many other challenges for us as a country in the coming years. However, my personal view is that I am in favour of hunting. I have supported hunting for a long time, and I have not changed my view. Many people accuse politicians of being duplicitous, but I believe it is better to be straight forward, even when we disagree.
> 
> I am sorry that our views differ on this issue, but I hope that we can agree that there are many other issues on which we agree, for example that it is imperative that Theresa May is returned as our Prime Minister.
> 
> Thank you again for your email and kind regards,


Our MP has stood down and we were on opposite sides with regard to fox hunting and the badger cull (among other things) and I couldn't in all conscience vote for him last time so made an alternative choice.

I have today emailed his replacement to get an idea of his feelings on a number of topics, including the above .......


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

[Kate Hoey is a Labour MP in favour of hunting.


stockwellcat said:


> Labour banned fox hunting and according to there draft manifesto will maintain the ban and the will also ban badger culling.


I know - it was me who pasted the relevant section from their leaked manifesto


----------



## Lurcherlad

Elles said:


> Some of the care in our area is excellent. Going for a breast screening, you get a modern clinic, free coffee machines in every room, fast, efficient appointments and any referrals to a consultant in around a week, when you'll go back in, see two at once and get a personal advisor who is available at any time to address any concerns you might have. So even in the one area it seems to depend on your potential ailment as to whether it seems that the NHS is on its last legs or not. People shouldn't be waiting a month for a gp appointment, 3 hours for an ambulance or sitting outside queuing for 8 hours to get into hospital though. If reports are true, the NHS is failing more than it should.


The NHS shouldn't be providing free coffee either!

I have noticed in one of our local hospitals that all the free water dispensers have been removed. Quite right. How much did they cost to provide? There are retail outlets selling refreshments if patients/visitors require them.

So easy to identify waste in the system and eliminate it.


----------



## Elles

My mp asked Jeremy Hunt what the government were doing about people using a&e because they couldn't get to see their gp and social care was lacking. It was causing hospitals to underperform, e.g. Having to call in the Red Cross, people dying on trollies etc. Jeremy Hunt's answer was employing Inspectors to inspect the underperforming hospitals. Lol


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> We got a fantastic reply from the Lib Dem candidate here about hunting - totally opposed to it, would never vote to repeal the ban, thinks it should be strengthened, sickened by Theresa May thinking she can ignore the 84% who are against hunting etc etc.


I think what worrys me more is if she feels she can so easily ignore an 84% majority on a relatively black and white issue, what other public opinions will she feel free to disregard...


----------



## Sarah H

I saw this website posted on Fb before the local elections. It's one of the better political party quizzes. I came out as 71% supporting the Lib Dems (unsurprisingly my party of choice). 
http://uk.isidewith.com/political-quiz


----------



## FeelTheBern

Sarah H said:


> I saw this website posted on Fb before the local elections. It's one of the better political party quizzes. I came out as 71% supporting the Lib Dems (unsurprisingly my party of choice).
> http://uk.isidewith.com/political-quiz


I posted a thread on that quiz a few weeks ago. My result was around 75% Conservative-this didn't surprise me at all considering they are my party of choice.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> Got my polling card yesterday. Have without a doubt decided who I am voting for, part in protest against the rival party (Conservatives) and part because I like there draft manifesto. So good luck old chap I hope it works out for you. I really think that because the Conservatives have decided they are going to have this hunting ban vote in there manifesto Labour actually stand a chance now of winning.
> 
> That is my opinion.
> So good luck Labour I am behind you.


SWC you do make me laugh! When you wrote this on Sunday morning: *but in 2022 my opinion may change *I did think surely that should be "by 20:22 my opinion may have changed" Fair play to you though you`ve gone almost exactly 4 days longer than I predicted 

Seriously though I think a lot of people are unsure where their vote is going this time, I`m undecided, my MP has a decent majority but I don`t agree with the way he has voted on so many issues including foxhunting and has been dismissive in his replies to concerns I have raised with him, he will not be getting my vote! But who to vote for? I have yet to see the candidates manifesto on local issues, I have emailed them asking for foxhunting stance as I doubt that will be on their campaign leaflets but I would like to know so I`ve asked!

I said in 2015 I would not vote Lib Dem but the candidate came canvassing at my parents while I was there, I spoke to her and told her dad normally voted Lib Dem however he was adamant he was`t voting ` for that bloody Clegg again` but it was a shame as he was far to poorly that day to talk to her as he liked a bit of a political debate. A week latter and she`d been back having remembered I`d said he`d have liked a chat and it would have perked him up. She spent an hour apparently, he had her whole life history out of her, she learnt 90 years worth of town history and how to grow dahlias Dad was very frail on election day but he was determined to go and vote for that ` lovely women` so I got him to the polling station. I also gave her my vote just for the kindness she had shown my father, probably not the best reason to vote for someone but I suppose not the worse either!


----------



## Honeys mum

Sarah H said:


> I saw this website posted on Fb before the local elections. It's one of the better political party quizzes. I came out as 71% supporting the Lib Dems (unsurprisingly my party of choice).
> http://uk.isidewith.com/political-quiz


I did it, and it came up with 69% the party I intend to vote for.


----------



## suewhite

I am getting really tired of all the Parties they all spout what they are going to do by sticking a 1p on this and 1p on that or hit the rich of the Country, to me they are like a load of Estate Agents or second hand car dealers peddling rubbish and which ever one's get in will back peddle as always.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Sarah H said:


> I saw this website posted on Fb before the local elections. It's one of the better political party quizzes. I came out as 71% supporting the Lib Dems (unsurprisingly my party of choice).
> http://uk.isidewith.com/political-quiz


I have just took this quiz and got 61% Labour who I am voting for.

@rottiepointerhouse I know my local MP is for fox hunting but voting for her is to get Labour in power. I am annoyed that she agrees with fox hunting but the choices in this GE in all fairness are sh*e. Labour as a whole are against Fox Hunting which is good enough for me. My vote is only to get Labour in nothing else. Just because I am voting for Kate Hoey doesn't mean I agree with her as I despise the woman because she backs Fox Hunting but it is the only way to get to give Labour a chance of winning this election.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> I have just took this quiz and got 61% Labour who I am voting for.
> 
> @rottiepointerhouse I know my local MP is for fox hunting but voting for her is to get Labour in power. I am annoyed that she agrees with fox hunting but the choices in this GE in all fairness are sh*e. Labour as a whole are against Fox Hunting which is good enough for me. My vote is only to get Labour in nothing else. Just because I am voting for Kate Hoey doesn't mean I agree with her as I despise the woman because she backs Fox Hunting but it is the only way to get to give Labour a chance of winning this election.


Agreed one thing for sure. All the choices are sh*te.

There is a gap a mile wide for a party that isn't sh*te. Doesn't have to be great even; just not sh*te.

Seriously, if had mega-bucks I would form a political party in the U.K. in time for the 2022 election. I would even call it the "Not Sh*te party" and I would confidently expect to send a decent number of MP's to Westminster.

ETA: I just changed my poll vote to Abstaining so Con and Lab are 50:50 now.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> Agreed one thing for sure. All the choices are sh*te.
> 
> There is a gap a mile wide for a party that isn't sh*te. Doesn't have to be great even; just not sh*te.
> 
> Seriously, if had mega-bucks I would form a political party in the U.K. in time for the 2022 election. I would even call it the "Not Sh*te party" and I would confidently expect to send a decent number of MP's to Westminster.


I'd vote for you as long as you don't dump the country into a pile of shi*e.


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> Seriously, if had mega-bucks I would form a political party in the U.K. in time for the 2022 election. I would even call it the "Not Sh*te party" and I would expect to get a decent number of MP's.


You aren't the only one thinking that way


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> I have just took this quiz and got 61% Labour who I am voting for.
> 
> @rottiepointerhouse I know my local MP is for fox hunting but voting for her is to get Labour in power. I am annoyed that she agrees with fox hunting but the choices in this GE in all fairness are sh*e. Labour as a whole are against Fox Hunting which is good enough for me. My vote is only to get Labour in nothing else. Just because I am voting for Kate Hoey doesn't mean I agree with her as I despise the woman because she backs Fox Hunting but it is the only way to get to give Labour a chance of winning this election.


So you will be happy to vote in a person who would add a vote to repeal the hunting act to the conservatives?

I do believe your local conservative would vote against but I'm not sure


----------



## KittenKong

Good point. From Facebook:


----------



## Lurcherlad

rona said:


> So you will be happy to vote in a person who would add a vote to repeal the hunting act to the conservatives?
> 
> I do believe your local conservative would vote against but I'm not sure


If my new MP thinks the way my old one did, I shall be voting Green again! 

I live in a Tory stronghold so doubt my vote will make much difference, but at least my conscience will be clear.

I think a repeal of the Fox Hunting Act shouldn't even be on anyone's Agenda, given all the other immediate and far reaching issues we face and which Parliament should be prioritising. It's not perfect, but it will suffice until it can be amended and strengthened!


----------



## Bisbow

KittenKong said:


> Good point. From Facebook:
> View attachment 310418


I think most household have boy jobs and girl jobs if they are honest about it
We do, and it suits us fine, my friends do, my daughter does so I think the fuss about it and that post is stupid

To tell the truth I am sick and tired of all the election stuff and the sooner it is all over the better

But that won't stop all the stupidity will it


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Good point. From Facebook:
> View attachment 310418


Really? I don't think its from the 1970's at all, as recently as 2012 this was published in the Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/mar/10/housework-gender-equality-women

Brace yourself for the most maritally divisive piece of news you'll hear all week: married women do more housework than their husbands. Analysis by the Institute for Public Policy Research thinktank shows that eight out of 10 married women do more household chores, while just one in 10 married men does an equal amount of cleaning and washing as his wife.

Just over one in 10 women - 13% - say their husbands do more housework than they do, while only 3% of married women do fewer than three hours a week, with almost half doing 13 hours or more.

In short, the gender imbalance is alive and thriving in the British household, according to the IPPR, which says its research shows that, for real equality, society needs to see men to pick up the vacuum cleaner and do their fair share.

Patterns of housework have changed only slightly. More than eight out of 10 women born in 1958 said they do more laundry and ironing than their partner, while seven out of 10 women born in 1970 agreed.

"The revolution in gender roles is unfinished business," said Nick Pearce, director of IPPR. "Women still shoulder the overwhelming burden of household tasks, particularly after they have had children. When they earn more, their bargaining power with their partners increases, so closing the gender pay gap would help. Universal childcare, rather than tax relief for nannies or cleaners, is also the best way forward for a family-friendly, more equal Britain.



Bisbow said:


> I think most household have boy jobs and girl jobs if they are honest about it
> We do, and it suits us fine, my friends do, my daughter does so I think the fuss about it and that post is stupid
> 
> To tell the truth I am sick and tired of all the election stuff and the sooner it is all over the better
> 
> But that won't stop all the stupidity will it


Same here, we've been married 33 years and together for 35 years, over 20 of those years we've also worked together. I do the majority of the cooking, all of the cleaning, washing and ironing, OH does any heavy jobs, the bins and the cars and there are some jobs we share. My OH is the main wage earner although I run his business working full time hours. He is not sat on his butt watching the TV while I run around doing everything, he is working which is for the good of both of us. I wouldn't dream of adding to his stress levels by nagging at him to iron his own shirts or make his own sandwiches.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Please excuse me going back to my main hobby horse - Lifestyle/preventative medicine.

Starting Monday BBC1 9 pm Doctor in the House with Dr Rangan Chatterjee. He isn't plant based but he shares many of the same ideas about reversing chronic illnesses such as Type 2 Diabetes which currently costs the NHS £20 billion per year. He is very much in favour of doctors receiving nutrition education (of which they get very very little). The pillars of his philosophy are Eat, Move, Relax, Sleep. This is a short video which is very interesting

https://www.drchatterjee.com/blog/video-is-it-possible-to-make-diseases-disappear.cfm

and his ideas on reversing Type 2 Diabetes which even though I don't totally agree with as not vegan I think they are far better than the standard diet most people adopt

https://www.drchatterjee.com/blog/11-ways-to-reverse-diabetes.cfm

I'm wish more of these motivated people who understand the costs of chronic health to the NHS would spread the word.

You can get his free e book here

https://www.drchatterjee.com/


----------



## Bisbow

Men and woman will never be equal until a man gives birth to his child and a woman fathers it


----------



## Elles

What's ironing? I do more of the clearing up, but my husband cooks a lot more often than I do. Whoever remembers to do it takes the bins out. Sainsbury's, Tesco or Greggs make his lunch. I don't eat in the daytime. Either of us will put the washing on and take it out and fold it, or chuck stuff in the dishwasher, he puts his clothes away, I put mine away. We make the bed together. There are no boy jobs, or girl jobs in my house and never have been. Thoroughly modern Millies we are. 

Theresa May should have had the nounce to know that saying there's boy and girl jobs wouldn't go down too well with everyone. Is she trying to look as idiotic as possible to prove that she can say anything she likes and still get in?


----------



## Arnie83

Bisbow said:


> Men and woman will never be equal until a man gives birth to his child and a woman fathers it


Probably the wrong thread, but I think that depends on what one means by 'equal'.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> Men and woman will never be equal until a man gives birth to his child and a woman fathers it


I think we are equal but I appreciate we are different and I don't try to fight that.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

If this rocks your boat you might be interested 

The Liberal Democrats would legalise selling and growing cannabis if elected, the party has confirmed ahead of publishing its manifesto.

The party would allow licensed shops to sell the drug to over-18s, let people grow cannabis at home and introduce small "cannabis social clubs".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39897999


----------



## Elles

How come every time Corbyn says anything, Theresa May or Boris get their comments on it printed at the end of the article, but when TM says something, there's no comment from anyone in the Labour Party printed?


----------



## Honeys mum

The BBC are at it again, don't think I'll be watching Question Time again.Did Anyone else watch it.


----------



## Happy Paws2

No I didn't see it, but knowing the BBC I can imagine what is was like.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Honeys mum said:


> The BBC are at it again, don't think I'll be watching Question Time again.Did Anyone else watch it.


I've recorded it but not watched it yet.


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> If this rocks your boat you might be interested
> 
> The Liberal Democrats would legalise selling and growing cannabis if elected, the party has confirmed ahead of publishing its manifesto.
> 
> The party would allow licensed shops to sell the drug to over-18s, let people grow cannabis at home and introduce small "cannabis social clubs".
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39897999


Then they know little about long term effects of using cannabis.
Cheapo way to get votes of youngsters.

Think alcohol and tobacco use costs NHS and us all enough...

It is not that cannabis will replace them. Just add more problems.

I agree with medicinal use, same as opiates are used.


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> If this rocks your boat you might be interested
> 
> The Liberal Democrats would legalise selling and growing cannabis if elected, the party has confirmed ahead of publishing its manifesto.


 I bet that will win a lot of votes from "tomato " plant growers !


----------



## Elles

But will you be allowed to smoke it in your council house? :Cigar


----------



## havoc

I'm not sure how I feel about it. Overall I'd rather all drug use was regulated somehow but I don't have enough knowledge of the subject to either condone or condemn the idea.


----------



## Odin_cat

People are always going to smoke cannabis.

Personally, I would prefer that they were able to buy it from a safe source, without added harmful ingredients, and pay tax on it. This seems better to me than it being sold by dealers who push harder, more profitable, drugs and the money raised funding crime.

I would also hope that legalisation would make addicts less afraid to seek help.


----------



## kimthecat

Elles said:


> But will you be allowed to smoke it in your council house? :Cigar


:Hilarious Um, well , there's always chocolate cake.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Odin_cat said:


> People are always going to smoke cannabis.
> 
> Personally, I would prefer that they were able to buy it from a safe source, without added harmful ingredients, and pay tax on it. This seems better to me than it being sold by dealers who push harder, more profitable, drugs and the money raised funding crime.
> 
> I would also hope that legalisation would make addicts less afraid to seek help.


Though it will make people think that if it is legal must be fairly harmless.
I saw people close to me develop.psychotic disorders so serious that they ended totally wrecked, unemployed and unemployable, relaying on benefits and their children practically lost a parent....

Add to the picture drivers under influence and the total.costs for taxpayers.
Illegal drugs are less used than legal.


----------



## Odin_cat

cheekyscrip said:


> Though it will make people think that if it is legal must be fairly harmless.
> I saw people close to me develop.psychotic disorders so serious that they ended totally wrecked, unemployed and unemployable, relaying on benefits and their children practically lost a parent....
> 
> Add to the picture drivers under influence and the total.costs for taxpayers.
> Illegal drugs are less used than legal.


Will it? Do people think alcohol and tobacco are harmless? According to recent studies over 40% of the US population have used cannabis- that's an awful lot of money going to fund crime.

I'm sorry about your friend. Perhaps if it were legal there would have been more support available before they reached this state. The stigma around drug use is a real barrier to receiving proper care in my experience.


----------



## havoc

Odin_cat said:


> According to recent studies over 40% of the US population have used cannabis- that's an awful lot of money going to fund crime.


I sometimes think I'm the only person left on this earth who has never even tried illegal drugs, not once, ever. I don't know why, maybe I'm just too much of a control freak. The closest I've been is wondering why I have such a headache at festivals  Maybe that's why I don't have a set view one way or the other. I do like the idea of ripping the bottom out of the criminal market somehow.


----------



## Guest

BBC can openly be so partial? You are in a deep sh*t , as BBC was supposed to be the last "objective" source of information. What´s left? Guardian and social media. Blimey, it´s worse than I thought. How come you let this happen without a huge scandal?


----------



## havoc

I don't know how the programme sources its audience. Does anyone? If it's outsourced to another company then I don't think the BBC can really be blamed - except maybe for allowing him too much airtime if he had more than is normal. It should be investigated whoever provided the audience to ensure he didn't get into the audience AND get the first question by anything other than normal means.


----------



## Odin_cat

havoc said:


> I sometimes think I'm the only person left on this earth who has never even tried illegal drugs, not once, ever. I don't know why, maybe I'm just too much of a control freak. The closest I've been is wondering why I have such a headache at festivals  Maybe that's why I don't have a set view one way or the other. I do like the idea of ripping the bottom out of the criminal market somehow.


Me neither, won't even take paracetamol unless I'm seriously sick. But if people want to do it, that's their choice. As you said, it seems sensible to crush the criminal market.


----------



## havoc

Oh my goodness I've just looked at how to get in the Question Time audience and it appears to be a direct BBC allocation. There's a form to fill out with all sorts of questions including the likes of this

_Political party membership_

_I'm an active member_
_I'm a member, but I don't take an active role_
_I'm not a member_
The full form can be seen here
https://ssl.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/5vyK2GwYrdQGFvCJyKNfZhn/join-the-question-time-audience

I'm sad to say this guy being in the audience can't have been an oversight


----------



## 3dogs2cats

havoc said:


> Oh my goodness I've just looked at how to get in the Question Time audience and it appears to be a direct BBC allocation. There's a form to fill out with all sorts of questions including the likes of this
> 
> _Political party membership_
> 
> _I'm an active member_
> _I'm a member, but I don't take an active role_
> _I'm not a member_
> The full form can be seen here
> https://ssl.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/5vyK2GwYrdQGFvCJyKNfZhn/join-the-question-time-audience
> 
> I'm sad to say this guy being in the audience can't have been an oversight


I was just about to reply and tell you I applied to QT last year and the bloody form wanted to know more than a passport application!!


----------



## havoc

Their argument for wanting so much information will be to prevent bias but I think an investigation is needed. An independent organisation needs to look at applications going back over some considerable time and analyse why each one was either accepted or rejected.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Odin_cat said:


> Will it? Do people think alcohol and tobacco are harmless? According to recent studies over 40% of the US population have used cannabis- that's an awful lot of money going to fund crime.
> 
> I'm sorry about your friend. Perhaps if it were legal there would have been more support available before they reached this state. The stigma around drug use is a real barrier to receiving proper care in my experience.


Not just friend. Many friends...I used to hang out with...close family member...

Then I used to work with those affected. ..
Call it professional bias. Yes, people know that alcohol, tobacco, sugar etc are bad for them...but, they are so easily available, so....
It is still harder to get cannabis unless you are self-sufficient.
Possibly, if you must, the best choice. At least not supporting gangsters.
" I can resist everything but temptation"...

Generally, though it sounds so boring, it is better to have sane and sober nation....

Deep relaxation techniques can have quite powerful effect with using nothing but your mind and body....though needs the patience and effort....


----------



## leashedForLife

*Odin_cat *said,

_People are always going to smoke cannabis.

Personally, I'd prefer they could buy it from* a safe source, without added harmful ingredients*, & pay tax on it...
seems better to me than... sold by dealers who push harder, more profitable, drugs, & [their profits] fund crime._
...
___________________________
.
.
This is the current struggle in the U-S: *the Feds don't want to legalize pot*.
Thus *the USDA* [Ag Dept] *cannot regulate pot-farming*, nor any chemicals or any of the processes used - contour plow, or vertical on hills?
Trickle irrigate, or sluice-gate & flood the fields weekly? -- Which fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides are legal & apropos? - No rules, no laws.

.
Dangerous chemicals are being used on pot: seed coatings, fungicides to prevent mold, persistent fertilizers, pest-controls NOT approved for food plants, hazardous herbicides, etc, which is then sold - & can be used to produce pot-oil for ingestion, pot-extract as a medication, pot powdered for edibles as an ingredient, pot for smoking, pot for cooking, anything, everything.
I can buy marijuana-oil & put a drop under my tongue, & have NO IDEA whether it contains hazardous agrichemicals - or even stuff used in *forestry*, not food crops.
It's a mess - with a vacuum at the Fed level, we need the states to step up & regulate the farming of state-legal marijuana.
.
*Illegal pot farmers use dangerous chemicals that threaten the ...*
https://www.washingtonpost.com/...pot-farmers...dangerous-chemicals.../a1c11c3c-13c5...
Apr 2, 2017 - 
_These bottles are lying around national forests and parks because they're being toted in by illegal pot farmers, who care about the environment ..._
.
*Illegal Pot Farms Are Poisoning California's Forests - The Atlantic*
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/03/backcountry-drug.../521352/
Mar 31, 2017 - 
_Growers often use empty containers like this to store toxic chemicals. In the previous year, every Gatorade bottle Gabriel and his team found at ..._
_._
_._
It's not only hidden pot-farms; LEGAL pot-farmers also use hazardous chemicals on their crop, with no regulation, & no tests for safety after the product hits the market.
.
Even a researcher who's trying to create better commercial strains gets no support whatever from the State Univ Extension system; ag-extension is a nationwide program that's been critical for Ag-research, run via land-grant universities in each state. She's on her own. This is a waste of effort, money, & time.
.
Worse, did U know we can't grow FIBER hemp legally in the U-S?!
The original "jeans" worn by gold-miners were not *cotton *- they were *hemp, *& far-tougher than any cotton denim! - Cotton can't handle abrasion, while hemp-fibers such as those used in rope are extremely resistant to friction damage. Manila rope is not a U-S product anymore; we must import it, just like industrial belts of woven hemp, just like hemp seeds bought for their nutritional boost.
.
.
http://www.mprnews.org/story/2015/07/21/bcst-marijuana-hemp-cannibis-genetics
QUOTE,
*When you have hemp as a crop, what do you get out of it?*
_Seed & fiber - the seed is very popular in food, cosmetics, lotions, & soaps - it's [pH]-balanced, & rich in omega-6 & omega-3 fatty acids. That's where the big demand is right now: healthy hemp seed oil. Think of it as you would sunflower seeds - eat them as seed, or press them & extract the oil._

_The fibrous stems have qualities that are very different from cotton or wood-pulp fibers. They're light & durable - they're being used in a lot of applications, mixing hemp fiber with concrete._
_._
_._
_._


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> I have a great deal of respect and admiration for John Pilger, Noush' It's such a pity there aren't more like him.
> He's always been passionate about the truth and has always possessed the indefatigable conviction to seek it out, no matter where it might be found.
> 
> Incidentally, I've ordered _'I Daniel Blake'_ from Amazon after doing a little research on the film.
> 
> Poor Ken, I understand his work was condemned by the Government as a mere work of fiction not unlike that of Charles Dickens.
> 
> Now, if I were Ken, I'd consciously make sure that my next film fiercely broadsided the Government by producing something typically Dickens in style such as _'A Tale Of Two Britains' _
> 
> _(For the super rich elite and ruling classes) It was the best of times (for the vast majority) the poor, the sick, the unemployed and the homeless) it was the worst of times.
> The elite and ruling classes were all going direct to the restaurant, the poor and the downtrodden were all going direct to the food bank....
> 
> :Hilarious Arthur Askey_


I agree with you on Pilger, a rare breed indeed. We need journalists like him more than ever in these days of deceit & fake news.

I've heard fantastic reviews about I, Daniel Blake, watched clips but have never seen the whole film. Its definitely on my to watch list. My hubby is on afters but I'm going to see if he can download tomorrow. Ken is brilliant. Typically tories always try to discredited anything which exposes their inhumanity, they are completely dishonest. As Ken says their attack on the poorest is conscious cruelty - the government know what they are doing & how hard their austerity policies are hitting people who need help, they know damn well Kens film is based on the fact. Your suggestion would make a great follow up - you should contact Ken with your idea - he is on twitter.

Did you see his acceptance speech when he won the BAFTA for the movie?










I watched 'Eyes of a child' by the way - truly awful. I wonder what became of those kids 

Zaros, don't you think the resemblance is uncanny?


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> I sometimes think I'm the only person left on this earth who has never even tried illegal drugs, not once, ever. I don't know why, maybe I'm just too much of a control freak. The closest I've been is wondering why I have such a headache at festivals  Maybe that's why I don't have a set view one way or the other. I do like the idea of ripping the bottom out of the criminal market somehow.


No your not the only one, I've not even come close to illegal drugs. Wouldn't know how to go about finding them. Saying that I'm quite happy with alcohol as my vice of choice, we all need one vice surely, especially if you have kids....

But keep your vice legal.


----------



## Honeys mum

havoc said:


> Oh my goodness I've just looked at how to get in the Question Time audience and it appears to be a direct BBC allocation. There's a form to fill out with all sorts of questions including the likes of this


My son told me ages ago not to take too much notice of QT as its all fixed and the audience is hand picked.Looks like he was right.


----------



## Odin_cat

cheekyscrip said:


> Generally, though it sounds boring, it is better to have sane and sober nation....


I agree completely but we.don't have a sober nation, thousands of people drink excessively and cause huge problems. This is particularly bad in the UK in my experience.

And I don't believe a great number of mental health problems stem from cannabis use, in fact I believe science has yet to establish a causal link.


----------



## havoc

Honeys mum said:


> My son told me ages ago not to take too much notice of QT as its all fixed and the audience is hand picked


I'm perfectly happy for the audience to be hand picked if it's done to prevent bias. I think they now need to justify their screening process.

All tv audiences are hand picked to an extent, usually it's that only well dressed, attractive people get on the front row or in seats which may be in shot. Known as 'greens' they are picked out of the queue outside the studio.


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Zaros, don't you think the resemblance is uncanny?
> View attachment 310450


Well, would you just look at that, complete with country cottage thatch, Wendolene Ramsbottom is actually Britain's Tory Prime minister.

All this talk of a hard Brexit and a soft Brexit, there's little wonder poor Philip can't even raise a semi.


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> Well, would you just look at that, complete with country cottage thatch, Wendolene Ramsbottom is actually Britain's Tory Prime minister.
> 
> All this talk of a hard Brexit and a soft Brexit, there's little wonder poor Philip can't even raise a semi.


:Hilarious So funny.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Odin_cat said:


> I agree completely but we.don't have a sober nation, thousands of people drink excessively and cause huge problems. This is particularly bad in the UK in my experience.
> 
> And I don't believe a great number of mental health problems stem from cannabis use, in fact I believe science has yet to establish a causal link.


144 active substances. Yes it affects different people in different ways.
Heavy use affects everyone. Their family too. 
Imagine your partner and dad of your child spends most of weekend stoned? 
People who have relatives with psychotic disorders should never use it.
It can work as a trigger of dormant problems.

Find a book " Henry's demons"...written by affected son and his father.
Links are established well enough...

It also affects productivity and motivation if frequent, regular user.


----------



## Honeys mum

havoc said:


> I'm perfectly happy for the audience to be hand picked if it's done to prevent bias. I think they now need to justify their screening process.


Yes I do realise that these programmes can't just let anybody in. But its all staged, they pick people who will say only what they want the public to hear.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> Their argument for wanting so much information will be to prevent bias but I think an investigation is needed. An independent organisation needs to look at applications going back over some considerable time and analyse why each one was either accepted or rejected.


They have a complaints procedure which I've used about bias in the past but I didn't get anywhere as they just denied bias. I should really have taken it further to OFCOM but it got buried in my to do list.

https://bbcwatch.org/complaints/


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Reply from my MP - will not be voting for him and neither will my husband.
> 
> Thank you very much for your email about repeal of the hunting ban.
> 
> I am bound to say that this is not a priority, and there are many other challenges for us as a country in the coming years. However, my personal view is that I am in favour of hunting. I have supported hunting for a long time, and I have not changed my view. Many people accuse politicians of being duplicitous, but I believe it is better to be straight forward, even when we disagree.
> 
> I am sorry that our views differ on this issue, but I hope that we can agree that there are many other issues on which we agree, for example that it is imperative that Theresa May is returned as our Prime Minister.
> 
> Thank you again for your email and kind regards,


Not sure if I'm still blocked so you may not see this, but I just wanted to say how much I respect you & your hubby for voting with your conscience RPH.

And......... ta da!...












rona said:


> An NHS falling apart
> 
> Go to doctor for lump, one week later a scan, one week after that a consultant appointment.......as strong indication of it being benign, the next appointment will take 4-6 weeks.
> 
> This is my first hand experience of our NHS over the last few weeks under the conservatives. Doesn't seem to be falling apart around here


Lucky you. Just because things seem ok in your area now, doesn't mean they will stay ok. STPs haven't been rolled out everywhere yet.



rona said:


> Maybe it's the fault of the individual CCGs rather than the government. After all, it is up to them to organise the structure of care in each area


No its definitely government cuts, underfunding & 'restructuring', Rona. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gkxISQSS3YgX6OD_gbsfUhyDN3BWvPbAFTw3EsXszZg/edit?usp=sharing

*ben goldacre*‏Verified [email protected]*bengoldacre* 19h19 hours ago

VOTERS!

I made you a graph of NHS spending. See if you can spot something in 1997,
and then in 2010? Your choice.












suewhite said:


> A very good friend of mine runs an A&E and last Sunday on a 12 hour shift she had 8 toothaches 3 sore throats and 28 drunks all wasting her time and causing a back log for people who genuinely needed seeing, I just don't understand why people feel they can just pop along to A&E with the most minor complaints.


Many more people are going to A&E because they can no longer get to see a gp.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> Not sure if I'm still blocked so you may not see this, but I just wanted to say how much I respect you & your hubby for voting with your conscience RPH.
> 
> And......... ta da!...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lucky you. Just because things seem ok in your area now, doesn't mean they will stay ok. STPs haven't been rolled out everywhere yet.
> 
> No its definitely government cuts, underfunding & 'restructuring', Rona. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gkxISQSS3YgX6OD_gbsfUhyDN3BWvPbAFTw3EsXszZg/edit?usp=sharing
> 
> *ben goldacre*‏Verified [email protected]*bengoldacre* 19h19 hours ago
> 
> VOTERS!
> 
> I made you a graph of NHS spending. See if you can spot something in 1997,
> and then in 2010? Your choice.
> 
> View attachment 310571
> 
> 
> Many more people are going to A&E because they can no longer get to see a gp.


No you are not still blocked, I only take a few days to calm down normally  Thank you, it was the shove we needed in the right direction and I was pleased to tell the Lib Dem candidate we will be voting for her. We don't necessarily agree with all of their policies but she is the only alternative to our current tory MP in this area.

I hope you enjoy the book (Happy Birthday by the way), its not necessarily my favourite of the plant based books being a bit light weight on the science but its a good one to start off with. Don't worry too much about his viewpoint on nuts though unless you are very overweight or have heart disease. I tend to have one serving per day but I do weigh them out (30 g) to avoid eating too many without even realising.


----------



## davidc

There has been an interesting change in the poll above - the Tories were miles ahead at the beginning of the poll with Labour trailing behind with a distant second place. However, since Theresa May's views/plans on fox hunting came to light both parties are now equal (at the time of writing). I know this is just a mini poll but the vast majority of the public are against fox hunting. So has Theresa May just shot herself in the foot and paved the way for an unexpected Labour victory?


----------



## havoc

davidc said:


> So has Theresa May just shot herself in the foot and paved the way for an unexpected Labour victory


Extremely unlikely. This is a forum populated by animal lovers so hunting is going to be more of a deal breaker here than in general. Away from here, in other polls, it doesn't seem to have done her much harm


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> Extremely unlikely. This is a forum populated by animal lovers so hunting is going to be more of a deal breaker here than in general. Away from here, in other polls, it doesn't seem to have done her much harm


This is an interesting poll asking people whether or not they support various policies from the Labour Party Manifesto

http://www.comresglobal.com/wp-cont...-Party-manifesto-poll_GE2017_Daily-Mirror.pdf

Keeping the ban on foxhunting Support 78%, Oppose 12%, Don't Know 10%


----------



## davidc

There is a petition for Theresa May to keep the ban which has over 700,000 signatures online. However, even if she does listen and says she will keep it, I doubt she will stick to that if she wins the election.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

davidc said:


> There is a petition for Theresa May to keep the ban which has over 700,000 signatures online. However, even if she does listen and says she will keep it, I doubt she will stick to that if she wins the election.


I don't think she will go back on the pledge she has made to hold a free vote

https://www.league.org.uk/news/leag...ee-vote-on-overturning-the-ban-on-fox-hunting

https://www.league.org.uk/election


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> This is an interesting poll asking people whether or not they support various policies from the Labour Party Manifesto
> 
> http://www.comresglobal.com/wp-cont...-Party-manifesto-poll_GE2017_Daily-Mirror.pdf
> 
> Keeping the ban on foxhunting Support 78%, Oppose 12%, Don't Know 10%


Fully accept these figures, what I'm not sure of is that this subject is a deal breaker for all those 78% and they wouldn't vote tory because of it. If their local candidate isn't openly in support of overturning the ban people won't change the way they vote over it.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> No you are not still blocked, I only take a few days to calm down normally  Thank you, it was the shove we needed in the right direction and I was pleased to tell the Lib Dem candidate we will be voting for her. We don't necessarily agree with all of their policies but she is the only alternative to our current tory MP in this area.
> 
> I hope you enjoy the book (Happy Birthday by the way), its not necessarily my favourite of the plant based books being a bit light weight on the science but its a good one to start off with. Don't worry too much about his viewpoint on nuts though unless you are very overweight or have heart disease. I tend to have one serving per day but I do weigh them out (30 g) to avoid eating too many without even realising.


Aw I am glad about that

Thank you. I haven't had a good look at it as yet, but I'm certainly going to. I don't eat many nuts anyway - just a few most days along with my seeds, so it probably will be about 30g - ish . But I know I don't eat a balanced diet & that's what I hope to change

(I may be in touch for more book recommendations so please bear that in mind before you stick me on ignore again x)

(oh & thank you very much for my birthday wishes. Its was actually my birthday tuther day - but we always leave cards up for a week in this house lol)

.


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> Tories don't have to do anything, the others are doing it for them aren't they
> 
> Such good examples of that on here
> 
> PS. As a child we had 9 people in a 3 bed house, we used to top and tail until we managed to get hold of some bunk beds. I had an idyllic childhood


Nothing wrong with any of that, and like you I had an idyllic childhood, didn't have much, but time and love were in abundance.
Think the difference then was Rona, we expected nor got nothing for free.


----------



## 1290423

Came across this thought you'd appreciate it!

Jeremy Hunt was doing an annual visit to a NHS hospital. As always he was looking for something to beat the NHS with to show how badly run and loss making things were.
While Hunt was checking the books, he turned to the executive of the hospital and said “I notice you buy a lot of bandages. What do you do with the middle of the roll ?"
"Good question," noted the executive. "We save them up and send them back to the bandage company and every once in a while, they send us a free roll. We recycle whenever possible"
"Oh," replied Hunt,, somewhat disappointed that his unusual question had a practical answer. But on he went, in his obnoxious way. “What about all these coloured casts you dispense. Isn't it rather a waste of money?"
"Ah, yes," replied the executive, realizing that Hunt was trying to trap him. "We ask that any patient wishing a coloured cast donates £1 which is far in excess of the 10p the colouring actually costs."
Hunt asked a dozen or more questions with similar results. he was determined to fluster the know-it-all executive. 
"Well, What do you do with all the remains from the circumcision surgeries?"
"Here, too, we do not waste," answered the executive. "What we do is save all the little foreskins and send them to government, and about once a year, at this time, they send us a complete prick."


----------



## rona

DT said:


> Nothing wrong with any of that, and like you I had an idyllic childhood, didn't have much, but time and love were in abundance.
> Think the difference then was Rona, we expected nor got nothing for free.


Yep, had to work for my sixpence a week pocket money


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> Yep, had to work for my sixpence a week pocket money


Can you remember national savings stamps Rona?
They used to cost sixpence each. My aunt who never had children brought each of us one of these stamps every week and stuck them in the savings book, when we left school she presented each of us with these books, think there was around £24 to each of us, boy, did I feel rich.


----------



## rona

DT said:


> Can you remember national savings stamps Rona?
> They used to cost sixpence each. My aunt who never had children brought each of us one of these stamps every week and stuck them in the savings book, when we left school she presented each of us with these books, think there was around £24 to each of us, boy, did I feel rich.


Yes I had one of those I cashed when 18.
Also green shied stamps, mum used to collect those and every few months we would go the the neighbouring town to the Green shield stamp shop


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> Yes I had one of those I cashed when 18.
> Also green shied stamps, mum used to collect those and every few months we would go the the neighbouring town to the Green shield stamp shop


Oh, I loved the green shield stamps shop, and then there were the vouchers in cigarette packets.


----------



## 1290423

And plastic flowers with wash powder


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> Aw I am glad about that
> 
> Thank you. I haven't had a good look at it as yet, but I'm certainly going to. I don't eat many nuts anyway - just a few most days along with my seeds, so it probably will be about 30g - ish . But I know I don't eat a balanced diet & that's what I hope to change
> 
> (I may be in touch for more book recommendations so please bear that in mind before you stick me on ignore again x)
> 
> (oh & thank you very much for my birthday wishes. Its was actually my birthday tuther day - but we always leave cards up for a week in this house lol)
> 
> .


I think I've got pretty much every book written on the subject and links to loads of lectures too so just ask if you want any info. You might like this one by Rip Esselstyn - its about 20 mins long, he is a great speaker and very funny

http://nutritionstudies.org/rip-esselstyn-at-tedx-plant-strong-healthy-living/


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I think I've got pretty much every book written on the subject and links to loads of lectures too so just ask if you want any info. You might like this one by Rip Esselstyn - its about 20 mins long, he is a great speaker and very funny
> 
> http://nutritionstudies.org/rip-esselstyn-at-tedx-plant-strong-healthy-living/


That's very kind of you, thank you so much. I'll have a look at the video, thanks again


----------



## noushka05

Now in cinemas...


----------



## Zaros

@noushka05 Yet another sleepless night for me and I was just laid here thinking, when the Tories have been voted in for another term and Brexit negotiations have finally been completed by all the crooks, liars and swindlers, do you think Iraq or Syria or Afghanistan, might be willing to take in British asylum seekers?


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> @noushka05 Yet another sleepless night for me and I was just laid here thinking, when the Tories have been voted in for another term and Brexit negotiations have finally been completed by all the crooks, liars and swindlers, do you think Iraq or Syria or Afghanistan, might be willing to take in British asylum seekers?


I doubt any country on the planet would willing to take in British asylum seekers tbqh And who could blame em?


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> I doubt any country on the planet would willing to take in British asylum seekers tbqh And who could blame em?


Doomed to wander the earth for all eternity then.

And death shall constantly elude their attempts to find it.:Nailbiting


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

The YouGov/Sunday Times poll this morning has topline voting intention figures of CON 49%, LAB 31%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 3%. As with most other recent polls, it shows a very large Conservative lead, Labour creeping up slightly and the smaller parties being squeezed. This is the first time YouGov have shown the Lib Dems in single figures this year and the first time UKIP have been as low as 3% since early 2012.


----------



## Elles

I've never voted Labour, in the long distant past I even admired Maggie T, but I can't stand this May woman, or conservative policies, so I shall vote Labour this time. I can't see the point voting lib dem, or greens, so it's Corbyn for me. Even though I'm not very keen on him personally, he's a lot less offensive than May and his policies seem reasonable. I don't want our new conservative candidate to get in, so I'll vote for Ben and hopefully he won't lose too many votes to the May juggernaut and will hold his seat.


----------



## Satori

rottiepointerhouse said:


> The YouGov/Sunday Times poll this morning has topline voting intention figures of CON 49%, LAB 31%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 3%. As with most other recent polls, it shows a very large Conservative lead, Labour creeping up slightly and the smaller parties being squeezed. This is the first time YouGov have shown the Lib Dems in single figures this year and the first time UKIP have been as low as 3% since early 2012.


So one has to ask is Corbyn all that bad for the Labour Party after all if he is eating into the Tory lead and the Tories are taking from UKIP rather than from Labour?

(Btw, in case anyone has not seen it, Emily Thornberry did very well indeed on the Andrew Marr show this morning.)


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> I've never voted Labour, in the long distant past I even admired Maggie T, but I can't stand this May woman, or conservative policies, so I shall vote Labour this time. I can't see the point voting lib dem, or greens, so it's Corbyn for me. Even though I'm not very keen on him personally, he's a lot less offensive than May and his policies seem reasonable. I don't want our new conservative candidate to get in, so I'll vote for Ben and hopefully he won't lose too many votes to the May juggernaut and will hold his seat.


This is pretty much how I feel; I don't particularly like Labour but the most important thing for me is getting the Tories out. I've only been able to vote in 2 previous elections and have voted purely based on policy, this time it's tactical!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> I've never voted Labour, in the long distant past I even admired Maggie T, but I can't stand this May woman, or conservative policies, so I shall vote Labour this time. I can't see the point voting lib dem, or greens, so it's Corbyn for me. Even though I'm not very keen on him personally, he's a lot less offensive than May and his policies seem reasonable. I don't want our new conservative candidate to get in, so I'll vote for Ben and hopefully he won't lose too many votes to the May juggernaut and will hold his seat.


If we could vote for the leaders I probably would vote for Corbyn even though there is a lot he says that I don't agree with, there is also much that I do. However as we have to vote for our local candidates and I desperately want to get ours out I have to go for Lib Dems as Labour seriously have no chance in this area - they came 5th behind UKIP last time. I'm still to even read anywhere who our Labour candidate is so they are not exactly making a big play for a fairly marginal seat probably because they know the Lib Dems have the best chance of ousting the incumbent.


----------



## havoc

I do have a Lib Dem candidate and I do think it's the way I'll go. Labour tend to poll in the hundreds rather than the thousands here. Been a Tory voter all my life but I don't think my feelings for TM are any secret on this forum  What that woman might do if she felt she had real power scares the hell out of me.


----------



## MollySmith

I love this - the connection between the Mays and sex robots by Stewart Lee...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/14/how-a-sex-robot-ended-up-on-the-one-show-sofa


----------



## Goblin

Don't know the source but worth a read and a think even if you don't agree with Corbyn.



> I don't think Corbyn's the best leader ever. I appreciate that he's not the best at appealing to a lot of demographics. he's crap with soundbites; not good at speaking straight to camera. Better in real situations with real people. I appreciate that he's not got a great deal of, what would you call it, zing. I don't agree with him on everything by any means.
> 
> Still, you know something I know? If Labour lose the election, Jeremy Corbyn will probably go back to being a local MP. He'll carry on holding speakers up for people at meetings, and helping people with their chairs, and thanking people for making the sandwiches. He'll carry on having talks and doing constituency surgeries and attending debates and asking questions and campaigning on various issues and staying behind to carry on talking about stuff with ordinary people after the event's finished. If he weren't the leader now, he'd be campaigning on behalf of the party. He'd be standing at the back helping.
> 
> He's not going to swan off to a career of after-dinner speaking and corporate events and non-executive directorships and consultancies. He's not going to edit the Evening Standard. It's not his personal ambition that's brought him here.
> 
> he wasn't ever that keen on being a leader. The only reason he stood when he did was that, to paraphrase another Labour front-bencher, every other remaining left-wing MP in the party had already stood as the token socialist candidate in a previous leadership election, and it was basically his turn.
> 
> And here's the thing: his apparent lack of charisma notwithstanding (and what is this charisma that apparently Tim Farron and Theresa May possess? It's like nothing I've ever seen described using that term before), he's the exact opposite of what everyone seems to agree they're sick of in politicians. The meaningless soundbites and stock phrases and glib dog-whistle oversimplifications don't sit naturally with him. He's better at sitting down calmly and talking about things like a grown-up. He's visibly irritated when interviewers push him to answer stupid, meaningless or leading questions, and, to me, that irritation seems remarkably restrained considering that I'd probably be unable to put up with such bollocks without flying into an expletive-laden rant. He reminds me of a Scandinavian politician, and that's nothing but a compliment. Politicians aren't supposed to be evangelists or salespeople; they're supposed to be people of substance, not just a mass of superficially appealing tics, right? Right?
> 
> In short, he's a real human person, like you get in real life, not whatever kind of thing most politicians are where you just cannot imagine them existing in any normal situation alongside real people without getting punched in the face. I've seen people like him, working in various capacities, usually doing something socially responsible, sometimes voluntary. They help. They support. They sympathise. They don't usually get to the top of organisations because they're not naturally competitive. And here he is, in a position he probably never expected to be in, and his expression is, for me, the right one: he's grim; a touch uncertain; perhaps somewhat daunted. Quite right too. Anyone who's not daunted by the prospect of being Prime Minister shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the job. I want whoever leads the country to feel the responsibility as keenly as possible. The Prime Minister is the servant of millions of masters, not the master of millions of servants, as Theresa May seems to think she is. It's a horrible job, but if nobody else is going to do it, he'll have to. Because someone's got to. You can't just stand there and do nothing. You have to try to help; to do what you can. That's what he's like. And if the election's lost as the last two were, he'll go back to helping in whatever other ways are available. And if he loses his seat (which he won't), he'll go and try to help somewhere else.
> 
> The fact that this man is considered unelectable when the alternatives are as they are is itself an indictment of our society.


----------



## Elles

From what I'm seeing on normal pages and groups, rather than specific or animal groups, people are concerned about two things. Trident and the deficit. Jeremy Corbyn has voted against trident in the past, so we're all going to be left undefended if labour get in. No doubt attacked by North Korea the day he opens number 10. Its labour's fault there's a deficit and they're just going to throw good money after bad and drop us all into a black hole. No doubt the one that appears when the nuclear bomb hits us.

Badger culls, fox hunting, social care and the NHS don't seem to figure and people seem to avoid mentioning Theresa May.

Ymmv.


----------



## KittenKong

Nice people these Tories eg?!
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...erendum-scottish-national-party-a7735311.html


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> From what I'm seeing on normal pages and groups, rather than specific or animal groups, people are concerned about two things. Trident and the deficit. Jeremy Corbyn has voted against trident in the past, so we're all going to be left undefended if labour get in. No doubt attacked by North Korea the day he opens number 10. Its labour's fault there's a deficit and they're just going to throw good money after bad and drop us all into a black hole. No doubt the one that appears when the nuclear bomb hits us.
> 
> Badger culls, fox hunting, social care and the NHS don't seem to figure and people seem to avoid mentioning Theresa May.
> 
> Ymmv.


I wouldn't worry to much about Corbyn's threats to scrap trident as it would have to go to a vote in the houses of parliament and more than likely be blocked. He cannot simply say he is scrapping it if he gets in power, he has to have the backing of Parliament to do this so this wouldn't come to fruition same if he wanted to get rid of the armed forces. You are correct the deficit is the previous Labour governments fault, but the huge debt that is spiraling out of control is the Conservatives fault. Wouldn't you be more concerned about how the UK is going to pay it's huge debt off than the deficit?


----------



## KittenKong

More from those awfully nice Tory people:

https://endpropaganda.wordpress.com...s-a-rude-arrogant-maidenhead-constituency-mp/


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> I wouldn't worry to much about Corbyn's threats to scrap trident as it would have to go to a vote in the houses of parliament and more than likely be blocked. He cannot simply say he is scrapping it if he gets in power, he has to have the backing of Parliament to do this so this wouldn't come to fruition same if he wanted to get rid of the armed forces. You are correct the deficit is the previous Labour governments fault, but the huge debt that is spiraling out of control is the Conservatives fault. Wouldn't you be more concerned about how the UK is going to pay it's huge debt off than the deficit?


Not me.  It's what I'm seeing on other more general pages. I blame the bankers for the deficit and Corbyn hasn't said anything that would concern me about Trident. Anyway what Tony Blair did had little to do with Corbyn or the current Labour Party really. That's like blaming him for Cyril Smith.


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> More from those awfully nice Tory people:
> 
> https://endpropaganda.wordpress.com...s-a-rude-arrogant-maidenhead-constituency-mp/
> View attachment 310770
> View attachment 310771


Aren't the tories 'Strong & Stable?

.


----------



## noushka05

I'll just leave this here for those who believe its labour that 'cant be trusted with the economy'.
*
Barry Gardiner*‏Verified [email protected]*BarryGardiner* May 11

National Debt: Labour 2010 - £979billion

Tory 2017 - £1,731 billion

,


----------



## Pawscrossed

Look at the poll here. If all the voters against the Conservatives voted for one party, they'd never make it with a majority.

I am voting Labour. The fox hunting and now this year off to care for an elderly parent (presumably the carer is to live off fresh air for this year, having argued with their siblings as to who has to do this and saving the NHS money..) and the beer cap removed which means that breweries will be allowed to push up the price of beer in line with inflation whilst supermarkets are excempt meaning that the pub industries and small breweries are even more likely to close. In small communities this matters. Matters to business and livelihoods and creates even more imbalance between huge businesses and small ventures. 

I have never voted for them and if there such a thing as comeuppance and karma she'll be ousted. This election feels like an ego trip.


----------



## Satori

Pawscrossed said:


> If all the voters against the Conservatives voted for one party, they'd never make it with a majority.


In practice they would unless the abstainers voted too or the SNP removed their candidates.

Eta: Thinking about that, the outcome that defeats the Tories is for every anti-Tory voter in England and Wales to vote labour and in Scotland for them to vote SNP. Then their could be a post-election coalition. Funny that they refuse to entertain any discussion of co-operation those two parties now that UKIP is falling apart. It's the vanity of the politicians at play here.


----------



## Odin_cat

KittenKong said:


> More from those awfully nice Tory people:
> 
> https://endpropaganda.wordpress.com...s-a-rude-arrogant-maidenhead-constituency-mp/
> View attachment 310770
> View attachment 310771


It's funny you posted this, I was speaking to a friend who lives in Maidenhead and she says TM is really unpopular. Unfortunately there are so many candidates standing there that any chance they had of getting rid of her has been pretty much thrown away.


----------



## KittenKong

Pawscrossed said:


> . This election feels like an ego trip.


Absolutely. Seeing they've virtually removed the Conservative branding perhaps they'll alter the voting papers to "TM's Strong and Stable team"?


----------



## havoc

Pawscrossed said:


> and now this year off to care for an elderly parent (presumably the carer is to live off fresh air for this year,


I'd say social care is coming across as important and this is typical of Lynton Crosby's methods. You take something which matters to the masses and make out your party is the one which cares and is addressing the problem while not actually addressing the problem or committing yourself to anything. It keeps your opponent continually on the back foot, continually playing catch up - and it works.

The man is brilliant, Boris refers to him as the Corbynator.


----------



## Satori

havoc said:


> I'd say social care is coming across as important and this is typical of Lynton Crosby's methods. You take something which matters to the masses and make out your party is the one which cares and is addressing the problem while not actually addressing the problem or committing yourself to anything. It keeps your opponent continually on the back foot, continually playing catch up - and it works.
> 
> The man is brilliant, Boris refers to him as the Corbynator.


I wonder though. The Tory campaign seems weak to me; a 'do nothing and hope Corbyn self destructs strategy' that isn't working. They must have something up there sleeves for the closing weeks I guess.


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> The Tory campaign seems weak to me; a 'do nothing and hope Corbyn self destructs strategy' that isn't working.


Isn't it? This social care thing is the first glimmer I've seen that the Conservatives might actually feel the need to 'fight' this election.


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> They must have something up there sleeves for the closing weeks I guess.


Wait and see is very much how Lynton works - followed by a fast strike of course. They've waited to see what needs addressed and this is the first thing. Is it an admission they've failed to keep it a single issue election? Not sure but they won't have wanted to take attention away from Brexit while that was working.


----------



## MollySmith

I don't understand anyone who won't vote but if you need an incentive and do your bit to help pubs then...

https://www.votethisyeargetfreebeer.co.uk


----------



## rona

MollySmith said:


> I don't understand anyone who won't vote but if you need an incentive and do your bit to help pubs then...
> 
> https://www.votethisyeargetfreebeer.co.uk


Christ, can anyone dumb down the election any more? I thought the stuff that Kittenkong was putting on was bad but this just about tops that


----------



## MollySmith

rona said:


> Christ, can anyone dumb down the election any more? I thought the stuff that Kittenkong was putting on was bad but this just about tops that


It's either dumbing down to the idiots or fabulous PR... *cough* bribery


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> Christ, can anyone dumb down the election any more?


All those who pontificate on 'the economy' when they don't know the difference between debt and deficit perhaps?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MollySmith said:


> I love this - the connection between the Mays and sex robots by Stewart Lee...
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/14/how-a-sex-robot-ended-up-on-the-one-show-sofa


What a horrible article 



MollySmith said:


> I don't understand anyone who won't vote but if you need an incentive and do your bit to help pubs then...
> 
> https://www.votethisyeargetfreebeer.co.uk


I can quite see why some people choose not to vote. If you look at all the parties and what they represent and tot up what you agree with and disagree with and are left not much agreeing with any of them what are you supposed to do. If you vote for one that you mostly agree with but vehemently disagree with one or two policies you feel you are not being true to yourself. Do you ignore those one or two policies and vote for them anyway or do you vote for another party who share your views on those issues but not on much else? For some people not voting is the only way they can see to protest against none of the parties representing them. I very nearly did this in the last election but at the last minute gave in and voted despite not agreeing with quite a few of their policies. This time I'm voting tactically but still for a party I don't totally agree with. Its a messy business this voting lark


----------



## KittenKong

......From the same person who backed remaining in the EU and frequently ruled out an early General Election! Why should anyone believe a word she says?

Of course most people are perfectly capable of taking a year's unpaid leave aren't they?

A couple of reactions to this:


----------



## havoc

MollySmith said:


> It's either dumbing down to the idiots or fabulous PR... *cough* bribery


It's a way of persuading the youngsters (students) to at least register. Where's the harm in encouraging that?


----------



## MollySmith

havoc said:


> It's a way of persuading the youngsters (students) to at least register. Where's the harm in encouraging that?


@rona disagrees!

The students around Cambridge don't seem to need much encouragement which is great!


----------



## MollySmith

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I can quite see why some people choose not to vote. If you look at all the parties and what they represent and tot up what you agree with and disagree with and are left not much agreeing with any of them what are you supposed to do. If you vote for one that you mostly agree with but vehemently disagree with one or two policies you feel you are not being true to yourself. Do you ignore those one or two policies and vote for them anyway or do you vote for another party who share your views on those issues but not on much else? For some people not voting is the only way they can see to protest against none of the parties representing them. I very nearly did this in the last election but at the last minute gave in and voted despite not agreeing with quite a few of their policies. This time I'm voting tactically but still for a party I don't totally agree with. Its a messy business this voting lark


It is a messy business, I agree. I'm all for PR as I've said, so this voting system annoys me, but I'm doing the best I can - tactical as you say.


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> It's a way of persuading the youngsters (students) to at least register. Where's the harm in encouraging that?


OK read the whole thing now and not just the poster at the top. I see that they get a beer for registering and not for voting. That's much more acceptable as it hopefully would make more engaged.

I don't know why they need their NI number though for a free beer 

I also haven't read all the links to how to vote sites. Are they bias?


----------



## noushka05

Greens stand aside in 31 seats to stop a tory landslide. https://infacts.org/greens-stand-aside-31-seats-stop-tory-landslide/ Very proud to be a Green.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> Greens stand aside in 31 seats to stop a tory landslide. https://infacts.org/greens-stand-aside-31-seats-stop-tory-landslide/ Very proud to be a Green.


Have to admit I'm surprised there hasn't been a more focused campaign to get candidates to stand aside and let the best chance person go up against the Conservative candidate. I posted about Labour expelling those long standing party members who were supporting just that in Jeremy Hunt's constituency in favour of the NHA party candidate which seems such a strange thing to do. Surely Corbyn doesn't think he can defeat May on his own?


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> I don't know why they need their NI number though for a free beer


It's a unique identifier which can be used to prevent multiple applications. It's required to register to vote - not for the free beer.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Have to admit I'm surprised there hasn't been a more focused campaign to get candidates to stand aside and let the best chance person go up against the Conservative candidate. I posted about Labour expelling those long standing party members who were supporting just that in Jeremy Hunt's constituency in favour of the NHA party candidate which seems such a strange thing to do. Surely Corbyn doesn't think he can defeat May on his own?


I think that's a grave error of judgement on Labours part. I think progressive alliances are the only hope we have. I don't think it was Corbyns decision to expel those loyal members but labours NEC. It was a disgraceful thing to do, wasn't it.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> I think that's a grave error of judgement on Labours part. I think progressive alliances are the only hope we have. I don't think it was Corbyns decision to expel those loyal members but labours NEC. It was a disgraceful thing to do, wasn't it.


Disgraceful and tactically very stupid.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-...s-39906665&link_location=live-reporting-story*

*Latest updates from senior elections and political analyst Peter Barnes*
*15 May: Labour improvement*
Four polls over the weekend reinforced the picture of a *Labour *improvement during the course of the campaign so far. ORB, Opinium, ComRes and YouGov all had them at 30% or above - clearly above the levels seen at around the time the election was announced.

However, this increase has not come at the expense of the *Conservatives *who remain in the mid-to-high 40s with a commanding lead.

The main losers have been *UKIP*, who are down in the 3-6% range.

If the current polls were reflected in the final result it would mean the two main parties between them capturing a significantly larger share of the vote than at recent elections.

In 2015, they received a total of 69%. The polls suggest a joint share of almost 80%.

You have to go back to 1992 to find an election where the total Conservative and Labour share was close to that - the figure was 78%. The last time it was above 80% was 1979.

*Most important issue*
As well as asking people which party they intend to vote for, pollsters also ask which issues are the most important. In 2015 the three biggest issues were the *NHS*, *immigration *and *the economy*.

A significant change at this election is the emergence of *Brexit*. Polls conducted since the election was called have put it at the top of the list of important issues ahead of the *NHS *in second place with the economy and immigration battling it out for third.

This may help to explain, at least in part, the Conservatives' lead in the polls.

So far as we can tell, they've managed to attract the support of a large number of new voters who backed leave at last year's referendum whilst holding on to most of their own supporters who backed remain - many of whom now think that the Government has a duty to implement the outcome of the referendum.


----------



## KittenKong

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...ronted-with-consequences-of-her-benefit-cuts/


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Have to admit I'm surprised there hasn't been a more focused campaign to get candidates to stand aside and let the best chance person go up against the Conservative candidate.


Isn't it part of Labour's constitution that they will fight every seat? Have to admit I haven't read it to check, just something I've always believed. Is it an urban myth? It would make a real difference if they didn't front a candidate in some seats but are they bound by their own rules?


----------



## MollySmith

Look, out there in General Chat.. can you spot what went onto page 2? At last!


----------



## stuaz

MollySmith said:


> Look, out there in General Chat.. can you spot what went onto page 2? At last!


Shhhhh don't point it out


----------



## noushka05

Hunt on the run again.


----------



## MollySmith

stuaz said:


> Shhhhh don't point it out


----------



## kimthecat

stuaz said:


> Shhhhh don't point it out


 I'm going to bump it up ! :Woot LOL


----------



## KittenKong

https://thegreatcritique.wordpress.com/2017/05/15/bbc-complaints-response/


----------



## noushka05

MollySmith said:


> Look, out there in General Chat.. can you spot what went onto page 2? At last!


It wasn't me:Bag


----------



## noushka05

This interview of Noam Chomsky by Evan Davis is a must watch. Chomsky is one of the greatest minds of our time & says he would vote for Corbyn. You cant get a finer endorsement than that.

He also speaks about how neoliberalism gave rise to Trump & brexit, Bernie Sanders & how the Republican Party is* the* most dangerous organisation in "*human history" (*& key tories share the same ideology as these lunatics)*.





*


----------



## Satori

... and Corbyn continues to make progress in the polls.

The Independent has him this morning at 32%. So, if materialised, the Labour Party under Corbyn would take 32% of the national vote. In 2015, under Miliband, The Labour Party took 31.2% of the national vote.

(For the non-mathematically inclined, 32% is better than 31.2%)


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> (For the non-mathematically inclined, 32% is better than 31.2%)


Thank you, so considerate


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> ... and Corbyn continues to make progress in the polls.


I'm not surprised now they're out and about. He is a lot better than TM at being among the little people.


----------



## MollySmith

http://www.filmsforaction.org/artic...-political-parties-targeting-you-on-facebook/


----------



## kimthecat

From Twitter -
I've been in the bath for 20mins, how many more £billions have Labour pledged since I've been gone??

I think the Labour pledging billions to spend is the same as Boris and his red bus . 
if you make promises ( or perhaps bribes ) that you know can't keep then that's as good as lying . 

Nationalising the national railway and the Royal mail means less to spend on hospitals and schools etc


----------



## havoc

kimthecat said:


> Nationalising the national railway and the Royal mail means less to spend on hospitals and schools etc


Only means less if you assume the same pot. You can always raise more. Don't forget, the Conservatives won't rule out tax rises either. They say their policies are 'fully costed' but they don't say how.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Labours mainfesto:
http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php/manifesto2017

I have glanced through it and like what I have read so far in Labours Manifesto.


----------



## stockwellcat.

*Labour climbs to highest poll rating since start of election campaign*
Two new polls put Jeremy Corbyn's party on 32 per cent

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ral-election-2017-jeremy-corbyn-a7734866.html


----------



## Odin_cat

kimthecat said:


> From Twitter -
> I've been in the bath for 20mins, how many more £billions have Labour pledged since I've been gone??
> 
> I think the Labour pledging billions to spend is the same as Boris and his red bus .
> if you make promises ( or perhaps bribes ) that you know can't keep then that's as good as lying .
> 
> Nationalising the national railway and the Royal mail means less to spend on hospitals and schools etc


Wouldn't nationalisation mean that the profits could be reinvested into public services, rather than benefiting individuals (and foreign governments)?


----------



## Elles

I think he's going to drop in the polls again. Talk of tax increases don't usually go down very well. People want things funded by multi billion companies and stamping down on tax evasion, not tax increases. He was bit evasive on his interview last night too I thought. I don't think labour have done anything to improve their chances tbh.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> *Labour climbs to highest poll rating since start of election campaign*
> Two new polls put Jeremy Corbyn's party on 32 per cent
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ral-election-2017-jeremy-corbyn-a7734866.html


That's very interesting and I've been following the polls very closely, I didn't really want to comment until we were three weeks away so hope I'm not jumping the gun by posting a couple of days early. So if you take the top four pollsters and their results over the past five weeks (from the day the election was called 18/04/17), then look back at the past three major political votes - USA election, EU, 2015 election and transfer those results to the polls three weeks before voting took place, then convert the findings of the erroneous polls with the actual results and you get a formula for what the current polls actually show, and if I'm correct the election results will almost certainly be a decisive victory for Mr Corbyn, or Labour will spectacularly lose and end up with just 27 seats.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> I think he's going to drop in the polls again. Talk of tax increases don't usually go down very well. People want things funded by multi billion companies and stamping down on tax evasion, not tax increases. He was bit evasive on his interview last night too I thought. I don't think labour have done anything to improve their chances tbh.


From what I've gathered he's not increasing taxes for the vast majority. They're only taxing the top few % of earners and multi billion dollar corporations. This is great news.


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> From Twitter -
> I've been in the bath for 20mins, how many more £billions have Labour pledged since I've been gone??
> 
> I think the Labour pledging billions to spend is the same as Boris and his red bus .
> if you make promises ( or perhaps bribes ) that you know can't keep then that's as good as lying .
> 
> Nationalising the national railway and the Royal mail means less to spend on hospitals and schools etc


Apparently rail renationalisation doesn't cost money. As each franchise expires we just take it back under public ownership .

For the sake of our NHS & schools we must stop the tories.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Apparently rail renationalisation doesn't cost money. As each franchise expires we just take it back under public ownership .
> 
> For the sake of our NHS & schools we must stop the tories.


There's still the rolling stock and infrastructure to pay for, basically everything you need to run a train service.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> There's still the rolling stock and infrastructure to pay for, basically everything you need to run a train service.


Privatisation has been a disaster for rail users and tax payers. http://actionforrail.org/the-four-big-myths-of-uk-rail-privatisation/


----------



## kimthecat

Odin_cat said:


> Wouldn't nationalisation mean that the profits could be reinvested into public services, rather than benefiting individuals (and foreign governments)?


I suppose it depends if they do actually make profits, I think they ran at a loss in the 70s but perhaps things would be different now , more streamlined.


----------



## suewhite

noushka05 said:


> View attachment 310926


I just don't see where the money is coming from we are in debt beyond belief!!


----------



## leashedForLife

.
Wow, Noushka! - that's great - i wish such a progressive agenda was remotely possible, in the USA. 
.
Guessing the '_EMA for 16- to 18-YOs_' has to do with Emancipated Minor status? // Especially appreciate slamming the door on gender-pay gaps.
.
.
.


----------



## Elles

Trouble is the headlines aren't reporting it quite like that and response comments posted are always basically, he's spending too much, he'll have to raise taxes. I don't know that people are that keen to see renationalisation, they're more interested in the NHS. Do you think anyone will swap from conservative to labour because he said he's going to buy back the water, railways and the post office. I don't think so. It just sounds like more debt.

It sounds like people unable to pay their mortgage (the NHS), buying a new car (the railways) and saying we'll find the money somewhere. It doesn't usually work. Do I want to buy back water, rail and the post office? Not sure I do at this stage. 

May wants to play with foxes, Corbyn wants to play with trains.


----------



## noushka05

suewhite said:


> I just don't see where the money is coming from we are in debt beyond belief!!


We are in debt beyond belief because of the tories, Sue. Austerity has been a complete & utter disaster for the majority of people in this country. Do we keep trusting them when they have made such a mess of everything?

I dare say there will be blips but this looks pretty good.

@*Kevin_Maguire* 3h3 hours ago

Labour manifesto costings in full: spend £48.6bn a year and raise £48.6bn a year. Beautiful symmetry











leashedForLife said:


> .
> 
> Wow, Noushka! - that's great - i wish such a progressive agenda was remotely possible, in the USA.
> .
> Guessing the '_EMA for 16- to 18-YOs_' has to do with Emancipated Minor status? // Especially appreciate slamming the door on gender-pay gaps.
> .
> .
> .


It is great manifesto. But sadly, like Sanders, Corbyn has the might of media against him so its unlikely we'll ever see these progressive policies in this country either - quite the opposite. The tories will win & our country will be ruined beyond repair. They will do to us what Trump & your Republican party are doing to you over the pond .


----------



## stockwellcat.

Deleted.


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> We are in debt beyond belief because of the tories, Sue. Austerity has been a complete & utter disaster for the majority of people in thes country.
> 
> It is great manifesto. But sadly, like Sanders, Corbyn has the might of media against him so its unlikely we'll ever see these progressive policies in this country either - quite the opposite. The tories will win & our country will be ruined beyond repair. They will do to us what Trump & your Republican party are doing to you over the pond .


I agree, but is renationalisation part of the answer? And even if it were, do people see it as part of the answer, or a step too far. I think Corbyn himself and this part of the manifesto have made it too easy for the might of the media. The headlines will not be favourable.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> I agree, but is renationalisation part of the answer? And even if it were, do people see it as part of the answer, or a step too far. I think Corbyn himself and this part of the manifesto have made it too easy for the might of the media. The headlines will not be favourable.


Yes I believe renationalisation is the answer. Why should the profits from Britains trains go foreign countries?

Caroline Lucas explains far better than I could.

"_Rail users are sick and tired of paying astronomical prices for a service that simply isn't up to scratch. We have to put up with overcrowded trains, unreliable services, and we spend up to six times as much on rail tickets as other European passengers._

_"The irony is that some of the biggest profiters are the state-owned rail companies of our European neighbours. Taxpayers' money that should be reinvested into services is ending up in the hands of overseas shareholders. By taking back individual franchises when they expire, the Government could save up to £1 billion a year every year._

_"It's time to end this rip-off and bring our railways back into public ownership._

_"This isn't a call for a throwback to a '70s British Rail. The modern, efficient, clean, affordable services enjoyed in other parts of Europe offer a much better blueprint than our own past_

Of course the media wont be favourable, when have they ever been? The establishment will do everything possible to stop him because he represents the majority & that is what they really fear - us.

I've posted this a lot but here goes again lol


----------



## 1290423

suewhite said:


> I just don't see where the money is coming from we are in debt beyond belief!!


Id like to know where all the money is coming from to buy back say the waterboard


----------



## Arnie83

I like lots of the Labour party promises.

The trouble for me is, when they are in quite large part paid for by 

Efficiency savings (that everyone claims will happen)
Cracking down on tax avoidance (which they think they can do because they're so much smarter than those who specialise in how to do the avoiding)
Making the rich pay more tax (which they always find ways around - see above)
I'm afraid I don't believe they will be able to afford them. Worse; that won't stop them spending the money they're not going to get, and we all end up paying for it!


----------



## 1290423

Arnie83 said:


> I like lots of the Labour party promises.
> 
> The trouble for me is, when they are in quite large part paid for by
> 
> Efficiency savings (that everyone claims will happen)
> Cracking down on tax avoidance (which they think they can do because they're so much smarter than those who specialise in how to do the avoiding)
> Making the rich pay more tax (which they always find ways around - see above)
> I'm afraid I don't believe they will be able to afford them. Worse; that won't stop them spending the money they're not going to get, and we all end up paying for it!


Again, another realistic post, its alright making promises it's keeping them that counts


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Labour manifesto costings in full: spend £48.6bn a year and raise £48.6bn a year. Beautiful symmetry


Oh come on, they've either decided they can raise £48.6bn and made costings fit or vice-a-versa. I don't believe for one minute it's a exact match. Just makes me trust them with the economy even less.


----------



## suewhite

DT said:


> Id like to know where all the money is coming from to buy back say the waterboard


I don't see how they can our water is owned by the Americans and Chinese previous to that the French they sold all the land owned then sold on for diddly squat my OH works for them and there is nothing left.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Oh come on, they've either decided they can raise £48.6bn and made costings fit or vice-a-versa. I don't believe for one minute it's a exact match. Just makes me trust them with the economy even less.


Worst decade of growth for 95 YEARS.

2010 National Debt was £979 BILLION - 65% of GDP

2016 National Debt was £1.73 TRILLION - 89% of GDP

Incompetent Tories have our trashed economy but its labour you don't trust


----------



## noushka05

Reaction from someone who cares about the things that really matter - environmental & social justice.

*GeorgeMonbiot*‏@*GeorgeMonbiot* 1h1 hour ago

_It is a great manifesto. If you vote Tory, it's a strong and stable march over a cliff._
_#_*Labour*_ promises a generous, inclusive nation_
_

_


----------



## noushka05

Arnie83 said:


> I like lots of the Labour party promises.
> 
> The trouble for me is, when they are in quite large part paid for by
> 
> Efficiency savings (that everyone claims will happen)
> Cracking down on tax avoidance (which they think they can do because they're so much smarter than those who specialise in how to do the avoiding)
> Making the rich pay more tax (which they always find ways around - see above)
> I'm afraid I don't believe they will be able to afford them. Worse; that won't stop them spending the money they're not going to get, and we all end up paying for it!


If the tories can afford the astronomical cost of their hard brexit we can definitely afford this.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Worst decade of growth for 95 YEARS.
> 
> 2010 National Debt was £979 BILLION - 65% of GDP
> 
> 2016 National Debt was £1.73 TRILLION - 89% of GDP
> 
> Incompetent Tories have our trashed economy but its labour you don't trust
> 
> View attachment 310937


I am confused with the graph because in 1950 Conservatives were in power in 1951 Labour won and in 1955 Conservatives were in power so the spike on the 1950's is vague as to which party caused the spike. The decline in 2010 Labour was in power until April that year (the decline started before 2010 if you look at the graph) and then the Conservatives took office so please explain who caused the decline?

You will find the incompetence has not come from the Tories.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Now I have had a look at Labours Manifesto in more detail I am confused were the money is coming from to pay for the renationalisation of the railway, energy companies etc? I don't know what to think of this manifesto to tell you truth.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> View attachment 310937


Sorry back to the graph if you notice in 1990 there was a spike, if I am reading this right the Conservatives were in power then and then the graph drops and bounces around a little bit this was when Labour was in power and then in 2010 there was a massive decline, this was after Labours spending spree if I am right.

Do you have an up to date graph that explains what state the economy is in from 2010 until 2017, to give us a more realistic picture?

I'll be honest I am very concerned over Labours Manifesto and it's spending does not add up, if they get into power they want to spend, spend, spend but spend what? If they get into power I feel that the country will be worse off.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> I am confused with the graph because in 1950 Conservatives were in power in 1951 Labour won and in 1955 Conservatives were in power so the spike on the 1950's is vague as to which party caused the spike. The decline in 2010 Labour was in power until April that year (the decline started before 2010 if you look at the graph) and then the Conservatives took office so please explain who caused the decline?


Its a Resolution Foundation graph here's what they say word for word: Britain's unprecedented post-crash pay squeeze - the 2010s is on course to be worse decade for pay growth in over 200 years.

Labour had a GLOBAL economic crash to deal with. This mess is created by tory austerity.



stockwellcat said:


> No I have had a look at Labours Manifesto in more detail I am confused were the money is coming from to pay for the renationalisation of the railway, energy companies etc? I don't know what to think of this manifesto to tell you truth.


We'll save money by taking them back into public ownership - even make money. These are cash generating assets that should never have been sold off in the first place. It costs us more money when they are privatised. Public money is going straight into private pockets & we get worse services for it. http://actionforrail.org/the-four-big-myths-of-uk-rail-privatisation/


----------



## Guest

noushka05 said:


> If the tories can afford the astronomical cost of their hard brexit we can definitely afford this.


I cannot understand how come Britain as one of the richest countries in the world, seem so poor when it comes to social security, and so rich when it comes to something else? Your infra structure (road systems, trains etc). should cost much less than ours too, as your climate is mild in comparison and you don´t have many desolate places to maintain. The main question is how you distribute it. You should have a better school system than we, better social security and better NHS. Where does to money go?

Does anyone believe anymore that after Brexit you´ll have more money, by the way? To me it seems that the discussion has focused now mainly on damage control, and as negotiation and elections "assets" May tries to use everything that matters to many of us at least, like people (UK citizens, EU citizens, Gibraltar), animal rights, labour laws. NHS .. I am puzzled, how you let this happen? Or is it that in real life most British are really so wealthy that they feel they don´t need society at all? Pensions don´t matter, because of the savings, education can be private, doctors can be private, there is no need fro public transport etc. Or is that people just don´t believe anymore things can genuinely be better?


----------



## noushka05

Spectator & Telegraphs Fraser Nelson hardly a leftie is keen to point this out.
*
Fraser Nelson*‏Verified [email protected]*FraserNelson* 19h19 hours ago

As Theresa May attacks Jeremy Corbyn for tax-and-spend policies, is it rude to point out that she plans way more spending and way more tax?


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Its a Resolution Foundation graph here's what they say word for word: Britain's unprecedented post-crash pay squeeze - the 2010s is on course to be worse decade for pay growth in over 200 years.
> 
> Labour had a GLOBAL economic crash to deal with. This mess is created by tory austerity.
> 
> We'll save money by taking them back into public ownership - even make money. These are cash generating assets that should never have been sold off in the first place. It costs us more money when they are privatised. Public money is going straight into private pockets & we get worse services for it. http://actionforrail.org/the-four-big-myths-of-uk-rail-privatisation/


But it will cost money for renationalisation as the Government would have to buy these services back.

Labour didn't deal with a global crisis, they made one by going to war in Iraq. Then they caused a near car crash with the UK's Economy (which is clearly explained on your graph) if I remember rightly and the Conservatives had to pick up the pieces.


----------



## Arnie83

noushka05 said:


> If the tories can afford the astronomical cost of their hard brexit we can definitely afford this.


I don't disagree. Whichever party gets in (and it won't be Labour) I think we'll be in the soft and smelly in 5 years. Unless May really is playing a shrewd hand and building her majority so she can face down the b******s and go for a soft Brexit. Which I think is more optimism than realism on my part.

I did notice that Labour have 'promised' to negotiate completely tariff free trade in the single market, though I must have missed the bit where they explained how they were going to do it!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Arnie83 said:


> I did notice that Labour have 'promised' to negotiate completely tariff free trade in the single market, though I must have missed the bit where they explained how they were going to do it!


I'd love to know myself how they are going to do this when if you read on immigration they want to control this which immediately under EU treaties denies us access to the single market as we have to accept the freedoms of movement. So how exactly is Corbyn going to negotiate tariff free trade in the single market?


----------



## leashedForLife

*stockwellcat *said,

_*Labour didn't deal with a global crisis*, they made one by going to war in Iraq. Then they caused a near car-crash in the UK..._
_____________________________
.
.
I don't know which particular "global crisis" is under discussion - was it the Great Recession? - which was indeed global.
.
Who was in power in 2008, '09, & '10? - in 2008, the paper-tiger that was the overvalued, oversold, & criminally irresponsible mortgage market / housing real-estate in the USA, finally collapsed; 
after years of incredible bubble-blowing increases in property value, a decade or more of doubling every 2-years, & the eager sale of extremely-complex financial instruments that bundled toxic mortgages [sold to ppl who could not afford them, & sold by unscrupulous agents & banks who assured the buyers that they would realize many times their buying price in just a few years, so it's an "*investment*", not a monthly vampire sucking all the money out of the buyer's income],
the bubble burst.
.
Wall St went into a vertical nosedive, millions of workers & retirees watched their pension savings evaporate, mutual funds saw the value of their funds plummet to 20% or 30% of their prior value, banks failed, & the Federal SIC had to step in.
The after-effects of the housing-market / financial firms collapse went worldwide - every economy was affected for many years, afterward.
.
Unemployment in the U-S soared, ppl who should have been in the prime years of their earning lives were jobless or worked part-time, savings became an impossible dream, underwater houses stood vacant for years, millions of homebuyers were evicted, & construction came to a complete halt. Retirees saw their savings reduced by half, or their pensions slashed when the investment fund drained away as if a valve had been opened.
.
In the U-S, *"too big to fail"* [or to be *prosecuted!*] banking firms, financial institutions, & other economic engines were saved by Federal-govt fiat; Goldman-Sachs' former managers, Admin, & ex-directors from their Board now make up over half of Trumpling's mahogany Cabinet. :Meh Funny, how short his memory is...
.
We're approaching ten years post-bubble-pop. // The mutual funds will never recoup what they lost, the housing industry is JUST re-emerging as an employer, housing stock still languish unsold in the majority of the US, & a critical shortage of affordable housing has more Americans than ever before in history either outright homeless & on the street, or crammed into places they wouldn't otherwise be - sharing their parents' home, living with relatives, splitting rent with a co-worker, living in B&Bs, renting an SRO hotel room, renting a mobile home, living in a camper or even a car, & so on.
.
Real wages - their purchasing power - has been stagnant in the U-S since the mid- to late-70s. Wages have not even come close to keeping up with inflation; prices have continued to climb, wages have been stuck.
Productivity has soared - because 3 ppl have been doing the jobs of 5. Big-business is thrilled with this; they love the extra profit margin, it works just fine for the employer or the corporation. For employees?... Not so good. 
.
.
.


----------



## stockwellcat.

leashedForLife said:


> *stockwellcat *said,
> 
> _*Labour didn't deal with a global crisis*, they made one by going to war in Iraq. Then they caused a near car-crash in the UK..._





> _____________________________
> .
> .
> I don't know which particular "global crisis" is under discussion - was it the Great Recession? - which was indeed global.
> .
> Who was in power in 2008, '09, & '10? - in 2008,


Labour was in power in 2008, 9 until April 2010.


----------



## leashedForLife

*stockwellcat* said,

_Labour was in power in 2008, '09 until April 2010_.
_____________________________
.
So they didn't "engineer" a global crisis, but they sure as sunrise had to live thru one.  The Great Recession is still sending massive ripples thru the economies of most nations.
.
.
.


----------



## noushka05

MrsZee said:


> I cannot understand how come Britain as one of the richest countries in the world, seem so poor when it comes to social security, and so rich when it comes to something else? Your infra structure (road systems, trains etc). should cost much less than ours too, as your climate is mild in comparison and you don´t have many desolate places to maintain. The main question is how you distribute it. You should have a better school system than we, better social security and better NHS. Where does to money go?
> 
> Does anyone believe anymore that after Brexit you´ll have more money, by the way? To me it seems that the discussion has focused now mainly on damage control, and as negotiation and elections "assets" May tries to use everything that matters to many of us at least, like people (UK citizens, EU citizens, Gibraltar), animal rights, labour laws. NHS .. I am puzzled, how you let this happen? Or is it that in real life most British are really so wealthy that they feel they don´t need society at all? Pensions don´t matter, because of the savings, education can be private, doctors can be private, there is no need fro public transport etc. Or is that people just don´t believe anymore things can genuinely be better?


Yes its incredible isn't it? We're so rich yet seeing more & more kids with malnutrition, a health service on its knees, every public service in crisis, a housing crisis, homelessness increasing. We're going down the pan - fast lol

While our rubbish media distracts us by focusing on benefits 'scroungers' or migrants the money is going up to those who least need it. The tories played us like a fiddle with their austerity con. "We're all in it together' they said. Another slogan so many fell for . It was just an excuse to steal public money & divert it into private pockets & shrink the state. 7 years of crippling cuts & pay freezes & the deficit is still there while the national debt spirals out of control.

I never thought for a second we'd have more money after brexit, but many brexiteers did & many still think we'll be better off We are going to poorer in so many ways. Its so sad, especially for the younger generation who are going to be the ones disproportionately affected by this madness. The tories will crush us into the ground, when they have unlimited power.

I'm as puzzled as you are Mrs Zee. I live in a very deprived area - a mining community at that The tories were hated round here, yet I know people who are voting for May & its totally against their own best interests. They say things like Corbyn is weak, we need to control immigration & all the things you hear in the msm. They actually do believe May is strong. I am very worried for the future of this country, people really believe we cant afford things because that's what we've had drilled into us.

_If we can afford wars to kill people we can afford to help people. _ Didn't Tony Bennn say that?


----------



## Arnie83

stockwellcat said:


> I'd love to know myself how they are going to do this when if you read on immigration they want to control this which immediately under EU treaties denies us access to the single market as we have to accept the freedoms of movement. So how exactly is Corbyn going to negotiate tariff free trade in the single market?


Much the same way as David Davis; in their dreams.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> I'd love to know myself how they are going to do this when if you read on immigration they want to control this which immediately under EU treaties denies us access to the single market as we have to accept the freedoms of movement. So how exactly is Corbyn going to negotiate tariff free trade in the single market?


Well enforcing some of the rules on freedom of movement allowed by the EU would actually mean the majority of people complaining about it would no longer have anything to complain about.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Well enforcing some of the rules on freedom of movement allowed by the EU would actually mean the majority of people complaining about it would no longer have anything to complain about.


I don't know we're you got that from in Labours Manifesto as they like the Conservatives want to end free movement to the UK and control immigration.



> Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union. Britain's immigration system will change,


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> But it will cost money for renationalisation as the Government would have to buy these services back.
> 
> Labour didn't deal with a global crisis, they made one by going to war in Iraq. Then they caused a near car crash with the UK's Economy (which is clearly explained on your graph) if I remember rightly and the Conservatives had to pick up the pieces.


















https://www.theguardian.com/busines...sible-crash-bank-england-governor-mervyn-king


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> I don't know we're you got that from in Labours Manifesto as they like the Conservatives want to end free movement to the UK and control immigration.


Depends on the definition of freedom of movement doesn't it  Freedom to move if you can support yourself is not what most people mean by freedom of movement is it. That was one of the lies of the leave campaign simply as the government(s) both Tory and Labour never enforced it. Enforce rules and call it something else and that promise is fulfilled.


----------



## rona

Just seen this on another site. I can't name the author unfortunately 

For those of you reciting the 'Tories defend the rich' argument, read this. 
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100...

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this... 
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7..
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.

So, that's what they decided to do.. 
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by £20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80. 
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.

So the first four men were unaffected.

They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? 
The paying customers? 
How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? 
They realised that £20 divided by six is £3.33. But if they
subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay. 
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving). 
The sixth now paid £2 instead of £3 (33% saving).

The seventh now paid £5 instead of £7 (28% saving).
The eighth now paid £9 instead of £12 (25% saving).

The ninth now paid £14 instead of £18 (22% saving).

The tenth now paid £49 instead of £59 (16% saving). 
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a pound out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man.

He pointed to the tenth man,"but he got £10!" 
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a pound too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me 
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I got only £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!" 
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. 
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works.


----------



## Goblin

rona said:


> Just seen this on another site. I can't name the author unfortunately
> 
> For those of you reciting the 'Tories defend the rich' argument, read this.


Main problem with that analysis.. it only works if the target number is fixed which isn't reality. Also in between days, only the rich man gets pay rises. The idea of the trickle down economy is that money trickles down. It doesn't. The rich simply get richer.


----------



## 1290423

Perhaps if you want to see the real difference between rich and poor you should go to India, everytime I go I am shocked by the divide .
I do seriously worry that in time we could end up the same.


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> Spectator & Telegraphs Fraser Nelson hardly a leftie is keen to point this out.
> *
> Fraser Nelson*‏Verified [email protected]*FraserNelson* 19h19 hours ago
> 
> As Theresa May attacks Jeremy Corbyn for tax-and-spend policies, is it rude to point out that she plans way more spending and way more tax?


That would depend. If you were just ignorant of the facts or incapable of understanding the graph, no it wouldn't be rude. That would be merely uninformed. Everyone has a right to be uninformed (although some abuse the privilege).

If however you actually understood the graph and knowingly pointed out the falsehood that you point out then that would be lying and, yes, that would be rude.

Depends.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> But it will cost money for renationalisation as the Government would have to buy these services back.
> 
> Labour didn't deal with a global crisis, they made one by going to war in Iraq. Then they caused a near car crash with the UK's Economy (which is clearly explained on your graph) if I remember rightly and the Conservatives had to pick up the pieces.


https://skwawkbox.org/2017/05/16/ac...ial-is-happening-the-ground-is-swelling-ge17/


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> https://skwawkbox.org/2017/05/16/ac...ial-is-happening-the-ground-is-swelling-ge17/
> 
> View attachment 310948


and there you have the scenario of the tenth man not showing up because he's buggered off to somewhere where he can keep his money


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> and there you have the scenario of the tenth man not showing up because he's buggered off to somewhere where he can keep his money


AWH, yes that would be dickie branson me thinks


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> https://skwawkbox.org/2017/05/16/ac...ial-is-happening-the-ground-is-swelling-ge17/
> 
> View attachment 310948


And then big corporate businesses and organisations and billionaires leave the UK. Less jobs available, mass unemployment. All of a sudden the UK looks less attractive under a Labour Government.

Why attack those that pay for there medical treatment with 20% tax for private health insurance?

Sorry the Labour party looks less attractive now with all these tax hikes.


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> Apparently rail renationalisation doesn't cost money. As each franchise expires we just take it back under public ownership .
> 
> For the sake of our NHS & schools we must stop the tories.


An example in question that's proven very popular locally. The Chronicle can hardly be considered a Labour supporting paper, far from it. See pages below. Nexus is formerly Tyne and Wear PTE incidentally.



suewhite said:


> I just don't see where the money is coming from we are in debt beyond belief!!


Yet they can still afford tax cuts for those who can well afford it while the rest of us in work have hardly seen pay increases, pay actually cut in some cases. You might believe we should have our place but don't we deserve better?



suewhite said:


> I don't see how they can our water is owned by the Americans and Chinese previous to that the French they sold all the land owned then sold on for diddly squat my OH works for them and there is nothing left.


That should never have been permitted. Wouldn't it be a good example of getting the country back if returned to British ownership?


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> And then big corporate businesses and organisations and billionaires leave the UK. Less jobs available, mass unemployment. All of a sudden the UK looks less attractive under a Labour Government.


It's one of the principles of the so called trickle down economy. Thing is the last 50 odd years of data from the states shows that cutting the top rate of tax does not:

lead to economic growth
Lead to income growth
lead to wage growth
lead to job creation
All it does it make the rich richer. On the flip side when Brown raised tax level for the rich he did end up with less tax income as people simply moved out of the country so simply taxing people higher is not always the solution, I agree. What are the options however?

Can you provide links showing evidence that if these billionaires left it would cause a collapse or demonstrate they actively create jobs as I cannot find any. Brexit is more likely to cause big corporate businneses and organisations to leave rather than personal tax rises. Corporate tax is more important I think to the creation of jobs, not personal tax levels.

Despite that, I Will say I'm not a fan of simply raising taxes. I still think closing tax loopholes should be the starting point of this process. Anyone pushing this?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> It's one of the principles of the so called trickle down economy. Thing is the last 50 odd years of data from the states shows that cutting the top rate of tax does not:
> 
> lead to economic growth
> Lead to income growth
> lead to wage growth
> lead to job creation
> All it does it make the rich richer. On the flip side when Brown raised tax level for the rich he did end up with less tax income as people simply moved out of the country so simply taxing people higher is not always the solution, I agree. What are the options however?


Well doesn't Corbyn remind you of this as he is planning tax hikes for corporate businesses.



> Despite that, I Will say I'm not a fan of simply raising taxes. I still think closing tax loopholes should be the starting point of this process. Anyone pushing this?


Look at what @KittenKong said with one of his many newspaper clippings or website clippings.








Labour intend raising taxes for corporate businesses, high rate earners etc. You answered your own point here above in the last quoted text.


> Brown raised tax level for the rich he did end up with less tax income as people simply moved out of the country so simply taxing people higher is not always the solution, I agree.


Businesses would shut up shop and move out of the UK. Of course corporate businesses would leave if they are being charged higher rate taxes making people unemployed.

You answered your own questions and points with the Brown quote here:


> Brown raised tax level for the rich he did end up with less tax income as people simply moved out of the country so simply taxing people higher is not always the solution, I agree.


----------



## KittenKong

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...a-attempts-to-rubbish-labours-spending-plans/


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...a-attempts-to-rubbish-labours-spending-plans/
> 
> View attachment 310958


I don't buy that the Tories have doubled or tripled the debt as the debt would have risen with Labour in power as any Government would have to borrow money to run the country. See my point here.

Of course the debt has risen it would have risen anyway.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Well doesn't Corbyn remind you of this as he is planning tax hikes for corporate businesses.


Again, depends on how it is done. Companies like Amazon, Google etc have a special lower tax rate than normal businesses. Shouldn't they be charged more tax? Companies such as Shell, Tesco etc will not move out of the country. Devil's in the details. Comes back to key question.. how do you actually get money made to the people who actually make it, the majority of the population, rather than only the top 1-10%?



> You answered your own questions and points with the Brown quote here:


No I didn't. Can you provide evidence that tax levels of billionaires relates to jobs etc. It's the working populace that creates and maintains UK growth, not the richest in society.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Again, depends on how it is done. Companies like Amazon, Google etc have a special lower tax rate than normal businesses. Shouldn't they be charged more tax? Companies such as Shell, Tesco etc will not move out of the country. Devil's in the details. Comes back to key question.. how do you actually get money made to the people who actually make it, the majority of the population, rather than only the top 1-10%?


I do believe that Amazon's European headquarters are still in mainland Europe (Luxemburg) are they not do not a good example in UK political affairs. Google's European headquarters (Dublin) again are not in the UK if I recall unless this has changed lately.


----------



## MollySmith

stockwellcat said:


> Well doesn't Corbyn remind you of this as he is planning tax hikes for corporate businesses.
> 
> Look at what @KittenKong said with one of his many newspaper clippings or website clippings.
> View attachment 310959
> 
> Labour intend raising taxes for corporate businesses, high rate earners etc. You answered your own point here above in the last quoted text.
> *Businesses would shut up shop and move out of the UK. Of course corporate businesses would leave if they are being charged higher rate taxes making people unemployed.*
> :


Brexit will have more of an effect than this certainly on local level here. And this proposal balances out to more equal earnings (speaking as a p/t employee where directors are paid £100k). But I think kudos to Labour for getting this out, they had two weeks. Bloody miracle.


----------



## 1290423

Well, I have to say after listening to labours manifesto I am for once well and truely speechless! All I can say is I seriously hope they get in if only to prove me wrong because if they do in four years time will all know what poverty is!
And no! Im not voting tory.


----------



## 1290423

And yes, it all sounds great but I stopped believing In Fairytales when I left Junior School


----------



## 1290423

And can someone remind me what happened to British Leyland when the government took them over


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> I don't buy that the Tories have doubled or tripled the debt as the debt would have risen with Labour in power as any Government would have to borrow money to run the country. See my point here.
> 
> Of course the debt has risen it would have risen anyway.


....But the point is the Tories promised to reduce the deficit by forcing austerity onto everyone but themselves.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> ....But the point is the Tories promised to reduce the deficit by forcing austerity onto everyone but themselves.


They did bring the deficit down.
Debt rose, it would have anyway.
Deficit and debt are two different things. Look it up.

In 2009/10 the deficit was at an all time high under a Labour Government:








As you can see that the deficit under a Tory Government is now very low. Can you see how bad Gordon Brown was for Labour and the UK as the 2009/2010 states were when he was in power? The 2017 stats show that the deficit is lower than the 2005 record. So yes in this instance the Austerity as much as we all didn't like it, it worked.

Source of information: http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_deficit_analysis


----------



## stockwellcat.

All I am going to say is god help us if Labour get in.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> All I am going to say is god help us if Labour get in.


I'm actually for the rich paying more tax and the clampdown on the super rich and large industries using loopholes to avoid tax.
But that's about it.
And lets face it those earning 80k+ is,hardly rich when there is only one breadwinner in the family with a large mortgage


----------



## Elles

The interviewer last night asked Jeremy (at least 3 times) if he was rich as he earned over 150k as Labour Party leader. He said no, he was well paid, but he wasn't rich because of what he did with his money. Tha What?


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> They did bring the deficit down.
> Debt rose, it would have anyway.
> Deficit and debt are two different things. Look it up.
> 
> In 2009/10 the deficit was at an all time high under a Labour Government:
> View attachment 310966
> 
> As you can see that the deficit under a Tory Government is now very low. Can you see how bad Gordon Brown was for Labour and the UK as the 2009/2010 states were when he was in power? The 2017 stats show that the deficit is lower than the 2005 record. So yes in this instance the Austerity as much as we all didn't like it worked.
> 
> Source of information: http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_deficit_analysis


Doesn't mean I'm going to vote Tory though. I'd rather jump off a cliff....

Austerity for all except the tax cut for millionaires. "We're all in this together". B****cks.

Recently this was the EU's fault. Now it's Labour's again. Wish they'd make their minds up!

With Brexit the deficit will most certainly increase.


stockwellcat said:


> All I am going to say is god help us if Labour get in.


God help the homeless, disabled, the low paid and the NHS.

Not forgetting the poor foxes who'll be hunted again.

Still, if a country votes to make themselves poorer with Brexit it'll be no surprise they'll fall for TM's soundbites.

No wonder why I'm so disillusioned with this country and look to Europe for inspiration.....


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> With Brexit the deficit will most certainly increase.


I got fed up with the remainers believing they could see into the future so went out and purchased one of these myself:








But mine doesn't seem to work 


> Not forgetting the poor foxes who'll be hunted again.


 I agree on this with you.


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> I
> 
> 
> KittenKong said:
> 
> 
> 
> God help the homeless, disabled, the low paid and the NHS.
> 
> Not forgetting the poor foxes who'll be hunted again.
> ....
> 
> 
> 
> I actually agree with all of this @KittenKong now can someone put the flags out please and that's the reason I'm not voting Tory
Click to expand...

That should say I agree with you on all of this guess I just cocked up quoting you


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 310975


But people are voting Conservatives because they don't believe in Corbyn or Farron and the ex UKIP supporters are joining the Conservatives now.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> God help the homeless, disabled, the low paid and the NHS.


You have a point there @KittenKong.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> But people are voting Conservatives because they don't believe in Corbyn or Farron and the ex UKIP supporters are joining the Conservatives now.


Not this one


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Not this one


So you're voting UKIP


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I got fed up with the remainers believing they could see into the future so went out and purchased one of these myself:
> View attachment 310976
> 
> But mine doesn't seem to work
> I agree on this with you.


Are shame you broke your ball or is it more a case it wasn't fit for purpose perhaps you should get on to Trading Standards


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> So you're voting UKIP


Tbh I haven't seen who is standing in our area, but cant stand our tory mp so he's out. I was a member of ukip for three years, but that was purely because they were our only chance to get out of the eu so take those two out of the equation and I shall judge who ever else is standing on their merits alone


----------



## Goblin

Elles said:


> The interviewer last night asked Jeremy (at least 3 times) if he was rich as he earned over 150k as Labour Party leader. He said no, he was well paid, but he wasn't rich because of what he did with his money. Tha What?


Rich, not me.. people have more than I do so I cannot be. That is part of the problem with society, it's all about who has more, not who has less.


----------



## 1290423

Just checked who is standing
We have 4
Ukip
Tory
Lib dem
Lab


----------



## Elles

Nigel Farage was a popular chap, I suspect a lot of people who voted ukip were voting Farage and now he's gone and we're out of Europe they can't see any reason to keep voting for them. Imho


----------



## Jesthar

I had a personal letter from Theresa May today (the MailMerge kind of personal, that is). It basically said "This election is all about Brexit, and if you don't vote for me it will be awful for you in the future!"

Nothing about home policies, the NHS, education, cuts etc. Just Brexit, and how important it is that SHE has my vote for her Strong and Stable leadership or she won't have a strong negotiating hand in Brexit. Strange, I'm not even in her constituency, yet somehow she's the one I'm voting for - via what she describes as "my candidate <Tory X>." Yet at the same time, she's warning that every vote for my local Labour candidate will be counted by Jeremy Corbyn as a "vote for him, and as a vote for his nonsensical and dangerous ideas". You couldn't make this up, could you? By contrast, the Lib Dem and Labour offerings have been pretty comprehensive policy wise, and included local affairs.)

Well, my dear Theresa, congratulations. Any party leader that feels the need to send out a communication that is basically fact free emotional blackmail has definitely ensured I _don't_ vote for them...


----------



## Elles

What about fracking? The conservatives have overruled councils who have turned down fracking in their area and whose constituents don't want it. They support fracking, so are prepared to step in and give permission to companies despite the British People and their elected councils in the particular area not wanting it. Labour have said they'll ban it I believe? Scotland and Wales already have a halt on it atm.

It seems energy and climate change aren't biggies in this election?


----------



## noushka05

Attlee did all this at a time the country was bankrupt after World War 2. The tories said his manifesto wasn't credible too & tried to block him at every turn on his policies - they treated him like they do Corbyn. This what progressive politics is all about, benefitting the majority not the few. Labours manifesto is full of good sensible policies, where is the Tories manifesto? They called this election you'd have thought they'd have had one prepared! I wonder if all those squealing about labours will hold Mays under as much scrutiny?


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> What about fracking? The conservatives have overruled councils who have turned down fracking in their area and whose constituents don't want it. They support fracking, so are prepared to step in and give permission to companies despite the British People and their elected councils in the particular area not wanting it. Labour have said they'll ban it I believe? Scotland and Wales already have a halt on it atm.
> 
> It seems energy and climate change aren't biggies in this election?


Both Labour & the Greens will ban fracking. But if the tories get in much of the country will be opened up for unregulated fracking. Our countryside will become a toxic wasteland. Green energy & climate change certainly aren't biggies for the tories.

Labours manifesto delivering a ban of fracking -










People in central England beware - & indeed everywhere!. Think hard who you vote for, fracking ruins lives. http://frack-off.org.uk/social-medi...or-survey-in-north-nottinghamshirederbyshire/

Ineos recruiting for fracking seismic survey to invade Notts/Debys communities soon -


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> But people are voting Conservatives because they don't believe in Corbyn or Farron and the ex UKIP supporters are joining the Conservatives now.


Ex UKIP supporters are joining the Conservatives because the Tories basically_ are_ ukip now, that's how far to the right they've shifted.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Just seen this.

May v's Corbyn Live 29th May 2017 at 8:30pm on Sky News and Channel 4, they are looking for people to join the audience:

http://news.sky.com/story/quiz-the-leaders-join-the-audience-for-may-v-corbyn-10880674

I thought May said she was not doing this.
Now I am confused.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> But it will cost money for renationalisation as the Government would have to buy these services back.
> 
> Labour didn't deal with a global crisis, they made one by going to war in Iraq. Then they caused a near car crash with the UK's Economy (which is clearly explained on your graph) if I remember rightly and the Conservatives had to pick up the pieces.


We don't buy them back - we take them back into public ownership when their franchise expires -



noushka05 said:


> _Rail users are sick and tired of paying astronomical prices for a service that simply isn't up to scratch. We have to put up with overcrowded trains, unreliable services, and we spend up to six times as much on rail tickets as other European passengers._
> 
> _"The irony is that some of the biggest profiters are the state-owned rail companies of our European neighbours. Taxpayers' money that should be reinvested into services is ending up in the hands of overseas shareholders. By taking back individual franchises when they expire, the Government could save up to £1 billion a year every year._
> 
> _"It's time to end this rip-off and bring our railways back into public ownership._
> 
> _"This isn't a call for a throwback to a '70s British Rail. The modern, efficient, clean, affordable services enjoyed in other parts of Europe offer a much better blueprint than our own past_


Don't fall for the tories LIE on labours handling of the economy or austerity SWC.

Please read this by the renowned US Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman. - https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/14/opinion/paul-krugman-labours-dead-center.html?_r=2

(here's a few snippets but please have a read at the whole article)

Worse, they all implicitly accepted the bogus justification for those policies, in effect pleading guilty to policy crimes that Labour did not, in fact, commit. If you want a U.S. analogy, it's as if all the leading candidates for the Democratic nomination in 2004 had gone around declaring, "We were weak on national security, and 9/11 was our fault." Would we have been surprised if Democratic primary voters had turned to a candidate who rejected that canard, whatever other views he or she held?

In the British case, the false accusations against Labour involve fiscal policy, specifically claims that the Labour governments that ruled Britain from 1997 to 2010 spent far beyond their means, creating a deficit and debt crisis that caused the broader economic crisis. The fiscal crisis, in turn, supposedly left no alternative to severe cuts in spending, especially spending that helps the poor.

These claims have, one must admit, been picked up and echoed by almost all British news media. It's not just that the media have failed to subject Conservative claims to hard scrutiny, they have reported them as facts. It has been an amazing thing to watch - because every piece of this conventional narrative is completely false.

Was the last Labour government fiscally irresponsible? Britain had a modest budget deficit on the eve of the economic crisis of 2008, but as a share of G.D.P. it wasn't very high - about the same, as it turns out, as the U.S. budget deficit at the same time. British government debt was lower, as a share of G.D.P., than it had been when Labour took office a decade earlier, and was lower than in any other major advanced economy except Canada.

In short, the whole narrative about Labour's culpability for the economic crisis and the urgency of austerity is nonsense. But it is nonsense that was consistently reported by British media as fact. And all of Mr. Corbyn's rivals for Labour leadership bought fully into that conventional nonsense, in effect accepting the Conservative case that their party did a terrible job of managing the economy, which simply isn't true. So as I said, Mr. Corbyn's triumph isn't that surprising given the determination of moderate Labour politicians to accept false claims about past malfeasance.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Jesthar said:


> I had a personal letter from Theresa May today (the MailMerge kind of personal, that is). It basically said "This election is all about Brexit, and if you don't vote for me it will be awful for you in the future!"


 I had this letter to. Here is the main body of the letter:


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> Just seen this.
> 
> May v's Corbyn Live 29th May 2017 at 8:30pm on Sky News and Channel 4, they are looking for people to join the audience:
> 
> http://news.sky.com/story/quiz-the-leaders-join-the-audience-for-may-v-corbyn-10880674
> 
> I thought May said she was not doing this.
> Now I am confused.


No, she said she wouldn't join the other leaders for a presidential style slanging match (debate).


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Was the last Labour government fiscally irresponsible? Britain had a modest budget deficit on the eve of the economic crisis of 2008.


True but what happened in 2009 and 2010 then when Labour (Gordon Brown declared himself PM) was in Government ?

These charts are taken from a reliable source:
http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_deficit_analysis


















These charts show that the austerity as much as everyone hated it worked as the deficit is now below 2005's levels.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Just seen this on another site. I can't name the author unfortunately
> 
> For those of you reciting the 'Tories defend the rich' argument, read this.
> Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100...
> 
> If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...
> The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
> The fifth would pay £1.
> The sixth would pay £3.
> The seventh would pay £7..
> The eighth would pay £12.
> The ninth would pay £18.
> The tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.
> 
> So, that's what they decided to do..
> The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.
> 
> "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by £20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.
> The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.
> 
> So the first four men were unaffected.
> 
> They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men?
> The paying customers?
> How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?
> They realised that £20 divided by six is £3.33. But if they
> subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
> And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
> The sixth now paid £2 instead of £3 (33% saving).
> 
> The seventh now paid £5 instead of £7 (28% saving).
> The eighth now paid £9 instead of £12 (25% saving).
> 
> The ninth now paid £14 instead of £18 (22% saving).
> 
> The tenth now paid £49 instead of £59 (16% saving).
> Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.
> 
> "I only got a pound out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man.
> 
> He pointed to the tenth man,"but he got £10!"
> "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a pound too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me
> "That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I got only £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
> "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
> The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
> The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
> 
> And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works.


Don't worry, even Snopes can't find the name of the author:Hilarious http://www.snopes.com/business/taxes/howtaxes.asp

Although it seems to me it was originally written by someone supporting George Bush's tax cuts for the rich.

And we know trickle down is a con now Rona


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Just checked who is standing
> We have 4
> Ukip
> Tory
> Lib dem
> Lab


Believe it or not these parties are standing were I am  I'd be worried if they weren't as it's a General Election after all


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> True but what happened in 2009 and 2010 then when Labour (Gordon Brown declared himself PM) was in Government ?
> 
> This is my chart taken from a reliable source:
> http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_deficit_analysis
> 
> View attachment 310988
> 
> 
> This chart shows that the austerity as much as everyone hates it worked as the deficit is below 2005's levels.


Focusing on the deficit was to justify austerity. The tories missed every one of their own targets. They told us we had to tighten our belts but they would get rid of the deficit by the end of the first Parliament...then the second parliament ... then ... targets were missed over & over again & they massively increased national debt. Borrowing & debt are up under them, this is not labours fault. Where has all that 'were all in this together' money gone? Imagine if this was labour? The economy is in a far worse state now. They are totally incompetent.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> they massively increased national debt. Borrowing & debt are up under them, this is not labours fault. Where has all that 'were all in this together' money gone? Imagine if this was labour?
> 
> View attachment 310992


National Debt and Borrowing would have gone up regardless of which party was in power. This rubbish that Conservatives have doubled or tripled the debt is so not true as these amounts would have had to be borrowed by the Labour Party, Lib Dems or whoever else would have been in power if Conservatives were not in power. Governments need to borrow money to run there country as they do not enter into power with a cash pot from there party it is borrowed from the Bank of England.

So again national Debt and Borrowing would have gone up regardless so this arguement is nonescene. This money would have had to be borrowed anyway.


----------



## noushka05

noushka05 said:


> Focusing on the deficit was to justify austerity. The tories missed every one of their own targets. They told us we had to tighten our belts but they would get rid of the deficit by the end of the first Parliament...then the second parliament ... then ... targets were missed over & over again & they massively increased national debt. Borrowing & debt are up under them, this is not labours fault. Where has all that 'were all in this together' money gone? Imagine if this was labour? The economy is in a far worse state now. They are totally incompetent.
> 
> View attachment 310992


Actually I'm not sure incompetent is the right word - they're achieving what they set out to achieve.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> National Debt and Borrowing would have gone up regardless of which party was in power. This rubbish that Conservatives have doubled or tripled the debt is so not true as these amounts would have had to be borrowed by the Labour Party, Lib Dems or whoever else would have been in power if Conservatives were not in power. Governments need to borrow money to run there country as they do not enter into power with a cash pot from there party it is borrowed from the Bank of England.
> 
> So again national Debt and Borrowing would have gone up regardless so this arguement is nonescene. This money would have had to be borrowed anyway.


Don't be an apologist for them. Look at what Paul Krugman says - look at what the tories are forced to admit 






Remember this lie?


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Don't be an apologist for them. Look at what Paul Krugman says - look at what the tories are forced to admit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Remember this lie?
> 
> View attachment 310994


But you don't get it.
The UK was crippled from the financial crisis, so had to borrow money from the Bank of England to survive. The deficit was at record highs and needed bringing down and the Conservatives achieved it, look at the charts and website link I provided. The UK didn't get bailed out by the EU like other countries did.

I am not excusing the Conservatives, but the facts that you relish on point to the fact they done the right thing at the time. The UK was one of the first countries to come out of the financial crisis.

I hope the debt will one day be tackled but now is not the right time entering into the negotiations stage with the EU. You will find more borrowing will be needed.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> But you don't get it.
> The UK was crippled from the financial crisis, so had to borrow money from the Bank of England to survive. The deficit was at record highs and needed bringing down and the Conservatives achieved it, look at the charts and website link I provided. The UK didn't get bailed out by the EU like other countries did.
> 
> I am not excusing the Conservatives, but the facts that you relish on point to the fact they don't the right thing at the time. The UK was one of the first countries to come out of the financial crisis.
> 
> I hope the debt will one day be tackled but now is not the right time entering into the negotiations stage with the EU. You will find more borrowing will be needed.


Did you even bother to read that article by Paul Krugman? Considering there was a GLOBAL economic crash Labour did a pretty good job, the tories inherited a growing economy. They lied to impose their austerity con on us. All those cuts, the sustained pay freezes, the sell off of our assests - wheres all that money SWC?


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Did you even bother to read that article by Paul Krugman? Considering there was a GLOBAL economic crash Labour did a pretty good job, the tories inherited a growing economy. They lied to impose their austerity con on us. All those cuts, the sustained pay freezes, the sell off of our assests - wheres all that money SWC?
> 
> View attachment 310996


Your opinion @noushka05. I do love the conspiracy theories you come up with.

Regarding were the money is you tell me?

The financial institutions don't believe there is money hidden anywhere. OBR etc beg to differ to what you are implying. Governments aren't allowed to hide money, I mean how would they benefit from doing this as every penny has to be accounted for and the books are heavily scrutinized each financial year. The money has to be spent on the country.


----------



## noushka05

*Rufus Hound *‏Verified [email protected]*RufusHound* 15h15 hours ago

This "newspaper" is editted by a SITTING TORY MP. 
This isn't news. It's propoganda.

.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> *Rufus Hound *‏Verified [email protected]*RufusHound* 15h15 hours ago
> 
> This "newspaper" is editted by a SITTING TORY MP.
> This isn't news. It's propoganda.
> 
> .
> View attachment 310997


George Osborne stood down as an MP a few weeks back so he is no longer a sitting MP as you put it.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Your opinion @noushka05. I do love the conspiracy theories you come up with.
> 
> Regarding were the money is you tell me?
> 
> The financial institutions don't believe there is money hidden anywhere. OBR etc beg to differ to what you are implying. Governments aren't allowed to hide money, I mean how would they benefit from doing this as every penny has to be accounted for and the books are heavily scrutinized each financial year. The money has to be spent on the country.


Are you saying Paul Krugman is some kind of fraud? Did I somehow tamper with the George Osborne video?

I'll tell you were all that money has gone - UP! Public money has been diverten into private pockets - that what austerity was all about. Paying down the deficit & the debt were big fat lies to justify it. If you want more of the same & fox hunting vote tory. The choice is yours.


----------



## stockwellcat.

stockwellcat said:


> George Osborne stood down as an MP a few weeks back so he is no longer a sitting MP as you put it.


Just to back up what I said @noushka05

*George Osborne to stand down as MP as he leaves Westminster 'for now'*
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/19/george-osborne-announces-will-stand-mp/amp/


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Just to back up what I said @noushka05
> 
> *George Osborne to stand down as MP as he leaves Westminster 'for now'*
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/19/george-osborne-announces-will-stand-mp/amp/


Yes you're quite right sorry about that & seems Rufus has already been corrected.

*Rufus Hound *‏Verified [email protected]*RufusHound* 14h14 hours ago

A delight to receive so many tweets correcting my error. Yes.
There are no sitting MPs, thus its definitely not Tory propaganda. Apologies

The fact that he was the most corrosively idealogical
Tory Chancellor in living memory means nothing. As you were.

...


----------



## havoc

Just heard a UKIP candidate say a large majority for TM would result in a soft Brexit. Seems strange at first but it does make sense. The rest of the EU don't care who is negotiating for the UK or how politically secure they are. An increased majority is not any help with negotiations in Europe, it's a cushion against failure here.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Ok, let's put the nonsense that is the conservative's who are wholly to blame for the level of debt once and for all. They have been coping with a world wide financial crisis on top of being sat at the bottom of a financial hole left by Labour (who have already got their spades out in readiness should they win). Anyone remember this https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/175749/Labour-There-s-no-money-left-in-Treasury


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok, let's put the nonsense that is the conservative's are wholly to blame for the level of debt once and for all. They have been coping with a world wide financial crisis on top of being sat at the bottom of a financial hole left by Labour (who have already got their spades out in readiness should they win). Anyone remember this https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/175749/Labour-There-s-no-money-left-in-Treasury


OMG not that old chestnut:Hilarious It was a JOKE Byrne wasn't being serious & he regretted it because the tores used it against labour to enforce cuts on the poorest. FYI the Tax Payers Alliance is dodgy right wing think tank, the Express is gutter press not credible sources of references by any stretch of the imagination.

Please read the FACTS about the state of the economy under labour by a heavyweight on the economy - Paul Krugman - https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/14/opinion/paul-krugman-labours-dead-center.html?_r=2

,


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> OMG not that old chestnut:Hilarious It was a JOKE Byrne wasn't being serious & he regretted it because the tores used it against labour to enforce cuts on the poorest. FYI the Tax Payers Alliance is dodgy right wing think tank, the Express is gutter press not credible sources of references by any stretch of the imagination.
> 
> Please read the FACTS about the state of the economy under labour by a heavyweight on the economy - Paul Krugman - https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/14/opinion/paul-krugman-labours-dead-center.html?_r=2
> 
> ,


So that's the old chestnut that shows Labour admitted leaving power with a record high in borrowing in their last year in government which the conservative's have now cut in half?


----------



## Jesthar

stockwellcat said:


> I had this letter to. Here is the main body of the letter:
> View attachment 310986


That wasn't the letter I received, mine was two pages long and a lot heavier on the emotional manipulation... Didn't ask for money, either, so probably a variant designed for those they aren't sure are voting Tory


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> So that's the old chestnut that shows Labour admitted leaving power with a record high in borrowing in their last year in government which the conservative's have now cut in half?


In your mind maybe. But then, despite overwhelming evidence, you don't believe our NHS is at breaking point & will be finished off if the tories get back in.

We had austerity AND record borrowing under the tories. Because austerity reduces the amount of tax that government collects so it contributes to economic decline & growing debt  Or can you provide references which refute this?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> And then big corporate businesses and organisations and billionaires leave the UK. Less jobs available, mass unemployment. All of a sudden the UK looks less attractive under a Labour Government.
> 
> Why attack those that pay for there medical treatment with 20% tax for private health insurance?
> 
> Sorry the Labour party looks less attractive now with all these tax hikes.


I'm afraid I wouldn't be able to bring myself to vote for that manifesto so I'm glad I have the option of the Lib Dem being the best challenger to the Tory here - although I haven't seen their manifesto yet. With only 3 weeks to go I still don't know who is standing and still haven't seen any manifesto other than Labour's. This manifesto does not seem "progressive" to me, it sounds like going back to the dark ages. Why the 20% tax for private health insurance? do they seriously think they can sort the NHS out so quickly that it can cope with all the extra demand if all those people with insurance come flooding back? We have insurance, not because we think we are too posh for the NHS or because we want to queue jump but because we are both self employed and have to carefully plan any time off around our work schedule, so its vital we can choose when we have treatment. The premium costs less than one of my dog's insurance - oh someone give Labour a hint they could make millions adding a 20% levy to pet insurance too or hey I have an idea what about an annual tax for *all* home owners after all they have pots of wealth sitting there doing nothing. I feel so sorry for the foxes because I think this manifesto has probably sealed their fate


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> With only 3 weeks to go I still don't know who is standing and still haven't seen any manifesto other than Labour's....


Probably waiting to see where they can score the most "points" promising the earth which they will not be capable of delivering on. Only a manifesto after all...


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm afraid I wouldn't be able to bring myself to vote for that manifesto so I'm glad I have the option of the Lib Dem being the best challenger to the Tory here - although I haven't seen their manifesto yet. With only 3 weeks to go I still don't know who is standing and still haven't seen any manifesto other than Labour's. This manifesto does not seem "progressive" to me, it sounds like going back to the dark ages. Why the 20% tax for private health insurance? do they seriously think they can sort the NHS out so quickly that it can cope with all the extra demand if all those people with insurance come flooding back? We have insurance, not because we think we are too posh for the NHS or because we want to queue jump but because we are both self employed and have to carefully plan any time off around our work schedule, so its vital we can choose when we have treatment. The premium costs less than one of my dog's insurance - oh someone give Labour a hint they could make millions adding a 20% levy to pet insurance too or hey I have an idea what about an annual tax for *all* home owners after all they have pots of wealth sitting there doing nothing. I feel so sorry for the foxes because I think this manifesto has probably sealed their fate


I'm sure most people wont agree with all their policies RPH but their policies for social justice are extremely progressive & they are very good on the environment too. If people care about animals the labour manifesto is very progressive only the Greens are better.


----------



## noushka05

*The London Economic*‏@*LondonEconomic* 16h16 hours ago
Can Corbyn's #*LabourManifesto* give hope & unite a







divided by Brexit? A manifesto worth a read: http://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/cobyns-labour-manifesto-well-worth-read/16/05/…


----------



## kimthecat

just found out the candidtaes for our area are , conservative , labour , ukip, green and Lib dem .

no Love party or monster raving loony party this time. 

In this thread poll, I first voted Abstain and then changed to to undecided. still undecided, 
ours is a safe seat , Ive only had Conservative blumpf through the door so far .
I dunno


----------



## Jesthar

kimthecat said:


> just found out the candidtaes for our area are , conservative , labour , ukip, green and Lib dem .
> 
> no Love party or monster raving loony party this time.
> 
> In this thread poll, I first voted Abstain and then changed to to undecided. still undecided,
> ours is a safe seat , Ive only had Conservative blumpf through the door so far .
> I dunno


No seat is safe if all the people who usually don't vote turn out - anything can happen


----------



## Satori

KittenKong said:


> Austerity for all except the tax cut for millionaires.


What tax cut for millionaires?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> I'm sure most people wont agree with all their policies RPH but their policies for social justice are extremely progressive & they are very good on the environment too. If people care about animals the labour manifesto is very progressive only the Greens are better.
> 
> View attachment 311013


The problem is that whilst we know the vast majority of the population are opposed to hunting and do care about animals the same people are highly unlikely to vote for that manifesto purely because of their animal policies. The other negative things of which there are many are likely to turn even the most dedicated of animal lovers away.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Here is the Liberal Democrats manifesto:
http://www.libdems.org.uk/manifesto

.


----------



## Elles

I'm with @rottiepointerhouse on this. I think the labour manifesto doesn't want to tax the rich to pay for the poor, they want to make us all the poor. I don't like to see 'we'll tax this, no we'll tax that and they shouldn't have that, so let's tax this too'. It's not just the rich who take out health insurance and send their kids to private school, so that's not taxing the rich who can afford to pay a bit more, or closing loopholes to make companies like Amazon and eBay pay more, is it.

It's not just that, he's talking about targets for health workers e.g. No-one waiting over 4 hours, as though bottlenecks can be resolved by people working faster. It doesn't work. Brexiteers won't vote for them, they're saying we'll leave the Eu, but not really.

As for renationalising, that's all well and good, but we haven't managed brexit yet, that's something for a successful government to consider, cost and gradually sort out, not something to be sprung on us as this stage imo.

I feel as though this time there's a choice between two extremes, I don't like either of them. It's tough, because I'd rather be broke than see the countryside torn up with fracking and I hate a government that runs roughshod over the people it's supposed to represent, but the labour manifesto is too extreme left for me. I wish we had PR, I wouldn't vote for any of the main parties.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Here is the Liberal Democrats manifesto:
> http://www.libdems.org.uk/manifesto


I've just been reading it and so far there are quite a lot of things I agree with/approve of - not least


It is better for patients and for the NHS if we keep people healthy in the first place, rather than just waiting until people develop illnesses and come for treatment, but 40% of NHS spending is on diseases that are preventable. We need to do more to promote healthy eating and exercise, making people aware of the dangers of smoking and excessive consumption of alcohol and other drugs, and helping to improve mental health and wellbeing. 

Maintain the 'triple lock' of increasing the State Pension each year by the highest of earnings growth, prices growth or 2.5% for the next Parliament.

Suspend the use of neonicotinoids until proven that their use in agriculture does not harm bees or other pollinators.
Introduce stronger penalties for animal cruelty offences, increasing the maximum sentencing from six months to five years, and bring in a ban on caged hens.
Clamp down on illegal pet imports through legal identification requirements for online sales, and minimise the use of animals in scientific experimentation, including by funding research into alternatives.

Continue to improve standards of animal health and welfare in agriculture by updating farm animal welfare codes and promoting the responsible stewardship of antibiotic drugs.
Ensure that future trade deals require high safety, environmental and animal welfare standards for food imports, including clear and unambiguous country of origin labelling for meat and dairy products.
Develop safe, effective, humane, and evidence-based ways of controlling bovine TB, including by investing to produce workable vaccines.

Building on the success of our plastic bag charge, introduce a 5p charge on disposable coffee cups to reduce waste.


Ensure that the immigration system is operated fairly and efficiently, with strict control of borders, including entry and exit checks and adequately funded Border Force policing of entry by irregular routes.
Hold an annual debate in Parliament on skill and labour market shortfalls and surpluses to identify the migration necessary to meet the UK's needs.
Continue to allow high-skilled immigration to support key sectors of our economy, and ensure work, tourist and family visas are processed quickly and efficiently.

I'm a bit disappointed it doesn't actually say to keep the ban on fox hunting and strengthen existing law. There are quite a few things I don't agree with as well but on the whole their manifesto suits me better than the Labour one.


----------



## Elles

Oh the lib dems want another referendum on the Eu, no thanks. They want PR. That'll do nicely. I prefer this manifesto. They have no chance though.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I've just been reading it and so far there are quite a lot of things I agree with/approve of - not least
> 
> 
> It is better for patients and for the NHS if we keep people healthy in the first place, rather than just waiting until people develop illnesses and come for treatment, but 40% of NHS spending is on diseases that are preventable. We need to do more to promote healthy eating and exercise, making people aware of the dangers of smoking and excessive consumption of alcohol and other drugs, and helping to improve mental health and wellbeing.
> 
> Maintain the 'triple lock' of increasing the State Pension each year by the highest of earnings growth, prices growth or 2.5% for the next Parliament.
> 
> Suspend the use of neonicotinoids until proven that their use in agriculture does not harm bees or other pollinators.
> Introduce stronger penalties for animal cruelty offences, increasing the maximum sentencing from six months to five years, and bring in a ban on caged hens.
> Clamp down on illegal pet imports through legal identification requirements for online sales, and minimise the use of animals in scientific experimentation, including by funding research into alternatives.
> 
> Continue to improve standards of animal health and welfare in agriculture by updating farm animal welfare codes and promoting the responsible stewardship of antibiotic drugs.
> Ensure that future trade deals require high safety, environmental and animal welfare standards for food imports, including clear and unambiguous country of origin labelling for meat and dairy products.
> Develop safe, effective, humane, and evidence-based ways of controlling bovine TB, including by investing to produce workable vaccines.
> 
> Building on the success of our plastic bag charge, introduce a 5p charge on disposable coffee cups to reduce waste.
> 
> 
> Ensure that the immigration system is operated fairly and efficiently, with strict control of borders, including entry and exit checks and adequately funded Border Force policing of entry by irregular routes.
> Hold an annual debate in Parliament on skill and labour market shortfalls and surpluses to identify the migration necessary to meet the UK's needs.
> Continue to allow high-skilled immigration to support key sectors of our economy, and ensure work, tourist and family visas are processed quickly and efficiently.
> 
> I'm a bit disappointed it doesn't actually say to keep the ban on fox hunting and strengthen existing law. There are quite a few things I don't agree with as well but on the whole their manifesto suits me better than the Labour one.


I agree with alot of what they have said in their manifesto it is alot better than the Labour manifesto. I don't mind if I have to pay an extra 1p on income tax to help give the NHS more money, it makes sense after all. Regarding the second Referendum to ask the British people if they agree with the deal offered by the EU, I can live with that.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> We had austerity AND record borrowing under the tories. Because austerity reduces the amount of tax that government collects so it contributes to economic decline & growing debt  Or can you provide references which refute this?


Of course debt has increased. BUT the conservative's currently borrow half per annum than Labour did, that's thanks to austerity. Going on Labour's outgoing amount of borrowing where do you presume the level of total debt would be today if they were in power, more or less than it currently is? I'm confident it would be far more, and their spend spend spend manifesto only reinforces this.


----------



## Elles

If the less well off and the poor are the ones paying for austerity and low borrowing rates, there's something not quite right there.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

I prefer this presentation as I find it easier to read

http://www.libdems.org.uk/manifesto

What they say about Brexit

At the end of negotiations, there will be a decision on the deal. The Conservatives want the decision to be taken by politicians. Liberal Democrats believe the British people should have the final say.

That's why, when the terms of our future relationship with the EU have been negotiated (over the next two years on the Government's timetable), we will put that deal to a vote of the British people in a referendum, with the alternative option of staying in the EU on the ballot paper. We continue to believe that there is no deal as good for the UK outside the EU as the one it already has as a member.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Of course debt has increased. BUT the conservative's currently borrow half per annum than Labour did, that's thanks to austerity. Going on Labour's outgoing amount of borrowing where do you presume the level of total debt would be today if they were in power, more or less than it currently is? I'm confident it would be far more, and their spend spend spend manifesto only reinforces this.


References please?

The tories have borrowed more than then every labour government combined - & repaid less debt - http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/...the-biggest-borrowers-over-the-last-70-years/


----------



## Arnie83

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I prefer this presentation as I find it easier to read
> 
> http://www.libdems.org.uk/manifesto
> 
> What they say about Brexit
> 
> At the end of negotiations, there will be a decision on the deal. The Conservatives want the decision to be taken by politicians. Liberal Democrats believe the British people should have the final say.
> 
> That's why, when the terms of our future relationship with the EU have been negotiated (over the next two years on the Government's timetable), we will put that deal to a vote of the British people in a referendum, with the alternative option of staying in the EU on the ballot paper. We continue to believe that there is no deal as good for the UK outside the EU as the one it already has as a member.


I really can't see how anyone can disagree with that. Of course, some 'Leavers' will, because they're scared that people might change their minds, and they're not allowed to do that. Perhaps what I mean is that I really can't see how anyone can reasonably disagree with that.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> The problem is that whilst we know the vast majority of the population are opposed to hunting and do care about animals the same people are highly unlikely to vote for that manifesto purely because of their animal policies. The other negative things of which there are many are likely to turn even the most dedicated of animal lovers away.


I honestly cant see that many negatives. Banning fracking, lots of good news for our NHS, helping the poor, saving badgers, investing in renewables, banning zero hours contracts. This is an amazing manifesto imo - the policies would be very mainstream in other European countries.












Elles said:


> I'm with @rottiepointerhouse on this. I think the labour manifesto doesn't want to tax the rich to pay for the poor, they want to make us all the poor. I don't like to see 'we'll tax this, no we'll tax that and they shouldn't have that, so let's tax this too'. It's not just the rich who take out health insurance and send their kids to private school, so that's not taxing the rich who can afford to pay a bit more, or closing loopholes to make companies like Amazon and eBay pay more, is it.
> 
> It's not just that, he's talking about targets for health workers e.g. No-one waiting over 4 hours, as though bottlenecks can be resolved by people working faster. It doesn't work. Brexiteers won't vote for them, they're saying we'll leave the Eu, but not really.
> 
> As for renationalising, that's all well and good, but we haven't managed brexit yet, that's something for a successful government to consider, cost and gradually sort out, not something to be sprung on us as this stage imo.
> 
> I feel as though this time there's a choice between two extremes, I don't like either of them. It's tough, because I'd rather be broke than see the countryside torn up with fracking and I hate a government that runs roughshod over the people it's supposed to represent, but the labour manifesto is too extreme left for me. I wish we had PR, I wouldn't vote for any of the main parties.


I disagree, this is a really progressive manifesto. Its only taxing the top 5% of earners. Just watch this video & think of it this way round Elles.






And renationalising the railways will save us money.










Gosh I really wish we had PR too

.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> *the British people should have the final say.*


I have actually come around to this. Yes the British people should get the final say as it is everyone's future in the UK that will be affected when the UK leaves the EU. This would also mean that a good deal would have to be negotiated for the British people to accept it.

There is an idea floating around that the Tories might opt for a softer Brexit if they win the majority vote in the next few weeks. Now that will upset hard brexitiers if they do.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> References please?
> 
> The tories have borrowed more than then every labour government combined - & repaid less debt - http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/...the-biggest-borrowers-over-the-last-70-years/


Don't have time to keep helping you by posting links. However have a look at that article I posted earlier then look at the latest borrowing figures. It's all there for you.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> I honestly cant see that many negatives. Banning fracking, lots of good news for our NHS, helping the poor, saving badgers, investing in renewables, banning zero hours contracts. This is an amazing manifesto imo - the policies would be very mainstream in other European countries.
> 
> View attachment 311023
> 
> 
> I disagree, this is a really progressive manifesto. Its only taxing the top 5% of earners. Just watch this video & think of it this way round Elles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And renationalising the railways will save us money.
> 
> View attachment 311022
> 
> 
> Gosh I really wish we had PR too
> 
> .


Yes I read it the first time you posted it noush and I don't like it any better the second time. These are just a few of my objections - (I'm not convinced about all the re nationalisation but am open to being convinced) however I don't agree with

Free childcare for all 2 - 4 year olds. 
Free school meals.
20% tax on private health.
20% tax on private schools.
45 p tax rate for those earning over £80,000.
50 p tax rate for those earning over £123,000.
Lowering the voting age to 16.
The right to 3 year tenancies. Although in fairness the Lib dem policy is even worse on that 

Give tenants first refusal to buy the home they are renting from a landlord who decides to sell during the tenancy at the market rate according to an independent valuation.
Promote longer tenancies of three years or more with an inflation-linked annual rent increase built in, to give tenants security and limit rent hikes.
One of the things I dislike about Labour is their desire to "control" everything and punish people who have worked hard and achieved some financial success/security. By all means go after the big corporations like @Elles mentioned but not individuals who have made choices on how to spend their money based on their own priorities. For instance I might choose to have private medical insurance but not spend anything on holidays abroad - why should I pay more tax because that is how I choose to spend my money than the person who chooses the holidays?


----------



## Odin_cat

Have to admit I don't really understand the 'working hard' argument. Many people work incredibly hard in jobs that benefit society- nurses, teachers, social workers and many more, most of them could only dream of earning £80,000. Likewise many people earn huge amounts for little work.

I guess I've never seen contributing to society as a punishment.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Odin_cat said:


> Have to admit I don't really understand the 'working hard' argument. Many people work incredibly hard in jobs that benefit society- nurses, teachers, social workers and many more, most of them could only dream of earning £80,000. Likewise many people earn huge amounts for little work.
> 
> I guess I've never seen contributing to society as a punishment.


I did not say not imply that other people don't work hard, of course they do but I can 100% say that I work much longer hours with no sick pay, no holiday pay and no pension contributions to earn the amount we do now rather than when I was nursing. During recessions our income drops through the floor and during better times yes its up in the higher bracket. I wouldn't dream of asking those nurses, teachers or social workers to give me some of their paid holiday or to give me some of their salary to cover me should I need to be off sick. Having private health insurance doesn't mean you are rich, it just means you go without other things to pay for it.


----------



## Odin_cat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I did not say not imply that other people don't work hard, of course they do but I can 100% say that I work much longer hours with no sick pay, no holiday pay and no pension contributions to earn the amount we do now rather than when I was nursing. During recessions our income drops through the floor and during better times yes its up in the higher bracket. I wouldn't dream of asking those nurses, teachers or social workers to give me some of their paid holiday or to give me some of their salary to cover me should I need to be off sick. Having private health insurance doesn't mean you are rich, it just means you go without other things to pay for it.


I don't think private healthcare should be taxed, it will increase demand on the NHS.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Odin_cat said:


> I don't think private healthcare should be taxed, it will increase demand on the NHS.


If anything there should be tax breaks for taking private healthcare and easing the NHS burden. Another Labour policy that's not been thought through any further than hitting the "seemingly" better off.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Odin_cat said:


> I don't think private healthcare should be taxed, it will increase demand on the NHS.


This has massively confused me. I really don't understand the backlash about people wanting to pay for their own treatment, thereby not using NHS resources, yet these same people still pay into the NHS. Surely it's a good thing and should be encouraged for anyone who can afford it


----------



## Goblin

MiffyMoo said:


> TI really don't understand the backlash about people wanting to pay for their own treatment, thereby not using NHS resources, yet these same people still pay into the NHS. Surely it's a good thing and should be encouraged for anyone who can afford it


Devil's advocate here.. What happens when those responsible for the quality of the NHS do not actually use it? What happens if you have a 2 tier system separated by, yes I know generalisation here, income and the ability to pay for more?


----------



## DoodlesRule

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes I read it the first time you posted it noush and I don't like it any better the second time. These are just a few of my objections - (I'm not convinced about all the re nationalisation but am open to being convinced) however I don't agree with
> 
> Free childcare for all 2 - 4 year olds.
> Free school meals.
> 20% tax on private health.
> 20% tax on private schools.
> 45 p tax rate for those earning over £80,000.
> 50 p tax rate for those earning over £123,000.
> Lowering the voting age to 16.
> The right to 3 year tenancies. Although in fairness the Lib dem policy is even worse on that
> 
> Give tenants first refusal to buy the home they are renting from a landlord who decides to sell during the tenancy at the market rate according to an independent valuation.
> Promote longer tenancies of three years or more with an inflation-linked annual rent increase built in, to give tenants security and limit rent hikes.
> One of the things I dislike about Labour is their desire to "control" everything and punish people who have worked hard and achieved some financial success/security. By all means go after the big corporations like @Elles mentioned but not individuals who have made choices on how to spend their money based on their own priorities. For instance I might choose to have private medical insurance but not spend anything on holidays abroad - why should I pay more tax because that is how I choose to spend my money than the person who chooses the holidays?


Agree with this.

Funny old world, Labour want to tax anything & everything, wonder why Mr Corbyn has not said he will change the rules so that MPs are taxed on their expenses and second homes in the same way as lesser mortals


----------



## MiffyMoo

Goblin said:


> Devil's advocate here.. What happens when those responsible for the quality of the NHS do not actually use it? What happens if you have a 2 tier system separated by, yes I know generalisation here, income and the ability to pay for more?


I'm responsible for the quality of service my vendors provide, yet I don't use those services myself. Does that mean I'm incapable of listening to client feedback and assessing what is happening? What happens if the person who is responsible for assessing the service in the NHS is ridiculously healthy? Does this make them incapable of fulfilling the role they are being paid to do?


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> Ive only had Conservative blumpf through the door so far .


Me too.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Calvine said:


> Me too.


I haven't had anything


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Don't have time to keep helping you by posting links. However have a look at that article I posted earlier then look at the latest borrowing figures. It's all there for you.


You're surely not talking about that Express article are you?



rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes I read it the first time you posted it noush and I don't like it any better the second time. These are just a few of my objections - (I'm not convinced about all the re nationalisation but am open to being convinced) however I don't agree with
> 
> Free childcare for all 2 - 4 year olds.
> Free school meals.
> 20% tax on private health.
> 20% tax on private schools.
> 45 p tax rate for those earning over £80,000.
> 50 p tax rate for those earning over £123,000.
> Lowering the voting age to 16.
> The right to 3 year tenancies. Although in fairness the Lib dem policy is even worse on that
> 
> Give tenants first refusal to buy the home they are renting from a landlord who decides to sell during the tenancy at the market rate according to an independent valuation.
> Promote longer tenancies of three years or more with an inflation-linked annual rent increase built in, to give tenants security and limit rent hikes.
> One of the things I dislike about Labour is their desire to "control" everything and punish people who have worked hard and achieved some financial success/security. By all means go after the big corporations like @Elles mentioned but not individuals who have made choices on how to spend their money based on their own priorities. For instance I might choose to have private medical insurance but not spend anything on holidays abroad - why should I pay more tax because that is how I choose to spend my money than the person who chooses the holidays?


I honestly cant see any part of the manifesto which is worse than fox hunting, education cuts or the end of the NHS (& that's just naming a few of my priorities).

95% of people wont be paying any more taxes RPH. Many people now are having to hold down more than one job just to try to make ends meet - they are grafting for their poverty. I don't think its much to ask those who can most afford it to contribute more when those at the bottom of society are barely hanging on by their fingernails because they have been hammered by austerity.

The Republicans don't believe in control as you put it, & look at the mess the USA is in now?

We might not have an NHS if enough of us don't vote wisely. (I know you're not voting for the tories, I'm just giving my views on labours manifesto)

This is being shared by Drs.

_And 643,000 Americans go bankruptcy annually over medical bills- many WITH insurance._
_Good insurance can be $1000s per month_ #*VoteNHS*

Surely


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> You're surely not talking about that Express article are you?
> 
> I honestly cant see any part of the manifesto which is worse than fox hunting, education cuts or the end of the NHS (& that's just naming a few of my priorities).
> 
> 95% of people wont be paying any more taxes RPH. Many people now are having to hold down more than one job just to try to make ends meet - they are grafting for their poverty. I don't think its much to ask those who can most afford it to contribute more when those at the bottom of society are barely hanging on by their fingernails because they have been hammered by austerity.
> 
> The Republicans don't believe in control as you put it, & look at the mess the USA is in now?
> 
> We might not have an NHS if enough of us don't vote wisely. (I know you're not voting for the tories, I'm just giving my views on labours manifesto)
> 
> This is being shared by Drs.
> 
> _And 643,000 Americans go bankruptcy annually over medical bills- many WITH insurance._
> _Good insurance can be $1000s per month_ #*VoteNHS*
> 
> Surely


So f--k the 5% and take their money that they have earned, how about I take a weeks holiday from every teacher? some might argue they are holiday rich. That quite rightly would not go down well, they work hard and have earned their time off, so what about if I take a few days sick pay from every nurse at my local hospital to make up for all the years I haven't had any? No that wouldn't be right either. What about I ask my local policeman to share his pension with me when he retires as I've been contributing to it for years anyway and no one contributes to mine? No that wouldn't be fair either. You say its not much to ask those who can most afford it to contribute more but we already contribute more because 20% of a lot is more than 20% of not much plus the threshold at which we all start paying tax has risen. You cannot assess someone's wealth and ability to afford more based purely on their salary, you have to take into account other things like the cost of living where they are, what other commitments they have, one might argue plenty of retired people might not have much income but they are sitting on a lot of money tied up in their property - what next a Robin Hood raid on that too? These are not policies that will win Labour an election Noush how ever much you want them to be. They will turn people away in droves and result in a landslide victory for the Conservatives and ultimately the lifting of the hunting ban and the death of foxes


----------



## Goblin

MiffyMoo said:


> I'm responsible for the quality of service my vendors provide, yet I don't use those services myself. Does that mean I'm incapable of listening to client feedback and assessing what is happening? What happens if the person who is responsible for assessing the service in the NHS is ridiculously healthy? Does this make them incapable of fulfilling the role they are being paid to do?


Well it's obvious Jeremy Hunt doesn't listen to client feedback or those actually working in the system  It's not simply a case of a single person being healthy, all it takes is the experiences of someone they know to influence policy. It's a delicate one. One would have to ask, why do people go "private" if the NHS system was working as it should? Will point out at this stage as I was on private healthcare when in the UK.

I think one of the questions should be asking.. do we want to use the Americans as a model (which Jeremy Hunt calls successfull) or look at alternatives such as those working in europe IF we need to change. I'm not saying any of those is perfect either by the way as I doubt if any are.


----------



## Goblin

rottiepointerhouse said:


> You cannot assess someone's wealth and ability to afford more based purely on their salary


Totally agree. You cannot simply steal from the rich to fund the poor without a cultural change. People need to work towards something and not simply have it taken away.

Interesting to note (although again generalisation), those who support Brexit most and nationalism are not the ones who are pushing the drive to support the majority of the population.


----------



## Guest

stockwellcat said:


> I had this letter to. Here is the main body of the letter:
> View attachment 310986


May said that coalition government would bring chaos? Like the current situation isn´t one? Unplanned brexit has already brought chaos and it will continue doing so for quite a many years. Also I´d say that coalition government are the most stable ones, just compare Nordic politics with most other countries and chaos is the last thing you find. Boring, maybe slow, but really steady. Or when was the last time you heard that any of Nordic countries was in chaos? So just another lie. Is anything actually true what she says? Will you just end up with a British version of Trump, who thinks she can get away with anything? Now that is proper chaos.


----------



## Elles

They say 95% won't pay more Income Tax. That doesn't include corporation tax, or tax on private health care and education, or the increases in contributions for small businesses who have to put wages up. Nor those that will lose their jobs because small businesses can't afford it. There will be a lot more than the top 5% and big business paying for this, there doesn't seem to be a safety net.

I don't mind paying a few pence more income tax in the pound, to cover things like the NHS and social care and I'm not a rich person, so I won't be asked to, but that's not the point. I'm still with @rottiepointerhouse on this and agree with most of her list. No, I'm not voting conservative, but I'm not liking labour either and I still think they'll drop in the polls again once this has had an effect, which will end up giving May the landslide she wants if they aren't careful.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> You're surely not talking about that Express article are you?


Yes, why? But if you want a second opinion try the net borrowing chart here, I warn you you won't like it.

http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/7568/debt/government-debt-under-labour-1997


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Yes, why? But if you want a second opinion try the net borrowing chart here, I warn you you won't like it.
> 
> http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/7568/debt/government-debt-under-labour-1997


That link explains things very clearly. Thanks @Dr Pepper


----------



## 1290423

DoodlesRule said:


> Agree with this.
> 
> Funny old world, Labour want to tax anything & everything, wonder why Mr Corbyn has not said he will change the rules so that MPs are taxed on their expenses and second homes in the same way as lesser mortals


Now! I like the sound of that


----------



## MiffyMoo

I haven't read the whole thread, but has anyone considered who will ultimately end up paying for the double whammy of a corporation tax rise and the minimum wage rise? The companies will not swallow the cost, it will get passed onto the consumer, thereby hitting the worst off hardest


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
Mandatory raising of min-wage is ALWAYS succeeded by claims that it will "ruin" everyone.
The Repugnants love to raise that specter.  Shall we look at a few examples?...
.
___________________________________________________
*Search Results*




  





_On March 27, 2014, Connecticut passed legislation to raise the minimum wage from *$8.70* to *$10.10* by 2017, making it one of about six states to aim at or above *$10.00* per hour._

*Minimum wage in the United States - Wikipedia*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_States
_______________________________________

People also ask
Which state has the highest minimum wage 2016?
What is minimum wage in Alabama 2016?
What is PA Minimum Wage 2016?
What is the federal minimum wage for 2015?
_____________________________________________
.

*Minimum wage in the United States - Wikipedia*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_States
Jump to Crime *increase* - 
_On March 27, 2014, Connecticut passed legislation to raise the minimum wage from $8.70 to $10.10 by 2017, making it one of about six states to aim at or above $10.00 per hour._
‎History · ‎Trends in purchasing power · ‎Economic effects · ‎Commentary


*Minimum Wage - ProCon.org*
minimum-wage.procon.org/
Feb 10, 2017 - 
[1] Economists from the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago predicted that a $1.75 rise in the federal minimum wage would increase aggregate ...
‎Background of the Issue · ‎Footnotes & Sources · ‎Should the Federal Minimum ...


*State Minimum Wages | 2017 Minimum Wage by State*
www.ncsl.org/research/labor-and-employment/state-minimum-wage-chart.aspx
_Washington D.C., Maryland and Oregon are scheduled to raise their respective minimum wages on July 1, 2017 due to previously enacted legislation._


*5 facts about the minimum wage | Pew Research Center*
www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/01/04/5-facts-about-the-minimum-wage/
Jan 4, 2017 - 
_*Adjusted for inflation, the federal minimum wage peaked in 1968 at $8.68 (in 2016 dollars).* Since it was last raised in 2009, to the current ..._


*Four states ok minimum wage hikes to at least $12 - USA Today*
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2016/11/...minimum-wage.../93537050/
Nov 9, 2016 - 
_Four states ok minimum wage hikes to at least $12 ... Roughly 2 million workers in the four states will see their wages increase, according to the ..._


*2017 minimum wage increases: These 21 states are ... - USA Today*
https://www.usatoday.com/story/...minimum-wage-increases...paying.../95741406/
Dec 30, 2016 - 
_In those areas, it's likely to take federal legislation to move the needle for minimum wageworkers. Although calls to raise the minimum wage at ..._


*Should the federal government raise the minimum wage to $15? - MIT ...*
mitsloan.mit.edu/.../should-the-federal-government-raise-the-minimum-wage-to-15-d...
Jul 14, 2016 - 
_Should the U.S. government increase the hourly minimum wage from $7.25 to $15? The issue is nuanced: Raising wages would boost ..._


*Minimum wage going up in 21 states, 22 cities - CNN Money*
money.cnn.com/2016/12/19/pf/minimum-wage-increases/index.html?iid=SF_LN
Dec 19, 2016 - 
_Come the new year, millions of the lowest-wage workers across the country will get araise. Some of those raises will be very minor -- a cost of ..._


*A Higher Minimum Wage in 2017 - The New York Times*
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/05/business/.../state-minimum-wages.html
Jan 5, 2017 - 
_Nineteen states raised their minimum wage in 2017, with increases ... in states that already had a minimum wage higher than the federal level._


*2017 Federal and State Minimum Wage Rates - The Balance*
https://www.thebalance.com › ... › Salary and Benefits › Minimum Wage Info
Jan 17, 2017 - 
_Here is a list of the current federal minimum wage and the rates for each ... 2017, and is slated for an increase to $10.10 effective July 1st, 2018._

=================================
.
.
FWIW, i'll add that Mass. raised the statewide min-wage effective 1/1/2017, from $10 to $11-usa per hour. 
The world did not end.
.
.
.


----------



## MiffyMoo

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> Mandatory raising of min-wage is ALWAYS succeeded by claims that it will "ruin" everyone.
> The Repugnants love to raise that specter.  Shall we look at a few examples?...
> .
> ___________________________________________________
> *Search Results*
> 
> 
> View attachment 311066
> 
> _On March 27, 2014, Connecticut passed legislation to raise the minimum wage from *$8.70* to *$10.10* by 2017, making it one of about six states to aim at or above *$10.00* per hour._
> 
> *Minimum wage in the United States - Wikipedia*
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_States
> _______________________________________
> 
> People also ask
> Which state has the highest minimum wage 2016?
> What is minimum wage in Alabama 2016?
> What is PA Minimum Wage 2016?
> What is the federal minimum wage for 2015?
> _____________________________________________
> .
> 
> *Minimum wage in the United States - Wikipedia*
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_States
> Jump to Crime *increase* -
> _On March 27, 2014, Connecticut passed legislation to raise the minimum wage from $8.70 to $10.10 by 2017, making it one of about six states to aim at or above $10.00 per hour._
> ‎History · ‎Trends in purchasing power · ‎Economic effects · ‎Commentary
> 
> 
> *Minimum Wage - ProCon.org*
> minimum-wage.procon.org/
> Feb 10, 2017 -
> [1] Economists from the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago predicted that a $1.75 rise in the federal minimum wage would increase aggregate ...
> ‎Background of the Issue · ‎Footnotes & Sources · ‎Should the Federal Minimum ...
> 
> 
> *State Minimum Wages | 2017 Minimum Wage by State*
> www.ncsl.org/research/labor-and-employment/state-minimum-wage-chart.aspx
> _Washington D.C., Maryland and Oregon are scheduled to raise their respective minimum wages on July 1, 2017 due to previously enacted legislation._
> 
> 
> *5 facts about the minimum wage | Pew Research Center*
> www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/01/04/5-facts-about-the-minimum-wage/
> Jan 4, 2017 -
> _*Adjusted for inflation, the federal minimum wage peaked in 1968 at $8.68 (in 2016 dollars).* Since it was last raised in 2009, to the current ..._
> 
> 
> *Four states ok minimum wage hikes to at least $12 - USA Today*
> https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2016/11/...minimum-wage.../93537050/
> Nov 9, 2016 -
> _Four states ok minimum wage hikes to at least $12 ... Roughly 2 million workers in the four states will see their wages increase, according to the ..._
> 
> 
> *2017 minimum wage increases: These 21 states are ... - USA Today*
> https://www.usatoday.com/story/...minimum-wage-increases...paying.../95741406/
> Dec 30, 2016 -
> _In those areas, it's likely to take federal legislation to move the needle for minimum wageworkers. Although calls to raise the minimum wage at ..._
> 
> 
> *Should the federal government raise the minimum wage to $15? - MIT ...*
> mitsloan.mit.edu/.../should-the-federal-government-raise-the-minimum-wage-to-15-d...
> Jul 14, 2016 -
> _Should the U.S. government increase the hourly minimum wage from $7.25 to $15? The issue is nuanced: Raising wages would boost ..._
> 
> 
> *Minimum wage going up in 21 states, 22 cities - CNN Money*
> money.cnn.com/2016/12/19/pf/minimum-wage-increases/index.html?iid=SF_LN
> Dec 19, 2016 -
> _Come the new year, millions of the lowest-wage workers across the country will get araise. Some of those raises will be very minor -- a cost of ..._
> 
> 
> *A Higher Minimum Wage in 2017 - The New York Times*
> https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/05/business/.../state-minimum-wages.html
> Jan 5, 2017 -
> _Nineteen states raised their minimum wage in 2017, with increases ... in states that already had a minimum wage higher than the federal level._
> 
> 
> *2017 Federal and State Minimum Wage Rates - The Balance*
> https://www.thebalance.com › ... › Salary and Benefits › Minimum Wage Info
> Jan 17, 2017 -
> _Here is a list of the current federal minimum wage and the rates for each ... 2017, and is slated for an increase to $10.10 effective July 1st, 2018._
> 
> =================================
> .
> .
> FWIW, i'll add that Mass. raised the statewide min-wage effective 1/1/2017, from $10 to $11-usa per hour.
> The world did not end.
> .
> .
> .


I'm not claiming the minimum wage rise alone will "ruin" everyone, but they are proposing a 7% corporation tax increase as well. It will cost companies and those costs will get passed on. Now if every day items increase by even a few pence, that all adds up and makes things so much more difficult for the poorest in the country


----------



## Elles

It's not the raising of minimum wage by itself, when we've employed people we pay double that anyway, it's the other additions alongside it.


----------



## 1290423

Tell you what id like to see! Dons hard hat and stab proof vest! Id like to see chikd allowance cut to two children.why should those of us who stop at two have to contribute to those who breed like rabbits, I know it's only a wee-wee in the ocean but we need to get the message over that all need to be responsible.


----------



## 1290423

I also think those that go along to the doctors for their free prescriptions of aspirin and paracetamol should stop doing that and pay for them like the rest of us!
Only pennies I know but look after the pennies and the pounds look after themselves


----------



## Jesthar

DT said:


> I also think those that go along to the doctors for their free prescriptions of aspirin and paracetamol should stop doing that and pay for them like the rest of us!
> Only Dennis I know but look after the pennies and the pounds look after themselves


Dennis? Who the heck is Dennis?


----------



## 1290423

Jesthar said:


> Dennis? Who the heck is Dennis?


Lol I'm using speech recognition text


----------



## Elles

Someone on the dole with 10 kids will get the same money. It's means tested. I don't know how child benefit works these days, but imo there's no need for it now. In the old sexist, patriarchal days it was given to women so that they had something when their husbands were tight with the housekeeping. Who gets free prescriptions these days? Over the counter medicines are often cheaper than prescriptions, especially things like paracetamol. Anyway, by the time they've got an appt with their doctor their headache will have gone and they've probably had ten more.


----------



## suewhite

Jesthar said:


> Dennis? Who the heck is Dennis?


Pennies brother I think.


----------



## 1290423

And you may have seen this circulating on Facebook


----------



## Elles

Dennis is a fire engine where I come from.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> Dennis is a fire engine where I come from.


Well let's hope you don't have a fire then they went into administration in 2004 xxxx


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> Dennis is a fire engine where I come from.


He's just a menace!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

And what will happen here if we return to punitive tax for people earning a half decent wage - we will simply stop working before we reach the threshold, that means we will cut right back on what we spend which if others do the same will hurt the economy, we will cancel our regular charity donations which will hurt the charities and we will stop employing people to do jobs we will then have the time to do ourselves. Good move. Not.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> And what will happen here if we return to punitive tax for people earning a half decent wage - we will simply stop working before we reach the threshold, that means we will cut right back on what we spend which if others do the same will hurt the economy, we will cancel our regular charity donations which will hurt the charities and we will stop employing people to do jobs we will then have the time to do ourselves. Good move. Not.


Spot on


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Find out who is standing in your constituency if you don't already know

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39946901

Greens are not standing in our area to try and help the Lib Dems take the seat so big thumbs up for them  However Greens only got about 1300 votes last time and Conservative majority is 10,000 with no UKIP (3rd place) candidate standing so its going to be a struggle to get the Lib Dem elected.


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Find out who is standing in your constituency if you don't already know
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39946901
> 
> Greens are not standing in our area to try and help the Lib Dems take the seat so big thumbs up for them  However Greens only got about 1300 votes last time and Conservative majority is 10,000 with no UKIP (3rd place) candidate standing so its going to be a struggle to get the Lib Dem elected.


My current MP is Dominic Raab and I like him. When I emailed him about the dangerous dogs act, he actually took the time to let me know that he had written to Defra, and then when Defra replied he posted it to me. He also said that I'm more than welcome to go to a surgery to discuss, if I wanted. I really do feel like he cares


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MiffyMoo said:


> My current MP is Dominic Raab and I like him. When I emailed him about the dangerous dogs act, he actually took the time to let me know that he had written to Defra, and then when Defra replied he posted it to me. He also said that I'm more than welcome to go to a surgery to discuss, if I wanted. I really do feel like he cares


Have you asked him if he is pro hunting though?


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Have you asked him if he is pro hunting though?


No, I haven't seen any bumf and haven't even had a look at what he has said lately. I was waiting to see what info came through the door from all the parties, but either nothing has arrived or the dogs decided it needed burying (highly likely!). They keep doing this to my bills, so I think they're quite discerning


----------



## Elles

He's a controversial chappie isn't he. He will be voting against according to his blog.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> He's a controversial chappie isn't he. He will be voting against according to his blog.


I seriously need to start paying attention. I'm off to check it out now


----------



## Elles

Brian May admires him, which he seemed to find quite amusing.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> He's a controversial chappie isn't he. He will be voting against according to his blog.


I like him even more now

http://www.conservativesagainstfoxhunting.com/2017/05/3900/


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MiffyMoo said:


> I like him even more now
> 
> http://www.conservativesagainstfoxhunting.com/2017/05/3900/


Brilliant. Need to keep him elected then as more Conservatives who will vote against in the "free" vote the better. If mine had said he would I probably would still be voting for him but as he made it quite clear he supports hunting and doesn't much care what we think we are changing to Lib Dem.


----------



## Pawscrossed

Satori said:


> I wonder though. The Tory campaign seems weak to me; a 'do nothing and hope Corbyn self destructs strategy' that isn't working. They must have something up there sleeves for the closing weeks I guess.


I have a few friends who are switched to Lab from Tory (tad alarmed I knew anyone who vote that way, hey ho!) and have all said they think the GE has done Corbyn more good. Esp when they've had scant time to do it.


----------



## Goblin

DT said:


> Tell you what id like to see! Dons hard hat and stab proof vest! Id like to see chikd allowance cut to two children.


That point I couldn't disagree with.



> why should those of us who stop at two have to contribute to those who breed like rabbits, I know it's only a wee-wee in the ocean but we need to get the message over that all need to be responsible.


Why should those who decide not to have any support ones like you who have 2 

Interesting consideration is those children contribute to society and you gain even if not directly. You benefit when people have children who have good education etc etc. These are the people who will increase little things like GDP in the future. These are the people who will become doctors, nurses etc supporting you. Why should they you may ask.


----------



## leashedForLife

*MiffyMoo* said,

... I was waiting to see what info came through the door from all the parties, but either nothing has arrived or *the dogs decided it needed burying* (highly likely!). They keep doing this to my bills, so I think they're quite discerning.
____________________________
.
.
Sounds like U need an inside-drop box for the post?... to keep it away from certain, a-hem, _pawties. _
.
.
.


----------



## MiffyMoo

leashedForLife said:


> *MiffyMoo* said,
> 
> ... I was waiting to see what info came through the door from all the parties, but either nothing has arrived or *the dogs decided it needed burying* (highly likely!). They keep doing this to my bills, so I think they're quite discerning.
> ____________________________
> .
> .
> Sounds like U need an inside-drop box for the post?... to keep it away from certain, a-hem, _pawties. _
> .
> .
> .


The the way my house is set up, you get to the garden door before the front door, so the postman throws the post in through the garden door. By the time I get down there he has already left. If I don't hear him arrive, then I only discover he has been when I find bits of envelope strewn around


----------



## rona

MiffyMoo said:


> The the way my house is set up, you get to the garden door before the front door, so the postman throws the post in through the garden door. By the time I get down there he has already left. If I don't hear him arrive, then I only discover he has been when I find bits of envelope strewn around


Why don't you get yourself a post box?


----------



## MiffyMoo

rona said:


> Why don't you get yourself a post box?


My house is rented and the landlord wouldn't allow it. I honestly don't care - all my bills are paid by direct debit and the majority of post is junk mail


----------



## Happy Paws2

So now TM is means testing the winter fuel allowance, this should be interesting where the cut off is going to be, I wonder how many us old people will be frighened to have the heating on this winter.


----------



## rona

Happy Paws said:


> So now TM is means testing the winter fuel allowance, this should be interesting where the cut off is going to be, I wonder how many us old people will be frighened to have the heating on this winter.


I've heard so many people complaining about receiving this, they'd rather it was spent on social care for those that need it. In fact one tried to stop his but couldn't, so gives his to charity every year


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> I know it's only a wee-wee in the ocean


@DT: the actual allowance may be a drop in the ocean but if it encourages people to have fewer kids who need educating/healthcare etc it is a fair bit more.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So f--k the 5% and take their money that they have earned, how about I take a weeks holiday from every teacher? some might argue they are holiday rich. That quite rightly would not go down well, they work hard and have earned their time off, so what about if I take a few days sick pay from every nurse at my local hospital to make up for all the years I haven't had any? No that wouldn't be right either. What about I ask my local policeman to share his pension with me when he retires as I've been contributing to it for years anyway and no one contributes to mine? No that wouldn't be fair either. You say its not much to ask those who can most afford it to contribute more but we already contribute more because 20% of a lot is more than 20% of not much plus the threshold at which we all start paying tax has risen. You cannot assess someone's wealth and ability to afford more based purely on their salary, you have to take into account other things like the cost of living where they are, what other commitments they have, one might argue plenty of retired people might not have much income but they are sitting on a lot of money tied up in their property - what next a Robin Hood raid on that too? These are not policies that will win Labour an election Noush how ever much you want them to be. They will turn people away in droves and result in a landslide victory for the Conservatives and ultimately the lifting of the hunting ban and the death of foxes


Gosh I wish people had got this worked up about the attacks on the disabled and the poorest in our society. 55% of hard working people are now working for their poverty. Where was the outrage about the tories raising indirect taxes which disproportionately affect the poor? The top rate of tax under 9 years of Thatcher was 60% way, way above what labour are proposing. Did the UK collapse? No. If we want a functioning society we have to get taxes from somewhere I'm afraid. Plenty on social media are happy to pay the higher rate. This is from a doctor in response to that awful Katie Hopkins woman:







*Philip Lee*‏@*drphiliplee1* May 16

Philip Lee Retweeted Katie Hopkins

_Actually, I'm quite happy for a portion of my tax to go on those who need it more._
_Isn't that what society is about?_

Labour could never win this election whatever their manifesto pledged RPH. The media bias against them is far too strong, we've all had Theresa May propaganda letters, the elite are pulling out all the stops to crush any opposition. Even where I live in a labour stronghold May is popular, Corbyn is not - it seems to be all about brexit to people round hear & we need someone 'strong' to negotiate a good deal. This is what people are talking about, this is their priority. I think the only hope is that enough people like you & your hubby will vote with their conscience & it will stop a tory landslide.

I know you hate memes so I'm really sorry, I'm not posting these to antagonise:Bag






























Elles said:


> They say 95% won't pay more Income Tax. That doesn't include corporation tax, or tax on private health care and education, or the increases in contributions for small businesses who have to put wages up. Nor those that will lose their jobs because small businesses can't afford it. There will be a lot more than the top 5% and big business paying for this, there doesn't seem to be a safety net.
> 
> I don't mind paying a few pence more income tax in the pound, to cover things like the NHS and social care and I'm not a rich person, so I won't be asked to, but that's not the point. I'm still with @rottiepointerhouse on this and agree with most of her list. No, I'm not voting conservative, but I'm not liking labour either and I still think they'll drop in the polls again once this has had an effect, which will end up giving May the landslide she wants if they aren't careful.


Labour are protecting small businesses Elles 












Dr Pepper said:


> Yes, why? But if you want a second opinion try the net borrowing chart here, I warn you you won't like it.
> 
> http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/7568/debt/government-debt-under-labour-1997


Well I do like it, its clearly a credible source of references so thank you for that.

This graph shows the peak in borrowing to be after the 'Global' crash prior to that labour borrowing was extremely low. Looking at the graphs it appears to me labour have borrowed less.



















If you check out your source of reference's twitter feed this is their last tweet to date. One of their own graphs with this David Schneider tweet 

*economicshelp* Retweeted
*David Schneider*‏Verified [email protected]*davidschneider* May 3

"Labour means more debt and higher taxes" says party that's increased debt to 86% of GDP and refused to rule out tax increases.



















More importantly though your source of reference supports what I have been saying about how the tories lied about labours handling of the economy to force austerity on us!. If only people would do their research & not just blindly accept everything hear :/

A VERY interesting article indeed. http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/21191/economics/media-bias-in-the-uk/

*Media bias in the UK*
*Tejvan Pettinger* July 5, 2016 economics

At the 1992 General election, the Conservative Party won a stunning electoral victory despite being in the middle of a self-imposed recession. Many point to this as an example of how the press can influence national debate and influence elections.

The 1991/92 recession was a classic example of a boom and bust. It wasn't a recession caused by global factors, but domestic mismanagement. In the late 1980s, the chancellor believed there had been a 'supply side miracle' raising the UK's long-run trend rate from 2.5% to 4%. The chancellor, Nigel Lawson kept real interest rates low and cut income tax rates. There was a boom, inflation, but then deep recession as they tried to control inflation. Despite the economic incompetence, the Conservatives won the election as the Press claimed it was the Labour Party which was economic incompetent and guaranteed to raising taxes.










It was an unlikely election victory, and the following day, the Sun's headline was "It was the Sun wot won it."

Some claim the Sun didn't win the election at all. Certainly a newspaper headline doesn't swing an election on its own. But, several years of framing political issues does have an influence on how people view issues and parties.

*Politics of Budget deficits*










_Post 2008 financial crisis, the UK budget deficit rose to record levels as the economy fell into a deep recession. This was classic textbook economics - as the private sector spending falls, the government should maintain demand by borrowing. There was no fiscal crisis, bond yields fell, as the private sector bought more bonds._

_However, at the last election the budget deficit became the most prominent issue. With the media generally portraying the idea it was high levels of government debt that caused the current economic crisis. The media onslaught was so sustained, even the Labour party started to believe it.

In 2007, public sector debt was close to a record low. The recession was due to a global financial crisis, but in the minds of voters, it became Labour's decision to moderately increase spending on the NHS in the mid 2000s. that caused the financial crisis and economic woes of the UK._

_The Conservative chancellor latched on to the public fear of government borrowing, coming up with very strict fiscal rules, which - hardly any economist would support. Fears over Labour economic incompetence was a major factor in election defeat and the political support for austerity - despite evidence austerity is counter-productive in a recession and liquidity trap._

You should read the rest of that article about brexit & post facts


----------



## Odin_cat

According to a tax calculator someone earning £200,000, already pays £75,000 income tax. It's a lot of money and the moment cuts are seriously damaging people's lives.

Would people really reject a relatively small increase if it meant their friends, family and neighbours didn't have to face benefit cuts, if it meant better healthcare and education?


----------



## Elles

Odin_cat said:


> According to a tax calculator someone earning £200,000, already pays £75,000 income tax. It's a lot of money and the moment cuts are seriously damaging people's lives.
> 
> Would people really reject a relatively small increase if it meant their friends, family and neighbours didn't have to face benefit cuts, if it meant better healthcare and education?


I can see them saying I already pay £75,000 when is it going to stop, when they see yet another 'benefits Britain' tv programme.

It works both ways. People should appreciate how much small businesses and higher earners are giving for them too. They talk about being entitled and pay no mind to the folk who worked to give it to them, whether that's free NHS care for their stubbed toe, or enough to buy their cigarettes and beer for the week.

When people who've never had it talk about how wonderful it is to get an education, or healthcare, or 3 meals a day, I'm more than happy to welcome them as refugees and hope some of my money goes towards helping them integrate and learn the language and give them the choice and the ability to go back home and help improve the world. I'm not happy paying more in stealth taxes so parents of 2-4 year olds can have free child care when they've just had a pay increase and one of them would rather stay at home than have someone else look after their babies anyway.

On the other side, if the winter fuel allowance is means tested a lot of the elderly who need it won't claim it, because they've never claimed benefits and they're not starting now. That's why it wasn't means tested. More cuts on the needy from them then.


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> I can see them saying I already pay £75,000 when is it going to stop, when they see yet another 'benefits Britain' tv programme.
> 
> It works both ways. People should appreciate how much small businesses and higher earners are giving for them too. They talk about being entitled and pay no mind to the folk who worked to give it to them, whether that's free NHS care for their stubbed toe, or enough to buy their cigarettes and beer for the week.
> 
> When people who've never had it talk about how wonderful it is to get an education, or healthcare, or 3 meals a day, I'm more than happy to welcome them as refugees and hope some of my money goes towards helping them integrate and learn the language and give them the choice and the ability to go back home and help improve the world. I'm not happy paying more in stealth taxes so parents of 2-4 year olds can have free child care when they've just had a pay increase and one of them would rather stay at home than have someone else look after their babies anyway.
> 
> On the other side, if the winter fuel allowance is means tested a lot of the elderly who need it won't claim it, because they've never claimed benefits and they're not starting now. That's why it wasn't means tested. More cuts on the needy from them then.





Elles said:


> I can see them saying I already pay £75,000 when is it going to stop, when they see yet another 'benefits Britain' tv programme.
> 
> It works both ways. People should appreciate how much small businesses and higher earners are giving for them too. They talk about being entitled and pay no mind to the folk who worked to give it to them, whether that's free NHS care for their stubbed toe, or enough to buy their cigarettes and beer for the week.
> 
> When people who've never had it talk about how wonderful it is to get an education, or healthcare, or 3 meals a day, I'm more than happy to welcome them as refugees and hope some of my money goes towards helping them integrate and learn the language and give them the choice and the ability to go back home and help improve the world. I'm not happy paying more in stealth taxes so parents of 2-4 year olds can have free child care when they've just had a pay increase and one of them would rather stay at home than have someone else look after their babies anyway.
> 
> On the other side, if the winter fuel allowance is means tested a lot of the elderly who need it won't claim it, because they've never claimed benefits and they're not starting now. That's why it wasn't means tested. More cuts on the needy from them then.


I understand their frustration, but how many people fit the 'Benefit Britain' stereotype? I think very few?

According to the ONS in the year 2014/15, 1% of the welfare budget was spent on unemployment benefits compared to 42% on pensions and 16% on disability benefits.

It seems like they're just another scapegoat.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Odin_cat said:


> I understand their frustration, but how many people fit the 'Benefit Britain' stereotype? I think very few?
> 
> According to the ONS in the year 2014/15, 1% of the welfare budget was spent on unemployment benefits compared to 42% on pensions and 16% on disability benefits.
> 
> It seems like they're just another scapegoat.


You forget to add housing benefit, which is an extra 10%, and just with those two we're already up to £30bn a year, then there's another £44bn on Family benefits, income support & tax credits. There's also £34bn spent on Personal social services and other benefits, which I have to admit, I have no idea what that is. In all, it's a huge amount


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> Gosh I wish people had got this worked up about the attacks on the disabled and the poorest in our society. 55% of hard working people are now working for their poverty. Where was the outrage about the tories raising indirect taxes which disproportionately affect the poor? The top rate of tax under 9 years of Thatcher was 60% way, way above what labour are proposing. Did the UK collapse? No. If we want a functioning society we have to get taxes from somewhere I'm afraid. Plenty on social media are happy to pay the higher rate. This is from a doctor in response to that awful Katie Hopkins woman:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Philip Lee*‏@*drphiliplee1* May 16
> 
> Philip Lee Retweeted Katie Hopkins
> 
> _Actually, I'm quite happy for a portion of my tax to go on those who need it more._
> _Isn't that what society is about?_
> 
> Labour could never win this election whatever their manifesto pledged RPH. The media bias against them is far too strong, we've all had Theresa May propaganda letters, the elite are pulling out all the stops to crush any opposition. Even where I live in a labour stronghold May is popular, Corbyn is not - it seems to be all about brexit to people round hear & we need someone 'strong' to negotiate a good deal. This is what people are talking about, this is their priority. I think the only hope is that enough people like you & your hubby will vote with their conscience & it will stop a tory landslide.
> 
> I know you hate memes so I'm really sorry, I'm not posting these to antagonise:Bag
> 
> View attachment 311099
> 
> 
> View attachment 311100
> 
> 
> View attachment 311101
> 
> 
> Labour are protecting small businesses Elles
> 
> View attachment 311102
> 
> 
> Well I do like it, its clearly a credible source of references so thank you for that.
> 
> This graph shows the peak in borrowing to be after the 'Global' crash prior to that labour borrowing was extremely low. Looking at the graphs it appears to me labour have borrowed less.
> 
> View attachment 311103
> 
> 
> View attachment 311104
> 
> 
> If you check out your source of reference's twitter feed this is their last tweet to date. One of their own graphs with this David Schneider tweet
> 
> *economicshelp* Retweeted
> *David Schneider*‏Verified [email protected]*davidschneider* May 3
> 
> "Labour means more debt and higher taxes" says party that's increased debt to 86% of GDP and refused to rule out tax increases.
> 
> View attachment 311105
> 
> 
> View attachment 311106
> 
> 
> More importantly though your source of reference supports what I have been saying about how the tories lied about labours handling of the economy to force austerity on us!. If only people would do their research & not just blindly accept everything hear :/
> 
> A VERY interesting article indeed. http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/21191/economics/media-bias-in-the-uk/
> 
> *Media bias in the UK*
> *Tejvan Pettinger* July 5, 2016 economics
> 
> At the 1992 General election, the Conservative Party won a stunning electoral victory despite being in the middle of a self-imposed recession. Many point to this as an example of how the press can influence national debate and influence elections.
> 
> The 1991/92 recession was a classic example of a boom and bust. It wasn't a recession caused by global factors, but domestic mismanagement. In the late 1980s, the chancellor believed there had been a 'supply side miracle' raising the UK's long-run trend rate from 2.5% to 4%. The chancellor, Nigel Lawson kept real interest rates low and cut income tax rates. There was a boom, inflation, but then deep recession as they tried to control inflation. Despite the economic incompetence, the Conservatives won the election as the Press claimed it was the Labour Party which was economic incompetent and guaranteed to raising taxes.
> 
> View attachment 311107
> 
> 
> It was an unlikely election victory, and the following day, the Sun's headline was "It was the Sun wot won it."
> 
> Some claim the Sun didn't win the election at all. Certainly a newspaper headline doesn't swing an election on its own. But, several years of framing political issues does have an influence on how people view issues and parties.
> 
> *Politics of Budget deficits*
> 
> View attachment 311108
> 
> 
> _Post 2008 financial crisis, the UK budget deficit rose to record levels as the economy fell into a deep recession. This was classic textbook economics - as the private sector spending falls, the government should maintain demand by borrowing. There was no fiscal crisis, bond yields fell, as the private sector bought more bonds._
> 
> _However, at the last election the budget deficit became the most prominent issue. With the media generally portraying the idea it was high levels of government debt that caused the current economic crisis. The media onslaught was so sustained, even the Labour party started to believe it.
> 
> In 2007, public sector debt was close to a record low. The recession was due to a global financial crisis, but in the minds of voters, it became Labour's decision to moderately increase spending on the NHS in the mid 2000s. that caused the financial crisis and economic woes of the UK._
> 
> _The Conservative chancellor latched on to the public fear of government borrowing, coming up with very strict fiscal rules, which - hardly any economist would support. Fears over Labour economic incompetence was a major factor in election defeat and the political support for austerity - despite evidence austerity is counter-productive in a recession and liquidity trap._
> 
> You should read the rest of that article about brexit & post facts


Oh sorry, I didn't realise so many people on social media were happy to pay the increased rate of tax - that must make it OK then  And I thought doctors were on the breadline struggling to get by on their meagre NHS wages so big thumbs up to him for coming out and telling us all he does in fact come into the top 5% of the population. Yes the top rate of tax was higher under Thatcher but it was coming down from the much higher levels under Labour (83% with an investment surcharge bring some up to 98%). Actually some of us did shout and complain about some of the proposed changes to benefits for the disabled I'll bet few will do more than snigger about tax rises for those they view as "well off". I much prefer the Lib Dems plans 

An immediate 1p rise on the basic, higher and additional rates of Income Tax to raise £6 billion additional revenue which would be ringfenced to be spent only on NHS and social care services.
In the longer term and as a replacement for the 1p Income Tax rise, commission the development of a dedicated Health and Care Tax on the basis of wide consultation, possibly based on a reform of National Insurance contributions, which will bring together spending on both services into a collective budget and sets out transparently, on people's payslips, what we spend on them.
Raise the amount people can earn before losing Carer's Allowance from £110 to £150 a week, and reduce the number of hours' care per week required to qualify.
and


Ensure those with the highest incomes and wealth are making a fair contribution. We have identified a series of distortions, loopholes and excessive reliefs that should be removed. These include reforms to Capital Gains Tax and Dividend Tax relief, and refocusing Entrepreneurs' Relief. We would reverse a number of the Conservatives' unfair and unjustified tax cuts, including:
- The cutting of Corporation Tax from 20% to 17% - Capital Gains Tax Cuts - Capital Gains Tax Extended Relief - The Marriage Allowance - The raising of the Inheritance Tax Threshold
Take tough action against corporate tax evasion and avoidance, including by:
- Introducing a General Anti-Avoidance Rule, setting a target for HM Revenue and Customs to reduce the tax gap and continuing to invest in staff to enable them to meet it. - Reforming Corporation Tax to develop a system that benefits the smallest companies while ensuring the biggest multinationals cannot avoid paying sums comparable to nationally-based competitors. We will consult on shifting away from a profits-based tax to one that takes account of a wider range of economic activity indicators, such as sales and turnover. - Reviewing the Business Rates system, prioritising reforms that recognise the development of the digital economy, lessen the burden on smaller businesses, and ensure high streets remain competitive. We will also consider the implementation of Land Value Taxation.
I also don't agree with you that Labour could never have won the election. Possibly not with Corbyn at the helm as he is viewed as too left wing by the majority and unfortunately his manifesto has demonstrated that admirably. I was hoping for a more modern approach not back to the old days with nationalisation of everything and penalising people who earn more or spend their money on things Labour don't approve of. Why no 20% tax on holidays abroad? I also do not believe the media hold as much influence as some think they do, social media is much more influential these days - I can't find the link I quoted before but there was some survey by buzz trends I think that showed Labour/Corbyn getting way way more coverage and support on social media than the other parties.

None of the parties represent or understand small businesses as far as I'm concerned - if they did they would raise the VAT threshold to a much higher figure. VAT comes in at £83,000 of turnover not profit, if you run a business with a high turnover but a low profit margin you can run in to VAT pretty quickly which not only means you have to charge more for your service sometimes when you are first starting out but also means you have the headache of collecting taxes for the government so more admin and headaches.

I can see the Conservative landslide starting to slip away with some of the manifesto bits we are hearing this morning about funding of social care and the winter fuel allowance so all is not lost yet.


----------



## Elles

Of course disability is another political hot potato. I could never vote for a party who behaves like the tories do against the disabled. Your doctor says you need help, that's good enough enough for me. We have enough money in the country to pay for the disabled (and the shirkers really, buts that's something else) without making someone who can barely stand up jump through hoops.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Odin_cat said:


> According to a tax calculator someone earning £200,000, already pays £75,000 income tax. It's a lot of money and the moment cuts are seriously damaging people's lives.
> 
> Would people really reject a relatively small increase if it meant their friends, family and neighbours didn't have to face benefit cuts, if it meant better healthcare and education?


Add your class 4 NI on top and it comes to over £82,000.

Whilst I'll never see that amount I do keep my income to below the higher rate, otherwise every hour I work over I'll be working for half my hourly rate. So there, on a smaller scale is a immediate loss to the HMRC. That's also one of the reasons I won't grow my business and take on employee's, that and the cost of holiday pay, bank holiday pay (another four will help, thanks Mr Corbyn), sick pay, employer's NI, paying into employee's pension before I can pay my own and the ever growing employee rights over employer's rights. Before I did what I do now we used to employ a dozen staff, wouldn't ever do now if just because of the pension issue which adds 3% to the wage bill by 2019. Doesn't sound much, but that's off a business's bottom line, and in retail, for example, your bottom line profit is about 5%, so for every £100,00 that goes through the till there is just £5,000 profit. So finding another 3% to add to your wage bill isn't as minimal as you'd think.

That's why there is a unprecedented number of one-man-band business out there with no ambition to expand.

Sorry, went off on a rant there. What was the question?


----------



## KittenKong

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...ry-doesnt-know-how-much-police-officers-earn/


----------



## Elles

@rottiepointerhouse can I be your new best friend? You put it all so much better than I do.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Odin_cat

MiffyMoo said:


> You forget to add housing benefit, which is an extra 10%, and just with those two we're already up to £30bn a year, then there's another £44bn on Family benefits, income support & tax credits. There's also £34bn spent on Personal social services and other benefits, which I have to admit, I have no idea what that is. In all, it's a huge amount


I have no idea what the other benefits are either.

Housing benefit and child related benefits are also paid to working people. I can't find amounts but around 1 million working people claim housing benefit so certainly a reasonable amount of that money doesn't go to the 'benefit Britain' type.


----------



## Dr Pepper

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 311115


Luckily for them the minimum income standard is reasonable.


----------



## Odin_cat

Has any party actually pledged not to raise taxes?


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 311113
> View attachment 311114
> 
> 
> http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...ry-doesnt-know-how-much-police-officers-earn/


Better than announcing that you're going to hire 250,00 extra police on £30 a year though


----------



## Elles

No it doesn't all go to the benefits Britain type, but they don't help from a social aspect.

We are in a pretty similar situation to @Dr Pepper 's rant. I don't think any of the political parties are offering to make anything easier, or even simpler for the self employed and small businesses. It's all about the wealthy, the children, the employed, the sick and the unemployed. And foxes.


----------



## DoodlesRule

Elles said:


> Someone on the dole with 10 kids will get the same money. It's means tested. I don't know how child benefit works these days, but imo there's no need for it now. In the old sexist, patriarchal days it was given to women so that they had something when their husbands were tight with the housekeeping. Who gets free prescriptions these days? Over the counter medicines are often cheaper than prescriptions, especially things like paracetamol. Anyway, by the time they've got an appt with their doctor their headache will have gone and they've probably had ten more.


My Dad is 87 in a couple of weeks. He was obviously around before the NHS, he worked from age 14 until 65 (heavy manual work, farming intially then labouring as it didn't pay enough to keep the family). He's never claimed benefits (other than child benefit), he had an hernia operation a couple of years ago and the surgeon was stunned he had never had anaesthetic and was on zero medication as he had no health conditions. Unfortunately he now has severe arthritis in his hip - due to years of hard manual work - he turned down a hip replacement a few years ago because he was looking after my Mum (advanced dementia).

The doctor prescribed paracetamol as Dad is very anti strong painkillers and Doc said they have least side affects. He chose to give up driving 2 years ago as the pain in his hip meant he would be unable to do an emergency stop, he just about walks with 2 elbow crutches. Mum got so bad she sadly had to go into a care home, Dad struggles onto his mobility scooter and goes to see her every day in all weathers. The agonising pain he is in would floor lesser mortals! I have at last managed to persuade him to go for hip replacement, we are waiting for the appointment - one has already been cancelled so it will be 2 months since seeing the doctor then how ever long before any operation.

Prescriptions are free due to his age, he has tried without the paracetamol but found they did in his words "take the edge of the pain". Don't think many would be begrudge him


----------



## Elles

Absolutely not. I thought free prescriptions were means tested or age related myself, so I couldn't see how free paracetamol on prescription would make any difference to the NHS either. It's not like you can take 10 at once and hardly anyone gets free prescriptions nowadays do they, or so I thought.


----------



## Calvine

Elles said:


> hardly anyone gets free prescriptions nowadays do they, or so I thought.


I went to pick up a prescription and got my wallet out and the pharmacist looked shell-shocked and informed me that he was amazed since SO FEW people pay for a prescription these days...hardly anyone, he said!


----------



## Calvine

MiffyMoo said:


> the majority of post is junk mail


Ha...your Christmas cards must look really festive!! I had a dog that did that...I put a letter cage on the inside of the door and he ripped it off and mangled it


----------



## MiffyMoo

Calvine said:


> Ha...your Christmas cards must look really festive!! I had a dog that did that...I put a letter cage on the inside of the door and he ripped it off and mangled it


They know what they want


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> No it doesn't all go to the benefits Britain type, but they don't help from a social aspect.
> 
> We are in a pretty similar situation to @Dr Pepper 's rant. I don't think any of the political parties are offering to make anything easier, or even simpler for the self employed and small businesses. It's all about the wealthy, the children, the employed, the sick and the unemployed. And foxes.


I didn't think any of the parties actually mentioned foxes other than the Conservatives and their plan to hold a vote on repealing the ban


----------



## DoodlesRule

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I didn't think any of the parties actually mentioned foxes other than the Conservatives and their plan to hold a vote on repealing the ban


 Is it actually in the manifesto then? I thought it came about because a journalist asked the question and TM answered


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 311113
> View attachment 311114
> 
> 
> http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...ry-doesnt-know-how-much-police-officers-earn/


Inspector £52,000 - £55,000
Detectives £47,000 - £51,000
Sergeant £36,000 - £41,000
Constable £22,000 - £36,000

The Met get even more.

I'd say she's not far out wouldn't you?


----------



## 3dogs2cats

As I have no idea who or why anyone qualifies for free prescriptions I`ve looked it up, this is the list:

You can get free NHS prescriptions if, at the time the prescription is dispensed, you:


are 60 or over
are under 16
are 16-18 and in full-time education
are pregnant or have had a baby in the previous 12 months and have a valid maternity exemption certificate (MatEx) 
have a specified medical condition and have a valid medical exemption certificate (MedEx)
have a continuing physical disability that prevents you from going out without help from another person and have a valid MedEx
hold a valid war pension exemption certificate and the prescription is for your accepted disability
are an NHS inpatient
You are also entitled to free prescriptions if you or your partner - including civil partner - receive, or you're under the age of 20 and the dependant of someone receiving:


Income Support
Income-based Jobseeker's Allowance
Income-related Employment and Support Allowance, or 
Pension Credit Guarantee Credit 
Universal Credit and meet the criteria 
If you're entitled to or named on:


a valid NHS tax credit exemption certificate - if you don't have a certificate, you can show your award notice; you qualify if you get Child Tax Credits, Working Tax Credits with a disability element (or both) and have income for tax credit purposes of £15,276 or less
a valid NHS certificate for full help with health costs (HC2)
People named on an NHS certificate for partial help with health costs (HC3) may also get help.

So now I know, I`ve also found out prescriptions are £8 and something pence which I also didn`t know having not had a prescription for years, see you learn something everyday


----------



## rona

Calvine said:


> I went to pick up a prescription and got my wallet out and the pharmacist looked shell-shocked and informed me that he was amazed since SO FEW people pay for a prescription these days...hardly anyone, he said!


Pfft, It's costing me a fortune since getting high blood pressure. Just put in for new ones and hoping the doc will give me 6 months this time..........will halve my costs


----------



## DoodlesRule

rona said:


> Pfft, It's costing me a fortune since getting high blood pressure. Just put in for new ones and hoping the doc will give me 6 months this time..........will halve my costs


I don't they can Rona, vaguely recall someone I know being put on blood pressure pills and doc said only permitted to prescribe a certain amount - the cynic in my thinks probably way of making those who do pay, pay more! But the non-cynic part of my wonders if its to cut waste, if you have had 6 months worth and drop dead after a month then 5 months worth is wasted (they can't reuse, if you return meds to a chemist they are simply destroyed).

The person I know is rich so it wasn't the money that bothered him, just moaned about having to keep getting repeat prescriptions


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DoodlesRule said:


> Is it actually in the manifesto then? I thought it came about because a journalist asked the question and TM answered


I got the impression it would be from the interview with Theresa May when she was asked and said she supported it and thought it was up to parliament to decide with a free vote also got the impression from my MP who said he would vote in favour of lifting the ban. Manifesto due out this morning so guess we will soon find out for certain.


----------



## Elles

From what I've seen of the conservative manifesto so far, I'm back voting Labour. I don't think May is strong and stable, so she'd rather be opposition and let Jeremy Corbyn deal with the Eu. Their manifesto is horrible so far.

I do like the 'conservatives against fox hunting' group though. Their manifesto is a nice one.


----------



## Happy Paws2

rona said:


> I've heard so many people complaining about receiving this, they'd rather it was spent on social care for those that need it. In fact one tried to stop his but couldn't, *so gives his to charity every *year


Nice if you can afford to do it I knew someone who did the same with family allowance, but we need it, so we don't have to worry about keeping warm, as do many people I know, but I bet somehow or other, they'll find away of stopping us getting it.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Live coverage of manifesto launch

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-2017-39945597


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

What a terrible noise - sounds like a cattle market


----------



## stockwellcat.

For those that are interested in reading it here is the Conservatives 2017 manifesto:
https://www.conservatives.com/manifesto

There website is running slow and has crashed 3 times on me. A PDF version is attached to this post.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> For those that are interested in reading it here is the Conservatives 2017 manifesto:
> https://www.conservatives.com/manifesto
> 
> There website is running slow and has crashed 3 times on me. A PDF version is attached to this post.


Thanks for posting. I couldn't see a pledge not.to increase income tax.

I like the idea of letting teachers off student loan repayments as long as interest is frozen.


----------



## Elles

Nothing much on the environment, plenty on forcing through fracking.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Took me a long time to find it but its there on P26  although the first paragraph is OK

We will continue to take action to improve animal welfare. We will implement our proposed reforms on pet sales and licensing and will make CCTV recording in slaughterhouses mandatory. As we leave the European Union, we can take early steps to control the export of live farm animals for slaughter.


We will grant a free vote, on a government bill in government time, to give parliament the opportunity to decide the future of the Hunting Act.


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> We will grant a free vote, *on a government bill in government time*, to give parliament the opportunity to decide the future of the Hunting Act.


Well, isn't that strange - apparently we have to trust them completely on which EU rights and protections are kept/discarded as there isn't enough time to put them through Parliament, but they have plenty of time to look at repealing something the majority of the country want to keep...


----------



## Calvine

rona said:


> Pfft, It's costing me a fortune since getting high blood pressure. Just put in for new ones and hoping the doc will give me 6 months this time..........will halve my costs


Yes, it was towards the end of last year when I went, think it was about £8.00 for one item (likely gone up now I guess). But I do remember there was a woman there who had a takeaway bag full and just signed for the lot...it would have cost her a fortune if she'd had to pay for them all.


----------



## DoodlesRule

Calvine said:


> Yes, it was towards the end of last year when I went, think it was about £8.00 for one item (likely gone up now I guess). But I do remember there was a woman there who had a takeaway bag full and just signed for the lot...it would have cost her a fortune if she'd had to pay for them all.


Certain medications you have to take forever are exempt from charges, such as I think thyroid meds, probably insulin etc. Asthama treatment isn't exempt even though when severe it can kill. Alternatively if someone is on a lot of meds they can buy some sort of certifcate which then means the individuals pills work out costing less than standard prescriptions charges. So the woman you saw could possibly have been signing to confirm she had an annual certificate


----------



## DoodlesRule

Disappointed that the hunting thing is in the manifesto. Don't think I agree with fracking, apologies for my vagueness I haven't looked into it in any great depth

I actually agree with stopping free school dinners for all - it should be just for those who need it

What do you all think of the social care idea? I would go for that as would mean we would not have to pay anything for our Mum. She gave up work in 1958 when she married Dad so had no actual money of her own but because Dad took Building Society advice and put some of his savings into her name we do. It must be very costly to administer currently, not talking big money here, she is on the border line so intitially it was 100% self fund (nearly £700 a week) which depletes funds rapidly so drop below the level and then get part funding so paying say £160 a week. When you have severe dementia you are obviously not spending anything so funds build up again so then have to pay 100% again and the cycle starts again. Probably the problem is we are too honest and don't dip into it!


----------



## MilleD

Oh my, £1bn extra for schools taken from the universal infant free school meal money.

Now I work in Education finance and I know the work and money that went into making kitchens in schools suitable to give all the youngsters a hot meal.

This won't go down well. Even if it does get put back into the schools (which I'll believe when I see).


----------



## DoodlesRule

MilleD said:


> Oh my, £1bn extra for schools taken from the universal infant free school meal money.
> 
> Now I work in Education finance and I know the work and money that went into making kitchens in schools suitable to give all the youngsters a hot meal.
> 
> This won't go down well. Even if it does get put back into the schools (which I'll believe when I see).


I hadn't thought of that but then surely the kitchens will still be used, just that if you want a hot meal for your child you would pay for it like it used to be?


----------



## MilleD

DoodlesRule said:


> Certain medications you have to take forever are exempt from charges, such as I think thyroid meds, probably insulin etc. Asthama treatment isn't exempt even though when severe it can kill. Alternatively if someone is on a lot of meds they can buy some sort of certifcate which then means the individuals pills work out costing less than standard prescriptions charges. So the woman you saw could possibly have been signing to confirm she had an annual certificate


This pisses me off about the asthma thing. It's supposed to be the things that are potentially lifelong threatening that are free. My inhalers cost me a fortune. When I go to Spain, I buy a load whilst I'm out there as it works out cheaper which is ridiculous.


----------



## MilleD

DoodlesRule said:


> I hadn't thought of that but then surely the kitchens will still be used, just that if you want a hot meal for your child you would pay for it like it used to be?


A lot of kitchens weren't geared up to make the amount of meals they needed. I imagine parents will probably go back to making sarnies in a lot of cases as it will work out cheaper.


----------



## DoodlesRule

MilleD said:


> This pisses me off about the asthma thing. It's supposed to be the things that are potentially lifelong threatening that are free. My inhalers cost me a fortune. When I go to Spain, I buy a load whilst I'm out there as it works out cheaper which is ridiculous.


I know I don't understand the logic behind that one being excluded other than I suppose there are different levels of severity. Have you looked into the pre-paid certificate thingy?


----------



## Goblin

So, "immigrants" will be prejudiced against with companies having to pay to employ them. Start getting the identification labels out, as the state of the country is all their fault.


----------



## noushka05

Here it is then.


----------



## sarybeagle

DoodlesRule said:


> Certain medications you have to take forever are exempt from charges, such as I think thyroid meds, probably insulin etc. Asthama treatment isn't exempt even though when severe it can kill. Alternatively if someone is on a lot of meds they can buy some sort of certifcate which then means the individuals pills work out costing less than standard prescriptions charges. So the woman you saw could possibly have been signing to confirm she had an annual certificate


I pay for a yearly prescription card. Costs £10.50 a month. Much better than forking out almost a £100 a month on prescription meds. Most of mine are controlled drugs so I can only get a months supply at a time. 
I don't qualify for free prescriptions sadly.


----------



## MilleD

DoodlesRule said:


> I know I don't understand the logic behind that one being excluded other than I suppose there are different levels of severity. Have you looked into the pre-paid certificate thingy?


I really should get organised and sort that


----------



## Smuge

Not many votes for crazy old Jezza in this house. Hard to confirm, but don't think he has even managed to win over my cat










Tho unlike the cat, I don't trust the Tories on Brexit as far as I could throw them


----------



## Elles

I still think she's being deliberately vague about freedom of movement, Gib etc because once she's back in it'll be all change and there'll be no hard brexit. No deal? No chance. Follow the money. Either way I'm not voting for her. :Yawn


----------



## Arnie83

Smuge said:


> Not many votes for crazy old Jezza in this house. Hard to confirm, but don't think he has even managed to win over my cat
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tho unlike the cat, I don't trust the Tories on Brexit as far as I could throw them


What a lovely waste paper basket!


----------



## 1290423

sarybeagle said:


> I pay for a yearly prescription card. Costs £10.50 a month. Much better than forking out almost a £100 a month on prescription meds. Most of mine are controlled drugs so I can only get a months supply at a time.
> I don't qualify for free prescriptions sadly.


I used to do that too,
I don't have to now as I am over 60


----------



## 1290423

Does anyone have a sneaky suspicion that teressa may does not want to be PM anymore?
Sorta getting an inkling that she is doing her best to p5ss off as many people as she can.
Or is it just me?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jeremy Corbyn mocks what he calls the Tories' "one really brilliant, great big cutting-edge 21st-Century idea - bring back fox-hunting".


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> Does anyone have a sneaky suspicion that teressa may does not want to be PM anymore?
> Sorta getting an inkling that she is doing her best to p5ss off as many people as she can.
> Or is it just me?


Brexit Hot Potato!!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DoodlesRule said:


> Disappointed that the hunting thing is in the manifesto. Don't think I agree with fracking, apologies for my vagueness I haven't looked into it in any great depth
> 
> I actually agree with stopping free school dinners for all - it should be just for those who need it
> 
> What do you all think of the social care idea? I would go for that as would mean we would not have to pay anything for our Mum. She gave up work in 1958 when she married Dad so had no actual money of her own but because Dad took Building Society advice and put some of his savings into her name we do. It must be very costly to administer currently, not talking big money here, she is on the border line so intitially it was 100% self fund (nearly £700 a week) which depletes funds rapidly so drop below the level and then get part funding so paying say £160 a week. When you have severe dementia you are obviously not spending anything so funds build up again so then have to pay 100% again and the cycle starts again. Probably the problem is we are too honest and don't dip into it!


I'm not impressed with the social care reforms and I don't imagine many pensioners will be either

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-...7-39945597&link_location=live-reporting-story

Social care is devolved, so there are different policies in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Unlike Labour and the Liberal Democrats earlier in the week, the Conservatives have not provided official costings for their policies in their manifesto.

The key changes are:


Taking into account the value of someone's home when means-testing for care at home, in the same way as they currently do for those in a care home
Increasing the amount of savings and property people can have while still getting their social care costs paid from £23,250 to £100,000
A government source suggested that the combination of these policies and the plan to means-test the winter fuel payments could save a total of around £2bn.

*Winter fuel allowance currently costs £3bn a year. We do not know on what basis it will be means-tested,* but it is not unreasonable to think half the money could be saved by means-testing, as the Institute for Fiscal Studies suggested.


----------



## 1290423

Goblin said:


> That point I couldn't disagree with.
> 
> Why should those who decide not to have any support ones like you who have 2
> 
> Interesting consideration is those children contribute to society and you gain even if not directly. You benefit when people have children who have good education etc etc. These are the people who will increase little things like GDP in the future. These are the people who will become doctors, nurses etc supporting you. Why should they you may ask.


Totally agree! But let me remind you, my children are in their forties now, I cannot recall exactly what family allowance we did get, and whether we got it for both, but when we had mine my husband used to get an extra £300 a year I think it was on his tax allowance, he was I guess pretty well paid and I never had to work so that was welcome.

On your second point, we benefit from a child having a good education??
Depends which way you look at that as it doesn't apply in all instances, certainly in this day and age when most go to uni anyway! My daughter, if I recall correct was funding by my ex husband through uni!


----------



## suewhite

I think she (they) will have lost a lot of the elderly voters the one's that always go and vote.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm not impressed with the social care reforms and I don't imagine many pensioners will be either
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-...7-39945597&link_location=live-reporting-story
> 
> Social care is devolved, so there are different policies in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
> 
> Unlike Labour and the Liberal Democrats earlier in the week, the Conservatives have not provided official costings for their policies in their manifesto.
> 
> The key changes are:
> 
> 
> Taking into account the value of someone's home when means-testing for care at home, in the same way as they currently do for those in a care home
> Increasing the amount of savings and property people can have while still getting their social care costs paid from £23,250 to £100,000
> A government source suggested that the combination of these policies and the plan to means-test the winter fuel payments could save a total of around £2bn.
> 
> *Winter fuel allowance currently costs £3bn a year. We do not know on what basis it will be means-tested,* but it is not unreasonable to think half the money could be saved by means-testing, as the Institute for Fiscal Studies suggested.


Confused about the amount of savings being raised to £100k. Is this figure to include the value of your home? Only if it is I know no one who lives in a house valued at less then that


----------



## 1290423

suewhite said:


> I think she (they) will have lost a lot of the elderly voters the one's that always go and vote.


Dunno, spoke with my aunt who's 87 and a friend who's 75 this morning, they are both still voting Tory.
We shall lose it too, other half I am guessing will still vote Tory too.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Confused about the amount of savings being raised to £100k. Is this figure to include the value of your home? Only if it is I know no one who lives in a house valued at less then that


Yes my understanding is it includes the value of your home - see below from the manifesto

Under the current system, care costs deplete an individual's assets, including in some cases the family home, down to £23,250 or even less. These costs can be catastrophic for those with modest or medium wealth. One purpose of long-term saving is to cover needs in old age; those who can should rightly contribute to their care from savings and accumulated wealth, rather than expecting current and future taxpayers to carry the cost on their behalf. Moreover, many older people have built considerable property assets due to rising property prices. Reconciling these competing pressures fairly and in a sustainable way has challenged many governments of the past. We intend to tackle this with three connected measures.

First, we will align the future basis for means-testing for domiciliary care with that for residential care, so that people are looked after in the place that is best for them. This will mean that the value of the family home will be taken into account along with other assets and income, whether care is provided at home, or in a residential or nursing care home.

Second, to ensure this is fair, we will introduce a single capital floor, set at £100,000, more than four times the current means test threshold. This will ensure that, no matter how large the cost of care turns out to be, people will always retain at least £100,000 of their savings and assets, including value in the family home.

Third, we will extend the current freedom to defer payments for residential care to those receiving care at home, so no-one will have to sell their home in their lifetime to pay for care


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes my understanding is it includes the value of your home - see below from the manifesto
> 
> Under the current system, care costs deplete an individual's assets, including in some cases the family home, down to £23,250 or even less. These costs can be catastrophic for those with modest or medium wealth. One purpose of long-term saving is to cover needs in old age; those who can should rightly contribute to their care from savings and accumulated wealth, rather than expecting current and future taxpayers to carry the cost on their behalf. Moreover, many older people have built considerable property assets due to rising property prices. Reconciling these competing pressures fairly and in a sustainable way has challenged many governments of the past. We intend to tackle this with three connected measures.
> 
> First, we will align the future basis for means-testing for domiciliary care with that for residential care, so that people are looked after in the place that is best for them. This will mean that the value of the family home will be taken into account along with other assets and income, whether care is provided at home, or in a residential or nursing care home.
> 
> Second, to ensure this is fair, we will introduce a single capital floor, set at £100,000, more than four times the current means test threshold. This will ensure that, no matter how large the cost of care turns out to be, people will always retain at least £100,000 of their savings and assets, including value in the family home.
> 
> Third, we will extend the current freedom to defer payments for residential care to those receiving care at home, so no-one will have to sell their home in their lifetime to pay for care


Right, so now, pensioners who decide to downsize, buy a house as near as the can to £100k. Put a minimal amount into their bank account, rent a safety deposit box from the bank and stick all your excess cash in there.


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> Right, so now, pensioners who decide to downsize, buy a house as near as the can to £100k. Put a minimal amount into their bank account, rent a safety deposit box from the bank and stick all your excess cash in there.


Or buy abroad in cheap places?
Leave your home to the kids...buy abroad...come back and rent....
Or get few Golden Girls together and buy one house?
Spend the rest on cruises and what not.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Right, so now, pensioners who decide to downsize, buy a house as near as the can to £100k. Put a minimal amount into their bank account, rent a safety deposit box from the bank and stick all your excess cash in there.


I would imagine there will be some rules about having to have disposed of assets more than 7 years before like there is for inheritance tax.


----------



## Elles

It used to not include your home if you were cared for at home apparently. Now you can keep assets of up to 100k including your home and borrow from the government to cover your care, to be paid back when you die plus interest. Win win there for the government, no homeless pensioners to look after and they get interest and they get all your savings, because it's unlikely your house is worth less than 100k. Best off will be those who sold their house and spent the money on a world cruise before they got old and infirm, or those who die first. I always wanted to see the Great Wall and the pyramids. 

I just love the promise that everyone can take a year off unpaid to look after these elderly relatives. :Hilarious


----------



## cheekyscrip

Again those who worked hard to own their house are sore losers.
Same like cutting down QROPS etc...to basically control people's savings in pension pots.

If those people simply stashed gold in deposit box or spent it...no one would touch it.
My idea: Remortgage to the hilt and pay kids' education.


----------



## havoc

DT said:


> Confused about the amount of savings being raised to £100k. Is this figure to include the value of your home? Only if it is I know no one who lives in a house valued at less then that


From what they're saying the costs can be deferred and property doesn't have to be sold until the death of the person needing the care. Does this mean any surviving spouse/partner has to find that money from somewhere or is made homeless? Is a surviving partner deemed to have had 50% ownership so only 50% of the value is taken into account? Is the deemed value that at the time of death or at the time care commenced?


----------



## 1290423

cheekyscrip said:


> Or buy abroad in cheap places?
> Leave your home to the kids...buy abroad...come back and rent....
> Or get few Golden Girls together and buy one house?
> Spend the rest on cruises and what not.


I'm on it cheeky X


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> It used to not include your home if you were cared for at home apparently. Now you can keep assets of up to 100k including your home and borrow from the government to cover your care, to be paid back when you die plus interest. Win win there for the government, no homeless pensioners to look after and they get interest and they get all your savings, because it's unlikely your house is worth less than 100k. Best off will be those who sold their house and spent the money on a world cruise before they got old and infirm, or those who die first. I always wanted to see the Great Wall and the pyramids.
> 
> I just love the promise that everyone can take a year off unpaid to look after these elderly relatives. :Hilarious


It's up to the individual council as to whether they charge interest


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> It's up to the individual council as to whether they charge interest


Now there's a quandry. Do you, as a council, charge interest and grab what you can upfront or do you not therefore making your area attractive to the dying and working on greater future returns instead?


----------



## Guest

MilleD said:


> Oh my, £1bn extra for schools taken from the universal infant free school meal money.
> Now I work in Education finance and I know the work and money that went into making kitchens in schools suitable to give all the youngsters a hot meal.
> This won't go down well. Even if it does get put back into the schools (which I'll believe when I see).


Did I understand this correctly - the plan is to cut down free lunches for youngest and use that money for the older students? I must got that wrong, as that makes no sense. Surely all children need a good, warm meal during the day just for health reasons. We must give them proper food so that they can learn and keep focused. Parents still need to provide another meal, naturally. Please tell me I am wrong, and the idea is to expand the free school meals and improve their quality, as that would benefit all children, rich and poor.


----------



## stockwellcat.

*This is what the British public think of the main party leaders:*

































Source of information: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/british-public-think-main-party-leaders-120410504.html


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

I can see a huge rush on equity release schemes.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I can see a huge rush on equity release schemes.


Ssshhh rottie, we dont want them to work that out


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Ssshhh rottie, we dont want them to work that out


I hope they don't put a stop on being able to withdraw your pension early as I'm planning to raid my pension fund, do an equity release on the house and spend my retirement living it up in a huge motorhome. We haven't got any kids to leave it to so we are going to spend spend spend :Hilarious:Hilarious


----------



## MollySmith

So, the Tories are to give workers the right to a year away from full-time employment, to look after elderly parents.

Win, win, for them then: lessen the burden on social care; take someone else off the unemployment register, for a year, whilst no remuneration will be paid to support the dutiful 'carer'! Wtf?

What exactly are those carers to live on during the 12 months grace?
Will they be expected to relocate to facilitate this? Many will have families of their own.
At what point will the decision be made that 'the ol' dear has no more than 12 months left in her so now's the time to bagsie your leave'? Who will get to call this?
What happens if the parent survives longer?
What if it's my partner - my husband is older than me.

It is a policy designed (and I use that term loosely) with no thought for how it will make parents feel even more of a burden on their children, or my husband on me. It will set up a presumed but untenable obligation - and cause tensions as to which 'child' will/should/must do it, and likely resentment from them towards other offspring, possible resentment towards a parent that's hanging on too long, as well as family fallouts with those unwilling to do it!

And who will this hit?

Those who've already had their working life extended.
Those who've already had their savings eroded.
Those who've had children later, after they've tried to save a deposit for a house.
Those who've accrued debt via education and will, in tandem with this call, be trying to help their own children through university.

Naive? Blinkered? Or sheer bloody minded? Honestly I'm appalled - her definination of 'mainstream' is completely at odds with mine and the angry crowds outside are a reflection of that. It's Dickension and utterly against the manifesto they were elected on last time!


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> I'm on it cheeky X


Yay...your place or mine?


----------



## Satori

havoc said:


> From what they're saying the costs can be deferred and property doesn't have to be sold until the death of the person needing the care. Does this mean any surviving spouse/partner has to find that money from somewhere or is made homeless? Is a surviving partner deemed to have had 50% ownership so only 50% of the value is taken into account? Is the deemed value that at the time of death or at the time care commenced?


I assume the council will simply put a charge on the house. So the position of the survivor depends on whether they were joint tenants or tenants in common.


----------



## MollySmith

havoc said:


> From what they're saying the costs can be deferred and property doesn't have to be sold until the death of the person needing the care. Does this mean any surviving spouse/partner has to find that money from somewhere or is made homeless? Is a surviving partner deemed to have had 50% ownership so only 50% of the value is taken into account? Is the deemed value that at the time of death or at the time care commenced?


This is what worries me, we own our home but my husband is older than me so I can only assume that I'd be homeless or paying for him should he pass away before me, and it's not something that we've anticipated saving for ever.


----------



## MiffyMoo

MollySmith said:


> So, the Tories are to give workers the right to a year away from full-time employment, to look after elderly parents.
> 
> Win, win, for them then: lessen the burden on social care; take someone else off the unemployment register, for a year, whilst no remuneration will be paid to support the dutiful 'carer'! Wtf?
> 
> What exactly are those carers to live on during the 12 months grace?
> Will they be expected to relocate to facilitate this? Many will have families of their own.
> At what point will the decision be made that 'the ol' dear has no more than 12 months left in her so now's the time to bagsie your leave'? Who will get to call this?
> What happens if the parent survives longer?
> What if it's my partner - my husband is older than me.
> 
> It is a policy designed (and I use that term loosely) with no thought for how it will make parents feel even more of a burden on their children, or my husband on me. It will set up a presumed but untenable obligation - and cause tensions as to which 'child' will/should/must do it, and likely resentment from them towards other offspring, possible resentment towards a parent that's hanging on too long, as well as family fallouts with those unwilling to do it!
> 
> And who will this hit?
> 
> Those who've already had their working life extended.
> Those who've already had their savings eroded.
> Those who've had children later, after they've tried to save a deposit for a house.
> Those who've accrued debt via education and will, in tandem with this call, be trying to help their own children through university.
> 
> Naive? Blinkered? Or sheer bloody minded? Honestly I'm appalled - her definination of 'mainstream' is completely at odds with mine and the angry crowds outside are a reflection of that. It's Dickension and utterly against the manifesto they were elected on last time!


You do realise that it's not compulsory?


----------



## leashedForLife

*MollySmith* said,

... _It will set up a presumed but untenable obligation - & cause tensions as to *which 'child' will/ should/ must do it*, and likely resentment from them towards other offspring, possible resentment towards a parent that's hanging on too long, as well as family fallouts with those unwilling to do it!_
...
___________________________
.
.
I'm sure there are millions of individual variations on this - but here's mine.
Because I had experience at caregiving, plus was the sole unmarried daughter, i was the obvious nominee. Not once, but *three times*.
.
the 1st time meant a year out of college, which started with caring for my mother for 2-months [she'd broken her arm badly, & had to be driven 45-mins each way to work, plus help at home - load the coal furnace, shake the ash-bed, cook, clean, help her dress...], FOLLOWED BY my sire being discharged *without notice* from the Veterans' hospital & sent "home" to the farm in a taxi-cab, a 2-hour trip from Coatesville; they sent him out dressed in a split-back jonny & flimsy bathrobe, with open slippers on his feet.

He arrived soaked in urine to his waist, as he'd been catheterized for 3-weeks post-stroke, & had no urinary control. // Natch, they loaded him into the front seat with no waterproof pad beneath him, & the cabbie was apoplectic.
.
Then i had to get a 300# man who can barely stand, let alone walk, to the house from the drive - about 150-ft, down a series of sharp slopes, in 6-inches of snow, without closed shoes on - let alone boots, or a coat, or gloves. It's February, & bitter cold. // He was phenomenally lucky that i was at home; my mother's cast was removed on Friday, & she drove herself to work that Monday for the 1st time in 2-months. Otherwise, i've no doubt the cabbie would have shoved him out the door, left him there, & driven back to Coatesville without a pause.
.
I cared for him until late August, & went back to college for fall term; that spring & summer were sheer H***. I'd *volunteered *to help my mum.
But i hated my sire - no bones about it, that abusive barsteward could have died in a ditch, for all i cared. I was drafted; his Dr at the Vet's Hosp shipped him off, & i was on scene. Woe is me.  Bad timing, on my part.
.
My younger sis, elder sis, & elder bro did nothing to help - not even chipping in to pay for respite-care, when my mother disappeared for the entire month of July on her annual vacation, leaving me to work 12-hour shifts, 6 days a week from 11 to 11, & worry that Johnny would burn the house down while i was gone. When i was at home, i was trying to run the farm solo, feed him, keep up with laundry for an incontinent patient, & not lose my mind... caring for a man i deeply despised, who even while completely dependent, was verbally & even physically abusive.
.
Fast-forward a couple of decades.
I'm sharing an apartment with my mum, working full-time; she's been stone deaf in her right ear since a car accident 40-years before [concussion], has lost 75% of the hearing in her left, & now has 25% vision in her left eye [none in her right], due to PRA. She's mobile & oriented, but needs more & more help. // My elder sis provides the enrichment - i leave my job, cash out my 401-k [thinking i can replace it, right?...], & spend the next 3-years as her unpaid, live-in caregiver.
.
then came the 2008 implosion; jobs? - What jobs?
My mother died in 2009, peacefully, at home. My small inheritance is long-gone [rent, food, utilities, & medical bills when i couldn't work for over 18-mos - severe allergic reaction, 4 bouts of steroids, etc.]. I have no savings. I work 6 days of 7.
My sister - or my mother! - could easily have afforded a part-time or even full-time carer. A daytime carer could have covered the hours i worked, & i'd have been there to cover overnite hours. I'd still have my retirement savings, or at least some part of them.
.
There's no do-over. I'm not sorry i cared for my mother & helped her; i *am* sorry it devastated my financial future. // There were no plans then that provided funds to pay relatives who provided care, or even tax credits for family caregivers - certainly not in backward Virginny.  I doubt the Olde Dominion has such legislation even now.
I saved my mum a boatload of money & distress by keeping her in her own home, & saved her thousands of dollars per month for those 3 years - but it did me no favors.
.
.
.


----------



## Elles

No it's not compulsory, what's the point in it? Who on Earth can afford to take a year off unpaid? Those who can are more likely to pay someone else to care for a sick or elderly relative. Otherwise, yes, they get a free carer and one less unemployed. It just seems another silly supposed benefit in the manifesto that isn't going to benefit anyone.


----------



## Goblin

DT said:


> On your second point, we benefit from a child having a good education??
> Depends which way you look at that as it doesn't apply in all instances,


So you don't benefit when the country has a strong economy? Not every individual will provide that, depends in part if they have are brought up in a me me me, why should I support others culture


----------



## Jesthar

havoc said:


> From what they're saying the costs can be deferred and property doesn't have to be sold until the death of the person needing the care. Does this mean any surviving spouse/partner has to find that money from somewhere or is made homeless? Is a surviving partner deemed to have had 50% ownership so only 50% of the value is taken into account? Is the deemed value that at the time of death or at the time care commenced?





rottiepointerhouse said:


> I can see a huge rush on equity release schemes.


Apparently this was first posted in the Comments section of the Guardian (can't find the original as the comments sections are thousands of posts long):

"People need to read the small print associated with this because its a lot nastier than it looks.

I work in the City. The insurance industry was approached by the Government several months ago with the aim of creating a new market for a new product.

This arrangement is a culmination of those discussions. You wont have to sell your house PROVIDED that you purchase an insurance product to cover your social care. The "premiums" would be recovered from the equity after the house has been sold, and the Insurance company will have a lien on the house and can force a sale if it wants to. So your offspring cant keep it on the market for long in order to get the best price.

The real kicker in this is that in order to encourage the industry to market these products the government guaranteed that there would be no cap on the premiums.

This was in some ways "atonement" for Osborne's destruction of the highly lucrative annuties market. This means that the premiums could be up to (and including) the entire remaining equity in the property after the government has taken its cut. Companies will be falling over themselves to get their snouts in this trough.

In short your offspring and relatives could get absolutely nothing from your estate.

If you buy one of these products you need to read the small print very very carefully indeed because there will be some real dogs on the market.

I suspect that this is another financial scandal waiting to happen, but by the time it does May will be long gone."


----------



## leashedForLife

*Jesthar* said,

_Apparently this was first posted in the Comments section of the Guardian...

"People need to read the small print associated with this, because it's a lot nastier than it looks.
... to encourage the industry to market these products, the Govt guaranteed that there'd be *no cap on the premiums*.
This was in some ways 'atonement' for Osborne's destruction of the highly-lucrative annuities market... premiums could be up to (& including) the entire remaining equity in the property, after the Govt takes its cut. Companies will be falling over themselves to get their snouts in this trough.

In short - *your offspring & / or relatives could get absolutely nothing from your estate*. If you buy one of these products, you need to read the small print very, very carefully, indeed --- because there will be some real dogs on the market.
I suspect that this is another financial scandal waiting to happen, but by the time it does, *May will be long gone.*"
________________________________
.
.
Good God.  That's appalling.
.
.
.


----------



## Zaros

If you click your heels together whilst repeating the phrase* 'Strong And Stable Cabinet*' three times, you will suddenly find yourself inside a cupboard at your local branch of IKEA.:Wacky


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> No it's not compulsory, what's the point in it? Who on Earth can afford to take a year off unpaid? Those who can are more likely to pay someone else to care for a sick or elderly relative. Otherwise, yes, they get a free carer and one less unemployed. It just seems another silly supposed benefit in the manifesto that isn't going to benefit anyone.


Exactly.

Furthermore, it now costs £1200 to take an unfair dismissal case to tribunal. So, if, after a year of no pay, your employer says your job is no longer available, you have to find £1200 to challenge it.


----------



## havoc

Jesthar said:


> This was in some ways "atonement" for Osborne's destruction of the highly lucrative annuties market


You're not listening to them are you. It can't possibly be yet another money making scheme for big business, that nice Mrs May said it's all about looking after people who are vulnerable, old and sick.

The real way to beat the system of course is to get ill with the right disease e.g. cancer good, dementia bad. How sad is that in a supposedly civilised country.


----------



## Satori

havoc said:


> You're not listening to them are you. It can't possibly be yet another money making scheme for big business, that nice Mrs May said it's all about looking after people who are vulnerable, old and sick.
> 
> The real way to beat the system of course is to get ill with the right disease e.g. cancer good, dementia bad. How sad is that in a supposedly civilised country.


And of course there will be no pressure on clinicians to tend towards diagnoses that lead to care outside of the narrow NHS remit. Not that this will matter if the 2022 manifesto extends the principal to all healthcare. Is that we're we are heading I wonder; a means tested NHS? a system wherein anyone with assets must purchase medical insurance?


----------



## MollySmith

MiffyMoo said:


> You do realise that it's not compulsory?


I do but why then do this, who on earth can afford to take a year of work - basically what @Elles said.

In general to the thread
It feels like their policies haven't caught up the diverse society we have now. The point that both Vince Cable and Angela Rayner made on Question Time last night is that the funds the Torys have allocated do not add up to the cost of long term illness. Dementia - in my father in laws case - lasted for 30 years of his life.


----------



## MollySmith

George Osbourne strikes again
http://www.filmsforaction.org/watch/sick-british-media-laid-bare-by-london-taxi-driver/


----------



## MollySmith

Zaros said:


> If you click your heels together whilst repeating the phrase* 'Strong And Stable Cabinet*' three times, you will suddenly find yourself inside a cupboard at your local branch of IKEA.:Wacky


I was thinking it was like that film - Chucky was it? With the clown and one had to say his name three times in the mirror and he'd appear to torment the speaker.


----------



## MilleD

MrsZee said:


> Did I understand this correctly - the plan is to cut down free lunches for youngest and use that money for the older students? I must got that wrong, as that makes no sense. Surely all children need a good, warm meal during the day just for heath reasons. We must give them proper food so that they can learn and keep focused. Parents still need to provide another meal, naturally. Please tell me I am wrong, and the idea is to expand the free school meals and improve their quality, as should benefit all children, rich and poor.


Yes, you've got it about right. UIFSM as it's called was brought in (by the ConLib coalition I believe) to give all children up to a certain age a free hot meal, not just those eligible under the normal rules for free school meals (any age).

They are now saying they will stop funding that and push the money probably into the overall school funding formula (don't know if you've read about this but it is currently being changed and most people are up in arms about it).

The kids can still have a hot meal, it's just that if they are not eligible for FSM, parents will have to pay. And when that happens, parents are very likely to send children in with a sarnie and a bag of crisps.


----------



## MilleD

MollySmith said:


> I was thinking it was like that film - Chucky was it? With the clown and one had to say his name three times in the mirror and he'd appear to torment the speaker.


That sounds like Beetlejiuce


----------



## Satori

Jesthar said:


> Apparently this was first posted in the Comments section of the Guardian (can't find the original as the comments sections are thousands of posts long):
> 
> "People need to read the small print associated with this because its a lot nastier than it looks.
> 
> I work in the City. The insurance industry was approached by the Government several months ago with the aim of creating a new market for a new product.
> 
> This arrangement is a culmination of those discussions. You wont have to sell your house PROVIDED that you purchase an insurance product to cover your social care. The "premiums" would be recovered from the equity after the house has been sold, and the Insurance company will have a lien on the house and can force a sale if it wants to. So your offspring cant keep it on the market for long in order to get the best price.
> 
> The real kicker in this is that in order to encourage the industry to market these products the government guaranteed that there would be no cap on the premiums.
> 
> This was in some ways "atonement" for Osborne's destruction of the highly lucrative annuties market. This means that the premiums could be up to (and including) the entire remaining equity in the property after the government has taken its cut. Companies will be falling over themselves to get their snouts in this trough.
> 
> In short your offspring and relatives could get absolutely nothing from your estate.
> 
> If you buy one of these products you need to read the small print very very carefully indeed because there will be some real dogs on the market.
> 
> I suspect that this is another financial scandal waiting to happen, but by the time it does May will be long gone."


Clever. So they will ride out the storm about care costs being dumped on individuals and effectively uninsurable. Then they will announce that they have listened to the concerns of those wonderful ordinary folk and worked tirelessly with the insurance industry to provide lovely new products to ensure that we can all approach our old age without the worry of care costs not being covered. Cue, pat on the back for Theresa May and nobody pointing out that the sequence of events weren't quite like that. Smoke and mirrors politics at its best.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong




----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> Smoke and mirrors politics at its best.


Well they have the best working for them and you can't deny the talent. It is truly brilliant - you listen to what people are worried about, claim you've taken it on board and come up with a 'solution' which actually shafts everyone except big business.


----------



## noushka05

Another classic courtesy of twitter, this time by Hugh Grant:Hilarious

*Hugh Grant*‏Verified account

_Theresa May's head now so far up Paul Dacre's arse I can only assume she'll be_
_wearing him as a hat to Ascot_

1,963 retweets 2,959 likes


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-cameron-right-wing-social-care-a7743146.html


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jesthar said:


> Apparently this was first posted in the Comments section of the Guardian (can't find the original as the comments sections are thousands of posts long):
> 
> "People need to read the small print associated with this because its a lot nastier than it looks.
> 
> I work in the City. The insurance industry was approached by the Government several months ago with the aim of creating a new market for a new product.
> 
> This arrangement is a culmination of those discussions. You wont have to sell your house PROVIDED that you purchase an insurance product to cover your social care. The "premiums" would be recovered from the equity after the house has been sold, and the Insurance company will have a lien on the house and can force a sale if it wants to. So your offspring cant keep it on the market for long in order to get the best price.
> 
> The real kicker in this is that in order to encourage the industry to market these products the government guaranteed that there would be no cap on the premiums.
> 
> This was in some ways "atonement" for Osborne's destruction of the highly lucrative annuties market. This means that the premiums could be up to (and including) the entire remaining equity in the property after the government has taken its cut. Companies will be falling over themselves to get their snouts in this trough.
> 
> In short your offspring and relatives could get absolutely nothing from your estate.
> 
> If you buy one of these products you need to read the small print very very carefully indeed because there will be some real dogs on the market.
> 
> I suspect that this is another financial scandal waiting to happen, but by the time it does May will be long gone."


I meant equity release as in the products that are already available and have been for many years which either give you a lump sum of cash or a monthly income, the amount is based on the value of your house, as you pay no interest on this by the time you die it is highly likely there will not be much left for your estate. As the equity release company have a big stake in the property they want the best price for it when it is sold based on a professional valuation which might of course not agree with the familiy's view of what it is worth. I've no doubt there will be a rush of new products to insure against this ridiculous policy but I meant one whereby you take your equity out and have a blast on it while you still can


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I meant equity release as in the products that are already available and have been for many years which either give you a lump sum of cash or a monthly income, the amount is based on the value of your house, as you pay no interest on this by the time you die it is highly likely there will not be much left for your estate. As the equity release company have a big stake in the property they want the best price for it when it is sold based on a professional valuation which might of course not agree with the familiy's view of what it is worth. I've no doubt there will be a rush of new products to insure against this ridiculous policy but I meant one whereby you take your equity out and have a blast on it while you still can


Yes, I know, but equity release has at least been _optional_ until now, meaning if you wanted to leave the house to the kids, you could. This new tack is something else entirely.

Of course, it only really affects the less well off, if you can afford to pay for your care anyway you won't be affected. The people most affected will be those who spent a lifetime working hard to buy and pay for a house in the hope it would be a nice little nest egg for the next generation and make their life a bit easier. Only to suddenly find that is going to be taken from them one way or another by the government and bankers too.

I seem to recall there have been a few observations regarding plans to increase tax for the higher brackets along the lines of "but they've worked hard for their money, why should they pay more?" Does this not apply to the poorer in society too?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jesthar said:


> Yes, I know, but equity release has at least been _optional_ until now, meaning if you wanted to leave the house to the kids, you could. This new tack is something else entirely.
> 
> Of course, it only really affects the less well off, if you can afford to pay for your care anyway you won't be affected. The people most affected will be those who spent a lifetime working hard to buy and pay for a house in the hope it would be a nice little nest egg for the next generation and make their life a bit easier. Only to suddenly find that is going to be taken from them one way or another by the government and bankers too.
> 
> I seem to recall there have been a few observations regarding plans to increase tax for the higher brackets along the lines of "but they've worked hard for their money, why should they pay more?" Does this not apply to the poorer in society too?


I think you are asking the wrong person - to be clear I don't like the plans anymore than you do and I hope they lose the pensioners vote as a result. I was just pointing out when you quoted me that I was referring to an entirely different type of "equity release" when I said "I can see a huge rush on equity release schemes".


----------



## Goblin

noushka05 said:


> Another classic courtesy of twitter, this time by Hugh Grant:Hilarious


As I had to look it up and to save people needing to do the same.. Paul Michael Dacre is an English journalist and editor of the British newspaper the Daily Mail


----------



## Zaros

MollySmith said:


> I was thinking it was like that film - Chucky was it? With the clown and one had to say his name three times in the mirror and he'd appear to torment the speaker.


I really wouldn't know about that Molly.

What I do know is, I'm going to write a book based on the madventures and exploits of a vicar's daughter, who encounters all sorts of weird people that converse in contentious and peculiar dialects and languages, most of it incomprehensible, after falling down an open manhole.
The story will end with her taking over the entire realm and punishing all the poor, sick, elderly and unemployed people, who she detests immensely, by subjecting them to a poverty greater than that of her predecessors.

I rather like the title 'Malice In Blunderland' but I'm not quite sure if it will actually attract the curiouser and curiouser?:Wacky


----------



## kimthecat

Zaros said:


> If you click your heels together whilst repeating the phrase* 'Strong And Stable Cabinet*' three times, you will suddenly find yourself inside a cupboard at your local branch of IKEA.:Wacky


good job MFI went bust , their cabinets used to fall apart .


----------



## kimthecat

MollySmith said: ↑


> I was thinking it was like that film - Chucky was it? With the clown and one had to say his name three times in the mirror and he'd appear to torment the speaker.


It was the Candyman


----------



## kimthecat

so all Corbyns own MPs who wanted to oust him did so because they read the Sun and the Mail ! 

If Labour win , it will be in spite of him , not because of him.

Just because the mail says he's an unelectable loser doesn't mean to say he isn't.


----------



## DoodlesRule

DT said:


> Confused about the amount of savings being raised to £100k. Is this figure to include the value of your home? Only if it is I know no one who lives in a house valued at less then that


At the moment if you are in a care home your house is already included, unless your have a spouse still living in it. In our case Dad still lives at home and its in his sole name anyway. Currently if you are getting a care package and still live at home then your house isn't counted at all.

Depends where you live I suppose quite a lot of terrace and older properties in my area worth less than 100k, Dad's house is hundreds of years old and unmodernised (no central heating even, he doesn't like it!) so not worth 100k



DT said:


> Right, so now, pensioners who decide to downsize, buy a house as near as the can to £100k. Put a minimal amount into their bank account, rent a safety deposit box from the bank and stick all your excess cash in there.


Already laws about deliberate depravation of assets to avoid care fees.

For years (like 20 or 30 years) the family has begged Dad to spend money on himself as we wanted him to have an easier life, rather leave his nest egg for us we wanted him to benefit. Its a generation thing, he was adamant he needed to save for old age in case needed care as he saw this coming he said donkeys years ago people are living so much longer there won't be enough to fund care.

In the care home Mum is in there are many residents in their 90's and quite a few 100+ with some having been there for over 10 years. For years governments have seen a funding crisis looming but just tinkered round the edge. Yes could have massive tax increases to fund care for all so that people can then leave inheritance for their children and grandchildren but is that fair? After all 100k is quite a nice inheritance anyways isn't it.

I thinks its still only deferring the same problems onto future generations though, so many of the current young don't own their homes so what happens in the future when they need care


----------



## Zaros

kimthecat said:


> good job MFI went bust , their cabinets used to fall apart .


I remember them. Strange how their flat-pack instructions always seem to conjure up a limited vocabulary; Phuqin, phuq, phuqit

Now I know swearing isn't smart or clever, even at the best of times...or the worst

Yet there were those times when it certainly did help. :Rage unch

And still does:Sorry


----------



## KittenKong

This is what I would expect from the likes of Putin or Robert Mugabe.

Dare we speak of any opposition to TM and her government post 8/6/17 if re-elected?

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...ternet-conservatives-government-a7744176.html


----------



## stockwellcat.

I am very disappointed with the manifesto's and I am completely lost as to who to vote for. This leaves me with no option but to vote in protest against the current ruling party. I didn't want to vote this way but I am left with no option but to do so. I have never voted like this before, I normally agree with the party I vote for so there you go this is how I am voting in this election. So my vote is going to Labour.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> I am very disappointed with the manifesto's and I am completely lost as to who to vote for. This leaves me with no option but to vote in protest against the current ruling party. I didn't want to vote this way but I am left with no option but to do so. I have never voted like this before, I normally agree with the party I vote for so there you go this is how I am voting in this election. So my vote is going to Labour.


I thought you had made your mind up on that with regards to the hunting vote anyway?


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> so all Corbyns own MPs who wanted to oust him did so because they read the Sun and the Mail !
> 
> If Labour win , it will be in spite of him , not because of him.
> 
> Just because the mail says he's an unelectable loser doesn't mean to say he isn't.


No its because the neoliberals didn't want to lose their grip of the party - in much the same way as the democrats didn't want to lose it to Bernie Sanders.

I think it was a mistake for MPs to keep undermining him like they did - it only gave more ammunition to the media and the tories. I think if they'd given him a chance at the beginning he might have appealed to more people now. That said, its not about one person, its about policies & labour have a fantastically progressive manifesto 

People should think long and hard which party they vote for if they want a healthy environment, want to save our NHS, want to stop fox hunting etc With so much to lose this is the most important election for generations.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> I am very disappointed with the manifesto's and I am completely lost as to who to vote for. This leaves me with no option but to vote in protest against the current ruling party. I didn't want to vote this way but I am left with no option but to do so. I have never voted like this before, I normally agree with the party I vote for so there you go this is how I am voting in this election. So my vote is going to Labour.


Aww bless ya


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> . So my vote is going to Labour.


I doubt it, you've still got the best part of three weeks to go


----------



## noushka05

Goblin said:


> As I had to look it up and to save people needing to do the same.. Paul Michael Dacre is an English journalist and editor of the British newspaper the Daily Mail


Sorry I shouldn't have just assumed people know who Dacre is. Dacre is one of the most powerful people in the UK - at the very heart of our government. He is destroying our democracy.

This is Dacre, Murdoch & the other media baron's reward for supporting May. Leveson 2 scrapped.

Summed up in another Hugh Grant tweet.

_This could have been written by Paul Dacre. And frankly probably was_*.*


----------



## noushka05

This in the Observer on Paul Dacre is well worth a read - 
*
Is the editor of the Daily Mail the most dangerous man in Britain?*

Under Paul Dacre's 25-year reign, the paper has become the UK's most fanatical anti-liberal voice. We trace its growing political influence through the past year's headlines

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...us-man-in-britain-daily-mail?CMP=share_btn_tw


----------



## MollySmith

kimthecat said:


> MollySmith said: ↑
> 
> It was the Candyman


That's it! Thank you. Everyone now, 'strong and stable' x 3 and let's see the horror of the full Tory cabinet :Stop:Nailbiting:Mooning


----------



## Zaros




----------



## MollySmith

How to vote if you have no fixed address

https://www.yourvotematters.co.uk/can-i-vote/registering-to-vote-with-no-fixed-address


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> I am very disappointed with the manifesto's and I am completely lost as to who to vote for. This leaves me with no option but to vote in protest against the current ruling party. I didn't want to vote this way but I am left with no option but to do so. I have never voted like this before, I normally agree with the party I vote for so there you go this is how I am voting in this election. So my vote is going to Labour.


Me too. I'm not voting at all this time. Not for a party I like (because their isn't one) nor for a protest party (because I refuse to vote for a bunch of [email protected]). I am looking forward to the canvassers calling. Whichever party they represent they shall be leaving my doorstep with a large flea in their ear.

At this point, I would be quite happy with a coalition of chaos; a hung parliament that can get nothing achieved.


----------



## MollySmith

And how to register, you only have days to do this and there is no excuse

https://www.yourvotematters.co.uk/uk-general-election-2017


----------



## MollySmith

Zaros said:


>


*cries..... and screams in fear*


----------



## suewhite

I was all set to vote Conservative as always but they have just lost my vote, I lost everything including my house when Mrs Thatcher was in power, I now own a lovely house and have a few quid in savings that I got by working day and night, if I had to go into a nursing home it would cost approx. £1000 a week (this is going on what my late Aunt was charged) so I will sell my house which is valued at 400k buy a small property out of this area and enjoy my hard earned money rather than grease the palms of a private nursing home owner, so Mrs May you have lost my vote and my money when I pop off because I will have spent it:Smug.


----------



## MiffyMoo

I'm so confused. It was at £23,250, but has been raised to £100,000 and everyone is up in arms. Am I missing something?


----------



## leashedForLife

*MiffyMoo* said,

... I_t was at £23,250, but has been raised to £100,000, and everyone is up in arms. Am I missing something?_
___________________________________
.
.
yes - the small print, see above, & the insurers' / bankers' plans to ensure there's nothing left of the home's value to pass on. 
.
.
.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MiffyMoo said:


> I'm so confused. It was at £23,250, but has been raised to £100,000 and everyone is up in arms. Am I missing something?


That was only for nursing home care, it has now been extended to cover care at home.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse




----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Another classic courtesy of twitter, this time by Hugh Grant:Hilarious
> 
> *Hugh Grant*‏Verified account
> 
> _Theresa May's head now so far up Paul Dacre's arse I can only assume she'll be_
> _wearing him as a hat to Ascot_
> 
> 1,963 retweets 2,959 likes


He's throwing a tantrum because Leveson 2 and section 40 has been scrapped


----------



## rona

suewhite said:


> I was all set to vote Conservative as always but they have just lost my vote, I lost everything including my house when Mrs Thatcher was in power, I now own a lovely house and have a few quid in savings that I got by working day and night, if I had to go into a nursing home it would cost approx. £1000 a week (this is going on what my late Aunt was charged) so I will sell my house which is valued at 400k buy a small property out of this area and enjoy my hard earned money rather than grease the palms of a private nursing home owner, so Mrs May you have lost my vote and my money when I pop off because I will have spent it:Smug.





MiffyMoo said:


> I'm so confused. It was at £23,250, but has been raised to £100,000 and everyone is up in arms. Am I missing something?





rottiepointerhouse said:


> That was only for nursing home care, it has now been extended to cover care at home.


http://www.ageuk.org.uk/home-and-care/care-homes/paying-for-permanent-residential-care/

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/social-care-and-support-guide/Pages/funding-care.aspx
"Currently, local authorities won't provide care services if you have more than £23,250 in savings and property (your "capital")."

They've raised what you can keep and pass on. Your home is already taken into consideration


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I think you are asking the wrong person - to be clear I don't like the plans anymore than you do and I hope they lose the pensioners vote as a result. I was just pointing out when you quoted me that I was referring to an entirely different type of "equity release" when I said "I can see a huge rush on equity release schemes".


To be honest, I quoted you accidentally...


----------



## DoodlesRule

suewhite said:


> I was all set to vote Conservative as always but they have just lost my vote, I lost everything including my house when Mrs Thatcher was in power, I now own a lovely house and have a few quid in savings that I got by working day and night, if I had to go into a nursing home it would cost approx. £1000 a week (this is going on what my late Aunt was charged) so I will sell my house which is valued at 400k buy a small property out of this area and enjoy my hard earned money rather than grease the palms of a private nursing home owner, so Mrs May you have lost my vote and my money when I pop off because I will have spent it:Smug.


I don't know if you are married Sue but if not, currently if you went into a nursing home your house would be taken into account along with any other assets and income and you would have to fully fund all the costs yourself until you were down to £23,250, then you would get part paid by the council until your money was finally whittled down to circa 14k. Once you dropped below that the council pays all of it. (If married and spouse still lived there house wouldn't be taken into account currently)

Under the manifesto, your nursing home fees would be paid once you drop down to 100k so your estate would be left with more money? Presumably there will still be some provision if a spouse still lives in the home, and obviously if property is joint only half of the value is counted as being your asset).

Looking at it another way, if you went into a nursing home you wouldn't need your house anyway so would sell it and then have 400k so you have options to select where you go - if its state funded you have to go to one they will pay for (ie cheaper one)

I read Hammond was asked why done this way instead of putting a cap on how much have to self fund in total, he said because some one with a high value property could still leave say £1million whereas another person with lower value property would be left with just 14k so its fairer this way. Made sense to me


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> http://www.ageuk.org.uk/home-and-care/care-homes/paying-for-permanent-residential-care/
> 
> http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/social-care-and-support-guide/Pages/funding-care.aspx
> "Currently, local authorities won't provide care services if you have more than £23,250 in savings and property (your "capital")."
> 
> They've raised what you can keep and pass on. Your home is already taken into consideration


As far as I understand it and certainly what happened with my FIL a few years ago, if he had gone into residential care his house would have been taken into account when calculating his wealth along with savings/shares etc but as he stayed in his own home he had to pay for his care until his savings/shares/income were down to £23,250 (or whatever it was then) but his house was not included in his wealth. The proposed changes mean that someone's house will now be included in their wealth for home care apart from £100,000. Someone said that was still a tidy sum but not if you have several children/grandchildren and have gone without in the hope of leaving them all a little something.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Quite a good explanation here from the BBC News live election feed (Simon Jack)

The fizz in the Conservative Club gin and tonics may taste a little flat this weekend as folks realise that they have just been hit with potentially the biggest new wealth tax of all time.

The Tory manifesto pledge to use accumulated property wealth to fund the escalating price of in-home social care bill will be welcomed by many as a bold attempt to tackle one of the greatest problems of our age. Others will see it as a huge and risky departure from traditional Tory policy.

I merely argue that it has profound implications for the intergenerational economic structure and is likely to trigger a number of unintended and unexpected consequences for financial services and families.

Just how profoundly it will affect you is a lottery with several variables. If you just drop dead one day, you are fine (!) if it happens before you need social care. If your house is worth less than £100,000, you are also fine. The Tory proposal allows you to keep the last £100,000 of your estate.

However, if you live in the South East, have a home worth £500,000 and you need long-term care, you could end up paying 80% of the value of your home to fund it - which may be a big disappointment to your offspring.

There are some enormous questions to answer.


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> As far as I understand it and certainly what happened with my FIL a few years ago, if he had gone into residential care his house would have been taken into account when calculating his wealth along with savings/shares etc but as he stayed in his own home he had to pay for his care until his savings/shares/income were down to £23,250 (or whatever it was then) but his house was not included in his wealth. The proposed changes mean that someone's house will now be included in their wealth for home care apart from £100,000. Someone said that was still a tidy sum but not if you have several children/grandchildren and have gone without in the hope of leaving them all a little something.


Don't forget the proposed 'insurance' premiums are payable after death and are uncapped, so that 100k could well be taken by that


----------



## Odin_cat

What I don't understand is that they've kept the inheritance tax threshold at £800,000. 

So, the well off get to leave their kids a large untaxed amount whereas those who have worked hard to buy a modest home only get to leave £100,000.

I thought the Tories were the party of the middle class?


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> As far as I understand it and certainly what happened with my FIL a few years ago, if he had gone into residential care his house would have been taken into account when calculating his wealth along with savings/shares etc but as he stayed in his own home he had to pay for his care until his savings/shares/income were down to £23,250 (or whatever it was then) but his house was not included in his wealth. The proposed changes mean that someone's house will now be included in their wealth for home care apart from £100,000. Someone said that was still a tidy sum but not if you have several children/grandchildren and have gone without in the hope of leaving them all a little something.


That must have been a few years ago now because your home is taken into consideration now. You can apply for a deferred payment loan to cover your home care costs
My mother never owned her own home but had very slightly over the limit and had to fund her own home care


----------



## DoodlesRule

rottiepointerhouse said:


> As far as I understand it and certainly what happened with my FIL a few years ago, if he had gone into residential care his house would have been taken into account when calculating his wealth along with savings/shares etc but as he stayed in his own home he had to pay for his care until his savings/shares/income were down to £23,250 (or whatever it was then) but his house was not included in his wealth. The proposed changes mean that someone's house will now be included in their wealth for home care apart from £100,000. Someone said that was still a tidy sum but not if you have several children/grandchildren and have gone without in the hope of leaving them all a little something.


But without this, or something similar, there would have to be a huge hike in taxes - which you don't agree with so what do you think is a fairer way to fund care? Didn't Miliband suggest a 10% death tax on all estates to fund care, that didn't go down very well!

Yes I worked hard to buy my house 20 years ago but I did nothing (other than maintaining it) to have it almost triple in value. I would love to leave my son/grandchild a tidy sum but if I am unfortunate & get dementia and need care is it right that the tax payers pick up the tab so I can leaves thousands to my family, I don't think so


----------



## Jesthar

Odin_cat said:


> What I don't understand is that they've kept the inheritance tax threshold at £800,000.
> 
> So, the well off get to leave their kids a large untaxed amount whereas those who have worked hard to buy a modest home only get to leave £100,000.
> 
> I thought the Tories were the party of the middle class?


I think to the tories anyone who works hard to buy a modest home is probabl classified as _working_ class...


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> That must have been a few years ago now because your home is taken into consideration now. You can apply for a deferred payment loan to cover your home care costs
> My mother never owned her own home but had very slightly over the limit and had to fund her own home care


Yes she would have had to fund her own home care if she had over the limit until she got to the limit when social services would start paying. Sorry if I'm being dumb but where does it say anywhere that the value of someones home would be taken into account for home care?

This is from their manifesto

First, we will align the future basis for means-testing for domiciliary care with that for residential care, so that people are looked after in the place that is best for them. This will mean that the value of the family home will be taken into account along with other assets and income, whether care is provided at home, or in a residential or nursing care home.

From the Community Care website

A re-elected Conservative government would make home care users contribute to their care out of the value of their homes and ditch plans to cap people's care liabilities.

The proposed overhaul of care funding was unveiled in the party's manifesto, published today, which also included plans to fund schemes to recruit older professionals into social work.

Under the care funding plans, people receiving care in the home would have their housing wealth taken into account as part of their assets when calculating care charges in the same way as care home residents currently do.


----------



## Odin_cat

Jesthar said:


> I think to the tories anyone who works hard to buy a modest home is probabl classified as _working_ class...


Haha, you're probably right.An £800,000 home might only have 5 bedrooms, that's roughing it .


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes she would have had to fund her own home care if she had over the limit until she got to the limit when social services would start paying. Sorry if I'm being dumb but where does it say anywhere that the value of someones home would be taken into account for home care?
> 
> This is from their manifesto
> 
> First, we will align the future basis for means-testing for domiciliary care with that for residential care, so that people are looked after in the place that is best for them. This will mean that *the value of the family home will be taken into account* along with other assets and income, whether *care is provided at home*, or in a residential or nursing care home.


Is that the bit you are looking for?


----------



## AlexPed2393

The current generation that are moving into care or will be in the next 10-15 years are the best off group there ever has or will be. What will happen when all of the current 20 somethings get to the age when they need care but have had to put their whole life into a mortgage only for that to be taken from them.

If I've got that right


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Sorry if I'm being dumb but where does it say anywhere that the value of someones home would be taken into account for home care?


I wish I could find it again!! Muddy lent on my keyboard and wiped everything 

It was a government site from September last year. I'll keep looking


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

@rona

http://www.ageuk.org.uk/Documents/E...t_at_home_fcs.pdf?epslanguage=en-GB?dtrk=true

Your local authority must carry out a financial assessment, also known as a 'means test'. This is when it has a duty to, or chooses to, meet your needs for care and support, or your carer's support needs. Your income, including benefits, pensions and capital (usually savings) are taken into account in the assessment. Your home is excluded if you still live there, but other available capital such as savings can be taken into account.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Odin_cat said:


> What I don't understand is that they've kept the inheritance tax threshold at £800,000.
> 
> So, the well off get to leave their kids a large untaxed amount whereas those who have worked hard to buy a modest home only get to leave £100,000.
> 
> I thought the Tories were the party of the middle class?


That's just coming across as envious. You have absolutely no idea how hard they had to work to get that house, what financial difficulties their children are in etc. My ex fiance's mum bought her house when she was in her early 20s with inheritance money, worked as a school dinner lady all her life and rented out the children's bedrooms after they left home. Obviously that house is worth a lot more than she bought it for, and neither of the children are well off. Looking at other houses in her area, hers is worth about £500k.

Don't begrudge People not having to pay this extra tax because "it's not fair on poor people".


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
I told my college buddies in West Halls at Penn State 2 things, as predictions -
* we'd be the 1st generation of U-S citizens who could NOT count on being better-off than our parents.
* we should find ways to invest in water, & hopefully die of natural causes before the Water Wars began. 
.
the water-wars have already begun; the ongoing border war between India & Afghanistan over meltwater from a glacier is over 10-years old, & shows no sign of ending.
.
.
.


----------



## havoc

DoodlesRule said:


> Yes I worked hard to buy my house 20 years ago but I did nothing (other than maintaining it) to have it almost triple in value. I would love to leave my son/grandchild a tidy sum but if I am unfortunate & get dementia and need care is it right that the tax payers pick up the tab so I can leaves thousands to my family, I don't think so


If you fall victim to dementia you have to pay but if you are 'lucky' enough to get cancer instead you won't. That's fair?


----------



## AlexPed2393

Also a lot of jobs for people in my age bracket 20-30, out there do not offer a nice healthy pension along with it so we have to somehow save for a pension as well as mortgage when house prices are at their highest and cost of living is also on the rise.

I'm just happy I live in the north east where housing isn't stupidly expensive. 

Also a lot of people my age struggle to save up for a house because of the rental market being so dear.


----------



## MiffyMoo

DoodlesRule said:


> But without this, or something similar, there would have to be a huge hike in taxes - which you don't agree with so what do you think is a fairer way to fund care? Didn't Miliband suggest a 10% death tax on all estates to fund care, that didn't go down very well!
> 
> Yes I worked hard to buy my house 20 years ago but I did nothing (other than maintaining it) to have it almost triple in value. I would love to leave my son/grandchild a tidy sum but if I am unfortunate & get dementia and need care is it right that the tax payers pick up the tab so I can leaves thousands to my family, I don't think so


THIS! ^^^


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I thought you had made your mind up on that with regards to the hunting vote anyway?


I waited like you said to see what the manifesto's said and to be honest all the manifesto's I read would not have influenced me to vote for either of the parties. So this made me fall back on voting for the party that is going to protect the ban on fox hunting, but I want to be clear I am not happy with there manifesto either so the other reason why I am voting for them is out of protest against the ruling party the Conservatives.

Seriously if the manifesto's were put through my letter box they would have been put straight into the recycling bin or posted straight back to them if it came with a free envelope to do so. I have never in the last few days read so much clap trap.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DoodlesRule said:


> But without this, or something similar, there would have to be a huge hike in taxes - which you don't agree with so what do you think is a fairer way to fund care? Didn't Miliband suggest a 10% death tax on all estates to fund care, that didn't go down very well!
> 
> Yes I worked hard to buy my house 20 years ago but I did nothing (other than maintaining it) to have it almost triple in value. I would love to leave my son/grandchild a tidy sum but if I am unfortunate & get dementia and need care is it right that the tax payers pick up the tab so I can leaves thousands to my family, I don't think so


I think there are plenty of things that governments waste money on that they could put into a special fund for social care. I said I objected to higher tax rate brackets not that I disagree with a tax rise across the board. I'm voting Lib Dem (still can't believe I'm saying that) and find this quite acceptable

Liberal Democrats will take five key steps in order to put our health and social care system back on a sustainable financial footing:


An immediate 1p rise on the basic, higher and additional rates of Income Tax to raise £6 billion additional revenue which would be ringfenced to be spent only on NHS and social care services.
Direct this additional investment to the following priority areas in the health and care system: social care, primary care (and other out-of-hospital care), mental health and public health. This represents the most efficient and effective way of spending these extra resources - ensuring they will have the greatest impact on the quality of care patients receive.
In the longer term and as a replacement for the 1p Income Tax rise, commission the development of a dedicated Health and Care Tax on the basis of wide consultation, possibly based on a reform of National Insurance contributions, which will bring together spending on both services into a collective budget and sets out transparently, on people's payslips, what we spend on them.
Establish a cross-party health and social care convention, bringing together stakeholders from all political parties, patients groups, the public, and professionals from within the health and social care system to carry out a comprehensive review of the longer-term sustainability of the health and social care finances and workforce, and the practicalities of greater integration. We would invite the devolved administrations to be a part of this work.
Introduce a statutory independent budget monitoring agency for health and care, similar to the Office for Budget Responsibility. This would report every three years on how much money the system needs to deliver safe and sustainable treatment and care, and how much is needed to meet the costs of projected increases in demand and any new initiatives - to ensure any changes in services are properly costed and affordable.
Our longer-term objective will be to bring together NHS and social care into one seamless service - pooling budgets in every area by 2020 and developing integrated care organisations.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jesthar said:


> Is that the bit you are looking for?


No that is from the manifesto I was asking @rona where it said the value of your home is *currently *taken in to account for home care costs.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> I am looking forward to the canvassers calling.


 I have lots of campaign flyers posted through my letter box, so many that I have put the recycling box I use under the letter box. I have had no one knock on my door yet.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

AlexPed2393 said:


> Also a lot of jobs for people in my age bracket 20-30, out there do not offer a nice healthy pension along with it so we have to somehow save for a pension as well as mortgage when house prices are at their highest and cost of living is also on the rise.
> 
> I'm just happy I live in the north east where housing isn't stupidly expensive.
> 
> Also a lot of people my age struggle to save up for a house because of the rental market being so dear.


Plenty of us oldies won't have a nice healthy pension either - being self employed we've only ever paid into ours when business has been good and we've stopped the payments as soon as things go quieter, no employer contributing into ours either.


----------



## DoodlesRule

havoc said:


> If you fall victim to dementia you have to pay but if you are 'lucky' enough to get cancer instead you won't. That's fair?


Of course not, but the harsh reality is if I had terminal cancer I wouldn't need care for what can be 10 + years


----------



## AlexPed2393

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Plenty of us oldies won't have a nice healthy pension either - being self employed we've only ever paid into ours when business has been good and we've stopped the payments as soon as things go quieter, no employer contributing into ours either.


But that is one of the risks/benefits taken as being self-employed, whilst as a salaried employee at a medium to large sized company you wold think some sort of pension would be part of the package


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

AlexPed2393 said:


> But that is one of the risks/benefits taken as being self-employed, whilst as a salaried employee at a medium to large sized company you wold think some sort of pension would be part of the package


How is it a benefit? I know my taxes go towards paying final salary pension schemes for a lot of public sector workers - that is what I'd call a benefit


----------



## AlexPed2393

rottiepointerhouse said:


> How is it a benefit? I know my taxes go towards paying final salary pension schemes for a lot of public sector workers - that is what I'd call a benefit


I was using the risk/benefit bit as a way of saying risk reward like in a lot of situations, didn't really apply here though so my error.

But I'm not in the public sector so i won't see any of that


----------



## leashedForLife

*DoodlesRule* said,

..._ if I had *terminal cancer,* I wouldn't need care for what can be 10 + years_.
_______________________________________________
.
.
If U had *terminal **anything*, U wouldn't need ongoing care for a decade or more. 
Terminal diagnoses are generally either of progressive [cancer, ALS, mult-sclerosis...] or chronic [cerebral palsy, cystic fibrosis...] conditions, & "terminal" generally means 6-mos or less to live, in the Dr's estimation.
A car-accident may be fatal, but we don't refer to the person as 'terminal'.
.
the terminal stage of dementia is reached when the person cannot swallow, & other basic body-functions begin to fail - breathing, etc. 
Cancers are all over the map, in terms of how aggressive they are, how likely to metastasize & where, how fast, & so on - some are very survivable; others are practically a death sentence when they're diagnosed.
Dementias similarly can be rapid & lethal, or slow & inexorable - plus, a person with dementia can die of any other thing: heart, kidney failure, stroke, choke on a grape, whatever. // There's no warranty that a dementia patient will have a long life.
.
.
.


----------



## Guest

MilleD said:


> Yes, you've got it about right. UIFSM as it's called was brought in (by the ConLib coalition I believe) to give all children up to a certain age a free hot meal, not just those eligible under the normal rules for free school meals (any age).
> 
> They are now saying they will stop funding that and push the money probably into the overall school funding formula (don't know if you've read about this but it is currently being changed and most people are up in arms about it). The kids can still have a hot meal, it's just that if they are not eligible for FSM, parents will have to pay. And when that happens, parents are very likely to send children in with a sarnie and a bag of crisps.


Don´t parents rise h*ll? It is the good of their children that will be in jeopardy? Don´t British parents care? I can´t believe that. One of the cheaptest way to cut down the amount of alienated people, is to support all children as small children. That means always also making sure all get a good meal and eat together. That way most will also do better later. The costs are a fraction of what each child will cost, if he/she isn´t integrated in society. Madness and cruel at the same time. What w*nkers the lot!



KittenKong said:


> This is what I would expect from the likes of Putin or Robert Mugabe. Dare we speak of any opposition to TM and her government post 8/6/17 if re-elected?
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...ternet-conservatives-government-a7744176.html
> View attachment 311257
> View attachment 311258
> View attachment 311260


With this UK will be as free as China. May really is like Trump in a skirt, only more dangerous, as she appears to have good manners, which fools many.

Both these suggestions would have meant a scandal and a definate loss in elections in most EU countries, (apart from e.g. Hungary). Are you sure you don´t need EU principles and rules like freedom of speech?


----------



## Odin_cat

MiffyMoo said:


> That's just coming across as envious. You have absolutely no idea how hard they had to work to get that house, what financial difficulties their children are in etc. My ex fiance's mum bought her house when she was in her early 20s with inheritance money, worked as a school dinner lady all her life and rented out the children's bedrooms after they left home. Obviously that house is worth a lot more than she bought it for, and neither of the children are well off. Looking at other houses in her area, hers is worth about £500k.
> 
> Don't begrudge People not having to pay this extra tax because "it's not fair on poor people".


I don't think you understand my point. I'm saying it's unfair that people with a reasonable amount of money have to use it to pay for care while the rich get £800,000 tax free.

The lady you.mention is a perfect example, her house is valued at £450,00, a care home costs £40,000, in 5 years her children's inheritance is halved.

I'm not envious of anyone.


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes she would have had to fund her own home care if she had over the limit until she got to the limit when social services would start paying.


So someone with just a few bob over the higher limit gets charged even if they own nothing else whereas a person with a huge house doesn't?
Doesn't that seem wrong?

That's saying the poor have to pay but the invested money doesn't count



rottiepointerhouse said:


> orry if I'm being dumb but where does it say anywhere that the value of someones home would be taken into account for home care?


I can't find it again and from the other stuff I'm reading I believe it may have been an idea that was already floating about in September last year rather than being so at that time


----------



## MilleD

rottiepointerhouse said:


> How is it a benefit? I know my taxes go towards paying final salary pension schemes for a lot of public sector workers - that is what I'd call a benefit


The Local Government Pension Scheme that I pay into is no longer a final salary pension scheme. That cover the majority of public sector workers.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> So someone with just a few bob over the higher limit gets charged even if they own nothing else whereas a person with a huge house doesn't?
> Doesn't that seem wrong?
> 
> I can't find it again and from the other stuff I'm reading I believe it may have been an idea that was already floating about in September last year rather than being so at that time


Yep it seems wrong all round - we need a fairer system but I don't believe this is it either.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MilleD said:


> The Local Government Pension Scheme that I pay into is no longer a final salary pension scheme. That cover the majority of public sector workers.


Yes I realise many organisations public sector included are trying to scrap final salary pension schemes but there are a lot of already retired public sector workers on them. I'm not objecting to that by the way just wish people would remember that tax payers have contributed to their pension schemes and appreciate what a huge "benefit" that is.


----------



## havoc

AlexPed2393 said:


> Also a lot of jobs for people in my age bracket 20-30, out there do not offer a nice healthy pension along with it so we have to somehow save for a pension as well as mortgage when house prices are at their highest and cost of living is also on the rise


Those healthy pensions you talk of were paid for by high interest rates. Final salary pensions can't be maintained unless the money paid in earns a high return. If you're happy to pay 11% or more for your mortgage as we did then pension fund returns will mirror that. You can't have it both ways. House prices are only what the market will bear - raise interest rates and they won't rise nearly so much.


----------



## Odin_cat

AlexPed2393 said:


> The current generation that are moving into care or will be in the next 10-15 years are the best off group there ever has or will be. What will happen when all of the current 20 somethings get to the age when they need care but have had to put their whole life into a mortgage only for that to be taken from them.
> 
> If I've got that right


Lots of people might not bother buying, or will sell at the age of 50 or so. Meaning the problem will get bigger.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Odin_cat said:


> I don't think you understand my point. I'm saying it's unfair that people with a reasonable amount of money have to use it to pay for care while the rich get £800,000 tax free.
> 
> The lady you.mention is a perfect example, her house is valued at £450,00, a care home costs £40,000, in 5 years her children's inheritance is halved.
> 
> I'm not envious of anyone.


Why should the tax payer have to pay?


----------



## havoc

Odin_cat said:


> Lots of people might not bother buying, or will sell at the age of 50 or so. Meaning the problem will get bigger


I think you're absolutely right but it won't be the problem of the current government and our political system doesn't favour long term solutions.


----------



## DoodlesRule

I honestly cannot see why the objection to including your house - if the government said we will not include pension funds that wouldn't be fair. A house is an asset the same as any other surely


----------



## Odin_cat

MiffyMoo said:


> Why should the tax payer have to pay?


They shouldn't necessarily. Maybe the amount you are allowed to keep should be increased and the inheritance tax threshold reduced.


----------



## AlexPed2393

havoc said:


> Those healthy pensions you talk of were paid for by high interest rates. Final salary pensions can't be maintained unless the money paid in earns a high return. If you're happy to pay 11% or more for your mortgage as we did then pension fund returns will mirror that. You can't have it both ways. House prices are only what the market will bear - raise interest rates and they won't rise nearly so much.


But surely the current value of houses bought back then far outstrip the interest paid on them?


----------



## Satori

MiffyMoo said:


> I'm so confused. It was at £23,250, but has been raised to £100,000 and everyone is up in arms. Am I missing something?


That isn't the big change. The big change is the u-turn on previous Conservative party policy to limit the personal liability for social care costs to £72,000 from 2020. Under the new regime it will not matter how much one has in assets (whether property or otherwise is utterly irrelevant), the state will be able to take all of it except the last 100k.

I am convinced that Theresa May is determined to lose this election and that is the reason she called it. Her manifesto is a full-on attack on the traditional Tory loyal demographic.


----------



## Arnie83

What worries me is that some people - a lot? - will be so intent on giving their children / grandchildren a helping hand that they will protect the inheritance by either foregoing the care that they should get, or, as a last resort, by removing the need for that care.

There will also be cases - and more than we care to imagine - where the elderly will be persuaded that they don't need outside help; that "of course we'll look after you" with more concern for protecting future finances than providing what is actually needed.


Plus, I can't see why the free NHS is so passionately protected as a universal benefit, while it's okay for care in old age to be, in effect, privatised. What's the difference?


----------



## MiffyMoo

Odin_cat said:


> They shouldn't necessarily. Maybe the amount you are allowed to keep should be increased and the inheritance tax threshold reduced.


They've already tripled it!


----------



## MiffyMoo

Satori said:


> That isn't the big change. The big change is the u-turn on previous Conservative party policy to limit the personal liability for social care costs to £72,000 from 2020. Under the new regime it will not matter how much one has in assets (whether property or otherwise is utterly irrelevant), the state will be able to take all of it except the last 100k.
> 
> I am convinced that Theresa May is determined to lose this election and that is the reason she called it. Her manifesto is a full-on attack on the traditional Tory loyal demographic.


I think £100,000 is generous.


----------



## DoodlesRule

Satori said:


> That isn't the big change. The big change is the u-turn on previous Conservative party policy to limit the personal liability for social care costs to £72,000 from 2020. Under the new regime it will not matter how much one has in assets (whether property or otherwise is utterly irrelevant), the state will be able to take all of it except the last 100k.
> 
> I am convinced that Theresa May is determined to lose this election and that is the reason she called it. Her manifesto is a full-on attack on the traditional Tory loyal demographic.


If your total assets were 100k and the cap was 72k you would be left with 28k - if on the other hand assets were say £1.5 million etc etc


----------



## MilleD

Satori said:


> That isn't the big change. The big change is the u-turn on previous Conservative party policy to limit the personal liability for social care costs to £72,000 from 2020. Under the new regime it will not matter how much one has in assets (whether property or otherwise is utterly irrelevant), the state will be able to take all of it except the last 100k.
> 
> I am convinced that Theresa May is determined to lose this election and that is the reason she called it. Her manifesto is a full-on attack on the traditional Tory loyal demographic.


You're not wrong, I've always been a die-hard Tory, but this is something else.

I've even checked to see if there is someone in my constituency that I can vote for that isn't UKIP or Labour.


----------



## havoc

Arnie83 said:


> Plus, I can't see why the free NHS is so passionately protected as a universal benefit, while it's okay for care in old age to be, in effect, privatised. What's the difference?


The young use the NHS and can't envisage ever being old.


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> I am convinced that Theresa May is determined to lose this election and that is the reason she called it. Her manifesto is a full-on attack on the traditional Tory loyal demographic


Are you taking into account the target seats? Paying for care is a devolved power and these proposals are therefore only likely to affect those living in England.


----------



## Arnie83

havoc said:


> The young use the NHS and can't envisage ever being old.


Well since the next logical step to protect the country's finances is euthanasia, they may not be!!


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Zaros

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 311288


Best to starve em' when they're young KK.

That way they won't be claiming 'Universal Credit' when they're older, because they just won't be getting older.


----------



## Satori

DoodlesRule said:


> If your total assets were 100k and the cap was 72k you would be left with 28k - if on the other hand assets were say £1.5 million etc etc


Precisely.


----------



## Satori

MiffyMoo said:


> I think £100,000 is generous.


And this policy might well appeal to those who agree with you I suppose.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Frankly I think it's a good idea to scrap free school meals (and the torture that was the free milk has never left me!). Firstly it's a insult to the majority of parents who cook decent meals in the evenings. OK there are a few few bad parents who don't care about their kids but, being stereotypical and judgemental here, they'll probably be getting free school meals anyway. Secondly, do the majority of kids need two cooked meals a day? A chicken sandwich, bag of crisps and a apple is perfectly acceptable as a lunchtime meal and no doubt less calories than the school meals, so actually better for the children (compared to two cooked meals) and will help combat child obesity. Also if they've had their cooked meal at school that's surely going to dramatically lessen the traditional family evening meal time. It just seems silly to feed every kid for free just to make up for the odd bad parent, who to be frank will probably have more issues that their kids need dealing with than a school dinner. A absurd waste of tax payers money. I think.


----------



## Satori

Dr Pepper said:


> Frankly I think it's a good idea to scrap free school meals (and the torture that was the free milk has never left me!). Firstly it's a insult to the majority of parents who cook decent meals in the evenings. OK there are a few few bad parents who don't care about their kids but, being stereotypical and judgemental here, they'll probably be getting free school meals anyway. Secondly, do the majority of kids need two cooked meals a day? A chicken sandwich, bag of crisps and a apple is perfectly acceptable as a lunchtime meal and no doubt less calories than the school meals, so actually better for the children (compared to two cooked meals) and will help combat child obesity. It just seems silly to feed every kid for free to just to make up for the odd bad parent, who to be frank will probably have more issues that their kids need dealing with than a school dinner. A absurd waste of tax payers money. I think.


Hmm. Dunno about that. I don't have kids. I doubt I would be a perfect parent if I did. You obviously are. I am quite happy for some of my taxes to pay for kids who would otherwise not have nutritious lunch to have one.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Frankly I think it's a good idea to scrap free school meals (and the torture that was the free milk has never left me!). Firstly it's a insult to the majority of parents who cook decent meals in the evenings. OK there are a few few bad parents who don't care about their kids but, being stereotypical and judgemental here, they'll probably be getting free school meals anyway. Secondly, do the majority of kids need two cooked meals a day? A chicken sandwich, bag of crisps and a apple is perfectly acceptable as a lunchtime meal and no doubt less calories than the school meals, so actually better for the children (compared to two cooked meals) and will help combat child obesity. It just seems silly to feed every kid for free to just to make up for the odd bad parent, who to be frank will probably have more issues that their kids need dealing with than a school dinner. A absurd waste of tax payers money. I think.


What about those children who go without a hot meal at home because there parents cannot afford it, and the only hot meal a day they look forward to is there school meal?

Do you think it is unfair on these children having free school meals taken away?


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> What about those children who go without a hot meal at home because there parents cannot afford it, and the only hot meal a day they look forward to is there school meal?
> 
> Do you think it is unfair on these children having free school meals taken away?


Won't they be getting free school meals anyway?


----------



## Jesthar

MiffyMoo said:


> I think £100,000 is generous.


That depends on whether or not that £100k is protected _after_ death. I'd want it clarified, or it could be that those new 'insurance' products (which are basically deferred equity release) that someone will _have_ to take out to pay for in home care could leave you in a position where you have to spend all but 100k of the house equity on care, but the finance company can take the rest in 'premiums' (which, remember, will be uncapped) after death.


----------



## Arnie83

Zaros said:


> Best to starve em' when they're young KK.
> 
> That way they won't be claiming 'Universal Credit' when they're older, because they just won't be getting older.


No, no, no! Mice on a starvation diet live up to 30% longer.

What we need to do is introduce compulsory school meals - KFC, McD, milk shakes & dunking hobnobs - so that obesity finishes them all off in their thirties, so no long term care costs. Short term spend for long term savings.

Let me be clear, you have to take the hard decisions to be strong and stable.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Won't they be getting free school meals anyway?


Not if TM does what she intends to do scrap free school meals.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Not if TM does what she intends to do scrap free school meals.


I presume that free school meals will still be provided for those that need it just like they were before it was free for all.


----------



## KittenKong

Satori said:


> Hmm. Dunno about that. I don't have kids. I doubt I would be a perfect parent if I did. You obviously are. I am quite happy for some of my taxes to pay for kids who would otherwise not have nutritious lunch to have one.


Not often we agree Satori but hats off to you!


----------



## Zaros

Arnie83 said:


> No, no, no! Mice on a starvation diet live up to 30% longer.
> 
> What we need to do is introduce compulsory school meals - KFC, McD, milk shakes & dunking hobnobs - so that obesity finishes them all off in their thirties, so no long term care costs. Short term spend for long term savings.
> 
> Let me be clear, you have to take the hard decisions to be strong and stable.


Damn! I completely forgot all about KFC,:Facepalm the Kindergarten Fat Club.

​


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> Not if TM does what she intends to do scrap free school meals.


I don't think that's so. Free school meals for those that need it will still be there


----------



## Odin_cat

A women speaking on the radio earlier said that the universal free school meals have meant that 'free school meal' parents have stopped telling the school they are entitled. This means that the school can't claim pupil premium for children who are eligible for it. 

Not sure whether this is a widespread problem, but, if it is, it needs sorting.


----------



## kimthecat

@KittenKong. Are you sure all school dinners are being stopped ? I could be wrong but I thought it was just the infants that had free school dinners.

I guess it depends on the area but judging by the newness and the size of the cars that drop the kids off , a lot of them don't need free school meals . If parents can afford massive 4 wheel drives they can afford to pay for their kids dinners.

ETA 3 years olds will be entitled to 30 hours free child care in September.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Frankly I think it's a good idea to scrap free school meals (and the torture that was the free milk has never left me!). Firstly it's a insult to the majority of parents who cook decent meals in the evenings. OK there are a few few bad parents who don't care about their kids but, being stereotypical and judgemental here, they'll probably be getting free school meals anyway. Secondly, do the majority of kids need two cooked meals a day? A chicken sandwich, bag of crisps and a apple is perfectly acceptable as a lunchtime meal and no doubt less calories than the school meals, so actually better for the children (compared to two cooked meals) and will help combat child obesity. It just seems silly to feed every kid for free to just to make up for the odd bad parent, who to be frank will probably have more issues that their kids need dealing with than a school dinner. A absurd waste of tax payers money. I think.


Well, we think differently, I´m not afraid to say. Firstly, I don`t understand why would it be an insult for the parents, who cook decent meals? I´d say it´s the opposite, as they value their children´s health By cooking them a decent meal. It´s those parents, who don´t care at all, who don´t care what their children eat during the day and who don´t cook any meals that are bad parents. Not people like you. As proved lots of time on PF already, you can cook healthy food with very little money.

Secondly, kids do need two cooked meals every day (or three, as they´d do well with porridge in the Morning too..) Crisps have absolutely no nutritional value at all, unless you're Denise Royle, only artificial additives and way too much salt, so I´d never ever consider that as food. Dark chocolate is healthier and that is no food either. Do you actually read what it says on the package about the nutritions? Children grow and that is why their food should be even healthier than ours. An apple is good, but if that is the only fruit a child gets, it is nowhere enough for all the vitamins you need. Sandwhiches can be healthy, but only if wholegrain wheat/oat or rye is used. Again, a sandwhich everyday is nowhere nearly as good as variousproteins (including fish, beans etc) with potatoes and veg.

Even when I don´t have children, I think all countries should take good care of their children (and elderly). That is for me the most important task any country has. Finland is nowhere near taking good care of the elderly, but all children are taken care of´, that is rule. One reason for our good Pisa result is a healthy meal all children get, from day care centers to the day they leave school. And all meals in all schools even later, are very heavily and financially backed by goverment, so that all could have a cheap wholesome meal.

Companies get tax deductions to provide cheap meals too, just so that most Finns can have a healty meal, as that is a cheap way of affecting national health. And that is what you have to do when a country is not as rich as Britain.


----------



## havoc

School meals came in during the war because we needed the parents to be out of the home and either fighting or working ie nobody home to prepare nutritious meals. We are now back in the situation where we want all parents working and if we do then it makes sense to me that we feed the children in the middle of the day. It's no joke getting out of work, picking up kids, getting home and then setting to on a home cooked, nutritious meal. Even the most conscientious parent can't get that done by a reasonable time of night.


----------



## suewhite

When I was at school many moons ago we had to take our dinner money on a Monday and if you didn't or couldn't afford it you had to take sandwiches, I cant remember any other option I always had to take sandwiches and craved the lovely food the kids tucked into.


----------



## kimthecat

havoc said:


> School meals came in during the war because we needed the parents to be out of the home and either fighting or working ie nobody home to prepare nutritious meals. We are now back in the situation where we want all parents working and if we do then it makes sense to me that we feed the children in the middle of the day. It's no joke getting out of work, picking up kids, getting home and then setting to on a home cooked, nutritious meal. Even the most conscientious parent can't get that done by a reasonable time of night.


Do you mean we want both parents working full time ? Why ? 
This isn't about stopping school meals , its about stopping free school meals for those who can afford them .


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> Well, we think differently, I´m not afraid to say. Firstly, I don`t understand why would it be an insult for the parents, who cook decent meals? I´d say it´s the opposite, as they value their children´s health By cooking them a decent meal. It´s those parents, who don´t care at all, who don´t care what their children eat during the day. As proved lots of time on PF already, you can cook healthy food with very little money.
> 
> Secondly, kids do need two cooked meals every day (or three, as they´d do well with porridge in the Morning too..) Crisps have absolutely no nutritional value at all, unless you're Denise Royle, only artificial additives and way too much salt, so I´d never ever consider that as food. Dark chocolate is healthier and that is no food either. Do you actually read what it says on the package about the nutritions? Children grow and that is why their food should be even healthier than ours. An apple is good, but if that is the only fruit a child gets, it is nowhere enough for all the vitamins you need. Sandwhiches can be healthy, but only if wholegrain wheat/oat or rye is used. Again, a sandwhich everyday is nowhere nearly as good as variousproteins (including fish, beans etc) with potatoes and veg.
> 
> Even when I don´t have children, I think all countries should take good care of their children (and elderly). That is for me the most important task any country has. Finland is nowhere near taking good care of the elderly, but all children are taken care of´, that is rule. One reason for our good Pisa result is a healthy meal all children get, from day care centers to the day they leave school. And all meals in all schools even later, are very heavily and financially backed by goverment, so that all could have a cheap wholesome meal.
> 
> Companies get tax deductions to provide cheap meals too, just so that most Finns can have a healty meal, as that is a cheap way of affecting national health. And that is what you have to do when a country is not as rich as Britain.


Ok, didn't think you'd be afraid to disagree 

There's nothing wrong with a bag of crisps in your otherwise healthy lunch box, might be nutritionally worthless but nothing wrong with a daily treat. I say that whilst drinking my nutritionally worthless glass of wine, empty calories but enjoyable.

I'd find it insulting being told my kids had to eat at school because the state thinks I'm incapable of looking after my own children.

As said before it's not a end of school meals for those that can't afford a hot meal, the UK has always (in my lifetime anyway) provided free meals for those in need.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> School meals came in during the war because we needed the parents to be out of the home and either fighting or working ie nobody home to prepare nutritious meals. We are now back in the situation where we want all parents working and if we do then it makes sense to me that we feed the children in the middle of the day. It's no joke getting out of work, picking up kids, getting home and then setting to on a home cooked, nutritious meal. Even the most conscientious parent can't get that done by a reasonable time of night.


Yes but there is absolutely no reason why most parents can't pay for those dinners, subsidise them by all means but not free for all children, just for those who need them.


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> School meals came in during the war because we needed the parents to be out of the home and either fighting or working ie nobody home to prepare nutritious meals. We are now back in the situation where we want all parents working and if we do then it makes sense to me that we feed the children in the middle of the day. It's no joke getting out of work, picking up kids, getting home and then setting to on a home cooked, nutritious meal. Even the most conscientious parent can't get that done by a reasonable time of night.


Who says we want all parents working?


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes but there is absolutely no reason why most parents can't pay for those dinners, subsidise them by all means but not free for all children,


I don't see any reason to differentiate. Those who are working are paying into the pot through their taxes. Nothing is really free.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok, didn't think you'd be afraid to disagree
> 
> There's nothing wrong with a bag of crisps in your otherwise healthy lunch box, might be nutritionally worthless but nothing wrong with a daily treat. I say that whilst drinking my nutritionally worthless glass of wine, empty calories but enjoyable.
> 
> I'd find it insulting being told my kids had to eat at school because the state thinks I'm incapable of looking after my own children.
> 
> As said before it's not a end of school meals that can't afford a hot meal, the UK has always (in my lifetime anyway) provided free meals for those in need.


Sorry but there is something wrong with a daily bag of crisps for children. No wonder 10 and 12 year old already have streaks of atherosclerosis in their arteries. They are calorie dense and nutrient poor. I agree there is no need for two hot/cooked meals per day but not crisps please.


----------



## kimthecat

suewhite said:


> When I was at school many moons ago we had to take our dinner money on a Monday and if you didn't or couldn't afford it you had to take sandwiches, I cant remember any other option I always had to take sandwiches and craved the lovely food the kids tucked into.


 I went for lunch from junior school but secondary school was too far so i stayed for lunch. The dinners were awful , the stew looked someone had been sick in it . In the end they decided to give us a choice of either a school dinner or a school lunch which was rolls and cheese and tomato etc . I had an evening meal so took the lunch offer .


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Who says we want all parents working?


I'm old fashioned enough to be against it but I have to assume it's the intention when free childcare seems to be so important.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Sorry but there is something wrong with a daily bag of crisps for children. No wonder 10 and 12 year old already have streaks of atherosclerosis in their arteries. They are calorie dense and nutrient poor. I agree there is no need for two hot/cooked meals per day but not crisps please.


I like crisps!! It could be any other treat, crisps was just an example.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> I don't see any reason to differentiate. Those who are working are paying into the pot through their taxes. Nothing is really free.


In La La land may be but in the real world I would far rather see that money spent on other things we need like education and social care and the NHS. Part of being a parent is providing food for your children, why is it someone else's responsibility?


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> I'm old fashioned enough to be against it but I have to assume it's the intention when free childcare seems to be so important.


I think it's probably more parents need to both work rather than want to. End result the same I guess.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> I like crisps!! It could be any other treat, crisps was just an example.


I expect you do, oil and salt are addictive and neither are good for you.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok, didn't think you'd be afraid to disagree
> 
> There's nothing wrong with a bag of crisps in your otherwise healthy lunch box, might be nutritionally worthless but nothing wrong with a daily treat. I say that whilst drinking my nutritionally worthless glass of wine, empty calories but enjoyable.
> 
> I'd find it insulting being told my kids had to eat at school because the state thinks I'm incapable of looking after my own children.
> 
> As said before it's not a end of school meals for those that can't afford a hot meal, the UK has always (in my lifetime anyway) provided free meals for those in need.


 we have agreed we disagree 

I too eat crisps sometimes, and I am happy to pay the price. But I wouldn´t suggest growing children should have that regularly as part of a meal. No matter how nice they taste. How do you come up with the conclusion that a state thinks you can´t look after your children? It is just difficult to provide a nutricious meal in a lunch box, and to be honest, most children choose junk food instead of a healthy meal any time. That is why it is important that all children get the same, healthy meal. Isn´t this what all good parents want?


----------



## MiffyMoo

Satori said:


> And this policy might well appeal to those who agree with you I suppose.


Well none of the other parties have said anything about changing it, so would you prefer it was put back down to what it currently is?


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> In La La land may be but in the real world I would far rather see that money spent on other things we need like education and social care and the NHS.


I see them as very connected. Health and diet very much so and feeding our children properly has long term benefits.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I expect you do, oil and salt are addictive and neither are good for you.


I know, to be fair I don't eat crisps every day but I do always have a treat everyday, And we let our kids have a daily treat. Beyond that they had a decent cooked meal round the table every night. I realise everyone can't do that though (well actually with a bit of effort most people probably could).


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> I see them as very connected. Health and diet very much so and feeding our children properly has long term benefits.


Oh gosh talk about preaching to the converted. I know health and diet are connected and I know feeding children properly has long term benefits (I never stop banging on about it so I'm told ) but I believe it is a parents responsibility to feed children properly not the tax payer. I absolutely don't mind picking up the tab for the children from poor families who can't afford it.


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> but I believe it is a parents responsibility to feed children properly not the tax payer.


By the same logic do you also believe that parents who can afford it should pay for prescriptions for their children? Surely parents are equally responsible there but we see that as a universal 'benefit'..


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> By the same logic do you also believe that parents who can afford it should pay for prescriptions for their children? Surely parents are equally responsible there but we see that as a universal 'benefit'..


No.


----------



## havoc

So what's the difference? I honestly don't see affordability as the important criteria on this one.


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Oh gosh talk about preaching to the converted. I know health and diet are connected and I know feeding children properly has long term benefits (I never stop banging on about it so I'm told ) but I believe it is a parents responsibility to feed children properly not the tax payer. I absolutely don't mind picking up the tab for the children from poor families who can't afford it.


Both of my parents have always worked. For breakfast we had cereal or porridge, a sandwich and an apple for lunch, when I got home I had a piece of fruit as a snack and then we have meat and 3 veg for supper. I certainly don't feel I suffered for lacking 2 hot meals a day


----------



## Dr Pepper

MiffyMoo said:


> Both of my parents have always worked. For breakfast we had cereal or porridge, a sandwich and an apple for lunch, when I got home I had a piece of fruit as a snack and then we have meat and 3 veg for supper. I certainly don't feel I suffered for lacking 2 hot meals a day


Same here and I'm still alive and I like to think a contributing member of society.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Who says we want all parents working?


Now we are getting there as that is a good question? Do we want a mother to stay at home or do we want that women too could work after having children. (and ideally I should be able to say a parent, but that it is still not common for men to stay at home, which is a pity)

For me wome should be able to work, as equality is good. In Sweden e.g. most mothers work, as the day care is good (and nowadays even dog care but that is anothe topic). In Finland too, women ´can choose if they work or not, as day care is really cheap and still good. But in most EU countries, in UK and US there is no care care really and women have to stay at home. I believe thay should be a choice for each family.



kimthecat said:


> I went for lunch from junior school but secondary school was too far so i stayed for lunch. The dinners were awful , the stew looked someone had been sick in it . In the end they decided to give us a choice of either a school dinner or a school lunch which was rolls and cheese and tomato etc . I had an evening meal so took the lunch offer .


I have heard of those horrible meals. But instead of not providing free food, should the quality of food be better? British cooks can do the same as Finnish, and our schoold dinners are ok. Not the bes food there is, but still decent.



Dr Pepper said:


> I think it's probably more parents need to both work rather than want to. End result the same I guess.


Again we agree. Often both parents need to work and that is when parents need support from the state.



havoc said:


> By the same logic do you also believe that parents who can afford it should pay for prescriptions for their children? Surely parents are equally responsible there but we see that as a universal 'benefit'..


That is an interesting point, as that is the reason Nordic middle class people don´t mind paying taxes, as they get benefits too. Good schools with meals, good healthcare and safe surroundings with public transprot even children can use on their own are good reasons why we are happy to pay taxes. All benefit, some more than others, but in the end, all benefit. Happy, carefree living! Brits could have it too, as you are acually richer than we. Well part from . the Norwegians,who do even better than you, but they have lots of oil.

But the idea that all benefit is really important, as that is the way to ensure that things have to work for all, not just for the poor.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> So what's the difference? I honestly don't see affordability as the important criteria on this one.


Just my take on it. Prescriptions are one off expenses for a health problem thus come under the NHS. We have a free NHS. Drugs are very expensive as those of us who have to buy them for dogs know only too well. We shouldn't go back to the days when children died of contagious or treatable diseases and having a child with a chronic disease isn't something you can plan for or budget for whereas feeding you children is.


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Just my take on it.


And I get that, I just have a different 'take'. We have a generation of parents who went through when school meals had become chips with everything. Having every child eat together at the point when we can grab 'em young and feed them well does strike me as the best education we could provide in healthy eating. For that to work it has to be the norm for all children to eat what's provided with no incentive to opt out.


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> We have a generation of parents who went through when school meals had become chips with everything


But they are adults now and should know better


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> But they are adults now and should know better


Should maybe - but obviously don't.


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> Should maybe - but obviously don't.


Then why is it my responsibility to pick up the tab?

I think it's about time people were made to take more responsibility for themselves I'm sick of this nanny culture we have now, it's always someone elses fault


----------



## Calvine

Let's not forget the very real childhood obesity epidemic either, from eating rubbish and getting on the bus for one stop because they have a free bus pass so they never walk anywhere. Never play out either as they are on FB or playing computer games. A friend of mine was a teacher and she reckons the packed lunches some children took to school were full of chocolate, Monster Munch and Coca Cola, quite unbelievable. But no, I don't think all kids should get a free lunch.
I believe some schools have a ''breakfast club'' too for those whose parents start work early? I imagine they pay for that, but not sure.


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> Then why is it my responsibility to pick up the tab


I'd rather pick up that tab now than a bigger one later. i don't know what obesity, type 2 diabetes etc. cost us or what they're projected to cost in the future but if you look at how education/prevention could make a difference I really do think it's probably cost effective. I see feeding children healthy food during the school day as part of that. I'm happy to view it as part of an education spend rather than paying to feed other people's children.


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> I'd rather pick up that tab now than a bigger one later. i don't know what obesity, type 2 diabetes etc. cost us or what they're projected to cost in the future but if you look at how education/prevention could make a difference I really do think it's probably cost effective. I see feeding children healthy food during the school day as part of that. I'm happy to view it as part of an education spend rather than paying to feed other people's children.


So you're basically saying that parents are incapable of packing a healthy lunch?


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> I'm happy to view it as part of an education spend rather than paying to feed other people's children.


I'd be perfectly happy to see it as that if they showed them how to cook it too


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> So you're basically saying that parents are incapable of packing a healthy lunch


Some are just as some would be capable of sending their children into school with a well prepared lesson plan for maths but wouldn't get defensive at it being provided.


----------



## Odin_cat

havoc said:


> I'd rather pick up that tab now than a bigger one later. i don't know what obesity, type 2 diabetes etc. cost us or what they're projected to cost in the future but if you look at how education/prevention could make a difference I really do think it's probably cost effective. I see feeding children healthy food during the school day as part of that. I'm happy to view it as part of an education spend rather than paying to feed other people's children.


Good point! According to this site 10% of the nhs budget is spent on diabetes, £11.7 billion being spent on type 2 a year :/.
http://www.diabetes.co.uk/cost-of-diabetes.html


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> Some are just as some would be capable of sending their children into school with a well prepared lesson plan for maths but wouldn't get defensive at it being provided.


Apples and oranges. Children are sent to school to learn, not to get the only decent meal a day. What else do you suggest the tax payer forks out for to cover for these multitude of dreadful parents?


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> Some are just as some would be capable of sending their children into school with a well prepared lesson plan for maths but wouldn't get defensive at it being provided.


But they aren't teaching them to cook are they?


----------



## Odin_cat

MiffyMoo said:


> Apples and oranges. Children are sent to school to learn, not to get the only decent meal a day. What else do you suggest the tax payer forks out for to cover for these multitude of dreadful parents?


The problem is that if the tax payer does not fund schemes to support the children of 'dreadful parents' those children are more likely to grow up to be 'dreadful parents'- it's a vicious circle.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> And I get that, I just have a different 'take'. We have a generation of parents who went through when school meals had become chips with everything. Having every child eat together at the point when we can grab 'em young and feed them well does strike me as the best education we could provide in healthy eating. For that to work it has to be the norm for all children to eat what's provided with no incentive to opt out.


Not if they go home to parents who buy them bottles of coke, packs of crisps and takeaways. I'd rather see money spent on educating everyone about nutrition and its role in preventing chronic illness but sadly not many people are interested and boy do they get defensive about their bad habits.



havoc said:


> I'd rather pick up that tab now than a bigger one later. i don't know what obesity, type 2 diabetes etc. cost us or what they're projected to cost in the future but if you look at how education/prevention could make a difference I really do think it's probably cost effective. I see feeding children healthy food during the school day as part of that. I'm happy to view it as part of an education spend rather than paying to feed other people's children.


Diabetes costs the NHS £20 billion per year. I'm not sure how eating a menu such as this example below from a primary school for Winter 2016 is going to prevent that - pizza, lasagne, sausage, chips, burgers, garlic bread, meat & potato pie, hot dogs, crispy battered fish and sugary sponge puddings with custard pretty much every day. To be fair if I had kids I wouldn't trust other people to decide what was healthy for them to eat.

http://www.tameside.gov.uk/TamesideMBC/media/education/SchoolMealsMenu.pdf

MONDAY Chicken Pasta bake or Cheese & Tomato Pizza Salad, Half Jacket Potato Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Pineapple Sponge & Custard

TUESDAY Roast Beef & Yorkshire pudding or Veggie Quorn Lasagne, Creamed Potatoes, Carrots, Broccoli Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab BagsDorset Apple Cake & Custard

WEDNESDAY Sausage or Cheese & Onion Pie Baked Wedges, Baked Beans Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Artic Roll

THURSDAY Spaghetti Bolognaise or Quorn Burger Salad, Sweetcorn, New Potatoes Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Chocolate Sponge & Mint Custard

FRIDAY Salmon Fishcakes or Quorn Bolognaise Bake Chips, Mushy Peas, Baked Beans Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Cornflake Tart

MONDAY Beef Burger in a bun or Veggie Quorn Curry Baked Wedges, Rice, Naan Bread, Sweetcorn Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Sultana Sponge & Custard

TUESDAY Shepherd's Pie or Quorn Sausages & Onion Gravy Creamed Potatoes, Carrots, Broccoli Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Fruit Jelly & Ice cream

WEDNESDAY Roast Turkey & Seasoning or Cheese Whirl Roast Potatoes, Peas Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Apple & Blackberry Crumble & Custard

THURSDAY Chicken Tikka Masala or Quorn Cottage Pie Rice, Naan Bread, Sweetcorn Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Cherry Sponge & Custard

FRIDAY Fish Fingers or Italian Veggie Wrap Chips, Mushy Peas, Baked Beans Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Paris Sandwich & Custard

MONDAY Lasagne or Veggie Quiche New Potatoes, Garlic Bread, Salad Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Banana & Custard

TUESDAY Meat & Potato Pie or Tomato & Basil Pasta Crusty Bread, Bunnies in a Meadow Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Chocolate & Orange Roly Poly & Custard

WEDNESDAY Roast Chicken or Cauliflower and Broccoli Bake Creamed Potatoes, Carrots, Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Apple Crunch & Custard

THURSDAY Hot Dog or Quorn Meat Ball Pasta Bake Baked Wedges, Sweetcorn Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Cherry Crumble & Custard

FRIDAY Crispy Battered Fish or Quorn Hot Dog Chips, Mushy Peas, Baked Beans Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Lemon Sponge & Custard


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Odin_cat said:


> The problem is that if the tax payer does not fund schemes to support the children of 'dreadful parents' those children are more likely to grow up to be 'dreadful parents'- it's a vicious circle.


Which is why we should be teaching them about health, nutrition and cooking in the classroom.


----------



## Odin_cat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Which is why we should be teaching them about health, nutrition and cooking in the classroom.


Yep, I agree. It's a terrible shame most of the children's centres are gone as parent and child cooking lessons would also be a great idea.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Odin_cat said:


> The problem is that if the tax payer does not fund schemes to support the children of 'dreadful parents' those children are more likely to grow up to be 'dreadful parents'- it's a vicious circle.


Where is the sense in spending billions for the minority? By all means, put some of the money towards home economics education, but don't keep coming up with new things to spend money on because a few people are incapable of rearing their own children


----------



## Odin_cat

MiffyMoo said:


> Where is the sense in spending billions for the minority? By all means, put some of the money towards home economics education, but don't keep coming up with new things to spend money on because a few people are incapable of rearing their own children


I don't think children should suffer for their parents faults. Society benefits from healthy, well rounded individuals.

I don't know if free school meals is the answer but I see social mobility as one of the most important aspects of a fair society.


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not if they go home to parents who buy them bottles of coke, packs of crisps and takeaways. I'd rather see money spent on educating everyone about nutrition and its role in preventing chronic illness but sadly not many people are interested and boy do they get defensive about their bad habits.
> 
> Diabetes costs the NHS £20 billion per year. I'm not sure how eating a menu such as this example below from a primary school for Winter 2016 is going to prevent that - pizza, lasagne, sausage, chips, burgers, garlic bread, meat & potato pie, hot dogs, crispy battered fish and sugary sponge puddings with custard pretty much every day. To be fair if I had kids I wouldn't trust other people to decide what was healthy for them to eat.
> 
> http://www.tameside.gov.uk/TamesideMBC/media/education/SchoolMealsMenu.pdf
> 
> MONDAY Chicken Pasta bake or Cheese & Tomato Pizza Salad, Half Jacket Potato Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Pineapple Sponge & Custard
> 
> TUESDAY Roast Beef & Yorkshire pudding or Veggie Quorn Lasagne, Creamed Potatoes, Carrots, Broccoli Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab BagsDorset Apple Cake & Custard
> 
> WEDNESDAY Sausage or Cheese & Onion Pie Baked Wedges, Baked Beans Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Artic Roll
> 
> THURSDAY Spaghetti Bolognaise or Quorn Burger Salad, Sweetcorn, New Potatoes Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Chocolate Sponge & Mint Custard
> 
> FRIDAY Salmon Fishcakes or Quorn Bolognaise Bake Chips, Mushy Peas, Baked Beans Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Cornflake Tart
> 
> MONDAY Beef Burger in a bun or Veggie Quorn Curry Baked Wedges, Rice, Naan Bread, Sweetcorn Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Sultana Sponge & Custard
> 
> TUESDAY Shepherd's Pie or Quorn Sausages & Onion Gravy Creamed Potatoes, Carrots, Broccoli Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Fruit Jelly & Ice cream
> 
> WEDNESDAY Roast Turkey & Seasoning or Cheese Whirl Roast Potatoes, Peas Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Apple & Blackberry Crumble & Custard
> 
> THURSDAY Chicken Tikka Masala or Quorn Cottage Pie Rice, Naan Bread, Sweetcorn Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Cherry Sponge & Custard
> 
> FRIDAY Fish Fingers or Italian Veggie Wrap Chips, Mushy Peas, Baked Beans Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Paris Sandwich & Custard
> 
> MONDAY Lasagne or Veggie Quiche New Potatoes, Garlic Bread, Salad Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Banana & Custard
> 
> TUESDAY Meat & Potato Pie or Tomato & Basil Pasta Crusty Bread, Bunnies in a Meadow Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Chocolate & Orange Roly Poly & Custard
> 
> WEDNESDAY Roast Chicken or Cauliflower and Broccoli Bake Creamed Potatoes, Carrots, Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Apple Crunch & Custard
> 
> THURSDAY Hot Dog or Quorn Meat Ball Pasta Bake Baked Wedges, Sweetcorn Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Cherry Crumble & Custard
> 
> FRIDAY Crispy Battered Fish or Quorn Hot Dog Chips, Mushy Peas, Baked Beans Jacket Potatoes with various fillings, Grab Bags Lemon Sponge & Custard


I did cookery for GCSE (failed miserably) but I still remember the one lesson that was devoted to nutrition. A lot of the information I didn't know, e.g. Vitamin c is water soluble, which is why you put vegetables into boiling water, and when I told my mum she admitted she never knew why she did that, but had been taught that that's what you do.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Odin_cat said:


> Yep, I agree. It's a terrible shame most of the children's centres are gone as parent and child cooking lessons would also be a great idea.


But you dont need a class for that! There are so many recipes out there that are really simple and you can get your kids involved by getting them to do really simple things.

A friend of mine researched how to make bread, jam and marmalade whilst she was on maternity leave with her first child. Now the kids are 3 & 5 and every weekend she posts photos of the three of them making all sorts. The kids absolutely love it and she loves doing her hobby and spending quality time with her girls


----------



## havoc

At no point have I said it's necessarily the 'only' decent meal of the day. That way of thinking stems from assuming the parents are incapable or unwilling to bother and I'm not saying they are. We do send our children to school to learn and I'm of the mind that everyone eating together is part of that process. What they learn and how they learn it will always be a matter for debate as will whether it's worth the money we spend on it.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Odin_cat said:


> I don't think children should suffer for their parents faults. Society benefits from healthy, well rounded individuals.
> 
> I don't know if free school meals is the answer but I see social mobility as one of the most important aspects of a fair society.


I personally see more investment in schools and teaching as a way to produce more well rounded adults, which is why the billions spent on feeding children who don't need to be fed, rather than hiring more teachers, infuriates me


----------



## Odin_cat

MiffyMoo said:


> I personally see more investment in schools and teaching as a way to produce more well rounded adults, which is why the billions spent on feeding children who don't need to be fed, rather than hiring more teachers, infuriates me


Fair enough, I agree that more money is needed for teaching. Unfortunately I somehow doubt that the money saved from cutting school meals will go to fund more teachers.


----------



## 1290423

Im gonna put the cat amongst the pigeons,
Gotta say judging by the amount of fat people out there including children, I find it hard to believe anyone's that hungry
Opps sorry, my sense of humour, but just had to look on the funny side else id cry .


----------



## havoc

Odin_cat said:


> I don't know if free school meals is the answer


Of course it isn't the answer to all ills but neither do I believe cutting them will end up being cost effective in the longer term. Seen in isolation it's an easy target and judging by the response on this forum quite a popular one.


----------



## 1290423

Maggie thatcher milk snatcher
Urm familiar


----------



## MiffyMoo

DT said:


> Maggie thatcher milk snatcher
> Urm familiar


And yet I don't see hordes of people suffering from calcium deficiency


----------



## 1290423

MiffyMoo said:


> And yet I don't see hordes of people suffering from calcium deficiency


Me neither​


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Maggie thatcher milk snatcher
> Urm familiar


She did us all a favour, cows milk is for baby cows and designed to grow them to a huge animal in a much shorter space of time than human children should grow which is why it contains IGF 1 growth hormone which we don't need. I can also remember gagging on that revolting warm creamy mixture and pouring mine away whenever possible :Yuck:Vomit


----------



## 1290423

Awyway! I'm not going to lose any sleep about it when we are all starving l and our children are wearing rags won't we be getting foreign aid? after all isn't that what civilised countries do


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MiffyMoo said:


> And yet I don't see hordes of people suffering from calcium deficiency


The countries with the highest intake of dairy products have the highest rates of osteoporosis and fractures. Its been a brilliant marketing trick for decades.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> She did us all a favour, cows milk is for baby cows and designed to grow them to a huge animal in a much shorter space of time than human children should grow which is why it contains IGF 1 growth hormone which we don't need. I can also remember gagging on that revolting warm creamy mixture and pouring mine away whenever possible :Yuck:Vomit


Wish they'd done it 20 years sooner rottie I hated the stuff


----------



## MollySmith

This

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/carer-bre...-will-homeless-mum-dies-tories-145758873.html


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> The countries with the highest intake of dairy products have the highest rates of osteoporosis and fractures. Its been a brilliant marketing trick for decades.


I can only drink a little bit or I get eczema on my face. I switched to almond milk years ago because of that


----------



## Elles

What do teachers think of it? It probably made it easier. All the kids in the same place eating lunch. No bullying for lunch money, or a special item in the packed lunch. No having to check kids' packed lunches to make sure they're adequate and are according to school rules. No teasing over free lunches. All kids fed. Less food thrown away as numbers were more predictable. Now they'll get free breakfast instead. That'll need supervision. 

In this thread, or another a while back, I said MaggieT was proved right to stop the milk, for more than one reason.


----------



## rona

MollySmith said:


> This
> 
> https://uk.news.yahoo.com/carer-bre...-will-homeless-mum-dies-tories-145758873.html


As I understand it a carer that lives in is protected much like a partner


----------



## Pawscrossed

I just wanted to say one thing Register to Vote!

It's too late after Tuesday and it takes seconds, even easier than a PF post so you have no excuses. No, I forgot. No, dunno who because the manifestos are out there and no dunno I dont know who because the reality is that you may only see two or three points you like but it's enough. It's not tailor made for you alone but a wide country. So no lazy or ignorant excuses. Vote.

Here is a link

https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote


----------



## Pawscrossed

rona said:


> As I understand it a carer that lives in is protected much like a partner


That wasn't how I read it or as my friend who cares for her elderly mum and their friends at the day care centre read it. Its incredibly woolly and open to all sorts of misinterpretation but as I saw it, without selling the home there is no care. I'm going to look for May's answer to the lady in the piece because that's the only amswer or understanding I'm interested in.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39977559

There are some enormous questions to answer.

One way to avoid your property wealth being consumed by care bills might be to take equity out of your house ahead of time.

With equity withdrawal, an insurance company will give you a portion of the value of your house now, charge interest on that amount until you die and take the money you owe them out of the eventual sale proceeds of the house.

To take the above example - an insurance company lends you £200,000 against your house aged 65, charges 5% interest a year until your eventual death at 90. You now owe them £200,000 plus 25 years' interest at 5%, which equals £359,000.

If your house price stays flat, that only leaves £141,000 left in equity. If, as the government proposes, you are allowed to keep £100,000, that means your liability or your own social care is only £41,000 rather than £400,000.

Would that arrangement be permitted? If yes - this manifesto pledge could be the start of a gold rush for private equity providers. If no - their death knell.

There are already safeguards to stop this happening when it comes to residential care (for example if you know you have an existing health condition with a poor prognosis, taking out money in this way is seen as "deliberate deprivation" and is prohibited) - but knowing that your house may one day be engulfed by social care bills may encourage more people to take the money earlier.

Who will pay the social care providers while you are still alive and living in your house? Your requirement to fund your own social care is deferred until you die and your house is sold, but the social care providers will need paying in real cash as they deliver it.

The government or some public agency would presumably have to advance the money in the intervening years.

In a way, it's a bit like a student loan arrangement for older people. You don't pay it back until you have the money when you are - er, dead. The numbers involved as we grow older as a society could be colossal - and the administration of it complex to say the least.


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> One way to avoid your property wealth being consumed by care bills might be to take equity out of your house ahead of time


I'd say this policy positively encourages it. It's getting more popular for parents or grandparents to take equity from their property to give children a deposit for their own home. You need to live for seven years for that gift to remain free of tax so it makes sense to do it earlier rather than later - same argument to avoid any claim of deliberate deprivation.


----------



## noushka05

Arnie83 said:


> Plus, I can't see why the free NHS is so passionately protected as a universal benefit, while it's okay for care in old age to be, in effect, privatised. What's the difference?


There's a massive difference. Increased privatisation is one of the reasons our NHS is in such a state now. Do we really want to end up like the USA? because that's what the tories have planned for our health service. Health care provision shouldn't be about profit for companies like Virgin. Privatisation is taking millions of ££ out of the NHS & putting it into private pockets Arnie. Private companies can even sue our NHS now.


----------



## noushka05

Those who were scrutinising labours fully costed manifesto don't seem too bothered about the tories uncosted manifesto. Funny that

Hardly any scrutiny in the media either. What a surprise. No wonder they can get away with trashing this country.

.This

_Labour: fully costed manifesto*: 'There is no magic money tree!' 
*Tories: pull something out their a****: 'manifestos should NOT be costed'_

How anyone can trust these people with anything apart from the certainty we'll get regressive policies is beyond me. http://www.itv.com/news/update/2017...increased-by-555-billion-under-conservatives/

*Fact-checked: UK debt has 'increased by £555 billion' under Conservatives*

The Conservative economic plan was meant to eliminate the deficit in five years, but now we're told it will take two decades, according to Plaid Cymru's Leanne Wood.

She also claimed the UK's debt has increased by £555 billion since the Tories came to power.

The government set deficit targets in 2010 (which it didn't meet) and in 2015 (which it abandoned), Full Fact explain.

As a result, UK government debt has continued to rise.

We haven't immediately been able to replicate Ms Wood's exact figure, but it's in the right ballpark.

Even adjusted for inflation, public sector net debt rose £450 billion between 2010/11 and 2015/16, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility.


----------



## Calvine

rottiepointerhouse said:


> The countries with the highest intake of dairy products have the highest rates of osteoporosis and fractures. Its been a brilliant marketing trick for decades


Lord, never knew that.


----------



## havoc

noushka05 said:


> Those who were scrutinising labours fully costed manifesto don't seem too bothered about the tories uncosted manifesto


Have to say I had noticed and I'm pretty sure May did say their plans were fully costed. That doesn't appear to be the case.


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> He's throwing a tantrum because Leveson 2 and section 40 has been scrapped


He has more reason then most to throw a tantrum, but anyone who believes in truth, justice & our very democracy should be seething about this.

_Conservatives in particular should have to answer these questions, given that most of the national press is backing the Conservatives in the expectation that victory will give them unprecedented power and freedom from accountability. If the newspapers get what they want from this election, after all, it is no exaggeration to say that they will be able to write whatever they choose about almost anyone, without consequence. No regulator will inhibit them, and no law. The lies and intrusion will be unstoppable_
Read more at:https://www.byline.com/column/68/article/1625

The tories aren't even pretending not to be corrupt anymore

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/part-two-leveson-inquiry-has-been-quietly-shelved-government


----------



## noushka05

havoc said:


> Have to say I had noticed and I'm pretty sure May did say their plans were fully costed. That doesn't appear to be the case.


I believe there are 60 uncosted pledges in the manifesto:Wideyed Can you imagine if this was labour or any other party for that matter, there would be uproar. I don't know how they get away with such hypocrisy & mendaciousness. Well I do - it helps when the media have your back.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> Do you mean we want both parents working full time ? Why ?
> This isn't about stopping school meals , its about stopping free school meals for those who can afford them .





rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes but there is absolutely no reason why most parents can't pay for those dinners, subsidise them by all means but not free for all children, just for those who need them.


I see where you're coming from but my concern is a small difference in earnings, say a fiver could make a difference between being eligible for free meals or not. It'll be the same when they means test the winter fuel allowance, as with any forms of means testing.

Plus with zero hour contracts earnings will no doubt vary from one week to the next.

Some who have pre paid gas and electric meters might have to decide between heating their home or cooking a meal, not being able to afford both.

To deprive infant school children of free dinners and many pensioners of their winter fuel allowance is damn right wicked in my view.

It won't be long before we hear advice to wrap up warm and wear wooly hats again...


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.canyoutrusttheresa.com/


----------



## havoc

KittenKong said:


> To deprive infant school children of free dinners


I am trying to be reasonably objective so I will say it wouldn't amount to real deprivation in many cases. I am glad someone has reminded us it is only infant school children this applies to which is why I'm not vehemently against funding it. There's so much we can instil at this age just by giving them the experience. Trying new things, 'normal' portion sizes, seeing mealtimes as a sociable occasion rather than just a refuelling stop. I'm not saying they don't necessarily get this at home, more that reinforcing the good habits at school isn't such a bad thing.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Something to lighten the mood

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....emy-corbyn-nicola-sturgeon-boris-johnson/amp/


----------



## KittenKong

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...does-theresa-may-want-to-make-them-pay-twice/
















Yes, Voxpolitical are a left of centre group, but this is a very good point.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> View attachment 311375


Are the Labour Party endorsing that strategy though? I hope they are but based on the case we discussed further back in the thread where they expelled some long standing party members for supporting the NHA candidate standing against Jeremy Hunt I'd be surprised.



KittenKong said:


> I see where you're coming from but my concern is a small difference in earnings, say a fiver could make a difference between being eligible for free meals or not. It'll be the same when they means test the winter fuel allowance, as with any forms of means testing.
> 
> Plus with zero hour contracts earnings will no doubt vary from one week to the next.
> 
> Some who have pre paid gas and electric meters might have to decide between heating their home or cooking a meal, not being able to afford both.
> 
> To deprive infant school children of free dinners and many pensioners of their winter fuel allowance is damn right wicked in my view.
> 
> It won't be long before we hear advice to wrap up warm and wear wooly hats again...


Its a difficult one but we do have to draw the line somewhere - why only feed infants free? why not all school children? then what about university students, they are often struggling to get by financially so perhaps we should give them a free hot dinner every day? then what about pregnant women perhaps they should all get a free dinner every day? what about pre school children should they get a free dinner every day? what about the sick should they get a free dinner every day? and most importantly what about the frail elderly who can no longer manage to cook for themselves should they get a free dinner every day? Pensioners have to buy their own food, even in my social services days under a very left wing council they had to pay for their meals on wheels, have you seen the price of Wiltshire Farm Foods which are often suggested for the elderly?

https://www.wiltshirefarmfoods.com/ready-meals/new-meals

I think we should have a clear provision for free school meals for those pupils who need them regardless of age but I do not believe the tax payer should foot the bill for feeding all infants anymore than it should foot the bill for feeding all students. The road I live in for instance is mainly 4-5 bed houses in a area that is pricey because of a couple of good schools, families with children move here to get into those schools, why on earth should the tax payer feed their children for them? Surely there are far more important things we could be spending that money on for instance I would rather that money went on social care and we brought back more lunch clubs for the elderly where they could get a free meal if they are on basic pension/pension credits.


----------



## Calvine

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/one-school...-go-ahead-to-sell-off-part-of-playing-fields/

Another reason for childhood obesity (possibly). When I was at school we had acres of land for sports: rugby, cricket, tennis, hockey, netball...you name it, we had it. Plus swimming once a week...plus gym. Schools have been selling off their land now for years.


----------



## Satori

KittenKong said:


> http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...does-theresa-may-want-to-make-them-pay-twice/
> View attachment 311392
> View attachment 311393
> 
> 
> Yes, Voxpolitical are a left of centre group, but this is a very good point.


I tend to agree with their viewpoint. Especially this: "*These are people who have spent their entire working lives paying National Insurance and taxes on the understanding that the health care they would receive - including social care - would run "from the cradle to the grave".
*
However, I don't understand the association with the Tory party. The Labour Party manifesto does not include a commitment for the state to pay for social care does it? I have not read the detail so may have missed it.

The Tory manifesto under Cameron did have such a commitment that May has now reneged on but as far as I know the Labour Party has no such intention. Happy to be corrected.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Are the Labour Party endorsing that strategy though? I hope they are but based on the case we discussed further back in the thread where they expelled some long standing party members for supporting the NHA candidate standing against Jeremy Hunt I'd be surprised.
> 
> Its a difficult one but we do have to draw the line somewhere - why only feed infants free? why not all school children? then what about university students, they are often struggling to get by financially so perhaps we should give them a free hot dinner every day? then what about pregnant women perhaps they should all get a free dinner every day? what about pre school children should they get a free dinner every day? what about the sick should they get a free dinner every day? and most importantly what about the frail elderly who can no longer manage to cook for themselves should they get a free dinner every day? Pensioners have to buy their own food, even in my social services days under a very left wing council they had to pay for their meals on wheels, have you seen the price of Wiltshire Farm Foods which are often suggested for the elderly?
> 
> https://www.wiltshirefarmfoods.com/ready-meals/new-meals
> 
> I think we should have a clear provision for free school meals for those pupils who need them regardless of age but I do not believe the tax payer should foot the bill for feeding all infants anymore than it should foot the bill for feeding all students. The road I live in for instance is mainly 4-5 bed houses in a area that is pricey because of a couple of good schools, families with children move here to get into those schools, why on earth should the tax payer feed their children for them? Surely there are far more important things we could be spending that money on for instance I would rather that money went on social care and we brought back more lunch clubs for the elderly where they could get a free meal if they are on basic pension/pension credits.


Only the Green party officially endorsed it as far as I'm aware RPH. Its down to individuals to vote tactically now.

.


----------



## Guest

rona said:


> I'd be perfectly happy to see it as that if they showed them how to cook it too


True, children should be taught how to cook healthy meals and the effects junks food does to you. Everyone has to do a cooking course here, so that all should have somekind of understanding what humans need in order to live healthy.



MiffyMoo said:


> Apples and oranges. Children are sent to school to learn, not to get the only decent meal a day. What else do you suggest the tax payer forks out for to cover for these multitude of dreadful parents?


It isn´t about dreadful parents, it could be busy parents, parents being ill or just parents, who can´t cook well. It is also about children, who would choose junk food every time they could, and instead of their healthy lunch box, end up eating chocolate. At school parents don´t have much influence, it´s other kids whose opinions matter. In the end, parents don´t really know what their children eat, do they. When all eat a healthy lunch, it benefits all.



MiffyMoo said:


> Where is the sense in spending billions for the minority? By all means, put some of the money towards home economics education, but don't keep coming up with new things to spend money on because a few people are incapable of rearing their own children


If you want to save the amount you pay for the minority, you start with the cheap ways to prevent problems. School meals are really one of the cheapest way to support the minority. Also it helps all children to learn, as no one is able to stay focused through out a school day, if they don´t get proper food. Junk food hinders learning, lack of food hinders learning and restless groups hinder learning for all. So all benefit, if all kids get a proper school dinner.



DT said:


> Im gonna put the cat amongst the pigeons, Gotta say judging by the amount of fat people out there including children, I find it hard to believe anyone's that hungry. Opps sorry, my sense of humour, but just had to look on the funny side else id cry .


Junk food makes people fat, healthy food doesn´t.

Some studies in English about the links btw nourisment and academic results, for those, who want to read how important it is for all children to eat well in order to learn.

http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2009.165746
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272704000209
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2008.00288.x/full


----------



## Team_Trouble

I don't understand why dementia and other old age ailments come under social care as opposed to health care. It just doesn't seem fair to me but I can't think of a way to solve it as including the country's increasing social care needs within the remit of the NHS, or having an NHS style social care service, would require even more taxes. I just don't think it's fair for some people to have to pay for more of their care than others. Perhaps a separate pension pot could be devised for working individuals? I'm not sure. I think my views have certainly changed since I'm working now (albeit part time and still receiving some benefits). I wish there was a way to positively help some people on benefits into jobs they might actually enjoy without forcing or generalising so that those who genuinely are unable to work are not targeted. Even if those jobs were part time (I really struggle to work full time as I need time to be by myself and wind down, to rest, and down time from constant socialising). For some there is no financial incentive to get a job, as there wasn't for me, although I do now have a little bit more than I did when I was solely on benefits. I work really hard at my job and I love it, I also do voluntary work. I know some people who are on benefits who certainly can't work, but there are others where I wonder why they don't. Is it because they can't, or is it because it is easier not to? Or is it because they don't believe that they can, when actually with the right support they are capable? For many I suspect low self esteem and fear are involved, which would take a lot of support to overcome. I think I've rambled for long enough on various topics now.


----------



## 1290423

MrsZee said:


> True, children should be taught how to cook healthy meals and the effects junks food does to you. Everyone has to do a cooking course here, so that all should have somekind of understanding what humans need in order to live healthy.
> 
> It isn´t about dreadful parents, it could be busy parents, parents being ill or just parents, who can´t cook well. It is also about children, you would choose junk food and instead of their healthy lunch box, end up eating chocolate. At school parents don´t have much influence, it´s other kids whose opinions matter. In the end, parents don´t really know what their children eat, do they. When all eat a healthy lunch, it benefits all.
> 
> If you want to save the amount you pay for the minority, you start with the cheap ways to prevent problems. School meals is really one of the cheapest way to support the minority. Also it helps all children to learn, as no one is able to stay focused through out a school day, if they don´t get proper food. Junk food hinders learning, lack of food hinders learning and restless groups hinder learning for all. So all benefit, if all kids get a proper school dinner.
> 
> Junk food makes people fat, healthy food doesn´t.
> 
> Some studies in English about the links btw nourisment and academic results, for those, who want to read how important it is for all children to eat well in order to learn.
> 
> http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2009.165746
> http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272704000209
> http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2008.00288.x/full


I dont know, when we were at school you seldom saw a fat kid, I wouldn't say our diet was particularly healthy even, well not by what they call healthy today, we didnt get a lot if fruit , we had cereal for breakfast- most meats were cooked in lard or dripping, we had lots of pastry and had Bread and butter with everything even the tinned fruit we had on sunday, The popman even came once a week and when it was gone it was gone'--' I wouldnt e call any of that healthy, yet I was as thin as a match, maybe it was down to the fact that I walked everywhere run a lot, played loads,outside never sat down at computer or played indoor games apart from snap with my dad, didn't eat processd foods and to my knowledge McDonald's haven't been invented, or maybe they just didn't tell me if it had no seriously I wouldn't put the stuff in my mouth if you paid me


----------



## Guest

DT said:


> I dont know, when we were at school you seldom saw a fat kid, I wouldn't say our diet was particularly healthy even, well not by what they call healthy today, we didnt get a lot if fruit , we had cereal for breakfast- most meats were cooked in lard or dripping and we had lots of pastry and had Bread and butter with everything even the tinned fruit we had on sunday, The popman even came once a week and when it was gone it was gone'--' I wouldnt e call any of that healthy yet I was as thin as a match, maybe it was down to the fact that I walked everywhere run a lot never sat down at computer or played indoor games apart from snap with my dad, didn't eat processd foods and to my knowledge McDonald's haven't been invented, or maybe they just didn't tell me if it had no seriously I wouldn't put the stuff in my mouth if you paid me


MacDonald´s is way to food h*ll I think, as processed food is bad. I don´t mean you couldn´t ever eat junk food, but not as regular thing. Processed food is pretty bad no matter where you get it, and e.g. now the recommendation is to have only 1-2 times a week sausages, all processed food and also red meat. You are right about exercise too, children should walk/cycle etc. much more, not just eat proper food in order to do well at school.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MrsZee said:


> True, children should be taught how to cook healthy meals and the effects junks food does to you. Everyone has to do a cooking course here, so that all should have somekind of understanding what humans need in order to live healthy.
> 
> It isn´t about dreadful parents, it could be busy parents, parents being ill or just parents, who can´t cook well. It is also about children, who would choose junk food every time they could, and instead of their healthy lunch box, end up eating chocolate. At school parents don´t have much influence, it´s other kids whose opinions matter. In the end, parents don´t really know what their children eat, do they. When all eat a healthy lunch, it benefits all.
> 
> If you want to save the amount you pay for the minority, you start with the cheap ways to prevent problems. School meals are really one of the cheapest way to support the minority. Also it helps all children to learn, as no one is able to stay focused through out a school day, if they don´t get proper food. Junk food hinders learning, lack of food hinders learning and restless groups hinder learning for all. So all benefit, if all kids get a proper school dinner.
> 
> Junk food makes people fat, healthy food doesn´t.
> 
> Some studies in English about the links btw nourisment and academic results, for those, who want to read how important it is for all children to eat well in order to learn.
> 
> http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2009.165746
> http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272704000209
> http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2008.00288.x/full


You can still be fat and not eat junk food just by consuming too many calorie dense/high fat/high cholesterol foods - eg cheese & meat. Many people consider chicken & fish to be healthy but they contain very similar amounts of saturated fat and cholesterol to red meat and lack any fibre which fills us up. These days a lot of foods con our natural appetite controls as they contain a lot of calories in a small amount of food, therefore we keep on eating because our stretch receptors have not been activated. Some of the meals in the primary school meal plan I quoted a few pages back would fall into that category. Unless we educate parents on healthy eating giving a child a hot meal at school will only eradicate their hunger that afternoon, they will still go home to junk and processed foods and fizzy drinks in the evening and at weekends/school holidays and a bowl of sugary cereal for breakfast.


----------



## rona

DT said:


> I dont know, when we were at school you seldom saw a fat kid, I wouldn't say our diet was particularly healthy even, well not by what they call healthy today, we didnt get a lot if fruit , we had cereal for breakfast- most meats were cooked in lard or dripping, we had lots of pastry and had Bread and butter with everything even the tinned fruit we had on sunday, The popman even came once a week and when it was gone it was gone'--' I wouldnt e call any of that healthy, yet I was as thin as a match, maybe it was down to the fact that I walked everywhere run a lot, played loads,outside never sat down at computer or played indoor games apart from snap with my dad, didn't eat processd foods and to my knowledge McDonald's haven't been invented, or maybe they just didn't tell me if it had no seriously I wouldn't put the stuff in my mouth if you paid me


A lot is down to lack of exercise. The thinnest of thin people I know, when all his counterparts have middle age spread, eats like a horse, loads of the "wrong" things but works very hard physically


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> A lot is down to lack of exercise. The thinnest of thin people I know, when all his counterparts have middle age spread, eats like a horse, loads of the "wrong" things but works very hard physically


Some of the longest living people in the world in the so called "blue zones" are very physically active throughout the day and well into old age, usually through their work or to survive - walking/growing their own food etc. I read a really interesting book about bone health not long ago and the author said one of the worse things we did was to tell people they had to do strenuous exercise where you break a sweat and raise your heart rate to a certain level several times a week as it just put so many people off exercise. Just being active and walking/doing chores or gardening are so good for us physically and mentally.


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Some of the longest living people in the world in the so called "blue zones" are very physically active throughout the day and well into old age, usually through their work or to survive - walking/growing their own food etc. I read a really interesting book about bone health not long ago and the author said one of the worse things we did was to tell people they had to do strenuous exercise where you break a sweat and raise your heart rate to a certain level several times a week as it just put so many people off exercise. Just being active and walking/doing chores or gardening are so good for us physically and mentally.


My mum used to play golf three times a week, until she had her stroke. I'm convinced the golf (walking 18 holes is quite a long way) kept her a lot younger than other people her age. Since her stroke she can't sustain it anymore and has to give up the golf. She has aged so fast since


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MiffyMoo said:


> My mum used to play golf three times a week, until she had her stroke. I'm convinced the golf (walking 18 holes is quite a long way) kept her a lot younger than other people her age. Since her stroke she can't sustain it anymore and has to give up the golf. She has aged so fast since


Sorry to hear about your Mum's stroke. My Mum is 80 in a couple of months and has no end of health problems but she has never driven a car so walks a lot, thus she is fitter than many people 20 years younger than her. She still walks to town most days for bits of shopping and still does her own garden.


----------



## Guest

rottiepointerhouse said:


> You can still be fat and not eat junk food just by consuming too many calorie dense/high fat/high cholesterol foods - eg cheese & meat. Many people consider chicken & fish to be healthy but they contain very similar amounts of saturated fat and cholesterol to red meat and lack any fibre which fills us up. These days a lot of foods con our natural appetite controls as they contain a lot of calories in a small amount of food, therefore we keep on eating because our stretch receptors have not been activated. Some of the meals in the primary school meal plan I quoted a few pages back would fall into that category. Unless we educate parents on healthy eating giving a child a hot meal at school will only eradicate their hunger that afternoon, they will still go home to junk and processed foods and fizzy drinks in the evening and at weekends/school holidays and a bowl of sugary cereal for breakfast.


You are so right about that. The more we discover about the affect of processed food and saturated fats, the worse they seem to be. I wouldn´t be surprised if one day the have to ban them, because to prove to be that bad for you. If the school meals are that bad as you said, they should have a quality control, healthy food is usually even cheaper, and if our schools can provide a healthy meal with about 2 €/ person, I´m sure British can do. Changing school menus should be easy enough.

"Unless we educate parents on healthy eating giving a child a hot meal at school will only eradicate their hunger that afternoon, they will still go home to junk and processed foods and fizzy drinks in the evening and at weekends/school holidays and a bowl of sugary cereal for breakfast". That might happen, but at least they´ll get one decent meal and become used to eating also proper food. Maybe some of them will also educate parents... It is a long process to change eating habits but it can be done. Schools are one of the best ways to start.


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Sorry to hear about your Mum's stroke. My Mum is 80 in a couple of months and has no end of health problems but she has never driven a car so walks a lot, thus she is fitter than many people 20 years younger than her. She still walks to town most days for bits of shopping and still does her own garden.


Mum still potters around her garden now, but it makes me sad that she has given up the golf. Even just doing 9 holes in a golf cart gets her out and about


----------



## Arnie83

MiffyMoo said:


> My mum used to play golf three times a week, until she had her stroke. I'm convinced the golf (*walking 18 holes is quite a long way*) kept her a lot younger than other people her age. Since her stroke she can't sustain it anymore and has to give up the golf. She has aged so fast since


Especially if your route on each hole is a zig-zag, like mine!


----------



## 1290423

Another thing, in my childhood we were too busy enjoying ourselves playing with our friends outside that we didn't bother to come in for food. these days sat up in their bedrooms on their computers there's always a temptation to nibble as there are usually biscuits, crisps and the likes at hand.
If free school meals were intended to encourage healthy eating its not worked


----------



## Elles

Did you see the lady waiting for a hip replacement? On one of the news channels. They'd told her she has to lose weight and won't treat her until she does. She's not even that big imo, she was strong and active, but can do less and less exercise and is in constant pain. I agree with not wanting to give someone a GE and do an op on them, when they're morbidly obese and at risk from the GE and the op is less likely to be successful, but not to delay on a strong fit woman, until she's fat (her description) and can barely walk to lose the weight. Such a shame for her I thought.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> Did you see the lady waiting for a hip replacement? On one of the news channels. They'd told her she has to lose weight and won't treat her until she does. She's not even that big imo, she was strong and active, but can do less and less exercise and is in constant pain. I agree with not wanting to give someone a GE and do an op on them, when they're morbidly obese and at risk from the GE and the op is less likely to be successful, but not to delay on a strong fit woman, until she's fat (her description) and can barely walk to lose the weight. Such a shame for her I thought.


Wasnt she what's only forty through? Which makes her very young


----------



## leashedForLife

.
in the U-S, more & more schools are dumping "recess" - *the time for active play outdoors*; kids spend way-too much time seated at desks, & even the opp to run about is gone. 
Also i think that art & music, crafts & cooking, practical skills in SHOP classes, are important - & again, these are gone from most curricula outside specialty schools or those that charge a massive premium, such as private schools that cost the sun & moon to attend.
.
.
.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Elles said:


> Did you see the lady waiting for a hip replacement? On one of the news channels. *They'd told her she has to lose weight and won't treat her until she does. * She's not even that big imo, she was strong and active, but can do less and less exercise and is in constant pain. I agree with not wanting to give someone a GE and do an op on them, when they're morbidly obese and at risk from the GE and the op is less likely to be successful, but not to delay on a strong fit woman, until she's fat (her description) and can barely walk to lose the weight. Such a shame for her I thought.


A lady round the corner from me, is waiting for a knee replacement, she has been told to loose a little weight and to try and get fit, so the leg mussels are strong enough to help with recovery and strong enough to walk after the operation. She in a lot of pain but the doctor has sent her to physio to help her.


----------



## noushka05

Wow just look at this garbage by our strong & stable Leader. Does anyone think Theresa is a bit worried? She sounding more & more like Trump by the minute.
*
Theresa May*‏Verified account 
_
If I lose just six seats I will lose this election and Jeremy Corbyn will be sitting
down to negotiate with Europe:_



__ https://www.facebook.com/TheresaMayOfficial/posts/1737355726281193


(I've been crying with laughing at some of the comments underneath :Hilarious)

C4s Krishnan Guru-Murthy tweeted it with these comments:
*
Krishnan Guru-Murthy*‏Verified account

Krishnan Guru-Murthy Retweeted Theresa May

_This is a quite bizarre tweet. When I saw it I assumed it was a fake_.

*Krishnan Guru-Murthy*‏Verified account

_They are Tory seats not hers. 6 losses to Labour doesn't put Corbyn in No 10. If
she tweets such drivel what chance in EU negotiation?

.,_


----------



## Elles

As has already been said, I think a lot of people wonder what she's up to. Does she want to lose, so that she doesn't have to deal with brexit, does she genuinely believe what she says, is she playing a trick to see how far she can go, or is she so arrogant she thinks it doesn't matter? Got me.


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> As has already been said, I think a lot of people wonder what she's up to. Does she want to lose, so that she doesn't have to deal with brexit, does she genuinely believe what she says, is she playing a trick to see how far she can go, or is she so arrogant she thinks it doesn't matter? Got me.


She wants to lose surely......she can't be that stupid?


----------



## Elles

http://blog.lboro.ac.uk/crcc/

'Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you' Mr Corbyn. Comparisons of press coverage on the election.


----------



## Happy Paws2

rona said:


> She wants to lose surely......she can't be that stupid?


Calculated maybe if she looses, then what ever happens with Brexit she can't be held responsible.

_edited for spelling_


----------



## rona

My friend is voting Ukip, not because he wants them in, that would be impossible in our area, but as a protest vote against the other useless sods


----------



## noushka05

LOL










*PM Theresa Thatcher*‏@*NHSApathy*

_The NHS is a priceless institution. 
No, wait, I've thought of a price

*PM Theresa Thatcher*‏@*NHSApathy* 10h10 hours ago

Can you all just focus on #*PippasWedding*, and not the cuts to funding of the
NHS, schools, police, disability benefits, free school meals

*PM Theresa Thatcher*‏@*NHSApathy* 11 Oct 2014

Coincidences are amazing; it turns out that many Conservative Party donors
have recently been awarded massive NHS contracts.

:Hilarious
*David Walliams*‏Verified account

Me in my younger days








_


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> http://blog.lboro.ac.uk/crcc/
> 
> 'Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you' Mr Corbyn. Comparisons of press coverage on the election.


----------



## KittenKong

Praise indeed from an unexpected source.

http://sybriefing.co.uk/2017/05/19/...acks-corbyns-manifesto-and-donates-to-labour/


----------



## KittenKong

http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/theresa-mays-extraordinary-facebook.html?m=1


----------



## 1290423

Royal Mail have created a stamp with a picture of Theresa May but the stamp isn`t sticking to envelopes.Enraged she has demanded a full investigation.After a month of testing at a cost of £2.1million, a special commission presented the following findings:
1. The stamp is in perfect order.
2. There is nothing wrong with the adhesive.
3. The Public are spitting on the wrong side of the stamp


----------



## kimthecat

Lib dems youtube

Corbyn asked 7 times whether he would reject a bad deal

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnqbeEkP65a1zC2EwmKl6Yg?v=GYP8DHQTG2g


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*YouGov/Sunday Times - CON 44, LAB 35, LD 9, UKIP 3*
20 MAY 2017
YouGov's weekly poll for the Sunday Times has topline voting intention figures of CON 44%(-1), LAB 35%(+3), LDEM 9%(+1), UKIP 3%(-3). Changes are from the YouGov/Times polls in the week. The fieldwork was, as usual, conducted on Thursday afternoon and Friday, so was wholly after the Conservative manifesto launch (though, of course, before much of the media reporting and discussion of it)

The nine point Tory lead is the lowest we've seen so far this campaign, the first in single figures. As ever, one should be cautious of unusual polls and wait to see if the trend is backed up by other polls before getting either too excited or too panicked (depending upon one's point of view!). Perhaps it could be that the Conservative manifesto and the coverage of the changes to care funding has knocked their support. Perhaps it's just a continuation of the gradual narrowing of the Tory lead that we have been seeing anyway over recent weeks. Perhaps it's just a bit of a outlier, and the next round of polls will go back to showing a larger Tory lead. Time will tell.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Great news in the polls:

Conservatives 44%
Labour 35%

The Conservatives are losing points due to there social reform pledge. I hope beyond all hope that the Conservatives lose on the 8th June 2017.


----------



## stockwellcat.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/uk-general-election-polls-corbyn-says-his-message-is-getting-through-to-voters-after-further-polls-a3544376.html?amp

*UK General Election polls: Corbyn says his message is 'getting through' to voters after further polls success*

Labour received a further boost this week as four new polls showed Jeremy Corbyn's party eating into the Conservative lead ahead of the General Election.

The polls for the Sunday newspapers put Labour between 35 per cent and 33 per cent, up significantly on the scores as low as 26 per cent it was recording early in the campaign.

In one survey by YouGov for the Sunday Times, the Tory advantage was narrowed to just nine points, the first time it has been in single figures in a mainstream poll since Theresa May called the snap election on April 18.

The figures would still deliver a comfortable Tory majority if repeated on June 8, but they will bolster Labour insiders' belief that Mr Corbyn's campaign is making inroads into Mrs May's support following her poorly-received policies on social care for the elderly.

Crucially, a result on these lines would put Mr Corbyn comfortably above the 30.4 per cent vote share achieved by Ed Miliband in 2015, which some supporters argue should be seen as a benchmark of whether he should stay on as leader.

The 35 per cent support for Labour recorded by YouGov is the best rating for the party since March last year before the EU referendum and challenge to Mr Corbyn's leadership.

The poll put Tories on 44 per cent, though Mrs May's party was on 46 per cent in separate surveys by ORB International for the Sunday Telegraph, Opinium for the Observer and Survation for the Mail on Sunday.

*The Survation survey, conducted entirely after Thursday's Tory manifesto launch, found 28 per cent of voters said they were less likely to vote Conservative because of the social care package, branded a "dementia tax" by opponents.*

The Telegraph and Mail on Sunday polls put Labour two points up since last week on 34 per cent, while the Observer put Labour up one point on 33 per cent.

Earlier this week two other polls also showed Mr Corbyn's party was closing in on Theresa May's Conservative Party.

And Mr Corbyn said: "This message is getting through. Get on any bus, get on any train, go in any cafe, talk to people.


----------



## noushka05

Well this is getting more Orwellian by the day. Isnt Trump trying to do something similar in the USA? http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...ternet-conservatives-government-a7744176.html


----------



## noushka05

leashedForLife said:


> .
> in the U-S, more & more schools are dumping "recess" - *the time for active play outdoors*; kids spend way-too much time seated at desks, & even the opp to run about is gone.
> Also i think that art & music, crafts & cooking, practical skills in SHOP classes, are important - & again, these are gone from most curricula outside specialty schools or those that charge a massive premium, such as private schools that cost the sun & moon to attend.
> .
> .
> .


As the tories privatise our schools turning them into Acadamies creative subjects are being dropped from the curriculum here too.


----------



## noushka05

Please think of these beautiful creatures. Do we really want to be responsible for driving them to extinction?


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> As has already been said, I think a lot of people wonder what she's up to. Does she want to lose, so that she doesn't have to deal with brexit, does she genuinely believe what she says, is she playing a trick to see how far she can go, or is she so arrogant she thinks it doesn't matter? Got me.





rona said:


> She wants to lose surely......she can't be that stupid?





Elles said:


> http://blog.lboro.ac.uk/crcc/
> 
> 'Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you' Mr Corbyn. Comparisons of press coverage on the election.


The media has her back, she thought she could get away with anything after being promoted as the strong & stable leader we need to 'negotiate' a good brexit deal for us. . She thinks people are so stupid that they will vote based on meaningless soundbites alone. She took the pensioners for granted. Now she's worried.


----------



## Satori

Satori said:


> I tend to agree with their viewpoint. Especially this: "*These are people who have spent their entire working lives paying National Insurance and taxes on the understanding that the health care they would receive - including social care - would run "from the cradle to the grave".
> *
> However, I don't understand the association with the Tory party. The Labour Party manifesto does not include a commitment for the state to pay for social care does it? I have not read the detail so may have missed it.
> 
> The Tory manifesto under Cameron did have such a commitment that May has now reneged on but as far as I know the Labour Party has no such intention. Happy to be corrected.


Ok, found it. The cap on social care costs was actually legislated. See social care act 2014. It comes into place in 2020. The Tory part would abolish it, the Labour Party not. Ergo, Labour are justified in calling this a Tory policy to introduce a 100% inheritance tax.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Satori

From the FT on the dementia tax.

"
The policy was inserted by Mrs May into the Tory manifesto at the last minute on the advice of Nick Timothy, her co-chief of staff, and against the advice of John Godfrey, head of the Number 10 policy unit, according to two people close to Number 10.

Mr Timothy, an architect of Mrs May's policy pitch to working-class voters, has long argued the Tories should tax inheritance more heavily while cutting taxes on work and enterprise. He drew up the manifesto in conditions of top secrecy.

"

Imagine the backlash if Labour had done this? The press would have crucified Corbyn. For me, this removes any doubt that May is trying the throw the fight. She doesn't want the job any more but doesn't have the balls to stand outside no 10 and publicly quit.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Satori said:


> For me, this removes any doubt that May is trying the throw the fight. She doesn't want the job any more but doesn't have the balls to stand outside no 10 and publicly quit.


Could be a strategic move on the conservative party as a whole. If Labour win it will probably be by the narrowest of margins leaving the conservatives as a very strong opposition. Then in five years time when Mr Corbyn has given the softest Brexit possible, failed to deliver most of his promises due to the cost and upped annual borrowing to breaking point (trying to deliver his giveaways) then in 2022 the conservatives come back and pretty much leave Labour in the same position as the Lib Dem's are today. Bit of a longer game that also dodges the EU bullet but gives them the soft Brexit they actually want as well, it's win win. Just a thought.


----------



## Colliebarmy

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 311496


utter borrox

RICHER pensioners dont need £400 winter allowance, certainly those living in Spain or care homes...


----------



## Colliebarmy

Dr Pepper said:


> If Labour win


............

oh my aching sides...


----------



## MilleD

stockwellcat said:


> Not if TM does what she intends to do scrap free school meals.


See this is what Labour wants people to say. It's ONLY the universal infant free school meals that are being stopped. It's a fairly new policy, and to be fair people managed before it was bought in.

Those receiving the free school meals due to low income will still get them, and the schools themselves attract additional funding because of them.


----------



## havoc

Colliebarmy said:


> RICHER pensioners dont need £400 winter allowance,


Who gets £400?


----------



## MilleD

kimthecat said:


> ETA 3 years olds will be entitled to 30 hours free child care in September.


Yep, and that's another policy that hasn't been very well thought through.


----------



## KittenKong

Colliebarmy said:


> utter borrox
> 
> RICHER pensioners dont need £400 winter allowance, certainly those living in Spain or care homes...


Have to disagree with you. We'll all be pensioners one day, don't you think after a lifetime of working and contributing to society they shouldn't get something back? If they don't want or need it it can be given to a charity.

Besides the problems with means testing is an amount as low as £5 could make a difference between qualifying or not.

Do we really want to return to the days when pensioners were told to wrap up warm and wear woolly hats during a severe cold spell again?


----------



## kimthecat

Colliebarmy said:


> ............
> 
> oh my aching sides...


Im not so confident that the Cons will win . Despite having Corbyn as leader , Labour are coming up with some good bribes and people fall for it . If John McDonnell was leader , they would have a good chance. he comes over very well and more clued up.

Anyone seen party posters up in peoples homes , not seen one any where. usually houses are festooned .

Winter fuel payment
https://www.gov.uk/winter-fuel-payment

Between £100 to £300


----------



## Zaros




----------



## Dr Pepper

Colliebarmy said:


> utter borrox
> 
> RICHER pensioners dont need £400 winter allowance, certainly those living in Spain or care homes...


Actually if you live in Spain or a care home you don't get the allowance. Which is perfectly fair. And I believe the maximum amount is £300. It's such a small amount means testing wouldn't be economically viable.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


>


Ah good, that doesn't trouble me then as my granny died decades ago and was in rented accommodation.


----------



## stockwellcat.

MilleD said:


> *See this is what Labour wants people to say.* It's ONLY the universal infant free school meals that are being stopped. It's a fairly new policy, and to be fair people managed before it was bought in.
> 
> Those receiving the free school meals due to low income will still get them, and the schools themselves attract additional funding because of them.


It's not just the Labour party attacking the Conservatives over this is it... Lib Dems have as well as Jamie Oliver:
*Jamie Oliver condemns Theresa May for scrapping free lunches*
http://amp.theguardian.com/educatio...ndemns-theresa-may-for-scrapping-free-lunches

*Scrapping free school lunches is an attack on struggling families*
Nick Clegg
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....hool-lunches-families-conservative-nick-clegg


----------



## MilleD

stockwellcat said:


> It's not just the Labour party attacking the Conservatives over this is it... Lib Dems have as well as Jamie Oliver:
> *Jamie Oliver condemns Theresa May for scrapping free lunches*
> http://amp.theguardian.com/educatio...ndemns-theresa-may-for-scrapping-free-lunches
> 
> *Scrapping free school lunches is an attack on struggling families*
> Nick Clegg
> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....hool-lunches-families-conservative-nick-clegg


But she's not scrapping free school lunches. God I hate the media sometimes.


----------



## MilleD

And Jamie Oliver is an idiot sometimes.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Ah good, that doesn't trouble me then as my granny died decades ago and was in rented accommodation


That's OK then. The Tory proposals will just cause people with property or other assets to liquidate them earlier and pass the money on to the next generation. I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing and plenty are doing it already. It won't solve the problem it's intended to address though.


----------



## KittenKong

MilleD said:


> But she's not scrapping free school lunches. God I hate the media sometimes.


She is for all but the poorest of families, as mentioned earlier a difference of £5 could make the difference between qualifying or not.

No wonder they are called the "Nasty Party".....


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> Anyone seen party posters up in peoples homes , not seen one any where. usually houses are festooned .


I've so far seen one for Labour.

Labour have also been canvassing. Nothing from the Lib Dems and the Tories though which is surprising as our area is a target for the latter party.


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> Have to disagree with you. We'll all be pensioners one day, don't you think after a lifetime of working and contributing to society they shouldn't get something back? If they don't want or need it it can be given to a charity.


We do get something back , we get a pension .
Telling well off pensioners to give the money to charity isn't helping the less well off pensioners. They could raise the limit for them , or put towards other benefits.


----------



## KittenKong

MilleD said:


> See this is what Labour wants people to say. It's ONLY the universal infant free school meals that are being stopped. It's a fairly new policy, and to be fair people managed before it was bought in.
> 
> Those receiving the free school meals due to low income will still get them, and the schools themselves attract additional funding because of them.


Yes, but living standards have dropped considerably, they don't need this additional burden.

Plus the fact this was introduced by the previous Tory government under David Cameron....


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> We do get something back , we get a pension .
> Telling well off pensioners to give the money to charity isn't helping the less well off pensioners. They could raise the limit for them , or put towards other benefits.


The thing is though, as I've previously mentioned, is a difference of as little as £5 can make a difference between qualifying or not.

So, if you get the state pension of say £100 or so and have PAID into a private pension during your working life you probably wouldn't qualify. Isn't that punishing those who worked and paid in to a pension scheme?

How long will it be before seeing your GP or having treatment in an NHS hospital will not be similarly means tested?

.....And what do you think of Scottish Tory Ruth Davidson"s pledge to keep the winter fuel allowance for ALL Scottish pensioners?

Is that fair???


----------



## havoc

KittenKong said:


> .....And what do you think of Scottish Tory Ruth Davidson"s pledge to keep the winter fuel allowance for ALL Scottish pensioners?
> 
> Is that fair???


The whole social care thing is a postcode lottery already and as it's a devolved power will remain so. Would be interesting to know if Conservative candidates in Scotland plan on pointing this out - well yes it's our policy but won't affect you because the Scottish parliament will protect you. That's a win/win situation for them - but not exactly moral


----------



## 3dogs2cats

KittenKong said:


> .....And what do you think of Scottish Tory Ruth Davidson"s pledge to keep the winter fuel allowance for ALL Scottish pensioners?
> 
> Is that fair???


Her worry north of the border is the SNP, she will not want to upset the Scottish pensioners if she wants to take votes off the SNP. South of the border and her only worry is Labour who she is expecting to take seats from by the bucket load. It`s a gamble, she can afford to upset a few people in England, enough will still vote for her, not so in Scotland.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Team_Trouble

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 311507


That's disgusting.


----------



## Satori

*TOM HARRIS: Now we socialists have a real leader offering Left-wing policies... Theresa May*

"
These are exciting times for socialists. Red-blooded, Left-wing policies have been so watered down by various Labour leaders that they resemble homeopathic medicines - too weak to change anything yet still inspiring the faith of a deluded few.

Now, at last, we have a leader who will stand up to the elites, to big business, to exploitative bosses. A leader who will raise taxes where necessary, who will make sure the workers have their say, who will intervene in free markets to protect consumers.

Just listen to our future Prime Minister: 'We do not believe in untrammelled free markets. We reject the cult of selfish individualism. We abhor social division, injustice, unfairness and inequality. We believe not just in society but in the good that government can do. Paying your fair share of tax is the price of living in a civilised society.'

The ghost of Thatcher's Government is at being laid to rest. And who is presiding over the exorcism? No, not Jeremy Corbyn - Theresa May! For the first time in 40 years, working-class Labour voters are being offered a Tory manifesto they can sign up to.

Gone are New Labour's attempts to bribe older, wealthier voters with winter heating allowances paid out irrespective of how well-off they were.

Gone is the 'triple lock' on pensions ensuring pensioners received bigger pay rises than those in work. Labour may be committed to that scam, but not the Tories.

Instead we have promises that firms previously owned by the Government - energy companies, for instance - can no longer rip off consumers and will be hog-tied by new regulation. Thatcher may be spinning in her grave, but Tony Benn will be dancing in his.

For the first time in 40 years, working-class Labour voters are being offered a Tory manifesto they can sign up to

Even the ultimate prize of the Conservative Party's Right wing - Britain's departure from the EU- will acquire a bitter taste. Instead of using the money we'll save on our £10 billion-plus contributions to the EU on tax cuts, it will go to a fund to reduce inequality. Labour's manifesto features no such socialist innovation.

May's departure from Tory norms has been made easier, of course, by Labour's retreat from the centre ground of British politics. Working-class voters have always had more than their fair share of conservatism (with a small 'c') when it came to social values, money and patriotism. So it should come as no surprise that Mrs May has taken full advantage of Corbyn's retreat into shady Left-wing irrelevance.

But Mrs May has taken her troops well beyond the line in the sand marked 'centre ground'.

Hers is a bold, some might say reckless, strategy. And it has been made possible only because, the polls say, she would have to try very hard to lose this Election.

And former Labour voters seem to like what they see.

Who would have thought that socialism - securing, on behalf of the workers, the full fruits of their industry - would be realised under a Tory Government? 
"


----------



## kimthecat

labour MP jessie phillips still blaming the press for Corbyns unpopularity . 

She didnt think they should drop students uni fee but after meeting some students she realised how hard it is to start life off with a massive debt and also buying their own home is out of their reach for many young people.


----------



## 1290423

Colliebarmy said:


> utter borrox
> 
> RICHER pensioners dont need £400 winter allowance, certainly those living in Spain or care homes...


Who gets £400? We only get  £250


----------



## MilleD

KittenKong said:


> She is for all but the poorest of families.


I think you'd be surprised how many kids qualify.


----------



## Happy Paws2

MilleD said:


> I think you'd be surprised how many kids qualify.


and I wonder how many pensioners will still qualify for the fuel allowance. :Rage


----------



## Elles

I don't see that the school lunch thing will save that much, when they're going to get free breakfast instead. The poorest will still be entitled to a free school lunch, they will now get breakfast too. On school days their parents will only have to provide an evening meal.


----------



## havoc

Happy Paws said:


> and I wonder how many pensioners will still qualify for the fuel allowance


The political damage is caused by taking away what somebody already has.


----------



## Happy Paws2

havoc said:


> The political damage is caused by taking away what somebody already has.


and that's just what she wants to do.


----------



## 1290423

Happy Paws said:


> and I wonder how many pensioners will still qualify for the fuel allowance. :Rage


Suspect it will be means tested and that the figure will be rather low, so the only people who will really miss it is those who have worked really hard all their lives, managed to save a small nest egg to put them over the limit , yet not enough that they dare go out and spend anything on little luxuries as the little bit they have saved is being used on neccessaties like fuel council tax rising prices ect etc etc


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Satori said:


> From the FT on the dementia tax.
> 
> "
> The policy was inserted by Mrs May into the Tory manifesto at the last minute on the advice of Nick Timothy, her co-chief of staff, and against the advice of John Godfrey, head of the Number 10 policy unit, according to two people close to Number 10.
> 
> Mr Timothy, an architect of Mrs May's policy pitch to working-class voters, has long argued the Tories should tax inheritance more heavily while cutting taxes on work and enterprise. He drew up the manifesto in conditions of top secrecy.
> 
> "
> 
> Imagine the backlash if Labour had done this? The press would have crucified Corbyn. For me, this removes any doubt that May is trying the throw the fight. She doesn't want the job any more but doesn't have the balls to stand outside no 10 and publicly quit.


Did you see Andrew Marr interview with Damien Green this morning?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p053k6y7

He raises some very important isses

1. Why have the Conservatives produced a document picking Labour's manifesto costings to bits yet their own manifesto is not costed.

2. At what threshold will the winter fuel allowance be removed? Why is this figure not being made available to the people who will be affected by it before the election? All they will say is those in "genuine need" will still get it but they will not define what "genuine need" means.

3. When the Labour Party wanted to remove it from higher and top rate tax payers in the 2015 election the Conservatives were totally opposed to it - David Cameron said at the time "once they have started chipping away at these benefits before long they will get rid of them altogether" and "the only way to make big savings from this is to aggressively restrict or abolish them". Big change in policy from just 2 years ago.

The interview is well worth listening to as it really does put him under pressure about the new way of paying for social care from the value of your estate.

I think TM believes that Labour voters in the northern strongholds will vote for her because the changes to paying for social care from your estate when you die but allowing you to keep £100,000 instead of £23,000 will appeal in areas where property prices are much lower. She thinks the Conservative voters in their safe seats will vote Conservative anyway as they won't like the alternative and she can take seats from Labour because of Brexit and this policy.



Colliebarmy said:


> utter borrox
> 
> RICHER pensioners dont need £400 winter allowance, certainly those living in Spain or care homes...


Which pensioners do you think do need the winter fuel allowance? Do you know which pensioners are going to lose it? Why do you think they won't tell you that before the election?



KittenKong said:


> Yes, but living standards have dropped considerably, they don't need this additional burden.
> 
> Plus the fact this was introduced by the previous Tory government under David Cameron....


It was Nick Clegg's policy and was estimated to save families £450 per year - do you seriously believe that every family in the country with infant aged children should be given the equivalent of £450 tax free when there are so many more important things we should be spending that money on. Free school dinners will still be available for those who need them.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Who gets free school meals

https://www.gov.uk/apply-free-school-meals

Your child might be able to get free school meals if you get any of the following:


Income Support
income-based Jobseeker's Allowance
income-related Employment and Support Allowance
support under Part VI of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999
the guaranteed element of Pension Credit
Child Tax Credit (provided you're not also entitled to Working Tax Credit and have an annual gross income of no more than £16,190)
Working Tax Credit run-on - paid for 4 weeks after you stop qualifying for Working Tax Credit
Universal Credit
Children who get paid these benefits directly, instead of through a parent or guardian, can also get free school meals.

Your child might also get free school meals if you get any of these benefits and your child is both:


younger than the compulsory age for starting school
in full-time education


----------



## Elles

The change to free school lunches will benefit the poorest who would get a free breakfast as well if they get to school early enough. I presume the breakfasts will be given before school starts and to all regardless of whether they get free lunch or not? It's fairer than giving all the infants free lunch. I don't think it will save very much and schools might not be pleased at having to start work earlier to provide free breakfasts and supervise all the youngsters coming in for them.


----------



## Satori

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Did you see Andrew Marr interview with Damien Green this morning?
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p053k6y7
> 
> He raises some very important isses
> 
> 1. Why have the Conservatives produced a document picking Labour's manifesto costings to bits yet their own manifesto is not costed.
> 
> 2. At what threshold will the winter fuel allowance be removed? Why is this figure not being made available to the people who will be affected by it before the election? All they will say is those in "genuine need" will still get it but they will not define what "genuine need" means.
> 
> 3. When the Labour Party wanted to remove it from higher and top rate tax payers in the 2015 election the Conservatives were totally opposed to it - David Cameron said at the time "once they have started chipping away at these benefits before long they will get rid of them altogether" and "the only way to make big savings from this is to aggressively restrict or abolish them". Big change in policy from just 2 years ago.
> 
> The interview is well worth listening to as it really does put him under pressure about the new way of paying for social care from the value of your estate.
> 
> I think TM believes that Labour voters in the northern strongholds will vote for her because the changes to paying for social care from your estate when you die but allowing you to keep £100,000 instead of £23,000 will appeal in areas where property prices are much lower. She thinks the Conservative voters in their safe seats will vote Conservative anyway as they won't like the alternative and she can take seats from Labour because of Brexit and this policy.
> 
> Which pensioners do you think do need the winter fuel allowance? Do you know which pensioners are going to lose it? Why do you think they won't tell you that before the election?
> 
> It was Nick Clegg's policy and was estimated to save families £450 per year - do you seriously believe that every family in the country with infant aged children should be given the equivalent of £450 tax free when there are so many more important things we should be spending that money on. Free school dinners will still be available for those who need them.


Just paused the interview with Green to catch up on this thread funnily enough; partly to stop me from throwing things at the tele. Absolute train wreck of an interview.


----------



## Zaros

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 311507


This ^^^ is excellent and illustrates quite perfectly who the real parasites are in this life.:Smug


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Satori said:


> Just paused the interview with Green to catch up on this thread funnily enough; partly to stop me from throwing things at the tele. Absolute train wreck of an interview.


I know I thought Marr wiped the floor with him.


----------



## kimthecat




----------



## Elles

5.8 million for what? Which meals? It doesn't sound anything like as much I would have expected.


----------



## noushka05

..
Under Theresa May's plans, 52% of people are at future risk of the state seizing their home when they die, says Tory Think Tank.


----------



## Satori

Happy Paws said:


> and I wonder how many pensioners will still qualify for the fuel allowance. :Rage


Work back from the assumed total savings and the answer is not many. About 15% of those who currently get it would be a good guess.


----------



## Elles

It'll bring down the cost of houses in the future. a: no-one will want to buy one b: the government will be selling a lot of houses to recoup care charges


----------



## noushka05

Talking of Damian Green.


----------



## Elles

Obviously none have their fingers in the energy pies then. The elderly heating allowance goes into the pockets of those who provide the heating.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> ..
> Under Theresa May's plans, 52% of people are at future risk of the state seizing their home when they die, says Tory Think Tank.
> View attachment 311515


If you watch the interview with Damien Green I've linked to on the Andrew Marr show he apparently used to be a member of The Bow Group himself. Not anymore - I wonder why


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> ..
> Under Theresa May's plans, 52% of people are at future risk of the state seizing their home when they die, says Tory Think Tank.
> View attachment 311515


It has really gone full circle hasn't it? Margaret Thatcher encouraged the masses to buy their own homes and Theresa May snatches them back. My plan has been to not vote but I could be on the verge of voting Labour. If the government is to be led by a crazed Marxist I would rather one who was open about it.


----------



## Elles

Theresa May must feel very flattered to be compared to Margaret Thatcher. She's not a patch on the Iron Lady. Whether you think that's a good or bad thing, depends on whether you liked Maggie T. There's a couple of daft polls asking whether you'd prefer Theresa May or Maggie as PM, last time I looked Margaret Thatcher had more than double the votes. :Hilarious


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> Anyone seen party posters up in peoples homes ,


Not one, now you mention it.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

I've seen a few big signs up in fields for the Tory who is our current MP (probably owns the fields or they are his friends) and some smaller boards for the Lib Dem but nothing like would normally be about for a general election.


----------



## Calvine

KittenKong said:


> Is that fair???


No; it makes no sense.


----------



## kimthecat

@Calvine and @rottiepointerhouse 
The Election reminds me of a party where everyone promises to come but hardly anyone turns up. i wonder how low the turn out will be ?


----------



## Elles

I think this will be one of the first elections where people are voting against rather than for.


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> The Election reminds me of a party where everyone promises to come but hardly anyone turns up. i wonder how low the turn out will be ?


It's so often unbelievably low, less than 70%; I know several 'reasonably intelligent' people who won't vote. They voted in the Referendum tho'.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Which pensioners do you think do need the winter fuel allowance? Do you know which pensioners are going to lose it? Why do you think they won't tell you that before the election?
> 
> It was Nick Clegg's policy and was estimated to save families £450 per year - do you seriously believe that every family in the country with infant aged children should be given the equivalent of £450 tax free when there are so many more important things we should be spending that money on. Free school dinners will still be available for those who need them.


But as I said before a slight difference in earnings can make the difference between qualifying or not. Besides those that do will have to fill out pages of forms then wait for a decision which could take weeks. This is further complicated by zero hour contracts where pay can differ considerably week after week, eg: You wouldn't qualify one week but you might the next.

In the early '90s I was doing casual work and spent periods with no work. I signed on and applied for Poll Tax benefit (the unemployed had to pay 20%). A new bill would be issued reflecting this then I would be offered more work which I of course accepted like a shot. Being unemployed is nothing to be proud of.

I signed off and never received the benefits owed to me. I also no longer qualified for Poll Tax benefit so was issued yet another bill for the year!

I can see the same thing happening with means tested school meals and the winter fuel allowance.

Of course the government have better things to spend money on like tax cuts for millionaires.....


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> But as I said before a slight difference in earnings can make the difference between qualifying or not. Besides those that do will have to fill out pages of forms then wait for a decision which could take weeks. This is further complicated by zero hour contracts where pay can differ considerably week after week, eg: You wouldn't qualify one week but you might the next.
> 
> In the early '90s I was doing casual work and spent periods with no work. I signed on and applied for Poll Tax benefit (the unemployed had to pay 20%). A new bill would be issued reflecting this then I would be offered more work which I of course accepted like a shot. Being unemployed is nothing to be proud of.
> 
> I signed off and never received the benefits owed to me. I also no longer qualified for Poll Tax benefit so was issued yet another bill for the year!
> 
> I can see the same thing happening with means tested school meals and the winter fuel allowance.
> 
> Of course the government have better things to spend money on like tax cuts for millionaires.....


Or social care which is in crisis whereas most families are perfectly capable of feeding their own children and should do so, as I asked yesterday but got no reply where do you draw the line? free meals for all children, free meals for pregnant women, free meals for students, free meals for anyone on benefits, free meals for all pensioners or what about just free meals for everyone?


----------



## noushka05

More on the subject. Paul Lewis tweeted this along with the Times article.
*
Paul Lewis*‏@*paullewismoney* 4h4 hours ago

More warnings on Tory 'home to pay for care plan' https://goo.gl/1IJNPG CCHQ has told me
it WILL apply to those going into care homes

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...5?shareToken=977330382cd10c5d19fe6b306c868f02

It seems the tories planning some time ago.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> More on the subject. Paul Lewis tweeted this along with the Times article.
> *
> Paul Lewis*‏@*paullewismoney* 4h4 hours ago
> 
> More warnings on Tory 'home to pay for care plan' https://goo.gl/1IJNPG CCHQ has told me
> it WILL apply to those going into care homes
> 
> https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...5?shareToken=977330382cd10c5d19fe6b306c868f02
> 
> It seems the tories planned this some time ago.
> 
> View attachment 311518


Is this not the part Damien Green mentions in the interview about the Dilnot Commission recommending amongst other things an insurance type equity release scheme to pay for care costs? If it is then he also said there was no appetite for it in the industry so they had to discard it as an option.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> or what about just free meals for everyone?


Pretty sure I saw that in the Labour manifesto.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> Pretty sure I saw that in the Labour manifesto.


:Hilarious:Hilarious You never know they might stretch to a free packet of crisps though 

Lib dems have this in their manifesto


Extend free school meals to all children in primary education and promote school breakfast clubs.
Never mind, I'm still voting for them.


----------



## Satori

I am just trying to imagine the conversation between Theresa May and Nick Timothy:

Nick, I need your help to produce a Manifesto that seals my ambition to become clear leader of the opposition.

You mean Prime Minister?

I know what I mean. Leader of the opposition pays the same but has no responsibility. How can we throw this one? I'll sort you out afterwards.

Well we could really screw the pensioners. Nobody likes them them any more anyway and they vote for you in droves. We could freeze them out by withdrawing the winter fuel allowance.

Good stuff Nick, what else? Let's go for it.

Well if we could wealth-tax their savings and inheritance-tax their homes; basically leave them with nothing. Then change the triple lock to a double lock, that'll really p1ss them off. The triple lock is irrelevant now that inflation is 2.7% anyway and will go up after Brexit but those daft old biddies won't know that.

Lovely stuff Nick. Who else can we alienate?

Hmmmm, how about taking food from poor school kids and legislating to slaughter foxes? Too extreme?

Nah, let's do it.

Well if we are going to be that silly let's lock Hammond in a cupboard for the next few weeks and issue a manifesto with no costings......


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Or social care which is in crisis whereas most families are perfectly capable of feeding their own children and should do so, as I asked yesterday but got no reply where do you draw the line? free meals for all children, free meals for pregnant women, free meals for students, free meals for anyone on benefits, free meals for all pensioners or what about just free meals for everyone?


Social care is in crisis thanks to the austerity measures introduced by the government while they still reduced tax for millionaires.

It's unfair of them to blame older people suffering from dementia and targeting young children because their parents are in insecure employment.

No one is arguing food should be free for everyone. If I have a meal in my workplace canteen I pay for it and wouldn't expect not to.


----------



## Satori

KittenKong said:


> Social care is in crisis thanks to the austerity measures introduced by the government while they still reduced tax for millionaires.


They didn't reduce tax for millionaires actually. That's a lie.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> I am just trying to imagine the conversation between Theresa May and Nick Timothy:
> 
> Nick, I need your help to produce a Manifesto that seals my ambition to become clear leader of the opposition.
> 
> You mean Prime Minister?
> 
> I know what I mean. Leader of the opposition pays the same but has no responsibility. How can we throw this one? I'll sort you out afterwards.
> 
> Well we could really screw the pensioners. Nobody likes them them any more anyway and they vote for you in droves. We could freeze them out by withdrawing the winter fuel allowance.
> 
> Good stuff Nick, what else? Let's go for it.
> 
> Well if we could wealth-tax their savings and inheritance-tax their homes; basically leave them with nothing. Then change the triple lock to a double lock, that'll really p1ss them off. The triple lock is irrelevant now that inflation is 2.7% anyway and will go up after Brexit but those daft old biddies won't know that.
> 
> Lovely stuff Nick. Who else can we alienate?
> 
> Hmmmm, how about taking food from poor school kids and legislating to slaughter foxes? Too extreme?
> 
> Nah, let's do it.
> 
> Well if we are going to be that silly let's lock Hammond in a cupboard for the next few weeks and issue a manifesto with no costings......


Well I'll give Labour there dues at least they attempted to cost there manifesto


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> They didn't reduce tax for millionaires actually. That's a lie.


----------



## Elles

I think the free school meals thing isn't a big deal. I think families should get enough money that no-one gets free school meals, or what about school holidays? Starve them? 

A bigger deal is elderly care imo. The elderly have already paid to be looked after when they're old, sick and infirm. The wealthy have private pensions and pay for private care, like my friend's parents who paid for a phillipino couple to live in and care for them. The rest is already paid for, it's just greedy to take their house when more than 90% are cared for at home and the majority are single women or widows, so no partners to worry about. 

If I end up in care and then dying, I expect my husband to sell up and travel the world, not spend the rest of his life living in a now government owned property. I don't think long lived in houses should be taken into account (second homes and short term investments would be different), and I think the amount of savings taken into account should be increased. Otherwise what is the point in saving up or buying a house? Both benefit the country generally and shouldn't be discouraged imo. It's a ploy to get up north where houses are cheaper voting for them imo.


----------



## suewhite

What about if MPs led by example and gave up there £400 per month food allowance?


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Elles said:


> A bigger deal is elderly care imo. The elderly have already paid to be looked after when they're old, sick and infirm. The wealthy have private pensions and pay for private care, like my friend's parents who paid for a phillipino couple to live in and care for them. The rest is already paid for, it's just greedy to take their house when more than 90% are cared for at home and the majority are single women or widows, so no partners to worry about
> .


If they are paying for their own care why would their house be taken from them? I thought the house would only need to be sold to cover the cost of care if provided by local authority. Surely they can`t touch it if the owner had been paying for their own care! Oh hang on do you mean the rest as in those not paying for private care but have paid into the state?


----------



## Team_Trouble

suewhite said:


> What about if MPs led by example and gave up there £400 per month food allowance?


Why on EARTH do THEY need a food allowance???! 

And £400? :Greedy How many people could that feed in a month?

Mind = blown :Jawdrop


----------



## Elles

Here's a radical solution.

Set up feeding centres. Have school age children health checked and interviewed by counsellors. Weed out the neglected and abused at home and hold their parents to account. Feed the kids and take the money for it from the parents. Make sure every parent has enough money to feed their own kids and make sure that's what they use it for, if they don't, we'll have it back thanks. Give training in nutrition. Protect kids that are being dragged into abuse and grooming gangs, with strict policing and social care. Offer training in language and social integration for immigrant and refugee children, instead of financing grammar schools.

Or we could just feed every child forever just in case and business as usual.

Oh it's all bull isn't it. :Hilarious

Yes, I mean those who have paid in, but get a tie on their houses with no restrictions on how much can be charged for their care, so end up losing everything. @3dogs2cats


----------



## Happy Paws2

Satori said:


> Work back from the assumed total savings and the answer is not many. About 15% of those who currently get it would be a good guess.


And what figures are you working on. How much would you think would be fair.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Social care is in crisis thanks to the austerity measures introduced by the government while they still reduced tax for millionaires.
> 
> It's unfair of them to blame older people suffering from dementia and targeting young children because their parents are in insecure employment.
> 
> No one is arguing food should be free for everyone. If I have a meal in my workplace canteen I pay for it and wouldn't expect not to.


Social care has been in crisis for years. Back in the 80's there was a trend to close the bigger geriatric hospitals (not a term we hear used much these days but that was the term used then) which were often rambling old buildings often previous workhouses as 1. They were expensive to maintain 2. Many patients hated going into them because of the workhouse associations and 3. They were hard to staff because it was viewed as less glamorous and was often back breaking work. So they decided to open shorter stay elderly care wards in general hospitals and go much more for "care in the community". However this was never adequately funded by *any* government. Local authorities shut down their own old peoples homes too, add to this an ever increasing elderly population with increasingly complex health problems and we were well on our way to a crisis. When I was still nursing we often had elderly patients taking acute surgical beds because we couldn't organise care for them at home - that was in the late 80's and up to the mid 90's. My MIL died in 1997 leaving a 82 year old blind husband with mobility problems so we had to look after him and eventually organise care, he had several hospital admissions because of falls often for several weeks and every time his discharge home was delayed because of problems organising carers - this was under the last Labour government. In the end we went for private carers until his money ran down low enough then we carried on with the same carers but got direct funding from the local authority to pay for a good part of the cost. We tried the local authority provided carers but they were seriously useless if they even turned up.

I would like to see social care come out of local authority/social services control and into the NHS (bringing its funding with it of course). Part of the current crisis is as much to do with lack of staff and that is partly because they are not paid enough for the work they do and partly because of zero hours contracts I think all carers should be adequately trained and supervised and be on a proper contract with set hours. I'd like to see them employed by hospitals and working together with ward staff to maintain continuity of care - perhaps even rotate so they do some placements on the wards and some of the ward staff do some community work too so they both understand each others problems better and can help get people home quicker.

So back to free school meals - I'd rather see the £450 per year saving to parents (£900 if you have two little ones at school) spent on properly funding social care and keep free school meals for children of all ages who actually need them.


----------



## Team_Trouble

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Social care has been in crisis for years. Back in the 80's there was a trend to close the bigger geriatric hospitals (not a term we hear used much these days but that was the term used then) which were often rambling old buildings often previous workhouses as 1. They were expensive to maintain 2. Many patients hated going into them because of the workhouse associations and 3. They were hard to staff because it was viewed as less glamorous and was often back breaking work. So they decided to open shorter stay elderly care wards in general hospitals and go much more for "care in the community". However this was never adequately funded by *any* government. Local authorities shut down their own old peoples homes too, add to this an ever increasing elderly population with increasingly complex health problems and we were well on our way to a crisis. When I was still nursing we often had elderly patients taking acute surgical beds because we couldn't organise care for them at home - that was in the late 80's and up to the mid 90's. My MIL died in 1997 leaving a 82 year old blind husband with mobility problems so we had to look after him and eventually organise care, he had several hospital admissions because of falls often for several weeks and every time his discharge home was delayed because of problems organising carers - this was under the last Labour government. In the end we went for private carers until his money ran down low enough then we carried on with the same carers but got direct funding from the local authority to pay for a good part of the cost. We tried the local authority provided carers but they were seriously useless if they even turned up.
> 
> I would like to see social care come out of local authority/social services control and into the NHS (bringing its funding with it of course). Part of the current crisis is as much to do with lack of staff and that is partly because they are not paid enough for the work they do and partly because of zero hours contracts I think all carers should be adequately trained and supervised and be on a proper contract with set hours. I'd like to see them employed by hospitals and working together with ward staff to maintain continuity of care - perhaps even rotate so they do some placements on the wards and some of the ward staff do some community work too so they both understand each others problems better and can help get people home quicker.
> 
> So back to free school meals - I'd rather see the £450 per year saving to parents (£900 if you have two little ones at school) spent on properly funding social care and keep free school meals for children of all ages who actually need them.


Totally agree with your ideas for care for the elderly. Carers should be valued with proper contracts and treated with more respect, properly trained etc. It shouldn't be a job that 'just anyone' can do with no qualifications, because I think it takes a very patient, caring nature and many carers I have seen (even in settings for children) have been lacking in these essential qualities, which really makes or breaks the level of care an individual receives.


----------



## Guest

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Your child might be able to get free school meals if you get any of the following:Income Support
> 
> income-based Jobseeker's Allowance
> income-related Employment and Support Allowance
> support under Part VI of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999
> the guaranteed element of Pension Credit
> 
> 
> 
> Elles said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think the free school meals thing isn't a big deal. I think families should get enough money that no-one gets free school meals, or what about school holidays? Starve them? A bigger deal is elderly care imo. .
> 
> 
> 
> Rottiepointerhouse:
> 
> Giving free meals for only poor children would make them feel and look poor, and I believe some would rather have just that cheap bag of crisp than admit that their family is poor. Children can be funny that way, as it is not a nice to feel you are a charity case. Also it would affect learning for all, as their will be plenty of children, who´ll have mainly junk food for their lunch. This means that the whole class will suffer, because the teacher would have to focus more on the slow learners, and results of group work will be poorer? Or is the real reason that something that would benefit all is actually not so important as maintaining class differences? This is the cheapest way to get more children to do well at school and that is again the cheapest way to help them to get a job, which again is the cheapest way to have enough tax payers to cover for the public sector (=NHS, roads, pension, schools etc). I just don´t get the logic behind the idea of not even wanting to provide good free meals for all children. Maybe you need to be British why middle class people don´t want that.
> 
> Elles`quote:
> 
> As I explained before, free meals help all kids to learn, which is a big thing IMO. During holidays they don´t need to learn. If they starve, hopefully parents will either get support or the kids won´t have to live with them. I agree that elderly care is very important too. You shouldn´t be made to choose, though. What an earth Britain as a much richer country than Finland is actually doing with it´s money? Where does it go? You should do better than us!
> 
> (sorry, bad use of quotes)
Click to expand...


----------



## Satori

Happy Paws said:


> And what figures are you working on. How much would you think would be fair.


£2bn and I don't think anyone should lose it. (Personally, I'd roll it in to the state pension and stop all the bureaucracy.). Green hinted this morning btw that only pensioners in poverty need it. That'd be 14%.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Will not be voting Green then, we might not be in poverty but I would say we were comfortable either.


----------



## Satori




----------



## Guest

Reply to Rottiepointerhouse´s quote: 

Giving free meals for only poor children would make them feel and look poor, and I believe some would rather have just that cheap bag of crisp than admit that their family is poor. Children can be funny that way, as it is not a nice to feel you are a charity case. Also it would affect learning for all, as their will be plenty of children, who´ll have mainly junk food for their lunch. This means that the whole class will suffer, because the teacher would have to focus more on the slow learners, and results of group work will be poorer? Or is the real reason that something that would benefit all is actually not so important as maintaining class differences? This is the cheapest way to get more children to do well at school and that is again the cheapest way to help them to get a job, which again is the cheapest way to have enough tax payers to cover for the public sector (=NHS, roads, pension, schools etc). I just don´t get the logic behind the idea of not providing good free meals for all children. Maybe you need to be British to understand that? 

Reply to Elles`quote:

As I explained before, free meals help all kids to learn, which is a big thing IMO. During holidays they don´t need to learn. If they starve, hopefully parents will either get support or the kids won´t have to live with them. I agree that elderly care is very important too. You shouldn´t be made to choose, though. What an earth Britain as a much richer country than Finland is actually doing with it´s money? Where does it go? You should do better than us!

(sorry, bad use of quotes before)


----------



## suewhite

In my opinion they really have lived up to there name the nasty party they went after the disabled, allowed community charges to rise to pay for social care and now they are homing in on the elderly and children who I wonder will be next, I have been a life long voter of them but will never vote for them again, once they are in power there will be no stopping them.x


----------



## Team_Trouble

MrsZee said:


> Reply to Rottiepointerhouse´s quote:
> 
> Giving free meals for only poor children would make them feel and look poor, and I believe some would rather have just that cheap bag of crisp than admit that their family is poor. Children can be funny that way, as it is not a nice to feel you are a charity case. Also it would affect learning for all, as their will be plenty of children, who´ll have mainly junk food for their lunch. This means that the whole class will suffer, because the teacher would have to focus more on the slow learners, and results of group work will be poorer? Or is the real reason that something that would benefit all is actually not so important as maintaining class differences? This is the cheapest way to get more children to do well at school and that is again the cheapest way to help them to get a job, which again is the cheapest way to have enough tax payers to cover for the public sector (=NHS, roads, pension, schools etc). I just don´t get the logic behind the idea of not providing good free meals for all children. Maybe you need to be British to understand that?
> 
> Reply to Elles`quote:
> 
> As I explained before, free meals help all kids to learn, which is a big thing IMO. During holidays they don´t need to learn. If they starve, hopefully parents will either get support or the kids won´t have to live with them. I agree that elderly care is very important too. You shouldn´t be made to choose, though. What an earth Britain as a much richer country than Finland is actually doing with it´s money? Where does it go? You should do better than us!
> 
> (sorry, bad use of quotes before)


I think all children should have a hot meal at lunchtime. At my primary school, we all ate school dinners (it was a private school). I just don't think that all children should get that meal for free. Isn't there a way of paying online for school dinners now, so that nobody would know who pays and who doesn't? If this was compulsory for all schools, I think this could work. I do agree that the poorest children should have their meal for free. 
At one school, there is a child who refuses to eat school dinnners. This child is a junior, so no longer eligible for the free school meal, although I believe their parents would qualify for free school meals but haven't filled out the form. On most days, their lunchbox consists of a jam sandwich, a satsuma, a bag of crisps, a chocolate bar and a cereal bar (for snack time). This child has very limited eating habits. If they were given the choice of school meals or nothing, I'm sure they would refuse to eat and wait until they got home, which would I think be worse than eating the not very healthy lunchbox. It seems there is no right answer, like most things.


----------



## Guest

KatieandOliver said:


> I think all children should have a hot meal at lunchtime. At my primary school, we all ate school dinners (it was a private school). I just don't think that all children should get that meal for free. Isn't there a way of paying online for school dinners now, so that nobody would know who pays and who doesn't? If this was compulsory for all schools, I think this could work. I do agree that the poorest children should have their meal for free.
> At one school, there is a child who refuses to eat school dinnners. This child is a junior, so no longer eligible for the free school meal, although I believe their parents would qualify for free school meals but haven't filled out the form. On most days, their lunchbox consists of a jam sandwich, a satsuma, a bag of crisps, a chocolate bar and a cereal bar (for snack time). This child has very limited eating habits. If they were given the choice of school meals or nothing, I'm sure they would refuse to eat and wait until they got home, which would I think be worse than eating the not very healthy lunchbox. It seems there is no right answer, like most things.


Maybe that could be a start, but I do believe middle class should get it free too, the cost just isn´t so big and without the red tape for separating children, you could spend more on food. Teachers always need to consider the whole class, and if all had a proper meal, kids would be able to concentrate more and all children would benefit.


----------



## Honeys mum




----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Happy Paws said:


> Will not be voting Green then, we might not be in poverty but I would say we were comfortable either.


He meant Damien Green the Conservative minister rather than the Green Party.



MrsZee said:


> Reply to Rottiepointerhouse´s quote:
> 
> Giving free meals for only poor children would make them feel and look poor, and I believe some would rather have just that cheap bag of crisp than admit that their family is poor. Children can be funny that way, as it is not a nice to feel you are a charity case. Also it would affect learning for all, as their will be plenty of children, who´ll have mainly junk food for their lunch. This means that the whole class will suffer, because the teacher would have to focus more on the slow learners, and results of group work will be poorer? Or is the real reason that something that would benefit all is actually not so important as maintaining class differences? This is the cheapest way to get more children to do well at school and that is again the cheapest way to help them to get a job, which again is the cheapest way to have enough tax payers to cover for the public sector (=NHS, roads, pension, schools etc). I just don´t get the logic behind the idea of not providing good free meals for all children. Maybe you need to be British to understand that?
> 
> Reply to Elles`quote:
> 
> As I explained before, free meals help all kids to learn, which is a big thing IMO. During holidays they don´t need to learn. If they starve, hopefully parents will either get support or the kids won´t have to live with them. I agree that elderly care is very important too. You shouldn´t be made to choose, though. What an earth Britain as a much richer country than Finland is actually doing with it´s money? Where does it go? You should do better than us!
> 
> (sorry, bad use of quotes before)


I used to have free school dinners Mrs Zee so I do understand how it feels. I really can't say as any of the kids even knew I was having them free and I was never made to feel like a charity case. School dinners can still be provided but parents should pay for them which is part of their responsibility when having and raising children. If we lived in an idea world everyone would have a free hot meal whatever their age but we don't and we have far more pressing needs IMO. Nutrition is vital for future health but as I keep saying nutrition should start at home, a good breakfast, money for school dinner or a packed lunch and a good evening meal, 7 days per week, 365 days of the year not just during term time. Look at the school menu I posted - plenty of chips, pizza, burgers and hot dogs on there for those that want it. Why on earth should the tax payer fund that?


----------



## Team_Trouble

I wonder if there has been any research into whether giving all infant school age children a free meal has impacted on their learning or behaviour. That would be very interesting.


----------



## havoc

suewhite said:


> I have been a life long voter of them but will never vote for them again, once they are in power there will be no stopping them


Never say never. There are plenty of lifelong Labour voters prepared to lend their vote to the Conservatives this time because they've been told it will make a difference to the Brexit negotiations. I bet they thought they'd never do that


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Social care has been in crisis for years. Back in the 80's there was a trend to close the bigger geriatric hospitals (not a term we hear used much these days but that was the term used then) which were often rambling old buildings often previous workhouses as 1. They were expensive to maintain 2. Many patients hated going into them because of the workhouse associations and 3. They were hard to staff because it was viewed as less glamorous and was often back breaking work. So they decided to open shorter stay elderly care wards in general hospitals and go much more for "care in the community". However this was never adequately funded by *any* government. Local authorities shut down their own old peoples homes too, add to this an ever increasing elderly population with increasingly complex health problems and we were well on our way to a crisis. When I was still nursing we often had elderly patients taking acute surgical beds because we couldn't organise care for them at home - that was in the late 80's and up to the mid 90's. My MIL died in 1997 leaving a 82 year old blind husband with mobility problems so we had to look after him and eventually organise care, he had several hospital admissions because of falls often for several weeks and every time his discharge home was delayed because of problems organising carers - this was under the last Labour government. In the end we went for private carers until his money ran down low enough then we carried on with the same carers but got direct funding from the local authority to pay for a good part of the cost. We tried the local authority provided carers but they were seriously useless if they even turned up.
> 
> I would like to see social care come out of local authority/social services control and into the NHS (bringing its funding with it of course). Part of the current crisis is as much to do with lack of staff and that is partly because they are not paid enough for the work they do and partly because of zero hours contracts I think all carers should be adequately trained and supervised and be on a proper contract with set hours. I'd like to see them employed by hospitals and working together with ward staff to maintain continuity of care - perhaps even rotate so they do some placements on the wards and some of the ward staff do some community work too so they both understand each others problems better and can help get people home quicker.
> 
> So back to free school meals - I'd rather see the £450 per year saving to parents (£900 if you have two little ones at school) spent on properly funding social care and keep free school meals for children of all ages who actually need them.


Social care used to be provided by Social Services. Nowadays it's contracted out to the private sector. Must cost local authorities thousands paying these contractors who in turn mostly pay their staff minimum wage.

Still, no profit to be made from social care, except for the private home care agencies.

Perhaps some who support the ending of free school meals and the winter fuel allowance would also argue that patients in hospital should be charged for their meals too?

Incredibly a letter in a famous tabloid suggested they do this!


----------



## havoc

KittenKong said:


> Perhaps some who support the ending of free school meals and the winter fuel allowance would also argue that patients in hospital should be charged for their meals too?
> 
> Incredibly a letter in a famous tabloid suggested they do this!


There is an argument for doing so, the problem with such an idea is that patients would become paying customers and would demand a decent product. Can you imagine the situation where there's one price for the 'set' menu with the current few choices and another a la carte menu? Would patients also be charged per hot drink do you suppose or to have a water jug refilled?


----------



## Dr Pepper

KittenKong said:


> Perhaps some who support the ending of free school meals and the winter fuel allowance would also argue that patients in hospital should be charged for their meals too?


Actually why not? Providing you don't need a special menu for your illness I can't really see a issue. You have to pay for your food at home ill or not. It's a hospital not a all inclusive hotel.

Not expecting this post to be popular.

Actually a system were you could pay for a decent meal rather than the bog standard slop could work well and be profitable. Still give free food to those that don't want to upgrade. Win win (apart from those that'll moan about a two tier system for those that can afford it).


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Actually why not? Providing you don't need a special menu for your illness I can't really see a issue. You have to pay for your food at home ill or not. It's a hospital not a all inclusive hotel.
> 
> Not expecting this post to be popular.


I understand the reasoning. Where I think it will fall down will be on quality of service. If I'm paying (directly) for a meal I expect a certain standard.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> Social care used to be provided by Social Services. Nowadays it's contracted out to the private sector. Must cost local authorities thousands paying these contractors who in turn mostly pay their staff minimum wage.
> 
> Still, no profit to be made from social care, except for the private home care agencies.
> 
> Perhaps some who support the ending of free school meals and the winter fuel allowance would also argue that patients in hospital should be charged for their meals too?
> 
> Incredibly a letter in a famous tabloid suggested they do this!


I'm well aware of that - I used to be a home care organiser for social services in London. I don't think you will find the private home care agencies make that much money anymore - certainly not the ones doing social services contracts - Panorama a few weeks back looked at it and found about a third I think were on the verge of bankruptcy. To be clear I am against free school meals for infants and not against free school meals for those who need them and I most certainly am not in favour of abolishing winter fuel payments.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> Obviously none have their fingers in the energy pies then. The elderly heating allowance goes into the pockets of those who provide the heating.


Oh I wouldn't say that Elles lol The tory party is bankrolled by the fracking industry - murky relationships between tories & their pro fracking donors. They intend to gift our country to the toxic industry.












rottiepointerhouse said:


> If you watch the interview with Damien Green I've linked to on the Andrew Marr show he apparently used to be a member of The Bow Group himself. Not anymore - I wonder why G


I saw the interview. Marr did well - for a change lol I didn't realise Green had been a member of the Bow group either. I remember the Bow group being very good on the awful badger cull policy. They did not approve at all, their opinion was based on the science & not political ideology.



Satori said:


> It has really gone full circle hasn't it? Margaret Thatcher encouraged the masses to buy their own homes and Theresa May snatches them back. My plan has been to not vote but I could be on the verge of voting Labour. If the government is to be led by a crazed Marxist I would rather one who was open about it.


Seems that way.

You should definitely go with Comrade Corbyn over that sly Comrade May:Hilarious at least he's humane lol



Elles said:


> Theresa May must feel very flattered to be compared to Margaret Thatcher. She's not a patch on the Iron Lady. Whether you think that's a good or bad thing, depends on whether you liked Maggie T. There's a couple of daft polls asking whether you'd prefer Theresa May or Maggie as PM, last time I looked Margaret Thatcher had more than double the votes. :Hilarious


I lived through the miners strike, I have no love for Thatcher or her policies, quite the opposite, but I can respect that she had conviction & she held the respect of many world leaders. May is nothing more than a puppet for media barons & the hard right & shes an embarrassment on the world stage. She will see this country trashed, she is utterly contemptible.


----------



## Guest

We had a visit from Mr Labour today. Better than who we bumped into on wednseday at the train atation, wednseday it was Mr tory. Mr tory gave me a leaflet which went straight in the bin. Mr Labour gave us a leaflet too.


----------



## noushka05

havoc said:


> Never say never. There are plenty of lifelong Labour voters prepared to lend their vote to the Conservatives this time because they've been told it will make a difference to the Brexit negotiations. I bet they thought they'd never do that


This is true. I live in a labour stronghold, I've heard of loads saying they're voting for May because they believe shes going to get a good brexit deal. This election is all about brexit to many round here. I'm really worried.


----------



## Elles

Under my plan every school meal will be paid for, no free meals. Parents on benefits will be given money to allocate to it, which they will keep outside of term time to feed their children in the school holidays. If they don't pay it will be deducted from pay, or benefits and sent directly to the school. This will also raise red flags. There'd be no outside caterers neither, or rubbish fed to the kids. If parents want to send them with a packed lunch, feel free, you'll be buying on top of paying for school lunch. Kids sent to private school don't get the money back from their state education.

What the tories are suggesting is that the poor and those entitled to free lunch will also get a free breakfast. What are their benefits for and with not having to find money for breakfast or lunch in term time and accustomed to it being sorted, how annoyed are they going to get in school holidays when suddenly they have to find extra cash? Maybe it's being coloured by my childhood experiences, where kids who got free school dinners got little else, were bullied over it and half starved in the holidays. I'm not sure going this breakfast way is a good idea.

Leave the winter fuel allowance as it is, but make energy companies pay it as an extra percentage of tax, put a cap on how much they can charge, but with a bonus for being green. The conservatives are trying to bribe councils and the public into supporting fracking. They can frack off.

Paying for your food in hospital would have to be means tested, it would be a bureaucratic nightmare. Food is included in your NI. Most people in hospital need to eat. I suppose you could fill out a form like you do for free prescriptions and while they're at it get those not entitled to pay for medication too. You don't get it for free at home, why should it be free in hospital?


----------



## havoc

noushka05 said:


> I lived through the miners strike, I have no love for Thatcher or her policies, quite the opposite, but I can respect that she had conviction & she held the respect of many world leaders. *May is nothing more than a puppet for media barons & the hard right & shes an embarrassment on the world stage*.


I was a Thatcherite, always voted Tory. Love her or hate her, at least she knew her own mind and was nobody's puppet.


----------



## noushka05

Tory voter threatens to burn her house down over tory manifesto.


----------



## suewhite

Dr Pepper said:


> Actually why not? Providing you don't need a special menu for your illness I can't really see a issue. You have to pay for your food at home ill or not. It's a hospital not a all inclusive hotel.
> 
> Not expecting this post to be popular.
> 
> Actually a system were you could pay for a decent meal rather than the bog standard slop could work well and be profitable. Still give free food to those that don't want to upgrade. Win win (apart from those that'll moan about a two tier system for those that can afford it).


I would have no objection to being charged for food, but if you paid for a decent meal would it be decent? I was under the impression that meals are now brought in by catering firms and they are pretty awful especially when your ill I ended up taking meals into a friend of mine, not sure what the budget per head is to feed people (I know it is very low) but I suspect they would up the price for the same food if people had to pay.


----------



## Elles

Well you could knock me down with a feather duster. Every time I've ever mentioned Margaret Thatcher and admiration in the same sentence I've practically been spat on. Yet here we are on petforums. :Wideyed


----------



## noushka05

Honeys mum said:


>


Here's an idea HM.


----------



## Odin_cat

My only experience of hospital food was on the day I gave birth. One piece of toast shortly after my daughter was born and nothing for lunch as I'd missed the ordering slot... Not a chance they could make people pay.


----------



## Team_Trouble

Two years ago I was in hospital for a few days. I wasn't able to eat to begin with, but when I was the food more than adequate. I don't know why some hospitals can provide decent food and others can't.


----------



## kimthecat

Just seen this on Twitter ! I don't remember this .

Women protesting outside Margaret Thatcher's home, London, 1980. Photo: Jane Bown


----------



## 3dogs2cats

[QUOTE="Elles, post: 1064868350, member: 1291226"

What the tories are suggesting is that the poor and those entitled to free lunch will also get a free breakfast.
[/QUOTE]

I thought they are planning on giving ALL primary schoolchildren a free breakfast.


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> Well you could knock me down with a feather duster. Every time I've ever mentioned Margaret Thatcher and admiration in the same sentence I've practically been spat on. Yet here we are on petforums. :Wideyed


I would have been the first to slag off any praise for Thatcher once, but now we have May as PM.......


----------



## suewhite

kimthecat said:


> Just seen this on Twitter ! I don't remember this .
> 
> Women protesting outside Margaret Thatcher's home, London, 1980. Photo: Jane Bown


I don't think there was a fuel allowance then I might be wrong?


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong




----------



## noushka05

Tories are hiding NHS performance data. They want us to be ignorant of the disaster they've created when we vote, so it will be too late to save our NHS.

*NHS performance data delay 'disappointing', regulator says*

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-39976701


----------



## Elles

3dogs2cats said:


> [QUOTE="Elles, post: 1064868350, member: 1291226"
> 
> What the tories are suggesting is that the poor and those entitled to free lunch will also get a free breakfast.


I thought they are planning on giving ALL primary schoolchildren a free breakfast.[/QUOTE]

Yep, those entitled to free lunch will 'also' get free breakfast. The not poor and entitled will get free breakfasts. My grammar was poor.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Elles said:


> I thought they are planning on giving ALL primary schoolchildren a free breakfast.


Yep, those entitled to free lunch will 'also' get free breakfast. The not poor and entitled will get free breakfasts. My grammar was poor. [/QUOTE]

No its me! I`m stuck in bed with a virus that is causing me to have slightly blurred vison, to keep myself occupied I`m flicking between seal watching and trying to read the debates on here - obviously doing a bad job of it


----------



## leashedForLife

*KittenKong* said,

_Social care *used to be provided by Social Services*. 
Nowadays it's contracted out to the private sector. *Must cost local authorities thousands, paying these contractors* --- *who, in turn, mostly pay their staff minimum wage.*
Still, *no profit* to be made from social care, *except for the private home care agencies.*_
...
________________________________________
.
.
I work as a contracted employee, for a healthcare agency - last year, when Mass min-wage was $10-usa per hour, their *lowest rate *was $26-usa per hour, of which the actual worker got $10 - that's gross wages. After taxes, i can very-safely assume i'd get $7.50-usa per hour. :Meh Impressed, yet? --- me, neither.
.
I have no idea what the agency's base rate is now; my big thrill was seeing Mass min-wage rise to $11/hour, but that came along with a poisonous Thank-You notice sent the Saturday after Thanksgiving [great timing, that]. // An 8-am text from the C.E.O & founder isn't a normal event, as she's rarely in the office past 3-pm, & _*never *_on a weekend.  Whaddaya think this is - work!?
.
Anyway, in our mass text-blurb, she assured us just how much she valued our hard work, & genuine dedication to our clients - then followed with the announcement re the min-wage hike effective Jan-1st, & said we'd see "an increase in our pay". As she won't employ anyone for more than 40-hours per week, that's a max of $36 / week, or $72 per payroll, less taxes = $54 net.
54 x 26 = *$1,404 / year additional *from the min-wage increase.
As a result... **drum roll** She was taking away the overnight pay for those who do LIVE-IN shifts ... that would include me.
The overnight stipend was 2-hours x $10 = $20 / night, & in my case, that's 3 nights per week - or $60 gross, $45 net per week, $90 per payroll.
90 x 26 = *$2,340 net wages i'm losing per year.* // Isn't it nice that she values her employees so highly?... 
.
God knows what she'd do to us, if she did NOT think we were reliable, dedicated, & trustworthy. :Banghead
.
As for her profit, she's doing fine - spent 3-weeks on vacay in Italy last October. :Meh I haven't had a vacay in a decade - layoffs, yes, actual vacation?... No.
.
And of course, i'm still on call each of the 3 nights. // For which, contrary to her expectation, i demand to be paid when i'm jarred from my warm bed, thanks very much.
.
.


----------



## Elles

kimthecat said:


> Just seen this on Twitter ! I don't remember this .
> 
> Women protesting outside Margaret Thatcher's home, London, 1980. Photo: Jane Bown





suewhite said:


> I don't think there was a fuel allowance then I might be wrong?


I don't think Margaret Thatcher lived at Antiquarius either.


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> I don't think Margaret Thatcher lived at Antiquarius either


I've obviously missed something as I don't understand that comment. Is here something saying she did? It did leap out at me though because Antiquarius was an indoor antique market I knew well on the corner of King's Road and Flood Street. The Thatchers had a house on Flood Street.


----------



## Elles

Maybe then the wall was hers. The signage says 'private no rubbish please. Antiquarius'

Apparently the picture is printed in a book printed more recently and long after the photographer's death. It's probably the worst photograph in there, when you compare how clever the others are as photography. I haven't seen the book.


----------



## havoc

Ah, they may not have been immediately outside her house but that notice does then indeed confirm they were on the street where she lived.


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> Actually why not? Providing you don't need a special menu for your illness I can't really see a issue. You have to pay for your food at home ill or not. It's a hospital not a all inclusive hotel.
> 
> Not expecting this post to be popular.
> 
> Actually a system were you could pay for a decent meal rather than the bog standard slop could work well and be profitable. Still give free food to those that don't want to upgrade. Win win (apart from those that'll moan about a two tier system for those that can afford it).


How . About we give everyone in the country one free meal a day at a restaurant of their choice that sounds good to me


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

suewhite said:


> I don't think there was a fuel allowance then I might be wrong?


I think it was that ridiculous scheme where the temperature had to be below freezing for 7 consecutive days and then you had to apply for it. Most didn't bother.


----------



## MollySmith

Labour recognise neurodivergencies and hidden disabilities through setting up a steering group with John McDonnell MP. The committee are almost all ND and were able to contribute to the manifesto with other working parties. They had hoped to contribute more radical suggestions had they not been surprised by the snap election. In order for this not to be seen as political bias, instead of slating Labour (if you don't like them for whatever reason) it would be good to state any alternative policies put forward by the other parties.


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 311596


labour cheering ? What like this ? They can hardly stay awake when Corbyn talks .

The continuous posters you post , they not as accurate as you think .


----------



## MollySmith

Elles said:


> Maybe then the wall was hers. The signage says 'private no rubbish please. Antiquarius'
> 
> Apparently the picture is printed in a book printed more recently and long after the photographer's death. It's probably the worst photograph in there, when you compare how clever the others are as photography. I haven't seen the book.


Jane Brown was an incredible photographer who worked for the Observer for many years. She was renewed for a straightforward and practical approach, using simple equipment and no tricks. For most of her career she worked exclusively in black-and-white, using only natural light setting as few barriers as possible between her and the subject. I've seen a lot of her work on exhibition at King Place - any photographic work is only as good as the scan and the book printing process which can vary dramatically. I recommend seeing her work up close and developed as she intended.


----------



## MollySmith

kimthecat said:


> labour cheering ? What like this ? They can hardly stay awake when Corbyn talks .
> 
> The continuous posters you post , they not as accurate as you think .


Who is asleep? Sorry I can't see anything but people holding notes, writing or tablets.


----------



## kimthecat

MollySmith said:


> Who is asleep? Sorry I can't see anything but people holding notes, writing or tablets.


I didn't say they were asleep. Ok let me change that too they look bored sh*tless. Why are all looking at their tablets and phones , shouldn't they be listening to him ?


----------



## Elles

Yes, even on the 'net her photographs are gorgeous and very cleverly taken, with a wonderful depth and use of natural light. I was very impressed. The photograph in the link is quite drab and boring in comparison. More like a meme someone would make, placing elderly women beneath a sign saying 'rubbish'.



MollySmith said:


> Jane Brown was an incredible photographer who worked for the Observer for many years. She was renewed for a straightforward and practical approach, using simple equipment and no tricks. For most of her career she worked exclusively in black-and-white, using only natural light setting as few barriers as possible between her and the subject. I've seen a lot of her work on exhibition at King Place - any photographic work is only as good as the scan and the book printing process which can vary dramatically. I recommend seeing her work up close and developed as she intended.


----------



## MollySmith

kimthecat said:


> I didn't say they were asleep. Ok let me change that too they look bored sh*tless. Why are all looking at their tablets and phones , shouldn't they be listening to him ?


Because they may have been preparing to speak or attend something else? I am frequently bored sh*tless in meetings and thinking about the next one and I'd be certain that the same photo could be taken by any side of the house


----------



## kimthecat

MollySmith said:


> Because they may have been preparing to speak or attend something else? I am frequently bored sh*tless in meetings and thinking about the next one and I'd be certain that the same photo could be taken by any side of the house


yes . I agree. My response was to KittenKongs rather silly poster ? Did you actually see it ?


----------



## MollySmith

Elles said:


> Yes, even on the 'net her photographs are gorgeous and very cleverly taken, with a wonderful depth and use of natural light. I was very impressed. The photograph in the link is quite drab and boring in comparison. More like a meme someone would make, placing elderly women beneath a sign saying 'rubbish'.


I suspect it's striking as the original, the life of a photo on the web is lengthy. I do hope nobody does repurpose it as a meme. I'm utterly allergic to memes myself as a designer and typography - I tend to go on this philosophy


----------



## MollySmith

kimthecat said:


> yes . I agree. My response was to KittenKongs rather silly poster ? Did you actually see it ?


OOH yes! Ooops! A _very_ tired dyspraxia brain.


----------



## Satori

leashedForLife said:


> *KittenKong* said,
> 
> _Social care *used to be provided by Social Services*.
> Nowadays it's contracted out to the private sector. *Must cost local authorities thousands, paying these contractors* --- *who, in turn, mostly pay their staff minimum wage.*
> Still, *no profit* to be made from social care, *except for the private home care agencies.*_
> ...
> ________________________________________
> .
> .
> I work as a contracted employee, for a healthcare agency - last year, when Mass min-wage was $10-usa per hour, their *lowest rate *was $26-usa per hour, of which the actual worker got $10 - that's gross wages. After taxes, i can very-safely assume i'd get $7.50-usa per hour. :Meh Impressed, yet? --- me, neither.
> .
> I have no idea what the agency's base rate is now; my big thrill was seeing Mass min-wage rise to $11/hour, but that came along with a poisonous Thank-You notice sent the Saturday after Thanksgiving [great timing, that]. // An 8-am text from the C.E.O & founder isn't a normal event, as she's rarely in the office past 3-pm, & _*never *_on a weekend.  Whaddaya think this is - work!?
> .
> Anyway, in our mass text-blurb, she assured us just how much she valued our hard work, & genuine dedication to our clients - then followed with the announcement re the min-wage hike effective Jan-1st, & said we'd see "an increase in our pay". As she won't employ anyone for more than 40-hours per week, that's a max of $36 / week, or $72 per payroll, less taxes = $54 net.
> 54 x 26 = *$1,404 / year additional *from the min-wage increase.
> As a result... **drum roll** She was taking away the overnight pay for those who do LIVE-IN shifts ... that would include me.
> The overnight stipend was 2-hours x $10 = $20 / night, & in my case, that's 3 nights per week - or $60 gross, $45 net per week, $90 per payroll.
> 90 x 26 = *$2,340 net wages i'm losing per year.* // Isn't it nice that she values her employees so highly?...
> .
> God knows what she'd do to us, if she did NOT think we were reliable, dedicated, & trustworthy. :Banghead
> .
> As for her profit, she's doing fine - spent 3-weeks on vacay in Italy last October. :Meh I haven't had a vacay in a decade - layoffs, yes, actual vacation?... No.
> .
> And of course, i'm still on call each of the 3 nights. // For which, contrary to her expectation, i demand to be paid when i'm jarred from my warm bed, thanks very much.
> .
> .


Then don't work there.


----------



## kimthecat

MollySmith said:


> OOH yes! Ooops! A _very_ tired dyspraxia brain.


Actually , Im not sure if it showed in my reply , sometimes it just gives the link and you have to click on it .

I bet they were all playing candy crush !!


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I think it was that ridiculous scheme where the temperature had to be below freezing for 7 consecutive days and then you had to apply for it. Most didn't bother.


 I think they still do it for people on benefits but it goes through automatically .


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> How . About we give everyone in the country one free meal a day at a restaurant of their choice that sounds good to me


Wasn't that in the Labour manifesto as well? Go team Corbyn.


----------



## kimthecat

Elles said:


> Maybe then the wall was hers. The signage says 'private no rubbish please. Antiquarius'
> 
> Apparently the picture is printed in a book printed more recently and long after the photographer's death. It's probably the worst photograph in there, when you compare how clever the others are as photography. I haven't seen the book.


I couldn't read the sign at the wall , it was too tiny.
So its a real photo but the signs they were holding were faked.


----------



## Elles

kimthecat said:


> I couldn't read the sign at the wall , it was too tiny.
> So its a real photo but the signs they were holding were faked.


They look fake, but maybe not. The Guardian or the Observer printed photos in a review of the book and that was one of them, so could be genuine.


----------



## havoc

There seems to be a desire for the photo to be a fake. Why?


----------



## 1290423

. Think the truth of the matter is whichever party gets in we are in for a rough ride. the election following this one will be the important one


----------



## Elles

havoc said:


> There seems to be a desire for the photo to be a fake. Why?


Because it's not a very good photo, 3 elderly ladies protesting about pensions is barely a protest and in 1980 Margaret Thatcher had barely stepped over the number 10 threshold. Also I'd forgotten about the extra pennies people got when it was cold, the winter fuel payment as it is now didn't exist and I thought the placard related to that, which would have made it fake. It wasn't particularly that I personally wanted it to be fake, more that I thought it was. 

No one likes being fooled. :Hilarious


----------



## havoc

All the evidence points towards it being genuine doesn't it? It's credited to a photojournalist and chosen by a newspaper to feature in a book review. You'd think they'd know. There is evidence in the picture to verify correct location. Three elderly ladies may not be much of a protest but isn't that rather the point of the picture? I've seen photographs of singleton protesters with their home made placards and the lack of a large crowd didn't make me automatically assume the photos were faked.

Of all the pictures and graphics put on this thread it's strange this is the one to attract such suspicion, especially as it's completely irrelevant to the current election.


----------



## kimthecat

havoc said:


> There seems to be a desire for the photo to be a fake. Why?


I don't think that's correct. Its more to do with getting to a bottom of a mystery . I would feel bad if it was fake as I'm the one that posted it .
Do you remember there being a fuel allowance in Thatchers time? I don't personally remember it and I cant find any mention of it on- line.
The present winter allowance was introduced by Brown in the 90's.

ETA I think the original photo is genuine but not sure about the placards . They could have been photoshopped. 
I've not seen the photo in the book to compare it to the photo taken from Twitter.


----------



## havoc

kimthecat said:


> I think the original photo is genuine but not sure about the placards . They could have been photoshopped


I had a closer look and if they are photoshopped someone has taken great care. The string around the neck of the woman on the left is caught under where the collar of her coat joins the lapel. It's exactly what does happen but an unlikely detail for a faker to bother with.


----------



## leashedForLife

*Satori *said,

_Then don't work there._
________________________
.
.
By cracky, @Satori , why didn't _* I *_ think of that?!... Incredible. // I post this flagrant instance of an employer ripping-off their staff, & U think of a solution, right off the top of Ur head. :Woot Unbelievable.
.
It's also unbelievable that i've been working for this agency since March 2013. :Meh Do U really think i haven't LOOKED for other, full-time employment?
And BTW, my 2nd job - on the other 3 days per week -- is direct hire of the PCA by the disabled person, & does NOT pay min-wage. // Thanks for the advice.

.
.
.


----------



## leashedForLife

*kimthecat* said,

... _not sure about the placards. They could have been* photoshopped.*_
...
____________________________
.
.
really? -- their gloves, the bag in the left hand of the woman to the right as her placard hangs round her neck, the chisel-tip majik-marker hand-printing on poster-board?...
Personally, it sure looks real to me. 
.
.
.


----------



## kimthecat

leashedForLife said:


> *-*
> .
> .
> really? -- their gloves, the bag in the left hand of the woman to the right as her placard hangs round her neck, the chisel-tip majik-marker hand-printing on poster-board?...
> Personally, it sure looks real to me.
> .
> .
> .


Ok they could have been carrying the placards but the words were changed . :Hilarious


----------



## Elles

There was a fuel allowance then. In 1979 it was from 85p for those on benefits and was mostly claimed by pensioners. I can only find a reference to it on a parliamentary debate at the time though. Reading some of the debates and manifesto pledges from the time is quite interesting. More interesting than reading today's fairy tales, because we know what actually came of them.


----------



## kimthecat

They take some reading those parliamentary debates !


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> I don't think that's correct. Its more to do with getting to a bottom of a mystery . I would feel bad if it was fake as I'm the one that posted it .
> Do you remember there being a fuel allowance in Thatchers time? I don't personally remember it and I cant find any mention of it on- line.
> The present winter allowance was introduced by Brown in the 90's.
> 
> ETA I think the original photo is genuine but not sure about the placards . They could have been photoshopped.
> I've not seen the photo in the book to compare it to the photo taken from Twitter.


I remember my dear Nan being angry because Maggie had advised OAPs to wrap themselves in tin foil to keep warm. Whether that's because she was taking some allowance off them I just don't know. I'll have to ask my cousin if she can remember.


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> Just seen this on Twitter ! I don't remember this .
> 
> Women protesting outside Margaret Thatcher's home, London, 1980. Photo: Jane Bown


@kimthecat: don't you just love hats nos. 2 and 3!! They looke like The Terrible Twins. I like the way no. 1 is wearing her placard like a pinnie too!


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> labour cheering ? What like this ? They can hardly stay awake when Corbyn talks .
> 
> The continuous posters you post , they not as accurate as you think .


I suspect @KittenKong is comparing Mays staged audiences v Corbyn crowds of real people.

Spot the difference? Wherever Corbyn goes hes greeted by huge crowds while strong & stable Theresa is shielded from the public. If May was attracting masses of people the MSM would be playing it on a loop!

Leamington Spa


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> . Think the truth of the matter is whichever party gets in we are in for a rough ride. the election following this one will be the important one


I couldn't disagree more Sue (but whats new hey). This is the most important election for generations. So much is at stake, from the survival of our NHS, our wildlife & environment, our democracy, brexit. We have a tiny window of opportunity to try to halt catastrophic climate breakdown - the tories are going to exacerbate it. In a few short years elephants will be wiped out in the wild - the tories are going to exacerbate their demise. If the tories get back in they will give themselves sweeping powers to bypass Parliament by implementing Statutory Instruments. This election is nothing more than a power grab - if they get into power we may never get them out for a long long time. The damage they will do doesn't bear thinking about.


----------



## suewhite

noushka05 said:


> I couldn't disagree more Sue (but whats new hey). This is the most important election for generations. So much is at stake, from the survival of our NHS, our wildlife & environment, our democracy, brexit. We have a tiny window of opportunity to try to halt catastrophic climate breakdown - the tories are going to exacerbate it. In a few short years elephants will be wiped out in the wild - the tories are going to exacerbate their demise. If the tories get back in they will give themselves sweeping powers to bypass Parliament by implementing Statutory Instruments. This election is nothing more than a power grab - if they get into power we may never get them out for a long long time. The damage they will do doesn't bear thinking about.


Stand back in amazement I actually agree with you Noushka.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> I couldn't disagree more Sue (but whats new hey). This is the most important election for generations. So much is at stake, from the survival of our NHS, our wildlife & environment, our democracy, brexit. We have a tiny window of opportunity to try to halt catastrophic climate breakdown - the tories are going to exacerbate it. In a few short years elephants will be wiped out in the wild - the tories are going to exacerbate their demise. If the tories get back in they will give themselves sweeping powers to bypass Parliament by implementing Statutory Instruments. This election is nothing more than a power grab - if they get into power we may never get them out for a long long time. The damage they will do doesn't bear thinking about.


Well you've finally convinced me to vote Labour. Why? Because I didn't realise Mrs May, or even this country, are going to be responsible for the demise of the elephant. Thank the lord for Mr Corbyn who is going to save them. How much is it going to cost by the way, oh wait doesn't matter there's the corporation tax rise coming.

On the plus side I've just remembered Mrs Pepper asked to me to pick up a copy of La La Land on the way home.


----------



## noushka05

suewhite said:


> Stand back in amazement I actually agree with you Noushka.


Aw bless you Sue



Dr Pepper said:


> Well you've finally convinced me to vote Labour. Why? Because I didn't realise Mrs May, or even this country, are going to be responsible for the demise of the elephant. Thank the lord for Mr Corbyn who is going to save them. How much is it going to cost by the way, oh wait doesn't matter there's the corporation tax rise coming.
> 
> On the plus side I've just remembered Mrs Pepper asked to me to pick up a copy of La La Land on the way home.


That's because you have no interest in informing yourself. You've proved that time & time again.

(Doesn't matter about the tories *uncosted* manifesto does it  )

http://actionforelephantsuk.org/letter-to-theresa-may-calling-for-ban-on-uk-ivory-trade/

*The UK's domestic ivory trade*
As the largest exporter of ivory in the EU, as well as allowing a thriving legal ivory trade at home, the UK plays a major role in feeding consumer demand for ivory. *This makes the UK a complicit player in the ongoing poaching that is driving elephants to extinction in the wild.*

The government pledged in two election manifestos - in 2010 and 2015 - to bring about the complete closure of the UK's domestic ivory market. As of 2017 it had still failed to honour this pledge.* Since 2010, over 200,000 elephants have been poached for their ivory.*

Action for Elephants UK has been in the forefront of campaigns to pressure the government to keep its pledge. We have carried out demonstrations at Westminster, DEFRA and auction houses (which are a chief outlet for ivory sales), written open letters to two prime ministers and DEFRA, and held marches that took the message to the door of No. 10. But the government is not listening.

Despite the clear condemnation by all NGOs and conservationists of the government's failure to act on closing the domestic ivory trade, and despite the fact that 85% of the British population want a total ban, and despite its commitment to support African countries in their efforts to end poaching, this government is instead prioritizing the commercial interests of a tiny number of British antiques dealers. These traders are the obstacle to a full ban, and are lobbying for the sale of antique (defined as pre-1947) ivory to continue.

In early 2017, the government announced it would hold a consultation process on what amounts to a partial ban - the discussion will only address possible ways to regulate more tightly the trade in antique ivory. This flies in the face of abundant evidence that as long as any trade in ivory is allowed to continue, illegal ivory will enter the market as well. *And if demand continues, the poaching of African elephants will continue - until it's too late, and the species will pass the point of recovery, beyond which lies EXTINCTION. All for the sake of useless ivory ornaments and the greed of a very small number of merchants*


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Aw bless you Sue
> 
> That's because you have no interest in informing yourself. You've proved that time & time again.
> 
> (Doesn't matter about the tories *uncosted* manifesto does it  )
> 
> http://actionforelephantsuk.org/letter-to-theresa-may-calling-for-ban-on-uk-ivory-trade/
> 
> *The UK's domestic ivory trade*
> As the largest exporter of ivory in the EU, as well as allowing a thriving legal ivory trade at home, the UK plays a major role in feeding consumer demand for ivory. *This makes the UK a complicit player in the ongoing poaching that is driving elephants to extinction in the wild.*
> 
> The government pledged in two election manifestos - in 2010 and 2015 - to bring about the complete closure of the UK's domestic ivory market. As of 2017 it had still failed to honour this pledge.* Since 2010, over 200,000 elephants have been poached for their ivory.*
> 
> Action for Elephants UK has been in the forefront of campaigns to pressure the government to keep its pledge. We have carried out demonstrations at Westminster, DEFRA and auction houses (which are a chief outlet for ivory sales), written open letters to two prime ministers and DEFRA, and held marches that took the message to the door of No. 10. But the government is not listening.
> 
> Despite the clear condemnation by all NGOs and conservationists of the government's failure to act on closing the domestic ivory trade, and despite the fact that 85% of the British population want a total ban, and despite its commitment to support African countries in their efforts to end poaching, this government is instead prioritizing the commercial interests of a tiny number of British antiques dealers. These traders are the obstacle to a full ban, and are lobbying for the sale of antique (defined as pre-1947) ivory to continue.
> 
> In early 2017, the government announced it would hold a consultation process on what amounts to a partial ban - the discussion will only address possible ways to regulate more tightly the trade in antique ivory. This flies in the face of abundant evidence that as long as any trade in ivory is allowed to continue, illegal ivory will enter the market as well. *And if demand continues, the poaching of African elephants will continue - until it's too late, and the species will pass the point of recovery, beyond which lies EXTINCTION. All for the sake of useless ivory ornaments and the greed of a very small number of merchants*


What a uneducated piece of propaganda that is. The UK are very much on the case of confiscating any ivory that even has the slightest whiff of being less than seventy years old (that time span is from memory so may have changed/be incorrect). That is a fact I know from first hand experience. You really need to broaden your horizons regarding the media you seek out.


----------



## RottieMummy

I'm another who is voting anyone but the Tory's. I'd vote a plank of wood with a face drawn on before I vote conservative. Working in the NHS means I see every single day the damage that party has caused by DELIBERATELY underfunding it. It won't survive another Tory victory.


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> labour cheering ? What like this ? They can hardly stay awake when Corbyn talks .
> 
> The continuous posters you post , they not as accurate as you think .


That's Parliament which is a completely different environment! Corbyn's attracting huge crowds in public where May hides away from them!


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> What a uneducated piece of propaganda that is. The UK are very much on the case of confiscating any ivory that even has the slightest whiff of being less than seventy years old (that time span is from memory so may have changed/be incorrect). That is a fact I know from first hand experience. You really need to broaden your horizons regarding the media you seek out.


Wow such wilful ignorance. Nothing I can do about that.

*Prince William charity urges UK to back ivory trade ban

Conservationists urge Tories to resist antique dealers' lobby and make good on manifesto promise *https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/07/uk-ivory-trade-fuels-poaching

Conservation organisations, including a charity championed by Prince William, say that by allowing the trade to continue the UK is fuelling the annual slaughter of thousands of rhinos and elephants. A recent study suggested that the UK is now the third-largest supplier of illegal ivory items to the US.










.


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> Because it's not a very good photo, 3 elderly ladies protesting about pensions is barely a protest and in 1980 Margaret Thatcher had barely stepped over the number 10 threshold. Also I'd forgotten about the extra pennies people got when it was cold, the winter fuel payment as it is now didn't exist and I thought the placard related to that, which would have made it fake. It wasn't particularly that I personally wanted it to be fake, more that I thought it was.
> 
> No one likes being fooled. :Hilarious


I wouldn't be surprised if the photos are genuine. Thatcher and her government became the most unpopular government ever in their early days. Another I remember was, "The first lady puts women last".

The Falklands war changed their fortunes, mostly thanks to the tabloids and TV coverage....


----------



## kimthecat

@KittenKong BTW I'm not a Tory voter.


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> That's Parliament which is a completely different environment! Corbyn's attracting huge crowds in public where May hides away from them!


yeah huge !


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> @KittenKong


They're Tory activists in a building!

That's rather different to appearing in public attracting huge crowds, unless you believe this is staged publicly!


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> @KittenKong BTW I'm not a Tory voter.


Does that not looked staged to you? lol



kimthecat said:


> yeah huge !


Just shows how badly the media are letting us down. In every town & city Corbyn has visited the crowds have been huge. Even in little Hebden Bridge.


----------



## KittenKong

Why May is shielded from the public.
One of many on You Tube.

Not covered by the BBC.....


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Wow such wilful ignorance. Nothing I can do about that.
> 
> *Prince William charity urges UK to back ivory trade ban
> 
> Conservationists urge Tories to resist antique dealers' lobby and make good on manifesto promise *https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/07/uk-ivory-trade-fuels-poaching
> 
> Conservation organisations, including a charity championed by Prince William, say that by allowing the trade to continue the UK is fuelling the annual slaughter of thousands of rhinos and elephants. A recent study suggested that the UK is now the third-largest supplier of illegal ivory items to the US.
> 
> View attachment 311675
> 
> 
> .
> View attachment 311674


Wow, you actually contradict yourself but can't see it.

The UK is in no way shape or form supporting a ivory trade in fact we are probably world leaders in fighting it. Yes it's legal to sell antique ivory that's decades old. The government are very hot on confiscating ANY ivory without provenance. Perhaps I'll post this on a ivory Facebook page then you might believe it.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong




----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> Why May is shielded from the public.
> One of many on You Tube.


sure but your original poster implied that her own lot didn't cheer her , that she wasn't popular with her own side . Y ou showed one photo and I showed another contradicting that .

Im sure Corbyn ( or rather Labour ) is popular now because of his Utopian socialism . There are still people saying they won't vote for him , desite being Labour supporters and don't believe his false promises . I'm not voting Tory or labour .


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> @kimthecat: don't you just love hats nos. 2 and 3!! They looke like The Terrible Twins. I like the way no. 1 is wearing her placard like a pinnie too!


I was thinking that they look like the three old ladies who were locked in the lavatory ,
That will be me soon . I already have the hat no 2


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> I was thinking that they look like the three old ladies who were locked in the lavatory ,
> That will be me soon . I already have the hat no 2


I often wonder where they sell these hats...Joan Collins is about 80 (+?) but I'd be totally speechless if I saw her wearing one (glad tho' you managed to find one).


----------



## kimthecat

@KingKong oh as for Rentamob , do you think its ok for Corbynite thugs to abuse anyone who dares criticise Corbyn or labour 

From twitter =you are clearly deluded Allison, and severely demented u imbecile.

The Tw*t didn't even spell my name right


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> I often wonder where they sell these hats...Joan Collins is about 80 (+?) but I'd be totally speechless if I saw her wearing one (glad tho' you managed to find one).


 My aunty bought me something similar years ago , I stopped wearing it after my mate asked why I was wearing a tea cosy on my head. :Smuggrin


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> @KingKong oh as for Rentamob , do you think its ok for Corbynite thugs to abuse anyone who dares criticise Corbyn or labour.


You didn't expect crowds would be cheering May do you? She's not the Queen whatever she thinks herself.

There is much anger felt over May and her policies I feel they were justified in letting off steam.

No, I do not condone thugs who abuse anyone who criticises Corbyn.

They're no better than the far right arguing May's opponents and any opposition to her must be crushed.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Are they getting a whiff of how strongly the public oppose some of the measures in the manifesto?

George Osborne

✔@George_Osborne
U-turn coming on social care. There will be a cap. Read today's @EveningStandard for the details

11:14 AM - 22 May 2017


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> You didn't expect crowds would be cheering May do you? She's not the Queen whatever she thinks herself.
> 
> There is much anger felt over May and her policies I feel they were justified in letting off steam.
> 
> No, I do not condone thugs who abuse anyone who criticises Corbyn.
> 
> They're no better than the far right arguing May's opponents and any opposition to her must be crushed.


 No I didnt expect crowds to cheer may , again that's not what the poster was about , nor my point.

Do you really believe that Corbyn can do all he promises? . He doesn't have a red bus big enough to put all his bribes on .

LIbDems seem to be backing fox hunting so that just leaves the Greens for me . If there was a raving looney party, I'd vote for them, Oh wait , there already is ! Labour


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Wow, you actually contradict yourself but can't see it.
> 
> The UK is in no way shape or form supporting a ivory trade in fact we are probably world leaders in fighting it. Yes it's legal to sell antique ivory that's decades old. The government are very hot on confiscating ANY ivory without provenance. Perhaps I'll post this on a ivory Facebook page then you might believe it.


Give me strength. Explain to me then, why the tories in their 2010, 2015 manifestos pledged to ban the ivory trade if there isn't a problem?  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...o-scrap-pledge-illegal-poaching-a7748581.html

The only way to shut down the ivory trade is to ban ivory - *ALL* ivory - including antique ivory.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Are they getting a whiff of how strongly the public oppose some of the measures in the manifesto?
> 
> George Osborne
> 
> ✔@George_Osborne
> U-turn coming on social care. There will be a cap. Read today's @EveningStandard for the details
> 
> 11:14 AM - 22 May 2017


I cant wait to see how the media who spun the pledge as good news are going to spin this as good news now lol


----------



## Happy Paws2

kimthecat said:


> No I didnt expect crowds to cheer may , again that's not what the poster was about , nor my point.
> 
> Do you really believe that Corbyn can do all he promises? . He doesn't have a red bus big enough to put all his bribes on .
> 
> LIbDems seem to be backing fox hunting so that just leaves the Greens for me . If there was a raving looney party,* I'd vote for them, *Oh wait , there already is *! Labour *


So your voting Labour then


----------



## Elles

I don't think Labour will do any better than the Conservatives. They're promising to give us the Earth, the conservatives are promising to destroy it. It's all bull. Some people will do ok, some won't, same as it ever was. Neither Theresa May, nor Jeremy Corbyn will get absolute rule and when has any party delivered everything in their manifesto? Never is when.

I'm voting labour because our labour chap is ok and our conservative chap is behaving like a schoolgirl at a One Direction concert, with his Theresa May fandom and little else. I want to see a ban on fracking and the hunting debate concreted over, the grave Tony dug for it was too shallow. I'm actually not keen on these tax increases and throwing money at school kids and university students and anyone else who whines that they don't get enough, but it's not worth voting for anyone else in my area. Ben Bradshaw is a pretty moderate labour mp, who seems to do his best so he'll have to do.

Apologies to those who are fans of Corbyn, but all I've seen of him is the typical politician, ducking, diving and dodging questions. He doesn't come over as genuine and honest and all that kind of thing people are saying about him to me. If there was a real alternative I'd be there like a shot, but there isn't.


----------



## kimthecat

@Happy Paws 

If it wasn't for Corbyn ... !!

Like everyone else , I wasnt expecting a GE this soon and I expected to vote Labour at the next one under a different leader


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> No I didnt expect crowds to cheer may , again that's not what the poster was about , nor my point.
> 
> Do you really believe that Corbyn can do all he promises? . He doesn't have a red bus big enough to put all his bribes on .
> 
> LIbDems seem to be backing fox hunting so that just leaves the Greens for me . If there was a raving looney party, I'd vote for them, Oh wait , there already is ! Labour


Are you sure the Lib Dems back foxhunting? Perhaps one or two of them do, as within Labour- Kate Hoey being a good example, but whether they back a vote to repeal the ban I'm not sure about that.

All I can say to your comments re Labour is I firmly believe they stand a better chance with Brexit negotiations and with many of their pledges, but is there such a thing as a perfect government, or person for that matter.

How some people, (not suggesting yourself), still have faith in May and her team I find absolutely incredible. May is behaving like Donald Trump or at least is showing similar personality traits.

Johnson openly lied about the £350m for the NHS pledge in their manifesto which even surprised some in the right of centre thinking media.

And what can be achieved by soundbites? They're only that. It took May nearly nine months to trigger article 50, then calls a general election she promised she wouldn't as, "The country is coming together, but Westminster is not".

She's so delusional she can't accept nor tolerate opposition. And as to their U Turns..... If George Osbourne is right they could be yet another, but not on the foxhunting vote of course....

Calling the Tories a "Looney Party" is much too kind.....


----------



## Jesthar

kimthecat said:


> @Happy Paws
> 
> If it wasn't for Corbyn ... !!
> 
> Like everyone else , I wasnt expecting a GE this soon and I expected to vote Labour at the next one under a different leader


Thing is, though, it's a lot easier to change a party leader that it is a govenment. No political party ever delivers anywhere near all of it's manifesto, but perhaps it's better to shoot for the Utopian stars and partially miss than aim for the middle of the cesspit and partially hit


----------



## Elles

Lol, The Lady is for Turning then. 

I don't think there'll be a u-turn on foxhunting, but I don't think she'll get enough MPs for a yes vote now.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Give me strength. Explain to me then, why the tories in their 2010, 2015 manifestos pledged to ban the ivory trade if there isn't a problem?  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...o-scrap-pledge-illegal-poaching-a7748581.html
> 
> The only way to shut down the ivory trade is to ban ivory - *ALL* ivory - including antique ivory.


What tosh. The UK doesn't support the illegal ivory trade, that's a fact.

The opinion that antique ivory has to be illegal also falls flat as it would actually encourage poaching to satisfy those people that want ivory and wouldn't be able to get it legally.

To come out with remarks like "vote for Mrs May and all elephants will die" is a nonsense fantasy and a new level sunk too.


----------



## Honeys mum

rottiepointerhouse said:


> U-turn coming on social care. There will be a cap. Read today's @EveningStandard for the details


Its in the Express also. Just said on BBC news, that they won't be saying what the cap figure is until after the election.
I wonder why.

Theresa May to change controversial social care policy amid backlash | Politics | News | Express.co.uk


----------



## Elles

I have to agree I'm afraid. I don't think banning the antique ivory trade will make a huge difference to elephants today. However, for me it's one of those grey areas. Will a ban on all ivory set an example and lead other countries to a ban, which eventually, in 100 years or more mean that the only ivory trade is the illegal one. Elephants aren't going to do particularly well anyway. Humans want their space.


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 311702


Coming to a cinema near you .

Jerry Corbyn starring as Walter Mitty in The Secret Life of Walter Mitty -

*Mitty is a meek, mild man with a vivid fantasy life. In a few dozen paragraphs he imagines himself to be a successful Prime Minister . Although the story has humorous elements, there is a darker and more significant message underlying the text, leading to a more tragic interpretation of the Mitty character. Even in his heroic daydreams, Mitty does not triumph, several fantasies being interrupted before the final one sees Mitty losing an election and being sacked . *

 I'll have egg on my face if he wins !


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> Coming to a cinema near you .
> 
> Jerry Corbyn starring Walter Mitty in The Secret Life of Walter Mitty -
> 
> *Mitty is a meek, mild man with a vivid fantasy life. In a few dozen paragraphs he imagines himself to be a successful Prime Minister . Although the story has humorous elements, there is a darker and more significant message underlying the text, leading to a more tragic interpretation of the Mitty character. Even in his heroic daydreams, Mitty does not triumph, several fantasies being interrupted before the final one sees Mitty losing an election and being sacked . *
> 
> I'll have egg on my face if he wins !


I think he's done very well to have survived a leadership challenge and much hatred from most of the media. He's stood firm and hasn't wobbled.....

.....While May makes extraordinary Trump like whinging appearances on TV claiming the EU member states are against her, as are the House of Lords and Westminster.

Of course a Corbyn lead Government could be a disaster but how do we know if he's not given a chance?

I remember critics of Blair in 1997, how the minimum wage would result in job losses, many of which were enjoying free labour at the taxpayers expense, disguised as "Employment Training"- full time work for dole + £10 to name one of many examples.

Great achievements were made in the early years of Blair's government, not I would expect everyone to agree.

What we do know is May's government WILL be a disaster for all except the very rich. Crashing out of the EU with no deal most likely, pensioners having to apply for their winter fuel allowance and may not get it, nor get it in time.

Not a country I want to be part of if this vile delusional person is elected.

I should be a Tory and not give a damn about anyone or anything except for myself. The trouble is, I'm not that person. I care too much.....


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> No I didnt expect crowds to cheer may , again that's not what the poster was about , nor my point.
> 
> Do you really believe that Corbyn can do all he promises? . He doesn't have a red bus big enough to put all his bribes on .
> 
> LIbDems seem to be backing fox hunting so that just leaves the Greens for me . If there was a raving looney party, I'd vote for them, Oh wait , there already is ! Labour


Where did you get that the Lib Dems back fox hunting from Kim? This is what their manifesto actually says about protecting nature


Establish a £2bn flood prevention fund focused on providing support for small community- and council-led schemes to reduce upstream flooding and the knock-on effects in downstream and coastal areas; in addition to improving flood defences, and introducing high standards for flood resilience for buildings and infrastructure in flood risk areas.
Pass a Nature Act to put the Natural Capital Committee (NCC) on a statutory footing, set legally binding natural capital targets, including on biodiversity, clean air and water, and empower the NCC to recommend actions to meet these targets.
Significantly increase the amount of accessible green space, including completion of the coastal path, and create a new designation of National Nature Parks to protect up to a million acres of accessible green space valued by local communities.
Protect and restore England's lakes, rivers and wetlands, including through reform of water management and higher water efficiency standards, and establish a 'blue belt' of marine protected areas.
Reverse the current sharp decline in the rate of woodland creation by aiming to plant a tree for every UK citizen over the next ten years, and protect remaining ancient woodlands.
Suspend the use of neonicotinoids until proven that their use in agriculture does not harm bees or other pollinators.
Introduce stronger penalties for animal cruelty offences, increasing the maximum sentencing from six months to five years, and bring in a ban on caged hens.
Clamp down on illegal pet imports through legal identification requirements for online sales, and minimise the use of animals in scientific experimentation, including by funding research into alternatives.
Whilst it doesn't directly mention fox hunting I assume that is because it is already banned so they didn't feel the need to. This is the response I got to an email to my local Lib Dem candidate

Thank you for getting in touch. This is a very simple one for me....I totally oppose Fox Hunting and cannot understand why anyone would find this acceptable in a civilised society.
I would never vote to repeal this ban and feel that we need to strengthen the ban we have as we are regularly seeing fox hunting going on but being disguised as scent hunts, and we are seeing those people who seek to stop hunting receiving harsher treatment for trying to uphold the law than the illegal hunts.
I am sickened that Theresa May is so confident that she will win a majority that she seeks to bring in policy with 84% of the public supporting the ban. We must show her that she cannot get away with such vile policies.



Honeys mum said:


> Its in the Express also. Just said on BBC news, that they won't be saying what the cap figure is until after the election.
> I wnder why.
> 
> Theresa May to change controversial social care policy amid backlash | Politics | News | Express.co.uk


Its outrageous that they still won't say what the cap will be or give the cut off for winter fuel payments until after the election. Talk about egg on the face for Damien Green after being so adamant on the Andrew Marr show yesterday that they would not be reconsidering.


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> Do you really believe that Corbyn can do all he promises?


I will be interested to see what Utopia is like!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Chancellor Philip Hammond spoke to BBC Radio Derby shortly after Theresa May announced her change of policy on social care.

"We've always been clear there would be a consultation later this year," he said. "We were already preparing the green paper before the election was called.

"What Theresa May has said this morning is just for clarity, that one of the issues that will be consulted on in that green paper is around an overall cap on how much people can spend... She's clarified that will be one of the issues - it won't be the only issue."

So the chancellor is actually saying that the cap along with the winter fuel threshold will be "consulted on" which really doesn't mean much does it?


----------



## Guest

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I used to have free school dinners Mrs Zee so I do understand how it feels. I really can't say as any of the kids even knew I was having them free and I was never made to feel like a charity case. School dinners can still be provided but parents should pay for them which is part of their responsibility when having and raising children. If we lived in an idea world everyone would have a free hot meal whatever their age but we don't and we have far more pressing needs IMO. Nutrition is vital for future health but as I keep saying nutrition should start at home, a good breakfast, money for school dinner or a packed lunch and a good evening meal, 7 days per week, 365 days of the year not just during term time. Look at the school menu I posted - plenty of chips, pizza, burgers and hot dogs on there for those that want it. Why on earth should the tax payer fund that?





KatieandOliver said:


> I wonder if there has been any research into whether giving all infant school age children a free meal has impacted on their learning or behaviour. That would be very interesting.


I found these sources in English in one of the studies in Finnish. The main message in the study was that at that age children require proper (=nutritional) meals for both development and also educating them eat healthy. The quality of food needs to be monitored and parents need to be aware of what children eat, as parents need to support healthy eating. Most parents want that automatically, naturally, as long as they have information why it is important.

But some studies: 
_
Australian Government Departments of Health and Ageing. 2008. Australian national children's nutrition and physical activity survey: Main findings. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. http://www.health.gov.au/internet/m...F0001E0109/$File/childrens-nut-physsurvey.pdf. Viitattu 10.2.2017. Ball, S.C., Benjamin, SE. & Ward, DS. 2008. Dietary intakes in North Carolina child-care centers: Are children meeting current recommendations? Journal of the American Dietetic Association 108 (4), 718-721. Belfield, C.R. & Kelly, I.R. 2012. Early education and health outcomes of a 2001 U.S. birth cohort. Economics and Human Biology 11, 310-325. Bellisle, F. 2008. Child nutrition and growth: a butterfly effects? British Journal of Nutrition 99 (1), 40-45. Brawley, L. & Henk, J. 2014. Encouraging healthy eating behaviors in toddlers. Dimension of early childhood, 42 (2), 18-22. Creswell, J. W. 2014. Research design. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. 4. Ed. Los Angeles: Sage. Crichton, G.E. & Alkerwi, A. 2014. Dairy food intake is positively associated with cardiovascular health: findings from observation of cardiovascular risk factors in Luxembourg study. Nutrition research 34, 1036-1044. Derscheid, L.E. Umoren, J., Kim, S-Y., Henry, B.W. & Zittel, L.L. 2010. Early childhood teachers' and staff members' perceptions of nutrition and physical activity practices for preschoolers. Journal of research in childhood education 24 (3), 248-265. Dubois, L., Girard, M., Kent, M.P., Farmer, A. & Tatone-Tokuda, F. 2008. Breakfast skipping is associated with differences in meal patterns, macronutrient intakes and overweight among pre-school children. Public Health Nutrition 12 (1), 19-28. Edwards, S., Skouteris, H., Cutter_Mckenzie, A., Rutherford, L., O'Conner, M., Mantilla, A., Morris, H. & Elliot, S. 2015. Young children learning about well-being and environmental education in the early years: a funds of knowledge approach. Early Years 36 (1), 33-50. Eliassen, E. 2011. The impact of teachers and families on young children's eating behaviors. Yong Children, 66 (2), 84-8_9.



suewhite said:


> I would have no objection to being charged for food, but if you paid for a decent meal would it be decent? I was under the impression that meals are now brought in by catering firms and they are pretty awful especially when your ill I ended up taking meals into a friend of mine, not sure what the budget per head is to feed people (I know it is very low) but I suspect they would up the price for the same food if people had to pay.


That would be a problem, if the quality of food is not good. Could it be that if only poor get free meals, they don ´t dare to demand better, and others think that they should be happy with any old cr*p they are given, even when we are talking about children´s well being? I bet most middle -class parents would not put up with bad quality food knowing that it is not good for their children and that is damaging to learning.

The rotating menus are monitored here and checked that they are healthy and also that they taste nice. Mostly they are provided by schools. Budgets are really low - I could never cook a proper meal that cheap. I guess that is one reason why just about all are so happy with them, poor, middle -class and really wealthy parents, as all benefit. I´m sure that is one reason why our Pisa-results are pretty good. Our students certainly do much home work, nor are they that ambitious. They can just stay awake and focused a bit longer..


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> What tosh. The UK doesn't support the illegal ivory trade, that's a fact.
> 
> The opinion that antique ivory has to be illegal also falls flat as it would actually encourage poaching to satisfy those people that want ivory and wouldn't be able to get it legally.
> 
> To come out with remarks like "vote for Mrs May and all elephants will die" is a nonsense fantasy and a new level sunk too.


Jeepers. Let me spell this out for you. Our domestic LEGAL ivory trade is fuelling the global ILLEGAL ivory trade - there is no ambiguity about this FACT. But as you seem so confident what I have posted is false (as per), I can only assume you must have very solid evidence which refutes mine  References please?. *I wonder if they'll just back my evidence up - again lol *

May refuses to ban the domestic market in ivory because antiques make profit & lets face it profits are far more important to the tories then the existence of a species.



Elles said:


> I have to agree I'm afraid. I don't think banning the antique ivory trade will make a huge difference to elephants today. However, for me it's one of those grey areas. Will a ban on all ivory set an example and lead other countries to a ban, which eventually, in 100 years or more mean that the only ivory trade is the illegal one. Elephants aren't going to do particularly well anyway. Humans want their space.


It would make a massive difference Elles. If we don't ban it we will be complicit it the extinction of this beautiful creature.

Here is the heartfelt letter to May signed by; Stephen Hawking, Jane Goodall, David Shepherd, Damian Aspinall, Ricky Gervais, Joanna Lumley, Joaquin Phoenix, Will Travers, Virginia McKenna to name but a few. http://actionforelephantsuk.org/letter-to-theresa-may-sept-2016/

24 September 2016

Dear Prime Minister,

Action for Elephants UK is a grassroots group fighting to save elephants and to end poaching and the ivory trade that perpetuates it. With the support of wildlife NGOs, we're organising the UK marches taking place on September 24th as part of the Global March for Elephants and Rhinos (GMFER).

The third annual Global March will take place this year on the opening day of CITES CoP17 in Johannesburg. Over 140 cities around the world will unite to call for a global ban on ivory and rhino horn trade, and for other measures to help save these iconic species. Action for Elephants UK and the undersigned groups are appealing to the government for a total ban on ivory sales in the UK, which is one of the Conservative Party manifesto commitments.

Tens of thousands of elephants are still being slaughtered every year for their ivory. This rate of poaching is pushing African elephants ever closer to extinction, and the window of opportunity for saving them is rapidly shrinking. Since poaching for the ivory trade is the most pressing threat facing Africa's elephants, the closure of all ivory markets, both international and domestic, is critical for their survival.

At present, the legal ivory trade in the UK feeds one of the largest markets for ivory in Europe. Significant amounts of ivory are also sold through online marketplaces in the UK. The existence of a legal ivory trade serves as a cover for illegal sales of ivory, while continuing to perpetuate the cycle of supply and demand.

The laws that attempt to regulate the ivory trade in the UK have proved to be ineffective and unworkable, and ivory sellers - whether market traders or high-end auction houses - continue to sell ivory without the required paperwork. The police and the courts don't have the resources to monitor the trade or prosecute all cases where the law is broken.

Earlier this months, the results of the Great Elephant Census - the first aerial census of Africa's elephant populations - revealed that one-third of Africa's elephants were wiped out in just seven years (2007 to 2014) - equivalent to 144,000 elephants. Between 2010 and 2012 alone, over 100,000 elephants were brutally slaughtered for their ivory. The poaching continues today across much of Africa, with some countries seeing an increase in illegal killings.

Rhinos are also in dire peril because of poaching for their horn, which has soared in recent years - in South Africa alone, by 9000% since 2007. Furthermore, the trade in ivory and horn is fuelled by organized criminal networks and widespread corruption; known terrorist groups are involved in both the poaching of elephants and rhinos and trafficking their body parts, reaping huge profits.

The past two years have seen an increase in international momentum to ban ivory: following a joint announcement on ivory bans by the USA and China in September 2015, the USA brought in a ban on ivory in July 2016, and China imposed a 3-year ban on ivory imports, promising a timeline for a complete ban by the end of 2016. Hong Kong, one of the biggest hubs of the illegal wildlife trade, announced in June 2016 that it will move towards a ban. France announced a ban on ivory trade in all its territories in April 2016.

Against this backdrop of global momentum, we would encourage the UK to not only take similar action by closing its own domestic ivory markets, but lead the way as a powerful voice in stopping this trade globally.

While your government has shown leadership in combatting the illegal wildlife trade internationally, including the landmark 2014 London Conference, it now needs to show similar leadership in implementing a total ban on all trade in ivory products in the UK once and for all.

With regard to CoP17, we hope the UK delegates will be voting against all proposals to allow trade in ivory and rhino horn, and in favour of proposals that afford these species maximum protection, including uplisting all elephants to Appendix 1.

Thank you for your attention and consideration


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Jeepers. Let me spell this out for you. Our domestic LEGAL ivory trade is fuelling the global ILLEGAL ivory trade - there is no ambiguity about this FACT. But as you seem so confident what I have posted is false (as per), I can only assume you must have very solid evidence which refutes mine  References please?. *I wonder if they'll just back my evidence up - again lol *
> 
> May refuses to ban the domestic market in ivory because antiques make profit & lets face it profits are far more important to the tories then the existence of a species.
> 
> It would make a massive difference Elles. If we don't ban it we will be complicit it the extinction of this beautiful creature.
> 
> Here is the heartfelt letter to May signed by; Stephen Hawking, Jane Goodall, David Shepherd, Damian Aspinall, Ricky Gervais, Joanna Lumley, Joaquin Phoenix, Will Travers, Virginia McKenna to name but a few. http://actionforelephantsuk.org/letter-to-theresa-may-sept-2016/
> 
> 24 September 2016
> 
> Dear Prime Minister,
> 
> Action for Elephants UK is a grassroots group fighting to save elephants and to end poaching and the ivory trade that perpetuates it. With the support of wildlife NGOs, we're organising the UK marches taking place on September 24th as part of the Global March for Elephants and Rhinos (GMFER).
> 
> The third annual Global March will take place this year on the opening day of CITES CoP17 in Johannesburg. Over 140 cities around the world will unite to call for a global ban on ivory and rhino horn trade, and for other measures to help save these iconic species. Action for Elephants UK and the undersigned groups are appealing to the government for a total ban on ivory sales in the UK, which is one of the Conservative Party manifesto commitments.
> 
> Tens of thousands of elephants are still being slaughtered every year for their ivory. This rate of poaching is pushing African elephants ever closer to extinction, and the window of opportunity for saving them is rapidly shrinking. Since poaching for the ivory trade is the most pressing threat facing Africa's elephants, the closure of all ivory markets, both international and domestic, is critical for their survival.
> 
> At present, the legal ivory trade in the UK feeds one of the largest markets for ivory in Europe. Significant amounts of ivory are also sold through online marketplaces in the UK. The existence of a legal ivory trade serves as a cover for illegal sales of ivory, while continuing to perpetuate the cycle of supply and demand.
> 
> The laws that attempt to regulate the ivory trade in the UK have proved to be ineffective and unworkable, and ivory sellers - whether market traders or high-end auction houses - continue to sell ivory without the required paperwork. The police and the courts don't have the resources to monitor the trade or prosecute all cases where the law is broken.
> 
> Earlier this months, the results of the Great Elephant Census - the first aerial census of Africa's elephant populations - revealed that one-third of Africa's elephants were wiped out in just seven years (2007 to 2014) - equivalent to 144,000 elephants. Between 2010 and 2012 alone, over 100,000 elephants were brutally slaughtered for their ivory. The poaching continues today across much of Africa, with some countries seeing an increase in illegal killings.
> 
> Rhinos are also in dire peril because of poaching for their horn, which has soared in recent years - in South Africa alone, by 9000% since 2007. Furthermore, the trade in ivory and horn is fuelled by organized criminal networks and widespread corruption; known terrorist groups are involved in both the poaching of elephants and rhinos and trafficking their body parts, reaping huge profits.
> 
> The past two years have seen an increase in international momentum to ban ivory: following a joint announcement on ivory bans by the USA and China in September 2015, the USA brought in a ban on ivory in July 2016, and China imposed a 3-year ban on ivory imports, promising a timeline for a complete ban by the end of 2016. Hong Kong, one of the biggest hubs of the illegal wildlife trade, announced in June 2016 that it will move towards a ban. France announced a ban on ivory trade in all its territories in April 2016.
> 
> Against this backdrop of global momentum, we would encourage the UK to not only take similar action by closing its own domestic ivory markets, but lead the way as a powerful voice in stopping this trade globally.
> 
> While your government has shown leadership in combatting the illegal wildlife trade internationally, including the landmark 2014 London Conference, it now needs to show similar leadership in implementing a total ban on all trade in ivory products in the UK once and for all.
> 
> With regard to CoP17, we hope the UK delegates will be voting against all proposals to allow trade in ivory and rhino horn, and in favour of proposals that afford these species maximum protection, including uplisting all elephants to Appendix 1.
> 
> Thank you for your attention and consideration


Ok, I get it (I think). You're under the impression new ivory is being sold legally in the UK?

Any ivory sold in the UK or exported will be recycled antique ivory. Surely reusing this seventy years old ivory will lessen the demand for illegal ivory. High end shaving brushes, for example, are made by refashioning antique ivory.

Edit

Not sure why your bunch of personalities think the UK is ineffective at policing the legal ivory trade. As I said first hand experience tells me different.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok, I get it (I think). You're under the impression new ivory is being sold legally in the UK?
> 
> Any ivory sold in the UK or exported will be recycled antique ivory. Surely reusing this seventy years old ivory will lessen the demand for illegal ivory. High end shaving brushes, for example, are made by refashioning antique ivory.


I guess the point is that it is so easy claim all ivory is antique and continue to use ivory from recently killed (last 50 years) elephants. When all trade is banned, there are less chances for people to bye and sell "new" ivory. This wouldn´t stop it all, but again, one step forward. Also - how do you define antique? Will new ivory become antique in 10- 50 or 100 years? So in order to make one´s grandchildren rich, they could start selling ivory killed today in 30 years? Or 50?

Elephants have enough problems already without this, don´t you think?


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok, I get it (I think). You're under the impression new ivory is being sold legally in the UK?
> 
> Any ivory sold in the UK or exported will be recycled antique ivory. Surely reusing this seventy years old ivory will lessen the demand for illegal ivory. High end shaving brushes, for example, are made by refashioning antique ivory.


New ivory IS being sold 'legally' in the UK AND across the globe - passed off as antique. We are fuelling the poaching of elephants - the tories know this. They don't care. Please read the links I provided.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> I guess the point is that it is so easy claim all ivory is antique and continue to use ivory from recently killed (last 50 years) elephants. When all trade is banned, there are less chances for people to bye and sell "new" ivory. This wouldn´t stop it all, but again, one step forward. Also - how do you define antique? Will new ivory become antique in 10- 50 or 100 years? So in order to make one´s grandchildren rich, they could start selling ivory killed today in 30 years? Or 50?
> 
> Elephants have enough problems already without this, don´t you think?


The date is, I believe, 1947, and I would have thought will not change so new ivory shouldn't become antique in time. I'd hope not anyway.

Actually I was wrong, now your not even allowed to refashion antique ivory. So our current rules are actually quite stringent.

Yes I agree, the elephant has enough to put up with. I just don't think you can blame Mrs May for their demise in just a few years time. Which was how the discussion started.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> The date is, I believe, 1947, and I would have thought will not change so new ivory shouldn't become antique in time. I'd hope not anyway.
> 
> Actually I was wrong, now your not even allowed to refashion antique ivory. So our current rules are actually quite stringent.
> 
> Yes I agree, the elephant has enough to put up with. I just don't think you can blame Mrs May for their demise in just a few years time. Which was how the discussion started.


Yet, despite the stringent rules, new ivory is being passed as old. Mrs May knows that very well, so anything she does to promote trade will help elephants to die. So yes, I can and do blame her for contributing for their demise. Even the proposal is bad.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> The date is, I believe, 1947, and I would have thought will not change so new ivory shouldn't become antique in time. I'd hope not anyway.
> 
> Actually I was wrong, now your not even allowed to refashion antique ivory. So our current rules are actually quite stringent.
> 
> Yes I agree, the elephant has enough to put up with. I just don't think you can blame Mrs May for their demise in just a few years time. Which was how the discussion started.


The currert rules aren't stringent at all. Can you please provide references to support your assertions.

_At present a legal ivory trade exists in the UK, one of the largest markets for ivory in Europe. Significant amounts of ivory are also sold through online marketplaces in the UK. The existence of a legal trade serves as a cover for illegal sales of ivory, while perpetuating the cycle of supply and demand. A recent study, 'The Ivory Project', produced by Caroline Cox at the University of Portsmouth for the House of Commons, stated that the UK is the third largest supplier of illegal ivory items into the US._

_The laws that attempt to regulate the ivory trade in the UK have proved to be ineffective and unworkable, and are full of loopholes for illegal ivory to enter the market. New ivory can be artificially aged to look old, fooling even experts. It is impossible to distinguish with any certainty a piece from, say, 1946 (considered a legitimate 'antique') and a piece from 1948 (considered illegal). The police and the courts don't have the resources to monitor the trade or prosecute all cases where the law is broken. The Ivory Project states that the UK ivory laws have an 'enormous scope for fraud'_


----------



## Happy Paws2

kimthecat said:


> @Happy Paws
> 
> If it wasn't for Corbyn ... !!
> 
> Like everyone else , I wasnt expecting a GE this soon and I expected to vote Labour at the next one under a different leader


I'm voting for him anyway, rather him than TM.


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> The currert rules aren't stringent at all. Can you please provide references to support your assertions


I doubt it.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> The currert rules aren't stringent at all. Can you please provide references to support your assertions.
> 
> _At present a legal ivory trade exists in the UK, one of the largest markets for ivory in Europe. Significant amounts of ivory are also sold through online marketplaces in the UK. The existence of a legal trade serves as a cover for illegal sales of ivory, while perpetuating the cycle of supply and demand. A recent study, 'The Ivory Project', produced by Caroline Cox at the University of Portsmouth for the House of Commons, stated that the UK is the third largest supplier of illegal ivory items into the US._
> 
> _The laws that attempt to regulate the ivory trade in the UK have proved to be ineffective and unworkable, and are full of loopholes for illegal ivory to enter the market. New ivory can be artificially aged to look old, fooling even experts. It is impossible to distinguish with any certainty a piece from, say, 1946 (considered a legitimate 'antique') and a piece from 1948 (considered illegal). The police and the courts don't have the resources to monitor the trade or prosecute all cases where the law is broken._


Fair enough, you've got your view I've got mine. Doesn't make you right, or me.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> I doubt it.


Here's a shocker for you. Brace yourself.

Some of us have a life outside the internet which means we actually encounter the situations you just read about.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> Here's a shocker for you. Brace yourself.
> 
> Some of us have a life outside the internet which means we actually encounter the situations you just read about.


Now don't tell me you have been big game hunting Dr Pepper :Jawdrop


----------



## rona

They can accurately test for age of ivory pre and post nuclear

Which is probably why they set the time they did as a marker for antique


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Fair enough, you've got your view I've got mine. Doesn't make you right you, or me.


No my views don't make me right but the FACTS do - which is what my views are based upon . On matters of importance I try to get as informed as I possibly can.



rona said:


> They can accurately test for age of ivory pre and post nuclear


That may well be the case but its clearly not enough . Defra has been slashed to the bone so unlikely we'll ever have the resources even if it would put an end to the trade. Experts say a total ban is the only way to save this beautiful animal Rona.

How much longer can this go on for before its too late?

*Since 2010, over 200,000 elephants have been poached for their ivory.*


----------



## noushka05




----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Now don't tell me you have been big game hunting Dr Pepper :Jawdrop


I once ran over a rabbit, wasn't my fault the little sod came out of nowhere. I felt terrible. Does that count though?


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> No my views don't make me right but the FACTS do - which is what my views are based upon . On matters of importance I try to get as informed as I possibly can.
> 
> That may well be the case but its clearly not enough . Defra has been slashed to the bone so unlikely we'll ever have the resources even if it would put an end to the trade. Experts say a total ban is the only way to save this beautiful animal Rona.
> 
> How much longer can this go on for before its too late?
> 
> *Since 2010, over 200,000 elephants have been poached for their ivory.*


You've got NO facts as to how the UK legal trade of antique ivory influences the barbaric slaughter of elephants. You have opinions, I have mine.


----------



## rona

It's not up to Defra to test it has nothing to do with Defra, though they have invested heavily in the development of the tests


----------



## rona

The test is called Stable isotope analysis and is use extensively, it can also be used with Rhino horn


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## MollySmith

kimthecat said:


> Ok they could have been carrying the placards but the words were changed . :Hilarious





Elles said:


> There was a fuel allowance then. In 1979 it was from 85p for those on benefits and was mostly claimed by pensioners. I can only find a reference to it on a parliamentary debate at the time though. Reading some of the debates and manifesto pledges from the time is quite interesting. More interesting than reading today's fairy tales, because we know what actually came of them.


It's a genuine photo!

The easiest way to tell if words have been added on is to check the style of the letters. Not that it's necessary because the Observer hold the Jane Brown collection and I'm pretty certain that they'd publish the right image, their photo editors are exceptionally well experienced. But we all write our letters individually so good quality script or handwritten fonts have evolved to include a feature called contextual alternates which basically means that it'll create tiny differences by using a slightly different e from it's library of characters. Almost all Photoshopped signs fail because they haven't used a font like this because they're compiled by people with nothing better to do who need a free, cheap font that doesn't do this or they don't have the right 'bend' or curve to replicate the board they are written on.

Here is the link

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2015/oct/17/jane-bowns-photojournalism-in-pictures

I shall now remove my anorak.


----------



## leashedForLife

rottiepointerhouse said,

...
_*Suspend the use of neonicotinoids* *until proven *that their use in agriculture *does not harm* bees or other pollinators._
_______________________________________
.
.
If the U-S Federal Govt could accomplish just *one* thing in the near term of the many that need to be done - climate change / renewable energy on a distributed national scale [rooftop mini-windmills, etc], stop the overseas export of national & international corporations' PROFITS to avoid all taxes, etc -
if the E.P.A. or U-S Dept of Ag could *only *stop all use of neonicotinoids *until proven safe* for pollinators, i'd be thrilled. 
.
not only honeybees, but native bees here, are being rapidly wiped-out. We will have no insects to pollinate food crops at this rate, let alone any wild blossoms.
MonsLanto & their partners in crime - the other biogen giants pushing GMOs - will be ecstatic, as anything that ropes agriculture more tightly to them is a boon for the bottom line. If farmers have nowhere to turn *but* MonsLanto et al, they will be coining money - & humanity will be utterly at their mercy.
.
.
.


----------



## Lucy Haygarth

Making my own box for proportional representation. Labour always win our seat anyway, I'd probably vote for them otherwise. The whole system is a mess though. We don't vote for parties anymore, just individuals paid off by lobbyists, so not sure it matters.


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Where did you get that the Lib Dems back fox hunting from Kim? This is what their manifesto actually says about protecting nature
> 
> .


Um, I'm not sure now. I think I came across it on line somewhere. Perhaps i got that wrong. i hope so !


----------



## Honeys mum




----------



## kimthecat

MollySmith said:


> It's a genuine photo!
> 
> The easiest way to tell if words have been added on is to check the style of the letters. Not that it's necessary because the Observer hold the Jane Brown collection and I'm pretty certain that they'd publish the right image, their photo editors are exceptionally well experienced. But we all write our letters individually so good quality script or handwritten fonts have evolved to include a feature called contextual alternates which basically means that it'll create tiny differences by using a slightly different e from it's library of characters. Almost all Photoshopped signs fail because they haven't used a font like this because they're compiled by people with nothing better to do who need a free, cheap font that doesn't do this or they don't have the right 'bend' or curve to replicate the board they are written on.
> 
> Here is the link
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2015/oct/17/jane-bowns-photojournalism-in-pictures
> 
> I shall now remove my anorak.


 Thank you  keep your anorak on ! That was actually interesting about the graphics, 

Amazing photos. It brought back a lot of memories from those times. The photo of the two autistic children tugs at the heartstrings. The one of George Harrison back stage too


----------



## Nagini

i won't be voting tories! never have, never will.
the comments from the deputy mayor owen lister some time ago, regarding disabled children 'best thing for them is the guillotine' ... never quite got over that one
if that is the mindset of just one, wow....just wow.


----------



## Zaros

Nagini said:


> i won't be voting tories! never have, never will.
> the comments from the deputy mayor owen lister some time ago, regarding disabled children 'best thing for them is the guillotine' ... never quite got over that one
> if that is the mindset of just one, wow....just wow.


_'Mr Lister quit the children's committee and now faces a council probe'_

One can only hope it's a red hot one inserted up his smug ageing 4r53!


----------



## rona

Nagini said:


> i won't be voting tories! never have, never will.
> the comments from the deputy mayor owen lister some time ago, regarding disabled children 'best thing for them is the guillotine' ... never quite got over that one
> if that is the mindset of just one, wow....just wow.


Where is he deputy mayor of now?

I believe he got the sack from the Conservatives didn't he?


----------



## Nagini

rona said:


> Where is he deputy mayor of now?
> 
> I believe he got the sack from the Conservatives didn't he?


he's no longer mayor, i believe he resigned over it? then got the sack if i remember correctly?


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> I don't think Labour will do any better than the Conservatives. They're promising to give us the Earth, the conservatives are promising to destroy it. It's all bull. Some people will do ok, some won't, same as it ever was. Neither Theresa May, nor Jeremy Corbyn will get absolute rule and when has any party delivered everything in their manifesto? Never is when.
> 
> I'm voting labour because our labour chap is ok and our conservative chap is behaving like a schoolgirl at a One Direction concert, with his Theresa May fandom and little else. I want to see a ban on fracking and the hunting debate concreted over, the grave Tony dug for it was too shallow. I'm actually not keen on these tax increases and throwing money at school kids and university students and anyone else who whines that they don't get enough, but it's not worth voting for anyone else in my area. Ben Bradshaw is a pretty moderate labour mp, who seems to do his best so he'll have to do.
> 
> Apologies to those who are fans of Corbyn, but all I've seen of him is the typical politician, ducking, diving and dodging questions. He doesn't come over as genuine and honest and all that kind of thing people are saying about him to me. If there was a real alternative I'd be there like a shot, but there isn't.


This has to be one of the most sensible posts on this thread and its pretty much how I am feeling myself here


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> Um, I'm not sure now. I think I came across it on line somewhere. Perhaps i got that wrong. i hope so !


I could only find something that referred to it being a free vote so they would leave it up to individual MP's to decide how to vote but that as a party they were opposed to hunting.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Not so strong and stable after all

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40003544

Suddenly, only four days after the Tory manifesto was published, Theresa May has added one rather crucial proposal to her social care plan - a limit or a cap to the amount of money one individual could be asked to pay.

She is adamant that she is not budging on her principles, and was clearly irritated by questions after her speech that said she was backtracking.

But the manifesto did not include the notion of a cap, and just yesterday ministers publicly rejected such an idea.

One senior minister told me "we always knew we were going to need to give protection to those with very high care costs".

They said the prime minister sees trying to fix the social care system "as a big, big deal and she is prepared to use political capital to do it".

But having to clarify the manifesto within days creates a whiff of panic.

Rather than the "strong and stable" mantra that the PM has repeated again and again during this campaign, this change of heart suggests that she is more susceptible to pressure than her team would care to admit.


----------



## Honeys mum

DT said:


> This has to be one of the most sensible posts on this thread and its pretty much how I am feeling myself here


Totally agree, thats how we are feeling.



Elles said:


> I don't think Labour will do any better than the Conservatives. They're promising to give us the Earth, the conservatives are promising to destroy it. It's all bull. Some people will do ok, some won't, same as it ever was. Neither Theresa May, nor Jeremy Corbyn will get absolute rule and when has any party delivered everything in their manifesto? Never is when.
> 
> I'm voting labour because our labour chap is ok and our conservative chap is behaving like a schoolgirl at a One Direction concert, with his Theresa May fandom and little else. I want to see a ban on fracking and the hunting debate concreted over, the grave Tony dug for it was too shallow. I'm actually not keen on these tax increases and throwing money at school kids and university students and anyone else who whines that they don't get enough, but it's not worth voting for anyone else in my area. Ben Bradshaw is a pretty moderate labour mp, who seems to do his best so he'll have to do.
> 
> Apologies to those who are fans of Corbyn, but all I've seen of him is the typical politician, ducking, diving and dodging questions. He doesn't come over as genuine and honest and all that kind of thing people are saying about him to me. If there was a real alternative I'd be there like a shot, but there isn't.


Same here, we were going to vote for the same party we voted for in the last election. But as they now have no chance of winning it would just be a wasted vote.This election is far too important to waste a vote.
Couldn't vote for the tories, and we have to try and get them out,so we don't really have a choice. The only good in this is the Labour guy who is standing in our area is very good,although it's a strong Tory area..So as you say Elles, he will have to do.


----------



## Honeys mum

Did anyone watch the Andrew Neil Interview, it was a real eye opener.
IMO T.M. didn't really answer any of the questions correctly that were put to her. Just avoided a direct answer and went baffling on.

She was adamant that nothing had changed regarding their Social Care system. She even tried to blame J.C. saying, he had been scare mongering the old and vunerable people.
When asked, she wouldn't say where the extra £8b. was coming from to fund the NHS.

Wouldn't say what the cap would be on the winter fuel allowance either, or if they would be putting N.I. and income tax up.

So all in all a complete waste of time IMO.


----------



## Goblin

Just been watching part of the Andrew Neil Interview. Interesting how she states it's a choice of who is negotiating Brexit, her or Corbyn. Can someone correct me if I am wrong, it's not her sitting across the table with 27 countries but David Davis along with other minions from the civil service. Also interesting is how it's I've put forward.. Surely it's the party, you are not voted for May but your local representative.


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not so strong and stable after all
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40003544
> 
> Suddenly, only four days after the Tory manifesto was published, Theresa May has added one rather crucial proposal to her social care plan - a limit or a cap to the amount of money one individual could be asked to pay.
> 
> She is adamant that she is not budging on her principles, and was clearly irritated by questions after her speech that said she was backtracking.
> 
> But the manifesto did not include the notion of a cap, and just yesterday ministers publicly rejected such an idea.
> 
> One senior minister told me "we always knew we were going to need to give protection to those with very high care costs".
> 
> They said the prime minister sees trying to fix the social care system "as a big, big deal and she is prepared to use political capital to do it".
> 
> But having to clarify the manifesto within days creates a whiff of panic.
> 
> Rather than the "strong and stable" mantra that the PM has repeated again and again during this campaign, this change of heart suggests that she is more susceptible to pressure than her team would care to admit.


First she's a dictator and that was a bad thing and now she's listened to her team and that seems to be a bad thing.


----------



## Satori

Honeys mum said:


> Did anyone watch the Andrew Neil Interview, it was a real eye opener.
> IMO T.M. didn't really answer any of the questions correctly that were put to her. Just avoided a direct answer and went baffling on.
> 
> She was adamant that nothing had changed regarding their Social Care system. She even tried to blame J.C. saying, he had been scare mongering the old and vunerable people.
> When asked, she wouldn't say where the extra £8b. was coming from to fund the NHS.
> 
> Wouldn't say what the cap would be on the winter fuel allowance either, or if they would be putting N.I. and income tax up.
> 
> So all in all a complete waste of time IMO.


Well it certainly looked like Theresa May but sounded more like Jim Hacker. Funny, when telling the truth would have actually gone down better she chose to lie in response to every question. It must be pathological.


----------



## kimthecat

Goblin said:


> Just been watching part of the Andrew Neil Interview. Interesting how she states it's a choice of who is negotiating Brexit, her or Corbyn. Can someone correct me if I am wrong, it's not her sitting across the table with 27 countries but David Davis along with other minions from the civil service. Also interesting is how it's I've put forward.. Surely it's the party, you are not voted for May but your local representative.


The conservative leaflet through the door , its very much about Brexit and a clear choice between Mays strong and stable or " a coalition of chaos with Jeremy Corbyn "and a clipping from the Mirror dated 20th april , Labour plots Brexit deal with other parties if Tories don't win election majority . 
Nothing about any of their policies!

The Green leaflet on the other hand clearly states their policy though they sound like a Labour mini me .


----------



## havoc

kimthecat said:


> First she's a dictator and that was a bad thing and now she's listened to her team and that seems to be a bad thing


It's all about timing. Pensioners are more likely than any other group to have a postal vote and they vote early. They needed to do something fast. As I understand it her 'team' is two people - until something goes this wrong and more get involved in damage limitation.


----------



## kimthecat

Satori said:


> Well it certainly looked like Theresa May but sounded more like Jim Hacker. Funny, when telling the truth would have actually gone down better she chose to lie in response to every question. It must be pathological.


 Theresa lies and Jerry avoids answering questions !


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> First she's a dictator and that was a bad thing and now she's listened to her team and that seems to be a bad thing.


But what do you think of refusing to say what the cap is going to be until after the election?


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> But what do you think of refusing to say what the cap is going to be until after the election?


sneaky !


----------



## havoc

No guarantee of any cap at all, only said there will be consultation. Interesting how what she said and what people heard differs.


----------



## kimthecat

On Twitter : maybond fims 

Your house is not enough #*maybondfilms*

You Only Lie Twice. Three times. No, sorry, make it four. #*maybondfilms*

Diamonds Are Forever (Policies Are For Four Days), #*MayBondFilms*

Licence to Kill Foxes #*maybondfilms*

Dr No Costings #*maybondfilms*


----------



## KittenKong

Source, BBC


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Elles

Didn't I read that the BBC has to cover free tv licences soon?


----------



## kimthecat

@Elles i thought that too.

i thought the local councils covered bus passes. The government have cut the amount of money they give local councils and i assumed the councils choose which cuts to make .


----------



## Elles

havoc said:


> No guarantee of any cap at all, only said there will be consultation. Interesting how what she said and what people heard differs.


She said "and there will be an absolute limit on what people have to pay" in a speech at Wrexham. Limit i.e. cap.


----------



## Jesthar

Satori said:


> Well it certainly looked like Theresa May but sounded more like Jim Hacker. Funny, when telling the truth would have actually gone down better she chose to lie in response to every question. It must be pathological.


Telling the truth isn't going to get her party elected though, is it?


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Edit
> 
> Not sure why your bunch of personalities think the UK is ineffective at policing the legal ivory trade. As I said first hand experience tells me different.


I must have quoted after you'd added this bit. I'm dying to know what is your first hand experience on this? (how anyone could defend the indefensible is beyond me)

I only named the personalities that were well known. Several of them having first hand experience as you put it. But here's a list of others who signed that letter; EXPERTS, some of whom see first hand the consequences & horrors of the bloody ivory trade!

Dame Daphne Sheldrick DBE
Chairman, David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust

Rob Brandford
Director, David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust iworry Campaign

Richard Leakey
Founder, Kenya Wildlife Service
Former Head of Kenya's Civil Service and Secretary to Cabinet in Kenya

Salisha Chandra
Founding member, Kenyans United Against Poaching - KUAPO Trust

Carol Buckley
Founder, Elephant Aid International

Scott Blais,
Co-founder, Global Sanctuary for Elephants

Rosemary Alles
Co-founder, Global March for Elephants and Rhinos

Susan Baetz
Chairman, Sauvez les Elephants d'Afrique/France

Arend de Haas
Co-founder & Director, African Conservation Foundation

Lee Durrell
Honorary Director, Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust

Dr Keith Dutlow and Dr Lisa Marabini
Co-Founders, AWARE Trust

Dr Kate Evans
Founder & Director, Elephants for Africa

Toni Frohoff, Ph.D.
Elephant & Cetacean Scientist

Viktor Gebhart
CEO, Animals United e.V.

Birgit Hampl
Board Member, Rettet die Elefanten Afrikas e.V.

Raabia Hawa
Executive Director, Ulinzi Africa Foundation
Founder, Walk with Rangers Initiative

Jeremy Hulme
CEO, SPANA (The Society for the Protection of Animals Abroad

Kate Silverton-Heron
Broadcaster and Journalist

Patsy Stagman
Rhino Conservation Dubai

Elizabeth Steinbart
Founder and Director of Elephantopia
Anneka Svenska
Wildlife Presenter and Conservationist

Yvette Taylor
International Executive Director, Lawrence Anthony Earth Organization

Janet Thomas
Founder & Chair, Animal Aid Abroad (Australia)

Peter Wrege
Director, Elephant Listening Project

Rory Young
Co-founder, Chengeta Wildlife

Professor Alice Roberts
Biological anthropologist, author and broadcaster

John Roberts
Director of Elephants, Golden Triangle Elephant Foundation

Caroline Ruane
CEO, Naturewatch Foundation, sponsors of World Animal Day

Dr Adam Rutherford
Geneticist, Author & Broadcaster

John Sauven
Executive Director, Greenpeace UK

William Shatner
Actor

David Shepherd CBE
Founder and President of the David Shepherd Wildlife Foundation

Stephen Sibbald
Country Director, World Animal Protection UK

Ruth Powys
CEO, Elephant Family
Ian Redmond OBE
Independent Wildlife Biologist, Co-Founder of the Elefriends campaign (1989) and Ambassador for the UNEP Convention on Migratory Species

Dr Mary Rice
Executive Director, Environmental Investigation Agency



Dr Pepper said:


> You've got NO facts as to how the UK legal trade of antique ivory influences the barbaric slaughter of elephants. You have opinions, I have mine.


That's because you're in denial again. So what exactly are _your _opinions based on? Please provide references.



rona said:


> It's not up to Defra to test it has nothing to do with Defra, though they have invested heavily in the development of the tests


Hasn't stopped us being the third largest supplier of illegal ivory to the USA has it. As this latest letter to May explains, without a total ban there will always be loopholes. http://actionforelephantsuk.org/letter-to-theresa-may-2017/

Dear Prime Minister,

*Action for Elephants UK* is a grassroots group fighting to save elephants and to end poaching and the ivory trade that perpetuates it. Along with other groups, we are appealing to the government for a total ban on ivory sales in the UK, as the Conservative Party has promised twice in its manifesto pledges.

This letter follows on the one we delivered to No. 10 on 24 September and our letter of 16 November to Andrea Leadsom (both attached), to re-iterate our call for the government to fulfil this commitment.

At present a legal ivory trade exists in the UK, one of the largest markets for ivory in Europe. Significant amounts of ivory are also sold through online marketplaces in the UK. The existence of a legal trade serves as a cover for illegal sales of ivory, while perpetuating the cycle of supply and demand. A recent study, 'The Ivory Project', produced by Caroline Cox at the University of Portsmouth for the House of Commons, stated that the UK is the third largest supplier of illegal ivory items into the US.

The laws that attempt to regulate the ivory trade in the UK have proved to be ineffective and unworkable, and are full of loopholes for illegal ivory to enter the market. New ivory can be artificially aged to look old, fooling even experts. It is impossible to distinguish with any certainty a piece from, say, 1946 (considered a legitimate 'antique') and a piece from 1948 (considered illegal). The police and the courts don't have the resources to monitor the trade or prosecute all cases where the law is broken. The Ivory Project states that the UK ivory laws have an 'enormous scope for fraud'.

As you are aware, this crisis is the consequence of an unrelenting hunger for ivory from consumers, especially in China and other Asian countries. This hunger pushed up the price of ivory and pushed the African elephant closer to extinction, in order to satisfy the demand. Ivory has traditionally been considered a status symbol in South East Asia, particularly China, where tusks have long been carved into intricate pieces and ornaments. We at Action for Elephants UK, like many NGO's, have enormous support for demand reduction strategies. We believe that governments have a crucial role to play in these strategies by exercising their legislative powers

The past two years have seen an increase in international momentum to ban ivory: following a joint announcement on ivory bans by the US and China in September 2015, the US brought in a ban in July 2016 and China imposed a 3-year ban on ivory imports, promising a timeline for a complete ban by the end of 2016. Hong Kong, one of the biggest hubs of the illegal wildlife trade, announced in June 2016 that it will move towards a ban. France announced a ban on ivory trade in all its territories in April 2016. At the CITES meeting in Johannesburg in September 2016, delegates endorsed calls for the closure of all domestic ivory markets. Then in December came China's momentous announcement that it would close its domestic ivory markets by the end of 2017, an initiative welcomed by ourselves and many other NGO's. This move commits China to:


Shutting down ivory processing and sale facilities with prescribed timescales (to be completed by 31st December 2017)
Arrangements for the transfer of skilled workers to non-commercial cultural sectors
Limiting legal ivory sales to certified institutions subject to strict monitoring
Enhanced enforcement and public education in 'ecological civilization

Yet despite these advancements in awareness, increased regulation, and global demand reduction, as well as greater public pressure, the UK government has still not fulfilled its commitment to move for a total ban. The government has said it will consult with the antiques trade and other businesses this year on how best to move forward. We hope that the interests of a small commercial sector will not take precedence over the protection and saving of elephants. Any strategy based simply on tighter regulation will leave loopholes for illegal trade.

Again we urge the UK government to fulfil its pledge and move to close its domestic ivory markets, and lead the way as a powerful voice in stopping this trade globally and ensuring the survival of one of our most iconic species.

Sincerely

*Action for Elephants UK*


----------



## Honeys mum

Satori said:


> she chose to lie in response to every question. It must be pathological


Ive always thought she was a liar, it was obvious watching that interview last night.
If they can do these things now before they get in. What will they do if they win.Like my son said to me, she is so sure she is going to win, she thinks she can get anyway with anything.


----------



## noushka05

Michael Crick








*Michael Crick*‏Verified [email protected]*MichaelLCrick* 11h11 hours ago

Michael Crick Retweeted Priti Patel

All of a sudden previously hidden Cabinet ministers have come to life.
It's almost as if Lynton Crosby has ordered a mass Cabinet tweet

*Priti Patel*Verified [email protected]*patel4witham*
Only Theresa May has a plan for Brexit - every vote will strengthen her hand to deliver for Britain #*GE2017* #*BBCElection*
1


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> Only Theresa May has a plan for Brexit - every vote will strengthen her hand to deliver for Britain #*GE2017* #*BBCElection*
> 1


----------



## Honeys mum

Two of the interesting articles in the Guardian today.

The Guardian view on the social care debacle: weak and wobbly | Editorial | Opinion | The Guardian

Oil bosses have given £390,000 to Tories under Theresa May | Business | The Guardian


----------



## MollySmith

Robert Peston today - a sobering and wise post.

_Talking to politicians and their advisers this morning they have no idea how long the election campaign will be suspended; like the rest of us, they are in shock.

For some time the normal argy-bargy between the political parties will feel wholly wrong, and indeed trivial; what unites us as a nation will be more important than the differences.

But that won't last, especially since this atrocity is a cynical attack on that normal argy-bargy, or on our freedom, democracy and way of life.

It really matters that what separates us from the terrorists is that we air our grievances with non-violent debate though our democratic structures and processes.

So political leaders and people agree on one big thing: we have to proudly stand up for our system of resolving our differences, as the best way of showing terrorism is never the answer to a problem.

We must get back to the peaceful business - and it is that word "peaceful" that matters - of choosing who to represent us in a new government, though not till we have shown the proper respect to and solidarity with the grieving families._


----------



## Happy Paws2

I thought the election was been left alone today..............


----------



## KittenKong

Happy Paws said:


> I thought the election was been left alone today..............


What gives you that idea? The politicians have said so but the Tory biased media have other ideas. 
This I found from Vox Political.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> You've got NO facts as to how the UK legal trade of antique ivory influences the barbaric slaughter of elephants. You have opinions, I have mine.


Maybe that is the difference between facts and fake facts. Nowadays there are even presidents, who mix them all the time. Noushka has has provided endless documents, statistics and expert statements, you none, but still you say that. But them Trump does make his own opinions as facts all the time, lots of people deny evolution, climate change doesn´t exist for some and I´m sure some believe the earth is flat. What can you do. People believe what they want to believe mostly. (Which is another fact by the way).


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> What gives you that idea? The politicians have said so but the Tory biased media have other ideas.
> This I found from Vox Political.
> 
> View attachment 311849


What a sad world we live in when people can't even stop trying to score political points or bleat about how much coverage they are getting on a day like today


----------



## stuaz

rottiepointerhouse said:


> What a sad world we live in when people can't even stop trying to score political points or bleat about how much coverage they are getting on a day like today


It's a case of damned if you do damned if you don't. The same people would be up in arms if she didn't say anything....


----------



## KittenKong

stuaz said:


> It's a case of damned if you do damned if you don't. The same people would be up in arms if she didn't say anything....


Think you've misunderstood.

Of course May should have spoken out but why didn't she invite the other party leaders to speak with her seeing all are united if grief following this appalling incident?

My thoughts are to to the victims of this terrible incident and their families.


----------



## stuaz

KittenKong said:


> Think you've misunderstood.
> 
> Of course May should have spoken out but why didn't she invite the other party leaders to speak with her seeing all are united if grief following this appalling incident?
> 
> To score political points like this certainly is in bad taste. Sickening.
> 
> My thoughts are to to the victims of this terrible incident and their families.


 Matter of opinion I guess. I see a political leader of the UK addressing an upset and concerned country after a terrorist attack. You see it as "political point scoring" *shrug*


----------



## 1290423

stuaz said:


> Matter of opinion I guess. I see a political leader of the UK addressing an upset and concerned country after a terrorist attack. You see it as "political point scoring" *shrug*


I agree with you, isn't it the norm for leaders to issue a statement? Don't believe that should include leaders of every political party, else where would we draw the line?


----------



## KittenKong

stuaz said:


> Matter of opinion I guess. I see a political leader of the UK addressing an upset and concerned country after a terrorist attack. You see it as "political point scoring" *shrug*


Yeah, I guess you're right but I do think it would have looked better if opposition parties were invited to stand with TM united in condemnation of this appalling attack.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> Yeah, I guess you're right but I do think it would have looked better if opposition parties were invited to stand with TM united in condemnation of this appalling attack.


I'm sure if they wanted to be there they could have gone and helped


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> Maybe that is the difference between facts and fake facts. Nowadays there are even presidents, who mix them all the time. Noushka has has provided endless documents, statistics and expert statements, you none, but still you say that. But them Trump does make his own opinions as facts all the time, lots of people deny evolution, climate change doesn´t exist for some and I´m sure some believe the earth is flat. What can you do. People believe what they want to believe mostly. (Which is another fact by the way).


Today isn't the day, neither is tomorrow for this discussion.


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> Of course May should have spoken out but why didn't she invite the other party leaders to speak with her seeing all are united if grief following this appalling incident?
> .


 She made an official statement in her position as PM outside No 10.
They don't usually invite other party leaders to speak. They've all made individual statements.


----------



## 1290423

kimthecat said:


> She made an official statement in her position as PM outside No 10.
> They don't usually invite other party leaders to speak. They've all made individual statements.


There are some who just want to condem everything she does!


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> Think you've misunderstood.
> 
> Of course May should have spoken out but why didn't she invite the other party leaders to speak with her seeing all are united if grief following this appalling incident?
> 
> My thoughts are to to the victims of this terrible incident and their families.


Maybe we could invite celebrities to have joined in too, Bob geldoff, Richard Branson anyone else you fancy!
Please remind me, did we see a collective broadcast following any on the other, just as appalling incidents, Lee rigby, the London bus bombings the tube attack?


----------



## MollySmith

rona said:


> I'm sure if they wanted to be there they could have gone and helped


My friend who has been in Manchester looking for his daughter (they are now reunited thank goodness), said that the emergency services are being very controlled about who does what, I imagine they have enough with the TV crews there never mind a politician arriving too. Another friend who is in the Met said the last thing they want is a celeb or a politician arriving as it adds on more security requirements when they are stretched already.


----------



## KittenKong

DT said:


> Maybe we could invite celebrities to have joined in too, Bob geldoff, Richard Branson anyone else you fancy!
> Please remind me, did we see a collective broadcast following any on the other, just as appalling incidents, Lee rigby, the London bus bombings the tube attack?


No, but politicians have abandoned the general election campaign, nothing to do with celebs but politicians.

Opposition leaders from other parties should have been invited to speak and show solidarity with May under these circumstances.

They have been no reports of Corbyn, Farron and others being invited to do so.

Didn't they recall Parliament for the other horrific acts that had happened where politicians united in their condemnation regardless of political attire?


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> No, but politicians have abandoned the general election campaign, nothing to do with celebs but politicians.
> 
> Didn't they recall Parliament for the other horrific acts that had happened where politicians united in their condemnation regardless of political attire?


But as prime minister she is expected to make a statement regarding the incident,, it is her job, as she would had that attack t been in another country, we don't expect marine le penn to make a statement do we?


----------



## Dr Pepper

KittenKong said:


> No, but politicians have abandoned the general election campaign, nothing to do with celebs but politicians.
> 
> Opposition leaders from other parties should have been invited to speak and show solidarity with May under these circumstances.
> 
> They have been no reports of Corbyn, Farron and others being invited to do so.
> 
> Didn't they recall Parliament for the other horrific acts that had happened where politicians united in their condemnation regardless of political attire?


Maybe, just maybe, if you actually listened to the news and what is being said, rather than "point scoring" on the internet for whatever your own ends are, you would have heard Mr Corbyn's heartfelt statement yesterday.

I'm out of this for now, because today just isn't any better than yesterday.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> No, but politicians have abandoned the general election campaign, nothing to do with celebs but politicians.
> 
> Opposition leaders from other parties should have been invited to speak and show solidarity with May under these circumstances.
> 
> They have been no reports of Corbyn, Farron and others being invited to do so.
> 
> Didn't they recall Parliament for the other horrific acts that had happened where politicians united in their condemnation regardless of political attire?


Why don't you take a leaf out of the politicians behaviour and stop campaigning for at least a few days and show some respect for those poor people


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> Why don't you take a leaf out of the politicians behaviour and stop campaigning for at least a few days and show some respect for those poor people


Who said I was campaigning at this time?

All I said was opposition leaders should have been invited to unite in solidarity with May in condemnation of this hideous attack.

How is showing solidarity in this manner got to do with campaigning?

Having expressed my view I would have hoped it would be respected even if you disagree.

If you saw my post earlier I did express my thoughts towards those who lost their lives and their families.

It's not very nice to be accused of not doing so.

Sad.....


----------



## Satori

KittenKong said:


> Who the hell said I was campaigning?
> 
> All I said was opposition leaders should have been invited to unite in solidarity with May in condemnation of this hideous attack.
> 
> How is showing solidarity in this manner got to do with campaigning?
> 
> Having expressed my view I would have hoped it would be respected even if you disagree.
> 
> You brought the matter up again and accused me of not showing respect towards those who were killed and their families.
> 
> Perhaps you should too consider those who were killed rather than waste time accusing others of not showing feelings towards them.
> 
> If you bothered to look at my earlier post properly I did express my thoughts for those killed and their families.
> 
> Time to put you on ignore so don't waste your time responding.
> 
> My thoughts are with those who were killed or injured and their families.


Wow.


----------



## 1290423

Satori said:


> Wow.


Empty vessels


----------



## 1290423

MollySmith said:


> My friend who has been in Manchester looking for his daughter (they are now reunited thank goodness), said that the emergency services are being very controlled about who does what, I imagine they have enough with the TV crews there never mind a politician arriving too. Another friend who is in the Met said the last thing they want is a celeb or a politician arriving as it adds on more security requirements when they are stretched already.


Yes, the last thing the emergency services need


----------



## Bisbow

KittenKong said:


> Who the hell said I was campaigning?
> 
> All I said was opposition leaders should have been invited to unite in solidarity with May in condemnation of this hideous attack.
> 
> How is showing solidarity in this manner got to do with campaigning?
> 
> Having expressed my view I would have hoped it would be respected even if you disagree.
> 
> You brought the matter up again and accused me of not showing respect towards those who were killed and their families.
> 
> Perhaps you should too consider those who were killed rather than waste time accusing others of not showing feelings towards them.
> 
> If you bothered to look at my earlier post properly I did express my thoughts for those killed and their families.
> 
> Time to put you on ignore so don't waste your time responding.
> 
> My thoughts are with those who were killed or injured and their families.


It amazes me how you can critizi

All I said was opposition leaders should have been invited to unite in solidarity with May in condemnation of this hideous attack.

How is showing solidarity in this manner got to do with campaigning?

Having expressed my view I would have hoped it would be respected even if you disagree.

You brought the matter up again and accused me of not showing respect towards those who were killed and their families.

Perhaps you should too consider those who were killed rather than waste time accusing others of not showing feelings towards them.

If you bothered to look at my earlier post properly I did express my thoughts for those killed and their families.

Time to put you on ignore so don't waste your time responding.

My thoughts are with those who were killed or injured and their families.[/QUOTE]

It amazes me how you can criticize other people to your hearts content and them get up in arms if you think you are being criticized

Sauce for the goose etc
Gr[w up for goodness sake


----------



## KittenKong

Satori, post: 1064870582, member: 1366180"]Wow.

I took exception to being accused of scoring political points and not showing support for the victims in Manchester. If anyone thought I was doing so, it certainly wasn't my intention.

As you will have seen I have edited this post, obviously not in time for you and Bisbow to quote it.

Just ain't worth falling out with anyone when we should all be united in support for the victims of this terrible incident.


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> Satori, post: 1064870582, member: 1366180"]Wow.
> 
> I took exception from being accused of scoring political points and not showing support for the victims in Manchester.
> 
> As you will have seen I have edited this post, obviously not in time for you and Bisbow to quote it.
> 
> Just ain't worth falling out with anyone when we should all be united in support for the victims of this terrible incident.


Totally agree, its the same with the elections too, irrespective of how we vote we all have to get on with it when its over until then I expect there will be harsh words but sooner or later we have to draw that line and move forward, cant come quick enough in my view


----------



## Bisbow

KittenKong said:


> Satori, post: 1064870582, member: 1366180"]Wo
> 
> Just ain't worth falling out with anyone when we should all be united in support for the victims of this terrible incident.


That is so true
I do not have the words to describe the way I feel about this outrage but trying to score points about the PM or anyone else is beyond me


----------



## kimthecat

DT said:


> There are some who just want to condem everything she does!


According to Twitter , May has initiated Operation Tempera to boost her election chances  its J-Tac that advises this.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> No, but politicians have abandoned the general election campaign, nothing to do with celebs but politicians.
> 
> Opposition leaders from other parties should have been invited to speak and show solidarity with May under these circumstances.
> 
> They have been no reports of Corbyn, Farron and others being invited to do so.
> 
> Didn't they recall Parliament for the other horrific acts that had happened where politicians united in their condemnation regardless of political attire?


I don't think opposition leaders need to be invited to speak and show solidarity - they do anyway and have done so. As for recalling parliament can I remind you

http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/elections-and-voting/general/dissolution/

By law, Parliament is dissolved 25 working days before a general election.

The next general election will be held on Thursday 8 June 2017, meaning Parliament will be dissolved at 00.01am on Wednesday 3 May 2017.

When Parliament is dissolved, every seat in the House of Commons becomes vacant. All business in the House comes to an end. There are no Members of Parliament. MPs revert to being members of the public and lose privileges associated with being a Member of Parliament.

MPs are allowed access to Parliament for just a few days in which to remove papers from their offices. The facilities that the House provides for MPs in Westminster during a Parliament are no longer available to them from 5pm on the day of dissolution.

Until a new Parliament is elected, there are no MPs. Those who wish to be MPs again must stand again as candidates for election.


----------



## MollySmith

MollySmith said:


> Robert Peston today - a sobering and wise post.
> 
> _Talking to politicians and their advisers this morning they have no idea how long the election campaign will be suspended; like the rest of us, they are in shock.
> 
> For some time the normal argy-bargy between the political parties will feel wholly wrong, and indeed trivial; what unites us as a nation will be more important than the differences.
> 
> But that won't last, especially since this atrocity is a cynical attack on that normal argy-bargy, or on our freedom, democracy and way of life.
> 
> It really matters that what separates us from the terrorists is that we air our grievances with non-violent debate though our democratic structures and processes.
> 
> So political leaders and people agree on one big thing: we have to proudly stand up for our system of resolving our differences, as the best way of showing terrorism is never the answer to a problem.
> 
> We must get back to the peaceful business - and it is that word "peaceful" that matters - of choosing who to represent us in a new government, though not till we have shown the proper respect to and solidarity with the grieving families._


I don't know if it's etiquette to quote oneself but I return to Peston's quote from yesterday. I think it distasteful of us to continue with any discussion of the election but not least because we will be racking over news from Monday that feels irrelevant today.

And if we look at social media, the politicians have paid their respects - every party including Jeremy Corbyn - who has spoken to Theresa May in private. Short of calling off the General Election which one must assume is unheard of, then Parliament cannot be recalled, it does not exist. And whose to say that the events didn't affect them too? It wasn't long since Westminster and as much as Morrissey asserted that politicians live in bubbles, there must be a concern there. Whatever we think, politicians are human and doubtless Jo Cox is on the minds of many from all parties not just Labour.

I was reading an article about social media and crisis events yesterday and trying to understand why there was this wealth of hearts of Manchester and the person who created the FB app to do this and his connection with the disaster (still not sure). The volume of this people who had done that but ommitted to share anything useful like the Manchester Evening News stories on how to help, the missing people. The most useful thing shared was the very basic meme with the details of the hotels and hospitals on it. But as humans it's okay to be quiet, to reflect, we don't have to hop onto social media for every damm thing.

This thread has no value today, it had little yesterday.


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> According to Twitter , May has initiated Operation Tempera to boost her election chances  its J-Tac that advises this.


Yes she has initiated operation Temperer and Military personnel have been deployed to key sites around London (Like Parliament, Downing Street, Buckingham Palace, Foreign Embassies) to relieve armed officers that guard these sites so they can go and help were needed. Every one police officer replaced by a soldier frees up that police officer to do other duties including going to Manchester to help there Northern colleagues. SAS have been assisting the police in Manchester on raids they have been doing.

Soldiers at Downing Street yesterday.









Theresa May hasn't done this to win brownie points for the elections she has done it to free up police officers at key sites. She has also done this to secure the country up in a time of a state of emergency.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Think you've misunderstood.
> 
> Of course May should have spoken out but why didn't she invite the other party leaders to speak with her seeing all are united if grief following this appalling incident?
> 
> My thoughts are to to the victims of this terrible incident and their families.


Of course Theresa May's party condemns what happened and funny enough on behalf of her party she was whisked up to Manchester to sign a book of condolences after attending a Cobra meeting and coming back to London to attend another Cobra meeting and raised the threat level and launched Operation Temperer.

Theresa May has reacted in the correct way. It wasn't Theresa May that solely upped the threat level to critical it was J-Tac who are UK intelligence authorities above TM. She just announced it. You have to remember Theresa May is running the country at a time when Parliament is suspended due to the election so there are no sitting MP's. Campaigning restarts today at 11am after three days of morning. Don't be fooled these MP's (although there are no sitting MP's at this present time, just civil servants) have been paying the condolences away from the prying eyes of the media and this is why your comics aren't reporting on it.

Theresa May and her Team have been busy behind the scenes to secure the UK up the best way they can and to catch these w***ers before anything else happens which we all hope won't.

I know you are critical of Theresa May but give the woman a break she is doing what leaders of countries do in incidents like this and has been working damn hard behind the scenes in Cobra meetings etc.


----------



## Honeys mum

Dr Pepper said:


> you would have heard Mr Corbyn's heartfelt statement yesterday.


Yes, I saw that on BBC news and have to say it was a very heartfelt and sincere message he gave.


----------



## Bisbow

I would be more inclined to believe him if he would condemn the IRA bombers but he won't so he is not totally against terrorism it seems, only when it suits him or his ambition


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> I would be more inclined to believe him if he would condemn the IRA bombers but he won't so he is not totally against terrorism it seems, only when it suits him or his ambition


You're being fooled by nasty tory smears.

Corbyn has lived his life striving for peace, he has condemned the IRA bombers.

Here's Sky's own interview transcript.










The Guardian putting the tory party straight.










You should read this.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Yes she has initiated operation Temperer and Military personnel have been deployed to key sites around London (Like Parliament, Downing Street, Buckingham Palace, Foreign Embassies) to relieve armed officers that guard these sites so they can go and help were needed. Every one police officer replaced by a soldier frees up that police officer to do other duties including going to Manchester to help there Northern colleagues. SAS have been assisting the police in Manchester on raids they have been doing.
> 
> Soldiers at Downing Street yesterday.
> View attachment 312002
> 
> 
> Theresa May hasn't done this to win brownie points for the elections she has done it to free up police officers at key sites. She has also done this to secure the country up in a time of a state of emergency.


Has anyone asked why this state of emergency wasn't called following the attack outside Westminster?

I'm saying nothing more....


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> Has anyone asked why this state of emergency wasn't called following the attack outside Westminster?
> 
> I'm saying nothing more....


Its to do with intelligence. For starters there is a bomber who supplied and fitted the bomb used for the suicide bomber , he is still out there and is a danger .
The Westminster attacker acted alone.


----------



## Bisbow

I saw Corbin on tv and he refused to condemn the ira after 5 times of asking
It is you who believe the pm is bad but Corbin is good
He has friends in the ira and is scared of upsetting them
You believe what you want but I believe what I saw and heard


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Has anyone asked why this state of emergency wasn't called following the attack outside Westminster?
> 
> I'm saying nothing more....


It wasn't needed. The Westminster attack was a lone wolf.

It has been called this time as the terrorist that done this attack is linked to a network or terrorists hence all the arrests in the last few days. They believe there was a secondary trigger on the bomb he used that could be remotely activated so this in anyone's eyes would suggest he wasn't there alone. He was also known to intelligence services.

It's nothing to do with what you are suggesting that TM is doing it for brownie points. There is an active terror network behind this recent attack and the intelligence services and police are playing catch up trying to arrest everyone associated to the recent attacker. The best option was to activate operation Temperer put the country in a state of emergency. It wasn't Theresa May's decision alone by the way it was J-Tac's. There currently is a high possibility of another attack and that's why operation Temperer was activated.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> It's nothing to do with what you are suggesting that TM is doing it for brownie points. There is an active terror network behind this recent attack and the intelligence services and police are playing catch up trying to catch everyone associated to the recent attacker. The best option was to activate operation Temperer in put the country in a state of emergency. It wasn't Theresa May's decision alone by the way it was J-Tac's.


I didn't suggest that. Just asking a question that hasn't been asked by anyone else.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> I saw Corbin on tv and he refused to condemn the ira after 5 times of asking
> It is you who believe the pm is bad but Corbin is good
> He has friends in the ira and is scared of upsetting them
> You believe what you want but I believe what I saw and heard


Hes probably sick of answering the same the question. How do you feel that the tories are selling arms to the most dangerous terrorists on the planet? bombing counties? They are directly fuelling terrorism, how do you feel about that? How do you feel May cut police numbers to the bone then accused the police of crying wolf? 
*Police Federation crying wolf over cuts, says Theresa May*

20 May 2015
From the section UK
924 comments

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32806520


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> I didn't suggest that. Just asking a question that hasn't been asked by anyone else.


Well you know the answer.

Westminster was a lone wolf attack.

This attack is linked to a network of terrorists active on UK soil and beyond.


----------



## Calvine

Happy Paws said:


> New I thought the election was been left alone today..............


You'll be lucky, @Happy Paws...it will likely be going on years after the election is over and done with; just like the EU Referendum thread. I'm amazed at how much time some people have on their hands...


----------



## noushka05

@Bisbow Iraq war: "This will set off a spiral of conflict that will fuel the wars, conflict, terrorism and misery of future generations" - Jeremy Corbyn, 2003


----------



## noushka05

Tory Peter Oborne -

*Peter Oborne*‏@*OborneTweets* May 20

_Corbyn's manifesto is coherent. His policies on the Middle East shame the Tories.
My latest for Middle East Eye:_ http://www.middleeasteye.net/column...ued-radical-and-morally-courageous-2036528122


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> @Bisbow Iraq war: "This will set off a spiral of conflict that will fuel the wars, conflict, terrorism and misery of future generations" - Jeremy Corbyn, 2003


Yes but Corbyn refuses to condemn the IRA bombings (I think it was the Brighton bombing specifically) and apparently was linked to a magazine that said the Tory MP (who at the time was Maggie Thatcher) should be killed or something to that effect. He still refuses to condemn this.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> give the woman a break


You'll be lucky, @stockwellcat...not when we can use a dreadful tragedy as a weapon against her! So many threads so quickly turn nasty on this forum (you must have noticed).


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> I didn't suggest that. Just asking a question that hasn't been asked by anyone else.


Your original post was "Has anyone asked why this state of emergency wasn't called following the attack outside Westminster?

I'm saying nothing more.... "

Because I expect most people knew the obvious answer and didnt feel it necessary to ask .


----------



## Odin_cat

I don't get...you condemn someone for 'political point scoring' against Theresa May and then do exactly the same amount Corbyn. He did condemn the IRA, I think there's a very good reason why Sky are pretending he didn't.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> I don't get...you condemn someone for 'political point scoring' against Theresa May and then do exactly the same amount Corbyn. He did condemn the IRA, I think there's a very good reason why Sky are pretending he didn't.


Not just Sky News try BBC News, ITV News, Channel 4 News. He was asked repeatedly to condemn the IRA bombings specifically and he refused to 6 times.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Yes but Corbyn refuses to condemn the IRA bombings (I think it was the Brighton bombing specifically) and apparently was linked to a magazine that said the Tory MP (who at the time was Maggie Thatcher) should be killed or something to that effect. He still refuses to condemn this.


Hes condemned all bombing. Unlike May the man has always been an advocate of peace. What about May selling arms to Saudi? Theresa May last month in Saudi Arabia - home of ISIS's biggest funders. ( Shes cut police numbers by 20,000 & intends to cut even more).

Tell me who is the greatest threat to this country.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Hes condemned all bombing. Unlike May the man has always been an advocate of peace. What about May selling arms to Saudi? Theresa May last month in Saudi Arabia - home of ISIS's biggest funders. ( Shes cut police numbers by 20,000 & intends to cut even more).
> 
> Tell me who is the greatest threat to this country.
> 
> View attachment 312016


Why is an arm's contract with Saudi Arabia a threat?

Corbyn would rather disarm the UK and leave us defenceless. What would he have done with recent events in Manchester?

Theresa May and J-Tac done the right thing.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> You'll be lucky, @stockwellcat...not when we can use a dreadful tragedy as a weapon against her! So many threads so quickly turn nasty on this forum (you must have noticed).


How do you feel about this Calvine?

Yorkshire policeman tells Amber Rudd about perilous state his force is in following Tory cuts


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Hes condemned all bombing. Unlike May the man has always been an advocate of peace. What about May selling arms to Saudi? Theresa May last month in Saudi Arabia - home of ISIS's biggest funders. ( Shes cut police numbers by 20,000 & intends to cut even more).
> 
> Tell me who is the greatest threat to this country.
> 
> View attachment 312016


He may well have condemned all bombing but refused 6 times to condemn the IRA bombings specifically.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Well you know the answer.
> 
> Westminster was a lone wolf attack.
> 
> This attack is linked to a network of terrorists active on UK soil and beyond.


And don't let's forget that USA intelligence , it must have been intelligence? Leaked the name of the attacker, something wrong somewhere when that can happen


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> How do you feel about this Calvine?


Not sure what the correlation is to my post. None as far as I can see. I was talking about people deliberately using a tragic event to further their own ends and score points in the snidey comments competition. I think we all know who they are.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Why is an arm's contract with Saudi Arabia a threat?
> 
> Corbyn would rather disarm the UK and leave us defenceless. What would he have done with recent events in Manchester?
> 
> Theresa May and J-Tac done the right thing.


Because Saudi fund Isis! The Saudis are bombing Yemen with our bombs! Tories foreign policy & arms dealing is fuelling terrorism.

No he would not disarm the UK. I thought you'd read labour manifesto?

Its the tories that are disarming the UK with their massive cuts!. (& more cuts to come)

20,000 Army
20,000 Police
6,000 Home Office
5,000 Royal Navy
5,000 RAF

Tories have put Britain at risk not Corbyn.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> Not sure what the correlation is to my post. None as far as I can see. I was talking about people deliberately using a tragic event to further their own ends and score points in the snidey comments competition. I think we all know who they are.


I'm not being snidey, I'm genuinely interested how you feel about the massive cuts to our police.


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> You'll be lucky, @stockwellcat...not when we can use a dreadful tragedy as a weapon against her! So many threads so quickly turn nasty on this forum (you must have noticed).





stockwellcat said:


> Why is an arm's contract with Saudi Arabia a threat?
> 
> Corbyn would rather disarm the UK and leave us defenceless. What would he have done with recent events in Manchester?
> 
> Theresa May and J-Tac done the right thing.


Duh, dont be silly, course we would manange, simple we would have sent that nice mr corbyn in to sit down and have tea with the suicide bomber


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Because Saudi fund Isis!


 Since when? They actually lead a coalition of air strikes against ISIS, the biggest contributor of this coalition of middle East allies is Saudi Arabia. I am not going around in circles with you as your questions have been answered a number of times throughout this thread and many others.

You forget UK, rest of Europe and America armed unknown terror groups in Syria during the Syrian war a few years back and ISIS then sprung it's head up out of the sand. Oh did you forget that crucial bit of information.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Duh, dont be silly, course we would manange, simple we would have sent that nice mr corbyn in to sit down and have tea with the suicide bomber


That's just not true Sue.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> He may well have condemned all bombing but refused 6 times to condemn the IRA bombings specifically.


Not the impression I got, yet never mind.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> That's just not true Sue.


ISIS won't sit around a table, he is deluded. If they did they would probably take everyone out in the room. They have no interest in peace. My dad explained this the other day when I was at his in Lancaster, they are a bunch of loonies that are hell-bent on killing themselves and taking out others in the process.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Since when? They actually lead a coalition of air strikes against ISIS, the biggest contributor of this coalition of middle East allies is Saudi Arabia. I am not going around in circles with you as your questions have been answered a number of times throughout this thread and many others.
> 
> You forget UK, rest of Europe and America armed unknown terror groups in Syria during the Syrian war a few years back and ISIS then sprung it's head up out of the sand. Oh did you forget that crucial bit of information.







I don't have a lot of time this morning but there is loads of evidence to support what I say about Saudi. And I don't forget anything. The Wests foreign policy is horrific & that's why we are targets for extremists now. Only Corbyn offers a change of policy. I'll respond fully later.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> ISIS won't sit around a table, he is deluded. If they did they would probably take everyone out in the room. They have no interest in peace. My dad explained this the other day when I was at his in Lancaster, they are a bunch of loonies that are hell-bent on killing themselves and taking out others in the process.


OMG Are you actually reading the posts or just scanning like I often do? lol Owen Smith wanted to negotiate with ISIS NOT Corbyn.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> I don't have a lot of time this morning but there is loads of evidence to support what I say about Saudi. And I don't forget anything. The Wests foreign policy is horrific & that's why we are targets for extremists now. Only Corbyn offers a change of policy. I'll respond fully later.


Yes but the middle East's human rights are practically none existent. Think about that one.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Owen Smith wanted to negotiate with ISIS.


Yes I did read your post. He's deluded.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> scanning like I often do?


Thank you for confirming this


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> ISIS won't sit around a table, he is deluded. If they did they would probably take everyone out in the room. They have no interest in peace. My dad explained this the other day when I was at his in Lancaster, they are a bunch of loonies that are hell-bent on killing themselves and taking out others in the process.


They once said that about the IRA and the loyalist terrorists some seem to have forgotten about. Over 20 years of troops in Ireland did nothing to help did it?

Then came the peace process. A remarkable achievement by John Major (yes I will give a Tory credit when its due) and Tony Blair.

George Bush's "War on terror" has done nothing to stop this kind of activity. It's actually made matters a good deal worse and treating aggression with aggression only fuels this activity further.

The media and press don't help either. It further fuels this activity through the publicity they receive. Some sick individuals and groups thrive on such "publicly". The media seemed more bothered about the culprit and his religious beliefs rather than those poor people who lost their lives.

When the German pilot who deliberately crashed his plane killing himself and the other 200+ on board nobody questioned his religious beliefs did they? Nor Thomas Hamilton when he killed those schoolchildren in Dunblane amongst many other examples.

There's no point in suggesting they won't sit by a table. You could well be right of course but how would we know if it's not attempted?

Besides Corbyn has said he would resort to military action as a last resort and when authorised to do so, ie: Not illegally as in Iraq.


----------



## Bisbow

The only thing Corbin offers is complete capitulation to all those who hate us and what we stand for

Corbin runs with the hare and hunts with the hounds, whatever side offers him the most brownie points

He is two faced and I don't trust either of them


----------



## Dr Pepper

KittenKong said:


> When the German pilot who deliberately crashed his plane killing himself and the other 200+ on board nobody questioned his religious beliefs did they? Nor Thomas Hamilton when he killed those schoolchildren in Dunblane amongst many other examples.


Shame you had to say that to prove a point. However you've failed because they weren't committed in the name of religion and no religion/cult took responsibility for them. Unlike Manchester.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> When the German pilot who deliberately crashed his plane killing himself and the other 200+ on board nobody questioned his religious beliefs did they? Nor Thomas Hamilton when he killed those schoolchildren in Dunblane amongst many other examples.


So you are comparing *individual* mentally disturbed people to organized religious terrorism?


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> They once said that about the IRA and the loyalist terrorists some seem to have forgotten about. Over 20 years of troops in Ireland did nothing to help did it?
> 
> Then came the peace process. A remarkable achievement by John Major (yes I will give a Tory credit when its due) and Tony Blair.
> 
> George Bush's "War on terror" has done nothing to stop this kind of activity. It's actually made matters a good deal worse and treating aggression with aggression only fuels this activity further.
> 
> The media and press don't help either. It further fuels this activity through the publicity they receive. Some sick individuals and groups thrive on such "publicly". The media seemed more bothered about the culprit and his religious beliefs rather than those poor people who lost their lives.
> 
> When the German pilot who deliberately crashed his plane killing himself and the other 200+ on board nobody questioned his religious beliefs did they? Nor Thomas Hamilton when he killed those schoolchildren in Dunblane amongst many other examples.
> 
> There's no point in suggesting they won't sit by a table. You could well be right of course but how would we know if it's not attempted?
> 
> Besides Corbyn has said he would resort to military action as a last resort and when authorised to do so, ie: Not illegally as in Iraq.


Seriously.
You are compairing the IRA to ISIS. The IRA didn't want to conquer and rule ISIS did with fear and killing people. The IRA (Irish Republician Army) was a totally different problem.

Again ISIS won't sit down around a table and negotiate peace.


----------



## kimthecat

DT said:


> Duh, dont be silly, course we would manange, simple we would have sent that nice mr corbyn in to sit down and have tea with the suicide bomber


Dont forget the Nutella sandwiches , that'll win 'em over .


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> not being snidey, I'm genuinely interested how you feel about the massive cuts to our police.


I'm talking about people using a tragic event as a stick to beat someone. You refuse to understand what you don't want to see. It's not you in particular...there's a few who do it.


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> Owen Smith wanted to negotiate with ISIS


You really think it is possible to negotiate with this lot? The word 'deluded' springs to mind.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Yes but the middle East's human rights are practically none existent. Think about that one.


Western intervention has made matters far worse. Please do your homework SWC. We created ISIS.



Bisbow said:


> The only thing Corbin offers is complete capitulation to all those who hate us and what we stand for
> 
> Corbin runs with the hare and hunts with the hounds, whatever side offers him the most brownie points
> 
> He is two faced and I don't trust either of them


Corbyns foreign policy has been consistent - & consistently right.

The only hope of making the UK, the world a safer place is to rethink our dreadful foreign policy. Bear in mind the person who wrote this, Peter Oborne, is a Tory

*Middle East Eye*‏Verified [email protected]*MiddleEastEye* May 19

This is how Corbyn is courageously changing the British foreign policy agenda on the Middle East http://ow.ly/eKRr30bSjC6






























stockwellcat said:


> Yes I did read your post. He's deluded.


Owen Smith is deluded, I agree! Corbyn however is not - which is the point I was making.



Calvine said:


> You really think it is possible to negotiate with this lot? The word 'deluded' springs to mind.


No I don't thinks its possible to negotiate with them & neither does Corbyn


----------



## DoodlesRule

KittenKong said:


> Has anyone asked why this state of emergency wasn't called following the attack outside Westminster?
> 
> I'm saying nothing more....


You do know it is not the Prime Minister who decides the terrorist threat levels? Pretty clear what you are trying to suggest and its a pretty low level to sink to.



noushka05 said:


> OMG Are you actually reading the posts or just scanning like I often do? lol Owen Smith wanted to negotiate with ISIS NOT Corbyn.


Proves what a deluded fool he is then doesn't it. Isn't Own Smith gay - it would be off with his head or chucked off the nearest high building pretty pronto


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> So you are comparing *individual* mentally disturbed people to organized religious terrorism?


About sums it up that does


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> Hes probably sick of answering the same the question. How do you feel that the tories are selling arms to the most dangerous terrorists on the planet? bombing counties? They are directly fuelling terrorism, how do you feel about that? How do you feel May cut police numbers to the bone then accused the police of crying wolf?
> *Police Federation crying wolf over cuts, says Theresa May*
> 
> 20 May 2015
> From the section UK
> 924 comments
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32806520
> 
> View attachment 312013


I'm not disagreeing about cuts to police numbers and the problems that must cause but in fairness I wouldn't expect any police force to have the capacity to bring in thousands of extra staff to deal with a crisis such as this so why not utilise the armed forces? Surely that is part of why we have them so they can be mobilised when we need them.



stockwellcat said:


> He may well have condemned all bombing but refused 6 times to condemn the IRA bombings specifically.


I'm not sure why he should condemn one lots bombings specifically if he has already condemned the bombing by both sides.



DT said:


> Duh, dont be silly, course we would manange, simple we would have sent that nice mr corbyn in to sit down and have tea with the suicide bomber


Do you know what DT? I bet he would stand more chance of achieving something than TM. To me he comes across as far more sincere and he probably would be prepared to sit down and have a chat rather than sabre rattling as a first course of action which has done nothing but create power vacuums and chaos whenever we've tried it - every time we make the same mistakes (no exit/long term plans) and things end up even worse.



Bisbow said:


> The only thing Corbin offers is complete capitulation to all those who hate us and what we stand for
> 
> Corbin runs with the hare and hunts with the hounds, whatever side offers him the most brownie points
> 
> He is two faced and I don't trust either of them


Where has he offered complete capitulation though? I'm genuinely interested to know. I'm not a Labour voter but I seriously don't see the same person as you describe and the hunting analogy is quite amusing given the PM's recent declaration of her support for it. She seems to want blood on her hands not Corbyn.

@stockwellcat am I detecting yet another flip back to the tories?


----------



## noushka05

DoodlesRule said:


> You do know it is not the Prime Minister who decides the terrorist threat levels? Pretty clear what you are trying to suggest and its a pretty low level to sink to.
> 
> Proves what a deluded fool he is then doesn't it. Isn't Own Smith gay - it would be off with his head or chucked off the nearest high building pretty pronto


I agree with you, Owen Smith is deluded to think we can negotiate with these monsters. I have no idea what the sexuality of Owen Smith is though.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm not disagreeing about cuts to police numbers and the problems that must cause but in fairness I wouldn't expect any police force to have the capacity to bring in thousands of extra staff to deal with a crisis such as this so why not utilise the armed forces? Surely that is part of why we have them so they can be mobilised when we need them.
> 
> I'm not sure why he should condemn one lots bombings specifically if he has already condemned the bombing by both sides.
> 
> Do you know what DT? I bet he would stand more chance of achieving something than TM. To me he comes across as far more sincere and he probably would be prepared to sit down and have a chat rather than sabre rattling as a first course of action which has done nothing but create power vacuums and chaos whenever we've tried it - every time we make the same mistakes (no exit/long term plans) and things end up even worse.
> 
> Where has he offered complete capitulation though? I'm genuinely interested to know. I'm not a Labour voter but I seriously don't see the same person as you describe and the hunting analogy is quite amusing given the PM's recent declaration of her support for it. She seems to want blood on her hands not Corbyn.
> 
> @stockwellcat am I detecting yet another flip back to the tories?


Please watch this from 2015 RPH.

*Manchester Police Officer Warned Theresa May That Budget Cuts Were A Threat To National Security*


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> I agree with you, Owen Smith is deluded to think we can negotiate with these monsters. I have no idea what the sexuality of Owen Smith is though.


He is married - to a woman.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> Please watch this from 2015 RPH.
> 
> *Manchester Police Officer Warned Theresa May That Budget Cuts Were A Threat To National Security*


Like I said I don't deny the cuts to policing must have caused an operational nightmare but even in times of plenty I wouldn't expect police forces to have the numbers who can respond to what is basically a state of emergency. We have to have back up numbers elsewhere to call upon so can't see a problem with using the army for that.


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Where has he offered complete capitulation though? I'm genuinely interested to know. I'm not a Labour voter but I seriously don't see the same person as you describe and the hunting analogy is quite amusing given the PM's recent declaration of her support for it. She seems to want blood on her hands not Corbyn.
> 
> @stockwellcat am I detecting yet another flip back to the tories?


He is very clever at manipulating people, if he can side with his IRA friends he can side with any one, he is the one with blood on his hands.

ISIS could and would change his mind as soon as they threatened him, as they will if he gains power, as a lot of his own party know


----------



## DoodlesRule

rottiepointerhouse said:


> He is married - to a woman.


oh! Thought I had read something in the Guardian but obviously wrong, unless married and also gay 

Just had a google, knew there was some gay issue - apparently he made some derogatory remark about Angela Eagle (who is gay)


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DoodlesRule said:


> oh! Thought I had read something in the Guardian but obviously wrong, unless married and also gay


Have you got the right Owen? Noush often quotes Owen Jones who writes for the guardian and is a gay rights/political activist whereas Owen Smith is a Labour MP in Wales.



Bisbow said:


> He is very clever at manipulating people, if he can side with his IRA friends he can side with any one, he is the one with blood on his hands.
> 
> ISIS could and would change his mind as soon as they threatened him, as they will if he gains power, as a lot of his own party know


I thought all politicians did that though? They all take sides and get us involved in things like invading other people's countries and deposing their leaders then leaving a great big mess behind. I also doubt there is a politician alive who would directly stand up to Isis themselves - send in the armed forces yes but not one to one face to face.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Like I said I don't deny the cuts to policing must have caused an operational nightmare but even in times of plenty I wouldn't expect police forces to have the numbers who can respond to what is basically a state of emergency. We have to have back up numbers elsewhere to call upon so can't see a problem with using the army for that.


The point is we wouldn't need the army on the streets had the police not been slashed to the bone. I think it would be better to re-employ the 20,000 police May sacked then deploy troops on the streets.



Bisbow said:


> He is very clever at manipulating people, if he can side with his IRA friends he can side with any one, he is the one with blood on his hands.
> 
> ISIS could and would change his mind as soon as they threatened him, as they will if he gains power, as a lot of his own party know


Corbyn has been an advocate for peace all his life, opposed the Iraq wars & the failed 'war on terror' which has only fuelled extremism yet hes the one with blood on his hands? Unbelievable.

The brother of Martyn Hett, who died in the attack has this message to say about the Sun newspaper which also claims Corbyn has blood on his hands.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Seriously.
> You are compairing the IRA to ISIS. The IRA didn't want to conquer and rule ISIS did with fear and killing people. The IRA (Irish Republician Army) was a totally different problem.
> 
> Again ISIS won't sit down around a table and negotiate peace.


I conceed you are right but the "solution" being a "war on terror" hasn't worked has it.

As Noushka and RPH have already commented I'll leave it there.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Have you got the right Owen? Noush often quotes Owen Jones who writes for the guardian and is a gay rights/political activist whereas Owen Smith is a Labour MP in Wales.
> 
> I thought all politicians did that though? They all take sides and get us involved in things like invading other people's countries and deposing their leaders then leaving a great big mess behind. I also doubt there is a politician alive who would directly stand up to Isis themselves - send in the armed forces yes but not one to one face to face.


Oh I bet @DoodlesRule has got the Owens, Smith & Jones, muddled up


----------



## noushka05




----------



## noushka05

We only need soldiers on the streets because of Tory cuts, say Police Federation. Corbyn is the danger though ;(

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/only-need-soldiers-streets-because-10493131


----------



## Odin_cat

Let's be clear, ISIS is not a Muslim organisation any more than the KKK are a christian one. I don't see why normal Muslims should be tarred with the same brush as fanatics.

I do think that to combat extremism we need to be allowed to criticise all religion more freely.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> The point is we wouldn't need the army on the streets had the police not been slashed to the bone. I think it would be better to re-employ the 20,000 police May sacked then deploy troops on the streets.
> 
> Corbyn has been an advocate for peace all his life, opposed the Iraq wars & the failed 'war on terror' which has only fuelled extremism yet hes the one with blood on his hands? Unbelievable.
> 
> The brother of Martyn Hett, who died in the attack has this message to say about the Sun newspaper which also claims Corbyn has blood on his hands.
> 
> View attachment 312046


I dislike Corbin as much as you dislike Mrs M

The difference is I don't go searching the net to find nasty things to say about him as you do her

I don't trust him an inch and if he becomes PM I would like to leave this country as hundreds of others would like to
The thing is I am too old


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> I dislike Corbin as much as you dislike Mrs M
> 
> The difference is I don't go searching the net to find nasty things to say about him as you do her
> 
> I don't trust him an inch and if he becomes PM I would like to leave this country as hundreds of others would like to
> The thing is I am too old


Do Mrs May's plan for social care not worry you? I know my Mum is very upset that the house she has scrimped and saved pennies to keep for years that she wanted to leave to her children and grandchildren might not be hers to leave if May gets her way.


----------



## DoodlesRule

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Have you got the right Owen? Noush often quotes Owen Jones who writes for the guardian and is a gay rights/political activist whereas Owen Smith is a Labour MP in Wales.
> 
> I thought all politicians did that though? They all take sides and get us involved in things like invading other people's countries and deposing their leaders then leaving a great big mess behind. I also doubt there is a politician alive who would directly stand up to Isis themselves - send in the armed forces yes but not one to one face to face.





noushka05 said:


> Oh I bet @DoodlesRule has got the Owens, Smith & Jones, muddled up


I have indeed - thank you ladies for clearing that up, least I know just confused rather than lost it  I just assumed Owen Jones because as you say Noush quotes him


----------



## 1290423

DT said:


> About sums it up that does


Me too I use it as a shortcut.

Seriously I do buy some food there the £10 food deals good value


----------



## DoodlesRule

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Do Mrs May's plan for social care not worry you? I know my Mum is very upset that the house she has scrimped and saved pennies to keep for years that she wanted to leave to her children and grandchildren might not be hers to leave if May gets her way.


May be selfish but doesn't worry me as under the manifesto situation we would no longer be paying for my Mum's care - her assets hover round the threshold so we pay full fees till it depletes, then get part funding till balance builds up again, then pay full again, its like ground hog day! Its stressful having to keep applying for funding as much as anything.

Not entirely selfish as my assets mean what I would be able to leave my son would be less but I don't think young tax payers should have to pay for my care should I need it so that I can leave a bigger inheritance for my son.


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Do Mrs May's plan for social care not worry you? I know my Mum is very upset that the house she has scrimped and saved pennies to keep for years that she wanted to leave to her children and grandchildren might not be hers to leave if May gets her way.


No. Because I don't think it will happen that way

It is the opposition trying to cause trouble, and, it seems, succeeding


----------



## DoodlesRule

DT said:


> Me too I use it as a shortcut.
> 
> Seriously I do buy some food there the £10 food deals good value


Turn right for the M&S thread lol :Smuggrin


----------



## 1290423

DoodlesRule said:


> Turn right for the M&S thread lol :Smuggrin


Oops x think my sat navs a bit iffy


----------



## 1290423

Bisbow said:


> No. Because I don't think it will happen that way
> 
> It is the opposition trying to cause trouble, and, it seems, succeeding


It worries me, again they are targeting those that have worked hard all their lives damd hard


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> No. Because I don't think it will happen that way
> 
> It is the opposition trying to cause trouble, and, it seems, succeeding


How is the opposition causing trouble by discussing the wording of the manifesto and the interviews that her ministers gave over the weekend? Have you seen the interview of Damien Green by Andrew Marr? I linked it earlier in the thread but in case you missed it have a watch. Of course she has started to back track a little when the strength of feeling against it rattled their cages somewhat

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p053k6y7


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DoodlesRule said:


> May be selfish but doesn't worry me as under the manifesto situation we would no longer be paying for my Mum's care - her assets hover round the threshold so we pay full fees till it depletes, then get part funding till balance builds up again, then pay full again, its like ground hog day! Its stressful having to keep applying for funding as much as anything.
> 
> Not entirely selfish as my assets mean what I would be able to leave my son would be less but I don't think young tax payers should have to pay for my care should I need it so that I can leave a bigger inheritance for my son.


I don't know your age and wouldn't be so rude as to ask  but my Mum is of the age when they believed paying NI meant care from the cradle to the grave, she is not a wealthy woman by any stretch of the imagination and has often got by on a pittance rather than get into debt so I think we do need to remember our current elderly people paid into the system all their lives believing it would look after them if they needed it. I'm not saying we shouldn't look at social care and how to fund it going forwards but its pretty mean to target the elderly who have paid in to the system in good faith.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I don't know your age and wouldn't be so rude as to ask .


Let me help you out there.

Oi @DoodlesRule how old are you?


----------



## Elles

The conservatives are placing the same limit whether you are in care, or at home. £100,000. They are then capping the maximum you can be asked to pay and offering loans against your house until you die, so if you do become well enough to go home, you have a home to go to. Sounds very fair to me, if the elderly have to be charged at all. The political parties generally seem to think they do so I don't think this one has much bite any more. 

The current way is that if you go into care you pay until you've got 23k left and are expected to sell your house. If at home you also get to keep 23k, but also your house. Even more of a lottery than the conservatives are suggesting.

Unless I've got it all completely wrong.


----------



## Jesthar

Elles said:


> The conservatives are placing the same limit whether you are in care, or at home. £100,000. They are then capping the maximum you can be asked to pay and offering loans against your house until you die, so if you do become well enough to go home, you have a home to go to. Sounds very fair to me, if the elderly have to be charged at all. The political parties generally seem to think they do so I don't think this one has much bite any more.
> 
> The current way is that if you go into care you pay until you've got 23k left and are expected to sell your house. If at home you also get to keep 23k, but also your house. Even more of a lottery than the conservatives are suggesting.
> 
> Unless I've got it all completely wrong.


Not completely wrong, but there are a couple of points,

First, forgive me if I'm misremembering (I'm struggling to keep up!), but I believe the comments on there being a 'cap' were more along the lines of something that will definitely have to be investigated and is likely rather than a firm committment. Either way, they won't say what value the cap will be until AFTER the election, so it _might_ be reasonable, it could be so high your average person won't hit ever hit it.

Secondly, insiders in the finance sector have already confirmed that the plan is if you want to have care in your own home, you'll have to take out a specific type of 'insurance' (basically a specialist form of equity release), and the premiums will be payable from the estate after death (the pre-dissolution govenrment approached them to design this product). It has been agreed those premiums will have NO upper limit, so you could end up paying up to the limit for your care, only for your relatives to find when you die that the insurance company present them with a bill worth the remainder of the estate.

Doesn't sound very fair to me.


----------



## Elles

I read that councils, not insurance companies will be providing the loans. The limit was promised in a speech by Theresa May. No they don't say what the limit will be, previously 75k was mooted, but with the new intentions, it is likely to be far higher. For me, in as of itself, it is no longer an consideration. It's one of those things that I think will be just as bad, whoever gets in, but this offering is slightly fairer than how it is today.

My personal opinion is that the elderly shouldn't be paying anything, they've already paid for it and more, but it's no longer on my list of reasons not to vote conservative. It's still a long list though.


----------



## Jesthar

Elles said:


> I read that councils, not insurance companies will be providing the loans.


I think that might be something else. The home care products were definitely referred to as 'insurance', and the Government definitely approached the City to design the product according to the whistleblowers


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> The conservatives are placing the same limit whether you are in care, or at home. £100,000. They are then capping the maximum you can be asked to pay and offering loans against your house until you die, so if you do become well enough to go home, you have a home to go to. Sounds very fair to me, if the elderly have to be charged at all. The political parties generally seem to think they do so I don't think this one has much bite any more.
> 
> The current way is that if you go into care you pay until you've got 23k left and are expected to sell your house. If at home you also get to keep 23k, but also your house. Even more of a lottery than the conservatives are suggesting.
> 
> Unless I've got it all completely wrong.


Don't you think its pretty arrogant to expect people to vote for you whilst not telling them what the cap will be and also not telling them what the cut off point for winter fuel allowance will be? I do think the other parties have better plans

*Liberal Democrats* will take five key steps in order to put our health and social care system back on a sustainable financial footing:


An immediate 1p rise on the basic, higher and additional rates of Income Tax to raise £6 billion additional revenue which would be ringfenced to be spent only on NHS and social care services.
Direct this additional investment to the following priority areas in the health and care system: social care, primary care (and other out-of-hospital care), mental health and public health. This represents the most efficient and effective way of spending these extra resources - ensuring they will have the greatest impact on the quality of care patients receive.
In the longer term and as a replacement for the 1p Income Tax rise, commission the development of a dedicated Health and Care Tax on the basis of wide consultation, possibly based on a reform of National Insurance contributions, which will bring together spending on both services into a collective budget and sets out transparently, on people's payslips, what we spend on them.
Establish a cross-party health and social care convention, bringing together stakeholders from all political parties, patients groups, the public, and professionals from within the health and social care system to carry out a comprehensive review of the longer-term sustainability of the health and social care finances and workforce, and the practicalities of greater integration. We would invite the devolved administrations to be a part of this work.
Introduce a statutory independent budget monitoring agency for health and care, similar to the Office for Budget Responsibility. This would report every three years on how much money the system needs to deliver safe and sustainable treatment and care, and how much is needed to meet the costs of projected increases in demand and any new initiatives - to ensure any changes in services are properly costed and affordable.
Our longer-term objective will be to bring together NHS and social care into one seamless service - pooling budgets in every area by 2020 and developing integrated care organisations.

*Labour*

Our social care sector is in crisis, with severe consequences for the quality of care, public finances, personal assets, pressures on unpaid carers of family and friends, and delays to discharging patients from hospitals.

Care services have been slowly but relentlessly privatised. In recent years, one in ten people reaching the age of 65 have faced lifetime care costs of over £100,000, with some homeowners paying the entire value of their homes.

The Conservatives' cuts have led to £4.6 billion lost from social care budgets, despite rising demand. Around 1.2 million older people have care needs that are going unmet. Care in the community has become a cover for unseen neglect.

In our first term, Labour will lay the foundations of a National Care Service for England.

Our first urgent task will be to address the immediate funding crisis. We will increase the social care budgets by a further £8 billion over the lifetime of the next Parliament, including an additional £1 billion for the first year. This will be enough for providers to pay a real living wage without cutting the quality of care they provide. It will allow implementation of the principles of the Ethical Care Charter, already adopted in 28 council areas, ending 15-minute care visits and providing care workers with paid travel time, access to training and an option to choose regular hours.

Labour will also increase the Carer's Allowance for unpaid full-time carers to align the benefit with rates of the Jobseeker's Allowance.

Short-term funding solutions will not address the fundamental long-term challenges of our ageing demographics, nor meet the growing demands arising from late-life illnesses.

The National Care Service will be built alongside the NHS, with a shared requirement for single commissioning, partnership arrangements, pooled budgets and joint working arrangements. We will build capacity to move quickly towards a joined-up service that will signpost users to all the appropriate services at the gateway through which they arrive.

In its first years, our service will require an additional £3 billion of public funds every year, enough to place a maximum limit on lifetime personal contributions to care costs, raise the asset threshold below which people are entitled to state support, and provide free end of life care. There are different ways the necessary monies can be raised. We will seek consensus on a cross-party basis about how it should be funded, with options including wealth taxes, an employer care contribution or a new social care levy.

Improving the quality of social care is a vital part of providing dignity in older age and independence and support for people who are vulnerable or have a disability or a mental health condition.

Labour will build a new National Care Service. We will also set out the funding alternatives clearly and honestly, seeking to implement change through consensus. Providing dignity and care in old age should transcend party politics and campaign slogans.

As opposed to this

*Conservatives*

Where others have failed to lead, we will act. We have already taken immediate action, putting £2 billion into the social care system and allowing councils to raise more money for care themselves from Council Tax. We are now proposing medium and long-term solutions to put elderly care in our country on a strong and stable footing. Under the current system, care costs deplete an individual's assets, including in some cases the family home, down to £23,250 or even less. These costs can be catastrophic for those with modest or medium wealth. One purpose of long-term saving is to cover needs in old age; those who can should rightly contribute to their care from savings and accumulated wealth, rather than expecting current and future taxpayers to carry the cost on their behalf. Moreover, many older people have built considerable property assets due to rising property prices. Reconciling these competing pressures fairly and in a sustainable way has challenged many governments of the past. We intend to tackle this with three connected measures. First, we will align the future basis for means-testing for domiciliary care with that for residential care, so that people are looked after in the place that is best for them. This will mean that the value of the family home will be taken into account along with other assets and income, whether care is provided at home, or in a residential or nursing care home. Second, to ensure this is fair, we will introduce a single capital floor, set at £100,000, more than four times the current means test threshold. This will ensure that, no matter how large the cost of care turns out to be, people will always retain at least £100,000 of their savings and assets, including value in the family home. Third, we will extend the current freedom to defer payments for residential care to those receiving care at home, so no-one will have to sell their home in their lifetime to pay for care. We believe this powerful combination maximises protection for pensioner households with modest assets, often invested in the family home, while remaining affordable for taxpayers. We consider it more equitable, within and across the generations, than the proposals following the Dilnot Report, which mostly benefited a small number of wealthier people.

I find the statement that those who can should rightly contribute to their care from savings and accumulated wealth rather than expecting current and future taxpayers to carry the cost on their behalf rather insulting to the millions of pensioners who have already paid in for their care and are now being told they can't have it


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Do Mrs May's plan for social care not worry you? .


yaeh , it takes the fun out of saying I'm changing my will .


----------



## Guest

I read a study about Isis, about the members and recruitment strategy, including an interview about a few Finns, who went to Syria. The information is in Finnish and I can´t find the source anymore (originally in Helsingin Sanomat/ monthly magazine). Apparently suicide bombers are the lowest of the rank, often western origin or young, without any particular skills and gullible, who seem to gain their only moment of "respect" by committing these acts. 

According the the study, the majority seem to join Isis just get money and gain power, and only few actually join because of religion. Of these many become soon very disappointed with Isis, as there is no real plan to create a real Islamic state. That shouldn´t surprise anyone but the most gullible or ignorant, as Isis kills mostly Muslims, which is against Koran. Sadly, attacks on any Western nation gain huge publicity and are therefore Isis considers them more "valuable" than attacks in e.g. Afganistan or Irak. The leaders are mostly Saddam´s Irak´s armies top officers, which were thrown out when Saddam was killed. The only aim is to create chaos and hatred everywhere, as that is the only way the Isis leaders can stay in power. Even Taleban had more plans than them and provided stability. Now, when Isis has lost the majority of it´s areas and sources of income, they don´t have much else left but terrorism. By murdering innocent people, Isis hopes that the West will associate all Islam with Isis. That will make them seem much bigger than what they are, and that will also make it much easier for them to recruit the gullible and stupid to join them. 

In the interviews, those, who travelled to Syria, said that it was just chaotic, no one knew what was the goal, who was the enemy or friend. Some ended up helping all wounded and didn´t join any group, as they couldn´t figure out what they were, some tried to fight against Syrian´s government, but realized that Isis was even worse, and became disillusioned by all, and one left for Isis dying soon after. Now they are facing a trial in Finland, and have no idea what will happen to them. All say that Isis doesn´t have anything for anyone, and try to warn gullible youngsters joining them. 

I just hope that the terrorists won´t get what they want and we will keep on fighting for the better world for all. IMO this is the least we can do to show respect for all those, who were murdered. This is a war for better world, democracy and freedom.


----------



## DoodlesRule

Dr Pepper said:


> Let me help you out there.
> 
> Oi @DoodlesRule how old are you?


Clearly not a gentleman  56.

My Dad is 87, Mum 80 - Dad always knew money would run out and the state would not be able to finance care because people are living so much longer. In my grandparents generation the majority were lucky to get a couple of years retirement and many died before (I had a great uncle who literally dropped dead the day after he retired), and that generation rarely owned property/had anything to leave. Many people now can have 30+ years in retirement and there gets a tipping point where there are more drawing from the system than paying in.

As I have said previously, yes I have worked hard but not for the increase in the value of my house, thats just down to luck. I am trying to think of the younger generation, house prices are so high many have no prospect of owning their own home and now face massive taxation because the older generation feel they shouldn't have to contribute.

What everyone seems to be missing is under the current rules if you are unfortunate enough to have to go into a care home your home is sold and you are left with £14,000 before you no longer have to pay any of your own care costs


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> my Mum is of the age when they believed paying NI meant care from the cradle to the grave, she is not a wealthy woman by any stretch of the imagination and has often got by on a pittance rather than get into debt so I think we do need to remember our current elderly people paid into the system all their lives believing it would look after them if they needed it.


That's what I was taken to believe until I was in my 30s, then the goal posts kept changing. 
I really don't think the young of today should pick up the tab, when so many older people are sitting pretty



Elles said:


> They are then capping the maximum you can be asked to pay and offering loans against your house until you die, so if you do become well enough to go home, you have a home to go to. Sounds very fair to me, if the elderly have to be charged at all


To me this cap was introduced as a knee jerk reaction, whether to the bad press or pressure from the well off, who yet again will be the beneficiaries, while the less well off suffer


----------



## Elles

So what are lib dems and labour going to do about the current situation with the elderly? At the moment, if you get taken into residential care your savings and income are taken, then your house. I suppose that's fair enough, you don't need it in a nursing home.  If you're lucky enough to die at home, your family keeps the house.

The wealthy can set up residential care, a wet room, lifts and nurses/carers at home, or pay for a private nursing home so they won't lose their 5 million dollar house either way. You've just got to have enough money to pay, which the wealthy have always had and mostly always done.

The poor who don't own a house, have no savings and rely on the state pay nothing.

So the discussion is should the less well off and middling pay, if so how much and how should it be calculated and applied.

I'm not convinced that labour, or lib dems have a better plan than the conservatives, because they don't seem to have one. Hence it's no longer in my calculations and I'm looking at other things.


----------



## Calvine

rottiepointerhouse said:


> He is married - to a woman.


So are my two gay neighbours who each have two children but live together...for what it's worth!


----------



## DoodlesRule

Re expectation of cradle to the grave care - I thought I would be retiring at 60, we all used to get NHS dental care etc. Times change I am afraid


----------



## Calvine

Odin_cat said:


> Let's be clear, ISIS is not a Muslim organisation any more than the KKK are a christian one. I don't see why normal Muslims should be tarred with the same brush as fanatics.


One is a genuine religion and the other is a warped ideology which commits atrocities in the name of that religion; in my opinion, that is.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> I dislike Corbin as much as you dislike Mrs M
> 
> The difference is I don't go searching the net to find nasty things to say about him as you do her
> 
> I don't trust him an inch and if he becomes PM I would like to leave this country as hundreds of others would like to
> The thing is I am too old


Everything I've posted about May I can support with references. I wouldn't dislike May if she was wasn't destroying everything I care about Bisbow. Her values are cruelty, greed, deceit & selfishness - I cant support someone who represents corporate interests and the media barons. Mays government is dangerous, it is acting against the national interests of this country in everything it does - just look at the overwhelming evidence, listen to the experts.

Corbyn may well be a crap PM if he got in but at least he'd be on the side of the majority in this country & he is incorruptible, hes the only hope we have. If the tories get in they will grant themselves sweeping powers that will affect young & old alike. We can wave goodbye to the NHS, they will continue to eviscerate public services, unregulated fracking will be rolled out across the country, badger cull rolled out, hunting ban repealed, EU migrants made to feel like criminals... All this will make me want to leave the country, but after the way May is treating migrants, who would welcome me?


----------



## Elles

As far as I'm aware the wealthy don't get local authority care, so limits either way would make no odds to them. They pay to be cared for, they go into a private home, or employ agency workers or private nurses and pay for it. The local authority doesn't, its means tested at the higher end and they wouldn't be entitled to anything. Maybe I'm wrong. Everyone I know who is wealthy have paid for it themselves and not asked for state help, perhaps it was just voluntary.


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> As far as I'm aware the wealthy don't get local authority care, so limits either way would make no odds to them. They pay to be cared for, they go into a private home, or employ agency workers or private nurses and pay for it. The local authority doesn't, its means tested at the higher end and they wouldn't be entitled to anything. Maybe I'm wrong. Everyone I know who is wealthy have paid for it themselves and not asked for state help, perhaps it was just voluntary.


The thing is, as I've said before. My mother wasn't wealthy, assessed as having just over £20,000 in savings and that was only because the Canadian government hadn't been paying her her war widows pension for 6 decades and eventually paid it to her in a lump sum. Yet she had to pay for her own care while someone sitting on a £300,000 house with no savings paid nothing.

How fair was that?


----------



## noushka05

MrsZee said:


> I read a study about Isis, about the members and recruitment strategy, including an interview about a few Finns, who went to Syria. The information is in Finnish and I can´t find the source anymore (originally in Helsingin Sanomat/ monthly magazine). Apparently suicide bombers are the lowest of the rank, often western origin or young, without any particular skills and gullible, who seem to gain their only moment of "respect" by committing these acts.
> 
> According the the study, the majority seem to join Isis just get money and gain power, and only few actually join because of religion. Of these many become soon very disappointed with Isis, as there is no real plan to create a real Islamic state. That shouldn´t surprise anyone but the most gullible or ignorant, as Isis kills mostly Muslims, which is against Koran. Sadly, attacks on any Western nation gain huge publicity and are therefore Isis considers them more "valuable" than attacks in e.g. Afganistan or Irak. The leaders are mostly Saddam´s Irak´s armies top officers, which were thrown out when Saddam was killed. The only aim is to create chaos and hatred everywhere, as that is the only way the Isis leaders can stay in power. Even Taleban had more plans than them and provided stability. Now, when Isis has lost the majority of it´s areas and sources of income, they don´t have much else left but terrorism. By murdering innocent people, Isis hopes that the West will associate all Islam with Isis. That will make them seem much bigger than what they are, and that will also make it much easier for them to recruit the gullible and stupid to join them.
> 
> In the interviews, those, who travelled to Syria, said that it was just chaotic, no one knew what was the goal, who was the enemy or friend. Some ended up helping all wounded and didn´t join any group, as they couldn´t figure out what they were, some tried to fight against Syrian´s government, but realized that Isis was even worse, and became disillusioned by all, and one left for Isis dying soon after. Now they are facing a trial in Finland, and have no idea what will happen to them. All say that Isis doesn´t have anything for anyone, and try to warn gullible youngsters joining them.
> 
> I just hope that the terrorists won´t get what they want and we will keep on fighting for the better world for all. IMO this is the least we can do to show respect for all those, who were murdered. This is a war for better world, democracy and freedom.


I hope everyone will read this.

. I believe many of the young Muslims who left to join Isis had no clue about Islam, proof of that is they had bough the book Islam for Dummies off Amazon.

And this is a brilliant article by Mehdi Hasan. I have loads of respect for Mehdi. We have to be careful not to play into the terrorists hands.

Reactions to Manchester Bombing Show How Anti-Muslim Bigots Are "Useful Idiots" for ISIS

https://theintercept.com/2017/05/24...nti-muslim-bigots-are-useful-idiots-for-isis/


----------



## Elles

It's not @rona My point was to the idea that a cap would benefit mostly the rich. The rich don't care, they pay for the best care they can afford, they don't care about caps on local authority cost when it's irrelevant to them.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DoodlesRule said:


> Clearly not a gentleman  56.
> 
> My Dad is 87, Mum 80 - Dad always knew money would run out and the state would not be able to finance care because people are living so much longer. In my grandparents generation the majority were lucky to get a couple of years retirement and many died before (I had a great uncle who literally dropped dead the day after he retired), and that generation rarely owned property/had anything to leave. Many people now can have 30+ years in retirement and there gets a tipping point where there are more drawing from the system than paying in.
> 
> As I have said previously, yes I have worked hard but not for the increase in the value of my house, thats just down to luck. I am trying to think of the younger generation, house prices are so high many have no prospect of owning their own home and now face massive taxation because the older generation feel they shouldn't have to contribute.
> 
> What everyone seems to be missing is under the current rules if you are unfortunate enough to have to go into a care home your home is sold and you are left with £14,000 before you no longer have to pay any of your own care costs


I've got plenty of death certificates in my family history research folder for people who lives into the 80's & 90's - for instance

John xxxx died 1850 of old age at 85 yrs.
Edward xxxx died 1848 from exhaustion aged 81 yrs
Anna xxx died 1868 from decay of nature aged 91 yrs.
Thomas xxxx died 1880 from decay of nature aged 90 yrs.
Maggie xxxx died 1901 aged 84 yrs.
Sarah xxx died 1927 senility and heart failure aged 82 yrs.

Rather than punish the elderly for the problems the young are facing why don't we address those problems instead?



rona said:


> That's what I was taken to believe until I was in my 30s, then the goal posts kept changing.
> I really don't think the young of today should pick up the tab, when so many older people are sitting pretty
> 
> To me this cap was introduced as a knee jerk reaction, whether to the bad press or pressure from the well off, who yet again will be the beneficiaries, while the less well off suffer


To be clear I'm not saying the young should pick up the tab but I am saying it is morally wrong to take money from people all their working lives with a promise to provide something then change the goal posts oh and not even tell them what those new goal posts will be before the election. How is that fair?



DoodlesRule said:


> Re expectation of cradle to the grave care - I thought I would be retiring at 60, we all used to get NHS dental care etc. Times change I am afraid


There is a world of difference between having to pay a percentage of dental costs and possibly hundreds of thousands of pounds.


----------



## Elles

The cost of residential care they reckon at between 29 and 40k a year. How long do you want to live in a care home?


----------



## noushka05

DoodlesRule said:


> Re expectation of cradle to the grave care - I thought I would be retiring at 60, we all used to get NHS dental care etc. Times change I am afraid


Why shouldn't we still expect that? Prior to the Health & Social Care Act 2012 our NHS was the fairest most cost effective health service in the world.


----------



## DoodlesRule

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I've got plenty of death certificates in my family history research folder for people who lives into the 80's & 90's - for instance
> 
> John xxxx died 1850 of old age at 85 yrs.
> Edward xxxx died 1848 from exhaustion aged 81 yrs
> Anna xxx died 1868 from decay of nature aged 91 yrs.
> Thomas xxxx died 1880 from decay of nature aged 90 yrs.
> Maggie xxxx died 1901 aged 84 yrs.
> Sarah xxx died 1927 senility and heart failure aged 82 yrs.
> 
> Rather than punish the elderly for the problems the young are facing why don't we address those problems instead?
> 
> To be clear I'm not saying the young should pick up the tab but I am saying it is morally wrong to take money from people all their working lives with a promise to provide something then change the goal posts oh and not even tell them what those new goal posts will be before the election. How is that fair?
> 
> There is a world of difference between having to pay a percentage of dental costs and possibly hundreds of thousands of pounds.


The difference is RP, there was no benefit system then either their families scrapped together to feed them or they still worked - my great grandfather died in his late 70's he was still working in a quarry.

There is a misconception that your NI contributions are covering you individually, what my Dad paid in his working life went towards what was being claimed by others at that time. Because people live longer then more people are claiming pensions for longer and needing care for longer. Ultimately more will be drawing out than tax payers paying in - governments have known this for many many years, because it was the proverbial political hot potato they passed it on to the next set in power and none of them were prepared to address it


----------



## noushka05

Please watch this if you want the NHS to survive.

So you're thinking of voting Conservative?


----------



## Elles

The young people joining ISIS and being convinced into a kamikazi style suicide are as indoctrinated and misled as those joining a destructive, or suicide cult imo. Their communities, families and religious leaders could learn how to communicate with them to try to prevent the mindset in the first place. Unfortunately as long as muslims (and various races) are subjected to religious and race hate, the more people are feeding the fire.


----------



## DoodlesRule

noushka05 said:


> Why shouldn't we still expect that? Prior to the Health & Social Care Act 2012 our NHS was the fairest most cost effective health service in the world.
> 
> View attachment 312058


I don't know the answer Noushka - maybe the country as a whole isn't prepared to pay the level of taxation to fund it, maybe expectations and usage is too high. My parents generation maybe respected it more because the welfare state was introduced in their lifetime so they only utilised even the doctors let alone A&E for serious illness. It was set up for health not dealing with lifestyle choices, perhaps its trying to do too much


----------



## noushka05

DoodlesRule said:


> The difference is RP, there was no benefit system then either their families scrapped together to feed them or they still worked - my great grandfather died in his late 70's he was still working in a quarry.
> 
> There is a misconception that your NI contributions are covering you individually, what my Dad paid in his working life went towards what was being claimed by others at that time. Because people live longer then more people are claiming pensions for longer and needing care for longer. Ultimately more will be drawing out than tax payers paying in - governments have known this for many many years, because it was the proverbial political hot potato they passed it on to the next set in power and none of them were prepared to address it


The government aren't overspending though, they have implemented massive cuts to social care and our NHS.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> Everything I've posted about May I can support with references. I wouldn't dislike May if she was wasn't destroying everything I care about Bisbow. Her values are cruelty, greed, deceit & selfishness - I cant support someone who represents corporate interests and the media barons. Mays government is dangerous, it is acting against the national interests of this country in everything it does - just look at the overwhelming evidence, listen to the experts.
> 
> Corbyn may well be a crap PM if he got in but at least he'd be on the side of the majority in this country & he is incorruptible,
> 
> Incorruptible. Don't make me laugh. he is friends with the IRA and you expect me to believe he is incorruptible. If it wasn't so serious it would be hilarious
> He has certainly manipulated you to his way of thinking
> I would never have believed you. of all people would be taken in by him
> 
> View attachment 312057


----------



## noushka05

DoodlesRule said:


> I don't know the answer Noushka - maybe the country as a whole isn't prepared to pay the level of taxation to fund it, maybe expectations and usage is too high. My parents generation maybe respected it more because the welfare state was introduced in their lifetime so they only utilised even the doctors let alone A&E for serious illness. It was set up for health not dealing with lifestyle choices, perhaps its trying to do too much


Please take a look at the video I just posted @DoodlesRule


----------



## Elles

I'm not thinking of voting conservative. I think though if people are going to need care for 30+ years of their life someone will have to pay for it. Who? Richard Branson, or my daughter perhaps? Personally I think it's exaggerated. Most elderly don't go into residential homes and require little care at home before they die. We can probably still afford their care, if it was more of a priority. Billions go into new equipment, maybe we should pay health workers and care for the elderly first? I don't know.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DoodlesRule said:


> The difference is RP, there was no benefit system then either their families scrapped together to feed them or they still worked - my great grandfather died in his late 70's he was still working in a quarry.
> 
> There is a misconception that your NI contributions are covering you individually, what my Dad paid in his working life went towards what was being claimed by others at that time. Because people live longer then more people are claiming pensions for longer and needing care for longer. Ultimately more will be drawing out than tax payers paying in - governments have known this for many many years, because it was the proverbial political hot potato they passed it on to the next set in power and none of them were prepared to address it


I know there was no benefit system but they still lived to a good age, most to them eventually went into the workhouse to die, actually I'm amazed at how much the workhouses did do for people, my lot were in and out every time they had babies or had no work and for end of life care. Looking at some of the photos of the hospital wards they were much better conditions than many of our elderly endure nowadays in nursing homes - I know I've worked in quite a few of them


----------



## Bisbow

Not sure what happened there but as I was saying

"Incorruptible" don't make me laugh, it would be hilarious if it was not so serious

He is friends with the IRA so is very corruptible

He has certainly manipulated you, something I would not have expected fromyou


----------



## noushka05

I'm not the one parroting Sun propaganda. @Bisbow










May is helping destabilise the Middle East. She sells arms to despotic regimes who fund ISIS - we are now the second biggest arms dealer in the world. Shes slashed our Polices & armed forces to the bone. These things we know as FACT. Yet you believe Corbyn is the danger.










I love Mark Steel lol


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> I'm not thinking of voting conservative. I think though if people are going to need care for 30+ years of their life someone will have to pay for it. Who? Richard Branson, or my daughter perhaps? Personally I think it's exaggerated. Most elderly don't go into residential homes and require little care at home before they die. We can probably still afford their care, if it was more of a priority. Billions go into new equipment, maybe we should pay health workers and care for the elderly first? I don't know.


We pool the cost like we do with our NHS. The likes of Branson are part of the problem, he is leeching public money from already underfunded NHS. Privatising services takes money out of our NHS & social care & directs it into private pockets.


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...news/tory-police-cuts-quit-manchester-9299619


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> I'm not thinking of voting conservative. I think though if people are going to need care for 30+ years of their life someone will have to pay for it. Who? Richard Branson, or my daughter perhaps? Personally I think it's exaggerated. Most elderly don't go into residential homes and require little care at home before they die. We can probably still afford their care, if it was more of a priority. Billions go into new equipment, maybe we should pay health workers and care for the elderly first? I don't know.


I quoted this quite a bit way back in the thread from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38887694

*9. Fewer older people are getting help with social care*

But perhaps the biggest problem is council-run social care. This encompasses day centres, help in the home for tasks such as washing and dressing, and good quality care in care homes during the final years of life. It is seen as essential to keep people well and living independently - and out of hospital.

In an era when the population is ageing you would expect more people to be getting help from the state.

However, the opposite is true. In England over the past four years, the number of older people getting help has fallen by a quarter. The result is large numbers going without care or having to pay for it themselves.









The other parts of the UK can make a case for being more generous in this respect - home care is capped at £60 a week in Wales and free for the over-75s in Northern Ireland, while Scotland provides free personal care (washing and dressing) in both care homes and people's own homes.

*10. Much more is spent on front-line healthcare than social care*
But none of them has cracked it. Indeed, if you were setting up a health and care service today, ask yourself this - how would it be done?

Would you separate medical care from personal care? Give one service to a national institution and the other to local councils? Would you provide one free at the point of need and charge for the other? Would you increase the budget of one, but cut the other?









Would you build more than 200 hospitals and spend over half of your budget on them when the biggest users of care are people with long-term illnesses that need care rather than medical intervention?


----------



## noushka05

A desperate police officer pleads with Amber Rudd to wake up to the reality of tory cuts.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## KittenKong

http://metro.co.uk/2017/05/25/there...of-scaremongering-over-spending-cuts-6660878/


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...news/tory-police-cuts-quit-manchester-9299619
> View attachment 312067


And May wants to slash another £157m from Manchesters police force .


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> I'm not the one parroting Sun propaganda. @Bisbow
> 
> View attachment 312061
> 
> 
> May is helping destabilise the Middle East. She sells arms to despotic regimes who fund ISIS - we are now the second biggest arms dealer in the world. Shes slashed our Polices & armed forces to the bone. These things we know as FACT. Yet you believe Corbyn is the danger.
> 
> View attachment 312062
> 
> 
> I love Mark Steel lol
> View attachment 312063


From the same people who brought you this.

Never forget those who died in Hillsborough.


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> From the same people who brought you this.
> 
> Never forget those who died in Hillsborough.
> 
> View attachment 312082


Decent people should boycott The SCUM. And the Mail & the rest of the gutter rags.

Have you seen this brilliant demolition of Dacre & the Mail by Andrew O'Hagan?


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> I'm not thinking of voting conservative. I think though if people are going to need care for 30+ years of their life someone will have to pay for it. Who? Richard Branson, or my daughter perhaps? Personally I think it's exaggerated. Most elderly don't go into residential homes and require little care at home before they die. We can probably still afford their care, if it was more of a priority. Billions go into new equipment, maybe we should pay health workers and care for the elderly first? I don't know.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I don't know your age and wouldn't be so rude as to ask  .


Oh I would how old are you please


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Oh I would how old are you please


I could tell you but then I would have to kill you  I will only admit to it starting with a 5.


----------



## Elles

This is more like reading the tabloids than a forum.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Latest poll results for Wales show Conservative drop of 7 and Labour gain of 9 from 2 weeks ago.









*YouGov Welsh poll*
22 MAY 2017
The latest YouGov Welsh poll for ITV Wales and Cardiff University has topline figures of CON 34%(-7), LAB 44%(+9), LDEM 6%(-1), Plaid 9%(-2), UKIP 5%(+1). Changes are from a fortnight ago. Full tabs are here.

The polls in Wales in the election campaign have been a roller coaster, perhaps exaggerated a little by timing - the first was at the very start of the campaign when there was that burst of Tory enthusiasm that produced twenty-plus point leads in Britain and a ten point Tory lead in Wales. This most recent one was conducted straight after the Conservative manifesto launch, when they were reeling from the badly received policy on social care, and has Labour back to a solid lead. Labour now have a ten point lead, essentially the same as they got at the 2015 general election in Wales.


----------



## Satori

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I find the statement that those who can should rightly contribute to their care from savings and accumulated wealth rather than expecting current and future taxpayers to carry the cost on their behalf rather insulting to the millions of pensioners who have already paid in for their care and are now being told they can't have it


Me too. I am disgusted by this. In fairness, I find the Labour Party manifesto extract equally disgusting but at least I expected it from them.

If there were a Tory party fighting this election, I would vote Tory as I always have. Under Theresa May, I genuinely feel there isn't a Tory party any more. I'll be voting for the apathy party this time.


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> From the same people who brought you this.
> 
> Never forget those who died in Hillsborough.
> 
> View attachment 312082


Gosh noush, youve kept that a long time, or did you borrow it off your little friend


----------



## Happy Paws2

noushka05 said:


> Hes condemned all bombing. Unlike May the man has always been an advocate of peace. What about May selling arms to Saudi? Theresa May last month in Saudi Arabia - home of ISIS's biggest funders. ( *Shes cut police numbers by 20,000 & intends to cut even more*).
> 
> Tell me who is the greatest threat to this country.
> 
> View attachment 312016


Yes, how on earth does she expect them to protect us, when she cutting their numbers all the time. The women is bloody dangerous and people will still vote for her, unbelievable.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> .


Yep, absolutely


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Satori said:


> Me too. I am disgusted by this. In fairness, I find the Labour Party manifesto extract equally disgusting but at least I expected it from them.
> 
> If there were a Tory party fighting this election, I would vote Tory as I always have. Under Theresa May, I genuinely feel there isn't a Tory party any more. I'll be voting for the apathy party this time.


Join us in the vote anything but Tory camp


----------



## Guest

Some statistics about national health care systems. Quite interesting and easy reading.

http://www.healthpowerhouse.com/files/EHCI_2016/EHCI_2016_report.pdf

And a quote from the report. 
"1.3.15 United Kingdom 15th place, 761 points. A 2014 survey to the public of the UK, asking about "What is the essence of being British?" got the most common response "Having access to the NHS". Nevertheless, the UK healthcare system has never made it into the top 10 of the EHCI, mainly due to poor accessibility (together with Poland and Sweden the worst among European healthcare systems) and an autocratic top-down management culture. Mediocre Outcomes of the British healthcare system are improving, with the UK scoring Green on Infant Mortality for the first time in the EHCI. The country, which once created the Bletchley Park code-breaking institution would do well to study the style of management of professional specialists created there5 !"

We were "8th, 842 points. As the EHCI ranking indicates, Finland has established itself among the European champions, with top Outcomes at a fairly low cost. In fact, Finland is a leader in value-for-money healthcare. Some waiting times are still long, provision of "comfort care" such as cataract surgery and dental care is limited and that out of pocket-payment, also for prescription drugs, is significantly higher than for Nordic neighbours. This probably means that the public payors and politicians traditionally were less sensitive to "care consumerism" than in other affluent countries. This situation seems to have been put right in recent years, with Finland being among the top scorers for Range and Reach of Healthcare Services." Now we might face huge changes , which scares most of, as the conservative government wants to speed privatization, knowing they´ll lose next elections. Bloody conservatives, they should never have the power alone, as they sell everything they can. Hopefully we can stall this 2 more years, and then improve the parts that don´t work and maintain the parts that do work.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Elles

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 312093


That would be an improvement.


----------



## 1290423

Ive just stolen this, some of you may enjoy reading it
Graham Neal
1 hr
The Disease of Austerity
In my (almost) 70 years on this planet I’ve lived through some 13 changes in government and 15 Prime Ministers from Tory to Labour and even one coalition. I’ve had close brushes with serious illness – one, in 1967, was a very nasty road accident from which I recovered even though I came within a whisker of losing a leg and from which the long term effects have left me somewhat immobile. The other was nearly 18 months ago when, by routine investigation, a large 10 inch tumour was found in my bowel and, within a month, through the incredible medical expertise of a very talented surgeon and the gentle caring of nurses, it was removed along with half of my bowel. Each incident, almost 50 years apart, but both carried out by an NHS for which I have the deepest regard and which has my endless thanks.
I’ve seen some changes in the NHS over that time. Some scanning and tests, which these days is taken for granted, to detect early cancers, AAA’s, degenerative conditions….the list goes on…are now just routine and were only dreamed of 50 years ago. How the NHS has grown and improved over my lifetime would have been unimaginable to me as a child.
Diseases of my childhood have also become a lot rarer. Polio, for instance, was more common even in the 1950’s than you would think. Now virtually unknown. I have seen the NHS expand, improve and innovate every year of my life - including when certain governments had no real belief or passion in it – to become, up until 2010, THE most efficient health system and admired the world over.
That was until the Tory/Liberal Coalition government of 2010.
Since then, the British Public have been systematically lied to and drip fed false statistics to numb us all to what has actually been going on. First was the Cameron government with the Health and Social Care Act – not a word of which was spoken about in their manifesto of the time….on the contrary….”The NHS is still safe in our hands” Cameron endlessly lied. And all written and rushed through Parliamentary procedure at top speed with barely a mention of it’s main enacting clause(s) ridding the Health Secretary of any and all obligation to actually be responsible for the provision of the NHS itself. Sly, these Tories.
Then came the greatest lie of all. Austerity. “We have no money” they lied. “We NEED austerity” they lied “The national debt is a time-bomb waiting to explode and kill us all” they lied. The reality, of course, was nothing of the sort. It was one big con-trick reinforced by all the media outlets – most of which were global companies – mainly banks and the MSM - that subsequently did VERY well out of it. The BBC had been primed and all the “right” people injected into it’s hierarchy into all the “right” posts to mould and spin the news in a constant 24 hour cycle and so we all became anaesthetised to the “need” for austerity even as, in the 5th or 6th richest country in the world, the national debt doubled and all that money, along with all the untaxed revenues from the friends of the Tories disappeared off-shore – never to be seen again.
Since then, along with just about every other public service in this country, it has been sold off to compensate for a lowering tax take - as virtually all the global companies who do business here pay virtually no tax at all - though all the profits are squirrelled away, right under the taxman’s nose incidentally, into far-off secret tax havens and the rich have become unimaginably richer. We have to imagine their riches because their accounts are SO secret.
Then came the 2015 election and the surprising result which gave Cameron the opportunity to shake off the Liberals and go it alone, albeit with a slim majority. They must have thought that all their Christmases had come at once. Re-elected by an electorate that actually liked what they were doing? “Good heavens, time to turn up the pain threshold” they must have thought “Time to really turn the Austerity Machine up to full power” they must have thought. “Time to separate the NHS from Social Care so that they will be a lot easier to sell off” they thought and so both the NHS and Social Care were starved of cash and resources whilst all the time, the drip, drip, drip, of anaesthetic was slowly pumped through the BBC that it was all “necessary” and “all in the National Long Term Interest of the country” to “remedy an out-dated system of provision that will saddle future generations with an unworkable model of social care” All meaningless and all lies.
It’s like Big Pharma….we’ve all heard the stories….
”We’ve found a cure for a disease that’s going to make us an absolute fortune…” 
“Oh, fabulous…..what’s the disease…?
Oh, we don’t exactly know yet…we’ll have to invent one but that’s the job of marketing…”
The disease turns out to be greed and we’ve all been drip-fed the “cure” Austerity.
There was never, ever a problem with either the NHS or Social Care paid for by National Insurance contributions. Not enough money? Okay – put another penny on NI. Everyone benefits, nobody made homeless or relying on food banks as a result. The ultimate equitable solution – as it has been since 1948. Democratic Socialism working at it’s finest.
We’ve all been sold the lie that the NHS and Social care have become unaffordable and unwieldy by a series of governments that have systematically starved them both of money and resources so that we believe the lie that the only Austerity is the Saviour. It is Bullshit and always has been.
Vote Labour – Vote Jeremy Corbyn on the 8th June. End the Lies


----------



## 1290423

And I dont often share links, but heres one 
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/this-is-the-worst-tory-election-campaign-ever/


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Who is he @DT


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Who is he @DT


I stole it rottie me bad  
Just thought it was well written,


----------



## 1290423

Would you trust National Security to a woman that 'lost' 114 files on MP and Peers connection to Paedophilia.?


----------



## 1290423

Just been doing some reading on social media They are destroying teressa may and the tories, I really dont like it.
Puts thinking cap back on as back on team 'undecided'
Can't promise a vote for labour just because a load of young people are ripping into the opposition.
Likewise can't promise the same to the Conservatives either as when I think back I have definitely become worse off over the past 10 years


----------



## 1290423

Two Weeks today the polling stations will be closed can't come soon enough now


----------



## 1290423

Last post today
The following snippet of information may help some of you who are in the undecided camp.
Looking at it from the labour side this must be a win win situation and a big vote puller, just think they can borrow all the money they are ever likely to need and never ever have to pay it back.

Here ya go,
Hope it helps with your decision
Night night xxxxx

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17281...tal-solar-eclipse-hitting-america-and-the-uk/


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/24/andrew-lansley-diary-simon-lewis-foi-request-court


----------



## noushka05

Happy Paws said:


> Yes, how on earth does she expect them to protect us, when she cutting their numbers all the time. The women is bloody dangerous and people will still vote for her, unbelievable.


She's extremely dangerous. 20,000 police cuts is why we have troops on the street now & we didn't after 7/7. May knew the risks - https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...hief-hugh-orde-tory-cuts-put-public-in-danger

This is what Theresa May did as Home Secretary HP.












MrsZee said:


> Some statistics about national health care systems. Quite interesting and easy reading.
> 
> http://www.healthpowerhouse.com/files/EHCI_2016/EHCI_2016_report.pdf
> 
> And a quote from the report.
> "1.3.15 United Kingdom 15th place, 761 points. A 2014 survey to the public of the UK, asking about "What is the essence of being British?" got the most common response "Having access to the NHS". Nevertheless, the UK healthcare system has never made it into the top 10 of the EHCI, mainly due to poor accessibility (together with Poland and Sweden the worst among European healthcare systems) and an autocratic top-down management culture. Mediocre Outcomes of the British healthcare system are improving, with the UK scoring Green on Infant Mortality for the first time in the EHCI. The country, which once created the Bletchley Park code-breaking institution would do well to study the style of management of professional specialists created there5 !"
> 
> We were "8th, 842 points. As the EHCI ranking indicates, Finland has established itself among the European champions, with top Outcomes at a fairly low cost. In fact, Finland is a leader in value-for-money healthcare. Some waiting times are still long, provision of "comfort care" such as cataract surgery and dental care is limited and that out of pocket-payment, also for prescription drugs, is significantly higher than for Nordic neighbours. This probably means that the public payors and politicians traditionally were less sensitive to "care consumerism" than in other affluent countries. This situation seems to have been put right in recent years, with Finland being among the top scorers for Range and Reach of Healthcare Services." Now we might face huge changes , which scares most of, as the conservative government wants to speed privatization, knowing they´ll lose next elections. Bloody conservatives, they should never have the power alone, as they sell everything they can. Hopefully we can stall this 2 more years, and then improve the parts that don´t work and maintain the parts that do work.


Conservative ideology means _nothing_ must get in the way of profit & everything is looked at as a business opportunity even ill health. Watch Jeremy Hunt admit they are " _looking at the aging population as one of the biggest commercial opportunities" _ The tories are trying to privatise social care purely for the benefit of big business.
_




_
I saw this yesterday.












DT said:


> Ive just stolen this, some of you may enjoy reading it
> Graham Neal
> 1 hr
> The Disease of Austerity
> In my (almost) 70 years on this planet I've lived through some 13 changes in government and 15 Prime Ministers from Tory to Labour and even one coalition. I've had close brushes with serious illness - one, in 1967, was a very nasty road accident from which I recovered even though I came within a whisker of losing a leg and from which the long term effects have left me somewhat immobile. The other was nearly 18 months ago when, by routine investigation, a large 10 inch tumour was found in my bowel and, within a month, through the incredible medical expertise of a very talented surgeon and the gentle caring of nurses, it was removed along with half of my bowel. Each incident, almost 50 years apart, but both carried out by an NHS for which I have the deepest regard and which has my endless thanks.
> I've seen some changes in the NHS over that time. Some scanning and tests, which these days is taken for granted, to detect early cancers, AAA's, degenerative conditions….the list goes on…are now just routine and were only dreamed of 50 years ago. How the NHS has grown and improved over my lifetime would have been unimaginable to me as a child.
> Diseases of my childhood have also become a lot rarer. Polio, for instance, was more common even in the 1950's than you would think. Now virtually unknown. I have seen the NHS expand, improve and innovate every year of my life - including when certain governments had no real belief or passion in it - to become, up until 2010, THE most efficient health system and admired the world over.
> That was until the Tory/Liberal Coalition government of 2010.
> Since then, the British Public have been systematically lied to and drip fed false statistics to numb us all to what has actually been going on. First was the Cameron government with the Health and Social Care Act - not a word of which was spoken about in their manifesto of the time….on the contrary…."The NHS is still safe in our hands" Cameron endlessly lied. And all written and rushed through Parliamentary procedure at top speed with barely a mention of it's main enacting clause(s) ridding the Health Secretary of any and all obligation to actually be responsible for the provision of the NHS itself. Sly, these Tories.
> Then came the greatest lie of all. Austerity. "We have no money" they lied. "We NEED austerity" they lied "The national debt is a time-bomb waiting to explode and kill us all" they lied. The reality, of course, was nothing of the sort. It was one big con-trick reinforced by all the media outlets - most of which were global companies - mainly banks and the MSM - that subsequently did VERY well out of it. The BBC had been primed and all the "right" people injected into it's hierarchy into all the "right" posts to mould and spin the news in a constant 24 hour cycle and so we all became anaesthetised to the "need" for austerity even as, in the 5th or 6th richest country in the world, the national debt doubled and all that money, along with all the untaxed revenues from the friends of the Tories disappeared off-shore - never to be seen again.
> Since then, along with just about every other public service in this country, it has been sold off to compensate for a lowering tax take - as virtually all the global companies who do business here pay virtually no tax at all - though all the profits are squirrelled away, right under the taxman's nose incidentally, into far-off secret tax havens and the rich have become unimaginably richer. We have to imagine their riches because their accounts are SO secret.
> Then came the 2015 election and the surprising result which gave Cameron the opportunity to shake off the Liberals and go it alone, albeit with a slim majority. They must have thought that all their Christmases had come at once. Re-elected by an electorate that actually liked what they were doing? "Good heavens, time to turn up the pain threshold" they must have thought "Time to really turn the Austerity Machine up to full power" they must have thought. "Time to separate the NHS from Social Care so that they will be a lot easier to sell off" they thought and so both the NHS and Social Care were starved of cash and resources whilst all the time, the drip, drip, drip, of anaesthetic was slowly pumped through the BBC that it was all "necessary" and "all in the National Long Term Interest of the country" to "remedy an out-dated system of provision that will saddle future generations with an unworkable model of social care" All meaningless and all lies.
> It's like Big Pharma….we've all heard the stories….
> "We've found a cure for a disease that's going to make us an absolute fortune…"
> "Oh, fabulous…..what's the disease…?
> Oh, we don't exactly know yet…we'll have to invent one but that's the job of marketing…"
> The disease turns out to be greed and we've all been drip-fed the "cure" Austerity.
> There was never, ever a problem with either the NHS or Social Care paid for by National Insurance contributions. Not enough money? Okay - put another penny on NI. Everyone benefits, nobody made homeless or relying on food banks as a result. The ultimate equitable solution - as it has been since 1948. Democratic Socialism working at it's finest.
> We've all been sold the lie that the NHS and Social care have become unaffordable and unwieldy by a series of governments that have systematically starved them both of money and resources so that we believe the lie that the only Austerity is the Saviour. It is Bullshit and always has been.
> Vote Labour - Vote Jeremy Corbyn on the 8th June. End the Lies


This is 100% accurate, you can fact check every point made. Consider yourself repped Sue


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Just been doing some reading on social media They are destroying teressa may and the tories, I really dont like it.
> Puts thinking cap back on as back on team 'undecided'
> Can't promise a vote for labour just because a load of young people are ripping into the opposition.
> Likewise can't promise the same to the Conservatives either as when I think back I have definitely become worse off over the past 10 years


Look at the tories record, those youngsters will be telling the truth. They must be terrified for their future under another 5 years or more of tory rule. This government is an absolute disaster. An uncosted manifesto with the most shocking policies - how arrogant to assume people will vote for you if you just keep slagging Corbyn off, blatantly lying & expecting people to believe you're strong & stable because you say so. The tories must think people stupid.

Labour's manifesto is costed - the tories is not. The money is there to run our services


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Last post today
> The following snippet of information may help some of you who are in the undecided camp.
> Looking at it from the labour side this must be a win win situation and a big vote puller, just think they can borrow all the money they are ever likely to need and never ever have to pay it back.
> 
> Here ya go,
> Hope it helps with your decision
> Night night xxxxx
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17281...tal-solar-eclipse-hitting-america-and-the-uk/


Good morning!

Just remember, the tories have borrowed more, got us into more debt - with the added bonus of dangerous levels of public service cuts


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> Gosh noush, youve kept that a long time, or did you borrow it off your little friend


@DT: I guess she has a scrapbook.:Hilarious


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> Look at the tories record, those youngsters will be telling the truth. They must be terrified for their future under another 5 years or more of tory rule. This government is an absolute disaster. An uncosted manifesto with the most shocking policies - how arrogant to assume people will vote for you if you just keep slagging Corbyn off, blatantly lying & expecting people to believe you're strong & stable because you say so. The tories must think people stupid.
> 
> Labour's manifesto is costed - the tories is not. The money is there to run our services
> 
> View attachment 312119


Costed. Lol. By a child maybe but as soon as it is exposed to an adult intelligence the whole thing is bullsh1t.

Let's just take the biggest source of funds £19.4bn from reversing corporation tax cuts. That has been derived by an idiot pro-rating the tax take using the historic and current CT rates but ignores the changes to cap allowances and other reliefs which, if considered, reduce the number to 0.6bn.

But, wait. Even allowing the 0.6bn would be generous because it requires increasing the headline rate without reversing the relief changes too so giving an historical high effective CT rate. You don't think that would hurt corporate economic activity? Well let's look at this hard fact. Corporation tax take in 09/10 under the last labour government was £32bn. In 16/17 it was £56bn.... a record high.

I CBA going further but I assume that every line of this garbage costing will similarly fall apart if prodded by a tiny bit of intelligence.


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> Costed. Lol. By a child maybe but as soon as it is exposed to an adult intelligence the whole thing is bullsh1t.
> 
> Let's just take the biggest source of funds £19.4bn from reversing corporation tax cuts. That has been derived by an idiot pro-rating the tax take using the historic and current CT rates but ignores the changes to cap allowances and other reliefs which, if considered, reduce the number to 0.6bn.
> 
> But, wait. Even allowing the 0.6bn would be generous because it requires increasing the headline rate without reversing the relief changes too so giving an historical high effective CT rate. You don't think that would hurt corporate economic activity? Well let's look at this hard fact. Corporation tax take in 09/10 under the last labour government was £32bn. In 16/17 it was £56bn.... a record high.
> 
> I CBA going further but I assume that every line of this garbage costing will similarly fall apart if prodded by a tiny bit of intelligence.


The Guardians economics editor Larry Elliott has done an interesting article on the manifesto. Tax expert Richard Murphy says hes bang on the button - https://www.theguardian.com/busines...tasy-land-quite-the-opposite?CMP=share_btn_tw

At least labour have tried to cost it!


----------



## noushka05

7 weeks ago , Corbyn told May he was worried about the 20,000 cut in the number of police.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> 7 weeks ago , Corbyn told May he was worried about the 20,000 cut in the number of police.


And


----------



## noushka05

Has anyone else on youtube had a tory party advert scaremongering about Jeremy Corbyn being a threat to our security?

The elite must be really rattled. Look at the massive amount of donations the tories are receiving compared to labour. The rich & powerful are buying our 'democracy'.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> And


And he was right to voice his concerns about the massive cuts wasn't he!


----------



## noushka05

*Conservatives admit they don't know how much school breakfasts pledge will cost*
Party admits it does not know how much it will cost to provide breakfasts for all 4.62 million primary school children in England
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/e...-election-2017-manifesto-pledge-a7753311.html


----------



## noushka05

Theresa May was Home Secretary at the time. Did she approve of this? http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/s...sent-british-libyans-fight-gaddafi-1219906488


----------



## noushka05




----------



## noushka05

This -

Irony -highest tory voting group are the over 65s, the ones who may lose their homes to pay for care.


----------



## DoodlesRule

DT said:


> And I dont often share links, but heres one
> https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/this-is-the-worst-tory-election-campaign-ever/


Love Rod Liddle 



noushka05 said:


> Look at the tories record, those youngsters will be telling the truth. They must be terrified for their future under another 5 years or more of tory rule. This government is an absolute disaster. An uncosted manifesto with the most shocking policies - how arrogant to assume people will vote for you if you just keep slagging Corbyn off, blatantly lying & expecting people to believe you're strong & stable because you say so. The tories must think people stupid.
> 
> Labour's manifesto is costed - the tories is not. The money is there to run our services
> 
> View attachment 312119


This is why I could never vote Labour Noushka they seem to have absolutely no business sense whatsoever, its all reliant on tax tax tax and it doesn't work.

If Corporation Tax is too high firms either move elsewhere or re-arrange their finances to reduce their profits - they just make a lot of capital expenditure and wait it out till Labour are voted out again.

Income Tax - its been proven time & again when higher rate tax is too high the actual tax collected is reduced because they either leave the country taking all their tax with them or are rich enough to rearrange their income so its below the threshold.

Robin Hood tax on financial transactions - would raise peanuts Joe Bloggs selling a few shares is a spit in the ocean, any big transactions would simply be held off until the next change in government

I could go on but is so predictable and depressing.

Also look at the figures over £11billion scrapping university fees - all that money for so many useless degrees that are wasted (example I have a nephew with a degree in environmental stuff, he works at Tesco so total waste of time and money). It was Labours policy wanting virtually everyone to go to university that made it unaffordable in the first place. Yet just £2billion for social care, their increases in minimum wage will soon wipe that out


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> This -
> 
> Irony -highest tory voting group are the over 65s, the ones who may lose their homes to pay for care.


Not covering points already risen is this record something to be proud of:






























Just think, not only parents with young children may not afford to give them a hot dinner, means testing winter fuel payments may take sometime with pages of documentation to fill out. Those entitled may have to wait weeks and may come too late in the event of a cold snap despite following ministerial instructions to wrap up warm and wear woolly hats.

No, I don't mean to scaremonger. I'm extremely worried this could happen if this lot get back in.

Still, it's a free country. I won't tell you who to vote for. If anyone agrees with the comments below, then go ahead and vote for TM's S(&)S team.


----------



## Elles

They were already losing their homes. They probably think keeping 100k if you have to go into residential care is better than it is now, a cap however vague is better than none and many people don't have much more than 100k after selling their house anyway. Labour haven't offered them anything.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> And he was right to voice his concerns about the massive cuts wasn't he!


And? Why would he not voice concerns? Hardly outstanding politics, more stating the bleedin' obvious! It's his job as opposition leader to question pretty much everything the government does.


----------



## Elles

I don't agree with labour taking money from me to pay for people to go to uni and very young children's child care outside the home.

I hate, hate, hate what the tories have done to the disabled. Better 10 scroungers get the money, than 1 in genuine need slips the net.


----------



## Elles

When hospital parking was free, there were no spaces. If you can afford a car, you can afford to pay to park it. If it's an emergency get an ambulance. If it's not, get the bus. There are more important things to spend NHS money on than car parking.


----------



## Satori




----------



## kimthecat

Elles said:


> When hospital parking was free, there were no spaces. If you can afford a car, you can afford to pay to park it. If it's an emergency get an ambulance. If it's not, get the bus. There are more important things to spend NHS money on than car parking.


They profit from the parking , in London there's still few spaces as they many are for the staff , depends how far and how often you go .
many have to go miles to a hospital. 
get the bus when you are sick? what if its a bus and a train and then a walk ? how much are the fares?


----------



## 1290423

DoodlesRule said:


> Love Rod Liddle
> 
> This is why I could never vote Labour Noushka they seem to have absolutely no business sense whatsoever, its all reliant on tax tax tax and it doesn't work.
> 
> If Corporation Tax is too high firms either move elsewhere or re-arrange their finances to reduce their profits - they just make a lot of capital expenditure and wait it out till Labour are voted out again.
> 
> Income Tax - its been proven time & again when higher rate tax is too high the actual tax collected is reduced because they either leave the country taking all their tax with them or are rich enough to rearrange their income so its below the threshold.
> 
> Robin Hood tax on financial transactions - would raise peanuts Joe Bloggs selling a few shares is a spit in the ocean, any big transactions would simply be held off until the next change in government
> 
> I could go on but is so predictable and depressing.
> 
> Also look at the figures over £11billion scrapping university fees - all that money for so many useless degrees that are wasted (example I have a nephew with a degree in environmental stuff, he works at Tesco so total waste of time and money). It was Labours policy wanting virtually everyone to go to university that made it unaffordable in the first place. Yet just £2billion for social care, their increases in minimum wage will soon wipe that out


I do object to there being VAT on private school fees because parents choose. the best education they can afford for their child they should not be penalised they should be praised. And lets remember many working class ramblers work damn hard to ensure that education


----------



## Odin_cat

I don't understand why Labour's costing are so deeply scrutinised and the Tories' are not. Their costings for free breakfast for children are a joke. I'm sure there are far more flaws too.


----------



## Elles

kimthecat said:


> They profit from the parking , there's still few spaces as they many are for the staff , depends how far and how often you go .
> many have to go miles to a hospital
> get the bus when you are sick? what if its a bus and a train and then a walk ?


Drive your car and pay to park it. What if you're poor and sick and don't have a car? Shall I buy you one?


----------



## Elles

Odin_cat said:


> I don't understand why Labour's costing are so deeply scrutinised and the Tories' are not. Their costings for free breakfast for children are a joke. I'm sure there are far more flaws too.


Probably because the tories aren't offering to spend money, they're offering to keep it. You don't need to explain where you'll find the money, if you're not buying anything.


----------



## kimthecat

Elles said:


> Drive your car and pay to park it. What if you're poor and sick and don't have a car? Shall I buy you one?


its not the paying , its more the high cost , they charge more than local car parks , why should they ?


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> When hospital parking was free, there were no spaces. If you can afford a car, you can afford to pay to park it. If it's an emergency get an ambulance. If it's not, get the bus. There are more important things to spend NHS money on than car parking.


That is not true and it's cruel maybe you have not been in a situation yourself. My uncle who was 89 had a stroke two years ok and was hospitalised almost 30-miles away 4 weeks prior to dying., 
My aunt and uncle had no children I am now the only niece I took that aunt to see my uncle every single day for a month sometimes twice today . can you imagine what the cost of fuel and car parking fees were? ok it was not a problem as that aunt is actually rather wEalthy but we met many many other elderly people who were not in the same boat as us and it's cruel and heartless to further Burden relatives with these huge costs when their loved ones are dying


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> Probably because the tories aren't offering to spend money, they're offering to keep it. You don't need to explain where you'll find the money, if you're not buying anything.


I see what you mean.

But the savings that they say they will make may not be accurate.
So cuts are made for little gain. I believe they have refused to let their manifesto be examined next labour's.

They have also been hazy on tax increases. Labour have been transparent with their plans.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Kantar and YouGov show the race narrowing…*
25 MAY 2017
Two polls are out tonight. A Kantar poll conducted between last Thursday and Sunday (so before the bombing) has topline figures of CON 42%(-5), LAB 34%(+5), LDEM 9%(+1), UKIP 4%(-2). TNS has a turnout model based partially on age, so has tended to show larger Tory leads… but this poll has it dropping ten points and falling into single figures. Tabs are here.

YouGov's weekly poll for the Times meanwhile has topline figures of CON 43%(-1), LAB 38%(+3), LDEM 10%(+1), UKIP 4%(+1) - a Tory lead of just five points. Fieldwork for this poll was conducted on Wednesday night and Thursday daytime, so is the first conducted entirely after the Manchester bombing. Tabs are here.


----------



## Elles

kimthecat said:


> its not the paying , its more the high cost , they charge more than local car parks , why should they ?


Ah. They should probably charge slightly higher to stop commuters parking there, but not extortionate and they could probably work some kind of discount scheme. When parking was free at our local hospital, I drove around forever looking for a space. I gave up at one hospital and cancelled the appt. Since we've had to pay, there's always a space. It's such a relief.

The selfish spoiled it of course. Selfish commuters and shoppers looking for free parking. I wouldn't want to pay for the NHS to police it, more waste of money, charging is a reasonable answer imo. If you are in hospital 30 miles away from relatives, parking is the least of their worries. Can you imagine driving the 30 miles, then there being nowhere to park?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> Probably because the tories aren't offering to spend money, they're offering to keep it. You don't need to explain where you'll find the money, if you're not buying anything.


Well they are really - they are planning to spend pensioners winter fuel allowances but they won't tell them which ones yet nor how much that will raise and they are planning to spend the money from pensioners homes should they be unfortunate enough to need carers but oh yes they won't tell them at what level they might set a cap until after the election.


----------



## kimthecat

DT said:


> That is not true and it's cruel maybe you have not been in a situation yourself. My uncle who was 89 had a stroke two years ok and was hospitalised almost 30-miles away 4 weeks prior to dying.,
> My aunt and uncle had no children I am now the only niece I took that aunt to see my uncle every single day for a month sometimes twice today . can you imagine what the cost of fuel and car parking fees were? ok it was not a problem as that aunt is actually rather wEalthy but we met many many other elderly people who were not in the same boat as us and it's cruel and heartless to further Burden relatives with these huge costs when their loved ones are dying


 my mum was in a local hospital for three weeks before she died and we were allowed to visit at any time , so that was several times a day for dad and me and my sister and the children were tiny , so some one was always with her , much more convenient and quicker by car and safer coming home late at night , it was free at the time , I dread to think how much it would have cost every day .


----------



## Elles

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Well they are really - they are planning to spend pensioners winter fuel allowances but they won't tell them which ones yet nor how much that will raise and they are planning to spend the money from pensioners homes should they be unfortunate enough to need carers but oh yes they won't tell them at what level they might set a cap until after the election.


Exactly, they're offering to take it, not give it. If they say we're taking £100 from the fuel allowance, you don't need to examine and cost it. It's £100 from the fuel allowance.


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> Exactly, they're offering to take it, not give it. If they say we're taking £100 from the fuel allowance, you don't need to examine and cost it. It's £100 from the fuel allowance.


But would they really save £100 after the costs of means testing ( staff, computer systems, postage etc). They need to tell people what the savings would be so they can judge whether it's worth it. As it is, they won't even say who's affected.


----------



## Elles

So, don't make parking free, work out a discount scheme for in patients and close relatives. Free parking costs money, the NHS can't afford it and selfish shoppers and commuters take the spaces. Policing it would cost even more money. We already get the treatment on the NHS I really don't see that parking should be a free for all. Poor people get sick too, they don't have cars.


----------



## Elles

Odin_cat said:


> But would they really save £100 after the costs of means testing ( staff, computer systems, postage etc). They need to tell people what the savings would be so they can judge whether it's worth it. As it is, they won't even say who's affected.


You need to judge whether it's worth taking the winter fuel payment from pensioners? I suppose for me it's just a 'no thanks', so I'm not interested in costing it.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> Exactly, they're offering to take it, not give it. If they say we're taking £100 from the fuel allowance, you don't need to examine and cost it. It's £100 from the fuel allowance.


I need to go back and read the manifesto again :Yawn:Yawn (has to be one of the most boring I have ever encountered and not easy to find things under the stupid headings)

For the winter fuel allowance they say

"So we will means test Winter Fuel Payments, focusing assistance on the least well-off pensioners, who are most at risk of fuel poverty. The money released will be transferred directly to health and
social care, helping to provide dignity and care to the most vulnerable pensioners and reassurance to their families".

One of the main things that strikes me from their manifesto is how woolly it is, who can take them to task about not fulfilling a manifesto pledge when actually there isn't really a pledge other than to take money away but not say who from and not say how much that will raise.


----------



## Elles

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Well they are really - they are planning to spend pensioners winter fuel allowances but they won't tell them which ones yet nor how much that will raise and they are planning to spend the money from pensioners homes should they be unfortunate enough to need carers but oh yes they won't tell them at what level they might set a cap until after the election.


What do you think of the current system, where if you're unlucky enough to have to go into residential care, everything is taken and you're left with a few thousand. When every time you go over by a few pounds, you lose cover and have to claim again, as was described earlier in the thread?


----------



## Elles

I agree, the conservative manifesto is very woolly about how much they're taking away. I just think the reason they don't have to explain it as deeply as labour is because it's all take, take, take. Whereas labour are all give, give, give, which is nice, but then people want to know whose money is being taken to pay for it, how much and does it add up, or will they want even more from them. 

I don't like either party, I'm voting tactically, so I'll argue if people want to promote cons or labour, they're both rubbish imo, just in different ways.


----------



## KittenKong

For one of May's cheerleaders' to report this really is saying something.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...inesses-overwhelmingly-reject-tory-manifesto/


----------



## kimthecat

I have my postal vote and still undecided. I would vote Green or LD but if a choice with Tory or labour under Corbyn, I would vote Tory .

Dip , dip , dog sh*t , you are not it !


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> What do you think of the current system, where if you're unlucky enough to have to go into residential care, everything is taken and you're left with a few thousand. When every time you go over by a few pounds, you lose cover and have to claim again, as was described earlier in the thread?


I don't much like it but I can understand that if you go permanently into residential care its much the same as moving to rented accommodation - you are renting the room/heating/hot water/food etc and no longer have other costs such as council tax to pay/maintenance costs of your home and garden. People who stay in their own homes still have all those costs, if anything they go up as they become less mobile and need the heating on more, they might have to pay for expensive "ready meals" if they can no longer manage to cook plus pay for a cleaner/gardener etc on top of their carers fees. They also have to maintain their homes, couldn't stay there with a leaking roof for instance so might spend out thousands for the benefit of the government so I think its even more unfair to take their homes.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> I have my postal vote and still undecided. I would vote Green or LD but if a choice with Tory or labour under Corbyn, I would vote Tory .
> 
> Dip , dip , dog sh*t , you are not it !


The way I've worked it out is to ask myself do I want another 5 years of a Tory government, especially one with a huge majority. In my case the answer is no, not with those social care plans and definitely not with their support for hunting and plans to hold the vote to repeal the ban. If you come to the same conclusion that you don't want another 5 years of those policies then look at the stats for your area at the last election and decide who has the best chance of defeating the Tory candidate and vote for them. I'm lucky that in my area the most likely candidate to defeat the incumbent Tory (who is a hunting supporter and will vote to repeal the ban) in our area is the Lib Dem who is vehemently anti hunting plus I agree with more of their policies than I do Labours but if the Labour candidate had the best chance of defeating our Tory then I would have to vote for them even though it would be a hard thing to make myself do.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Elles said:


> Ah. They should probably charge slightly higher to stop commuters parking there, but not extortionate and they could probably work some kind of discount scheme. When parking was free at our local hospital, I drove around forever looking for a space. I gave up at one hospital and cancelled the appt. Since we've had to pay, there's always a space. It's such a relief.
> 
> The selfish spoiled it of course. Selfish commuters and shoppers looking for free parking. I wouldn't want to pay for the NHS to police it, more waste of money, charging is a reasonable answer imo. If you are in hospital 30 miles away from relatives, parking is the least of their worries. Can you imagine driving the 30 miles, then there being nowhere to park?


I don`t have to imagine it unfortunately. I regularly have to travel approx. 30 miles to hospitals and worrying if I can park is a huge issue. The one is so bad I can`t take mum on my own, someone else has to come to stay with mum inside hospital while I go and hope their is still a space on the private carpark 10 mins up the road. The other I have so far been lucky to be able to bump up on to the grass verges still on site so doesn`t take long to get back to mum. Parking in not free at these hospitals, the problem with parking here is not people taking advantage of free parking, I think part of the reason why the carparks are so full is some consultant outpatient clinics have stopped offering clinics at local community hospitals. This is the reason I have to take mum and I often hear offer people saying they used to see Mr. Whoever at their local hospital but he has stopped coming so they have to come here.

Of course free parking wouldn`t help in finding a space but certainly in my experience a paying hospital car park does not equal spaces!


----------



## Elles

Are labour going to reopen community hospitals and decentralise care? That would go some way to solving both problems. It was most definitely the case at our hospital that free parking meant no parking. It looks as though for some there'd be no parking either way. Though free would still mean policing it and I still can't be persuaded that it should be free gratis for all when there's so much else that needs to be paid for.


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> You need to judge whether it's worth taking the winter fuel payment from pensioners? I suppose for me it's just a 'no thanks', so I'm not interested in costing it.


No I don't, that why I said 'people'. I do believe it would be more popular if it saved 2.5 billion than 100 million, it's a simple cost- benefit ratio.

I also think you shouldn't trust a party who are unwilling or incapable of showing how much a policy will save.


----------



## Elles

Incapable.


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> Incapable.


I'm not so sure...to reveal the savings they'd have to reveal who it would affect.

At the moment middle income pensioners who don't like Corbyn can tell themselves they won't be affected.


----------



## Elles

People are darned selfish then, if all they're worried about is how they personally will be affected.


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> People are darned selfish then, if all they're worried about is how they personally will be affected.


Unfortunately I think a lot of people are .


----------



## Elles

If I read the manifestos and get selfish, the only thing that will affect me is corporation tax, so best I vote Tory.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Very powerful speech just now from Jeremy Corbyn.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*IFS: Gaps in information from both parties*
Posted at10:20

At a news conference by the Institute for Fiscal Studies, its director Paul Johnson outlined what the think tank has identified as information gaps in the parties' manifestos.

He said a bigger state as Labour had proposed was perfectly feasible, but added that the party "should not pretend that such a step-change could be funded entirely by a small minority at the very top".

In particular, the large increase in company taxation that they propose would undoubtedly affect a far broader group than that."

The IFS said that the Conservatives' additional funding vows for the NHS and schools largely confirmed proposals made in the Budget in March.

These plans imply at least another five years of austerity, with the continuation of planned welfare cuts and serious pressures on the public services including on the NHS."


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*IFS: Tories' pension plan won't save money*

BBC assistant political editor tweets...

Posted at9:33

Follow
norman smith

✔@BBCNormanS
Tory plan to axe pensioners "triple lock" will not save money over next parl - @TheIFS

9:29 AM - 26 May 2017


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> In particular, the large increase in company taxation that they propose would undoubtedly affect a far broader group than that."


Many people see corporation tax as fair game and think businesses like Amazon, Starbucks, Tesco can easily afford it.

Well for starters it'll also have a dramatic effect on your local shop/post office, public house, taxi driver, back street garage even possibly your window cleaner and dog walker. But hey as long Tesco and Sainsbury's pay more tax who cares? Not Mr Corbyn.

Also everyone's day to day shopping will go up, yep your bread, milk and nappies. These large supermarkets (and your corner independent grocery store) have a net profit of around 5%. That means for every £100 extra tax they pay they need to sell £2,000 of goods. That can only mean increased prices for the big boys, and the last straw for many a independent. So if you want increased prices on your groceries and utilities, plus small businesses going bust vote Labour.


----------



## noushka05

DoodlesRule said:


> Love Rod Liddle
> 
> This is why I could never vote Labour Noushka they seem to have absolutely no business sense whatsoever, its all reliant on tax tax tax and it doesn't work.
> 
> If Corporation Tax is too high firms either move elsewhere or re-arrange their finances to reduce their profits - they just make a lot of capital expenditure and wait it out till Labour are voted out again.
> 
> Income Tax - its been proven time & again when higher rate tax is too high the actual tax collected is reduced because they either leave the country taking all their tax with them or are rich enough to rearrange their income so its below the threshold.
> 
> Robin Hood tax on financial transactions - would raise peanuts Joe Bloggs selling a few shares is a spit in the ocean, any big transactions would simply be held off until the next change in government
> 
> I could go on but is so predictable and depressing.
> 
> Also look at the figures over £11billion scrapping university fees - all that money for so many useless degrees that are wasted (example I have a nephew with a degree in environmental stuff, he works at Tesco so total waste of time and money). It was Labours policy wanting virtually everyone to go to university that made it unaffordable in the first place. Yet just £2billion for social care, their increases in minimum wage will soon wipe that out


But that is a fallacy Doodles, evidence shows that Labour have been fiscally more competent than the tories. Despite the global economic crisis the tories inherited a growing economy. Its the tories that have borrowed more & got us into more debt even though they have slashed public services to the bone, crippled our NHS & sold off our cash generating public assets. So where has all that money gone? All our public services are in crisis. Austerity is a proven con - it was a way of transferring public money into private pockets. And neoliberalism has been an absolute disaster, its created gross inequality, its destroying our living planet. If we want to leave a habitable world for future generation we have to change our economic model asap.

Please read this by Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman on the Austerity delusion. http://theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr/29/the-austerity-delusion


----------



## DoodlesRule

Think we are stuck between a rock & a hard place - Labour tax too much and spend too much, Conservatives tax too little and spend too little. Wish there was a sensible alternative - I could not vote Lib Dem with their legalising drugs stance


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> Many people see corporation tax as fair game and think businesses like Amazon, Starbucks, Tesco can easily afford it.
> 
> Well for starters it'll also have a dramatic effect on your local shop/post office, public house, taxi driver, back street garage even possibly your window cleaner and dog walker. But hey as long Tesco and Sainsbury's pay more tax who cares? Not Mr Corbyn.
> 
> Also everyone's day to day shopping will go up, yep your bread, milk and nappies. These large supermarkets (and your corner independent grocery store) have a net profit of around 5%. That means for every £100 extra tax they pay they need to sell £2,000 of goods. That can only mean increased prices for the big boys, and the last straw for many a independent. So if you want increased prices on your groceries and utilities, plus small businesses going bust vote Labour.


From their manifesto

• Reinstate the lower small-business corporation tax rate.

I run a small business too - the biggest thing any party could do for us is to raise the VAT threshold much higher and give new businesses a number of years to establish before they get dragged in to it.


----------



## stockwellcat.

*General Election 2017: Labour cut Tory poll lead to five points as Jeremy Corbyn gives speech on Manchester*

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/26/general-election-2017-latest-news-polls-analysis/


----------



## stockwellcat.

*Conservatives cancel election campaign relaunch as poll lead over Labour evaporates*

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/conservatives-election-campaign-relaunch-party-lead-polls-cut-labour-theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-a7756976.html?amp


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> *General Election 2017: Labour cut Tory poll lead to five points as Jeremy Corbyn gives speech on Manchester*
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/26/general-election-2017-latest-news-polls-analysis/


Not sure it was down to his speech on Manchester - that cut in lead was already being reported last night but good news all the same


----------



## Elles

An increase to 21% for small business, 26% for big business. Not sure who's what and which is which though.

The conservatives also want to increase tax, they aren't saying they will, but they aren't saying they won't either and recent history shows they want more of our money. Their proposal was going to hit the one man band the worst though, so they had to put it on hold when people complained about it.


----------



## Elles

They can't take a poll in 5 minutes. They might as well look at ours. :Hilarious


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> They can't take a poll in 5 minutes. They might as well look at ours. :Hilarious


They didn't that poll was reported in the press earlier today - see @Satori's post #3860 on P 193


----------



## DoodlesRule

noushka05 said:


> But that is a fallacy Doodles, evidence shows that Labour have been fiscally more competent than the tories. Despite the global economic crisis the tories inherited a growing economy. Its the tories that have borrowed more & got us into more debt even though they have slashed public services to the bone, crippled our NHS & sold off our cash generating public assets. So where has all that money gone? All our public services are in crisis. Austerity is a proven con - it was a way of transferring public money into private pockets. And neoliberalism has been an absolute disaster, its created gross inequality, its destroying our living planet. If we want to leave a habitable world for future generation we have to change our economic model asap.
> 
> Please read this by Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman on the Austerity delusion. http://theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr/29/the-austerity-delusion


Probably a bit over my head Noush :Shamefullyembarrased

There is just so many of Labours policies I can't agree with. I remember when the minimum wage came in, I thought it was a really bad idea for the lower paid as employers would simply pay the minimum they could - the competition went, no moving to a job that paid more because they all pay the minimum. Same with working tax credits, the tax payer is subsidising big businesses to pay the minimum they can. There must be a better way

Labour are too soft with welfare whereas the Tories are too harsh.

Also with Corbyns idealistic pacifist views how safe would the country be. Yes I totally agree meddling in Middle Eastern affairs has probably caused much of the terrorism but it is what it is, we have to deal in the situation here and now he is not realistic


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

I can't believe I'm quoting the Green Party but here goes

The Green Party responded to Jeremy Corbyn's speech on foreign policy and terrorism with praise, but pointed out only 11 Labour MPs voted against the military intervention in Libya.

Jonathan Bartley, Green Party co-leader, said: "The responsibility for terror attacks like that in Manchester lies solely with those who perpetrate these heinous crimes, but it is important to look at the wider picture too.

"The Labour leader is right to point to failed western intervention as a cause of instability. Indeed when you look at the Libyan intervention you see failure at almost every level.

"If we're going to beat terrorism we need both adequate security measures at home and a look at how Britain's role in world affairs can have serious unintended consequences which lead to greater insecurity."


----------



## Elles

Yes, I'd already seen it. I read the papers too.  People are suggesting that the increase could be down to Corbyn's speech though.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> Yes, I'd already seen it. I read the papers too.  People are suggesting that the increase could be down to Corbyn's speech though.


They may well but we know it wasn't :Smug


----------



## stockwellcat.

I don't really care what the real story is behind the sudden jump in the polls for labour. I really hope the Conservatives are gone in 2 weeks time and Labour win.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> From their manifesto
> 
> • Reinstate the lower small-business corporation tax rate.
> 
> I run a small business too - the biggest thing any party could do for us is to raise the VAT threshold much higher and give new businesses a number of years to establish before they get dragged in to it.


Didn't know that about reinstating small business tax. Did they say what the rate would be? Prices will still go up though for your grocery shopping and utilities and insurance and petrol and public transport and other things that don't come to mind just now!!

VAT I'm undecided on. It could be argued there should be no limit and everyone charges vat. There is the flat rate scheme which can actually produce a profit and goes up to £150,000 or so (not sure on that figure as it's been several years since I dealt with vat).

Frankly they should stop hammering small businesses in line with large businesses. They could start by removing small business from employee pensions, holiday pay, sick pay, business rates and redundancy payments. These could be funded for by government to encourage new business and eventually produce more tax returns.


----------



## Elles

@Dr Pepper it's an increase to 21% for small business and 26% for big business


----------



## Elles

Basically a small business has to pay an employee's pension, which will then go back to the government for their care when they get old.


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> The way I've worked it out is to ask myself do I want another 5 years of a Tory government, especially one with a huge majority. In my case the answer is no, not with those social care plans and definitely not with their support for hunting and plans to hold the vote to repeal the ban. If you come to the same conclusion that you don't want another 5 years of those policies then look at the stats for your area at the last election and decide who has the best chance of defeating the Tory candidate and vote for them. I'm lucky that in my area the most likely candidate to defeat the incumbent Tory (who is a hunting supporter and will vote to repeal the ban) in our area is the Lib Dem who is vehemently anti hunting plus I agree with more of their policies than I do Labours but if the Labour candidate had the best chance of defeating our Tory then I would have to vote for them even though it would be a hard thing to make myself do.


 that's good advice . This is a Tory safe seat and the MP won the last election by 10,000 votes  Labour were next .


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> object to there being VAT on private school fees


Me too...I reckon I already saved the country megabucks by paying for mine privately aged 4 - 18. it wouldn't affect me now, but if I still had a child at private school it would annoy me.


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> they charge more than local car parks


I get what you're saying, but if they charged less, then shoppers and the like would fill the hospital car parks _first_ rather than pay more in a NCP place? Even if it meant they had an extra walk to the shops. Just a thought, @kimthecat. .


----------



## Dr Pepper

Elles said:


> @Dr Pepper it's an increase to 21% for small business and 26% for big business


So they're actually increasing the tax all round then. That's a ridiculous increase for larger businesses. That'll have more effect on businesses leaving the UK than Brexit ever will.


----------



## Jesthar

kimthecat said:


> that's good advice . This is a Tory safe seat and the MP won the last election by 10,000 votes  Labour were next .


I've said it before and I'll say it again - if everyone who thinks 'my vote doesn't make a differente' actually voted, NO seat would be safe


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> Didn't know that about reinstating small business tax. Did they say what the rate would be? Prices will still go up though for your grocery shopping and utilities and insurance and petrol and public transport and other things that don't come to mind just now!!
> 
> VAT I'm undecided on. It could be argued there should be no limit and everyone charges vat. There is the flat rate scheme which can actually produce a profit and goes up to £150,000 or so (not sure on that figure as it's been several years since I dealt with vat).
> 
> Frankly they should stop hammering small businesses in line with large businesses. They could start by removing small business from employee pensions, holiday pay, sick pay, business rates and redundancy payments. These could be funded for by government to encourage new business and eventually produce more tax returns.


From Labour's manifesto

One in ten households are in fuel poverty, yet the Competition Markets Authority found customers are overcharged an enormous £2 billion every year.
Labour understands that many people don't have time to shop around, they just want reliable and affordable energy. So the next Labour Government will:
• Introduce an immediate emergency price cap to ensure that the average dual-fuelhousehold energy bill remains below £1,000 per year, while we transition to a fairer system for bill payers.
• Take energy back into public ownership to deliver renewable energy, affordability for consumers, and democratic control. We will do this in the following stages:
> Regaining control of energy supply networks through the alteration of the National and Regional Network Operator license conditions.
> Supporting the creation of publicly owned, locally accountable energy companies and co-operatives to rival existing private energy suppliers, with at least one if every region.
> Legislating to permit publicly owned local companies to purchase the regional grid infrastructure, and to ensure that national and regional grid infrastructure is brought into public ownership over time.

Labour will insulate four million homes as an infrastructure priority to help those who suffer in cold homes each winter. This will cut emissions, improve health, save on bills, and reduce fuel poverty and winter deaths.

I can't say whether re nationalisation of the utilities and transport systems will see prices go up or down to be honest.

As for VAT it probably depends on the line of business you are in. The current threshold of £85,000 is based on your turnover not on your profit so for some businesses who have a lot of expense but not that big a profit it is a huge burden. I don't know how you think the flat rate scheme can produce a profit - we were in that some years ago and it simply means rather than showing every penny of VAT you have reclaimed and adding it all up that you use a flat rate pre set by HMRC so it might be 13% you pay and you keep the other 7% but there are rules applied to the scheme such as if you come out of it (if you go below the threshold and want to stop charging VAT to your customers) you are not allowed back into it for a year. So in our line of business which has good years and bad years we obviously want to get out of VAT so that our fees are more competitive in bad years which means when the next good time comes and we have to re register we can't go back on the flat rte scheme. We worked out a couple of our VAT returns on both methods and we got more money back on the old scheme than we did on the flat rate scheme unless we had a couple of months with very low expenditure. My main objection to it is why do I get to spend a whole weekend every 3 months on collecting taxes for the government with no recompense for my time and effort? Fine for big businesses who employ book keepers and have fancy systems for logging everything but I'm an old fashioned girl (who happens to hate maths) who still uses a book and a pencil


----------



## Odin_cat

Dr Pepper said:


> So they're actually increasing the tax all round then. That's a ridiculous increase for larger businesses. That'll have more effect on businesses leaving the UK than Brexit ever will.


Maybe but many European countries have a higher rate than 26%, 17% is very low in comparison.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> From Labour's manifesto
> 
> One in ten households are in fuel poverty, yet the Competition Markets Authority found customers are overcharged an enormous £2 billion every year.
> Labour understands that many people don't have time to shop around, they just want reliable and affordable energy. So the next Labour Government will:
> • Introduce an immediate emergency price cap to ensure that the average dual-fuelhousehold energy bill remains below £1,000 per year, while we transition to a fairer system for bill payers.
> • Take energy back into public ownership to deliver renewable energy, affordability for consumers, and democratic control. We will do this in the following stages:
> > Regaining control of energy supply networks through the alteration of the National and Regional Network Operator license conditions.
> > Supporting the creation of publicly owned, locally accountable energy companies and co-operatives to rival existing private energy suppliers, with at least one if every region.
> > Legislating to permit publicly owned local companies to purchase the regional grid infrastructure, and to ensure that national and regional grid infrastructure is brought into public ownership over time.
> 
> Labour will insulate four million homes as an infrastructure priority to help those who suffer in cold homes each winter. This will cut emissions, improve health, save on bills, and reduce fuel poverty and winter deaths.
> 
> I can't say whether re nationalisation of the utilities and transport systems will see prices go up or down to be honest.
> 
> As for VAT it probably depends on the line of business you are in. The current threshold of £85,000 is based on your turnover not on your profit so for some businesses who have a lot of expense but not that big a profit it is a huge burden. I don't know how you think the flat rate scheme can produce a profit - we were in that some years ago and it simply means rather than showing every penny of VAT you have reclaimed and adding it all up that you use a flat rate pre set by HMRC so it might be 13% you pay and you keep the other 7% but there are rules applied to the scheme such as if you come out of it (if you go below the threshold and want to stop charging VAT to your customers) you are not allowed back into it for a year. So in our line of business which has good years and bad years we obviously want to get out of VAT so that our fees are more competitive in bad years which means when the next good time comes and we have to re register we can't go back on the flat rte scheme. We worked out a couple of our VAT returns on both methods and we got more money back on the old scheme than we did on the flat rate scheme unless we had a couple of months with very low expenditure. My main objection to it is why do I get to spend a whole weekend every 3 months on collecting taxes for the government with no recompense for my time and effort? Fine for big businesses who employ book keepers and have fancy systems for logging everything but I'm an old fashioned girl (who happens to hate maths) who still uses a book and a pencil


The flat rate scheme can work well for service providers business to business. We were in retail so the limit wasn't a issue. One way they could help on vat (I don't know your business so might not benefit you) would to not count zero rated products towards the threshold. Hell if any party even vaguely suggested they'd help small businesses in anyway they'd probably get my vote!

I can't see Labour re-nationalising the power companies, it'd be hugely complicated and expensive.

Try Sage accounting software, it works out your vat in one click.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Odin_cat said:


> Maybe but many European countries have a higher rate than 26%, 17% is very low in comparison.


I though it was currently 20%?


----------



## Odin_cat

Dr Pepper said:


> I though it was currently 20%?


In the UK? It's 19% but Tories are decreasing it 17% in the next year I think.


----------



## Elles

17% is the Tory promise for the future. 

They're saying that renationalising is a matter of waiting for the franchise terms to expire, then just taking over. I have no idea how that would work myself.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Odin_cat said:


> In the UK? It's 19% but Tories are decreasing it 17% in the next year I think.


Thanks.



Elles said:


> 17% is the Tory promise for the future.
> 
> They're saying that renationalising is a matter of waiting for the franchise terms to expire, then just taking over. I have no idea how that would work myself.


They can take back the franchises but they still need to buy infrastructure. You ain't got much of a railway without trains! Are power companies franchises? I'm pretty sure the national grid is a private company?


----------



## Elles

I agree. It sounds a rather ambition plan. Especially if the plan is to take them all back in one term.


----------



## ForestWomble

I received my postal vote yesterday. 
I'm currently 50/50 on who to vote for and I can't work out where to put my cross :Arghh
Been looking at menifestos for the two parties I'm considering and it's making no sense. :Bag


----------



## stockwellcat.

Animallover26 said:


> I received my postal vote yesterday.
> I'm currently 50/50 on who to vote for and I can't work out where to put my cross :Arghh
> Been looking at menifestos for the two parties I'm considering and it's making no sense. :Bag


Can I help you decide 
The institute of fiscal studies said today that the Conservatives maybe planing more Austerity and cuts.
The Labour party may raise taxes.

I don't mind paying more tax to help save the NHS, recruit more Police officers and stop closures of Fire Stations etc. Then there's stopping cuts and reversing cuts as well.

Corbyn is right the current tactics to tackle terrorism isn't working either.

I know where I am putting my x on election day and that is for my Labour MP.

Can you personally cope with more cuts and austerity?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Animallover26 said:


> I received my postal vote yesterday.
> I'm currently 50/50 on who to vote for and I can't work out where to put my cross :Arghh
> Been looking at menifestos for the two parties I'm considering and it's making no sense. :Bag


Not sure if you are the same constituency as me (Tomlinson) but if so keep in mind he is in favour of the badger cull and hunting  You can also look up his voting record on other issues that are important to you by entering your postcode here

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/


----------



## ForestWomble

stockwellcat said:


> Can I help you decide
> The institute of fiscal studies said today that the Conservatives maybe planing more Austerity and cuts.
> The Labour party may raise taxes.
> 
> I don't mind paying more tax to help save the NHS, recruit more Police officers and stop closures of Fire Stations etc. Then there's stopping cuts and reversing cuts as well.
> 
> Corbyn is right the current tactics to tackle terrorism isn't working either.
> 
> I know where I am putting my x on election day and that is for my Labour MP.
> 
> Can you personally cope with more cuts and austerity?





rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not sure if you are the same constituency as me (Tomlinson) but if so keep in mind he is in favour of the badger cull and hunting  You can also look up his voting record on other issues that are important to you by entering your postcode here
> 
> https://www.theyworkforyou.com/


Thanks both 

@rottiepointerhouse, yep, I am in the same constituency.


----------



## 1290423

Odin_cat said:


> I don't understand why Labour's costing are so deeply scrutinised and the Tories' are not. Their costings for free breakfast for children are a joke. I'm sure there are far more flaws too.


Agree, it will probably cost more as more supervisiOn will be required earlier in the day


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Animallover26 said:


> Thanks both
> 
> @rottiepointerhouse, yep, I am in the same constituency.


So not much choice between him and Lib Dems in our area as Labour came in 5th below UKIP last time. Two choices really - more Tory or Lib Dems who held the seat for years up until the last election.


----------



## 1290423

3dogs2cats said:


> I don`t have to imagine it unfortunately. I regularly have to travel approx. 30 miles to hospitals and worrying if I can park is a huge issue. The one is so bad I can`t take mum on my own, someone else has to come to stay with mum inside hospital while I go and hope their is still a space on the private carpark 10 mins up the road. The other I have so far been lucky to be able to bump up on to the grass verges still on site so doesn`t take long to get back to mum. Parking in not free at these hospitals, the problem with parking here is not people taking advantage of free parking, I think part of the reason why the carparks are so full is some consultant outpatient clinics have stopped offering clinics at local community hospitals. This is the reason I have to take mum and I often hear offer people saying they used to see Mr. Whoever at their local hospital but he has stopped coming so they have to come here.
> 
> Of course free parking wouldn`t help in finding a space but certainly in my experience a paying hospital car park does not equal spaces!


Then maybe they need to look at a new system, perhaps those that are likely to be hospitalized over a period of time getting a pass appointments get a reduced pass, and all others pay more


----------



## ForestWomble

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So not much choice between him and Lib Dems in our area as Labour came in 5th below UKIP last time. Two choices really - more Tory or Lib Dems who held the seat for years up until the last election.


I'm trying to choose between Labour and Lib dems. 
Oh it's hard, especially when politics goes way over my head.
But you and @stockwellcat have helped explaining a few things


----------



## 1290423

May I just add to the comments regarding hospital parking our village is almost 30 miles away from the hospital where our trust generally send us, it's in special needs as well by the way so much not much confidence there we used to have a free bus running daily from the local hospital which you had to book that has been discontinued .now the only way, for those without a car is by taxi or three different bus rides which would in my case take a total time of around 4 hours. I will help any neighbour elderly who has to get to that hospital in a hurry but I damn well begrudge having to pay to park when I get there and let's face it those old people are oftrn distraught and nit in the state of mind to even think about often you parking and petrol money, even if they could afford it, not I add that I would ever consider taking it


----------



## 1290423

Animallover26 said:


> I'm trying to choose between Labour and Lib dems.
> Oh it's hard, especially when politics goes way over my head.
> But you and @stockwellcat have helped explaining a few things


pretend its spot the ball the stick a pin in it


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Animallover26 said:


> I'm trying to choose between Labour and Lib dems.
> Oh it's hard, especially when politics goes way over my head.
> But you and @stockwellcat have helped explaining a few things


You just have to decide whether your overriding objective is to stop the Tory getting back in or whether its to vote for the party you agree with the most. If its the first then Lib Dems are probably the only chance in this area but if its the later then only you can decide


----------



## noushka05

DoodlesRule said:


> Probably a bit over my head Noush
> 
> There is just so many of Labours policies I can't agree with. I remember when the minimum wage came in, I thought it was a really bad idea for the lower paid as employers would simply pay the minimum they could - the competition went, no moving to a job that paid more because they all pay the minimum. Same with working tax credits, the tax payer is subsidising big businesses to pay the minimum they can. There must be a better way
> 
> Labour are too soft with welfare whereas the Tories are too harsh.
> 
> Also with Corbyns idealistic pacifist views how safe would the country be. Yes I totally agree meddling in Middle Eastern affairs has probably caused much of the terrorism but it is what it is, we have to deal in the situation here and now he is not realistic


Neoliberalism has been our economic model for the past 30+ years. I guess its better known as Thatcherism in this country - the ideology that wealth is created at the top by a free market economy & low taxes for rich & that wealth created trickles down to those below. Of course we know now that it doesn't trickle down it flows up. We were sold a big fat lie.

OK as I'm no good at explaining it myself & as you brought Owen Jones into this  can I ask please ask you to watch this interview of Ha-Joon Chang by Owen JONES (not Smith!) ?. Ha-Joon Chang is one of our leading economists he clearly explains the neoliberal ideology. He touches on nationalisation of services, welfare state & inequality.






And a short explanation of Neoliberalism by George Monbiot 






Yet all evidence shows Corbyns domestic & foreign policies would make us far safer. The military interventions in the middle east have fuelled extremism. The massive cuts to our police & our armed forces have disastrous implications. We face even more cuts under a tory government, not to mention more arms sales to tyrants who fund ISIS, more wars.


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> Neoliberalism has been our economic model for the past 30+ years. I guess its better known as Thatcherism in this country - the ideology that wealth is created at the top by a free market economy & low taxes for rich & that wealth created trickles down to those below. Of course we know now that it doesn't trickle down it flows up. We were sold a big fat lie.
> 
> OK as I'm no good at explaining it myself & as you brought Owen Jones into this  can I ask please ask you to watch this interview of Ha-Joon Chang by Owen JONES (not Smith!) ?. Ha-Joon Chang is one of our leading economists he clearly explains the neoliberal ideology. He touches on nationalisation of services, welfare state & inequality.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And a short explanation of Neoliberalism by George Monbiot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet all evidence shows Corbyns domestic & foreign policies would make us far safer. The military interventions in the middle east have fuelled extremism. The massive cuts to our police & our armed forces have disastrous implications. We face even more cuts under a tory government, not to mention more arms sales to tyrants who fund ISIS, more wars.
> 
> View attachment 312177


Awh but noush, would he press the buttons.
And re the veterans, what they going to do, attach the enemy with their walking frames. Seriously. Hope he's going to house them all and make sure they have enough to live on without having to grovel


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> You just have to decide whether your overriding objective is to stop the Tory getting back in or whether its to vote for the party you agree with the most. If its the first then Lib Dems are probably the only chance in this area but if its the later then only you can decide


My vote is tactical and is to stop the Tories getting back in. I understand some want to vote Lib Dems for various reasons which is fair enough.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> My vote is tactical and is to stop the Tories getting back in. I understand some want to vote Lib Dems for various reasons which is fair enough.


I wouldnt vote lib dem myself if my life depended on it, buts thats me, each to their own


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> My vote is tactical and is to stop the Tories getting back in. I understand some want to vote Lib Dems for various reasons which is fair enough.


Im back to camp undecided, I dont like the way the tories are being shredded by the young on social media.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> I wouldnt vote lib dem myself if my life depended on it, buts thats me, each to their own


I wouldn't vote Lib Dems either that's why I am voting Labour. My vote is tactical.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> I wouldnt vote lib dem myself if my life depended on it, buts thats me, each to their won


Its tactical voting for me. I cannot bring myself to vote for the Tory who openly supports hunting, states he will vote for the ban to be lifted and supports the badger cull, never mind some other things like his support for closing our local A & E which is an extremely busy unit and means all but the walking wounded will have to make a long journey to the nearest A & E, not so bad for us but for some in our area it could take an hour by road. Therefore as the Labour guy has no chance (came 5th behind UKIP last time) Lib Dems are the only way to keep the Tory out. I would poke sticks in my eyes before I voted for him again and wouldn't have done so last time had I known his views on hunting then.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Im back to camp undecided, I dont like the way the tories are being shredded by the young on social media.


Why would that influence how you vote though?


----------



## noushka05

I would tactically vote for any party (with the exception of ukip) to keep the tories out.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Im back to camp undecided, I dont like the way the tories are being shredded by the young on social media.


You practically swore on oath you'd made your mind up to me:Hilarious


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Why would that influence how you vote though?


Because im looking at both sides, in the same vein I don't like the way that the BBC is slate in labour I'm trying to reach a decision not necessarily on what will affect me but what I think will be the best long-term what's turns me again tory is that all they want is more austerity and they are not taking care of the working class Brits those ones that work damn hard.
Probably, I've used the wrong words there maybe I should have said I'm trying not to take notice of the BBC nor what's said on social media


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Because im looing at both sides, in the same vein I don't like the way that the BBC is slate in labour I'm trying to reach a decision not necessarily on what will affect me but what I think will be the best long-term what's turns me again tory is that all they want is more austerity and they are not taking care of the working class Brits those ones that work damn hard.
> Probably, I've used the wrong words there maybe I should have said I'm trying not to take notice of the BBC nor what's said on social media


Best to ignore the media altogether unless you can watch an interview live and see for yourself what questions were asked, were not asked and what the actual answers given were rather than what some reporter thinks or is told to tell us the answer was.


----------



## 1290423

And it's damn hard to look from both sides rottie it would be very very easy to vote for labour as they could benefit me,. Traditionally im a conservative voter but over the past 10 years I have been worse off under their lead they still continue to come for us, even without an income. But I am trying to look long term and at the moment I really don't know.


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> May I just add to the comments regarding hospital parking our village is almost 30 miles away from the hospital where our trust generally send us, it's in special needs as well by the way so much not much confidence there we used to have a free bus running daily from the local hospital which you had to book that has been discontinued .now the only way, for those without a car is by taxi or three different bus rides which would in my case take a total time of around 4 hours. I will help any neighbour elderly who has to get to that hospital in a hurry but I damn well begrudge having to pay to park when I get there and let's face it those old people are oftrn distraught and nit in the state of mind to even think about often you parking and petrol money, even if they could afford it, not I add that I would ever consider taking it


So the problem isn't free parking. It's accessibility. Another elderly, or disabled person will be saying it's all well and good giving the fit and wealthy car drivers free parking, what about us, when we have to get 3 busses or a taxi and spend 4 hours getting there. Instead of spending money on free parking for all at hospitals, how about a bus service, drivers, transport and more local community hospitals. I know there are voluntary drivers at rd&e who collect the elderly and disabled, but I don't know how hit or miss it is as to whether you can get one. People shouldn't need to rely on neighbours and volunteers to get them to hospital appointments.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> And it's damn hard to look from both sides rottie it would be very very easy to vote for labour as they could benefit me,. Traditionally im a conservative voter but over the past 10 years I have been worse off under their lead they still continue to come for us, even without an income. But I am trying to look long term and at the moment I really don't know.


Yes I understand - we've been Conservative voters for many years now and they would benefit us more but I cannot vote for the local MP nor Mrs May after she made her support for hunting so clear. I don't want to end up paying even higher high rate tax but if that is what it takes then so be it although I prefer the Lib Dems extra penny for the NHS/social care.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> So the problem isn't free parking. It's accessibility. Another elderly, or disabled person will be saying it's all well and good giving the fit and wealthy car drivers free parking, what about us, when we have to get 3 busses or a taxi and spend 4 hours getting there. Instead of spending money on free parking for all at hospitals, how about a bus service, drivers, transport and more local community hospitals. I know there are voluntary drivers at rd&e who collect the elderly and disabled, but I don't know how hit or miss it is as to whether you can get one. People shouldn't need to rely on neighbours and volunteers to get them to hospital appointments.


Well I dont think these drivers work 24/7, although I do have friends who do it, by the way there has been some change there, due to health and safety I guess. We were allowed to visit anytime, . The hospital called us on three occasions at unearthly hours to go over, parking then not being a problem.
As for the disabled there is normally a drop off point very close to the hospital where drivers can drop the disabled on those in wheelchairs then the driver can go and park just like everyone else can so I don't see an issue there unless it is the disabled person driving themselves, then of course the parking should be free.


----------



## 1290423

By the way, another hospital our Trust use a better one where we seldom get sent to operate a park and ride service.


----------



## 1290423

Back to the parking, the night my uncle actually died other half did not have chance for the car park, they did give him a token to get out.
And about a year ago I had to go to walk in for the norm, fearing the worse the doctor sent me straight to that hospital, he asked my other half if he could get me there quickly as it would be faster then ambulance, again we had no cash, even had to park in a,red zone as by then I was serious, again, security were great


----------



## stockwellcat.

A question off topic. So sorry for taking my thread off topic slightly 

I am watching TM on TV at the moment doing a news conference in G7. Why is it when she answers a question she gurns?

Body language wise I am sure this means she is either not very confident in her response or is lying.

Ps it didn't take long before she said Strong and Stable.


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> I would tactically vote for any party (with the exception of ukip) to keep the tories out.


Oh id vote ukip if the stood even half a chance. Ukip were the party that got us the vote on the EU if it hadn't of been for them we never would have got it but something I thank ukip for albeit understand many don't agree with me water off a ducks back though.
Besides I don't like this leader


----------



## Odin_cat

DT said:


> Agree, it will probably cost more as more supervisiOn will be required earlier in the day


I don't even think their costing would cover the food;
60 million for 3.6 million children, that's less that £17 per child per year. Based on 200 school days a year that's 8p a day. I'm not sure it's possible to feed a child a healthy breakfast for 8p.

Of course not all children will go but even if only 25% go that's only 32p to cover food, wages.and extra heating.


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Very powerful speech just now from Jeremy Corbyn.


I just saw a bit on the 6 pm news , he started straight off about Manchester and security etc so not capitalising on that then are you , Jerry , !


----------



## Elles

Yup, it sounds more like accessibility needs improving than all and sundry getting free parking on hospital premises. I had various scans and tests last year that meant I had to visit the hospital 4 times. I knew I'd need to pay to park. I don't want free parking for all and sundry, including me, at the expense of others, when the money can be put to better use. It doesn't mean Labour can't look at accessibility, affordability and urgent appts and look at passes or exemptions. Free parking just seems so far down the list of NHS priorities at the moment, I don't get why it's even in the manifesto tbh.

If it was me, I'd be complaining like hell that my poor neighbour had to rely on me to take them, I wouldn't accept free parking as a solution. It's disgusting, especially for the people who don't have as generous a neighbour and even more so if there's somewhere nearer and more easily accessible, but they don't get sent there.


----------



## Elles

I liked Nigel.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> Yup, it sounds more like accessibility needs improving than all and sundry getting free parking on hospital premises. I had various scans and tests last year that meant I had to visit the hospital 4 times. I knew I'd need to pay to park. I don't want free parking for all and sundry, including me, at the expense of others, when the money can be put to better use. It doesn't mean Labour can't look at accessibility, affordability and urgent appts and look at passes or exemptions. Free parking just seems so far down the list of NHS priorities at the moment, I don't get why it's even in the manifesto tbh.
> 
> If it was me, I'd be complaining like hell that my poor neighbour had to rely on me to take them, I wouldn't accept free parking as a solution. It's disgusting, especially for the people who don't have as generous a neighbour and even more so if there's somewhere nearer and more easily accessible, but they don't get sent there.


We singing off the same sheet elles


----------



## Elles

Both leaders seem to suffer foot in mouth disease. Either that, or their speech writers don't like them very much. :Hilarious


----------



## FeelTheBern

I don't quite know who to go for now. I side mostly with the Conservatives-but I strongly oppose fox hunting. In my opinion, it's a waste of time voting for any party other than Labour or Tories.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> I liked Nigel.


Ive met nigel on a couple of occasions, not claiming to know him at all, but he comes over as a very ordinary guy.


----------



## FeelTheBern

DT said:


> Ive met nigel on a couple of occasions, not claiming to know him at all, but he comes over as a very ordinary guy.


I've met Trump before-he combs over as a bit of a fool.


----------



## FeelTheBern

I'm not trying to have a dig at voters here; but if you vote for Green or UKIP you're wasting your vote.


----------



## Elles

That is a tough one. If no-one votes Green or UKIP the main parties will think green and ukip policies are no longer important to anyone. It's only a waste if you totally support one of the other 3, or are totally against 1 or more and don't use your vote tactically. No vote is wasted imo.


----------



## KittenKong

DoodlesRule said:


> Probably a bit over my head Noush :Shamefullyembarrased
> 
> There is just so many of Labours policies I can't agree with. I remember when the minimum wage came in, I thought it was a really bad idea for the lower paid as employers would simply pay the minimum they could - the competition went, no moving to a job that paid more because they all pay the minimum. Same with working tax credits, the tax payer is subsidising big businesses to pay the minimum they can. There must be a better way
> 
> Labour are too soft with welfare whereas the Tories are too harsh.
> 
> Also with Corbyns idealistic pacifist views how safe would the country be. Yes I totally agree meddling in Middle Eastern affairs has probably caused much of the terrorism but it is what it is, we have to deal in the situation here and now he is not realistic


I see where you're coming from but at the time some employers were taking advantage of YTS and Employment Training which effectively allowed them to take on staff at the taxpayers' expense. With ET staff had to work full time for their existing benefits with the insulting £10 extra to cover transport costs which the employers didn't have to subsidies either! No wonder the Tories and such employers were so against it.

In 1996 I knew people who worked for £2.90 an hour with no enhancements for unsocial hours, not even Christmas. The introduction of the minimum wage improved matters considerably as the employers were no longer allowed to pay so little. It was not much seeing the job they had to do but made a difference.

I don't believe Corbyn is a pacifist whatever the media say, more a person who would rather see peace than war. Nothing wrong with that surely.

It's about time people listened to him as he's been right all along. No one can accuse him of changing his stance and despite his opposition to Trident personally, has accepted he's in the minority.

He's also expressed force would be used as a last resort and if authorised to do so, ie:not enter into a conflict illegally as Bush and Blair did in Iraq. I think everyone knows what that lead to.



stockwellcat said:


> My vote is tactical and is to stop the Tories getting back in. I understand some want to vote Lib Dems for various reasons which is fair enough.


Tactical voting is certainly very important in an election like this. My vote most certainly would have gone to the Lib Dems if I still lived in the South West where a vote for Labour would be as use as a spoilt ballot paper.

Seeing the Tories are targeting the North, especially places which voted decisively for leave in the EU referendum like here they've been surprisingly conspicuous by their absence. Labour have canvassed and have sent two leaflets, the Lib Dems 1 yet nothing from the Tories nor UKIP.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

FeelTheBern said:


> I don't quite know who to go for now. I side mostly with the Conservatives-but I strongly oppose fox hunting. In my opinion, it's a waste of time voting for any party other than Labour or Tories.


Surely that depends on where you live or rather who the incumbent MP is, how big their majority was and who is their main opposition in that area. In this area voting Labour is a wasted vote but in your area it might be they are the best opposition.


----------



## KittenKong

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...terror-threat-and-what-we-all-think-about-it/




















































Does anyone else remember the plan to replace full time Army etc staff with "Reserves"? Zero hour contracts in other words....


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> Tactical voting is certainly very important in an election like this. My vote most certainly would have gone to the Lib Dems if I still lived in the South West where a vote for Labour would be as use as a spoilt ballot paper.
> 
> Seeing the Tories are targeting the North, especially places which voted decisively for leave in the EU referendum like here they've been surprisingly conspicuous by their absence. Labour have canvassed and have sent two leaflets, the Lib Dems 1 yet nothing from the Tories nor UKIP.


My vote is only tactical because my Labour MP supports fox hunting which I am against but I am voting Labour because they as a party are against fox hunting. Plus I want the Tories out as I don't want more Austerity and cuts which the Institute of Fiscal Studies suggested will happen if the Tories get in after the elections. Enough is enough with the cuts and austerity in my opinion.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Awh but noush, would he press the buttons.
> And re the veterans, what they going to do, attach the enemy with their walking frames. Seriously. Hope he's going to house them all and make sure they have enough to live on without having to grovel


Personally I hope he wouldn't push that flippin button - nuclear armageddon isn't really going to any of us any good lol

Corbyn will help them. The tories have let our war veterans down big time - http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/former-soldier-left-relying-foodbanks-5597810

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...iates-disabled-army-war-veterans-8633610.html


----------



## noushka05

FeelTheBern said:


> I'm not trying to have a dig at voters here; but if you vote for Green or UKIP you're wasting your vote.


Ukip & the tories are now indistinguishable both are extreme right wing parties - hence why hard right mps interchange between them both lol So imo UKIP is a waste of space never mind a wasted vote

The Greens wanted to create a progressive alliance with the other progressive parties but it wasn't to be. They have stood down 30 something candidates to help get labour & the lib dems seats. The Greens have a good chance of winning seats in Bristol West, the Isle of Wight & obviously Brighton Pavilion, if I lived in any of these constituencies I would 100% vote Green. The Greens only MP, Caroline Lucas is the best MP there is. No one works harder for the people & the environment, she has cast iron integrity.


----------



## kimthecat

FeelTheBern said:


> I'm not trying to have a dig at voters here; but if you vote for Green or UKIP you're wasting your vote.


Its always been Cons, Labour or Lib Dems, , other parties have their moments but are losers the rest of the time.


----------



## Elles

A vote for ukip is one less for the conservatives and you call it a wasted vote?


----------



## Guest

kimthecat said:


> Its always been Cons, Labour or Lib Dems, , other parties have their moments but are losers the rest of the time.


Other parties can influence on politics, even if they don´t get the majority. Conservatives adapted lots of UKIP policies to get their voters too, and I bet Labour will do the same for the Green party. Sometimes it can be a good thing (like adapting to Green Party policies) and at times just bad (like adapting to UKIP´s policies).


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> A vote for ukip is one less for the conservatives and you call it a wasted vote?


The tories ARE UKIP now



MrsZee said:


> Other parties can influence on politics, even if they don´t get the majority. Conservatives adapted lots of UKIP policies to get their voters too, and I bet Labour will do the same for the Green party. Sometimes it can be a good thing (like adapting to Green Party policies) and at times just bad (like adapting to UKIP´s policies).


Well said. The tories shifted further to the right to out ukip ukip lol And labour have adopted many of the Greens progressive policies in their manifesto


----------



## Elles

Wow, the spin and lies about what Corbyn actually said. Shocking. 

May saying that Corbyn said that the Manchester atrocity was our own fault. No he didn't Mrs May. If you're that stupid you think that, you're not bright enough to be pm. Fortunately from interviews of the general public in Manchester, they haven't fallen for her (and the journalist's) blatant misrepresentation either.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> Wow, the spin and lies about what Corbyn actually said. Shocking.
> 
> May saying that Corbyn said that the Manchester atrocity was our own fault. No he didn't Mrs May. If you're that stupid you think that, you're not bright enough to be pm. Fortunately from interviews of the general public in Manchester, they haven't fallen for her (and the journalist's) blatant misrepresentation either.


24 hours ago political commentator Liam Young said this - _When Theresa May called the election Tories had a 24 point lead. Today it's just 5 points. Please get ready for the vileness to come._


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> 24 hours ago political commentator Liam Young said this - _When Theresa May called the election Tories had a 24 point lead. Today it's just 5 points. Please get ready for the vileness to come._


See, is it just me, but I prefer a discussion based on personal experiences and opinions rather than rehashed multi-media posts from "whoever".

As for the polls, yea whatever.


----------



## kimthecat

Elles said:


> Wow, the spin and lies about what Corbyn actually said. Shocking.
> 
> May saying that Corbyn said that the Manchester atrocity was our own fault. No he didn't Mrs May. If you're that stupid you think that, you're not bright enough to be pm. Fortunately from interviews of the general public in Manchester, they haven't fallen for her (and the journalist's) blatant misrepresentation either.


 Can you remind us of what he actually did said ?


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> See, is it just me, but I prefer a discussion based on personal experiences and opinions rather than rehashed multi-media posts from "whoever".
> 
> As for the polls, yea whatever.


I dont think its just you. Lots of people base their opinions on personal experience rather then hard evidence & expertise. That's why you believe the NHS will still be ok if the tories get back in. You believed the lie that labour trashed the economy. You didn't know Trump would be a catastrophe when it was blatantly obvious he would be. You don't believe the UK ivory trade is contributing to the demise of the elephant. You don't think brexit will be a disaster. I prefer to look at all the evidence, listen to the experts & so on, so that I can make an informed opinion. You never did say what your personal experience of the ivory trade was?

As it happens I take polls with a pinch of salt too - but theres no doubt the tories are rattled & Liam is bang on about the vileness being directed at Corbyn.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> Wow, the spin and lies about what Corbyn actually said. Shocking.
> 
> May saying that Corbyn said that the Manchester atrocity was our own fault. No he didn't Mrs May. If you're that stupid you think that, you're not bright enough to be pm. Fortunately from interviews of the general public in Manchester, they haven't fallen for her (and the journalist's) blatant misrepresentation either.


Yes I believe May is getting desperate by making up lies about what Corbyn actually said today and the gap in the polls is closing. Even Boris had a dig at Corbyn today as well.

Everyone I know is voting Labour. So roll on the 8th June 2017 so we can all vote.


----------



## noushka05

Tory Britain.

Shocking. 9% rise in crime in one year. Police officers down 14%. 1 in 20 emergency workers have attempted suicide.


----------



## Elles

kimthecat said:


> Can you remind us of what he actually did said ?


It's probably best if people watch the speech, or a follow up interview tbh. Then they can make up their own minds and we can discuss it, if we want. 

I have never voted Labour and I'm not a big Corbyn fan, but I found May's accusation shocking.

I prefer to read forum members' take on things and their personal experience, over pages of articles I can read myself tbh. Of course a link, opinion, speech, or newspaper article can be raised for us to discuss, but I do agree that sometimes it's a bit overwhelming. As I said earlier, sometimes I think I'm reading a tabloid, not a forum. Not my forum though. 

I don't think brexit will necessarily be a disaster. I think that depends on who's sorting it and how they do it.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Corbyn said by the way:


> "many experts" had linked UK involvement in wars abroad to terrorism at home,


Then May and Boris jumped on the bandwagon to put him down.



> He also pledged to reverse police spending cuts - but stressed the blame for attacks lay with the terrorists.


He added:


> "An informed understanding of the causes of terrorism is an essential part of an effective response that will protect the security of our people, that fights rather than fuels terrorism."
> 
> He said that "many experts, including professionals in our intelligence and security services, have pointed out the connections between wars that we have been involved in, or supported, or fought, in other countries and terrorism here at home".


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Corbyn by the way said:
> 
> Then May and Boris jumped on the bandwagon to put him down.


And he was telling the truth 

The tories are a bunch of pathological liars.


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> Can you remind us of what he actually did said ?


May is getting desperate. Her media like the BBC never reminded her of her belittling of the police in Greater Manchester in 2015 who were clear in their concerns. These are the experts but May knows better of course.

Thank God we have social media who remind us of this when the Tory biased media keep it concealed. Is it any wonder why May wants control of the internet?

Everyone has united behind her of course, even me. If that's not delusional in the first order then tell me what is! Just like everyone in Zimbabwe has united behind Robert Mugabe and Russians have with Putin to name other examples.

May's appalling record as Home Secretary is gradually making itself known to the mainstream. You won't hear it on TV and most of the press. Yes, Labour had appalling HS too when in power. At least they're not standing for party leadership.

She was clearly warned in 2015 but ignored it.

Nobody, not even myself, holds May personally responsible for the Manchester terrorist attack, but the way she attempted to use it as a means of winning votes is despicable in the extreme.

She wanted her Falklands moment, she thought she had it after a day of bad publicly following the Dementia tax scandal.

Back on topic, Corbyn never directly blamed May for the Manchester terrorist attack. He said foreign policy had a lot to do with it, not forgetting Blair's close association with GW Bush which Corbyn has ALWAYS criticised. The fact Blair was in the same party didn't stop him at the time.

I respect him for that, in much the same way I respect Micheal Heseltine for not being afraid to criticise his own party/government when in power.

Not keen on Heseltine's own politics, but he's one Conservative I would happily shake by the hand and show nothing but the upmost respect for.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> I'm not a big Corbyn fan,


Or am I might I point out but out of a choice of Conservatives and Labour running this country for the next 5 years I'd prefer Labour any day. Party leaders come and go by the way.


----------



## 1290423

Corbyn claims he will do nothing to cut migration,  is this correct?


----------



## Elles

What he's saying is that foreign policy (not just the uk) has left ungoverned spaces and we need to address it. We need to look at where the terrorist originates. Addressing terrorism here alone isn't enough. He condemned the attacks repeatedly when questioned and lay the blame squarely at the suicide bomber's feet and that of his group.

Basically he said part of the answer to ISIS and other terror groups is to fill those ungoverned spaces so that these groups can't fill them, or persuade ungoverned, abandoned people to join them. As foreign policy and a part of NATO working with the countries involved.

I've heard the same concerns from soldiers after we took out Saddam, so it's not a new idea. Experts have also suggested it. Now for suggesting it as Labour foreign policy, May has accused Corbyn of saying that the Manchester attack was our own fault, which is not what he said. Obviously before we vote Labour we want to know what they intend to do about terrorism, there's no point ignoring it until after the election. But she's the one using it to score political points imo.

Hopefully I've explained my understanding of it well enough.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Corbyn claims he will do nothing to cut migration, is this correct?


Labour wont trash the economy to get numbers down. That's labours policy Sue. Watch Barry Gardiner.






We've made the country such a crap place for immigrants they're leaving of their own accord anyway.

*Net migration to UK falls by 84,000, driven by "statistically significant" increase in number of EU citizens leaving *http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40043483


----------



## 1290423

Well! I tried to convert myself to vote labour, I really did, but failed miserably


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> Corbyn claims he will do nothing to cut migration, is this correct?


Not exactly. His idea is to train up our own people so that we need fewer skilled immigrants, but that there will be controls on immigration, including controls on companies who bring unskilled, low paid workers here and undermine our pay rates. What he hasn't done is put numbers on it. He's being flexible about it. It's a bit wishy washy tbh. But then the conservatives did put numbers on it and failed repeatedly to come even close to their targets, so who knows.


----------



## 1290423

Think I'm going benefit from this election one way or another......


Im gonna put my vote on ebay lol


----------



## noushka05

Shes such a liar


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Well! I tried to convert myself to vote labour, I really did, but failed miserably


It isn't labour manifesto people should be worried about. Check this out Missis.

*Conservatives' migration target threatens economy, report finds*

Workforce is leaving and "80,000 drop in annual net migration would increase government borrowing by £6bn a year"

https://www.ft.com/content/c4f69e04-3fc4-11e7-82b6-896b95f30f58


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> 24 hours ago political commentator Liam Young said this - _When Theresa May called the election Tories had a 24 point lead. Today it's just 5 points. Please get ready for the vileness to come._


Noush, its not over until the fat lady sings, and we all know what happened with the eu vote, im writing neither parties off, that's why its so important xxx


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> Not exactly. His idea is to train up our own people so that we need fewer skilled immigrants, but that there will be controls on immigration, including controls on companies who bring unskilled, low paid workers here and undermine our pay rates. What he hasn't done is put numbers on it. He's being flexible about it. It's a bit wishy washy tbh. But then the conservatives did put numbers on it and failed repeatedly to come even close to their targets, so who knows.


I think he didn't put a number on it because the Conservatives have repeatedly failed to reach these targets or exceeded them so Corbyn thought that putting a number on this would be unrealistic. He doesn't want to commit to a certain number and fail to meet that target like the Conservatives have repeatedly.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Corbyn claims he will do nothing to cut migration, is this correct?


This is what the Labour manifesto says

IMMIGRATION Labour offers fair rules and reasonable management of migration. In trade negotiations our priorities favour growth, Jobs and prosperity. We make no apologies for putting these aims before bogus immigration targets. Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union. Britain's immigration system will change, but Labour will not scapegoat migrants nor blame them for economic failures. Labour will develop and implement fair immigration rules. We will not discriminate between people of different races or creeds. We will end indefinite detentions and distinguish between migrant labour and family attachment and will continue to support the work of the Forced Marriage Unit. We will replace income thresholds with a prohibition on recourse to public funds. New rules will be equally informed by negotiations with the EU and other partners, including the Commonwealth. Whatever our trade arrangements, we will need new migration management systems, transparent and fair to everybody. Working with businesses, trade unions, devolved governments and others to identify specific labour and skill shortages.

Working together we will institute a new system which is based on our economic needs, balancing controls and existing entitlements. This may include employer sponsorship, work permits, visa regulations or a tailored mix of all these which works for the many, not the few. Labour will protect those already working here, whatever their ethnicity. Our National Education Service will raise the level of skills and training. We will take decisive actions to end the exploitation of migrant labour undercutting workers' pay and conditions. Labour will crack down on unscrupulous employers. We will stop overseas-only recruitment practices, strengthen safety at work inspections and increase prosecutions of employers evading the minimum wage. Working with trade unions, we will end workplace exploitation. Labour values the economic and social contributions of immigrants. Both public and private sector employers depend on immigrants. We will not denigrate those workers. We value their contributions, including their tax contributions. For areas where immigration has placed a strain on public services we will reinstate the Migrant Impact Fund and boost it with a contributory element from the investments required for High Net Worth Individual Visas. Labour will restore the rights of migrant domestic workers, and end this form of modern slavery.

Labour will ease the underlying pressures in any areas struggling to cope with seven years of austerity by our programme of investments. We will not cut public services and pretend the cuts are a consequence of immigration. Refugees are not migrants. They have been forced from their homes, by war, famine or other disasters. Unlike the Tories, we will uphold the proud British tradition of honouring the spirit of international law and our moral obligations by taking our fair share of refugees. The current arrangements for housing and dispersing refugees are not fit for purpose. They are not fair to refugees or to our communities. We will review these arrangements. Labour welcomes international students who benefit and strengthen our education sector, generating more than £25 billion for the British economy and significantly boosting regional jobs and local businesses. They are not permanent residents and we will not include them in immigration numbers, but we will crack down on fake colleges.

This is what the Lib Dem manifesto says

7.8 Immigration and asylum
Immigration and asylum are under attack. Immigration is essential to our economy
and a benefit to our society. We depend on immigration to ensure we have the
people we need contributing to the UK's economy and society, including doctors,
agricultural workers, entrepreneurs, scientists and so many others. Immigration
broadens our horizons and encourages us to be more open, more tolerant.
Refugees are human beings fleeing from war zones and persecution, and we have
a legal and moral obligation to offer them sanctuary. The Liberal Democrats are
proud of the UK's historic commitments to assisting those seeking refuge from
war, persecution and degradation, and believe that we should continue to uphold
our responsibilities.
The immigration and asylum systems have suffered from inefficiency and severe
backlogs and delays over many years, harming their credibility and ability to
operate effectively. We recognise that large-scale immigration has placed strains
on some local communities and services. Major improvements are urgently
needed. For that reason, when it comes to immigration the Liberal Democrats will:

●● Ensure that the immigration system is operated fairly and efficiently, with strict
control of borders, including entry and exit checks, and adequately funded Border
Force policing of entry by irregular routes.
●● Hold an annual debate in parliament on skill and labour market shortfalls and
surpluses to identify the migration necessary to meet the UK's needs.
●● Continue to allow high-skilled immigration to support key sectors of our economy,
and ensure work, tourist and family visas are processed quickly and efficiently.
●● Recognising their largely temporary status, remove students from the official
migration statistics.
●● Ensure the UK is an attractive destination for overseas students. We will
reinstate post-study work visas for graduates in STEM (science, technology,
engineering and maths) subjects who find suitable employment within six
months of graduating. Give the devolved administrations the right to sponsor
additional post-study work visas.
● Work with universities to ensure a fair and transparent student visa process and
find ways to measure accurately the number of students leaving at the end of
their course.
●● Establish a centrally funded Migration Impact Fund to help local communities to
adjust to new migration and meet unexpected pressures on public services
and housing.
●● Provide additional government funding for English as an additional language
classes to help migrants and residents gain independence and integrate with
their local communities.

And for asylum, the Liberal Democrats will:
●● Apply the asylum system fairly, efficiently and humanely, including the process for
those who have no right to be here.
●● Offer safe and legal routes to the UK for refugees to prevent them from making
dangerous journeys, which too often result in the loss of life, for example via
reform of family reunion rules to make it easier for refugees to join relatives
already living in safety in the UK.
●● Expand the Syrian Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Scheme to offer sanctuary
to 50,000 people over the lifetime of the next parliament.
●● Re-open the Dubs unaccompanied child refugee scheme, ensuring Britain
meets its responsibilities by taking in 3,000 unaccompanied refugee children.
Liberal Democrats would offer these children indefinite leave to remain,
meaning they will not be deported once they turn 18.
●● End indefinite immigration detention by introducing a 28-day limit.
●● Speed up the processing of asylum claims, reducing the time genuine refugees
must wait before they can settle into life in the UK.
●● Expect working-age asylum seekers who have waited more than six months for
their claim to be processed to seek work like other benefit claimants, and only to
receive benefits if they are unable to do so.
●● Offer asylum to people fleeing countries where their sexual orientation or
gender identification means that they risk imprisonment, torture or execution,
and stop deporting people at risk to such countries.


----------



## 1290423

E


rottiepointerhouse said:


> This is what the Labour manifesto says
> 
> IMMIGRATION Labour offers fair rules and reasonable management of migration. In trade negotiations our priorities favour growth, Jobs and prosperity. We make no apologies for putting these aims before bogus immigration targets. Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union. Britain's immigration system will change, but Labour will not scapegoat migrants nor blame them for economic failures. Labour will develop and implement fair immigration rules. We will not discriminate between people of different races or creeds. We will end indefinite detentions and distinguish between migrant labour and family attachment and will continue to support the work of the Forced Marriage Unit. We will replace income thresholds with a prohibition on recourse to public funds. New rules will be equally informed by negotiations with the EU and other partners, including the Commonwealth. Whatever our trade arrangements, we will need new migration management systems, transparent and fair to everybody. Working with businesses, trade unions, devolved governments and others to identify specific labour and skill shortages.
> 
> Working together we will institute a new system which is based on our economic needs, balancing controls and existing entitlements. This may include employer sponsorship, work permits, visa regulations or a tailored mix of all these which works for the many, not the few. Labour will protect those already working here, whatever their ethnicity. Our National Education Service will raise the level of skills and training. We will take decisive actions to end the exploitation of migrant labour undercutting workers' pay and conditions. Labour will crack down on unscrupulous employers. We will stop overseas-only recruitment practices, strengthen safety at work inspections and increase prosecutions of employers evading the minimum wage. Working with trade unions, we will end workplace exploitation. Labour values the economic and social contributions of immigrants. Both public and private sector employers depend on immigrants. We will not denigrate those workers. We value their contributions, including their tax contributions. For areas where immigration has placed a strain on public services we will reinstate the Migrant Impact Fund and boost it with a contributory element from the investments required for High Net Worth Individual Visas. Labour will restore the rights of migrant domestic workers, and end this form of modern slavery.
> 
> Labour will ease the underlying pressures in any areas struggling to cope with seven years of austerity by our programme of investments. We will not cut public services and pretend the cuts are a consequence of immigration. Refugees are not migrants. They have been forced from their homes, by war, famine or other disasters. Unlike the Tories, we will uphold the proud British tradition of honouring the spirit of international law and our moral obligations by taking our fair share of refugees. The current arrangements for housing and dispersing refugees are not fit for purpose. They are not fair to refugees or to our communities. We will review these arrangements. Labour welcomes international students who benefit and strengthen our education sector, generating more than £25 billion for the British economy and significantly boosting regional jobs and local businesses. They are not permanent residents and we will not include them in immigration numbers, but we will crack down on fake colleges.
> 
> This is what the Lib Dem manifesto says
> 
> 7.8 Immigration and asylum
> Immigration and asylum are under attack. Immigration is essential to our economy
> and a benefit to our society. We depend on immigration to ensure we have the
> people we need contributing to the UK's economy and society, including doctors,
> agricultural workers, entrepreneurs, scientists and so many others. Immigration
> broadens our horizons and encourages us to be more open, more tolerant.
> Refugees are human beings fleeing from war zones and persecution, and we have
> a legal and moral obligation to offer them sanctuary. The Liberal Democrats are
> proud of the UK's historic commitments to assisting those seeking refuge from
> war, persecution and degradation, and believe that we should continue to uphold
> our responsibilities.
> The immigration and asylum systems have suffered from inefficiency and severe
> backlogs and delays over many years, harming their credibility and ability to
> operate effectively. We recognise that large-scale immigration has placed strains
> on some local communities and services. Major improvements are urgently
> needed. For that reason, when it comes to immigration the Liberal Democrats will:
> 
> ●● Ensure that the immigration system is operated fairly and efficiently, with strict
> control of borders, including entry and exit checks, and adequately funded Border
> Force policing of entry by irregular routes.
> ●● Hold an annual debate in parliament on skill and labour market shortfalls and
> surpluses to identify the migration necessary to meet the UK's needs.
> ●● Continue to allow high-skilled immigration to support key sectors of our economy,
> and ensure work, tourist and family visas are processed quickly and efficiently.
> ●● Recognising their largely temporary status, remove students from the official
> migration statistics.
> ●● Ensure the UK is an attractive destination for overseas students. We will
> reinstate post-study work visas for graduates in STEM (science, technology,
> engineering and maths) subjects who find suitable employment within six
> months of graduating. Give the devolved administrations the right to sponsor
> additional post-study work visas.
> ● Work with universities to ensure a fair and transparent student visa process and
> find ways to measure accurately the number of students leaving at the end of
> their course.
> ●● Establish a centrally funded Migration Impact Fund to help local communities to
> adjust to new migration and meet unexpected pressures on public services
> and housing.
> ●● Provide additional government funding for English as an additional language
> classes to help migrants and residents gain independence and integrate with
> their local communities.
> 
> And for asylum, the Liberal Democrats will:
> ●● Apply the asylum system fairly, efficiently and humanely, including the process for
> those who have no right to be here.
> ●● Offer safe and legal routes to the UK for refugees to prevent them from making
> dangerous journeys, which too often result in the loss of life, for example via
> reform of family reunion rules to make it easier for refugees to join relatives
> already living in safety in the UK.
> ●● Expand the Syrian Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Scheme to offer sanctuary
> to 50,000 people over the lifetime of the next parliament.
> ●● Re-open the Dubs unaccompanied child refugee scheme, ensuring Britain
> meets its responsibilities by taking in 3,000 unaccompanied refugee children.
> Liberal Democrats would offer these children indefinite leave to remain,
> meaning they will not be deported once they turn 18.
> ●● End indefinite immigration detention by introducing a 28-day limit.
> ●● Speed up the processing of asylum claims, reducing the time genuine refugees
> must wait before they can settle into life in the UK.
> ●● Expect working-age asylum seekers who have waited more than six months for
> their claim to be processed to seek work like other benefit claimants, and only to
> receive benefits if they are unable to do so.
> ●● Offer asylum to people fleeing countries where their sexual orientation or
> gender identification means that they risk imprisonment, torture or execution,
> and stop deporting people at risk to such countries.


Thank you sharing that rottie, my mind is made up now. Well 95%


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> I think he didn't put a number on it because the Conservatives have repeatedly failed to reach these targets or exceeded them so Corbyn thought that putting a number on this would be unrealistic. He doesn't want to commit to a certain number and fail to meet that target like the Conservatives have repeatedly.


I agree.
Tbh what he's saying about immigration I think is actually the closest to what I believe people actually wanted and voted brexit to achieve. Unfortunately a lot of people will find it hard to decipher.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Out of context: Whoever for whichever side tries to hijack the Manchester attack to their campaign it is disgusting, disrespectful, despicable.
No gains justify those means.


----------



## 1290423

cheekyscrip said:


> Out of context: Whoever for whichever side tries to hijack the Manchester attack to their campaign it is disgusting, disrespectful, despicable.
> No gains justify those means.


Well definitely labour tried that one


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> I think he didn't put a number on it because the Conservatives have repeatedly failed to reach these targets or exceeded them so Corbyn thought that putting a number on this would be unrealistic. He doesn't want to commit to a certain number and fail to meet that target like the Conservatives have repeatedly.


I think he's a sly old dog , he implies a lot of things but you can't pin him down , reminds me of forum tactics. 
This will keep some of his labour supporters who felt their jobs were at risk and voted for Brexit happy , though .

Respect , mate ! I'm still not voting for you , though .


----------



## Elles

I'm not sure. People want to know what will be done about terrorism. Theresa May made her speech about putting the army on the streets, without mentioning she meant outside buck palace, the Houses of Parliament and London. Corbyn made his speech about addressing where the terrorism originates.

Both have condemned the attack and offered their idea of solutions. 

TM hijacked it by saying Jeremy Corbyn said the Manchester attack was our fault.

I think Jeremy Corbyn is a clever chap who tries to please most of the people most of the time, it's politics.


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> Think I'm going benefit from this election one way or another......
> 
> Im gonna put my vote on ebay lol


I wish. My vote is still in undecided. I've never voted Labour, do I really want to start now, when there's so much in their manifesto I don't agree with, or feel that now is not the time.


----------



## kimthecat

Elles said:


> I'm not sure. People want to know what will be done about terrorism. Theresa May made her speech about putting the army on the streets, without mentioning she meant outside buck palace, the Houses of Parliament and London. Corbyn made his speech about addressing where the terrorism originates.


Are there no troops in Manchester ? 



> I think Jeremy Corbyn is a clever chap who tries to please most of the people most of the time, it's politics.


or perhaps he's a clever chap who took advantage of a situation and grabbed the chance to use it while Mrs May was away dealing with the G7 .


----------



## Elles

kimthecat said:


> Are there no troops in Manchester ?
> 
> or perhaps he's a clever chap who took advantage of a situation and grabbed the chance to use it while Mrs May was away dealing with the G7 , it's politics.


People in Manchester were complaining that there were no troops there, so I guess not. I can't confirm though, I don't live in Manchester.

I presume the speech was planned. If he'd said nothing about how labour plan on dealing with security and terrorism, Mrs May would have said he was weak instead probably. He's boxing clever really. Rarely mentions May or the conservatives and lets them hang themselves by insulting him at every opportunity. People like an underdog and don't like when politics gets personal.


----------



## MilleD

I'm now totally confused. 

I thought I would be voting Tory but there are so many things in their manifesto I disagree with. 

Can't vote Labour, just doesn't agree with my sensibilities .

And checked the greens but they want mandatory licencing of private landlords, of which I am one. But that will just increase my very fair rents. My rents are very low because I rent to people I know will look after my properties and I don't want to raise their rents.


----------



## kimthecat

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...orbyn-the-war-on-terror-is-simply-not-working

Tim Farron Lib Dem leader agrees with May.

"Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat leader, also criticised Corbyn's speech, saying: "A few days ago, a young man built a bomb, walked into a pop concert and deliberately slaughtered children. Our children. Families are grieving. A community is in shock. Jeremy Corbyn has chosen to use that grotesque act to make a political point."
Farron added: "I don't agree with what he says, but I disagree even more that now is the time to say it. That's not leadership, it's putting politics before people at a time of tragedy."


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> https://www.theguardian.com/politic...orbyn-the-war-on-terror-is-simply-not-working
> 
> Tim Farron Lib Dem leader agrees with May.
> 
> "Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat leader, also criticised Corbyn's speech, saying: "A few days ago, a young man built a bomb, walked into a pop concert and deliberately slaughtered children. Our children. Families are grieving. A community is in shock. Jeremy Corbyn has chosen to use that grotesque act to make a political point."
> Farron added: "I don't agree with what he says, but I disagree even more that now is the time to say it. That's not leadership, it's putting politics before people at a time of tragedy."
> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/labour


I can see both sides. Unless the election is postponed which it hasn't been, after an agreed period of not campaigning they all have to get back to it as there is less than 2 weeks to go. Even if he had waited another week to say what he wanted to people still would have turned it against him and made out he was point scoring or being insensitive.


----------



## rona

kimthecat said:


> Are there no troops in Manchester ?


Not sure, but we have armed police patrolling our town have you?

There is actually a large and active police presence here and we are rather a long way from Manchester


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> Not sure, but we have armed police patrolling our town have you?
> 
> There is actually a large and active police presence here and we are rather a long way from Manchester


And a friend too me yesterday that two armed police walking into the shopping centre her units in, she lives in boston lincs.


----------



## noushka05

.Looking to discredit Corbyn's speech about terrorism? 
Here's a handy guide to selective quoting for Tories and others.


----------



## 1290423

[QUOTE="Elles, post: 1064873176, member:

I presume the speech was planned. If he'd said nothing about how labour plan on dealing with security and terrorism, [/QUOTE]

And that is my problem with the nice mr corbyn, well one of many actually, for me fraid to say there are more holes in the labour manifesto then a colander. 
Its begining to stack up just as nicely, not, as the tories


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> .Looking to discredit Corbyn's speech about terrorism?
> Here's a handy guide to selective quoting for Tories and others.


I missed question time noushka apparently Terry told me there was a very nice sensible young Muslim on their claims the first thing we should do to combat this is close all the mosques that are funded by Saudi Arabia she insists that is where radicaizisation is taking place children as young as under 8.
Now whether that is correct I dont know.
But very much doubt mr corbyn would close any mosque, a synigog maybe, but never on my nellie a mosque.


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> Are there no troops in Manchester ?


There are troops in Manchester. The SAS were flown into the Ethiad Stadium in Military helicopters on Tuesday (Day after the attack) and have been involved in every anti terror raid across Greater Manchester and Merseyside. They look like the police officers but don't have police insignias but instead wear the SAS insignia. They have been involved right from the beginning and will continue to be involved for some time yet. You will find the SAS are trained to blend in, they won't be in combat fatigues they will look like the everyday person in the street or an armed police officer. The SAS are anti Terrorist units in the military. The SAS were ordered into Manchester in the earlier hours of Tuesday morning before TM announced that soldiers would be on the street.

The two on the left with helmets on are SAS the one on the right in between the cars is police. This picture was a raid in Manchester.









Another raid in the city centre of Manchester. The armed person at the front is SAS the rest are police.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> I missed question time noushka apparently Terry told me there was a very nice sensible young Muslim on their claims the first thing we should do to combat this is close all the mosques that are funded by Saudi Arabia she insists that is where radicaizisation is taking place children as young as under 8.
> Now whether that is correct I dont know.
> But very much doubt mr corbyn would close any mosque, a synigog maybe, but never on my nellie a mosque.


I didnt see it Sue, but Saudi is the biggest funder of terrorism. May supports Saudi sells uk arms to them, Saudi funds ISIS. Its time to look at the bigger picture. That's something Corbyn will do.


----------



## Cleo38

noushka05 said:


> .Looking to discredit Corbyn's speech about terrorism?
> Here's a handy guide to selective quoting for Tories and others.


It truly is unbelievable the amount of his quotes or opinions have been taken out of context or manipulated to suit ..... I understand that's how the system works but it does seem so much more like a big campaign from certain media companies to smear his name, alot more than with previous Labour leaders .... is he really that much of a threat to them all?!

I am one of those people who hasn't voted in a general election for years (yes I know my history & how people fought for the right to vote!) as no party seemed to represent what I really believed in, Labour just seemed to be a watered down Tory party & Ed Milliband was just far too much like Blair for my liking ...... but this time I am going to vote as finally there is someone worth voting for


----------



## 1290423

Cleo38 said:


> It truly is unbelievable the amount of his quotes or opinions have been taken out of context or manipulated to suit ..... I understand that's how the system works but it does seem so much more like a big campaign from certain media companies to smear his name, alot more than with previous Labour leaders .... is he really that much of a threat to them all?!
> 
> I am one of those people who hasn't voted in a general election for years (yes I know my history & how people fought for the right to vote!) as no party seemed to represent what I really believed in, Labour just seemed to be a watered down Tory party & Ed Milliband was just far too much like Blair for my liking ...... but this time I am going to vote as finally there is someone worth voting for


Totally correct, its the same on social media, and it does sadly get people thinking. Even if its untrue. But there are many people who arnt interested in facts, just because joe browns aunt sally told their next door neighbours second cousin who then told the guy queuing up to buy a lottery ticket who told my uncle arthur then it must be true.


----------



## Elles

Ah ok. I expect people thought it meant an obvious army presence. 

As Mr Trump has just sold billions worth of arms to the Saudis, that stable door is off its hinges, there's no bolting it. The suicide bombers get their bombs from the local shops, not Saudi Arabia though. If some Saudis are funding ISIS, I shouldn't think there's much we can do about it. No more than we could stop some Americans funding the IRA back in the day.


----------



## noushka05

Cleo38 said:


> It truly is unbelievable the amount of his quotes or opinions have been taken out of context or manipulated to suit ..... I understand that's how the system works but it does seem so much more like a big campaign from certain media companies to smear his name, alot more than with previous Labour leaders .... is he really that much of a threat to them all?!
> 
> I am one of those people who hasn't voted in a general election for years (yes I know my history & how people fought for the right to vote!) as no party seemed to represent what I really believed in, Labour just seemed to be a watered down Tory party & Ed Milliband was just far too much like Blair for my liking ...... but this time I am going to vote as finally there is someone worth voting for


It is shocking. And the dignity of Corbyn never to stoop to their level I find really impressive. Hes decent & principled, he has always represented us - the people & thats why the establishment fear him, they will do & say anything to keep their grip on power. I've posted this so many times but here goes lol


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> Ah ok. I expect people thought it meant an obvious army presence.
> 
> As Mr Trump has just sold billions worth of arms to the Saudis, that stable door is off its hinges, there's no bolting it. The suicide bombers get their bombs from the local shops, not Saudi Arabia though. If some Saudis are funding ISIS, I shouldn't think there's much we can do about it. No more than we could stop some Americans funding the IRA back in the day.


There are no soldiers on the street in London only around key locations like Buckingham Palace, Houses of Parliament, Downing Street, etc. They have replaced the police at these locations so the police can do other things. There are more police about now than before.


----------



## noushka05

Calling @Zaros! Have a read at this about Corbyn on the Chagos Islanders  - http://www.middleeasteye.net/column...ued-radical-and-morally-courageous-2036528122


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> There are soldiers on the street in London only around key locations like Buckingham Palace, Houses of Parliament, Downing Street, The London Eye etc. They have replaced the police at these locations so the police can do other things. There are more police about now than before.


This was probably already planned and a part of increasing the threat alert. I'd like to imagine May and her advisors stood around a table, pushing models about like something from Game of Thrones. May would throw Corbyn out of the moon door, with Tim Farron clapping his hands and saying 'see the bad man fly mother'. But no, there'll already be plans in place, I don't doubt.


----------



## noushka05

Heres one liar completely humiliated last night by Krishnan Guru-Murthy:Finger


----------



## Happy Paws2

Gets better doesn't it.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Elles

Looks like even some of the press were a bit shocked too. When Theresa May said it, it was in answer to questions at the G7, so not a rehearsed speech and the question didn't even ask about Jeremy Corbyn. I'm sure the speech will be online somewhere, the speech I saw is about 6 minutes long, followed by questions. The questions and answers are quite interesting, if you haven't seen it.


----------



## Elles

That's a rubbish meme @KittenKong it doesn't mention coalition of chaos once.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Calling @Zaros! Have a read at this about Corbyn on the Chagos Islanders  - http://www.middleeasteye.net/column...ued-radical-and-morally-courageous-2036528122


Source: _Corbyn has also had the moral courage to highlight the predicament of the Chagos Islanders, supporting their right to "return to their homelands._

This exercise in moral courage and outrage is pointless, Noush'. He's up against powers at their most ruthless.

The Chagossians are a lost people. They will never be returned to their home island. In 2004, the queen saw to this with a decree that forbids them from ever returning.:Rage

Loyal British subjects treated as if they are of no consequence.

Despicable!


----------



## MiffyMoo

cheekyscrip said:


> Out of context: Whoever for whichever side tries to hijack the Manchester attack to their campaign it is disgusting, disrespectful, despicable.
> No gains justify those means.


You mean like this?










He was the Labour candidate for my constituency


----------



## Guest

DT said:


> I missed question time noushka apparently Terry told me there was a very nice sensible young Muslim on their claims the first thing we should do to combat this is close all the mosques that are funded by Saudi Arabia she insists that is where radicaizisation is taking place children as young as under 8.
> Now whether that is correct I dont know.
> But very much doubt mr corbyn would close any mosque, a synigog maybe, but never on my nellie a mosque.


We are about to build a bigger mosque in Helsinki, and populists have warned against it, saying it will increase terrorism. Understandably our police have been very interested in the plan too, as has our security office (a bit like M2, but much smaller). As a result of their investigations, both the police and security office found out that mosques actually do the opposite (at least in the west). Usually they provide support and a constructive way to study Islam and therefore those attending mosques are less vulnerable to Isis propaganda. They also found out that religion played only a minor role why people joined Isis. Many were just common criminals, who were able to "rob and kill" and get away with it, many liked the "power" they gained, and for some it was just a job. For some was the only group that accepted them, and only minority thought they`ll be better muslims joining Isis. No wonder, as Isis doesn´t follow Islam, (unlike Taleban e.g. , ). The lowest of the rank were the gullible westerners without any real skills, and they often became suicide bombers. The leaders (originally) were ex Irak- army officers, who were left without a position after Saddam was thrown out.

So it´d would actually be good, if there were more mosques around, if we want to fight against terrorism.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Not sure if this has been posted and I've missed it but here is a video and transcript of Corbyn's speech in full

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/read-watch-jeremy-corbyns-full-10504578

and Theresa May's response to his speech in which she has twisted what he said to make out he excused the Manchester attack (starts at 7.57)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/shameless-theresa-twists-jeremy-corbyn-10507897


----------



## stockwellcat.

UK terror threat level reduced from Critical to Severe at 11:55am this morning. PM and J-Tac announced this update. Armed police will remain visible at various venues around the UK over the Bank Holiday weekend. Soldiers will be gradually withdrawn from the streets and key locations from midnight on Monday.


----------



## Elles

A conspiracy theorist in our local said that because the terrorist was 22, it happened on the 22nd and 22 people died, it proves it was all planned by May and the US government. How I have no idea, he was told to shut up.


----------



## Elles

I've been reading up on Chagos. They were treated badly, they were slaves and our government (and plantation owners) were terrible to them (and their pets ) when they bought out the plantations and kicked them all out to set up military operations. Mauritius was bloody awful too, hanging on to what little money these people should have got at the time. It's a horrible story.

But since then they've had millions in compensation and many relocated to the uk and get trips back. The rest live in Mauritius and Seychelles, but feel excluded, so they (or mostly their descendants now) want the islands they lived and worked on for plantation owners, so they can set up tourist resorts and work what's left of the plantations and fishing. I think Corbyn is fighting a lost cause there tbh. Once the uk and us military leave, it probably should go back to being uninhabited and be a protected area, so I don't think environmentalists will be on their side either really. It's only from what I've been reading in various places on the net though.


----------



## 1290423

MrsZee said:


> We are about to build a bigger mosque in Helsinki, and populists have warned against it, saying it will increase terrorism. Understandably our police have been very interested in the plan too, as has our security office (a bit like M2, but much smaller). As a result of their investigations, both the police and security office found out that mosques actually do the opposite (at least in the west). Usually they provide support and a constructive way to study Islam and therefore those attending mosques are less vulnerable to Isis propaganda. They also found out that religion played only a minor role why people joined Isis. Many were just common criminals, who were able to "rob and kill" and get away with it, many liked the "power" they gained, and for some it was just a job. For some was the only group that accepted them, and only minority thought they`ll be better muslims joining Isis. No wonder, as Isis doesn´t follow Islam, (unlike Taleban e.g. , ). The lowest of the rank were the gullible westerners without any real skills, and they often became suicide bombers. The leaders (originally) were ex Irak- army officers, who were left without a position after Saddam was thrown out.
> 
> So it´d would actually be good, if there were more mosques around, if we want to fight against terrorism.


You could well be correct on that one, as here to our faith leaders do come together during this time muslims especially, but as I said this was mentioned on question time by a young muslin, who specifically said mosques funded by saudi arabia, there was also printed leaflets produced, as I said I dont know how viable any of this is, but I am sure I will not be the only person to watch this. Or rather my other half wouldnt be.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> A conspiracy theorist in our local said that because the terrorist was 22, it happened on the 22nd and 22 people died, it proves it was all planned by May and the US government. How I have no idea, he was told to shut up.


A right plonker by the sounds of it xxx


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> There are no soldiers on the street in London only around key locations like Buckingham Palace, Houses of Parliament, Downing Street, etc. They have replaced the police at these locations so the police can do other things. There are more police about now than before.


 I think there will be special security at Wembley Stadium today because of the Cup Final .

Come on you, Reds !


----------



## kimthecat

Cleo38 said:


> I am one of those people who hasn't voted in a general election for years (yes I know my history & how people fought for the right to vote!) as no party seemed to represent what I really believed in, Labour just seemed to be a watered down Tory party & Ed Milliband was just far too much like Blair for my liking ...... but this time I am going to vote as finally there is someone worth voting for


I envy you ! I have always voted but this time I may abstain and not vote.


----------



## kimthecat

rona said:


> Not sure, but we have armed police patrolling our town have you?
> 
> There is actually a large and active police presence here and we are rather a long way from Manchester


Not that I've seen . I did expect to see some in town earlier this morning but didn't see anyone , I think they might deployed to Wembley Stadium but cant say for certain.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

We've apparently got them on the streets in Dorset - at a festival in Bournemouth and elsewhere

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/15313148.Armed_police_out_on_patrol_in_Dorset_and_Hampshire/

I don't find it remotely reassuring - fine if you happen to be at the festival but there is no way they can protect every place where large numbers of people gather - what about supermarkets, department stores, church fetes, school sporting events etc etc ?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Just walked into Soho from were I live and walked passed 3 major sites (Parliament, Downing Street and an Embassy) and saw 3 soldiers (one at each location) flanked with armed police officers. There is more armed police on the street in general. Didn't bother me one bit.


----------



## Elles

Can someone clarify with official links if possible, what exactly is going on with what they're calling the dementia tax?

So far I've read:

private companies (bankers, insurance companies etc) will sell some kind of policy to cover it until you die, then take extortionate levels of compound interest. Basically May's husband and her friends profiting from this new policy.

insurance companies etc turned it down, they don't want to do it. 

Councils will cover it and take the money when you die, plus interest.

Which is true? I'm talking about the selling the house after death to cover the cost of care bar £100k

For me, if councils will be given enough to cover it I can accept it, if private companies will make huge profits, I can't and it's back on my list.


----------



## Honeys mum




----------



## 1290423

Honeys mum said:


>


 But how much did they start out with


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> But how much did they start out with


This was discussed before and the fact is the conservatives have halved the annual borrowing Labour left them with.


----------



## kimthecat

Honeys mum said:


>


 They're spelt privatisation with a Z , dont you just hate that ?


----------



## kimthecat

Elles said:


> Can someone clarify with official links if possible, what exactly is going on with what they're calling the dementia tax?


 I have no idea but it sounds alarming . Also they are making inroads toward a cure for dementia so hopefuly not too far in the future they wont need this .


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> Can someone clarify with official links if possible, what exactly is going on with what they're calling the dementia tax?
> 
> So far I've read:
> 
> private companies (bankers, insurance companies etc) will sell some kind of policy to cover it until you die, then take extortionate levels of compound interest. Basically May's husband and her friends profiting from this new policy.
> 
> insurance companies etc turned it down, they don't want to do it.
> 
> Councils will cover it and take the money when you die, plus interest.
> 
> Which is true? I'm talking about the selling the house after death to cover the cost of care bar £100k
> 
> For me, if councils will be given enough to cover it I can accept it, if private companies will make huge profits, I can't and it's back on my list.


I might be wrong but I don't think its been clarified yet - they've said there will be a consultation Green Paper as early as the summer and I have a feeling we won't get the details such as caps/winter fuel cut off point and this delaying of care costs until you die until then.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Honeys mum said:


>


More Austerity on the way and cuts if she gets in again :Muted

Source of information the Institute of Fiscal Studies.


----------



## Elles

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I might be wrong but I don't think its been clarified yet - they've said there will be a consultation Green Paper as early as the summer and I have a feeling we won't get the details such as caps/winter fuel cut off point and this delaying of care costs until you die until then.


Ah ok thanks. That's probably why I haven't got a clue either then. :Bag


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> Can someone clarify with official links if possible, what exactly is going on with what they're calling the dementia tax?


Details have not been released but of the suggestions put forward I know which one sounds most likely. It could be that councils will supply top quality care without seeing a penny until the recipient of that care dies and then leave themselves at the mercy of the housing market to try and recoup those costs. Alternatively, it could be underwritten so the equity is released as needed much like current equity release options but without the homeowner seeing the money.

Depends which you think is most likely I suppose.


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Just walked into Soho from were I live and walked passed 3 major sites (Parliament, Downing Street and an Embassy) and saw 3 soldiers (one at each location) flanked with armed police officers. There is more armed police on the street in general. Didn't bother me one bit.


I have been there today..waving wildly to you ..feeling ignored...


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> I have been there today..waving wildly to you ..feeling ignored...


So sorry @cheekyscrip I was so busy listening to the musician across the road from Parliament and concerntrating on getting an ice cold drink of beer :Shamefullyembarrased

Are you about tomorrow?


----------



## cheekyscrip

Possibly around St James Park and St.Paul....
Actually passing Stockwell on.my way been thinking how you bearing up...


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> Possibly around St James Park and St.Paul....
> Actually passing Stockwell on.my way been thinking how you bearing up...


Can meet for a drink if you want?
I'm fine thanks.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*'Women's surge' towards Labour*
Posted at22:4827 May

Ben Riley-Smithy, assistant political editor at The Telegraph, has tweeted a graphic illustrating the recent surge of women voters towards Labour which the paper is reporting.

View image on Twitter









Follow
Ben Riley-Smith

✔@benrileysmith
Labour fightback is being driven by women voters.

Tories had double-digit lead among women. Now just 1pt.

10:22 PM - 27 May 2017

https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?in_reply_to=868578106000502784


739739 Retweets


790790 likes


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Apologies - I don't usually post Labour propaganda but this song is so catchy - I can't stop singing it now. We need to get it to number 1


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> This was discussed before and the fact is the conservatives have halved the annual borrowing Labour left them with.


Here we go again. The tory Austerity con is destroying our society. From your own source of reference. (don't forget we're still waiting to hear about your personal experience of the ivory trade)

_The Conservative chancellor latched on to the public fear of government borrowing, coming up with very strict fiscal rules, which - hardly any economist would support. Fears over Labour economic incompetence was a major factor in election defeat and the political support for austerity - despite evidence austerity is counter-productive in a recession and liquidity trap._

http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/21191/economics/media-bias-in-the-uk/


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Apologies - I don't usually post Labour propaganda but this song is so catchy - I can't stop singing it now. We need to get it to number 1


I bought this yesterday It is really catchy isn't it lol

ETA All proceeds from this song are to be split between food banks & The Peoples Assembly Against Austerity


----------



## stockwellcat.

Wow look at the crowds Jeremy Corbyn is pulling in:









































I believe now he is in it to win it:


----------



## stockwellcat.

You gov poll 24/25 May 2017









Only 11 whole days (including today) to go before we cast our votes (8th June 2017).


----------



## stockwellcat.




----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> Source: _Corbyn has also had the moral courage to highlight the predicament of the Chagos Islanders, supporting their right to "return to their homelands._
> 
> This exercise in moral courage and outrage is pointless, Noush'. He's up against powers at their most ruthless.
> 
> The Chagossians are a lost people. They will never be returned to their home island. In 2004, the queen saw to this with a decree that forbids them from ever returning.:Rage
> 
> Loyal British subjects treated as if they are of no consequence.
> 
> Despicable!


Absolutely Despicable! Ultimate betrayal of her most loyal subjects. How the Queen( & all those involved in this travesty) sleep at night I do not know. Obviously Corbyn too is horrified by this injustice so has brought it onto the agenda when all others have swept it under the carpet. He's being portrayed as weak, but as Tory Peter Oborne keeps pointing out - Corbyn is courageous.


----------



## stockwellcat.

https://www.tactical2017.com/


----------



## noushka05

George Osborne savagely attacks Mays manifesto - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...listering-attack-theresa-mays-tory-manifesto/


----------



## noushka05

Actor Robert Lindsey calling out the tories.


----------



## noushka05

Danny DeVito out on the labour campaign trail yesterday

*Danny DeVito*‏Verified [email protected]*DannyDeVito* 14h14 hours ago

_London with my DN hat. Jeremy June 8th. Show us how it's done!_


----------



## havoc

I have had three different leaflets from the conservatives and absolutely nothing from any other party. I am disappointed. You wouldn't know any other candidates are standing here if you didn't look it up online.


----------



## noushka05

Musician Rag'n'bone Man Endorses Jeremy Corbyn For Prime Minister. Hes never voted before. He's bang on what he says about the media too!


----------



## Honeys mum

havoc said:


> I have had three different leaflets from the conservatives and absolutely nothing from any other party. I am disappointed. You wouldn't know any other candidates are standing here if you didn't look it up online.


The only leaflet weve had is one from our local MP , and we certainly won't be voting for her she's tory.


----------



## noushka05

If you want a good laugh have a read at Mark Steels latest:Hilarious - http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...for-kids-manifesto-costings-nhs-a7755971.html


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Absolutely Despicable! Ultimate betrayal of her most loyal subjects. How the Queen( & all those involved in this travesty) sleep at night I do not know. Obviously Corbyn too is horrified by this injustice so has brought it onto the agenda when all others have swept it under the carpet. He's being portrayed as weak, but as Tory Peter Oborne keeps pointing out - Corbyn is courageous.


The late John Lennon wrote;

_There's room at the top they are telling you still
But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
If you want to be like the folks on the hill._
(Working Class Hero)

And the folks on the hill are obscenely rich. They sleep well because they do not care.
They take what they want, when they want and there's no one to stop them.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Honeys mum said:


> The only leaflet weve had is one from our local MP , and we certainly won't be voting for her she's tory.


I have had Labour and Lib Dems leaflets continuously through my letter box and only one letter from Theresa May. I am voting Labour but not for my local MP as she is for Fox Hunting but for Labour to win the GE so yes my vote is tactical.


----------



## 1290423

Honeys mum said:


> The only leaflet weve had is one from our local MP , and we certainly won't be voting for her she's tory.


We have had two lib dem and labour


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I have had Labour and Lib Dems leaflets continuously through my letter box and only one letter from Theresa May. I am voting Labour but not for my local MP as she is for Fox Hunting but for Labour to win the GE so yes my vote is tactical.


Im back In camp stockwell this morning


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Im back In camp stockwell this morning


Which camp ?


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> *I have had *Labour and Lib Dems leaflets continuously through my letter box and *only one letter from Theresa May.* I am voting Labour but not for my local MP as she is for Fox Hunting but for Labour to win the GE so yes my vote is tactical.


Let me guess its content.

Dear Stockwellcat,

Why must you desert me in my desperate last hours of need?


----------



## Honeys mum

stockwellcat said:


> I am voting Labour but not for my local MP as she is for Fox Hunting but for Labour to win the GE so yes my vote is tactical.


Our vote will be tactical as well. That's the only way to vote this time, in the hope getting the Tories out. If that's what you want of course.


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> The late John Lennon wrote;
> 
> _There's room at the top they are telling you still
> But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
> If you want to be like the folks on the hill._
> (Working Class Hero)
> 
> And the folks on the hill are obscenely rich. They sleep well because they do not care.
> They take what they want, when they want and there's no one to stop them.


Basically what John is saying is if you want to get to the top of that hill you have to be ruthless enough to trample on others to get there? All I can think is you'd need to have psychopathic tendencies to be so indifferent to those at the bottom of the hill.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Zaros said:


> Let me guess its content.
> 
> Dear Stockwellcat,
> 
> Why must you desert me in my desperate last hours of need?


I have put the letter in this thread somewhere.

I think alot of people are deserting the Tories sorry Conservatives.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## noushka05




----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Basically what John is saying is if you want to get to the top of that hill you have to be ruthless enough to trample on others to get there? All I can think is you'd need to have psychopathic tendencies to be so indifferent to those at the bottom of the hill.


 That's about the top and bottom of it, Noush'.

And as we all know, sh1t has this awful inclination to run down hill, and some of those at the bottom.....well now, they should be eternally grateful for what little they get.

Working Class Hero"

As soon as you're born they make you feel small
By giving you no time instead of it all
'Til the pain is so big you feel nothing at all

A working class hero is something to be
A working class hero is something to be

They hurt you at home and they hit you at school
They hate you if you're clever and they despise a fool
'Til you're so ****ing crazy you can't follow their rules

A working class hero is something to be
A working class hero is something to be

When they've tortured and scared you for 20 odd years
Then they expect you to pick a career
When you can't really function, you're so full of fear

A working class hero is something to be
A working class hero is something to be

Keep you doped with religion, and sex, and T.V.
And you think you're so clever and classless and free
But you're still ****ing peasants as far as I can see

A working class hero is something to be
A working class hero is something to be

There's room at the top they are telling you still
But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
If you want to be like the folks on the hill

A working class hero is something to be
A working class hero is something to be

If you want to be a hero well just follow me
If you want to be a hero well just follow me​


----------



## MiffyMoo

Zaros said:


> The late John Lennon wrote;
> 
> _There's room at the top they are telling you still
> But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
> If you want to be like the folks on the hill._
> (Working Class Hero)
> 
> And the folks on the hill are obscenely rich. They sleep well because they do not care.
> They take what they want, when they want and there's no one to stop them.


John Lennon, well known pauper


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> That's about the top and bottom of it, Noush'.
> 
> And as we all know, sh1t has this awful inclination to run down hill, and some of those at the bottom.....well now, they should be eternally grateful for what little they get.
> 
> Working Class Hero"
> 
> As soon as you're born they make you feel small
> By giving you no time instead of it all
> 'Til the pain is so big you feel nothing at all
> 
> A working class hero is something to be
> A working class hero is something to be
> 
> They hurt you at home and they hit you at school
> They hate you if you're clever and they despise a fool
> 'Til you're so ******* crazy you can't follow their rules
> 
> A working class hero is something to be
> A working class hero is something to be
> 
> When they've tortured and scared you for 20 odd years
> Then they expect you to pick a career
> When you can't really function, you're so full of fear
> 
> A working class hero is something to be
> A working class hero is something to be
> 
> Keep you doped with religion, and sex, and T.V.
> And you think you're so clever and classless and free
> But you're still ******* peasants as far as I can see
> 
> A working class hero is something to be
> A working class hero is something to be
> 
> There's room at the top they are telling you still
> But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
> If you want to be like the folks on the hill
> 
> A working class hero is something to be
> A working class hero is something to be
> 
> If you want to be a hero well just follow me
> If you want to be a hero well just follow me​


Those lyrics really make you think. I love John Lennon, he had great socialist values, I bet he never forgot his working class roots. The words to Imagine is another of his songs that has so much meaning. If only people would strive for a kinder world, hey.










I've just found this on youtube.
_
The world is run by insane people for insane objectives._


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> John Lennon, well known pauper


Even rich people can have socialist values.


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Even rich people can have socialist values.


And yet those socialist values didn't stop him avoiding tax


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> And yet those socialist values didn't stop him avoiding tax


I didn't know that & I wont be an apologist for him. It doesn't stop his words being right.


----------



## rona

So, in response to Mondays atrocity, Mrs May has decided we need yet another paper pushing department, and Mr Corbyn reckons we need more feet and eyes on the ground.......Mmmmm 

Starting to completely lose patience with that silly out of touch woman, aren't any who surround her living in the real world or are they now so out of touch they can't see that she needs to shut up.

I so wish the Jeremy didn't have that Diane Abbott in his cabinet


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> So, in response to Mondays atrocity, Mrs May has decided we need yet another paper pushing department, and Mr Corbyn reckons we need more feet and eyes on the ground.......Mmmmm
> 
> Starting to completely lose patience with that silly out of touch woman, aren't any who surround her living in the real world or are they now so out of touch they can't see that she needs to shut up.
> 
> I so wish the Jeremy didn't have that Diane Abbott in his cabinet


The whole tory cabinet is out of touch Rona. Diane Abbott is just one member of Jeremys cabinet. The labour party represent us not the elite


----------



## Honeys mum

rona said:


> I so wish the Jeremy didn't have that Diane Abbott in his cabinet


She is on the Andrew Marr show at the moment.


----------



## kimthecat

Amber Rudd is going to stand in for May at the BBC Election debate . !! How odd !

@rona i wish jeremy didnt have jeremy in his cabinet. I wish it was John Mcdonnell or someone else who was leader.

I cant bear the thought of looking at his smug face for the next five years if he wins.
Not very rational, I know , 

BTW why does everyone assume that if you vote Tory you are rich ?

Also people might vote about local issues that affect them like the third runway at heathrow .

Its all Cameronss fault this mess. !


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Apologies - I don't usually post Labour propaganda but this song is so catchy - I can't stop singing it now. We need to get it to number 1


Saw this on Facebook yesterday. Brilliant! Didn't know how to share it here but thanks for doing so!


----------



## Zaros

MiffyMoo said:


> John Lennon, well known pauper


Working class superhero. 



MiffyMoo said:


> And yet those socialist values didn't stop him avoiding tax


If you found a way of avoiding to pay tax, and many have, I'm sure you would jump at the chance.

As many did.

Including the corrupt corporations.


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Those lyrics really make you think. *I love John Lennon*, he had great socialist values, *I bet he never forgot his working class roots. * The words to Imagine is another of his songs that has so much meaning. If only people would strive for a kinder world, hey.
> View attachment 312379
> 
> I've just found this on youtube.
> _The world is run by insane people for insane objectives._


He never did. Working your way up in life isn't a crime and remembering your meagre origins is no shame.


----------



## kimthecat

Zaros said:


> Working class superhero.
> 
> If you found a way of avoiding to pay tax, and many have, I'm sure you would jump at the chance.
> 
> As many did.
> 
> .


Sure but I wouldn't pretend to be a holier than thou.
John Lennon wasnt the guy he made himself out to be .


----------



## stockwellcat.

Honeys mum said:


> So, in response to Mondays atrocity, Mrs May has decided we need yet another paper pushing department, and Mr Corbyn reckons we need more feet and eyes on the ground.......Mmmmm
> 
> Starting to completely lose patience with that silly out of touch woman, aren't any who surround her living in the real world or are they now so out of touch they can't see that she needs to shut up.
> 
> I so wish the Jeremy didn't have that Diane Abbott in his cabinet


Diane Abbott might not be in his cabinet team if he wins, it depends on the elections, she might be ousted in her area or Corbyn may replace her.

I believe Corbyn is right with more police officers and security service staff is the right move to make.

I have this vision in my head that if Corbyn becomes PM the other Labour MP's will be scrambling for a position in his cabinet as he would have to form a new Government and cabinet.


----------



## Zaros

kimthecat said:


> Sure but I wouldn't pretend to be a holier than thou.
> John Lennon wasnt the guy he made himself out to be .


It's an unfortunate handicap and habit of life that the successful will always have their detractors.


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> Diane Abbott is just one member of Jeremys cabinet.


...whose son went to public school.


----------



## kimthecat

Zaros said:


> It's an unfortunate handicap and habit of life that the successful will always have their detractors.


  you need to take off your rose tinted specs, george , paul and ringo are/were successful and no ones knocking them .


----------



## Elles

Couldn't stand John Lennon, or the Beatles. Nothing to do with their politics though.



Calvine said:


> ...whose son went to public school.


So she knows that the state schools are a mess then.


----------



## MiffyMoo

rona said:


> So, in response to Mondays atrocity, Mrs May has decided we need yet another paper pushing department, and Mr Corbyn reckons we need more feet and eyes on the ground.......Mmmmm
> 
> Starting to completely lose patience with that silly out of touch woman, aren't any who surround her living in the real world or are they now so out of touch they can't see that she needs to shut up.
> 
> I so wish the Jeremy didn't have that Diane Abbott in his cabinet


Abbott just announced that they're getting in 10K extra community police. They are not police officers, have no police powers and frequently create situations where cases get thrown out of court.

*no, I can't provide links to back up the last bit; this was told to me by ex-boyfriend who is criminal lawyer


----------



## MiffyMoo

Zaros said:


> Working class superhero.
> 
> If you found a way of avoiding to pay tax, and many have, I'm sure you would jump at the chance.
> 
> As many did.
> 
> Including the corrupt corporations.


So you're allowed to berate anyone dodging tax, unless they're your favourite pop star, at which point it's absolutely fine and well done him for being clever?


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> Couldn't stand John Lennon, or the Beatles. Nothing to do with their politics though.
> 
> So she knows that the state schools are a mess then.


And her, not for the first time, racist comment:

"I'm a West Indian mum and West Indian mums will go to the wall for their children."

Anyone denying this is racist, please replace West Indian with White and see how it sounds


----------



## Honeys mum

So, in response to Mondays atrocity, Mrs May has decided we need yet another paper pushing department, and Mr Corbyn reckons we need more feet and eyes on the ground.......Mmmmm

Starting to completely lose patience with that silly out of touch woman, aren't any who surround her living in the real world or are they now so out of touch they can't see that she needs to shut up.
I so wish Jeremy didn't have that Dianne Abbott in his cabinet



Sorry Stockwellcat, youve got that wrong, I didn't post that. I think you'll find rona did.


----------



## Honeys mum

Just found this article on T.May.

mainly macro: Theresa May


----------



## MiffyMoo

rona said:


> So, in response to Mondays atrocity, Mrs May has decided we need yet another paper pushing department, and Mr Corbyn reckons we need more feet and eyes on the ground.......Mmmmm
> 
> Starting to completely lose patience with that silly out of touch woman, aren't any who surround her living in the real world or are they now so out of touch they can't see that she needs to shut up.
> 
> I so wish the Jeremy didn't have that Diane Abbott in his cabinet


Please bear in mind that Corbyn has historically voted against every piece of anti-terror legislation in parliament


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> They are not police officers, have no police powers and frequently create situations *where cases get thrown out of court.*
> *no, I can't provide links to back up the last bit; this was told to me by ex-boyfriend who is criminal lawyer


It's the CPS who decide whether a case goes to court, not the police. Perhaps we should be asking why they are letting weak cases proceed.


----------



## Zaros

kimthecat said:


> you need to take off your rose tinted specs, george , paul and ringo are/were successful and no ones knocking them .


:Wideyed

I do so despise distractions. Why are you focusing on the little things?
John has been dead for thirty years and no longer has the privilege of defending himself.......
And yes, I'v read some right controversial old sh1t about him, from as recent as 2016.
Is no one allowed to rest in peace anymore?:Stop

Now, you're going to have to remind me how John's behaviour, conduct and political ideology adversely affected the population of different nations around this globe.
Who were the despots and tyrants he sold arms to?
How many people did he see out of employment?
How many people did he make homeless?
How did he cripple the NHS?
How did he create poverty?

There's loads more questions, but I'm sure you must get the point by now.


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> It's the CPS who decide whether a case goes to court, not the police. Perhaps we should be asking why they are letting weak cases proceed.


I'm aware, but if procedure isn't followed then cases will get thrown out. These guys do not have police training, so do not know full procedure. Which leads to the question, is it worth adding 10,000 to the streets?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well it seems that the Conservative Party are not all behind Theresa May's Manifesto amid fresh party in fighting over the Manifesto as Theresa May announces that she is relaunching the Conservatives General Election campaign.


----------



## kimthecat

The Spectator's Stephen Daisley pretty angry at Corbyn and the IRA 

There is no evidence Corbyn has genuinely changed his outlook. He believes what he has always believed - that the West is an oppressor, jihadists are helpless victims, and targets of terrorism were asking for it". What he is trying to do is triangulate between the far-Left fringe, who love this stuff, and Labour voters who don't but want an end to austerity. Corbyn's cynicism should not be shocking; the reason the far-Left has endured for so long is its ability to lie convincingly about what it actually believes.

The Labour Party still doesn't get it; a few do, but most don't. Corbyn is not some mad old geography teacher with a lapel full of lost causes. He is not well-meaning or idealistic or a bit quirky in his views. He is an extremist and an enabler of extremism. He is a fellow traveller with terrorists and anti-Semites. When the IRA was murdering British soldiers and civilians, Corbyn had their back. When Hamas rains rockets down on Israeli kindergartens, Corbyn has their back. If he was Prime Minister and we came under attack, would he have our back?

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/the-three-lies-that-jeremy-corbyn-told-andrew-neil/

We learned something important from Jeremy Corbyn's interview with Andrew Neil: The Labour leader wants to be Prime Minister and will do whatever it takes. His soppier critics often announce their sympathy for a man who would be much happier on the backbenches. Do not believe a word of it. Listen instead to what he told the BBC presenter and you will hear a man trying to rewrite his record and trusting that most voters know too little to challenge him.

Corbyn told Neil: 'I didn't support the IRA. I don't support the IRA. What I want everywhere is a peace process.' This is a lie. Corbyn opposed the Anglo-Irish agreement. He reportedly lobbied the government on behalf of IRA prisoners. A socialist magazine whose editorial board he headed gloated over the Brighton bombing and threatened Margaret Thatcher with further violence.

Corbyn told Neil: 'I never met the IRA.' This is a lie. Corbyn invited Gerry Adams to the Commons weeks after the Brighton bombing. Ireland's Taoiseach Enda Kenny has said that, from all the evidence he has seen, Adams was not merely an IRA member but sat on its army council. According to a Daily Telegraph investigation, Corbyn shared a platform at a 1994 rally with Angelo Fusco, an IRA terrorist on the run after shooting dead an SAS officer. 
Corbyn told Neil: 'My role was supporting a process which would bring about a dialogue and I believe you have to talk.' This is a lie. The SDLP's Seamus Mallon, former deputy first minister of Northern Ireland and one of the architects of the peace process, says: 'I never heard anyone mention Corbyn at all. He very clearly took the side of the IRA and that was incompatible, in my opinion, with working for peace.' Ex-IRA terrorist Sean O'Callaghan says Corbyn 'played no part ever, at any time, in promoting peace in Northern Ireland' and any suggestion otherwise is 'a cowardly, self-serving lie'.

Why is a lifelong leftist seemingly abandoning hitherto unshakeable views? For the same reason any politician does anything: There are votes in it. There is a strain of public opinion in this country that fears Britain has become too entangled in the affairs of the Middle East. They were disillusioned by the Iraq War, a just conflict sold badly and prosecuted worse. How much easier it would be if we withdrew from the big, bad world out there and just took care of our own. It is essentially a conservative view, insular and perhaps even isolationist, and Corbyn believes he can win them over. To this end, he is repackaging himself as a wise old man wary of grand visions and geopolitical meddling.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Zaros said:


> :Wideyed
> 
> I do so despise distractions. Why are you focusing on the little things?
> John has been dead for thirty years and no longer has the privilege of defending himself.......
> And yes, I'v read some right controversial old sh1t about him, from as recent as 2016.
> Is no one allowed to rest in peace anymore?:Stop
> 
> Now, you're going to have to remind me how John's behaviour, conduct and political ideology adversely affected the population of different nations around this globe.
> Who were the despots and tyrants he sold arms to?
> How many people did he see out of employment?
> How many people did he make homeless?
> How did he cripple the NHS?
> How did he create poverty?
> 
> There's loads more questions, but I'm sure you must get the point by now.


According to many, tax avoiders are responsible for pretty much all of the above


----------



## Elles

MiffyMoo said:


> Abbott just announced that they're getting in 10K extra community police. They are not police officers, have no police powers and frequently create situations where cases get thrown out of court.
> 
> *no, I can't provide links to back up the last bit; this was told to me by ex-boyfriend who is criminal lawyer


In all reports and articles they speak of more community policing, more bobbies on the beat, more police for the communities, increasing police numbers by 10k. They don't mention the support word, i.e. PCSO - police community support officers, or CSO - community support officers, which will be who your ex means.

That's not to say they aren't being clever about wording it though.


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Well it seems that the Conservative Party are not all behind Theresa May's Manifesto amid fresh party in fighting over the Manifesto as Theresa May announces that she is relaunching the Conservatives General Election campaign.


 Its all gone pete tong for May


----------



## stockwellcat.

MiffyMoo said:


> I'm aware, but if procedure isn't followed then cases will get thrown out. These guys do not have police training, so do not know full procedure. Which leads to the question, is it worth adding 10,000 to the streets?


I believe it is right to increase police numbers as Manchester has had a large reduction in its police forces numbers due to cuts. They handled the terror attack very well taking into consideration the reduction in numbers they have had.


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> Its all gone pete tong for May


This report was in The Sunday Times by the way  I heard about it on Sophy Ridge show.


----------



## Zaros

MiffyMoo said:


> So you're allowed to berate anyone dodging tax, unless they're your favourite pop star, at which point it's absolutely fine and well done him for being clever?


Erm.

John isn't my favourite pop star. It still didn't stop me from paying attention to his lyrics though.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> In all reports and articles they speak of more community policing, more bobbies on the beat, more police for the communities, increasing police numbers by 10k. They don't mention the support word, i.e. PCSO - police community support officers, or CSO - community support officers, which will be who your ex means.
> 
> That's not to say they aren't being clever about wording it though.


She just told Marr that the extra police won't cost anything as they will be community police officers


----------



## Zaros

MiffyMoo said:


> According to many, tax avoiders are responsible for pretty much all of the above


And that would completely absolve the government would it?


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> I believe it is right to increase police numbers as Manchester has had a large reduction in its police forces numbers due to cuts. They handled the terror attack very well taking into consideration the reduction in numbers they have had.


I'm not talking about police


----------



## MiffyMoo

Zaros said:


> And that would completely absolve the government would it?


Of course not. You're switching the discussion though


----------



## stockwellcat.

MiffyMoo said:


> I'm not talking about police


My apologies.


----------



## Elles

Conservatives cut the police by 20k when they say they were already struggling. Labour have promised to stop cutting police numbers and add an extra 10k police over the next 4 years. So if labour had been in instead of the conservatives, they would have cut the police by 10k? A cut is still a cut. 

Who said they won't cost anything?


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> Conservatives cut the police by 20k when they say they were already struggling. Labour have promised to stop cutting police numbers and add an extra 10k police over the next 4 years. So if labour had been in instead of the conservatives, they would have cut the police by 10k? A cut is still a cut.
> 
> Who said they won't cost anything?


As I said, Abbott just announced it on Andrew Marr. Now if she got it wrong or made it up really wouldn't surprise me, as we all know she panics when asked for figures


----------



## Elles

Omg, the woman is an idiot. Even a pcso costs money. What's she going to do, give voluntary vigilantes a uniform and get them to work from home?

ETA sell the voluntary vigilantes a uniform of course. Silly me.


----------



## kimthecat

Zaros said:


> :Wideyed
> 
> I do so despise distractions.
> :Stop


This thread is filled with distractions !
If you want to hero worship a hypocrite , that's up to you but don't expect others not to comment.


----------



## Zaros

MiffyMoo said:


> Of course not. You're switching the discussion though


I am? 



kimthecat said:


> This thread is filled with distractions.


It is.

And in the meantime, the real issues went that a way >>>>≥>>>>>>>>>>:Facepalm


----------



## kimthecat

Zaros said:


> I am?
> And in the meantime, the real issues went that a way >>>>≥>>>>>>>>>>:Facepalm


 so why are you wasting your time criticising us for not agreeing with you about Lennon , posting lyrics to his song is not necessary in the first place. is it ?

ETA lets drop this now .


----------



## Zaros

kimthecat said:


> :Finger


One what?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> So, in response to Mondays atrocity, Mrs May has decided we need yet another paper pushing department, and Mr Corbyn reckons we need more feet and eyes on the ground.......Mmmmm
> 
> Starting to completely lose patience with that silly out of touch woman, aren't any who surround her living in the real world or are they now so out of touch they can't see that she needs to shut up.
> 
> I so wish the Jeremy didn't have that Diane Abbott in his cabinet


I do wish they would stop putting her on the political shows, she doesn't come across well and is never going to win any voters over. I thought she made a fair comment when Andrew Marr hammered her about her previous views about the IRA when she said those were 35 years ago and that just as she has changed her hairstyle since then she has also changed some of her views. I think that is probably true for most people, your political views evolve and life/experience/world events can change how you look at things. Still wish she would shut up and go away though.


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> The Spectator's Stephen Daisley pretty angry at Corbyn and the IRA
> 
> There is no evidence Corbyn has genuinely changed his outlook. He believes what he has always believed - that the West is an oppressor, jihadists are helpless victims, and targets of terrorism were asking for it". What he is trying to do is triangulate between the far-Left fringe, who love this stuff, and Labour voters who don't but want an end to austerity. Corbyn's cynicism should not be shocking; the reason the far-Left has endured for so long is its ability to lie convincingly about what it actually believes.
> 
> The Labour Party still doesn't get it; a few do, but most don't. Corbyn is not some mad old geography teacher with a lapel full of lost causes. He is not well-meaning or idealistic or a bit quirky in his views. He is an extremist and an enabler of extremism. He is a fellow traveller with terrorists and anti-Semites. When the IRA was murdering British soldiers and civilians, Corbyn had their back. When Hamas rains rockets down on Israeli kindergartens, Corbyn has their back. If he was Prime Minister and we came under attack, would he have our back?
> 
> https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/the-three-lies-that-jeremy-corbyn-told-andrew-neil/
> 
> We learned something important from Jeremy Corbyn's interview with Andrew Neil: The Labour leader wants to be Prime Minister and will do whatever it takes. His soppier critics often announce their sympathy for a man who would be much happier on the backbenches. Do not believe a word of it. Listen instead to what he told the BBC presenter and you will hear a man trying to rewrite his record and trusting that most voters know too little to challenge him.
> 
> Corbyn told Neil: 'I didn't support the IRA. I don't support the IRA. What I want everywhere is a peace process.' This is a lie. Corbyn opposed the Anglo-Irish agreement. He reportedly lobbied the government on behalf of IRA prisoners. A socialist magazine whose editorial board he headed gloated over the Brighton bombing and threatened Margaret Thatcher with further violence.
> 
> Corbyn told Neil: 'I never met the IRA.' This is a lie. Corbyn invited Gerry Adams to the Commons weeks after the Brighton bombing. Ireland's Taoiseach Enda Kenny has said that, from all the evidence he has seen, Adams was not merely an IRA member but sat on its army council. According to a Daily Telegraph investigation, Corbyn shared a platform at a 1994 rally with Angelo Fusco, an IRA terrorist on the run after shooting dead an SAS officer.
> Corbyn told Neil: 'My role was supporting a process which would bring about a dialogue and I believe you have to talk.' This is a lie. The SDLP's Seamus Mallon, former deputy first minister of Northern Ireland and one of the architects of the peace process, says: 'I never heard anyone mention Corbyn at all. He very clearly took the side of the IRA and that was incompatible, in my opinion, with working for peace.' Ex-IRA terrorist Sean O'Callaghan says Corbyn 'played no part ever, at any time, in promoting peace in Northern Ireland' and any suggestion otherwise is 'a cowardly, self-serving lie'.
> 
> Why is a lifelong leftist seemingly abandoning hitherto unshakeable views? For the same reason any politician does anything: There are votes in it. There is a strain of public opinion in this country that fears Britain has become too entangled in the affairs of the Middle East. They were disillusioned by the Iraq War, a just conflict sold badly and prosecuted worse. How much easier it would be if we withdrew from the big, bad world out there and just took care of our own. It is essentially a conservative view, insular and perhaps even isolationist, and Corbyn believes he can win them over. To this end, he is repackaging himself as a wise old man wary of grand visions and geopolitical meddling.


Thought I was reading "The Daily Mail" there. Are you aware there's a Tory ex IRA activist councillor in, I think Croydon?

I'm absolutely sick and tired of them bringing up the past like this. What the IRA and UDA, don't forget them, was despicable. There's been peace in the main for over 20 years now. What the hell do they want? A return to the "good old days" with bombings and troops in Northern Ireland again? Oh yes, Bloody Sunday, remember that???

What next, bring up Nazi Germany and the holocaust?

The country has enough to contend with.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> so why are you wasting your time criticising us for not agreeing with you about Lennon , posting lyrics to his song is not necessary in the first place. is it ?
> 
> ETA lets drop this now .


Guess you could say most of the thread isn't necessary  I've posted lyrics to a song too - hope it gets to number one and the BBC have to play it :Hilarious:Hilarious


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I do wish they would stop putting her on the political shows, she doesn't come across well and is never going to win any voters over. I thought she made a fair comment when Andrew Marr hammered her about her previous views about the IRA when she said those were 35 years ago and that just as she has changed her hairstyle since then she has also changed some of her views. I think that is probably true for most people, your political views evolve and life/experience/world events can change how you look at things. Still wish she would shut up and go away though.


I thought that was the most dreadful, disrespectful and flippant comeback! Do not compare your support of terrorists blowing up innocent people to your bloody afro! This joke wants to be Home Secretary, yet that's the best she can come up with. Give me a break. Bloody awful woman


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> Thought I was reading "The Daily Mail" there. Are you aware there's a Tory ex IRA activist councillor in, I think Croydon?
> 
> I'm absolutely sick and tired of them bringing up the past like this. What the IRA and UDA, don't forget them, was despicable. There's been peace in the main for over 20 years now. What the hell do they want? A return to the "good old days" with bombings and troops in Northern Ireland again? Oh yes, Bloody Sunday, remember that???
> 
> What next, bring up Nazi Germany and the holocaust?
> 
> The country has enough to contend with.


It is relevant when the potential future PM and Home Secretary sided with a terrorist group against the British people.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MiffyMoo said:


> I thought that was the most dreadful, disrespectful and flippant comeback! Do not compare your support of terrorists blowing up innocent people to your bloody afro! This joke wants to be Home Secretary, yet that's the best she can come up with. Give me a break. Bloody awful woman


I agree she is an awful woman but I thought it was a fair comment when being put under a great deal of pressure about views held 35 years ago. Who hasn't changed their views in 35 years?


----------



## rona

MiffyMoo said:


> I thought that was the most dreadful, disrespectful and flippant comeback! Do not compare your support of terrorists blowing up innocent people to your bloody afro! This joke wants to be Home Secretary, yet that's the best she can come up with. Give me a break. Bloody awful woman


Agreed. Also to the first few questions she more or less answered that we shouldn't be talking about this we should be considering the events and people from Monday...........just disgusted with using those events to deflect :Rage


----------



## kimthecat

Zaros said:


> One what?


:Hilarious one :Kiss (sorry , you saw the finger before I deleted it } !


----------



## Colliebarmy

lets get it over with, get the Tories into power, get rid of Corbyn and get out of the EU


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I agree she is an awful woman but I thought it was a fair comment when being put under a great deal of pressure about views held 35 years ago. Who hasn't changed their views in 35 years?


But when you look at her and Corbyn's views, and then combine them with their voting record on anti-terrorism bills, you wonder where their loyalties really do lie and how much they will do to defend the country if they became the two most powerful muppets in the country


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Guess you could say most of the thread isn't necessary  I've posted lyrics to a song too - hope it gets to number one and the BBC have to play it :Hilarious:Hilarious


You need to read my reply in context to Zaros post to me .


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MiffyMoo said:


> But when you look at her and Corbyn's views, and then combine them with their voting record on anti-terrorism bills, you wonder where their loyalties really do lie and how much they will do to defend the country if they became the two most powerful muppets in the country


She did explain some of those times though saying that some of the organisations on "lists" were not terrorists and they thought the measures were too restrictive to the non terrorists or something like that. I've recorded it so will have another look. I agree she absolutely should not be home secretary or any other secretary for that matter but I do wonder why the press give them such a hard time about things they said or did decades ago yet the David Cameron was rarely asked about putting his penis in a dead pigs mouth whilst high on cannabis (allegedly) 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...s-in-a-dead-pigs-mouth-while-at-10510500.html

The book accuses David Cameron of being part of a debauched group called the Piers Gaveston Society, as well as the infamous Bullingdon Club, during his time at Oxford.

Lord Ashcroft and the book's co-author, Isabel Oakeshott, the former_ Sunday Times _political editor, wrote that an unnamed "distinguished Oxford contemporary", who is now an MP, recalled how Mr Cameron took part in an "outrageous" initiation ceremony at a Piers Gaveston event.

"His extraordinary suggestion is that the future PM inserted a private part of his anatomy into the animal's mouth,"

Few sitting MPs have commented on the story but the Liberal Democrat leader, Tim Farron, wrote on Twitter: "I've never been more pleased to be a vegetarian."



kimthecat said:


> You need to read my reply in context to Zaros post to me .


I did


----------



## kimthecat

Corbyn on Peston , hes improving and a bit more clued up but he said he never spoke to the IRA only to IRA prisoners , isnt that the same thing,?

the M5 were concerned enough to opened a file on him

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...d-file-jeremy-corbyn-amid-concerns-ira-links/

ETA I feel sorry for MPs getting it wrong . Not an easy task to remember every detail of a wide range of facts and figures.


----------



## Elles

The best answer would be an apology if her views have changed and she no longer agrees with her younger self, instead of being an idiot and giving the press even more ammo than they have already.

If Jeremy Corbyn spoke to Gerry Adams he spoke to the IRA and knew who he was speaking to. If he felt the government should have been talking to them, then as a politician he could have pressed for it, not had a sympathetic Guinness with that sponging loser. The peace talks eventually worked, because the violent sections were losing support for their campaigns, the Irish stood up against them where they dare and Hume was in the right place at the right time. imo.

Corbyn does not and did not support retaliation against terrorists. He won't send the army in to assassinate terror leaders, if that's what you're looking for. He's more likely to send a diplomat to begin talks with Isis and watch his head being returned to him on a plate. That's not to say he will do nothing, but he is unlikely imo to deport terrorists, or attack them. That would be my conclusion from his past history and his denials today. 

He's not the Labour Party though, if he was, we'd not be keeping Trident. I'm hopeful that Reagan's idea of Star Wars is still alive and kicking in some form and eventually bombs and air strikes will be useless as they're intercepted before they hit. I don't agree with Corbyn's idea of unilateral disarmament.


----------



## KittenKong

MiffyMoo said:


> But when you look at her and Corbyn's views, and then combine them with their voting record on anti-terrorism bills, you wonder where their loyalties really do lie and how much they will do to defend the country if they became the two most powerful muppets in the country


That's a bit hypocritical as I'm sure you'll condemn Blair's involvement in Bush's Iraq war.

That really has resulted in stability hasn't it.


----------



## Calvine

Elles said:


> So she knows that the state schools are a mess then


@Elles: Well, in the article I read, the reason she gave was that being a black boy in a state school he might well end up joining a gang. She obviously had to say something as it was the Labour party that closed the grammars for being too ''elitist'' so there weren't many of those around that she could get him into. The expression 'Don't do as I do, do as I say' comes to mind just a bit? A fee-paying school for hers, but the local comprehensive for the plebs!


----------



## Elles

What led to instability is our pulling out and leaving vast ungoverned spaces. I agree with Corbyn on that. If we are going to support people who say their leader is a dictator who kills and tortures thousands, we need to give them something to replace him, or butt out. We did neither.


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> She did explain some of those times though saying that some of the organisations on "lists" were not terrorists and they thought the measures were too restrictive to the non terrorists or something like that. I've recorded it so will have another look. I agree she absolutely should not be home secretary or any other secretary for that matter but I do wonder why the press give them such a hard time about things they said or did decades ago yet the David Cameron was rarely asked about putting his penis in a dead pigs mouth whilst high on cannabis (allegedly)
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...s-in-a-dead-pigs-mouth-while-at-10510500.html
> 
> The book accuses David Cameron of being part of a debauched group called the Piers Gaveston Society, as well as the infamous Bullingdon Club, during his time at Oxford.
> 
> Lord Ashcroft and the book's co-author, Isabel Oakeshott, the former_ Sunday Times _political editor, wrote that an unnamed "distinguished Oxford contemporary", who is now an MP, recalled how Mr Cameron took part in an "outrageous" initiation ceremony at a Piers Gaveston event.
> 
> "His extraordinary suggestion is that the future PM inserted a private part of his anatomy into the animal's mouth,"
> 
> Few sitting MPs have commented on the story but the Liberal Democrat leader, Tim Farron, wrote on Twitter: "I've never been more pleased to be a vegetarian."
> 
> I did


She said she didn't think they were terrorist groups, not that they weren't.

Since when has a university student being a bit of a **** been a national security issue? Seriously, Cameron's behaviour is such a non-issue, and I'm pretty stunned that you're complaining that they're getting a harder time over, frankly, treasonous activity vs. Something that is a bit gross and a lot embarrassing


----------



## Elles

Calvine said:


> @Elles: Well, in the article I read, the reason she gave was that being a black boy in a state school he might well end up joining a gang. She obviously had to say something as it was the Labour party that closed the grammars for being too ''elitist'' so there weren't many of those around that she could get him into. The expression 'Don't do as I do, do as I say' comes to mind just a bit? A fee-paying school for hers, but the local comprehensive for the plebs!


She doesn't think much of state schools, or her son then. It's true, private (day) schools are generally better than state schools. They have to be, or no one would pay to send their kids there.


----------



## Zaros

kimthecat said:


> :Hilarious one :Kiss (sorry , you saw the finger before I deleted it } !


Not to worry.

If I allowed my proctologist to get away with it, literally, what harm could a smiley gesture ever possibly do......

Bring the memory of that distressful appointment with him flooding back, that's what!:Meh
Why some men insist on wearing those awfully large, and ever so tacky sovereign rings is quite beyond me!

Some men's 4r535 are in Playgirl, mine's in tatters!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MiffyMoo said:


> She said she didn't think they were terrorist groups, not that they weren't.
> 
> Since when has a university student being a bit of a **** been a national security issue? Seriously, Cameron's behaviour is such a non-issue, and I'm pretty stunned that you're complaining that they're getting a harder time over, frankly, treasonous activity vs. Something that is a bit gross and a lot embarrassing


Well I suppose if she didn't think they were that meant they weren't to her so she didn't feel able to support the legislation.

I would say it is a national security issue once you reach the heights of PM, you could be blackmailed to award favours/contracts or turn a blind eye to certain things if someone had photos for instance and you didn't want them in the public eye (and which PM would want a photo of him with his dick in a dead pigs mouth wearing a bow tie :Wtf). I'm not condemning him by the way, we all have to grow up and experiment and evolve into who we become as adults but I find the media very hypocritical in who they hammer about their past and who they don't.


----------



## Elles

rottiepointerhouse said:


> "His extraordinary suggestion is that the future PM inserted a private part of his anatomy into the animal's mouth,"
> 
> Few sitting MPs have commented on the story but the Liberal Democrat leader, Tim Farron, wrote on Twitter: "I've never been more pleased to be a vegetarian."


Plenty of people put the same part of a dead pig into their mouth and no-one says a word about it. :Bag


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> Plenty of people put the same part of a dead pig into their mouth and no-one says a word about it. :Bag


:Vomit I don't recall ever eating pigs penis even in my meat eating days. If by some chance I had without knowing I would not have been naked apart from a bow tie with other also naked people in bow ties watching me. Shudders.


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> That's a bit hypocritical as I'm sure you'll condemn Blair's involvement in Bush's Iraq war.
> 
> That really has resulted in stability hasn't it.


my views on the Iraq war are completely irrelevant. Now if I was sympathising with Al Qaeda and then decided that I wanted to be PM, that would be relevant


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> But when you look at her and Corbyn's views, and then combine them with their voting record on anti-terrorism bills, you wonder where their loyalties really do lie and how much they will do to defend the country if they became the two most powerful muppets in the country


Its muppets like May putting us as risk - have you seen her foreign policy? . I'm far more concerned with May's foreign policy, her arms dealing & her present close ties with Saudi royal family & their ties to terrorism. The tories are prepared to sacrifice the country for their party & you're worried about Corbyn.


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Its muppets like May putting us as risk - have you seen her foreign policy? . I'm far more concerned with May's foreign policy, her arms dealing & her present close ties with Saudi royal family & their ties to terrorism. The tories are prepared to sacrifice the country for their party & you're worried about Corbyn.
> 
> View attachment 312386


What utter rubbish. Tell me, how is Corbyn sending someone to have a cup of tea with the leader of DAESH going to help us?


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Its muppets like May putting us as risk - have you seen her foreign policy? . I'm far more concerned with May's foreign policy, her arms dealing & her present close ties with Saudi royal family & their ties to terrorism. The tories are prepared to sacrifice the country for their party & you're worried about Corbyn.
> 
> View attachment 312386


Hypocrite indeed, and just like Thatcher before her, with Pinochet & Surhato, they all seem to favour tyrants.:Nailbiting


----------



## noushka05

.Dr on social media nails it.
_
Conservatives now using fear of terrorism to attack Corbyn and manipulated scared people into votes_.

_Cowardly duplicitous *******_.

(had to bleep out that last word but its ends in 'ers' lol )


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> Hypocrite indeed, and just like Thatcher before her, with Pinochet & Surhato, they all seem to favour tyrants.:Nailbiting


Heres Mark Steel again


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> What utter rubbish. Tell me, how is Corbyn sending someone to have a cup of tea with the leader of DAESH going to help us?


References please? I thought this was just another nasty right wing smear.


----------



## KittenKong

MiffyMoo said:


> my views on the Iraq war are completely irrelevant. Now if I was sympathising with Al Qaeda and then decided that I wanted to be PM, that would be relevant


It has everything to do with Iraq as Corbyn was proved to be right.

So you consider that sympathising with Islamic terrorists?!


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Elles

Labour governments are just as responsible for selling arms. So the meme shouldn't say 'Conservative Party bravely fought etc' it should say 'British Government' 

Labour and Conservative governments have been as bad as each other when it comes to arms sales.


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> Labour governments are just as responsible for selling arms. So the meme shouldn't say 'Conservative Party bravely fought etc' it should say 'British Government'
> 
> Labour and Conservative governments have been as bad as each other when it comes to arms sales.


Can't dispute that in the past. Corbyn saying he doesn't agree with it somehow results in him being accused of sympathising with terrorists!


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> It has everything to do with Iraq as Corbyn was proved to be right.
> 
> So you consider that sympathising with Islamic terrorists?!


No, and you know full well that's not what I'm saying


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> Labour governments are just as responsible for selling arms. So the meme shouldn't say 'Conservative Party bravely fought etc' it should say 'British Government'
> 
> Labour and Conservative governments have been as bad as each other when it comes to arms sales.


Under the tories we've actually rose to the 2nd biggest arms dealer in the world. But putting that aside, you are quite right to hold successive labour governments to account, they have been shocking. And this is where labour under Corbyn are different. They have moved away from the neoliberal warmongering Elles  Please have a read at this by Tory Peter Oborne -
*Oborne: Corbyn's election manifesto for the Middle East is radical and morally courageous*

http://www.middleeasteye.net/column...ued-radical-and-morally-courageous-2036528122


----------



## noushka05




----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> my views on the Iraq war are completely irrelevant. Now if I was sympathising with Al Qaeda and then decided that I wanted to be PM, that would be relevant


Are you implying that Corbyn is an Al Qaeda sympathiser now?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Just put my bets down on Corbyn and May to win GE with betfair and will win a nice tidy sum of money if either win.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## kimthecat

@stockwellcat I'm not risking a bet ! This is a case of : I used to be uncertain now I'm not so sure. :Smuggrin

talking of songs earlier in the thread -

I think this is applicable but chose your own party !

Never cared for what they say
Never cared for games they play
Never cared for what they do
Never cared for what they know
And I know, yeah!

So close, no matter how far
Couldn't be much more from the heart
Forever trusting who we are
No, nothing else matters


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> @stockwellcat I'm not risking a bet ! This is a case of : I used to be uncertain now I'm not so sure. :Smuggrin
> 
> talking of songs earlier in the thread -
> 
> I think this is applicable but chose your own party !
> 
> Never cared for what they say
> Never cared for games they play
> Never cared for what they do
> Never cared for what they know
> And I know, yeah!
> 
> So close, no matter how far
> Couldn't be much more from the heart
> Forever trusting who we are
> No, nothing else matters


I didn't want to risk gambling on one so gambled on both of them  that way who ever wins will give me enough money to give up work for a while and live on it 

I maxed out the stakes on Corbyn and May. So I will have some nice tax free money coming my way


----------



## kimthecat

@stockwellcat What are the odds at the moment. Should have placed a bet on Corbyn when the election was first announced.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> ...whose son went to public school.


She may well be a hypocrite but al least shes not vicious & morally bankrupt like May & her cabinet.


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> @stockwellcat What are the odds at the moment. Should have placed a bet on Corbyn when the election was first announced.


The odds are 13/1 for Corbyn or 1/8 for May but if you go through the UK General Elections link you can up the stake to 1000 say and place a £10 bet and it will tell you what the return will be before you place the bet. Remember any gambling winnings are tax free. I won't tell you the amount I put down  but it was an even amount for the both of them


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> @stockwellcat What are the odds at the moment. Should have placed a bet on Corbyn when the election was first announced.


My youngest put a £40 bet on Corbyn to win not long after the election was announced. I cant remember what the odds were then, but he'll be home later so will find out. . I told him he might as well have flushed it down the loo - or given it to his Mum:Smuggrin Because he & most of his mates support Corbyn he really thinks labour can win.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> Just put my bets down on Corbyn and May to win GE with betfair and will win a nice tidy sum of money if either win.


You need to buy a calculator.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> You need to buy a calculator.


Why? It calculated the winnings before I placed my bets


----------



## kimthecat

*PoliticsSense*‏@*PoliticsSense* 6h6 hours ago
Corbyn allowing Diane Abbott to be interviewed on Marr says all you need to know about Corbyn's judgement and leadership.

ETA I though this amusing , I never realised JC has a sense of humour though I assume its a joke .

*Jeremy Corbin MP*‏@*CorbynSnap* 6h6 hours ago
Diane Abbott makes a great case for being Home Secretary stating she once did work experience at the Home Office. #*Marr*

Sorry @stockwellcat I added an extra bit after you liked the post .


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> Tell me, how is Corbyn sending someone to have a cup of tea with the leader of DAESH going to help us?


Could have said that once about the IRA but it was the only thing that worked in the end. I could feel the bile rising every time the likes of Adams or McGuinness appeared in the media as reasonable human beings but I had to learn to accept it. In return I could walk into Belfast city centre without being searched and some semblance of normality could be restored. When it comes to it you have to decide if you truly want peace or if you are hell bent on revenge. One day (we're not there yet by a long way I admit) people will have to sit and talk.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> Why? It calculated the winnings before I placed my bets


So you can see that there is no way to guarantee a win backing both. With the odds you cite, putting a pound on each will give you back £1.13 for your two pound stake if May were to win.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> So you can see that there is no way to guarantee a win backing both. With the odds you cite, putting a pound on each will give you back £1.13 for your two pound stake if May were to win.


I didn't place a bet on the odds. I placed a stake of 1000 and the amount I placed in each of them separately the amount of return if either wins is nice. Two separate bets  the return was calculated for me and I nearly chocked as the return is guaranteed.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> I didn't place a bet on the odds. I placed a stake of 1000 and the amount I placed in each of them separately the amount of return if either wins is nice. Two separate bets  the return was calculated for me and I nearly chocked as the return is guaranteed.


Sorry. You are deluded. We can show you why if you provide details.


----------



## kimthecat

havoc said:


> Could have said that once about the IRA but it was the only thing that worked in the end. I could feel the bile rising every time the likes of Adams or McGuinness appeared in the media as reasonable human beings but I had to learn to accept it. In return I could walk into Belfast city centre without being searched and some semblance of normality could be restored. When it comes to it you have to decide if you truly want peace or if you are hell bent on revenge. One day (we're not there yet by a long way I admit) people will have to sit and talk.


i think it was the offer of power sharing and releasing murderers and torturers from their life sentences that did it rather than the tea. 

Im glad there is relative peace there now though I feel for those whose relatives died on all sides.

the thing is what do we have to offer ISIS that will bring peace? Can we let them rule over parts of the world in their dreadful way so we can feel safe in Britain?


----------



## Dr Pepper

Apparently the best odds currently are conservatives 1/14 and labour 8/1. I can't be bothered to do the maths but a quick think through suggest that if you bet £900 on Mrs May then you would get back £965 approx. Hardly earth shattering and a loss, but if Mr Corbyn won you get back (from your £100) £900 still a loss. There might be a sweet point where you can come out on top but I can't see it.

Edit

At last a interesting new sub-topic on this thread!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> Sorry. You are deluded. We can show you why if you provide details.


Ok please do.
I put a stake down at 1,000 on betfair to back Theresa May say and paid £49.50 it says the profit is £49,200.75. I am not normally a gambler so please explain why this will not be.

Receipt read this:
Odds 1,000 to win
Stake £49.50
Profit £49,200.75


----------



## Dr Pepper

Odds of 1000/1 for Mrs May!!! I'm off to betfair.

Ah, was this a TOTE bet? Nope, I think you've bet on the Greens by mistake, they are 1000/1.


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> She may well be a hypocrite


You can say that again.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Odds of 1000/1 for Mrs May!!! I'm off to betfair.


On this link:
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28051210/market?marketId=1.131081434

You can click on say back or lay and take out the 1.12 and enter 1,000 in the first box (which is odds) and then the amount you are putting down(stake).


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Ok please do.
> I put a stake down at 1,000 on betfair to back Theresa May say and paid £49.50 it says the profit is £49,200.75. I am not normally a gambler so please explain why this will not be.
> 
> Receipt read this:
> Odds 1,000 to win
> Stake £49.50
> Profit £49,200.75





stockwellcat said:


> On this link:
> https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event/28051210/market?marketId=1.131081434
> 
> You can click on say back or lay and take out the 1.12 and enter 1,000 in the first box (which is odds) and then the amount you are putting down(stake).


You've bet on her not to win. Worse still your up for a £49,000 payout, can you afford that? Sorry keep editing. Basically you've taken the bet not placed it.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> You've bet on her not to win. *Worse still your up for a £49,000 payout, can you afford that?*


Why's that worse with such a large profit?
I was backing her to win.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> You can say that again.


She may well be a hypocrite


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Why's that worse with such a large profit?
> I was backing her to win.


No, check out "lay betting", you've taken on the bet as a bookie not a punter. That £49,000 is what you have to pay out if she wins.

**** it, I'm going to vote Labour now just to try and help you out of a expensive hole.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> No, check out "lay betting", you've taken on the bet as a bookie not a punter. That £49,000 is what you have to pay out if she wins.
> 
> **** it, I'm going to bet Labour now just to try and help you out of a expensive hole.


I have cancelled the bets, got a refund and just gone with the odds:
13/2 Corbyn (Hope he wins as I'll get a nice payout)
1/9 May

See what happens.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> I have cancelled the bets, got a refund and just gone with the odds:
> 13/2 Corbyn (Hope he wins as I'll get a nice payout)
> 1/9 May
> 
> See what happens.


.

Glad you were able to do that. I was seriously worried for you there. Don't piss about with lay betting unless you know 100% what you are doing.


----------



## noushka05

Someone has found this tweet from back in 2015 of Corbyn warning Cameron cuts to the police would be a threat to national security!.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> .
> 
> Glad you were able to do that. I was seriously worried for you there. Don't piss about with lay betting unless you know 100% what you are doing.


Thanks for explaining that for me. You saved me from financial ruin


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Are you implying that Corbyn is an Al Qaeda sympathiser now?


No


----------



## noushka05

Liar Liar up to no 12 now:Woot Hope more buy it so we can get it into the top 10.


----------



## Guest

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Apologies - I don't usually post Labour propaganda but this song is so catchy - I can't stop singing it now. We need to get it to number 1


I must say I envy and admire British talent. You could genuily be Great Britain again, if you gave your people half a chance. (provide them with schools and day care, NHS and social security and you´d beat most of us in a heart beat. I shouldn´t even say that, as I might end up as your enemy number one (EU-citizen). But that is what I think, I´d so prefer you to German, French or Spanish culture. Comon, get this election home and let Labour deal with Brexit, so that you´ll be part of Europe.



havoc said:


> Could have said that once about the IRA but it was the only thing that worked in the end. I could feel the bile rising every time the likes of Adams or McGuinness appeared in the media as reasonable human beings but I had to learn to accept it. In return I could walk into Belfast city centre without being searched and some semblance of normality could be restored. When it comes to it you have to decide if you truly want peace or if you are hell bent on revenge. One day (we're not there yet by a long way I admit) people will have to sit and talk.


That is a good point, as the only way to peace is to negotiate with everybody. That was way the peace was made in Namibia, Aceh and Kosovo. Patience, firmness and being able to discuss both sides, no matter who horrid the atrocities were, was the only way, said Ahtisaari. You cannot have both - peace and revenge don´t go together. I so agree with you Havoc on this one.


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...onceived-libya-war-led-to-rise-of-islamic-st/


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Thanks for explaining that for me. You saved me from financial ruin


 Phew !


----------



## Colliebarmy

The war was centuries old way before Cameron took charge or Blair sent our troops in


----------



## havoc

Colliebarmy said:


> The war was centuries old way before Cameron took charge or Blair sent our troops in


That rather suggests then that our more recent interference does have something to do with the terror attacks here by extremists. We were not targeted in the previous centuries.


----------



## noushka05

Read this before considering voting for the tories.
*

NHS Million*‏@*NHSMillion* May 27

In the wake of the #*ManchesterTerroristAttack* this is a really sobering read. (via @*BarnabyEdwards*)


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> That rather suggests then that our more recent interference does have something to do with the terror attacks here by extremists. We were not targeted in the previous centuries.


Don't forget, these attacks aren't just against us, but the Western World. In which case, go back in history and you'll find that the Muslims invaded Catholic Spain in the 8th century. It was only in the 11th century that the papacy encouraged Christian Knights to fight the Moors


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Read this before considering voting for the tories.
> *
> 
> NHS Million*‏@*NHSMillion* May 27
> 
> In the wake of the #*ManchesterTerroristAttack* this is a really sobering read. (via @*BarnabyEdwards*)
> 
> View attachment 312468


At no point has the government said you will have to pay for the NHS


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> At no point has the government said you will have to pay for the NHS


You really ought to do your research. Look at what the drs are saying, find out the implications of the Health & social care act 2012 & STPs .

The tories are privatising our NHS by stealth.


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> You really ought to do your research. Look at what the drs are saying, find out the implications of the Health & social care act 2012 & STPs .
> 
> The tories are privatising our NHS by stealth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 312486


Maybe try stop spreading fear and irritating memes. Unless the doctors are privy to governmental meetings, they know about as much as you or I


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Thanks for explaining that for me. You saved me from financial ruin


Bigger relief here as I don't have to vote Labour now


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> Maybe try stop spreading fear and irritating memes. Unless the doctors are privy to governmental meetings, they know about as much as you or I


That's right, better to stick bury your head in the sand then get informed. You keep believing the NHS is safe with the people who receive millions from private healthcare companies. Surely you know the ideology of the party you support?

Did you bother to watch the video? Hunts own words about his plans to privatise our NHS.

Here's an irritating meme for you - fact check it 










Another lying tory?


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> That's right, better to stick bury your head in the sand then get informed. You keep believing the NHS is safe with the people who receive millions from private healthcare companies. Surely you know the ideology of the party you support?
> 
> Did you bother to watch the video? Hunts own words about his plans to privatise our NHS.
> 
> Here's an irritating meme for you - fact check it
> 
> View attachment 312500
> 
> 
> Another lying tory?
> 
> View attachment 312491


Nope, your constant flooding of, generally, useless and extremely biased memes and reports have ensured I skip past anything added


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 312508


So what does he suggest that everyone who owns their own home sell it to a youngster for a fraction of what it is worth?


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So what does he suggest that everyone who owns their own home sell it to a youngster for a fraction of what it is worth?


Of course not! Just pointing out how hard it is for many young people to get on the housing ladder.

Affordable housing would be the answer, not what some politicians regard as "affordable".


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> Nope, your constant flooding of, generally, useless and extremely biased memes and reports have ensured I skip past anything added


And yet you quoted me If I felt as strongly as you obviously do that I am merely spreading false information I would fact check to make sure so I counter the claims. But if you prefer be in denial that's your prerogative.

It really doesn't alter the FACT that our NHS *is *being deliberately being underfunded & streamlined for privatisation. Hard to believe some people actually trust the tories over the people we trust with our lives, but there you go.


----------



## KittenKong

MiffyMoo said:


> Nope, your constant flooding of, generally, useless and extremely biased memes and reports have ensured I skip past anything added


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Elles

We've had memes regarding the conservative record with the NHS. Can we have one with Labour's? Their record isn't that great either. Politicians from both parties have spoken about privatising at least some of the NHS. I wouldn't trust either of them. Labour isn't just Jeremy. Whole thing's a mess.

If Maggie was still alive and in her prime, I know who I'd be voting for.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> We've had memes regarding the conservative record with the NHS. Can we have one with Labour's? Their record isn't that great either. Politicians from both parties have spoken about privatising at least some of the NHS. I wouldn't trust either of them. Labour isn't just Jeremy. Whole thing's a mess.
> 
> If Maggie was still alive and in her prime, I know who I'd be voting for.


Our NHS is facing the greatest crisis since it was created - a deliberately manufactured crisis. If the tories get back in it will be gone forever - they will push through their STPs. Labour are our ONLY hope of saving the NHS.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> We've had memes regarding the conservative record with the NHS. Can we have one with Labour's? Their record isn't that great either. Politicians from both parties have spoken about privatising at least some of the NHS. I wouldn't trust either of them. Labour isn't just Jeremy. Whole thing's a mess.
> 
> If Maggie was still alive and in her prime, I know who I'd be voting for.


Please read this by Dr Marie-Louise Irvine standing against Jeremy Hunt in a desperate attempt to save our NHS. https://nhaswsurrey.wordpress.com/2...my-hunt-day-1-the-nhsthe-truth-must-be-heard/

*Ten days to stop Jeremy Hunt: Day 1 - The NHS…the truth must be heard*
Posted on May 28, 2017 by swsurreynha

People ask me why I want to leave my practice as a doctor and become an MP. In this, the first of ten daily posts where I will share the things that I care most about, I will start to explain why.

I have been a doctor for 28 years. I love my profession - we save and improve people's lives every day. And I love the role the NHS plays - giving this service to everyone, regardless of wealth.

My passion for the NHS is only matched by my equal passion for letting people like you and me know the truth about what is happening to our NHS.

So, when I heard Jeremy Hunt making claims that I know to be trying to con people like you and me, you can only imagine how incensed I became. Let me share a few selected ones from the recent Haslemere hustings with you now.

Jeremy Hunt said:

*"I don't support privatisation of the NHS"*

The percentage of NHS budget spent on outsourcing to the private for-profit sector has gone up every year since the Tories came to power in 2010. In the last five years, it's gone up by 55%. (Incidentally, this statement by Jeremy that he did not support privatisation was greeted with laughter in the room at the hustings!)

Jeremy Hunt said:

* "The NHS has £6.5b more every year than it did the last time I did hustings in Haslemere in 2015. That's a significant increase."*

This is a breathtaking claim and I have no idea where it can have come from. According to the Kings Fund, this is simply untrue.

Jeremy Hunt said:

*"NHS front line staff have never worked harder than they are working at the moment."*

This bit is actually true… because there are not enough of them to provide the care patients need so all staff routinely work many extra hours a week, unpaid. This amounts to millions of unpaid hours a year.

Jeremy Hunt carried on trying to pull the wool over our eyes by hiding the truth about the state of mental health care (shockingly awful), maternal safety (falling) and infant mortality (rising for the first time in a decade). And it's interesting to note that he didn't even mention the increase in ambulance waiting times, the failure of A&E departments to hit targets, thousands of patients lying on trolleys, the closure of 7,000 beds in 7 years and so much more. Maybe even Jeremy Hunt can't find a way of pretending they are successes!

You can read the full fact check on what Jeremy Hunt said at the hustings here.

*I believe the NHS is worth fighting for and I believe the NHS deserves better than Jeremy Hunt.* That's why I want to be your MP. I want to stand up to the lies that politicians tell, to bring a new honesty to politics. And I will fight to save our NHS.

Over the next ten days I will share my views on the other things that I am passionate about. I hope you'll enjoy them and decide by the 8th June to *vote for me, Dr Louise Irvine* of the National Health Action Party to save your NHS.

Come back tomorrow for Day 2 of my Top 10 where I share my thoughts on cuts to education….

Dr Louise Irvine

Vote for Dr Louise Irvine, National Health Action Party.

The candidate selected by Lib Dem, Labour and Green party members in South West Surrey to kick out Jeremy Hunt.


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> Our NHS is facing the greatest crisis since it was created - a deliberately manufactured crisis. If the tories get back in it will be gone forever - they will push through their STPs. Labour are our ONLY hope of saving the NHS.


Darn shame then. Their record with the NHS is not good either. I agree that conservatives are deliberately running it down and intend to privatise it. The evidence is all over the place. Sadly I don't think Labour will do a good job of saving it. We'll end up with a badly run behemoth with management to manage the managers, or an expensive private service. We need neither and should be looking to learn from more efficient services, not America.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> Darn shame then. Their record with the NHS is not good either. I agree that conservatives are deliberately running it down and intend to privatise it. The evidence is all over the place. Sadly I don't think Labour will do a good job of saving it. We'll end up with a badly run behemoth with management to manage the managers, or an expensive private service. We need neither and should be looking to learn from more efficient services, not America.


Labour actually did many good things for our NHS. It had the highest level of satisfaction & the lowest waiting times, where they went drastically wrong was adopting John Majors PFIs. Corbyn didn't vote for them but he has apologised on labours behalf. He is against privatising our NHS as his voting history proves. Labour would halt the tories hospital closure plans, repeal the Health & Safety act, stop privatisation, safely staff & fund the nhs. Plenty of doctors seem to trust labour & that's good enough for me.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Labour actually did many good things for our NHS. It had the highest level of satisfaction & the lowest waiting times, where they went drastically wrong was adopting John Majors PFIs. Corbyn didn't vote for them but he has apologised on labours behalf. He is against privatising our NHS as his voting history proves. Labour would halt the tories hospital closure plans, repeal the Health & Safety act, stop privatisation, safely staff & fund the nhs. Plenty of doctors seem to trust labour & that's good enough for me.


How do you explain their track record in Wales?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-35364644


----------



## Elles

It had the highest level of satisfaction, lowest waiting times and best staff morale ever, when Ben Bradshaw was health secretary. Says so on the leaflet that was put through my door. He was Health secretary under Gordon Brown.

Their (poor) track record in Wales is due to central government funding.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> It had the highest level of satisfaction, lowest waiting times and best staff morale ever, when Ben Bradshaw was health secretary. Says so on the leaflet that was put through my door. He was Health secretary under Gordon Brown.
> 
> Their (poor) track record in Wales is due to central government funding.


NHS Wales receives the majority of its funding from the Welsh Government. This takes the following forms:


Revenue allocations to local health boards to secure hospital, community and primary care services for their resident populations
Capital allocations to local health boards and NHS Trusts for operational and strategic capital developments
Targeted funding for health improvement and other Welsh Government initiatives


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> Please read this by Dr Marie-Louise Irvine standing against Jeremy Hunt in a desperate attempt to save our NHS. https://nhaswsurrey.wordpress.com/2...my-hunt-day-1-the-nhsthe-truth-must-be-heard/
> 
> *Ten days to stop Jeremy Hunt: Day 1 - The NHS…the truth must be heard*
> Posted on May 28, 2017 by swsurreynha
> 
> People ask me why I want to leave my practice as a doctor and become an MP. In this, the first of ten daily posts where I will share the things that I care most about, I will start to explain why.
> 
> I have been a doctor for 28 years. I love my profession - we save and improve people's lives every day. And I love the role the NHS plays - giving this service to everyone, regardless of wealth.
> 
> My passion for the NHS is only matched by my equal passion for letting people like you and me know the truth about what is happening to our NHS.
> 
> So, when I heard Jeremy Hunt making claims that I know to be trying to con people like you and me, you can only imagine how incensed I became. Let me share a few selected ones from the recent Haslemere hustings with you now.
> 
> Jeremy Hunt said:
> 
> *"I don't support privatisation of the NHS"*
> 
> The percentage of NHS budget spent on outsourcing to the private for-profit sector has gone up every year since the Tories came to power in 2010. In the last five years, it's gone up by 55%. (Incidentally, this statement by Jeremy that he did not support privatisation was greeted with laughter in the room at the hustings!)
> 
> Jeremy Hunt said:
> 
> * "The NHS has £6.5b more every year than it did the last time I did hustings in Haslemere in 2015. That's a significant increase."*
> 
> This is a breathtaking claim and I have no idea where it can have come from. According to the Kings Fund, this is simply untrue.
> 
> Jeremy Hunt said:
> 
> *"NHS front line staff have never worked harder than they are working at the moment."*
> 
> This bit is actually true… because there are not enough of them to provide the care patients need so all staff routinely work many extra hours a week, unpaid. This amounts to millions of unpaid hours a year.
> 
> Jeremy Hunt carried on trying to pull the wool over our eyes by hiding the truth about the state of mental health care (shockingly awful), maternal safety (falling) and infant mortality (rising for the first time in a decade). And it's interesting to note that he didn't even mention the increase in ambulance waiting times, the failure of A&E departments to hit targets, thousands of patients lying on trolleys, the closure of 7,000 beds in 7 years and so much more. Maybe even Jeremy Hunt can't find a way of pretending they are successes!
> 
> You can read the full fact check on what Jeremy Hunt said at the hustings here.
> 
> *I believe the NHS is worth fighting for and I believe the NHS deserves better than Jeremy Hunt.* That's why I want to be your MP. I want to stand up to the lies that politicians tell, to bring a new honesty to politics. And I will fight to save our NHS.
> 
> Over the next ten days I will share my views on the other things that I am passionate about. I hope you'll enjoy them and decide by the 8th June to *vote for me, Dr Louise Irvine* of the National Health Action Party to save your NHS.
> 
> Come back tomorrow for Day 2 of my Top 10 where I share my thoughts on cuts to education….
> 
> Dr Louise Irvine
> 
> Vote for Dr Louise Irvine, National Health Action Party.
> 
> The candidate selected by Lib Dem, Labour and Green party members in South West Surrey to kick out Jeremy Hunt.


Tory mindset time:

But Jeremy Hunt can see the golden opportunities that a private health service can provide. It's the biggest opportunity to bring British Health into the 21st century.

I do wish people would stop being moaning minnies, they need to learn nothing is for free. If people looked after themselves properly they wouldn't need to see a GP or receive treatment in hospital. Surely that's a good incentive and allows British subjects to take responsibility for their health?

The opportunities are endless. We can allow popular fast food chains to take over hospital canteens and allowing them to employ their own staff. They can provide finger licking good food for the patients who certainly will get what they pay for.

We can also allow wards to be sponsored by popular brands, say Capstan could sponsor the respiratory wards for example.

Oh yes, the disabled. I do wish they would stop moaning and learn how to stand on their own two feet. There's no excuse.

Employed people must take responsibility too by taking out unemployment protection insurance. The country cannot afford to pay them benefits anymore.

Prisoners could be put into good use too. A fortune could be saved if they're utilised for huge projects such as HS2. To prevent the possibility of escape they'll be attached to a ball and chain.

And pensioners, they'll just have to accept they'll have to work to make ends meet. The nice George Dixon (of Dock Green), was still working in his 80s. If he could do it, so can you. Don't forget your blankets and wooly hats so you don't catch a cold.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 312530


Did you not notice something wrong with this one?


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> If Maggie was still alive and in her prime, I know who I'd be voting for.


Oh I wish .........................Had high hopes for May........ she totally shattered those pretty damn quick


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## stockwellcat.

Well I am watching May v's Corbyn Live: The Battle for Number 10 on Sky News and Channel 4 at 8:30pm tonight.

This will be interesting.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> It had the highest level of satisfaction, lowest waiting times and best staff morale ever, when Ben Bradshaw was health secretary. Says so on the leaflet that was put through my door. He was Health secretary under Gordon Brown.
> 
> Their (poor) track record in Wales is due to central government funding.


Its true.












MiffyMoo said:


> NHS Wales receives the majority of its funding from the Welsh Government. This takes the following forms:
> 
> 
> Revenue allocations to local health boards to secure hospital, community and primary care services for their resident populations
> Capital allocations to local health boards and NHS Trusts for operational and strategic capital developments
> Targeted funding for health improvement and other Welsh Government initiatives


I wont be an apologist for labours failings & I have no idea how cuts in funding from central government may or maynot have affected labours running of the NHS but even Leanne Wood & Plaid Cymru see tory privatisation as the greatest threat to the NHS in Wales.

*LeanneWood*‏Verified [email protected]*LeanneWood* May 10

#*PleidleisiwchPlaid* / #*votePlaid* on June 8 to #*DefendWales*'s NHS from Tory privatisation.

http://www2.partyof.wales//handsoff_nhs
*
Plaid Cymru says "Hands off our NHS"*

*Plaid Cymru pledge to defend NHS from privatisation*

Plaid Cymru has pledged to defend the Welsh NHS from privatisation, warning that a Tory government with a "weak and divided Labour opposition" will be free to sell-off Wales' public services, including the NHS.

The party will hold a debate in the National Assembly later today in an effort to "send a message" to Westminster that the Welsh NHS is "not for sale."

The UK Government under the Conservative Party was one of the few EU member states to support the controversial Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), which would have put the NHS at risk of irreversible privatisation. If the UK leaves the Customs Union as a result of Brexit, it will be up to the International Trade Secretary, who supported TTIP, to draw up trade agreements.

Plaid Cymru will hold a debate in the National Assembly later today calling on the Assembly to:

• support the principle of the Welsh National Health Service being kept in public hands;
• express concern at the creeping privatisation of the Health Service in England under the Tories
• demand that future trade deals between the United Kingdom and other parties, where those deals affect devolved policy areas such as health, must be subject to the consent of the National Assembly for Wales.

Commenting, Plaid Cymru's Shadow Health Secretary, Rhun ap Iorwerth AM, said:

"The National Health Service is one of Wales' greatest achievements and it is our duty as politicians to defend it and strengthen it.

"The NHS should always be in the public's hands and run in the public's interest - never in the interest of profit.

"We know the Tories are desperate to let the private sector get its hands on our public services and one of the most desperate is the man who will ultimately be signing trade deals, opening the door to privatisation.

The Labour Party has failed in its duty to provide an opposition. They are too weak and divided to stand up to the Tories - too distracted attacking their own leader to hold the Prime Minister to account. Ever since Tony Blair, the NHS has seen creeping privatisation.

"Unless we take action to defend our NHS through strengthening Wales' grip, its future will be in the hands of a Tory Government in Westminster being let off the hook by a weak and divided Labour opposition.

"Only Plaid Cymru can stand up to the Tories, hold their feet to the fire and defend our NHS.

"We will work with governments in each UK country to ensure any future trade deals involving devolved areas such as health, require the endorsement of each UK Parliament, including Wales' National Assembly."


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Its true.
> 
> View attachment 312552
> 
> 
> I wont be an apologist for labours failings & I have no idea how cuts in funding from central government may or maynot have affected labours running of the NHS but even Leanne Wood & Plaid Cymru see tory privatisation as the greatest threat to the NHS in Wales.
> 
> *LeanneWood*‏Verified [email protected]*LeanneWood* May 10
> 
> #*PleidleisiwchPlaid* / #*votePlaid* on June 8 to #*DefendWales*'s NHS from Tory privatisation.
> 
> http://www2.partyof.wales//handsoff_nhs
> *
> Plaid Cymru says "Hands off our NHS"*
> 
> *Plaid Cymru pledge to defend NHS from privatisation*
> 
> Plaid Cymru has pledged to defend the Welsh NHS from privatisation, warning that a Tory government with a "weak and divided Labour opposition" will be free to sell-off Wales' public services, including the NHS.
> 
> The party will hold a debate in the National Assembly later today in an effort to "send a message" to Westminster that the Welsh NHS is "not for sale."
> 
> The UK Government under the Conservative Party was one of the few EU member states to support the controversial Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), which would have put the NHS at risk of irreversible privatisation. If the UK leaves the Customs Union as a result of Brexit, it will be up to the International Trade Secretary, who supported TTIP, to draw up trade agreements.
> 
> Plaid Cymru will hold a debate in the National Assembly later today calling on the Assembly to:
> 
> • support the principle of the Welsh National Health Service being kept in public hands;
> • express concern at the creeping privatisation of the Health Service in England under the Tories
> • demand that future trade deals between the United Kingdom and other parties, where those deals affect devolved policy areas such as health, must be subject to the consent of the National Assembly for Wales.
> 
> Commenting, Plaid Cymru's Shadow Health Secretary, Rhun ap Iorwerth AM, said:
> 
> "The National Health Service is one of Wales' greatest achievements and it is our duty as politicians to defend it and strengthen it.
> 
> "The NHS should always be in the public's hands and run in the public's interest - never in the interest of profit.
> 
> "We know the Tories are desperate to let the private sector get its hands on our public services and one of the most desperate is the man who will ultimately be signing trade deals, opening the door to privatisation.
> 
> The Labour Party has failed in its duty to provide an opposition. They are too weak and divided to stand up to the Tories - too distracted attacking their own leader to hold the Prime Minister to account. Ever since Tony Blair, the NHS has seen creeping privatisation.
> 
> "Unless we take action to defend our NHS through strengthening Wales' grip, its future will be in the hands of a Tory Government in Westminster being let off the hook by a weak and divided Labour opposition.
> 
> "Only Plaid Cymru can stand up to the Tories, hold their feet to the fire and defend our NHS.
> 
> "We will work with governments in each UK country to ensure any future trade deals involving devolved areas such as health, require the endorsement of each UK Parliament, including Wales' National Assembly."


They say a lot about "our NHS" and being proud of it. At no point have they said anything about actually trying to improve it


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> They say a lot about "our NHS" and being proud of it. At no point have they said anything about actually trying to improve it


Yes they have. And they want their fair share of that £350 million a week the brexiters promised us!


----------



## noushka05

I thought Nicola Sturgeon was fantastic last night. Compare her performance with our weak & wobbly terrified pm.

And good on her for defending Corbyn against May and for linking terrorism in UK to foreign policy.

*Nicola Sturgeon defends Jeremy Corbyn linking terrorism in UK to foreign policy*
'We must have the ability to have honest debates about foreign policy and security,' says Scotland's First Minister

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...nchester-foreign-policy-theresa-a7759996.html


----------



## noushka05

Ouch...

*Krishnan Guru-Murthy*‏Verified [email protected]*krishgm* 11h11 hours ago

Rudd to represent Tories in TV debate. (If she's a safer pair of hands than May maybe they should job swap??)

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...levised-leaders-debate?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other


----------



## Dr Pepper

:Yawn


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> :Yawn


Two words - Ivory trade.


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Yes they have. And they want their fair share of that £350 million a week the brexiters promised us!
> 
> View attachment 312553


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


>


:Mooning


----------



## KittenKong

http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/30-things-you-should-know-about-tory.html?m=1


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> Rudd to represent Tories in TV debate. (If she's a safer pair of hands than May maybe they should job swap??)
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/politic...levised-leaders-debate?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other


Hmmm..... Makes you wonder if she's earmarked to replace May?

John Major got on his soapbox in 1992, anyone remember that?

True blue Tories should be asking themselves why the continued refusal to take part in TV debates. This could have been her chance to tell people how strong and stable she is to deploy the army on our streets.

What's she scared of? People finding out the truth probably.

Coward.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 312570


Pity that Tony Blair didn't do anything to protect us from recession then and ran away with his fortune when it hit


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> Hmmm..... Makes you wonder if she's earmarked to replace May?
> 
> John Major got on his soapbox in 1992, anyone remember that?
> 
> True blue Tories should be asking themselves why the continued refusal to take part in TV debates. This could have been her chance to tell people how strong and stable she is to deploy the army on our streets.
> 
> What's she scared of? People finding out the truth probably.
> 
> Coward.
> View attachment 312571


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/may-v-corbyn-live-battle-number-10-channel-4-sky/
"Each leader will be quizzed for 45 minutes, divided between questions from an invited audience and questions posed by Mr Paxman."

Also if your meme showed her standing next to Trump, you and the rest of the trivial pickers would have slammed her for that


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> Pity that Tony Blair didn't do anything to protect us from recession then and ran away with his fortune when it hit


So you think May will protect you when crashing out of the EU with no deal results in a major recession? It'll be the EU's fault of course just as the global recession was Gordon Brown's fault.....

Perhaps you think "normal" people should be kept in a permanent state of austerity. While the rich have all the fun.

It was Harold MacMillan who said you never had it so good, not Tony Blair.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 312571



The thing is the UK voted to leave the EU. It doesn't matter who gets in on the 9th June 2017 as PM as May and Corbyn have both promised to honour the results. We'll either have May's version or Brexit or Corbyn's version of Brexit, so it can be quite easily be Corbyn stood where May was stood. Either way we still face a Brexit bill etc, etc. Plus 11 days after the elections we'll be around the negotiating table with the EU. Don't you think that she quite possibly didn't want to speek to Trump? To me she seemed quite p**sed off with him.


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> The thing is the UK voted to leave the EU. It doesn't matter who gets in on the 9th June 2017 as PM as May and Corbyn have both promised to honour the results. We'll either have May's version or Brexit or Corbyn's version of Brexit, so it can be quite easily be Corbyn stood where May was stood. Either way we still face a Brexit bill etc, etc. Plus 11 days after the elections we'll be around the negotiating table with the EU. Don't you think that she quite possibly didn't want to speek to Trump? To me she seemed quite p**sed off with him.


accprding to his tweet (because he can't tie his shoe laces without telling the world), she was bl**dy furious over the leak. Personally I would want to steer clear and not run the risk of being catapulted out of his way


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> So you think May will protect you when crashing out of the EU with no deal results in a major recession? It'll be the EU's fault of course just as the global recession was Gordon Brown's fault.....


It's not guaranteed you know, that we will have no deal, and if we don't get a deal there are a huge number of places that aren't in Europe


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> The thing is the UK voted to leave the EU. It doesn't matter who gets in on the 9th June 2017 as PM as May and Corbyn have both promised to honour the results. We'll either have May's version or Brexit or Corbyn's version of Brexit, so it can be quite easily be Corbyn stood where May was stood. Either way we still face a Brexit bill etc, etc.


Not strictly true. You can honour the result of the referendum whilst still allowing more options. Once terms are known you can have a "dictator" decide to do something regardless of the consequences for the majority or you can have someone check if people are okay with the consequences which will result before proceeding. No deal is better than a bad one sounds great until you look at things like the Irish border... If the terms are not acceptable not leaving the EU is still an option. What's important is that people can decide when they know what they are actually voting for.


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> It's not guaranteed you know, that we will have no deal, and if we don't get a deal there are a huge number of places that aren't in Europe


You can grovel to Trump. Count me out.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Two words - Ivory trade.


35 words (is this some sort of new game?)

What's the point. I said I had first hand experience of the UK government dealing with illegal ivory. You want some sort of proof because you don't believe anything unless it's on the internet somewhere.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Pity that Tony Blair didn't do anything to protect us from recession then and ran away with his fortune when it hit


New labour didn't cause the global economic crash but where they went wrong was to adopt Thatchers neoliberal policies. Thatcher started deregulation. Blair being a neoliberal just continued Thatchers work. Corbyn is a traditional social democrat, he rejects the failed neoliberal ideology.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Not strictly true. You can honour the result of the referendum whilst still allowing more options. Once terms are known you can have a "dictator" decide to do something regardless of the consequences for the majority or you can have someone check if people are okay with the consequences which will result before proceeding. No deal is better than a bad one sounds great until you look at things like the Irish border... If the terms are not acceptable not leaving the EU is still an option. What's important is that people can decide when they know what they are actually voting for.


Maybe so but neither Corbyn or May are offering a second Referendum so that's your theory in the bin. The only party offering a second Referendum is UKIP but let's be honest they don't stand a chance against the two big parties in the elections. Can't believe you are still hoping that this is going to be stopped somehow. Even Donald Tusk has said he doesn't care who he is negotiating with as long as the negotiations start 11 days after the GE. So again we are still leaving the EU but is it May's Brexit or Corbyn's Brexit? The EU are also planning a Europe after Brexit didn't you read/hear what Merkel said with a huge pint in her hand 

I know you will pick this to shreds and try to defend what you believe but I'll leave you to it.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> 35 words (is this some sort of new game?)
> 
> What's the point. I said I had first hand experience of the UK government dealing with illegal ivory. You want some sort of proof because you don't believe anything unless it's on the internet somewhere.


And you're seriously expecting anyone to take you seriously & believe a tory supporter on a pet forum over respected experts who are fighting to save the elephant from extinction.

Disgusting that you care so little about these animals.

This is the shameful response to the tweet below by Lady Victoria Borwick .

"*but* we need to conserve our heritage, our museums" WTF

Trinkets matter more then elephant lives!.

_*Victoria Borwick*‏@*backborwick*
No one wants to kill elephants today, but we need to conserve our heritage, our museums - happy to give longer reply on email if you wish VB_

_Meet Lady Victoria Borwick MP key lobbyist for antique trade who got PM drop ivory trade ban from manifesto_


----------



## noushka05

*Deborah Meaden*‏Verified [email protected]*DeborahMeaden* May 26

Deborah Meaden Retweeted Victoria Borwick

Dear Elephants. Thanks for all the Tusks. We don't need you now.. we can visit the trinkets made from your lives and glory in our legacy.https://twitter.com/backborwick/status/867479784523255808…

*Victoria Borwick*@*backborwick*

No one wants to kill elephants today, but we need to conserve our heritage, our museums - happy to give longer reply on email if you wish VB


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Please don't get dist


stockwellcat said:


> Maybe so but neither Corbyn or May are offering a second Referendum so that's your theory in the bin. The only party offering a second Referendum is UKIP but let's be honest they don't stand a chance against the two big parties in the elections. Can't believe you are still hoping that this is going to be stopped somehow. Even Donald Tusk has said he doesn't care who he is negotiating with as long as the negotiations start 11 days after the GE. So again we are still leaving the EU but is it May's Brexit or Corbyn's Brexit? The EU are also planning a Europe after Brexit didn't you read/hear what Merkel said with a huge pint in her hand
> 
> I know you will pick this to shreds and try to defend what you believe but I'll leave you to it.


Don't forget the Lib Dems  - from their manifesto

Liberal Democrats campaigned for the UK to remain in the EU. However, we
acknowledge the result of the 2016 referendum, which gave the government a
mandate to start negotiations to leave. The decision Britain took, though, was
simply whether to remain in or to leave the European Union. There was no option
on the ballot paper to choose the shape of our future relationship with the EU on
vital issues including trade, travel or security.

A hard Brexit will make all these problems worse. It is the wrong choice for the
country. Liberal Democrats will fight to prevent a hard Brexit.

At the end of negotiations there will be a decision on the deal. The Conservatives
want the decision to be taken by politicians. Liberal Democrats believe the British
people should have the final say.

That's why, when the terms of our future relationship with the EU have been
negotiated (over the next two years on the Government's timetable), we will
put that deal to a vote of the British people in a referendum, with the alternative
option of staying in the EU on the ballot paper.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Please don't get dist
> 
> Don't forget the Lib Dems  - from their manifesto
> 
> Liberal Democrats campaigned for the UK to remain in the EU. However, we
> acknowledge the result of the 2016 referendum, which gave the government a
> mandate to start negotiations to leave. The decision Britain took, though, was
> simply whether to remain in or to leave the European Union. There was no option
> on the ballot paper to choose the shape of our future relationship with the EU on
> vital issues including trade, travel or security.
> 
> A hard Brexit will make all these problems worse. It is the wrong choice for the
> country. Liberal Democrats will fight to prevent a hard Brexit.
> 
> At the end of negotiations there will be a decision on the deal. The Conservatives
> want the decision to be taken by politicians. Liberal Democrats believe the British
> people should have the final say.
> 
> That's why, when the terms of our future relationship with the EU have been
> negotiated (over the next two years on the Government's timetable), we will
> put that deal to a vote of the British people in a referendum, with the alternative
> option of staying in the EU on the ballot paper.


Yep and the bookies have Tim Farron and the Lib Dems down as a 1000/1 to actually win. The majority of the UK just want to get on with the Brexit negotiations whilst TF wants to hopefully stop Brexit from happening.

Can the Lib Dems be trusted from there previous track record?

Again I believe it is going to be a May Brexit or Corbyn Brexit (Still waiting for Corbyn to explain his Brexit though if a no deal scenario happens as he said in his Manifesto that the UK wouldn't leave the EU without a trade deal - WTO rules are a trade deal so what does he actually mean?).


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Yep and the bookies have Tim Farron and the Lib Dems down as a 1000/1 to actually win. The majority of the UK just want to get on with the Brexit negotiations whilst TF wants to hopefully stop Brexit from happening.
> 
> Can the Lib Dems be trusted from there previous track record?
> 
> Again I believe it is going to be a May Brexit or Corbyn Brexit (Still waiting for Corbyn to explain his Brexit though if a no deal scenario happens as he said in his Manifesto that the UK wouldn't leave the EU without a trade deal - WTO rules are a trade deal so what does he actually mean?).


I'm not promoting Tim Farron's Brexit by any means (I voted to leave) just showing there is an alternative other than UKIP, but I would not object to another vote on the deal with an option to remain if people are not happy with that deal. I don't think he nor the Lib Dems are any more or any less trustworthy than the Tories or Labour. On a scale of 1 - 10 for trustworthiness I would rate the vast majority of politicians with one or two exceptions about a 1-3 along with second hand car sales people and estate agents


----------



## Elles

What he means is that he's too good for there to be a bad deal, so there's no point discussing a no deal scenario. Any deal negotiated by him will be a great deal, only May is so useless as to be offered a bad deal.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm not promoting Tim Farron's Brexit by any means (I voted to leave) just showing there is an alternative other than UKIP, but I would not object to another vote on the deal with an option to remain if people are not happy with that deal. I don't think he nor the Lib Dems are any more or any less trustworthy than the Tories or Labour. On a scale of 1 - 10 for trustworthiness I would rate the vast majority of politicians with one or two exceptions about a 1-3 along with second hand car sales people and estate agents


My concern is this that if there is a second vote on this to agree to the terms and the UK votes remain, you do know that the EU could say ok as you voted to remain this time around you must accept the Euro as currency and unlimited migration. The UK won't get a say then and as a default would not be able to object or have a veto on this. Just a scenario for you that's all.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> And you're seriously expecting anyone to take you seriously & believe a tory supporter on a pet forum over respected experts who are fighting to save the elephant from extinction.
> 
> Disgusting that you care so little about these animals.
> ]


I though I was quite clear that I didn't expect you to believe me!

Where I have said I "care so little about these animals"? I've at no point said I support the illegal ivory trade because I most certainly don't.


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> And you're seriously expecting anyone to take you seriously & believe a tory supporter on a pet forum over respected experts who are fighting to save the elephant from extinction.
> Disgusting that you care so little about these animals.
> _Meet Lady Victoria Borwick MP key lobbyist for antique trade who got PM drop ivory trade ban from manifesto_
> View attachment 312576


Ugly people. Ugly minds.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> What he means is that he's too good for there to be a bad deal, so there's no point discussing a no deal scenario. Any deal negotiated by him will be a great deal, only May is so useless as to be offered a bad deal.


I'll see what he says tonight.
Don't get me wrong I agree with spending some money on the NHS, Defense, Schools, Police, Security etc, maintaining the ban on Fox Hunting and introducing a ban on badger culling all sounds great.

Brexit is my only concern at this stage. What makes Corbyn think that the EU are going to be nice to him around the negotiating table? When Merkel said yesterday that America and the UK cannot be trusted allies stirring up trouble before the negotiations start.

As I said the live debate tonight will be interesting.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> My concern is this that if there is a second vote on this to agree to the terms and the UK votes remain, you do know that the EU could say ok as you voted to remain this time around you must accept the Euro as currency and unlimited migration. The UK won't get a say then and as a default would not be able to object or have a veto on this. Just a scenario for you that's all.


Not going to worry about that because we all know they won't get elected, certainly not on their own although possibly as part of a coalition (again). I only posted it because you said UKIP were the only party offering a second referendum whereas for people who do want a say there is the Lib Dem alternative. I'm sure as hell not voting Lib Dem because of their Brexit policy :Hilarious:Hilarious although I do think its fair enough to give what was only just short of half the people who voted to remain and some of those who voted to leave but didn't want a hard Brexit a say.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not going to worry about that because we all know they won't get elected, certainly not on their own although possibly as part of a coalition (again). I only posted it because you said UKIP were the only party offering a second referendum whereas for people who do want a say there is the Lib Dem alternative. I'm sure as hell not voting Lib Dem because of their Brexit policy :Hilarious:Hilarious although I do think its fair enough to give what was only just short of half the people who voted to remain and some of those who voted to leave but didn't want a hard Brexit a say.


But voting for something you don't want to happen doesn't make sense as this is what remainers done on the EU referendum day. People where saying the voted leave because they didn't think it would happen and they where remainers.


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> I'll see what he says tonight.
> Don't get me wrong I agree with spending some money on the NHS, Defense, Schools, Police, Security etc, maintaining the ban on Fox Hunting and introducing a ban on badger culling all sounds great.
> 
> Brexit is my only concern at this stage. What makes Corbyn think that the EU are going to be nice to him around the negotiating table? When Merkel said yesterday that America and the UK cannot be trusted allies stirring up trouble before the negotiations start.
> 
> As I said the live debate tonight will be interesting.


I think the reason the conservatives are still hanging on is brexit and Corbyn. There's a lot I don't like in the conservative manifesto, but there's a lot I don't trust about the labour one too. People still think May will be the better negotiator come brexit. Personally I couldn't care less about trade deals, I want to know what's going to happen for people, not trade. Trade deal or no trade deal, we'll still trade with them and I don't think that's why people voted leave. They voted leave, not leave, but do the same.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> But voting for something you don't want to happen doesn't make sense as this is what remainers done on the EU referendum day. People where saying the voted leave because they didn't think it would happen and they where remainers.


You've lost me there. Do you mean me voting for Lib Dems - if so I think you know why I'm voting for them and its got naff all to do with Brexit.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Maybe so but neither Corbyn or May are offering a second Referendum so that's your theory in the bin.


Who said anything about a second referendum? Parliament can decide if terms are acceptable or not. The question is if you want people to actually have a say once terms are known or a single person decide. One of the interesting things about this election.. how many times has May said "we" meaning the conservative party compared to "me".


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> One of the interesting things about this election.. how many times has May said "we" meaning the conservative party compared to "me".


Yes I have noticed that and she u-turn on her own manifesto which her party is infighting about at the moment. So the Conservatives seem to be in disarray and May has to really sort things out tonight in her live debate.

Corbyn's ideas on repairing the UK sound good (NHS, Defense etc) and maintaining the fox hunting ban and planning to ban badger culling etc.

Tonight's debate will be interesting.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Liar Liar no. 10 in the ITunes top 10 although it appears radio stations are not playing it


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> My concern is this that if there is a second vote on this to agree to the terms and the UK votes remain, you do know that the EU could say ok as you voted to remain this time around you must accept the Euro as currency and unlimited migration. The UK won't get a say then and as a default would not be able to object or have a veto on this. Just a scenario for you that's all.


Actually no, we will not have left in the first place. Article 50 is not leaving, it's a declaration of intent. The gains and exceptions the UK currently has in place would remain. We would lose face however.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> Perhaps you think "normal" people should be kept in a permanent state of austerity. .


What's "normal"



KittenKong said:


> While the rich have all the fun.


I bet I'm poorer than most on here, but still have fun and happier than most. Never claimed anything either
Money isn't everything


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> The thing is the UK voted to leave the EU. It doesn't matter who gets in on the 9th June 2017 as PM as May and Corbyn have both promised to honour the results. We'll either have May's version or Brexit or Corbyn's version of Brexit, so it can be quite easily be Corbyn stood where May was stood. Either way we still face a Brexit bill etc, etc. Plus 11 days after the elections we'll be around the negotiating table with the EU. Don't you think that she quite possibly didn't want to speek to Trump? To me she seemed quite p**sed off with him.


Perhaps this is more relevant to the Brexit thread. I certainly have a great deal more confidence Labour will negotiate a good deal with the EU and maintain friends with Europe unlike May who's making enemies and using them as scapegoats when things go horribly wrong.

Of course the TM S(&)S fan club will defend her all the way. I would expect that.

The image, although coming from a pro EU Facebook page showed an international G7 gathering (was it?). Trump in front with May at the back.

It doesn't inspire confidence does it, nor is shielding herself from the public.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> I though I was quite clear that I didn't expect you to believe me!
> 
> Where I have said I "care so little about these animals"? I've at no point said I support the illegal ivory trade because I most certainly don't.


You've got to be pretty deluded to expect _anyone _to believe you.

What you're doing is being an apologist for the tories by denying our 'legal' domestic ivory trade is fuelling the illegal trade which is wiping elephants out.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> What's "normal"
> 
> I bet I'm poorer than most on here, but still have fun and happier than most. Never claimed anything either
> Money isn't everything


Very true rona and something I keep telling my OH but he won't listen. We should have gone off to Dartmoor for a long weekend but yet again had to cancel because of too much work so I've spent most of the weekend in my little office typing reports. I'd much rather earn less and relax more.


----------



## KittenKong

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...theresa-may-the-less-she-seems-like-a-leader/


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> You can grovel to Trump. Count me out.


America isn't the only alternative you know? There's one big wide world out there


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> Ugly people. Ugly minds.


Vile vile people. How anyone could possible trust them when all that matters to them is profit & power is beyond me. This is their ideology. This is what people are voting for. Look at the state of this Zaros - I don't think calling them psychopaths is too strong a word to describe their mentality, do you? http://www.conservativehome.com/pla...the-ethics-of-adapting-to-climate-change.html


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'd much rather earn less and relax more.


Made this decision a few years back for myself, I wasn't ever going to be able to have a "comfortable" retirement, and after one friends spine started to crumble, another keeps collapsing and the docs say she could die at any time, then losing mum, all of who had/have saved and saved and can no longer enjoy their money, that was it. 
Live for today is now my motto. All this crap is pointless and chasing those pennies seem rather silly when faced with the above .........it'll all change again in a few years no matter what we decide on June 8th


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Made this decision a few years back for myself, I wasn't ever going to be able to have a "comfortable" retirement, and after one friends spine started to crumble, another keeps collapsing and the docs say she could die at any time, then losing mum, all of who had/have saved and saved and can no longer enjoy their money, that was it.
> Live for today is now my motto. All this crap is pointless and chasing those pennies seem rather silly when faced with the above .........it'll all change again in a few years no matter what we decide on June 8th


Except If the tories get in we will have more austerity. More people will suffer, public services will continue to crumble, the NHS will be gone forever, badgers killed, fracking, climate change exacerbated etc etc This is the most important election for generations.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Perhaps this is more relevant to the Brexit thread.


 Well not really. Reasons. Whoever wins the election will be responsible for the EU negotiations so this is very applicable to this thread.


> I certainly have a great deal more confidence Labour will negotiate a good deal with the EU and maintain friends with Europe unlike May who's making enemies and using them as scapegoats when things go horribly wrong.


 So if a no deal becomes a situation and Corbyn isn't willing to accept it or doesn't know what to do this will land him in very murky waters. It is a very real risk that the UK may get no deal. Have you been listening to what the EU leaders have been saying? During the next two years a trade deal more than likely won't be agreed to as we have to iron out the leaving the EU deal first, the first stage of which the EU want wrapping up in October this year. They won't be revisiting things to negotiate them again once they have been discussed.


> Of course the TM S(&)S fan club will defend her all the way. I would expect that.





> The image, although coming from a pro EU Facebook page showed an international G7 gathering (was it?). Trump in front with May at the back.
> 
> It doesn't inspire confidence does it, nor is shielding herself from the public.


It hasn't worried me. The first thing I thought of was she didn't want to speek to or be near Trump because of his behaviour and recent speech talking down to the European Leaders and Merkel who is again using a hostile tone with a big pint of larger/beer in her hand.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Well not really. Reasons. Whoever wins the election will be responsible for the EU negotiations so this is very applicable to this thread. So if a no deal becomes a situation and Corbyn isn't willing to accept it or doesn't know what to do this will land him in very murky waters. It is a very real risk that the UK may get no deal. Have you been listening to what the EU leaders have been saying? During the next two years a trade deal more than likely won't be agreed to as we have to iron out the leaving the EU deal first, the first stage of which the EU want wrapping up in October this year. They won't be revisiting things to negotiate them again once they have been discussed.
> 
> 
> It hasn't worried me. The first thing I thought of was she didn't want to speek to or be near Trump because of his behaviour and recent speech talking down to the European Leaders and Merkel who is again using a hostile tone with a big pint of larger in her hand.


Brexit is going to be a disaster full stop but if we get no deal we are in serious trouble SW.


----------



## Elles

Not everyone is bothered about a trade deal with the Eu.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Brexit is going to be a disaster full stop but if we get no deal we are in serious trouble SW.


We will still be trading with the EU after Brexit.

Although the EU have said the trade negotiations may well be discussed after Brexit has happened which doesn't stop the UK negotiating other trade deals in this circumstance. The world doesn't stop at the EU's front or back door.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Yes or you pay into a pension get just enough to get by on and then they tax you on it, so you get even less, but it puts you just a few pounds over the amount to get any help, then they want to take your heating allowance of you. So I no who I'm voting for and it's not TM and her thieving party.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> Not everyone is bothered about a trade deal with the Eu.


Your right.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Have you been listening to what the EU leaders have been saying? During the next two years a trade deal more than likely won't be agreed to as we have to iron out the leaving the EU deal first, the first stage of which the EU want wrapping up in October this year. They won't be revisiting things to negotiate them again once they have been discussed.


That was known before the referendum if you had listened to experts in the field. Despite May trying to link the two together the EU constitution has them as two separate discussions. It's also one of the reasons so many politicians were pushing the idea of transitional deal before May stamped her foot down. The timescales are tight simply for leaving the EU. Trade deals remember normally take 5+ years. May's already been told she cannot have what she tells the UK she expects, summarised as membership benefits without membership. It's all the EU's fault if she doesn't get it. Then again when has May actually accepted responsibility for anything which goes wrong. It's always someone else's fault.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> Not everyone is bothered about a trade deal with the Eu.





stockwellcat said:


> We will still be trading with the EU.
> 
> Although the EU have said the trade negotiations may well be discussed after Brexit has happened which doesn't stop the UK negotiating other trade deals in this circumstance. The world doesn't stop at the EU's front or back door.


People seriously need to wake up & face the facts.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...russels-destroy-british-economy-a7760026.html


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> That was known before the referendum if you had listened to experts in the field. Despite May trying to link the two together the EU constitution has them as two separate discussions. It's also one of the reasons so many politicians were pushing the idea of transitional deal before May stamped her foot down. The timescales are tight simply for leaving the EU. Trade deals remember normally take 5+ years. May's already been told she cannot have what she tells the UK she expects, summarised as membership benefits without membership. It's all the EU's fault if she doesn't get it. Then again when has May actually accepted responsibility for anything which goes wrong. It's always someone else's fault.


I am fully aware of this, thank you for reminding me.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well whoever wins May or Corbyn will be judged on Brexit in 5 years time.


----------



## Odin_cat

rona said:


> I bet I'm poorer than most on here, but still have fun and happier than most. Never claimed anything either
> Money isn't everything


I completely agree to a certain extent but I think there is limit.

Personally, I'd find it a bit patronising to tell someone left with £100 a month to live on due to benefit cuts, or someone relying on food banks to feed their kids that money isn't everything.

I think I'd find it hard to be happy if I didn't know whether my daughter would be able to eat next week.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> You've got to be pretty deluded to expect _anyone _to believe you.
> 
> What you're doing is being an apologist for the tories by denying our 'legal' domestic ivory trade is fuelling the illegal trade which is wiping elephants out.


Not being an apologist for anyone. I'm just not personally blaming Mrs May for the illegal ivory trade.

Why didn't Labour put a stop to the legal ivory trade while they were in power for, what was it, twelve, thirteen years? I'm surprised you'd support a party that didn't put a end to it whilst they had such ample opportunity to do so.


----------



## Elles

I don't care, stuff the trade deal. Sort out what's going to happen with people and Gib and Ireland and stop farting about over trade deals. Do what's right first.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Why didn't Labour put a stop to the legal ivory trade while they were in power for, what was it, twelve, thirteen years? I'm surprised you'd support a party that didn't put a end to it whilst they had such ample opportunity to do so.


The parties of today are not the same as those even during the last general election. Whilst some "ideals" are common throughout, directions can change to a degree especially with new leaders. If people vote for a Corbyn labour, they should not expect the same as Blair's labour. The same goes for the conservatives with May and even Cameron. Certainly not another Thatcher, although comparisons have been made, May is no Thatcher.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Not being an apologist for anyone. I'm just not personally blaming Mrs May for the illegal ivory trade.
> 
> Why didn't Labour put a stop to the legal ivory trade while they were in power for, what was it, twelve, thirteen years? I'm surprised you'd support a party that didn't put a end to it whilst they had such ample time to do so.


Yes you are, you're even pretending you have personal experience of the ivory trade which contradicts the evidence. Mrs May is complicit in the demise of the elephant because she wont ban the ivory trade. She knows our domestic market is fuelling the illegal market.

I don't know why it wasn't on new labours agenda - but its on their agenda now & labour have always been far superior when it comes to animal welfare, wildlife & the environment. The tories just lie to get votes. We are running out of time to save the species.


----------



## rona

.........................


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> America isn't the only alternative you know? There's one big wide world out there


We are tied to the US now & at the worst possible time. Trump has played right into Putins hands by breaking down Western ties. We are going to left isolated & in servitude to Trumps America. Taking our country back? What a joke.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> We are tied to the US now & at the worst possible time. Trump has played right into Putins hands by breaking down Western ties. We are going to left isolated & in servitude to Trumps America. Taking our country back? What a joke.



Have we struck a trade deal with America? No
There is a world beyond the EU and America. Do you honestly think that May was impressed with Trump last week? From the expression on her face I think she wasn't. Nothing is set in stone after Brexit with the US, they have only expressed they wish to trade with us, we can refuse you know.


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> tory supporter on a pet forum


Are people who vote conservative banned from pet forums then? Just...wow.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> Are people who vote conservative banned from pet forums then? Just...wow.


That's right cherry pick it & take it out of context 



stockwellcat said:


> Have we struck a trade deal with America? No
> There is a world beyond the EU and America. Do you honestly think that May was impressed with Trump last week? From the expression on her face I think she wasn't. Nothing is set in stone after Brexit with the US, they have only expressed they wish to trade with us, we can refuse you know.


Research dark money - brexit, liam fox & corporate America.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Research dark money - brexit, liam fox & corporate America.


But it's not down to Liam Fox is it? The PM will be the one who says yes or no if she gets in.

At the moment I am trying to envisage Diane Abbott in charge of National Security, scary thought.


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> That's right cherry pick it & take it out of context


You're a fine one to talk!


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> Diane Abbott in charge of National Security,


@stockwellcat: perish the thought! She's the one who said ''The British invented racism''...no kidding.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> You're a fine one to talk!


Thank you


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> But it's not down to Liam Fox is it? The PM will be the one who says yes or no if she gets in.
> 
> At the moment I am trying to envisage Diane Abbott in charge of National Security, scary thought.


I'm sensing you've flip flopped AGAIN :Hilarious


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> I'm sensing you've flip flopped AGAIN :Hilarious


Nah.
My vote is a swing vote.

I am not happy with TM, but I am not happy that JC and DA are linked to IRA that is very concerning


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Please can we stay focused - only 10 days to go. For those of us who don't want a landslide Tory government don't let this turn into a Brexit election. Keep on track reminding people to vote for whoever has the best chance to beat the Tory in their constituency, and pray she doesn't get a huge majority. Those who want to vote Tory please at least ask your candidate for their views on repealing the hunting ban and make them aware this is something you will take into account when voting (even if it won't actually sway your choice) - who knows if they realise enough people care about it they might just abstain or vote against when the time comes.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Nah.
> My vote is a swing vote.
> 
> I am not happy with TM, but I am not happy that JC and DA linked to IRA is very concerning


I think a pendulum is a more accurate description


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I think a pendulum is a more accurate description


It will stop on election day when I have put my x in the box


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> It will stop on election day when I have put my x in the box


:Hilarious:Hilarious Yes but where it will stop nobody knows.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> :Hilarious:Hilarious Yes but where it will stop nobody knows.


At the ballot box I will close my eyes with the ballot sheet in front of me and mark it with my black pen. Who knows where that will be 

My dad said he voted incorrectly with the EU referendum and will vote in the GE for the Conservatives because they won in his area and will more than likely win the GE. We all have our own voting strategy.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Nah.
> My vote is a swing vote.
> 
> I am not happy with TM, but I am not happy that JC and DA are linked to IRA that is very concerning


The tories scaremongering is working.

Just been reading this skewering of Johnson.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> The tories scaremongering is working.
> 
> Just been reading this skewering of Johnson.
> 
> View attachment 312607
> 
> 
> View attachment 312608
> 
> 
> View attachment 312609


I will do my own research on this instead of believing someone mouthing off on twitter/Facebook. I am not saying this person is right or wrong I am saying I will investigate the allegations.


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Tory please at least ask your candidate for their views on repealing the hunting ban


This really isn't one of the bigger issues as it will never get passed anyway. Brexit, social care and NHS are much more important as far as I can see.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Alot of the promises all parties are making will not come into fruition until after Brexit. Think about it. Who ever is in power won't have time to do anything else except passing laws to make Brexit happen and negotiate with the EU for the first two years at least.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> I will do my own research on this instead of believing someone mouthing off on twitter/Facebook. I am not saying this person is right or wrong I am saying I will investigate the allegations.


You're unaware May sells arms to Saudi - the biggest funders of terrorism? I thought this was common knowledge.


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> Alot of the promises all parties are making will not come into fruition until after Brexit. Think about it. Who ever is in power won't have time to do anything else except passing laws to make Brexit happen and negotiate with the EU for the first two years at least.


This is the only reason I still think the conservatives will be best this time, the negotiations. I certainly wouldn't even be contemplating voting that dreadful woman in otherwise


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Alot of the promises all parties are making will not come into fruition until after Brexit. Think about it. Who ever is in power won't have time to do anything else except passing laws to make Brexit happen and negotiate with the EU for the first two years at least.


Who do you want negotiating a brexit deal Keir Starmer QC or Boris Johnson. Think about it.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Who do you want negotiating a brexit deal Keir Starmer QC or Boris Johnson. Think about it.
> 
> View attachment 312611
> 
> 
> View attachment 312610


Neither of them. That isn't there designated jobs. Boris Johnson is Foreign Secretary. David Davis (and his team) and The UK Ambassador to the EU and PM will be in charge of Brexit :Muted


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> This is the only reason I still think the conservatives will be best this time, the negotiations. I certainly wouldn't even be contemplating voting that dreadful woman in otherwise


You used to sing her praises when many of us could see straight through her for the duplicitous wretch that she is.

Shes antagonised the other EU member states, is sending Amber Rudd to the represent the tories in the BBC debate but you think shes the one who can get the better brexit deal. She has said shes prepared to drag us out with no deal. Shes serving only the interests of her party and her backers no one else. Leaving without a deal will be catastrophic.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> You're unaware May sells arms to Saudi - the biggest funders of terrorism? I thought this was common knowledge.


So does the EU, America etc :Muted
What's your point?


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Neither of them. That isn't there designated jobs. Boris Johnson is Foreign Secretary. David Davis (and his team) and The UK Ambassador to the EU and PM will be in charge of Brexit :Muted


And David Davis is another incompetent fool - of course the brexit ministers would be involved in negotiating the deal.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Neither of them. That isn't there designated jobs. Boris Johnson is Foreign Secretary. David Davis (and his team) and The UK Ambassador to the EU and PM will be in charge of Brexit :Muted


So shouldn't we be hearing from David Davis about Brexit rather than May? Maybe he still cannot actually sugar coat the "no deal" option in terms of what it would mean for the UK which is why we haven't really heard anything.

In terms of 2 years to do anything.. that's what negotiation teams are for or do you expect May to get personally involved? Negotiating teams negotiate May runs the country, implementing policies as per normal for the full term.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> And David Davis is another incompetent fool - of course the brexit ministers would be involved in negotiating the deal.


They do have a negotiating team you know and have been hiring lawyers, negotiators etc over the months after the Referendum.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> I actually am starting to believe this.
> T
> 
> So does the EU, America etc :Muted
> What's your point?


My point is her arms dealing to despot regimes, her foreign policy, her massive cuts to the police & our armed forces is putting us at risk not something from 30 years ago. Trump is equally despicable. Do you think the war on terror has been a success?


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> They do have a negotiating team you know and have been hiring lawyers, negotiators etc over the months after the Referendum.


Not that May listens to people like lawyers or negotiators...


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> So does the EU, America etc :Muted
> What's your point?


Actually, last year the European Parliament ( nasty Eu again) passed an embargo on arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Unfortunately it was non-binding and the UK ( and perhaps other countries) have ignored it.


----------



## mrs phas

stockwellcat said:


> Nah.
> My vote is a swing vote.
> 
> I am not happy with TM, but I am not happy that JC and DA are linked to IRA that is very concerning


what about the conservative links, EIGHT years before JC met them, douglas Hurd, soon to be home secretary met with Jerry anderson et al
Just because hes not electable this time, doesnt mean it isnt historically (as with JC and DA) relevant, can you hear the pot calling?

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2017...s-7-years-before-corbyn-even-visited-belfast/


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Nah.
> My vote is a swing vote.
> 
> I am not happy with TM, but I am not happy that JC and DA are linked to IRA that is very concerning


Just thinking about the irony of this post. Brexit is a real threat to peace in Ireland....


----------



## noushka05

This >

May has happily sold arms to Saudi Arabia and voted to bomb children. Corbyn's done neither. And Corbyn's the terrorist sympathiser?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> Actually, last year the European Parliament ( nasty Eu again) passed an embargo on arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Unfortunately it was non-binding and the UK ( and perhaps other countries) have ignored it.


They still trade with the middle east who in turn trade off arms to Saudi Arabia so it's a vicious circle. Trading to the middle east and Saudi Arabia was one of there biggest trading arrangements. But again they still do it through the back door with trading arms to the middle eastern countries which they still do trade with Saudi Arabia. So they aren't innocent the EU as they like making themselves out to be.


----------



## Guest

rona said:


> America isn't the only alternative you know? There's one big wide world out there


True, and it has always been there. Britain has been doing business already with lots of countries beside EU and US. Nothing has stopped Britain to business with all the countrie sin the world. So no new markets will suddenly open up after Brexit. Just one market (EU) will become that bit more difficult do business with. Nothing to gain for business in Brexit, unless you want to create a tax haven out of Britain. That will be very good naturally for big corporations, but pretty bad for people and smaller business (as they have much less skills and possibility to discover all the loop holes).



noushka05 said:


> My point is her arms dealing to despot regimes, her foreign policy, her massive cuts to the police & our armed forces is putting us at risk not something from 30 years ago. Trump is equally despicable. Do you think the war on terror has been a success?


Terrorism cannot be won by wars. Isis a product of badly gone wrong Irak war, Saddam´s ex army created Isis. Libya was thrown into a total chaos ,as is Syria. All countries facing now the consequences of war on terror. Wars fuel fear and fear fuels terrorism. Trump praising the old Saudi king as the best leader "is both idiotic, ignorant and cruel. Sinc ewhen have arm factories acted as peace makers? Never ever.

And cutting police forces at these times really shows how much they cared for the people. F A.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> This >
> 
> May has happily sold arms to Saudi Arabia and voted to bomb children. Corbyn's done neither. And Corbyn's the terrorist sympathiser?


No she didn't authorise to bomb children. You will find the targets where military or terrorist. People die in wars you know that is one of the things you cannot avoid.


----------



## rona

Odin_cat said:


> Actually, last year the European Parliament ( nasty Eu again) passed an embargo on arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Unfortunately it was non-binding and the UK ( and perhaps other countries) have ignored it.


France and Germany also do, along with Russia, China and of course the USA


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Just thinking about the irony of this post. Brexit is a real threat to peace in Ireland....


I know.
What's the solution then?
Ireland uniting is a very strong possibility.


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> Think about it. Who ever is in power won't have time to do anything else except passing laws to make Brexit happen and negotiate with the EU for the first two years at least.


Makes you wonder why they bothered with manifestos at all then doesn't it. Who will be running the country?


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> They still trade with the middle east who in turn trade off arms to Saudi Arabia so it's a vicious circle. Trading to the middle east and Saudi Arabia was one of there biggest trading arrangements. But again they still do it through the back door with trading arms to the middle eastern countries which they still do trade with Saudi Arabia. So they aren't innocent the EU as they like making themselves out to be.


Absolutely, lots of work still to be done. But it doesn't justify May sucking up to Saudi Arabia. We shouldn't trade with a country that still crucifies peoples- end of.


----------



## Odin_cat

rona said:


> France and Germany also do, along with Russia, China and of course the USA


Didn't know.about France and Germany- they should be ashamed. The others don't surprise me
Doesn't justify the UK doing it though.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> Absolutely, lots of work still to be done. But it doesn't justify May sucking up to Saudi Arabia. We shouldn't trade with a country that still crucifies peoples- end of.


I think you may find out that she has talked to them about there human rights violations and told them we are interested in trading with them if they stop doing certain things. Trump just signed a massive arms deal with Saudi Arabia so you will find that it isn't just the UK trading arms with them.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> I think you may find out that she has talked to them about there human rights violations and told them we are interested in trading with them if they stop doing certain things. Trump just signed a massive arms deal with Saudi Arabia so you will find that it isn't just the UK trading arms with them.


I'm well aware the US trades with them. But Trump is hardly a beacon of virtue, the UK should do better.

Yes, May said she raise human rights issues at the same time she was selling them weapons, I'm sure they were really moved by her harsh words...


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> This really isn't one of the bigger issues as it will never get passed anyway. Brexit, social care and NHS are much more important as far as I can see.


Firstly you have no way of knowing that Rona. The Countryside Alliance estimate they need a Conservative majority of 60 seats to get the ban lifted. If there is a big enough Conservative majority there is every chance it will get through and it will be too late for us to do anything or influence our MPs then. What is the harm in emailing your candidate and suggesting it is a very important issue to you - even if it won't actually influence your vote you can let them think it will so it just might influence how they vote when the free vote is held. Perhaps it would help if you could explain why you don't think it will get passed. Do you seriously think the big Tory backers and funders are going to let a manifesto commitment to hold a free vote go if she has a big majority?



mrs phas said:


> what about the conservative links, EIGHT years before JC met them, douglas Hurd, soon to be home secretary met with Jerry anderson et al
> Just because hes not electable this time, doesnt mean it isnt historically (as with JC and DA) relevant, can you hear the pot calling?
> 
> https://tompride.wordpress.com/2017...s-7-years-before-corbyn-even-visited-belfast/


Even the bloody Queen met them but nobody calls her an IRA sympathiser :Hilarious:Hilarious


----------



## rona

Odin_cat said:


> Didn't know.about France and Germany- they should be ashamed. The others don't surprise me
> Doesn't justify the UK doing it though.


I think it would be very awkward and financially extremely difficult for us to cut ties with Saudi Arabia, who we have had close links with for over a century.


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Perhaps it would help if you could explain why you don't think it will get passed


Purely because even in the conservative party, there aren't enough in favour to get it passed. With other parties in the mix it will 100% fail



rottiepointerhouse said:


> Do you seriously think the big Tory backers and funders are going to let a manifesto commitment to hold a free vote go if she has a big majority?


I don't think the big Tory backers will give a stuff about hunting, they'll be more interested in lining their pockets and hunting doesn't make anyone rich


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> I'm well aware the US trades with them. But Trump is hardly a beacon of virtue, the UK should do better.
> 
> Yes, May said she raise human rights issues at the same time she was selling them weapons, I'm sure they were really moved by her harsh words...


Can I ask. How do you know Corbyn wouldn't strike a deal with Saudi Arabia? Saudi Arabia after all is rich in gold, oil etc, etc. He might tell you one thing and do another just like the Tories have been doing for the last 7 years. He may find all his promises won't come to fruition if he got into Government. Just saying, that's all.


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> Can I ask. How do you know Corbyn wouldn't strike a deal with Saudi Arabia? Saudi Arabia after all is rich in gold, oil etc, etc. He might tell you one thing and do another just like the Tories have been doing for the last 7 years. He may find all his promises won't come to fruition if he got into Government. Just saying, that's all.


Corbyn has already upset them and they said they will not be told what to do in their own country by anyone


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Even the bloody Queen met them but nobody calls her an IRA sympathiser


I found that as galling as anything but the alternative is to stay living in a past riddled with hatred and there comes a point with everything where we have to move forward. There are still those who don't think we should have anything to do with Germany because of two wars, white South Africans who have had to apologise for behaviour rooted in their upbringing and communities all round the world who have to come to terms with the past and decide to move on. I have no idea what JC's motives were at the time but that was then and this is now. I'm not a fan of his any more than I am of TM and I'm afraid I'm still a floating voter. What I will be doing is looking to the future rather than the past when I place an X in whatever box seems most sensible on the day.


----------



## mrs phas

stockwellcat said:


> People die in wars you know that is one of the things you cannot avoid.


So youre saying that, the manchester incident and the children killed within was unavoidable, seeing that isis are 'at war' with us?


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> I don't think the big Tory backers will give a stuff about hunting, they'll be more interested in lining their pockets and hunting doesn't make anyone rich


It doesn't but the rich have their rituals and they don't like the great unwashed messing with them


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> So shouldn't we be hearing from David Davis about Brexit rather than May? Maybe he still cannot actually sugar coat the "no deal" option in terms of what it would mean for the UK which is why we haven't really heard anything.
> 
> In terms of 2 years to do anything.. that's what negotiation teams are for or do you expect May to get personally involved? Negotiating teams negotiate May runs the country, implementing policies as per normal for the full term.


We won't need to hear from May or Davis as the EU said they are televising it as they want to be open about the negotiations.


----------



## stockwellcat.

mrs phas said:


> So youre saying that, the manchester incident and the children killed within was unavoidable, seeing that isis are 'at war' with us?


The Manchester bomber wasn't from Saudi Arabia he was from the UK, born and raised over here, his parents where migrants from Lybia fleeing Gadaffi. So please get your facts right.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Can I ask. How do you know Corbyn wouldn't strike a deal with Saudi Arabia? Saudi Arabia after all is rich in gold, oil etc, etc. He might tell you one thing and do another just like the Tories have been doing for the last 7 years. He may find all his promises won't come to fruition if he got into Government. Just saying, that's all.


I don't know he wouldn't. I never said I did. I would be opposed to it no matter who was in power.


----------



## stockwellcat.

mrs phas said:


> So youre saying that, the manchester incident and the children killed within was unavoidable, seeing that isis are 'at war' with us?


Well is any terror incident avoidable? Was the Paris one, was the Belgium One I could go on and on. There are sleeper cells amongst us and people are slipping into the UK unchecked just like the EU. MI5 stopped watching this guy because they deemed him as not a threat now there is an enquiry into this within MI5.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> The parties of today are not the same as those even during the last general election. Whilst some "ideals" are common throughout, directions can change to a degree especially with new leaders. If people vote for a Corbyn labour, they should not expect the same as Blair's labour. The same goes for the conservatives with May and even Cameron. Certainly not another Thatcher, although comparisons have been made, May is no Thatcher.


What's changed regarding the sentiment, laws and ideology regarding the illegal ivory trade since 2010? Or if your going to blame Mrs May personally since 2016 when she became PM (not you personally Goblin)?



noushka05 said:


> Yes you are, you're even pretending you have personal experience of the ivory trade which contradicts the evidence. Mrs May is complicit in the demise of the elephant because she wont ban the ivory trade. She knows our domestic market is fuelling the illegal market.
> 
> I don't know why it wasn't on new labours agenda - but its on their agenda now & labour have always been far superior when it comes to animal welfare, wildlife & the environment. The tories just lie to get votes. We are running out of time to save the species.


I'm pretending nothing thank you. Now YOU won't believe me but, somewhen in 2011, our town was "raided" by customs and excise (I think that's the right department) and antique shops had ivory confiscated that had provenance, but not provenance they chose to accept. They even confiscated approx £12,000 of razors from a barbers/retailer. I was in the position of "go to" person to try and sort this as a group via my position of "chairman" of a certain group and thereby my contacts with solicitors etc. Despite official letters and even court action to try and get the stock returned were knocked back and lost even though no evidence was produced to prove the provenances false. Apparently C&E own groundless doubts are sufficient.

So yes, the government are taking illegal ivory seriously, and no they are most certainly not bowing down to pressure from the antique traders as you claim.

Now I've got no proof of that, it might be out there on Google somewhere but I have no inclination to find it for you as I know it to be fact from first hand experience.


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> So, in response to Mondays atrocity, Mrs May has decided we need yet another paper pushing department, and Mr Corbyn reckons we need more feet and eyes on the ground.......Mmmmm
> 
> Starting to completely lose patience with that silly out of touch woman, aren't any who surround her living in the real world or are they now so out of touch they can't see that she needs to shut up.
> 
> I so wish the Jeremy didn't have that Diane Abbott in his cabinet


That woman! And the very fact that she in virtually corbyns right arm infuriates me. As yes, if I switch camps again it will be because I cannot vote for a party that she is a member of! Well there are a few more too actually,........


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Diane Abbott might not be in his cabinet team if he wins, it depends on the elections, she might be ousted in her area or Corbyn may replace her.
> 
> I believe Corbyn is right with more police officers and security service staff is the right move to make.
> 
> I have this vision in my head that if Corbyn becomes PM the other Labour MP's will be scrambling for a position in his cabinet as he would have to form a new Government and cabinet.


Really! I think there's more chance of Teresa may being in Jeremy's team then Diane Abbott not being personally!
They are practically joined at the hip!


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> They are practically joined at the hip!


True 

































They have history ^^^


----------



## MiffyMoo

DT said:


> Really! I think there's more chance of Teresa may being in Jeremy's team then Diane Abbott not being personally!
> They are practically joined at the hip!


Corbyn confirmed on Peston that she would be Home Secretary


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Which Party are you going to vote for?
> 
> To not cause any friction you do not have to disclose publicly on here who you are voting.


At this very moment
I'm
33% conservative, as I trust her more then labour on the run negotiations
33%. Labour, as think we need to look at other ways regarding cuts, taxes etc
33% UKIP. As I see that as a protest, ok it may appear to be a wasted vote but it lets both other parties know I'm not happy with their manifestos

Basically, yep eleven days to go and still undecided, might as well just still a damd pin in my ballot paper


----------



## 1290423

MiffyMoo said:


> Corbyn confirmed on Peston that she would be Home Secretary


No improvement on Amber judd then! Just have to decide which I detest the most!


----------



## mrs phas

stockwellcat said:


> The Manchester bomber wasn't from Saudi Arabia he was from the UK, born and raised over here, his parents where migrants from Lybia fleeing Gadaffi. So please get your facts right.


Where do you see me say he was, i deliberately quoted the exact piece of your post I was reffering to
I have my facts all lined up like little duckies in a row thank you
maybe take your own advice BEFORE you rush to post an answer
thank you x


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> At this very moment
> I'm
> 33% conservative, as I trust her more then labour on the run negociations
> 33%. Labour, as think we need to look at other ways regarding cuts, taxes etc
> 33% UKIP. As I see that as a protest, ok it may appear to be a wasted vote but it lets both other parties know I'm not happy with their manifestos
> 
> Basically, yep eleven days to go and still undecided, might as well just still a damd pin in my ballot paper


It might help watch May v's Corbyn tonight at 8:30pm on Channel 4 or Sky News.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> It might help watch May v's Corbyn tonight at 8:30pm on Channel 4 or Sky News.


It might,
On the other hand!


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> It might help watch May v's Corbyn tonight at 8:30pm on Channel 4 or Sky News.


Actually Stockwell it's got worse for me before all this election talk I definitely wasn't voting ukip now you see Ive put them in at 33% purely as a protest vote as I now have little confidence in either parties I really dont know if I can bring myself to vote for either of them. Someones really got to come up trumps now,


----------



## noushka05

MrsZee said:


> True, and it has always been there. Britain has been doing business already with lots of countries beside EU and US. Nothing has stopped Britain to business with all the countrie sin the world. So no new markets will suddenly open up after Brexit. Just one market (EU) will become that bit more difficult do business with. Nothing to gain for business in Brexit, unless you want to create a tax haven out of Britain. That will be very good naturally for big corporations, but pretty bad for people and smaller business (as they have much less skills and possibility to discover all the loop holes).
> 
> Terrorism cannot be win by wars. Isis a product of badly gone wrong Irak war, Saddam´s ex army created Isis. Libya was thrown into a total chaos ,as is Syria. All countries facing now the consequences of war on terror. Wars fuel fear and fear fuels terrorism. Trump praising the old Saudi king as the best leader "is both idiotic, ignorant and cruel. Sinc ewhen have arm factories acted as peace makers? Never ever.
> 
> And cutting police forces at these times really shows how much they cared for the people. F A.


I think some people are in for a very rude awakening when they realise, definitely under the tories, we're going to be sacrificing our living standards, environment, workers rights, nhs & our freedoms for trade deals. They have said quite clearly they intend to deregulate, cut red tape to make the uk attractive to big business. May has threatened to turn us into a tax haven. Even less money for public services. Our country will be impoverished for all but the few.
.

As Chomsky says - " _Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism.
Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it.". _

You've only got to listen how arrogantly May dismissed police officers pleas about the cuts as 'crying wolf' to know she doesn't give a damn. We've more cuts to come yet people actually trust the tories. My mind boggles

Ironically its that dangerous extremist Corbyn that offers us a better way forward , more police on the streets, armed forces, a change in foreign policy, no dodgy arms dealing.

I keep posting this Peter Oborne article because Oborne knows what hes talking about & hes a Tory so it cant be thrown back at me as left wing propaganda..
*
*

.
*Peter Oborne*‏@*OborneTweets* May 20

_Corbyn's manifesto is coherent. His policies on the Middle East shame the Tories_.

Oborne: Corbyn's election manifesto for the Middle East is radical and morally courageous
http://www.middleeasteye.net/column...ued-radical-and-morally-courageous-2036528122



stockwellcat said:


> I think you may find out that she has talked to them about there human rights violations and told them we are interested in trading with them if they stop doing certain things. Trump just signed a massive arms deal with Saudi Arabia so you will find that it isn't just the UK trading arms with them.


The tories pulled strings to get the Saudis on the UN Human rights council?? 

Mays talk went well then, they've just beheaded this poor disabled man for protesting. They are the most evil, dangerous regime in the world - 'our good friends'. Its revolting.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Actually Stockwell it's got worse for me before all this election talk I definitely wasn't voting ukip now you see Ive put them in at 33% purely as I now have little confidence in either parties I really dont know if I can bring myself to vote for either of them. Someones really got to come up trumps now,


I know what you mean.
I ended up becoming a swing voter I am totally unsure myself of Labour and Conservatives and you're right. One of them would have to shine tonight for me to vote them.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well Boris is making a right tit of himself right now on Sky News, the presenter cut him and the Labour MP off.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> What's changed regarding the sentiment, laws and ideology regarding the illegal ivory trade since 2010? Or if your going to blame Mrs May personally since 2016 when she became PM (not you personally Goblin)?
> 
> I'm pretending nothing thank you. Now YOU won't believe me but, somewhen in 2011, our town was "raided" by customs and excise (I think that's the right department) and antique shops had ivory confiscated that had provenance, but not provenance they chose to accept. They even confiscated approx £12,000 of razors from a barbers/retailer. I was in the position of "go to" person to try and sort this as a group via my position of "chairman" of a certain group and thereby my contacts with solicitors etc. Despite official letters and even court action to try and get the stock returned were knocked back and lost even though no evidence was produced to prove the provenances false. Apparently C&E own groundless doubts are sufficient.
> 
> So yes, the government are taking illegal ivory seriously, and no they are most certainly not bowing down to pressure from the antique traders as you claim.
> 
> Now I've got no proof of that, it might be out there on Google somewhere but I have no inclination to find it for you as I know it to be fact from first hand experience.


Is this supposed to prove we're not the 3rd biggest exporter of illegal ivory to the USA via the antiques market?


----------



## havoc

I accept we're going to have another Conservative government. What I hope is it won't be a landslide victory. What TM wants is enough of a buffer to do exactly what she pleases without interference from her own parliamentary party and that's where the real danger lies. The dementia tax is the perfect example - not part of the manifesto and as much a surprise announcement to most of her own as it was to the rest of us. It's this arrogance, this wish for absolute power I'd like curbed. She's shown the trait over and over again.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Well Boris is making a right tit of himself right now on Sky News,


Well at least one politician is being consistent!!


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Is this supposed to prove we're not the 3rd biggest exporter of illegal ivory to the USA via the antiques market?


No, it's not meant to prove or disprove that, hence why proof wasn't mentioned.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Theresa May has just arrived at Sky News Studios with her convoy and police outrider.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> No, it's not meant to prove or disprove that, hence why proof wasn't mentioned.


I thought you were defending the tories for reneging on their pledge to ban the ivory trade?


----------



## noushka05

*

Caroline Lucas*‏Verified [email protected]*CarolineLucas* 5h5 hours ago

_Reckless & underhand Tory moves to weaken vital EU climate protections: the way is being cleared for a dirty Brexit_.

http://energydesk.greenpeace.org/2017/05/28/brexit-uk-eu-climate-change-energy-efficiency/


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> It hasn't worried me. The first thing I thought of was she didn't want to speek to or be near Trump because of his behaviour and recent speech talking down to the European Leaders and Merkel who is again using a hostile tone with a big pint of larger/beer in her hand.


She should show some maturity. She's like a spoilt child who sulks when she can't get her own way.

Heard on the news tonight May is to start Brexit negotiations on June 19th. Wait a minute, has she forgotten she's holding a general election on May 8th? How does she guarantee she'll still be PM on that day?

Talk about arrogant and over confident. She could even lose her seat. That would be interesting even if the Tories get re-elected!


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Heard on the news tonight May is to start Brexit negotiations on June 19th. Wait a minute, has she forgotten she's holding a general election on May 8th? How does she guarantee she'll still be PM on that day?


No you're wrong there. The EU want the negotiations to start on the 19th June not May, and Donald Tusk reiterated this last week at the G7 summit. Donald Tusk said to sky news reporter Beth Rigby he doesn't care who he is negotiating with but the negotiations must start 11 days (19th June 2017) after the UK GE. See again you're twisting it.

I saw this live on Sky News.

Remember the EU pull all the strings during Brexit not the UK.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Here's Boris performing earlier at Sky News Studios before he got cut off:








You have to give him the fact he is consistent


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well in my opinion Corbyn has really put me off.

Avoided question from audience member on IRA.

Then Paxman asked him various questions on terrorism and what if there was 20 minutes given to him to take out a target by drone strike and Corbyn said he'd have to look at the evidence. 

I am still remaining open minded as much as I can.


----------



## 1290423

Well! Seen the first half.
Impressed NOT
Turned into this so wanting a reason to vote for labour I have not got one.
Waiting to see what the second half brings that Sharnt told my breath


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Well in my opinion Corbyn has really put me off.
> 
> Avoided question from audience member on IRA.
> 
> Then Paxman asked him various questions on terrorism and what if there was 20 minutes given to him to take out a target by drone strike and Corbyn said he'd have to look at the evidence.
> 
> I am still remaining open minded as much as I can.


That was the bit that particularly got me stockwell
Twenty minutes to make a decision and he wants to arrange a tea party


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> Purely because even in the conservative party, there aren't enough in favour to get it passed. With other parties in the mix it will 100% fail
> 
> I don't think the big Tory backers will give a stuff about hunting, they'll be more interested in lining their pockets and hunting doesn't make anyone rich


In the last parliament the Conservatives against Hunting group who I used to support estimated 50 - 70 Tory MPs who would vote against or abstain. Given Mancrofts comments about only supporting candidates who are supportive of hunting, its not difficult to work out that if they get 50 more seats this time than last and 70 Tory's vote against lifting the ban there won't be enough of them and it will be carried.

Extracts from leaked email from Tory Peer Lord Mancroft (3rd Baron Mancroft) to Hunt Masters

There is a real chance that on 8th June, Theresa May could achieve a majority significantly in excess of the seventeen seats she currently has. A majority of fifty or more would give us a real opportunity for repeal of the Hunting Act (HA), or perhaps an alternative legislative measure - but only if that leaves hunting in a better position than it is now. It must be clearly understood that repeal is our primary objective, but also that politics is "the art of the possible", and we will take whichever option is the most advantageous to hunting when the time comes. It will only become clear what our best option is after 8th June.

First, we need a cast iron manifesto commitment from the Conservative Party, as we had in the last four election manifestos. Like everyone else, we will have to wait until the manifesto is published on 8th May to be certain,but Simon Hart MP and I have received assurances that such a commitment will be carried forward to the 2017 manifesto. I have made it clear that we will only provide support on that basis, and that if the manifesto does not contain an acceptable commitment, we will withdraw our support.

We have repeatedly made clear that we need a Government that has both a manifesto commitment to repeal the HA, and a big enough majority to get repeal through the Commons and then the Lords.

It now looks, unexpectedly, as if there is a very real chance we could get such a Government. While nothing in politics is certain, this is by far the best opportunity we have had since the ban, and is probably the best we are likely to get in the foreseeable future.

On that basis, we must do everything we possibly can to maximise the chance of getting repeal of the HA. I am confident that every Master will give the leadership and direction that our community needs at this seminal moment.

A number of constituencies do not yet have candidates, so there is a role for us in *making sure that only candidates supportive of hunting are selected*.

*We will only help candidates who give us an unequivocal commitment to support repeal when the time comes. *Nor do we need to help candidates in "safe seats" with large majorities. Instead we will concentrate on those seats where we can make the most difference.

This is the chance we have been waiting for. We have six weeks to show, yet again, what we are made of, and our undying commitment to our way of life.

We have six weeks to win back all that has been taken from us. Masters, if ever there was a time to give a lead, this is it. Please don't waste a single day of those six weeks.



stockwellcat said:


> True
> View attachment 312625
> 
> View attachment 312623
> 
> View attachment 312621
> 
> View attachment 312622
> 
> 
> They have history ^^^


Who doesn't? John Major & Edwina Curry :Vomit David Cameron and the pigs head :Vomit I hope he side lines her but I suppose she has remained loyal to him so he feels he should reward her, just hope and pray its not with the Home Office if they do get in.



stockwellcat said:


> I know what you mean.
> I ended up becoming a swing voter I am totally unsure myself of Labour and Conservatives and you're right. One of them would have to shine tonight for me to vote them.


But you absolutely and categorically stated several times you would not vote for the Conservatives because of the free vote on hunting. Are you a man of your word?


----------



## stockwellcat.

This is seriously making my head spin.

She was challenged on school funding and immediately she said Labours figures don't add up. A studio audience member said what are the Conservatives figures and there was laughter from some members of the audience.

She has been gurning, obviously she was lying or uncertain.

So I am seeing where this goes. Just waiting for the Paxman interview now with TM.


----------



## 1290423

Well! No points for the tories either.
At this moment I do not feel there is a party, certainly not a main one worthy of a vote.


----------



## noushka05

she was gurning:Hilarious


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> she was gurning:Hilarious


Well pulling that silly face when she is uncertain or lying with her lips.


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> she was gurning:Hilarious


She looked to me like she were looking down her nose but trying to disguise it


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Well pulling that silly face when she is uncertain or lying with her lips.





DT said:


> She looked to me like she were looking down her nose but trying to disguise it


I'm watching Britains got Talent so I wouldn't know You just tickled me SWC


----------



## 1290423

People say that to vote for a party that has no chance of winning is a wasted vote.
I don't necessarily see it that way as all votes are counted even voting for a minority party shows the main parties that people are not happy.


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> I'm watching Britains got Talent so I wouldn't know You just tickled me SWC


Wise decision noushka you"re missing nothing a load of codswallop


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> I'm watching Britains got Talent so I wouldn't know You just tickled me SWC


Me too. I'll watch Britain's got no talent on catch up later.


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> People say that to vote for a party that has no chance of winning is a wasted vote.
> I don't necessarily see it that way as all votes are counted even voting for a minority party shows the main parties that people are not happy.


Agreed. The problem was that conservatives were going to get a landslide and switching to labour was the only way to stop them.


----------



## Goblin

Don't really care who get in. What I do not want is any party to get with a large enough majority to feel secure. We need opposition in parliament.


----------



## 1290423

David waliams for pm noush


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> . See again you're twisting it.
> 
> I saw this live on Sky News.
> 
> Remember the EU pull all the strings during Brexit not the UK.


That's not fair, haven't you not been mistaken yourself from time to time?. I appreciate your correction but there was no need for that. I saw that on the BBC Red Button news, not Murdoch's Sky. Politically there's no difference between the two nowadays.

The EU should indeed be pulling the strings as, after all the UK's departure is voluntary.


----------



## noushka05

:Jawdrop

*Nigel Farage*‏Verified [email protected]*Nigel_Farage* 30m30 minutes ago

I may not agree with @*jeremycorbyn* but he came across as being totally sincere.
Paxman didn't score any goals .


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well you're both missing May dig herself into a big hole 

She was asked if she had changed her mind on Brexit as she voted to remain, she wouldn't answer the question.

Ohh Paxman has clammed up. Arms folded as May isn't answering any of his questions directly.


----------



## 1290423

Goblin said:


> Don't really care who get in. What I do not want is any party to get with a large enough majority to feel secure. We need opposition in parliament.


Agreed


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> David waliams for pm noush


He'd get my vote


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Well you're both missing May dig herself into a big hole
> 
> She was asked if she had changed her mind on Brexit as she voted to remain, she wouldn't answer the question.
> 
> Ohh Paxman has clammed up. Arms folded as May isn't answering any of his questions directly.


I've always believed she wanted out anyway Stockwell but didn't dare admit it


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> He'd get my vote


I do like David Walliams he is funny.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Well in my opinion Corbyn has really put me off.
> 
> Avoided question from audience member on IRA.
> 
> Then Paxman asked him various questions on terrorism and what if there was 20 minutes given to him to take out a target by drone strike and Corbyn said he'd have to look at the evidence.
> 
> I am still remaining open minded as much as I can.


The past can't be undone but they did renounce terrorism. I don't understand the obsession with bringing up the past....


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I do like David Walliams he is funny.


Qualities of a pm then, well better then the choice we have.


----------



## stockwellcat.

TM is so bad at lying. I am laughing my head off here during Paxman's interview.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> The past can't be undone but they did renounce terrorism. I don't understand the obsession with bringing up the past....
> View attachment 312667
> View attachment 312668


They didn't an audience member did because Corbyn attended a ceremony to glorify the IRA not to remember there victims.


----------



## Elles

I quite like Ruth Davidson. I think she would be a better pm than May.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well now I don't know where to stick that magical x.

I am confused.

IRA sympathiser or complusive liar. What a choice.

Paxman had fun with both of them.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> They didn't an audience member did because Corbyn attended a ceremony to glorify the IRA not to remember there victims.


Is there any concrete evidence of that or did the person asking the question get that from the Daily Mail?

The fact the IRA gave up arms is something to celebrate is it not? Many were killed on both sides including by the loyalist equivalent who, to be fair, also renounced terrorism.


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> Well now I don't know where to stick that magical x.
> 
> I am confused.
> 
> IRA sympathiser or complusive liar. What a choice.
> 
> Paxman had fun with both of them.


Who are your own local candidates? Maybe you'd like one of those?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> Who are your own local candidates? Maybe you'd like one of those?


Well I looked into this and my area is a strong Labour area but could possibly fall to Lib Dems.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Is there any concrete evidence of that or did the person asking the question get that from the Daily Mail?
> 
> The fact the IRA gave up arms is something to celebrate is it not? Many were killed on both sides including by the loyalist equivalent who, to be fair, also renounced terrorism.


Nothing to do with Daily Mail. The man that asked the question was from Northern Ireland.

How about an apology directly from Corbyn for attending the event and it would be forgotten about instead he avoids the question.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Well now I don't know where to stick that magical x.
> 
> I am confused.
> 
> IRA sympathiser or complusive liar. What a choice.
> 
> Paxman had fun with both of them.


I'm in the same boat Stockwell well almost I've written off Conservatives that's a definite as for labour to many negatives there I don't feel I can vote for them as I don't trust Jeremy Corbyn on matters of security dealing with the eu regarding brexit nor do I like him wanting to put VAT on private tuition fees. Besides I seem to recall vat only being a temporary tax!


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> :Jawdrop
> 
> *Nigel Farage*‏Verified [email protected]*Nigel_Farage* 30m30 minutes ago
> 
> I may not agree with @*jeremycorbyn* but he came across as being totally sincere.
> Paxman didn't score any goals .


Some of replies to that are very funny. :Hilarious


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> I'm in the same boat Stockwell well almost I've written off Conservatives that's a definite as for labour to many negatives there I don't feel I can vote for them as I don't trust Jeremy Corbyn on matters of security dealing with the eu regarding brexit nor do I like him wanting to put VAT on private tuition fees. Besides I seem to recall vat only being a temporary tax!


You forgot terrorism in your list for Corbyn.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> I'm in the same boat Stockwell well almost I've written off Conservatives that's a definite as for labour to many negatives there I don't feel I can vote for them as I don't trust Jeremy Corbyn on matters of security dealing with the eu regarding brexit nor do I like him wanting to put VAT on private tuition fees. Besides I seem to recall vat only being a temporary tax!


Conservatives - I don't know what there figures are and I don't think they can be trusted with things at home.

Labour - Same list as yours.

Who to vote for I don't know but not these two parties. So this leaves me stuck as I said I wouldn't vote Lib Dems.

I am off on a long holiday abroad and will be back after Brexit   (I wish).


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> You forgot terrorism in your list for Corbyn.


I class that as security


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> Besides I seem to recall vat only being a temporary tax


That was about 100 years ago too!


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> That was about 100 years ago too!


Purchase tax, introduced on luxury goods during the war, was initially on the wholesale price.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Well now I don't know where to stick that magical


On their foreheads maybe


----------



## stockwellcat.

I have moved my vote to undecided which I am more than ever.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I have moved my vote to undecided which I am more than ever.


We could always put em on ebay stockwell


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> We could always put em on ebay stockwell


That's a good idea.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> I'm in the same boat Stockwell well almost I've written off Conservatives that's a definite as for labour to many negatives there I don't feel I can vote for them as I don't trust Jeremy Corbyn on matters of security dealing with the eu regarding brexit nor do I like him wanting to put VAT on private tuition fees. Besides I seem to recall vat only being a temporary tax!


Aren't you a member of the Animal Welfare Party? I know they have no candidates in your area (although they have 4 standing nationwide) but if you look at their key policies for this election which are


Increase penalties for those convicted of animal abuse.
End the badger cull and oppose any repeal of the fox hunting ban.
Strengthen companion animal welfare with an end to breed specific legislation, the sale of animals online and in retail stores and the exotic pet trade.
Phase out farming practices and systems with poor welfare consequences for animals.
Improve human health, save NHS funds, protect the environment and global food security by promoting healthy plant-based diets.
Phase out animal experimentation with binding targets for reduction combined with proper funding & real support for alternatives.
Introduce independently monitored CCTV for all slaughterhouses.
End live animal export and all slaughter without prior stunning.
Oppose hard Brexit. Support a ratification referendum on the final exit deal.
why not compare those to the manifestos of the main parties and vote for the one that best matches up to the above? Not that I am trying to turn you against the Conservatives or anything :Hilarious:Hilarious



stockwellcat said:


> Conservatives - I don't know what there figures are and I don't think they can be trusted with things at home.
> 
> Labour - Same list as yours.
> 
> Who to vote for I don't know but not these two parties. So this leaves me stuck as I said I wouldn't vote Lib Dems.
> 
> I am off on a long holiday abroad and will be back after Brexit   (I wish).


Just because you said you wouldn't vote Lib Dem doesn't mean you can't. You said you were definitely voting Labour so if you can't do that because you don't trust Corbyn why not vote for the other party who don't plan to hold a vote to repeal the hunting ban?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

OMG I've just noticed the animal welfare party say 

Improve human health, save NHS funds, protect the environment and global food security by* promoting healthy plant-based diets*.
Well I knew it would reach our politics eventually so that has absolutely made my day


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Aren't you a member of the Animal Welfare Party? I know they have no candidates in your area (although they have 4 standing nationwide) but if you look at their key policies for this election which are
> 
> 
> Increase penalties for those convicted of animal abuse.
> End the badger cull and oppose any repeal of the fox hunting ban.
> Strengthen companion animal welfare with an end to breed specific legislation, the sale of animals online and in retail stores and the exotic pet trade.
> Phase out farming practices and systems with poor welfare consequences for animals.
> Improve human health, save NHS funds, protect the environment and global food security by promoting healthy plant-based diets.
> Phase out animal experimentation with binding targets for reduction combined with proper funding & real support for alternatives.
> Introduce independently monitored CCTV for all slaughterhouses.
> End live animal export and all slaughter without prior stunning.
> Oppose hard Brexit. Support a ratification referendum on the final exit deal.
> why not compare those to the manifestos of the main parties and vote for the one that best matches up to the above? Not that I am trying to turn you against the Conservatives or anything :Hilarious:Hilarious
> 
> Just because you said you wouldn't vote Lib Dem doesn't mean you can't. You said you were definitely voting Labour so if you can't do that because you don't trust Corbyn why not vote for the other party who don't plan to hold a vote to repeal the hunting ban?


Yes I am, and no they dont, otherwise there would be no competition as obviously they would get my vote, no party in my view comes anywhere close to them, we have never had a candidate and I doubt we will, but can hope.
That said when I joined awp they were for remaining in the eu, but I would still ha e vote for them despite me wanting brexit.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> OMG I've just noticed the animal welfare party say
> 
> Improve human health, save NHS funds, protect the environment and global food security by* promoting healthy plant-based diets*.
> Well I knew it would reach our politics eventually so that has absolutely made my day


You ahould join
They urgently need members


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> Well you're both missing May dig herself into a big hole
> 
> She was asked if she had changed her mind on Brexit as she voted to remain, she wouldn't answer the question.
> 
> Ohh Paxman has clammed up. Arms folded as May isn't answering any of his questions directly.


It depends how you look at it. Everyone knows that she was a remainer but, as she said, the country voted to leave, so she had to step up and do the best she could. Maybe she hasn't changed her mind, she's just doing what an elected representative of the people is meant to do


----------



## stockwellcat.

MiffyMoo said:


> It depends how you look at it. Everyone knows that she was a remainer but, as she said, the country voted to leave, so she had to step up and do the best she could. Maybe she hasn't changed her mind, she's just doing what an elected representative of the people is meant to do


But why not answer Paxman's question, it was a simple yes or no answer.


----------



## MiffyMoo

DT said:


> I'm in the same boat Stockwell well almost I've written off Conservatives that's a definite as for labour to many negatives there I don't feel I can vote for them as I don't trust Jeremy Corbyn on matters of security dealing with the eu regarding brexit nor do I like him wanting to put VAT on private tuition fees. Besides I seem to recall vat only being a temporary tax!


He also completely swerved the question about small business owners


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Yes I am, and no they dont, otherwise there would be no competition as obviously they would get my vote, no party in my view comes anywhere close to them, we have never had a candidate and I doubt we will, but can hope.
> That said when I joined awp they were for remaining in the eu, but I would still ha e vote for them despite me wanting brexit.


*Lib Dems*

Continue to improve standards of animal health and welfare in agriculture by
updating farm animal welfare codes and promoting the responsible
stewardship of antibiotic drugs.
●● Ensure that future trade deals require high safety, environmental and animal
54 Liberal Democrat Manifesto 2017
welfare standards for food imports, including clear and unambiguous countryof-
origin labelling for meat and dairy products.
●● Develop safe, effective, humane and evidence-based ways of controlling
bovine TB, including by investing to produce workable vaccines.

>>Introduce stronger penalties for animal cruelty offences, increasing the
maximum sentencing from six months to five years, and bring in a ban on
caged hens.
●● Clamp down on illegal pet imports through legal identification requirements
for online sales, and minimise the use of animals in scientific experimentation,
including by funding research into alternatives.
*>>*Suspend the use of neonicotinoids until proven that their use in agriculture
does not harm bees or other pollinators.

*Labour *

Animals in our food chain need welfare standards. 
Domestic animals require stronger protection from cruelty. 
Wild animals need a sustainable ecosystem.
Labour's vision is for the UK to lead the world with high animal welfare standards in the wild, in farming and for domestic animals. 
Labour will increase the maximum sentence for those convicted of committing animal cruelty. 
We will promote cruelty-free animal husbandry and consult on ways to ensure better enforcement of agreed standards. 
We will prohibit the third-party sale of puppies, introduce and enforce a total ban on ivory trading, and support the ban on wild animals in circuses. 
We will cease the badger cull, which spreads bovine TB. Labour ended fox hunting, deer hunting and hare coursing. Only a Labour government will maintain the bans


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> Some of replies to that are very funny. :Hilarious


I'll have to have a look at them I almost pulled a muscle laughing at the #TheresaMayGifs hash tag:Hilarious


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> But why not answer Paxman's question, it was a simple yes or no answer.


She did insofar as she said she was doing what she had to do. It's nothing to do with the manifesto, it's something that she had to take on because Cameron was an *rse


----------



## stockwellcat.

So my choices in my area are:

Labour - No way

Conservatives - No way

Lib Dems

The Pirate Party

My area is a swing area was previously a Labour area but the Lib Dems have a rising support in my area and actually stand a chance of winning in my area.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Theresa May is drowning ar ITV right now...what a level of incompetence... Matches Diane Abbott.
God help us.
Corbyn just as dangerous for different reason ..
Think it is time England decided to join Scotland and elect Nicola...


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> *Lib Dems*
> 
> Continue to improve standards of animal health and welfare in agriculture by
> updating farm animal welfare codes and promoting the responsible
> stewardship of antibiotic drugs.
> ●● Ensure that future trade deals require high safety, environmental and animal
> 54 Liberal Democrat Manifesto 2017
> welfare standards for food imports, including clear and unambiguous countryof-
> origin labelling for meat and dairy products.
> ●● Develop safe, effective, humane and evidence-based ways of controlling
> bovine TB, including by investing to produce workable vaccines.
> 
> >>Introduce stronger penalties for animal cruelty offences, increasing the
> maximum sentencing from six months to five years, and bring in a ban on
> caged hens.
> ●● Clamp down on illegal pet imports through legal identification requirements
> for online sales, and minimise the use of animals in scientific experimentation,
> including by funding research into alternatives.
> *>>*Suspend the use of neonicotinoids until proven that their use in agriculture
> does not harm bees or other pollinators.
> 
> *Labour *
> 
> Animals in our food chain need welfare standards.
> Domestic animals require stronger protection from cruelty.
> Wild animals need a sustainable ecosystem.
> Labour's vision is for the UK to lead the world with high animal welfare standards in the wild, in farming and for domestic animals.
> Labour will increase the maximum sentence for those convicted of committing animal cruelty.
> We will promote cruelty-free animal husbandry and consult on ways to ensure better enforcement of agreed standards.
> We will prohibit the third-party sale of puppies, introduce and enforce a total ban on ivory trading, and support the ban on wild animals in circuses.
> We will cease the badger cull, which spreads bovine TB. Labour ended fox hunting, deer hunting and hare coursing. Only a Labour government will maintain the bans


Yep, I agree rottie, both labour and lib dem do at least mention these issues, but do I totally trust them to act on them? The difference with the awp is in the name


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> So my choices in my area are:
> 
> Labour - No way
> 
> Conservatives - No way
> 
> Lib Dems
> 
> The Pirate Party
> 
> My area is a swing area was previously a Labour area but the Lib Dems have a rising support in my area and actually stand a chance of winning in my area.


We have the norm three plus ukip
The tories are very strong here with a huge majority,


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> You ahould join
> They urgently need members


I probably will.


----------



## Elles

I've watched the Jeremy Corbyn part, I thought he came over quite well.

May next.


----------



## Elles

Theresa May on the NHS. We're putting more money into the NHS for new buildings and equipment.

All the better to privatise you my dear?

Doesn't the NHS want more staff? The studio audience seemed very impressed with her. 

I feel Corbyn came over better than she did, but she was more of a (n aggressive) personality and more memorable, though more evasive, only quoting the manifesto. I think she's been advised that saying 'strong and stable' has started to grate. The questions to Corbyn seemed to be focussed too much on the past and his personal ethics on peace and not enough on the now and other issues relevant to today.

Not especially helpful imo. 

Let's see May and Corbyn against each other instead. 

Which is best, May or Corbyn? Only one way to find out. FIGHT!


----------



## KittenKong

https://bda.org.uk/conservative-party-refuse-bsl-translation-of-manifesto/
















Speaks volumes doesn't it...


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong




----------



## noushka05

Wow. Channel 4s Cathy Newman.

*Cathy Newman*‏Verified [email protected]*cathynewman* 9h9 hours ago

We're all so used to politicians answering in sound bites it's disarming - & effective - when they don't. @*jeremycorbyn*

Much more traditional political interview - #*Paxman* asks questions repeatedly; @*theresa_may* answers mostly in soundbites #*BattleForNumber10*


----------



## noushka05

CCHQ supporters to tweet these five attack lines against Corbyn during last nights debate. And to get the hashtag right. Typical tories


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> In the last parliament the Conservatives against Hunting group who I used to support estimated 50 - 70 Tory MPs who would vote against or abstain.


That group was found to have nothing to do with the Conservative party. It was/is being financed by IFAW. Just another pressure group.



rottiepointerhouse said:


> Tory Peer Lord Mancroft


One man and no money involved as far as we know. Money talks in the conservative world not status 
Also a Countryside Alliance director, so he has to do the rallying call. They are as much out of touch with reality as the Conservatives.
Talk, talk while the men/women on the ground, the hunt staff just get on with it



rottiepointerhouse said:


> On that basis, we must do everything we possibly can to maximise the chance of getting repeal of the HA. I am confident that every Master will give the leadership and direction that our community needs at this seminal moment.


Even though a few more have joined the hunting fraternity since the ban most because they do not kill foxes. I can see no political reason to think that that number has any influence on policy.

It's just never going to happen


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> That group was found to have nothing to do with the Conservative party. It was/is being financed by IFAW. Just another pressure group.
> 
> One man and no money involved as far as we know. Money talks in the conservative world not status
> Also a Countryside Alliance director, so he has to do the rallying call. They are as much out of touch with reality as the Conservatives.
> Talk, talk while the men/women on the ground, the hunt staff just get on with it
> 
> Even though a few more have joined the hunting fraternity since the ban most because they do not kill foxes. I can see no political reason to think that that number has any influence on policy.
> 
> It's just never going to happen


Trail hounds are 'accidentally' killing foxes all the time Rona. Many tory mps still support hunting.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 312680


Can I correct this meme? The UDA are not a paramilitary group anymore. So your meme is complete spin. I know this for a fact because I have strong links to Northern Ireland. The UDA are now just a gang that drug deals and are embroiled in a drug dealing turf war previously (well last year at least) and gang leadership feud.


----------



## Honeys mum

noushka05 said:


> I'm watching Britains got Talent


Same here noush, That's what I watched. So will be watching it some time today.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> This is the only reason I still think the conservatives will be best this time, the negotiations. I certainly wouldn't even be contemplating voting that dreadful woman in otherwise





stockwellcat said:


> They do have a negotiating team you know and have been hiring lawyers, negotiators etc over the months after the Referendum.


Perhaps you should read this. Former British Ambassador wouldn't hesitate to choose Corbyn over May. He's joining many people recognising May's inability to negotiate.


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> Can I correct this meme? The UDA are not a paramilitary group anymore. So your meme is complete spin. I know this for a fact because I have strong links to Northern Ireland. The UDA are now just a gang that drug deals and are embroiled in a drug dealing turf war previously (well last year at least) and gang leadership feud.


Are you saying that makes it better or worse for politicians to meet with them?


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> Can I correct this meme? The UDA are not a paramilitary group anymore. So your meme is complete spin. I know this for a fact because I have strong links to Northern Ireland. The UDA are now just a gang that drug deals and are embroiled in a drug dealing turf war previously (well last year at least) and gang leadership feud.


Plus that's well after the supposed peace. Corbyn was supporting them while they were still bombing us


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> Let's see May and Corbyn against each other instead.
> 
> Which is best, May or Corbyn? Only one way to find out. FIGHT!


 You can see that every week?


----------



## stockwellcat.

havoc said:


> Are you saying that makes it better or worse for politicians to meet with them?


I was saying kittenkong meme was spin and it is. The UDA stopped terrorist activity in 2010. The killings going on at the moment are within the UDA's own members as they are feuding at the moment, gang members taking gang members out.

--------
Well we could say the same about Corbyn attending a vigil to glorify the IRA and refusing to admit it. A studio audience member pointed this out last night so it wasn't the Conservatives oh and then there's Hamas. So not one terror group but two.

So waving your fingers at the Conservatives isn't right as Corbyn has a history he refuses to admit to.


----------



## stockwellcat.

*Revealed: Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell's close IRA links*
News report October 2015
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11924431/Revealed-Jeremy-Corbyn-and-John-McDonnells-close-IRA-links.html

*Night Jeremy Corbyn stood in honour of dead IRA terrorists*
News report October 2015
http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/night-jeremy-corbyn-stood-in-honour-of-dead-ira-terrorists-1-7008757

*Exclusive: MI5 opened file on Jeremy Corbyn amid concerns over his IRA links*
News report May 2017
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/19/exclusive-mi5-opened-file-jeremy-corbyn-amid-concerns-ira-links/amp/


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Plus that's well after the supposed peace. Corbyn was supporting them while they were still bombing us





stockwellcat said:


> I was saying kittenkong meme was spin and it is. The UDA stopped terrorist activity in 2010. The killings going on at the moment are within the UDA's own members as they are feuding at the moment, gang members taking gang members out.
> 
> Well we could say the same about Corbyn attending a vigil to glorify IRA and refusing to admit it. A studio audience member pointed this out last night so it wasn't the Conservatives oh and then there's Hamas. So not one terror group but two.
> 
> So waving your fingers at the Conservatives isn't right as Corbyn has a history he refuses to admit to.


Whatever you believe about Corbyns past don't forget our PM is selling arms to despotic regimes who fund terrorism right now.

Look at all these cuts The tories are putting us in danger not Corbyn.

20,000 police cut

1,337 firearms officers cut

1/3 of police dogs cut


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> *Revealed: Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell's close IRA links*
> News report October 2015
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11924431/Revealed-Jeremy-Corbyn-and-John-McDonnells-close-IRA-links.html
> 
> *Night Jeremy Corbyn stood in honour of dead IRA terrorists*
> News report October 2015
> http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/night-jeremy-corbyn-stood-in-honour-of-dead-ira-terrorists-1-7008757
> 
> *Exclusive: MI5 opened file on Jeremy Corbyn amid concerns over his IRA links*
> News report May 2017
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/19/exclusive-mi5-opened-file-jeremy-corbyn-amid-concerns-ira-links/amp/


This.

The folk attacking Corbyn over The Troubles are the same folk whose Brexit threatens to revive them. . It's almost like it's pure opportunism.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Whatever you believe about Corbyns past don't forget our *PM is selling arms to despotic regimes who fund terrorism right now*.


 So is Germany, France, Russia and USA. Even though when EU put a ban on trading arms with Saudi Arabia last year France, Germany and UK still openly trade arms with them and the EU still do through the back door via trading arms with middle eastern countries who in turn sell them on to Saudi Arabia. The vote on the ban in the European Parliament was none binding.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> So is Germany, France, Russia and USA.


And that excuses May does it? And doesn't May threaten to pull us out of the EU with no deal? What about Europol ? You really think she cares about our security??


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> And that excuses May does it? And doesn't May threaten to pull us out of the EU with no deal? What about Europol ? You really think she cares about our security??
> 
> View attachment 312693


Well the Government are being honest about this they aren't hiding the fact we sell arms to Saudi Arabia. Corbyn on the other hand is trying to hide his past by refusing to admit to it. What makes you think Corbyn cares about our security when he'd rather be chums with terrorists and refuses to admit it? There's an open MI5 file on him.


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> So is Germany, France, Russia and USA.


Isn't Brexit our big chance to truly 'go it alone' and not do things because other countries do? Isn't it our chance for a really worthwhile fresh start?


----------



## stockwellcat.

stockwellcat said:


> Well the Government are being honest about this they aren't hiding the fact we sell arms to Saudi Arabia. Corbyn on the other hand is trying to hide his past by refusing to admit to it. What makes you think Corbyn cares about our security when he'd rather be chums with terrorists and refuses to admit it? There's an open MI5 file on him.


I just wanted to add that Saudi Arabia lead the coalition of Middle Eastern airstrikes against ISIS.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Businesses are worried about Corbyn's tax hike to 26% to corporation tax.

May promises to bring this down to 17% over the next term of Parliament.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Well the Government are being honest about this they aren't hiding the fact we sell arms to Saudi Arabia. Corbyn on the other hand is trying to hide his past by refusing to admit to it. What makes you think Corbyn cares about our security when he'd rather be chums with terrorists and refuses to admit it? There's an open MI5 file on him.


Oh well that's ok then. Imagine a media obsessed with smearing Corbyn on IRA that it doesn't report May's complicity in current war crimes in Yemen?

Yes and Caroline Lucas & other members of the Green party were on the MI5 watch list too!


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Businesses are worried about Corbyn's tax hike to 26% to corporation tax.
> 
> May promises to bring this down to 17% over the next term of Parliament.


Of course big business want to pay less tax. If she cuts it further how will we pay for our already crumbling public services?


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Oh well that's ok then. Imagine a media obsessed with smearing Corbyn on IRA that it doesn't report May's complicity in current war crimes in Yemen?


Cameron was in power when the Civil War in Yeman started on 22nd March 2015. So why is May to blame, she was Home Secretary at this time not PM? Why haven't the EU done anything as we are still in the EU at the moment after all?


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Well the Government are being honest about this they aren't hiding the fact we sell arms to Saudi Arabia. Corbyn on the other hand is trying to hide his past by refusing to admit to it. What makes you think Corbyn cares about our security when he'd rather be chums with terrorists and refuses to admit it? There's an open MI5 file on him.


You couldn't make this up.

MI5, which may have aided sending radicals abroad, begins probe into itself.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...i-moss-side-raids-amber-rudd?CMP=share_btn_tw


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Of course big business want to pay less tax. If she cuts it further how will we pay for our already crumbling public services?


I'll just leave these here


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> You couldn't make this up.
> 
> MI5, which may have aided sending radicals abroad, begins probe into itself.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...i-moss-side-raids-amber-rudd?CMP=share_btn_tw


You don't get it. Raising corporation tax and the national living wage to £10 per hour will stop businesses recruiting the staff they need. Unemployment on the rise again if this happens.


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> You don't get it. Raising corporation tax and the national living wage will stop businesses recruiting the staff they need.


Not to mention that the cost increase will affect only one section of the population- the poorest.


----------



## Odin_cat

Corbyn said that corporation tax was 28% in 2010, is that true?


----------



## MiffyMoo

Odin_cat said:


> Corbyn said that corporation tax was 28% in 2010, is that true?


Have a look at the graph I posted above


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> Corbyn said that corporation tax was 28% in 2010, is that true?


Yes. That was when the previous Labour Government was in power. The Conservatives have brought it down which in turn has attracted large businesses to relocate to the UK.


----------



## rona

Admitting a mistake and taking steps to correct it, is surely far better than denying a fault at all?


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Yes. That was when the previous Labour Government was in power. The Conservatives have brought it down which in turn has attracted large businesses to relocate to the UK.


Businesses must be very happy
...why the need to decrease it further? To try and persuade them to stay after Brexit? Surely a 9% decrease while many deparmeets are suffering massive cuts is more than generous?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> Businesses must be very happy
> ...why the need to decrease it further? To try and persuade them to stay after Brexit? Surely a 9% decrease while many deparmeets are suffering massive cuts is more than generous?


Well if you raise the Corporation tax and National Living Wage to £10 per hour we'll be waving good by to these businesses so it's a catch 22 circumstance. Why would this affect the UK? We'd have higher unemployment and decrease in living standards and increase in taxes to us. Currently we do not have to pay tax under £11,500 per year under the Conservative Government if we are employed.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Well if you raise the Corporation tax and National Living Wage to £10 per hour we'll be waving good by to these businesses so it's a catch 22 circumstance.


I expect they'll just fiddle it if.they want to stay...interesting that the Tories seem to have abolished the small business rate so huge corporations pay the same as family businesses.

I think Labour's plan would be more popular if they had kept small businesses at 19%.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> That group was found to have nothing to do with the Conservative party. It was/is being financed by IFAW. Just another pressure group.
> 
> One man and no money involved as far as we know. Money talks in the conservative world not status
> Also a Countryside Alliance director, so he has to do the rallying call. They are as much out of touch with reality as the Conservatives.
> Talk, talk while the men/women on the ground, the hunt staff just get on with it
> 
> Even though a few more have joined the hunting fraternity since the ban most because they do not kill foxes. I can see no political reason to think that that number has any influence on policy.
> 
> It's just never going to happen


So the Conservatives against foxhunting has nothing to do with the Conservative Party?

_We have three Co Founders- one is the present Vice President of a Surrey Conservative party Association and the former Chairman, the second Co Founder is a Trustee of a leading animal welfare charity , was awarded the International Fund For Animal Welfare 2012 Award presented in the House of Lords ,was a shortlist finalist for the Inspiration Awards For Women Award 2013, was awarded the RSPCA Lord Erskine Silver Award 2014 and presented with the Ceva Animal Welfare Finalist Award in 2016. Our third Co Founder was selected to be in the top three finalists in the world to be the Voice Of Conservation for the Shamwari Game Reserve in South Africa in 2011._
_
Welcome to Conservatives Against Fox Hunting (The Blue Fox Group) established by a Conservative Association Chairman ( now the Association Vice President )and his family in January 2010. This web site is here to represent the two thirds of Conservative supporters and the 84% of the general population who think hunting should remain illegal as demonstrated in an Ipsos MORI poll carried out for The League Against Cruel Sports.

We have 5 Conservative MP Patrons, including Tracey Crouch MP, Sports Minister, Caroline Dinenage MP, Equalities Minister, Sir Roger Gale MP, Sir David Amess MP and Dominic Raab MP, former Justice Minister.
_
We have no way of knowing whether some Tory Party backers have threatened to withdraw their support if the free vote isn't held.

I am not prepared to sit back and hope you are right and I don't understand your objection to writing a simple email to your candidates to ask for their views and intentions in the free vote. If we all sit back and say nothing they will assume its OK and that we don't care enough to write an email.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Odin_cat said:


> Businesses must be very happy
> ...why the need to decrease it further? To try and persuade them to stay after Brexit? Surely a 9% decrease while many deparmeets are suffering massive cuts is more than generous?


Did you look at the graph?


----------



## MiffyMoo

Odin_cat said:


> I expect they'll just fiddle it if.they want to stay...interesting that the Tories seem to have abolished the small business rate so huge corporations pay the same as family businesses.
> 
> I think Labour's plan would be more popular if they had kept small businesses at 19%.


Small businesses trade with larger corporations, so the larger companies pass on their increase to the smaller companies, smaller companies pass these onto the consumer


----------



## Odin_cat

MiffyMoo said:


> Did you look at the graph?


Yes, but will that pattern continue indefinitely? I'm not convinced that increasing it is that good thing but I don't think it's the right time to decrease it.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MiffyMoo said:


> Did you look at the graph?


What that graph doesn't show is the additional tax raised by associated increased employment. So that's additional PAYE, NI, VAT, there's more money in the economy as well. It's win win.

Like most of Labour's ideas they are not thought through to conclusion.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Odin_cat said:


> Yes, but will that pattern continue indefinitely? I'm not convinced that increasing it is that good thing but I don't think it's the right time to decrease it.


On the contrary, I think now may be an excellent time to decrease it and make the UK even more attractive to multinationals prior to Brexit. When exactly is a good time in your eyes?


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I am not prepared to sit back and hope you are right and I don't understand your objection to writing a simple email to your candidates to ask for their views and intentions in the free vote. If we all sit back and say nothing they will assume its OK and that we don't care enough to write an email.


I know my MPs stance, he's in favour of the vote, I just don't see this as the most pressing issue and also don't believe for one minute that it will ever get through. 
It'll probably be cancelled again anyway and bought up at another opportune moment to slide something else through.


----------



## Dr Pepper

I see Labour's Land Value Tax is hitting the headlines. Couldn't afford to vote for them and their ridiculous scheme. We have two acres. It's not classed as agricultural land but doesn't have planning permission. How would they value that, as if it was building land leaving me with a annual bill of some £60,000? If they make up a figure of what it's worth without planning does that then rocket when some developer applies and recieves planning permission, which is totally out of my control.

Another barmy idea with no thought behind it.


----------



## Odin_cat

MiffyMoo said:


> On the contrary, I think now may be an excellent time to decrease it and make the UK even more attractive to multinationals prior to Brexit. When exactly is a good time in your eyes?


When disabled people aren't having their benefits taken away, when companies stop using exploitative zero hour contracts.... I doubt we'll ever agree.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Odin_cat said:


> When disabled people aren't having their benefits taken away, when companies stop using exploitative zero hour contracts.... I doubt we'll ever agree.


You're right, we're never going to agree


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So the Conservatives against foxhunting has nothing to do with the Conservative Party?


Lets get this right, the founder of Conservatives against fox hunting is Lorraine Platt, best buds with many animal right activists, and yes, she has the support of a few conservatives but the organiztion she runs has nothing to do with the Conservative party


----------



## kimthecat

Still a lot of people who are uncertain who to vote for , its really not your standard GE !
Even those who normally vote Tory or Lab are having doubts .


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> Well if you raise the Corporation tax and National Living Wage to £10 per hour we'll be waving good by to these businesses so it's a catch 22 circumstance. Why would this affect the UK? We'd have higher unemployment and decrease in living standards and increase in taxes to us. Currently we do not have to pay tax under £11,500 per year under the Conservative Government if we are employed.


And the spiral starts again, no jobs more unemployment, more welfare, more debt


----------



## Calvine

Dr Pepper said:


> I see Labour's Land Value Tax is hitting the headlines. Couldn't afford to vote for them and their ridiculous scheme. We have two acres. It's not classed as agricultural land but doesn't have planning permission. How would they value that, as if it was building land leaving me with a annual bill of some £60,000? If they make up a figure of what it's worth without planning does that then rocket when some developer applies and recieves planning permission, which is totally out of my control.
> 
> Another barmy idea with no thought behind it.


@Dr Pepper: saw that...they are calling it a ''garden tax''!


----------



## 3dogs2cats

kimthecat said:


> Still a lot of people who are uncertain who to vote for , its really not your standard GE !
> Even those who normally vote Tory or Lab are having doubts .


I still don`t know who I`m voting for. There is virtually no campaigning here, I have had one leaflet from the incumbent MP telling us he is team Theresa May and one from Labour, nothing at all from Lib Dem who are considered to be the threat to the Tory held seat, or the Greens who increased their share of the vote considerably in 2015. I have not seen a single banner or poster anywhere, no one has a poster in their window or garden. Compared to other election years I would not know an election is taking place next week. I was going to go to a husting but no one seems to know if all candidates are going or not. I have emailed all the candidates but had nothing back. At this present moment in time I will not be voting for any of them.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Calvine said:


> @Dr Pepper: saw that...they are calling it a ''garden tax''!


It's a corker they've kept very quiet about. Probably because it'll raise the average council tax bill to £4,000. Who'd vote for that?


----------



## MiffyMoo

Dr Pepper said:


> It's a corker they've kept very quiet about. Probably because it'll raise the average council tax bill to £4,000. Who'd vote for that?


Are you kidding me?? That's insane! Surely they're not crazy enough to think that anyone with more than a handkerchief garden is a secret millionaire?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> I know my MPs stance, he's in favour of the vote, I just don't see this as the most pressing issue and also don't believe for one minute that it will ever get through.
> It'll probably be cancelled again anyway and bought up at another opportune moment to slide something else through.


Yes I understand you believe the vote won't go ahead but that is just your opinion, its in their manifesto to hold it, if they have a big enough majority I believe they will hold it and if they have a big enough majority I believe they will win it. I hope and pray you are right and I am wrong but I'm not going to leave it to chance.



rona said:


> Lets get this right, the founder of Conservatives against fox hunting is Lorraine Platt, best buds with many animal right activists, and yes, she has the support of a few conservatives but the organiztion she runs has nothing to do with the Conservative party


What has who someone is friends with got to do with anything? Of course they are not an "official" Conservative Party group - that is hardly likely in a party that supports hunting. They are a group set up by Conservatives for Conservatives who oppose hunting. I would prefer to associate with someone who is friends with animal rights activists than with people who go hunting any day of the week.

http://www.conservativehome.com/pla...uld-be-wrong-to-scrap-the-ban-on-hunting.html

Our Blue Fox campaign, also known as Conservatives Against Fox Hunting, started in 2010 when my husband, who was Chairman of our Esher and Walton Association at the time - he is the President now - and I came across talk of the party leadership's support for a return of hunting with dogs, and its commitment to offer a free vote on the repeal of the Hunting Act.

So from one basic homemade website, we then decided to take it further and set up an online group for everyone who had emailed us to connect further on our Facebook site and twitter sites which have a combined following of thousands of followers, including MPs, peers and councillors, Association Chairmen, agents, Conservative candidates, Associations and environmental journalists all over the country. Blue Fox activists are all volunteers who give up their time to speak out to protect wildlife.

It is extraordinarily that 85 per cent of Conservative MPs support a return of hunting with dogs - and this is where we focus our work.

We held the largest anti hunting parliamentary event in June 2013 which was very well attended by 10 anti hunting Conservative MPs, a leading Criminal Law QC and some of our Blue Fox team comprised of Conservative councillors, Conservative Women's Future and a Conservative Association president.

It is significant that many of our team are Conservative women. The repeal issue is toxic and damaging to the progressive image of the Conservative party brand ,and alienates some people from engaging with the Party. No party can afford to alienate supporters, especially women, which every party is keen to connect with


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> I'll just leave these here
> 
> View attachment 312697
> 
> 
> View attachment 312699


Leave it where you like. The great con is unravelling. Even the IMF acknowledges neoliberalism has been a disaster - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/31/witnessing-death-neoliberalism-imf-economists

And brexit is the biggest con of our time. The neoliberal elite conning the people.












stockwellcat said:


> You don't get it. Raising corporation tax and the national living wage to £10 per hour will stop businesses recruiting the staff they need. Unemployment on the rise again if this happens.


It hasn't in other countries. Funny that.



stockwellcat said:


> Yes. That was when the previous Labour Government was in power. The Conservatives have brought it down which in turn has attracted large businesses to relocate to the UK.


Yes our society has never been better has it? NHS & public services are really feeling the benefit, society is flourishing :/


----------



## Bisbow

I do not want to see hunting returning to the countryside but there are far more important issues in this country to be addressed than hunting

If that is the only reason for not voting tory, I'm sorry, I find that argument silly.

I don't think it will be passed anyway

Corbin is a much bigger danger to the UK than any one else at the moment, a man who holds hand with terrorists and invites them to tea is very, very dangerous

A man who honours dead terrorists but not innocent people is to be avoided at all costs

If hunting is more important to some of you than human lives then vote for him but I will not


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> I do not want to see hunting returning to the countryside but there are far more important issues in this country to be addressed than hunting
> 
> If that is the only reason for not voting tory, I'm sorry, I find that argument silly.
> 
> I don't think it will be passed anyway
> 
> Corbin is a much bigger danger to the UK than any one else at the moment, a man who holds hand with terrorists and invites them to tea is very, very dangerous
> 
> A man who honours dead terrorists but not innocent people is to be avoided at all costs
> 
> If hunting is more important to some of you than human lives then vote for him but I will not


Rubbish. He doesn't support terrorism. The tories are funding terrorism all over the Middle East. Their foreign policy is radicalising people - we know this for a FACT. They have cut our police & armed services to the bone. Have you anything to say about that?


----------



## noushka05

So many posts I would loved to have repped you for @rottiepointerhouse. x


----------



## Bisbow

I knew you would jump to his defence, he can do no wrong to you can he

He won't condemn terrorists, he skirts the question every time it is asked

Who invited terrorists to the House? He did,

Who shakes hands with IRA men, he does

Who voted against allowing known ISIS admires to enter the UK, he did

He will appease anyone who wants to bully him


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> I do not want to see hunting returning to the countryside but there are far more important issues in this country to be addressed than hunting
> 
> If that is the only reason for not voting tory, I'm sorry, I find that argument silly.
> 
> I don't think it will be passed anyway
> 
> Corbin is a much bigger danger to the UK than any one else at the moment, a man who holds hand with terrorists and invites them to tea is very, very dangerous
> 
> A man who honours dead terrorists but not innocent people is to be avoided at all costs
> 
> If hunting is more important to some of you than human lives then vote for him but I will not


Did anyone ask you to vote for him because of hunting Bisbow? I certainly didn't, however I did remind people who categorically stated that they would not vote Conservative (because of their manifesto commitment to hold a free vote and because of Theresa May's public statement that she supported hunting and would let parliament decide) of their public statement that they could not and would not support a party with these views. All I have asked the rest of you to do is to email your candidates and ask them how they would vote in the free vote and tell them that you do not want to see the hunting ban repealed so that if and when the vote is held they might just consider voting against or abstain. Sorry if that is considered too radical. I'm afraid that argument about hunting being more important than human lives is a sad attempt to undermine people who are prepared to vote according to their beliefs. Labour are not the only party who oppose hunting. Conservatives are the only party who want to see it back.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> I knew you would jump to his defence, he can do no wrong to you can he
> 
> He won't condemn terrorists, he skirts the question every time it is asked
> 
> Who invited terrorists to the House? He did,
> 
> Who shakes hands with IRA men, he does
> 
> Who voted against allowing known ISIS admires to enter the UK, he did
> 
> He will appease anyone who wants to bully him


You're falling for the scaremongering. May is the danger not Corbyn.


----------



## noushka05

Do you disagree with this @Bisbow? http://www.middleeasteye.net/column...ued-radical-and-morally-courageous-2036528122


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> I knew you would jump to his defence, he can do no wrong to you can he
> 
> He won't condemn terrorists, he skirts the question every time it is asked
> 
> Who invited terrorists to the House? He did,
> 
> Who shakes hands with IRA men, he does
> 
> Who voted against allowing known ISIS admires to enter the UK, he did
> 
> He will appease anyone who wants to bully him


The Queen shook hands with IRA terrorists too, does that make her a terrorist supporter? Sometimes we do have to converse with people we don't agree with to get them around the table and hammer out an agreement. Do you feel the same way about Mo Mowlem for example?

In 1997, Mowlam was once again re-elected as MP for Redcar with an increased majority of 21,667. She was made Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the first woman to have held the post. She was successful in helping to restore an IRA ceasefire and including Sinn Féin in multi-party talks about the future of Northern Ireland. In an attempt to persuade the Ulster loyalists to participate in the peace process, she paid an unprecedented and potentially dangerous visit to loyalist prisoners in the Maze prison, meeting convicted murderers face-to-face and unaccompanied.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> So many posts I would loved to have repped you for @rottiepointerhouse. x


We should be held up as an example of how people with very very different views on many subjects, and who have frequent heated debates can still find common ground and iron out our differences 

Have you started reading Rip yet?


----------



## samuelsmiles

noushka05 said:


> Leave it where you like. The great con is unravelling. Even the IMF acknowledges *neoliberalism has been a disaster* - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/31/witnessing-death-neoliberalism-imf-economists
> 
> And brexit is the biggest con of our time. *The neoliberal elite conning the people.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It hasn't in other countries. Funny that.
> 
> Yes our society has never been better has it? NHS & public services are really feeling the benefit, society is flourishing :/


Owen Jones, Jeremy Corbyn et al were utterly gushing over the success of socialist Venezuela a couple of years back. The country is now falling apart.

Former president Hugo Chavez's daughter, however, is now the richest woman in the country, worth billions of dollars.

(And now I will be lectured on the neoliberal conspiracies that are to blame.)


----------



## 1290423

Can anyone shred any light please on this so called ed garden tax that is said to be hidden somewhere in labour manifesto. I can't find anything on it but I'm curious as to what this is all about, as they are saying council tax could triple, or is this just more scaremonging or fake news


----------



## Bisbow

The Queen had to, she had no choice but the look on her face said it all

Corbyn chose to because they are his friends and he wants to run this country. And run it straight into the ground if, heaven forbid, he wins

His "friends" will hold us to ransom

Mo Molam is a completely different kettle of fish


----------



## Colliebarmy

Bisbow said:


> I knew you would jump to his defence, he can do no wrong to you can he
> 
> He won't condemn terrorists, he skirts the question every time it is asked
> 
> Who invited terrorists to the House? He did,
> 
> Who shakes hands with IRA men, he does
> 
> Who voted against allowing known ISIS admires to enter the UK, he did
> 
> He will appease anyone who wants to bully him


He doesnt want Trident but his party does

He wouldnt fight an agressor like N.Korea or Iran, hes a pacifist in the extreme, a danger to our countries well being and security, he wouldnt stand up to Putin.

add to that hes Old labour (union puppets), god forbid he should win, the union limos would be up Downing street before Corbyn has unpacked


----------



## Colliebarmy

DT said:


> Can anyone shred any light please on this so called ed garden tax that is said to be hidden somewhere in labour manifesto. I can't find anything on it but I'm curious as to what this is all about, as they are saying council tax could triple, or is this just more scaremonging or fake news


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4553476/Labour-s-secret-plans-4-000-garden-tax.html


----------



## 1290423

Colliebarmy said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4553476/Labour-s-secret-plans-4-000-garden-tax.html


aware all of all that cb, ive been told it's also in the manifesto but well hidden or disguised maybe just curious as to how it actually reads


----------



## MiffyMoo

DT said:


> aware all of all that cb, ive been told it's also in the manifesto but well hidden or disguised maybe just curious as to how it actually reads


Here you go

http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/Images/manifesto-2017/Funding Britain's Future.PDF

"A Labour government will give local government £1.5 billion of extra funding for next year (2018/19) and initiate a review into reforming council tax and business rates and consider new options, such as a land value tax, to ensure local government has sustainable funding for the long term."


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well Corbyn is on the MI5 watch list for his IRA sympathising, comments that he made about Hamas and Hezbollah who he claims are his friends:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2016/may/04/cameron-corbyn-hamas-hezbollah-pmqs-video






How about he apologised for going to an IRA vigil to celebrate the IRA who killed people in there campaign of terror? How about apologising to the victims of this terror group for praising the IRA? No he skips passed the subject.










Do I trust him on national security? No.


----------



## Colliebarmy

How about he gets a new calculator?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40090520

"£2.7bn, then £4.8bn... with half a billion to reverse cuts to the Sure Start scheme. Does that sound about right?"

so £5.3 billion? wow.........


----------



## Colliebarmy

Labour couldnt run a whelk stall


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> The Queen shook hands with IRA terrorists too, does that make her a terrorist supporter? Sometimes we do have to converse with people we don't agree with to get them around the table and hammer out an agreement. Do you feel the same way about Mo Mowlem for example?
> 
> In 1997, Mowlam was once again re-elected as MP for Redcar with an increased majority of 21,667. She was made Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the first woman to have held the post. She was successful in helping to restore an IRA ceasefire and including Sinn Féin in multi-party talks about the future of Northern Ireland. In an attempt to persuade the Ulster loyalists to participate in the peace process, she paid an unprecedented and potentially dangerous visit to loyalist prisoners in the Maze prison, meeting convicted murderers face-to-face and unaccompanied.


Mo Mowlam had good reason to mix with all, I admired her greatly, pity we haven't politicians like her any more. Corbyn certainly isn't one


----------



## KittenKong

Anyone see Nicola Sturgeon's manifesto launch speech earlier. Brilliant.

If I was a few miles further North I know who I would have voted for.


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> What has who someone is friends with got to do with anything? Of course they are not an "official" Conservative Party group - that is hardly likely in a party that supports hunting. They are a group set up by Conservatives for Conservatives who oppose hunting. I would prefer to associate with someone who is friends with animal rights activists than with people who go hunting any day of the week.


Then why weren't they proud of their links and not cover them up?

They are just another pressure group, same old same old. Another way to make money out of animal lovers


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Anyone see Nicola Sturgeon's manifesto launch speech earlier. Brilliant.
> 
> If I was a few miles further North I know who I would have voted for.


Well they are welcoming anyone from England who wants to live in Scotland who opposes Brexit. If you are only a few miles from the border it would be an easy move


----------



## 1290423

Colliebarmy said:


> He doesnt want Trident but his party does
> 
> He wouldnt fight an agressor like N.Korea or Iran, hes a pacifist in the extreme, a danger to our countries well being and security, he wouldnt stand up to Putin.
> 
> add to that hes Old labour (union puppets), god forbid he should win, the union limos would be up Downing street before Corbyn has unpacked


Duh CB shame on you! Course he,d sort it out, I imagine the senario! The private phone rings, PM sir, we have a cataspory, there are 3000 suicide bombers located at prime locations to create the maximum damage around the uk, and Korea have a missile directed at us eta 1700hrs, but we have good news, every bomber we have in target and can take them out all at once on your word sir.
Reply from the pms hang on, that's the last resort, let's see if we can all sit down with a nice cuppa tea !


----------



## Dr Pepper

MiffyMoo said:


> Here you go
> 
> http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/Images/manifesto-2017/Funding Britain's Future.PDF
> 
> "A Labour government will give local government £1.5 billion of extra funding for next year (2018/19) and initiate a review into reforming council tax and business rates and consider new options, such as a land value tax, to ensure local government has sustainable funding for the long term."


I think they are saying it's going to be an average increase of 224%. So once he's raised corporation tax which will put a freeze on your pay rises at best or make you unemployed at worst, then he's going to do his best to personally bankrupt you.

Turkey's voting for Christmas......


----------



## Calvine

Dr Pepper said:


> It's a corker they've kept very quiet about. Probably because it'll raise the average council tax bill to £4,000. Who'd vote for that?


Just had a text from my son who maintains that they are denying it?


----------



## Elles

http://www.landvaluetax.org/what-is-lvt/


----------



## Dr Pepper

Calvine said:


> Just had a text from my son who maintains that they are denying it?


I have no doubt they will deny it!! They'll probably come up with another manifesto. Personally I think they'd be better off investing in a calculator and private intensive maths tuition.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> The Queen had to, she had no choice but the look on her face said it all
> 
> Corbyn chose to because they are his friends and he wants to run this country. And run it straight into the ground if, heaven forbid, he wins
> 
> His "friends" will hold us to ransom
> 
> Mo Molam is a completely different kettle of fish


Why is she a completely different kettle of fish? Because you liked her and you don't like Corbyn?



stockwellcat said:


> Well Corbyn is on the MI5 watch list for his IRA sympathising, comments that he made about Hamas and Hezbollah who he claims are his friends:
> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2016/may/04/cameron-corbyn-hamas-hezbollah-pmqs-video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How about he apologised for going to an IRA vigil to celebrate the IRA who killed people in there campaign of terror? How about apologising to the victims of this terror group for praising the IRA? No he skips passed the subject.
> 
> View attachment 312711
> 
> 
> Do I trust him on national security? No.


I thought he answered that point quite well on the debate last night. To be fair anyone who goes on demonstrations or protests is on a watch list. I've no doubt both me and my OH are on watch lists as previous animal rights activists.



Colliebarmy said:


> Labour couldnt run a whelk stall


Just as well they don't need to. JC and Tim Farron I believe are both vegetarians anyway so no need for whelks (or pigs heads for that matter).



rona said:


> Mo Mowlam had good reason to mix with all, I admired her greatly, pity we haven't politicians like her any more. Corbyn certainly isn't one


Yes I admired her too and also wish there were more like her in politics. I'm not so sure Corbyn isn't. You seem to have changed your views of him a great deal Rona. Back when the Labour leadership campaign was going on even though neither of us were Labour voters I seem to remember we both stuck up for him a great deal.



rona said:


> Then why weren't they proud of their links and not cover them up?
> 
> They are just another pressure group, same old same old. Another way to make money out of animal lovers


I'm not sure they do cover them up - this is on the front page of their website but why do they need to promote people they are friends with? Does the Conservative Party literature state everywhere "Friends and supporters of pro hunting organisations".

_ the second Co Founder is a Trustee of a leading animal welfare charity _


----------



## samuelsmiles

samuelsmiles said:


> Owen Jones, Jeremy Corbyn et al were utterly gushing over the success of socialist Venezuela a couple of years back. The country is now falling apart.
> 
> Former president Hugo Chavez's daughter, however, is now the richest woman in the country, worth billions of dollars.
> 
> (And now I will be lectured on the neoliberal conspiracies that are to blame.)


I have found this explanation from The Canary, although it doesn't clarify how Chavez's daughter ended up with about $5billion in her bank account.

As an aside, what country does have a good properly _socialist _government that we can look to as a system to aspire to?


----------



## 1290423

Wonder which camp my mate Stockwell is in now?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> http://www.landvaluetax.org/what-is-lvt/


I've just been reading up about it too -

http://www.labourland.org/what-is-land-value-tax/

You do all realise that we are well overdue for a revaluation in England anyway so council tax will go up considerably at some point whoever is in government.


----------



## rona

Calvine said:


> @Dr Pepper: saw that...they are calling it a ''garden tax''!





Dr Pepper said:


> It's a corker they've kept very quiet about. Probably because it'll raise the average council tax bill to £4,000. Who'd vote for that?


Going to levied against farmers too apparently. That's your food bill spiralling


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I've just been reading up about it too -
> 
> http://www.labourland.org/what-is-land-value-tax/
> 
> You do all realise that we are well overdue for a revaluation in England anyway so council tax will go up considerably at some point whoever is in government.


Not necessarily as the bandings also increase. If they don't bands A, B and C wouldn't apply to anyone.



rona said:


> Going to levied against farmers too apparently. That's your food bill spiralling


I think this is probably the final nail in Labour's coffin.


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes I admired her too and also wish there were more like her in politics. I'm not so sure Corbyn isn't. You seem to have changed your views of him a great deal Rona. Back when the Labour leadership campaign was going on even though neither of us were Labour voters I seem to remember we both stuck up for him a great deal.


I still admire him for the way he hasn't given in to pressure from all sides and stuck to his own principles as much as he can, I just don't like a lot of how he sees things. It seems very distorted to me.
Not saying that Mays vision isn't as bad, and I wouldn't back her either



rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm not sure they do cover them up - this is on the front page of their website but why do they need to promote people they are friends with? Does the Conservative Party literature state everywhere "Friends and supporters of pro hunting organisations".
> 
> _ the second Co Founder is a Trustee of a leading animal welfare charity _


They tried to cover up where their funding came from for 3 years


----------



## 1290423

May might be a liar and deceitful,
But think I'm gonna back the devil I know
Against the sly snake in the grass, just waiting to get into power, then he'll strike!


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Wonder which camp my mate Stockwell is in now?


None 
Didn't like Corbyn last night and didn't like May last night. Undecided.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> Not necessarily as the bandings also increase. If they don't bands A, B and C wouldn't apply to anyone.
> 
> .


My OH used to work for the Valuation Office (Chartered Surveyor/valuer). There has been talk of creating new higher bandings for years to make the difference between your average terrace house and larger detached houses in big plots greater. If the Conservatives are happy to raid your property value to pay for home care in your old age and to take heating allowance away from pensioners I doubt they will think twice about a reval and changing bandings early in a term especially if they have a big enough majority.



rona said:


> They tried to cover up where their funding came from for 3 years


Do you have some evidence of that please?



DT said:


> May might be a liar and deceitful,
> But think I'm gonna back the devil I know
> Against the sly snake in the grass, just waiting to get into power, then he'll strike!


DT he is not the only alternative to the Conservative Party who are the polar opposite to your Animal Welfare Party.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> May might be a liar and deceitful,
> But think I'm gonna back the devil I know
> Against the sly snake in the grass, just waiting to get into power, then he'll strike!


When it comes to Brexit she is right. The UK must be prepared to walk away if no deal is the only option but I believe that a deal is achievable just for the record.


----------



## Team_Trouble

I'm not changing how I am voting, and still agree with much of the labour manifesto and Jeremy Corbyn. But I am becoming worried about what I have read about the effects of raising corporation tax compared to reducing it. Surely the labour party are aware of how this effects the Economy? Can anyone explain why they have made the decision they have? 
Also I had not heard about the garden tax.


----------



## Elles

People will accept increases in taxes so far, especially if they think it doesn't apply to them, e.g. Corporation tax, but tax their garden, or their mum's garden, or their council house garden and they've suddenly lost interest in fox hunting and the NHS.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KatieandOliver said:


> I'm not changing how I am voting, and still agree with much of the labour manifesto and Jeremy Corbyn. But I am becoming worried about what I have read about the effects of raising corporation tax compared to reducing it. Surely the labour party are aware of how this effects the Economy? Can anyone explain why they have made the decision they have?
> Also I had not heard about the garden tax.


They have come to this conclusion because they believe in taxing the rich. Labour don't realise though that in doing this corporate businesses (who are on there target lists for increased taxes) would leave the UK putting people's jobs at risk and that is the truth. Then the knock on effect will be higher unemployment, higher personal taxes, lower living standards, damage to the economy etc. This has not been thought through by Labour.


----------



## Elles

Big corporations need to get a moral backbone, start paying their workers better and pay their taxes, not run off to tax havens. Unfortunately labour's intentions encourage them to do the opposite and hit the little and middle men instead. There's a reason call centres in India are popular and it's not because the workers are better at using the telephone.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> Big corporations need to get a moral backbone, start paying their workers better and pay their taxes, not run off to tax havens. Unfortunately labour's intentions encourage them to do the opposite and hit the little and middle men instead. There's a reason call centres in India are popular and it's not because the workers are better at using the telephone.


Why? They're not charities, they are run for profit. So if a country raises its tax base to such an extent that relocating makes fiscal sense, then they would be fools not to. It is not for them to beg to stay in a country to pay tax and provide employment, it is for the government to provide a suitable environment that encourages corporations to set up here to pay said taxes and employ their people.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> My OH used to work for the Valuation Office (Chartered Surveyor/valuer). There has been talk of creating new higher bandings for years to make the difference between your average terrace house and larger detached houses in big plots greater. If the Conservatives are happy to raid your property value to pay for home care in your old age and to take heating allowance away from pensioners I doubt they will think twice about a reval and changing bandings early in a term especially if they have a big enough majority.


I'm probably being selfish, but what about little old me with a very modest house on a large plot, the garden tax grossly unfair in my situation. Depending on how they would work out the value I could well be forced to sell up. Seems about up-to-date as the window tax in the 1700's.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> People will accept increases in taxes so far, especially if they think it doesn't apply to them, e.g. Corporation tax, but tax their garden, or their mum's garden, or their council house garden and they've suddenly lost interest in fox hunting and the NHS.


Not true! Well maybe half true,
From my own point of view I am almost certainly worse of under conservative, but sadly, I'm one of the few who did agree with the poll tax, just because some of us worked damd hard to pay for our houses and land doesn't mean that just the two of us are any more of a burden then say a family with umpteen generations living under one roof, we don't us any more street lighting, we don't produce more refuse, we don't wear the verges parking our oil leaking vehicles there, we dont use librarys nor any of the other council service so yep, any party that even sniffs at raising my council taxx you can bet your,last penny ill campaign against them


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> I'm probably being selfish, but what about little old me with a very modest house on a large plot, the garden tax grossly unfair in my situation. Depending on how they would work out the value I could well be forced to sell up. Seems about up-to-date as the window tax in the 1700's.


Totally in agreement here


----------



## Elles

Why? Generosity isn't a sin. Wealthy corporations shouldn't be paying minimum wage and letting the rest of us supplement their crap rates of pay and reluctance to pay tax. They're just as bad as someone who has ten kids so they can sponge off the state and never work.

What people should do world wide isn't what they do. So labour's policies of increasing taxes and pay encourages big business to move elsewhere. Which might work if there weren't so many people in the uk needing a job. Swings and roundabouts. It's never worked before though.


----------



## Elles

I agreed with the poll tax. People just saw that they would be paying more than their current rates. Council tax was worse. If conservatives had been clever, they would have hiked rates and water rates first, then offered a 'lower' poll tax.


----------



## 1290423

The only solution I can see regardless of who gets in is to totally blow our savings!
And that could be easily arranged.


----------



## Elles

My point is that labour haven't actually said they'll bring it in, just they'll look at it and many other methods of taxing us and maybe replacing council tax.

The papers have jumped on 'garden tax' because they're scared the conservatives might lose.

They know people will forget foxhunting and the NHS, if they think labour will tax their back yard. Sorry, but it's true. Tell people they'll pay more tax themselves, it's not just some imaginary corporation paying it for them and out come the placards.


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> Not true! Well maybe half true,
> From my own point of view I am almost certainly worse of under conservative, but sadly, I'm one of the few who did agree with the poll tax, just because some of us worked damd hard to pay for our houses and land doesn't mean that just the two of us are any more of a burden then say a family with umpteen generations living under one roof, we don't us any more street lighting, we don't produce more refuse, we don't wear the verges parking our oil leaking vehicles there, we dont use librarys nor any of the other council service so yep, any party that even sniffs at raising my council taxx you can bet your,last penny ill campaign against them


Have to agree, never could see the issue of paying per occupation rather than house value. It makes total sense and is fair and just.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Elles said:


> My point is that labour haven't actually said they'll bring it in, just they'll look at it and many other methods of taxing us and maybe replacing council tax.
> 
> The papers have jumped on 'garden tax' because they're scared the conservatives might lose.
> 
> They know people will forget foxhunting and the NHS, if they think labour will tax their back yard. Sorry, but it's true. Tell people they'll pay more tax themselves, it's not just some imaginary corporation paying it for them and out come the placards.


Yep, it's a obvious, immediate and quantifiable direct tax. Baldrick came up with better plans.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> Why? Generosity isn't a sin. Wealthy corporations shouldn't be paying minimum wage and letting the rest of us supplement their crap rates of pay and reluctance to pay tax. They're just as bad as someone who has ten kids so they can sponge off the state and never work.
> 
> What people should do world wide isn't what they do. So labour's policies of increasing taxes and pay encourages big business to move elsewhere. Which might work if there weren't so many people in the uk needing a job. Swings and roundabouts. It's never worked before though.


Hang on, how are we supplementing their crap rates of pay? If they advertise a job at minimum wage and someone takes it, they are providing a job. If that person wishes to get paid more, they can lobby to get a pay rise or look elsewhere.

If they didn't provide these jobs, then we would be supplementing a lot more than we are now, so try not to whine too much. And onto your point about them being as bad as someone who has ten children and sponges off the state; please, really please do explain exactly how a company that pays tax, VAT, NI and pension contributions and employs people is as bad?


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> The only solution I can see regardless of who gets in is to totally blow our savings!
> And that could be easily arranged.


Absolutely. Own if you must, but as little as possible. 
Buy gold, stash safely in deposit box in a bank.

One thing you can clearly see: Why Theresa May avoided debates..
She has to answers to give, she changes her mind from week to week, how anyone can believe she might keep her word?

One cam change or tone down their views in thirty years or so...I can understand Abbott on this. ..
But May could save us millions on electricity bills if employed as a windmill.

No deal is absolutely ridiculous failure of anyone diplomatic skills.

Cannot get a deal? Resign or admit Brexit is really bad for our economy. 
Then resign.

What has she achieved during her Tim in government?

Many other countries in EU managed much, much better to use tools in hand already to control EU immigration.

One of our members shared his experience in Holland. They are in EU.
Switzerland is not in EU but has a deal and very efficient immigration control, even with" free movement".
Please take students out of equation though.
If falling immigration if due to foreign students choosing to go elsewhere then our Universities are doomed. 
Reminder: They generate 4% of national revenue....


----------



## 1290423

cheekyscrip said:


> Absolutely. Own if you must, but as little as possible.
> Buy gold, stash safely in deposit box in a bank.
> 
> One thing you can clearly see: Why Theresa May avoided debates..
> She has to answers to give, she changes her mind from week to week, how anyone can believe she might keep her words?


 banks in the UK have been phasing these out cheeky, certainly in our area, I used to work at our bank and had my name down many years ago but since moving they are no longer taking new customers at least the few that still have them aren't. the most you can get now is space in their safe which means putting documentation into an envelope basically.


----------



## Bisbow

Does any one believe Corbyn will keep his word, I don't Where is he going to get the 10000 new police recruits from, where is he going to get all the new doctors and nurses from he has promised and teachers to reduce class sizes
Is he going to round up the homeless and train them all, be nice if he could get them off the street for their sake

There just are not enough people that want those jobs, but never mind, he promised it so we must believe him, after all, he is as good as his word
Isn't he, just like he is not friends with the IRA


----------



## Elles

A quickish reply @MiffyMoo cos I have to go out. 

Because my taxes are supplementing them. When a company like Amazon pays someone minimum wage and exploits them with ridiculous conditions and hides away in somewhere like Ireland to avoid paying tax on the business they profit from in England, they are treating people poorly and being just as exploitive as someone who thinks it's fine for the state to take care of them, just because it will. We are the state. So yes, imo they are just as bad.

We wouldn't pay minimum wage, because I think it's being exploitive and relying on other taxpayers to supplement our meanness, yet we can afford it far less than Amazon or eBay. If labour get in and increase corporation tax, it's likely it won't stop there and it's people like us who will pay for it. I don't buy anything through Amazon, they exploit sellers as well as their workers imo.

However the conservatives lowering taxes isn't enough reason for me to want to vote for them either.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Bisbow said:


> Does any one believe Corbyn will keep his word, I don't Where is he going to get the 10000 new police recruits from, where is he going to get all the new doctors and nurses from he has promised and teachers to reduce class sizes
> Is he going to round up the homeless and train them all, be nice if he could get them off the street for their sake
> 
> There just are not enough people that want those jobs, but never mind, he promised it so we must believe him, after all, he is as good as his word
> Isn't he, just like he is not friends with the IRA


Abbott said that they would be community officers, so not actually police at all


----------



## Dr Pepper

cheekyscrip said:


> One thing you can clearly see: Why Theresa May avoided debates..
> She has to answers to give, she changes her mind from week to week, how anyone can believe she might keep her word?
> 
> .


There's the conundrum, what's worse when one of them becomes PM, Mrs May not keeping her word or Mr Corbyn keeping his?


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> A quickish reply @MiffyMoo cos I have to go out.
> 
> Because my taxes are supplementing them. When a company like Amazon pays someone minimum wage and exploits them with ridiculous conditions and hides away in somewhere like Ireland to avoid paying tax on the business they profit from in England, they are treating people poorly and being just as exploitive as someone who thinks it's fine for the state to take care of them, just because it will. We are the state. So yes, imo they are just as bad.
> 
> We wouldn't pay minimum wage, because I think it's being exploitive and relying on other taxpayers to supplement our meanness, yet we can afford it far less than Amazon or eBay. If labour get in and increase corporation tax, it's likely it won't stop there and it's people like us who will pay for it. I don't buy anything through Amazon, they exploit sellers as well as their workers imo.
> 
> However the conservatives lowering taxes isn't enough reason for me to want to vote for them either.


What ridiculous conditions are these? It isn't up to Amazon etc. to supplement the welfare state - if the government has put the minimum wage at x, then they are well within their rights to pay that much. If it is a skilled job, and nobody with those skills is willing to take it at minimum wage, then they will increase the wage.

Your issue is with the government, who have created loopholes, not with the corporations, who are running their businesses far more efficiently than the country is being run.


----------



## Elles

In that case it's the government's fault that people have 10 kids and claim from the state too. If the government will give them x money and a house the more children they have, you can't blame them for taking advantage of it.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> In that case it's the government's fault that people have 10 kids and claim from the state too. If the government will give them x money and a house the more children they have, you can't blame them for taking advantage of it.


That I absolutely agree with you on


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> In that case it's the government's fault that people have 10 kids and claim from the state too. If the government will give them x money and a house the more children they have, you can't blame them for taking advantage of it.


Awh! But you withdraw your money and hide it under the bed, you get investigated for fraud! You have loads of children to get more money plus a free house, and they just hand it to you on a plate, but thats not fraud cant see the difference Myself


----------



## 1290423

Awh! Got it the penny dropped there's legal fraud and there's illegal fraud


----------



## Guest

Bisbow said:


> I
> 
> Corbin is a much bigger danger to the UK than any one else at the moment, a man who holds hand with terrorists and invites them to tea is very, very dangerous.


Yet that is the only way peace can be made, Wars are terrible and terrible things are done. Still, if you want peace, the only way to reach it, is to start to talk. That was the way Ahtisaari (with others) managed to get end e.g. fighting/killingsin Aceh. Maybe that is easier for a Finn to understand, as we had a civil war, tens of thousands were killed. But in the end, we had to start talking to one another, as that was the only way to a peaceful future. And looks like that the same strategy worked for Nothern Ireland too. Pity it didn´t start sooner, as some lives could have been saved.



stockwellcat said:


> They have come to this conclusion because they believe in taxing the rich. Labour don't realise though that in doing this corporate businesses (who are on there target lists for increased taxes) would leave the UK putting people's jobs at risk and that is the truth. Then the knock on effect will be higher unemployment, higher personal taxes, lower living standards, damage to the economy etc. This has not been thought through by Labour.


Isn´t Brexit doing that, not raising corporate tax? Losing the benefits EU provided will harm the corporations and, above all, small business. See yourself, Britain´s tax rate is much lower e.g. than German one, and they do pretty well. Compare these statistics and you´ll see that you could easily raise the corporate tax, and still do well. The risk is Brexit, especially without a deal, financially and politically. Or are you saying you can´t expect British corporations to be able to compete with other companies? You only have the language as your asset and the vast global experience and a fairly big inner market in Britain alone. Climate is moderate too. Don´t buy the bull you are getting from corporations, compare just these statistics,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rates_in_Europe

http://statisticstimes.com/economy/european-countries-by-gdp-per-capita.php


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle...er-two-in-itunes-download-chart-a3551926.html

Very nearly got to number one


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

I thought the saying was "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned" but listen to George Osborne go for the Tory election campaign in his editorial in the Evening Standard

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/george-osborne-apos-evening-standard-150400830.html

The Evening Standard derided the campaign's apparent attempt to launch a "personality cult" around the Prime Minister and attacked her handling of Brexit as marred by "high-handed British arrogance".

Mr Osborne took over at _The Standard_ after being sacked from his job by Ms May after she won the keys to No10 in the last year's Tory leadership contest.

The paper's editorial said: "The Conservative campaign has meandered from an abortive attempt to launch a personality cult around Mrs May [sic] to the self-inflicted wound of the most disastrous manifesto in recent history and, after the atrocity in Manchester, shrill attacks on Mr Corbyn's appeasement of terrorism."

It went on: "The result can be summed up by what we imagine to be the conversation around the breakfast table in Downing Street:* 'Honey, I shrunk the poll lead'*."


----------



## kimthecat

big fuss about corbyn not knowing how much 30 hours free child care will cost . A lot I bet .
how about offering free dementia care for those looking after ageing parents .


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Doorstep dogs bare their teeth*
Posted at18:18

Thinkstock

One canvasser feels the sharp end of the election campaign as the clock ticks down towards polling day.

Sorry can't get the photo to load - one little JRT not happy with canvassers at his door.


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> *Doorstep dogs bare their teeth*
> Posted at18:18
> 
> Thinkstock
> 
> One canvasser feels the sharp end of the election campaign as the clock ticks down towards polling day.


It's just coming up as error


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MiffyMoo said:


> It's just coming up as error


Sorry it won't load the photo


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Sorry it won't load the photo


Boo


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MiffyMoo said:


> Boo


Its on this life feed a couple of posts down

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-2017-40091449


----------



## kimthecat




----------



## Elles

So which is it? Community support officers, or Community police officers? One is a real policeman (woman, person, officer) the other isn't. 

I haven't seen anywhere that says labour will employ 10,000 more community support officers, just police. So where is the rumour about cpso's coming from? When they give their figures, they usually say that the conservatives have reduced police numbers (real police, not pretend ones) by 20k, but that labour will increase police numbers by 10k.

I have seen no mention of cpso anywhere other than here.


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> In that case it's the government's fault that people have 10 kids and claim from the state too. If the government will give them x money and a house the more children they have, you can't blame them for taking advantage of it.


I think child tax credit has been capped at 2 kids? And if the benefit cap applies to you ( not disabled and don't work) it would be hard.to have such a family.


----------



## rona

Odin_cat said:


> I think child tax credit has been capped at 2 kids? And if the benefit cap applies to you ( not disabled and don't work) it would be hard.to have such a family.


Labour will reverse that and we will start supporting them again ....................


----------



## Odin_cat

rona said:


> Labour will reverse that and we will start supporting them again ....................


Maybe, I think 10 kids is very rare but I guess a reasonable number of people have 4.

My main problem with the policy is that life is unpredictable. You could have 4 kids thinking that you'd be able to support them but circumstances change; what if you lose you job or your relationship breaks down? The welfare state should be there to support you. It's such a shame that a few abuse it and the press blow this out of proportion.


----------



## Colliebarmy

Labour is going to (as my old mum used to say) work wonders and shit miracles

except they never have


----------



## Colliebarmy

kimthecat said:


> big fuss about corbyn not knowing how much 30 hours free child care will cost . A lot I bet .
> how about offering free dementia care for those looking after ageing parents .


Ask him, he will promise the sun and moon and stars to get your vote


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> So which is it? Community support officers, or Community police officers? One is a real policeman (woman, person, officer) the other isn't.
> 
> I haven't seen anywhere that says labour will employ 10,000 more community support officers, just police. So where is the rumour about cpso's coming from? When they give their figures, they usually say that the conservatives have reduced police numbers (real police, not pretend ones) by 20k, but that labour will increase police numbers by 10k.
> 
> I have seen no mention of cpso anywhere other than here.


That's what Abbott said on Marr, as she was saying that they wouldn't cost anything


----------



## stockwellcat.

Labours corporation tax seems to pay for:

Reversing cuts to the police and paying for 10,000 new police officers.
Saving the NHS even though they couldn't save it last time they where in power.
More MI5 staff.
More border security guards.
Free schooling.
Free University places.
30 hours child care per week per person with children old enough for this.
Reversing Conservatives cuts.
Increasing Unpaid Carers Benefits.
Stopping Universal Credit Sanctions.
Stopping cuts for those fit enough to work on ESA Work component not the Support component.
Protecting the triple lock on pensions.
Stopping the UK leaving the single market after Brexit because he thinks he knows he is able to do it.
Raising the national living wage to £10 per hour.
If you earn below £80,000 per year you won't have to pay tax.
These corporation tax increases must be massive.

You think the Conservatives U-turn alot I can see Labour u-turning on all the above pledges.

God help us if they win the elections, the UK will be bankrupt after Brexit as Corbyn also agreed to pay the Brexit bill at an amount they feel is suitable. Hard times ahead with Corbyn running the country.


----------



## stockwellcat.

But all is not rosey as the Labour Party give with one hand and in the other snatch it right back:

*Tax on homes 'to treble under Labour plans for Land Value Tax'*

Council tax bills would treble for middle-class homeowners under Labour plans to introduce a so-called "garden tax" on the value of land, it was claimed last night.

The Labour manifesto contains plans for a Land Value Tax to replace council tax, which would hit people with gardens the hardest.

The manifesto contains no detail of how the tax would be applied, but the Conservatives claim tax on the the average family home would go up from £1,185 to £3,837 per year, an increase of £2,651 or 224 per cent.

Opponents of the tax say it would cause house prices to plummet, putting homeowners at risk of negative equity and forcing families to sell off their gardens to developers to lessen their tax burden.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/29/tax-homes-treble-labour-plans-land-value-tax/amp/

If you have a garden under a Labour Government expect to sell it to a developer.


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> But all is not rosey as the Labour Party give with one hand and in the other snatch it right back:
> 
> *Tax on homes 'to treble under Labour plans for Land Value Tax'*
> 
> Council tax bills would treble for middle-class homeowners under Labour plans to introduce a so-called "garden tax" on the value of land, it was claimed last night.
> 
> The Labour manifesto contains plans for a Land Value Tax to replace council tax, which would hit people with gardens the hardest.
> 
> The manifesto contains no detail of how the tax would be applied, but the Conservatives claim tax on the the average family home would go up from £1,185 to £3,837 per year, an increase of £2,651 or 224 per cent.
> 
> Opponents of the tax say it would cause house prices to plummet, putting homeowners at risk of negative equity and forcing families to sell off their gardens to developers to lessen their tax burden.
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/29/tax-homes-treble-labour-plans-land-value-tax/amp/
> 
> If you have a garden under a Labour Government expect to sell it to a developer.


It's 3% of 55% of property value. A friend just worked out that his new council tax will be £14k a year!


----------



## stockwellcat.

MiffyMoo said:


> It's 3% of 55% of property value. A friend just worked out that his new council tax will be £14k a year!


That's alot


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> That's alot


That's peanuts, if they take your land as planning accepted (or some company applies and get permission) mine will be £60,000 per annum because it's not classed as agricultural which will obviously be valued lower per acre. More details are needed rather this is wishy washy labour nonsense.


----------



## 1290423

MiffyMoo said:


> It's 3% of 55% of property value. A friend just worked out that his new council tax will be £14k a year!


Bliddy hell! I pay almost £2300 council now which is around a quarter of other halfs pension, with them sort of rises they'll need the fooking look, they can go swivel for my vote.


----------



## Elles

This is proper scaremongering by the tories. No-one could afford those sort of prices, even the politicians and they aren't going to bankrupt themselves. A load of tosh.


----------



## 1290423

Im goin let gipsies use mine if labour get in


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> This is proper scaremongering by the tories. No-one could afford those sort of prices, even the politicians and they aren't going to bankrupt themselves. A load of tosh.


No it's in Labours Manifesto and if you look the link was to a newspaper not the Tories.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> No it's in Labours Manifesto and if you look the link was a newspaper.


More holes then a colander in the labour manifesto costing.


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> More holes then a colander in the labour manifesto costing.


Have to disagree, it's just one feckin' great hole everybody's and every businesses money is being thrown into.


----------



## MiffyMoo

DT said:


> Bliddy hell! I pay almost £2300 council now which is around a quarter of other halfs pension, with them sort of rises they'll need the fooking look, they can go swivel for my vote.


I currently pay £1860. Am trying to find comparable house prices to see how much mine is worth, as my landlord bought it brand new 15 years ago


----------



## Elles

It said in an add-on that they might be looking at alternatives to the council tax and included this in the list of things they might be looking at. They can't tax money we don't have. Poll tax practically led to riots, no way would this get through at the kind of levels boris and the conservatives are suggesting. It's twaddle.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> It said in an add-on that they might be looking at alternatives to the council tax and included this in the list of things they might be looking at. * They can't tax money we don't have. Poll tax practically led to riots, no way would this get through at the kind of levels boris and the conservatives are suggesting. It's twaddle*.


Oh yes they can they would be the Government if they won the GE. Politicians wouldn't have to afford the tax they'll claim it back on expenses at the tax payers expense. The only twaddle I heard was last night in the debate was from Corbyn.


----------



## MiffyMoo

DT said:


> Bliddy hell! I pay almost £2300 council now which is around a quarter of other halfs pension, with them sort of rises they'll need the fooking look, they can go swivel for my vote.


Eek, it would go up to £9,389!!!


----------



## 1290423

MiffyMoo said:


> I currently pay £1860. Am trying to find comparable house prices to see how much mine is worth, as my landlord bought it brand new 15 years ago


Problem with us its not so much the value, its the area, nottinghamshire was amongst the highest three rateble areas, along with dorset I believe and somewhere else, then we have extra for the local council, then the village. Grrrrh


----------



## Elles

Labour are denying it. Riots tend to change the minds of uk governments. They'd not last 5 minutes if they tried to tax granny's garden at 14k a year.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Elles said:


> It said in an add-on that they might be looking at alternatives to the council tax and included this in the list of things they might be looking at. They can't tax money we don't have. Poll tax practically led to riots, no way would this get through at the kind of levels boris and the conservatives are suggesting. It's twaddle.


Have to agree to some extent. There would have to be caps on the amounts payable.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> Labour are denying it. Riots tend to change the minds of uk governments. They'd not last 5 minutes if they tried to tax granny's garden at 14k a year.


Where are the links to Labour denying it we only have your word.


----------



## Elles

Read the link, at the end.


----------



## MiffyMoo

DT said:


> Problem with us its not so much the value, its the area, nottinghamshire was amongst the highest three rateble areas, along with dorset I believe and somewhere else, then we have extra for the local council, then the village. Grrrrh


I live in the same village as all the Chelsea footballers, which makes it hugely expensive. I have possibly the smallest house in the village, but because it's such a desirable area, it's way more expensive than if we were two towns over


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> Labour are denying it. Riots tend to change the minds of uk governments. They'd not last 5 minutes if they tried to tax granny's garden at 14k a year.


But many grannies wont be affected, as many get their pensions,topped up or on a,low,income. It will be us suckers who have worked and saved who will suffer. Like with the cons and the fuel grant,


----------



## stockwellcat.

Still undecided by the way.

One of them is going to have to do something to make an impression in the final week of campaigning to win my vote.

The problems I have is I want to make my vote count and not be wasted.


----------



## stockwellcat.

I had to Google Land Tax and wow how many papers, magazines etc are publishing it here is another one:
http://www.hortweek.com/labour-mani...erns-raised/parks-and-gardens/article/1434977

The only reason they give for Labour not implementing it is they won't win. I have very little confidence in this assumption as they could win, what then?



> Hayloft Plants' Derek Jarman said it is unlikely Labour will get to implement the tax as they are unlikely to win the election.


----------



## Elles

I don't like labour, I've never voted Labour, I'm not a socialist. Chicken Licken was right, the sky is falling. But no party has said they're going to charge those kind of ridiculous amounts, whatever the excuse, or reasoning behind it. It would be political suicide. It's a con, so we all go scurrying back to May. I don't believe it. They might charge 98% tax on the highest earners, they will not charge me 14k a year to live in my house. I'd go to prison first. It's total and utter bull. And that's my final word on it (probably).


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Still undecided by the way.
> 
> One of them is going to have to do something to make an impression in the final week of campaigning to win my vote.
> 
> The problems I have is I want to make my vote count and not be wasted.


No vote is wasted even if you vote for a party with no chance let's see other parties no you don't like what they have to offer


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Oh yes they can they would be the Government if they won the GE. Politicians wouldn't have to afford the tax they'll claim it back on expenses at the tax payers expense. The only twaddle I heard was last night in the debate was from Corbyn.


Not necessarily they might win with a small majority in which case it would be almost impossible for them to get a policy like that through if and its a big if the press and the tory's interpretation of it can be relied upon or more likely still if the Conservatives don't win there will be a coalition again but this time probably Lab/Lib. I'm surprised you say he spoke twaddle last night, my OH who has been fiercely anti Labour for years and years conceded that he spoke a lot of sense.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> I had to Google Land Tax and wow how many papers, magazines etc are publishing it here is another one:
> http://www.hortweek.com/labour-mani...erns-raised/parks-and-gardens/article/1434977
> 
> The only reason they give for Labour not implementing it is they won't win. I have very little confidence in this assumption as they could win, what then?


Did he also write about the Conservatives stealing away the winter fuel allowance from pensioners?


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Still undecided by the way.
> 
> One of them is going to have to do something to make an impression in the final week of campaigning to win my vote.
> 
> The problems I have is I want to make my vote count and not be wasted.


I don't think it's a matter of who impresses most in the final week, rather who mucks up the least. At the moment if I were Mrs May I'd be instructing my party to be quiet for now (I'd also get a new hair-do, but that's just a matter of personal taste).


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not necessarily they might win with a small majority in which case it would be almost impossible for them to get a policy like that through if and its a big if the press and the tory's interpretation of it can be relied upon or more likely still if the Conservatives don't win there will be a coalition again but this time probably Lab/Lib. I'm surprised you say he spoke twaddle last night, my OH who has been fiercely anti Labour for years and years conceded that he spoke a lot of sense.


Did you OH agree with the scenario given that Corbyn had 20 minutes to make a decision to engage a drone strike on a terrorist who is about to carry out a terrorist attack. Corbyn said he'd have to look at the facts but he wouldn't have time to do this in reality as he wouldn't have time to do this.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Did you OH agree with the scenario given that Corbyn had 20 minutes to make a decision to engage a drone strike on a terrorist who is about to carry out a terrorist attack. Corbyn said he'd have to look at the facts but he wouldn't have time to do this in reality as he wouldn't have time to do this.


So you think the PM should authorise strikes without knowing the facts first?


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Did he also write about the Conservatives stealing away the winter fuel allowance from pensioners?


Haven't got a clue but they are aren't they? May was challenged on it last night and failed to answer the question acceptably in my opinion.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> I don't think it's a matter of who impresses most in the final week, rather who mucks up the least. At the moment if I were Mrs May I'd be instructing my party to be quiet for now (I'd also get a new hair-do, but that's just a matter of personal taste).


What has her hair style got to do with anything?


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So you think the PM should authorise strikes without knowing the facts first?


They would have had the facts given to them before this. He would have already been breif by MI5 and counter terrorism. They wouldn't just carry out a drone strike. Corbyn was staging a delay tactic. But didn't Cameron launch an drone strike on a UK citizen fighting for ISIS because he was deemed a threat and he didn't consult parliament or go through the normal protocols as it had to be done straight away. It was deemed as an act of self defence.


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> Did you OH agree with the scenario given that Corbyn had 20 minutes to make a decision to engage a drone strike on a terrorist who is about to carry out a terrorist attack. Corbyn said he'd have to look at the facts but he wouldn't have time to do this in reality as he wouldn't have time to do this.


That was a bloody stupid question. They don't have drones flying about willy nilly just in case they happen upon a terror cell and recognise and assess who they all are. There would be weeks, if not months of prior planning, not 20 minutes. If a pm had no prior intel and 20 minutes to decide, best he says no, or more likely it'll be a mistake and he'd accidentally take out American undercover agents. Or am I thinking of more likely scenario, trump and uk undercover.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> They would have had the facts given to them before this. He would have already been breif by MI5 and counter terrorism. They wouldn't just carry out a drone strike. Corbyn was staging a delay tactic. But didn't Cameron launch an airstrike on a UK citizen fighting for ISIS because he was deemed a threat and he didn't consult parliament or go through the normal protocols as it had to be done straight away.


Really I'm surprised you get drawn in to all these possible scenarios, in reality as PM he would have the facts he already knows and then have to make a decision but say for instance he wants to know first whether there are innocent members of the public such as young children also likely to be affected by the strike, then I am glad he would ask for more facts and not just give a carte blanche to blow people up. Those methods really haven't got us very far have they?


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> What has her hair style got to do with anything?


Absolutely nothing, just thought I'd throw it in there whilst putting myself in her position! I'm probably just a tad jealous because she has more hair than I do


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> That was a bloody stupid question. They don't have drones flying about willy nilly just in case they happen upon a terror cell and recognise and assess who they all are. There would be weeks, if not months of prior planning, not 20 minutes. If a pm had no prior intel and 20 minutes to decide, best he says no, or more likely it'll be a mistake and he'd accidentally take out American undercover agents. Or am I thinking of more likely scenario, trump and uk undercover.


I think they do actually, well in areas where they suspect.


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> Absolutely nothing, just thought I'd throw it in there whilst putting myself in her position! I'm probably just a tad jealous because she had more hair than I do


Think shes in dire need of botox myself, poor girls not wearing to well!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well perhaps those that sympathise with Corbyn should read the comments at the bottom of this news article and they are Labour supporters but cannot stand Corbyn:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/810759/Labour-Jeremy-Corbyn-IRA-election-debate-terrorism

I know everyone's favourite newspaper, but I tend to read the comments people are making and not the article.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Well perhaps those that sympathise with Corbyn should read the comments at the bottom of this news article and they are Labour supporters but cannot stand Corbyn:
> 
> http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/810759/Labour-Jeremy-Corbyn-IRA-election-debate-terrorism
> 
> I know everyone's favourite newspaper, but I tend to read the comments people are making and not the article.


Wales is a prime example!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Well perhaps those that sympathise with Corbyn should read the comments at the bottom of this news article and they are Labour supporters but cannot stand Corbyn:
> 
> http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/810759/Labour-Jeremy-Corbyn-IRA-election-debate-terrorism
> 
> I know everyone's favourite newspaper, but I tend to read the comments people are making and not the article.


Why would we want to read a lot of ignorant to--ers letting rip? The article pretty fairly reflects what he said and I didn't hear or read anything there that was reprehensible. Like he said how do you bring about dialogue and a peace process if you won't meet and talk? If politicians hadn't been prepared to go into prison and meet these people and talk to them we would still not have peace in Ireland.


----------



## 1290423

And scotland


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> I think they do actually, well in areas where they suspect.


Exactly, it's not willy nilly is it. I would expect our intel to give themselves and a pm more than 20 minutes, if there's a question over it. Otherwise they'd be out with the drone and the attack already planned. They try to make it sound like certainty is a bad thing.

I don't sympathise with Corbyn, I don't want to be taken for a fool by naysayers making up fairytales.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Why would we want to read a lot of ignorant to--ers letting rip? The article pretty fairly reflects what he said and I didn't hear or read anything there that was reprehensible. Like he said how do you bring about dialogue and a peace process if you won't meet and talk? If politicians hadn't been prepared to go into prison and meet these people and talk to them we would still not have peace in Ireland.


Do you really think ISIS want to talk?


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> And scotland


Isn't krankies slogan the same as it was last time they had an election "Stronger For Scotland"?



> Stronger for Scotland Campaign - Vote SNP General Election 2015


----------



## Elles

I don't think he wants to talk to ISIS he wants to promote government in areas ISIS are taking hold and talk to those who want to.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> Exactly, it's not willy nilly is it. I would expect our intel to give themselves and a pm more than 20 minutes, if there's a question over it. Otherwise they'd be out with the drone and the attack already planned. They try to make it sound like certainty is a bad thing.
> 
> I don't sympathise with Corbyn, I don't want to be taken for a fool by naysayers making up fairytales.


Ok metaphorically speaking they are in an area where they suspect that Terroists are at t large they stumble on a plot call Corbyn for the ok what's he going to do suggest a tea party?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> I don't think he wants to talk to ISIS he wants to promote government in areas ISIS are taking hold and talk to those who want to.


But he talks to and makes friends with terrorists why not ISIS?


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> So after surgical speaking they are in an area where they suspect that Terry so at large they stumble on a plot uncle Corbyn for the ok what's going to do suggest a tea party?


No idea, he didn't answer the question and I'm not sure terrorists drink tea.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> No idea, he didn't answer the question and I'm not sure terrorists drink tea.


Lol at the quote I'm on my phone and speaking into it I'm obviously not speaking very clearly


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> But he talks and makes friends with terrorists.


 Irish terrorists. Lots of people spoke with Irish terrorists. He didn't make bombs for them.


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> Lol at the quote I'm on my phone and speaking into it I'm obviously not speaking very clearly


I just assumed you were drunk and it was like a cryptic crossword clue. :Hilarious


----------



## 1290423

Wonder if he's worked out the cost of unnmmmeans-tested childcare yet


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> Irish terrorists.





DT said:


> Wonder if he's worked out the cost of unnmmmeans-tested childcare yet


Did he manage to switch his laptop on?


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> I just assumed you were drunk and it was like a cryptic crossword clue. :Hilarious


Good translation skills there elles


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Do you really think ISIS want to talk?


Stop changing the goal posts. We were talking about Ireland and the article you linked is about the IRA. Corbyn already condemned ISIS terrorist attacks and he already said he knew it wasn't possible to negotiate with them at the present time. However if you had asked people in the 1970's, 80's and early 90's whether they thought it was possible to negotiate with the IRA I'm sure the majority would have said no. Things change, loyalties change, needs change, and eventually someone will have to sit down and hammer out some sort of agreement.


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> Wonder if he's worked out the cost of unnmmmeans-tested childcare yet


Just a few billion. A mere drop in the ocean of money he's spending.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Stop changing the goal posts. We were talking about Ireland and the article you linked is about the IRA. Corbyn already condemned ISIS terrorist attacks and he already said he knew it wasn't possible to negotiate with them at the present time. However if you had asked people in the 1970's, 80's and early 90's whether they thought it was possible to negotiate with the IRA I'm sure the majority would have said no. Things change, loyalties change, needs change, and eventually someone will have to sit down and hammer out some sort of agreement.


But he never condemned the IRA did he?


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> I just assumed you were drunk and it was like a cryptic crossword clue. :Hilarious


Wish I were, been almost t total since joined the fat club in january, sadly im obsessed


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> Just a few billion. A mere drop in the ocean of money he's spending.


5.8 billion, I worked it out on my fingers


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> But he never condemned the IRA did he?


Sighs.

https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/pi...ely-wrong-because-it-killed-civilians-corbyn/

Jeremy Corbyn has condemned the IRA's bombing campaign after coming under severe pressure to single out the terror group for criticism.

The Labour leader said the IRA's bombing campaign was "completely wrong" because it killed civilians.

But asked about his reaction when Downing Street and then-prime minister Sir John Major were targeted in an IRA mortar attack in 1991, Mr Corbyn told reporters in Hackney Marshes, east London: "Obviously appalled. I was in Parliament at the time, I heard the attack go off.

"And the bombing campaign was completely wrong because it was taking civilian lives and there had to be a process that dealt with the basis of it in Northern Ireland.

On Friday, the BBC's Andrew Neil pointed out to him in an interview that the IRA had killed 1,800 people.

Mr Corbyn replied: "Yes. And people were killed by Loyalist bombs as well. All deaths are appalling, all deaths are wrong. There isn't a military solution to a conflict between traditions and communities. There has to be a better way and a better process of doing it."

*and*

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-violence-1994-general-election-a7761801.html

Jeremy Corbyn signed a motion in the House of Commons that condemned IRA violence and "extended its sympathy to the relatives of those murdered".

The Leader of the Labour Party supported an early day motion put forward by Labour MP David Winnick to commemorate the victims of the IRA bombing in Birmingham in 1974.

The motion was tabled on the 20 year anniversary of the attack that killed 21 people and injured 182 others and was signed by Mr Corbyn in November 1994.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Sighs.
> 
> https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/pi...ely-wrong-because-it-killed-civilians-corbyn/
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn has condemned the IRA's bombing campaign after coming under severe pressure to single out the terror group for criticism.
> 
> The Labour leader said the IRA's bombing campaign was "completely wrong" because it killed civilians.
> 
> But asked about his reaction when Downing Street and then-prime minister Sir John Major were targeted in an IRA mortar attack in 1991, Mr Corbyn told reporters in Hackney Marshes, east London: "Obviously appalled. I was in Parliament at the time, I heard the attack go off.
> 
> "And the bombing campaign was completely wrong because it was taking civilian lives and there had to be a process that dealt with the basis of it in Northern Ireland.
> 
> On Friday, the BBC's Andrew Neil pointed out to him in an interview that the IRA had killed 1,800 people.
> 
> Mr Corbyn replied: "Yes. And people were killed by Loyalist bombs as well. All deaths are appalling, all deaths are wrong. There isn't a military solution to a conflict between traditions and communities. There has to be a better way and a better process of doing it."
> 
> *and*
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-violence-1994-general-election-a7761801.html
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn signed a motion in the House of Commons that condemned IRA violence and "extended its sympathy to the relatives of those murdered".
> 
> The Leader of the Labour Party supported an early day motion put forward by Labour MP David Winnick to commemorate the victims of the IRA bombing in Birmingham in 1974.
> 
> The motion was tabled on the 20 year anniversary of the attack that killed 21 people and injured 182 others and was signed by Mr Corbyn in November 1994.


Well written diane, opps, sorry, I mean rottie, xxxxx sorry , just want to say I'm at the stage when I Have Nothing sensible left to say so if I don't act light hearted sadly I will cry no offence to anyone, maybe I should just button it xx


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Last Friday, the BBC's Andrew Neil frustrated a majority of viewer and even the press by spending the bulk of his half-hour interview with Jeremy Corbyn on the topic of the IRA. Others have done similarly and it's to be expected that Jeremy Paxman will do more than touch on the topic tonight.








Corbyn speaking to Andrew Neil last Friday

One of the main questions that keeps being used is whether Corbyn will condemn IRA violence specifically. Corbyn will answer, because it's true, that he condemns all bombings.

But he has, in fact, condemned IRA violence specifically. Parliament even has it on record.

In 1994, Labour MP David Winnick proposed an EDM (Early Day Motion) in the Commons commemorating the victims of the IRA bombing in Birmingham 20 years earlier.

The wording of the motion is unequivocal:

That this House notes that it is 20 years since the mass killings…


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Well written diane, opps, sorry, I mean rottie, xxxxx soory, just want to say im at the stage when I Have Nothing sensible left to say so if I don't at light hearted sad Lee I will cry no offence to anyone


I haven't got a clue what you are talking out. I would suggest taking more water with it.


----------



## 1290423

He also said they shouldn't have killed bin Laden
Duh! Any excuse for a tea party


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Sighs.
> 
> https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/pi...ely-wrong-because-it-killed-civilians-corbyn/
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn has condemned the IRA's bombing campaign after coming under severe pressure to single out the terror group for criticism.
> 
> The Labour leader said the IRA's bombing campaign was "completely wrong" because it killed civilians.
> 
> But asked about his reaction when Downing Street and then-prime minister Sir John Major were targeted in an IRA mortar attack in 1991, Mr Corbyn told reporters in Hackney Marshes, east London: "Obviously appalled. I was in Parliament at the time, I heard the attack go off.
> 
> "And the bombing campaign was completely wrong because it was taking civilian lives and there had to be a process that dealt with the basis of it in Northern Ireland.
> 
> On Friday, the BBC's Andrew Neil pointed out to him in an interview that the IRA had killed 1,800 people.
> 
> Mr Corbyn replied: "Yes. And people were killed by Loyalist bombs as well. All deaths are appalling, all deaths are wrong. There isn't a military solution to a conflict between traditions and communities. There has to be a better way and a better process of doing it."
> 
> *and*
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-violence-1994-general-election-a7761801.html
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn signed a motion in the House of Commons that condemned IRA violence and "extended its sympathy to the relatives of those murdered".
> 
> The Leader of the Labour Party supported an early day motion put forward by Labour MP David Winnick to commemorate the victims of the IRA bombing in Birmingham in 1974.
> 
> The motion was tabled on the 20 year anniversary of the attack that killed 21 people and injured 182 others and was signed by Mr Corbyn in November 1994.


Well at last he came clean and admitted it but point blankly refused to admit it last night. Still don't trust him and cannot imagine Diane Abbott in charge of National Security.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I haven't got a clue what you are talking out. I would suggest taking more water with it.


I'm currently aiming at 4 litres a day do you want me to be waterlogged too xxx


----------



## 1290423

DT said:


> He also said they shouldn't have killed bin Laden
> Duh! Any excuse for a tea party


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> But also said they shouldn't have killed bin Laden
> Duh! Any excuse for a tea party


I believe his views are that they should have attempted to arrest him and put him on trial - perhaps in the hope of finding out more information from him?

This is what he said back in 2011

In a clip from the Press TV show the Agenda, Corbyn is heard complaining that there had been "no attempt whatsoever that I can see to arrest him and put him on trial, to go through that process". He went on: "This was an assassination attempt, and is yet another tragedy, upon a tragedy, upon a tragedy.

"The World Trade Center was a tragedy, the attack on Afghanistan was a tragedy, the war in Iraq was a tragedy. Tens of thousands of people have died. Torture has come back on to the world stage, been canonised virtually into law by Guantánamo and Bagram.

"Can't we learn some lessons from this? Are we just going to sink deeper and deeper?

"The next stage will be an attempted assassination on Gaddafi and so it will go on. This will just make the world more dangerous and worse and worse and worse."

A spokesman for Corbyn said he was "a total opponent of al-Qaida, all it stands for".

Of course he was right about Gaddafi and look how well that has ended


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I believe his views are that they should have attempted to arrest him and put him on trial - perhaps in the hope of finding out more information from him?
> 
> This is what he said back in 2011
> 
> In a clip from the Press TV show the Agenda, Corbyn is heard complaining that there had been "no attempt whatsoever that I can see to arrest him and put him on trial, to go through that process". He went on: "This was an assassination attempt, and is yet another tragedy, upon a tragedy, upon a tragedy.
> 
> "The World Trade Center was a tragedy, the attack on Afghanistan was a tragedy, the war in Iraq was a tragedy. Tens of thousands of people have died. Torture has come back on to the world stage, been canonised virtually into law by Guantánamo and Bagram.
> 
> "Can't we learn some lessons from this? Are we just going to sink deeper and deeper?
> 
> "The next stage will be an attempted assassination on Gaddafi and so it will go on. This will just make the world more dangerous and worse and worse and worse."
> 
> A spokesman for Corbyn said he was "a total opponent of al-Qaida, all it stands for".
> 
> Of course he was right about Gaddafi and look how well that has ended


I very much doubt they would have taken him alive. Certainly without killing a heck of a lot of people they wouldn't


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> I'm currently aiming at 4 litres a day do you want me to be waterlogged too xxx


Be careful - you can have too much water you know and end up with water intoxication

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...advising-drink-water-fact-drinking-worse.html


----------



## MiffyMoo

DT said:


> I'm currently aiming at 4 litres a day do you want me to be waterlogged too xxx


Careful, you don't want to overdo it - too much is as dangerous as not enough


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I believe his views are that they should have attempted to arrest him and put him on trial - perhaps in the hope of finding out more information from him?
> 
> This is what he said back in 2011
> 
> In a clip from the Press TV show the Agenda, Corbyn is heard complaining that there had been "no attempt whatsoever that I can see to arrest him and put him on trial, to go through that process". He went on: "This was an assassination attempt, and is yet another tragedy, upon a tragedy, upon a tragedy.
> 
> "The World Trade Center was a tragedy, the attack on Afghanistan was a tragedy, the war in Iraq was a tragedy. Tens of thousands of people have died. Torture has come back on to the world stage, been canonised virtually into law by Guantánamo and Bagram.
> 
> "Can't we learn some lessons from this? Are we just going to sink deeper and deeper?
> 
> "The next stage will be an attempted assassination on Gaddafi and so it will go on. This will just make the world more dangerous and worse and worse and worse."
> 
> A spokesman for Corbyn said he was "a total opponent of al-Qaida, all it stands for".
> 
> Of course he was right about Gaddafi and look how well that has ended


You know what rottie sometimes just sometimes we do have to learn to look at doing things another way maybe not many people would agree with me on this but if we cast our mine back to adi amin seldom did we see any trouble then from that area when he were in power did we does make you wonder if sometimes there needs to be a dictator to keep Law and Order


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> You know what richey sometimes just sometimes we do have to learn to look at doing things another way maybe not many people would agree with me on this but if we cast our mine back to adi um in solden did we see any trouble then from that area did we does make you wonder if sometimes there needs to be a dictator to keep Law and Order


Who is richey and what is or was adi um in solden?


----------



## 1290423

MiffyMoo said:


> Careful, you don't want to overdo it - too much is as dangerous as not enough


Yep, I read but I've always actually drank a lot of water anyway after reading someone knocked 10 years off their age just for drinking 3 litres a day for a month I'm currently working on it I should be 21 next week


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Who is richey and what is or was adi um in solden?


Sorry I explained earlier I am using my phone and speaking into it when I reply unfortunately I cannot correct any errors that my phone has heard so I have to go back and edit later


----------



## 1290423

Think id better call it a day, xxxxx. Duh, wish folk would give me two minutes to correct the speech recognition software errors hope labour are going to give away free speech therapy as it's looking like I need it


----------



## Elles

Richey is rottie and adi um is Idi Amin?


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Be careful - you can have too much water you know and end up with water intoxication
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...advising-drink-water-fact-drinking-worse.html


Yep I've always drank a lot of water anyway right until I was 36 years old I had never had a cup of coffee nor tea still only had green tea,


----------



## MiffyMoo

DT said:


> Yep, I read but I've always actually drank a lot of water anyway after reading someone knocked 10 years off their age just for drinking 3 litres a day for a month I'm currently working on it I should be 21 next week


Haha, muppet. I was told that the rule of thumb is your kg weight x 0.33, which sounds about right.

I'm just worried, as you mentioned that you're a little disoriented, which is a symptom of early stage over-hydration.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> Richey is rottie and adi um is Idi Amin?


Displaying great interpretation skills yet again thank you else


----------



## 1290423

MiffyMoo said:


> Haha, muppet. I was told that the rule of thumb is your kg weight x 0.33, which sounds about right.
> 
> I'm just worried, as you mentioned that you're a little disoriented, which is a symptom of early stage over-hydration.


I'm not this inaugurated its the phone software seems it can't understand English but like the rest of the UK then


----------



## Elles

Sad thing is I'm reading the posts and not noticing lol. My brain reads elephant.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Sorry I explained earlier I am using my phone and speaking into it when I reply unfortunately I cannot correct any errors that my phone has heard so I have to go back and edit later


Very posh - I didn't realise you could get a phone that you spoke at and it did your typing for you. Wonder if I could get OH to dictate his 35 page reports into one and I could skive off.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> Sad thing is I'm reading the posts and not noticing lol. My brain reads elephant.


They have actually proven that there only needs to be certain letters in a word for it to be understood


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Very posh - I didn't realise you could get a phone that you spoke at and it did your typing for you. Wonder if I could get OH to dictate his 35 page reports into one and I could skive off.


The reason I am using it Lottie is because of eye strain I have an astigmatism which is quite high and I do struggle with bad light and a small screen


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> They have actually proven that there only needs to be certain letters in a word for it to be understood


That's what I meant by elephant.


----------



## 1290423

And my iPad is flat


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Very posh - I didn't realise you could get a phone that you spoke at and it did your typing for you. Wonder if I could get OH to dictate his 35 page reports into one and I could skive off.


Did you really think I have managed to achieve 300 words per minute typing rottie I actually did struggle to make it to 50 words per minute


----------



## 1290423

Omg, it understood rottie x


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Very posh - I didn't realise you could get a phone that you spoke at and it did your typing for you. Wonder if I could get OH to dictate his 35 page reports into one and I could skive off.


Don't know about that Lottie I've got myself into some write fixes normally with people who don't know me know that I have had chance to explain to


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> banks in the UK have been phasing these out cheeky, certainly in our area, I used to work at our bank and had my name down many years ago but since moving they are no longer taking new customers at least the few that still have them aren't. the most you can get now is space in their safe which means putting documentation into an envelope basically.


You possibly can in Gibraltar? Or set up a trust?
Get good jewellery and divide between your kids...
So if you lived in government flat and spent your money...that is fine...
If you saved, paid deposit, mortgage etc...then you cannot leave it for your kids? What if they actually live there?
It is simply middle class bashing. The rich will stash their money in Dubai or Cayman...out of Europe and try to get them...

That is bashing teachers, doctors, accountants or shop managers....

Dividing Britain into paupers and princes. .
With a moat impossible to jump over 
.Sorry, but this is 
EXACTLY what big money behind Brexit always wanted.

Power for the rich and social immobility and apathy.

So grim and evil, " Will of the people".
What a joke...
How to protect people from themselves?

On the other side a vision of new Cuba Libre...

What a MESS!!!!


----------



## 1290423

cheekyscrip said:


> You possibly can in Gibraltar? Or set up a trust?
> Get good jewellery and divide between your kids...
> So if you lived in government flat and spent your money...that is fine...
> If you saved, paid deposit, mortgage etc...then you cannot leave it for your kids? What if they actually live there?
> It is simply middle class bashing. The rich will stash their money in Dubai or Cayman...out of Europe and try to get them...
> 
> That is bashing teachers, doctors, accountants or shop managers....
> 
> Dividing Britain into paupers and princes. .
> With a moat impossible to jump over
> .Sorry, but this is
> EXACTLY what big money behind Brexit always wanted.
> 
> Power for the rich and social immobility and apathy.
> 
> So grim and evil, " Will of the people".
> What a joke...
> How to protect people from themselves?
> 
> On the other side a vision of new Cuba Libre...
> 
> What a MESS!!!!


I wouldn't mind cheeky if we had saved mega bucks but we didn't, enough to keep us going but certainly not the luxuries we are actually living on a pittance around £200 a week everything else is supplemented from savings I've actually had words with a friend today about this someone who has seldom worked gets a pension and it's made up with tax credit council tax paid she gets help with everything, glasses, dental etc, she has more coming in the we do! and to top it all she actually said to me she thinks,pensioners should lose their fuel allowance!


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> That's what I meant by elephant.


I never saw no elephant x


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> I wouldn't mind cheeky if we had saved mega bucks but we didn't, enough to keep us going but certainly not the luxuries we are actually living on a pittance around £200 a week everything else is supplemented from savings I've actually had words with a friend today about this someone who has seldom worked gets a pension and it's made up with tax credit council tax paid she gets help with everything, glasses, dental etc, she has more coming in the we do! and to top it all she actually said to me she thinks,pensioners should lose their fuel allowance!


Totally understand. If we got council flat we would be entitled to get bigger flat with every kid coming, we would pay peanuts and demand a new boiler if old goes bust ...
Because we own our house ( no matter how much more to pay to the bank) we were not allowed to apply for new built houses , even to buy!

While single people were give few bedrooms!!!

Plus with money saved could then buy property in Spain and then leave our council.house to the kids ..

One thinks why bother with getting degree, paying money back, then saving for own house etc ..

In Germany nearly all rent...smaller, then bigger as family grows, then again smaller ...
Very well regulated systems, no problem with garden or bedroom tax...you rent as you need, if you want to have extra you pay. ..

People expect to move depending on their work or family...

Very fair system too.

Then I know families who get everything for free just playing the system...

That is why I want free meals for all kids, free uni for all students...
Why support some parents and punish others?

Why deprive anyone of state pension???
Just because they have savings?

Or demand they paid for their care more than others?

Why then bother?
QROPS closed practically - because middle class started using them, not Only privileged people.

Which gave them more freedom to use their pensions ...
Anyhow...with inheritance tax of 45% why bother at all?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*YouGov pollster explains method behind findings*
Posted at23:5230 May

Writing in The Times, YouGov's Stephan Shakespeare explains its constituency-by-constituency election model which the paper reports as showing the Tories' lead has narrowed.

He says its something the pollsters tried in the EU referendum campaign and it consistently put Leave ahead.

It involves every constituency, key voter types, and looks at behaviour from the 2015 and EU votes, along with 7,000 daily voter interviews.

He says the "midpoints" suggest a hung parliament at this moment, but with "leeway" either side.

There is "churn" of the parties winning and losing seats on "all fronts" and that today's take is just a "snapshot" from the last week, according to YouGov.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> We should be held up as an example of how people with very very different views on many subjects, and who have frequent heated debates can still find common ground and iron out our differences
> 
> Have you started reading Rip yet?


We should I think sharing a deep empathy for animals meant we would always make up again at some point

I've just started reading it & I'm finding it really interesting and informative. Thank you RPH for recommending it.



samuelsmiles said:


> Owen Jones, Jeremy Corbyn et al were utterly gushing over the success of socialist Venezuela a couple of years back. The country is now falling apart.
> 
> Former president Hugo Chavez's daughter, however, is now the richest woman in the country, worth billions of dollars.
> 
> (And now I will be lectured on the neoliberal conspiracies that are to blame.)


The whole planet is falling apart due to the unsustainability of neoliberalism. We need to switch to a green sustainable economy or we are all screwed. I don't know that much about Venezuela without looking into it tbh, not a conspiracy but isn't it true that the US Neocons had something to do with undermining the government there?

Here a the views of labours manifesto by leading economist Steve Keen.








Bisbow said:


> The Queen had to, she had no choice but the look on her face said it all
> 
> Corbyn chose to because they are his friends and he wants to run this country. And run it straight into the ground if, heaven forbid, he wins
> 
> His "friends" will hold us to ransom
> 
> Mo Molam is a completely different kettle of fish


May has a choice 

I take it you didn't bother to read the Peter Oborne article or watch the video of the police officer warning May her cuts were threatening our national security? The country has never been in such a state. Every public service in crisis, our NHS going after 69 years, the brexit shambles. Remind me again who's been in power for 7 years?



Colliebarmy said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4553476/Labour-s-secret-plans-4-000-garden-tax.html


You can always trust a fail reader to fall for it hook line & sinker:Hilarious LVT isn't a garden tax - unless your garden is as big as a county :Hilarious http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...17-jeremy-corbyn-john-mcdonnell-a7738766.html


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> Here you go
> 
> http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/Images/manifesto-2017/Funding Britain's Future.PDF
> 
> "A Labour government will give local government £1.5 billion of extra funding for next year (2018/19) and initiate a review into reforming council tax and business rates and consider new options, such as a land value tax, to ensure local government has sustainable funding for the long term."


Land Value Tax isn't a garden tax:Hilarious Its one of the fairest ways to tax people. Why should billionaires with their massive estates pay the same council tax as you or I ? LVT is a progressive form of taxation. I'm shocked to see so many on here have fallen for tory scaremongering.


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> Land Value Tax isn't a garden tax:Hilarious Its one of the fairest ways to tax people. Why should billionaires with their massive estates pay the same council tax as you or I ? LVT is a progressive form of taxation. I'm shocked to see so many on here have fallen for tory scaremongering.


However it would massively affect farmers to, who are the polar opposite to a billionaire with an enormous estate......


----------



## rona

Lexiedhb said:


> However it would massively affect farmers to, who are the polar opposite to a billionaire with an enormous estate......


Also. what about those people with allotments? Land prices in the SE are sky high.
They won't be worth having will they!
I suppose they may be exempt because Jeremy has one


----------



## Lexiedhb

rona said:


> Also. what about those people with allotments? Land prices in the SE are sky high.
> They won't be worth having will they!
> I suppose they may be exempt because Jeremy has one


Yes those in more expensive areas will pay the price. Its hardly a "share the wealth" strategy is it. I have farming friends who are actually petrified of this happening.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Wait until one or the other introduces cat tax, dog tax ( think this one is already in, called licence)..and pet tax...
Brexit shrinks British economy. Revenue will fall, therefore or Britain gets rid of essential public services, or taxes go up.
Experts warned you...but who needs experts? 
Right?


----------



## Honeys mum

IF this is true, doesn't say anything about it in their manifesto.
Labour drawn up secret plans to throw open Britain's doors | Daily Mail Online


----------



## samuelsmiles

noushka05 said:


> We should I think sharing a deep empathy for animals meant we would always make up again at some point
> 
> I've just started reading it & I'm finding it really interesting and informative. Thank you RPH for recommending it.
> 
> The whole planet is falling apart due to the unsustainability of neoliberalism. We need to switch to a green sustainable economy or we are all screwed. *I don't know that much about Venezuela without looking into it tbh*, not a conspiracy but isn't it true that the US Neocons had something to do with undermining the government there?
> 
> Here a the views of labours manifesto by leading economist Steve Keen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> May has a choice
> 
> I take it you didn't bother to read the Peter Oborne article or watch the video of the police officer warning May her cuts were threatening our national security? The country has never been in such a state. Every public service in crisis, our NHS going after 69 years, the brexit shambles. Remind me again who's been in power for 7 years?
> 
> You can always trust a fail reader to fall for it hook line & sinker:Hilarious LVT isn't a garden tax - unless your garden is as big as a county :Hilarious http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...17-jeremy-corbyn-john-mcdonnell-a7738766.html


Venezuela was the flagship of proper socialism up until a couple of years ago. Jones, Corbyn, Dianne Abbott etc feted the country as a model that could be followed successfully.

Please can you point to any country in history that has succeeded with a properly socialist government. Where everyone is/was equal and content with what they have/had?


----------



## 1290423

Sorry to crash the thread but if anyone is interested they awp are having a meeting tonight in Bethnal Green for any members supporters or volunteers who would like to help I know this is not really in relation to your voting but thought some of you may be interested for future.


----------



## noushka05

Lexiedhb said:


> However it would massively affect farmers to, who are the polar opposite to a billionaire with an enormous estate......


No it wouldn't. It wouldn't affect tenant farmers (might even give them the chance to own their own land). It would only really affect the big landowners. http://www.landvaluetax.org/frequently-asked-questions/ The Greens have been campaigning for years to get LVT on the debate.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> Land Value Tax isn't a garden tax:Hilarious Its one of the fairest ways to tax people.


It is fair if you live in a high rise flat and don't have a garden

We grow a lot of our own food so we would be taxed heavily because we own a bit of land. Very fair

But never mind, it is only "scaremongering" and Mr Corbyn wants it so it must be good for us all, after all he can only do good


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> No it wouldn't. It wouldn't affect tenant farmers (might even give them the chance to own their own land). It would only really affect the big landowners. http://www.landvaluetax.org/frequently-asked-questions/ The Greens have been campaigning for years to get LVT on the debate.


Friends of mine are not TENANT farmers, they OWN their own land - it WOULD affect them. the link you have posted is not by Labour is it?


----------



## noushka05

samuelsmiles said:


> Venezuela was the flagship of proper socialism up until a couple of years ago. Jones, Corbyn, Dianne Abbott etc feted the country as a model that could be followed successfully.
> 
> Please can you point to any country in history that has succeeded with a properly socialist government. Where everyone is/was equal and content with what they have/had?


Didn't the USA undermine the government there?

In a social democracy no one is equal - there will always be some inequality & I don't think that's a bad thing, its the gross inequality which destroys society. A social democracy is about creating a fairer society. Where things like health care are a right not a privilege. We need a new model which puts social & environmental justice at the top of the agenda. Or do you think we should just carry on along this suicidal route? Because that is exactly what neoliberalism is.


----------



## samuelsmiles

noushka05 said:


> Didn't the USA undermine the government there?
> 
> In a social democracy no one is equal - there will always be some inequality & I don't think that's a bad thing, its the gross inequality which destroys society. A social democracy is about creating a fairer society. Where things like health care are a right not a privilege. We need a new model which puts social & environmental justice at the top of the agenda. Or do you think we should just carry on along this suicidal route? Because that is exactly what neoliberalism is.


Gross inequality? Yes, like Venezuela's former socialist President's daughter being the richest wonan in the country.

Did the US government undermine the Venezuelan government? Well, of course that is always the default position taken by the left when such things happen.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> It is fair if you live in a high rise flat and don't have a garden
> 
> We grow a lot of our own food so we would be taxed heavily because we own a bit of land. Very fair
> 
> But never mind, it is only "scaremongering" and Mr Corbyn wants it so it must be good for us all, after all he can only do good


No one with or without a garden would be taxed. Most ordinary farmers would not be worse off. Only the big landowners. You should be more worried about what your brexit vote will do to farmers & the price of food - https://infacts.org/brexiters-sheepish-risk-farmers/



Lexiedhb said:


> Friends of mine are not TENANT farmers, they OWN their own land - it WOULD affect them. the link you have posted is not by Labour is it?


Lets have a look at your link then please?


----------



## noushka05

samuelsmiles said:


> Gross inequality? Yes, like Venezuela's former socialist President's daughter being the richest wonan in the country.
> 
> Did the US government undermine the Venezuelan government? Well, of course that is always the default position taken by the left when such things happen.


Well obviously I'm not going to make excuses to corruption if that's what it was. So you think we shouldn't seek a better way, we should just carry on this suicidal road then?


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Also. what about those people with allotments? Land prices in the SE are sky high.
> They won't be worth having will they!
> I suppose they may be exempt because Jeremy has one


People with allotments?? I'm splitting my sides here:Hilarious


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> No one with or without a garden would be taxed. Most ordinary farmers would not be worse off. Only the big landowners. You should be more worried about what your brexit vote will do to farmers & the price of food - https://infacts.org/brexiters-sheepish-risk-farmers/
> 
> Lets have a look at your link then please?


Link to what? Its what I have read in the papers (the telegraph I believe- but you'll probably just state its all nonsense unless its from a source YOU deem fit) and had conversations with those who will be affected the most, namely farming friends. Although I would be affected to. Work incredibly hard to be able to buy my own home in what happens to be an expensive area of the country - get penalised for it- yeah seems fair......


----------



## noushka05

Lexiedhb said:


> Link to what? Its what I have read in the papers (the telegraph I believe- but you'll probably just state its all nonsense unless its from a source YOU deem fit) and had conversations with those who will be affected the most, namely farming friends. Although I would be affected to. Work incredibly hard to be able to buy my own home in what happens to be an expensive area of the country - get penalised for it- yeah seems fair......


OMG you read it in the telegraph. Say no more.


----------



## noushka05

*Healthier in the EU*‏@*HealthierIn* 56m56 minutes ago

The Brexit gamble... Your NHS might just get trashed as part of this adventure, sorry.









*Jeremy Hunt warns Tories may not be able to fulfil NHS pledges because 'Brexit could go wrong'*

Read more at: https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/health/jeremy-hunt-brexit-nhs/
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/health/jeremy-hunt-brexit-nhs/


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> OMG you read it in the telegraph. Say no more.


And other papers, links, internet, have conversations with actual people.... your response is SO predictable...... boring, and does nothing for your "cause"


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> People with allotments?? I'm splitting my sides here:Hilarious


You seem to know everything that is going on, being so knowledgable why are you not standing as a candidate for the election
Then you and your hero Jeremy could lead this country to rack and ruin in no time flat


----------



## noushka05

Lexiedhb said:


> And other papers, links, internet, have conversations with actual people.... your response is SO predictable......


Don't you ever fact check anything?


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Don't you ever fact check anything?


Source of information please? Memes are ok but what's the source and how old is this source of information?

Thanks.


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> Don't you ever fact check anything?


And each and every single one of the billion links you share is 100% FACT is it - dont make me laugh.......... who even wrote what you have put above - was it a nice little pic you put together yourself?????


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> You seem to know everything that is going on, being so knowledgable why are you not standing as a candidate for the election
> Then you and your hero Jeremy could lead this country to rack and ruin in no time flat


I don't think I know everything - hence why I tend to fact check things & listen to experts.

The country is over if the tories get back in. No NHS, a trashed economy, fracking, climate change, more cuts to already crumbling public services, increased cruelty to wildlife. At least my conscience will be clear.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Source of information please? Memes are ok but what's the source and how old is this source of information?
> 
> Thanks.


http://www.mediareform.org.uk/wp-co...o_owns_the_UK_media-report_plus_appendix1.pdf



Lexiedhb said:


> And each and every single one of the billion links you share is 100% FACT is it - dont make me laugh.......... who even wrote what you have put above - was it a nice little pic you put together yourself?????


Not everything. Most of the things that are important to me I try my best to get as informed as possible.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> I don't think I know everything - hence why I tend to fact check things & listen to experts.
> 
> The country is over if the tories get back in. No NHS, a trashed economy, fracking, climate change, more cuts to already crumbling public services, increased cruelty to wildlife. At least my conscience will be clear.


Can I ask where you are fact checking?

The Guardian?
Mirror?
The Sun?
Telegraph?
Express?
Biased websites?
Biased people's opinions?
Facebook?
Twitter?

I am intrigued as to were the so called facts are coming from?


----------



## noushka05

*The NHA Party*‏@*NHAparty* 3h3 hours ago

Why is May's support for the #*NaylorReport* of such concern? Read this:

*The Naylor Report - the NHS sell-off is being speeded up. Our children are being robbed of their inheritance.*

http://nhap.org/the-naylor-report-t...ildren-are-being-robbed-of-their-inheritance/


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> http://www.mediareform.org.uk/wp-co...o_owns_the_UK_media-report_plus_appendix1.pdf
> 
> Not everything. Most of the things that are important to me I try my best to get as informed as possible.


Right but if you dont agree with something then the source can not possibly be legit right?


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> http://www.mediareform.org.uk/wp-co...o_owns_the_UK_media-report_plus_appendix1.pdf


This is a biased piece of information as it is a Media Reform Coalition.


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> *The NHA Party*‏@*NHAparty* 3h3 hours ago
> 
> Why is May's support for the #*NaylorReport* of such concern? Read this:
> 
> *The Naylor Report - the NHS sell-off is being speeded up. Our children are being robbed of their inheritance.*
> 
> http://nhap.org/the-naylor-report-t...ildren-are-being-robbed-of-their-inheritance/


Twitter - that most credible source..........


----------



## Bisbow

Half the things you check and your experts are all on Corbyns side anyway and are often their own ideas and are made up and wrong.
You spend your time looking for things to "prove" you are right and everyone else is wrong

If you were less adamant that you are always right I would listen to you but you try to bully people into believing everything you say and post is gospel truth

It IS not


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Can I ask where you are fact checking?
> 
> The Guardian?
> Mirror?
> The Sun?
> Telegraph?
> Express?
> Biased websites?
> Biased people's opinions?
> Facebook?
> Twitter?
> 
> I am intrigued as to were the so called facts are coming from?


Depends. Direct from scientists, experts & transparent NGOs usually. I like the guardian its a quality paper.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Have you noticed something this morning?

The pound is plummeting against world currencies because they fear Corbyn may win the GE or there will be a hung Parliament.

Currently the pound has fallen from £1.17 to €1 yesterday to £1.14 to €1 today.


----------



## noushka05

Lexiedhb said:


> Twitter - that most credible source..........


lol I think you'll find the National Health Action Party is a VERY credible source. Or don't you trust the people we trust with our lives? Perhaps you have more trust non dom media barons & tory politicians.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Depends. *Direct from scientists, experts & transparent NGOs usually.* I like the guardian its a quality paper.


On twitter?

There facts were wrong about the EU Referendum weren't they?


----------



## cheekyscrip

noushka05 said:


> Didn't the USA undermine the government there?
> 
> In a social democracy no one is equal - there will always be some inequality & I don't think that's a bad thing, its the gross inequality which destroys society. A social democracy is about creating a fairer society. Where things like health care are a right not a privilege. We need a new model which puts social & environmental justice at the top of the agenda. Or do you think we should just carry on along this suicidal route? Because that is exactly what neoliberalism is.


I actually believe Scandinavian model works. But total nationalisation never does. That is not economically viable, that is just killing any cost effectiveness...
As to equality... That was the biggest scam...
One party state cannot be fair.
Many years ago we were putting our ki es on the line to get rid of socialism we never asked for, we were handed in to Stalin as trophies, by our allies, after all promises made...

Communism works for ants.

Both extremes are just very dangerous, rampant capitalism and dictatorship of communism. The last one is just deadly.
" power for the people"...but people mattered the least....


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> lol I think you'll find the National Health Action Party is a VERY credible source. Or don't you trust the people we trust with our lives? Perhaps you have more trust non dom media barons & tory politicians.


in your opinion..... because you like what they say. It was still on blumming twitter...... The NHAP is also not responsible for lives. I prefer to rely on doctors, nurses and surgeons for that.......


----------



## noushka05

Lexiedhb said:


> Right but if you dont agree with something then the source can not possibly be legit right?


Not at all. If its a fact its a fact. Even the gutter press sometimes print facts.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Have you noticed something this morning?
> 
> The pound is plummeting against world currencies because they fear Corbyn may win the GE.


I don't think it's anything to do with Corbyn. At the beginning of the campaign the result was seen to be a foregone conclusion, no it's not so certain...markets hate uncertainty. Closer polls also make a hung parliament more likely- even more uncertainty.


----------



## noushka05

Lexiedhb said:


> in your opinion..... because you like what they say. It was still on blumming twitter...... The NHAP is also not responsible for lives. I prefer to rely on doctors, nurses and surgeons for that.......


They ARE doctors 

The NHAP was set up by doctors to save our NHS from the tories sell off of it.


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> They ARE doctors
> 
> The NHAP was set up by doctors to save our NHS from the tories sell off of it.


In their role as a member of NHAP - they are not "doctors" - thusly I dont go to my GP's surgery to see a NHAP member, I go because of their medical degree.......


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> They ARE doctors
> 
> The NHAP was set up by doctors to save our NHS from the tories sell off of it.


Can I correct you NHAP are an action campaigning group not doctors:

National Health Action Party

See I can fact check as well and find the truth.
I wouldn't say NHAP is a reliable source.


----------



## noushka05

Lexiedhb said:


> In their role as a member of NHAP - they are not "doctors" - thusly I dont go to my GP's surgery to see a NHAP member, I go because of their medical degree.......


Are you serious. They are practising doctors who have evaluated the Tories Health & social care act 2012 & see its devastating effects first hand. EVERYTHING the junior doctors & the NHAP have been warning is about is coming to pass. But you keep trusting the tories & their mates in the media if you like. My faith lies with our most trusted & respected professionals.



stockwellcat said:


> Can I correct you NHAP are an action campaigning group not doctors:
> 
> National Health Action Party
> 
> See I can fact check as well and find the truth.
> I wouldn't say NHAP is a reliable source of information.


No you cant correct me because you are wrong.



http://www.doctorsforthenhs.org.uk/allied-organisation/national-health-action-party/


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Are you serious. They are practising doctors who have evaluated the Tories Health & social care act 2012 & see its devastating effects first hand. EVERYTHING the junior doctors & the NHAP have been warning is about is coming to pass. But you keep trusting the tories & their mates in the media if you like. My faith lies with our most trusted & respected professionals.
> 
> No you cant correct me because you are wrong.
> 
> http://www.doctorsforthenhs.org.uk/allied-organisation/national-health-action-party/


I am correct https://nhap.org National Health Action (Protest) Party 

I put protest in there


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> I am correct https://nhap.org National Health Action (Protest) Party


Of course its a protest party - the doctors are protesting at the tories sell off of our NHS!


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Of course its a protest party - the doctors are protesting at the tories sell off of our NHS!


If Labour get in they'll be protesting at them when Labour realises they'll have to make cuts :Muted and start u-turning on there manifesto.


----------



## noushka05

*







*


*Ten days to stop Jeremy Hunt: Day 4 - Why this election matters to the under 30s*
Posted on May 31, 2017 by swsurreynha
If you are under 30, I'd rather you voted against me than not vote at all!

I know, it's an odd thing for a candidate in next week's election to say, but it's something I really care about.

I know people are turned off by party politics. I hate that kind of politics too - it seems so divorced from people's lives. Many people feel their MPs don't really represent them. They feel their vote doesn't count in our first past the post electoral system. Most MPs, and almost certainly our government, will be elected despite more than half of the population voting against them.

It makes me angry that many politicians ignore the needs of people under 30 as they are less likely to vote.

But voting is important. Your MP will have a say in whether the NHS gets funded or cut more. Whether we enshrine human rights into British Law post Brexit. Whether we support poor countries and welcome refugees. Whether we invest in clean air and take climate change seriously. Whether we create more affordable and social housing. Whether we reinstate Educational Maintenance Allowances and nurses training bursaries, or abolish university tuition fees. And so much more.

I'm part of a "progressive alliance" of people across parties- from the Greens who stood down for me to many members of the Lib Dem and Labour Party who actively support me as the person with the best chance of beating Jeremy Hunt!

So please vote next week. Don't vote for a politician or a party - vote for the person who will stand up on the issues that you care about.

I obviously hope that's me. But if not, please still vote!

Dr Louise Irvine.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Of course its a protest party - the doctors are protesting at the tories sell off of our NHS!


I beg to differ that they are doctors in NHAP but that's that.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> *Ten days to stop Jeremy Hunt: Day 4 - Why this election matters to the under 30s*
> Posted on May 31, 2017 by swsurreynha
> If you are under 30, I'd rather you voted against me than not vote at all!
> 
> I know, it's an odd thing for a candidate in next week's election to say, but it's something I really care about.
> 
> I know people are turned off by party politics. I hate that kind of politics too - it seems so divorced from people's lives. Many people feel their MPs don't really represent them. They feel their vote doesn't count in our first past the post electoral system. Most MPs, and almost certainly our government, will be elected despite more than half of the population voting against them.
> 
> It makes me angry that many politicians ignore the needs of people under 30 as they are less likely to vote.
> 
> But voting is important. Your MP will have a say in whether the NHS gets funded or cut more. Whether we enshrine human rights into British Law post Brexit. Whether we support poor countries and welcome refugees. Whether we invest in clean air and take climate change seriously. Whether we create more affordable and social housing. Whether we reinstate Educational Maintenance Allowances and nurses training bursaries, or abolish university tuition fees. And so much more.
> 
> I'm part of a "progressive alliance" of people across parties- from the Greens who stood down for me to many members of the Lib Dem and Labour Party who actively support me as the person with the best chance of beating Jeremy Hunt!
> 
> So please vote next week. Don't vote for a politician or a party - vote for the person who will stand up on the issues that you care about.
> 
> I obviously hope that's me. But if not, please still vote!
> 
> Dr Louise Irvine.


Eleven days and Labour starts making there cuts to make up for there spending spree


----------



## Elles

Boris is the one throwing around extortionate rates and figures regarding this so called garden tax. Labour have denied it. I believe it's scare tactics. Alongside 'Corbyn will allow unlimited immigration', he hasn't said that and 'Corbyn loves terrorists', he hasn't said that either. I wonder what they'll come up with next.

Labour are catching up in the polls. With any luck we'll get a coalition. That will be fun for brexit.

The problem with the current news is that most of it supports the conservatives and lambasts Corbyn, so some posts are bound to defend him. The conservatives don't get defended, because most negatives printed about them are true e.g. The foxhunting repeal and most of us here don't agree with them. Most of us also agree that privatising the NHS is a bad thing. The only argument here is over whether the conservatives really are doing it. My conclusions drawn from various sources is that they are. 

I don't think the NHS will do a better job than it is now, if labour do win. I'll still be waiting a month for a gp appt and there'll still be bottlenecks and long journeys for some, and people who don't get to go to a dentist. It will be propped up better, but with an expanding and longer living population there will always be some areas where it struggles, if we try to keep it modern and pay for new procedures. Maybe some of it should be privatised. I'm sure there are procedures available on the NHS that people think shouldn't be. 

Our choice at the moment is pick one of two extremes imo. If they did actually try to tax land and my tax worked out around 10 - 14k a year as Boris is saying, plus I'd have to be charged more for where I keep my horse to cover their land tax, I hope Spain would still accept Brits. I'm not one of the rich, but I'd be joining them leaving the sinking ship. I don't agree with a labour government practically bankrupting me so I can pay for everyone's toddlers and young children to be fed and cared for by the state. 

If the conservatives privatise the NHS and charge grannies to live longer than they want them to, if they don't freeze them to death, I'm selling up and heading for Andalusia.

Either way at this rate, I'll be posting from Spain if they'll still have us, not Devon. Might as well be warm.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> If Labour get in they'll be protesting at them when Labour realises they'll have to make cuts :Muted and start u-turning on there manifesto.


These highly qualified academics don't fall for scaremongering like you do. They know where the real & present danger to our NHS lies


----------



## stockwellcat.

We'll have a Conservative Labour coalition with this slogan:
Strong and Stable Coalition of Chaos 

We are heading for no landslide victory in this election from either side Conservatives or Labour but rather a hung Parliament.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Land Value Tax isn't a garden tax:Hilarious Its one of the fairest ways to tax people. Why should billionaires with their massive estates pay the same council tax as you or I ? LVT is a progressive form of taxation. I'm shocked to see so many on here have fallen for tory scaremongering.


It's very unfair, just because you have a plot of land doesn't make you wealthy. And those millionaires in their mansions have already paid 55% tax plus a fortune in stamp duty and the highest band of council tax. Do you want a higher vat rate for them as well? Many of them will also be the one's who've taken great personal financial risk and hard work to grow a business that is paying corporation tax and keeping you and your family in employment.

I don't know why you think tenant farmers won't be effected? If I rent a commercial property I'm liable for the business rates not the landlord. And if this tax was directed at the land owner do you really suppose that cost won't be passed on to the tenant?

The fairest form of collecting local tax is on household adult occupation.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> Boris is the one throwing around extortionate rates and figures regarding this so called garden tax. Labour have denied it. I believe it's scare tactics. Alongside 'Corbyn will allow unlimited immigration', he hasn't said that and 'Corbyn loves terrorists', he hasn't said that either. I wonder what they'll come up with next.
> 
> Labour are catching up in the polls. With any luck we'll get a coalition. That will be fun for brexit.
> 
> The problem with the current news is that most of it supports the conservatives and lambasts Corbyn, so some posts are bound to defend him. The conservatives don't get defended, because most negatives printed about them are true e.g. The foxhunting repeal and most of us here don't agree with them. Most of us also agree that privatising the NHS is a bad thing. The only argument here is over whether the conservatives really are doing it. My conclusions drawn from various sources is that they are.
> 
> I don't think the NHS will do a better job than it is now, if labour do win. I'll still be waiting a month for a gp appt and there'll still be bottlenecks and long journeys for some, and people who don't get to go to a dentist. It will be propped up better, but with an expanding and longer living population there will always be some areas where it struggles, if we try to keep it modern and pay for new procedures. Maybe some of it should be privatised. I'm sure there are procedures available on the NHS that people think shouldn't be.
> 
> Our choice at the moment is pick one of two extremes imo. If they did actually try to tax land and my tax worked out around 10 - 14k a year as Boris is saying, plus I'd have to be charged more for where I keep my horse to cover their land tax, I hope Spain would still accept Brits. I'm not one of the rich, but I'd be joining them leaving the sinking ship. I don't agree with a labour government practically bankrupting me so I can pay for everyone's toddlers and young children to be fed and cared for by the state.
> 
> If the conservatives privatise the NHS and charge grannies to live longer than they want them to, if they don't freeze them to death, I'm selling up and heading for Andalusia.
> 
> Either way at this rate, I'll be posting from Spain if they'll still have us, not Devon. Might as well be warm.


Maybe we should heed what all those doctors are saying Elles.

GP's share of the NHS budget has fallen from a high of 11% in 2006 to less than 8.5% now

*If general practice fails, the whole NHS fails *
Kailash Chand

GPs are the bedrock of the health service, but practices have been brought to their knees by unprecedented funding cuts and rising demand

https://www.theguardian.com/healthc...ral-practice-fails-nhs-fails?CMP=share_btn_tw


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> It's very unfair, just because you have a plot of land doesn't make you wealthy. And those millionaires in their mansions have already paid 55% tax plus a fortune in stamp duty and the highest band of council tax. Do you want a higher vat rate for them as well? Many of them will also be the one's who've taken great personal financial risk and hard work to grow a business that is paying corporation tax and keeping you and your family in employment.
> 
> I don't know why you think tenant farmers won't be effected? If I rent a commercial property I'm liable for the business rates not the landlord. And if this tax was directed at the land owner do you really suppose that cost won't be passed on to the tenant?
> 
> The fairest form of collecting local tax is on household adult occupation.


You really need to do your reseach - LVT wont affect anyone with 'a plot of land'. Its a progressive tax.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> You seem to know everything that is going on, being so knowledgable why are you not standing as a candidate for the election
> Then you and your hero Jeremy could lead this country to rack and ruin in no time flat


Does being knowledgeable about something mean you have to stand as a candidate in the election then? Hell doesn't that mean every doctor, every lawyer, every teacher, every farmer should be standing? Who will be left to run the country? I also believe Noush is a Green party member/voter.



stockwellcat said:


> Can I ask where you are fact checking?
> 
> The Guardian?
> Mirror?
> The Sun?
> Telegraph?
> Express?
> Biased websites?
> Biased people's opinions?
> Facebook?
> Twitter?
> 
> I am intrigued as to were the so called facts are coming from?


OMG Stockwell Cat I never know from one day to the next which way you will be swinging. Please do share where your unbiased facts come from.


----------



## Elles

Where have labour said they'll employ more gps and reopen local hospitals and walk in centres? I don't trust them not to throw money around randomly, employ more admin and hope some of it sticks. I don't care how progressive land tax is, it will be extremely unfair on some and too fair on others. It's a ridiculous way of taxing people.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> No you cant correct me because you are wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.doctorsforthenhs.org.uk/allied-organisation/national-health-action-party/


This isn't NHAP though is it,you have changed your meme to a different one


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> OMG Stockwell Cat I never know from one day to the next which way you will be swinging. Please do share where your unbiased facts come from.


Labours Manifesto 

There isn't a good choice this year so I might vote UKIP


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Does being knowledgeable about something mean you have to stand as a candidate in the election then? Hell doesn't that mean every doctor, every lawyer, every teacher, every farmer should be standing? Who will be left to run the country? I also believe Noush is a Green party member/voter.
> 
> OMG Stockwell Cat I never know from one day to the next which way you will be swinging. Please do share where your unbiased facts come from.


Every Dr and all the others you quote are not on here telling us we don't know what we are talking about and treating us like idiots


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> Every Dr and all the others you quote are not on here telling us we don't know what we are talking about and treating us like idiots


Not on here perhaps but they obviously are out there telling other people and whether we agree with Noush or not she is just posting what they are saying. If they weren't saying it she wouldn't be able to post it.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> You really need to do your reseach - LVT wont affect anyone with 'a plot of land'. Its a progressive tax.


Oh phew, I thought because my modest house is on a two acre plot I would be paying a tax on the value of the land, which would obviously be more than someone in that mansion on a quarter acre plot.

How does it work then if it's not based on the value of the land?


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> Are you serious. They are practising doctors who have evaluated the Tories Health & social care act 2012 & see its devastating effects first hand. EVERYTHING the junior doctors & the NHAP have been warning is about is coming to pass. But you keep trusting the tories & their mates in the media if you like. My faith lies with our most trusted & respected professionals.
> 
> No you cant correct me because you are wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.doctorsforthenhs.org.uk/allied-organisation/national-health-action-party/


"trust me I'm a doctor" eh??? yeah they dont have a vested interest AT ALL


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> http://www.doctorsforthenhs.org.uk/allied-organisation/national-health-action-party/


I have been reading this new website you posted above and this is what they say:

*Our Party*
We launched the National Health Action Party in 2012 in opposition to the Coalition Goverment's damaging NHS reforms.

And...

*A Fair Society:*
We are committed to reject the soaring inequality created by 30 years of privatisation and corporation-led economic policies; to cracking down on tax avoidance and evasion by multinational corporations and the wealthiest in our society; and to putting the British government back at the service of the British people on issues such as housing, employment and an efficient and compassionate welfare state.

So let's summerize here:

they aren't blaming the Conservatives they are blaming the Coalition Government setup in 2012 that no longer exists.

That's a FACT according to there website.


They are rejecting 30 years of privatisation.
Over the last 30 years (since 1987 to present) we have had a Conservative Government, Labour Government (for 13 years), Conservative and Lib Dem Government (who the owners of this website and those that formed this party are protesting about) and a Conservative Government (who have had less time in power than Labour - 12 years in total by themselves). So this isn't the Conservatives fault per se as Labour couldn't fix the NHS last time they were in Government for 13 years.

Parties Length of time in power:

1987 to 1997 Conservatives (10 years)
1997 to 2010 Labour (13 years)
2010 to 2015 Coalition Government Conservatives and Lib Dems (5 years)
2015 to Present Conservatives (2 years)
Total time Conservatives in power as sole party: 12 years
Total time Labour in power as sole party: 13 years

So over the last 30 years Labour had more time in power as a sole party. This covers the privatisation period this website is talking about.


----------



## Lexiedhb

Dr Pepper said:


> Oh phew, I thought because my modest house is on a two acre plot I would be paying a tax on the value of the land, which would obviously be more than someone in that mansion on a quarter acre plot.
> 
> How does it work then if it's not based on the value of the land?


 It is based on the value of the land hence its name LVT - LAND VALUE TAX. It will affect me too, as I happen to live in an expensive area of the country


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> brexit vote


Back to the inevitable....


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> OMG you read it in the telegraph. Say no more.


You don't say too much though when your followers constantly quote the ''Sun'' (that bastion of truth, information and learning).


----------



## Lexiedhb

Calvine said:


> You don't say too much when your followers constantly quote the ''Sun'' (that bastion of truth and learning).


Dont forget "twitter" on that line up.........


----------



## Calvine

Lexiedhb said:


> Dont forget "twitter" on that line up.........


Thank you for reminding me; I must be slipping!!


----------



## KittenKong

Lexiedhb said:


> "trust me I'm a doctor" eh??? yeah they dont have a vested interest AT ALL


I find it incredible some seem to have more faith in Jeremy Hunt and Theresa May.

I think we all know what happened when May belittled the police (who are the experts, not her), in 2015.


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> Oh phew, I thought because my modest house is on a two acre plot I would be paying a tax on the value of the land, which would obviously be more than someone in that mansion on a quarter acre plot.
> 
> How does it work then if it's not based on the value of the land?


I shall let gipsies move on, let them collect from them. Hang on a moment the way things are going to end up a gypsy


----------



## Lexiedhb

KittenKong said:


> I find it incredible some seem to have more faith in Jeremy Hunt and Theresa May.
> 
> I think we all know what happened when May belittled the police (who are the experts, not her), in 2015.
> 
> Still, the Tories know best. The papers tell you so.
> 
> "I know it's true, I know it's right. It's in the papers, in black and white"
> 
> (Benny Hill 1965)


How funny..... 
Just because someone is a doctor, does not mean they don't have a vested interest in what happens to the body which surrounds their career.... they do, which makes their stance somewhat biased. 
I have no faith in any politician.


----------



## Lexiedhb

KittenKong said:


> I find it incredible some seem to have more faith in Jeremy Hunt and Theresa May.
> 
> I think we all know what happened when May belittled the police (who are the experts, not her), in 2015.


So the Tories dont know best anymore??? LOL


----------



## Dr Pepper

Lexiedhb said:


> It is based on the value of the land hence its name LVT - LAND VALUE TAX. It will affect me too, as I happen to live in an expensive area of the country


That's exactly what I thought but we must be wrong because noushka05 said so.


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> I shall let gipsies move on, let them collect from them. Hang on a moment the way things are going to end up a gypsy


On the plus side these days you can choose from being:-

Gypsy
Romany traveller
Traveller
Pikey
Homeless
Refugee

I believe they are all exempt from every tax bar vat.


----------



## Elles

I want a party that gives everyone the chance to better themselves. Not a party who will take, take, take from those who already have to support the squalor of those who haven't, removing incentives and promoting an entitled society, or one riding roughshod over the weak and helpless and the environment. The two main parties are going bonkers imo. and the lib dems were hoist by their own petard when they formed a coalition with the tories and are now implying they want another Eu referendum. The current political climate is terrible. We're all doomed either way. Doomed I say.


----------



## 1290423

aSHere's a polite message to anyone even thinking of supporting the garden tax see this tiny bit of land here nobody gave it me. No one I didn't inherit it I didn't steal it I brought it through working Damned hard . nobody looks after it for us we do that ourselves! the water I put onto it I pay for everything taken to maintain it is provided by me so if some jumped up half brained moron of a politician comes along and even thinks they are going to charge me for what's mind I will fight with every bone in my body against them! On that you can depend


----------



## Elles

We should get paid for having a garden that nice, it's environmentally friendly and pretty.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> We should get paid for having a garden that nice, it's environmentally friendly and pretty.


Agreed! The countryside and parks are beginning to look like Beirut!

In some areas at least.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> On the plus side these days you can choose from being:-
> 
> Gypsy
> Romany traveller
> Traveller
> Pickey
> Homeless
> Refugee
> 
> I believe they are all exempt from every tax bar vat.


You do realise that "Pickey" is considered a race hate word and that people have been prosecuted for using it.


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> View attachment 312722
> View attachment 312723
> View attachment 312722
> View attachment 312724
> aSHere's a polite message to anyone even thinking of supporting the garden tax see this tiny bit of land here nobody gave it me. No one I didn't inherit it I didn't steal it I brought it through working Damned hard . nobody looks after it for us we do that ourselves! the water I put onto it I pay for everything taken to maintain it is provided by me so if some jumped up half brained moron of a politician comes along and even thinks they are going to charge me for what's mind I will fight with every bone in my body against them! On that you can depend


I hear they're also going to bring in a wood pile tax, you're screwed.

Actually I've just got woodpile envy, mines a right disorganised shambles.



rottiepointerhouse said:


> You do realise that "Pickey" is considered a race hate word and that people have been prosecuted for using it.


Na, Pikey refers to those less than pleasant travellers that leave a mess, rip off the vulnerable with roofing and driveways, pay no tax and steal from whatever community they are currently terrorising. I don't believe they are of any particular race (many do seem to be Irish though) so don't see how the racist card could be played. But thanks for your concern for these lovely people.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> I hear they're also going to bring in a wood pile tax, you're screwed.
> 
> Actually I've just got woodpile envy, mines a right disorganised shambles.
> 
> Na, Pikey refers to those less than pleasant travellers that leave a mess, rip off the vulnerable with roofing and driveways, pay no tax and steal from whatever community they are currently terrorising. I don't believe they are of any particular race (many do seem to be Irish though) so don't see how the racist card could be played. But thanks for your concern for these lovely people.


Whether you like it or agree with it the name has been classed as a racial/ethnic hate term and people have been prosecuted for using it.


----------



## Calvine

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Whether you like it or agree with it the name has been classed as a racial/ethnic hate term and people have been prosecuted for using it.


I never heard the word 'pikey' when I lived in the north; not once. I can guarantee my family, even now, would not know what it meant.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Calvine said:


> I never heard the word 'pikey' when I lived in the north; not once. I can guarantee my family, even now, would not know what it meant.


Its been used as a very derogatory term in the south for decades.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Whether you like it or agree with it the name has been classed as a racial/ethnic hate term and people have been prosecuted for using it.


Ok point taken. Back to calling them thieving, scrounging, unhygienic tax avoiding inbred scumbags who pray on the vulnerable then.

Don't know if you've ever had these scum prey on your family. Trust me they have no respect for you, your loved ones or your property and pets. The word "Pikey" isn't racist (no race involved so that's just a nonsense), it refers to a certain type of traveller and their lifestyle.


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> Can I ask where you are fact checking?
> 
> The Guardian?
> Mirror?
> The Sun?
> Telegraph?
> Express?
> Biased websites?
> Biased people's opinions?
> Facebook?
> Twitter?
> 
> I am intrigued as to were the so called facts are coming from?


That's easy, one sided pressure groups


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> If Labour get in they'll be protesting at them when Labour realises they'll have to make cuts :Muted and start u-turning on there manifesto.


At least one of the founders has already had a go at Labour in 2004, seems to be a constant activist


----------



## rona

Oh look, this is the other co founder
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/ne...rsonal_abuse_from_within_own_political_group/

"A LEADING health campaigner has stood down following personal abuse from within his own political group.

Dr Clive Peedell made the decision to quit as leader when he felt the executive committee of the National Health Action Party (NHA) failed to take sufficient action to remedy his complaint."


----------



## Lexiedhb

rona said:


> Oh look, this is the other co founder
> http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/ne...rsonal_abuse_from_within_own_political_group/
> 
> "A LEADING health campaigner has stood down following personal abuse from within his own political group.
> 
> Dr Clive Peedell made the decision to quit as leader when he felt the executive committee of the National Health Action Party (NHA) failed to take sufficient action to remedy his complaint."


But but but but they are VERY credible........


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> Oh look, this is the other co founder
> http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/ne...rsonal_abuse_from_within_own_political_group/
> 
> "A LEADING health campaigner has stood down following personal abuse from within his own political group.
> 
> Dr Clive Peedell made the decision to quit as leader when he felt the executive committee of the National Health Action Party (NHA) failed to take sufficient action to remedy his complaint."


That would be Dr Clive Peedell the consultant oncologist?

So all pressure groups and all political parties have to be in the huggy lovey club now to be taken seriously? If you look back to the Conservatives and the Labour Party and the Lib Dems and UKIP at the last election only 2 years ago they all had different leaders and different personalities to the fore. I don't understand the need to try and discredit every lobbying group.


----------



## 1290423

Aziz as


Dr Pepper said:


> I hear they're also going to bring in a wood pile tax, you're screwed.
> 
> Actually I've just got woodpile envy, mines a right disorganised shambles.
> 
> e.


Hands off my piles


----------



## Elles

The best thing about the conservatives is that every time people have a fit about what they promise to do, they u turn faster than Stirling Moss.


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> This isn't NHAP though is it,you have changed your meme to a different one


Doctors for the NHS was initially the NHS Consultants' Association, but guess who's got his toes in that water, none other than Clive Peedell, you know, the one that left the other one cos they didn't treat him right. Also another activist and journalist Jacky Davis, yes she's a doctor too but seems to spend more time doing activist things


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> That would be Dr Clive Peedell the consultant oncologist?
> 
> So all pressure groups and all political parties have to be in the huggy lovey club now to be taken seriously? If you look back to the Conservatives and the Labour Party and the Lib Dems and UKIP at the last election only 2 years ago they all had different leaders and different personalities to the fore. I don't understand the need to try and discredit every lobbying group.


Because you can't get a clear view if all you look at is what you want to believe. Not discrediting the lobbying groups at all. Just the person holding them all up as factual


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> Doctors for the NHS was initially the NHS Consultants' Association, but guess who's got his toes in that water, none other than Clive Peedell, you know, the one that left the other one cos they didn't treat him right. Also another activist and journalist Jacky Davis, yes she's a doctor too but seems to spend more time doing activist things


I get it he's a spin doctor. Spins rubbish and claims they are facts :Hilarious :Muted


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> I get it he's a spin doctor. Spins rubbish and claims they are facts :Hilarious :Muted


No I believe a lot of what he says will be facts but it's obviously from a very bias standpoint, there must be another viewpoint other than from action groups.

I know my own GP is very happy in his work and how things are run for him


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> No I believe a lot of what he says will be facts but it's obviously from a very bias standpoint, there must be another viewpoint other than from action groups.
> 
> I know my own GP is very happy in his work and how things are run for him


I know some of these pressure groups are very biased.

My GP is very happy in his work as well.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> Doctors for the NHS was initially the NHS Consultants' Association, but guess who's got his toes in that water, none other than Clive Peedell, you know, the one that left the other one cos they didn't treat him right. Also another activist and journalist Jacky Davis, yes she's a doctor too but seems to spend more time doing activist things


I wonder how long it will be before he leaves this group?


----------



## noushka05

This derision of experts is exactly why the USA is going down the plug hole as well. People ought to look over the pond because our current hard right tory party share pretty much the same ideology as those Republicans.


----------



## 1290423

Mines my neighbour, he's seldom there though these days, but that said he is past retirement age


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok point taken. Back to calling them thieving, scrounging, unhygienic tax avoiding inbred scumbags who pray on the vulnerable then.


Pikey is a slang term, which is considered derogatory and slighting ... It is not received well amongst Irish Travellers or Romas, and is considered an ethnic slur.

FYR: http://metro.co.uk/2007/12/13/pikey-is-now-a-race-hate-word-583752/

I also have friends in England who happen to be travellers. Good, honest, hardworking people who don't want to be tied down to bricks and mortar.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> The best thing about the conservatives is that every time people have a fit about what they promise to do, they u turn faster than Stirling Moss.


A massive 98% of junior drs voted to strike & they didn't u turn. Austerity protests all over the place & they didn't. A huge majority of people oppose fracking - no u turn. If they get in with a big majority we are in serious trouble.


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> A massive 98% of junior drs voted to strike & they didn't u turn. Austerity protests all over the place & they didn't. A huge majority of people oppose fracking - no u turn. If they get in with a big majority we are in serious trouble.


If they get in with a big majority it won't be my fault. It will be the fault of the other parties not giving us a decent alternative that the majority of people want to vote for, or the country's fault for not giving us PR. It's really bad that so many people are voting against the conservatives rather than for a party, or mp they like.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> This isn't NHAP though is it,you have changed your meme to a different one


Surely you're capable of critically evaluating the evidence. There is now a mountain range of evidence proving the tories are selling off our NHS. Even a video of Jeremy Hunt himself admitting he favours US style healthcare for our NHS. (that's the same Jeremy hunt who also co wrote a book on privatising our NHS  ) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...et-replacement-direct-democracy-a6865306.html

Do you know what the Naylor report is SWC?


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Surely you're capable of critically evaluating the evidence. There is now a mountain range of evidence proving the tories are selling off our NHS. Even a video of Jeremy Hunt himself admitting he favours US style healthcare for our NHS. (that's the same Jeremy hunt who also co wrote a book on privatising our NHS  ) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...et-replacement-direct-democracy-a6865306.html
> 
> Do you know what the Naylor report is SWC?


Noush it isn't just US health care that charges you know. Live anywhere else in the world apart from the UK you have to pay for healthcare, I had to in Holland, my dad had to in Germany, you even have to pay for it in Ireland. The NHS is flawed in so many ways because people abuse it because it's free.

Labour tried patching it up from 1997 until 2010 and failed, the Conservatives have realised that throwing chunks of unaccountable money at it doesn't work, and why should the NHS not be held to account over its finances? I could go on but I don't have the time.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> If they get in with a big majority it won't be my fault. It will be the fault of the other parties not giving us a decent alternative that the majority of people want to vote for, or the country's fault for not giving us PR. It's really bad that so many people are voting against the conservatives rather than for a party, or mp they like.


People who vote for regressive parties are responsible for putting them in power. I saw a lot of Americans voting for Trump because they didn't like the alternative - wonder how many regret that decision now hes taken away their health care ? or pulled out of the Paris agreement? or ramped up the destruction of wild animals & the environment?


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Noush it isn't just US health care that charges you know. Live anywhere else in the world apart from the UK you have to pay for healthcare, I had to in Holland, my dad had to in Germany, you even have to pay for it in Ireland. The NHS is flawed in so many ways because people abuse it.
> 
> Labour tried patching it up from 1997 until 2010 and failed, the Conservatives have realised that throwing chunks of unaccountable money at it doesn't work, and why should the NHS not be held to account over its finances? I could go on but I don't have the time.


They're not over spending on it - they are underfunding it & forcing it to make another £22 BILLION in cuts. If you really want to get informed do your research on the Health & Social care Act 2012 on STPs. People in those countries you mention don't go bankrupt paying for their health care like they do in the USA. The USA has the worst health service in the west. Even having a gold plated insurance cover isn't guaranteed to save you from bankruptcy. This is going to be us soon.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> They're not over spending on it - they are underfunding it & forcing it to make another £22 BILLION in cuts. If you really want to get informed do your research on the Health & Social care Act 2012 on STPs. People in those countries you mention don't go bankrupt paying for their health care like they do in the USA. The USA has the worst health service in the west. Even having a gold plated insurance cover isn't guaranteed to save you from bankruptcy. This is going to be us soon.
> 
> View attachment 312763


They are underfunding the NHS for overspending. The NHS hasn't been held to account for 30 years noush and surely you know that. 13 years might I add Labour had to fix the NHS and didn't. On top of this people abuse the NHS because it's free and it's staff. Perhaps the NHS should look at charging people for failed appointments without good reason etc. There is no simple solution to fixing the mess the NHS is in.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> They are underfunding the NHS for overspending. The NHS hasn't been held to account for 30 years noush and surely you know that. 13 years might I add Labour had to fix the NHS and didn't. On top of this people abuse the NHS because it's free and it's staff. Perhaps the NHS should look at charging people for failed appointments without good reason etc. There is no simple solution to fixing the mess the NHS is in.


The NHS was in surplus until they 'restructured' it - H&SC Act 2012.


----------



## 1290423

240 pages, umpteen posts, eight days to go and still no nearer making that decision, labour were out in force today on the local market, I must have walked past them three times, all they did was smile and turn away...... Sorta got an inkling they might know me


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> Pikey is a slang term, which is considered derogatory and slighting ... It is not received well amongst Irish Travellers or Romas, and is considered an ethnic slur.
> 
> FYR: http://metro.co.uk/2007/12/13/pikey-is-now-a-race-hate-word-583752/
> 
> I also have friends in England who happen to be travellers. Good, honest, hardworking people who don't want to be tied down to bricks and mortar.


Couldn't agree more, which is why (in the south of the UK anyway) the term Pikey refers to a specific anti-social type of traveller. Personally I think it's better to have this different term of reference for these scum so as to differentiate them for the honest and hard working traveller. Which is why I gave a number of examples rather than call them all the same.

What you like us to call these scum then?


----------



## 1290423

Or perhaps they just didn't like my placard


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> Doctors for the NHS was initially the NHS Consultants' Association, but guess who's got his toes in that water, none other than Clive Peedell, you know, the one that left the other one cos they didn't treat him right. Also another activist and journalist Jacky Davis, yes she's a doctor too but seems to spend more time doing activist things


So is it a crime now to be an activist? All that means is campaigning for what you believe in - so technically all those who went on the Countryside Alliance marches for blood sports are classed as activists - blood sports activists and anyone who writes to their local paper to complain about something is an activist. The only people who aren't activists are those that keep their mouths shut and don't stand up for what they believe in - whatever that may be.



rona said:


> Because you can't get a clear view if all you look at is what you want to believe. Not discrediting the lobbying groups at all. Just the person holding them all up as factual


Yes I gathered it was personal rather than about the actual issues.



stockwellcat said:


> I get it he's a spin doctor. Spins rubbish and claims they are facts :Hilarious :Muted


:Jawdrop Bloody hell - doctors are not my favourite people at the best of times but the one you are slating is a consultant oncologist - you know - he cares for people with cancer. I think that makes him rather more than a spin doctor 



Zaros said:


> Pikey is a slang term, which is considered derogatory and slighting ... It is not received well amongst Irish Travellers or Romas, and is considered an ethnic slur.
> 
> FYR: http://metro.co.uk/2007/12/13/pikey-is-now-a-race-hate-word-583752/
> 
> I also have friends in England who happen to be travellers. Good, honest, hardworking people who don't want to be tied down to bricks and mortar.


If I could talk my OH in to it we would be too. Nearly got him to give it all up and rent our house out and live in a motorhome permanently touring and would do so without hesitation if he would agree. That would make us travellers then. Strange how people like to stick labels on those who don't conform to their way of life.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> They're not over spending on it - they are underfunding it & forcing it to make another £22 BILLION in cuts. If you really want to get informed do your research on the Health & Social care Act 2012 on STPs. People in those countries you mention don't go bankrupt paying for their health care like they do in the USA. The USA has the worst health service in the west. Even having a gold plated insurance cover isn't guaranteed to save you from bankruptcy. This is going to be us soon.
> 
> View attachment 312763


Oh do stop wittering on about the NHS and how the tories are ruining it

If your beloved labour could not fix it when they were in power don't put all the blame on the tories and make them the scapegoat for labours failures

Labour had ample time to correct if but did not but I do not see you complaining about that, but then you would not, would you


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes I gathered it was personal rather than about the actual issues.


Not at all, just stating what I see as facts. If you only see one side how can you be balanced?



rottiepointerhouse said:


> So is it a crime now to be an activist? All that means is campaigning for what you believe in - so technically all those who went on the Countryside Alliance marches for blood sports are classed as activists - blood sports activists and anyone who writes to their local paper to complain about something is an activist. The only people who aren't activists are those that keep their mouths shut and don't stand up for what they believe in - whatever that may be.


Of course it's not a crime. I've got nothing but respect for those that get off their arse away from their computer screens and actually do something about what they believe in. Doesn't make them any more right than me


----------



## Lexiedhb

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So is it a crime now to be an activist? All that means is campaigning for what you believe in - so technically all those who went on the Countryside Alliance marches for blood sports are classed as activists - blood sports activists and anyone who writes to their local paper to complain about something is an activist. The only people who aren't activists are those that keep their mouths shut and don't stand up for what they believe in - whatever that may be.
> 
> Yes I gathered it was personal rather than about the actual issues.
> 
> :Jawdrop Bloody hell - doctors are not my favourite people at the best of times but the one you are slating is a consultant oncologist - you know - he cares for people with cancer. I think that makes him rather more than a spin doctor
> 
> If I could talk my OH in to it we would be too. Nearly got him to give it all up and rent our house out and live in a motorhome permanently touring and would do so without hesitation if he would agree. That would make us travellers then. Strange how people like to stick labels on those who don't conform to their way of life.


The labelling works both ways unfortunately......


----------



## Colliebarmy

We have to realise they all piss in the same pot and feed from the same trough... your all being conned


----------



## Honeys mum

DT said:


> . Sorta got an inkling they might know me


perhaps they have been reading your posts on PF DT.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> Not at all, just stating what I see as facts. If you only see one side how can you be balanced?
> 
> Of course it's not a crime. I've got nothing but respect for those that get off their arse away from their computer screens and actually do something about what they believe in. Doesn't make them any more right than me


But how do you know the person posting has only seen one side, they may well have looked at both sides and come to their conclusion reading what both side has to offer in way of evidence. Of course it doesn't make an activist any more right than you, nobody said it did, I just don't get the derision of people who as you say get off their arse and do something. There are many ways to be an activist of course - one of the most common ways is writing letters and emails to people which you can of course do sat on your computer. I'm sure most of us with strong views have gone on plenty of demonstrations in our time and some will have taken direct action in other ways which they might of course not be able to discuss on a public forum.



Lexiedhb said:


> The labelling works both ways unfortunately......


Sorry you have lost me there.


----------



## Honeys mum

Surprise as Corbyn joins tonight's live TV debate


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> 240 pages, umpteen posts, eight days to go and* still no nearer making that decision*,


Same here.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Honeys mum said:


> Surprise as Corbyn joins tonight's live TV debate


Oh goody I'll watch it.
Come on May drop in at the last minute.

I hope this will make me decide who I am going to vote but I won't hold my breath.


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I just don't get the derision of people who as you say get off their arse and do something


If you've taken it that way then you have taken it wrong. If you are an activists for any cause and are very involved in that then you are most probably coming from a bias standpoint.

If the other side was ever given then I'd be more inclined to listen and take notice. Some people on here do seem to at least try and get/post proper information from both sides rather than lambasting with propaganda


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> If you've taken it that way then you have taken it wrong. If you are an activists for any cause and are very involved in that then you are most probably coming from a bias standpoint.
> 
> If the other side was ever given then I'd be more inclined to listen and take notice. Some people on here do seem to at least try and get/post proper information from both sides rather than lambasting with propaganda


People who don't agree with the lambaster can always post the alternative evidence then other forum members/readers can make up their own mind


----------



## rona

http://www.fwi.co.uk/news/wealthy-landowners-face-cuts-brexit-says-eustice.htm

"Wealthy landowners and farmers face cuts in the levels of farm support after Brexit under a Conservative government,"


----------



## Elles

My view is balanced and unbiased. I don't like any of them. If lib dem had a chance here, I'd probably vote lib dem, because on balance I dislike fewer of their policies than I do of the other two.


----------



## Lexiedhb

rottiepointerhouse said:


> But how do you know the person posting has only seen one side, they may well have looked at both sides and come to their conclusion reading what both side has to offer in way of evidence. Of course it doesn't make an activist any more right than you, nobody said it did, I just don't get the derision of people who as you say get off their arse and do something. There are many ways to be an activist of course - one of the most common ways is writing letters and emails to people which you can of course do sat on your computer. I'm sure most of us with strong views have gone on plenty of demonstrations in our time and some will have taken direct action in other ways which they might of course not be able to discuss on a public forum.
> 
> Sorry you have lost me there.


Some Travellers have less than pleasant names for those who reside in one place .......


----------



## Elles

rona said:


> http://www.fwi.co.uk/news/wealthy-landowners-face-cuts-brexit-says-eustice.htm
> 
> "Wealthy landowners and farmers face cuts in the levels of farm support after Brexit under a Conservative government,"


Good.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Elles

What is Theresa May doing instead? If she was already booked for something important, she'd have to keep to it. It's not like she knew there was going to be an election, she said there wasn't.


----------



## Elles

Honeys mum said:


> Surprise as Corbyn joins tonight's live TV debate


Let's hope this one doesn't end up being a debate on the IRA.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> If I could talk my OH in to it we would be too. Nearly got him to give it all up and rent our house out and live in a motorhome permanently touring and would do so without hesitation if he would agree. That would make us travellers then. Strange how people like to stick labels on those who don't conform to their way of life.


Deleted rest of post as I misunderstood where @rottiepointerhouse was coming from. Apologies.

Besides I'm desperate to know the latest turn of events @stockwellcat who you favouring today?


----------



## Honeys mum

stockwellcat said:


> Oh goody I'll watch it.


I will have to record it. Have to watch BGT. Sad isn't it.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Oh goody I'll watch it.
> Come on May drop in at the last minute.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> @stockwellcat who you favouring today?


Undecided and have been for a while now


----------



## stockwellcat.

Honeys mum said:


> Have to watch BGT. Sad isn't it.


David Walliams for PM


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 312777


Well Maggie is right isn't she?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> Strange how some people like to accuse others of being racist when the post they are referring to clearly gave a number of examples of type of travellers, Pikey being just one. But never mind I'll let go because there's obviously a chip on your shoulder about something. Or might just be point scoring for whatever your own ends are.
> 
> Also it was a vaguely related post regarding the election that you have dragged into something totally irrelevant to the thread.
> 
> So that's an end of it from me.
> 
> Besides I'm desperate to know the latest turn of events @stockwellcat who you favouring today?


To be clear I did not accuse you of being racist. I said

"You do realise that "Pickey" is considered a race hate word and that people have been prosecuted for using it."

and

"Whether you like it or agree with it the name has been classed as a racial/ethnic hate term and people have been prosecuted for using it."

To point out that a word someone has used is considered a race hate word and people have been prosecuted for using it is not calling *you *a racist - it is pointing out that a word you are using has been classed as a hate term. I have no chip on my shoulder and was not point scoring - I was actually offering you the opportunity to say you hadn't realised that and would go back and edit your post to remove it. I have nothing to gain by point scoring about the terminology you use and there are plenty of posts on this thread which some would view as irrelevant - long threads like this that run for weeks have a habit of going off at a tangent - it wasn't me who raised the issue you are now objecting to me commenting on


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> To be clear I did not accuse you of being racist. I said
> 
> "You do realise that "Pickey" is considered a race hate word and that people have been prosecuted for using it."
> 
> and
> 
> "Whether you like it or agree with it the name has been classed as a racial/ethnic hate term and people have been prosecuted for using it."
> 
> To point out that a word someone has used is considered a race hate word and people have been prosecuted for using it is not calling *you *a racist - it is pointing out that a word you are using has been classed as a hate term. I have no chip on my shoulder and was not point scoring - I was actually offering you the opportunity to say you hadn't realised that and would go back and edit your post to remove it. I have nothing to gain by point scoring about the terminology you use and there are plenty of posts on this thread which some would view as irrelevant - long threads like this that run for weeks have a habit of going off at a tangent - it wasn't me who raised the issue you are now objecting to me commenting on


Please accept my apologies, I took your last post on the subject personally. I shouldn't have done


----------



## samuelsmiles

We have even less of a voice in Buckinghamshire. John Bercow, the Speaker of the House, is our representative and "it is a long-held tradition for the mainstream parties to respect the constituency of the Speaker and not to field candidates against him." So no Conservative, Labour or Lib Dems. Surely the Speaker should only serve 1 term?

We do have a 25 year old (Scott Raven) independent candidate standing, however, and he'll be getting my vote.

On a positive note I don't have to make the decision to vote Conservative or Labour.


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> My view is balanced and unbiased. I don't like any of them. If lib dem had a chance here, I'd probably vote lib dem, because on balance I dislike fewer of their policies than I do of the other two.


We've had a few Lib Dem councils around here and generally they don't get in again


----------



## kimthecat

Russel brand is endorsing Corbyn oh oh ! Kiss of death or will he win the youngsters over ?


----------



## Guest

noushka05 said:


> http://www.mediareform.org.uk/wp-co...o_owns_the_UK_media-report_plus_appendix1.pdf .





noushka05 said:


> lol I think you'll find the National Health Action Party is a VERY credible source. Or don't you trust the people we trust with our lives? Perhaps you have more trust non dom media barons & tory politicians.


Would this link be objective enough? For those, who are interested, you can check them out and think how reliable these sources of information really are in comparison to the links Noushka puts on PF.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_Kingdom
(and about how much they try to avoid paying tax
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Harmsworth,_4th_Viscount_Rothermere
or about their reliabolity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Desmond



cheekyscrip said:


> I actually believe Scandinavian model works. But total nationalisation never does. That is not economically viable, that is just killing any cost effectiveness... Both extremes are just very dangerous, rampant capitalism and dictatorship of communism. The last one is just deadly.
> " power for the people"...but people mattered the least....


I agree, extremes don´t work, and at least by the numbers (from social welfare, wellbeing etc) Scandi countries work. Not perfect, still lots to do, but a as a model one of the bests. Won´t change that for anything, unless I were a multimillionaire looking for tax havens...



stockwellcat said:


> Noush it isn't just US health care that charges you know. Live anywhere else in the world apart from the UK you have to pay for healthcare, I had to in Holland, my dad had to in Germany, you even have to pay for it in Ireland. The NHS is flawed in so many ways because people abuse it because it's free.
> Labour tried patching it up from 1997 until 2010 and failed, the Conservatives have realised that throwing chunks of unaccountable money at it doesn't work, and why should the NHS not be held to account over its finances? I could go on but I don't have the time.


We pay too on our healthcare. A visit to dentist about 20-30€, a visit to a specialist (about 20€) etc, If you live on benefits, social care will pick all medical bills, The maximum amount is 691€/ year. In US I believe the sums you pay will have 2-3 zeros more so 20€ > 2000€. So if you are seriously ill, it won´t cost you more than 691€. In US you´d just can´t afford to get seriously ill, as you´d need to pay 20 000-200 000€. (Unless your company has a good insurance).

Naturally our NHS is constantly hold accountable of their finances, and we have one of the most cost effective NHS in the world, if you compare the results and the amount of money you spend on it. Netherland seems to have the best system. I post the same link again, if you want to compare countries.

2016 http://www.healthpowerhouse.com/files/EHCI_2016/EHCI_2016_report.pdf


----------



## Honeys mum

Just seen on BBC News J.C. has invited T.M. to join him tonight on the debate.. She has refused, saying she would rather be out meeting people.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Honeys mum said:


> Just seen on BBC News J.C. has invited T.M. to join him tonight on the debate.. She has refused, saying she would rather be out meeting people.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> She'd rather duck and dive.


That's a bit harsh and uncalled for. I've heard she's not going because she already had arrangements made, weeks ago, that she can't cancel. So it's the BBC's own fault/error for having the debate in direct competition with britain's got talent.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> people abuse it because it's free


...Including many who have _never_ worked a day here and _never_ contributed a penny to the system.


----------



## rona

Lets face it, throwing money at the NHS isn't going to fix it. It's blatantly obvious what needs doing to at least start to put things right. Fine people for missed appointments, It's disgusting how many are missed. Sort out social care, most old people don't need and don't want to be in hospital.
Allow people to choose euthanasia, Far too many people who don't want to be here are suffering immeasurably
Stop treating all those Friday and Saturday night drunks in A&E


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> That's a bit harsh and uncalled for. I've heard she's not going because she already had arrangements made, weeks ago, that she can't cancel. So it's the BBC's own fault/error for having the debate in direct competition with britain's got talent.


Oh I forgot BGT (even though it was mentioned above - doh) is on so I apologise

It is annoying they have clashed the debate with BGT.

I retract what I said.


----------



## Lexiedhb

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Lets face it, throwing money at the NHS isn't going to fix it. It's blatantly obvious what needs doing to at least start to put things right. Fine people for missed appointments, It's disgusting how many are missed. Sort out social care, most old people don't need and don't want to be in hospital.
> Allow people to choose euthanasia, Far too many people who don't want to be here are suffering immeasurably
> Stop treating all those Friday and Saturday night drunks in A&E


Stop writing prescriptions for paracetamol. Turn people away from a &e when they have neither had an accident, nor require emergency treatment. Educate people that they do not need to see a doctor for a common cold, scraped knee, or standard headache.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Lexiedhb said:


> Stop writing prescriptions for paracetamol. Turn people away from a &e when they have neither had an accident, nor require emergency treatment. Educate people that they do not need to see a doctor for a common cold, scraped knee, or standard headache.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Lets face it, throwing money at the NHS isn't going to fix it. It's blatantly obvious what needs doing to at least start to put things right. Fine people for missed appointments, It's disgusting how many are missed. Sort out social care, most old people don't need and don't want to be in hospital.
> Allow people to choose euthanasia, Far too many people who don't want to be here are suffering immeasurably
> Stop treating all those Friday and Saturday night drunks in A&E


Yeah all those cuts - under the guise of 'efficiency savings', the underfunding, the ramped up privatisation have had no effect at all.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Lexiedhb said:


> Stop writing prescriptions for paracetamol. Turn people away from a &e when they have neither had an accident, nor require emergency treatment. Educate people that they do not need to see a doctor for a common cold, scraped knee, or standard headache.


Not my post you've quoted.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Oh do stop wittering on about the NHS and how the tories are ruining it
> 
> If your beloved labour could not fix it when they were in power don't put all the blame on the tories and make them the scapegoat for labours failures
> 
> Labour had ample time to correct if but did not but I do not see you complaining about that, but then you would not, would you


They're not my beloved labour as you put it. I have been critical of labour for their failings, the fact remains the NHS is on the brink of collapse due to the tories 'restructuring' of it. Even Cameron admitted it was their biggest mistake - yet they have carried on regardless.


----------



## noushka05

Lexiedhb said:


> How funny.....
> Just because someone is a doctor, does not mean they don't have a vested interest in what happens to the body which surrounds their career.... they do, which makes their stance somewhat biased.
> I have no faith in any politician.


People don't have to have vested interest in something to care about it. I would imaging doctors would get paid much more in a private hospital but hard as it may be to believe many of them love the principles of our NHS. Fair & free treatment for all at the point of need.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> That's easy, one sided pressure groups


lol


----------



## noushka05

Drs are sharing this -

stick your postcode in this website, zoom out, and take a look at projected #*NHS* *cuts* in your area http://nhscuts.org.uk/#!/


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> People don't have to have vested interest in something to care about it. I would imaging doctors would get paid much more in a private hospital but hard as it may be to believe many of them love the principles of our NHS. Fair & free treatment for all at the point of need.


So when the NHS fails they are all going to quit medicine and get another career on the go?


----------



## Lexiedhb

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not my post you've quoted.


Nope it was quite clearly Rona's...... Oddness


----------



## Elles

It seems we all agree that the NHS needs improvement, we just don't all agree that throwing more money at it is the answer, or that the American example is the only alternative.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Elles said:


> It seems we all agree that the NHS needs improvement, we just don't all agree that throwing more money at it is the answer, or that the American example is the only alternative.


The answer is obvious, a meeting of the two. Encouraging those that can pay to do so, and discouraging the time wasters.


----------



## 1290423

Well stockwell! Still as clear as mud here


----------



## Dr Pepper

Well I've just returned to BGT, I can see exactly why Mrs May wouldn't want to join in a debate with these petulant children.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Well stockwell! Still as clear as mud here


Not even watching the debate tonight. Can't be bothered. I'll close my eyes at the ballot box and put an x in the box for UKIP/Conservative coalition Government 

Oh damn just thought there are no boxes for guessing a coalition government. :Smuggrin

Honestly still undecided @DT


----------



## Guest

rona said:


> Lets face it, throwing money at the NHS isn't going to fix it. It's blatantly obvious what needs doing to at least start to put things right. Fine people for missed appointments, It's disgusting how many are missed. Sort out social care, most old people don't need and don't want to be in hospital.
> Allow people to choose euthanasia, Far too many people who don't want to be here are suffering immeasurably
> Stop treating all those Friday and Saturday night drunks in A&E


So the problem is the patients, not the cut backs in the system? What about those cases, when people don´t go to a doctor, when they should? Or aren´t treated, when they should? Usually that is still the bigger problem. But naturally missed appointments are a waste, that should be dealt with. Like sending messages the previous day as a reminder, and also making people pay for them, if they miss them and don´t cancel them in time without a good reason. Social care should be sorted out too, as I´m sure a reform is necessary. (but not cut backs).

But do you seriously mean, that if someone is drunk, he/she shouldn´t be treated? What about smokers? Sofa potatoes? Where do you draw the line? What about if some is just a bit tipsy and has a fall? Or is drunk on Wednesday?

Just to get real, these statistics do make interesting reading .E.g. Comparing bed availability from 2012-2016, the amount of beds have been cut by about 10 000. (from about 140 000 to 131 00) You think that these cuts have nothing to do with the current problems? 
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statisti...lity-and-occupancy-quarter-ending-march-2017/

Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_the_United_Kingdom

So lets face it, cuts will make NHS much worse, as it you don´t have a bed to lie in when you need it, the quality of healthcare is bad. You have had a great system, but not for long, if the "development" means cuts.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> So the problem is the patients, not the cut backs in the system? What about those cases, when people don´t go to a doctor, when they should? Or aren´t treated, when they should? Usually that is still the bigger problem. But naturally missed appointments are a waste, that should be dealt with. Like sending messages the previous day as a reminder, and also making people pay for them, if they miss them and don´t cancel them in time without a good reason. Social care should be sorted out too, as I´m sure a reform is necessary. (but not cut backs).
> 
> But do you seriously mean, that if someone is drunk, he/she shouldn´t be treated? What about smokers? Sofa potatoes? Where do you draw the line? What about if some is just a bit tipsy and has a fall? Or is drunk on Wednesday?
> 
> Just to get real, these statistics do make interesting reading .E.g. Comparing bed availability from 2012-2016, the amount of beds have been cut by about 10 000. (from about 140 000 to 131 00) You think that these cuts have nothing to do with the current problems?
> https://www.england.nhs.uk/statisti...lity-and-occupancy-quarter-ending-march-2017/
> 
> Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_the_United_Kingdom
> 
> So lets face it, cuts will make NHS much worse, as it you don´t have a bed to lie in when you need it, the quality of healthcare is bad. You have had a great system, but not for long, if the "development" means cuts.


Or......

Making the NHS responsible for its expenditure. Do people come to your country for free treatment? Would they get it? If the NHS started charging those not entitled to use the service that would be a good start. Then they could start looking at costs, all those unecessary GP appointment follow ups that could be dealt with via a phone call (I'm seriously pissed at the amount of time and money that's wasted looking for why a 88 year old isn't as healthy as a 30 year old, and thats my parents and in-laws I'm talking about!).

Privatisation, but still free at the point of delivery for those in need, could well be the best thing to drag the NHS into the realities of the 21st century. Chucking cash at it has never worked.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> Or......
> 
> Makeing the NHS responsible for its expenditure. Do people come to your country for free treatment? Would they get it? If the NHS started charging those not entitled to use the service that would be a good start. Then they could start looking at costs, all those unecessary GP appointment follow ups that could be dealt with via a phone call (I'm seriously pissed at the amount of time that's wasted looking for why a 88 year old isn't as healthy as a 30 year old, and thats my parents and in-laws I'm talking about!).
> 
> Privatisation, but still free at the point of delivery for those in need, could well be the best thing to drag the NHS into the realities of the 21st century. Chucking cash at it has never worked.


Can you give us some examples of how they waste money looking at why an 88 year old isn't as healthy as a 30 year old? Do you mean routine screening and monitoring of risk factors for heart disease, stroke and diabetes or do you mean how many press ups they can do and how long it takes to run a mile?


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Can you give us some examples of how they waste money looking at why an 88 year old isn't as healthy as a 30 year old? Do you mean routine screening and monitoring of risk factors for heart disease, stroke and diabetes or do you mean how many press ups they can do and how long it takes to run a mile?


Mostly the first things you mentioned but less so. 88 year old gets out of breath after walking three miles, let's do loads of tests, hospital appointments and follow ups. The bloke is 88 he's going to get out of breath and tired quicker, when tests come back normal for his age then go onto more time consuming and costly tests. Seems like being old is now considered a treatable disease.

Instead of the GP telephoning negative/all ok results to patients they are calling them into the practice and using valuable appointments just to say "all's well".

Maybe it's different in other parts of the UK, but round here the way the NHS is run is pathetically inefficient.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Or......
> 
> Making the NHS responsible for its expenditure. Do people come to your country for free treatment? Would they get it? If the NHS started charging those not entitled to use the service that would be a good start.


So why not detail just how much this costs the NHS in the overall scheme of things? Then maybe you could explain why avoiding recognising something like TB and have it spread into the "entitled" population would actually work out cheaper? Sounds great but like most things.. not as black and white as it sounds.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well a friend of mine from Oxford has told me the waiting lists in Oxford are so high at hospitals people are being referred at the expense of the NHS to private hospitals just so people can get seen.


----------



## Zaros

.


stockwellcat said:


> I'll close my eyes at the ballot box and put an x in the.........


I thought I would always miss the opportunity to draw a penis on my ballot paper come polling day, but not anymore....a good friend recently informed me, it counted as a vote for the conservatives anyway.:Wacky


----------



## 1290423

Out of interest can anyone tell me how much the nhs spent on interpretators in the last three years


----------



## 1290423

Zaros said:


> .
> 
> I thought I would always miss the opportunity to draw a penis on my ballot paper come polling day, but not anymore....a good friend recently informed me, it counted as a vote for the conservatives anyway.:Wacky


You sure? I thought the cons were tits and labour djckies


----------



## 1290423

And tim fallon were certainly the comedian, seriously I thought he was really funny


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> So why not detail just how much this costs the NHS in the overall scheme of things? Then maybe you could explain why avoiding recognising something like TB and have it spread into the "entitled" population would actually work out cheaper? Sounds great but like most things.. not as black and white as it sounds.


Couldn't tell you because the NHS don't charge our family as they are entitled to use it. Oh, just remembered they don't charge those not intitled either.

Is TB a big problem in the UK?

I don't know what country you reside in, but I would ask do they provide free medical care to anyone without question?


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> Couldn't tell you because the NHS don't charge our family as they are entitled to use it. Oh, just remembered they don't charge those not intitled either.
> 
> Is TB a big problem in the UK?
> 
> I don't know what country you reside in, but I would ask do they provide free medical care to anyone without question?


TB a problem, You bet he was! Still is always sticking his oar in


----------



## Zaros

DT said:


> You sure? I thought the cons were tits and labour djckies


I don't think it really matters what genitalia you apply to tell them apart, once they're all in the same room together, they just become a pack of *****.:Smug


----------



## bearcub

DT said:


> Out of interest can anyone tell me how much the nhs spent on interpretators in the last three years


Around £20 million a year


----------



## kimthecat

DT said:


> And tim fallon were certainly the comedian, seriously I thought he was really funny


 I laughed when he said muesli eating guardian readers :Hilarious


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> TB a problem, You bet he was! Still is always sticking his oar in


You are right, he did infect the population of the UK and another outbreak could be imminent.


----------



## 1290423

bearcub said:


> Around £20 million a year


Thank you, albeit not as much as I would have thought


----------



## 1290423

kimthecat said:


> I laughed when he said muesli eating guardian readers :Hilarious


And advertiser the bake off starting over on bbc2


----------



## 1290423

kimthecat said:


> I laughed when he said muesli eating guardian readers :Hilarious


Heck! I eat muesli wonder if he's planning an extra tax on it


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> You are right, he did infect the population of the UK and another outbreak could be imminent.


Dont worry, all the money they're going to chuck at the NHS they"ll soon invent a cure for it. Prevention would have been preferable but hey ho that's so it goes


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> Mostly the first things you mentioned but less so. 88 year old gets out of breath after walking three miles, let's do loads of tests, hospital appointments and follow ups. The bloke is 88 he's going to get out of breath and tired quicker, when tests come back normal for his age then go onto more time consuming and costly tests. Seems like being old is now considered a treatable disease.
> 
> Instead of the GP telephoning negative/all ok results to patients they are calling them into the practice and using valuable appointments just to say "all's well".
> 
> Maybe it's different in other parts of the UK, but round here the way the NHS is run is pathetically inefficient.


 If an 88 year old has a good quality of life and is still active/enjoying life then I think its a good idea to screen/monitor them and give appropriate lifestyle advice in the hope of avoiding the onset of a condition that will cost the NHS a lot of money. There are plenty of 30 and 40 year olds these days who don't look after themselves or care about how much the chronic diseases they end up with will cost the NHS. I would rather see resources targeted at prevention for all ages.

In our area we phone in to the GP for test results, they set aside half an hour every lunch time for telephone consults so you can ring for advice or results without going in unless there is something they prefer to tell you face to face or which needs further investigation/treatment.


----------



## 1290423

So the odds are suggesting we could have a 'hung' parliament then. Do you think maybe this,was what TM was hoping for when she called the election?
I dont, I think she was that sure of winning. But that said this must be one of the worst run election campaigns there has ever been the woman deserves to lose votes!


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> If an 88 year old has a good quality of life and is still active/enjoying life then I think its a good idea to screen/monitor them and give appropriate lifestyle advice in the hope of avoiding the onset of a condition that will cost the NHS a lot of money. There are plenty of 30 and 40 year olds these days who don't look after themselves or care about how much the chronic diseases they end up with will cost the NHS. I would rather see resources targeted at prevention for all ages.


I'm with you on the prevention rottie but do you not think that we get more health conscious as we get older which emphasises the need to start early and make interesting the importance of a healthy lifestyle.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Couldn't tell you because the NHS don't charge our family as they are entitled to use it. Oh, just remembered they don't charge those not intitled either.
> 
> Is TB a big problem in the UK?
> 
> I don't know what country you reside in, but I would ask do they provide free medical care to anyone without question?


So once again, no answer. You make statements you are unable to back up with facts simply as they sound great to support you. TB simply an example demonstrating why prevention can easily save money.

As for your question, answer is no, medical isn't free but then I know, from experience, the UK isn't free either, even for people from the EU.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> But that said this must be one of the worst run election campaigns there has ever been the woman deserves to lose votes!


Absolutely one of the worst run election campaigns I have ever seen in my lifetime.

Another waste of tax payers money or is it?

I am personally lost as to who to vote for.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Absolutely one of the worst run election campaigns I have ever seen in my lifetime.
> 
> Another waste of tax payers money or is it?
> 
> I am personally lost as to who to vote for.


Well im not, not anymore, but ask me again this time next week!


----------



## Satori

DT said:


> So the odds are suggesting we could have a 'hung' parliament then. Do you think maybe this,was what TM was hoping for when she called the election?
> I dont, I think she was that sure of winning. But that said this must be one of the worst run election campaigns there has ever been the woman deserves to lose votes!


Not an iota of doubt remaining as far as I am concerned. She wanted to lose and still does. Doesn't want the job but lacks the character to quit. Seriously: if one were to run a nationwide competition to gather ideas from which to derive the most crass, stupid, doomed-to-fail election campaign in history; there is nothing that would be dreamt up that she hasn't done.

The Monster Raving Loony party appears sober and professional in comparison.

I know longer know anybody (in the real world) who intends to vote such is the paucity of intelligent thought behind any of the party manifestos.

@porps come back; your country needs you.


----------



## Elles

I like Caroline Lucas.  What a sensible lady.


----------



## FeelTheBern

Why hasn't May been attending the debates? She called the election, didn't she?


----------



## stockwellcat.

I was that fed up with the campaigns so far from all parties that I refused to watch the debate on BBC 1 and instead watched something boringly educational on the great fire of London. The whole election campaign is dull and no one has given me a good reason to choose them. TM seems to want to lose the election she'll be replaced by Corbyn or possibly a coalition without a doubt. She obviously called the election because she doesn't want the responsibility of delivering Brexit, she has no real motivation for this election campaign and surrounds herself with not many members of public, she isn't really reaching out to the public as well. Personally I think she is going to lose and she is trying her best to do this as well.

Rant over but thought I'd just let you know how I see what is going on.


----------



## 1290423

Satori said:


> Not an iota of doubt remaining as far as I am concerned. She wanted to lose and still does. Doesn't want the job but lacks the character to quit. Seriously: if one were to run a nationwide competition to gather ideas from which to derive the most crass, stupid, doomed-to-fail election campaign in history; there is nothing that would be dreamt up that she hasn't done.
> 
> The Monster Raving Loony party appears sober and professional in comparison.
> 
> I know longer know anybody (in the real world) who intends to vote such is the paucity of intelligent thought behind any of the party manifestos.
> 
> @porps come back; your country needs you.


Yes I felt she came across well did really like her, sad that I dont agree with a lot of their proposals. But could well switch to them in the future.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I was that fed up with the campaigns so far from all parties that I refused to watch the debate on BBC 1 and instead watched something boringly educational on the great fire of London. The whole election campaign is dull and no one has given me a good reason to choose them. TM seems to want to lose the election she'll be replaced by Corbyn or possibly a coalition without a doubt. She obviously called the election because she doesn't want the responsibility of delivering Brexit, she has no real motivation for this election campaign and surrounds herself with not many members of public, she isn't really reaching out to the public as well. Personally I think she is going to lose and she is trying her best to do this as well.
> 
> Rant over but thought I'd just let you know how I see what is going on.


Look on the bright side Stockwell this time next week it will all be over.
Wonder what the thread that replaces,it wi be,named?
We are all doomed maybe
Or
You didnt listen
Or
We tried to tell you


----------



## 3dogs2cats

For those who are thinking of not voting, (hopefully link will work!)

http://www.votenone.org.uk/


----------



## 1290423

FeelTheBern said:


> Why hasn't May been attending the debates? She called the election, didn't she?


Maybe its the wrong time of the month
Or shes washing her hair perhaps


----------



## Elles

The conservatives want to lose this one, watch Corbyn/coalition make a pig's ear of it, then get back in afterwards for the next 50 years and do what they like. Let's hope that if labour do win, they don't make a pig's ear of it.


----------



## bearcub

It would be interesting if we could do the poll on this thread again to compare.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Look on the bright side Stockwell this time next week it will all be over.
> Wonder what the thread that replaces,it wi be,named?
> We are all doomed maybe
> Or
> You didnt listen
> Or
> We tried to tell you


The Labour supporters jumping for joy if we have a hung Parliament. The Tories would have to have a Coalition with them because there Brexit plan is almost the same. Labour won't let them make anymore cuts and will make the Tories spend some money and reverse some of the cuts. The Tories said they wouldn't go into coalition with the Lib Dems again. So the other alternative is a Tory/SNP coalition as the SNP said they wouldn't go into coalition with Labour.

Yep one week to go.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> The conservatives want to lose this one, watch Corbyn/coalition make a pig's ear of it, then get back in afterwards for the next 50 years and do what they like. Let's hope that if labour do win, they don't make a pig's ear of it.


Both main parties are going to cream cracker us in my view.


----------



## stockwellcat.

bearcub said:


> It would be interesting if we could do the poll on this thread again to compare.


I don't know if I can start another poll on this thread. Is it possible?


----------



## 3dogs2cats

FeelTheBern said:


> Why hasn't May been attending the debates? She called the election, didn't she?


 Because she knows she is piss poor under pressure


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I don't know if I can start another poll on this thread. Is it possible?


Maybe start one just to vote on, no replies, post here the same, there must be a clever mod who can sort that out


----------



## Elles

Another poll on what? We can change our vote on this one. I'm confused.


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> For those who are thinking of not voting, (hopefully link will work!)
> 
> http://www.votenone.org.uk/


I am voting but who I don't know. I need to re-evaluate things. I am not wasting my vote by not voting.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well including me there are 26 undecided voters on the poll on this thread. Let's see if we change our minds in the next 7 days.


----------



## noushka05

Lexiedhb said:


> So when the NHS fails they are all going to quit medicine and get another career on the go?


A lot have already quit. Many more are considering. NHS staff are leaving in droves - even going to work in supermarkets. This Junior Dr quit live on air.








Elles said:


> It seems we all agree that the NHS needs improvement, we just don't all agree that throwing more money at it is the answer, or that the American example is the only alternative.


They're not throwing money at it, they're deliberately underfunding it whilst forcing the NHS to make cuts. We now spend less per GDP then any western country I believe. The only way to save our NHS is to repeal the dreadful Health & Social care act 2012, get rid of the internal market & take our NHS back into public ownership - which Labour will do.



Dr Pepper said:


> Or......
> 
> Making the NHS responsible for its expenditure. Do people come to your country for free treatment? Would they get it? If the NHS started charging those not entitled to use the service that would be a good start. Then they could start looking at costs, all those unecessary GP appointment follow ups that could be dealt with via a phone call (I'm seriously pissed at the amount of time and money that's wasted looking for why a 88 year old isn't as healthy as a 30 year old, and thats my parents and in-laws I'm talking about!).
> 
> Privatisation, but still free at the point of delivery for those in need, could well be the best thing to drag the NHS into the realities of the 21st century. Chucking cash at it has never worked.


As Caroline Lucas says its not migrants to blame that you cant get a hospital appointment, its government cuts. You're more likely to be treated by a migrant then be behind on in a queue. The tories are driving these people away!












Elles said:


> I like Caroline Lucas.  What a sensible lady.


She's the best politician in the UK. Caroline Lucas is the exact opposite of Theresa May, courageous, kind, caring, honest, compassionate, humble and trustworthy.



FeelTheBern said:


> Why hasn't May been attending the debates? She called the election, didn't she?


Because she's spineless - to scared to be put under any scrutiny. Shes an absolutely hopeless politician. Which doesn't bode well for brexit negotiations.


Elles said:


> The conservatives want to lose this one, watch Corbyn/coalition make a pig's ear of it, then get back in afterwards for the next 50 years and do what they like. Let's hope that if labour do win, they don't make a pig's ear of it.


Seriously Elles, has the country ever been in such a state? Every public service in crisis, our NHS going after 69 years, a country divided. The tories are toxic.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> As Caroline Lucas says its not migrants to blame that you cant get a hospital appointment, its government cuts. You're more likely to be treated by a migrant then be behind on in a queue. The tories are driving these people away!


What I said was "start charging people who are not intitled to use it" working migrants paying their taxes don't come into this which is why I never mentioned it.

It's the UK's National Health Service. Not the International Health Service.

Getting that sorted would be one step of many in the right direction.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> As for your question, answer is no, medical isn't free but then I know, from experience, the UK isn't free either, even for people from the EU.


Of course it's not free for EU residents, why would it be? Have you not got one of those European Health Insurance Cards? They give you the same service within the EU that'd you'd get in your own country, so you'd pay the same in the UK as you would at home. I don't know how the fee is collected, I presume you'd be billed by your own country?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Of course it's not free for EU residents, why would it be? Have you not got one of those European Health Insurance Cards? They give you the same service within the EU that'd you'd get in your own country, so you'd pay the same in the UK as you would at home. I don't know how the fee is collected, I presume you'd be billed by your own country?


You cannot use the European Health Insurance Card if you live in another European country it is only for those going on holiday. You have to buy health insurance in the country you are living in. This was the way it was when I lived in the Netherlands (Holland). You cannot claim the health insurance policy you pay into to another European country back from the NHS if living in that European country.


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> A lot have already quit. Many more are considering. NHS staff are leaving in droves - even going to work in supermarkets. This Junior Dr quit live on air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They're not throwing money at it, they're deliberately underfunding it whilst forcing the NHS to make cuts. We now spend less per GDP then any western country I believe. The only way to save our NHS is to repeal the dreadful Health & Social care act 2012, get rid of the internal market & take our NHS back into public ownership - which Labour will do.
> 
> As Caroline Lucas says its not migrants to blame that you cant get a hospital appointment, its government cuts. You're more likely to be treated by a migrant then be behind on in a queue. The tories are driving these people away!
> 
> View attachment 312831
> 
> 
> She's the best politician in the UK. Caroline Lucas is the exact opposite of Theresa May, courageous, kind, caring, honest, compassionate, humble and trustworthy.
> 
> Because she's spineless - to scared to be put under any scrutiny. Shes an absolutely hopeless politician. Which doesn't bode well for brexit negotiations.
> 
> Seriously Elles, has the country ever been in such a state? Every public service in crisis, our NHS going after 69 years, a country divided. The tories are toxic.


Well that totally contradicts what you said about them doing it for the love of the NHS. Being short of medical staff isn't going to help is it.. ....


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> Look on the bright side Stockwell this time next week it will all be over.
> Wonder what the thread that replaces,it wi be,named?


If it's anything like the EU referendum thread, it will run for ever...and ever...and ever. And the usual suspects (you know who) will still be trying to blind us with facts and quotes and so many pictures it looks like the Beano.


----------



## samuelsmiles

noushka05 said:


> A lot have already quit. Many more are considering. *NHS staff are leaving in droves - even going to work in supermarkets.* This Junior Dr quit live on air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They're not throwing money at it, they're deliberately underfunding it whilst forcing the NHS to make cuts. We now spend less per GDP then any western country I believe. The only way to save our NHS is to repeal the dreadful Health & Social care act 2012, get rid of the internal market & take our NHS back into public ownership - which Labour will do.
> 
> As Caroline Lucas says its not migrants to blame that you cant get a hospital appointment, its government cuts. You're more likely to be treated by a migrant then be behind on in a queue. The tories are driving these people away!
> 
> View attachment 312831
> 
> 
> She's the best politician in the UK. Caroline Lucas is the exact opposite of Theresa May, courageous, kind, caring, honest, compassionate, humble and trustworthy.
> 
> Because she's spineless - to scared to be put under any scrutiny. Shes an absolutely hopeless politician. Which doesn't bode well for brexit negotiations.
> 
> Seriously Elles, has the country ever been in such a state? Every public service in crisis, our NHS going after 69 years, a country divided. The tories are toxic.


Noushka, I've seen this supermarket claim before without any real evidence of it happening. Can you substantiate one case where a NHS worker has left to work in a supermarket stacking shelves or sitting on the tills to earn more money?

One case please. Just 1.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Does anyone remember that QC in Ireland who was going to go to court after raising £70,000 to try and find out if article 50 is reversible by taking it to the European Court? It was his attempt to stop Brexit. The Campaigners in Dublin have abandoned the case. I wonder what will happen to the £70,000 he raised in donations, surely he'd have to pay it back to the contributors?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> If it's anything like the EU referendum thread, it will run for ever...and ever...and ever.


No it won't.
Once the results are through on the 9th June 2017 I'll ask for the thread to be closed.


----------



## Happy Paws2

stockwellcat said:


> No it won't.
> Once the results are through on the 9th June 2017 I'll ask for the thread to be closed.


I'm with you on that, you can't keep flogging a dead horse, as they say.


----------



## Happy Paws2

I would have liked to have seen TM on last nights debate and hear what she had to say instead of having to listen to Rudd keeping say that TM has a strong team, TM hasn't done herself any favors.

I haven't changed my mind I'm voting Labour.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> You cannot use the European Health Insurance Card if you live in another European country it is only for those going on holiday. You have to buy health insurance in the country you are living in. This was the way it was when I lived in the Netherlands (Holland). You cannot claim the health insurance policy you pay into to another European country back from the NHS if living in that European country.


Yes, I presumed we were on about visitors to other EU countries rather than residents. Thank you, I forgot you have to spell things out for some people otherwise your words get twisted!!

Do you know how they collect payment?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Yes, I presumed we were on about visitors to other EU countries rather than residents. Thank you, I forgot you have to spell things out for some people otherwise your words get twisted!!





> Do you know how they collect payment?


Quoted from the NHS website:

Your EHIC provides you with the right to access state-provided healthcare that becomes necessary during your trip, and you will be treated on the same basis as a resident of the country you are visiting. *However, in some EEA countries you may be expected to pay your bill upfront and then claim a refund afterwards.

Remember to keep all receipts and any paperwork (make copies if necessary). You or your insurance company may need them if you're applying for a refund.

Some countries ask patients to pay a contribution towards the cost of their care, such as for prescription costs. This is known as a co-payment or 'patient share'. You can claim back the difference between the total bill and the 'patient share', however, the actual 'patient share' is non-refundable (since July 2014). It is the responsibility of the foreign authority to determine the amount of the 'patient share' and therefore how much is refundable from the total bill.*

http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/Healthcareabroad/EHIC/Pages/about-the-ehic.aspx


----------



## stockwellcat.

..


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> You cannot use the European Health Insurance Card if you live in another European country it is only for those going on holiday. You have to buy health insurance in the country you are living in. This was the way it was when I lived in the Netherlands (Holland). You cannot claim the health insurance policy you pay into to another European country back from the NHS if living in that European country.


Even if you are working? Here (Spain) you and your family are covered as soon as you sign a contract.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> Even if you are working?


Quoted again from the NHS website:

A valid European Health Insurance Card gives you the right to access state-provided healthcare during a temporary stay in another European Economic Area (EEA) country or Switzerland.

The EHIC covers treatment that is medically necessary until your planned return home.

And...

The EHIC is not an alternative to travel insurance. It will not cover any private medical healthcare or costs, such as mountain rescue in ski resorts, being flown back to the UK, or lost or stolen property. It is also not valid on cruises.

It is therefore important to have both an EHIC and a valid private travel insurance policy in place before you travel. Some insurers now insist you hold an EHIC, and many will waive the excess if you have one.

http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/Healthcareabroad/EHIC/Pages/about-the-ehic.aspx

So yes even if you're working


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Quoted again from the NHS website:
> 
> A valid European Health Insurance Card gives you the right to access state-provided healthcare during a temporary stay in another European Economic Area (EEA) country or Switzerland.
> 
> The EHIC covers treatment that is medically necessary until your planned return home.
> 
> http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/Healthcareabroad/EHIC/Pages/about-the-ehic.aspx


Sorry, I was talking about having to buy health insurance in the Netherlands.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> Sorry, I was talking about having to buy health insurance in the Netherlands.


Sorry.
Yes you have to buy health insurance in the Netherlands regardless of your circumstances if you are living there.

This website might help:
https://www.government.nl/topics/health-insurance

Every person who lives or works in the Netherlands is legally obliged to take out standard health insurance to cover the cost of, for example, consulting a general practitioner, hospital treatment and prescription medication. You may also opt to take out additional insurance to cover costs not included in the standard package.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Sorry.
> Yes I had to buy health insurance when I was working in the Netherlands, I don't know what the circumstances are if you aren't working because I wasn't in that situation when I was there.
> 
> This website might help:
> https://www.government.nl/topics/health-insurance
> 
> Every person who lives or works in the Netherlands is legally obliged to take out standard health insurance to cover the cost of, for example, consulting a general practitioner, hospital treatment and prescription medication. You may also opt to take out additional insurance to cover costs not included in the standard package.


Ahh ok, completely different system to here and the UK then. I guess that's part of the reason it's so tricky to deal with.


----------



## Goblin

Calvine said:


> If it's anything like the EU referendum thread, it will run for ever...and ever...and ever. And the usual suspects (you know who) will still be trying to blind us with facts and quotes and so many pictures it looks like the Beano.


Says it all doesn't it.. complaining about facts rather than fantasy.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> What I said was "start charging people who are not intitled to use it" working migrants paying their taxes don't come into this which is why I never mentioned it.
> 
> It's the UK's National Health Service. Not the International Health Service.
> 
> Getting that sorted would be one step of many in the right direction.


You're missing the point entirely, charging migrants wont make the slightest bit of difference. Its a zombie issue the tories want us to focus on whilst they destroy our NHS.



Lexiedhb said:


> Well that totally contradicts what you said about them doing it for the love of the NHS. Being short of medical staff isn't going to help is it.. ....


No it does not contradict them doing it for the love of the NHS when they have been completely demoralised & are struggling to cope under the immense pressure this government & its policies has put them under. They are at their wits end.



samuelsmiles said:


> Noushka, I've seen this supermarket claim before without any real evidence of it happening. Can you substantiate one case where a NHS worker has left to work in a supermarket stacking shelves or sitting on the tills to earn more money?
> 
> One case please. Just 1.


You surely don't think the report that found this gives out names & addresses? lol

https://www.nursingtimes.net/7017776.article?

We have a severe shortage of NHS staff - you think the cut to the nursing bursary or brexit is going to help? Anyone would think the tories were doing all they could to ensure our NHS fails... https://www.nhsproviders.org/media/2933/investing-in-success-briefing.pdf

And lets not forget the nurses forced to use food banks.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> Ahh ok, completely different system to here and the UK then. I guess that's part of the reason it's so tricky to deal with.


It explains though why there health care comes out as one of the best.

It's quite easy really, you just need to have the Standard Health Insurance policy whilst you live there. You pay for your appointments, treatment, dentist, GP, hospital etc and claim it back from the health insurance company you are with in Netherlands. The health insurance company pays you back really fast as well or they did when I lived there.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Of course it's not free for EU residents, why would it be? Have you not got one of those European Health Insurance Cards? They give you the same service within the EU that'd you'd get in your own country, so you'd pay the same in the UK as you would at home. I don't know how the fee is collected, I presume you'd be billed by your own country?


As stockwellcat said, you join the health service of the country you are in. EU rules state to stay longer than 3 months in another EU country you must either be employment (paying taxes etc) or be able to financially support yourself including money for medical cover. Medical cover is specifically mentioned as having to be covered. What happens in regards to people from germany is the NHS charges your insurance company.


----------



## 1290423

I have been thinking and reading a lot about the NHS
And I have come to a decision. And that is that I am going to completely remove the NHS from my reasons to vote hence Releasing me from the party that would have been offering the most,


----------



## Calvine

Goblin said:


> Says it all doesn't it.. complaining about facts rather than fantasy.


As you well know, I'm complaining about _everything_ being quoted and repeated a million times as it was on the EU thread. As I said before, you just love to pick holes in my posts without reading them properly! You do it at every possible opportunity. Whatever turns you on I guess...by the way, did you check on the spelling of the word 'bloc' since it's facts and accuracy you want?


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> It explains though why there health care comes out as one of the best.
> 
> It's quite easy really, you just need to have the Standard Health Insurance policy whilst you live there. You pay for your appointments, treatment, dentist, GP, hospital etc and claim it back from the health insurance company you are with in Netherlands. The health insurance company pays you back really fast as well or they did when I lived there.


Although according to Wikipedia ( bad source I know) premiums are about €100 a month.

I guess the tax rate is lower though.

The main issue I can see is that people go to the doctor more to 'make the most of it'. I haven't been to the Dr in over 4 years- if I had paid €5000 I definitely would've gone. Might just be me though!


----------



## 1290423

Goblin said:


> As stockwellcat said, you join the health service of the country you are in. EU rules state to stay longer than 3 months in another EU country you must either be employment (paying taxes etc) or be able to financially support yourself including money for medical cover. Medical cover is specifically mentioned as having to be covered. What happens in regards to people from germany is the NHS charges your insurance company.


Thank you for that, I am sure many people are unaware.
But out of interest, I wonder would you know do these countries adhere to this, do they collect payment prior to treatment, do they just let those who don't pay go? How efficient is it?


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> I'm complaining about _everything_ being quoted and repeated a million times as it was on the EU thread. As I said before, you just love to pick holes in my posts!! You do it at every possible opportunity. Whatever turns you on I guess...by the way, did you check on the spelling of the word 'bloc' since it's facts and accuracy you want?


Fact is there is going to be a very bored person around here when this thread closes lol X


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> Fact is there is going to be a very bored person around here when this thread closes lol X


Not just one, @DT, there's a couple more: maybe they will just continue the thread by PM and 'like' and agree with each other for eternity...!


----------



## Dr Pepper

Odin_cat said:


> Although according to Wikipedia ( bad source I know) premiums are about €100 a month.
> 
> I guess the tax rate is lower though.
> 
> The main issue I can see is that people go to the doctor more to 'make the most of it'. I haven't been to the Dr in over 4 years- if I had paid €5000 I definitely would've gone. Might just be me though!


£100 a month seems very reasonable compared to NI contributions.


----------



## Odin_cat

Dr Pepper said:


> £100 a month seems very reasonable compared to NI contributions.


But doesn't NI cover pensions too?


----------



## 1290423

With regard to the NHS to be quite honest I'm sick to the back teeth of hearing about. Let's face set this isn't a problem that happened overnight the situation has been getting gradually worse for years and years and years. 
Looking at it from another angle is it not possible that we have quite possibly outgrown the NHS? Just looking at the services we now offer together with everything that is expected of it it's hardly surprising that it's buckling at the knees. When the NHS was first introduced it was a fantastic idea the envy of the world but surely that has now come unsustainable due to the advancement in medical procedures. If someone had told you you could have a new heart new lungs new hips new knees fertility treatment when the NHS was first introduced you would have laughed at them those things have now become the norm.
Perhaps it is now time that we did accept that if we want to continue to improve the NHS that we will need to pay more whether that comes by form of higher higher ni NHS privatisation or insurance I don't know but the system is broke it needs a complete overhaul and I will probably upset a few by saying this the sooner the better.
And that boys and girls is my reason to remove the NHS or anything to do with it away for my reason to vote


----------



## Elles

Why do nurses use food banks? Loads of people are paid less than them. 

Ah, I see, it's not true. People working full time can't use food banks. The articles were about student nurses being broke now that they have to pay for training, but the report was eventually manipulated into poor nurses using food banks. Chinese whispers. I thought it seemed odd. Nurses aren't the highest paid people in the country, but they aren't the lowest paid either.


----------



## Goblin

DT said:


> Thank you for that, I am sure many people are unaware.
> But out of interest, I wonder would you know do these countries adhere to this, do they collect payment prior to treatment, do they just let those who don't pay go? How efficient is it?


Never tried it outside but http://blog.mygermancity.com/medical-and-health-care-for-tourists-in-germany suggests you pay up front. What happens in emergencies I couldn't say. Interestingly Germany is actually pushing for medical tourism as a business opportunity. https://www.imtj.com/news/germany-performing-well-medical-and-health-tourism/

When it comes to the election however with the Tories wanting to emulate America (Hunt praises the american system) the following is informative:
http://www.welcometogermerica.com/2015/01/american-expat-german-health-insurance.html?m=1

I am not saying the German system is perfect by the way. It isn't.


----------



## Odin_cat

DT said:


> Thank you for that, I am sure many people are unaware.
> But out of interest, I wonder would you know do these countries adhere to this, do they collect payment prior to treatment, do they just let those who don't pay go? How efficient is it?


Can only answer for Spain; all emergency treatment is free at the point of use, I've read of people being charged afterwards but not had any personal experience of this.

Under 18's and pregnant women can access all health services free if charge, regardless of where they are from.

Furthermore, different regions can offer further protections, here all immigrants have a right to the treatment as Spanish citizens, regardless of whether they are documented or not.

Spain claims British pensioners healthcare costs from the UK as far as I know.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Odin_cat said:


> But doesn't NI cover pensions too?


Oh yea!

Mind you not one you could live off if it's your sole income and you pay rent. I could get a better pension paying £100 for health care and the remainder of my contributions to a private pension.


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> Why do nurses use food banks? Loads of people are paid less than them.
> 
> Ah, I see, it's not true. People working full time can't use food banks. The articles were about student nurses being broke now that they have to pay for training, but the report was eventually manipulated into poor nurses using food banks. Chinese whispers. I thought it seemed odd. Nurses aren't the highest paid people in the country, but they aren't the lowest paid either.


Full time workers can use.food banks.

I doubt many nurses at all have to use foodbanks but it's certainly possible. For example, their benefits could be delayed meaning they have to cover childcare purely from their wages, a relationship breakdown, debt problems etc.


----------



## Lexiedhb

Odin_cat said:


> Can only answer for Spain; all emergency treatment is free at the point of use, I've read of people being charged afterwards but not had any personal experience of this.
> 
> Under 18's and pregnant women can access all health services free if charge, regardless of where they are from.
> 
> Furthermore, different regions can offer further protections, here all immigrants have a right to the treatment as Spanish citizens, regardless of whether they are documented or not.
> 
> Spain claims British pensioners healthcare costs from the UK as far as I know.


And this seems like an excellent system.......


----------



## samuelsmiles

*You surely don't think the report that found this gives out names & addresses? lol

https://www.nursingtimes.net/7017776.article?

*


Ah, just more headlines - no substantiating evidence, though. (lol)


----------



## Odin_cat

Lexiedhb said:


> And this seems like an excellent system.......


In my experience it is excellent.


----------



## 1290423

Odin_cat said:


> But doesn't NI cover pensions too?


Yes it


Odin_cat said:


> Can only answer for Spain; all emergency treatment is free at the point of use, I've read of people being charged afterwards but not had any personal experience of this.
> 
> Under 18's and pregnant women can access all health services free if charge, regardless of where they are from.
> 
> Furthermore, different regions can offer further protections, here all immigrants have a right to the treatment as Spanish citizens, regardless of whether they are documented or not.
> 
> Spain claims British pensioners healthcare costs from the UK as far as I know.[/QUOT
> 
> Maybe we should adopt a similar arrangement,


Maybe we could adopt a similar arrangement, or is it more we already have one but are too lazy to address it?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Never tried it outside but http://blog.mygermancity.com/medical-and-health-care-for-tourists-in-germany suggests you pay up front. What happens in emergencies I couldn't say. Interestingly Germany is actually pushing for medical tourism as a business opportunity. https://www.imtj.com/news/germany-performing-well-medical-and-health-tourism/
> 
> When it comes to the election however with the Tories wanting to emulate America (Hunt praises the american system) the following is informative:
> http://www.welcometogermerica.com/2015/01/american-expat-german-health-insurance.html?m=1
> 
> I am not saying the German system is perfect by the way. It isn't.


In the Netherlands when I lived there they'd ask you for you medical insurance details if it was an emergency and if you didn't have it they'd choose an insurance company and charge you through them, you'd be classed in this incident as a none paid insurance customer and be liable to pay the costs in full, you wouldn't be able to claim the money back.


----------



## Goblin

When looking at nurses and foodbanks: https://fullfact.org/economy/how-many-nurses-are-using-foodbanks/


----------



## Odin_cat

DT said:


> Maybe we could adopt a similar arrangement, or is it more we already have one but are too lazy to address it?


Probably the second, not sure to be honest.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> In the Netherlands when I lived there they'd ask you for you medical insurance details if it was an emergency and if you didn't have it they'd choose an insurance company and charge you through them, you'd be classed in this incident as a none paid insurance customer and be liable to pay the costs in full, you wouldn't be able to claim the money back.


Wouldn't shock me if it's something similar. AOK is, if you like, a default insurance company. Getting them to chase the money as opposed to the hospital or hospital trust in the UK instance to chase it down makes sense. Without experience or knowledge however I cannot say if that is true.

The whole issue though is a red herring when it comes to the election. May and her government has reduced funding for the NHS which has led to service breakdowns. If they reduced funding and made the system more efficient people couldn't complain. They haven't.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Goblin

Calvine said:


> As you well know, I'm complaining about _everything_ being quoted and repeated a million times as it was on the EU thread. As I said before, you just love to pick holes in my posts without reading them properly! You do it at every possible opportunity. Whatever turns you on I guess...by the way, did you check on the spelling of the word 'bloc' since it's facts and accuracy you want?


Looking at it, you are right. Should have been Bloc. Learn something new everyday. Thing is I'm prepared to learn. It's a shame that's the only thing you pull me up, spelling, rather than anything important like facts and details which impact the well being of people don't you think.


----------



## Goblin

Elles said:


> Why do nurses use food banks? Loads of people are paid less than them.
> 
> Ah, I see, it's not true. People working full time can't use food banks. The articles were about student nurses being broke now that they have to pay for training, but the report was eventually manipulated into poor nurses using food banks. Chinese whispers. I thought it seemed odd. Nurses aren't the highest paid people in the country, but they aren't the lowest paid either.


Not simply about pay is it? When you are in work the general assumption is that you get pay rises equal or more than inflation. This allows you to plan ahead be it something as simple as a mortgage, a loan for a car whatever, start a family. What happens when your pay is frozen and doesn't keep up with inflation which is what has happened?


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Elles

Goblin said:


> Not simply about pay is it? When you are in work the general assumption is that you get pay rises equal or more than inflation. This allows you to plan ahead be it something as simple as a mortgage, a loan for a car whatever, start a family. What happens when your pay is frozen and doesn't keep up with inflation which is what has happened?


I said the reports about poor, starving nurses using food banks weren't true. Your answer isn't relevant.


----------



## Goblin

Elles said:


> I said the reports about poor, starving nurses using food banks weren't true. Your answer isn't relevant.


When you have more money going out due to pre-existing financial commitments and you do not have the disposable money to buy food, it is relevant.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> With regard to the NHS to be quite honest I'm sick to the back teeth of hearing about. Let's face set this isn't a problem that happened overnight the situation has been getting gradually worse for years and years and years.
> Looking at it from another angle is it not possible that we have quite possibly outgrown the NHS? Just looking at the services we now offer together with everything that is expected of it it's hardly surprising that it's buckling at the knees. When the NHS was first introduced it was a fantastic idea the envy of the world but surely that has now come unsustainable due to the advancement in medical procedures. If someone had told you you could have a new heart new lungs new hips new knees fertility treatment when the NHS was first introduced you would have laughed at them those things have now become the norm.
> Perhaps it is now time that we did accept that if we want to continue to improve the NHS that we will need to pay more whether that comes by form of higher higher ni NHS privatisation or insurance I don't know but the system is broke it needs a complete overhaul and I will probably upset a few by saying this the sooner the better.
> And that boys and girls is my reason to remove the NHS or anything to do with it away for my reason to vote


The NHS ran a surplus prior to the H&SC Act 2012 - now its in massive deficit. The biggest top down reorganisation in its history is the main reason its collapsing. This was a manufactured crisis - don't forget that Sue.

But if you're not bothered about the NHS don't forget the elephants. I know you love them.



samuelsmiles said:


> *You surely don't think the report that found this gives out names & addresses? lol
> 
> https://www.nursingtimes.net/7017776.article?
> 
> *
> 
> Ah, just more headlines - no substantiating evidence, though. (lol)


Its firewalled.

We know nurses are struggling to get by & they have the added stress of an nhs in deep crisis to contend with. - https://www.nhsproviders.org/media/2933/investing-in-success-briefing.pdf



Elles said:


> I said the reports about poor, starving nurses using food banks weren't true. Your answer isn't relevant.


Nurses are using food banks .https://fullfact.org/economy/how-many-nurses-are-using-foodbanks/ And in 2015 Guys & St Thomas NHS set up their own food bank for staff. Many public sector workers are struggling to get by now.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> When you have more money going out due to pre-existing financial commitments and you do not have the disposable money to buy food, it is relevant.


Irresponsible borrowing isn't down to the NHS or tax payer. And if you borrow so you have no leeway for financial movement you've been irresponsible.

I don't think anyone in the private sector expects a pay rise every year, and if Labour get in pay rises will be a lot less or none at all. It always seems to be the public sector that think they are intitled to a yearly pay rise for some reason.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Many public sector workers are struggling to get by now.


And many more in the private sector are struggling to get by as well. What's your point, that public sector workers are more worthy?


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> I don't think anyone in the private sector expects a pay rise every year, and if Labour get in pay rises will be a lot loss or none at all. It always seems to be the public sector that think they are intitled to a yearly pay rise for some reason.


Strange, under the tories I don't see the rich, those funding the Tory party not getting pay rises at least equal to inflation. Any benefits of economic growth are not being spread around but being concentrated at the higher level. It's not simply the public sector. In the private sector pay reviews each year are common. It's how they retain staff.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> And many more in the private sector are struggling to get by as well. What's your point, that public sector workers are more worthy?


Of course that's not my point.


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> Its firewalled.
> 
> We know nurses are struggling to get by & they have the added stress of an nhs in deep crisis to contend with. - https://www.nhsproviders.org/media/2933/investing-in-success-briefing.pdf
> 
> Nurses are using food banks .https://fullfact.org/economy/how-many-nurses-are-using-foodbanks/ And in 2015 Guys & St Thomas NHS set up their own food banks for staff. Many public sector workers are struggling to get by now.


No, they aren't. Nothing in that report states that qualified, employed nurses are using food banks. Firstly full time workers don't get to use them, secondly it says trainee nurses are taking out pay day loans (more fool them, sorry) and using food banks. Trainee nurses. Loads of young people take out pay day loans and get themselves into trouble, it's not the fault of the NHS.

The articles were to do with the tories taking away free training for nurses, nothing to do with poor, qualified nurses who are no worse, or better off than anyone else. If a full time worker is struggling and need state top ups, they get them. A full time nurse is paid more than many workers, he or she has no business claiming poverty. That's not to say I don't think they could be paid more. I just object to the idea that a full time nurse is in as dire straits as someone living on the streets and need to go cap in hand to food banks to feed their poor starving children. It's rubbish.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Strange, under the tories I don't see the rich, those funding the Tory party not getting pay rises at least equal to inflation. Any benefits of economic growth are not being spread around but being concentrated at the higher level. It's not simply the public sector. In the private sector pay reviews each year are common. It's how they retain staff.


Not in UK, not for many years anyway.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> No, they aren't. Nothing in that report states that qualified, employed nurses are using food banks. Firstly full time workers don't get to use them, secondly it says trainee nurses are taking out pay day loans (more fool them, sorry) and using food banks. Trainee nurses. Loads of young people take out pay day loans and get themselves into trouble, it's not the fault of the NHS.
> 
> The articles were to do with the tories taking away free training for nurses, nothing to do with poor, qualified nurses who are no worse, or better off than anyone else. If a full time worker is struggling and need state top ups, they get them. A full time nurse is paid more than many workers, he or she has no business claiming poverty. That's not to say I don't think they could be paid more. I just object to the idea that a full time nurse is in as dire straits as someone living on the streets and need to go hand in cap to food banks to feed their poor starving children. It's rubbish.


I never said it was the fault of the NHS. Lots of people from all walks of life now forced to use food banks - they are desperate! No one in a wealthy country like our should be reduced to this. We're a disgrace.

Like the Junior doctors, nurses are so demoralised it looks like they will be taking strike action for the first time in history. https://www.rcn.org.uk/news-and-events/news/members-appetite-for-pay-action


----------



## rona

Goblin said:


> In the private sector pay reviews each year are common.


In who's world, not mine or anyone I know


----------



## Goblin

rona said:


> In who's world, not mine or anyone I know


Not knowing the right people then.


----------



## samuelsmiles

noushka05 said:


> The NHS ran a surplus prior to the H&SC Act 2012 - now its in massive deficit. The biggest top down reorganisation in its history is the main reason its collapsing. This was a manufactured crisis - don't forget that Sue.
> 
> But if you're not bothered about the NHS don't forget the elephants. I know you love them.
> 
> Its firewalled.
> 
> We know nurses are struggling to get by & they have the added stress of an nhs in deep crisis to contend with. - https://www.nhsproviders.org/media/2933/investing-in-success-briefing.pdf
> 
> Nurses are using food banks .https://fullfact.org/economy/how-many-nurses-are-using-foodbanks/ And in 2015 Guys & St Thomas NHS set up their own food bank for staff. Many public sector workers are struggling to get by now.


I don't think it unreasonable to ask for just one case study of one nurse leaving the NHS to work in a supermarket because it is better paid or offers better working conditions, is it?

It was widely publicised in the left wing press as being so just a couple of weeks back.


----------



## samuelsmiles

I earn no more than I did 15 years ago. Do they have food banks in Buckinghamshire?


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Of course that's not my point.


So why are you so fixated with student nurses using food banks and not the far higher proportion of other people using them?

It's almost like you're trying to skew the facts to make a phoney political point.


----------



## Dr Pepper

samuelsmiles said:


> I earn no more than I did 15 years ago. Do they have food banks in Buckinghamshire?


Yes, but they call them Waitrose.


----------



## rona

Odd, this report is from 2008 after almost a decade of a Labour government

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7770788.stm

"*Health bosses are planning to wipe out millions of pounds worth of debt in a cash bail-out proposal for the NHS.*

Primary Care Trusts in London have agreed to work together to help debt-ridden hospitals.

According to NHS London, figures show the capital's health debt will reach £579m by 2011 unless action is taken.

NHS London described the decision as groundbreaking and said the plan would see the "historic NHS debt across the capital wiped out".

Under the plan, PCTs will invest part of their money in a joint fund over the next two years to provide £275m.


----------



## rona

http://www.nhshistory.net/shorthistory.htm

According to this it was in financial difficulty in 1978 again under Labour

"10 Downing Street became involved in the NHS as never before. Successive Secretaries of State, Frank Dobson, Alan Milburn, John Reid, Patricia Hewitt and Alan Johnson produced a series of plans, white papers and organisational changes. The NHS Plan of 2000 was the most significant.[18] The "New Labour" internal market applied only to England and in a period of sustained increase in funds. PCTs contracted selectively with providers, and practice based commissioning with indicative budgets seemed an extension of the GP fundholding model.

The turmoil hardly bears recounting, with the formation, dissolution and rearrangement of the structure and responsibilities of NHS authorities and trusts."

If you read most of this it seems to point to the Tories trying to put right the mess that Labour had left the NHS in.

Not saying that's the case now, now it's because of lack of foresight over the last decade or two, oh..........again mainly under Labour!!!


----------



## Elles

Someone book keeping for the local council are generally paid more than a book keeper in the private sector and have better job security and benefits. The reason the poor little public sector people are using pay day loans, if they are, is because they're living beyond their means.

When there are people living on the streets and elderly and disabled people in terrible conditions, dying unnecessarily, and genuinely low paid workers being exploited by big business, I will have no sympathy for someone earning 23k a year and pleading poverty. No-one should need to use food banks, it's a bad state of affairs for those in genuine need. In the modern uk they shouldn't exist, but although they do, they aren't bloody nurses.



noushka05 said:


> Like the Junior doctors, nurses are so demoralised it looks like they will be taking strike action for the first time in history. https://www.rcn.org.uk/news-and-events/news/members-appetite-for-pay-action


They won't be taking strike action, because 'not enough turned out to make a formal ballot'. Like everyone else, they're probably waiting to see the result of the general election.


----------



## kimthecat

I dont understand how food banks work , can anyone collect food from them or do you need to be on benefits?


----------



## noushka05

samuelsmiles said:


> I don't think it unreasonable to ask for just one case study of one nurse leaving the NHS to work in a supermarket because it is better paid or offers better working conditions, is it?
> 
> It was widely publicised in the left wing press as being so just a couple of weeks back.


Is the Royal College of Nursing is too left wing to be a credible source? http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nurses-forced-to-use-food-banks_uk_5811c59ce4b0ccfc9561bdcc








*The RCN*‏Verified [email protected]*theRCN* Apr 30

Theresa May had no answers today on nurse pay cuts and use of foodbanks. She must #*scrapthecap* Watch the video: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-skewered-live-tv-refusing-10326568…











Dr Pepper said:


> So why are you so fixated with student nurses using food banks and not the far higher proportion of other people using them?
> 
> It's almost like you're trying to skew the facts to make a phoney political point.


Because we were talking about the NHS. No you're the one doing the skewing. No one, either in the public sector OR the private sector should be working for their poverty. We live on one of the wealthiest countries on the planet it is absolutely shameful that more than a million people are forced to rely on food banks. Everyone deserves a fair days pay for a fair days work.


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> I dont understand how food banks work , can anyone collect food from them or do you need to be on benefits?


No you can only used a food bank if you've been referred by a third party - such as a doctor or social worker etc. Guys hospital provided the food bank for staff themselves so I assume this is different.


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> Is the Royal College of Nursing is too left wing to be a credible source? http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nurses-forced-to-use-food-banks_uk_5811c59ce4b0ccfc9561bdcc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The RCN*‏Verified [email protected]*theRCN* Apr 30
> 
> Theresa May had no answers today on nurse pay cuts and use of foodbanks. She must #*scrapthecap* Watch the video: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-skewered-live-tv-refusing-10326568…
> 
> View attachment 312853
> 
> 
> Because we were talking about the NHS. No you're the one doing the skewing. No one, either in the public sector OR the private sector should be working for their poverty. We live on one of the wealthiest countries on the planet it is absolutely shameful that more than a million people are forced to rely on food banks. Everyone deserves a fair days pay for a fair days work.


Huffington post known for their excellent journalistic abilities now?


----------



## Elles

Well if full time nurses were exploiting charities they should be ashamed of themselves. It's untrue and it's propaganda. 

Yet again, your huffington post link talks about student nurses, the article interviewed a student nurse. 

If I was someone who actually was very grateful for the food bank tiding me over in an absolute emergency I would be furious about people making out someone earning more than I could imagine is using the charities and just to make some kind of political point.


----------



## noushka05

Lexiedhb said:


> Huffington post known for their excellent journalistic abilities now?


I love how you conveniently overlooked the tweet from the verified account of The RCN


----------



## noushka05




----------



## rona

Another snippet from NHS history link above.

*1998 - 2007*
In this decade the NHS was controlled by Labour throughout
*Provision was no longer necessarily by a publicly owned infrastructure. Labour achieved a change that, had it been attempted by the Conservatives, would have faced immense opposition*. *Private sector organisations came to build and operate hospitals under the public/private partnerships, and to run clinical services such as Independent Treatment Centres and some NHS Walk-in Centres. "Contestability" - the introduction of competition between providers - became significant. Private practice was now an important part of a new and more sophisticated market. Labour's traditional desire to look at health care from a community and public health perspective led to policies rather than achievements (with the exception of a ban on smoking in public places). *


----------



## rona

Christ I wish I was in the sort of poverty that £23,000 a year makes you in

That's take home pay of £363.84. I'd feel rich


----------



## Elles

The tweet has nothing to do with food banks and I agree with the sentiments expressed in it. 

We have already agreed that the NHS is not in a good way and that there are bottlenecks. What we may not all agree on is how we would like to see it solved. Do we agree with some privatisation, do we agree with some being charged, do we agree with higher taxes and more money being ploughed in? Do we believe nurses should receive free training? What about the immigrant situation? Social care? Etc etc

omg nurses use food banks because their children are starving. need moar pay. Is a load of rubbish. Of course they should get decent pay and conditions, but exaggerated and false claims is not the way to go about it.


----------



## Dr Pepper

When it comes to voting on Thursday, if the NHS is your main concern, I think it's easy enough to cut to chase on what both parties are offering.

Labour - pump more money into it and carry on as before.

Conservatives - keep the cuts coming so it's forced to change.

Maybe over simplified but I think that's the crux of it.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> In who's world, not mine or anyone I know


Nor ours, we have good years and bad years and on the whole our fees are about the same as they were 10 years ago.

For once I actually think Theresa May was right not to take part in that debacle last night. I haven't finished watching it yet and don't know if I will bother. There were too many people, the chair person was ineffective at keeping order and it turned into a bun fight with the loudest shouter (SNP) drowning out the other speakers and the others chirping away all the time someone was trying to speak or answer a question. Total chaos and learnt nothing from it.


----------



## samuelsmiles

noushka05 said:


> Is the Royal College of Nursing is too left wing to be a credible source? http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nurses-forced-to-use-food-banks_uk_5811c59ce4b0ccfc9561bdcc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The RCN*‏Verified [email protected]*theRCN* Apr 30
> 
> Theresa May had no answers today on nurse pay cuts and use of foodbanks. She must #*scrapthecap* Watch the video: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-skewered-live-tv-refusing-10326568…
> 
> View attachment 312853
> 
> 
> Because we were talking about the NHS. No you're the one doing the skewing. No one, either in the public sector OR the private sector should be working for their poverty. We live on one of the wealthiest countries on the planet it is absolutely shameful that more than a million people are forced to rely on food banks. Everyone deserves a fair days pay for a fair days work.


But you still haven't shown one instance of a nurse leaving the NHS to work stacking shelves in a supermarket for better pay and/or working conditions. If that is the case why doesn't the struggling nurse in your attached HuffPost article do just that?


----------



## rona

Just another snippet of facts that might interest a few 
http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/past_spending

Public spending for health services increased steadily through most of the 20th century, from 0.3 percent of GDP to six percent of GDP by 1980. Following a mild decline in the 1980s and 1990s, health spending increased rapidly in the 2000s to a peak of 8 percent of GDP in 2009.









Chart 2.24: Health Spending 1900-2020

At the beginning of the 20th century, government spent about 0.5 percent of GDP on health. But spending began to increase in 1909 after passage of the National Insurance Act, reaching 1.14 percent of GDP in 1921.

Health spending increased steadily in the 1920s and 1930s reaching 1.91 percent of GDP at the start of World War II. Spending kept steady during the war and then increased briskly after the war, reaching 3.07 percent just before the National Health Service was set up in 1948.

Costs rose sharply in the early years of the NHS, reaching 3.6 percent of GDP by 1950 and then dropping to 3.0 percent of GDP by 1955. Spending increased steadily after the mid 1950s, running at about 3.5 percent of GDP in the early 1960s and increasing to 4.0 percent of GDP by 1970 and peaking at 4.98 percent of GDP in 1975.

Health spending declined in the late 1970s, down to 4.7 percent of GDP in 1979 and increased thereafter, reaching 5.24 percent of GDP in 1981 before beginning a decline to 4.28 percent in 1988. Then spending began increased to 5.35 percent of GDP in 1993 and declined to 4.9 percent of GDP by 1998.

Spending began increasing sharply after 1999, and reached 8.01 percent of GDP in 2009. Planned health care spending in the mid 2010s is expected to hold just below 8 percent of GDP.


----------



## 1290423

Goblin said:


> Strange, under the tories I don't see the rich, those funding the Tory party not getting pay rises at least equal to inflation. Any benefits of economic growth are not being spread around but being concentrated at the higher level. It's not simply the public sector. In the private sector pay reviews each year are common. It's how they retain staff.


Hallelujah I totally agree


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> When it comes to voting on Thursday, if the NHS is your main concern, I think it's easy enough to cut to chase on what both parties are offering.
> 
> Labour - pump more money into it and carry on as before.
> 
> Conservatives - keep the cuts coming so it's forced to change.
> 
> Maybe over simplified but I think that's the crux of it.


Or the Lib Dems

Saving the NHS by putting a penny in the pound on Income Tax to
give the NHS and social care services the cash injection they need.
●● Transforming mental health care with waiting time standards to
match those in physical health care.
●● Home not hospital: better integration of health and social care and
limiting the amount elderly people have to pay for social care.

Liberal Democrats will take five key steps to put our health and social care system
back on a sustainable financial footing:
1. An immediate 1p rise on the basic, higher and additional rates of Income Tax
to raise £6 billion additional revenue, which would be ringfenced to be spent
only on NHS and social care services.
2. Direct this additional investment to the following priority areas in the health
and care system: social care, primary care (and other out-of-hospital care),
mental health and public health. This represents the most efficient and
effective way of spending these extra resources - ensuring they will have the
greatest impact on the quality of care patients receive.
3. In the longer term and as a replacement for the 1p Income Tax rise, commission
the development of a dedicated health and care tax on the basis of wide
consultation, possibly based on a reform of National Insurance contributions,
which will bring together spending on both services into a collective budget and
set out transparently, on people's payslips, what we spend on them.
4. Establish a cross-party health and social care convention, bringing together
stakeholders from all political parties, patients groups, the public and
professionals from within the health and social care system to carry out a
comprehensive review of the longer-term sustainability of the health and
social care finances and workforce, and the practicalities of greater integration.
We would invite the devolved administrations to be a part of this work.
5. Introduce a statutory independent budget monitoring agency for health and
care, similar to the Office for Budget Responsibility. This would report every
three years on how much money the system needs to deliver safe and
sustainable treatment and care, and how much is needed to meet the costs of
projected increases in demand and any new initiatives - to ensure any
changes in services are properly costed and affordable.
Our longer-term objective will be to bring together NHS and social care into one
seamless service - pooling budgets in every area by 2020 and developing integrated
care organisations.


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> Another snippet from NHS history link above.
> 
> *1998 - 2007*
> In this decade the NHS was controlled by Labour throughout
> *Provision was no longer necessarily by a publicly owned infrastructure. Labour achieved a change that, had it been attempted by the Conservatives, would have faced immense opposition*. *Private sector organisations came to build and operate hospitals under the public/private partnerships, and to run clinical services such as Independent Treatment Centres and some NHS Walk-in Centres. "Contestability" - the introduction of competition between providers - became significant. Private practice was now an important part of a new and more sophisticated market. Labour's traditional desire to look at health care from a community and public health perspective led to policies rather than achievements (with the exception of a ban on smoking in public places). *


Interesting


----------



## kimthecat

rona said:


> Christ I wish I was in the sort of poverty that £23,000 a year makes you in
> 
> That's take home pay of £363.84. I'd feel rich


It depends on your circumstances , if you have a family in this area , that probably wouldn't even cover your mortgage or rent .


----------



## Elles

samuelsmiles said:


> But you still haven't shown one instance of a nurse leaving the NHS to work stacking shelves in a supermarket for better pay and/or working conditions. If that is the case why doesn't the struggling nurse in your attached HuffPost article do just that?


There isn't a struggling nurse in the huff article. There's a 23year old student nurse. In my day there weren't food banks, you lived on scrumped apples in a garret. My friend stacks shelves overnight in Sainsbury's, she isn't paid anything like as much as a qualified nurse or doctor, her prospects aren't that great either. She does earn more than a college student though.

The private sector manage to retain staff on minimum wage and zero hours contracts, but probably not the private health sector. They probably pay more to get the best staff. I expect NHS nurses would like to be paid the same as ones who work at a posh private clinic and not be rushed off their feet in an overstretched a&e or geriatric ward.


----------



## 1290423

kimthecat said:


> It depends on your circumstances , if you have a family in this area , that probably wouldn't even cover your mortgage or rent .


Which only goes to prove that the NHS is not the only area that's broken, housing most certainly needs, the rental sector certainly needs more.


----------



## rona

kimthecat said:


> It depends on your circumstances , if you have a family in this area , that probably wouldn't even cover your mortgage or rent .


But if you had a family then I'd expect another parent earning and all the bonuses you get for pumping out kids.
If I was single in my area and taking on a new rental property (in the expensive SE), and a nurse on minimum wage, it would take half my wages, for a mortgage on a one bed flat 3/4 wages, it's always been that way, even back in the 1970s and 1990s when I've taken on morgages, we've struggled. Remember, that's the minimum they earn not maximum
Why should todays generation * expect *life on a plate?

I still think Nurses, police and firemen should be better paid however


----------



## Elles

And there should be more of them.


----------



## kimthecat

DT said:


> Which only goes to prove that the NHS is not the only area thats broken, housing most certainly needs, the rental sector certainly needs more


They really need to build more social housing but generally no matter how many houses are built , I dont think it will be enough . we're an over crowded island. 
The rental sector is actually causing the houses prices to rise here in the outskirts of west london, virtually every house sold here goes to buy to let , it forced the prices up and leaves less houses for those who want to buy for themselves.


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> But if you had a family then I'd expect another parent earning and all the bonuses you get for pumping out kids.
> If I was single in my area and taking on a new rental property (in the expensive SE), and a nurse on minimum wage, it would take half my wages, for a mortgage on a one bed flat 3/4 wages, it's always been that way, even back in the 1970s and 1990s when I've taken on morgages, we've struggled. Remember, that's the minimum they earn not maximum
> Why should todays generation * expect *life on a plate?
> 
> I still think Nurses, police and firemen should be better paid however


Because they were never taught to make do as we did, everything has,to be new, everything ,on credit too. Talk about live for today worry about it tomorrow

When we brought our first house we were just thankful the seller left carpets and curtains I had an old red sofa from someone dead secondhand bed fortunately my auntie brought me a cooker that was about it but that said I've lived my life without credit that includes the,large,purchases too, we have worked and saved until we can afford it.


----------



## ClaireLouise

rona said:


> Christ I wish I was in the sort of poverty that £23,000 a year makes you in
> 
> That's take home pay of £363.84. I'd feel rich


Can i just add rona. I am a newly qualified nurse on the first increment which is 23000 but is actually more like 26000 with unsociable hours added on without working overtime. Which means thoses qualified longer than me are on around 29000+ as band 5s.
I do agree nurses need a pay rise in keeping with inflation. The job is much more skilled than it was and many have studied to degree standard.
However, i fully agree its not a pittance and they should be surviving without the use of food banks.

Ive worked in the nhs 10 years and never known anyone leave to work in a supermarket


----------



## Odin_cat

I don't understand why people struggle to understand why a nurse might need to use a food bank. I gave some examples earlier.

A nurse with a well paid partner wouldn't be able to claim benefits. If the partner leaves a benefit claim would take at least 4 weeks. In the time the nurse's wages would have to cover rent, bills, childcare, travel... In many parts of the country it wouldn't be enough. Not.a common situation but certainly believable.


----------



## rona

ClaireLouise said:


> Can i just add rona. I am a newly qualified nurse on the first increment which is 23000 but is actually more like 26000 with unsociable hours added on without working overtime. Which means thoses qualified longer than me are on around 29000+ as band 5s.
> I do agree nurses need a pay rise in keeping with inflation. The job is much more skilled than it was and many have studied to degree standard.
> However, i fully agree its not a pittance and they should be surviving without the use of food banks.
> 
> Ive worked in the nhs 10 years and never known anyone leave to work in a supermarket


So what's your take on it then?

It seems to me from watching and hearing about the GPs surgeries around here that a lot of the problems stem from managerial incompetence. I'm lucky that mine works like a dream but there are some that are true horror stories.

Do you think it could be similar in individual hospitals or trusts? I see that not all trusts are in debt


----------



## rona

Odin_cat said:


> I don't understand why people struggle to understand why a nurse might need to use a food bank. I gave some examples earlier.
> 
> A nurse with a well paid partner wouldn't be able to claim benefits. If the partner leaves a benefit claim would take at least 4 weeks. In the time the nurse's wages would have to co


But that's circumstance not because of wages. Anyone could end up in that predicament, even those on slightly more


----------



## Elles

When I was a child a poor family did their washing by hand and used a mangle. Had a black and white coin slot tv from rumbelows. A gas and electric coin meter. They'd often run out of coins, so sat in the dark, or went to bed early. Many a time children doing their homework by the bedroom window, trying to see by candle and moonlight. They had a tin bath and and outside loo. One Christmas present each and maybe some balloons, an orange that kind of thing. A chicken was a luxury and they did the weekly shop on tick at a local shop. School uniforms they bought on provident and a chap called once a week for the money. Another chap called for the weekly rent. The kids would often go to school with no breakfast and share a tin of beans, or have a sugar or dripping sandwich for tea. Only the rich person down the road could afford a car, a colour tv, a fridge and a pedigree dog. 

Poor? Most don't know what poor is in the uk these days and poor when I was a child, was still nothing like poor in many countries today. Suggesting nurses in the uk need food banks to survive is an absolute insult to the genuine poor and nurses.


----------



## Elles

rona said:


> But that's circumstance not because of wages. Anyone could end up in that predicament, even those on slightly more


Exactly. They used to give out an interim social payment, or benefit loan while people waited for benefit claims to be processed. They don't do that now?


----------



## Odin_cat

rona said:


> But that's circumstance not because of wages. Anyone could end up in that predicament, even those on slightly more


Depends how much more, and a person in those circumstances could well have to use a food bank. I agree that a pay rise wouldn't solve these problems but it would help.


----------



## KittenKong

This was brilliant.


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> Exactly. They used to give out an interim social payment, or benefit loan while people waited for benefit claims to be processed. They don't do that now?


https://www.gov.uk/short-term-benefit-advance
Not for any benefits a nurse could receive by the looks of it.


----------



## ClaireLouise

rona said:


> So what's your take on it then?
> 
> It seems to me from watching and hearing about the GPs surgeries around here that a lot of the problems stem from managerial incompetence. I'm lucky that mine works like a dream but there are some that are true horror stories.
> 
> Do you think it could be similar in individual hospitals or trusts? I see that not all trusts are in debt


I work in 10 GP surgeries and see both well managed and poorly managed practices and i personally think this is the main issue.

I work for a trust that makes a profit. We are well staffed and have reasonable amount of resources.
I cant really complain, they paid for me to do my nursing degree and paid me a full time band 3 wage 18000 while i did it. Its not all doom and gloom out there


----------



## rona

Odin_cat said:


> Depends how much more, and a person in those circumstances could well have to use a food bank. I agree that a pay rise wouldn't solve these problems but it would help.


So we should give pay rises to everyone who has a partner that might walk out?


----------



## Calvine

Goblin said:


> Looking at it, you are right. Should have been Bloc. Learn something new everyday. Thing is I'm prepared to learn. It's a shame that's the only thing you pull me up, spelling, rather than anything important like facts and details which impact the well being of people don't you think.


Off you go again: you couldn't resist another dig, could you? You seem to have a problem with everything I post. It's interesting.


----------



## Odin_cat

rona said:


> So we should give pay rises to everyone who has a partner that might walk out?


No, to people who perform vital public services.


----------



## rona

ClaireLouise said:


> I work in 10 GP surgeries and see both well managed and poorly managed practices and i personally think this is the main issue.
> 
> I work for a trust that makes a profit. We are well staffed and have reasonable amount of resources.
> I cant really complain, they paid for me to do my nursing degree and paid me a full time band 3 wage 18000 while i did it. Its not all doom and gloom out there


Thank you. I've been having trouble reconciling the rhetoric with what I actually see on the ground and what my own GP tells me. You have just cleared my mind on that.

Another question if possible, not sure you can answer this. What are the mental health service like in your area?


----------



## rona

Oh ClairLouise, I have so many questions but have to go out. Thank you for your input


----------



## Calvine

Goblin said:


> Not knowing the right people then.


What sort of answer is that?


----------



## ClaireLouise

rona said:


> Thank you. I've been having trouble reconciling the rhetoric with what I actually see on the ground and what my own GP tells me. You have just cleared my mind on that.
> 
> Another question if possible, not sure you can answer this. What are the mental health service like in your area?


They trust i work for is actually a mental health trust. Our adult community nursing team was put up for tender several years ago and they took us over.
Its a good trust to work for. Mental health services are stretched but our trust is building more facilities. They are also a forensic trust so have x2 very large secure units and a prison.


----------



## Bisbow

Elles said:


> When I was a child a poor family did their washing by hand and used a mangle. Had a black and white coin slot tv from rumbelows. A gas and electric coin meter. They'd often run out of coins, so sat in the dark, or went to bed early. Many a time children doing their homework by the bedroom window, trying to see by candle and moonlight. They had a tin bath and and outside loo. One Christmas present each and maybe some balloons, an orange that kind of thing. A chicken was a luxury and they did the weekly shop on tick at a local shop. School uniforms they bought on provident and a chap called once a week for the money. Another chap called for the weekly rent. The kids would often go to school with no breakfast and share a tin of beans, or have a sugar or dripping sandwich for tea. Only the rich person down the road could afford a car, a colour tv, a fridge and a pedigree dog.
> 
> Poor? Most don't know what poor is in the uk these days and poor when I was a child, was still nothing like poor in many countries today. Suggesting nurses in the uk need food banks to survive is an absolute insult to the genuine poor and nurses.


I remember a time like that as well, tiny two up two down house with a copper outside my mother did the washing in, no washing machine. no TV
Gas light in the house, a small coal fire and in winter waking up with ice on the inside of the windows

We survived and I had a very happy childhood, hand me down clothes and hard work an well. My parents worked hard to keep a rented roof over our heads, did the best they could for me and as I say, I remember a happy, contented life

Most people today do not know what being poor is


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> Because they were never taught to make do as we did, everything has,to be new, everything ,on credit too. Talk about live for today worry about it tomorrow
> 
> When we brought our first house we were just thankful the seller left carpets and curtains I had an old red sofa from someone dead secondhand bed fortunately my auntie brought me a cooker that was about it but that said I've lived my life without credit that includes the,large,purchases too, we have worked and saved until we can afford it.


That made me smile, had to sell my car to carpet our first house. Luckily it was new so had a cooker. Everything else came along as we could afford it. Oh, and interest rates were 15%. Unfortunately people can't wait these days and don't appreciate the value of money - until it's to late.

EDIT
Just to be clear, it was the house that had a cooker not the car.



ClaireLouise said:


> Can i just add rona. I am a newly qualified nurse on the first increment which is 23000 but is actually more like 26000 with unsociable hours added on without working overtime. Which means thoses qualified longer than me are on around 29000+ as band 5s.
> I do agree nurses need a pay rise in keeping with inflation. The job is much more skilled than it was and many have studied to degree standard.
> However, i fully agree its not a pittance and they should be surviving without the use of food banks.
> 
> Ive worked in the nhs 10 years and never known anyone leave to work in a supermarket


Sorry, that's all personal experiences and counts for nothing round here


----------



## ClaireLouise

Ah i see living and breathing it counts for nothing 

☺


----------



## havoc

Odin_cat said:


> No, to people who perform vital public services


There are some pretty important private enterprises too and although they aren't paid directly from the public purse they have to be subsidised. I can envisage the ridiculous situation where a farmer could end up referred to a food bank if we don't get things right.


----------



## Elles

ClaireLouise said:


> Ah i see living and breathing it counts for nothing
> 
> ☺


Nope, you need a few memes and a couple of contradictory links, and a hope that no one reads them. 

Thank you for your input.


----------



## Calvine

I thought nurses could eat at work and receive a subsidised meal?


----------



## ClaireLouise

Calvine said:


> I thought nurses could eat at work and receive a subsidised meal?


Not that i have ever encountered on my travels- no


----------



## 1290423

Bisbow said:


> I remember a time like that as well, tiny two up two down house with a copper outside my mother did the washing in, no washing machine. no TV
> Gas light in the house, a small coal fire and in winter waking up with ice on the inside of the windows
> 
> We survived and I had a very happy childhood, hand me down clothes and hard work an well. My parents worked hard to keep a rented roof over our heads, did the best they could for me and as I say, I remember a happy, contented life
> 
> Most people today do not know what being poor is


Exactly the same here, only we lived in a tied work house, I had an immensely happy childhood I recall the power cuts in the sixties we lived by candlelight the house stove was electric and as we lived in a village with no gas we couldn't even Cook but I don't recall feeling hungry nor cold, and yes I so so remember the,frosted glass on the inside of the windows .christmas was always a meagre affair to, you didnt go into debt to pay for christmas, my parents always put me first but if it hadnt have been for my aunt and gran I would not have needed a stocking, an ankle sock would have been too big .


----------



## ClaireLouise

Elles said:


> Nope, you need a few memes and a couple of contradictory links, and a hope that no one reads them.
> 
> Thank you for your input.


I did worry about the validity of my post as i didnt have 10 different (questionable) sources to support it


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> I love how you conveniently overlooked the tweet from the verified account of The RCN


No didn't over look it, had no comment to make on it. You say you fact find on everything you post then insist on posting things from the likes of Huffington etc as if it were law


----------



## Calvine

ClaireLouise said:


> Not that i have ever encountered on my travels- no


Thank you. I know my neighbour did but she worked in a private clinic, some years ago, so possibly different.


----------



## 1290423

ClaireLouise said:


> Ah i see living and breathing it counts for nothing
> 
> ☺


Shurrup, dont give em ideas, they'll be taxing us for the air we breathe soon xxxxnice to see you by the,way xxx


----------



## Lexiedhb

ClaireLouise said:


> Ah i see living and breathing it counts for nothing
> 
> ☺


Not leaving the profession to go stack shelves then?


----------



## noushka05

Can I ask your opinion on these @ClaireLouise ?


----------



## Elles

A farmer could eat one of his cows and keep a few of his potatoes for himself. If all he grows is rapeseed, then tough. Farm workers and tenant farmers can be less well off as can the smaller ones going organic. The big farming corporations who get subsidised can go swing for it for all I care. Don't forget labour want to tax their land, if you're worried about the conservatives not paying their subsidies. No one wants to give the farmers any money, when nurses are relying on food banks. 

Jack Frost on the windows. Now we have global warming, but it's probably the poor's fault for burning damp coal in their fireplaces, they alongside the elderly, should have worn a woolly jumper instead.


----------



## noushka05

No wonder May avoided the leadership debate


----------



## stockwellcat.

Theresa May is off again on the news.

Soundbite after soundbite speech on Brexit.

I have not made my mind up by the way yet.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Theresa May is off again on the news.
> 
> Soundbite after soundbite speech.
> 
> I have not made my mind up by the way yet.


Youre down to single days now this time next week youll need to pull your finger out


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Youre down to single days now this time next week youll need to pull your finger out


Pressure. 

There's still 7 and a half days left. Still time to analyse everything thoroughly.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> I have not made my mind up by the way yet.


No shit!!


----------



## noushka05

I love this cartoon.


----------



## Lexiedhb

Elles said:


> A farmer could eat one of his cows and keep a few of his potatoes for himself. If all he grows is rapeseed, then tough. Farm workers and tenant farmers can be less well off as can the smaller ones going organic. The big farming corporations who get subsidised can go swing for it for all I care. Don't forget labour want to tax their land, if you're worried about the conservatives not paying their subsidies. No one wants to give the farmers any money, when nurses are relying on food banks.
> 
> Jack Frost on the windows. Now we have global warming, but it's probably the poor's fault for burning damp coal in their fireplaces, they alongside the elderly, should have worn a woolly jumper instead.


Can they wear a woolly jumper if sheep farmers have been forced out of business?


----------



## Elles

Lexiedhb said:


> Can they wear a woolly jumper if sheep farmers have been forced out of business?


:Hilarious


----------



## Creativecat

Wow as an avid observer . But can't post links or data . There's more info on this thread than there is on the sky news wall lol . Big applause to all the learned informed PF members. You know who you are . Just really suprised looking how the poll has swung on this thread. Just hope whoever takes the seat will do right for all of the uk


----------



## Lexiedhb

Creativecat said:


> Wow as an avid observer . But can't post links or data . There's more info on this thread than there is on the sky news wall lol . Big applause to all the learned informed PF members. You know who you are . Just really suprised looking how the poll has swung on this thread. Just hope whoever takes the seat will do right for all of the uk


What's scary about the poll is 8 people aren't going to and 7 are voting ukip!!!!!!!


----------



## KittenKong

Having to apply for means tested benefits is humiliating enough.

Words absolutely fail me with this.

The National Scotland summed up May perfectly in three words after the Tory conference last year.


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> if you're worried about the conservatives not paying their subsidies


Well that's pretty pointed with no reason. Where in my post did I refer to any of the political parties?


----------



## Elles

Well if we are going to only pay for the first two children, there has to be exceptions.

I would hope that if someone has been made redundant and happen to have 3 or 4 children, they'll get more than someone who conceived 2 children when they were on income support and don't intend to work?

Or is it that everyone will have the sword of Damocles hanging over their head if they dare go full term with more than 2 children.


----------



## Elles

havoc said:


> Well that's pretty pointed with no reason. Where in my post did I refer to any of the political parties?


Dunno, the thread was talking about the food banks and the conservatives, so I just mentioned them first. Not 'you' personally, 'you' generally. If one is concerned. 

I'd turn it the other way. If you are worried about land tax, don't forget the conservatives want to do away with farming subsidies. Tbh, I'm not sure who said they want to stop farm subsidies, I just know somebody does. 

Don't let facts get in the way of a good story.


----------



## shadowmare

Just had a look through May's Q and A from an hour ago.... I don't think the woman knows what the "A" stands for. I mean she actually managed to avoid every possible question. Poor journalists!
Q: Do you agree with what BJ said about last night's debate?
TM: Amber Rudd did a good job last night.
Q: Did you watch the debate?
TM: Amber Rudd did a good job last night.
Q: Brexit?
TM: People in Europe want to punish us. 
Q: You're the only one saying that...
TM: You don't believe in Britain!

It's like U.K. has got their personal female version of Trump. Great at filling in the silence without actually saying anything.


----------



## 1290423

Lexiedhb said:


> What's scary about the poll is 8 people aren't going to and 7 are voting ukip!!!!!!!


There ya go! 8 now!


----------



## Zaros

Not too long to go now.:Nailbiting

Has anyone been into William Hill's and put their hard earned on a hung parliament?

Personally, I'd like to see a hung parliament...

The absolute phuqin' lot of 'em!:Cigar


----------



## shadowmare

Lexiedhb said:


> What's scary about the poll is 8 people aren't going to and 7 are voting ukip!!!!!!!


It's quite disappointing numbers tbh... I'd love to be able to vote. On the other hand, I am quite enjoying walking down the street and telling people handing out leaflets to keep them to themselves because I'm not allowed to vote.


----------



## 1290423

Zaros said:


> Not too long to go now.
> 
> Has anyone been into William Hill's and put their hard earned on a hung parliament?
> 
> Personally, I'd like to see a hung parliament...
> 
> The absolute phuqin' lot of 'em!:Cigar


Same here, definitely like to see them hung


----------



## noushka05




----------



## noushka05

Lexiedhb said:


> What's scary about the poll is 8 people aren't going to and 7 are voting ukip!!!!!!!


I know its mad int it! I mean ukip voters might just as well vote tory - they're all but the same these days.


----------



## Zaros

DT said:


> Same here, definitely like to see them hung


And talking about hanging,

I recall a time when I visited London and accidentally bumped into Cherie Blair.

She smiled at me as I looked directly into her face and told her; _'That phuqin' husband of yours, should be bloody well hung!'
_
Now, not one to be easily offended by working class scum, she simply replied; _'Oh but he is love. He is!':Wacky
_


----------



## noushka05

Talking of UKIP.

Nigel Farage is 'person of interest' in FBI investigation into Trump and Russia

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...gation-into-trump-and-russia?CMP=share_btn_tw


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> I know its mad int it! I mean ukip voters might just as well vote tory - they're all but the same these days.
> 
> View attachment 312880


Keep trying hard and you might get even nastier,


----------



## stockwellcat.

Zaros said:


> Not too long to go now.:Nailbiting
> 
> Has anyone been into William Hill's and put their hard earned on a hung parliament?
> 
> Personally, I'd like to see a hung parliament...
> 
> The absolute phuqin' lot of 'em!:Cigar


What are William Hills odds on a hung Parliament? Can they beat 7/2?


----------



## KittenKong

http://newsthump.com/2017/06/01/the...lowance-for-failing-to-turn-up-for-interview/


----------



## noushka05

*NHS Roadshow*‏@*NHS_RoadShow* May 31

Jeremy Hunt on record in Parliament:
Wants to move NHS to a USA style model Like Kaiser Permanente
Did you vote for this? 8 days #*voteNHS*










*NHS Roadshow*‏@*NHS_RoadShow* 1h1 hour ago

#*CancerMatters* Oncology doctors across UK are concerned by the deteriorating waiting times for
cancer diagnosis and treatments #*voteNHS*


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Keep trying hard and you might get even nastier,


Wow.


----------



## KittenKong

Bisbow said:


> Keep trying hard and you might get even nastier,


Nastier than SS May? Really?
How is showing compassion for others, animals and the environment be regarded as "Nasty"?

Don't get me started. How can intentions to repeal the hunting ban as an example be considered "nice"?


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> Wow.


Your character assassinations get worst by the day, disgusting the way you carry on, you do love to belittle people you don't agree with, don't you

But then, you seem to think your opinion is the only one that matters


----------



## noushka05

*NHS Roadshow*‏@*NHS_RoadShow* May 29

#*BattleForNumber10* Just to be clear
They are NOT increasing spending per person on the healthservice
It's doing DOWN


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Your character assassinations get worst by the day, disgusting the way you carry on, you do love to belittle people you don't agree with, don't you
> 
> But then, you seem to think your opinion is the only one that matters


REAL people are dying due to this governments austerity policies - the tories deserve to be exposed for what they are: a bunch of cruel, callous, greedy duplicitous liars.

I respect every ones right to have an opinion as it happens. But opinions aren't facts.


----------



## noushka05

@Bisbow Disabled people are dying & nobody cares >>>


----------



## rona

Some figures for you, I would say facts but they would be pooh-poohed by some on here

Lots of reading here guys, good and bad, surveys of actual staff of the NHS 
http://www.nhsstaffsurveys.com/Page/1006/Latest-Results/2016-Results/


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> What are William Hills odds on a hung Parliament? Can they beat 7/2?


No idea what the bookies are offering but I doubt very much we will end up with a hung parliament.


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> No idea what the bookies are offering but I doubt very much we will end up with a hung parliament.


I am placing a bet on a hung Parliament and was looking around for the best odds. No harm in making some money from the Election.

The best odds I have found so far are 7/2 on unibet for a hung Parliament


----------



## rona

To quote a source that keeps being quoted
https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/blog/2017/03/mixed-bag-staff-survey

Now if you read that you will probably see that it is almost certainly the people running and within a trust which makes it good or bad, not just how much money is thrown at it

"The survey indicates that one in eight staff (13 per cent) reported that they have experienced harassment or bullying from their manager on more than one occasion"
"Another equally shocking figure is that 8 per cent of staff reported having faced discrimination from their own team or managers."

.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> I am placing a bet on a hung Parliament and was looking around for the best odds. No harm in making some money from the Election.
> 
> The best odds I have found so far are 7/2 on unibet for a hung Parliament


Steady on, you've already bet on Conservatives and Labour. Bet for a hung parliament and your adding to losses now rather than increasing your chances of a actual financial win.


----------



## noushka05

My hubby says he's going out door to dooring for labour - I'm flippin gobsmacked -- & proud of him

*Owen Jones* Retweeted
*Dr. Brian May*‏Verified [email protected]*DrBrianMay* 40m40 minutes ago

Dr. Brian May Retweeted Owen Jones

Morality CAN beat Money. Let's see it. Bri



*Owen Jones*Verified [email protected]*OwenJones84*
The Tories want to buy this election. They have money. Labour has people. Let's all knock on some doors in the last week. https://twitter.com/joncstone/status/870234783225438208…
13


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> REAL people are dying due to this governments austerity policies - the tories deserve to be exposed for what they are: a bunch of cruel, callous, greedy duplicitous liars.
> 
> I respect every ones right to have an opinion as it happens. But opinions aren't facts.


You post opinions as fact often enough

I can't stand Corbyn but I would be that cruel even to him

People have died under labour and he has blood on his hands


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> I am placing a bet on a hung Parliament and was looking around for the best odds. No harm in making some money from the Election.
> 
> The best odds I have found so far are 7/2 on unibet for a hung Parliament


Indeed there would be no harm however you are unlikely to make any money by betting on a hung parliament.


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> Dunno, the thread was talking about the food banks and the conservatives, so I just mentioned them first. Not 'you' personally, 'you' generally. If one is concerned.
> 
> I'd turn it the other way. If you are worried about land tax, don't forget the conservatives want to do away with farming subsidies. Tbh, I'm not sure who said they want to stop farm subsidies, I just know somebody does.
> 
> Don't let facts get in the way of a good story.


The farmers Weekly did 

Scare mongering and conjecture like everyone else. You can only know what has happened not what is about to happen


----------



## Honeys mum

noushka05 said:


> Nigel Farage is 'person of interest' in FBI investigation into Trump and Russia[/QUOTE
> 
> If you read the article noush it says,
> 
> Farage has not been accused of wrongdoing and is not a suspect or a target of the US investigation. But being a person of interest means investigators believe he may have information about the acts that are under investigation and he may therefore be subject to their scrutiny.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Steady on, you've already bet on Conservatives and Labour. Bet for a hung parliament and your adding to losses now rather than increasing your chances of a actual financial win.


Well I bet two separate bets one on Theresa May becoming next PM and one on Jeremy Corbyn becoming next PM. So a hung Parliament in the mix is a win, win either way 

7/2 odds £50 bet, returns £225


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> You post opinions as fact often enough
> 
> I can't stand Corbyn but I would be that cruel even to him
> 
> People have died under labour and he has blood on his hands


Maybe you should compare their voting histories. The direct suffering & death she is responsible for is immense.


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> Indeed there would be no harm however you are unlikely to make any money by betting on a hung parliament.


7/2 on a £50 bet is a £225 return


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> Maybe you should compare their voting histories. The direct suffering & death she is responsible for is immense.


Voting history has nothing to do with it

She is not friends with the IRA or other terrorist movements that have killed hundreds of people, How you can defend him is beyond my comprehension


----------



## stockwellcat.

So Theresa May today defended why she didn't turn up yesterday to the debate in her speech. She then says to we'll have to just trust her on Brexit. She explained a no deal situation would be the worst possible scenario. Well at least we know what the worst possible deal is then.


----------



## 1290423

[QUOTE="rona, post: 1064878324, You can only know what has happened not what is about to happen [/QUOTE]

Duh! Dont be silly! If that were true we wouldn't have the likes of Mystic Meg and Russell Grant to name just a couple


----------



## stockwellcat.

@DT decided yet who you're voting for? I am still lost as to who to vote for.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> @DT decided yet who you're voting for? I am still lost as to who to vote for.


At this precise moment in time its ukip, see my reply above in reply to u believable 7 voting ukip


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> At this precise moment in time its ukip, see my reply above *in reply to u* believable 7 voting ukip


Wasn't me you replied to it was @Lexiedhb 

Glad you have decided for now that you are voting UKIP


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> 7/2 on a £50 bet is a £225 return


What were your odds on Mrs May and Mr Corbyn though? Wasn't it 1/8 on Conservatives? That'll return a profit of £6. What was labour 7/1? That's a £350 profit, and hung is a £175 profit.

This means

Conservative's win £146 loss
Labour win £200 profit
Hung parliament £25 profit

The hung parliament, odds wise with the two bets already has reduced the odds to 1/2. Would you have taken those odds? You've also increased your potential losses if Conservative's win by some 40%.


----------



## stockwellcat.

*New YouGov Poll*

*Conservatives 42%, Labour 39% (30-31 May)*
*







*


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Jeremy Hunt on record in Parliament:
> Wants to move NHS to a USA style model Like Kaiser Permanente
> Did you vote for this? 8 days #*voteNHS*
> View attachment 312884


God help us all if this ever came to fruition!

Have you seen this, Noush'?

And it's not the only instance of patient dumping either.


----------



## 1290423

And the reason I am doing that Stockwell is because I've thought about the wasted vote issue and come to the conclusion but that is not truly correct. To vote for either of the main parties infers that you are in agreement with the majority of their manifestos sadly I am not so the way I see it is ok tory or labour are going to win this time! 5 years is not forever when the poo hits the fan and everything goes boobies up which it will people are going to look for a a way out, to get them out then the two main parties will be looking as to why voters voted for UKIP in the first place how do you think we ever managed to get the EU referendum I am not ever going to say that UKIP will come to power I'm not saying I want them to but there are a fair few of their ideas that I agree with.


----------



## stockwellcat.

New YouGov Poll

*Who would make the best Prime Minister? *
*43% May (her lowest ever) *
*30% Corbyn (his highest ever) *
*27% don't know*

*







*


----------



## stockwellcat.

New YouGov London Poll:
Latest Westminster voting intention poll (LONDON)
CON 33%
LAB 50%
LD 11%
UKIP 3%
OTH 3% (Fieldwork 26-31 May)


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> New YouGov Poll
> 
> *Who would make the best Prime Minister? *
> *43% May (her lowest ever) *
> *30% Corbyn (his highest ever) *
> *27% don't know*
> 
> *
> View attachment 312904
> *


Neither in fact no politician in power today


----------



## 1290423

But theres 8 days to go still stockwell. A lot can happen in that time and what do they say a woman's prerogative is


----------



## stockwellcat.

New YouGov Poll:

YouGov 2017 election model results (1 June) 
CON 42%, 285-353 seats 
LAB 38%, 219-285 seats


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Voting history has nothing to do with it
> 
> She is not friends with the IRA or other terrorist movements that have killed hundreds of people, How you can defend him is beyond my comprehension


No she's just friends with despots who behead innocent people & sells arms to them even though they are the biggest funders of terrorism in the world. Those bombs shes selling are being used to bomb innocent men, women & children in the Yemen! I think we should be far more concerned with what is happening today not what may or may not have happened 30 years ago. https://www.theguardian.com/comment...bs-yemen-tories-human-rights?CMP=share_btn_tw



Zaros said:


> God help us all if this ever came to fruition!
> 
> Have you seen this, Noush'?
> 
> And it's not the only instance of patient dumping either.


Jeezus. That''ll be us soon. Millions of us are going to be without health care if the tories get their way. You only need to look at the ideology of their Conservative counterparts across the pond.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> What were your odds on Mrs May and Mr Corbyn though? Wasn't it 1/8 on Conservatives? That'll return a profit of £6. What was labour 7/1? That's a £350 profit, and hung is a £175 profit.
> 
> This means
> 
> Conservative's win £146 loss
> Labour win £200 profit
> Hung parliament £25 profit
> 
> The hung parliament, odds wise with the two bets already has reduced the odds to 1/2. Would you have taken those odds? You've also increased your potential losses if Conservative's win by some 40%.


I bet on who was going to be next PM:

Jeremy Corbyn next PM profit £594.38
Theresa May next PM profit £54.72

Odds have changed but my bet isn't affected. New odds are:
Jeremy Corbyn 4/1
Theresa May 2/9

I see your point on a hung Parliament so won't bother.


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> No she's just friends with despots who behead innocent people & sells arms to them even though they are the biggest funders of terrorism in the world. Those bombs shes selling are being used to bomb innocent men, women & children in the Yemen! I think we should be far more concerned with what is happening today not what may or may not have happened 30 years ago. https://www.theguardian.com/comment...bs-yemen-tories-human-rights?CMP=share_btn_tw
> 
> Jeezus. That''ll be us soon. Millions of us are going to be without health care if the tories get their way. You only need to look at the ideology of their Conservative counterparts across the pond.


Noush, I tried to send you messave but it says I cant talk to you
Have started a thread with a piccy of the cover xx


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> No she's just friends with despots who behead innocent people & sells arms to them even though they are the biggest funders of terrorism in the world. Those bombs shes selling are being used to bomb innocent men, women & children in the Yemen! I think we should be far more concerned with what is happening today not what may or may not have happened 30 years ago. https://www.theguardian.com/comment...bs-yemen-tories-human-rights?CMP=share_btn_tw
> 
> Jeezus. That''ll be us soon. Millions of us are going to be without health care if the tories get their way. You only need to look at the ideology of their Conservative counterparts across the pond.


So what happened 30 odd years ago is of no importance

So that's why you won't condemn him for what he has done

Nice to know what you really feel, and of course labour never dabbled in the arms


----------



## stockwellcat.

Right I have made up my mind. Not because of what anyone has said with endless memes etc.

@DT I am not telling until 9th June 2017


----------



## samuelsmiles

noushka05 said:


> No she's just friends with despots who behead innocent people & sells arms to them even though they are the biggest funders of terrorism in the world. Those bombs shes selling are being used to bomb innocent men, women & children in the Yemen! I think we should be far more concerned with what is happening today not what may or may not have happened 30 years ago. https://www.theguardian.com/comment...bs-yemen-tories-human-rights?CMP=share_btn_tw
> 
> Jeezus. That''ll be us soon. Millions of us are going to be without health care if the tories get their way. You only need to look at the ideology of their Conservative counterparts across the pond.


Actually, the Kaiser Permanente model was first investigated by the Labour Party many, many years ago.

If the Conservatives _do _want to part privatise the NHS, why should this necessarily be such a bad thing? There are some EU countries that have models we could copy that are far better than our archaic system.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Right I have made up my mind. Not because of what anyone has said with endless memes etc.
> 
> @DT I am not telling until 9th June 2017


Take it its the lib dems then,shall I put a bet on it


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Take it its the lib dems then,shall I put a bet on it


You can put a bet on it but I'll win


----------



## Lexiedhb

Bisbow said:


> So what happened 30 odd years ago is of no importance
> 
> So that's why you won't condemn him for what he has done
> 
> Nice to know what you really feel, and of course labour never dabbled in the arms


Rules is rules. You are allowed to bring up the past of the party u hate, whilst sweeping anything untoward the party u like did under the rug. Whilst posting slanderous memes, and your opinion thinly disguised as fact - if questioned use Twitter, Huffington post and wiki as reference, and at all cost ignore first hand, real life experiences.


----------



## cheekyscrip

For once I agree....


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> View attachment 312913
> 
> For once I agree....


Couldn't agree more.


----------



## Lexiedhb

stockwellcat said:


> Couldn't agree more.


Me three....


----------



## Bisbow

cheekyscrip said:


> View attachment 312913
> 
> For once I agree....


How two faced can he get

It is barbarity to kill foxes but not British troops and innocent people

How on Earth can you support him


----------



## Elles

What else is he doing for animal welfare?

Well, I say what else, but leaving the hunting ban isn't really 'doing' anything is it.


----------



## Lexiedhb

Bisbow said:


> How two faced can he get
> 
> It is barbarity to kill foxes but not British troops and innocent people
> 
> Hoe on Earth can you support him


I don't support him. Just agree the hunting ban should stay....


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> How two faced can he get
> 
> It is barbarity to kill foxes but not British troops and innocent people
> 
> Hoe on Earth can you support him


Did you read the links I posted yesterday for @stockwellcat which proved that he not only did condemn the IRA but he also voted on an EDM in the commons doing the same. It is perfectly possible to care about humans and animals, humans also have a choice in what they do for a living - animals have no say in being chased to the point of exhaustion and ripped apart by a pack of dogs while very odd people on horse back laugh and enjoy their day out riding or smear little children's faces with blood.


----------



## Lexiedhb

Elles said:


> What else is he doing for animal welfare?
> 
> Well, I say what else, but leaving the hunting ban isn't really 'doing' anything is it.


Ohhhh great question..... Noush?


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> What else is he doing for animal welfare?
> 
> Well, I say what else, but leaving the hunting ban isn't really 'doing' anything is it.


Better ban or no ban.

I do not support Corbyn, neither May...


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Did you read the links I posted yesterday for @stockwellcat which proved that he not only did condemn the IRA but he also voted on an EDM in the commons doing the same. It is perfectly possible to care about humans and animals, humans also have a choice in what they do for a living - animals have no say in being chased to the point of exhaustion and ripped apart by a pack of dogs while very odd people on horse back laugh and enjoy their day out riding or smear little children's faces with blood.


Yes I read your posts


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> What else is he doing for animal welfare?
> 
> Well, I say what else, but leaving the hunting ban isn't really 'doing' anything is it.


From Labour's manifest0 which I have already posted along with the Lib Dems

Animals in our food chain need welfare standards.
Domestic animals require stronger protection from cruelty.
Wild animals need a sustainable ecosystem.
Labour's vision is for the UK to lead the world with high animal welfare standards in the wild, in farming and for domestic animals.
Labour will increase the maximum sentence for those convicted of committing animal cruelty.
We will promote cruelty-free animal husbandry and consult on ways to ensure better enforcement of agreed standards.
We will prohibit the third-party sale of puppies, introduce and enforce a total ban on ivory trading, and support the ban on wild animals in circuses.
We will cease the badger cull, which spreads bovine TB.
Labour ended fox hunting, deer hunting and hare coursing. Only a Labour government will maintain the bans


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> I bet on who was going to be next PM:
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn next PM profit £594.38
> Theresa May next PM profit £54.72
> 
> Odds have changed but my bet isn't affected. New odds are:
> Jeremy Corbyn 4/1
> Theresa May 2/9
> 
> I see your point on a hung Parliament so won't bother.


All being well whoever you better with, if online, will offer "best odds guaranteed", so if Mrs May wins you'll get the now better odds, and if Mr Corbyn does (cough) you'll get the odds at the time you aced the bet. How much did you bet? Way more than £50 each, I would guess about £100 on Labour and £600 on Conservatives?

The general wisdom is never take a odds on bet. Why would you gamble £100 to make £10?


----------



## havoc

Bisbow said:


> So what happened 30 odd years ago is of no importance


It shouldn't be in terms of how anyone chooses to vote in this election, at least it shouldn't be what's important. This election decides the future of our country for at least a generation and sadly there isn't anyone fit to take us forward. The best we can hope for is a coalition of chaos so no party can make extreme decisions for a few years and we can hope some true leaders emerge before the next one. I honestly believe people should be looking to whoever can do least harm - there's little chance of good over the next parliament whichever way it goes.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> All being well whoever you better with, if online, will offer "best odds guaranteed", so if Mrs May wins you'll get the now better odds, and if Mr Corbyn does (cough) you'll get the odds at the time you aced the bet. How much did you bet? Way more than £50 each, I would guess about £100 of Labour and £600 on Conservatives?


Now that would be telling


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

For anyone interested Lib Dem manifesto on animal welfare

Suspend the use of neonicotinoids until proven that their use in agriculture
does not harm bees or other pollinators.

● Introduce stronger penalties for animal cruelty offences, increasing the
maximum sentencing from six months to five years, and bring in a ban on
caged hens.
●● Clamp down on illegal pet imports through legal identification requirements
for online sales, and minimise the use of animals in scientific experimentation,
including by funding research into alternatives.

● Continue to improve standards of animal health and welfare in agriculture by
updating farm animal welfare codes and promoting the responsible
stewardship of antibiotic drugs.

Develop safe, effective, humane and evidence-based ways of controlling
bovine TB, including by investing to produce workable vaccines.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Lexiedhb said:


> Ohhhh great question..... Noush?


Considerably more than the Conservatives are thats for sure.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Now that would be telling


Not really, the profit makes it relatively easy to work out if the odds were 7/1ish and 1/8ish at the time. For you I hope Labour win, for the rest of the country I hope the conservative's do


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Did you read the links I posted yesterday for @stockwellcat which proved that he not only did condemn the IRA but he also voted on an EDM in the commons doing the same. It is perfectly possible to care about humans and animals, humans also have a choice in what they do for a living - animals have no say in being chased to the point of exhaustion and ripped apart by a pack of dogs while very odd people on horse back laugh and enjoy their day out riding or smear little children's faces with blood.


No, I was out most of yesterday
But I still say he is two faces, he did not condemn them until he was forced to if he wanted to be PM

I don't agree with hunting as I have said before if you had not noticed but I believe it will never be passed by any party


----------



## 1290423

cheekyscrip said:


> Better ban or no ban.
> 
> I do not support Corbyn, neither May...


You n me alike


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Not really, the profit makes it relatively easy to work out if the odds were 7/1ish and 1/8ish at the time. For you I hope Labour win, for the rest of the country I hope the conservative's do


When I placed the bet Corbyn was 13/2 and May 1/9 to be next PM or around that figure.


----------



## Lexiedhb

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Considerably more than the





rottiepointerhouse said:


> Considerably more than the Conservatives are thats for sure.


If they are to be believed of course...... That's not to say I just don't believe labour, I don't believe any of em.


----------



## kimthecat

Hows Liar, Liar doing in the charts , perhaps they should do one about Corbyn -Denier , Denier 

*Tom Harris*‏Verified [email protected]*MrTCHarris* May 31
This is why Corbyn seems to be doing better on the media than expected - deny, deny, deny.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> No, I was out most of yesterday
> But I still say he is two faces, he did not condemn them until he was forced to if he wanted to be PM
> 
> I don't agree with hunting as I have said before if you had not noticed but I believe it will never be passed by any party


I'm afraid that isn't true - please see the two posts below which are the ones I posted yesterday for stockwellcat. The EDM he signed was in 1994.



rottiepointerhouse said:


> Sighs.
> 
> https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/pi...ely-wrong-because-it-killed-civilians-corbyn/
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn has condemned the IRA's bombing campaign after coming under severe pressure to single out the terror group for criticism.
> 
> The Labour leader said the IRA's bombing campaign was "completely wrong" because it killed civilians.
> 
> But asked about his reaction when Downing Street and then-prime minister Sir John Major were targeted in an IRA mortar attack in 1991, Mr Corbyn told reporters in Hackney Marshes, east London: "Obviously appalled. I was in Parliament at the time, I heard the attack go off.
> 
> "And the bombing campaign was completely wrong because it was taking civilian lives and there had to be a process that dealt with the basis of it in Northern Ireland.
> 
> On Friday, the BBC's Andrew Neil pointed out to him in an interview that the IRA had killed 1,800 people.
> 
> Mr Corbyn replied: "Yes. And people were killed by Loyalist bombs as well. All deaths are appalling, all deaths are wrong. There isn't a military solution to a conflict between traditions and communities. There has to be a better way and a better process of doing it."
> 
> *and*
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-violence-1994-general-election-a7761801.html
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn signed a motion in the House of Commons that condemned IRA violence and "extended its sympathy to the relatives of those murdered".
> 
> The Leader of the Labour Party supported an early day motion put forward by Labour MP David Winnick to commemorate the victims of the IRA bombing in Birmingham in 1974.
> 
> The motion was tabled on the 20 year anniversary of the attack that killed 21 people and injured 182 others and was signed by Mr Corbyn in November 1994.





rottiepointerhouse said:


> Last Friday, the BBC's Andrew Neil frustrated a majority of viewer and even the press by spending the bulk of his half-hour interview with Jeremy Corbyn on the topic of the IRA. Others have done similarly and it's to be expected that Jeremy Paxman will do more than touch on the topic tonight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Corbyn speaking to Andrew Neil last Friday
> 
> One of the main questions that keeps being used is whether Corbyn will condemn IRA violence specifically. Corbyn will answer, because it's true, that he condemns all bombings.
> 
> But he has, in fact, condemned IRA violence specifically. Parliament even has it on record.
> 
> In 1994, Labour MP David Winnick proposed an EDM (Early Day Motion) in the Commons commemorating the victims of the IRA bombing in Birmingham 20 years earlier.
> 
> The wording of the motion is unequivocal:
> 
> That this House notes that it is 20 years since the mass killings…


I hope you are right about the hunting ban but I fear you are wrong - if they have a big enough majority they have to hold the vote to repeal the ban and have promised their hunting supporters they will. With a big majority there will not be enough to oppose it and unfortunately despite asking members of this forum who love animals and mostly say they do not support the ban being lifted I can only think of 2 have actually bothered to write or email their candidates to even ask how they would vote. Have you asked your candidates/incumbent MP how they will vote?


----------



## 1290423

Can someone tell meet please old this is 
*Conservatives*
Currently 330 MPs

*Party Policies*
The Conservative manifesto has two paragraphs on animal issues - on page 55.

The manifesto says that the Conservatives will:


'push for higher animal welfare standards to be incorporated into international trade agreements'
'ban wild animals in circuses'
'press for all EU member states to ensure that animals are only sent to slaughterhouses that meet high welfare standards'
'encourage other countries to follow the EU's lead in banning animal testing for cosmetics'
'work to accelerate the global development and take-up of alternatives to animal testing where appropriate'
'protect methods of slaughter such as shechita and halal'
'continue to lead the world in stopping the poaching that kills thousands of rhinos, elephants and tigers each year'
'oppose any resumption of commercial whaling and seek further measures… to end shark finning'
'press for a total ban on ivory sales'
'press for full "endangered species" status for polar bears'
Read the full manifesto

What it doesn't say: the Conservatives want to overturn the hunting ban and roll out the badger cull across the country. The Party has issued a disappointing and error-riddled response to our five election campaigns issues. Read it here


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> Hows Liar, Liar doing in the charts , perhaps they should do one about Corbyn -Denier , Denier
> 
> *Tom Harris*‏Verified [email protected]*MrTCHarris* May 31
> This is why Corbyn seems to be doing better on the media than expected - deny, deny, deny.


It got to number one for a short period yesterday but then slipped back to number 2 I believe. Perhaps the lyrics of the song above could be amended to include that he has condemned the IRA and did sign a EDM condemning them in 1994


----------



## Lexiedhb

DT said:


> Can someone tell meet please old this is
> *Conservatives*
> Currently 330 MPs
> 
> *Party Policies*
> The Conservative manifesto has two paragraphs on animal issues - on page 55.
> 
> The manifesto says that the Conservatives will:
> 
> 
> 'push for higher animal welfare standards to be incorporated into international trade agreements'
> 'ban wild animals in circuses'
> 'press for all EU member states to ensure that animals are only sent to slaughterhouses that meet high welfare standards'
> 'encourage other countries to follow the EU's lead in banning animal testing for cosmetics'
> 'work to accelerate the global development and take-up of alternatives to animal testing where appropriate'
> 'protect methods of slaughter such as shechita and halal'
> 'continue to lead the world in stopping the poaching that kills thousands of rhinos, elephants and tigers each year'
> 'oppose any resumption of commercial whaling and seek further measures… to end shark finning'
> 'press for a total ban on ivory sales'
> 'press for full "endangered species" status for polar bears'
> Read the full manifesto
> 
> What it doesn't say: the Conservatives want to overturn the hunting ban and roll out the badger cull across the country. The Party has issued a disappointing and error-riddled response to our five election campaigns issues. Read it here


So actally on balance they are ALL doing a bit..... I wouldn't say one party more than any other actually.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Can someone tell meet please old this is
> *Conservatives*
> Currently 330 MPs
> 
> *Party Policies*
> The Conservative manifesto has two paragraphs on animal issues - on page 55.
> 
> The manifesto says that the Conservatives will:
> 
> 
> 'push for higher animal welfare standards to be incorporated into international trade agreements'
> 'ban wild animals in circuses'
> 'press for all EU member states to ensure that animals are only sent to slaughterhouses that meet high welfare standards'
> 'encourage other countries to follow the EU's lead in banning animal testing for cosmetics'
> 'work to accelerate the global development and take-up of alternatives to animal testing where appropriate'
> 'protect methods of slaughter such as shechita and halal'
> 'continue to lead the world in stopping the poaching that kills thousands of rhinos, elephants and tigers each year'
> 'oppose any resumption of commercial whaling and seek further measures… to end shark finning'
> 'press for a total ban on ivory sales'
> 'press for full "endangered species" status for polar bears'
> Read the full manifesto
> 
> What it doesn't say: the Conservatives want to overturn the hunting ban and roll out the badger cull across the country. The Party has issued a disappointing and error-riddled response to our five election campaigns issues. Read it here


Don't think that is the current manifesto as I found it really hard to find the paragraph about holding a free vote on repealing the hunting ban. The current manifesto has defeating extremism on P55 - that almost sounds more like the aims of the Conservatives against hunting group.


----------



## 1290423

Lexiedhb said:


> So actally on balance they are ALL doing a bit..... I wouldn't say one party more than any other actually.


Dont know when it was written lexie?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Lexiedhb said:


> So actally on balance they are ALL doing a bit..... I wouldn't say one party more than any other actually.


Would be interested to see if you can find that in their manifesto - I couldn't.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Don't think that is the current manifesto as I found it really hard to find the paragraph about holding a free vote on repealing the hunting ban. The current manifesto has defeating extremism on P55 - that almost sounds more like the aims of the Conservatives against hunting group.


Thank you, I suspected it were camarons, but there is a division of tory that are for animal welfare
Definitely not making excuses for them but I would like to find information on it


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Don't think that is the current manifesto as I found it really hard to find the paragraph about holding a free vote on repealing the hunting ban. The current manifesto has defeating extremism on P55 - that almost sounds more like the aims of the Conservatives against hunting group.


Actually forget that - it isn't the Blue Fox manifesto.


----------



## Lexiedhb

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Would be interested to see if you can find that in their manifesto - I couldn't.


Ahhhh probably old then


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> When I placed the bet Corbyn was 13/2 and May 1/9 to be next PM or around that figure.


I'll take a bow for being so close 

You feckin stoopid for betting £500 for a hopefully £56 :Jawdrop I wouldn't have risked that the day she announced the election!!

Good luck anyway


----------



## Honeys mum

cheekyscrip said:


> I do not support Corbyn,kyscrip. neither May...


Same here cheekyscrip.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> I'll take a bow for being so close
> 
> You feckin stoopid for betting £500 for a hopefully £56 :Jawdrop I wouldn't have risked that the day she announced the election!!
> 
> Good luck anyway


No I bet £79.25 (13/2) on Corbyn becoming new PM. It says profits £594.72. I only bet this because they gave me £30 credit for signing up to Betfair.

May to remain as PM £54.72 profit (£49.25).

Now you got it out of my


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Suspend the use of neonicotinoids until proven that their use in agriculture
> does not harm bees or other pollinators.


https://geneticliteracyproject.org/...e-science-pushing-eu-towards-insecticide-ban/

In Britain, for example, the study finds that farmers have more than quadrupled the number of insecticide applications on oil-seed rape (from 0.7 to 3.4 per growing season), but pest pressure has increased.

This makes sense because neonics are mostly used as seed dressings, absorbed into the plant from germination, rather than sprayed on a growing crop.

http://www.fwi.co.uk/arable/eu-food-watchdog-delays-neonicotinoids-review.htm


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> No I bet £79.25 (13/2) on Corbyn becoming new PM. It says profits £594.72. I only bet this because they gave me £30 credit for signing up to Betfair.
> 
> May to remain as PM £50 odd quid profit.


I was going on 7/1ish for Mr Corbyn. I'm worried about you again, at 1/9 to return a £50 profit you need to bet £450


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> I was going on 7/1ish for Mr Corbyn. I'm worried about you again, at 1/9 to return a £50 profit you need to bet £450


Just looked at betting slips online:
7.5 odds Corbyn (advertised 13/2)
1.11 odds May (advertised 1/9 or 9/1 cannot quite remember).


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> No I bet £79.25 (13/2) on Corbyn becoming new PM. It says profits £594.72. I only bet this because they gave me £30 credit for signing up to Betfair.
> 
> May to remain as PM £54.72 profit (£49.25).
> 
> Now you got it out of my





stockwellcat said:


> Just looked at betting slips online:
> 7.5 odds Corbyn (advertised 13/2)
> 1.11 odds May (advertised 1/9 or 9/1 cannot quite remember).


You've confused me now. How much did put on Mrs May to win @1/9? Your figures don't add up. There's a world away from 1/9 and 9/1

Edit
Send me a pm (conversation I think they call it here) if you'd rather.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> You've confused me now. How much did put on Mrs May to win @1/9? Your figures don't add up. There's a world away from 1/9 and 9/1


It doesn't say on betting slip it says odds 1.11 £49.25 profit £54.72. I don't know if I mentioned somewhere back in the thread I just cannot be bothered going back through it


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> It doesn't say on betting slip it says odds 1.11 £49.25 profit £54.72. I don't know if I mentioned somewhere back in the thread I just cannot be bothered going back through it


Ok, got it, that's not your profit it's your return. The profit is £5.47. Phew, sorted.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok, got it, that's not your profit it's your return. The profit is £5.47. Phew, sorted.


Better returns on Labour then I guess


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> Just looked at betting slips online:
> 7.5 odds Corbyn (advertised 13/2)
> 1.11 odds May (advertised 1/9 or 9/1 cannot quite remember).


You have misunderstood the bet. The 7.5 factor includes the return of stake. The profit from your Corbyn bet, should he win, is actually 515.13

There is absolutely no combination of bets at the odds you cite that can guarantee a win. It is mathematically impossible. Fact.

If May wins, you make 5.47. Take away your bet on Corbyn of 79.25 and you have lost 73.78


----------



## Calvine

noushka05 said:


> I know its mad int it! I mean ukip voters might just as well vote tory - they're all but the same these days.
> 
> View attachment 312880


 Nothing to do with anything, this post, @noushka05, but I can't help thinking TM looks very much like an ageing/elderly Robert de Niro here (but sorry, can't remember which particular film). The mean, tight-lipped and somewhat sadistic smile. Saying which, I like RdN...


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Better returns on Labour then I guess


Only by £590 or so, guess the secret as to who you are voting for is out now!


----------



## Dr Pepper

Satori said:


> You have misunderstood the bet. The 7.5 factor includes the return of stake. The profit from your Corbyn bet, should he win, is actually 515.13
> 
> There is absolutely no combination of bets at the odds you cite that can guarantee a win. It is mathematically impossible. Fact.
> 
> If May wins, you make 5.47. Take away your bet on Corbyn of 79.25 and you have lost 73.78


I know it's unfair, almost like they set it up in their favour. That why I play Blackjack which, with a bit of skill you can win on, Roulette not so easy but play outside and inside and you can win big, and the ponies which is a lot of luck, work and a tad of inside knowledge. Generally it's a mugs game.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> guess the secret as to who you are voting for is out now!


Maybe, maybe not as I placed the bets before I made my mind up


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> I know it's unfair, almost like they set it up in their favour. That why I play Blackjack which, with a bit of skill you can win on, Roulette not so easy but play outside and inside and you can win big, and the ponies which is a lot of luck, work and a tad of inside knowledge. Generally it's a mugs game.


I'll play blackjack next time then instead  I know how to play that


----------



## stockwellcat.

*Labour would try to form minority government if it is largest party*

Labour has said it will try to implement its programme as a minority government if it is the largest party in a hung parliament after the election.

Shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry said the party would not seek to enter into a coalition with other parties, but would present a Queen's Speech and Budget.

This high stakes move would effectively challenge other "progressive" parties to back Jeremy Corbyn's party or risk a return to Conservative rule.

http://news.sky.com/story/labour-wo...ty-government-if-it-is-largest-party-10901127


----------



## CollieSlave

Here's a touch of truth and reality for you -
http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/this-facebook-comment-about-the-uk-election-is-going-viral/


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Or......
> 
> Making the NHS responsible for its expenditure. Do people come to your country for free treatment? Would they get it? If the NHS started charging those not entitled to use the service that would be a good start. Then they could start looking at costs, all those unecessary GP appointment follow ups that could be dealt with via a phone call (I'm seriously pissed at the amount of time and money that's wasted looking for why a 88 year old isn't as healthy as a 30 year old, and thats my parents and in-laws I'm talking about!). Privatisation, but still free at the point of delivery for those in need, could well be the best thing to drag the NHS into the realities of the 21st century. Chucking cash at it has never worked.


People come to Finland for lots of reasons, and we treat all in emergencies. Later, if possible (e.g. covered by insurance), the hospital might send a bill (which is very low). For not emergent health care all EU citizens are entitled to free (or very cheap) treatment as in all EU countries. For non EU-citizens, who want e.g. give birth in Finnish hospitals, they can arrange it beforehand, It will cost around a few thousand, but is still cheaper than most private hospitals would charge, We even get some US- mothers here, as they can easily pay the flights, rent a place to stay and give birth, and still find it much cheaper than what they´d ended up paying in US, Naturally some just come here and when in labor go to hospital and get treated as any mother would. If some one is interested more, see these instructions.

http://www.vsshp.fi/en/potilaille-ja-laheisille/foreign-patients-in-finland/Pages/default.aspx
http://www.kela.fi/documents/12099/...stem.pdf/d68610f5-3248-4f8f-af2f-080045a2d395

Are you saying that e.g. my mother shouldn´t go to a doctor anymore, as she is old? But wouldn´t that be a really expensive system, as that would make them soon hospital patients, when their problems would get worse? Or do you think they should just die sooner? I don´t get the connection between chucking cash and public health care, as in comparison, public health care is much cheaper than private. Health care in Us cost about $9000 & per person, or 15/20% percentage of gross domestic product. That is twice as much as e.g. France and four times as much as UK. About the quality/ for rich it is good, but for the rest poor or non existent. The average life span is getting even lower for some. Is this what you really want.

So if you want to chuck money away, privatise by all means. But dont be fooled by the medical companies experts. They know exactly how much money can be made, if you privatised even parts of NHS. Any politician even suggesting this knows that too and as such, IMO, is a complete ****, who cares nothing of the people.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> I'll play blackjack next time then instead  I know how to play that


Oh god don't, I can't take the stress, it's not a matter of just getting as close to 21 as you can


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> People come to Finland for lots of reasons, and we treat all in emergencies. Later, if possible (e.g. covered by insurance), the hospital might send a bill (which is very low). For not emergent health care all EU citizens are entitled to free (or very cheap) treatment as in all EU countries. For non EU-citizens, who want e.g. give birth in Finnish hospitals, they can arrange it beforehand, It will cost around a few thousand, but is still cheaper than most private hospitals would charge, We even get some US- mothers here, as they can easily pay the flights, rent a place to stay and give birth, and still find it much cheaper than what they´d ended up paying in US, Naturally some just come here and when in labor go to hospital and get treated as any mother would. If some one is interested more, see these instructions.
> 
> http://www.vsshp.fi/en/potilaille-ja-laheisille/foreign-patients-in-finland/Pages/default.aspx
> http://www.kela.fi/documents/12099/...stem.pdf/d68610f5-3248-4f8f-af2f-080045a2d395
> 
> Are you saying that e.g. my mother shouldn´t go to a doctor anymore, as she is old? But wouldn´t that be a really expensive system, as that would make them soon hospital patients, when their problems would get worse? Or do you think they should just die sooner? I don´t get the connection between chucking cash and public health care, as in comparison, public health care is much cheaper than private. Health care in Us cost about $9000 & per person, or 15/20% percentage of gross domestic product. That is twice as much as e.g. France and four times as much as UK. About the quality/ for rich it is good, but for the rest poor or non existent. The average life span is getting even lower for some. Is this what you really want.
> 
> So if you want to chuck money away, privatise by all means. But dont be fooled by the medical companies experts. They know exactly how much money can be made, if you privatised even parts of NHS. Any politician even suggesting this knows that too and as such, IMO, is a complete ****, who cares nothing of the people.


I just think a awful lot of time and money is wasted investigating just being old.


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Jeezus. That''ll be us soon. Millions of us are going to be without health care if the tories get their way. *You only need to look at the ideology of their Conservative counterparts across the pond.*


I know Noush'. It's kinda been the shallow end for years.

And now these suck ups wanna be just like good old uncle Sam.

You'll be the good old USB (United States of Britain) before you know it.:Facepalm


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> I just think a awful lot of time and money is wasted investigating just being old.


That is true, but as our life spans get longer, it is money well spend. The healthier we remain when old, the cheaper it is to take care of us. Japan has started to use robots for elderly, and I can easily see that happening here too. Though will it ever work that well for us I doubt, as they believe in animate spirits and a robot can be accepted more easily there. They would work better than here too, well at least in Finland.

But privatizing NHS scares me to bits, as that would not only become really expensive, but many people I know would have no health care. That kind of world is just bad IMO.


----------



## shadowmare

Zaros said:


> I know Noush'. It's kinda been the shallow end for years.
> 
> And now these suck ups wanna be just like good old uncle Sam.
> 
> You'll be the good old USB (United States of Britain) before you know it.:Facepalm


More like SB - States of Britain


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> No you can only used a food bank if you've been referred by a third party - such as a doctor or social worker etc. Guys hospital provided the food bank for staff themselves so I assume this is different.


I have tried to find any evidence that the Guys and Thomas' food bank is for staff, but can only see that it was set up for the local community


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> I just think a awful lot of time and money is wasted investigating just being old.


 At what age should the medical profession stop investigating the illnesses of the old/older?
At what stage should we stop administering medication to the terminally I'll?

After all, they're all going to die and no amount of money is going to save them from the grave.


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> View attachment 312855


I had two pay cuts since 2011. Not a nurse


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> At what age should the medical profession stop investigating the illnesses of the old/older?
> At what stage should we stop administering medication to the terminally I'll?
> 
> After all, they're all going to die and no amount of money is going to save them from the grave.


Depends what it is. Never said stop administering medicine to the terminally ill, why would you want to do that?

But being a bit breathless after a three mile walk at the age of 88, and having ongoing tests six months later all to no avail, and there comes a time you realise 'he's not thirty anymore".

He's not got any worse either and still does that walk two or three times a week.


----------



## ClaireLouise

Dr Pepper said:


> Depends what it is. Never said stop administering medicine to the terminally ill, why would you want to do that?
> 
> But being a bit breathless after a three mile walk at the age of 88, and having ongoing tests six months later all to no avail, and there comes a time you realise 'he's not thirty anymore".
> 
> He's not got any worse either and still does that walk two or three times a week.


But if They didnt do the tests how would they know it wasnt something more sinister such as a lung cancer


----------



## Dr Pepper

ClaireLouise said:


> But if They didnt do the tests how would they know it wasnt something more sinister such as a lung cancer


Agree, but when you've ruled out everything why keep calling him back every month to repeat the tests? Give it at least a year or two unless he gets worse.


----------



## rona

The Pensionalities to win BGT


----------



## Dr Pepper

rona said:


> The Pensionalities to win BGT


Providing they don't puff a bit and have to go to hospital!


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> Being a bit breathless after a three mile walk at the age of 88, and having ongoing tests six months later all to no avail, there comes a time you realise 'he's not thirty anymore


The point of the medical profession is to make life as physically as comfortable as possible during the autumn years.
And ya seem to be forgetting each case that crosses the threshold of a doctor's surgery is further expanding medical knowledge which will benefit us all in the future.
We're all Guinea pigs to some extent.

Again, at what age would you consider the medical profession should stop treating the elderly?


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> The point of the medical profession is to make life as physically as comfortable as possible during the autumn years.
> And ya seem to be forgetting each case that crosses the threshold of a doctor's surgery is further expanding medical knowledge which will benefit us all in the future.
> We're all Guinea pigs to some extent.


Agree, but there is overkill and in this case that's what is. It isn't just the constent tests it's the endless wasted follow up appointments just to say "everything is ok", a phone call can do that. It's a waste of NHS resources.


----------



## Colliebarmy

Tell you what...

We will have the election, either Labour or the Conservatives will win, and Sturgeon will own Scotland (and nothing else) and it all be the "same shit/different day" in 2 weeks

Whoever wins will NOT abide by thier election promises (cos they never do)

In reality the choice is bad or badder


----------



## Colliebarmy

MiffyMoo said:


> I have tried to find any evidence that the Guys and Thomas' food bank is for staff, but can only see that it was set up for the local community


you believed the hype?


----------



## Colliebarmy

MrsZee said:


> That is true, but as our life spans get longer, it is money well spend. The healthier we remain when old, the cheaper it is to take care of us. .


but more living longer (even a lower care cost each) means increased overall costs


----------



## MiffyMoo

Colliebarmy said:


> you believed the hype?


Nope, not one little bit


----------



## Elles

There's a lot being made of Jeremy Corbyn and being different, but he's nearly 70 and half his party don't like him. I can't see half his labour manifesto being implemented even if they do get in. I have one reason for voting labour and that's to stop the conservatives doing exactly what they want. If I think labour might actually win, I don't know that I'll vote. There's probably a reason labour are doing well in the polls, it's to worry tactical voters and stop them voting for them. I wouldn't put it past them anyway. Who owns these polling companies?


----------



## Satori

Dr Pepper said:


> I know it's unfair, almost like they set it up in their favour. That why I play Blackjack which, with a bit of skill you can win on, Roulette not so easy but play outside and inside and you can win big, and the ponies which is a lot of luck, work and a tad of inside knowledge. Generally it's a mugs game.


Nothing unfair about it. Bookmakers exist to make profits for their stakeholders. It would be impossible to do that by running an unbalanced book.


----------



## 1290423

A piece of useless information maybe a list of the best prime ministers of the UK as judged by Eden only one labour p.m. ever got on to that list and that was Attlee
Are any of us daft enough to believe that ANY of the current candidates could ever dream of making that list?
Biggest shower of  loonies ever .


----------



## Dr Pepper

Satori said:


> Nothing unfair about it. Bookmakers exist to make profits for their stakeholders. It would be impossible to do that by running an unbalanced book.


I wasn't being entirely serious


----------



## noushka05

63[/ATTACH]


Dr Pepper said:


> When it comes to voting on Thursday, if the NHS is your main concern, I think it's easy enough to cut to chase on what both parties are offering.
> 
> Labour - pump more money into it and carry on as before.
> 
> Conservatives - keep the cuts coming so it's forced to change.
> 
> Maybe over simplified but I think that's the crux of it.


"Maybe over simplified"? Hmm well just a bit  If you're interested in finding out what is happening to our NHS and the peril it is in, a good start would be the Health & safety act 2012. STPs. the Naylor report. Nurses burseries. Brexit.

I have many 'main concerns'. Here's a few more of my priorities the tories are going to be a catastrophe for: climate change - this is THE most dangerous issue facing us!, the environment in general, badgers, wildlife in general, the renewables industry, poor people, democracy, society. I'm extremely concerned about the tories opening up the country to fracking - you're worried about the 'garden tax' how do you feel about the tories allowing frackers to pump toxic chemicals under people property? I'm concerned about the dangerous air pollution they refuse to address. I'm concerned they are actually prepared to drag us out of the EU with NO deal. They are a disaster.



Bisbow said:


> So what happened 30 odd years ago is of no importance
> 
> So that's why you won't condemn him for what he has done
> 
> Nice to know what you really feel, and of course labour never dabbled in the arms


And what did he do? He spoke to Sinn Fein years ago. He has condemned the bombing on both sides. Did you read that Peter Oborne article about Corbyns foreign policy? I bet you'll find hes always opposed dabbling in arms even by his own party - as do I  . Its inexcusable, we are wreaking havoc in the middle east! Then people moan about refugees. We should be ashamed of ourselves.

By the same token I notice you have never condemned May for her terrible attacks on the most vulnerable in our society - her policies are quite literally killing people _today - _are they of no importance? Many people are barely clinging on by their fingernails. Neither have I seen you condemn May for supporting evil regimes who fund terrorism & selling arms to them.

May sells arms to 'our good friends' the Saudis who are bombing babies. Please look at the devastation created in the Yemen by these monsters (_and _directly by us!). I think that people should choose either to support a man determined to create peace, or a woman profiting from war & death.










This Tory politician actually WAS a member of the IRA - http://www.croydonguardian.co.uk/news/4045346.IRA_Councillor_welcomed_back_to_Tory_bosom/












samuelsmiles said:


> Actually, the Kaiser Permanente model was first investigated by the Labour Party many, many years ago.
> 
> If the Conservatives _do _want to part privatise the NHS, why should this necessarily be such a bad thing? There are some EU countries that have models we could copy that are far better than our archaic system.


They definitely want to privatise it that - that's what the H&SA 2012 was all about. Surely you know the ideology of the tories? I'm disgusted labour looked into the KP model for our NHS. Of course its a bad thing - please look at the USA - they have the worst health care in the west. There may well be other models we could copy but the tories are not copying them. They have been touting our NHS in the USA - where the vultures have been circling over our NHS for years.



Bisbow said:


> How two faced can he get
> 
> It is barbarity to kill foxes but not British troops and innocent people
> 
> How on Earth can you support him


How is he two faced? He isn't a cruel man, he has campaigned for peace all his life. Rightly or wrongly I truly believe he thought by engaging with Sienn Fein he could do some good.



Lexiedhb said:


> If they are to be believed of course...... That's not to say I just don't believe labour, I don't believe any of em.


Labours past record for progressive change for animals speaks for itself.



rona said:


> https://geneticliteracyproject.org/...e-science-pushing-eu-towards-insecticide-ban/
> 
> In Britain, for example, the study finds that farmers have more than quadrupled the number of insecticide applications on oil-seed rape (from 0.7 to 3.4 per growing season), but pest pressure has increased.
> 
> This makes sense because neonics are mostly used as seed dressings, absorbed into the plant from germination, rather than sprayed on a growing crop.
> 
> http://www.fwi.co.uk/arable/eu-food-watchdog-delays-neonicotinoids-review.htm


Neonics in any form are a disaster for bees, other pollinators, birds - nature.



CollieSlave said:


> Here's a touch of truth and reality for you -
> http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/this-facebook-comment-about-the-uk-election-is-going-viral/


Spot on! 

Look at todays right wing press. The fearmongering has been ramped up. They've hit the panic button.


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> I have tried to find any evidence that the Guys and Thomas' food bank is for staff, but can only see that it was set up for the local community





Colliebarmy said:


> you believed the hype?





MiffyMoo said:


> Nope, not one little bit


I remember reading about it a few years ago. Believe what you like but its a fact that millions of people are now working for their poverty, top up benefits have been cut and they are struggling to make ends meet. EVEN nurses, unless you don't believe the RCN is a credible source? I suspect nurses who live in expensive areas like London are in a real fix.

ETA This is all I can find about it.


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> I know Noush'. It's kinda been the shallow end for years.
> 
> And now these suck ups wanna be just like good old uncle Sam.
> 
> You'll be the good old USB (United States of Britain) before you know it.:Facepalm


Yep this is what 'Taking our country back' will look like. How easily people get hyped up over silly nationalistic slogans.

Trump has officially pulled the USA out of the Paris Climate Deal our government doesn't give a to$$ about climate change either.

Out of step with the rest of the world >>>












shadowmare said:


> More like SB - States of Britain


We'll be Poundland soon lol


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Yep this is what 'Taking our country back' will look like. How easily people get hyped up over silly nationalistic slogans.


Really, your moaning about people getting hyped up over silly slogans 

You've posted more silly slogans than you get at a slogan convention in slogansville at the height of slogan season.


----------



## Satori

Dr Pepper said:


> I wasn't bring entirely serious


Consider me caught.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Really, your moaning about people getting hyped up over silly slogans
> 
> You've posted more silly slogans than you get at a slogan convention in slogansville at the height of slogan season.


That is a private conversation - so keep your beak out!


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> The tweet has nothing to do with food banks and I agree with the sentiments expressed in it.
> 
> We have already agreed that the NHS is not in a good way and that there are bottlenecks. What we may not all agree on is how we would like to see it solved. Do we agree with some privatisation, do we agree with some being charged, do we agree with higher taxes and more money being ploughed in? Do we believe nurses should receive free training? What about the immigrant situation? Social care? Etc etc
> 
> omg nurses use food banks because their children are starving. need moar pay. Is a load of rubbish. Of course they should get decent pay and conditions, but exaggerated and false claims is not the way to go about it.


But the tweet by The RCN WAS about food banks:Wideyed. Are you another person disputing the credibility of the RCN?


----------



## Honeys mum

UK Election: May to 'reduce net migration to tens of thousands by 2022' | UK | News | Express.co.uk

What a load of s***e. They have promised this twice already, is it going to be a case of third time lucky. I don't think so.


----------



## noushka05

*Election 2017: What are nurses' priorities?*
A group attending a Royal College of Nursing conference in Liverpool tell us about the issues they want the new government to tackle.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-40119162/election-2017-what-are-nurses-priorities


----------



## Lurcherlad

Elles said:


> Exactly. They used to give out an interim social payment, or benefit loan while people waited for benefit claims to be processed. They don't do that now?


Actually, I think that is where the welfare system is failing.

If someone falls on hard times, seems they have to wait so long for help, they sink deeper into the mire - sometimes too deep to get out again or at least it's a major struggle.

Recently genuine people have been "reassessed" and lost some or all of their benefit immediately, and have to fight to get it back which takes months, causing them to go into poverty.

Mortgage interest payments used to be supported for 6 months which helped people to keep their homes rather than be repossessed, which probably works out cheaper than another family on the streets and on benefits?

Somewhere along the line what should have been short term assistance for the vast majority of healthy/able claimants has turned into long term. Some of those claimants, and their offspring have frankly become "expectant" that the State will support them. The fact that they are financially better off then someone in work is wrong IMO.

Lack of jobs is always used as the reason, however, I have been looking for part time work for some time and there are always many jobs on offer every time I look. Had I been desperate for work/money I could very easily have found something even if it wasn't ideal. I would clean public toilets if I needed the money badly enough. (Luckily, I'm not so I can afford to be choosy.)


----------



## rona

https://www.rcn.org.uk/employment-and-pay/nhs-conditions-of-employment
*High cost area supplements*
If you work in Greater London or the counties immediately surrounding London (the fringe zone), you'll receive extra pay on top of your basic salary as follows:

+ 20%if you work in inner London (subject to a minimum payment of £4,076 & a maximum payment of £6,279)

I've never heard of a trade union that doesn't say their members are underpaid. That's what the RCN is, a trades union. Wasn't always the case but that's what they've morphed into


----------



## Lurcherlad

noushka05 said:


> No wonder May avoided the leadership debate
> 
> View attachment 312868


Show any Politician of any Party that gives a straight answer to a straight question?


----------



## noushka05

Lurcherlad said:


> Show any Politician of any Party that gives a straight answer to a straight question?


Caroline Lucas lol

I don't think I've seen May give a straight answer yet. Shes avoiding proper scrutiny, backing out of media interviews. I've never seen such hopeless PM.


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> I remember reading about it a few years ago. Believe what you like but its a fact that millions of people are now working for their poverty, top up benefits have been cut and they are struggling to make ends meet. EVEN nurses, unless you don't believe the RCN is a credible source? I suspect nurses who live in expensive areas like London are in a real fix.
> 
> ETA This is all I can find about it.


I found that document, but it strangely doesn't have the section about a food bank for staff...


----------



## Lurcherlad

rottiepointerhouse said:


> From Labour's manifest0 which I have already posted along with the Lib Dems
> 
> Animals in our food chain need welfare standards.
> Domestic animals require stronger protection from cruelty.
> Wild animals need a sustainable ecosystem.
> Labour's vision is for the UK to lead the world with high animal welfare standards in the wild, in farming and for domestic animals.
> Labour will increase the maximum sentence for those convicted of committing animal cruelty.
> We will promote cruelty-free animal husbandry and consult on ways to ensure better enforcement of agreed standards.
> We will prohibit the third-party sale of puppies, introduce and enforce a total ban on ivory trading, and support the ban on wild animals in circuses.
> We will cease the badger cull, which spreads bovine TB.
> Labour ended fox hunting, deer hunting and hare coursing. Only a Labour government will maintain the bans


All good, but why (apart from fox hunting) didn't they sort all the others out last time they were in power - 3 terms I believe?

The all spout about what they WILL do if they get in. Experience shows they rarely DO any of it!


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> I found that document, but it strangely doesn't have the section about a food bank for staff...
> 
> View attachment 312970


I didn't add it on lol It was something I'd remembered prior to the last election & snippet was all I could find. But fair enough. Thank you. It doesn't change the fact that some nurses are having to use food banks as this video from yesterday shows. And now nurses bursaries have been scrapped student nurses will have to pay for their own tuition.

These are real nurses http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-40119162/election-2017-what-are-nurses-priorities


----------



## Lurcherlad

noushka05 said:


> Caroline Lucas lol
> 
> I don't think I've seen May give a straight answer yet. Shes avoiding proper scrutiny, backing out of media interviews. I've never seen such hopeless PM.


If you say so! 

Greens are getting my vote anyway 

TBF they can promise rainbows and unicorns because they stand very little chance of having to deliver


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> View attachment 312960
> View attachment 312961
> View attachment 312962
> View attachment 312963


Who takes a blind bit of notice what the comics have to say today? Tomorrow it will be all about the Conservatives and Trump 

I think at this stage noush the majority of people have made their minds up and just want to get on with the voting next week.


----------



## noushka05

Lurcherlad said:


> All good, but why (apart from fox hunting) didn't they sort all the others out last time they were in power - 3 terms I believe?
> 
> The all spout about what they WILL do if they get in. Experience shows they rarely DO any of it!


Labour made lots of progressive reforms for animals. Under the tories we have gone backwards.


----------



## noushka05

Lurcherlad said:


> If you say so!
> 
> Greens are getting my vote anyway
> 
> TBF they can promise rainbows and unicorns because they stand very little chance of having to deliver


Theres plenty of money - its all about prioritising what its spent on & I'd rather vote for hope over more of the same but worse. I do not want to go down the same route as the USA. Its a terrifying vision. I wonder how many people over there are now wishing they'd voted for Bernie Sanders?


----------



## Bisbow

Corbyn


The man who wants to slash inheritance tax so millions more are caught in the trap
The man who wants to tax the rich so they leave the country to keep their money and leave the country pennyless
The man who backs squatters to live rent free in other peoples homes
The man who cosies up to terrorists who kill without thought
Etc. etc, etc

Is this the man you want to lead this country
Heaven help us all if he does because we will badly need help


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Corbyn
> 
> The man who wants to slash inheritance tax so millions more are caught in the trap
> The man who wants to tax the rich so they leave the country to keep their money and leave the country pennyless
> The man who backs squatters to live rent free in other peoples homes
> The man who cosies up to terrorists who kill without thought
> Etc. etc, etc
> 
> Is this the man you want to lead this country
> Heaven help us all if he does because we will badly need help


This is straight out of the fail


----------



## Lexiedhb

stockwellcat said:


> Who takes a blind bit of notice what the comics have to say today? Tomorrow it will be all about the Conservatives and Trump
> 
> I think at this stage noush the majority of people have made their minds up and just want to get on with the voting next week.


Errrrrrrmmmm I haven't.......


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> Who takes a blind bit of notice what the comics have to say today? Tomorrow it will be all about the Conservatives and Trump
> 
> I think at this stage noush the majority of people have made their minds up and just want to get on with the voting next week.


Yes but not everybody holds firm onto their beliefs so tenaciously as you. Some folk have been known to change their minds, believe it or not.


----------



## noushka05

OMG This is despicable if true!

*Alberto Nardelli*‏Verified [email protected]*AlbertoNardelli* 10h10 hours ago

*Am told UK declined to sign joint statement with Germany, Italy and France on 
Trump's decision to pull out of Paris climate agreement*


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> Yes but not everybody holds firm onto their beliefs so tenaciously as you. Some folk have been known to change their minds, believe it or not.


LOL


----------



## noushka05

*David Schneider*‏Verified [email protected]*davidschneider* 33m33 minutes ago

Shock as party that's missed every target they set themselves
says they might miss target they've set themselves.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Who takes a blind bit of notice what the comics have to say today? Tomorrow it will be all about the Conservatives and Trump
> 
> I think at this stage noush the majority of people have made their minds up and just want to get on with the voting next week.


 except for you and me that is.


----------



## noushka05

I love Ed Milibands response to this news - (he's actually quite witty lol)

BREAKING Theresa May has refused to appear on @*BBCRadio4*'s Woman's Hour tomorrow morning. She is sending Justine Greening.








*Ed Miliband*‏Verified [email protected]*Ed_Miliband* 13h13 hours ago

Ed Miliband Retweeted Christopher Hope

Can I report someone who has failed to attend two job interviews in 48 hours.
I know where she lives.
What is the sanction?

. Retweeted
15K


----------



## 1290423

Bisbow said:


> Corbyn
> 
> The man who wants to slash inheritance tax so millions more are caught in the trap
> The man who wants to tax the rich so they leave the country to keep their money and leave the country pennyless
> The man who backs squatters to live rent free in other peoples homes
> The man who cosies up to terrorists who kill without thought
> Etc. etc, etc
> 
> Is this the man you want to lead this country
> Heaven help us all if he does because we will badly need help


Wouldn't it have been easier just to say the man who wants to take us back 100 years or 70 at least


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 312974
> View attachment 312975


Oh I've just posted about this as well. I don't know about strong - she is totally spineless - & weird.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Wouldn't it have been easier just to say the man who wants to take us back 100 years or 70 at least


No its the tories taking us back to Victorian times. Corbyns just dragging us back as far as the 70's


----------



## Lexiedhb




----------



## Lexiedhb




----------



## noushka05

]



Lexiedhb said:


> View attachment 312979


Source of your meme please? Both of them lol


----------



## 1290423

Can anyone tell me please is Corbyn still deputy chairman of the CND


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> No its the tories taking us back to Victorian times. Corbyns just dragging us back as far as the 70's
> 
> View attachment 312978


Ahhh, I think you are confused. Isn't that a poster for Mr Corbyn's pledge of "jobs for everyone". To be fair it's admirable but it looks he's taken it a tad to far.


----------



## Lexiedhb

noushka05 said:


> ]
> 
> Source of your meme please?


Lol I thought we were just pulling any old tat off the net and posting it here?


----------



## Bisbow

DT said:


> Wouldn't it have been easier just to say the man who wants to take us back 100 years or 70 at least


Yes, you are right but I wanted someone to see what I was getting at

I failed, someone is to hard headed to see the truth when it hits you in the eye


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> except for you and me that is.


----------



## 1290423

Heres something for you to all pick too.
pieces

But can we all play a little game before you reply can we all imagine that this is the CV supporting the application for the position of prime minister would you give this person the job?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33624145


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Can anyone tell me please is Corbyn still deputy chairman of the CND


He stepped down on 17th October 2015 due to increased work loads and took on the role as Vice President of the CND on the same day 

*Jeremy Corbyn to take CND vice-president role*
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-34559975/jeremy-corbyn-to-take-cnd-vice-president-role


----------



## noushka05

Lexiedhb said:


> Lol I thought we were just pulling any old tat off the net and posting it here?


So I see lol



Bisbow said:


> Yes, you are right but I wanted someone to see what I was getting at
> 
> I failed, someone is to hard headed to see the truth when it hits you in the eye


You don't seem interested in truth to me. You keep on evading these. http://www.middleeasteye.net/column...ued-radical-and-morally-courageous-2036528122


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> He stepped down on 17th October 2015 due to increased work loads, but then he accepted the role as Vice President of the CND on the same day.


So what you off saying then is the man in line to lead this country is one who would take that role despite the possibility of there being conflicting issues that are exact opposite of his principles. a bit like me go to work in a halal slaughterhouse really.
Please don't anyone ever say to me that this is a man of integrity and principal


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> So what you off saying then is the man in line to lead this country is one who would take that role despite the possibility of there being conflicting issues that are exact opposite of his principles. a bit like me go to work in a halal slaughterhouse really.
> Please don't anyone ever say to me that this is a man of integrity and principal


Don't you want someone who work towards a peaceful world?


----------



## noushka05

Shame on May & her diabolical government.


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> Don't you want someone who work towards a peaceful world?


Not if hes going to change himself to a fence when we are under nuclear attack I don't xxxx
How can we trust him he won't answer the question directly


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> Don't you want someone who work towards a peaceful world?


Not if it leaves us wide open to attacks from anyone who hates us, and that's what he will do


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong




----------



## rona

So, it's all Mrs Mays fault that Trump got out, nothing to do with the other leaders of course, or even Trump himself......................


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 312986


While telling you how you should live and think


----------



## rona

I'm starting to get the feeling that Mrs May might be ill. Something more is obviously going on than the press and those stupid memes are insinuating


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Lurcherlad said:


> All good, but why (apart from fox hunting) didn't they sort all the others out last time they were in power - 3 terms I believe?
> 
> The all spout about what they WILL do if they get in. Experience shows they rarely DO any of it!


I have no idea as I'm not a Labour voter - just quoting their manifesto. However they did bring about the ban on hunting which was a pretty major achievement for animals and I do believe they will go on to do more which hand on heart I can't say about the Tories.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> I'm starting to get the feeling that Mrs May might be ill. Something more is obviously going on than the press and those stupid memes are insinuating


I was thinking the same thing.


----------



## samuelsmiles

noushka05 said:


> Shame on May & her diabolical government.
> 
> View attachment 312985


https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-call-with-us-president-1-june-2017
*PM call with US President: 1 June 2017*

"*The Prime Minister expressed her disappointment with the decision and stressed that the UK remained committed to the Paris Agreement,* as she set out recently at the G7.

She said that the Paris Agreement provides the right global framework for protecting the prosperity and security of future generations, while keeping energy affordable and secure for our citizens and businesses"


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## cheekyscrip

noushka05 said:


> Shame on May & her diabolical government.
> 
> View attachment 312985


She is a coward, coward, you can't trust her ...

I do hope for no win parliament and none of them being able to introduce their extremist views.


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> I'm starting to get the feeling that Mrs May might be ill. Something more is obviously going on than the press and those stupid memes are insinuating


I agree, it proves that May is unfit to rule. Funny to think Corbyn was the target with people saying Labour should look for a new leader to have any chance of winning, but he's proved himself and is looking more electable by the day.

Does anyone honestly believe May can negotiate with the 27 EU member states when she can't bring herself to participate in a debate with six other UK leaders?

If May does achieve the huge landslide she desires which is looking less likely I doubt she'll be PM by Christmas.


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Yep this is what 'Taking our country back' will look like. How easily people get hyped up over silly nationalistic slogans.
> Trump has officially pulled the USA out of the Paris Climate Deal our government doesn't give a to$$ about climate change either.
> Out of step with the rest of the world >>>
> View attachment 312964
> 
> We'll be Poundland soon lol


*THIS WOMAN CANNOT BE BOUGHT!*










*THAT'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT DONALD. BUT I DO HAVE A COUNTRY YOU CAN HAVE FOR A SONG.
I RATHER THINK THE STAR SPANGLED BANNER MIGHT BE MORE FAVOURABLE THAN THAT MONOTONOUS GOD SAVE THE QUEEN NONSENSE!*​


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> So what you off saying then is the man in line to lead this country is one who would take that role despite the possibility of there being conflicting issues that are exact opposite of his principles. a bit like me go to work in a halal slaughterhouse really.
> Please don't anyone ever say to me that this is a man of integrity and principal


This is a man of integrity and principle 

Seriously though he answered this question the other day on one of the debates - he is not a dictator and he has accepted the decision of his party and its members as agreed at their conference. I would far prefer a leader who is prepared to accept that not all of their "ideals" are acceptable to the masses and agree to go with what the majority think and want. If only Mrs May would do the same about various issues such as leaving pensioners winter fuel allowance alone and leaving the hunting ban in place but from what I understand she is not a great one for listening to her cabinet and relies more on her special advisers.



rona said:


> I'm starting to get the feeling that Mrs May might be ill. Something more is obviously going on than the press and those stupid memes are insinuating


Yes I think she is suffering from the strain of running this election campaign so soon after becoming leader and it shows with their cobbled together uncosted manifesto. They keep banging on about Labour's magic money tree but they are being dishonest by not even telling us where they will set the cap for the dementia tax and the threshold for losing winter fuel payments. I think it is dawning on her that she made a mistake throwing the country into unnecessary chaos and should have just got on with it.



KittenKong said:


> Source: BBC
> View attachment 312991


That will set the cat among the pigeons igeonigeon


----------



## samuelsmiles

Everyone I know is just thoroughly disillusioned with the choices we have. Where is our strong, principled and charismatic leader?


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> This is a man of integrity and principle
> 
> Seriously though he answered this question the other day on one of the debates - he is not a dictator and he has accepted the decision of his party and its members as agreed at their conference. I would far prefer a leader who is prepared to accept that not all of their "ideals" are acceptable to the masses and agree to go with what the majority think and want. If only Mrs May would do the same about various issues such as leaving pensioners winter fuel allowance alone and leaving the hunting ban in place but from what I understand she is not a great one for listening to her cabinet and relies more on her special advisers.
> 
> Yes I think she is suffering from the strain of running this election campaign so soon after becoming leader and it shows with their cobbled together uncosted manifesto. They keep banging on about Labour's magic money tree but they are being dishonest by not even telling us where they will set the cap for the dementia tax and the threshold for losing winter fuel payments. I think it is dawning on her that she made a mistake throwing the country into unnecessary chaos and should have just got on with it.
> 
> That will set the cat among the pigeons igeonigeon


Absolutely.
Then she says Labour has no plan for Brexit!!!
Pot kettle black?

She might be bloody difficult woman which makes her bloody awful diplomat ..

Nobody told her about bees, vinegar and honey?

Holding hands with Trump and inviting him for " state visit" her only achievement so far?

Sorry to say but even Corbyn comes across as charming in comparison!!!!


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> But the tweet by The RCN WAS about food banks:Wideyed. Are you another person disputing the credibility of the RCN?


The tweet I read wasn't, but then there's been so many. The nurse in the video you linked said 'we hear' too. They know that someone earning 23000 a year, with the chance to progress is doing something wrong if they're asking for charitable handouts. There are plenty of people on minimum wage who manage without. Yes it's more expensive to live in London, it always has been.

When my husband worked in Dillon's the bookstore on minimum wage and I worked part time, we didn't earn as much as a nurse did if you combined our wages. We didn't need to use food banks, which is lucky as there weren't any. Everyone working at Dillon's on retail levels of pay had at least one university degree.

There are people far worse off than nurses who manage. Nurses will get no sympathy by saying they need to use food banks, when it's not true, a student nurse with children said she had to use a food bank. We don't know her situation other than she's a student. People earning nursing levels of pay will only use something like a food bank if catastrophe hits, talking although it's a common occurrence for the poor nurses just makes me cross.


----------



## Bisbow

If she could read this thread it would not be surprising if she were ill

I am surprised so called civilized people can be so cruel about another person

I can't stand Corbyn but would never be so cruel as to say such nasty things about him

If it were one of your loved ones you would be up at arms about it and so you should be but as she has no comeback to you, you can be extremely nasty and be proud of it

Making a point is one thing but to tear someone to bits because you disagree is totally uncalled for

What ever the out come of the election I hope you are proud of yourselves, I would be very ashamed of myself but if he wins you will just gloat and say "I told you so"

I don't think I want to be involved with such a disgusting thread any more


----------



## Elles

I started to wonder if it's making her ill too. She knows pulling out of debates and interviews is making her look bad, yet she continues to do it. People must wonder if she's ill, or just determined to lose.


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> I started to wonder if it's making her ill too. She knows pulling out of debates and interviews is making her look bad, yet she continues to do it. People must wonder if she's ill, or just determined to lose.


Quite frankly I think she still believes the entire UK is behind her, so why bother taking part in debates etc. when she's going to win anyway, thanks to the undying support in the right wing tabloids.....

I hope she'll be proven to be very wrong....


----------



## KittenKong

Bisbow said:


> If she could read this thread it would not be surprising if she were ill
> 
> I am surprised so called civilized people can be so cruel about another person
> 
> I can't stand Corbyn but would never be so cruel as to say such nasty things about him
> 
> If it were one of your loved ones you would be up at arms about it and so you should be but as she has no comeback to you, you can be extremely nasty and be proud of it
> 
> Making a point is one thing but to tear someone to bits because you disagree is totally uncalled for
> 
> What ever the out come of the election I hope you are proud of yourselves, I would be very ashamed of myself but if he wins you will just gloat and say "I told you so"
> 
> I don't think I want to be involved with such a disgusting thread any more


Come on! How much abuse has Jeremy Corbyn, as with Ed Miliband before him, had to endure from the far right press? Corbyn has handled it extremely well but it must get him down a bit at times. He's only human.

Thatcher endured a lot of opposition too, especially in her early years as PM.

Yet it's TM who brags about being strong and stable. My a**e!

I have absolutely no sympathy for May if she's struggling to cope. I'll save that for the foxes that will be killed and the pensioners who'll struggle through the removal of their winter fuel allowance amongst other things.


----------



## Bisbow

KittenKong said:


> Come on! How much abuse has Jeremy Corbyn, as with Ed Miliband before him, had to endure from the far right press? Corbyn has handled it extremely well but it must get him down a bit at times. He's only human.
> 
> Thatcher endured a lot of opposition too, especially in her early years as PM.
> 
> Yet it's TM who brags about being strong and stable. My a**e!


Corbyn has not had the same abuse on this thread as she has and the abuse has been so bad.
She is not perfect
Neither is he, or you, or me
I can't remember him getting the same treatment
That is my last word on this dreadful thread


----------



## stockwellcat.

A Conservative MP has been charged with the expenses thing in 2015.

*Tory candidate Craig Mackinlay charged over election expenses*

Tory candidate Craig Mackinlay has been charged as part of an investigation into spending at the 2015 general election.

Mr Mackinlay, who is standing to be re-elected South Thanet MP, is one of three people to have been charged with offences under the Representation of the People Act 1983, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said.

It follows an investigation into allegations concerning the Conservative Party's spending at the last general election.

After being handed a file by Kent Police, the CPS said there was "sufficient evidence" to authorise the charges.

Mr Mackinlay is due to appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on 4 July alongside election agent Nathan Gray, 28, and Conservative campaign organiser Marion Little, 62.

In May 2015, Mr Mackinlay defeated then UKIP leader Nigel Farage into second place by more than 2,000 votes to be elected South Thanet MP.

The Electoral Commission has confirmed Mr Mackinlay will still be able to stand for re-election at the general election on 8 June.

Last month, it was announced no criminal charges were to be brought in relation to inquiries by 14 police forces into Conservative election spending.

But the Kent Police case was still being considered by the CPS.

The probe followed allegations expenses for an election "battle bus" were wrongly recorded as part of national campaign spending rather than falling within the lower constituency limits as required by the Electoral Commission.

http://news.sky.com/story/tory-candidate-craig-mackinlay-charged-over-election-expenses-10901914


----------



## kimthecat

rona said:


> Another question if possible, not sure you can answer this. What are the mental health service like in your area?


It has been piss poor in my area , they actually admitted it to the local gazette a couple of years ago though it has improved a bit since then . you know when some one goes missing here the chances of them being found alive are slim. 
OH had to wait nearly 6 months for urgent counselling after we found the young man . He was already suffering from depression from when his parents died and known to them but he had to start all over again . 

ETA our local hospital is a trust but the mental health is run by another hospital trust .


----------



## Dr Pepper

Elles said:


> I started to wonder if it's making her ill too. She knows pulling out of debates and interviews is making her look bad, yet she continues to do it. People must wonder if she's ill, or just determined to lose.


I don't know. I reckon, after that childish bun fight on TV the other night, she just has to lie low and say as little as possible over the next few days to hold onto a respectable lead. She totally made the right choice not to participate in the debate. Give them enough rope and all that.


----------



## Elles

The thing that worries me the most about the conservatives is how their new rules have affected the disabled. Someone severely and permanently disabled shouldn't be made to jump through hoops to get care. Some of their stories since the new changes came about are heartbreaking. Local MPs have had to get involved to get them basic care. It's terrible. 

If they had a better plan for the NHS laid out transparently and took better care of the weak and disabled, I wouldn't mind some of their cuts. I do think people should take care of themselves and be given incentives to make sure they do. For me Labour is just going to be too generous. Giving away money left, right and centre and paying for things we can't afford and shouldn't have to pay. 

I paid for my daughter to go to music academy, she could have done maths at college for free, but she wanted to do music. Now I'm going to be expected to pay for a bunch of layabouts to go to uni whether their parents can afford it or not. I don't want to. When I went back to work when my daughter was young, I paid a child minder. Now I will be expected to pay for everyone's child, whether their parents can afford it or not. Where's the fairness in that? I don't get it. 

There's more, but it all boils down to Labour is going too far and as a country we can't afford it and shouldn't have to whether it's costed or not and Conservatives aren't going far enough. Conservatives could take a little more and give a bit more. Labour could take a little less and give a bit less.


----------



## KittenKong

Before I hear accusations of being a Tory hater I have nothing but the upmost respect for Lord Michael Heseltine even if I disagree with much of his politics.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-pol...ine-launches-scathing-attack-on-boris-johnson









Edit - Just realised this is an old news item (30/6/16)


----------



## kimthecat

trump not signing Paris agreement  apparently some states have their own strict laws (California , for example, ) about pollution etc so one can only hope that others follow suit.


----------



## Elles

Trump is doing what he said he'd do. Putting America first. Unfortunately that's not always a good thing, for Americans or anyone else.


----------



## 1290423

Bisbow said:


> Corbyn has not had the same abuse on this thread as she has and the abuse has been so bad.
> She is not perfect
> Neither is he, or you, or me
> I can't remember him getting the same treatment
> That is my last word on this dreadful thread


Totally agree


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> I don't know. I reckon, after that childish bun fight on TV the other night, she just has to lie low and say as little as possible over the next few days to hold onto a respectable lead. She totally made the right choice not to participate in the debate. Give them enough rope and all that.


Debate? Did you have a different channel on to me?--
first I thought id turned into the cbeebies channel, but as the show progressed I seriously did begin to wonder if I was watching auditions for a new game show called the comedians


----------



## Team_Trouble

I'm now debating voting green. I was intending to vote tactically and vote lib dem, but supporting labour. Having investigated the green manifesto (after previously writing them off as they're a small party) I am considering voting for them. The trouble is, I know that in the grand scheme of things my vote is not going to have any effect on who is MP in our constituency. However, one more vote for the green party is still one more vote for the green party.
On the other hand, voting lib dem is the best chance to oust the current tory MP. 
I'd appreciate any thoughts on this.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Not all Tories are all bad, not everyone of them wants to murder foxes, not all are cowards.

Heseltine. Clarke. Bercow.

Same with Republicans.


Pity though those more honest and decent ones seem to be pushed out by the nasties.


----------



## 1290423

KatieandOliver said:


> I'm now debating voting green. I was intending to vote tactically and vote lib dem, but supporting labour. Having investigated the green manifesto (after previously writing them off as they're a small party) I am considering voting for them. The trouble is, I know that in the grand scheme of things my vote is not going to have any effect on who is MP in our constituency. However, one more vote for the green party is still one more vote for the green party.
> On the other hand, voting lib dem is the best chance to oust the current tory MP.
> I'd appreciate any thoughts on this.


Totally agree with your intentions to vote for the party who's manifesto appeals to us the most, is the right thing to do. All votes are counted and it keeps the bigger parties on their toes.


----------



## Elles

Have you seen the Mail is now accusing the BBC of having been biased towards Labour throughout the election campaigns? :Hilarious


----------



## 3dogs2cats

KittenKong said:


> If May does achieve the huge landslide she desires which is looking less likely I doubt she'll be PM by Christmas.


Do you mean if she doesn`t achieve a huge landslide? If she gets a landslide she`ll be OK, if she doesn`t I agree she is going to be in difficulties within her party and may be asking a removal company to take her belongings out of No. 10 a lot sooner than she ever imagined!

Should she be forced to step down as PM what happens next will be interesting. Of course a new leader will be decided within the party and the country will be presented with a new PM because we don't vote for a PM only MPs so that's fine and dandy, well it would be if we hadn`t been told over and over again to vote Theresa May . Conservative candidates are now Theresa May candidates, her team. My incumbent MP has made it very clear he stands for May, a vote for him is a vote for a strong and stable Theresa May government, there is no talk of the "my party the conservatives will .... " it is all "Theresa May will ....."

If/When Mrs May can`t deliver and crumbles we will be expected to forget in this election we were actually asked to vote for her and not the party.


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> Heres something for you to all pick too.
> pieces
> 
> But can we all play a little game before you reply can we all imagine that this is the CV supporting the application for the position of prime minister would you give this person the job?
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33624145


@DT: just because he makes jam and his name is Bernard...hahaha! ROFL.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Corbyn has not had the same abuse on this thread as she has and the abuse has been so bad.
> She is not perfect
> Neither is he, or you, or me
> I can't remember him getting the same treatment
> That is my last word on this dreadful thread


You have got to be joking. I have never seen any politician as unfairly treated as Corbyn. May deserves everything she gets - her policies are quite literally killing people. My sympathy lies with all those innocent lives she is destroying. She will oversee the end of our NHS leaving millions without health care. Her stance on climate change is not only putting future generations in grave peril - but the entire living planet. Trump & May are a catastrophe for all of us.

Do you feel any sympathy at all for disabled people who are dying thanks to Mays policies? 
_
"people are dying, and nobody cares" "this election is life or death for us. Anyone who votes for the conservative party, who are going to continue with these cuts, are complicit in their deaths"_


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> Trump is doing what he said he'd do. Putting America first. Unfortunately that's not always a good thing, for Americans or anyone else.


Trump is not putting America first. The only people Trump is putting first are the super rich. Sounds familiar ...


----------



## noushka05

KatieandOliver said:


> I'm now debating voting green. I was intending to vote tactically and vote lib dem, but supporting labour. Having investigated the green manifesto (after previously writing them off as they're a small party) I am considering voting for them. The trouble is, I know that in the grand scheme of things my vote is not going to have any effect on who is MP in our constituency. However, one more vote for the green party is still one more vote for the green party.
> On the other hand, voting lib dem is the best chance to oust the current tory MP.
> I'd appreciate any thoughts on this.


I love the Green party, they represent all my values, I'm very proud to be a member of such a brilliant & progressive party, but if I were in your position I would probably vote tactically & vote for the lib dems. (even though I'm not that keen on them). That's just my opinion


----------



## 1290423

Can I just remind people please of mr corbyns grades for A level maths.
Is there any wonder his sums dont add up


----------



## Elles

I think I've made my mind up. Labour will probably win in Exeter again anyway. I'm going to vote for myself and vote Green. Now I'd better check and see if I can.


----------



## Honeys mum

Just on the BBc news
South Thanet Tory candidate Craig Mackinlay charged over expenses - BBC News

T,May has said, he will still be a canidate for her party.


----------



## Honeys mum

noushka05 said:


> *David Schneider*‏Verified [email protected]*davidschneider* 33m33 minutes ago


D.Davis admitted that on Question time last night noush.


----------



## Elles

Aha, my Green Party candidate is a 22 year old Jewish university student from London. Ah well, in for a penny, in for a pound.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> If she could read this thread it would not be surprising if she were ill
> 
> I am surprised so called civilized people can be so cruel about another person
> 
> I can't stand Corbyn but would never be so cruel as to say such nasty things about him
> 
> If it were one of your loved ones you would be up at arms about it and so you should be but as she has no comeback to you, you can be extremely nasty and be proud of it
> 
> Making a point is one thing but to tear someone to bits because you disagree is totally uncalled for
> 
> What ever the out come of the election I hope you are proud of yourselves, I would be very ashamed of myself but if he wins you will just gloat and say "I told you so"
> 
> I don't think I want to be involved with such a disgusting thread any more





Bisbow said:


> Corbyn has not had the same abuse on this thread as she has and the abuse has been so bad.
> She is not perfect
> Neither is he, or you, or me
> I can't remember him getting the same treatment
> That is my last word on this dreadful thread


@Bisbow I don't like/agree with memes which attack the person rather than their politics and I don't like hate tactics on either side but sadly the world we live in is one in which politics gets dirty. Theresa May constantly claims "strong and stable leadership" so if that were true she would be tough enough to take any of the criticisms aimed at her on this thread, however I don't believe it is true and I think she is crumbling under the pressure and back tracking on policies when the public react to them - have you ever known a leader back track on a manifesto commitment before an election? Is this strong and stable enough to lead Brexit negotiations or will she end up crying off and sending Amber Rudd in her place? Theresa May has chosen to focus a lot of her campaign against Corbyn presumably because she has fallen for the claims that the general public don't like him when actually they really seem to appreciate his listening and communication skills/warmth whereas she can come across as very cold/hard robotic. You have also been rather nasty about him yourself and accused him of things and when I showed you links to disprove those things you said you didn't like him anyway and did not apologise for misjudging him. Its all irrelevant anyway as I very much doubt any politicians every read pet forums 



KatieandOliver said:


> I'm now debating voting green. I was intending to vote tactically and vote lib dem, but supporting labour. Having investigated the green manifesto (after previously writing them off as they're a small party) I am considering voting for them. The trouble is, I know that in the grand scheme of things my vote is not going to have any effect on who is MP in our constituency. However, one more vote for the green party is still one more vote for the green party.
> On the other hand, voting lib dem is the best chance to oust the current tory MP.
> I'd appreciate any thoughts on this.


It all depends on how strongly you feel about the issues that are important to you. If you feel another term of Conservative government will be bad for those issues then to vote tactically for whichever party stand the best chance of beating the Tory in your area makes the most sense. If you prefer to vote for the party you agree with the most but don't mind if that means another 5 years of the Conservatives and all that will entail then vote for the Greens.


----------



## Calvine

Bisbow said:


> That is my last word on this dreadful thread


@Bisbow: I don't blame you one bit. I gave up on the EU referendum thread as it became so vitriolic.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Not if hes going to change himself to a fence when we are under nuclear attack I don't xxxx
> How can we trust him he won't answer the question directly


Trident makes us a target not safer. Russia have already warned the tories they will wipe the UK off the map after Fallon threatened a preemptive strike. Has there ever been a more an incompetent bunch of fools?



Bisbow said:


> Not if it leaves us wide open to attacks from anyone who hates us, and that's what he will do


I say flogging arms to madmen, a dreadful foreign policy & massive cuts to police & armed forces is putting us at more risk.



rona said:


> So, it's all Mrs Mays fault that Trump got out, nothing to do with the other leaders of course, or even Trump himself......................


She's weak. She is dragging our name through the dirt.



samuelsmiles said:


> *PM call with US President: 1 June 2017*
> 
> "*The Prime Minister expressed her disappointment with the decision and stressed that the UK remained committed to the Paris Agreement,* as she set out recently at the G7.
> She said that the Paris Agreement provides the right global framework for protecting the prosperity and security of future generations, while keeping energy affordable and secure for our citizens and businesses"


She should be standing shoulder to shoulder with world leaders in condemnation at this travesty. Not expressing her 'disappointment'. But then lets face her government don't give a damn about climate change.



KittenKong said:


> I agree, it proves that May is unfit to rule. Funny to think Corbyn was the target with people saying Labour should look for a new leader to have any chance of winning, but he's proved himself and is looking more electable by the day.
> 
> Does anyone honestly believe May can negotiate with the 27 EU member states when she can't bring herself to participate in a debate with six other UK leaders?
> 
> If May does achieve the huge landslide she desires which is looking less likely I doubt she'll be PM by Christmas.


I don't know if you saw this by former British Ambassador Craig Murray ?












Zaros said:


> *THIS WOMAN CANNOT BE BOUGHT!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *THAT'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT DONALD. BUT I DO HAVE A COUNTRY YOU CAN HAVE FOR A SONG.
> I RATHER THINK THE STAR SPANGLED BANNER MIGHT BE MORE FAVOURABLE THAN THAT MONOTONOUS GOD SAVE THE QUEEN NONSENSE!*​


LOL We must have the worst national anthem in the world So i'll try to focus on the ONLY bonus to come out of this


----------



## Zaros

Bisbow said:


> I am surprised so called civilized people can be so cruel about another person


And I'm shocked and sickened that so called civilised people can do this to each other...










And yet your government provides the means, the resources and the troops for this to take place again, and again, and again.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Elles said:


> I think I've made my mind up. Labour will probably win in Exeter again anyway. I'm going to vote for myself and vote Green. Now I'd better check and see if I can.


Do you not know who is standing in your constituency?


----------



## Elles

The problem with this thread imo is it's very pro labour, but then it's easy to defend and promote a party that's promising the world. The poor generally haven't got poorer. They've always got richer, or they'd still be using mangles and watching black and white tv, if they had a tv. Some sections of our society are struggling and that needs addressing, but I'm sorry, I don't believe it's all doom and gloom and I don't believe Jeremy Corbyn is the saviour of Britain. Maybe he'll prove me wrong.


----------



## Elles

3dogs2cats said:


> Do you not know who is standing in your constituency?


No, I'd only checked conservative, labour and lib dem. I'd also had leaflets through from an independent and those three, nothing from green. I know now. The green candidate is someone I'd not give the time of day. An young upstart, a university student activist.  Still it's policies, not personalities.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> The problem with this thread imo is it's very pro labour, but then it's easy to defend and promote a party that's promising the world. The poor generally haven't got poorer. They've always got richer, or they'd still be using mangles and watching black and white tv, if they had a tv. Some sections of our society are struggling and that needs addressing, but I'm sorry, I don't believe it's all doom and gloom and I don't believe Jeremy Corbyn is the saviour of Britain. Maybe he'll prove me wrong.


Its not so much pro labour as anti tory. This government are a catastrophe.


----------



## noushka05

Go on Corbyn!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> Its not so much pro labour as anti tory. This government are a catastrophe.


I was going to say the same thing - it started out pretty balanced I thought until the manifestos came out then the gloves were off. I personally don't like Labour's manifesto and would find it hard to vote for it but if they were the best alternative to the Tory here I would vote for them even though we would be significantly worse off under them. I would say the thread is pretty anti Tory even from quite a few of us who have previously been their supporters - can think of 3 perhaps 4 who have said they won't vote for them based on that crappy manifesto. The way they are treating pensioners who have been the back bone of their supporters for many years and is unbelievable.


----------



## KittenKong

So much for the Tories targeting Labour strongholds where Leave gained a large majority in the EU Referendum.

We've had three leaflets from Labour plus a canvassing visit, three leaflets from the Lib Dems, one from UKIP and another from the Space Navies Party!

Nothing from the Tories yet though.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Are Theresa May's days numbered as PM?

Find out on the 9th June 2017.

Remember to remember what the UK went through in the last 7 years with the current Government when you cast your vote on the 8th June 2017.

Vote responsibly by avoiding the Conservative option on your ballot sheet


----------



## Elles

I got my first Conservative leaflet through the door today. The front proudly proclaims:

STANDING WITH THERESA MAY

Which tickled me, considering the latest memes on 'where's Theresa?'. He must know, he's stood next to her.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I was going to say the same thing - it started out pretty balanced I thought until the manifestos came out then the gloves were off. I personally don't like Labour's manifesto and would find it hard to vote for it but if they were the best alternative to the Tory here I would vote for them even though we would be significantly worse off under them. I would say the thread is pretty anti Tory even from quite a few of us who have previously been their supporters - can think of 3 perhaps 4 who have said they won't vote for them based on that crappy manifesto. The way they are treating pensioners who have been the back bone of their supporters for many years and is unbelievable.


Absolutely the way I see it too RPH x

(I'm really getting into my book by the way  All I need now is some good recipes! I'm going to seek out that recipe thread that you did as soon as I get off this one My hubby is full vegetarian now - one more step & I'll have him vegan too. I've just got to get more variety recipe wise to keep him happy.)


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> 'where's Theresa?'.


She's probably out eyeing people's houses up for there new dementia tax.


----------



## Honeys mum

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I was going to say the same thing - it started out pretty balanced I thought until the manifestos came out then the gloves were off. I personally don't like Labour's manifesto and would find it hard to vote for it but if they were the best alternative to the Tory here I would vote for them even though we would be significantly worse off under them. I would say the thread is pretty anti Tory even from quite a few of us who have previously been their supporters - can think of 3 perhaps 4 who have said they won't vote for them based on that crappy manifesto. The way they are treating pensioners who have been the back bone of their supporters for many years and is unbelievable.


Totally agree with you RPH.For a start, we thought best to vote tactfully and vote for Labour to try and stop the tories getting in. But don't think I can vote for them now on principal. Also the L.Dems are a no no, So looks like we will be voting for who we voted for in the last election, although they have no chance.
I


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> She's probably out eyeing people's houses up for there new dementia tax.


And the reason you will see a lot of labour canvassers is because whilst there's one keeping you talking at the front door there's another round the back measuring your bloody garden.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> And the reason you will see a lot of labour canvassers is because whilst there's one keeping you talking at the front door there's another round the back measuring your bloody garden.


I haven't heard much talk about this Land Tax anywhere other than here - admit I didn't stick with the bun fight of a debate so not sure if anyone is even asking about it. If its such a big deal though and the Conservatives had their "people " trawl though Labour's manifesto and even come up with a document picking their costing to bits why has it only just been put in the public arena? Why aren't Labour being challenged about it everywhere they go?


----------



## 3dogs2cats

KittenKong said:


> So much for the Tories targeting Labour strongholds where Leave gained a large majority in the EU Referendum.
> 
> We've had three leaflets from Labour plus a canvassing visit, three leaflets from the Lib Dems, one from UKIP and another from the Space Navies Party!
> 
> Nothing from the Tories yet though.


What are the Space Navies Party all about


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> Absolutely the way I see it too RPH x
> 
> (I'm really getting into my book by the way  All I need now is some good recipes! I'm going to seek out that recipe thread that you did as soon as I get off this one My hubby is full vegetarian now - one more step & I'll have him vegan too. I've just got to get more variety recipe wise to keep him happy.)


I have tons of good recipes and can also link you a book I use (better not do it on public forum though so will try and pm it to you) and some blogs. Unfortunately a lot of the proper plant based books are American - most of the British vegan books use a lot of salt/sugar and oil so I tend to adapt the recipes from them I was thinking about starting another thread with all the plant based news, videos and for recipe sharing but thought I would leave it until after the election. I'm going to start taking photos of some of my meals which I will put on to give people some ideas too.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I haven't heard much talk about this Land Tax anywhere other than here - admit I didn't stick with the bun fight of a debate so not sure if anyone is even asking about it. If its such a big deal though and the Conservatives had their "people " trawl though Labour's manifesto and even come up with a document picking their costing to bits why has it only just been put in the public arena? Why aren't Labour being challenged about it everywhere they go?


Nothing mentioned on the debate, nothing on any of the interviews I`ve seen, nothing on last night QT, maybe it will get mentioned on QT tonight?


----------



## Elles

The land tax is being mentioned and memed all over the 'net, but I don't think anyone has had a chance to ask about it yet. If they are pro Jeremy they will ask so he can deny it, if they are anti they may or may not ask him I guess.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> And the reason you will see a lot of labour canvassers is because whilst there's one keeping you talking at the front door there's another round the back measuring your bloody garden.


This is one of the funniest things I've read on this whole thread



rottiepointerhouse said:


> I haven't heard much talk about this Land Tax anywhere other than here - admit I didn't stick with the bun fight of a debate so not sure if anyone is even asking about it. If its such a big deal though and the Conservatives had their "people " trawl though Labour's manifesto and even come up with a document picking their costing to bits why has it only just been put in the public arena? Why aren't Labour being challenged about it everywhere they go?


Full Fact has fact checked it RPH  - https://fullfact.org/economy/labours-land-value-tax-will-you-have-sell-your-garden/



rottiepointerhouse said:


> I have tons of good recipes and can also link you a book I use (better not do it on public forum though so will try and pm it to you) and some blogs. Unfortunately a lot of the proper plant based books are American - most of the British vegan books use a lot of salt/sugar and oil so I tend to adapt the recipes from them I was thinking about starting another thread with all the plant based news, videos and for recipe sharing but thought I would leave it until after the election. I'm going to start taking photos of some of my meals which I will put on to give people some ideas too.


That's fantastic. Thank you very much. I would love to see photos - what a great idea. And we could all add our own to it


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> The thing that worries me the most about the conservatives is how their new rules have affected the disabled. Someone severely and permanently disabled shouldn't be made to jump through hoops to get care. *Some *of their stories since the new changes came about are heartbreaking. Local MPs have had to get involved to get them basic care. It's terrible.


None of the disabled people or even elderly people I know have had any issues. I do wonder how many these SOME are?



Elles said:


> Now I will be expected to pay for everyone's child, whether their parents can afford it or not.


I felt like this all my life. It's one of my biggest bug bears. Paying for people to have kids when I think they should ruddy well stop having them to save the planet


----------



## noushka05

3dogs2cats said:


> Nothing mentioned on the debate, nothing on any of the interviews I`ve seen, nothing on last night QT, maybe it will get mentioned on QT tonight?





Elles said:


> The land tax is being mentioned and memed all over the 'net, but I don't think anyone has had a chance to ask about it yet. If they are pro Jeremy they will ask so he can deny it, if they are anti they may or may not ask him I guess.


I've just posted this for RPH, but in case you missed it, it has been fact checked - https://fullfact.org/economy/labours-land-value-tax-will-you-have-sell-your-garden/


----------



## KittenKong

3dogs2cats said:


> What are the Space Navies Party all about


Can't say I'd heard of them either!

https://www.the-space-navies.com/home/


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I haven't heard much talk about this Land Tax anywhere other than here - admit I didn't stick with the bun fight of a debate so not sure if anyone is even asking about it. If its such a big deal though and the Conservatives had their "people " trawl though Labour's manifesto and even come up with a document picking their costing to bits why has it only just been put in the public arena? Why aren't Labour being challenged about it everywhere they go?


Probably because the conservative's have similar plans, so when they are in power they can bring it without Labour being able to oppose it or them being accused of hypocrisy. Maybe.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> Probably because the conservative's have similar plans, so when they are in power they can bring it without Labour being able to oppose it or them being accused of hypocrisy. Maybe.


Hadn't thought of that. They pinched some of Labour's ideas from last time such as the energy price cap so wouldn't surprise me.


----------



## Elles

If you don't believe spending more money on the NHS short term will do any good (long term all parties are pretty similar, none maintaining it in real terms) If you feel that increasing corporation tax to pay for things people should work for, not be given for free is wrong. If you believe a free vote on hunting is the chance to bury it once and for all. If you believe a person should be able to sell a 200 year old chess set they inherited and it has nothing to do with ivory poaching. If you believe you can protest against fracking where it's an issue, or maybe it's not as bad as they say, we need energy from somewhere. If you believe that poor people are better off than they were 20, 30, 40 years ago. If you believe renationalising may be too expensive. If you believe Conservative policies, maybe with a little tempering are better than Labour policies, which are quite extreme in comparison to what we're used to, I won't blame you for voting conservative and I think you'll likely be in the majority.

Personally I think the conservatives are selling England by the pound, which was a genesis album I used to own and has 'I know what I like (in your wardrobe)' on it.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> If you don't believe spending more money on the NHS short term will do any good (long term all parties are pretty similar, none maintaining it in real terms) If you feel that increasing corporation tax to pay for things people should work for, not be given for free is wrong. If you believe a free vote on hunting is the chance to bury it once and for all. If you believe a person should be able to sell a 200 year old chess set they inherited and it has nothing to do with ivory poaching. If you believe you can protest against fracking where it's an issue, or maybe it's not as bad as they say, we need energy from somewhere. If you believe that poor people are better off than they were 20, 30, 40 years ago. If you believe renationalising may be too expensive. If you believe Conservative policies, maybe with a little tempering are better than Labour policies, which are quite extreme in comparison to what we're used to, I won't blame you for voting conservative and I think you'll likely be in the majority.
> 
> Personally I think the conservatives are selling England by the pound, which was a genesis album I used to own and has 'I know what I like (in your wardrobe)' on it.


If you believe most of these things it might be advisable to do a bit of research.


----------



## noushka05

Wow. Feel the Bern.

Bernie Sanders 'very impressed' with Jeremy Corbyn. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ghton-speech-donald-trump-paris-a7768226.html


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> This is one of the funniest things I've read on this whole thread
> 
> Full Fact has fact checked it RPH  - https://fullfact.org/economy/labours-land-value-tax-will-you-have-sell-your-garden/
> 
> That's fantastic. Thank you very much. I would love to see photos - what a great idea. And we could all add our own to it


Ive been making another good flan noush, no pastry, I use sweet potatos but sadly its got cottage cheese in so guess that makes it a no no for you , but its blinking lovely x


----------



## 1290423

It's high time all the parties got together and solve the NHS problem once and for all


----------



## rona

Jeremy Corbyn......the perfect example of a career politician who has never worked.

At least May has a traceable work record. She went into politics alongside her work not as her work


----------



## 1290423

Honeys mum said:


> Just on the BBc news
> South Thanet Tory candidate Craig Mackinlay charged over expenses - BBC News
> 
> T,May has said, he will still be a canidate for her party.


Let's hope all those vote for him that he can serve his constituents from a prison cell then


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> Are Theresa May's days numbered as PM?
> 
> Find out on the 9th June 2017.
> 
> Remember to remember what the UK went through in the last 7 years with the current Government when you cast your vote on the 8th June 2017.
> 
> Vote responsibly by avoiding the Conservative option on your ballot sheet


Friday 9th June 2017 will no doubt see Theresa May stood outside No.10 making a speech along the lines of promising to give us a strong and stable government now we have elected her as PM. The countdown to how long she remains will begin at that point.

Don`t get confused on election day SWC looking for the conservative option to avoid, you might need to read the small print to actually spot the word `conservative` Look carefully where it says `THERESA MAY` you might find a conservative lurking


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> Can't say I'd heard of them either!
> 
> https://www.the-space-navies.com/home/


Think they may be very popular on the moon they live in la la land bit like the rest of our leaders


----------



## 1290423

Speaking of party leaders did anyone see the interview with Dim Fallon last night?
And before anyone quotes me no that wasn't a mistake


----------



## 3dogs2cats

DT said:


> Speaking of party leaders did anyone see the interview with Dim Fallon last night?
> And before anyone quotes me no that wasn't a mistake


Was this the one with Andrew Neil? I`ve seen it today but I don`t know if it was originally shown last night, it`s like groundhog day I don`t know which day I`m on TBH


----------



## cheekyscrip

3dogs2cats said:


> What are the Space Navies Party all about


There it is:















Space Navies Party...

If they can satisfy my questions about Gibraltar, uni fees, foxes and single market....

They look no worse than others may ...


----------



## noushka05

BREAKING NEWS: Magic money tree found.


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> BREAKING NEWS: Magic money tree found.
> 
> View attachment 313028


2012 noush, wonder if the tax man got any?


----------



## rona

DT said:


> 2012 noush, wonder if the tax man got any?


Also about global rich and not just UK rich
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/jul/21/global-elite-tax-offshore-economy

It's mainly places like Saudi and Nigeria


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> 2012 noush, wonder if the tax man got any?


I doubt that very much lol. In fact didn't the tories try to block the EU who wanted to crack down on tax havens?

Don't have much time but I found this Sue - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jan/30/google-tory-battle-protect-30bn-tax-haven-bermuda



rona said:


> Also about global rich and not just UK rich
> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/jul/21/global-elite-tax-offshore-economy
> 
> It's mainly places like Saudi and Nigeria


Didn't you know May has threatened to turn us into a tax haven?? Merkel cares more about us then May does.


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> Friday 9th June 2017 will no doubt see Theresa May stood outside No.10 making a speech along the lines of promising to give us a strong and stable government now we have elected her as PM. The countdown to how long she remains will begin at that point.
> 
> Don`t get confused on election day SWC looking for the conservative option to avoid, you might need to read the small print to actually spot the word `conservative` Look carefully where it says `THERESA MAY` you might find a conservative lurking


She hasn't got anything strong and stable about her, only her sound bites. I know who I am voting and won't be changing my mind and it ain't Theresa May.


----------



## rona

Might take some of the money that flows through her country
https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/the-worlds-15-biggest-tax-havens/

*8. Germany*
Another major economy, and home to some of the world's most famous manufacturers (and allegedly David Hasselhoff). The income tax system for normal workers is pretty watertight, but it's a different matter for large companies. Only 2.8% of Germany's tax revenue comes from corporate tax paid by corporations, with private tax specialists creating very complicated company structures to help major companies to avoid tax

http://www.taxjustice.net/2015/09/11/tax-haven-germany-new-tjn-book/


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> She hasn't got anything strong and stable about her, only her sound bites. I know who I am voting and won't be changing my mind and it ain't Theresa May.


 you sure about that I'll believe it when I see it


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> you sure about that I'll believe it when I see it


Yep absolutely sure.
Made up my mind and that's final.


----------



## kimthecat

Ive finally made up my mind. I have a postal vote and just posted it .
I've changed the Poll vote from abstaining to Green .


----------



## stockwellcat.

*Nicola Sturgeon signals SNP would support Labour government*

http://news.sky.com/story/nicola-sturgeon-signals-snp-would-support-labour-government-10902237


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> She hasn't got anything strong and stable about her, only her sound bites. I know who I am voting and won't be changing my mind and it ain't Theresa May.


You never know she might lose her seat! Now that really would put the cat amongst the pigeons, unlikely though, she has a huge majority and there are hundreds (slight exaggeration) of candidates to split the vote.



stockwellcat said:


> Yep absolutely sure.
> Made up my mind and that's final.


Are you sure your sure? What odds can we get on you being sure your sure


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> You never know she might lose her seat!


All the seats in Parliament are up for grabs so yes she might. The Conservatives might have the majority before the general election, this could change as no party has the majority at the moment.


> Are you sure your sure? What odds can we get on you being sure your sure


Run to the bookies and put me down as 1/1  I am absolutely sure I know who I voting for.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Yep absolutely sure.
> Made up my mind and that's final.


Final for now


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Final for now


No. Final, Final. No changing


----------



## davidc

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...video-of-corbyn-ira-comments?CMP=share_btn_fb More Tory lies. They really are getting desperate now.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Run to the bookies and put me down as 1/1  I am absolutely sure I know who I voting for.


1/1 also know as evens. I'll do a personal wager with you on that for £200. That'll means if you change your mind or even if you don't, you owe me £200.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> 1/1 also know as evens. I'll do a personal wager with you on that for £200. That'll means if you change your mind or even if you don't, you owe me £200.



So how do you wanna pay me. PayPal?


----------



## 1290423

Lol, I know who stockwell is voting for I just broke into the results of the pole and he is voting for UKIP
Bet you forgot I knew how that worked x


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Lol, I know who stockwell is voting for I just broke into the results and is voting for UKIP


Nope.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Nope.


----------



## cheekyscrip

noushka05 said:


> BREAKING NEWS: Magic money tree found.
> 
> View attachment 313028


Most of it out of Europe.

Nothing we can do .... 
Big Money sponsors political parties...also abroad....

Who poured money into Trump, Brexit, Le Pen, who os begin Putin or Chinese ?
Who do you think is Murdoch, May's bff?


----------



## kimthecat

DT said:


> Lol, I know who stockwell is voting for I just broke into the results of the pole and he is voting for UKIP
> Bet you forgot I knew how that worked x


 How do you break into the results !


----------



## 3dogs2cats

kimthecat said:


> Ive finally made up my mind. I have a postal vote and just posted it .
> I've changed the Poll vote from abstaining to Green .


Well done coming to a decision, have you had much campaigning in your area? I`m vaguely remembering someone - Farage possibly - arguing postal votes favour the incumbent candidate because the postal voter has less time to look at other candidates. I remember thinking that was nonsense but as I read your post it reminded me to check my FIL has voted and post it off for him, it occurred to me, as we have had virtually no campaigning as of yet, if he should be undecided ( I admit I am ) he can`t make an informed decision about the candidates if he has no idea apart from incumbent MP who they are!


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> How do you break into the results !


@DT is guessing


----------



## kimthecat

3dogs2cats said:


> Well done coming to a decision, have you had much campaigning in your area? !


 None as far as I can tell, no posters anywhere , we had leaflets through the door and that's about it. 
you really wouldn't know there's an election on if you didn't watch the telly .


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> @DT is guessing


DT is cheeky !


----------



## 3dogs2cats

kimthecat said:


> None as far as I can tell, no posters anywhere , we had leaflets through the door and that's about it.
> you really wouldn't know there's an election on if you didn't watch the telly .


Its weird isn`t it! I can`t remember an election before where there has been nothing, no leaflets (apart from the current MP) no posters, no banners no knocking on doors. I will not be surprised if the turn out is fairly low.


----------



## cheekyscrip

I guess that it is Space Navies Party. Which means poll needs amendment.

I always wanted to vote for SNP. Now England has one...


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> I guess that it is Space Navies Party. Which means poll needs amendment.
> 
> I always wanted to vote for SNP. Now England has one...


We can't vote SNP in England only Scotland can


----------



## sesmo

I go on hols tomorrow so have my postal vote in front of me. I have honestly no idea who to vote for. The previous MP (Liberal) stood down at the last election and we have a Tory now. I voted Liberal as I agreed largely with their values and he was a good constituency MP. I don't like the current MP, the Lib candidate doesn't seem to be able to put her own point of view across- all the mailings are written either by the previous Lib MP, her Father... everyone but her. Labour have no chance up here (don't agree with their fiscal policies) and the only other candidate is a Green who I have had no literature about.

For the first time since I turned 18 I'm thinking about spoiling my vote. Feel very sad about it.


----------



## 1290423

kimthecat said:


> How do you break into the results !


I cracked the code


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> We can't vote SNP in England only Scotland can


I meant SNP as Space Navies Party...I bet you can!!!


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> Jeremy Corbyn......the perfect example of a career politician who has never worked.
> 
> At least May has a traceable work record. She went into politics alongside her work not as her work


He didn't do too well in his A levels rona.
And he's been in trouble with the law.
Thick and brick spring to mind.


----------



## Honeys mum

DT said:


> Lol, I know who stockwell is voting for I just broke into the results of the pole and he is voting for UKIP
> Bet you forgot I knew how that worked x


Well, DT, the poll figures for UKIP have gone up one number today.


----------



## 1290423

Honeys mum said:


> Well, DT, the poll figures for UKIP have gone up one number today.


I know, its stockwell


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> I know, its stockwell


Honestly it's not me  but if you wanna put a wager on it if it is me please put your bets down because I'll win


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Honestly it's not me  but if you wanna put a wager on it if it is me please put your bets down because I'll win


I cant have any wafers, I'm watching my waistline


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> I cant have any wafers, I'm watching my waistline


Watching your waiste line


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> He didn't do too well in his A levels rona.
> And he's been in trouble with the law.
> Thick and brick spring to mind.


How very dare you  I'm not owning up to anything apart from I left school half way through my A levels to go and start nursing. The law is another matter.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Watching your waiste line
> View attachment 313036


 I want to forget about those if you don't mind! I don't think you quite understand how difficult it was for me to walk past Poundland today


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313038


They are both on BBC question time 8:30am tonight. Should be interesting.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> They are both on BBC question 8:30am time tonight. Should be interestng.


I think may will make him look a right dick


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> I think may will make him look a right dick


Or it could make him win seats. It depends how he conducts himself. Let's turn to Theresa May. She could lose alot of seats due to failing to turn up for her job interview and how she conducts herself tonight. As I said it will be interesting.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> How very dare you  I'm not owning up to anything apart from I left school half way through my A levels to go and start nursing. The law is another matter.


Don't do yourself down, you got through more of a A level than I ever did! And look at me now, thirty years later and I've made it to the kiddy heights of a dog walker


----------



## Guest

Colliebarmy said:


> but more living longer (even a lower care cost each) means increased overall costs


That is true. What are the options? You let old people die or you take care of them. (=means us pretty soon). Cost effective means include good social support as early as possible and good health care as early and as much as possible, as the most expensive way to deal this is to let old people to get really ill, have poor social and health care, so that they won´t be able to live at home. Which way do you think we should deal with old people? Our mothers, fathers, aunts and uncles? It´ll be you sooner than later, so think hard what you are saying.



Dr Pepper said:


> I don't know. I reckon, after that childish bun fight on TV the other night, she just has to lie low and say as little as possible over the next few days to hold onto a respectable lead. She totally made the right choice not to participate in the debate. Give them enough rope and all that.


And how would this person deal with negotiations? Hide away like now when things get tough? So while May hides away ",the tough get going" . Good on you Jeremy! You are tough and don´t give up. That is strong and stable.


----------



## Zaros

DT said:


> I think may will make him look a right dick


Just remember, she's spent some considerable time with Mr D Trump.

She may well grab him by the dick.:Wacky


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> And how would this person deal with negotiations? Hide away like now when things get tough? So while May hides away ",the tough get going" . Good on you Jeremy! You are tough and don´t give up. That is strong and stable.


Or.......

She's got more sense than to make herself look like a child at a chimp's tea party so when it comes to EU negotiations she's still got a bit of credibility.

Let's face it, who out of that bun fight do you want negotiating Brexit!!!!!


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Or.......
> 
> She's got more sense to make herself look like a child at a chimp's tea party so when it comes to EU negotiations she's still got a bit of credibility.


Really, didn´t she lose it all already By her earlier conduct? I mean she was just stupid. Does she really think we all read only Sun´s headlines? This just about says it:

"If you start from that basis and show respect, you are more likely to get a good deal. But if you start with a megaphone, calling people silly names, it is not a great start to anything." And the link:
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-im-10-times-more-sceptical-than-i-was-before


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> Really, didn´t she lose it all already By her earlier conduct? I mean she was just stupid. Does she really think we all read only Sun´s headlines? This just about says it:
> 
> "If you start from that basis and show respect, you are more likely to get a good deal. But if you start with a megaphone, calling people silly names, it is not a great start to anything." And the link:
> https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-im-10-times-more-sceptical-than-i-was-before


I think we all might find out she's a bit more savvy, and in it for the long run, than she's being credited for.

We'll see, I could be wrong, it has been know.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> I think we all might find out she's a bit more savvy, and in it for the long run, than she's being credited for. We'll see, I could be wrong, it has been know.


 For the first one, I´ll repeat, really? If she can´t handle the elections (where she started as a favourite), how can she handle really difficult negotiatios, where she already made an A** of herself?

For the second, I know


----------



## stockwellcat.

*Jeremy Corbyn endorsed by rock magazine Kerrang!*


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> They are both on BBC question time 8:30am tonight. Should be interesting.


Perhaps?

Perhaps it might be a no show for May or a May show. Her absence is not uncommon.....

Ya see, the thing about May is this; Scientists have been researching the 'Shy' gene for ages and May has been a perfect show and tell case for them.

Because of Theresa they've actually managed to identify the gene responsible, they found it hiding behind a couple of other genes. :Wacky


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> For the first one, I´ll repeat, really? If she can´t handle the elections (where she started as a favourite), how can she handle really difficult negotiatios, where she already made an A** of herself?
> 
> For the second, I know


Your second point, yea I agree :Blackalien. What the feck is that meant to be I wanted 

First point, let's wait and see. Simply because she's not playing "by the rules" doesn't mean she doesn't know what's she doing.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Zaros said:


> Perhaps?
> 
> Perhaps it might be a no show for May or a May show. Her absence is not uncommon.....
> 
> Ya see, the thing about May is this; Scientists have been researching the 'Shy' gene for ages and May has been a perfect show and tell case for them.
> 
> Because of Theresa they've actually managed to identify the gene responsible, they found it hiding behind a couple of other genes. :Wacky


They have Justine Greening standing in   joking.


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> They have Justine Greening standing in   joking.


Thank phuq MrsZee has her own defibrillator on standby. :Nurse


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Your second point, yea I agree :Blackalien. What the feck is that meant to be I wanted
> 
> First point, let's wait and see. Simply because she's not playing "by the rules" doesn't mean she doesn't know what's she doing.


So you are informed of what she will do? There is a plan and she didn´t say no deal is ok? Rules don´t mean anything, but the real deals mean. So far she has said zero, nada, noúght, nothing about what she holds even important. People? Nope. Animals. Double no. Rich (=tax havens) - most likely. Country´s backbones (= NHS, schools etc,) Nope. Whom are you kidding? You are better than this!


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> So you are informed of what she will do? There is a plan and she didn´t say no deal is ok? Rules don´t mean anything, but the real deals mean. So far she has said zero, nada, noúght, nothing about what she holds even important. People? Nope. Animals. Double no. Rich (=tax havens) - most likely. Country´s backbones (= NHS, schools etc,) Nope. Whom are you kidding? You are better than this!


Frankly I think she's going with the "carry on as we are doing now, bringing down annual borrowing year on year and get to a position where the UK is solvent, eventually". Then all the other issues can be addressed as a going concern and dealt with when finances dictate it's possible. It's a long term job for long term gain.

Rather than chucking money left, right and centre with no thought of the consequences.


----------



## rona

Dr Pepper said:


> Don't do yourself down, you got through more of a A level than I ever did! And look at me now, thirty years later and I've made it to the kiddy heights of a dog walker


I'd rather have our work place than almost any other


----------



## Dr Pepper

rona said:


> I'd rather have our work place than almost any other


To right, and it beats working for a living


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> I think she's going with the "carry on as we are"


Tory totty getting her tits out for the toffs then.....


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> Tory totty getting her tits out for the toffs then.....


No not really.

Edit

But there is more than a whiff about the Carry On films with this election, I'll agree with that.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Frankly I think she's going with the "carry on as we are doing now, bringing down annual borrowing year on year and get to a position where the UK is solvent, eventually". Then all the other issues can be addressed as a going concern and dealt with when finances dictate it's possible. It's a long term job for long term gain.
> .Rather than chucking money left, right and centre with no thought of the consequences.[/QUOTE


Carry on as now won´t happen, Remember, you won´t be part of EU. There is no more carry on any more. Also, managing a nation´s finances isn´t the same as managing your own. Sweden (no cuts, more dept) made through recession must faster than we (more cuts). Cutting everything just doesn´t generate money, it will just increase misery


----------



## Dr Pepper

.,,..
,..,


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> They are both on BBC question time 8:30am tonight. Should be interesting.





DT said:


> I think may will make him look a right dick


They are not going head to head though are they? I thought I saw some clip on BBC news earlier where Corbyn was challenging May to appear with him on QT and have a debate? Perhaps I`ve misunderstood!


----------



## Zaros

MrsZee said:


> Carry on as now won´t happen, Remember, you won´t be part of EU. There is no more carry on any more. Also, managing a nation´s *financies* isn´t the same as managing your own. Sweden (no cuts, more* debth*) made through recession *mush* faster than we (more cuts). Cutting everything just doesn´t generate money, it will just increase misery


Pi553d again, I see.:Meh

Bloody foreigners coming over here and phuqin our language and grammar up!


----------



## Happy Paws2

Dr Pepper said:


> .,,..
> But I'm pro-Brexit and don't buy into the doom and gloom.
> 
> So let's wait and see how it turns out. Could be good for everyone.
> ,..,


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> But I'm pro-Brexit and don't buy into the doom and gloom.
> So let's wait and see how it turns out. Could be good for everyone.


?You just said carry on as usual? Let´s wait and see is not a negotiation strategy, as you will end up with nothing. Could bes won´t be happy endings in real politics. For a good results you have to know what is happening, why, what are the alternatives and consequences. If you don´t have any ideas even of what is important, or what is your aim, is just a way to doom and gloom.


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> They are not going head to head though are they? I thought I saw some clip on BBC news earlier where Corbyn was challenging May to appear with him on QT and have a debate? Perhaps I`ve misunderstood!


Oh that's ashame.


----------



## Honeys mum

They are not having a debate with each other. It's just the public asking them questions.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> Oh that's ashame.


I might have got it wrong SWC.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Honeys mum said:


> They are not having a debate with each other. It's just the public asking them questions.


Still be interesting 
Just watch out for TM gurning as she'll either be lying or unsure


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Honeys mum said:


> They are not having a debate with each other. It's just the public asking them questions.


Sorry Honeys mum I posted a reply to SWC before seeing your post. I think its all a bit misleading because they keep saying debate which I would have took as a head to head, until I saw that clip of Corbyn asking her to change her mind I presumed it was a proper debate!


----------



## Zaros

MrsZee said:


> If you don´t have any ideas even of what is important, is just a way to *doom and gloom*.


_Preaching Doom and Gloom has been beneficial to the political class. They use it to gain more power and more control. _Walter E Williams.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> ?You just said carry on as usual? Let´s wait and see is not a negotiation strategy, as you will end up with nothing. Could bes won´t be happy endings in real politics. For a good results you have to know what is happening, why, what are the alternatives and consequences. If you don´t have any ideas even of what is important, or what is your aim, is just a way to doom and gloom.


Yes, "carry on as usual" for the economy, it's working and national borrowing is reducing year on year.

"Let's wait and see" re Brexit isn't our choice now, so let's wait and see what happens whoever's in power. Bloody pointless second guessing it, it's out of our control now whoever wins next week.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Some of the faces to look out for tonight at 8:30pm on BBC One. They either mean she is unsure or lying when replying to the audience's questions:


----------



## stockwellcat.

Hows this song doing in the charts? Anyone know?


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> Some of the faces to look out for tonight at 8:30pm on BBC One. They either mean she is unsure or lying when replying to the audience's questions:
> View attachment 313049
> 
> View attachment 313050


She might be ok tonight, she`ll know the questions and her advisers will make sure she is well prepped they can`t allow another disappointing performance, she`ll be ok so long David doesn`t let any hostiles have a say and nobody laughs this time!


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> Hows this song doing in the charts? Anyone know?


I don`t really understand the charts but just read it is doing well but BBC will not play it although its not actually banned.


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> She might be ok tonight, she`ll know the questions and her advisers will make sure she is well prepped they can`t allow another disappointing performance, she`ll be ok so long David doesn`t let any hostiles have a say and nobody laughs this time!


Well live audience's can be unpredictable. Look what happened with David Cameron on the EU referendum live audience questions he was accused of waffling and he wasn't expecting that


----------



## Zaros

3dogs2cats said:


> I don`t really understand the charts but just read it is doing well but *BBC will not play it although its not actually banned.*


And this is what makes a best seller. An outright ban, of course, makes it an even better seller.

The BBC are slowly learning by their mistakes.


----------



## Lexiedhb

Bisbow said:


> Corbyn has not had the same abuse on this thread as she has and the abuse has been so bad.
> She is not perfect
> Neither is he, or you, or me
> I can't remember him getting the same treatment
> That is my last word on this dreadful thread


He hasn't no. Because anyone not voting labour probably does not agree with posting any random slang they find. His supporters do. Actually says alot


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> Well live audience's can be unpredictable. Look what happened with David Cameron on the EU referendum live audience questions he was accused of waffling and he wasn't expecting that


They can indeed but I am guessing her advisors will have been spending a lot of time coaching her to handle the pressure, they know she needs to perform well. Personally I think if they could back her out of it they would but they can`t afford to do that so will throw everything at her to make sure she looks strong and stable!


----------



## rona

Lexiedhb said:


> He hasn't no. Because anyone not voting labour probably does not agree with posting any random slang they find. His supporters do. Actually says alot


I've tried to post some more informative links but they keep getting lost in the drivel


----------



## stockwellcat.

TM is answering questions at the moment and hasn't shut up about Brexit. Come on this is a General Election which should be focused on things here at home in the UK (eg NHS, Security, Schools etc) as well as Brexit.


----------



## 1290423

Lexiedhb said:


> He hasn't no. Because anyone not voting labour probably does not agree with posting any random slang they find. His supporters do. Actually says alot


Yep!


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> TM is answering questions at the moment and hasn't shut up about Brexit. Come on this is a General Election which should be focused on things here at home in the UK (eg NHS, Security, Schools etc) as well as Brexit.


She is answering the questions being asked, the public are asking about Brexit so she doesn`t have much choice really.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> TM is answering questions at the moment and hasn't shut up about Brexit. Come on this is a General Election which should be focused on things here at home in the UK (eg NHS, Security, Schools etc) as well as Brexit.


I think she is actually doing very well!
And lets not forget, like the hustings the questions are pre selected.
It will be interested to see if corbyn is asked any questions relating to the so called land tax.
And for the record, at this precise moment I am actually quaking in my boots at the very thought of diane abbott being in the cabinet!


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> I think she is actually doing very well!
> And lets not forget, like the hustings the questions are pre selected.
> It will be interested to see if corbyn is asked any questions relating to the so called land tax.
> And for the record, at this precise moment I am actually quaking in my boots at the very thought of diane abbott being in the cabinet!


Actually you're right. She is actually doing quite well.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Hows this song doing in the charts? Anyone know?


I posted about it yesterday - it did get to number one briefly then knocked back to number two (I Tune download charts).

A song labelling Theresa May a "liar" has reached number four in the charts less than a week before Britain goes to the polls.

Despite not being aired on any mainstream radio stations, Captain Ska's Liar Liar GE2017 has shot up the Official Singles Chart since its release last week.

At one point the track was thought to be close to beating pop superstar Justin Bieber to the number one spot before finally landing at fourth behind the Canadian's remix of Luis Fonsi and Daddy Yankee's Despacito, DJ Khaled's I'm The One and Liam Payne's Strip That Down.

The band said the song's success "shows people are fed up with this government of the rich, for the rich".

They added: "We're overwhelmed with the support and our message is that people do have the power to change society if we act together."

The BBC and several other radio stations have chosen not to play the track and Radio 1 confirmed it will not be played during the chart countdown as it may breach impartiality guidelines during the ongoing election campaign.

A protest demanding it be played has been organised for outside the BBC's headquarters in central London on Friday afternoon.

Organisers are planning to "blast the song" in Portland Place and claimed the broadcaster had "been anything but impartial" during the election campaign.


----------



## stockwellcat.

So @DT are you sure about your decision?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

OMG I sense you are about to flip again stockwellcat


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> OMG I sense you are about to flip again stockwellcat


Nope I am sticking to my decision I was just wondering if @DT is 

Right now time for a game of cards...


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> So @DT are you sure about your decision?


Well, I was UKIP . But that said I'm open to change , but you can BET your little cotton socks I am not repeat NOT with a capital N voting labour


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> OMG I sense you are about to flip again stockwellcat


Cartwheels. I want cartwheels! And hey! Not revealing my age,but I can still do them!!


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Nope I am sticking to my decision I was just wondering if @DT is
> 
> Right now time for a game of cards...
> View attachment 313064


Oh! I can play that


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> The problem with this thread imo is it's very pro labour, but then it's easy to defend and promote a party that's promising the world. The poor generally haven't got poorer. They've always got richer, or they'd still be using mangles and watching black and white tv, if they had a tv. Some sections of our society are struggling and that needs addressing, but I'm sorry, I don't believe it's all doom and gloom and I don't believe Jeremy Corbyn is the saviour of Britain. Maybe he'll prove me wrong.


There is a very vocal, vitriolic and memetastic faction who are. I think most others are trying to have an informed debate


----------



## 1290423

Duh,! Why do you think they call me the belligo queen


MiffyMoo said:


> There is a very vocal, vitriolic and memetastic faction who are. I think most others are trying to have an informed debate


Opps  does that mean im excluded


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> Duh,! Why do you think they call me the belligo queen
> 
> Opps  does that mean im excluded


I am doubly excluded for memetasticking both Corbyn and May...
It is like a game of moles...I am trying to whack them all!!!


----------



## 1290423

[QUOTE="MiffyMoo, post: 1064879891, member: t others are trying to have an informed debate[/QUOTE]
That would be me then


----------



## cheekyscrip

Think today was a draw, might be Corbyn a bit better speaker ...
Stronger and more stable
Your opinions?


----------



## 1290423

cheekyscrip said:


> Think today was a draw, might be Corbyn a bit better speaker ...
> Your opinions?


Neither cheeky! And no would not say he was a better speaker, both were wishy washy banton weights!


----------



## FeelTheBern

Ed Miliband @Ed_Miliband·Jun 1
*@WestEndJCP Can I report someone who has failed to attend two job interviews in 48 hours. I know where she lives. What is the sanction?*


----------



## 1290423

6 days to go and I am no wiser I'll be taking zaros advice and drawing pretty pictures on my voting slip


----------



## Satori

DT said:


> Neither cheeky! And no would not say he was a better speaker, both were wishy washy banton weights!


Yup. I am sad that it has come down to this choice between a pathological liar and an apparent imbecile.


----------



## 1290423

Satori said:


> Yup. I am sad that it has come down to this choice between a pathological liar and an apparent imbecile.


Its the latter I fear backed up by his sidekick diane flabbot


----------



## Elles

Both a bit boring, but it is getting late in the day. May came out slightly ahead I'd say. Corbyn gets asked too many silly hypothetical questions about the IRA and nuclear weapons. Theresa May managed to resist the silly face pulling and the sound bites, so overall I think she won this debate. The cheering for Corbyn was the youngsters. May's supporters were more restrained. All the cheering and clapping for Corbyn is getting a bit tedious. He's a politician, not a member of One Direction.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> Both a bit boring, but it is getting late in the day. May came out slightly ahead I'd say. Corbyn gets asked too many silly hypothetical questions about the IRA and nuclear weapons. Theresa May managed to resist the silly face pulling and the sound bites, so overall I think she won this debate. The cheering for Corbyn was the youngsters. May's supporters were more restrained. All the cheering and clapping for Corbyn is getting a bit tedious. He's a politician, not a member of One Direction.


Pretty much the same here, personally don't think the Chosen audience was a genuine representation of society. obviously hand picked!


----------



## 1290423

Anyway I'm back to my prime I'm watching Top of the Pops and enjoying every moment of it so if you expect any more sensible conversation out of me tonight sorry but it aint gonna happen x


----------



## 3dogs2cats

DT said:


> Anyway I'm back to my prime I'm watching Top of the Pops and enjoying every moment of it so if you expect any more sensible conversation out of me tonight sorry but it aint gonna happen x


Oh what year TOTPs you watching?


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I posted about it yesterday - it did get to number one briefly then knocked back to number two (I Tune download charts).
> 
> A song labelling Theresa May a "liar" has reached number four in the charts less than a week before Britain goes to the polls.
> 
> Despite not being aired on any mainstream radio stations, Captain Ska's Liar Liar GE2017 has shot up the Official Singles Chart since its release last week.
> 
> At one point the track was thought to be close to beating pop superstar Justin Bieber to the number one spot before finally landing at fourth behind the Canadian's remix of Luis Fonsi and Daddy Yankee's Despacito, DJ Khaled's I'm The One and Liam Payne's Strip That Down.
> 
> The band said the song's success "shows people are fed up with this government of the rich, for the rich".
> 
> They added: "We're overwhelmed with the support and our message is that people do have the power to change society if we act together."
> 
> The BBC and several other radio stations have chosen not to play the track and Radio 1 confirmed it will not be played during the chart countdown as it may breach impartiality guidelines during the ongoing election campaign.
> 
> A protest demanding it be played has been organised for outside the BBC's headquarters in central London on Friday afternoon.
> 
> Organisers are planning to "blast the song" in Portland Place and claimed the broadcaster had "been anything but impartial" during the election campaign.


30,000 downloads. Hardly the majority of voters


----------



## MiffyMoo

DT said:


> Duh,! Why do you think they call me the belligo queen
> 
> Opps  does that mean im excluded


You're safe


----------



## 1290423

3dogs2cats said:


> Oh what year TOTPs you watching?


84 I think


----------



## 3dogs2cats

DT said:


> Anyway I'm back to my prime I'm watching Top of the Pops and enjoying every moment of it so if you expect any more sensible conversation out of me tonight sorry but it aint gonna happen x





3dogs2cats said:


> Oh what year TOTPs you watching?


Just found some TOTPs to watch, I`m happy


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I posted about it yesterday - it did get to number one briefly then knocked back to number two (I Tune download charts).
> The BBC and several other radio stations have chosen not to play the track and Radio 1 confirmed it will not be played during the chart countdown as it may breach impartiality guidelines during the ongoing election campaign.
> 
> A protest demanding it be played has been organised for outside the BBC's headquarters in central London on Friday afternoon.
> 
> Organisers are planning to "blast the song" in Portland Place and claimed the broadcaster had "been anything but impartial" during the election campaign.


 The BB are right to ban it . If it was a song about Corbyn they'd be screaming blue murder.


----------



## Lexiedhb

Lots and lots of "tactical voting" posts flying about FB. ........really?


----------



## kimthecat

3dogs2cats said: ↑
Oh what year TOTPs you watching?



DT said:


> 84 I think


was flipping through freeview channels and caught the fabulous Weather girls singing , It's raining men :Happy


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MiffyMoo said:


> 30,000 downloads. Hardly the majority of voters


Who said it was?


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Who said it was?


Just putting a different view on it


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...general-election-2017-manifesto-a7769866.html


----------



## davidc

Kittenkong, things like that make me wonder how May gets any votes at all, she does so many U-turns, you can virtually guarantee she won't stick to anything if she wins this election.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> mr corbyns grades for A level maths.


Crazy: at my school, if you were as bad as that at a subject you weren't allowed to take it at A level. The school didn't want to end up with a load of crap A level grades published when the results came out in August. To get below a C was unusual.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Deleted


----------



## noushka05

MrsZee said:


> That is true. What are the options? You let old people die or you take care of them. (=means us pretty soon). Cost effective means include good social support as early as possible and good health care as early and as much as possible, as the most expensive way to deal this is to let old people to get really ill, have poor social and health care, so that they won´t be able to live at home. Which way do you think we should deal with old people? Our mothers, fathers, aunts and uncles? It´ll be you sooner than later, so think hard what you are saying.
> 
> And how would this person deal with negotiations? Hide away like now when things get tough? So while May hides away ",the tough get going" . Good on you Jeremy! You are tough and don´t give up. That is strong and stable.


Not only have tory cuts put social care into crisis, in their manifesto millions of people who now get care in the home stand to lose their house when they die because they are going to make them pay for their own care as well as those in residential care. Now there are plenty of younger people with homes who need outside help - could this affect them too? I can't seem to find out & you can bet the tories will exploit this if they can.

Corbyn wanted to debate May face to face last night but she's too scared to go head to head with him. She's an utter disgrace. She has showed nothing but contempt for the electorate.

Theres no emotional connection with her. She told a hard working nurse struggling to get by 'there's no 'magic money tree'  (that's the latest soundbite by the way  )- funnily she found a money tree for her 11% pay hike!. The tories can always find money when it suits them. Look no further than the brutal badger cull - which will be rolled out when they get back in

Oh I've found a clip. Here's May's response to the nurse who hasn't had pay rise in 8 yrs: "no magic money tree" - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...c-question-time-leaders-special-a7770371.html

Just adding this on. Lovely Brian May's reaction -








*Dr. Brian May*‏Verified [email protected]*DrBrianMay* 7h7 hours ago

Dr. Brian May Retweeted BBC Question Time

Watch this ghastly woman squash a nurse who hasn't had a pay rise since 2009. "There's no magic money tree" https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/870732339155836928… Bri


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> Not only have tory cuts put social care into crisis, in their manifesto millions of people who now get care in the home stand to lose their house when they die because they are going to make them pay for their own care as well as those in residential care. Now there are plenty of younger people with homes who need outside help - could this affect them too? I can't seem to find out & you can bet the tories will exploit this if they can.
> 
> Corbyn wanted to debate May face to face last night but she's too scared to go head to head with him. She's an utter disgrace. She has showed nothing but contempt for the electorate.
> 
> Theres no emotional connection with her. She told a hard working nurse struggling to get by 'there's no 'magic money tree'  (that's the latest soundbite by the way  )- funnily she found a money tree for her 11% pay hike!. The tories can always find money when it suits them. Look no further than the badger cull - which will be rolled out when they get back in


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313078


I recommend that home buyers don't buy a home with a garden to avoid the Land Tax if Labour get in


----------



## noushka05

3dogs2cats said:


> I might have got it wrong SWC.


You were right  Corbyn did want to debate May head to head. May wouldn't take him up on it.



Dr Pepper said:


> Yes, "carry on as usual" for the economy, it's working and national borrowing is reducing year on year.
> 
> "Let's wait and see" re Brexit isn't our choice now, so let's wait and see what happens whoever's in power. Bloody pointless second guessing it, it's out of our control now whoever wins next week.


How is it working? We're the worst performing economy in the G7 now. Is this the 'long term economic plan'? - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...t-slump-election-pound-sterling-a7766286.html


Lexiedhb said:


> He hasn't no. Because anyone not voting labour probably does not agree with posting any random slang they find. His supporters do. Actually says alot


He isn't responsible for all the suffering and destruction the tories have wreaked in their 7 years in office. If he had been, I for one, would be the first to hold him to account.



stockwellcat said:


> I recommend that home buyers don't buy a home with a garden to avoid the Land Tax if Labour get in


The scaremongering about labours 'garden tax' can be put to bed now @DT & SWC . Its been fact checked  https://fullfact.org/economy/labours-land-value-tax-will-you-have-sell-your-garden/

I


----------



## Honeys mum

stockwellcat said:


> Still be interesting
> Just watch out for TM gurning as she'll either be lying or unsure


Have just watched it, I did notice a few of those funny faces she does.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Honeys mum said:


> Have just watched it, I did notice a few of those funny faces she does.


Corbyn struggled with the nuclear strike questions and struggled to recompose himself afterwards and got a bit snappy.


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> _Preaching Doom and Gloom has been beneficial to the political class. They use it to gain more power and more control. _Walter E Williams.


Or as Chomsky puts it - _"jingoism, racism, fear, religious fundamentalism: these are the ways of appealing to people if you're trying to organize a mass base of support for policies that are really intended to crush them"_


----------



## Bisbow

Breaking my vow again

Corbyn wants peace


The only peace we (in the UK) would get is in the after life if he ever becomes PN

Back to my vow again


----------



## Elles

May basically told the nurse no when she asked her for a pay rise.

Corbyn promised everything and anything to the small business owner.

Only one was telling the truth.


----------



## Happy Paws2

I thought that Corbyn handled himself much better than TM she skirted round more questions than Jeremy and I think his honesty came across well.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> May basically told the nurse no when she asked her for a pay rise.


Well at least TM was being truthful.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Corbyn struggled with the nuclear strike questions and struggled to recompose himself afterwards and got a bit snappy.


Very shocking that a number of the audience members seemed angry that he wouldn't authorise a nuclear first strike.

I thought most decent people would prefer their PM not to end the world...


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> May basically told the nurse no when she asked her for a pay rise.
> 
> Corbyn promised everything and anything to the small business owner.
> 
> Only one was telling the truth.


Well we all know which one is a pathological liar


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> Very shocking that a number of the audience members seemed angry that he wouldn't authorise a nuclear first strike.
> 
> I thought most decent people would prefer their PM not to end the world...


So if Iran or North Korea fired a nuclear bomb at the UK and it landed in the UK killing millions of people we should have a tea party, sit back and look at the facts. Come on. Get real.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Well at least TM was being truthful.


She was telling the truth that theres no money for nurses when theres money for everything the tories prioritise?


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> Well we all know which one is a pathological liar


Yes we do

Corbyn


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> So if Iran or North Korea fired a nuclear bomb at the UK and it landed in the UK killing millions of people we should have a tea party, sit back and look at the facts. Come on.


Tell me what will nuclear Armageddon solve?


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Yes we do
> 
> Corbyn


Except theres a mountain range of evidence to the contrary  Corbyn, for all his faults, is a very principled man. And I've seen tories honest enough to admit as much.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> So if Iran or North Korea fired a nuclear bomb at the UK and it landed in the UK killing millions of people we should have a tea party, sit back and look at the facts. Come on.


That wouldn't be a first strike!

If you fired a nuclear weapon, millions of people, including children would die. I agree with Corbyn that the situation would have to be considered.

Personally I was faced with watching my child die, I would gain no comfort from knowing 1000's more kids were going to die.

It's all irrelevant anyone, the US would retaliate and the world would end.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Tell me what will nuclear Armageddon solve?


So we should say oh North Korea or Iran killed our citizens it's ok we shouldn't retaliate, let them get away with it.

Corbyn's throwing a tea party at number 10.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> That wouldn't be a first strike!
> 
> If you fired a nuclear weapon, millions of people, including children would die. I agree with Corbyn that the situation would have to be considered.
> 
> Personally I was faced with watching my child die, I would gain no comfort from knowing 1000's more kids were going to die.
> 
> It's all irrelevant anyone, the US would retaliate and the world would end.


That scenario is a first strike scenario. His response was lame.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> That wouldn't be a first strike!
> 
> If you fired a nuclear weapon, millions of people, including children would die. I agree with Corbyn that the situation would have to be considered.
> 
> Personally I was faced with watching my child die, I would gain no comfort from knowing 1000's more kids were going to die.
> 
> It's all irrelevant anyone, the US would retaliate and the world would end.


So you want to live in Corbyn's imaginary world of a peaceful utopia. Meanwhile in the real world.

Before I get we are leaving the EU so should do things differently. We are still committed to NATO, nothing changes there.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> So we should say oh North Korea or Iran killed our citizens got killed it's ok we shouldn't retaliate, let them get away with it Corbyn's throwing a tea party at number 10.


Nuclear weapons don't keep anyone safe. First strike, second strike - game over! Only a psychopath would push that button to kill millions of people.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> That scenario is a first strike scenario. His response was lame.


How is it a first strike? You said that a weapon had landed in the UK.


stockwellcat said:


> So you want to live in Corbyn's imaginary world of a peaceful utopia. Meanwhile in the real world.
> 
> Before I get we are leaving the EU so should do things differently. We are still committed to NATO, nothing changes there.


I didnt realise that in the 'real world' it's certain we're all going to die in an utterly horrific way.

I'll stay here thanks .


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Well at least TM was being truthful.


Really?

What about the £350m a week promised for the NHS in the event of a leave vote in last year's referendum? Surely that would go towards a much overdue pay rise, or do think the public sector, if there's any left by 2022, don't deserve a pay rise?

Privatisation won't give a pay rise, on the contrary.

Yes, I know May didn't promise this personally seeing she voted Remain but in view of the sudden change in position she should have honoured that


----------



## Elles

May said no when the nurse asked for a pay rise.. = truth

Corbyn told the small business owner that he'd look at exemptions, tax reductions, that sort of thing (he was vague) if the business owner couldn't afford the new corporation tax and minimum wage and he thinks some businesses wouldn't pay more tax. = lie

Corbyn was saying anything that would keep people happy and squirming uncomfortably when he couldn't find an answer that everyone would like. May was telling everyone tough titties. She was probably the more truthful of the two on the night.  If someone promises unicorns and rainbows ask what they want and why they don't think they'll get it.

Nuclear deterrent wise we have to lie and threaten that we might use it even if we know we wouldn't.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> That scenario is a first strike scenario. His response was lame.


Push the button first & its suicide. Push it second & it was never a deterrent.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Really?
> 
> What about the £350m promised for the NHS in the event of a leave vote in last year's referendum? Surely that would go towards a much overdue pay rise, or do think the public sector, if there's any left by 2022, don't deserve a pay rise?
> 
> Privatisation won't give a pay rise, on the contrary.
> 
> Yes, I know May didn't promise this personally seeing she voted Remain but in view of the sudden change in position she should have honoured that


Read what was said instead of ranting.

TM was telling the truth to the nurse that she wouldn't get a pay rise.


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> So if Iran or North Korea fired a nuclear bomb at the UK and it landed in the UK killing millions of people we should have a tea party, sit back and look at the facts. Come on. Get real.


You don't fire bombs, bombs are dropped, you fire missiles.

And the last time N Korea fired a missile I think it just hit managed to hit the sea after being catapulted from the beach.

What with all the chemicals stored in my garage and outhouses, I personally happen to have more fire power than Kim Jong-il.

But don't tell the yanks. :Muted

I don't want their clumsy boots stomping across my property, or their gunships hovering around the tree tops, because the dogs have become accustomed to their peace and quiet.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> May said no when the nurse asked for a pay rise.. = truth
> 
> Corbyn told the small business owner that he'd look at exemptions, tax reductions, that sort of thing (he was vague) if the business owner couldn't afford the new corporation tax and minimum wage and he thinks some businesses wouldn't pay more tax. = lie
> 
> Corbyn was saying anything that would keep people happy and squirming uncomfortably when he couldn't find an answer that everyone would like. May was telling everyone tough titties. She was probably the more truthful of the two on the night. If someone promises unicorns and rainbows ask what they want and why they don't think they'll get it.
> 
> Nuclear deterrent wise we have to lie and threaten that we might use it even if we know we wouldn't.


Well that's one way of looking at it I suppose. The lie is there is no money for their payrise.

Corbyns manifesto is at least costed, his record proof he will represents the majority over corporate power & the elite.

And Russia threated to wipe the UK off the map when Fallon opened his stupid mouth about a preemptive strike.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> So if Iran or North Korea fired a nuclear bomb at the UK and it landed in the UK killing millions of people we should have a tea party, sit back and look at the facts. Come on. Get real.


What makes you think North Korea or Iran intend to nuke the UK? Have you been reading the Daily Express again?

I consider the fact Trump could order the UK to launch the US weapons stationed in the UK and May will be happy to oblige more of a worry.

Yes, a nuclear war would be the end of ISIS and the likes, but would be the end of all civilisation too, even here in the UK.

If the bomb doesn't kill us, the fall out certainly will.

Have you forgotten about the Chernobyl nuclear disaster and the illnesses and deformities it caused?


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Tell me what will nuclear Armageddon solve?


It will solve the problem of the dumbest, yet most arrogant species of animal to ever walk this planet.......:Banghead


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Nuclear weapons don't keep anyone safe. First strike, second strike - game over! Only a psychopath would push that button to kill millions of people.


I've outlined all this previously, Noush' but ya just get ridiculed and laughed at.

So what, lets all go out with a BIG BANG.

It's how the scientists claim we first began our miserable existence, so it's quite a fitting end.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Have you been reading the Daily Express again?


Nah don't read comics.


> I consider the fact Trump could order the UK to launch the US


Well we all know that. But if the UK and America fall out over Trump being President they won't necessarily come to our aid.

I now know which party leader lives in:


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> So if Iran or North Korea fired a nuclear bomb at the UK and it landed in the UK killing millions of people we should have a tea party, sit back and look at the facts. Come on. Get real.


Corbyn didn't actually say that.

He said he wouldn't be the first to launch a missile. The death of millions would be on his conscience.

What is wrong with that.

If the US doesn't want Iran or N Korea to have nuclear weapons they should lead by example.

It's hypocritical for them to have them yet condemn other countries that don't meet their criteria for arming themselves too.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Corbyn didn't actually say that.
> 
> He said he wouldn't be the first to launch a missile. The death of millions would be on his conscience.


He didn't say that either. Why do you think he got heckled, then he went quiet and didn't recompose himself well afterwards.


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> And Russia threated to wipe the UK off the map when Fallon opened his stupid mouth about a preemptive strike.


Did they? There you go then. Proof of the deterrent. Of course Russia aren't about to bomb Britain, nuclear or otherwise, but that they can if they want to and saying so probably shut everyone up and prevented nuclear war.

I strongly believe in multilateral disarmament, but unfortunately that's currently in the clouds with the rainbows and unicorns.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Read what was said instead of ranting.
> 
> TM was telling the truth to the nurse that she wouldn't get a pay rise.


I have read what was said. The NHS was promised £350m a week in the event of a leave victory vote.

May should have acknowledged that.

So you think May deserves to win for her "honesty". You must be joking. You think NHS staff don't deserve a pay rise.

And, haven't you forgotten about the repeal of the hunting act? The "question" was not on the agenda was it?


----------



## Elles

May, it is rumoured, wants to turn the Uk into a tax haven. I've only been to one, Andorra, and that was lovely. I know many businesses base themselves in Ireland and Ireland are doing a bit better now. Would turning Britain into a tax haven be good or bad for the country?


----------



## Elles

KittenKong said:


> I have read what was said. The NHS was promised £350m a week in the event of a leave victory vote.
> 
> May should have acknowledged that.
> 
> So you think May deserves to win for her "honesty". You must be joking. You think NHS staff don't deserve a pay rise.
> 
> And, haven't you forgotten about the repeal of the hunting act? The "question" was not on the agenda was it?


My assessment was of last night and the impression I feel both leaders gave last night. Not last week, or last year, or 30 years ago. Last night.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> He didn't say that either. Why do you think he got heckled, then he went quiet and didn't recompose himself well afterwards.


That's your observation, not mine. Corbyn certainly hasn't U Turned on his stance. Seeing the audience comprised of mainly Tory voting Daily Mail or Sun etc. readers specially selected it's hardly surprising he was heckled for his anti nuclear stance. Perhaps many don't appreciate how disastrous a nuclear war would be.

He would have been cheered and given a standing ovation had it been a different audience.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Tell me what will nuclear Armageddon solve?


The financial crisis
The NHS crisis
Terrorism
Global warming
National debt
Personal debt
Housing crisis
Unemployment
Brexit
Child obesity
Care for the elderly
Poverty
Etc etc

Edit
Just realised that sounds an awful lot like Mr Corbyn's election pledges.



noushka05 said:


> Nuclear weapons don't keep anyone safe. First strike, second strike - game over! Only a psychopath would push that button to kill millions of people.


It's the threat of a second strike that prevents the first.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> Except theres a mountain range of evidence to the contrary  Corbyn, for all his faults, is a very principled man. And I've seen tories honest enough to admit as much.


Principled

He has no idea what the word means, probably never even head of it


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> The NHS was promised £350m a week in the event of a leave victory vote.


Not by the Conservatives though was it? The leave camp was a mixture of cross party MP's so was the remain camp. So why should the Conservatives honour it they didn't make the promise? The remain camp lied to.

I cannot believe we are into this again.


----------



## Elles

KittenKong said:


> That's your observation, not mine. Corbyn certainly hasn't U Turned on his stance. Seeing the audience comprised of mainly Tory voting Daily Mail or Sun etc. readers specially selected it's hardly surprising he was heckled for his anti nuclear stance. Perhaps many don't appreciate how disastrous a nuclear war would be.
> 
> He would have been cheered and given a standing ovation had it been a different audience.


He was cheered and clapped and whistled. His supporters also clapped and cheered at the young lady who expressed concern about Nuclear Armageddon and killing people. He wouldn't have been questioned on it by a 100% supportive audience. I wouldn't have questioned him on it.

It's a waste of a question, we already know his answer. He doesn't like nuclear weapons, would prefer unilateral disarmament and wouldn't renew Trident. The Labour Party over ruled him on it. Next.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Questions Corbyn struggled on:

Obviously the nuclear strike question.
Brexit negotiations - he did not have an answer to if there was no deal scenario.
Immigration - he failed to say how they would curb it.


----------



## Elles

His immigration plans are very fair imo.

Whether their application would be fair, only time and a labour government would tell.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Nah don't read comics.
> Well we all know that. But if the UK and America fall out over Trump being President they won't necessarily come to our aid.
> 
> I now know which party leader lives in:
> View attachment 313083
> 
> View attachment 313084


Yes, you're entitled to your sudden pro Strong and Stable May viewpoint. Goodness, you U Turn as much as she does if you don't mind me saying so!

So what makes you think she'll get a good Brexit deal? The very likely outcome is her walking away with no deal with the fate of EU citizens living here and vice versa unknown let alone the other consequences.

She'll come running on national television whinging the 27 states won't give her what she wants and will blame them for the consequences. Jeremy Hunt for example claimed no deal will be damaging to the NHS.

There's so many lies the Tories can con people with. With the Poll Tax their spin was, "Conservative Councils cost you less (Community Charge)". The people didn't fall for that.


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> That's your observation, not mine. Corbyn certainly hasn't U Turned on his stance. Seeing the audience comprised of mainly Tory voting Daily Mail or Sun etc. readers specially selected it's hardly surprising he was heckled for his anti nuclear stance. Perhaps many don't appreciate how disastrous a nuclear war would be.
> 
> He would have been cheered and given a standing ovation had it been a different audience.


What￼￼ surely diane abbott don't make that much noise￼￼


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Yes, you're entitled to your sudden pro Strong and Stable May viewpoint. Goodness, you U Turn as much as she does if you don't mind me saying so!
> 
> So what makes you think she'll get a good Brexit deal? The very likely outcome is her walking away with no deal with the fate of EU citizens living here and vice versa unknown let alone the other consequences.
> 
> She'll come running on national television whinging the 27 states won't give her what she wants and will blame them for the consequences. Jeremy Hunt for example claimed no deal will be damaging to the NHS.
> 
> There's so many lies the Tories can con people with. With the Poll Tax their spin was, "Conservative Councils cost you less (Community Charge)". The people didn't fall for that.


I am not voting for the Conservatives. Didn't you read what I have previously said yesterday? I have not u-turned this time around.


----------



## Elles

The poll tax was a great idea, people fell for the anti spin.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I am not voting for the Conservatives. Didn't you read what I have previously said yesterday?


No stockwells not, it's our little secret who stockwells voting for isn't it Stockwell


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> No stockwells not, it's our little secret who stockwells voting for isn't it Stockwell


I did say at the beginning of this 274 page thread:

"To not cause any friction you do not have to disclose publicly on here who you are voting."

So yes I am now keeping it to myself and no I have not u-turned this time around


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Not by the Conservatives though was it? The leave camp was a mixture of cross party MP's so was the remain camp. So why should the Conservatives honour it they didn't make the promise? The remain camp lied to.
> 
> I cannot believe we are into this again.


Why should they not honour it if they lead us to Brexit?

So many people voted for Leave to use the money poured into EU for NHS!

Did people vote Leave to cut corporate tax?

Though it is exactly what Brexit donors wanted.

This what they will get under May.
Plus privatisation of NHS, uni fees rise practically stopping social mobility. There will be money for grammar schools,

Division between haves and havenots will widen.

If Labour had more electable, less extreme leader they would have won.

Both May and Corbyn were before referendum telling you why with EU Britain will prosper.

Both abandoned their stand for their career.

Very, very sad that this is the choice and honestly cannot vote for any of them, cannot trust any of them.

Anyhow May will win. Foxes, students, Gibraltar, economy be damned.

Possibly I rather have Labour people leading Brexit talks than three stooges.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Not by the Conservatives though was it? The leave camp was a mixture of cross party MP's so was the remain camp. So why should the Conservatives honour it they didn't make the promise? The remain camp lied to.
> 
> I cannot believe we are into this again.


Evidence of the Remain camp lies please.

From what I've seen, and yes I am biased being a solid remainer, their predictions have or are becoming true.

I promised to put Brexit to one side in this election. I don't agree with Corbyn's stance on Brexit either. I feel he would achieve a far better deal with no deal not on the agenda.

Deals can be achieved only through compromise, something May doesn't believe in which is a cheek seeing she wants to leave voluntarily.

I chose to vote Labour early in this election for tactical reasons. My vote would have gone to the SNP if further North.

I have now voted. Labour it is.

Vote for anyone but this bunch of far right extremists in my view.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> I am not voting for the Conservatives. Didn't you read what I have previously said yesterday? I have not u-turned this time around.


My apologies and full respect to you.


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> She told a hard working nurse struggling to get by 'there's no 'magic money tree'


Brace yourself but.... there isn't one. Really.


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> Tell me what will nuclear Armageddon solve?


The social care crisis.

ETA: that was a bit late. Damn this thread moves fast.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> May, it is rumoured, wants to turn the Uk into a tax haven. I've only been to one, Andorra, and that was lovely.


I have been to one to. Luxembourg. Lovely place.


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> Evidence of the Remain camp lies please.
> a


Please leave this sort of questioning for the Brexit thread


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313088


The Tories did not promise this @KittenKong the leave Campaign did which was made up of cross party MP's from all parties. The Tories are under no obligation to fulfill what they did not promise.


----------



## Happy Paws2

stockwellcat said:


> Well at least TM was being truthful.


That makes a change.


----------



## Happy Paws2

stockwellcat said:


> So if Iran or North Korea fired a nuclear bomb at the UK and it landed in the UK killing millions of people we should have a tea party, sit back and look at the facts. Come on. Get real.


He never said that if we were attacked he wouldn't strike back. He just hoped it would never get to the point when he would have to.



Elles said:


> May, it is rumoured, wants to turn the Uk into a tax haven. *I've only been to one, Andorra, and that was lovely. * I know many businesses base themselves in Ireland and Ireland are doing a bit better now. Would turning Britain into a tax haven be good or bad for the country?


Tax havens don't make a beautiful country, just greed.


----------



## Elles

So, are the poor and disabled much worse off on Ireland, Luxembourg and Andorra?

I'm all for equality, but if there's a chance of the poor getting richer, rather than the rich getting poorer to make us all equal, I'm all for it.


----------



## stockwellcat.

So people are worried that the Tories will make the UK a tax haven.

Let's look at the list of tax havens:









I have been to the Isle of Man and Luxembourg both are lovely countries. Ireland is also a tax haven but isn't listed so is the Netherlands who have one of the best health care systems.

@cheekyscrip and Gibraltar is on the list 

My point is we are surrounded by tax havens (Isle of Man, Jersey, Guernsey, Ireland, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Gibraltar etc) who seem to be doing well for themselves.


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> So people are worried that the Tories will make the UK a tax haven.
> 
> Let's look at the list of tax havens:
> View attachment 313090
> 
> 
> I have been to the Isle of Man and Luxembourg both are lovely countries. Ireland is also a tax haven but isn't listed so is the Netherlands who have one of the best health care systems.
> 
> @cheekyscrip and Gibraltar is on the list
> 
> My point is we are surrounded by tax havens who seem to be doing well for themselves.


It is not as straight. Per capita looks good, but of you have s bunch of multimillionaires in population of 30 thousand it rises the average nicely.
But the price of houses, food, utility bills is fit for their pockets too.
Our hospital is honestly shambles in many wards except few. Schools are in tatters except one.
Come and see government houses.

Those lovely gated estates that Spain envies so much are not for ordinary people either...

Even with decent incomes you live very modest life, else you have to live in Spain.

But then ....


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> So people are worried that the Tories will make the UK a tax haven.
> 
> Let's look at the list of tax havens:
> View attachment 313090
> 
> 
> I have been to the Isle of Man and Luxembourg both are lovely countries. Ireland is also a tax haven but isn't listed so is the Netherlands who have one of the best health care systems.
> 
> @cheekyscrip and Gibraltar is on the list
> 
> My point is we are surrounded by tax havens (Isle of Man, Jersey, Guernsey, Ireland, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Gibraltar etc) who seem to be doing well for themselves.


Perhaps you haven't seen the poverty? Just because you've never seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Look at footage of '60s swinging London for example, hardly a true reflection when you see films like, "Up the Junction" and "Poor Cow".

Likewise with US dramas, most are based in suburbia, not deprived areas.

I don't believe for a second the Tories will aim to improve life for the masses, they'll be kept in their place with The Sun to keep them happy.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> The Sun to keep them happy.


Why are you so fixated on newspapers?


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Likewise with US dramas, most are based in suburbia, not deprived areas.


That's because it's TV dramas nothing to do with the state the world is in.


----------



## stockwellcat.

.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> The Tories did not promise this @KittenKong the leave Campaign did which was made up of cross party MP's from all parties. The Tories are under no obligation to fulfill what they did not promise.


You're right of course but the Vote Leave campaign was predominantly Tory.



stockwellcat said:


> That's because it's TV dramas nothing to do with the state the world is in.












That is true too of course but doesn't it give the impression life's like that in the US for some viewers. I also know some people who long to travel back to the '60s on the strength of Canarby Street/King's Road rosy coloured spectacles image. They're shocked on seeing films like, "Up the Junction".


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> You're right of course but the Vote Leave campaign was predominantly Tory.
> 
> View attachment 313092
> 
> 
> That is true too of course but doesn't it give the impression life's like that in the US for some viewers. I also know some people who long to travel back to the '60s on the strength of Canarby Street/King's Road rosy coloured spectacles image. They're shocked on seeing films like, "Up the Junction".


My postman is voting the way I am voting as we have just spoken about it. Now I am voting this way not because I necessarily agree with everything this person I am voting for has said. Just to reiterate @KittenKong it isn't the Conservatives I am voting for. You are lucky @KittenKong that you have managed to vote before me, I have to wait until Thursday.

Now I will leave it for you to guess who I am voting for by leaving you with the London statistics of voting intentions in London.









I am not revealing who though.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> Not only have tory cuts put social care into crisis, in their manifesto millions of people who now get care in the home stand to lose their house when they die because they are going to make them pay for their own care as well as those in residential care. Now there are plenty of younger people with homes who need outside help - could this affect them too? I can't seem to find out & you can bet the tories will exploit this if they can.
> 
> Corbyn wanted to debate May face to face last night but she's too scared to go head to head with him. She's an utter disgrace. She has showed nothing but contempt for the electorate.
> 
> Theres no emotional connection with her. She told a hard working nurse struggling to get by 'there's no 'magic money tree'  (that's the latest soundbite by the way  )- funnily she found a money tree for her 11% pay hike!. The tories can always find money when it suits them. Look no further than the brutal badger cull - which will be rolled out when they get back in
> 
> Oh I've found a clip. Here's May's response to the nurse who hasn't had pay rise in 8 yrs: "no magic money tree" - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...c-question-time-leaders-special-a7770371.html
> 
> Just adding this on. Lovely Brian May's reaction -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Dr. Brian May*‏Verified [email protected]*DrBrianMay* 7h7 hours ago
> 
> Dr. Brian May Retweeted BBC Question Time
> 
> Watch this ghastly woman squash a nurse who hasn't had a pay rise since 2009. "There's no magic money tree" https://twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/870732339155836928… Bri


Very good point Noush and one I haven't heard anyone ask - we need to get a question in to them to find out if younger people who need ongoing care in their own homes are also going to have their homes taken to pay for it after their death - I'm thinking of a young man with motor neurone disease for instance who has a wife and young kids and they need carers twice a day to help the wife get him up and washed/dressed then to put him back to bed at night. I know they are saying with the elderly that the home won't be taken if the partner is alive and living in the property but what about in a case like the one I've mentioned - his wife will likely live for many years after his death and will have that hanging over her head - what happens if she moves after he dies, what happens if she remarries etc etc?



stockwellcat said:


> So if Iran or North Korea fired a nuclear bomb at the UK and it landed in the UK killing millions of people we should have a tea party, sit back and look at the facts. Come on. Get real.


Well if they have already fired a nuclear bomb at us we won't be doing anything much will we? Don't you think peace and diplomacy are the best chance of preventing that from happening rather than chest beating, sabre rattling and threats? If you have a massive falling out with your neighbour which is more likely to prevent you from punching him - him saying lets have a chat about it and try to sort out a compromise or him telling you to shut your big mouth or he will punch your lights out? I know the answer for me - the more someone prods and pokes at me the more angry I get and the more likely I am to do something in the heat of the moment that I may regret later.



stockwellcat said:


> So we should say oh North Korea or Iran killed our citizens it's ok we shouldn't retaliate, let them get away with it.
> 
> Corbyn's throwing a tea party at number 10.
> View attachment 313081


Lovely, I've always wanted to go to a tea party like that, Do you think they serve vegan food? 



Bisbow said:


> Principled
> 
> He has no idea what the word means, probably never even head of it


You were complaining about people attacking Theresa May yesterday and there you go doing the same thing about Corbyn. You say he has no idea what the word principled means and has probably never even heard of it. I disagree, I might not (and don't) agree with many of his principles but not agreeing with them does not mean he doesn't have them.

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/principle

"In general, a principle is some kind of basic truth that helps you with your life. "Be fair" is a principle that guides (or should guide) most people and businesses. A politician who tries to do the right thing rather than win votes is acting on principle. A person who has principles is a good, decent person. On the other hand, if you say someone has no principles, that means they're dishonest, corrupt, or evil."

I would say the above description fits Jeremy Corbyn pretty well actually.

Edited because I got the illness the young man I referred to wrong should be motor neurone disease not muscular dystrophy.


----------



## Honeys mum

noushka05 said:


> Theres no emotional connection with her. She told a hard working nurse struggling to get by 'there's no 'magic money tree'


She lied again noush, according to this video there is.

This is genius. --Credits-- Artist Taxi Driver:... - Another Angry Voice


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> You're right of course but the Vote Leave campaign was predominantly Tory.


The key people were 2 x Tories, 2 x Labour and 2 x political strategists. The chairperson is Gisela Stuart (Labour)


----------



## CollieSlave

stockwellcat said:


> The Tories did not promise this @KittenKong the leave Campaign did which was made up of cross party MP's from all parties. The Tories are under no obligation to fulfill what they did not promise.


Based on past experience, the Tories seem to think they are under no obligation to fulfill what they DO promise, if they so choose!!


----------



## Bisbow

You were complaining about people attacking Theresa May yesterday and there you go doing the same thing about Corbyn. You say he has no idea what the word principled means and has probably never even heard of it. I disagree, I might not (and don't) agree with many of his principles but not agreeing with them does not mean he doesn't have them.

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/principle

"In general, a principle is some kind of basic truth that helps you with your life. "Be fair" is a principle that guides (or should guide) most people and businesses. A politician who tries to do the right thing rather than win votes is acting on principle. A person who has principles is a good, decent person. On the other hand, if you say someone has no principles, that means they're dishonest, corrupt, or evil."

I would say the above description fits Jeremy Corbyn pretty well actually.[/QUOTE]

I said that because I don't believe he has any, look at his stance for terrorists for example

What I AM NOT doing is posting made up silly pictures or nasty cartoons about him or posting downright lies about him

There is a difference between saying what I think and being cruel and I have not, as I have said before, I will not stoop to such a low level about anyone whether I LIKE THEM OR NOT


----------



## KittenKong

I laughed out loud when I saw this.
Does have a serious message though.

Pudsey Warhead, whoever thought that. Genius!


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> I laughed out loud when I saw this.
> Does have a serious message though.
> 
> Pudsey Warhead, whoever thought that. Genius!
> View attachment 313108


That was worth a chuckle.
What was the comment next to the 33 likes?


----------



## Calvine

KittenKong said:


> I promised to put Brexit to one side in this election.


But not in this thread?


----------



## 1290423

Happy Paws said:


> He never said that if we were attacked he wouldn't strike back. He just hoped it would never get to the point when he would have d.


You are right! 
he could always chuck a cup of hot tea into their laps


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> You were complaining about people attacking Theresa May yesterday and there you go doing the same thing about Corbyn. You say he has no idea what the word principled means and has probably never even heard of it. I disagree, I might not (and don't) agree with many of his principles but not agreeing with them does not mean he doesn't have them.
> 
> https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/principle
> 
> "In general, a principle is some kind of basic truth that helps you with your life. "Be fair" is a principle that guides (or should guide) most people and businesses. A politician who tries to do the right thing rather than win votes is acting on principle. A person who has principles is a good, decent person. On the other hand, if you say someone has no principles, that means they're dishonest, corrupt, or evil."
> 
> I would say the above description fits Jeremy Corbyn pretty well actually.


I said that because I don't believe he has any, look at his stance for terrorists for example

What I AM NOT doing is posting made up silly pictures or nasty cartoons about him or posting downright lies about him

There is a difference between saying what I think and being cruel and I have not, as I have said before, I will not stoop to such a low level about anyone whether I LIKE THEM OR NOT[/QUOTE]

Fair enough but I suppose it depends on what each individual would consider is being cruel. You mentioned how would Theresa May's family feel seeing some of the memes/cartoons about her and I do agree, I don't see any purpose in them, certainly can't imagine they win anyone over to the other side's arguments but do you not think Jeremy Corbyn's family might be upset if they read your comments about him having no idea what the word principled means and that he has probably never even heard of it?


----------



## Satori

KittenKong said:


> I laughed out loud when I saw this.
> Does have a serious message though.
> 
> Pudsey Warhead, whoever thought that. Genius!
> View attachment 313108


Brilliant.


----------



## Guest

stockwellcat said:


> So you want to live in Corbyn's imaginary world of a peaceful utopia. Meanwhile in the real world. Before I get we are leaving the EU so should do things differently. We are still committed to NATO, nothing changes there.


Apart from Trump.. and that means that just about everything can be changed.



Elles said:


> Did they? There you go then. Proof of the deterrent. Of course Russia aren't about to bomb Britain, nuclear or otherwise, but that they can if they want to and saying so probably shut everyone up and prevented nuclear war.
> I strongly believe in multilateral disarmament, but unfortunately that's currently in the clouds with the rainbows and unicorns.


And why do you think the current situation is like it is now? Russia doesn´t need to bomb Britain, it is enough they have Trump, who will destroy Nato. Did you know that he still hasn´t appointed his personnel to Nato, so it can´t even function now. No one around to make any decision.



Elles said:


> May, it is rumoured, wants to turn the Uk into a tax haven. I've only been to one, Andorra, and that was lovely. I know many businesses base themselves in Ireland and Ireland are doing a bit better now. Would turning Britain into a tax haven be good or bad for the country?





stockwellcat said:


> I have been to one to. Luxembourg. Lovely place.


Do you really think that tax havens are good countries? You really think that corporations or really rich don´t need to pay any taxes? (as that is what tax haven is)? Who will pay for the NHS, roads, schools, pensions, social care etc.? Working people alone? Also, did you notice how small these places are and did you figure why? You are aware, those actually working in these places usually live in a country around them, who has provided the roads, educated staff, housing etc. using taxes. So if Britain were to become a tax haven, where would you send all who work or are poor? Or will there be slums like there is in developing countries? Fenced areas like there used to be in South Africa. Ireland gets huge support from EU, and is doing well because of that.

Also why do you think most governments (including British) are fighting against tax havens? You are aware that they are used for also criminals to laundry money.



Happy Paws said:


> . Tax havens don't make a beautiful country, just greed.


Thank you, some has actually studied a bit about tax havens. Criminals, dictators, corrupt governments - and law breaking corporations use them. Nothing good! I so agree with you.



cheekyscrip said:


> It is not as straight. Per capita looks good, but of you have s bunch of multimillionaires in population of 30 thousand it rises the average nicely.But the price of houses, food, utility bills is fit for their pockets too.
> Our hospital is honestly shambles in many wards except few. Schools are in tatters except one.Come and see government houses.
> Those lovely gated estates that Spain envies so much are not for ordinary people either...Even with decent incomes you live very modest life, else you have to live in Spain..


You know the truth, as you live there. Will people believe you, though? It is easy as a tourist just look at the pretty scenery and think what a great country it is. But you cannot eat a scenery nor live in it, can you ?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Cable: Tax comments 'raise suspicions'*
Posted at11:39

Former business secretary Sir Vince Cable is questioning comments made by the Tory defence secretary this morning about keeping taxes low.

Sir Vince, who is campaigning to win back his old seat in Twickenham, says Sir Michael Fallon's promises "raise the obvious question" as to where the Conservatives will raise money to provide the funding for schools, the NHS, the police and defence - all areas they have pledged to invest in.

He tells the Press Association: "Since they are ruling out increases in income, corporate tax and VAT we must assume that there will be an increase in national insurance and in various 'stealth taxes' yet to be specified. It undoubtedly raises suspicions."


----------



## stockwellcat.

MrsZee said:


> Also why do you think most governments (including British) are fighting against tax havens?


 Let's see the UK are fighting against tax havens, well we better clean our act up then:

Jersey
Guernsey
Gibraltar
Isle of Man
British Overseas Territories. Bermuda. British Virgin Islands. Cayman Islands.
All the above are tax havens owned by the UK.


----------



## cheekyscrip

MrsZee said:


> Apart from Trump.. and that means that just about everything can be changed.
> 
> And why do you think the current situation is like it is now? Russia doesn´t need to bomb Britain, it is enough they have Trump, who will destroy Nato. Did you know that he still hasn´t appointed his personnel to Nato, so it can´t even function now. No one around to make any decision.
> 
> Do you really think that tax havens are good countries? You really think that corporations or really rich don´t need to pay any taxes? (as that is what tax haven is)? Who will pay for the NHS, roads, schools, pensions, social care etc.? Working people alone? Also, did you notice how small these places are and did you figure why? You are aware, those actually working in these places usually live in a country around them, who has provided the roads, educated staff, housing etc. using taxes. So if Britain were to become a tax haven, where would you send all who work or are poor? Or will there be slums like there is in developing countries? Fenced areas like there used to be in South Africa. Ireland gets huge support from EU, and is doing well because of that.
> 
> Also why do you think most governments (including British) are fighting against tax havens? You are aware that they are used for also criminals to laundry money.
> 
> Thank you, some has actually studied a bit about tax havens. Criminals, dictators, corrupt governments - and law breaking corporations use them. Nothing good! I so agree with you.
> 
> You know the truth, as you live there. Will people believe you, though? It is easy as a tourist just look at the pretty scenery and think what a great country it is. But you cannot eat a scenery nor live in it, can you ?


The truth is even more complicated. 
Places like Gibraltar, IoM or Luxembourg are well regulated, as transparent as any banks in UK or Germany, remember recent scandal of Deutsche Bank, also their link to Trump/ Russian oligarchs loans?

Getting rid of EU / Europe financial centres only means BiG money going to Dubai, Singapore etc...where is so much less control.

Part of my daily bread toil I checking if all money in are clean, clean,clean, and our clients are clean, clean, clean

.

Any doubts and we refuse. They can go to Cayman then.

I am afraid there are nil tax places. Nothing we can do about it.
Yes, we have to understand that tax system has to be fair for the rich and for the poor.
Being poor is not a virtue per se and being rich is not a sin.

If we want social mobility then we have to provide good education at all level, including uni, affordable to all.

We can have limited number of free placements for those with best grades. In areas most needed like medicine, nursing, engineering, IT for example.

We can have 50/50 system: Students pay half and gov pays half to discourage placement wasting.

If Poland can afford free uni...why England cannot?

,


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Let's see the UK are fighting against tax havens, well we better clean our act up then:
> 
> Jersey
> Guernsey
> Gibraltar
> Isle of Man
> British Overseas Territories. Bermuda. British Virgin Islands. Cayman Islands.
> All the above are tax havens owned by the UK.


Oh, yes! Send all the money to Middle East then or Chinese Hong Kong....
Great thinking mate....

What is the point of UK getting rid of them leaving their population jobless and homeless for Dubai and Hong Kong to take over the business?


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I said that because I don't believe he has any, look at his stance for terrorists for example
> 
> What I AM NOT doing is posting made up silly pictures or nasty cartoons about him or posting downright lies about him
> 
> There is a difference between saying what I think and being cruel and I have not, as I have said before, I will not stoop to such a low level about anyone whether I LIKE THEM OR NOT


Fair enough but I suppose it depends on what each individual would consider is being cruel. You mentioned how would Theresa May's family feel seeing some of the memes/cartoons about her and I do agree, I don't see any purpose in them, certainly can't imagine they win anyone over to the other side's arguments but do you not think Jeremy Corbyn's family might be upset if they read your comments about him having no idea what the word principled means and that he has probably never even heard of it?[/QUOTE]

What principled man would stand head bowed in a minutes silence for dead IRA killers

What principled man would invite terrorist leaders into the House of Commons of all places

What principled man would stand laughing and joking and shaking hands with the same terrorist to have his photo taken to be shown world wide

You tell me because I do not know of any


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> Oh, yes! Send all the money to Middle East then or Chinese Hong Kong....
> Great thinking mate....


Well @MrsZee said we are fighting tax havens. We have enough of our own tax havens.


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Well @MrsZee said we are fighting tax havens. We have enough of our own tax havens.


The way to go is to control them. Check and catch the dirty and the tax avoidance.

British ones , at least Channel Islands or Gibraltar follow British law and co-operate closely with HMRC and justice.

We report everyone and every penny to HMRC .

At least my company will not let anyone use us as to hide money from UK justice..for example divorce settlement etc.

Separate jurisdiction, but British territory.

But nothing you can do to check what is up in Emirates etc...China....many unregulated territories....


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> The way to go is to control them. Check and catch the dirty and the tax avoidance.
> 
> British ones , at least Channel Islands or Gibraltar follow British law and co-operate closely with HMRC and justice.


Cayman islands don't


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Cayman islands don't


Cannot say as I am not working there.
But they are at least regulated jurisdiction, as far as I know. 
Means controlled and obliged to adhere to financial regulations posed by international bodies.
China, Russia are not.
Means free for all.

When UK is out of EU Gibraltar will be unregulated territory too...

My job obviously pointless then...


----------



## JANICE199

Bisbow said:


> Fair enough but I suppose it depends on what each individual would consider is being cruel. You mentioned how would Theresa May's family feel seeing some of the memes/cartoons about her and I do agree, I don't see any purpose in them, certainly can't imagine they win anyone over to the other side's arguments but do you not think Jeremy Corbyn's family might be upset if they read your comments about him having no idea what the word principled means and that he has probably never even heard of it?


What principled man would stand head bowed in a minutes silence for dead IRA killers

What principled man would invite terrorist leaders into the House of Commons of all places

What principled man would stand laughing and joking and shaking hands with the same terrorist to have his photo taken to be shown world wide

You tell me because I do not know of any[/QUOTE]

*I am confused by your post Bisbow. You talk of principled  how about those that are willing to sell arms to countries, only then for those countries to use those arms against the country that sold them to them? haha your having a laugh.*


----------



## Guest

The UK government claims to be leading the fight against tax havens, with David Cameron saying that there are "too many tax havens, too many places where people and businesses manage to avoid paying taxes", yet it refuses to act to abolish the UK's own global network of tax havens.


stockwellcat said:


> Let's see the UK are fighting against tax havens, well we better clean our act up then:
> 
> Jersey
> Guernsey
> Gibraltar
> Isle of Man
> British Overseas Territories. Bermuda. British Virgin Islands. Cayman Islands.
> All the above are tax havens owned by the UK.


True, maybe Britain claims only in public it is fighting against tax evasion and tax havens, but in reality doesn´t. Maybe this is the real reason why conservatives are so happy to leave EU, as EU is fighting against them? E.g. the owners of The SUN are charged with tax evasion.. Makes sense to me, as otherwise Brexit is bad for the economy. But you are right, British government don´t seem care, which is odd, as Brits are not supposed to have any money for NHS etc.. You´d think that if the economy is so poor, they´d do everything to fight against tax frauds and tax evasion. I wonder why not? Who is benefiting from this?

Margaret Hodge supporting your opinion:

"The government has been facing both ways," said Margaret Hodge, who chairs the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Responsible Tax. "While publicly proclaiming their determination to tackle global tax avoidance, they have been encouraging these practices by changes they have made to the U.K. tax system and by refusing privately to agree to some key OECD proposals."
http://www.petforums.co.uk/threads/general-election-8th-june-2017.447012/page-276#post-1064880503

This is a link saying how Britain is fighting against tax havens...https://www.blevinsfranks.com/news/blevinsfranks/article/uk-fight-offshore-tax-evasion
Maybe this is something of the past anyway, and your policies have changed. That would be bad for all honest people and companies.

And if someone would be more interested in tax havens, some more links.
http://anonhq.com/eu-fights-trumps-...orlds-biggest-tax-haven-for-money-launderers/
https://www.theguardian.com/business/taxavoidance


----------



## Happy Paws2

MrsZee said:


> Thank you, some has actually studied a bit about tax havens. Criminals, dictators, corrupt governments - and law breaking corporations use them. Nothing good! I so agree with you.


And the majority of the tory millionaire government


----------



## Bisbow

JANICE199 said:


> What principled man would stand head bowed in a minutes silence for dead IRA killers
> 
> What principled man would invite terrorist leaders into the House of Commons of all places
> 
> What principled man would stand laughing and joking and shaking hands with the same terrorist to have his photo taken to be shown world wide
> 
> You tell me because I do not know of any


*I am confused by your post Bisbow. You talk of principled  how about those that are willing to sell arms to countries, only then for those countries to use those arms against the country that sold them to them? haha your having a laugh.*[/QUOTE]

I don't agree with arms sales to any country but every "civilised" country in the world is doing it and I can't see how it can be stopped
But what has that to do with taking known terrorists into the H of C or honouring IRA dead


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> Fair enough but I suppose it depends on what each individual would consider is being cruel. You mentioned how would Theresa May's family feel seeing some of the memes/cartoons about her and I do agree, I don't see any purpose in them, certainly can't imagine they win anyone over to the other side's arguments but do you not think Jeremy Corbyn's family might be upset if they read your comments about him having no idea what the word principled means and that he has probably never even heard of it?


What principled man would stand head bowed in a minutes silence for dead IRA killers

What principled man would invite terrorist leaders into the House of Commons of all places

What principled man would stand laughing and joking and shaking hands with the same terrorist to have his photo taken to be shown world wide

You tell me because I do not know of any[/QUOTE]

Did you listen to him on one of the debates earlier in the week where he explained that it was a minutes silence for all of those killed during the troubles? On both sides and the civilians. You ask what principled man would invite terrorist leaders into the House of Commons but some of those very people - Martin McGuiness & Gerry Adams were elected MP's and have offices in the Commons. When Martin McGuiness died Theresa May had this to say

Theresa May joined in the tributes but said McGuinness had initially chosen the wrong violent path.

"While I can never condone the path he took in the earlier part of his life, Martin McGuinness ultimately played a defining role in leading the republican movement away from violence. In doing so, he made an essential and historic contribution to the extraordinary journey of Northern Ireland from conflict to peace," the prime minister said.

Someone has to make the first move in any negotiation and try to bring both sides together to talk, you seem to hold great hatred for Jeremy Corbyn for being involved in those very early stages where others went on to follow and did eventually achieve peace. Surely that has to be better than the alternative?

All governments invite other world leaders of questionable ethics/morals especially when they want to do trade with them, why is that any better than inviting people you want to negotiate peace with?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Is fox hunting an election issue?*

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40085091

Research by pollsters YouGov suggests fox hunting is one of the few policies in the Conservative manifesto that people can remember.

Social care reform was the policy that stuck in voters' minds the most, with 36% recall, according to the online survey carried out on 22 and 23 May. That was followed by "going ahead with Brexit" and means-testing the winter fuel allowance, and other headline-grabbing issues.

"Legalising fox hunting" got 6% - more than some of the party's headline policies such as increasing funding for the NHS and reducing taxes.

Research by ComRes, for the Daily Mirror, suggested keeping the fox hunting ban was the most popular policy in Labour's manifesto - ahead of banning zero-hours contracts and keeping the state pension age at 66 - among supporters of all parties, including 64% of Conservative voters.

The Blue Fox Group, the Conservative campaign against fox hunting, says it has had "tons" of emails from Conservative supporters, and those thinking of voting Conservative for the first time, who are "surprised and dismayed" by Mrs May's stance.

"Some people are actually saying that they will withhold their vote on this issue," co-founder Lorraine Platt told the BBC.

"They feel quite strongly about it. They are very surprised that it's in the manifesto. We have received so many emails from people. People saying with all that's going on in the world and the Brexit focus how on earth can this free vote be included in the Conservative Party manifesto?"

The majority of Conservative MPs in the last Parliament were in favour of overturning the ban but Mrs Platt claims a growing number of Conservative politicians are getting behind her campaign, meaning the party would have to have a large majority to make it a realistic prospect.


----------



## Honeys mum

Tactical voting guide: how to make your vote count in the 2017 election | Politics | The Guardian

For anyone who is undecided how to vote.


----------



## cheekyscrip

MrsZee said:


> The UK government claims to be leading the fight against tax havens, with David Cameron saying that there are "too many tax havens, too many places where people and businesses manage to avoid paying taxes", yet it refuses to act to abolish the UK's own global network of tax havens.
> 
> True, maybe Britain claims only in public it is fighting against tax evasion and tax havens, but in reality doesn´t. Maybe this is the real reason why conservatives are so happy to leave EU, as EU is fighting against them? E.g. the owners of The SUN are charged with tax evasion.. Makes sense to me, as otherwise Brexit is bad for the economy. But you are right, British government don´t seem care, which is odd, as Brits are not supposed to have any money for NHS etc.. You´d think that if the economy is so poor, they´d do everything to fight against tax frauds and tax evasion. I wonder why not? Who is benefiting from this?
> 
> Margaret Hodge supporting your opinion:
> 
> "The government has been facing both ways," said Margaret Hodge, who chairs the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Responsible Tax. "While publicly proclaiming their determination to tackle global tax avoidance, they have been encouraging these practices by changes they have made to the U.K. tax system and by refusing privately to agree to some key OECD proposals."
> http://www.petforums.co.uk/threads/general-election-8th-june-2017.447012/page-276#post-1064880503
> 
> This is a link saying how Britain is fighting against tax havens...https://www.blevinsfranks.com/news/blevinsfranks/article/uk-fight-offshore-tax-evasion
> Maybe this is something of the past anyway, and your policies have changed. That would be bad for all honest people and companies.
> 
> And if someone would be more interested in tax havens, some more links.
> http://anonhq.com/eu-fights-trumps-...orlds-biggest-tax-haven-for-money-launderers/
> https://www.theguardian.com/business/taxavoidance


EU does not fight against Mslta, Luxembourg or Monaco.
Just tightens money laundering laws and regulations.

Those financial centres themselves want to be rid of money coming from crime or tax avoidance.

Do not confuse with tax evasion..
Which is legal ways of not paying extra taxes like double taxation and punishment for savings.

After Brexit when Spain squashes our tiny place the most of our business will stay in EU, Malta etc...
We contribute to UK coffers.
They will contribute to EU.


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> What principled man would stand head bowed in a minutes silence for dead IRA killers
> 
> What principled man would invite terrorist leaders into the House of Commons of all places
> 
> What principled man would stand laughing and joking and shaking hands with the same terrorist to have his photo taken to be shown world wide
> 
> You tell me because I do not know of any


Did you listen to him on one of the debates earlier in the week where he explained that it was a minutes silence for all of those killed during the troubles? On both sides and the civilians. You ask what principled man would invite terrorist leaders into the House of Commons but some of those very people - Martin McGuiness & Gerry Adams were elected MP's and have offices in the Commons. When Martin McGuiness died Theresa May had this to say

Theresa May joined in the tributes but said McGuinness had initially chosen the wrong violent path.

"While I can never condone the path he took in the earlier part of his life, Martin McGuinness ultimately played a defining role in leading the republican movement away from violence. In doing so, he made an essential and historic contribution to the extraordinary journey of Northern Ireland from conflict to peace," the prime minister said.

Someone has to make the first move in any negotiation and try to bring both sides together to talk, you seem to hold great hatred for Jeremy Corbyn for being involved in those very early stages where others went on to follow and did eventually achieve peace. Surely that has to be better than the alternative?

All governments invite other world leaders of questionable ethics/morals especially when they want to do trade with them, why is that any better than inviting people you want to negotiate peace with?








[/QUOTE]
Then Msy held hands with Trump.

Actually how would you achieve peace agreement without talking to IRA or Hamas?

He did not invite them for state visit and doubt that as PM he would.

I still DO NOT support him, but common-sense makes me agree with that and with not using nukies first !


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> What principled man would stand head bowed in a minutes silence for dead IRA killers
> 
> What principled man would invite terrorist leaders into the House of Commons of all places
> 
> What principled man would stand laughing and joking and shaking hands with the same terrorist to have his photo taken to be shown world wide
> 
> You tell me because I do not know of any


Did you listen to him on one of the debates earlier in the week where he explained that it was a minutes silence for all of those killed during the troubles? On both sides and the civilians. You ask what principled man would invite terrorist leaders into the House of Commons but some of those very people - Martin McGuiness & Gerry Adams were elected MP's and have offices in the Commons. When Martin McGuiness died Theresa May had this to say

Theresa May joined in the tributes but said McGuinness had initially chosen the wrong violent path.

"While I can never condone the path he took in the earlier part of his life, Martin McGuinness ultimately played a defining role in leading the republican movement away from violence. In doing so, he made an essential and historic contribution to the extraordinary journey of Northern Ireland from conflict to peace," the prime minister said.

Someone has to make the first move in any negotiation and try to bring both sides together to talk, you seem to hold great hatred for Jeremy Corbyn for being involved
in those very early stages where others went on to follow and did eventually achieve peace. Surely that has to be better than the alternative?

All governments invite other world leaders of questionable ethics/morals especially when they want to do trade with them, why is that any better than inviting people you want to negotiate peace with?








[/QUOTE]

Yes, I dislike him intensely, just as some on here dislike Mrs May, I would whatever party he belonged to. I find him despicable

It is easy to say now that he honoured all the people killed but why at a remembrance of IRA killers

Yes talks are important to try and solve the problems but not with an IRA sympathizer in the chair siting with IRA leaders


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/virgin-care-take-over-key-12211467























For any who may be in denial that the May government are privatising the NHS.

Profit can't be made from a free service so it makes you wonder where they're getting the money from....


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> Did you listen to him on one of the debates earlier in the week where he explained that it was a minutes silence for all of those killed during the troubles? On both sides and the civilians. You ask what principled man would invite terrorist leaders into the House of Commons but some of those very people - Martin McGuiness & Gerry Adams were elected MP's and have offices in the Commons. When Martin McGuiness died Theresa May had this to say
> 
> Theresa May joined in the tributes but said McGuinness had initially chosen the wrong violent path.
> 
> "While I can never condone the path he took in the earlier part of his life, Martin McGuinness ultimately played a defining role in leading the republican movement away from violence. In doing so, he made an essential and historic contribution to the extraordinary journey of Northern Ireland from conflict to peace," the prime minister said.
> 
> Someone has to make the first move in any negotiation and try to bring both sides together to talk, you seem to hold great hatred for Jeremy Corbyn for being involved
> in those very early stages where others went on to follow and did eventually achieve peace. Surely that has to be better than the alternative?
> 
> All governments invite other world leaders of questionable ethics/morals especially when they want to do trade with them, why is that any better than inviting people you want to negotiate peace with?


Yes, I dislike him intensely, just as some on here dislike Mrs May, I would whatever party he belonged to. I find him despicable

It is easy to say now that he honoured all the people killed but why at a remembrance of IRA killers

Yes talks are important to try and solve the problems but not with an IRA sympathizer in the chair siting with IRA leaders[/QUOTE]

What does it matter who is sitting where? What matters is that talks are started and peace is achieved. I'm afraid being dogmatic usually just results in stalemate and meanwhile more people would be injured or die because people are being precious about who talks to who and where.

So not one word of criticism of Mr Blair for the photo above? He is laughing and obviously sharing a joke with two IRA leaders, and here is one of Mo Mowlem also laughing with Jerry Adams - why single out Corbyn?


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/virgin-care-take-over-key-12211467
> View attachment 313156
> View attachment 313158
> View attachment 313159
> 
> 
> For any who may be in denial that the May government are privatising the NHS.
> 
> Profit can't be made from a free service so it makes you wonder where they're getting the money from....


A friend of mine from Oxford told me that she has waited nearly 7 months for a CAT scan and as a result the NHS are now outsourcing to private hospitals at the NHS's expense. So it doesn't surprise me that they are now outsourcing to Virgin Care to be honest.


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes, I dislike him intensely, just as some on here dislike Mrs May, I would whatever party he belonged to. I find him despicable
> 
> It is easy to say now that he honoured all the people killed but why at a remembrance of IRA killers
> 
> Yes talks are important to try and solve the problems but not with an IRA sympathizer in the chair siting with IRA leaders


What does it matter who is sitting where? What matters is that talks are started and peace is achieved. I'm afraid being dogmatic usually just results in stalemate and meanwhile more people would be injured or die because people are being precious about who talks to who and where.

So not one word of criticism of Mr Blair for the photo above? He is laughing and obviously sharing a joke with two IRA leaders, and here is one of Mo Mowlem also laughing with Jerry Adams - why single out Corbyn?








[/QUOTE]

I didn't look at the photo' sorry
I am dashing about like a demented yo-yo at the moment

I would have mentioned it had I seen it
All cut from the same cloth it seems


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> What does it matter who is sitting where? What matters is that talks are started and peace is achieved. I'm afraid being dogmatic usually just results in stalemate and meanwhile more people would be injured or die because people are being precious about who talks to who and where.
> 
> So not one word of criticism of Mr Blair for the photo above? He is laughing and obviously sharing a joke with two IRA leaders, and here is one of Mo Mowlem also laughing with Jerry Adams - why single out Corbyn?


I didn't look at the photo' sorry
I am dashing about like a demented yo-yo at the moment

I would have mentioned it had I seen it
All cut from the same cloth it seems[/QUOTE]

Yes perhaps but still the cloth that achieved a peace agreement and for that I think we should all be thankful


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes, I dislike him intensely, just as some on here dislike Mrs May, I would whatever party he belonged to. I find him despicable
> 
> It is easy to say now that he honoured all the people killed but why at a remembrance of IRA killers
> 
> Yes talks are important to try and solve the problems but not with an IRA sympathizer in the chair siting with IRA leaders


What does it matter who is sitting where? What matters is that talks are started and peace is achieved. I'm afraid being dogmatic usually just results in stalemate and meanwhile more people would be injured or die because people are being precious about who talks to who and where.

So not one word of criticism of Mr Blair for the photo above? He is laughing and obviously sharing a joke with two IRA leaders, and here is one of Mo Mowlem also laughing with Jerry Adams - why single out Corbyn?








[/QUOTE]

I thought these images of two former sworn enemies wonderful to see.

Perhaps you could also include John Major's contribution to the peace process too?

A remarkable achievement from all involved. Something to be proud of.

I remember May's tribute to McGuinness, the first and only time she spoke any sense.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

I'm sure there are many more I haven't mentioned @KittenKong - I'm no expert on the peace process but yes John Major deserves credit too.


----------



## kimthecat

@rottiepointerhouse Seeing as mrs may has her own hit song , I'm suggesting one for Mr Corbyn 

Day after day
Alone on a hill
The man with the foolish grin
Is keeping perfectly still
But nobody wants to know him
They can see that he's just a fool
And he never gives an answer


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm sure there are many more I haven't mentioned @KittenKong - I'm no expert on the peace process but yes John Major deserves credit too.


Apologies to you RPH. My post said it was quoting yours when it originated from Bisbow. Seems something funny's going on with quotes on this thread at the moment.


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> @rottiepointerhouse Seeing as mrs may has her own hit song , I'm suggesting one for Mr Corbyn
> 
> Day after day
> Alone on a hill
> The man with the foolish grin
> Is keeping perfectly still
> But nobody wants to know him
> They can see that he's just a fool
> And he never gives an answer


Or perhaps The Motions' "Miracle Man"? Sadly the You tube upload has been blocked.http://www.45cat.com/record/nc570050nl


----------



## Happy Paws2

kimthecat said:


> @rottiepointerhouse Seeing as mrs may has her own hit song , I'm suggesting one for Mr Corbyn
> 
> Day after day
> Alone on a hill
> The man with the foolish grin
> Is keeping perfectly still
> But nobody wants to know him
> They can see that he's just a fool
> *And he never gives an answer*


He answered more questions than TM last night and more truthfully, he wasn't side stepping the answers the way TM was.


----------



## rona

Happy Paws said:


> He answered more questions than TM last night and more truthfully, he wasn't side stepping the answers the way TM was.


Do you know, I saw that completely differently. I was so hoping he would convince me of his integrity, but all he did was make himself look a fool 

On the other hand TM seemed to handle the questions with ease


----------



## Bisbow

KittenKong said:


> Apologies to you RPH. My post said it was quoting yours when it originated from Bisbow. Seems something funny's going on with quotes on this thread at the moment.


Thought my lap top was playing up with the Quotes problem

I said I did not look at the photo or I would have remarked about it

Blair was a war monger and everyone knows it

Corbyn is two faced and tries to hide the fact he is the terrorists friend


----------



## KittenKong

Sorry it mentions the B word but a good letter all the same.


----------



## rona

Bisbow said:


> Thought my lap top was playing up with the Quotes problem
> 
> I said I did not look at the photo or I would have remarked about it
> 
> Blair was a war monger and everyone knows it
> 
> Corbyn is two faced and tries to hide the fact he is the terrorists friend


Yep, can't compare to the wonderful Mo Mowlam who was a huge part of the peace process


----------



## Zaros

Bisbow said:


> I don't agree with arms sales to any country but every "civilised" country in the world is doing it.


Civilised? 

There's nothing civilised about the arms industry.

Civilised people do not manufacture or sell arms to others.

Uncivilised, yes.
















​It takes a special kind of 845t4rd to inflict pain and suffering on his fellow man, and a far greater iniquitous 845t4rd to help provide the means to inflict such suffering on an industrial scale.

Civilised?

My 4r53!​


----------



## Bisbow

Zaros said:


> Civilised?
> 
> There's nothing civilised about the arms industry.
> 
> Civilised people do not manufacture or sell arms to others.
> 
> Uncivilised, yes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​It takes a special kind of 845t4rd to inflict pain and suffering on his fellow man, and a far greater iniquitous 845t4rd to help provide the means to inflict such suffering on an industrial scale.
> 
> Civilised?
> 
> My 4r53!​


Note that I put "civilized" in inverted comma"s


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> @rottiepointerhouse Seeing as mrs may has her own hit song , I'm suggesting one for Mr Corbyn
> 
> Day after day
> Alone on a hill
> The man with the foolish grin
> Is keeping perfectly still
> But nobody wants to know him
> They can see that he's just a fool
> And he never gives an answer


Could you add a verse about the Tories not telling pensioners where the threshold for losing their winter fuel allowance will be and how much the cap on paying for homecare out of the value of their houses will be?

Day after day
Alone on a hill
Mrs May keeps saying
Strong and stable leadership
But nobody is listening
Because she thinks we are all fools
And that she doesn't need to tell pensioners
How much of their money they will lose

Day after day
Alone in its den
The beautiful red fox
Is keeping perfectly still
The hounds are baying with excitement
The fat man in red is blowing his horn
They all want the fox to come out
So they can rip it to shreds.

I'm not very good at this but hopefully you get my drift


----------



## 1290423

kimthecat said:


> @rottiepointerhouse Seeing as mrs may has her own hit song , I'm suggesting one for Mr Corbyn
> 
> Day after day
> Alone on a hill
> The man with the foolish grin
> Is keeping perfectly still
> But nobody wants to know him
> They can see that he's just a fool
> And he never gives an answer


Duh! Its not finished
Here, let me help!

A proper useless tool


----------



## rona

Corbyn always looks and acts as if he's just had a joint


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> Corbyn always looks and acts as if he's just had a joint


Perhaps he has. Mrs May often looks like she needs a poo and judging by the crap I've seen her eating on the campaign trail I would guess she probably struggles to have one


----------



## Zaros

Bisbow said:


> Note that I put "civilized" in inverted comma"s


And you'll also note that your country is now the SECOND biggest arms dealer in the world and, yet, you want to stand by a government that will continue to spread death and destruction about this globe for profit, without a second thought for the people it puts to death, or the towns and cities it turns to dust and rubble, conveniently burying the dead no one is prepared to discuss.

Shaking hands and finding the things that unite us is what's important now. Not finding the things that divide us and leaves us shaking our fists at each other.

The only arms man needs are those attached to helping hands. There aren't enough helping hands in this world, but there are more than enough arms, which is why this troubled world is in the state it finds itself in today.
Again, we need to find a way to disarm the world and can only do that if we find the thing that ultimately binds us all together.


----------



## Elles

This thread is boring now. Think I'll get some chips and gravy. :Brb


----------



## Bisbow

Zaros said:


> And you'll also note that your country is now the SECOND biggest arms dealer in the world and, yet, you want to stand by a government that will continue to spread death and destruction about this globe for profit, without a second thought for the people it puts to death, or the towns and cities it turns to dust and rubble, conveniently burying the dead no one is prepared to discuss.
> 
> Shaking hands and finding the things that unite us is what's important now. Not finding the things that divide us and leaves us shaking our fists at each other.
> 
> The only arms man needs are those attached to helping hands. There aren't enough helping hands in this world, but there are more than enough arms, which is why this troubled world is in the state it finds itself in today.
> Again, we need to find a way to disarm the world and can only do that if we find the thing that ultimately binds us all together.


And if Corbyn gets in this country will soon be so divided you will be able to put the Grand Canyon in it

I agree with a lot you say but he is no saint and will not lead us all to the land of milk and honey


----------



## Bisbow

Elles said:


> This thread is boring now. Think I'll get some chips and gravy. :Brb


Hang on, I will come and join you


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Could you add a verse about the Tories not telling pensioners where the threshold for losing their winter fuel allowance will be and how much the cap on paying for homecare out of the value of their houses will be?


Well yes, I could add another verse but then I'd have to find another song about Corbyn


----------



## Calvine

Bisbow said:


> Blair was a war monger and everyone knows it


Lucky he wasn't tried as a war criminal to be honest.


----------



## kimthecat

rona said:


> Corbyn always looks and acts as if he's just had a joint


i keep thinking he's going to pull off his face and there's an alien lizard under there . :Wtf


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> Again, we need to find a way to disarm the world and can only do that if we find the thing that ultimately binds us all together.


An alien invasion or whatever God/creator there might be out there making an appearance.

I won't hold my breath.


----------



## Zaros

Bisbow said:


> I agree with a lot you say but he is no saint and will not lead us all to the land of milk and honey


There is no such place. And those who went in search of it were destined to wander..............lost.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Calvine said:


> Lucky he wasn't tried as a war criminal to be honest.


Not forgetting Cameron and Hague for getting us into the Libya mess.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Summing up:
Voting for May means:
Higher taxes, but only for low and middle earners,
Low corporate tax,
Murdered foxes,
Higher uni fees,

Dementia tax,

Privatisation of NHS,

Crash Brexit,

Funding for grammar schools it cuts for education,
Lower pensions,
Higher retirement age.
Lower disability allowances and benefits.

No money trees. Or money for any trees.
U turn on everything that could be taken away though promised.





So obviously this is what majority of English people would vote for, English like being different and having it their own way.
Not like French or German.
More like Americans.


----------



## kimthecat

Elles said:


> This thread is boring now. Think I'll get some chips and gravy. :Brb


Im looking forward to my baked potato and salad and kelly's honeycomb cornish ice cream for afters


----------



## Bisbow

Zaros said:


> There is no such place. And those who went in search of it were destined to wander..............lost.


With a bit of luck Corbyn will join the lost then


----------



## Dr Pepper

Elles said:


> This thread is boring now. Think I'll get some chips and gravy. :Brb


Who the feck wants gravy on their chips :Vomit That's something to vote against.


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> An alien invasion or whatever God/creator there might be out there making an appearance.


It's not up to a fiction or a figment of our imagination. Ultimately, it's up to us as a species.

The world we want for our children will either be the one we strived towards or the ruins of the one we fought over.


----------



## Zaros

Bisbow said:


> With a bit of luck Corbyn will join the lost then


Tut tut Bizzy, and you accused Noushka of being 'nasty':Facepalm


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> It's not up to a fiction or a figment of our imagination. Ultimately, it's up to us as a species.
> 
> The world we want for our children will either be the one we strived towards or the ruins of the one we fought over.


Yep, agree. Bring on the aliens because there will never be world peace left to our own devices.


----------



## Bisbow

Zaros said:


> Tut tut Bizzy, and you accused Noushka of being 'nasty':Facepalm


Have I, how come ?


----------



## Zaros

rona said:


> Corbyn always looks and acts as if he's just had a joint


Well so what.

Churchill used opium.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Yep, agree. Bring on the aliens because there will never be world peace left to our own devices.


True, with way we are selling arms to dictators and warmingers..


----------



## Bisbow

Zaros said:


> Tut tut Bizzy, and you accused Noushka of being 'nasty':Facepalm


Forget your last post, I read it wrong, That's what comes of being a demented yo-yo today


----------



## Zaros

Bisbow said:


> That's what comes of being a demented yo-yo today


I hate politics and politicians. It and they, respectively, drive people to say things they wouldn't normally say to each other.

Well, maýbe they might if they were chavs living on a run down council estate.


----------



## Happy Paws2

rona said:


> Do you know, I saw that completely differently. I was so hoping he would convince me of his integrity, but all he did was make himself look a fool
> 
> On the other hand TM seemed to handle the questions with ease


Sorry, I saw it the other way, TM just told one lie after another and showed no compassion for the hurt she is doing.


----------



## Calvine

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not forgetting Cameron and Hague for getting us into the Libya mess.


Yes indeed.


----------



## havoc

When I was a small child (about 8 years old) I remember asking my dad to explain the two main parties. His simplistic explanation was that the Conservatives wanted things to keep things the same and Labour were for change. He never said either were good or bad. 

Every time I come back to look at this thread ALL I see is people arguing over the past - or at least clinging to it as an excuse for entrenched views. Is there really no hope of a tomorrow, I'm only seeing yesterdays. Yes McGuinness was a murderous barsteward .............. who happened to turn into a very able politician. I lived through checking under my car every morning, living behind a wire where I couldn't have civilian friends visit without going down to the guardroom to vouch for them and check them in, being met at Aldergrove for a security briefing every time we visited family in NI, having to visit military barracks for a further security briefing within 24 hours and then change the hire car for one which hadn't been clocked going in there, not being able to go to a family funeral because the church was overlooked by Divis flats. This and much more was our 'normal'.

I can get past it and move on because I want better. It really isn't worth hanging onto.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> This thread is boring now. Think I'll get some chips and gravy. :Brb


I miss chips and gravy so much! When I first moved to London I had no idea it was just a northern thing. It broke my heart when I couldn't get them anywhere. Have to go to KFC to satisfy my craving


----------



## Dr Pepper

Bisbow said:


> Forget your last post, I read it wrong, That's what comes of being a demented yo-yo today


You mad, don't mention being demented they'll have your house off you quicker than err umm...... something really quick.


----------



## Bisbow

Dr Pepper said:


> You mad, don't mention being demented they'll have your house off you quicker than err umm...... something really quick.


Never thought of that, thanks
Better think of another way to describe my very busy day


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Don't you think peace and diplomacy are the best chance of preventing that from happening rather than chest beating, sabre rattling and threats?


Why assume that having a nuclear deterrent precludes having talks and using diplomancy?


----------



## Elles

MiffyMoo said:


> I miss chips and gravy so much! When I first moved to London I had no idea it was just a northern thing. It broke my heart when I couldn't get them anywhere. Have to go to KFC to satisfy my craving


Ooh is it? I make my own. Chips in gravy, chips with coleslaw, chips in tomato soup, mash in tomato soup, egg poached in tomato soup. All with salt and black pepper. Cheap rubbish. ​


----------



## KittenKong

https://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/zero-hours-student-is-stinking-rich.html?m=1


----------



## cheekyscrip

KittenKong said:


> https://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/zero-hours-student-is-stinking-rich.html?m=1
> 
> View attachment 313221
> View attachment 313222
> View attachment 313223


He sounded strange? Not like someone with working experience.
Plus there are summer jobs and simply contracts to do certain work. Freelance. Etc.

You are free to accept or say no if you are busy.

I also blame TV presenter for going back to the same question, answered already.... Got stuck on red button.


----------



## rona

I thought Brexit was the main threat to my small pension which matures this year, seems I was wrong and it's getting a Labour government that will wipe it out


----------



## Odin_cat

KittenKong said:


> https://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/zero-hours-student-is-stinking-rich.html?m=1
> 
> View attachment 313221
> View attachment 313222
> View attachment 313223


Saw this on Facebook earlier, I think it's a bit low tbh, let's leave the smearing to the right-wing press.

This guy is obviously a joke, and I've made it clear how I feel about zero hour contracts but I expect some students are a bit worried. Science students, for instance, have to do very intense study for certain periods so a normal contract wouldn't suit them.

However, as only 18% of zero hours contracts are held by full time students (66% by over 25s), I don't think the policy should be stopped. Worth reminding students that Labour would free them from debt too.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> https://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/zero-hours-student-is-stinking-rich.html?m=1
> 
> View attachment 313221
> View attachment 313222
> View attachment 313223


So, what's his name and where did the other pictures originate. A family members wedding maybe?


----------



## cheekyscrip

rona said:


> I thought Brexit was the main threat to my small pension which matures this year, seems I was wrong and it's getting a Labour government that will wipe it out


No worries. It will be for your health care in old age.
Tories will take it.

Along with your house.


----------



## Elles

When he started talking about zero hours meaning he could decide when he wants to work, I just raised my eyebrows and thought typical entitled student. Just the type whose uni fees I don't want to pay. Looks like I was right. Surely Jeremy Corbyn isn't going to squeeze me for taxes to pay fees for people like that.


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40141470


----------



## Elles

rona said:


> So, what's his name and where did the other pictures originate. A family members wedding maybe?


He's called Ed Robins and he's a son of one of the elite. It's in the link.


----------



## 1290423

Right!
I've made my decision and its final I've done so based on the following statement that I have copied and pasted from one of my local candidates

Beautiful birds! When Brexit is finally over, and if I get elected, I will press for the start up of an animal NHS. This would probably have to be means tested but it would have an emphasis on rescue animals and be several fairly central hospitals. 

Privilege to hold this lovely creature.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Right!
> I've made my decision and its final I've done so based on the following statement that I have copied and pasted from one of my local candidates
> 
> Beautiful birds! When Brexit is finally over, and if I get elected, I will press for the start up of an animal NHS. This would probably have to be means tested but it would have an emphasis on rescue animals and be several fairly central hospitals.
> 
> Privilege to hold this lovely creature.


Who is it? Please tell 
I am all for the creation of an animal NHS.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40141470
> View attachment 313228


So we are expecting a tax increase for the poorest in society whilst the richest sunbathe in the Maldives and hide their money in tax havens.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Who is it? Please tell


Nope! 
Ill trade, you first


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Nope!


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Nope!
> Ill trade, you first


Trade me what?


----------



## Happy Paws2

rona said:


> I thought Brexit was the main threat to my small pension which matures this year, seems* I was wrong and it's getting a Labour government that will wipe it out*


How are they going to do that?


----------



## Happy Paws2

Elles said:


> When he started talking about zero hours meaning he could decide when he wants to work, I just raised my eyebrows and thought typical entitled student. Just the type whose uni fees I don't want to pay. Looks like I was right. * Surely Jeremy Corbyn isn't going to squeeze me for taxes *to pay fees for people like that.


His only rising taxes for the top 5% the rest of us wont be paying any more.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Who is it? Please tell
> I am all for the creation of an animal NHS.


Its something my local candidate wants to do stock well its not in the party manifesto I am voting for her purely because I like and trust her. And if she is passionate about it and it's something she can push all the better. My view is the more animal lovers we have as MPs the better


----------



## Elles

Happy Paws said:


> His only rising taxes for the top 5% the rest of us wont be paying any more.


Corporation tax. We have a small company.


----------



## rona

Happy Paws said:


> How are they going to do that?


Because if they get in, the stock market will collapse, just at the time I'm deciding what to do with my already paltry few hundred quid


----------



## 1290423

Zaros said:


> Well so what.
> 
> Churchill used opium.


Used to love opium, but that was in the seventies, moved on now, prefer the jo malone smellies


----------



## rona

Happy Paws said:


> His only rising taxes for the top 5% the rest of us wont be paying any more.


Yeah yeah yeah, until he's borrowed so much he'll need a quick injection of cash, unless it's near a general election of course and then he'll leave it to a conservatives to short it out yet again...............................


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> Because if they get in, the financial markets will collapse, just at the time I'm deciding what to do with my already paltry few hundred quid


Ive been worrying about that too rona, and fear you could be right


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> Corporation tax. We have a small company.


Only a 2% rise. Completely understand why you won't want it to pay for rich kids to go to university though.


----------



## rona

DT said:


> Ive been worrying about that too rona, and fear you could be right


I changed my post to say Stock market


----------



## Dr Pepper

Elles said:


> Corporation tax. We have a small company.


Exactly, corporation tax effects every one-man-band Ltd company. That could be your car mechanic, window cleaner, painter & decorator etc etc. It's not just the huge national companies. Yes there's a lower rate for small business but it's still a increase.

Then again Labour seem to despise enterprise and profit so no surprise really.


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> Yeah yeah yeah, until he's borrowed so much he'll need a quick injection of cash, unless it's near a general election of course and then he'll leave it to a conservatives to short it out yet again...............................


Well that's how it usually works!


----------



## Dr Pepper

Odin_cat said:


> Only a 2% rise. Completely understand why you won't want it to pay for rich kids to go to university though.


Do you want a 2% income tax rise?


----------



## Odin_cat

Dr Pepper said:


> Do you want a 2% income tax rise?


Wouldn't bother me if the money was supporting public services. I pay more tax than I would in the UK but feel I get good value.


----------



## 1290423

I actually think that all of us should pay more. Purely for the nhs,


----------



## rona

DT said:


> I actually think that all of us should pay more. Purely for the nhs,


Only if it was spent on services and staff on the wards and not management or paper pushers


----------



## Zaros

DT said:


> Used to love opium, but that was in the seventies, moved on now, prefer the jo malone smellies


Yeah, yeah, I know all that, and more, but personally, I still prefer Gaultier.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Odin_cat said:


> Wouldn't bother me if the money was supporting public services. I pay more tax than I would in the UK but feel I get good value.


Well pop back here, open a small business as then see how you feel about another 2% being taken off your business's bottom line. It's a hell of a lot more than you'd think.


----------



## 1290423

Zaros said:


> Yeah, yeah, I know all that, and more, but personally, I still prefer Gaultier.


The bottle once attracted me
Seriously, not that its important, but jo malone is over priced, a posh avon, I actually prefer hermes or. Bond no 9. Which I realy cant afford. Me sad


----------



## Odin_cat

Dr Pepper said:


> Well pop back here, open a small business as then see how you feel about another 2% being taken off your business's bottom line. It's a hell of a lot more than you'd think.


You're not selling it to me I'm afraid. Think I'll stay put .


----------



## 1290423

Odin_cat said:


> You're not selling it to me I'm afraid. Think I'll stay put .


Class 4 used to annoy the hell out of me, seriously what is that used for I really did begrudge paying that


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> Only if it was spent on services and staff on the wards and not management or paper pushers


They need to look at the trusts rona, and also the contractors, all needs to go back under the umbrella of the nhs. The who lot needs a complete overall


----------



## Odin_cat

DT said:


> Class 4 used to annoy the hell out of me, seriously what is that used for I really did begrudge paying that


Had to look it up...if it's on profits rather than what you pay yourself it seems quite unfair...must make it more difficult to grow a business.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> Why assume that having a nuclear deterrent precludes having talks and using diplomancy?


Not sure I said it did preclude having talks and using diplomacy but to be honest when you only quote a sentence from a post I can't see what I did say and what it was in response to and I'm sure as hell not trawling back though to find it. I "think" it was in reference to whether or not JC should be prepared to make the first strike.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Best idea is to put savings into gold and hide it from taxman.
Or just spend it well.

Why should anyone go after your savings, that are part of your already taxes wages?
But oh yes, Tories did that.
Instead of working and saving you should be claiming benefits and growing debts. .


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> So we are expecting a tax increase for the poorest in society whilst the richest sunbathe in the Maldives and hide their money in tax havens.


The Tories are increasing the personal allowance to £12,500, Labour have not mentioned any change.

Tories are increasing the basic tax threshold from £45k to £50k, Labour yet again have not mentioned any change.

Labour want to increase corporation tax, which will directly impact the poorest through increased costs on their everyday goods.

Yes, Labour are increasing minimum wage to £10, whereas Tories are only proposing a raise to £8.75, but surely, to help the poorest, Labour need to look at increasing the personal allowance as well.

To me it seems that the one party who are looking to help the working and middle classes is actually the Tories.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Dr Pepper said:


> Exactly, corporation tax effects every one-man-band Ltd company. That could be your car mechanic, window cleaner, painter & decorator etc etc. It's not just the huge national companies. Yes there's a lower rate for small business but it's still a increase.
> 
> Then again Labour seem to despise enterprise and profit so no surprise really.


Don't forget that the small mechanic needs to buy his goods, and that will very likely be from a company who have been hit by the 7% increase, and have already adjusted their pricing to compensate. The little guy has to pay more to buy his goods, has to pass that price increase on, but also has to add more on to cover his 2% increase. Bottom line, the person getting their car fixed that needs a replacement part ends up paying through the nose


----------



## Dr Pepper

MiffyMoo said:


> Don't forget that the small mechanic needs to buy his goods, and that will very likely be from a company who have been hit by the 7% increase, and have already adjusted their pricing to compensate. The little guy has to pay more to buy his goods, has to pass that price increase on, but also has to add more on to cover his 2% increase. Bottom line, the person getting their car fixed that needs a replacement part ends up paying through the nose


Exactly, all the labour supporters see though is "corporation tax" = "big business who can afford it" they don't think the policy through.


----------



## 1290423

Odin_cat said:


> Had to look it up...if it's on profits rather than what you pay yourself it seems quite unfair...must make it more difficult to grow a business.


As i manufactured , had low overheads, a high profit margin and a healthy turnover it did seem excessive, bearing in mind my working week was around 80 hours, which was my choice I admit, butand why the hell should I have to pay so much for basically nothing! Glad im out of it now, no more returns, albeit cant get my pension until im 66-but wouldnt work again for any amount of money.
You can sell your time for any price you like but you can never buy back


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> So we are expecting a tax increase for the poorest in society whilst the richest sunbathe in the Maldives and hide their money in tax havens.


I'll imagine they'll put VAT up again, their favourite tax that hits most people.

I remember when Geoffrey Howe put VAT up from 8% to 15% in his first budget and added VAT to take away food at the same time. A very unpopular move.


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> I'll imagine they'll put VAT up again, their favourite tax that hits most people.
> 
> I remember when Geoffrey Howe put VAT up from 8% to 15% in his first budget and added VAT to take away food at the same time. A very unpopular move.


I wouldn't be at all surprised on that one


----------



## KittenKong

Wasn't going to comment further but more has come to light.


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...am-holloway-ex-ukip-campaigning-a7771416.html

Anyone surprised to hear this? I'm not.........


----------



## Elles

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313234
> 
> Wasn't going to comment further but more has come to light.


You already told us a few pages back. So some over privileged student went on tv to lie and get his 15 minutes of fame. He's an idiot. Can't stand people like him. What's new? Has he put Corbyn off paying all their university fees for them. That would be a result.


----------



## cheekyscrip

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313234
> 
> Wasn't going to comment further but more has come to light.


So much for fair treatment of both candidates?

British economy will struggle.

Whichever way cuts have to be made.
Blame Brexit and both May and Corbyn who were Remainers, saw clearly why it is better for Britain to stay in EU.
So now we all are poorer, decision time who be hit the hardest.

May promised to find way of uniting Leave and Remain, now leading us into crash Brexit, cost what May.
Corbyn whipped Labour to support passing Article 50.

There is no money tree but black hole in the budget.

Theresa May was asked what no deal means and did not answered.
But she knows it means WTO rules.

Tariffs.

Corbyn wants a deal. Obviously more beneficial than WTO rules.

Damage limitation.

Whichever way it is slowdown and rather gloomy perspectives.

May lies. 
Corbyn sabotaged Remain campaign.

Choice is yours.

Very, very unpalatable one.


----------



## Elles

KittenKong said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...am-holloway-ex-ukip-campaigning-a7771416.html
> 
> Anyone surprised to hear this? I'm not.........


I'm as shocked as the Lib Dem candidate interviewed about it in the article. What do you mean a Tory candidate has a friend? Has to be a lie.


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> You already told us a few pages back. So some over privileged student went on tv to lie and get his 15 minutes of fame. He's an idiot. Can't stand people like him. What's new? Has he put Corbyn off paying all their university fees for them. That would be a result.


Yes I did. I didn't intend to comment any further, but it turns out he's not even on a zero hours contract!


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not sure I said it did preclude having talks and using diplomacy but to be honest when you only quote a sentence from a post I can't see what I did say and what it was in response to and I'm sure as hell not trawling back though to find it. I "think" it was in reference to whether or not JC should be prepared to make the first strike.


Oh I see . Sorry , I should have quoted more but it makes the posts so long. ! 

it does seem though from reading posts in general ,not just on here , that its assumed that we would go in sabre rattling without using diplomacy or talk first . 
We dont know what sort of situations we will be in , in the future , I wouldn't want to be the one that makes the decision.


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> I'm as shocked as the Lib Dem candidate interviewed about it in the article. What do you mean a Tory candidate has a friend? Has to be a lie.


I'm not sure, but some Tory activists appear uncomfortable about this too.


----------



## Elles

KittenKong said:


> Yes I did. I didn't intend to comment any further, but it turns out he's not even on a zero hours contract!


Lol, you thought he was? Sorry, I didn't realise there was a question over it. To oiks like him, zero hours contract means he doesn't work. You know, zero hours. :Hilarious


----------



## Elles

KittenKong said:


> I'm not sure, but some Tory activists appear uncomfortable about this too.
> View attachment 313241


He probably fancies her, or she has video of him with prostitutes in an hotel.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> You already told us a few pages back. So some over privileged student went on tv to lie and get his 15 minutes of fame. He's an idiot. Can't stand people like him. What's new? Has he put Corbyn off paying all their university fees for them. That would be a result.


Somehow do not see why more successful parents should be punished by paying for education or health care of their children?

Fair is to offer the same fee reductions to all.

Lets say parents are rich or not but we are talking about adults , young adults that can be seen as independent beings, no longer tied to parents' money?
What if parents do not approve their choice?
It is fair to offer placements to.most talented, hard working, original thinkers , regardless of their pedigree.

The rich pay taxes. More than poor obviously. So lets say they cover the fees?

I would be happy to pay for my and other kids school meals, uni fees etc..through taxes.
Fair enough. I pay tax, kids get warm lunch, decent school, access to.uni, health care etc.

We together give best chance to next generation.


----------



## Happy Paws2

rona said:


> Because if they get in, the stock market will collapse, just at the time I'm deciding what to do with my already paltry few hundred quid


You should have tried to live on a pension over the last few years since the torys have been in power our living standards have dropped like a brick, we were OK when Labour were in..


----------



## Elles

cheekyscrip said:


> Somehow do not see why more successful parents should be punished by paying for education or health care of their children?
> 
> Fair is to offer the same fee reductions to all.
> 
> Lets say parents are rich or not but we are talking about adults , young adults that can be seen as independent beings, no longer tied to parents' money?
> What if parents do not approve their choice?
> It is fair to offer placements to.most talented, hard working, original thinkers , regardless of their pedigree.


No, it's not. Why should someone, say a nurse, having to use food banks to survive, have to pay for some privileged oik with billionaire parents to go to university? It's ridiculous. If this (un)talented oik with his private education and parents' back handers gets a placement, force the parents to pay for it if the poor lamb can't afford it, it's barely even pocket money to them. I live in a university city and the privileged are unbelievable. They have shoes that cost more than I earn in six months and cars more valuable than my house, but you want me to pay their uni fees when the NHS is in the state it's in. They can get stuffed.  Anyway, it's a ploy to try to get the young to vote Labour.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> No, it's not. Why should someone, say a nurse, having to use food banks to survive, have to pay for some privileged oik with billionaire parents to go to university? It's ridiculous. If this (un)talented oik with his private education and parents' back handers gets a placement, force the parents to pay for it if the poor lamb can't afford it, it's barely even pocket money to them. I live in a university city and the privileged are unbelievable. They have shoes that cost more than I earn in six months and cars more valuable than my house, but you want me to pay their uni fees when the NHS is in the state it's in. They can get stuffed.  Anyway, it's a ploy to try to get the young to vote Labour.


This is why placements are given on the basis of passed exams , interview etc ..not to all.
I knew situations where parents were choosing unis and courses, because they were paying. Regardless of what the young person wanted.

Or people had no relationship with their wealthy dad at all.
Who refused to pay for " bastard" kid.

We should give chance to study to all talented and hardworking, no matter who the patents are.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> No, it's not. Why should someone, say a nurse, having to use food banks to survive, have to pay for some privileged oik with billionaire parents to go to university? It's ridiculous. If this (un)talented oik with his private education and parents' back handers gets a placement, force the parents to pay for it if the poor lamb can't afford it, it's barely even pocket money to them. I live in a university city and the privileged are unbelievable. They have shoes that cost more than I earn in six months and cars more valuable than my house, but you want me to pay their uni fees when the NHS is in the state it's in. They can get stuffed.  Anyway, it's a ploy to try to get the young to vote Labour.


Dine know why its so important that everyone goes,to university myself! They already stay at school until they are 18. Reckon that's plenty long enough to get an education, personally I think apprenticeships should be brought back for all with the exception of doctors dentists etc.


----------



## Elles

I helped my kids as much as I was able, they've worked for they've got. I'm happy for my taxes to pay for the less well off. I'm not happy to pay for kids whose beer allowance is higher than my income and their parents shouldn't accept it. They can already get a free state education if they want it. University is for the few, not the many. It doesn't do the kids any harm to work for it and they can get free places and bursaries if they're particularly talented. They're not exactly kids by the time they get to uni anyway. I'll never agree that ordinary people should pay for all young adults to get a university education, so well have to agree to differ this time.


----------



## Team_Trouble

It's a shame the government can't change the mindsets of big corporatioin owners. Instead of passing on the extra tax to consumers, surely they can afford to take a cut in profits? It's probably just a drop in the ocean to those at the top.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Just watching the news from London, I wonder if she'll still want to cut the number of police.


----------



## kimthecat




----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> Lol, you thought he was? Sorry, I didn't realise there was a question over it. To oiks like him, zero hours contract means he doesn't work. You know, zero hours. :Hilarious


I knew that and you said exactly what I wanted to say! Someone thought it was "bad taste" to bring it up here so, ahem, I thought I'd give him the benefit of the doubt....

People like that turn my stomach. Reminds me of those Tory MPs who spent A WEEK on benefits in the '80s claiming they managed OK at a time 100,000s were losing their jobs....


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


>


*
Labours economic policies are sound - and gaining support* *writes Professor John Weeks*.

http://www.primeeconomics.org/articles/labours-economic-policies-are-sound-and-gaining-support


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


>


I've heard that one before. It was in 1997 when the Tories and some businesses warned introducing the minimum wage would lead to job losses and bankruptcies.

A year before that I knew people on £2.90 an hour for back breaking work plus unsociable hours with no enhancements not even for Christmas (they gave you a day in lieu!).

And those in "Employment Training" where the employer didn't have to pay wages, full time work for existing benefits disguised as "Training"!

If I wasn't sickened I would find it funny. They always claim you need to work long and hard to enjoy the good things in life. On that kind of money?!


----------



## noushka05

Happy Paws said:


> Just watching the news from London, I wonder if she'll still want to cut the number of police.


Have a listen to this by former Chief Inspector Peter Kirkham from the Met Police as he tells how the "streets have been lost" - and he blames Theresa May

http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/ian-payne/striking-interview-with-former-police-inspector/


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Exactly, corporation tax effects every one-man-band Ltd company. That could be your car mechanic, window cleaner, painter & decorator etc etc. It's not just the huge national companies. Yes there's a lower rate for small business but it's still a increase.
> 
> Then again Labour seem to despise enterprise and profit so no surprise really.


----------



## Calvine

Elles said:


> egg poached in tomato soup


Sounds a bit heathen tbh!


----------



## KittenKong

Deleted as a mark of respect to those killed and injured in the appalling attack last night.

Not a day to go electioneering.


----------



## rona

Happy Paws said:


> You should have tried to live on a pension over the last few years since the torys have been in power our living standards have dropped like a brick, we were OK when Labour were in..


I don't know how this has happened because the pensions have been protected by the triple lock.........bought in by the way by the conservatives


----------



## MiffyMoo

KatieandOliver said:


> It's a shame the government can't change the mindsets of big corporatioin owners. Instead of passing on the extra tax to consumers, surely they can afford to take a cut in profits? It's probably just a drop in the ocean to those at the top.


They're not charities


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313248
> View attachment 313249


You're right, vile that people are using death and destruction to gain political points


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> View attachment 313247


At any point did you read my response to this, or did you choose to ignore it because it was inconvenient?


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313248
> View attachment 313249


What the hell is the matter with you?


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Do you want a 2% income tax rise?


Is @Odin_cat in the top 5% ? lol

Labour gives guarantee of no tax rises for the 95%.
Tories give guarantee of no tax rises for the top 5%.


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> At any point did you read my response to this, or did you choose to ignore it because it was inconvenient?


No I havent ignored anything, I don't know which post you're talking about - I'm still trying to catch up. I cant even see where you've replied to that particular post?? (apart from your moaning post )


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313248
> View attachment 313249


I'm going back to this because I'm so angry with you, and people like you who spout **** because it fits their political rhetoric. The police got their first call at 22:08 and shot them dead eight minutes later. One policeman was stabbed in the face.

Now please go away and rethink what sort of person you really want to be.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....-closed-after-serious-police-incident-reports


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> The Tories are increasing the personal allowance to £12,500, Labour have not mentioned any change.
> 
> Tories are increasing the basic tax threshold from £45k to £50k, Labour yet again have not mentioned any change.
> 
> Labour want to increase corporation tax, which will directly impact the poorest through increased costs on their everyday goods.
> 
> Yes, Labour are increasing minimum wage to £10, whereas Tories are only proposing a raise to £8.75, but surely, to help the poorest, Labour need to look at increasing the personal allowance as well.
> 
> To me it seems that the one party who are looking to help the working and middle classes is actually the Tories.


Wow. Increasing corporation tax - will help alleviate poverty. What do you think pays for health care & public services?

Tories are the party helping the working class? 55% of people in work are living in poverty !


----------



## noushka05

This is being shared by Drs, Nurses & groups fighting to save our NHS.

*
NHS Million*‏@*NHSMillion* 12h12 hours ago

The widespread closure of NHS services is not a myth - it's happening right now
and will only get worse if you vote Conservative #*SaveOurNHS*


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Wow. Increasing corporation tax - will help alleviate poverty. What do you think pays for health care & public services?
> 
> Tories are the party helping the working class? 55% of people in work are living in poverty !


I'll post these for you again re corporation tax. On poverty, are we talking relative or absolute?


----------



## stockwellcat.

*Election campaigning suspended for the day after a terror attack in London.* 6 people dead and 48 in hospital after a van careered into crowds of people on London Bridge and then the occupants of the vehicle got out and stabbed people at Borough Market. Armed police shot the 3 terrorists dead who where wearing fake suicide vests.

Campaigning suspended for one day at least.


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> I'll post these for you again re corporation tax. On poverty, are we talking relative or absolute?
> 
> View attachment 313255
> 
> 
> View attachment 313256


And I responded to it  >>



MiffyMoo said:


> I'll just leave these here
> 
> View attachment 312697
> 
> 
> View attachment 312699





noushka05 said:


> Leave it where you like. The great con is unravelling. Even the IMF acknowledges neoliberalism has been a disaster - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/31/witnessing-death-neoliberalism-imf-economists
> 
> And brexit is the biggest con of our time. The neoliberal elite conning the people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It hasn't in other countries. Funny that.
> 
> Yes our society has never been better has it? NHS & public services are really feeling the benefit, society is flourishing :/


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Is @Odin_cat in the top 5% ? lol
> 
> Labour gives guarantee of no tax rises for the 95%.
> Tories give guarantee of no tax rises for the top 5%.


You're wilfully ignoring how many will be taken out of tax at the bottom end with the personal allowance increase, and how many will benefit from the £5k increase before paying 40%


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> And I responded to it  >>


Your response is still irrelevant, it's just more complaining about Brexit


----------



## KittenKong

MiffyMoo said:


> I'm going back to this because I'm so angry with you, and people like you who spout **** because it fits their political rhetoric. The police got their first call at 22:08 and shot them dead eight minutes later. One policeman was stabbed in the face.
> 
> Now please go away and rethink what sort of person you really want to be.
> 
> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....-closed-after-serious-police-incident-reports


They weren't my words actually, but are words I agree wholeheartedly with, although I can't speak for the police response times. That was included in the quote I used.

You really think I'm spouting political gain from this?

I've just about had enough of your own crap actually. Time to put you on ignore. I suggest you do the same.

In respect for those who lost their lives I will not be commenting on this thread further today.

EDIT- As a mark of respect to those killed and injured in last night's appalling attack I have deleted the post Miffy Moo had quoted.

Not a day to go electioneering.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> *Election campaigning suspended for the day after a terror attack in London.* 6 people dead and 48 in hospital after a van careered into crowds of people on London Bridge and then the occupants of the vehicle got out and stabbed people at Borough Market. Armed police shot the 3 terrorists dead who where wearing fake suicide vests.
> 
> Campaigning suspended for one day at least.
> View attachment 313257


Do you know what, I think electioneering should continue this time. We're just giving these arseholes exactly what they want by pausing the democratic process. Worrying that they might be "winning".


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> You're wilfully ignoring how many will be taken out of tax at the bottom end with the personal allowance increase, and how many will benefit from the £5k increase before paying 40%


And you're wilfully ignoring the fact that the tories have crushed millions of working people with their austerity con trick.



MiffyMoo said:


> Your response is still irrelevant, it's just more complaining about Brexit


No its not more complaining about brexit - please read the link. Trickle down has been a disaster.


----------



## noushka05

A meme of the highly respected Elizabeth Warren for you to ridicule @MiffyMoo


----------



## noushka05

Interesting article in the Torygraph of all places  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...inesses-overwhelmingly-reject-tory-manifesto/


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> A meme of the highly respected Elizabeth Warren for you to ridicule @MiffyMoo
> 
> View attachment 313259


What has that to do with personal taxation? If you're referring to the corporation tax, what is your response to the fact that it is the poorest in the country who will ultimately suffer from an increase in the price of goods?


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Interesting article in the Torygraph of all places  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...inesses-overwhelmingly-reject-tory-manifesto/
> 
> View attachment 313260


I can see why SMEs aren't happy, it really it tough for them, and I honestly think a lot more could be done to help them. After all, if a small business does well, it gets bigger and has to employ more people - win, win


----------



## Bisbow

MiffyMoo said:


> Your response is still irrelevant, it's just more complaining about Brexit


I have given up wasting my time on them. it is like hitting your head onto a brick wall

They have been so brainwashed by Corbyn and co to see any truth anywhere else

They are the only people who are right and the rest of us are just idiots


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Have a listen to this by former Chief Inspector Peter Kirkham from the Met Police as he tells how the "streets have been lost" - and he blames Theresa May
> 
> http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/ian-payne/striking-interview-with-former-police-inspector/


The streets certainly weren't lost last night with the response being eight minutes. Good on them, very impressive.



noushka05 said:


> View attachment 313247


Well that's a outright lies, he needs to take a gander at his manifesto.



noushka05 said:


> Is @Odin_cat in the top 5% ? lol
> 
> Labour gives guarantee of no tax rises for the 95%.
> Tories give guarantee of no tax rises for the top 5%.


You need to understand just who will be paying extra corporation tax.


----------



## Lurcherlad

rona said:


> I thought Brexit was the main threat to my small pension which matures this year, seems I was wrong and it's getting a Labour government that will wipe it out


I was thinking of taking a lump sum from my private pension and whooping it up a bit in case I die early  ...... better do it fast while it's still worth something!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> The streets certainly weren't lost last night with the response being eight minutes. Good on them, very impressive.


Unarmed officers where on the scene instantly (British Transport Police Officers came from London Bridge Tube station across the road from Borough Market) it was armed response that had shot and killed the attackers in 8 minutes of the initial call which is a very impressive response time. It wouldn't have made any difference if soldiers where on the streets as the response time would have been the same.


----------



## Guest

Anyone else think the election might be postponed?


----------



## stockwellcat.

spamvicious said:


> Anyone else think the election might be postponed?


No.
The election is still going ahead on Thursday. They have just said on the news just now. You may find security is beefed up at the polling stations that's all.


----------



## Guest

stockwellcat said:


> No.
> The election is still going ahead on Thursday. They have just said on the news just now. You may find security is beefed up at the polling stations that's all.


Oh good. I think it would be the wrong thing to do to postpone it.


----------



## stockwellcat.

spamvicious said:


> Oh good. I think it would be the wrong thing to do to postpone it.


They have only suspended campaigning for today only at the moment. Tories and SNP have announced this so far but they expect all parties to suspend campaigning for 24 hours at least.


----------



## Happy Paws2

rona said:


> I don't know how this has happened because the pensions have been protected by the triple lock.........bought in by the way by the conservatives


Maybe, but it would be nice if we were actually get something like the living wage, pensioners are still living in poverty or very close to it.

Since they have come to power we haven't had a holiday not even for a few days we just can't afford a small break and we have had to give up our car. Oh yes vote tory, *I don't think so.*


----------



## MiffyMoo

spamvicious said:


> Anyone else think the election might be postponed?


We can't let that happen. These idiots cannot be allowed to completely change our way of life. Obviously it is insofar as everyone has to be so much more vigilant etc, but we have to carry on


----------



## Lurcherlad

cheekyscrip said:


> No worries. It will be for your health care in old age.
> Tories will take it.
> 
> Along with your house.


I don't have an issue with the concept of paying towards my own healthcare in old age - after I die I won't need my home after all. Yes, it's nice to be able to leave some money to our offspring but not if the cost of our care has to come out of the public purse.

We've always looked upon our property as our pension tbh and will probably have to sell to fund our old age anyway.

I thought our National Insurance payments were meant to cover this, but seemingly not 

However, it has to be fair and the system would seem to be penalising people who are able to save or work hard yet I know families who have never worked or paid into the system who will be entirely state funded.

I think everybody should have to pay into a properly ring fenced social care fund.

Whether there should be a level of wealth at which point one would not qualify, I don't know as that seems unfair too as they will have contributed. However, those people will probably have made their own provisions anyway which far exceed anything the State would give them.

It's complicated.


----------



## Satori

KittenKong said:


> You really think I'm spouting political gain from this?


Err, yes. That's exactly what you are doing. One might be charitable and attribute your posts merely to crass insensitivity, however you have form; you did exactly the same after the Manchester attacks.


----------



## Bisbow

KittenKong said:


> You really think I'm spouting political gain from this?
> 
> I will not be commenting on this thread further today.


That's a relief, a little less scare mongering


----------



## stockwellcat.

All political parties have now confirmed they have suspended national election campaigning which will be reviewed later on.


----------



## Odin_cat

noushka05 said:


> Is @Odin_cat in the top 5% ? lol
> 
> Labour gives guarantee of no tax rises for the 95%.
> Tories give guarantee of no tax rises for the top 5%.


As a humble teacher there's little chance... Obviously any tax changes won't affect me, but it's nice to think of others!


----------



## Team_Trouble

MiffyMoo said:


> They're not charities


That is the kind of attitude I'm talking about.


----------



## MiffyMoo

KatieandOliver said:


> That is the kind of attitude I'm talking about.


So the government squeeze and squeeze, yet it's the companies who are to blame for raising their prices?


----------



## kimthecat

Happy Paws said:


> You should have tried to live on a pension over the last few years since the torys have been in power our living standards have dropped like a brick, we were OK when Labour were in..


Ive not noticed living standards have dropped though perhaps gas bills have gone up. Ive noticed thought that the little savings I had over the years and a small life insurance due , the interest rates have been so low that and the returns so poor that i wish i hadn't bothered saving , in fact the insurance won't cover a funeral unless I'm buried in a cardboard box in my garden


----------



## cheekyscrip

kimthecat said:


> Ive not noticed living standards have dropped though perhaps gas bills have gone up. Ive noticed thought that the little savings I had over the years and a small life insurance due , the interest rates have been so low that and the returns so poor that i wish i hadn't bothered saving , in fact the insurance won't cover a funeral unless I'm buried in a cardboard box in my garden


Long life to you then!!!
( Ikea introduced cardboard coffins at 4.99).


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> I have given up wasting my time on them. it is like hitting your head onto a brick wall
> 
> They have been so brainwashed by Corbyn and co to see any truth anywhere else
> 
> They are the only people who are right and the rest of us are just idiots


On the Brexit thread (sorry to mention it folks) one of the things those of us who voted to leave complained of time and time again was the remain voters accusing us of being brainwashed. Holding strong opinions about something whether its leaving Europe, whether its the NHS or whether its about hunting do not mean you have been brain washed. Who are "they" - If you mean me then you are entitled to your opinion but just to reassure you I have not been brain washed by anyone - I'm not even voting Labour. I think we have some passionate people and responses from all sides of the political spectrum on here and its good to debate issues and look at evidence that we might not previously have seen isn't it?



Lurcherlad said:


> I was thinking of taking a lump sum from my private pension and whooping it up a bit in case I die early  ...... better do it fast while it's still worth something!


We've already started doing that  We've also seen a significant rise in equity release valuations over the past couple of weeks.


----------



## Team_Trouble

MiffyMoo said:


> So the government squeeze and squeeze, yet it's the companies who are to blame for raising their prices?


Yes. I think they should, because they can afford it. It will make little difference to them. They will still make massive profits and get ridiculous bonuses.


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> On the Brexit thread (sorry to mention it folks) one of the things those of us who voted to leave complained of time and time again was the remain voters accusing us of being brainwashed. Holding strong opinions about something whether its leaving Europe, whether its the NHS or whether its about hunting do not mean you have been brain washed. Who are "they" - If you mean me then you are entitled to your opinion but just to reassure you I have not been brain washed by anyone - I'm not even voting Labour. I think we have some passionate people and responses from all sides of the political spectrum on here and its good to debate issues and look at evidence that we might not previously have seen isn't it?
> 
> We've already started doing that  We've also seen a significant rise in equity release valuations over the past couple of weeks.


Not you in particular, I have not seen you being vicious as some posts have been. those of yours I have read seem to be much more sensible
And I am not sucking up to you, you just seem more fair minded than some even though we don't always agree

The ones I was talking about have not shouted at me yet so they must know what I mean and are keeping quiet


----------



## Elles

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39641222

The reality on tax.

Seems to me everyone will pay more tax under Labour, whether indirectly or directly. Corporation tax will be increased for all companies, including the smaller ones, although the larger ones will pay a higher rate. If Corbyn is saying otherwise he's making it up, it's in his manifesto.

Anyone on minimum wage will pay more tax and NI when the minimum wage is increased, as will the companies employing them. If everything costs more, which to cover it it will have to, the NHS will cost more to run. if we follow a graph on spending for the NHS, over 4 or 5 years all parties end up pretty similar, with Labour spend only very slightly higher than Conservative and Lib Dem. in real terms, Labour will end up spending less on the NHS as they increase wages and taxes and the cost of living increases.

In more simple terms Nurses getting a 4% pay increase when their costs increase by 10% are getting a pay cut. Nurses getting a 1% increase when their costs reduce, or cost the same are getting a pay increase. They say they've had a 14% pay cut in real terms, they need to keep looking at real terms. As do we all.

Small companies will have to increase prices, large companies will be pressured by shareholders to increase prices.

Financially we're probably all being conned and not just by Labour.

However, Conservatives do intend to hold a vote on foxhunting, they aren't going to go for a complete ban on ivory and there are various other policies you may not agree with. For me the so called dementia tax sounds slightly better than it is now. The best thing either way is to either have spent all of your money in plenty of time, or die quickly. I believe in euthanasia, so I'll probably try for the die quickly option.

Just as there are conservative policies that not everyone agrees with, there are probably Labour policies people don't agree with. It's a case of trying to shift through the hype and scaremongering and vote for what you feel is the best of a bad bunch, or tactically imo.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Can anyone who is on good terms with their Conservative candidate (which I am not - surprise surprise) please ask them how the so called dementia tax will affect younger people with disabilities or chronic illnesses who need care at home.


----------



## Dr Pepper

KatieandOliver said:


> Yes. I think they should, because they can afford it. It will make little difference to them. They will still make massive profits and get ridiculous bonuses.


You do realise you are talking about a small minority of companies there. Very many more small businesses will find just a 2% increase will mean staff pay cuts. For larger companies suddenly having to find a extra 7% of their net profit will almost certainly mean pay cuts or redundancies in many cases.


----------



## Elles

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Can anyone who is on good terms with their Conservative candidate (which I am not - surprise surprise) please ask them how the so called dementia tax will affect younger people with disabilities or chronic illnesses who need care at home.


Care for the elderly once over retirement age is assessed differently to care for the younger disabled. I haven't seen anywhere that says that will change?


----------



## Bisbow

The parties have stopped electrical campaigning for 24 hours because of the London atrocity, good for them but I wish they would stop now entirely until the election is over

I am fed up with them sniping at each other every time I watch the news
,


----------



## MiffyMoo

Dr Pepper said:


> You do realise you are talking about a small minority of companies there. Very many more small businesses will find just a 2% increase will mean staff pay cuts. For larger companies suddenly having to find a extra 7% of their net profit will almost certainly mean pay cuts or redundancies in many cases.


Companies also have to keep a buffer of about six months operating costs. So if you take a company like Goldman Sachs, their yearly expenses are over $7bn, which means that they need to have over $3.5bn on hand.

A lot of shareholders are also pension funds, so any knock on profits of a public company will, once again, affect the every day person


----------



## Bisbow

The election is on Thursday and I still have no idea who is standing for labour, libdems, green or any other party

Only had notices from the Tory candidate

So much for the others wanting my vote, not that I'd vote labour under any circumstances but I was prepared to give the others chance to put their side forward and listen to their views

What now, stick a pin their names, when I find out what they are, and hope for the best


----------



## Guest

British corporations pay less tax than most EU countries. E.g. German, French, Swedish, Finnish, and Italian corporations pay more. Is it really so that British corporations can´t pay any more taxes, when they competitors can and still do well? Or is it that they just try to get away with paying taxes. That is totally understandable for a company to do that, but not for a politician, whose job should be to look after the people. And at the same time you have your numerous British tax havens, where dodgy companies can get registered in order to evade all taxes, and that is not seen a problem?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rates_in_Europe


----------



## Team_Trouble

Dr Pepper said:


> You do realise you are talking about a small minority of companies there. Very many more small businesses will find just a 2% increase will mean staff pay cuts. For larger companies suddenly having to find a extra 7% of their net profit will almost certainly mean pay cuts or redundancies in many cases.


So why can't those at the top, paid the most, take the cut? Stop it filtering down to people who will be affected more detrimentally?


----------



## MiffyMoo

KatieandOliver said:


> So why can't those at the top, paid the most, take the cut? Stop it filtering down to people who will be affected more detrimentally?


What is a suitable salary for a CEO, in your eyes?


----------



## Dr Pepper

KatieandOliver said:


> So why can't those at the top, paid the most, take the cut? Stop it filtering down to people who will be affected more detrimentally?


Because in small and even medium sized companies, and almost without exception new and young (three years or so old), many of those "at the top" will be earning less than many of their employees, that's if they are drawing a wage at all.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Dr Pepper said:


> Because in small and even medium sized companies, and almost without exception new and young (three years or so old), many of those "at the top" will be earning less than many of their employees, that's if they are drawing a wage at all.


Exactly. As soon as I can afford it, I will be hiring someone to take on a sales role in my company, as that's my weak point. I have to pay her salary and pension, but that means that I will still continue to only be able to take the bare minimum to cover my rent and food (currently pasta or beans on toast), until my gamble pays off. Even then I have absolutely no plans on being able to get paid a comfortable amount for at least a couple of years. By comfortable I mean being able to cover all my bills and upgrade my food from beans on toast every day


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> Care for the elderly once over retirement age is assessed differently to care for the younger disabled. I haven't seen anywhere that says that will change?


I'd still like someone from the Conservatives to confirm it so if anyone could email their Conservative candidate that would be very helpful 



Bisbow said:


> The election is on Thursday and I still have no idea who is standing for labour, libdems, green or any other party
> 
> Only had notices from the Tory candidate
> 
> So much for the others wanting my vote, not that I'd vote labour under any circumstances but I was prepared to give the others chance to put their side forward and listen to their views
> 
> What now, stick a pin their names, when I find out what they are, and hope for the best


We've only had a few leaflets. I've gone by what my local MP has said in answer to my questions his arrogance since he was elected 2 years ago has shocked me. I understand MP's can't vote on things to suit everyone in their constituency and have to make their own minds up when there is a free vote but I did (mistakenly) believe they were supposed to represent their constituents. Therefore even if he supports something I do not I would expect him to reply politely and say that he hasn't made his mind up, is prepared to listen to all sides of the debate and invite people to present their evidence/arguments to him which he will give due consideration to when the time comes. Not just say I've always supported it, always will and will vote how I like. That aside the 3 manifestos are available on line and I'm more than happy to put all 3 links on if anyone wants them so they can read through them again.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MiffyMoo said:


> Exactly. As soon as I can afford it, I will be hiring someone to take on a sales role in my company, as that's my weak point. I have to pay her salary and pension, but that means that I will still continue to only be able to take the bare minimum to cover my rent and food (currently pasta or beans on toast), until my gamble pays off. Even then I have absolutely no plans on being able to get paid a comfortable amount for at least a couple of years. By comfortable I mean being able to cover all my bills and upgrade my food from beans on toast every day


Beans on toast and pasta (wholewheat not white) are very healthy, just chuck in a handful of green leaves and have some berries (frozen are not too expensive) on some supermarket own brand oats for breakfast and you can join our plant based thread when I start it after the election


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Beans on toast and pasta (wholewheat not white) are very healthy, just chuck in a handful of green leaves and have some berries (frozen are not too expensive) on some supermarket own brand oats for breakfast and you can join our plant based thread when I start it after the election


I can't tell you how much I'm craving a good steak!


----------



## Elles

The trouble is in the real world increasing taxes increases costs. Labour need to take that into account when costing the NHS. It's no use their promising to put twice as much money into the NHS if everything is going to cost twice as much. And even less use if companies go broke, or move out. It's all relative. Are Labour increasing costs too high too fast? Is it necessary for the Conservatives to reduce Corporation tax so much? It's one extreme or the other. 

I'd rather there was a middle ground personally, but I fear the Labour plans just don't work and we'll all be paying higher taxes to cover it all, there will be more unemployed and we'll still not be improving anything.  We've seen it all before, why will it be different this time? Imo Corbyn's labour are going too far. We need PR like other successful countries have, so that we can have nice coalitions keeping each other in check and making politics boring.


----------



## Elles

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Beans on toast and pasta (wholewheat not white) are very healthy, just chuck in a handful of green leaves and have some berries (frozen are not too expensive) on some supermarket own brand oats for breakfast and you can join our plant based thread when I start it after the election


I got into trouble for suggesting that a volunteer who bought a young lad a load of unhealthy rubbish from Morrisons with £45 of charity, or social care money ( not sure, but it wasnt hers) then posting a photo of her tearful face on fb could have bought a pack of oats instead of a fry up and shopped at Lidl or Aldi instead of Morrisons.  :Bag


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'd still like someone from the Conservatives to confirm it so if anyone could email their Conservative candidate that would be very helpful
> 
> We've only had a few leaflets. I've gone by what my local MP has said in answer to my questions his arrogance since he was elected 2 years ago has shocked me. I understand MP's can't vote on things to suit everyone in their constituency and have to make their own minds up when there is a free vote but I did (mistakenly) believe they were supposed to represent their constituents. Therefore even if he supports something I do not I would expect him to reply politely and say that he hasn't made his mind up, is prepared to listen to all sides of the debate and invite people to present their evidence/arguments to him which he will give due consideration to when the time comes. Not just say I've always supported it, always will and will vote how I like. That aside the 3 manifestos are available on line and I'm more than happy to put all 3 links on if anyone wants them so they can read through them again.


It is not just the manifestos, I like to know what each candidate is like and what he/she stands for
The manifesto does not tell you that and they mat be like yours and are rude and arrogant. Not all the candidates follow the manifestos blindly and I would like to make up my own mind as you have your candidate. If they are like yours I would give them a wide berth
It is wrong to treat their constituents as yours did you


----------



## 3dogs2cats

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Beans on toast and pasta (wholewheat not white) are very healthy, just chuck in a handful of green leaves and have some berries (frozen are not too expensive) on some supermarket own brand oats for breakfast and you can join our plant based thread when I start it after the election


Better still if you make your own baked beans and not those awful things out of a tin!


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> British corporations pay less tax than most EU countries. E.g. German, French, Swedish, Finnish, and Italian corporations pay more. Is it really so that British corporations can´t pay any more taxes, when they competitors can and still do well? Or is it that they just try to get away with paying taxes. That is totally understandable for a company to do that, but not for a politician, whose job should be to look after the people. And at the same time you have your numerous British tax havens, where dodgy companies can get registered in order to evade all taxes, and that is not seen a problem?
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rates_in_Europe


Be interesting to see what other direct tax burdens the countries have. In the UK we have business rates (absolutely huge amounts that, for example, a modest sized gym on a industrial park will be in excess of £100,000 per annum), National Insurance and there's at least one other that totally escapes me at the moment!!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MiffyMoo said:


> I can't tell you how much I'm craving a good steak!


 Bet your arteries aren't though :Smug


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> What has that to do with personal taxation? If you're referring to the corporation tax, what is your response to the fact that it is the poorest in the country who will ultimately suffer from an increase in the price of goods?


You quoted me with some snide remark about me ignoring your meme - which I had, in fact, responded to - naturally I assumed we were talking about corporate tax. So firstly what is the source of origin for that meme you keep posting. Can you provide a link please?.

But in case you are unaware, the lowest earning 20% of households now pay more of their income in tax than the highest earning. Austerity is hitting the poorest the hardest - do you think that's fair? Back to corporations, we need to increase corporation tax if we want a fairer society. Don't you want good public services, health care etc? Look at countries like Germany where corporation tax is much higher - they also have a much higher standard of living than we do.

Our 'progressive' tax system is anything but.








.


MiffyMoo said:


> I can see why SMEs aren't happy, it really it tough for them, and I honestly think a lot more could be done to help them. After all, if a small business does well, it gets bigger and has to employ more people - win, win


I bet you wouldn't find a 'win, win' anywhere if this was labour



MiffyMoo said:


> You're right, vile that people are using death and destruction to gain political points


You mean Theresa May right? Even one of her own activists was appalled with her speech.


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Very good point Noush and one I haven't heard anyone ask - we need to get a question in to them to find out if younger people who need ongoing care in their own homes are also going to have their homes taken to pay for it after their death - I'm thinking of a young man with motor neurone disease for instance who has a wife and young kids and they need carers twice a day to help the wife get him up and washed/dressed then to put him back to bed at night. I know they are saying with the elderly that the home won't be taken if the partner is alive and living in the property but what about in a case like the one I've mentioned - his wife will likely live for many years after his death and will have that hanging over her head - what happens if she moves after he dies, what happens if she remarries etc etc?
> 
> Well if they have already fired a nuclear bomb at us we won't be doing anything much will we? Don't you think peace and diplomacy are the best chance of preventing that from happening rather than chest beating, sabre rattling and threats? If you have a massive falling out with your neighbour which is more likely to prevent you from punching him - him saying lets have a chat about it and try to sort out a compromise or him telling you to shut your big mouth or he will punch your lights out? I know the answer for me - the more someone prods and pokes at me the more angry I get and the more likely I am to do something in the heat of the moment that I may regret later.
> 
> Lovely, I've always wanted to go to a tea party like that, Do you think they serve vegan food?
> 
> You were complaining about people attacking Theresa May yesterday and there you go doing the same thing about Corbyn. You say he has no idea what the word principled means and has probably never even heard of it. I disagree, I might not (and don't) agree with many of his principles but not agreeing with them does not mean he doesn't have them.
> 
> https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/principle
> 
> "In general, a principle is some kind of basic truth that helps you with your life. "Be fair" is a principle that guides (or should guide) most people and businesses. A politician who tries to do the right thing rather than win votes is acting on principle. A person who has principles is a good, decent person. On the other hand, if you say someone has no principles, that means they're dishonest, corrupt, or evil."
> 
> I would say the above description fits Jeremy Corbyn pretty well actually.
> 
> Edited because I got the illness the young man I referred to wrong should be motor neurone disease not muscular dystrophy.


Poor young man & his family, what a terrible condition motor neurone disease is. My best friend is a home carer for the council & she goes in to a lady in her 50s with MS. This social care change could affect even more people then we thought. I'm still trying to find out about it but not getting very far. All I can find is a lot of worried people asking the same question and others convinced it is going to affect working age disabled and people who fall ill. Some of the tweets I have been reading have actually really upset me. People are scared.

Look at this for example RPH - _We are a disabled couple living in own home valued 300 k & our social care costs 100 K a year.
We are in our 40-50s
_
And heres another angle I never thought of _- As a disabled person, parents want to pass home to me to secure my future, Tory social care puts that at risk._

And another_ - __#_*disabilityhustings*_ impact of __@_*Conservatives*_ policy on _social care _means young disabled will never be able to own their own home _

]



Honeys mum said:


> She lied again noush, according to this video there is.
> 
> This is genius. --Credits-- Artist Taxi Driver:... - Another Angry Voice


He cracks me up:Hilarious & he knows his stuff does chunky lol


----------



## Honeys mum

noushka05 said:


> He cracks me up:Hilarious & he knows his stuff does chunky lol


Yes , he's really good isn't he.


----------



## noushka05

Honeys mum said:


> Yes , he's really good isn't he.


He's excellent & VERY passionate If you haven't seen Jonathan Pie, hes well worth checking out HM lol x


----------



## kimthecat

About selling your house to pay for care fees, I know you gift or can hand over your house to your children and they register it in their name and if you live for 7 years they don't pay tax , if you do this could the government make them sell it and pay for your fees if you did finally have to go into a care home ?


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Be interesting to see what other direct tax burdens the countries have. In the UK we have business rates (absolutely huge amounts that, for example, a modest sized gym on a industrial park will be in excess of £100,000 per annum), National Insurance and there's at least one other that totally escapes me at the moment!!


That is a good question. Here e.g. companies pay about 25 % on top of salaries (insurances etc). Staff pays a bit themselves too (pentions - about 2%), So if one´s gross salary would be 1000€, the employer would pay 1227 ,58 €.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> I have given up wasting my time on them. it is like hitting your head onto a brick wall
> 
> They have been so brainwashed by Corbyn and co to see any truth anywhere else
> 
> They are the only people who are right and the rest of us are just idiots


If this is a dig at me @Bisbow, I'd just like to make it clear that I have been speaking out against neoliberalism ( & the austerity that goes with it) LONG before I'd ever even heard of Jeremy Corbyn. No one has brainwashed me - I was already well informed neoliberalism is a catastrophe for people & for the planet. What Corbyn has done is to transform labour into a genuine alternative to neoliberalism & austerity. He's given millions hope.


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> You quoted me with some snide remark about me ignoring your meme - which I had, in fact, responded to - naturally I assumed we were talking about corporate tax. So firstly what is the source of origin for that meme you keep posting. Can you provide a link please?.
> 
> But in case you are unaware, the lowest earning 20% of households now pay more of their income in tax than the highest earning. Austerity is hitting the poorest the hardest - do you think that's fair? Back to corporations, we need to increase corporation tax if we want a fairer society. Don't you want good public services, health care etc? Look at countries like Germany where corporation tax is much higher - they also have a much higher standard of living than we do.
> 
> Our 'progressive' tax system is anything but.
> View attachment 313264
> 
> .
> 
> I bet you wouldn't find a 'win, win' anywhere if this was labour
> 
> You mean Theresa May right? Even one of her own activists was appalled with her speech.


I very rarely post memes, I find them uninformative and annoying. The base information for the graph was taken from the HMRC report

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...e/615091/Apr17_Receipts_NS_Bulletin_Final.pdf

Your argument that the lowest earning households are paying more tax seems to work more towards the argument that personal allowance should be increased, which is what the Tories are doing.

I agree with her speech, but do feel that it was bad timing - she called for a cessation of campaigning today, so she should have stuck to it. Platitudes today and call for action tomorrow


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> I very rarely post memes, I find them uninformative and annoying. The base information for the graph was taken from the HMRC report
> 
> https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...e/615091/Apr17_Receipts_NS_Bulletin_Final.pdf
> 
> Your argument that the lowest earning households are paying more tax seems to work more towards the argument that personal allowance should be increased, which is what the Tories are doing.
> 
> I agree with her speech, but do feel that it was bad timing - she called for a cessation of campaigning today, so she should have stuck to it. Platitudes today and call for action tomorrow


I knew the meme didn't go with graph, its a link to the meme I'm interested in please?

VAT & council tax hammers the poorest the hardest. We need to tax more progressively - see labour manifesto.

She used that speech to campaign & now shes going to use these terrible acts of evil as an excuse to take away more of _our_ freedoms.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> If this is a dig at me @Bisbow, I'd just like to make it clear that I have been speaking out against neoliberalism ( & the austerity that goes with it) LONG before I'd ever even heard of Jeremy Corbyn. No one has brainwashed me - I was already well informed neoliberalism is a catastrophe for people & for the planet. What Corbyn has done is to transform labour into a genuine alternative to neoliberalism & austerity. He's given millions hope.


If the cap fits wear it as the saying goes

He's given millions hope you say

He also given millions despair, you don't bother about them do you


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> I knew the meme didn't go with graph, its a link to the meme I'm interested in please?
> 
> VAT & council tax hammers the poorest the hardest. We need to tax more progressively - see labour manifesto.
> 
> She used that speech to campaign & now shes going to use these terrible acts of evil as an excuse to take away more of _our_ freedoms.


It's not a meme, it's a graph. I posted the link to the base info.

Surely you can see that increasing corp tax will increase the cost of goods?


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> It's not a meme, it's a graph. I posted the link to the base info.
> 
> Surely you can see that increasing corp tax will increase the cost of goods?


This government has slashed corporation tax yet we've got more people then ever relying on food banks to survive - they cant afford to buy any food. As I said its the meme not the graph I would like the link for please.



Bisbow said:


> If the cap fits wear it as the saying goes
> 
> He's given millions hope you say
> 
> He also given millions despair, you don't bother about them do you


Yes, hope for those of us who care about social justice and a habitable planet for our children & future generations. If we don't change course & switch to a sustainable economy everyone will suffer @Bisbow - that is a fact not an opinion.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> This government has slashed corporation tax yet we've got more people then ever relying on food banks to survive - they cant afford to buy any food. As I said its the meme not the graph I would like the link for please.
> 
> Yes, hope for those of us who care about social justice and a habitable planet for our children & future generations. If we don't change course & switch to a sustainable economy everyone will suffer @Bisbow - that is a fact not an opinion.


Everyone will suffer if he gets the keys to no10 , that is the fact


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> This government has slashed corporation tax yet we've got more people then ever relying on food banks to survive - they cant afford to buy any food. As I said its the meme not the graph I would like the link for please.
> 
> Yes, hope for those of us who care about social justice and a habitable planet for our children & future generations. If we don't change course & switch to a sustainable economy everyone will suffer @Bisbow - that is a fact not an opinion.


There was no Meme! A meme is a captioned photo


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Everyone will suffer if he gets the keys to no10 , that is the fact


_People are dying and nobody cares...._








MiffyMoo said:


> There was no Meme! A meme is a captioned photo


Ok to clarify then - can I have a link to the source for the one that wasn't a meme or a graph please.


----------



## 1290423

Noushka! Guess what


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Noushka! Guess what


You've changed your mind again? You've made your mind up? Millies ate your dinner? Am I close??:Hilarious


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> If the cap fits wear it as the saying goes
> 
> He's given millions hope you say
> 
> He also given millions despair, you don't bother about them do you


Out of interest Bisbow which millions has he given despair to? Like I said earlier in the thread my OH is a die hard public school boy Tory who hated Corbyn and everything he thought he stood for but even he has given him a fair hearing in the debates and read up on him and has admitted he misjudged him and that a lot of what he says is fair. I understand you really really can't bring yourself to like him but I do wonder what it is he stands for that you think brings despair to millions.



Bisbow said:


> Everyone will suffer if he gets the keys to no10 , that is the fact


Apart from the vulnerable in society and not forgetting the foxes


----------



## kimthecat

MiffyMoo said:


> There was no Meme! A meme is a captioned photo


The word meme has been around for sometime 

* Definition of meme *

_1_ : an idea, behavior, style, or usage that spreads from person to person within a culture _Memes (discrete units of knowledge, gossip, jokes and so on) are to culture what genes are to life. Just as biological evolution is driven by the survival of the fittest genes in the gene pool, cultural evolution may be driven by the most successful memes. - Richard Dawkins_

_2_ : an amusing or interesting item (such as a captioned picture or video) or genre of items that is spread widely online especially through social media


----------



## Honeys mum

noushka05 said:


> If you haven't seen Jonathan Pie, hes well worth checking out HM lol x


Thanks for that noush, just looked him up.Had never heard of him,watched the video on T.M. & NHS, very funny. x


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Out of interest Bisbow which millions has he given despair to? Like I said earlier in the thread my OH is a die hard public school boy Tory who hated Corbyn and everything he thought he stood for but even he has given him a fair hearing in the debates and read up on him and has admitted he misjudged him and that a lot of what he says is fair. I understand you really really can't bring yourself to like him but I do wonder what it is he stands for that you think brings despair to millions.
> 
> Apart from the vulnerable in society and not forgetting the foxes


Small business men and their staff due to corporation tax, in case they become redundant, less well off families that will have to pay more for their products just for starters
If he does put tax on gardens numerous people with a little more than average size gardens ( I know a few worried people} to add a few more
And as you say, the more vulnerable
Foxes have nothing to worry about, that won't happen


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> Small business men and their staff due to corporation tax, in case they become redundant, less well off families that will have to pay more for their products just for starters
> If he does put tax on gardens numerous people with a little more than average size gardens ( I know a few worried people} to add a few more
> And as you say, the more vulnerable
> Foxes have nothing to worry about, that won't happen


So you keep saying but be sure I will back to remind you of those words if it does happen which my current Tory MP is pretty confident about 
We are small business people - he hasn't brought despair to us. Yes if he is elected we will pay more tax - the tax on private health insurance makes me particularly cross so it could well be the push we needed to give it up anyway. The garden tax is just talk at the moment - don't you find it more worrying and more despairing that millions of pensioners are going to lose their winter fuel allowance and they haven't even got the decency to tell them which ones. All those with small private pensions currently just getting by but not eligible for pension credit - I would imagine they feel pretty anxious and upset right now not to mention those who risk their hard worked for and looked after homes being taken to pay for home care.


----------



## Elles

More people are using food banks, because there are food banks. 

The poor are a lot better off than they were 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago, when there were no food banks.

Noush you say people are dying and no one cares. That is grossly unfair and untrue. Most people are trying to make the right decision, which is hard when there isn't one.


----------



## Team_Trouble

MiffyMoo said:


> What is a suitable salary for a CEO, in your eyes?


I don't think I know enough about business to answer this question. You make a very valid point about small and fledgling businesses. 
I'm mainly thinking about huge branded companies that have been around for years like McDonald's, Heinz, Colemans, VUE, odeon. I suppose it would limit growth to put some sort of tax after a certain amount of profit.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> The poor are a lot better off than they were 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago, when there were no food banks.
> 
> .


Yes agree they are, but think the difference was then that familes were not so scattered as they are now are perhaps communities pulled together more, anyone remember queuing for bread ? I didn't, I baked it, and for the rest of the family too, but with a young family I didn't have to work.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> More people are using food banks, because there are food banks.
> 
> The poor are a lot better off than they were 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago, when there were no food banks.
> 
> Noush you say people are dying and no one cares. That is grossly unfair and untrue. Most people are trying to make the right decision, which is hard when there isn't one.


How insensitive to say people are using food banks because there are food banks, Elles. Don't you think changes to the benefit system, all the sanctions might be affecting people? https://www.trusselltrust.org/2016/10/27/benefit-sanctions-foodbank-use/

No one can use a food bank unless they are referred by a third party such as a Doctor or a social worker.

I didn't say it. But I agree with that lady. The tories have hammered disabled people & their massive cuts to social care are killing people.


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So you keep saying but be sure I will back to remind you of those words if it does happen which my current Tory MP is pretty confident about
> We are small business people - he hasn't brought despair to us. Yes if he is elected we will pay more tax - the tax on private health insurance makes me particularly cross so it could well be the push we needed to give it up anyway. The garden tax is just talk at the moment - don't you find it more worrying and more despairing that millions of pensioners are going to lose their winter fuel allowance and they haven't even got the decency to tell them which ones. All those with small private pensions currently just getting by but not eligible for pension credit - I would imagine they feel pretty anxious and upset right now not to mention those who risk their hard worked for and looked after homes being taken to pay for home care.


You are very lucky if you are not bothered by the corp tax hike, I know people who are
The garden tax may or may not be just talk but it is a threat hanging over peoples heads
We will probably lose the winter fuel payment
Corbyn, will tax private pensions anyway


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Small business men and their staff due to corporation tax, in case they become redundant, less well off families that will have to pay more for their products just for starters
> If he does put tax on gardens numerous people with a little more than average size gardens ( I know a few worried people} to add a few more
> And as you say, the more vulnerable
> Foxes have nothing to worry about, that won't happen











And just in case you're interested in the truth about the 'garden tax' - https://fullfact.org/economy/labours-land-value-tax-will-you-have-sell-your-garden/


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> _People are dying and nobody cares...._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


So you think you are the only one who cares

Arrogance at it's best


----------



## noushka05

Odin_cat said:


> As a humble teacher there's little chance... Obviously any tax changes won't affect me, but it's nice to think of others!


I can see you have a social conscience x


----------



## noushka05

Did you even bother to watch the video @Bisbow? How many more people will die when the NHS is gone for all but those who can afford to pay? Millions of people depend upon it. Even if you have a gold plated insurance it isn't guaranteed to save you from bankruptcy - look at the USA. This is what the tories are remodelling our health service on.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> So you think you are the only one who cares
> 
> Arrogance at it's best


If people care about the most vulnerable in our society they need to use their vote to help them.


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> How insensitive to say people are using food banks because there are food banks, Elles. Don't you think changes to the benefit system, all the sanctions might be affecting people? https://www.trusselltrust.org/2016/10/27/benefit-sanctions-foodbank-use/
> 
> No one can use a food bank unless they are referred by a third party such as a Doctor or a social worker.
> 
> I didn't say it. But I agree with that lady. The tories have hammered disabled people & their massive cuts to social care are killing people.


_'But people shouldn't donate to food banks just because the poor families can't budget. If they're given food it would mean they have more money for cigarettes and alcohol' _Chris Steward - Conservative councillor, York.

And let us not forget the rise in homeless people either Noush'

https://www.theguardian.com/society...rs-in-england-rises-for-sixth-successive-year

The bleedin' Tories think a homeless person is something you step over when leaving the opera.

Britain needs a government that will build a strong and stable country for all, not just the privileged few and those who are stricken down with delusions of bloody grandeur.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> If people care about the most vulnerable in our society they need to use their vote to help them.


As they no doubt will

And no, I don't read or watch all your posts because they are contrived to make me believe Corbyn is the saviour of the world


----------



## KittenKong

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...on-theresa-may-plans-on-terror-they-are-wrong

Excellent article.


----------



## noushka05

Wow this is amazing.

LOOK at the stunning list of signatories endorsing Labours anti-austerity policies https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jun/03/the-big-issue-labour-manifesto-what-economy-needs

This lot trust labour with the economy.

Dr Adotey Bing-Pappoe, lecturer in economics, Alan Freeman (personal capacity), Alfredo Saad Filho, Professor of Political Economy, SOAS University of London, Andrew Cumbers, Professor of Regional Political Economy, University of Glasgow, Andrew Simms, author of The New Economics, co-director New Weather Institute, Andy Ross FAcSS, Visiting Professor, Birkbeck University of London , Andy Kilmister, Department of Accounting, Finance and Economics, Oxford Brookes University, Ann Pettifor, Director of PRIME Economics (Policy Research in Macroeconomics), Dr Antonio Andreoni (PhD Cambridge), Senior Lecturer in Economics, SOAS University of London, Anwar Shaikh, Professor, New School for Social Research, USA, Arturo Hermann, Senior research fellow, Italian National Institute of Statistics, Rome, Italy, Professor Ben Fine, Department of Economics, SOAS University of London, Robert Rowthorn, Emeritus Professor of Economics, University of Cambridge., Bruce Cronin, Professor of Economic Sociology
Director of Research, Director of the Centre for Business Network Analysis, University of Greenwich, Dr Bruno Bonizzi, Lecturer in Political Economy, University of Winchester, Carlos Oya, Reader in Development Studies, SOAS University of London, Carolina Alves, PhD Economics, Carolyn Jones, Director, Institute of Employment Rights, Cem Oyvat, Lecturer, University of Greenwich, Christopher Cramer, Professor of the Political Economy of Development, SOAS University of London, Ciaran Driver FAcSS, Professor of Economics, SOAS University of London, Professor Colin Haslam, Professor of Accounting and Finance, Queen Mary University of London, Costas Lapavitsas, Professor of Economics, SOAS University of London, Cyrus Bina, Distinguished Research Professor of Economics, University of Minnesota, USA, Dr Dan O'Neill, Lecturer in Ecological Economics, University of Leeds, Daniela Gabor, Professor of Economics and Macro-Finance, University of the West of England, Daniele Archibugi, Professor, Birkbeck College, Professor Danny Dorling, University of Oxford, Writer and Academic, Dean Baker, Co-Director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, Washington, DC, Dr Deborah Johnston Pro-Director (Learning and Teaching) SOAS (University of London), Diego Sánchez-Ancochea, Associate Professor in Political Economy, Director, Latin American Centre, University of Oxford, Dr Dimitris P. Sotiropoulos, The Open University Business School, Elisa Van Waeyenberge, Lecturer of Economics, SOAS University of London, Dr Emanuele Lobina, Public Services International Research Unit, University of Greenwich, Dr Faiza Shaheen, Economist (in a personal capacity), Frances Stewart, Professor of Development Economics and Director, Centre for Research on Inequality, Human Security and Ethnicity, University of Oxford, Gary Dymski,
Professor of Applied Economics, Leeds University Business School, Geoff Harcourt, Honorary Professor, UNSW Australia, Gerald Epstein, Co-Director, Political Economy Research Institute, and Department of Economics, University of Massachusetts Amherst, USA, Dr Giorgos Galanis, Lecturer in Economics, Goldsmiths University, Gregor Semieniuk, Lecturer in Economics, SOAS University of London, Guglielmo Forges Davanzati, Associate professor of Political Economy, University of Salento, Italy, Dr Guy Standing FAcSS, Professorial Research Associate, SOAS University of London, Ha-Joon Chang, University of Cambridge, Hannah Bargawi, Lecturer in Economics, SOAS University of London, and Research Partner, Centre for Development Policy and Research, Dr Hassan Hakimian, Reader in Economics, SOAS University of London, Professor Dr Heiner Flassbeck, former Chief Economist of UNCTAD, Geneva, Heikki Patomäki, Professor of World Politics, University of Helsinki, Howard M. Wachtel, Professor Emeritus of Economics, American University, Washington, DC, USA, Howard Reed, Director, Landman Economics, Dr Hugh Goodacre, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Westminster, Teaching Fellow, University College London, Hugo Radice, University of Leeds., Hulya Dagdeviren, Professor of Economic Development, University of Hertfordshire, Ilhan Dögüs, Department of Socioeconomics, University of Hamburg, Germany, James K. Galbraith, Professor of Government, University of Texas, USA, Jan Toporowski, Professor of Economics and Finance, SOAS University of London, Dr Jane Lethbridge, Public Services International Research Unit, University of Greenwich, Jeanette Findlay, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Glasglow, Jeff Faux, Founder &
former Director, Economic Policy Institute, Washington D C, Dr Jeff Powell, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Greenwich, Dr Jeff Tan, Economist, Aga Khan University in the UK, Jeremy Smith, co-director, PRIME Economics (Policy Research in Macroeconomics), Dr Jo Michell, Senior Lecturer in Economics, UWE Bristol, Professor John Grahl, Economics Department, Middlesex University, John Palmer, former Political Director of the European Policy Centre, Dr Johnna Montgomerie, Senior Lecturer in Economics, Deputy Director of the Political Economy Research Centre, Goldsmiths University of London, Jonathan Dawson, Coordinator of Economics, Schumacher College, Professor Jonathan Michie, Professor of Innovation & Knowledge Exchange, University of Oxford , Dr Jonathan Perraton, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Sheffield, Jorge Buzaglo, Associate Professor of Economics, University of Stockholm, Sweden, Dr Julian Wells, Principal Lecturer of Economics, Kingston University, Kate Bayliss, Research Fellow, Economics Department, SOAS University of London, Professor Kate Pickett, University of York Champion for Research on Justice & Equality, Dr Kevin Deane, Senior Lecturer in International Development, University of Northampton (personal capacty), Dr Kitty Stewart, Associate Professor of Social Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, Klaus Nielsen, Professor of Institutional Economics, Birkbeck University of London, László Andor, Associate Professor, Corvinus University, Hungary, Leslie Huckfield, Yunus Centre for Social Business & Health, Glasgow Caledonian University, Malcolm Sawyer, Emeritus Professor of Economics, University of Leeds, Marco Veronese Passarella, Economics Division, Leeds University Business School, Maria
Nikolaidi, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Greenwich, Dr Mario Seccareccia, Full Professor, Department of Economics, University of Ottawa, Canada, Dr Martin Watts, Emeritus Professor of Economics, The University of Newcastle, Massoud Karshenas, Professor of Economics, SOAS University of London, Dr Matteo Rizzo, Senior Lecturer, Department of Economics, SOAS University of London, Mehmet Ugur, Professor of Economics and Institutions, University of Greenwich Business School, Michael Roberts, financial economist and author of The Long Depression, Professor Mushtaq Khan, Department of Economics, SOAS, University of London, Professor Ozlem Onaran, Director of Greenwich Political Economy Research Centre, University of Greenwich, Pallavi Roy, Lecturer in International Economics, SOAS, University of London, Paulo dos Santos, Assistant Professor of Economic, New School for Social Research, USA, Paul Mason, economics writer, Prem Sikka, Emeritus Professor of Accounting, University of Essex, Dr Pritam Singh, Professor of Economics, Oxford Brookes University, Radhika Desai, Professor, Department of Political Studies, University of Manitoba, USA, Richard McIntyre, Professor, Chair, Department of Economics, University of Rhode Island, USA, Richard Murphy, Professor of Practice in International Political Economy at City University of London and Director of Tax Research LLP, Richard Parker, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, USA, Richard Wilkinson, Emeritus Professor of Social Epidemiology, University of Nottingham, Dr Robert Calvert Jump, Lecturer in Economics,
Kingston University, Robert Neild, Professor Emeritus of Economics, University of Cambridge, Robert Pollin, Distinguished Professor of Economics and Co-Director, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts Amherst, USA, Roberto Veneziani, Queen Mary University of London, Susan Himmelweit, Emeritus Professor of Economics, Open University, Dr Sara Gorgoni, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Greenwich, Dr Sara Maioli, Lecturer in Economics, Newcastle University, Dr Satoshi Miyamura, Lecturer in the Economy of Japan, SOAS University of London, Shawky Arif, The University of Northampton, Simon Wren-Lewis, Professor of Economic Policy, Oxford University
Professor Steve Keen, Department of Economics, Kingston University, Professor Engelbert Stockhammer, Kingston University, Simon Mohun, Emeritus Professor of Political Economy, Queen Mary University of London, Dr Sunil Mitra Kumar, Lecturer in Economics, King's College London, Susan Newman, Senior Lecturer of Economics, University of West England, Dr Susan Pashkoff, Economist, Dr Suzanne J Konzelmann, Director, Postgraduate Programmes in Corporate Governance and Business Ethics, Director, London Centre for Corporate Governance and Ethics, Co-Executive Editor, Cambridge Journal of Economics, Tom Palley, Former Chief Economist, US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, Tomás Rotta, Lecturer in Economics, University of Greenwich, Trevor Evans, Emeritus Professor of Economics, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Germany, Will Davies, Reader in Political Economy, Goldsmiths, University of London, Dr William Van Lear, Economics Professor, Belmont Abbey College, USA, Yanis Varoufakis, Former Minister of Finance, Greece, Yannis Dafermos, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of the West of England, José Gabriel Palma, University of Cambridge, Yulia Yurchenko, University of Greenwhich, Laurie Macfarlane, Economics Editor, Open Democracy, Meghnad Desai, London School of Economics, Clive Lawson, University of Cambridge, Professor Lawrence King, University of Cambridge


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> As they no doubt will
> 
> And no, I don't read or watch all your posts because they are contrived to make me believe Corbyn is the saviour of the world


Oh well there you go ..............................


----------



## Dr Pepper

....


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> Oh well there you go ..............................
> 
> View attachment 313338


Not only arrogant but insulting too

Call me what you like, I shall not be in for a few hours to read them

Have fun at my expense if it makes you happy


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> _'But people shouldn't donate to food banks just because the poor families can't budget. If they're given food it would mean they have more money for cigarettes and alcohol' _Chris Steward - Conservative councillor, York.
> 
> And let us not forget the rise in homeless people either Noush'
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/society...rs-in-england-rises-for-sixth-successive-year
> 
> The bleedin' Tories think a homeless person is something you step over when leaving the opera.
> 
> Britain needs a government that will build a strong and stable country for all, not just the privileged few and those who are stricken down with delusions of bloody grandeur.


Did you see what else he said? ( Oh ETA its a different set of tories not your York guy! (well point made about them all feeling contempt ) )









This is the attitude of the tories - they are devoid of empathy. You only have to look at the voting histories of May & her cohorts to see the utter contempt they have for the poor & for ordinary working people. Corbyn has given millions of people, who are barely clinging on by their fingertips, hope.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Not only arrogant but insulting too
> 
> Call me what you like, I shall not be in for a few hours to read them
> 
> Have fun at my expense if it makes you happy


Pot & kettle spring to mind.. But I'm prepared to move on. Have a nice day @Bisbow.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> Pot & kettle spring to mind.. But I'm prepared to move on. Have a nice day @Bisbow.


I've not gone yet

I have got to admit to you, I enjoy winding you up
Childish I know but you do leave yourself wide open to it

As for having a nice day, thanks, but I don't think nice is the right word for today


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> I've not gone yet
> 
> I have got to admit to you, I enjoy winding you up
> Childish I know but you do leave yourself wide open to it
> 
> As for having a nice day, thanks, but I don't think nice is the right word for today


That's ok, I don't take it to heart lol

I'm genuinely sorry to hear its not going to be a nice day for you. Take care Bisbow x


----------



## Odin_cat

noushka05 said:


> I can see you have a social conscience x


, I know that teachers in the UK have a rough deal compared to me, nurses even worse imo. Sad for one of the biggest economies in the world!


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.disabilitynewsservice.co...an-to-vote-tory-on-thursday-please-read-this/


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-leaflets-hillsborough-disaster-a7771176.html










Backfired on them a bit didn't it.
Fancy using quotes taken from Tory backing papers!


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> How insensitive to say people are using food banks because there are food banks, Elles. Don't you think changes to the benefit system, all the sanctions might be affecting people? https://www.trusselltrust.org/2016/10/27/benefit-sanctions-foodbank-use/
> 
> No one can use a food bank unless they are referred by a third party such as a Doctor or a social worker.
> 
> I didn't say it. But I agree with that lady. The tories have hammered disabled people & their massive cuts to social care are killing people.


I said more people are using food banks, because there are food banks. It's not at all insensitive it's true. It's also true that the family of 3 children, 4 Rottweilers, 2 cars, a large trampoline in the front garden of their council house and usually a cigarette hanging out of their mouth when asked to move one of their 2 cars are ok people and on benefits. The lady next door to me who has ms is very well cared for by her nurses and ambulance taxis for days out and nice house with disabled adjustments for her. Before she was ill she never worked either. I wouldn't change places with either of them for all the money in the world, but they aren't destitute and they're on benefits.

It's not cuts in money, it's accessibility. People get plenty of money if they can make their appointments and get the right assessments. That's how they are treated badly, not the amount of money they get, but whether they get it. There are more homeless, because there are more people. People need to get off their arse and sort themselves out not whine and rely on others. Then the real needy can get what they need.

I don't deny that we could pay a little more tax, but a few more people should get working and stop whining too.

That aside, the next available appt with my gp is the end of august, the elderly being cared for at home need more than a 10 minute dash in and out by their carer, the disabled don't need to be jumping hoops to get help when they can barely walk. Classes in schools should be smaller. We need more healthcare staff on the floor, more police on the beat and the fire service and army don't need cutting.

Conservatives are too tight and selfish.
Labour are too greedy and generous.

If labour get in no doubt we'll find out whether their policies work. I thought they were offering pie in the sky because they knew they couldn't get in, but from what I've seen over the past few weeks Jeremy will promise just about anything to get elected, which I find worrisome.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## rona

The bit I picked Up from Theresa's statement was " to be frank - far too much tolerance of extremism in our country."

At last, someone who recognises what is actually the main threat to our way of life


----------



## Cleo38

rona said:


> The bit I picked Up from Theresa's statement was " to be frank - far too much tolerance of extremism in our country."
> 
> At last, someone who recognises what is actually the main threat to our way of life


But her party has been in government so it's the Conservatives that have tolerated this ......


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> There are more homeless, because there are more people. People need to get off their arse and sort themselves out not whine and rely on others. Then the real needy can get what they need.
> 
> I don't deny that we could pay a little more tax, but a few more people should get working and stop whining too.
> 
> If labour get in no doubt we'll find out whether their policies work. I thought they were offering pie in the sky because they knew they couldn't get in, but from what I've seen over the past few weeks Jeremy will promise just about anything to get elected, which I find worrisome.


The problem is, without a fixed address a homeless person wouldn't be able to get a job. Yes, I agree there's an increase in the population numbers but that doesn't explain why homelessness was high in the late '80s, reduced but by no means eradicated by the Labour government yet rocketed again under the Tories over the past seven years.

I see your point about Corbyn's promises, I'm a firm believer in the saying, "If it sounds too good to be true, it properly is".

Having said that his manifesto has been costed and approved by many experts. See Noushka's recent post for example.

Then, no doubt the masses will vote for further austerity, the dementia tax, you name it.

So much for telling people to, "Believe in Britain". The British people must start believing in themselves and feel they deserve better.

During the recent horrific terrorist incidents the police and NHS staff have, quite rightly, been showered with praise.

Yet May doesn't believe Nurses deserve a pay rise as, "There's no magic money tree".

Patronising and insulting in the first order.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Odin_cat said:


> , I know that teachers in the UK have a rough deal compared to me, !


:Hilarious


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> The bit I picked Up from Theresa's statement was " to be frank - far too much tolerance of extremism in our country."
> 
> At last, someone who recognises what is actually the main threat to our way of life


_"At last"_ lmao All shes going to do is use this as an excuse to take away more of our civil liberties.

So why has she slashed our police & armed forces - why is she going to slash them further?

*Army fears for future as pledge on troop numbers is abandoned*

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...ledge-on-troop-numbers-is-abandoned-xxmxsc9qt


----------



## noushka05

Odin_cat said:


> , I know that teachers in the UK have a rough deal compared to me, nurses even worse imo. Sad for one of the biggest economies in the world!


Its absolutely shameful how you've all been treated x


----------



## Odin_cat

Dr Pepper said:


> :Hilarious


Why is that funny?


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> The bit I picked Up from Theresa's statement was " to be frank - far too much tolerance of extremism in our country."
> 
> At last, someone who recognises what is actually the main threat to our way of life


Shame its taken so long for then even to accept we have a problem!
But I guess better late then never.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Shame its taken so long for then even to accept we have a problem!
> But I guess better late then never.


You need to see this Sue.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> I said more people are using food banks, because there are food banks. It's not at all insensitive it's true. It's also true that the family of 3 children, 4 Rottweilers, 2 cars, a large trampoline in the front garden of their council house and usually a cigarette hanging out of their mouth when asked to move one of their 2 cars are ok people and on benefits. The lady next door to me who has ms is very well cared for by her nurses and ambulance taxis for days out and nice house with disabled adjustments for her. Before she was ill she never worked either. I wouldn't change places with either of them for all the money in the world, but they aren't destitute and they're on benefits.
> 
> It's not cuts in money, it's accessibility. People get plenty of money if they can make their appointments and get the right assessments. That's how they are treated badly, not the amount of money they get, but whether they get it. There are more homeless, because there are more people. People need to get off their arse and sort themselves out not whine and rely on others. Then the real needy can get what they need.
> 
> I don't deny that we could pay a little more tax, but a few more people should get working and stop whining too.
> 
> That aside, the next available appt with my gp is the end of august, the elderly being cared for at home need more than a 10 minute dash in and out by their carer, the disabled don't need to be jumping hoops to get help when they can barely walk. Classes in schools should be smaller. We need more healthcare staff on the floor, more police on the beat and the fire service and army don't need cutting.
> 
> Conservatives are too tight and selfish.
> Labour are too greedy and generous.
> 
> If labour get in no doubt we'll find out whether their policies work. I thought they were offering pie in the sky because they knew they couldn't get in, but from what I've seen over the past few weeks Jeremy will promise just about anything to get elected, which I find worrisome.


Can you provide some evidence to support your opinion please?

You need to do more research into things like welfare sanctions Elles.

I dont know if you missed this signed letter supporting Labours anti austerity economics? The signatory list is stunning. I'm sure these leading academics have a far better understanding than anyone on this forum lol



noushka05 said:


> Wow this is amazing.
> 
> LOOK at the stunning list of signatories endorsing Labours anti-austerity policies https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jun/03/the-big-issue-labour-manifesto-what-economy-needs
> 
> This lot trust labour with the economy.
> 
> Dr Adotey Bing-Pappoe, lecturer in economics, Alan Freeman (personal capacity), Alfredo Saad Filho, Professor of Political Economy, SOAS University of London, Andrew Cumbers, Professor of Regional Political Economy, University of Glasgow, Andrew Simms, author of The New Economics, co-director New Weather Institute, Andy Ross FAcSS, Visiting Professor, Birkbeck University of London , Andy Kilmister, Department of Accounting, Finance and Economics, Oxford Brookes University, Ann Pettifor, Director of PRIME Economics (Policy Research in Macroeconomics), Dr Antonio Andreoni (PhD Cambridge), Senior Lecturer in Economics, SOAS University of London, Anwar Shaikh, Professor, New School for Social Research, USA, Arturo Hermann, Senior research fellow, Italian National Institute of Statistics, Rome, Italy, Professor Ben Fine, Department of Economics, SOAS University of London, Robert Rowthorn, Emeritus Professor of Economics, University of Cambridge., Bruce Cronin, Professor of Economic Sociology
> Director of Research, Director of the Centre for Business Network Analysis, University of Greenwich, Dr Bruno Bonizzi, Lecturer in Political Economy, University of Winchester, Carlos Oya, Reader in Development Studies, SOAS University of London, Carolina Alves, PhD Economics, Carolyn Jones, Director, Institute of Employment Rights, Cem Oyvat, Lecturer, University of Greenwich, Christopher Cramer, Professor of the Political Economy of Development, SOAS University of London, Ciaran Driver FAcSS, Professor of Economics, SOAS University of London, Professor Colin Haslam, Professor of Accounting and Finance, Queen Mary University of London, Costas Lapavitsas, Professor of Economics, SOAS University of London, Cyrus Bina, Distinguished Research Professor of Economics, University of Minnesota, USA, Dr Dan O'Neill, Lecturer in Ecological Economics, University of Leeds, Daniela Gabor, Professor of Economics and Macro-Finance, University of the West of England, Daniele Archibugi, Professor, Birkbeck College, Professor Danny Dorling, University of Oxford, Writer and Academic, Dean Baker, Co-Director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, Washington, DC, Dr Deborah Johnston Pro-Director (Learning and Teaching) SOAS (University of London), Diego Sánchez-Ancochea, Associate Professor in Political Economy, Director, Latin American Centre, University of Oxford, Dr Dimitris P. Sotiropoulos, The Open University Business School, Elisa Van Waeyenberge, Lecturer of Economics, SOAS University of London, Dr Emanuele Lobina, Public Services International Research Unit, University of Greenwich, Dr Faiza Shaheen, Economist (in a personal capacity), Frances Stewart, Professor of Development Economics and Director, Centre for Research on Inequality, Human Security and Ethnicity, University of Oxford, Gary Dymski,
> Professor of Applied Economics, Leeds University Business School, Geoff Harcourt, Honorary Professor, UNSW Australia, Gerald Epstein, Co-Director, Political Economy Research Institute, and Department of Economics, University of Massachusetts Amherst, USA, Dr Giorgos Galanis, Lecturer in Economics, Goldsmiths University, Gregor Semieniuk, Lecturer in Economics, SOAS University of London, Guglielmo Forges Davanzati, Associate professor of Political Economy, University of Salento, Italy, Dr Guy Standing FAcSS, Professorial Research Associate, SOAS University of London, Ha-Joon Chang, University of Cambridge, Hannah Bargawi, Lecturer in Economics, SOAS University of London, and Research Partner, Centre for Development Policy and Research, Dr Hassan Hakimian, Reader in Economics, SOAS University of London, Professor Dr Heiner Flassbeck, former Chief Economist of UNCTAD, Geneva, Heikki Patomäki, Professor of World Politics, University of Helsinki, Howard M. Wachtel, Professor Emeritus of Economics, American University, Washington, DC, USA, Howard Reed, Director, Landman Economics, Dr Hugh Goodacre, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Westminster, Teaching Fellow, University College London, Hugo Radice, University of Leeds., Hulya Dagdeviren, Professor of Economic Development, University of Hertfordshire, Ilhan Dögüs, Department of Socioeconomics, University of Hamburg, Germany, James K. Galbraith, Professor of Government, University of Texas, USA, Jan Toporowski, Professor of Economics and Finance, SOAS University of London, Dr Jane Lethbridge, Public Services International Research Unit, University of Greenwich, Jeanette Findlay, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Glasglow, Jeff Faux, Founder &
> former Director, Economic Policy Institute, Washington D C, Dr Jeff Powell, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Greenwich, Dr Jeff Tan, Economist, Aga Khan University in the UK, Jeremy Smith, co-director, PRIME Economics (Policy Research in Macroeconomics), Dr Jo Michell, Senior Lecturer in Economics, UWE Bristol, Professor John Grahl, Economics Department, Middlesex University, John Palmer, former Political Director of the European Policy Centre, Dr Johnna Montgomerie, Senior Lecturer in Economics, Deputy Director of the Political Economy Research Centre, Goldsmiths University of London, Jonathan Dawson, Coordinator of Economics, Schumacher College, Professor Jonathan Michie, Professor of Innovation & Knowledge Exchange, University of Oxford , Dr Jonathan Perraton, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Sheffield, Jorge Buzaglo, Associate Professor of Economics, University of Stockholm, Sweden, Dr Julian Wells, Principal Lecturer of Economics, Kingston University, Kate Bayliss, Research Fellow, Economics Department, SOAS University of London, Professor Kate Pickett, University of York Champion for Research on Justice & Equality, Dr Kevin Deane, Senior Lecturer in International Development, University of Northampton (personal capacty), Dr Kitty Stewart, Associate Professor of Social Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, Klaus Nielsen, Professor of Institutional Economics, Birkbeck University of London, László Andor, Associate Professor, Corvinus University, Hungary, Leslie Huckfield, Yunus Centre for Social Business & Health, Glasgow Caledonian University, Malcolm Sawyer, Emeritus Professor of Economics, University of Leeds, Marco Veronese Passarella, Economics Division, Leeds University Business School, Maria
> Nikolaidi, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Greenwich, Dr Mario Seccareccia, Full Professor, Department of Economics, University of Ottawa, Canada, Dr Martin Watts, Emeritus Professor of Economics, The University of Newcastle, Massoud Karshenas, Professor of Economics, SOAS University of London, Dr Matteo Rizzo, Senior Lecturer, Department of Economics, SOAS University of London, Mehmet Ugur, Professor of Economics and Institutions, University of Greenwich Business School, Michael Roberts, financial economist and author of The Long Depression, Professor Mushtaq Khan, Department of Economics, SOAS, University of London, Professor Ozlem Onaran, Director of Greenwich Political Economy Research Centre, University of Greenwich, Pallavi Roy, Lecturer in International Economics, SOAS, University of London, Paulo dos Santos, Assistant Professor of Economic, New School for Social Research, USA, Paul Mason, economics writer, Prem Sikka, Emeritus Professor of Accounting, University of Essex, Dr Pritam Singh, Professor of Economics, Oxford Brookes University, Radhika Desai, Professor, Department of Political Studies, University of Manitoba, USA, Richard McIntyre, Professor, Chair, Department of Economics, University of Rhode Island, USA, Richard Murphy, Professor of Practice in International Political Economy at City University of London and Director of Tax Research LLP, Richard Parker, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, USA, Richard Wilkinson, Emeritus Professor of Social Epidemiology, University of Nottingham, Dr Robert Calvert Jump, Lecturer in Economics,
> Kingston University, Robert Neild, Professor Emeritus of Economics, University of Cambridge, Robert Pollin, Distinguished Professor of Economics and Co-Director, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts Amherst, USA, Roberto Veneziani, Queen Mary University of London, Susan Himmelweit, Emeritus Professor of Economics, Open University, Dr Sara Gorgoni, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Greenwich, Dr Sara Maioli, Lecturer in Economics, Newcastle University, Dr Satoshi Miyamura, Lecturer in the Economy of Japan, SOAS University of London, Shawky Arif, The University of Northampton, Simon Wren-Lewis, Professor of Economic Policy, Oxford University
> Professor Steve Keen, Department of Economics, Kingston University, Professor Engelbert Stockhammer, Kingston University, Simon Mohun, Emeritus Professor of Political Economy, Queen Mary University of London, Dr Sunil Mitra Kumar, Lecturer in Economics, King's College London, Susan Newman, Senior Lecturer of Economics, University of West England, Dr Susan Pashkoff, Economist, Dr Suzanne J Konzelmann, Director, Postgraduate Programmes in Corporate Governance and Business Ethics, Director, London Centre for Corporate Governance and Ethics, Co-Executive Editor, Cambridge Journal of Economics, Tom Palley, Former Chief Economist, US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, Tomás Rotta, Lecturer in Economics, University of Greenwich, Trevor Evans, Emeritus Professor of Economics, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Germany, Will Davies, Reader in Political Economy, Goldsmiths, University of London, Dr William Van Lear, Economics Professor, Belmont Abbey College, USA, Yanis Varoufakis, Former Minister of Finance, Greece, Yannis Dafermos, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of the West of England, José Gabriel Palma, University of Cambridge, Yulia Yurchenko, University of Greenwhich, Laurie Macfarlane, Economics Editor, Open Democracy, Meghnad Desai, London School of Economics, Clive Lawson, University of Cambridge, Professor Lawrence King, University of Cambridge


----------



## KittenKong

rona said:


> The bit I picked Up from Theresa's statement was " to be frank - far too much tolerance of extremism in our country."
> 
> At last, someone who recognises what is actually the main threat to our way of life


Tony Blair said something quite similar after the 7/7 bombings yet was ridiculed for it.

So, do you think Blair was wrong while May is right?


----------



## Calvine

Elles said:


> That aside, the next available appt with my gp is the end of august


That is quite shocking...where do you live?


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Do all leaders get to make a live televised Election speech? I`m trying to think back to past elections but can`t remember, I presume they all get the chance to address the nation at some point before Thursday?


----------



## Elles

Calvine said:


> That is quite shocking...where do you live?


Exeter. It's got to the stage where the earliest gp appts are 6 to 8 weeks away for any gp at the practice I use, longer if you want to see your own. I phoned one time last year, I hadn't seen a gp in over 25 years, and was told that they were booked up until the end of the next month, but didn't have the diaries for the following month yet and could I call back in 2 weeks. I was told to go to a&e.

The practice stopped offering urgent appointments last year, patients have to go to the rd&e or there is a walk in centre open until 4. There was some concern it may close. I don't know what's going on here. Maybe if you have small children you can get an appointment sooner, but I don't think so. For some reason my area is really bad for gp access.

It's one of the reasons I'd like to see gps made more accessible to ease some of the stress on a&e. My mp brought it up in parliament.


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> Exeter. It's got to the stage where the earliest gp appts are 6 to 8 weeks away for any gp at the practice I use, longer if you want to see your own. I phoned one time last year, I hadn't seen a gp in over 25 years, and was told that they were booked up until the end of the next month, but didn't have the diaries for the following month yet and could I call back in 2 weeks. I was told to go to a&e.
> 
> The practice stopped offering urgent appointments last year, patients have to go to the rd&e or there is a walk in centre open until 4. There was some concern it may close. I don't know what's going on here. Maybe if you have small children you can get an appointment sooner, but I don't think so. For some reason my area is really bad for gp access.
> 
> It's one of the reasons I'd like to see gps made more accessible to ease some of the stress on a&e. My mp brought it up in parliament.


Absolutely disgraceful! It seems like the a&e crisis could be really improved by having more gps.

Training more will take years though...


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> That's ok, I don't take it to heart lol
> 
> I'm genuinely sorry to hear its not going to be a nice day for you. Take care Bisbow x


Thank you
I'm back sooner than I thought
It was not as bad as I expected

So, I am all geared up and ready to do battle again


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> Can you provide some evidence to support your opinion please?
> 
> You need to do more research into things like welfare sanctions Elles.
> 
> I dont know if you missed this signed letter supporting Labours anti austerity economics? The signatory list is stunning. I'm sure these leading academics have a far better understanding than anyone on this forum lol


Welfare sanctions, exactly. It's not that the money isn't there, it's that it's difficult for some to get it. 3 billion I think it is that isn't claimed by pensioners alone, because it's too difficult for them to claim it. Disabled jumping through hoops and being denied money, because they were ill and missed an appointment, or waiting over a year to get an appointment. Tests that are far too strict. A housing crisis. That kind of thing. Labour don't need to plough billions into all sorts of extra schemes, they need to make sure that people are getting what they need and are entitled to. Don't offer them cake with icing and end up with no one able to afford bread, or keep throwing money at wasteful enterprises.

If labour get in we'll see won't we. Corbyn is nearly 70 and half his party don't agree with him, so he'd better be quick.


----------



## Smuge

Corbyn calling on May to resign 3 days before a GE seems rather pointless... unless he thinks that he isnt going to win


----------



## Elles

Oh and evidence, you want me to take photos of my neighbours?   I suppose I could take a pic of her ambulance, hand rail and motorised wheelchair cover and the trampoline down the road, wait for the dogs to be let out.


----------



## kimthecat

Smuge said:


> Corbyn calling on May to resign 3 days before a GE seems rather pointless... unless he thinks that he isnt going to win


he's getting desperate .
How many times has Corbyn been asked to resign and refused by his own MPs , I've lost count. What a hypocrypt.

you could have a cop on every street in the country and it wont stop terrorist attacks .


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Bisbow said:


> It is not just the manifestos, I like to know what each candidate is like and what he/she stands for
> The manifesto does not tell you that and they mat be like yours and are rude and arrogant. Not all the candidates follow the manifestos blindly and I would like to make up my own mind as you have your candidate. If they are like yours I would give them a wide berth
> It is wrong to treat their constituents as yours did you


Do you mean you would like to meet them? Last election I met our Lib Dem candidate when she knocked on the door of my parents house while I happened to be there but other than that it has been years since I have opened the door to find an election candidate on my doorstep, that applies to both general and local although to be fair the area has more houses to go around now so probably isn`t possible to get to everyone or maybe I`m always out when they call!


----------



## Bisbow

i


3dogs2cats said:


> Do you mean you would like to meet them? Last election I met our Lib Dem candidate when she knocked on the door of my parents house while I happened to be there but other than that it has been years since I have opened the door to find an election candidate on my doorstep, that applies to both general and local although to be fair the area has more houses to go around now so probably isn`t possible to get to everyone or maybe I`m always out when they call!


It would be nice to meet them but that is unlikely in this village
But some leaflets or such to give insight on their personal vews would be nice
Still no names forthcoming


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> he's getting desperate .
> How many times has Corbyn been asked to resign and refused by his own MPs , I've lost count. What a hypocrypt.
> 
> you could have a cop on every street in the country and it wont stop terrorist attacks .


Hes not a hypocrite. He was voted in by the largest mandate ever - twice! David Camerons former advisor has backed Corbyn in calling for her to resign. She has put our lives in danger - *not* Corbyn.










*For* *Too Long, Austerity Has Excused Cuts - Investing In Our Police Is Literally Critical*
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/jim-gamble/police-cuts-funding_b_16948424.html

*Police Federation Chair: army deployment was only needed because of Tory cuts to police numbers 
htt*p://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/manchester-attack-soldiers-streets-theresa-may-police-cuts-federation-a7755146.html


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> he's getting desperate .
> How many times has Corbyn been asked to resign and refused by his own MPs , I've lost count. What a hypocrypt.
> 
> you could have a cop on every street in the country and it wont stop terrorist attacks .


I think its a fairly important issue that as Home Secretary she accused the police who were warning her about the cuts to their numbers of "crying wolf". Also fairly important that people understand the number of armed officers has been cut since 2010 by 1,000 and whilst they are trying to improve this again now with more funding it will take until 2020 to get back to the numbers from 2010


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Thank you
> I'm back sooner than I thought
> It was not as bad as I expected
> 
> So, I am all geared up and ready to do battle again


Really glad it wasn't as bad as you feared.

I guess the gloves are off again then


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I think its a fairly important issue that as Home Secretary she accused the police who were warning her about the cuts to their numbers of "crying wolf". Also fairly important that people understand the number of armed officers has been cut since 2010 by 1,000 and whilst they are trying to improve this again now with more funding it will take until 2020 to get back to the numbers from 2010


yes it is important but how would May resigning now help except cause more chaos and benefit Corbyn ?

ETA I would hope she would learn from that .


----------



## Elles

How is it May's fault if the police ignored information they were given? All we know is that all of these people were known to the authorities, alongside many more, so what's going to happen about them? The only party who says they'll do anything at all is ukip. More police isnt going to stop people driving vans at people, they know who they are, so what's the plan?

Haven't we heard somewhere else about police and the cps ignoring information they've been given?

More police ignoring information isn't going to help. If there are more police what will they actually do?


----------



## Smuge

I wonder if Diane Abbott still wants to shut down MI5?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/35702...-after-she-tried-to-scrap-mi5-special-branch/

Terrifying that this is the Shadow Home Secretary


----------



## noushka05

Smuge said:


> I wonder if Diane Abbott still wants to shut down MI5?
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/35702...-after-she-tried-to-scrap-mi5-special-branch/
> 
> Terrifying that this is the Shadow Home Secretary


I don't think there could possibly be a worst Home Secretary then the last one.

Watch this. This is damning. Theresa May is NOT keeping us safe.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> yes it is important but how would May resigning now help except cause more chaos and benefit Corbyn ?
> 
> ETA I would hope she would learn from that .


I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with calls for May to resign just saying that the issues Corbyn has raised are important ones that need to be discussed, probably a publicity stunt calling for her to resign to get some coverage of this as sadly a lot of people believe them when they talk about keeping us safe and having more armed police.



Elles said:


> How is it May's fault if the police ignored information they were given? All we know is that all of these people were known to the authorities, alongside many more, so what's going to happen about them? The only party who says they'll do anything at all is ukip. More police isnt going to stop people driving vans at people, they know who they are, so what's the plan?
> 
> Haven't we heard somewhere else about police and the cps ignoring information they've been given?
> 
> More police ignoring information isn't going to help. If there are more police what will they actually do?


I suppose they would argue that cutting police numbers year after year has made it much harder (its often the community police officers who are got rid of) to correlate all the information they have and to follow up on every phone call. If police officers are too stretched because there are not enough of them and they keep having their days off and leave cancelled then it is Mays fault.


----------



## Smuge

noushka05 said:


> I don't think there could possibly be a worst Home Secretary then the last one.
> 
> Watch this. This is damning. Theresa May is NOT keeping us safe.


I am not voting Tory. But lets not kid ourselves here - Jeremy Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbott etc are no friends of the police and our armed forces. Until he became leader Corbyn openly bragged about how he voted against all counter terror legislation. Not only would Corbyn not keep us safe, he wouldn't even want to try

Mcdonnell - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...for-MI5-and-armed-police-to-be-disbanded.html

I have already covered abbott

Corbyn - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ns-three-decades-blocking-terror-legislation/

It goes on and on and on...


----------



## Dr Pepper

Smuge said:


> I wonder if Diane Abbott still wants to shut down MI5?
> 
> Terrifying that this is the Shadow Home Secretary


I've heard she's gutted she failed to shut it down but is determined to prevent the release of the 6th one next year. She's no fan of Tom Cruise apparently.


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> you could have a cop on every street in the country and it wont stop terrorist attacks


True; and to be honest, the police response in the latest incident was amazing...all three terrorists dead within eight (I read) minutes. It couldn't have been much faster.


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> True; and to be honest, the police response in the latest incident was amazing...all three terrorists dead within eight (I read) minutes. It couldn't have been much faster.


 I thought that too. 
We had the bombings in 2006 and now the latest one in 2017 and I have always felt safe in London .


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-2017-40157259

*Former terrorism legislation reviewer calls for return of control orders*

Lord Alex Carlile, the former independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, says it's absolutely clear to all those involved in counter-terrorism issues that the police and security services have the resources they need.

He called for a return to control orders - which detained foreign terrorism suspects without trial - claiming "they saved lives".

But former Conservative justice minister Dominic Raab claimed the powers "leaked like a sieve" and were attacked by the courts.

If there's any evidence that any powers need to be looked at "we'll do so", he said.

Lord Carlile said he could not say if control orders would have dealt with the terror attackers on Saturday, but he said the powers acted "well within human rights leglislation and I'm telling you they work"

*Former foreign secretary 'concerned' when control orders scrapped*

"I bow to no-one in my admiration of what the security services try to do," says former Labour Foreign Secretary Dame Margaret Beckett, who has also served on Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee.

She says the committee was "concerned" when control orders were dropped and calls for all counter-terrorism measures to be looked at "afresh".

Dame Margaret adds: "I have a degree of respect for Theresa May but she cannot talk as though she's the only one with a degree of wisdom."


----------



## rona

Cleo38 said:


> But her party has been in government so it's the Conservatives that have tolerated this ......


Pfft.......told to do by the EU you mean



KittenKong said:


> Tony Blair said something quite similar after the 7/7 bombings yet was ridiculed for it.
> 
> So, do you think Blair was wrong while May is right?


You'll have to give me the quote
I don't know in what context Blair said it, so I can't answer your conundrum. All I know is it's something I'm pleased to hear.



Elles said:


> t's got to the stage where the earliest gp appts are 6 to 8 weeks away for any gp at the practice I use, longer if you want to see your own. I phoned one time last year, I hadn't seen a gp in over 25 years, and was told that they were booked up until the end of the next month, but didn't have the diaries for the following month yet and could I call back in 2 weeks. I was told to go to a&e.


My OH had this issue with his surgery, changed to mine just a few miles apart and hey presto, appointments when you need them. Maybe you have a surgery like mine in your neck of the woods


----------



## kimthecat

Just to be mischievous and annoy people Im posting this .


----------



## rona

When I watched the Dimbleby programme the other night, it struck me that Corbyn came out, and before saying anything else, lead with an attack on Mrs May. Totally irrelevant to the programme.

Now he's trying to score points on a tragedy. Really not the man I thought he was to begin with. I thought he had principles. Guess I was wrong


----------



## KittenKong

Odin_cat said:


> Absolutely disgraceful! It seems like the a&e crisis could be really improved by having more gps.
> 
> Training more will take years though...


I note some adverts for private healthcare on tv, generally not seen since the 1980s with emphasis on no waiting lists.


----------



## KittenKong

Smuge said:


> I am not voting Tory. But lets not kid ourselves here - Jeremy Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbott etc are no friends of the police and our armed forces. Until he became leader Corbyn openly bragged about how he voted against all counter terror legislation. Not only would Corbyn not keep us safe, he wouldn't even want to try
> 
> Mcdonnell - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...for-MI5-and-armed-police-to-be-disbanded.html
> 
> I have already covered abbott
> 
> Corbyn - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ns-three-decades-blocking-terror-legislation/
> 
> It goes on and on and on...


They were rightly critical of the police years ago, as many were over the handling of the racist murder of Steven Lawrence and the old sus laws that targeted mainly black people.

To be critical of that doesn't make one anti police.

Things have thankfully changed for the better since then.


----------



## Smuge

KittenKong said:


> They were rightly critical of the police years ago, as many were over the handling of the racist murder of Steven Lawrence and the old sus laws that targeted mainly black people.
> 
> To be critical of that doesn't make one anti police.
> 
> Things have thankfully changed for the better since then.


Always an excuse.

The man defended those who support ISIS just a few short years ago - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-supporters-should-not-prosecuted-expressing/

Corbyn is not fit to be a local Cllr nevermind Prime Minister.


----------



## noushka05

Smuge said:


> I am not voting Tory. But lets not kid ourselves here - Jeremy Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbott etc are no friends of the police and our armed forces. Until he became leader Corbyn openly bragged about how he voted against all counter terror legislation. Not only would Corbyn not keep us safe, he wouldn't even want to try
> 
> Mcdonnell - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...for-MI5-and-armed-police-to-be-disbanded.html
> 
> I have already covered abbott
> 
> Corbyn - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ns-three-decades-blocking-terror-legislation/
> 
> It goes on and on and on...


That's the right wing media's spin on things 

He voted against counter terror legislation which would impede on OUR civil liberties. May has also voted against it in the past - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40111329

Authoritarian governments use terrorism as an excuse to curb of its citizens - look at Mays dreadful 'snoopers charter' for example. It is Orwellian!  Only China & Russia violate their citizens privacy as much as us - http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...cy-as-much-the-snoopers-charter-a6907136.html



rona said:


> Pfft.......told to do by the EU you mean


:Hilarious



rona said:


> When I watched the Dimbleby programme the other night, it struck me that Corbyn came out, and before saying anything else, lead with an attack on Mrs May. Totally irrelevant to the programme.
> 
> Now he's trying to score points on a tragedy. Really not the man I thought he was to begin with. I though he had principles. Guess I was wrong


No hes saying what hes said all along


----------



## kimthecat

"For the many , not the few "is hardly original . I watched The Queen last night about events following the death of Diana and Tony Blair was the new prime minister and he said it 20 years ago .


----------



## noushka05

Smuge said:


> Always an excuse.
> 
> The man defended those who support ISIS just a few short years ago - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-supporters-should-not-prosecuted-expressing/
> 
> Corbyn is not fit to be a local Cllr nevermind Prime Minister.


Heres what lifelong Tory Peter Oborne says about Corbyn. You have fallen for the smears against him.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Those calling for Theresa May's resignation should hang there heads in shame. Corbyn is nothing but a terrorist apologist and is against the shoot to kill policy. These men in London had what was assumed was suicide vests on so Corbyn would have let them do what they where doing? Theresa May has more experience with dealing with terrorism than anyone else currently in Parliament previously being home secretary. Corbyn has no experience with this except apologising to them and celebrating there acts. He should be ashamed of his new move to get her to step down.


----------



## Smuge

noushka05 said:


> Heres what lifelong Tory Peter Oborne says about Corbyn. You have fallen for the smears against him.
> 
> View attachment 313387


My smears about him? It is not my fault that the man stood up in Parliamwent and defended ISIS supporters.

He defended ISIS supporters, he worked with Hamas, he is an open ally of the IRA, an opponent of the british army and he makes me sick to the pit of my stomach.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Those calling for Theresa May's resignation should hang there heads in shame. Corbyn is nothing but a terrorist apologist and is against the shoot to kill policy. These men in London had what was assumed was suicide vests on so Corbyn would have let them do what they where doing? Theresa May has more experience with dealing with terrorism than anyone else currently in Parliament. Corbyn has none except apologising to them and celebrating there acts. He should be ashamed of his new move to get her to step down.


I'm sensing another u - turn? lol

Remind again, which Home Secretary made the massive cuts to our police force? And which PM has been dealing arms to extremists who export terrorism across the globe?


----------



## Smuge

I look forward to seeing how @noushka05 is going to excuse the growing antisemitism within the Labour party in recent years


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> I'm sensing another u - turn? lol


No


----------



## Guest

Elles said:


> How is it May's fault if the police ignored information they were given? All we know is that all of these people were known to the authorities, alongside many more, so what's going to happen about them? The only party who says they'll do anything at all is ukip. More police isnt going to stop people driving vans at people, they know who they are, so what's the plan?
> 
> Haven't we heard somewhere else about police and the cps ignoring information they've been given?
> 
> More police ignoring information isn't going to help. If there are more police what will they actually do?


The information from the Police anti terrorist hotline

This is nothing to do with the Police. The Police anti terrorist hotline is manned by civilian staff. The information is passed on to the security services. Unless people dialled 999, it would have bypassed the Police entirely.
My sister lives in Devon, in a lovely village where the local Police wander round once in a blue moon. I was talking to her this morning & we both agreed, thank goodness this didn't happen near her - Taunton, Tivvy, even Exeter, don't have full time armed response Police . Devon shares many of its' resources with Cornwall, but, as she pointed out neither does it have a large Muslim community, so it is simple to see this as a big city problem.
The met Police used to employ 68% more Police community support officers. My son was one of the first to pass through Hendon in 2007. He worked on a local Boroughs' safer Neighborhood team. He liased with local schools being in each local secondary school on a bi weekly basis & built up tremendous contacts in all local Communities. This freed up the Police for other tasks. He was lucky enough to move up to be a PC before the cuts were made. 68% were made redundant.
Theresa May is loathed by the Police rank & file. There was a Police federation conference not so long ago where she made a speech & absolute silence when it ended. What the cameras don't show is how many members had turned their backs on her. Do not forget, Cressida Dick is NOT a Police Officer, she has no more powers of arrest than you. She was appointed by Amber Rudd, she is hardly going to say, we are underfunded, under manned & it is your Governments fault. I bet you anything you like, she would if she could though.
WHY are the barriers up on bridges today? Why not 3 months ago? smacks of bolting the stable door & If I was a relative of those injured / killed on London Bridge, I would damn well want to know who's decision it was to wait.


----------



## noushka05

Smuge said:


> My smears about him? It is not my fault that the man stood up in Parliamwent and defended ISIS supporters.
> 
> He defended ISIS supporters, he worked with Hamas, he is an open ally of the IRA, an opponent of the british army and he makes me sick to the pit of my stomach.


The media smears you believe.

Corbyn has strived for peace all his career. In 2013 Corbyn was awarded The Gandhi Foundation International Peace Award for consistent 30yr commitment to social justice and non‐violence. While May sells arms to extremists who fund ISIS.


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Did you see what else he said? ( Oh ETA its a different set of tories not your York guy! (well point made about them all feeling contempt ) )
> View attachment 313339
> 
> This is the attitude of the tories - they are devoid of empathy. You only have to look at the voting histories of May & her cohorts to see the utter contempt they have for the poor & for ordinary working people. Corbyn has given millions of people, who are barely clinging on by their fingertips, hope.


I'd like to see just one of these smug, pig ignorant, loud mouthed Tory's endure a year on skid row Noush' . Deprive them of their champagne lifestyle, take away their car, friends with helping hands, access to their bank account and give them the bare minimum to survive on, (£45.00 should do it) in a bedsit, whilst the 'benefit system' processes their claim with the same crippling indifference it exhibits to everyone else.

Let them experience first hand the humiliation of trying to claim from the so called 'benefit system'. Let them experience the delays, the endless telephone calls, the countless number of times calls are disconnected forcing you to call back, the mistakes, the number of times the system is down delaying claims even further.
Better still, find some strange, poorly explained reason why they can't be referred to a food bank.
We could even subject them to further humiliation by sanctioning them for completing their claims forms incorrectly.
Or how about, making them homeless. Kicked out onto the street by a landlord who grew tired of excuses and waiting for his money due to a system that doesn't work effectively or efficiently,
And lets make no exceptions or award any preferential treatment. We can't go making exceptions for one person because, as we already know, if everyone else was to find out, they'd demand they be treated equally.
I have a thousand and one different scenarios of how to make the clever 845t4rd's life as miserable as possible and each and every one as real as the circumstances that affected the people I once knew.
Lets see íf they're so arrogant and mouthy after just a few months away from lie, lie land.

And when the devil drives, let's see if they've been desperately tempted to work for a fiver in the dark of an alley.

W4nk3r5!

PS, come winter, maybe someone will be merciful enough to show them how to p155 on their fingers to stave off the bleedin' cold.


----------



## noushka05

Smuge said:


> I look forward to seeing how @noushka05 is going to excuse the growing antisemitism within the Labour party in recent years


You'll have a long wait. Heres what Jewish Voice have to say on the matter - http://www.jvoiceuk.org/p/centrists-vs-lefties-how-to-solve-abuse.html


----------



## rona

I seem to remember police taking to the streets at the end of the last Labour government.


----------



## Smuge

noushka05 said:


> The media smears you believe.
> 
> Corbyn has strived for peace all his career. In 2013 Corbyn was awarded The Gandhi Foundation International Peace Award for consistent 30yr commitment to social justice and non‐violence. While May sells arms to extremists who fund ISIS.
> 
> View attachment 313390


lol thats it settled then


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Those calling for Theresa May's resignation should hang there heads in shame. Corbyn is nothing but a terrorist apologist and is against the shoot to kill policy. These men in London had what was assumed was suicide vests on so Corbyn would have let them do what they where doing? Theresa May has more experience with dealing with terrorism than anyone else currently in Parliament previously being home secretary. Corbyn has no experience with this except apologising to them and celebrating there acts. He should be ashamed of his new move to get her to step down.


Sighs again. I already posted you all the information last week to show that Corbyn had indeed condemned the IRA and voted on an EDM (as shown by Hansard records) condeming their actions in 1994. As to you saying he should be ashamed of his "new move" to get her to step down - it isn't his move - he was asked to comment on the calls

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40154361

But as he embarked on a whirlwind series of campaign events planned for the next 72 hours, Mr Corbyn said there was "deep anger" at the number of police and firefighters who had lost their jobs in recent years.

Asked whether he agreed with a *call by some,* including former Downing Street adviser *Steve Hilton*, for Mrs May to quit, he said he did, but added that the "best way" for the issue to be dealt with was by voters on Thursday.

"There is an election, everybody has a choice. A lot of people are very angry and *would have wanted her to resign were she still *home secretary. The choice is going to be made on Thursday by the people of this country."

So a former aid of David Cameron's called Steve Hilton has called for her to resign not Jeremy Corbyn

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/david-cameron-apos-former-aide-084545945.html

David Cameron's former director of strategy has called for Theresa May to resign over her record on security following Saturday's deadly terror attack in London.

He said Mrs May, who served as Home Secretary between 2010 and 2016, should be "resigning not seeking re-election".

Mr Hilton, who worked for Mr Cameron during the Coalition Government, tweeted: "Theresa May responsible for security failures of London Bridge, Manchester, Westminster Bridge. Should be resigning not seeking re-election".

Responding to newspaper reports which suggested that Mrs May was sending a tough message to the security services in the wake of the London Bridge attack, Mr Hilton said: "Theresa May blame-shifting again. her spin doctors attack MI5, but she was in charge of them for years..."


----------



## porps

while i still ultimately think the state, any state, is a bad thing, this is probably the first time in my lifetime (at least since i have been old enough to vote) that there's been an actual meaningful choice, so i have already sent my postal vote for the labour party.. get the tory scum out.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> The media smears you believe
> 
> View attachment 313390





noushka05 said:


> The media smears you believe.
> 
> Corbyn has strived for peace all his career. In 2013 Corbyn was awarded The Gandhi Foundation International Peace Award for consistent 30yr commitment to social justice and non‐violence. While May sells arms to extremists who fund ISIS.
> 
> View attachment 313390


It amazes me how you insist everything nasty in the media about JCis false and smears but everything about TM has to be true

The only way he works for peace is by sympathising with terrorists

Didn't labour sell arms, no of course not, they are too saintly

And calling for her to resign shows me how desperate he is getting, he would wipe the floor with anyone who stands in his way


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> It amazes me how you insist everything nasty in the media about JCis false and smears but everything about TM has to be true
> 
> The only way he works for peace is by sympathising with terrorists
> 
> Didn't labour sell arms, no of course not, they are too saintly
> 
> And calling for her to resign shows me how desperate he is getting, he would wipe the floor with anyone who stands in his way


He didn't call for her to resign - David Cameron's adviser Steve Hilton did and JC was asked by journalists for his views - see my post to @stockwellcat above.


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> He didn't call for her to resign - David Cameron's adviser Steve Hilton did and JC was asked by journalists for his views - see my post to @stockwellcat above.


According to BBC news, he did
Steve Hilton is suffering from a case of sour grapes


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> According to BBC news, he did
> Steve Hilton is suffering from a case of sour grapes


Its BBC News I quoted - not really interested in Steve Hilton's grapes, sour or otherwise other than to repeat it was him who called for her to resign and JC was asked if he agreed with it -

"But as he embarked on a whirlwind series of campaign events planned for the next 72 hours, Mr Corbyn said there was "deep anger" at the number of police and firefighters who had lost their jobs in recent years.

Asked whether he agreed with a call by some, including former Downing Street adviser Steve Hilton, for Mrs May to quit, he said he did, but added that the "best way" for the issue to be dealt with was by voters on Thursday.

"There is an election, everybody has a choice. A lot of people are very angry and would have wanted her to resign were she still home secretary.

"The choice is going to be made on Thursday by the people of this country."


----------



## Elles

It's always been like it, with people waiting for benefits and not being able to find somewhere to live because all the ads say no dss. None of this is new and no one has ever solved it. A lot of the NHS is inefficient and wasteful, same in councils. Some are good, some not so good. People have complained about the police and the law for years, too much, too little, too soft, too hard. Everyone complains. It doesn't matter who gets in, they're all politicians, even Jeremy Corbyn and people will still complain. At least in this country not always, but mostly, life is what you make it.


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-to-criticise-donald-trump-over-a3557266.html

The "strong and stable" TM still cannot publicly condemn Donald Trump. First was his Muslim ban, then withdrawing from the Climate change agreement and now this:


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Its BBC News I quoted - not really interested in Steve Hilton's grapes, sour or otherwise other than to repeat it was him who called for her to resign and JC was asked if he agreed with it -
> 
> "But as he embarked on a whirlwind series of campaign events planned for the next 72 hours, Mr Corbyn said there was "deep anger" at the number of police and firefighters who had lost their jobs in recent years.
> 
> Asked whether he agreed with a call by some, including former Downing Street adviser Steve Hilton, for Mrs May to quit, he said he did, but added that the "best way" for the issue to be dealt with was by voters on Thursday.
> 
> "There is an election, everybody has a choice. A lot of people are very angry and would have wanted her to resign were she still home secretary.
> 
> "The choice is going to be made on Thursday by the people of this country."


So, he didn't say she should resign didn't he

Now he has changed his mind, he knows he upset people and now wants to get back into their books
I said he was getting desperate


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-terror-attack-general-election-a7773491.html

Here we go again, Theresa "Can't Do Wrong" May won't admit cutting police numbers has left the country less safe. She was warned by the Police federation who are the experts, she belittled them, accusing them of scaremongering.

It's all the Internet's fault apparently. What will she claim to be "extremist" material? Pro EU, Labour, the SNP, even the Lib Dems. Anything that criticises her?

Has she not forgotten the internet wasn't around when the UK was subjected to terrorist attacks over 40 years ago?

She'll do the same with Brexit. I noticed the Northern Echo had a four page pull out advertising TM "for a good Brexit deal".

So, when she walks out of negotiations claiming the EU won't accept her terms she'll come whinging on national television blaming everything on the EU. She's already making enemies with them.

Trust May to run the country? I wouldn't trust her to boil a kettle.


----------



## cheekyscrip

One cut police force. Other opposed anti terrorists laws.
Who could make us safer?
Possibly Space Navies Party...


----------



## Zaros

cheekyscrip said:


> One cut police force. Other opposed anti terrorists laws.
> Who could make us safer?
> Possibly Space Navies Party...


I say we put our dogs amongst them all Scrippy.

They're an excellent judge of character.:Smug


----------



## noushka05

cheekyscrip said:


> One cut police force. Other opposed anti terrorists laws.
> Who could make us safer?
> Possibly Space Navies Party...


Corbyn opposed anti terrorist laws which took away all of our civil liberties Cheeky - like Mays 'snoopers charter'. We are now on par with China and Russia as the most spied on cirizens in the world - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1533054/Britain-the-most-spied-on-nation-in-the-world.html She is going to use these latest terrorist atrocities as an excuse to crack down on us further. Corbyn & all decent MPs will vote against this.


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> Corbyn opposed anti terrorist laws which took away all of our civil liberties Cheeky - like Mays 'snoopers charter'. We are now on par with China and Russia as the most spied on cirizens in the world - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1533054/Britain-the-most-spied-on-nation-in-the-world.html She is going to use these latest terrorist atrocities as an excuse to crack down on us further. Corbyn & all decent MPs will vote against this.


Indeed and don't forget when Tony Blair came up with a similar idea he was ridiculed for it. Remember his, "If you've got nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" soundbite?

Not least a certain David Davis was one of the most vocal against it.

....Yet he keeps quiet when the Tories propose it!

I'm not saying Blair was right, on the contrary, but talk about one law for Labour and another for the Tories.


----------



## Dr Pepper

KittenKong said:


> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-to-criticise-donald-trump-over-a3557266.html
> 
> The "strong and stable" TM still cannot publicly condemn Donald Trump. First was his Muslim ban, then withdrawing from the Climate change agreement and now this:
> View attachment 313441


Why on earth do you expect Mrs May to continually criticise Mr Trump? How's that going to help or achieve anything? Or do you want all relationship's with the USA to break down? Mr Trump is going to be President for another three and a half years at best, nice to see she's playing the longer game.


----------



## KittenKong

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-to-the-uk-his-invitation-should-be-rescinded

Another fine editorial from The Guardian.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> How is it May's fault if the police ignored information they were given? All we know is that all of these people were known to the authorities, alongside many more, so what's going to happen about them? The only party who says they'll do anything at all is ukip. More police isnt going to stop people driving vans at people, they know who they are, so what's the plan?
> 
> Haven't we heard somewhere else about police and the cps ignoring information they've been given?
> 
> More police ignoring information isn't going to help. If there are more police what will they actually do?


_
'Theresa May is the single most damaging thing for the police" "She treats them with contempt"_








Calvine said:


> True; and to be honest, the police response in the latest incident was amazing...all three terrorists dead within eight (I read) minutes. It couldn't have been much faster.


It was, and that is DESPITE the massive cuts. Shouldn't we be supporting the police who tell us cuts are having a detrimental affect?



Zaros said:


> I'd like to see just one of these smug, pig ignorant, loud mouthed Tory's endure a year on skid row Noush' . Deprive them of their champagne lifestyle, take away their car, friends with helping hands, access to their bank account and give them the bare minimum to survive on, (£45.00 should do it) in a bedsit, whilst the 'benefit system' processes their claim with the same crippling indifference it exhibits to everyone else.
> 
> Let them experience first hand the humiliation of trying to claim from the so called 'benefit system'. Let them experience the delays, the endless telephone calls, the countless number of times calls are disconnected forcing you to call back, the mistakes, the number of times the system is down delaying claims even further.
> Better still, find some strange, poorly explained reason why they can't be referred to a food bank.
> We could even subject them to further humiliation by sanctioning them for completing their claims forms incorrectly.
> Or how about, making them homeless. Kicked out onto the street by a landlord who grew tired of excuses and waiting for his money due to a system that doesn't work effectively or efficiently,
> And lets make no exceptions or award any preferential treatment. We can't go making exceptions for one person because, as we already know, if everyone else was to find out, they'd demand they be treated equally.
> I have a thousand and one different scenarios of how to make the clever 845t4rd's life as miserable as possible and each and every one as real as the circumstances that affected the people I once knew.
> Lets see íf they're so arrogant and mouthy after just a few months away from lie, lie land.
> 
> And when the devil drives, let's see if they've been desperately tempted to work for a fiver in the dark of an alley.
> 
> W4nk3r5!
> 
> PS, come winter, maybe someone will be merciful enough to show them how to p155 on their fingers to stave off the bleedin' cold.


You're not the only one. Maybe they'd grow a moral compass if they had a dose of the suffering they have caused. The sad thing is the Conservatives don't even give a damn about the 'conservatives' who vote for them. Once they have got back into power they will use Statutory Instruments to bypass Parliament and give themselves even more power - then they will screw their supporters as well. Their greed is insatiable. They will destroy this country.



porps said:


> while i still ultimately think the state, any state, is a bad thing, this is probably the first time in my lifetime (at least since i have been old enough to vote) that there's been an actual meaningful choice, so i have already sent my postal vote for the labour party.. get the tory scum out.


Great to see you back & telling it like it is!



Bisbow said:


> It amazes me how you insist everything nasty in the media about JCis false and smears but everything about TM has to be true
> 
> The only way he works for peace is by sympathising with terrorists
> 
> Didn't labour sell arms, no of course not, they are too saintly
> 
> And calling for her to resign shows me how desperate he is getting, he would wipe the floor with anyone who stands in his way


Its not a smear when its a fact Bisbow. The tories ARE stealing YOUR NHS. They have cut public services to the bone until everything is in crisis. We know for a fact that austerity is a con to transfer public money into private pockets. We know for a fact that the tories are bankrolled by the filthy oil industry, corporations & the wealthy elite - this is who they represent.

New labour I'm sure did sell arms & I would never be an apologist for them - labour today are different. Corbyn opposes arms dealing, we have the chance of a better world.

Unlike May, Corbyn is not an authoritarian - he wants to give the grass roots more power not less


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-to-the-uk-his-invitation-should-be-rescinded
> 
> Another fine editorial from The Guardian.
> View attachment 313451


Weak, weak, weak.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Why on earth do you expect Mrs May to continually criticise Mr Trump? How's that going to help or achieve anything? Or do you want all relationship's with the USA to break down? Mr Trump is going to be President for another three and a half years at best, nice to see she's playing the longer game.


Sucking up to a racist moron who insults are London Mayor because we're desperate for a deal. This is what we've been reduced to. Disgusting.


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> Indeed and don't forget when Tony Blair came up with a similar idea he was ridiculed for it. Remember his, "If you've got nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" soundbite?
> 
> Not least a certain David Davis was one of the most vocal against it.
> 
> ....Yet he keeps quiet when the Tories propose it!
> 
> I'm not saying Blair was right, on the contrary, but talk about one law for Labour and another for the Tories.


In the past May also voted against anti terrorism legislation


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...lection-2017-unflattering-light-a7774326.html

Dear God, I shouldn't be surprised I'm shocked by her sheer arrogance sometimes.

It's now the Lib Dems fault!!!!!


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Happy Paws2

KittenKong said:


> No longer Strong and Stable, but Strong, Stable....
> View attachment 313454


or The Borg Queen....Resistance is Futile


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...lection-2017-unflattering-light-a7774326.html
> 
> Dear God, I shouldn't be surprised I'm shocked by her sheer arrogance sometimes.
> 
> It's now the Lib Dems fault!!!!!
> 
> View attachment 313452
> View attachment 313453


Look @KittenKong , it is NEVER the tories fault! You should know that by now

I suppose Lib dems makes a change from the usual list though. I'll have to add it lol -

Labour, the EU, immigrants, benefit scroungers, Corbyn, badgers, lib dems.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Sucking up to a racist moron who insults are London Mayor because we're desperate for a deal. This is what we've been reduced to. Disgusting.


Hardly sucking up, more paying lip service at best.

Anyhow, thank god there's only three days to go until Mr Corbyn either resigns or faces a leadership contest, again. Sorry, I mean the results of the election will be known.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Hardly sucking up, more paying lip service at best.
> 
> Anyhow, thank god there's only three days to go until Mr Corbyn either resigns or faces a leadership contest, again. Sorry, I mean the results of the election will be known.


It takes New Yorks Mayor to defend him from Trumps attack! May is WEAK.

*Bill de Blasio*‏Verified [email protected]*NYCMayor* 13h13 hours ago

_Mayor Sadiq Khan is doing an extraordinary job supporting Londoners in a time of pain. _
_President Trump's attack on him is unacceptable_.


----------



## cheekyscrip

noushka05 said:


> Corbyn opposed anti terrorist laws which took away all of our civil liberties Cheeky - like Mays 'snoopers charter'. We are now on par with China and Russia as the most spied on cirizens in the world - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1533054/Britain-the-most-spied-on-nation-in-the-world.html She is going to use these latest terrorist atrocities as an excuse to crack down on us further. Corbyn & all decent MPs will vote against this.


We are anyhow. But even on pf one is not free and all, even pms are available.

Those are fanatics . They just want to cleanse the world of us basically.

I am afraid people prefer generally to be safer rather than free.

At the moment we are neither.

Just one question..Mrs May was Home Secretary till last year/ For many, many years and she does not accept responsibility?

Will she ever take any for anything?
Like crash Brexit?

If Corbyn gets elected we can have Abbott to do Johnson....


----------



## stockwellcat.

48 hours to go until all those that haven't voted and are registered to vote go to the polls.

72 hours and we'll know if Diane Abbott will be in charge of National Security? Scary thought.

72 hours and we'll know if Corbyn is going to be in power or if Theresa May remains in power.


----------



## KittenKong

Happy Paws said:


> or The Borg Queen....Resistance is Futile


Think you're referring to this:


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> 48 hours to go until all those that haven't voted and are registered to vote go to the polls.
> 
> 72 hours and we'll know if Diane Abbott will be in charge of National Security? Scary thought.
> 
> 72 hours and we'll know if Corbyn is going to be in power or if Theresa May remains in power.


There couldn't possible BE a worse Home Secretary than the previous one. Have you listened to what the police are saying?


----------



## stockwellcat.

*Diane Abbott struggles with questions on recent London terror report in another car crash interview*

The Shadow Home Secretary fails to answer questions about a recent report into London's terror preparedness.

Diane Abbott is facing fresh criticism after she struggled to answer questions in yet another interview - this time about a recent report on improving London's terror preparedness.

Asked about the recommendations made by Lord Harris's October 2016 inquiry, of which there were 127, the Shadow Home Secretary could not name one.

"Do you think some of the things he said in there were prescient and should be acted on," asked Sky News presenter Dermot Murnaghan.

Ms Abbott replied that it "was about preparedness and resilience" and that we needed to act "not necessarily on every specific recommendation".

Asked to be more specific, particularly on the bullet points Lord Harris had included, Ms Abbott said it was "an important review and we should act on it".

Mr Murnaghan then asked what she thought about the report's recommendations on police forces, to which Ms Abbott replied: "What the idea that they should work more closely together?"

The presenter pointed out that Lord Harris had suggested they amalgamate, to which Ms Abbott said there might be resistance.

"Have you actually read the report?" asked Mr Murnaghan, to which she replied that she had.

But when she was asked about the physical resilience, Ms Abbott said she thought it was important. Mr Murnaghan pointed out the report was talking about putting up barriers.

It comes just over a month after Ms Abbott was criticised for underestimating the number of net losses Labour has suffered in local elections in a television interview with ITN.

After if she knew the number of net losses so far for Labour, the shadow Home Secretary said: "At the time of us doing this interview, I think the net losses are about 50."

The interviewer corrected her, saying: "They're actually 125 net losses so far."

Viewers quickly took to social media to criticise the gaffe.

Diane Abbott is a liability, acting like a tory plant who does not have the slightest clue. It's genuinely worrying to see #GE2017

- sukz (@sillwuka) June 6, 2017
Diane Abbott should stop doing TV appearances

- Ewan Valentine (@Ewan_Valentine) June 6, 2017
That came within days of her "car crash" interview with LBC, which saw Ms Abbott struggle to give clear numbers on Labour's plan to add 10,000 new police officer roles.

She gave several estimates for how much the new officers would cost, ranging from £300,000 to £80m.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/diane-abbott-general-election-latest-car-crash-interview-dermot-murnaghan-lord-harris-terror-report-a7774626.html?amp

Just think Diane Abbott could be in charge of National Security in 72 hours time. She's a liability.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> *Diane Abbott struggles with questions on recent London terror report in another car crash interview*
> 
> The Shadow Home Secretary fails to answer questions about a recent report into London's terror preparedness.
> 
> Diane Abbott is facing fresh criticism after she struggled to answer questions in yet another interview - this time about a recent report on improving London's terror preparedness.
> 
> Asked about the recommendations made by Lord Harris's October 2016 inquiry, of which there were 127, the Shadow Home Secretary could not name one.
> 
> "Do you think some of the things he said in there were prescient and should be acted on," asked Sky News presenter Dermot Murnaghan.
> 
> 
> 
> Asked about the recommendations made by Lord Harris's October 2016 inquiry, of which there were 127, the Shadow Home Secretary could not name one.
> 
> "Do you think some of the things he said in there were prescient and should be acted on," asked Sky News presenter Dermot Murnaghan.
> 
> Ms Abbott replied that it "was about preparedness and resilience" and that we needed to act "not necessarily on every specific recommendation".
> 
> Asked to be more specific, particularly on the bullet points Lord Harris had included, Ms Abbott said it was "an important review and we should act on it".
> 
> Mr Murnaghan then asked what she thought about the report's recommendations on police forces, to which Ms Abbott replied: "What the idea that they should work more closely together?"
> 
> The presenter pointed out that Lord Harris had suggested they amalgamate, to which Ms Abbott said there might be resistance.
> 
> "Have you actually read the report?" asked Mr Murnaghan, to which she replied that she had.
> 
> But when she was asked about the physical resilience, Ms Abbott said she thought it was important. Mr Murnaghan pointed out the report was talking about putting up barriers.
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/diane-abbott-general-election-latest-car-crash-interview-dermot-murnaghan-lord-harris-terror-report-a7774626.html?amp
> 
> Just think Diane Abbott could be in charge of National Security in 72 hours time. She's a liability.


And Mays record speaks for itself. And she hasn't ruled out MORE cuts.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/05/theresa-may-police-cuts-margaret-thatcher-budgets










I am thinking of our security - as well as our NHS, environment, foxes, badgers, elephants, the disabled, the poor, our democracy.

*
*


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> And Mays record speaks for itself. And she hasn't ruled out MORE cuts.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/05/theresa-may-police-cuts-margaret-thatcher-budgets
> 
> View attachment 313465
> 
> 
> I am thinking of our security - as well as our NHS, environment, foxes, badgers, elephants, the disabled, the poor, our democracy.


Diane Abbott is a liability both for her party and National Security.


----------



## stockwellcat.

*This woman is a liability and could be in charge of National Security in 72 hours time. Scary thought.





*


----------



## cheekyscrip

Do we have ANY strong and stable, at least moderately intelligent, with some understanding of home and foreign affairs , generally honest, kind to humans and animals leader?


South of the border?


Theresa is a disgrace and disaster...but is Corbyn electable?

Abbott.... She cannot be a school secretary not Home Secretary.

If I were her I would have made sure my house in under 100k...


If Corbyn cannot control her or get her out of harm way ...that does not show much?
Loyalty to old comrades is commendable, but that costs Labour many votes when she opens her mouth....


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Diane Abbott is a liability both for her party and National Security.


You really need to listen to what people on the front line are saying our safety is being compromised by this governments massive cuts. And its not just the police.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...byn-fire-service-dangerous-cuts-a7773826.html


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> You really need to listen to what people on the front line are saying our safety is being compromised by this governments massive cuts. And its not just the police.
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...byn-fire-service-dangerous-cuts-a7773826.html
> 
> View attachment 313466


Are you listening to them?
No.
You are just pushing your cause on here posting memes because you are anti Tory.

No I have not changed my mind on who I am voting for.


----------



## noushka05

cheekyscrip said:


> Do we have ANY strong and stable, at least moderately intelligent, with some understanding of home and foreign affairs , generally honest, kind to humans and animals leader?
> 
> South of the border?
> 
> Theresa is a disgrace and disaster...but is Corbyn electable?


He's electable if people vote for him  And the brainiest man in the world is voting labour - you cant get a better endorsement then that  So that's Noam Chomsky AND Stephen Hawking, two of the brightest minds on the planet endorsing Corbyn. As well as Bernie Sanders.
_
"I'm voting _*Labour*_ because another 5 years of Tory govt would be a disaster for NHS, police & public services_"


----------



## stockwellcat.

I can see that the memes and anti Tory posts are going to get pushed and pushed over the next 48 hours.

Labour have their faults as well and they aren't the cure to the problems in the UK at the moment to. Remember Labour are introducing taxes for everyone if they get in whilst the Conservatives currently offer your income to be tax free up to £11,500 per year which is to go up to £12,500 by the end of next Parliament if they get in.

For those interested I have not changed my mind.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Are you listening to them?
> No.
> You are just pushing your cause on here posting memes because you are anti Tory.
> 
> No I have not changed my mind on who I am voting for.


WTH are you talking about?? I posted loads of videos of the police for you to watch!


----------



## cheekyscrip

noushka05 said:


> He's electable if people vote for him  And the brainiest man in the world is voting labour - you cant get a better endorsement then that  So that's Noam Chomsky AND Stephen Hawking, two of the brightest minds on the planet endorsing Corbyn. As well as Bernie Sanders.
> _
> "I'm voting _*Labour*_ because another 5 years of Tory govt would be a disaster for NHS, police & public services_"
> 
> View attachment 313467


 But can you really imagine Abbott in key role in government???

Really???

Why do we have to have Muppets in every party ?

Johnson is a clown. Abbott is just totally ignorant or loses the plot in front of camera....


----------



## suewhite

cheekyscrip said:


> But can you really imagine Abbott in key role in government???
> 
> Really???


A big fat NO!!


----------



## noushka05

cheekyscrip said:


> But can you really imagine Abbott in key role in government???
> 
> Really???


Anything is better than the alternative. More cuts, more austerity, degraded environment, wildlife slaughter - or hope of something better.


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> But can you really imagine Abbott in key role in government???
> 
> Really???









> Abbott loses the plot in front of camera....


Not just on camera @cheekyscrip radio as well.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Not just on camera @cheekyscrip radio as well.


And the tories never have car crash interviews do they? I could post you videos as long as my arm of them!

Nothing Diane has done can be worse than what has done May. Nothing! May has put us all at risk with her massive cuts.


----------



## noushka05

*Terror In Britain: What Did The Prime Minister Know?*
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47153.htm


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> And the tories never have car crash interviews do they? I could post you videos as long as my arm of them!
> 
> Nothing Diane has done can be worse than what has done May. Nothing! May has put us all at risk with her massive cuts.


Really.
Whatever.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Really.
> Corbyn wants to cut the police by a further 10%.


No he does not


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> No he does not


10,000 extra police officers across the UK would not make an iota of a difference to:
1) Response times.
2) The amount of police on the streets. There will be more police officers tied up with paper work.

A baton does not protect a police officer as proven during the attacks on Saturday as the officer confronting the terrorists was stabbed.

We need more armed police. But saying this the response time would not have been any quicker to an incident like Saturday's attack. Corbyn hasn't promised more armed officers.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> 10,000 extra police officers across the UK would not make an iota of a difference to:
> 1) Response times.
> 2) The amount of police on the streets. There will be more police officers tied up with paper work.
> 
> A baton does not protect a police officer as proven during the attacks on Saturday as the officer confronting the terrorists was stabbed.
> 
> We need more armed police. Corbyn hasn't promised that.


Theresa May has crippled the police.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...t-wrong-police-cuts-theresa-may-a7772506.html

*
I'm a serving firearms officer and the Government is wrong to claim police cuts have nothing to do with recent attacks*

*Despite her denials, Theresa May's cuts to police numbers have made attacks like London and Manchester much more likely.*


----------



## stockwellcat.

@noushka05 
@KittenKong 
I know who I am voting for. I have not changed my mind and will be voting them in 48 hours time.

Labour has its faults and they aren't the cure to the UK's current problems. They promise the earth and to finance this taxes will go up for the everyday person as well as businesses.


----------



## Bisbow

stockwellcat said:


> We need more armed police. But saying this the response time would not have been any quicker to an incident like Saturday's attack. Corbyn hasn't promised more armed officers.


Well he won't when he does not want to upset his terrorist friends will he

That man has so many faces he has 360 degree vision


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Diane Abbott is a liability both for her party and National Security.


What makes you think May will do well? She's already had 7 years.....

And if you think this is anti Tory propaganda ask yourself this:

Margaret Thatcher looked after the police force under her premiership.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> @noushka05
> @KittenKong
> I know who I am voting for. I have not changed my mind and will be voting them in 48 hours time.
> 
> Labour has its faults and they aren't the cure to the UK's current problems. They promise the earth and to finance this taxes will go up for the everyday person as well as businesses.


Maybe you should see the awesome list of signatories who support Labour anti austerity manifesto  Now I'm pretty sure they are far better informed to judge it then any of us are 

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jun/03/the-big-issue-labour-manifesto-what-economy-needs


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> What makes you think May will do well? She's already had 7 years.....
> 
> And if you think this is anti Tory propaganda ask yourself this:
> 
> Margaret Thatcher looked after the police force under her premiership.


You do know the police cuts reflect the reduction in crime across the UK as crime has fallen alot overall year on year.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Well he won't when he does not want to upset his terrorist friends will he
> 
> That man has so many faces he has 360 degree vision


Its Theresa Mays evil friends we need to be worried about. Her collusion with them & arms dealing it putting us in danger - not Corbyn.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> You do know the police cuts reflect the reduction in crime across the UK as crime has fallen alot overall year on year.


You're just being an apologist for the tories. The police warned her the massive cuts put us at risk of terrorism. She accused the police of 'crying wolf'


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Its Theresa Mays evil friends we need to be worried about. Her collusion with them & arms dealing it putting us in danger - not Corbyn.
> 
> View attachment 313471


Yes and Corbyn would be making friends with them to and wanting to trade with them as well. What makes you think he won't?


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> You're just being an apologist for the tories. The police warned her the massive cuts put us at risk of terrorism. She accused the police of 'crying wolf'


Shall I show you the figures?
I am not apologising for no one.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Yes and Corbyn would be making friends with them to and wanting to trade with them as well. What makes you think he won't?


Don't talk ridiculous. He has always been opposed to trading with despots.


----------



## Jonescat

We need more police. Police to follow intelligence and have the time to deal with things that are not on top of the pile but will be one day if they are left alone. We need a better foreign policy, we need to stop selling arms to Saudi et al, and we need not to publish pictures of bombs with messages written on the side. We have the armed police we need, we are all agreed 8 mins is a good response time. Arming the police at all times is a distraction, and puts the blame on the operational heads instead of the strategic ones. Where is the plan? Who is actually competent to lead?


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Don't talk ridiculous. He has always been opposed to trading with despots.


But he shakes hands with terrorists :Muted


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Shall I show you the figures?
> I am not allowing for no one.


Do what you like, it wont alter the fact the police are under great strain because of the cuts.


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> *Terror In Britain: What Did The Prime Minister Know?*
> View attachment 313469


Those last three words of John Pilger's statement are music to my ears, Noush'

When are people going to realise that 'Terrorism' is a product of British Foreign Policy.

We should get out of other countries we have no business of interfering with, and bloody well stay out, and then maybe, just maybe the streets of Britain can return to normal once again.

Politicians never suffer the consequences of the sh1t they deliberately stir up, ordinary people do.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> But he shakes hands with terrorists :Muted


Doesn't she?:Muted


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> We need more armed police. .


And when they mistakenly shoot you down on the street and you know you're laid there dying, you'll still think more armed police on the streets was the right way to go will you?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Ok I'll be fair. Labour costed there manifesto pledges:
1) Raise to carers allowance - Costed by raising corporation tax.
2) 10,000 extra new police officers - Costed by raising corporation tax.
3) 30 hours free child care - Costed by raising corporation tax.
4) NHS funding raised - Costed by raising corporation tax.
5) Reversing benefit cuts - Costed by raising corporation tax.
6) Stopping the bedroom tax - Costed by raising corporation tax.

I'd hate to be a business owner paying corporation tax as it is going to be a huge raise in corporation tax to pay for the above.


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> Those last three words of John Pilger's statement are music to my ears, Noush'
> 
> When are people going to realise that 'Terrorism' is a product of British Foreign Policy.
> 
> We should get out of other countries we have no business of interfering with, and bloody well stay out, and then maybe, just maybe the streets of Britain can return to normal once again.
> 
> Politicians never suffer the consequences of the sh1t they deliberately stir up, ordinary people do.


Seems many people prefer to be wilfully ignorant, Zaros. They don't want change and hope of a better, safer world. If they did they would look further than the end of their noses at the root causes of terrorism & the major role we play in fuelling extremism.

I'll check the video out when I get back later


----------



## stockwellcat.

Zaros said:


> And when they mistakenly shoot you down on the street and you know you're laid there dying, you'll still think more armed police on the streets was the right way to go will you?


So why haven't residents of other European countries have these fears as police are armed in other European countries? You don't hear of innocent people being shot in these countries. I felt comfortable with police carrying side arms in the Netherlands when I lived there.

Police carry guns in Northern Ireland by the way and that is part of the UK.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> Seems many people prefer to be wilfully ignorant, Zaros. They don't want change and hope of a better, safer world. If they did they would look further than the end of their noses at the root causes of terrorism & the major role we play in fuelling extremism.
> 
> I'll check the video out when I get back later


It is you that can't see beyond the end of your nose
You refuse to see that he is the terrorists friend ans appeases them at every turn, they have him right where they want him
And you support him, I would have thought better from you


----------



## rona

Bisbow said:


> It is you that can't see beyond the end of your nose
> You refuse to see that he is the terrorists friend ans appeases them at every turn, they have him right where they want him
> And you support him, I would have thought better from you


I wouldn't ...............


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> So why haven't residents of other European countries have these fears as police are armed in other European countries? You don't hear of innocent people being shot in these countries. I felt comfortable with police carrying side arms in the Netherlands when I lived there.


Perhaps you want to be reminded of those who have been shot dead by mistake. Perhaps not.
Perhaps you're simply not interested. 
However, the information is there for you and everyone else to read.

And Britain and its mix of cultures is manifestly different to the Netherlands.

Just as the Finnish Police are manifestly different to British Police. You simply cannot compare.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> It is you that can't see beyond the end of your nose
> You refuse to see that he is the terrorists friend ans appeases them at every turn, they have him right where they want him
> And you support him, I would have thought better from you


Yes I support him, as do many highly respected public figures, environmentalists, economists etc. Because hes the ONLY hope we have of saving our NHS, badgers, foxes, elephants. He rejects austerity for the con we know it is. He offers millions of people suffering under tory austerity hope.

ETA can I ask why you support May who supports the most dangerous extremists in the world?


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Ok I'll be fair. Labour costed there manifesto pledges:
> 1) Raise to carers allowance - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 2) 10,000 extra new police officers - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 3) 30 hours free child care - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 4) NHS funding raised - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 5) Reversing benefit cuts - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 6) Stopping the bedroom tax - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 
> I'd hate to be a business owner paying corporation tax as it is going to be a huge raise in corporation tax to pay for the above.


You obviously don't want a health service & fully funded public services.


----------



## Bisbow

The hope they may have will be dashed to pieces in a very short while once the terrorists and militant unions get the control they want, and will get di he wins


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> The hope they may have will be dashed to pieces in a very short while once the terrorists and militant unions get the control they want


Under the tories there is no hope just more despair. This government are putting lives at risk.


----------



## rona

Pilger, the man that twists the truth by omission. Go look it up.

Also started a news paper to do much the same 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_on_Sunday


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> Under the tories there is no hope just more despair. This government are putting lives at risk.
> 
> View attachment 313475


Not as much of a risk as JC will put us all in, he is a puppet to all those he admires and will find excuses for then at every turn


----------



## 1290423

Morning all. Well thursday will soon be upon us and until this morning I was decided which way I was voting.then I read this. I don't normally copy and paste what I've seen elsewhere often but would be interested in your thoughts on this please serious replies welcome. Thanks xxx
This from Charlie Kostromin Will our Muslim communities blindly vote labour? 
This started in the 1950,s when labour changed the British National Act to open door immigration. 
Yes mass immigration is nothing new. But the Torys way back then were against mass immigration. 
Labour imported skilled Africans with false promises of a house and a good wage. 
They paid the African a third of the British mans wage. 
And when the African was entitled to their family into the country,a council house and NHS care. 
Labour refused them their rights and blamed the Torys. 
But the African felt they owed the Labour Party their votes. 
Labour realising this imported more people. 
But they need the majority to vote for them. 
So once again import more people. Make them promises,pander to them and they will vote for you. 
But then the Torys also realised this. So they also pander to the different communities as they grew. 
Labour once loved the Jewish until Muslim communities out grew them. 
They pandered to the polish hard worker allowing them to be paid poor wages,until mass immigration via the EU. 
So you see history keeps repeating itself time and time again with both Tory and Labour. 
But let us not forget labour pandered to the working class,the poor paid,then the unemployed and disabled of this country. 
Yet they like the Torys go back on their manifestos and promises. 
All we are is a vote to both labour and Tory. 
They USE the people of this country and those who enter the country. 
And the people fall for it time and time again. 
The people will not wake up to it,they can not see they are just used,they are pawns in labour/Torys political games.
And there ends my history lesson of the day.


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> So why haven't residents of other European countries have these fears as police are armed in other European countries? You don't hear of innocent people being shot in these countries. I felt comfortable with police carrying side arms in the Netherlands when I lived there.


Simple question.. Which country is the UK becoming more like.. America or the Netherlands? Given Corbyn and May, which countries would you associate with them?


----------



## rona

DT said:


> Morning all. Well thursday will soon be upon us and until this morning I was decided which way I was voting.then I read this. I don't normally copy and paste what I've seen elsewhere often but would be interested in your thoughts on this please serious replies welcome. Thanks xxx
> This from Charlie Kostromin Will our Muslim communities blindly vote labour?
> This started in the 1950,s when labour changed the British National Act to open door immigration.
> Yes mass immigration is nothing new. But the Torys way back then were against mass immigration.
> Labour imported skilled Africans with false promises of a house and a good wage.
> They paid the African a third of the British mans wage.
> And when the African was entitled to their family into the country,a council house and NHS care.
> Labour refused them their rights and blamed the Torys.
> But the African felt they owed the Labour Party their votes.
> Labour realising this imported more people.
> But they need the majority to vote for them.
> So once again import more people. Make them promises,pander to them and they will vote for you.
> But then the Torys also realised this. So they also pander to the different communities as they grew.
> Labour once loved the Jewish until Muslim communities out grew them.
> They pandered to the polish hard worker allowing them to be paid poor wages,until mass immigration via the EU.
> So you see history keeps repeating itself time and time again with both Tory and Labour.
> But let us not forget labour pandered to the working class,the poor paid,then the unemployed and disabled of this country.
> Yet they like the Torys go back on their manifestos and promises.
> All we are is a vote to both labour and Tory.
> They USE the people of this country and those who enter the country.
> And the people fall for it time and time again.
> The people will not wake up to it,they can not see they are just used,they are pawns in labour/Torys political games.
> And there ends my history lesson of the day.


This has been obvious to anyone with two brain cells


----------



## Happy Paws2

Bisbow said:


> Not as much of a risk as JC will put us all in, *he is a puppet to all those he admires and will find excuses for then at every turn[*/QUOTE]
> 
> I would answer that rude remake but I'd get banned.
> 
> The world would be a safer place with him, than it will be with TM selling arms to anyone who wants them.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Simple question.. Which country is the UK becoming more like.. America or the Netherlands? Given Corbyn and May, which countries would you associate with them?



May = Netherlands and USA (Both countries have armed police routinely so do Germany, Spain, Austria, France etc).
Corbyn= Northern Ireland  (He has association with this country eg IRA)
You did ask.


----------



## Zaros

rona said:


> Pilger, the man that twists the truth by omission. Go look it up.
> 
> Also started a news paper to do much the same
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_on_Sunday


I think you'll find that John left before the newspaper was launched. :Singing

However, so you want to claim that there's absolutely no truth what so ever in any of his documentaries then Rona. I believe the American government, the British government, the French and his even his own government have attempted to discredit him and all because he pursues the truth. Not the truth that's distorted into some one sided and more favoured fairytale by your government or its misleading press.
The truth Rona. The absolute irrefutable truth.

Embedded he is not, and never will be. He refuses to be told what to write, he refuses to be shown what the authorities want him his to see, he wants to see what the authorities have done for himself.

Carry on singing...:Singing


----------



## Zaros

DT said:


> All we are is a vote to both labour and Tory.


And that's all that needs to be said.

After you've shown your loyalty to them, ya can go and phuq yourselves.

Provided either of the parties don't do it first.


----------



## Bisbow

What is rude about calling him a puppet when he is

But then we are not allowed to make remarks about him whilst anything about TM is perfectly admissible


----------



## Happy Paws2

God the panorama on here about JC, wake up and smell the coffee, what good have the tories ever do us. The only people they really care about are those who have all the money.


----------



## suewhite




----------



## stockwellcat.

Happy Paws said:


> God the panorama on here about JC, wake up and smell the coffee, what good have the tories ever do us. The only people they really care about are those who have all the money.


I have smelt the coffee and it is a gorgeous smell in the morning.

I have weighed up Corbyn and the risks and the risks are to much.

No I haven't changed my voting position.


----------



## Odin_cat

Goblin said:


> Simple question.. Which country is the UK becoming more like.. America or the Netherlands? Given Corbyn and May, which countries would you associate with them?


Whilst in most ways the UK seems more and more like the US, I think with regards to gun ownership it is still European.

Unless I've missed legalisation plans in the Tory manifesto, which wouldn't surprise me!


----------



## Bisbow

Happy Paws said:


> God the panorama on here about JC, wake up and smell the coffee, what good have the tories ever do us. The only people they really care about are those who have all the money.


The first thing that comes to mind
They gave us the chance to say whether we wanted to stay in or get out of the corrupt EU
Labour would not have given us the choice in a month of Sundays

So what if it did not do as Cameron wanted, we had the choice and took it


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> The sad thing is Parliament.....


is a perfect anagram for Anal permit

Or

Rampant lie.

I prefer the latter, it appears to be more appropriate.:Cigar


----------



## Happy Paws2

Oh god.... I'll be glad when it's all over, I'm not having a another news on until the results are in.

They have all said what they can, and are just going round in circles.


----------



## Zaros

Happy Paws said:


> Oh god.... I'll be glad when it's all over, I'm not having a another news on until the results are in.
> They have all said what they can, and are just going round in circles.


One can only hope those circles are ever decreasing and eventually they disappear up their own smug 4r53holes.:Smug


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> 48 hours to go until all those that haven't voted and are registered to vote go to the polls.
> 
> 72 hours and we'll know if Diane Abbott will be in charge of National Security? Scary thought.
> 
> 72 hours and we'll know if Corbyn is going to be in power or if Theresa May remains in power.


 Never fear SWC, your Mrs. May will remain in power, the question is will her gamble have paid off and she increases her majority greatly or has it been a bit of a disaster and she only gains a couple of seats, keeps the same, or worse loses a couple.


----------



## Bisbow

Happy Paws said:


> Oh god.... I'll be glad when it's all over, I'm not having a another news on until the results are in.
> 
> They have all said what they can, and are just going round in circles.


Could not agree more, roll on Friday when it's all over except the aftermath of moans whatever side wins


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> Never fear SWC, your Mrs. May will remain in power, the question is will her gamble have paid off and she increases her majority greatly or has it been a bit of a disaster and she only gains a couple of seats, keeps the same, or worse loses a couple.


My Mrs May 
I am not even voting that way


----------



## stockwellcat.

Happy Paws said:


> *I'll be glad when it's all over,*


Couldn't agree with you more.

Roll on Friday.

I am asking for this thread to be closed after the election so it doesn't go on and on and on.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Two minutes silence for the victims of the terror attack in London.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> is a perfect anagram for Anal permit
> 
> Or
> 
> Rampant lie.
> 
> I prefer the latter, it appears to be more appropriate.:Cigar





Zaros said:


> One can only hope those circles are ever decreasing and eventually they disappear up their own smug 4r53holes.:Smug


You do have a rather immature foul mouthed vocabulary. There will be kids reading this forum and whilst the occasional expletive is maybe forgivable, it's not really good manners (or clever) to curse in every other post.

Just saying.


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> You do have a rather immature foul mouthed vocabulary. There will be kids reading this forum and whilst the occasional expletive is maybe forgivable, it's not really good manners (or clever) to curse in every other post.
> 
> Just saying.


Kids will be reading politics? 

Yeah, sure. :Hilarious

You're just cut because you don't have a creative imagination. :Smug


----------



## Bisbow

Zaros said:


> Kids will be reading politics?
> 
> Yeah, sure. :Hilarious
> 
> You're just cut because you don't have a creative imagination. :Smug


|If that's creative imagination I will do without one thanks

I must be more grown up than you, now tell me I am a moron


----------



## stockwellcat.

Oh well only one more day of junk mail to go. Got today's daily dose, today it's the Conservatives turn. Over the last number of weeks I have had nothing but Lib Dem material and two flyers from Labour.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> Ok I'll be fair. Labour costed there manifesto pledges:
> 1) Raise to carers allowance - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 2) 10,000 extra new police officers - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 3) 30 hours free child care - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 4) NHS funding raised - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 5) Reversing benefit cuts - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 6) Stopping the bedroom tax - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 
> I'd hate to be a business owner paying corporation tax as it is going to be a huge raise in corporation tax to pay for the above.


Is the Labour Party manifesto actually costed though? I concede it is something that they are unlikely to lie about, but have the costings been released for us to actually see or are we just to take their word for it?


----------



## Satori

Loved this from (admittedly biased) Iain Dale yesterday ..........

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Corbyn’s vision of socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Corbyn’s ideological plan”. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A…. (substituting grades for £ ’s )something closer to home and more readily understood by all).

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.
The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.
To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.

It could not be any simpler than that.

There are five morals to this story:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.


----------



## Zaros

Bisbow said:


> *tell me I am a moron*


Is that some sort of dare?


----------



## Bisbow

Zaros said:


> Is that some sort of dare?


Are you going to fall for it


----------



## stockwellcat.

*Diane Abbott cancels radio appearance after embarrassing Sky News interview*

Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott has pulled out of a radio programme after an embarrassing interview on Sky News with Dermot Murnaghan.

Ms Abbott was unable to answer questions on recommendations made in a key counter-terrorism review in October about how best to prevent London from terror attack.

In a series of vague answers after long pauses, it became clear that Ms Abbott was unable to recall details of the review by Labour's Lord Harris.

Despite insisting she had read the review, commissioned by London Mayor Sadiq Khan, Ms Abbott faltered on questions about merging police forces and putting up security barriers.

*Dermot Murnaghan:* "What do you think about the amalgamation of various police forces in London?"

*Diane Abbott:* "You mean the idea that they should work more closely together?"

*Dermot Murnaghan:* "Well he suggested they should amalgamate…"

*Diane Abbott:* "Well I think that's an interesting idea but I think you would find resistance in some part of London to the amalgamation."

*Dermot Murnaghan:* "Have you actually read the report?"

*Diane Abbott:* "I have."

*Dermot Murnaghan: *"OK. What about the physical resilience?"

*Diane Abbott:* "Mmmmmmmmmm. Yes. I mean I think physical resilience. I think that…"

*Dermot Murnaghan:* "Yes but there was a specific aspect of physical resilience…"

*Diane Abbott:* "Well I think that physical resilience is important."

*Dermot Murnaghan:* "Yes, well but the specific aspect was he talked about putting up more barriers in light of the Nice attack…"

*Diane Abbott:* "Yes, we are now putting up barriers on, erm, bridges and you would think we might have done that before…"

Ms Abbott was booked to appear on Radio 4's Women's Hour this morning but pulled out at the last minute citing "ill health". Shadow defence secretary Emily Thornberry will be appearing instead.

The shadow home secretary has suffered from a series of embarrassing interviews during the election campaign, in which she has struggled to answer questions on her brief.

There have been suggestions that Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell's teams have attempted to keep her off the airwaves in recent days.

However, Ms Abbott, who had arranged the interview on Sky News herself, denied there were concerted attempts to stop her appearing, saying: "No, that's why I'm here this evening."

In February, Ms Abbott missed a politically awkward vote on triggering Article 50 because of a migraine.

Cabinet minister Priti Patel said: "Jeremy Corbyn wants to make Diane Abbott home secretary in just two days but is hiding her away from voters.

"The woman who would be in charge of our police and the intelligence services cannot even be trusted by Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell to go on the airwaves to explain their shocking record on national security."

http://news.sky.com/story/diane-abb...r-embarrassing-interview-on-sky-news-10905847


----------



## Bisbow

And some of you want this woman in the cabinet "protecting" us

Dear God, save us from these idiots


----------



## cheekyscrip

Bisbow said:


> And some of you want this woman in the cabinet "protecting" us
> 
> Dear God, save us from these idiots


On both sides.

Amen.

We have schoolboy clown for Foreign Secretary.

We have PM who was Home Secretary till mid 2016 and for seven years?
Who refuses to take any responsibility for current situation on national security???

Then we have Shadow Home Secretary who cannot count. Neither she can read.
Has flu in critical.moments and stays home.

We have shadow PM who effectively sabotaged Remain campaign of his own party and I personally cannot trust him at all.

At least he will not harm foxes, neither Abbott will.

Actually I want one sly old fox for PM.
And Badger for Home Secretary.

Else I see weasels, rats and a toad.

( apologies to relevant pf sections for those comparisons).


----------



## Jesthar

The thing is, individual people and miisters can be replaced easily. A Party, a Prime Minister and their policies, on the other hand, cannot so easily be changed.

I may not like Diane Abbot, but I like the Tory policies even less. And that's saying something...


----------



## Zaros

Bisbow said:


> Are you going to fall for it


The only thing in this life I fell for, is MrsZee.

I have fallen for very little else.

Although, on quick reflection, there have been those times when I considered I was pushed.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Zaros said:


> The only thing in this life I fell for, is MrsZee.
> 
> I have fallen for very little else.
> 
> Although, on quick reflection, there have been those times when I considered I was pushed.


I would call it Divine Intervention...


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> My Mrs May
> I am not even voting that way


Well no of course technically unless you live in the Maidenhead constituency you can not vote for May, your will just have to be satisfied with voting for her local representative 

DT, the AWP is being discussed on Daily Politics


----------



## Zaros

cheekyscrip said:


> I would call it Divine Intervention...


Oh, I don't know Scrippy.

I think it might have had more to do with Flunitrazepam.

Jesus told us we had to love everyone.....

But he didn't actually say it had to be consensual....:Shy


----------



## cheekyscrip

Zaros said:


> Oh, I don't know Scrippy.
> 
> I think it might have had more to do with Flunitrazepam.
> 
> Jesus told us we had to love everyone.....
> 
> But he didn't actually say it had to be consensual....:Shy


Or lucid....

Very wise man Jesus.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> 10,000 extra police officers across the UK would not make an iota of a difference to:
> 1) Response times.
> 2) The amount of police on the streets. There will be more police officers tied up with paper work.
> 
> A baton does not protect a police officer as proven during the attacks on Saturday as the officer confronting the terrorists was stabbed.
> 
> We need more armed police. But saying this the response time would not have been any quicker to an incident like Saturday's attack. Corbyn hasn't promised more armed officers.


The thing is, unless you're a servicing police officer, neither you, me nor Theresa May know that for sure.

Serving police officers know what they're talking about. The fact May belittled them when warned about cut back in numbers proves she will not listen to the experts. Not a good showing of leadership in my view. Her way or no way every time.

Do you think a busy hospital ward could cope just as well with reduced staffing, or that teachers are able to teach larger class sizes just as well?

As I said earlier Margaret Thatcher looked after the police. Tony Blair introduced PCSOs that gave a strong presence in patrolling the streets but can't remember when I last saw one.

I was shocked at May's attitude when speaking at the Police Federation two years ago. Thatcher, as much as I disagreed with her policies at least treated them with respect.


----------



## Zaros

cheekyscrip said:


> Very wise man Jesus.


Wise indeed.

How the hell he managed to find mates by the names of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John in the middle east, is completely beyond me.:Wacky


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> The thing is, unless you're a servicing police officer, neither you, me nor Theresa May know that for sure.
> 
> Serving police officers know what they're talking about. The fact May belittled them when warned about cut back in numbers proves she will not listen to the experts. Not a good showing of leadership in my view. Her way or no way every time.
> 
> Do you think a busy hospital ward could cope just as well with reduced staffing, or that teachers are able to teach larger class sizes just as well?
> 
> As I said earlier Margaret Thatcher looked after the police. Tony Blair introduced PCSOs that gave a strong presence in patrolling the streets but can't remember when I last saw one.
> 
> I was shocked at May's attitude when speaking at the Police Federation two years ago. Thatcher, as much as I disagreed with her policies at least treated them with respect.


Can I ask are you expecting the NHS etc to be fixed immediately if Corbyn gets into power?

Corbyn seems to have alot on if he becomes PM:

He is going to see Anglea Merkel straight away. Not the Queen asking her if he can form a Government.
Has 11 days to sort out who is negotiating for Brexit and sending them to Brussels to negotiate on the 19th June 2017.
Possibly will have a cabinet reshuffle because everyone's seat is up for grabs in the GE.
Will be trying to keep Diane Abbott away from the media.
This is a short form list.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> *Diane Abbott struggles with questions on recent London terror report in another car crash interview*
> 
> The Shadow Home Secretary fails to answer questions about a recent report into London's terror preparedness.
> 
> Diane Abbott is facing fresh criticism after she struggled to answer questions in yet another interview - this time about a recent report on improving London's terror preparedness.
> 
> Asked about the recommendations made by Lord Harris's October 2016 inquiry, of which there were 127, the Shadow Home Secretary could not name one.
> 
> "Do you think some of the things he said in there were prescient and should be acted on," asked Sky News presenter Dermot Murnaghan.
> 
> Ms Abbott replied that it "was about preparedness and resilience" and that we needed to act "not necessarily on every specific recommendation".
> 
> Asked to be more specific, particularly on the bullet points Lord Harris had included, Ms Abbott said it was "an important review and we should act on it".
> 
> Mr Murnaghan then asked what she thought about the report's recommendations on police forces, to which Ms Abbott replied: "What the idea that they should work more closely together?"
> 
> The presenter pointed out that Lord Harris had suggested they amalgamate, to which Ms Abbott said there might be resistance.
> 
> "Have you actually read the report?" asked Mr Murnaghan, to which she replied that she had.
> 
> But when she was asked about the physical resilience, Ms Abbott said she thought it was important. Mr Murnaghan pointed out the report was talking about putting up barriers.
> 
> It comes just over a month after Ms Abbott was criticised for underestimating the number of net losses Labour has suffered in local elections in a television interview with ITN.
> 
> After if she knew the number of net losses so far for Labour, the shadow Home Secretary said: "At the time of us doing this interview, I think the net losses are about 50."
> 
> The interviewer corrected her, saying: "They're actually 125 net losses so far."
> 
> Viewers quickly took to social media to criticise the gaffe.
> 
> Diane Abbott is a liability, acting like a tory plant who does not have the slightest clue. It's genuinely worrying to see #GE2017
> 
> - sukz (@sillwuka) June 6, 2017
> Diane Abbott should stop doing TV appearances
> 
> - Ewan Valentine (@Ewan_Valentine) June 6, 2017
> That came within days of her "car crash" interview with LBC, which saw Ms Abbott struggle to give clear numbers on Labour's plan to add 10,000 new police officer roles.
> 
> She gave several estimates for how much the new officers would cost, ranging from £300,000 to £80m.
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/diane-abbott-general-election-latest-car-crash-interview-dermot-murnaghan-lord-harris-terror-report-a7774626.html?amp
> 
> Just think Diane Abbott could be in charge of National Security in 72 hours time. She's a liability.


@stockwellcat: I saw her being interviewed a couple of times and quite honestly she really was clueless. When asked how much to provide another 10,000 police on the streets, the figure she conjured up worked out at £30 per officer.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> @stockwellcat: I saw her being interviewed a couple of times and quite honestly she really was clueless. When asked how much to provide another £10,000 police on the streets, the figure she conjured up worked out at £30 per officer.


That interview on LBC cracked me up laughing. The interview last night had me worried she could be Home Secretary in a few days and she hasn't got a clue.


----------



## KittenKong

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...esident-who-trolled-us-after-a-terror-attack/


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...esident-who-trolled-us-after-a-terror-attack/
> 
> View attachment 313489
> View attachment 313490
> View attachment 313491


Why are people wanting the state visit to be cancelled now when nothing can be done about it as we are in the midst of a GE? This can be dealt with after the GE has happened.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> 30 hours free child care - Costed by raising corporation tax


Free child care _and_ free meals for children: are parents not going to pay anything towards the cost of having a family in this Utopian future?


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Can I ask are you expecting the NHS etc to be fixed immediately if Corbyn gets into power?
> 
> Corbyn seems to have alot on if he becomes PM:
> 
> He is going to see Anglea Merkel straight away. Not the Queen asking her if he can form a Government.
> Has 11 days to sort out who is negotiating for Brexit and sending them to Brussels to negotiate on the 19th June 2017.
> Possibly will have a cabinet reshuffle because everyone's seat is up for grabs in the GE.
> Will be trying to keep Diane Abbott away from the media.
> This is a short form list.


Rome wasn't built in a day of course but I would expect further privatisation plans for the NHS to be halted very quickly.

Thought Sir Keith Stermer was the obvious choice to negotiate Brexit. He's certainly more likely to get a deal with "No deal" not being on the agenda.

TM has no respect for anyone as the EU, Police, Doctors and nurses have found out.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> The interview last night had me worried she could be Home Secretary in a few days and she hasn't got a clue.


TBH, in the interviews I saw, she seriously looked as tho' she didn't understand the questions: not a flicker of understanding in her eyes. I seriously thought maybe she was ill.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Why are people wanting the state visit to be cancelled now when nothing can be done about it as we are in the midst of a GE? This can be dealt with after the GE has happened.


I think the point is May should have reacted angrily to Trump, saying the planned UK visit is off unless he apologised and retracts his tweets done at a time the country was still in mourning.

It would have given her some respect had she done so, the fact she hasn't and not for the first time speaks volumes.

She is still, after all, PM even if she loses the election on Friday.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Thought Sir Keith Stermer was the obvious choice to negotiate Brexit. He's certainly more likely to get a deal with "No deal" not being on the agenda.


Even his seat is up for grabs in the GE, so he won't necessarily be negotiating with the EU as he could lose his seat if Labour win the GE.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> She is still, after all, PM even if she loses the election on Friday.


No she is acting PM as all seats in Parliament have been dissolved and are up for grabs in the GE. She has to win her seat back in Parliament like everyone else.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> That interview on LBC cracked me up laughing. The interview last night had me worried she could be Home Secretary in a few days and she hasn't got a clue.


You are right: it would be funny if it were not so serious! It was like something out of French and Saunders (could just see Dawn French playing the part of Abbott).


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Are you listening to them?
> No.
> You are just pushing your cause on here posting memes because you are anti Tory.
> 
> No I have not changed my mind on who I am voting for.


A hell of a lot of us are anti Tory as you yourself have been a great deal on this thread.



Bisbow said:


> Well he won't when he does not want to upset his terrorist friends will he
> 
> That man has so many faces he has 360 degree vision


Which terrorist friends are you referring to? There are very few politicians who are not two faced, which ones do you particularly admire?



stockwellcat said:


> But he shakes hands with terrorists :Muted


So have lots of other politicians - its called "talking" "negotiating" "opening channels of communication" "brokering a deal" - without it there would not be peace in Northern Ireland.



stockwellcat said:


> Ok I'll be fair. Labour costed there manifesto pledges:
> 1) Raise to carers allowance - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 2) 10,000 extra new police officers - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 3) 30 hours free child care - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 4) NHS funding raised - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 5) Reversing benefit cuts - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 6) Stopping the bedroom tax - Costed by raising corporation tax.
> 
> I'd hate to be a business owner paying corporation tax as it is going to be a huge raise in corporation tax to pay for the above.


Whereas Mrs May just wants to rob pensioners and not even tell them until after the election whether they will lose their winter fuel payments or not and how much of a cap she will set on their homes being taken to pay for care. That manifesto is the biggest pile of un costed crap I've ever read.



Bisbow said:


> It is you that can't see beyond the end of your nose
> You refuse to see that he is the terrorists friend ans appeases them at every turn, they have him right where they want him
> And you support him, I would have thought better from you


I support him too although I won't be voting Labour. I've read the 3 manifestos, I've listened to them all debate or not debate as the case may be, I've looked at their past records and I still find him to be a decent man who stands by his principles. You accuse Noush of not being able to see beyond the end of her nose but can you 100% hand on heart say you are not letting your personal dislike of him cloud your judgement of him, of the Labour Party and of their manifesto? Is there anything Theresa May says or does that you don't approve of or are you letting your hatred of Corbyn cloud your judgement as you accuse others of. The poll on this thread has 49 people down as voting for Labour - they can't all be brain washed.



Dr Pepper said:


> You do have a rather immature foul mouthed vocabulary. There will be kids reading this forum and whilst the occasional expletive is maybe forgivable, it's not really good manners (or clever) to curse in every other post.
> 
> Just saying.


Says the person who used an ethnic hate term which also isn't very good manners. Just saying


----------



## Dr Pepper

Calvine said:


> @stockwellcat: I saw her being interviewed a couple of times and quite honestly she really was clueless. When asked how much to provide another 10,000 police on the streets, the figure she conjured up worked out at £30 per officer.


To be fair I think you miss the point. Their manifesto is fully costed, we've been told that's a fact. Ergo 10,000 have to cost £30 per annum because that's all the budget there is for them. So she was actually bang on with her figures.

By the same token the free school meals are 12p each and free child care 97p a week.


----------



## -Ash-

I'll be voting Labour, but seriously, they have to do something about Diane.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> A hell of a lot of us are anti Tory as you yourself have been a great deal on this thread.
> 
> Which terrorist friends are you referring to? There are very few politicians who are not two faced, which ones do you particularly admire?
> 
> So have lots of other politicians - its called "talking" "negotiating" "opening channels of communication" "brokering a deal" - without it there would not be peace in Northern Ireland.
> 
> Whereas Mrs May just wants to rob pensioners and not even tell them until after the election whether they will lose their winter fuel payments or not and how much of a cap she will set on their homes being taken to pay for care. That manifesto is the biggest pile of un costed crap I've ever read.
> 
> I support him too although I won't be voting Labour. I've read the 3 manifestos, I've listened to them all debate or not debate as the case may be, I've looked at their past records and I still find him to be a decent man who stands by his principles. You accuse Noush of not being able to see beyond the end of her nose but can you 100% hand on heart say you are not letting your personal dislike of him cloud your judgement of him, of the Labour Party and of their manifesto? Is there anything Theresa May says or does that you don't approve of or are you letting your hatred of Corbyn cloud your judgement as you accuse others of. The poll on this thread has 49 people down as voting for Labour - they can't all be brain washed.
> 
> Says the person who used an ethnic hate term which also isn't very good manners. Just saying


So can I ask are you happy with the fact that Labour want to raise taxes which may over time affect personal tax relief which currently stands for people who are employed £11,500 tax free per annum?

Corporation tax can only stretch so far before corporate business owners pull the plug and leave the UK.

Taxing people who earn above £80,000 per annum will soon annoy these people and they will probably look at leaving the UK.

Then there's taxing millionaire's and billionaires who will also probably leave the UK as well.

So who will Labour tax when all these have gone?


----------



## AlexPed2393

I find it ridiculous that people who have children get so much help financially from the state. You shouldn't have kids if you can't afford it, simple as that. And I HATE it when families are on the breadline with 3-4 kids to feed


----------



## Zaros

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Whereas Mrs May just wants to rob pensioners and not even tell them until after the election whether they will lose their winter fuel payments or not and how much of a cap she will set on their homes being taken to pay for care. That manifesto is the biggest pile of un costed *crap* I've ever read.











The word, 'Crap' is considered, by some, to be an expletive and, therefore, unnecessary.
Please refrain from any further use of such words.

Little eyes are watching.​


----------



## -Ash-

stockwellcat said:


> So can I ask are you happy with the fact that Labour want to raise taxes which may over time affect personal tax relief which currently stands for people who are employed £11,500 tax free per annum?
> 
> Corporation tax can only stretch so far before corporate business owners pull the plug and leave the UK.
> 
> Taxing people who earn above £80,000 per annum will soon annoy these people and they will probably look at leaving the UK.
> 
> Then there's taxing millionaire's and billionaires who will also probably leave the UK as well.
> 
> So who will Labour tax when all these have gone?


Even with the increased taxes, the UK would still be more attractive for businesses than a lot of other countries.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Says the person who used an ethnic hate term which also isn't very good manners. Just saying


What, Pikey? Still waiting for someone to tell me what we should call those of no fixed abode that rob, steal, threaten you, your family and pets, con the elderly and vulnerable. Any ideas?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

-Ash- said:


> I'll be voting Labour, but seriously, they have to do something about Diane.


Have to say I agree with you, she has messed up too many times now and is a liability. They should remove her from the shadow cabinet promptly.



stockwellcat said:


> So can I ask are you happy with the fact that Labour want to raise taxes which may over time affect personal tax relief which currently stands for people who are employed £11,500 tax free per annum?
> 
> Corporation tax can only stretch so far before corporate business owners pull the plug and leave the UK.
> 
> Taxing people who earn above £80,000 per annum will soon annoy these people and they will probably look at leaving the UK.
> 
> Then there's taxing millionaire's and billionaires who will also probably leave the UK as well.
> 
> So who will Labour tax when all these have gone?


No I'm not happy with a lot of their tax plans and I will be worse off but in direct comparison to the Conservative manifesto which doesn't even attempt to give costings (who knew you could throw together a document, not give costings and even say you are going to take things away from the elderly but not which elderly and people would still fall for it) I would vote for theirs. Not forgetting of course your similar outrage to mine at the Conservatives plan to hold a free vote on hunting and your absolute declaration that you could never vote for them when Mrs May openly declared her support for hunting being reintroduced.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> What, Pikey? Still waiting for someone to tell me what we should call those of no fixed abode that rob, steal, threaten you, your family and pets, con the elderly and vulnerable. Amy ideas?


So you still choose to use that term even though you know this

google the word yourself and you will find

But in more recent years it has become a term of abuse and in the eyes of the law using it can even be deemed a racist offence, given its association with Irish travellers and Roma Gypsies.

Often these words are used by people who have always been prejudiced and nasty and who are now feeling they can safely express themselves again, he says, although this "petty snobbishness" has always been lurking below the surface of public debate.

Yet you call @Zaros immature, foul mouthed, lacking in manners and warn him that children may be reading


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> Those last three words of John Pilger's statement are music to my ears, Noush'
> 
> When are people going to realise that 'Terrorism' is a product of British Foreign Policy.
> 
> We should get out of other countries we have no business of interfering with, and bloody well stay out, and then maybe, just maybe the streets of Britain can return to normal once again.
> 
> Politicians never suffer the consequences of the sh1t they deliberately stir up, ordinary people do.


I've watched the video, I have seen it before - but its a must watch for anyone who wants to see the bigger picture, not just how its framed for us plebs. We have made a right mess with our meddling in the Middle East How right is he about the propaganda too? "_western actions that are reinforced by our propaganda. Propaganda is so powerful now... _"

Have you seen his latest Zaros on May?

*John Pilger on "Terror in Britain: What did the Prime Minister Know?"*


----------



## Calvine

Dr Pepper said:


> To be fair I think you miss the point. Their manifesto is fully costed, we've been told that's a fact. Ergo 10,000 have to cost £30 per annum because that's all the budget there is for them. So she was actually bang on with her figures.
> 
> By the same token the free school meals are 12p each and free child care 97p a week


You are probably right: I'm crap at maths.


----------



## Zaros

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yet you call @Zaros immature, foul mouthed, lacking in manners and warn him that children may be reading


Hey, RP, How many immature people does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

Snigger, snigger, snigger.  _'Screw!'_


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> So can I ask are you happy with the fact that Labour want to raise taxes which may over time affect personal tax relief which currently stands for people who are employed £11,500 tax free per annum?
> 
> Corporation tax can only stretch so far before corporate business owners pull the plug and leave the UK.
> 
> Taxing people who earn above £80,000 per annum will soon annoy these people and they will probably look at leaving the UK.
> 
> Then there's taxing millionaire's and billionaires who will also probably leave the UK as well.
> 
> So who will Labour tax when all these have gone?


I like this  Where to SWC?


----------



## Jesthar

AlexPed2393 said:


> I find it ridiculous that people who have children get so much help financially from the state. You shouldn't have kids if you can't afford it, simple as that. And I HATE it when families are on the breadline with 3-4 kids to feed


How about if you can afford kids when you have them, but then your circumstances dramatically change through no fault of your own? What are people supposed to do then, give the kids away because they can no longer afford them?

I don't have kids, but I'd rather my tax money went on supporting the next generation of our kids than bombing the next generation of somebody else's kids into refugee status...


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So you still choose to use that term even though you know this
> 
> google the word yourself and you will find
> 
> But in more recent years it has become a term of abuse and in the eyes of the law using it can even be deemed a *racist offence*, given its association with Irish travellers and Roma Gypsies.


Pikey is not a racial group


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So you still choose to use that term even though you know this
> 
> google the word yourself and you will find
> 
> But in more recent years it has become a term of abuse and in the eyes of the law using it can even be deemed a racist offence, given its association with Irish travellers and Roma Gypsies.
> 
> Often these words are used by people who have always been prejudiced and nasty and who are now feeling they can safely express themselves again, he says, although this "petty snobbishness" has always been lurking below the surface of public debate.
> 
> Yet you call @Zaros immature, foul mouthed, lacking in manners and warn him that children may be reading


What do we call these people then? I'm also not to bothered if they take offence at it. Give me another term and I'll use it, just make sure it differentiates them from other travelers because there is a difference.


----------



## stockwellcat.

I am just doing a bit of maths on the 10,000 police officers.

Labour said


> 10,000 extra bobbies would cost £300m


Ok let's do some basic mathematics:
£300,000,000 (£300 million) divided by 10,000 new bobbies = £30,000 per year divided by 52 weeks = a wage of £576.92 (actual figure is £576.92307692) per week.

Is that all full time police officers get paid to protect us?


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> You are right: it would be funny if it were not so serious! It was like something out of French and Saunders (could just see Dawn French playing the part of Abbott).


Speaking of French & Saunders .....

*jennifer saunders*‏Verified [email protected]*ferrifrump* 25m25 minutes ago

Crikey!


----------



## Calvine

AlexPed2393 said:


> I find it ridiculous that people who have children get so much help financially from the state. You shouldn't have kids if you can't afford it, simple as that. And I HATE it when families are on the breadline with 3-4 kids to feed


Agree: I know someone who positively squeezes them out and now has eight (from three fathers) resulting in a nice big five-bedroom detached house, courtesy of the council.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> I am just doing a bit of maths on the 10,000 police officers.
> 
> Labour said
> 
> Ok let's do some basic mathematics:
> £300,000,000 (£300 million) divided by 10,000 new bobbies = £30,000 per year divided by 52 weeks = a wage of £576.92 per week.
> 
> Is that all full time police officers get paid to protect us?


My badger loving friends have been doing some maths as well.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> My badger loving friends have been doing some maths as well.
> 
> View attachment 313499


It's a shame Diane Abbott is no good at maths.


----------



## noushka05

Now for a bit of light entertainment from Cassetteboy


----------



## rona

Calvine said:


> Agree: I know someone who positively squeezes them out and now has eight (from three fathers) resulting in a nice big five-bedroom detached house, courtesy of the council.


No, courtesy of the tax payer


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Have you seen his latest Zaros on May?
> 
> *John Pilger on "Terror in Britain: What did the Prime Minister Know?"*


Oh I certainly have Noush'.

SHAME! SHAME! SHAME!...Ting-a-ling!...SHAME! SHAME! SHAME!...Ting-a-ling...SHAME!....

The walls of parliament, which I've recently been informed is regarded as an expletive, are seething with skulldugerry and subterfuge and those who conspire care little for the consequences.


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> It's a shame Diane Abbott is no good at maths.


According to Twitter she was rubbish on a Sky interview last night . She cancelled a womans hour interview today but it was because she is ill apparently .

@Calvine ,


> TBH, in the interviews I saw, she seriously looked as tho' she didn't understand the questions: not a flicker of understanding in her eyes. I seriously thought maybe she was ill.


She could have been .


----------



## Zaros

Jesthar said:


> I'd rather my tax money went on supporting the next generation of our kids than bombing the next generation of somebody else's kids into refugee status...


----------



## stockwellcat.

stockwellcat said:


> No she is acting PM as all seats in Parliament have been dissolved and are up for grabs in the GE. She has to win her seat back in Parliament like everyone else.


Just a follow on. There is a possibility the Conservatives win and Boris becomes PM or Labour win and Chuka Harrison Umunna becomes PM. No political seats are guaranteed.


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> She could have been .


You're right, she called off another interview (today? I think) as she was supposedly ill.


----------



## AlexPed2393

Jesthar said:


> How about if you can afford kids when you have them, but then your circumstances dramatically change through no fault of your own? What are people supposed to do then, give the kids away because they can no longer afford them?
> 
> I don't have kids, but I'd rather my tax money went on supporting the next generation of our kids than bombing the next generation of somebody else's kids into refugee status...


I could say the same about my pets though. Me and my partner are unable to have kids so we have pets, if we fall on hard times we won't be supported by the council etc. I know my viewpoint on this is pretty out there but I think we are giving way too much help to parents.

Because we are a welfare state we will always help those that have hit hard times like in your example


----------



## cheekyscrip

AlexPed2393 said:


> I could say the same about my pets though. Me and my partner are unable to have kids so we have pets, if we fall on hard times we won't be supported by the council etc. I know my viewpoint on this is pretty out there but I think we are giving way too much help to parents.
> 
> Because we are a welfare state we will always help those that have hit hard times like in your example


Because children grow into adults? 
Pets are our hobby/ life style choice?

But I rather see taxpayers money spent directly on education uni fees down!, on health care for our kids, school meals than pour it into feckless parents' pockets.
Gibraltar gives benefit for no more than two kids of low earners.

It is unfair than government has to provide you with bigger house , because you produce more and more kids, you have a choice to stop.
Exceptions for triplets etc...one cannot help that!

We have to look after all those children who will eventually look after us. 
Else we will waste our human potential and then have to relay on foreigners to plug the gaps in professional skills.


----------



## Zaros

rona said:


> *Pikey is not a racial group*


Been referring to the 'Urban' Dictionary have we Rona? 

*Pikey is* *not a racial group*, the term is used to describe anyone who lives in a caravan or shares the same values and "culture" of "the travelling community", and whose main sources of income are as follows:

Stealing cars, flogging roses in pubs for "childrens charities", nicking lead off church roofs, burgling garden sheds, blagging entry to old peoples house to rob them, laying dodgy tarmac drives ("we've got some black stuff left over from a job up the road"), sometimes with mint imperials used as a substitute for white chippings or, reportedly, using snow to lay paving slabs on when the sand runs out. Stealing your bollocks if they not in a bag (apologies for the expletive but it's a necessary evil cos it's in the 'Urban Dictionary' and anything else that's not nailed down but will fit in the back of an untaxed Transit van when nobody is looking.

Pikeys are characterised by lurchers on a string, an unintelligible language that is neither English or Irish, it's just Pikey (source: Film: Snatch), A penchant for hare coursing, ketamine, lighter fuel, prize fighting, fighting in pubs, street fighting, fighting amongst themselves and shopping at Lidl.

Again I post the following...



Zaros said:


> Pikey is a slang term, which is considered derogatory and slighting ... It is not received well amongst Irish Travellers or Romas, and is regarded as an ethnic slur.
> 
> FYR: http://metro.co.uk/2007/12/13/pikey-is-now-a-race-hate-word-583752/


----------



## AlexPed2393

What about looking after young adults then? People in my age bracket 20-25 are majorly struggling to become independent, having to live at home with parents, unable to get a decently paid job, no chance of mortgage unless funding comes from elsewhere, constantly having to get things on finance etc etc.

Everything seems to be stacked against people in my age group but still everyone is 'save the children' oh bore off they have enough funding around their parents, they don't need any more. And eventually I will probably conk out early due to overload of stress, reducing the burden on the NHS


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> Pikey is not a racial group


It is considered a racist/ethnic hate term and people have been prosecuted for using it.



Dr Pepper said:


> What do we call these people then? I'm also not to bothered if they take offence at it. Give me another term and I'll use it, just make sure it differentiates them from other travelers because there is a difference.


How about calling them people. Why do you need a derogatory label at all?



AlexPed2393 said:


> I could say the same about my pets though. Me and my partner are unable to have kids so we have pets, if we fall on hard times we won't be supported by the council etc. I know my viewpoint on this is pretty out there but I think we are giving way too much help to parents.
> 
> Because we are a welfare state we will always help those that have hit hard times like in your example


Yes but the welfare state is supposed to help us from cradle to grave so its there for children, for families and for the elderly. We don't have children either but we will be old one day and might need to rely on the welfare state.


----------



## AlexPed2393

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes but the welfare state is supposed to help us from cradle to grave so its there for children, for families and for the elderly. We don't have children either but we will be old one day and might need to rely on the welfare state.


In my experience it is helping us in the cradle part and in the grave part. Not a whole lot in between. This is for me PERSONALLY.

I was the first unlucky bunch where I had £9k of fees to deal with to get me a degree that promises plenty but meant very little.

Now I travel 50 miles round trip every day to go to a job that pays 21k a year, having to pay off the finance on my car, pay monthly for car tax, pay monthly for council bills, pay monthly for pretty much f'ing everything because there is no disposable income left over to save for any of these things.

I am tremendously lucky in that my mum was able to leave me a substantial sum of money for a house deposit but if I didn't have that... I'd 100% be living in my dads garage


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> How about calling them people. Why do you need a derogatory label at all?


You or yours have never had "dealings" with a Pikey have you? If you had you'd know they can't be grouped with normal right minded, law abiding folk. What do I do, ring up my parents and tell them to be on their guard because the "people" are in town?

They are a very specific type of traveller and do need a label to differentiate them from other travelers, tramps etc. And at this point in time that word is "Pikey". It's not the word that's offensive, it's the people it relates to that are worse than offensive.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

AlexPed2393 said:


> In my experience it is helping us in the cradle part and in the grave part. Not a whole lot in between. This is for me PERSONALLY.
> 
> I was the first unlucky bunch where I had £9k of fees to deal with to get me a degree that promises plenty but meant very little.
> 
> Now I travel 50 miles round trip every day to go to a job that pays 21k a year, having to pay off the finance on my car, pay monthly for car tax, pay monthly for council bills, pay monthly for pretty much f'ing everything because there is no disposable income left over to save for any of these things.
> 
> I am tremendously lucky in that my mum was able to leave me a substantial sum of money for a house deposit but if I didn't have that... I'd 100% be living in my dads garage


Yes I know its hard for youngsters starting out - I think its only the Conservatives in favour of keeping tuition fees now. Whilst I understand your frustration perhaps remind yourself that the lot in between do get help from the welfare state if they fall on hard times or become sick/disabled. I'm really very grateful that I've never needed to once sign on for unemployment nor sickness benefit and have remained fit, healthy, able to work my entire adult life. My Mum on the other hand has been reliant on the welfare state/NHS either through unemployment or long term ill health since she was about 40 - she is about to have her 80th birthday, although she is frugal with her living expenses she has been pretty well looked after.



Dr Pepper said:


> You or yours have never had "dealings" with a Pikey have you? If you had you'd know they can't be grouped with normal law abiding folk. What do I do, ring up my parents and tell them to be on their guard because the "people" are in town?
> 
> They are a very specific type of traveller and do need a label to differentiate them from other travelers, tramps etc. And at this point in time that word is "Pikey".


How do you know who and what dealings I've had and with whom? Please don't assume we all feel the need to attach "slurs" on people. I personally wouldn't ring up my elderly mother and use a hate term about people to her, she would find that upsetting. I would just remind her to keep safe and lock her doors/put things away and not to open the door to anyone as I always do.


----------



## kimthecat

Dr Pepper said: ↑
What do we call these people then? I'm also not to bothered if they take offence at it. Give me another term and I'll use it, just make sure it differentiates them from other travelers because there is a difference.



rottiepointerhouse said:


> How about calling them people. Why do you need a derogatory label at all?


Traveller covers all sorts of people . We frequently have people who pass through in their caravans , break into our fields , parks and urban places leaving behind so much rubbish that it costs our council thousands of pounds to clear up .
So to avoid offence , we should avoid the term traveller when referring to the people that break in our fields and parks and leave behind rubbish , because not all travellers do this .
i think in future we should label these people -people who live in caravans and break into fields and parks and urban places leaving behind rubbish. To save time we could refer to them as PWLICABIFAPAUSLBR . 

https://www.bing.com/search?q=trave...-47&sk=&cvid=4EC40357AB66449385ED142F39F56562


----------



## cheekyscrip

AlexPed2393 said:


> In my experience it is helping us in the cradle part and in the grave part. Not a whole lot in between. This is for me PERSONALLY.
> 
> I was the first unlucky bunch where I had £9k of fees to deal with to get me a degree that promises plenty but meant very little.
> 
> Now I travel 50 miles round trip every day to go to a job that pays 21k a year, having to pay off the finance on my car, pay monthly for car tax, pay monthly for council bills, pay monthly for pretty much f'ing everything because there is no disposable income left over to save for any of these things.
> 
> I am tremendously lucky in that my mum was able to leave me a substantial sum of money for a house deposit but if I didn't have that... I'd 100% be living in my dads garage


This is why I want uni fees to be reduced. How can you save for deposit and pay back 60k debts?
More vocational course too, more opportunities to improve your qualifications and more job openings for school/ uni leavers.

One funny thought though: If EU nationals come here and find jobs why natives cannot find them?


----------



## -Ash-

cheekyscrip said:


> This is why I want uni fees to be reduced. How can you save for deposit and pay back 60k debts?
> More vocational course too, more opportunities to improve your qualifications and more job openings for school/ uni leavers.
> 
> One funny thought though: If EU nationals come here and find jobs why natives cannot find them?


I would prefer if there were no uni fees in the first place...


----------



## AlexPed2393

cheekyscrip said:


> This is why I want uni fees to be reduced. How can you save for deposit and pay back 60k debts?
> More vocational course too, more opportunities to improve your qualifications and more job openings for school/ uni leavers.
> 
> One funny thought though: If EU nationals come here and find jobs why natives cannot find them?


Oh I'm not saying it is difficult to find a job, it is difficult to find a job that ticks all of your boxes


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> Dr Pepper said: ↑
> What do we call these people then? I'm also not to bothered if they take offence at it. Give me another term and I'll use it, just make sure it differentiates them from other travelers because there is a difference.
> 
> Traveller covers all sorts of people . We frequently have people who pass through in their caravans , break into our fields , parks and urban places leaving behind so much rubbish that it costs our council thousands of pounds to clear up .
> So to avoid offence , we should avoid the term traveller when referring to the people that break in our fields and parks and leave behind rubbish , because not all travellers do this .
> i think in future we should label these people -people who live in caravans and break into fields and parks and urban places leaving behind rubbish. To save time we could refer to them as PWLICABIFAPAUSLBR .
> 
> https://www.bing.com/search?q=trave...-47&sk=&cvid=4EC40357AB66449385ED142F39F56562


Yes I think that should catch on


----------



## cheekyscrip

AlexPed2393 said:


> Oh I'm not saying it is difficult to find a job, it is difficult to find a job that ticks all of your boxes


True.
Also it was for years cheaper for government to employ young people from EU, whose education and childcare was paid by other taxpayers, yes?
Instead of educating own IT specialists, own nurses, teachers etc...

Then unskilled labourers earn not much and truly are better off on

handouts...

Uni fees pr abolished or minimal to stop placement waste.


----------



## Goblin




----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


>


Well done for guessing who I am voting for


----------



## FeelTheBern

stockwellcat said:


> Well done for guessing who I am voting for


It's better than Corbyn and Abbott, I suppose!


----------



## Calvine

AlexPed2393 said:


> In my experience it is helping us in the cradle part and in the grave part. Not a whole lot in between. This is for me PERSONALLY.
> 
> I was the first unlucky bunch where I had £9k of fees to deal with to get me a degree that promises plenty but meant very little.
> 
> Now I travel 50 miles round trip every day to go to a job that pays 21k a year, having to pay off the finance on my car, pay monthly for car tax, pay monthly for council bills, pay monthly for pretty much f'ing everything because there is no disposable income left over to save for any of these things.
> 
> I am tremendously lucky in that my mum was able to leave me


Sounds a bit like my son...who also has to pay £8000 a year for his season ticket (altho' his salary is somewhat better).


----------



## rona

I spent a summer with some true Romanies once, they parked on the grass a few hundred yards away from where I lived. Lovely couple, beautiful caravan and well looked after animals.

Also had dealings with a few Travellers who were/are just happy to be left in peace and they cause no trouble. Some park on wide country verges for the whole winter, and because they are decent people, no one tries to get them moved on.

There's Romanies
Travellers
and Pikeys


----------



## Calvine

FeelTheBern said:


> Corbyn and Abbott


Actually, when you say it like that, it sounds like a comedy team...Abbott and Costello is maybe what's come to my mind.


----------



## stockwellcat.

FeelTheBern said:


> It's better than Corbyn and Abbott, I suppose!


Well why not vote for someone that stands no chance of getting in power. The more people that vote this way may actually make that person get into power


----------



## Calvine

rottiepointerhouse said:


> How do you know who and what dealings I've had and with whom?


I think @Dr Pepper was asking, not making a statement, if you had ever had to deal with these 'people'.


----------



## kimthecat

Goblin said:


>


I have actually voted for him before ! When I saw the other candidates it made sense !


----------



## KittenKong

FeelTheBern said:


> It's better than Corbyn and Abbott, I suppose!


Most certainly better than May who's already turned the UK into a laughing stock and grovels to Donald Trump, even when he's truly out of order like on Sunday.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Calvine said:


> I think @Dr Pepper was asking, not making a statement, if you had ever had to deal with these 'people'.


Really? Doesn't read like that to me.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Most certainly better than May who's already turned the UK into a laughing stock and grovels to Donald Trump, even when he's truly out of order like on Sunday.


Well my conscience will be clear I won't be voting for Corbyn, Abbott, Boris or May to be in power


----------



## havoc

Still don't believe Labour have a chance of winning but this hasn't been the walk in the park the Conservatives thought it would be six weeks ago.


----------



## kimthecat

It's two days away! eek! Im getting nervous 

ETA what if its Jerry and the Nicola .


----------



## Dr Pepper

kimthecat said:


> Dr Pepper said: ↑
> What do we call these people then? I'm also not to bothered if they take offence at it. Give me another term and I'll use it, just make sure it differentiates them from other travelers because there is a difference.
> 
> Traveller covers all sorts of people . We frequently have people who pass through in their caravans , break into our fields , parks and urban places leaving behind so much rubbish that it costs our council thousands of pounds to clear up .
> So to avoid offence , we should avoid the term traveller when referring to the people that break in our fields and parks and leave behind rubbish , because not all travellers do this .
> i think in future we should label these people -people who live in caravans and break into fields and parks and urban places leaving behind rubbish. To save time we could refer to them as PWLICABIFAPAUSLBR .
> 
> https://www.bing.com/search?q=trave...-47&sk=&cvid=4EC40357AB66449385ED142F39F56562


An interesting point you make there. If anyone could pronounce that and it became synonymous with them, then some would claim it a racist word, again.



rona said:


> I spent a summer with some true Romanies once, they parked on the grass a few hundred yards away from where I lived. Lovely couple, beautiful caravan and well looked after animals.
> 
> Also had dealings with a few Travellers who were/are just happy to be left in peace and they cause no trouble. Some park on wide country verges for the whole winter, and because they are decent people, no one tries to get them moved on.
> 
> There's Romanies
> Travellers
> and Pikeys


....and tramps. Used to be a chap who lived rough and moved around the local villages. He'd do some labouring on farms and was a very decent and pleasant man. He didn't consider himself homeless as he didn't want a home. There is no way you'd want him to be considered in the same social group as Pikeys.



Calvine said:


> I think @Dr Pepper was asking, not making a statement, if you had ever had to deal with these 'people'.


Thank you, yes it was a question hence the question mark rather than a full stop or exclamation mark.


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> It's two days away! eek! Im getting nervous


Well I am voting as soon as the polling booth opens on the 8th June 2017 as it is normally quiet then.


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> It's two days away! eek! Im getting nervous
> 
> ETA what if its Jerry and the Nicola .


Well Nicola said if Labour win the SNP will back him.

Corbyn plans to form a minority Government if Labour wins so will need backing from all the other parties except Conservatives.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Well I am voting as soon as the polling booth opens on the 8th June 2017 as it is normally quiet then.


I've got a feeling they'll all be quiet this time round. Voter apathy.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

havoc said:


> Still don't believe Labour have a chance of winning but this hasn't been the walk in the park the Conservatives thought it would be six weeks ago.


I think it will take a major miracle for the Conservatives not to get in so I will be praying for one but failing that I just hope their majority isn't massive. I had this email from 38 degrees today which shows our incumbent Tory with his 10,530 majority but just look at the number of people who didn't vote last time. It does make me wonder what would happen if all the people who didn't bother to vote last time did bother this time.










Check out details for your area here

https://election.38degrees.org.uk/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=blast2017-06-06


----------



## Calvine

Dr Pepper said:


> Thank you, yes it was a question hence the question mark rather than a full stop or exclamation mark.


That was how I read it, having carefully scrutinised the punctuation (me, the grammar police!) Punctuation can change the meaning enormously.


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Well I am voting as soon as the polling booth opens on the 8th June 2017 as it is normally quiet then.


have you made your mind up yet ?

As Bucks Fizz once said !

Don't let your indecision
Take you from behind
Trust your inner vision
Don't let others change your mind !


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> have you made your mind up yet ?
> 
> As Bucks Fizz once said !
> 
> Don't let your indecision
> Take you from behind
> Trust your inner vision
> Don't let others change your mind !


Of course I have made my mind up  I was only joking about the Looney Party by the way. Have you made up your mind yet?


----------



## rona

Dr Pepper said:


> ....and tramps. Used to be a chap who lived rough and moved around the local villages. He'd do some labouring on farms and was a very decent and pleasant man. He didn't consider himself homeless as he didn't want a home. There is no way you'd want him to be considered in the same social group as Pikeys.


Oh yes, we have one that's lived in a British Rail building for years, he cycles almost the same route every single day. It does concern me now he's a little older, but I'm sure he'd rather be out there than in a home


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Of course I have made my mind up  I was only joking about the Looney Party by the way. Have you made up your mind yet?


Yup , my postal vote was sent and its the Greens for me. ! So who are voting for ?


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Well Nicola said if Labour win the SNP will back him.
> 
> Corbyn plans to form a minority Government if Labour wins so will need backing from all the other parties except Conservatives.


 I actually admire her , she makes a good leader , but I don't want her leading in our parliament , shes got her own one in Scotland !


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> I actually admire her , she makes a good leader , but I don't want her leading in our parliament , shes got her own one in Scotland !


I don't think she'll lead in the UK Parliament. She said she will back the Labour Party on an issue by issue basis if Labour win the Elections, but will not back any plans for austerity.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> I was only joking about the Looney Party by the way


Really? I think they are starting to look quite attractive, @ stockwellcat.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> Really? I think they are starting to look quite attractive, @ stockwellcat.


He was right in saying he was going to lower the voting age to 5 as this is the age they act in PMQ's.


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> He was right in saying he was going to lower the voting age to 5 as this is the age they act in PMQ's.


 he has a point !


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> So who are voting for ?


Well I flipped a coin to help make my mind up. Heads Labour, tails Conservatives. I'll let you know which side it landed on, on Thursday after I have voted 

I was tempted to vote the Looney Party though. Here is there Policy Proposals:

*Policy Proposals*
*Educational Funding*
25th April 17
The Loony Party proposes that all Schools would have a Jumble sale or fete or other fundraising event at least twice per month to help raise funds for those little extras. . . such as Desks, Books, paper, pens , etc
_R.U. Seerius_

*Pensions - triple lock*
12th April 17
In keeping with the Labour Party's latest bid to get one or two pensioners to vote for them they have brought out a new policy guaranteeing the Triple lock on pensions until 2025 if they get voted in.
The Loony party of course will go one better and buy a padlock, and as its now safer than a bank, new mattresses for all pensioners on less than 20p per week.
_R.U. Seerius_

*The definitive Welsh Assembly Loony Party Manicfesto 2016*
28th April 16

We will feed the Welsh dragon as its looking a bit thin due to government cuts

We will try to find a breeding pair of dragons as the Welsh Dragon is an endangered species.

We will Report the Welsh dragon to the monopolies commission (there is only One)

In the Interests of national security we will ban all Leeks from the Welsh Assembly canteen

To save money we will reduce the Welsh assembly from 60 seats to 5 and create the Welsh Ensemble .

Man versus horse and Bog snorkling to be an Olympic sport.

We will create massive factories in South Wales manufacturing Bird nests and noodles and then flood china with them… well they did it to our steel,

We will Legalise Broccoli

We will give the Letter K a sound

We will have different Coloured Dragons on the Welsh Flag.

Anyone over 5 years old who can hold a crayon will be eligible to vote.

We will Introduce Mermaids to Tiger Bay to increase tourism.

We will make Swansea Airport the Hub of the Welsh Space Program.

We promise that should we be elected we will not initiate any of our policies.
*New Proposals*
28th September 15
In the light of proposals at the Labour Party Conference under its new leadership with Jeremy Corbyn we have come up with 2 new proposals for Defense :

We will get rid of Trident and replace it with a new Tuning Fork.

We shall keep the Falklands and Give Jeremy Corbyn to the Argentinians.

*Tuition fees*
27th February 15
Well once again the main parties are stealing our election proposals. Today Ed Moribund has declared that they would reduce University Tuition fees to much media acclaim.
I didn't notice the same amount of acclaim when we announced in our Manicfesto:
E. Education. All University Tuition fees for women would be free as we are strong believers in Female intuition. (Due to gender equality laws we would include males as well)

*New proposals*
14th January 15
We propose to cancel stamp duty…….stamps are expensive enough so we shouldn't have to pay duty on them.

Besides leap years, there needs to be hop, skip, and jump years (thanks to Brassdancer)

Parliament will be relocated to Wormwood Scrubs, reducing the commuting costs for most Peers and MPs. (thanks to WolfBaginski)

*Heritage refund*
5th November 14
We will reduce the national debt by selling the castles back to the French. (Buyer dismantles)

*Points make prizes*
5th November 14
Tax payers to receive Nectar Points from HMRC

*E.U Budget Adjustment and other news*
25th October 14
We can confirm that the Loony party was not notified of the E.U budget demand of £1.7bn before George Osborne or David Cameron.
Also in the news the BBC in keeping with their policy of not important news coverage will be televising the incarceration of Oscar Pistorius 24 hours a day. Yes you can see the riveting instalments of Oscar sitting in a cell for 5 years. You can see Oscar walking around his cell and his special hour of Recreation. .Ping Pong exclusives …..Don't miss the Slopping Out Special Highlights.

*Asda's equality policy*
24th October 14
The Loony Party being strong advocates of equal pay agree that the women workers of Asda should have equal pay with the men.
We have it on good authority that George Osborne also agrees with this, and to save needless court costs, has asked for the men's wages to be reduced accordingly.

https://www.loonyparty.com/about/policy-proposals/


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Well I flipped a coin to help make my mind up. Heads Labour, tails Conservatives. I'll let you know which side it landed on, on Thursday after I have voted


Looking at your posts over the last few days I think I already know lol


----------



## havoc

noushka05 said:


> Looking at your posts over the last few days I think I already know lol


Considering this particular individual there's time yet for any number of changes of mind


----------



## noushka05

Labours hard hitting party political broadcast about our NHS with real doctors spelling out the danger the tories present to our NHS.


----------



## noushka05

havoc said:


> Considering this particular individual there's time yet for any number of changes of mind


True


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Well my conscience will be clear I won't be voting for Corbyn, Abbott, Boris or May to be in power


55 minutes ago both tory & labour were out of the running, now we've flipped a coin :Hilarious


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Looking at your posts over the last few days I think I already know lol


Well you might be wrong. 
Shall we put a wager on it


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Well you might be wrong.
> Shall we put a wager on it


 you're such a tease !


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> you're such a tease !


All I will say is I haven't changed my mind since I changed it last time


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> All I will say is I haven't changed my mind since I changed it last time


Which was 5 minutes ago


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> All I will say is I haven't changed my mind since I changed it last time


:Hilarious


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> Which was 5 minutes ago


I was only fooling around about the Raving Looney party I wasn't being serious so I haven't changed my mind since last week


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Well you might be wrong.
> Shall we put a wager on it


I've got a £100 bet on with @Dr Pepper, if I have a bet with you as well I'd be quids in. Problem with yours is you could scam me Dr Pepper can't.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> I've got a £100 bet on with @Dr Pepper, if I have a bet with you as well I'd be quids in. Problem with yours is you could scam me Dr Pepper can't.


Oh I don't do scams. Not my thing.
I'd be quids in to on election day but I do have concerns about certain members of that party, so that narrows things down to Conservatives and Labour  oh and UKIP and Lib Dems.


----------



## noushka05

The mayor of Barcelona putting our weak PM to shame now & speaking out in defence of Sadiq.

*Ada Colau*‏Verified [email protected]*AdaColau* 21h21 hours ago

Ada Colau Retweeted Donald J. Trump

The attack on the Mayor of London by Trump is unacceptable and only serves to divide and spread panic. @*SadiqKhan* has Barcelona's support.


----------



## noushka05

This is disgraceful. As Graham Linehan says, by refusing to answer, she's practically taking Trump's side against Sadiq.


----------



## stockwellcat.

havoc said:


> Considering this particular individual there's time yet for any number of changes of mind


Maybe I haven't changed my mind since last week  that was when I had made my decision. So the question is am I going to win my bets I placed at the bookies? Roll on Friday, results day.


----------



## Calvine

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Really? Doesn't read like that to me.


Obviously: I gathered that from the reply you gave.


----------



## FeelTheBern

havoc said:


> Considering this particular individual there's time yet for any number of changes of mind


Who knows? Perhaps @stockwellcat will walk into the polling station, certain he's going to vote Labour, and then put an X in the UKIP box on the polling card.


----------



## stockwellcat.

FeelTheBern said:


> Who knows? Perhaps @stockwellcat will walk into the polling station, certain he's going to vote Labour, and then put an X in the UKIP box on the polling card.


Why do you think I am voting early in the morning? I'll be half asleep so prone to mistakes


----------



## FeelTheBern

stockwellcat said:


> Why do you think I am voting early in the morning? I'll be half asleep so prone to mistakes


Wherever you decide to place that X, just don't put it in the Labour box, please!


----------



## stockwellcat.

FeelTheBern said:


> just don't put it in the Labour box


Just spoke to my dad and he agrees, so do I. How incompetent is Diane Abbott? I won't even mention Corbyn. It's good to voice politics sometimes with family.


----------



## Jesthar

I'm not one to usually make personal comments, but is anyone else starting to think Mrs May is controlled by one of those electronic keyring things that have half a dozen or buttons with pre-programmed phrases?

1. I'm/It's Very Clear
2. Strong and Stable
3. Coalition of Chaos
4. Brexit means Brexit
5. Make Me Strong
6. Global Britain
7. Make Britain Great Again
8. Give Me The Mandate


----------



## stockwellcat.

@FeelTheBern if I was to vote UKIP I might as well put the x in the Conservatives box as this is where most of the UKIP supporters have gone. 

For those wondering if I have changed my mind I haven't no. Next time I am postal voting.


----------



## samuelsmiles

stockwellcat said:


> Well I flipped a coin to help make my mind up. Heads Labour, tails Conservatives. I'll let you know which side it landed on, on Thursday after I have voted
> 
> I was tempted to vote the Looney Party though. Here is there Policy Proposals:
> 
> *Policy Proposals*
> *Educational Funding*
> 25th April 17
> The Loony Party proposes that all Schools would have a Jumble sale or fete or other fundraising event at least twice per month to help raise funds for those little extras. . . such as Desks, Books, paper, pens , etc
> _R.U. Seerius_
> 
> *Pensions - triple lock*
> 12th April 17
> In keeping with the Labour Party's latest bid to get one or two pensioners to vote for them they have brought out a new policy guaranteeing the Triple lock on pensions until 2025 if they get voted in.
> The Loony party of course will go one better and buy a padlock, and as its now safer than a bank, new mattresses for all pensioners on less than 20p per week.
> _R.U. Seerius_
> 
> *The definitive Welsh Assembly Loony Party Manicfesto 2016*
> 28th April 16
> 
> We will feed the Welsh dragon as its looking a bit thin due to government cuts
> 
> We will try to find a breeding pair of dragons as the Welsh Dragon is an endangered species.
> 
> We will Report the Welsh dragon to the monopolies commission (there is only One)
> 
> In the Interests of national security we will ban all Leeks from the Welsh Assembly canteen
> 
> To save money we will reduce the Welsh assembly from 60 seats to 5 and create the Welsh Ensemble .
> 
> Man versus horse and Bog snorkling to be an Olympic sport.
> 
> We will create massive factories in South Wales manufacturing Bird nests and noodles and then flood china with them… well they did it to our steel,
> 
> We will Legalise Broccoli
> 
> We will give the Letter K a sound
> 
> We will have different Coloured Dragons on the Welsh Flag.
> 
> Anyone over 5 years old who can hold a crayon will be eligible to vote.
> 
> We will Introduce Mermaids to Tiger Bay to increase tourism.
> 
> We will make Swansea Airport the Hub of the Welsh Space Program.
> 
> We promise that should we be elected we will not initiate any of our policies.
> *New Proposals*
> 28th September 15
> In the light of proposals at the Labour Party Conference under its new leadership with Jeremy Corbyn we have come up with 2 new proposals for Defense :
> 
> We will get rid of Trident and replace it with a new Tuning Fork.
> 
> We shall keep the Falklands and Give Jeremy Corbyn to the Argentinians.
> 
> *Tuition fees*
> 27th February 15
> Well once again the main parties are stealing our election proposals. Today Ed Moribund has declared that they would reduce University Tuition fees to much media acclaim.
> I didn't notice the same amount of acclaim when we announced in our Manicfesto:
> E. Education. All University Tuition fees for women would be free as we are strong believers in Female intuition. (Due to gender equality laws we would include males as well)
> 
> *New proposals*
> 14th January 15
> We propose to cancel stamp duty…….stamps are expensive enough so we shouldn't have to pay duty on them.
> 
> Besides leap years, there needs to be hop, skip, and jump years (thanks to Brassdancer)
> 
> Parliament will be relocated to Wormwood Scrubs, reducing the commuting costs for most Peers and MPs. (thanks to WolfBaginski)
> 
> *Heritage refund*
> 5th November 14
> We will reduce the national debt by selling the castles back to the French. (Buyer dismantles)
> 
> *Points make prizes*
> 5th November 14
> Tax payers to receive Nectar Points from HMRC
> 
> *E.U Budget Adjustment and other news*
> 25th October 14
> We can confirm that the Loony party was not notified of the E.U budget demand of £1.7bn before George Osborne or David Cameron.
> Also in the news the BBC in keeping with their policy of not important news coverage will be televising the incarceration of Oscar Pistorius 24 hours a day. Yes you can see the riveting instalments of Oscar sitting in a cell for 5 years. You can see Oscar walking around his cell and his special hour of Recreation. .Ping Pong exclusives …..Don't miss the Slopping Out Special Highlights.
> 
> *Asda's equality policy*
> 24th October 14
> The Loony Party being strong advocates of equal pay agree that the women workers of Asda should have equal pay with the men.
> We have it on good authority that George Osborne also agrees with this, and to save needless court costs, has asked for the men's wages to be reduced accordingly.
> 
> https://www.loonyparty.com/about/policy-proposals/


The Raving Loony's would get my vote if they had a candidate standing in my constituency - they really are a progressive party. Combating global warming by simply putting the air conditioners outside of the buildings is such a logical solution.


----------



## stockwellcat.

samuelsmiles said:


> The Raving Loony's would get my vote if they had a candidate standing in my constituency - they really are a progressive party. Combating global warming by simply putting the air conditioners outside of the buildings is such a logical solution.


When you actually read there policies they make sense and they are comical as well  I would consider them if they had a candidate in my area to but they don't 

I haven't stopped laughing as I cannot believe they are an actual political party


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Just spoke to my dad and he agrees, so do I. How incompetent is Diane Abbott? I won't even mention Corbyn. It's good to voice politics sometimes with family.


Diane Abbott is a national treasure. Je suise Diane Abbott!

I want to have a badge like that.

We will send her as an envoy to White House.

Imagine the dialogs!!!!

We will send her to Putin!!! She will never reveal any secret information, ever, will never read them in the first place.

We can send her to Saudi Arabia and Quatar. They might agree to everything we want....

She is funnier than Johnston without even trying.


----------



## Dimwit

Jesthar said:


> I'm not one to usually make personal comments, but is anyone else starting to think Mrs May is controlled by one of those electronic keyring things that have half a dozen or buttons with pre-programmed phrases?
> 
> 1. I'm/It's Very Clear
> 2. Strong and Stable
> 3. Coalition of Chaos
> 4. Brexit means Brexit
> 5. Make Me Strong
> 6. Global Britain
> 7. Make Britain Great Again
> 8. Give Me The Mandate


Don't forget "enough is enough" which, I'm sure, has every potential terrorist quaking in their shoes.


----------



## Elles

Qatar are in trouble with Saudi at the moment aren't they. Saudi says to Qatar, everybody out. Your embassy has 2 days, and anyone else from Qatar has 2 weeks to get out of Saudi. And by the way, you're not flying over our airspace neither. 'Hear, hear' says half a dozen other countries. 

Saudi are disgusted with Qatar for allegedly supporting terrorists with money and arms. They even paid up when people were kidnapped. How terribad of them.

Pot, kettle? 

Clearly we should have left them all to it, helped refugees when they asked, but kept our bombs and bullets to ourselves, they sound pretty capable in the Middle East without our help.


----------



## stockwellcat.

*Theresa May says she will rip up human rights laws to fight terror*

Theresa May has said she will rip up some human rights laws if they "stop us" from tackling terrorism.

Speaking on the election trail, the Prime Minister told supporters she would change any laws that got in the way of preventing jihadis from launching attacks in Britain.

Mrs May used one of her final speeches of the General Election campaign to step up her rhetoric against Islamist extremism in the wake of the London Bridge terror attack that left seven people dead and more than 40 injured.

She said: "As we see the threat changing, evolving becoming a more complex threat, we need to make sure that our police and security and intelligence agencies have the powers they need.

"I mean longer prison sentences for people convicted of terrorist offences. I mean making it easier for the authorities to deport foreign terrorist suspects back to their own countries.

"And I mean doing more to restrict the freedom and the movements of terrorist suspects when we have enough evidence to know they are a threat, but not enough evidence to prosecute them in full in court.

"And if our human rights laws stop us from doing it, we will change the laws so we can do it.

"If I am elected as Prime Minister on Thursday, that work begins on Friday."

Speaking earlier to Sky's Political Editor Faisal Islam, Mrs May *said police and the intelligence services need to launch a review* after the three attackers slipped through the net to launch the attack.

Security services have come under pressure after it emerged one of the attackers, Khuram Butt, had been reported to the anti-terror hotline in 2015, when Mrs May was Home Secretary.

But as well as the focus on what the authorities knew, the PM has come under fire for scrapping control orders, which allowed terror suspects to be detained under house arrest, during her time in the Home Office.

Mrs May has also been forced to defend her record on police cuts after officer numbers dropped by 20,000 when she was Home Secretary.

On Monday, Jeremy Corbyn *appeared to back calls for Mrs May to resign* over the cuts - before later seeming to row back.

Speaking earlier on Tuesday, the Labour leader expressed concern that the police and security services lacked the resources they needed to deal with the terrorist threat.

"Obviously we're all worried that this could happen again," he said.

"That does require obviously vigilance but it does require proper resources and therefore cutting police numbers and not funding sufficiently those that are involved in security is a problem."

Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron accused Mrs May of launching a "nuclear arms race" on terror laws and claimed she was "simply posturing about being tough on terror".

http://news.sky.com/story/theresa-m...up-human-rights-laws-to-fight-terror-10906543


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dimwit said:


> Don't forget "enough is enough" which, I'm sure, has every potential terrorist quaking in their shoes.


And Jeremy Corbyn wants unlimited immigration or so it would seem as he isn't willing to tell us how many people he will allow into the UK or will agree to with the EU.


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> And Jeremy Corbyn wants unlimited immigration or so it would seem as he isn't willing to tell us how many people he will allow in or will agree to with the EU.


He did not say he wants unlimited immigration. That is a lie.

He did not specify the number, fair enough.

He said that Britain needs foreign workers until we educate our own .

Fair enough.

We also need foreign students, their fees!


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> He did not say he wants unlimited immigration. That is a lie.
> 
> He did not specify the number, fair enough.


Well he won't commit to a figure. So what's a lie then? His statement about not specifying a number can be interpreted this way.


----------



## Elles

Ooer that'll up her popularity in the polls. People are always complaining about rights to a family etc that prevent criminals being deported. They blamed the Eu for it.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> *Theresa May says she will rip up human rights laws to fight terror*
> 
> Theresa May has said she will rip up some human rights laws if they "stop us" from tackling terrorism.
> 
> Speaking on the election trail, the Prime Minister told supporters she would change any laws that got in the way of preventing jihadis from launching attacks in Britain.
> 
> Mrs May used one of her final speeches of the General Election campaign to step up her rhetoric against Islamist extremism in the wake of the London Bridge terror attack that left seven people dead and more than 40 injured.
> 
> She said: "As we see the threat changing, evolving becoming a more complex threat, we need to make sure that our police and security and intelligence agencies have the powers they need.
> 
> "I mean longer prison sentences for people convicted of terrorist offences. I mean making it easier for the authorities to deport foreign terrorist suspects back to their own countries.
> 
> "And I mean doing more to restrict the freedom and the movements of terrorist suspects when we have enough evidence to know they are a threat, but not enough evidence to prosecute them in full in court.
> 
> "And if our human rights laws stop us from doing it, we will change the laws so we can do it.
> 
> "If I am elected as Prime Minister on Thursday, that work begins on Friday."
> 
> Speaking earlier to Sky's Political Editor Faisal Islam, Mrs May *said police and the intelligence services need to launch a review* after the three attackers slipped through the net to launch the attack.
> 
> Security services have come under pressure after it emerged one of the attackers, Khuram Butt, had been reported to the anti-terror hotline in 2015, when Mrs May was Home Secretary.
> 
> But as well as the focus on what the authorities knew, the PM has come under fire for scrapping control orders, which allowed terror suspects to be detained under house arrest, during her time in the Home Office.
> 
> Mrs May has also been forced to defend her record on police cuts after officer numbers dropped by 20,000 when she was Home Secretary.
> 
> On Monday, Jeremy Corbyn *appeared to back calls for Mrs May to resign* over the cuts - before later seeming to row back.
> 
> Speaking earlier on Tuesday, the Labour leader expressed concern that the police and security services lacked the resources they needed to deal with the terrorist threat.
> 
> "Obviously we're all worried that this could happen again," he said.
> 
> "That does require obviously vigilance but it does require proper resources and therefore cutting police numbers and not funding sufficiently those that are involved in security is a problem."
> 
> Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron accused Mrs May of launching a "nuclear arms race" on terror laws and claimed she was "simply posturing about being tough on terror".
> 
> http://news.sky.com/story/theresa-m...up-human-rights-laws-to-fight-terror-10906543


Oh what a surprise! So shes going to tear up our Human rights to protect her own failings. I honestly cant believe people are actually going to vote for this sly creature. Shes taking us for fools.


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Well he won't commit to a figure. So what's a lie then? His statement about not specifying a number can be interpreted this way.


Or twisted that way...
Just an interpretation of your take on Corbyn.
Whom I dislike for much more obvious parting with his promises.

But agree with some points like no number on immigration.
Lastest: Vacancies as EU nationals are leaving. Especially in hospitals and care.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Well he won't commit to a figure. So what's a lie then? His statement about not specifying a number can be interpreted this way.


The Tories have had the same target figure since 2010. Nowhere near to achieving it.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Oh what a surprise! So shes going to tear up our Human rights to protect her own failings. I honestly cant believe people are actually going to vote for this sly creature. Shes taking us for fools.


Well my dad said die hard Labour supporters he knows that have voted Labour there entire adult lives aren't voting Labour this time around as they don't trust Corbyn and Abbott is incompetent. My dad said the UK voted for Brexit even though he didn't and he believes he voted incorrectly and said if the UK wants Brexit they should vote Conservatives which he is doing.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Well my dad said die hard Labour supporters he knows that have voted Labour there entire adult lives aren't voting Labour this time around as they don't trust Corbyn and Abbott is incompetent. My dad said the UK voted for Brexit even though he didn't and he believes he voted incorrectly and said if the UK wants Brexit they should vote Conservatives which he is doing.


How old are you?


----------



## noushka05

Maybe you should show your Dad this @stockwellcat. Or doesn't he listen to expert opinion either?


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> How old are you?


What?

I was having a political discussion with my dad and he is right.

Corbyn cannot be trusted.
Abbott is incompetent. Look at her disasterous performance so far.


----------



## cheekyscrip

As to EU immigrants


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> What?
> 
> I was having a political discussion with my dad and he is right.
> 
> Corbyn cannot be trusted.
> Abbott is incompetent. Look at her disasterous performance so far.


But the party that is destroying our NHS, social care, public services & taking away our human rights can be trusted, right?


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Maybe you should show your Dad this @stockwellcat. Or doesn't he listen to expert opinion either?
> 
> View attachment 313546


My dad isn't a member of PF so wouldn't see what you deem as facts. The majority of people (that's the public) are more interested in what there local candidates have to say rather than researching so called facts.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> But the party that is destroying our NHS, social care, public services & taking away our human rights can be trusted, right?


We'll see on the 9th June won't we.

They aren't taking our human rights away, if you read the news article May is removing human rights that prevent them from dealing with the terrorists and potential terrorists appropriately.


----------



## cheekyscrip

noushka05 said:


> How old are you?


He is early middle age..SWC, not his Dad...


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> He is early middle age..SWC, not his Dad...


My dad is the young side of... Well that would be telling his age wouldn't it


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> We'll see on the 9th June won't we.
> 
> They aren't taking our human rights away, if you read the news article May is removing human rights that prevent them from dealing with the terrorists appropriately.


Don't be so gullible SWC. I predicted something like this would happen days ago.


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> He is early middle age..SWC


At least I am not refered to as the Hobbit anymore


----------



## noushka05

cheekyscrip said:


> He is early middle age..SWC, not his Dad...


Its hard to believe sometimes


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> Mrs May has also been forced to defend her record on police cuts after officer numbers dropped by 20,000 when she was Home Secretary.


There were large cuts of course, one reason being that when they took over from Labour (2010) the kitty was empty I believe. And (according to today's Evening Standard) Britain's intelligence and security services were given a huge budget increase in 2015, from £11.7 billion to £15.1 billion.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ter-there-is-no-money-labour-general-election


----------



## noushka05

Even Nige is sticking the boot in.
*
Nigel Farage*‏Verified [email protected]*Nigel_Farage* 1h1 hour ago

U-turn Theresa is at it again. Her manifesto says: Remain in ECHR.
But last minute grab for votes says the opposite.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> There were large cuts of course, one reason being that when they took over from Labour (2010) the kitty was empty I believe. And (according to today's Evening Standard) Britain's intelligence and security services were given a huge budget increase in 2015, from £11.7 billion to £15.1 billion.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ter-there-is-no-money-labour-general-election


See people forget these facts @noushka05


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> Don't be so gullible SWC. I predicted something like this would happen days ago.


An easy prediction as it's one of the gripes people had about human rights. Forget the rights of terrorists and criminals, what about our rights, that sort of thing.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> There were large cuts of course, one reason being that when they took over from Labour (2010) the kitty was empty I believe. And (according to today's Evening Standard) Britain's intelligence and security services were given a huge budget increase in 2015, from £11.7 billion to £15.1 billion.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ter-there-is-no-money-labour-general-election


OMG not that again. Surely:Hilarious Nothing is ever the tories fault. They can find money for wars, trident, HS2, tax cuts for corporations, badger culls, the fossil fuel industry - but the pots empty for public services & the NHS. Funny that.

Austerity was con. Please read this @Calvine by Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman - https://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr/29/the-austerity-delusion


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> May is removing human rights that prevent them from dealing with the terrorists and potential terrorists appropriately.


Ya mean like a policy similar to the Patriot Act.

Where they can lift a 12 year old from the street and interrogate them without the parents been present?


----------



## Elles




----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> At least I am not refered to as the Hobbit anymore


Early middle aged hobbit...

Well...seems I missed the opportunity to find out!!!


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> Ya mean like a policy similar to the Patriot Act.
> 
> Where they can lift a 12 year old from the street and interrogate them without the parents been present?


No, not like that.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Abbott latest:


She is taking break from the campaign due to poor health.



I am truly sorry.

Corbyn was using her as an example of woman with a career.


I never suspected him of GSOH.


But I am sorry to see her gone...

She was much , much more watchable than most Muppets on that show.


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> Abbott latest:
> 
> She is taking break from the campaign due to poor health.
> 
> I am truly sorry.
> 
> Corbyn was using her as an example of woman with a career.
> 
> I never suspected him of GSOH.
> 
> But I am sorry to see her gone...
> 
> She was much , much more watchable than most Muppets on that show.


Bit late in the campaign to do this, the damage has been done:

*Corbyn refuses to say Abbott will keep job if Labour wins*

Speaking to reporters on Labour's battle bus in Telford, Shropshire, Mr Corbyn defended his close ally - but refused to commit to appointing her as home secretary if he wins Thursday's General Election.

Asked if he had confidence in Ms Abbott, Mr Corbyn said: "Our shadow home secretary has done a good job, she's not well today and is therefore not on the campaign today."

Asked if her media appearances had damaged Labour's campaign, Mr Corbyn said: "Diane has been a great advocate for the Labour Party and a great advocate for young women trying to achieve in politics, and I think we should recognise she has received an awful lot of very unfair criticism and abuse in the past, she's not well at the moment and she's taking a break for the campaign."

Mr Corbyn refused to be drawn on who would make up his cabinet if he won on 8 June.

"I will be appointing a cabinet on Friday if we are elected into government and that's when you will find out who's going to be in the cabinet, I'm not appointing it on television," he said.

http://news.sky.com/story/corbyn-refuses-to-say-abbott-will-keep-job-if-labour-wins-10906460

I think this is more the reason why this has happened:

A number of difficult interviews for Ms Abbott has led to reports that Mr Corbyn and shadow chancellor John McDonnell wanted to keep her off air in the closing stages of the election, fearing she had become a liability.


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> No, not like that.


How do you know? Removing human rights for the few, is the first step to removing human rights for the many 
There are no black hats and there are no white hats!

It also might be worth you noting that no one has any rights. They have privileges.

And privileges can be revoked.


----------



## Team_Trouble

stockwellcat said:


> Oh I don't do scams. Not my thing.
> I'd be quids in to on election day but I do have concerns about certain members of that party, so that narrows things down to Conservatives and Labour  oh and UKIP and Lib Dems.


Is there no green party candidate in your constituency?



noushka05 said:


> The mayor of Barcelona putting our weak PM to shame now & speaking out in defence of Sadiq.
> 
> *Ada Colau*‏Verified [email protected]*AdaColau* 21h21 hours ago
> 
> Ada Colau Retweeted Donald J. Trump
> 
> The attack on the Mayor of London by Trump is unacceptable and only serves to divide and spread panic. @*SadiqKhan* has Barcelona's support.


I was actually bothered when Sadiq Khan said this

Sadiq Khan has said he believes the threat of terror attacks are "part and parcel of living in a big city"

It certainly SHOULD NOT and he shouldn't accept terrorism in this way.


----------



## kimthecat

Anyone watch Election Spy? its on for about 5 mins before Newsnight BBC 2 each night . takes a pop at the four main parties and is laugh out loud funny. " Corbyn looks like a geography teacher who's spent a whole term teaching the wrong syllabus. " :Hilarious

Episodes here 
https://www.comedy.co.uk/tv/election_spy/episodes/1/


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> I spent a summer with some true Romanies once, they parked on the grass a few hundred yards away from where I lived. Lovely couple, beautiful caravan and well looked after animals.
> 
> Also had dealings with a few Travellers who were/are just happy to be left in peace and they cause no trouble. Some park on wide country verges for the whole winter, and because they are decent people, no one tries to get them moved on.
> 
> There's Romanies
> Travellers
> and Pikeys


Romany or roma gipsies
Irish travellers or travellers
Pikeys are a different breed, they are NONE of the above


----------



## 1290423

Ops sorry rona didn't mean to quote you think it were rttie I was after


----------



## 1290423

well im voting ukip!


----------



## Jesthar

KatieandOliver said:


> I was actually bothered when Sadiq Khan said this
> 
> Sadiq Khan has said he believes the threat of terror attacks are "part and parcel of living in a big city"
> 
> It certainly SHOULD NOT and he shouldn't accept terrorism in this way.


I don't think acknowledging the truth of the current world situation is accepting terrorism in any way. It's more or less similar to, for example, saying that fatal crashes are part and parcel of people driving cars. One hopes that the situation doesn't occur and urges people to take all possible precautions to prevent it happening, but at some point the balance of probability tips into the inevitable.


----------



## Elles

Over 1500 people haven't received the paperwork for their postal vote in the most marginal seat in the south-west.  A computer error was blamed.

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/mor...-in-plymouth/story-30375176-detail/story.html


----------



## 1290423

Jesthar said:


> I don't think acknowledging the truth of the current world situation is accepting terrorism in any way. It's more or less similar to, for example, saying that fatal crashes are part and parcel of people driving cars. One hopes that the situation doesn't occur and urges people to take all possible precautions to prevent it happening, but at some point the balance of probability tips into the inevitable.


Yeah right! To me he was just saying its the way of life, get used to it ! the sooner he's Gone the better!


----------



## 3dogs2cats

KatieandOliver said:


> Is there no green party candidate in your constituency?
> 
> I was actually bothered when Sadiq Khan said this
> 
> Sadiq Khan has said he believes the threat of terror attacks are "part and parcel of living in a big city"
> 
> It certainly SHOULD NOT and he shouldn't accept terrorism in this way.


SWC is voting Conservative so wouldn`t be interested in the Greens.

I don`t see Sadiq Khans remarks as accepting terrorism. My Niece was living in Paris at the time of attacks there, she said the same thing to me. she does not accepts terrorism but does accept cities are much more likely to be a target for terrorist.


----------



## 1290423

3dogs2cats said:


> SWC is voting Conservative so wouldn`t be interested in the Greens.
> 
> I don`t see Sadiq Khans remarks as accepting terrorism. My Niece was living in Paris at the time of attacks there, she said the same thing to me. she does not accepts terrorism but does accept cities are much more likely to be a target for terrorist.


I dont see sadiQ khan as a true representation of the Mayor of London as it happens I would like to see him gone. sooner rather than later


----------



## Goblin

> Part and parcel of living in a great global city is you've got to be prepared for these things, you've got to be vigilant, you've got to support the police doing an incredibly hard job. We must never accept terrorists being successful, we must never accept that terrorists can destroy our life or destroy the way we lead our lives.


Sadi Khan in September. Common sense actually for decades. Let us not forget things like http://metro.co.uk/2017/04/30/deadl...uncan-in-soho-remembered-18-years-on-6606700/ Nothing to do with middle east or even the IRA.


----------



## Jesthar

DT said:


> Yeah right! To me he was just saying its the way of life, get used to it ! the sooner he's Gone the better!


What would you prefer him to say, then? That there's nothing to worry about, big cities aren't any more likely to be targetted than a remote cowshed in Yorkshire?


----------



## 1290423

Jesthar said:


> What would you prefer him to say, then? That there's nothing to worry about, big cities aren't any more likely to be targetted than a remote cowshed in Yorkshire?


Yep


----------



## Jesthar

DT said:


> Yep


Why? Given that it would be a blatant lie and a very stupid thing to say?


----------



## 1290423

Jesthar said:


> What would you prefer him to say, then? That there's nothing to worry about, big cities aren't any more likely to be targetted than a remote cowshed in Yorkshire?


Seriously?? what I would have expected him to say is, these dropouts will not affect our lives, we will continue as we always have to be a happy multicultural Society they won't change us not today, not tomorrow, not ever


----------



## 1290423

Jesthar said:


> Why? Given that it would be a blatant lie and a very stupid thing to say?


. So you are ready to roll over then! You gonna run and hide ? Does life stop for you here? Seriously get a grip buttercup!


----------



## 1290423

Anyway I can't be bothered to argue with jester to busy out having fun in the City!


----------



## Goblin

DT said:


> . So you are ready to roll over then! You gonna run and hide ? Does life stop for you here? Seriously get a grip buttercup!


Maybe you should actually read what he actually said then


----------



## 1290423

Goblin said:


> Maybe you should actually read what he actually said then


Who? Jesther or khan?


----------



## Jesthar

DT said:


> Seriously?? what I would have expected him to say is, these dropouts will not affect our lives, we will continue as we always have to be a happy multicultural Society they won't change us not today, not tomorrow, not ever


The two sentiments are not mutually exclusive, you know. One can honest about there being a heightened risk and still refuse to let it affect the way you live.



DT said:


> . So you are ready to roll over then! You gonna run and hide ? Does life stop for you here? Seriously get a grip buttercup!


Cupcake, my main idea of fun is getting on the back of a creature with a mind of it's own and barrelling through the countryside at speeds up to close to 30mph. I just spent a week in France doing Paris and Disneyland, ideal terrorist targets. Disneyland even had police armed with sub-machine guns (Heckler & Koch G36's, I think) on duty. That also involved Eurostar and travelling through London alone on the Underground. And in all that time I was more scared of missing a connection or getting on the wrong train than being blown up.

I also work in an industry that is more likely to be targetted by terrorists than most. And I ain't going anywhere 

Statistically speaking, I'm more likely to meet my end at the paws of one of my cats than at the hand of a terrorist. And yet I'm still not getting rid of the cats!


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> An easy prediction as it's one of the gripes people had about human rights. Forget the rights of terrorists and criminals, what about our rights, that sort of thing.


Authoritarian leaders use terrorism as an excuse to take away the civil liberties of their citizens. Imagine people actually cheering for this? The terrorists have won.












stockwellcat said:


> My dad isn't a member of PF so wouldn't see what you deem as facts. The majority of people (that's the public) are more interested in what there local candidates have to say rather than researching so called facts.


So called facts? You sound just like Trump.


----------



## noushka05

KatieandOliver said:


> Is there no green party candidate in your constituency?
> 
> I was actually bothered when Sadiq Khan said this
> 
> Sadiq Khan has said he believes the threat of terror attacks are "part and parcel of living in a big city"
> 
> It certainly SHOULD NOT and he shouldn't accept terrorism in this way.


He wasn't accepting terrorism Katie, he was warning us to be vigilant.


----------



## noushka05

FeelTheBern said:


> Wherever you decide to place that X, just don't put it in the Labour box, please!


Bernie would vote for Labour


----------



## havoc

3dogs2cats said:


> I don`t see Sadiq Khans remarks as accepting terrorism


He didn't, he said we have to accept there is the threat of it.
If we don't do that we don't take any measures to counter it. Why is everyone bitching about our counter terrorism measures if they don't accept the threat exists?


----------



## stockwellcat.

> I was actually bothered when Sadiq Khan said this
> 
> Sadiq Khan has said he believes the threat of terror attacks are "part and parcel of living in a big city".


This is why in September this year I am moving out of London to a lovely area of the country called Lancaster (I have almost got the money to do this). I don't like what Khan said and it scares me that people are willing to accept this as being part of the parcel of big city living. My main reasons for leaving London are to be closer to my dad.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> So called facts? You sound just like Trump.


Well Labour is set to lose seats in every area apart from London according to one of the daily comics .

*Labour to lose seats everywhere but London*

Labour is heading for a "nuclear winter" outside London as party activists north of the M25 brace for a dismal result in Thursday's election, according to a report.

Analysis based on testimony from Labour officials, candidates and activists, who have seen thousands of canvass returns, concluded there was "a marked improvement in London but precious little to cheer about outside".

The report by Labour Uncut, an influential grassroots blog, suggested that despite Labour's surge in the polls in recent weeks, the party is preparing for wide-scale losses.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...n/news-story/bca35bc27598e9e35bc636ba7b0d2c26


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Pilger, the man that twists the truth by omission. Go look it up.
> 
> Also started a news paper to do much the same
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_on_Sunday


Can you do one of your character assassinations on lifelong Tory Peter Oborne please? http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/theresa-may-counter-terrorism-london-bridge-224806927

*Theresa May, you know that 'enough is enough' is just not enough*
Days ahead of the general election, Theresa May has announced a new approach to security. It sounds strong, but it's actually weak, dangerous and very un-British

We all need to ponder whether
leadership really is the same as
violent and impulsive action leading to 
murderous and counter-productive results



Bisbow said:


> What is rude about calling him a puppet when he is
> 
> But then we are not allowed to make remarks about him whilst anything about TM is perfectly admissible


Because he clearly isn't a puppet. Single handedly he has transformed the labour party into a truly progressive anti-austerity party.

May on the other hand IS a puppet. For Trump, for the billionaire media barons, hedgefunders & corporations who's interests she represents.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Well Labour is set to lose seats in every area apart from London according to one of the daily comics .


And? I'm sure the tories will win by a landslide, I've said so all along - so what is your point?


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> This is why in September this year I am moving out of London to a lovely area of the country called Lancaster (I have almost got the money to do this). I don't like what Khan said and it scares me that people are willing to accept this as being part of the parcel of big city living. My main reasons for leaving London are to be closer to my dad.


I suppose you'd feel safer if he'd lied.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well 24 hours from now it will all be over for me as I would have voted.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> I suppose you'd feel safer if he'd lied.


Who my dad? (My dad doesn't lie )
Oh you mean Khan


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> I suppose you'd feel safer if he'd lied.


It doesn't need to be part of the parcel of big city of living. Why should it be? We need to get tough on terrorists, those associated to terrorism by changing the anti terror laws.


----------



## noushka05

*Rachel Clarke*‏@*doctor_oxford* 14h14 hours ago

_The most extreme NHS cuts ever are planned - but in secret until after the election.
Furtive, grubby, insulting.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/h...eaked-campaigners-election-2017-a7775571.html_


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> Can you do one of your character assassinations on lifelong Tory Peter Oborne please? http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/theresa-may-counter-terrorism-london-bridge-224806927
> 
> *Theresa May, you know that 'enough is enough' is just not enough*
> Days ahead of the general election, Theresa May has announced a new approach to security. It sounds strong, but it's actually weak, dangerous and very un-British
> 
> We all need to ponder whether
> leadership really is the same as
> violent and impulsive action leading to
> murderous and counter-productive results
> 
> Because he clearly isn't a puppet. Single handedly he has transformed the labour party into a truly progressive anti-austerity party.
> 
> May on the other hand IS a puppet. For Trump, for the billionaire media barons, hedgefunders & corporations who's interests she represents.
> 
> View attachment 313568





noushka05 said:


> Can you do one of your character assassinations on lifelong Tory Peter Oborne please? http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/theresa-may-counter-terrorism-london-bridge-224806927
> 
> *Theresa May, you know that 'enough is enough' is just not enough*
> Days ahead of the general election, Theresa May has announced a new approach to security. It sounds strong, but it's actually weak, dangerous and very un-British
> 
> We all need to ponder whether
> leadership really is the same as
> violent and impulsive action leading to
> murderous and counter-productive results
> 
> Because he clearly isn't a puppet. Single handedly he has transformed the labour party into a truly progressive anti-austerity party.
> 
> May on the other hand IS a puppet. For Trump, for the billionaire media barons, hedgefunders & corporations who's interests she represents.
> 
> View attachment 313568


You should know about Character assassinations as you have a masters degree in it as you have proved many times

Of course JC is a puppet as as he has his strings pulled by all the militants of one sort or another


----------



## Bisbow

The desperation is get getting manic now the election is so close


----------



## Calvine

cheekyscrip said:


> She is funnier than Johnston without even trying


You hit the nail on the head there, @cheekyscrip.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> You should know about Character assassinations as you have a masters degree in it as you have proved many times
> 
> Of course JC is a puppet as as he has his strings pulled by all the militants of one sort or another


It isn't a character assassination when you call out duplicitous liars like May & her government. Their record speaks for itself. Slandering someone just because you don't like hearing the truth is a character assassination,

No he isn't, no ones pulling his strings. He is governed by his principles.


----------



## Calvine

cheekyscrip said:


> Abbott latest:
> 
> She is taking break from the campaign due to poor health.
> 
> I am truly sorry.
> 
> Corbyn was using her as an example of woman with a career.
> 
> I never suspected him of GSOH.
> 
> But I am sorry to see her gone...
> 
> She was much , much more watchable than most Muppets on that show.


In other words she has been sidelined until Friday in case she does any more damage? Or...?


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> The desperation is get getting manic now the election is so close


When the NHS is gone & our society begins to break down further & things start to impact on you & your loved ones, maybe then, you will understand the desperation millions are feeling right now. Austerity is a political choice, remember that.


----------



## Calvine

KatieandOliver said:


> Sadiq Khan has said he believes the threat of terror attacks are "part and parcel of living in a big city"


@KatieandOliver: I have posted your quote on here, twice, and was informed by 'those who know' that 'I was taking what he said 'out of context'. Glad you think the same.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> No he isn't, no ones pulling his strings. He is governed by his principles.


The union's Govern him and the Labour party


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> It isn't a character assassination when you call out duplicitous liars like May & her government. Their record speaks for itself. Slandering someone just because you don't like hearing the truth is a character assassination,
> 
> No he isn't, no ones pulling his strings. He is governed by his principles.


So, it is not character assassination to post vile pictures of someone and say it is true, or silly cartoons to try to make a point, . Not many people make me shudder with revulsion but he does and has done since the first time I saw him

His principles are told to him by has masters and he has to obey


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well the daily mail are running this front page today:








​http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4578716/Apologists-terror-Corbyn-McDonnell-Abbott.html


----------



## Bisbow

stockwellcat said:


> Well the daily mail are running this front page today:
> 
> View attachment 313569​


Stand by tor all the abuse that will be coming your way any minute


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> We need to get tough on terrorists, those associated to terrorism by changing the anti terror laws


They are protected by their human rights and legal aid though...more importance should be placed on the victims' human rights.


----------



## Calvine

Thank you for that @stockwellcat...off to take a look at that (Mail). Bye for now


----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> They are protected by their human rights and legal aid though...more importance should be placed on the victims' human rights.


Totally agree with you.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> So, it is not character assassination to post vile pictures of someone and say it is true, or silly cartoons to try to make a point, . Not many people make me shudder with revulsion but he does and has done since the first time I saw him
> 
> His principles are told to him by has masters and he has to obey


But they are based on facts. May & her government are bunch of pathological liars.



stockwellcat said:


> Well the daily mail are running this front page today:
> 
> View attachment 313569​


Did you expect anything else from this foul rag?


----------



## noushka05

#LastMinuteCorbynSmears trending top on twitter. Says it all about our so called democracy.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> They are protected by their human rights and legal aid though...more importance should be placed on the victims' human rights.


This >

_The thing about human rights is it protects humans.
That means everybody who is a human. _
_Not merely people Theresa May decides are human. _Marcus Chown


----------



## Jonescat

It is the day before the election - of course the papers are trying to make sure you vote the way they want you to - has nothing to do with truth or journalism. 
Meanwhile greater ability of the police to access personal data without justification will lessen the chance of a finding of adequacy by the European Information Commissioner and hit our economy - in 2015 the internet economy contributed 10% of the UK’s GDP. And that is just one tiny bit of the complexity of Brexit, and most of it hasn't been discussed at all.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> This >
> 
> _The thing about human rights is it protects humans.
> That means everybody who is a human. _
> _Not merely people Theresa May decides are human. _Marcus Chown


If you listened to what May said properly she is ripping up Human Rights laws that protect terrorists and prevents the UK from deporting foreign terrorists. She is not ripping up all Human Rights but obviously you will twist this.


----------



## samuelsmiles

noushka05 said:


> When the NHS is gone & our society begins to break down further & things start to impact on you & your loved ones, maybe then, *you will understand the desperation millions are feeling right now*. Austerity is a political choice, remember that.


If that is so true, the people will vote out the Conservatives. We'll see what the majority says tomorrow.


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> View attachment 313570


Don't much care which column is true. Either one makes him un-electable.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> It doesn't need to be part of the parcel of big city of living. Why should it be? We need to get tough on terrorists, those associated to terrorism by changing the anti terror laws.


This.

It is right and proper that we operate within the law but, when our laws require us to stand idly by and ignore people whom we are virtually certain will commit acts of terror, it is high time to change the law.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> View attachment 313570


Oh my, desperation has now passed the manic stage

How far will you go I wonder


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> If you listened to what May said properly she is ripping up Human Rights laws that protect terrorists and prevents the UK from deporting foreign terrorists. She is not ripping up all Human Rights but obviously you will twist this.


You are seriously naïve. 
*

David Allen Green*‏@*davidallengreen* 11h11 hours ago

Journalists: please ask May exactly how human rights law and ECHR stops her dealing with terrorism.
She will NOT have an answer

Human rights law does nothing to limit government dealing with terrorism.
But human rights law demonstrates the values that need defending


"Tearing up" human rights law would mean UK joining those few countries without rights protection.
Countries which still have terrorism.

*David Allen Green*‏@*davidallengreen* 1h1 hour ago

"Tearing up" human rights law would have meant no new Hillsborough Inquest.
Second inquest only possible because of human right law

*David Allen Green*‏@*davidallengreen* 1h1 hour ago

"Tearing up" human rights law would mean an end to Good Friday Agreement.
GFA has as a fundamental requirement that ECHR is enforceable.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Oh my, desperation has now passed the manic stage
> 
> How far will you go I wonder


I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you mean?


----------



## samuelsmiles

stockwellcat said:


> *Theresa May says she will rip up human rights laws to fight terror*
> 
> Theresa May has said she will rip up some human rights laws if they "stop us" from tackling terrorism.
> 
> Speaking on the election trail, the Prime Minister told supporters she would change any laws that got in the way of preventing jihadis from launching attacks in Britain.
> 
> Mrs May used one of her final speeches of the General Election campaign to step up her rhetoric against Islamist extremism in the wake of the London Bridge terror attack that left seven people dead and more than 40 injured.
> 
> She said: "As we see the threat changing, evolving becoming a more complex threat, we need to make sure that our police and security and intelligence agencies have the powers they need.
> 
> "I mean longer prison sentences for people convicted of terrorist offences. I mean making it easier for the authorities to deport foreign terrorist suspects back to their own countries.
> 
> "And I mean doing more to restrict the freedom and the movements of terrorist suspects when we have enough evidence to know they are a threat, but not enough evidence to prosecute them in full in court.
> 
> "And if our human rights laws stop us from doing it, we will change the laws so we can do it.
> 
> "If I am elected as Prime Minister on Thursday, that work begins on Friday."
> 
> Speaking earlier to Sky's Political Editor Faisal Islam, Mrs May *said police and the intelligence services need to launch a review* after the three attackers slipped through the net to launch the attack.
> 
> Security services have come under pressure after it emerged one of the attackers, Khuram Butt, had been reported to the anti-terror hotline in 2015, when Mrs May was Home Secretary.
> 
> But as well as the focus on what the authorities knew, the PM has come under fire for scrapping control orders, which allowed terror suspects to be detained under house arrest, during her time in the Home Office.
> 
> Mrs May has also been forced to defend her record on police cuts after officer numbers dropped by 20,000 when she was Home Secretary.
> 
> On Monday, Jeremy Corbyn *appeared to back calls for Mrs May to resign* over the cuts - before later seeming to row back.
> 
> Speaking earlier on Tuesday, the Labour leader expressed concern that the police and security services lacked the resources they needed to deal with the terrorist threat.
> 
> "Obviously we're all worried that this could happen again," he said.
> 
> "That does require obviously vigilance but it does require proper resources and therefore cutting police numbers and not funding sufficiently those that are involved in security is a problem."
> 
> Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron accused Mrs May of launching a "nuclear arms race" on terror laws and claimed she was "simply posturing about being tough on terror".
> 
> http://news.sky.com/story/theresa-m...up-human-rights-laws-to-fight-terror-10906543


I thought, blimey, she didn't say that did she? Turns out she didn't - it was a headline for dramatic effect. What she actually said was -

_"And I mean doing more to restrict the freedom and the movements of terrorist suspects when we have enough evidence to know they present a threat, but not enough evidence to prosecute them in full in court.

"And if human rights laws stop us from doing it, we will change those laws so we can do it."
_
Not saying she'd get my vote though. Well I am actually - she wouldn't.
_
_


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> You are seriously naïve.


*
*
I can think for myself you know and make my own decisions.
*
*


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> Bit late in the campaign to do this, the damage has been done:
> 
> *Corbyn refuses to say Abbott will keep job if Labour wins*
> 
> Speaking to reporters on Labour's battle bus in Telford, Shropshire, Mr Corbyn defended his close ally - but refused to commit to appointing her as home secretary if he wins Thursday's General Election.
> 
> Asked if he had confidence in Ms Abbott, Mr Corbyn said: "Our shadow home secretary has done a good job, she's not well today and is therefore not on the campaign today."
> 
> Asked if her media appearances had damaged Labour's campaign, Mr Corbyn said: "Diane has been a great advocate for the Labour Party and a great advocate for young women trying to achieve in politics, and I think we should recognise she has received an awful lot of very unfair criticism and abuse in the past, she's not well at the moment and she's taking a break for the campaign."
> 
> Mr Corbyn refused to be drawn on who would make up his cabinet if he won on 8 June.
> 
> "I will be appointing a cabinet on Friday if we are elected into government and that's when you will find out who's going to be in the cabinet, I'm not appointing it on television," he said.
> 
> http://news.sky.com/story/corbyn-refuses-to-say-abbott-will-keep-job-if-labour-wins-10906460
> 
> I think this is more the reason why this has happened:
> 
> A number of difficult interviews for Ms Abbott has led to reports that Mr Corbyn and shadow chancellor John McDonnell wanted to keep her off air in the closing stages of the election, fearing she had become a liability.


That's odd, just 3 days ago he said she was definitely in


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> That's odd, just 3 days ago he said she was definitely in


I know it's a Labour u-turn.


----------



## noushka05

*Another day another police representative accusing the tories of misleading the public -* https://www.thecanary.co/2017/06/05...esentative-accusing-tories-misleading-public/

_I think one of the issues that we're most concerned about following on from those cuts has been an increase in crime that we've seen in England and Wales since 2012/13. And this is something which the government has sought to avoid, but we think there is a connection, there's an analysis, [on] what the public will be doing in relation to these figures. And some of those figures are truly, truly shocking._

_Since 2012/13, there's been a 29% increase in possession of weapons. This is police-recorded crime. These are the crimes that the police themselves through rigorous process have deemed to be
crimes. A 29% increase in possession of weapons. A 65% increase in violence against the person. A 38% increase in assault with injury. Sexual offences are up 97%. And public order offences are up 54%._

_Now, if those figures weren't shocking enough, this government, which has claimed repeatedly, and also claimed in its Conservative Party manifesto, that crime is falling. But nothing could actually be further from the truth. The government relies on the crime survey for England and Wales, which is an opinion poll, which disregards homicide; it disregards sexual offences; it disregards crimes against business. It is a very very small proportion of overall crime._

_So the government relies on those figures to tell the electorate that crime is falling. Whereas recorded crime figures tell exactly the opposite story._

_Now I'll return to the issue of policing cuts, and the effect that's had on our members' ability to police the work places, and the places that they are overseeing. And I think the most worrying aspect of that is if you look at the 37% - 38% decline in PCSOs [police community support officers], they now say they are no longer able to gather that important intelligence on a day-to-day basis about criminal, and potentially terrorist activity, in the communities that they are policing_.


----------



## samuelsmiles

It's great. Cos I have the Speaker of the House as my standing representative I don't get to vote for any of the Major parties (or the Lib Dems)

Can't blame me for nuffing come Friday morning.


----------



## stockwellcat.

samuelsmiles said:


> I have the Speaker of the House as my standing representative


The Speaker of the House John Bercow is Conservative.


----------



## noushka05

samuelsmiles said:


> It's great. Cos I have the Speaker of the House as my standing representative I don't get to vote for any of the Major parties (or the Lib Dems)
> 
> Can't blame me for nuffing come Friday morning.


At least your conscience will be clear when the climate destroying frackers are rolled out & the NHS is gone


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you mean?


What I mean is how far will you stoop to get people to believe your friend CF is the Saviour reborn
Haw many times are you going to twist what TM is saying
How many times are you only going to read parts of what is said, the parts you can twist to suit your reasoning


----------



## rona

http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...ur-cancel-Oxford-Circus-Tube-General-Election
"Nick Astaire, who had just seen the tweet, said he saw Ms Abbott in the station so took a photo of her talking on the phone and tweeted it to Woman's Hour."

I get a sense of deja vu here. Didn't this happen once before when she couldn't stand the heat?

This woman is going to be in charge of security or our country


----------



## havoc

I'm trying to work out what any proposed change to anti terrorism laws will do to help. We obviously can't cope with the intel already so other than a mass roundup of everyone 'already known to the police' (and presumably a few more just for luck) what good would it do? Wouldn't we still need more resources - not armed police but more counter terrorism intelligence officers. By the time it needs armed police on the streets we've already failed.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> What I mean is how far will you stoop to get people to believe your friend CF is the Saviour reborn
> Haw many times are you going to twist what TM is saying
> How many times are you only going to read parts of what is said, the parts you can twist to suit your reasoning


Firstly I don't think Corbyn is the saviour reborn. I feel like Stephen Hawking, Noam Chomsky, Bernie Sanders, all the stunning list of signatories who have signed this letter - https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jun/03/the-big-issue-labour-manifesto-what-economy-needs feel. Corbyn stands for social & environmental justice, not the suicidal path we're racing down under the tories.

I haven't twisted what May has said - its a well known tactic of authoritarians to use terrorism as an excuse to take away the liberties of its citizens. Instead of trusting a proven pathological liar, I recommend you take a look at what experts have to say on the matter.

ETA I misread, I thought you were talking about Corbyn sorry. Who is CF?


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> At least your conscience will be clear when the climate destroying frackers are rolled out & the NHS is gone


Just a reminder John Bercow is Conservative and speaker of the House :Muted


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Just a reminder John Bercow is Conservative and speaker of the House :Muted


Then isn't he supposed to remain neutral?:Muted I don't think he can stand as a candidate.


----------



## rona

rona said:


> http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...ur-cancel-Oxford-Circus-Tube-General-Election
> "Nick Astaire, who had just seen the tweet, said he saw Ms Abbott in the station so took a photo of her talking on the phone and tweeted it to Woman's Hour."
> 
> I get a sense of deja vu here. Didn't this happen once before when she couldn't stand the heat?
> 
> This woman is going to be in charge of security or our country


Oh yes there was this http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ion-anna-soubry-bbc-andrew-marr-a7563526.html

"It is farcical what is happening. Diane was taken terribly poorly and actually couldn't vote even though there were people with very serious cancers who did come in and vote".

She seems to have no sense of what is important and no backbone.
At least Jeremy only pulls a face and goes into a sulk, he doesn't run away


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> Firstly I don't think Corbyn is the saviour reborn. I feel like Stephen Hawking, Noam Chomsky, Bernie Sanders, all the stunning list of signatories who have signed this letter - https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jun/03/the-big-issue-labour-manifesto-what-economy-needs feel. Corbyn stands for social & environmental justice, not the suicidal path we're racing down under the tories.
> 
> I haven't twisted what May has said - its a well known tactic of authoritarians to use terrorism as an excuse to take away the liberties of its citizens. Instead of trusting a proven pathological liar, I recommend you take a look at what experts have to say on the matter.


Corbyn stands for nothing good, he will lead this country to ruin, he won't answer a question with a simple yes or no if his masters have not given him the answer first
You do only take what suits you from any publication you think will help your cause
Your experts leave a great deal to be desired

Don't know why you are bothering now, everyone, or most everyone has made up their mind by now


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...sh-voters-agree-majority-latest-a7776276.html


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> I don't think he can stand as a candidate.


Wrong.
He is standing as a candidate in his constituency. Just looked it up online to see if he is standing he is a Conservative MP after all.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Corbyn stands for nothing good, he will lead this country to ruin, he won't answer a question with a simple yes or no if his masters have not given him the answer first
> You do only take what suits you from any publication you think will help your cause
> Your experts leave a great deal to be desired
> 
> Don't know why you are bothering now, everyone, or most everyone has made up their mind by now


That's your opinion. The overwhelming evidence says the opposite. Don't you think the smartest man in the world & all those academics are capable of evaluating the evidence?


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Wrong.
> He is standing as a candidate in his constituency. Just looked it up online to see if he is standing he is a Conservative MP after all.


Fair enough. I didn't realise that.


----------



## AlexPed2393

Calvine said:


> Sounds a bit like my son...who also has to pay £8000 a year for his season ticket (altho' his salary is somewhat better).


Don't follow football and don't have a season ticket, my biggest hobby expense would be my £180 a year for golf (got a tasty discount )


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> I haven't twisted what May has said - its a well known tactic of authoritarians to use terrorism as an excuse to take away the liberties of its citizens.


It's a practice and strategy as old as time itself, Noush'

May talks of _'Strong and Stable'_ yet peace order and stability are the three things that are constantly being eroded from everyday life, and the voids they leave behind are gradually being filled with unrest, disorder and instability.
Society is systematically being attacked (acts of terrorism) with the deliberate intent to instill fear in the population. The government wants people to feel powerless and afraid. It renders them vulnerable and when a society is vulnerable it is exposed to an unimaginable world horrors, misery and pain.
The more chaos there is in society the more the fear grows and, just like any epidemic, it eventually spreads throughout the population.
Here is born the inevitable search for someone, anyone, to protect them from whatever it is they are being manipulated to fear .
Ultimately it's about control.
And a person who is not living in fear cannot be controlled.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...sh-voters-agree-majority-latest-a7776276.html
> 
> View attachment 313572
> View attachment 313573


So what's his reasoning behind why attacks are happening to countries with no link to these wars?


----------



## Honeys mum

Bisbow said:


> he won't answer a question with a simple yes or no


To be fair, T.M. doesn't either.
TBH I am not voting for either of them, I don't think none of them can be trusted nor the Lib Dems

Still not changed my mind, we shall be voting for who we voted for in the last election.


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> *Another day another police representative accusing the tories of misleading the public -* https://www.thecanary.co/2017/06/05...esentative-accusing-tories-misleading-public/
> 
> _I think one of the issues that we're most concerned about following on from those cuts has been an increase in crime that we've seen in England and Wales since 2012/13. And this is something which the government has sought to avoid, but we think there is a connection, there's an analysis, [on] what the public will be doing in relation to these figures. And some of those figures are truly, truly shocking._
> 
> _Since 2012/13, there's been a 29% increase in possession of weapons. This is police-recorded crime. These are the crimes that the police themselves through rigorous process have deemed to be
> crimes. A 29% increase in possession of weapons. A 65% increase in violence against the person. A 38% increase in assault with injury. Sexual offences are up 97%. And public order offences are up 54%._
> 
> _Now, if those figures weren't shocking enough, this government, which has claimed repeatedly, and also claimed in its Conservative Party manifesto, that crime is falling. But nothing could actually be further from the truth. The government relies on the crime survey for England and Wales, which is an opinion poll, which disregards homicide; it disregards sexual offences; it disregards crimes against business. It is a very very small proportion of overall crime._
> 
> _So the government relies on those figures to tell the electorate that crime is falling. Whereas recorded crime figures tell exactly the opposite story._
> 
> _Now I'll return to the issue of policing cuts, and the effect that's had on our members' ability to police the work places, and the places that they are overseeing. And I think the most worrying aspect of that is if you look at the 37% - 38% decline in PCSOs [police community support officers], they now say they are no longer able to gather that important intelligence on a day-to-day basis about criminal, and potentially terrorist activity, in the communities that they are policing_.


He doesn't state where he gets his figures from - any idea?


----------



## MiffyMoo

samuelsmiles said:


> It's great. Cos I have the Speaker of the House as my standing representative I don't get to vote for any of the Major parties (or the Lib Dems)
> 
> Can't blame me for nuffing come Friday morning.


Same area as a friend of mine - she's furious as we all think he's a poison dwarf


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> If you listened to what May said properly she is ripping up Human Rights laws that protect terrorists and prevents the UK from deporting foreign terrorists. She is not ripping up all Human Rights but obviously you will twist this.


So tell me, an asylum seeker is refused, kicked out the country but comes back.. are the human rights laws responsible or possibly the fact that border controls have been reduced to "save money"? Why is it that many of countries using exactly the same human right laws do not have the problems of the UK (under May) when it comes to deporting people?

When someone wants power and can only talk about "I" or "me" rather than "we" wants to change rules on rights of individuals, I worry.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## rona

MiffyMoo said:


> He doesn't state where he gets his figures from - any idea?


Well I was looking on a police statistic site the other day and crime had fallen by something like 6%. Not time to find it now unfortunately


----------



## stockwellcat.

Lyn Brown standing in for Diane Abbott.

Who is Lyn Brown?


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> Wrong.
> He is standing as a candidate in his constituency. Just looked it up online to see if he is standing he is a Conservative MP after all.


All the parties have historically agreed to not put up a candidate against the speaker, which is so undemocratic!

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petiti...&source=facebook-share-button&time=1493242732


----------



## Calvine

AlexPed2393 said:


> follow football and don't have a season ticket, my biggest hobby expense would be my £180 a year for golf (got a tasty discount


Not a hobby, £8000 is his season ticket for the privilege of travelling by train to work and back each day! When the tubes are on strike he has to walk from Euston to Piccadilly Circus which is nice.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> Lyn Brown standing in for Diane Abbott.
> 
> Who is Lyn Brown?


 Let me know when you find out.


----------



## JANICE199

*Haha, i have been reading some of the posts on this thread and i find them so funny. People are acting like the Tories have been good for this country.:Mooning*
*Tomorrow will be the first time i have ever voted, and i will vote Labour. Yes i am willing to take a chance on the fact, they can't be anywhere near as bad as the selfish bunch of tories we have ruining this country. *


----------



## 3dogs2cats

noushka05 said:


> And? I'm sure the tories will win by a landslide, I've said so all along - so what is your point?


Exactly, May will win possibly by the landslide she has gambled on, maybe by a few seats less than she have would liked. I can`t see what the May supporters are getting so worked up about, your lady will still be there come Friday.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> Let me know when you find out.


Shadow Home Office MP (Policing)

http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/commons/lyn-brown/1583


----------



## Calvine

rona said:


> Well I was looking on a police statistic site the other day and crime had fallen by something like 6%. Not time to find it now unfortunately


@rona This any good? It's from the Guardian so they might believe it.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/23/crime-rate-ons-lowest-level-england-wales-police


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Just a reminder John Bercow is Conservative and speaker of the House :Muted


But he can't vote in debates so his seat isn't counted with regards to majorities as far as I know.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> Shadow Home Office MP (Policing)


Thank you.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> But he can't vote in debates so his seat isn't counted with regards to majorities as far as I know.


Just checked. His seat is up for re-election like everyone elses in Parliament as Parliament was dissolved for the GE. To remain as speaker of the house he has to win his seat back in his constituency.
*
Speaker*
John Bercow

*UKIP*
Brian Mapletoft

*Independent*
Scott Raven

*Party Green Party*
Michael Sheppard


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> Well I was looking on a police statistic site the other day and crime had fallen by something like 6%.


Murder is down but violent crime in general is up. An overall figure isn't always representative of the things which really worry us. Much as I don't condone it I'm not concerned for my safety in regard to shoplifting whereas I do fear being mugged.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Just checked. His seat is up for re-election like everyone elses in Parliament as Parliament was dissolved for the GE. To remain as speaker of the house he has to win his seat back in his constituency.
> *
> Speaker*
> John Bercow
> 
> *UKIP*
> Brian Mapletoft
> 
> *Independent*
> Scott Raven
> 
> *Party Green Party*
> Michael Sheppard


Yes but he is no longer considered a Tory, that's why the party isn't next to his name.


----------



## Creativecat

Just heared Diane abacus has dropped out and replaced by another mouth piece . Down to ill health . Wouldn't be down to her not doing her homework . Is this lady really fit to be shadow Home Secretary lord help us


----------



## KittenKong

I think we know the answer to that don't we.....


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313581
> 
> 
> I think we know the answer to that don't we.....


None of them.
I am able to make my own decisions without listening to anyone from the science world or the press.


----------



## Satori

Honeys mum said:


> To be fair, T.M. doesn't either.
> TBH I am not voting for either of them, I don't think none of them can be trusted nor the Lib Dems
> 
> Still not changed my mind, we shall be voting for who we voted for in the last election.


I shall definitely not be voting this time although I have always supported the Tories in the past.

If I had a gun to my head, however, and were forced to vote it'd have to be for UKIP. Paul Nuttall's style grates with me for some reason but he has been the only party leader to conduct himself with a shred of decency during this campaign and the leader's character is important to me. The others are liars &/or thieves imho and no party with them at the helm could attract my vote.


----------



## kimthecat

Creativecat said:


> Just heared Diane abacus has beef dropped out and replaced by another mouth piece . Down to ill health . Wouldn't be down to her not doing her homework . Is this lady really fit to be shadow Home Secretary lord help us


She might really have an underlying illness , I don't like her much but i hope it's not serious.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## havoc

Creativecat said:


> Just heared Diane abacus has beef dropped out and replaced by another mouth piece . Down to ill health


I've got a feeling we are eventually going to find out that DA is ill - properly ill, not just a bug.


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> Murder is down but violent crime in general is up. An overall figure isn't always representative of the things which really worry us. Much as I don't condone it I'm not concerned for my safety in regard to shoplifting whereas I do fear being mugged.


According to the ONS website, violent crime is also all encompassing, so pushing and shoving falls under the banner.


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> I shall definitely not be voting this time although I have always supported the Tories in the past


I can't not vote but still not sure where I'll place my X. I had thought of closing my eyes and sticking a pin in the ballot paper but if I take a pin in I'll probably be arrested for having a dangerous weapon


----------



## Elles

Satori said:


> I shall definitely not be voting this time although I have always supported the Tories in the past.
> 
> If I had a gun to my head, however, and were forced to vote it'd have to be for UKIP. Paul Nuttall's style grates with me for some reason but he has been the only party leader to conduct himself with a shred of decency during this campaign and the leader's character is important to me. The others are liars &/or thieves imho and no party with them at the helm could attract my vote.


Caroline Lucas (greens) has been quite nice too. Nuttall is no Farage, though he's not been doing too badly under fire. The whole thing has been a charade from start to finish. Has it been worse than usual do you think?. Seem to be more lies and exaggerations than the Eu referendum campaigns and that was bad enough.


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> According to the ONS website, violent crime is also all encompassing, so pushing and shoving falls under the banner


Yes assault does count.


----------



## Elles

havoc said:


> Yes assault does count.


Stating the obvious, but I don't think Trump believes pushing and shoving is a crime.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Satori said:


> I shall definitely not be voting this time although I have always supported the Tories in the past.
> 
> If I had a gun to my head, however, and were forced to vote it'd have to be for UKIP. Paul Nuttall's style grates with me for some reason but he has been the only party leader to conduct himself with a shred of decency during this campaign and the leader's character is important to me. The others are liars &/or thieves imho and no party with them at the helm could attract my vote.


I was chatting to the UKIP candidate for Leicester a couple of days ago, and he was a seriously nice guy. Just off the back of that I would have voted for him.

He also told me that Dominic Raab is a good guy and he's pleased I'm voting for him.


----------



## Creativecat

I seem to have taken to JC to be fair
He really has enjoyed his campaign and came into his own . Where may hasnt performed that great in my opinion . But to JC he seems like a really nice genuine guy . Owner of a mountain bike shop absolutely .
Leader of this government not so sure to be honest . But will see tomoro


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> Stating the obvious, but I don't think Trump believes pushing and shoving is a crime.


Trump?


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Elles

Trump. The leader of the free world, apparently. Potus. If he doesn't think pushing or shoving is a crime, probably no one else should.

https://www.indy100.com/article/donald-trump-shoved-prime-minister-montenegro-brussels-nato-7756691


----------



## havoc

Trump would be shouting about being assaulted at the top of his voice if it had been the other way round


----------



## Bisbow

She is not tearing up OUR human rights, she is tearing up the rights of those who think it good to kill young, very young people enjoying a night at a concert, who kill people enjoying the sights of London and a quiet drink
To be able to deport terrorists without the corrupt EU sticking their nose in

Do you think human rights is more important to these killers than the rights of the young to grow up and lead happy lives, that is the impression you are giving


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Even his seat is up for grabs in the GE, so he won't necessarily be negotiating with the EU as he could lose his seat if Labour win the GE.


Using the same argument May could lose her own seat. That would be very interesting even if the Tories win!


Zaros said:


> The word, 'Crap' is considered, by some, to be an expletive and, therefore, unnecessary.
> Please refrain from any further use of such words.
> 
> Little eyes are watching.​


Think it was the excellent Stiff Little Fingers who were told off for using the word, "Crap" on the radio. They even did a song about it.


----------



## stockwellcat.

I was looking for an example of how the Human Rights Courts stop deportation of foreign terrorists in the UK and lone behold I found one.

*European Court of Human Rights blocks more deportations from UK than any other country*

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ortations-from-UK-than-any-other-country.html

Britain eventually deported Abdul Qatada in 2013 after lengthy court cases and a huge legal bill paid for by the UK tax payer.

*Britain finally deports Abu Qatada to Jordan after decade long saga*
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-Qatada-to-Jordan-after-decade-long-saga.html

The UK Government has been looking to drop out of the Convention for Human Rights since.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

KittenKong said:


> Using the same argument May could lose her own seat. That would be very interesting even if the Tories win!
> 
> Think it was the excellent Stiff Little Fingers who were told off for using the word, "Crap" on the radio. They even did a song about it.


She could but she has a large majority so it is unlikely, I always stop up and watch the results coming in, should she lose her seat I`ll be laughing so much I`ll wake all the neighbours up!


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> I was looking for an example of how the Human Rights Courts stop deportation of foreign terrorists in the UK and lone behold I found one.
> 
> *European Court of Human Rights blocks more deportations from UK than any other country*
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ortations-from-UK-than-any-other-country.html
> 
> Britain eventually deported Abdul Qatada in 2013 after lengthy court cases and a huge legal bill paid for by the UK tax payer.
> 
> The UK Government has been looking to drop out of the Convention for Human Rights since.


There is much more to the human rights act than what you quoted. It's no excuse to deny EVERYONE their rights as that would be a dictatorship.

Even Cameron bleated on about a "British Bill of Rights" which May hasn't even mentioned, so it has to be presumed she's abandoned that idea too.

That should be a concern to everyone.

Yes, a few have abused it and clauses should be introduced to prevent this but denying EVERYONE their human rights is not the way to go about it.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> There is much more to the human rights act than what you quoted. It's no excuse to deny EVERYONE their rights as that would be a dictatorship.
> 
> Even Cameron bleated on about a "British Bill of Rights" which May hasn't even mentioned.
> 
> That should be a concern to everyone.
> 
> Yes, a few have abused it and clauses should be introduced to prevent this but denying EVERYONE their human rights is not the way to go about it.
> View attachment 313596


So why should the UK tax payer pay to house a foreign terrorist at her majesty's pleasure and the court cases as well?

Sorry I don't buy your dictatorship comment.

We are talking about terrorist human rights under the convention of human rights which May is talking about getting rid of, not all the human rights laws which everyone on here has jumped on the bandwagon with which is a twisted version of what May actually said.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> So why should the UK tax payer pay to house a foreign terrorist at her majesty's pleasure and the court cases as well?
> 
> Sorry I don't buy your dictatorship comment.
> 
> We are talking about terrorist human rights under the convention of human rights which may is talking about getting rid of not all the human rights laws.


Just you wait when debates like this are outlawed as been seen as "subversive" as being critical to Theresa May.

Make the most of your right to debate (either for or against) while you can.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Just you wait when debates like this are outlawed as been seen as "subversive" as being critical to Theresa May.
> 
> Make the most of your right to debate (either for or against) while you can.



Yeah ok. Whatever.


----------



## Zaros

...


KittenKong said:


> Think it was the excellent Stiff Little Fingers who were told off for using the word, "Crap" on the radio. They even did a song about it.


And so it goes. Some people look for offence where none is intended as though they have a right to be offended by something, anything, just so long as they can find offence. But we already know why certain parties do so.

These same people nurture an odd set of morals.. They turn a blind eye to the bombing of innocents in distant cities, allow themselves to use and insist to use terminology that is offensive and has been known to result in court cases, yet rise up with fiery indignation at words such as anal.

But here's what I find truly offensive, the fact that world governments perpetuate the enclosed on an almost daily basis...

.








​The self-righteous are often the most blinded...:Meh


----------



## Bisbow

KittenKong said:


> Just you wait when debates like this are outlawed as been seen as "subversive" as being critical to Theresa May.
> 
> Make the most of your right to debate (either for or against) while you can.


You still have not said that the human rights of the dead instead of leading a normal life are less important than those of terrorists

You must believe they are


----------



## Bisbow

I suppose once you are dead your human rights die with you, even if you are killed by terrorists but the terrorists rights must be honoured


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Yeah ok. Whatever.


Don't forget it will go against your opposition to repealing the Foxhunting ban too.....


----------



## Happy Paws2

I still think as soon as someone is flagged up, as a risk, they should be deported with their family to the country they or their family came from. S*d their human rights they don't have any.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Don't forget it will go against your opposition to repealing the Foxhunting ban too.....


Ok.

Try to have a debate something and you think I am supporting that particular party. :Hilarious Well ok if you are thinking I will be supporting fox hunting you are so wrong and if you are guessing I am voting a particular way you are wrong again. :Smuggrin


----------



## stockwellcat.

Terrorists don't deserve human rights period.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> So, it is not character assassination to post vile pictures of someone and say it is true, or silly cartoons to try to make a point, . Not many people make me shudder with revulsion but he does and has done since the first time I saw him
> 
> His principles are told to him by has masters and he has to obey


So now we have the truth - since the first time you saw him he has made you shudder with revulsion  his kindness and wish to make life better for the poor and vulnerable doesn't matter but his appearance does 



stockwellcat said:


> Well the daily mail are running this front page today:
> 
> View attachment 313569
> ​http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4578716/Apologists-terror-Corbyn-McDonnell-Abbott.html


No shit Sherlock. What did you expect them to be running the day before the election? actual policies? proper journalism laying out a fair assessment of each manifesto?



Bisbow said:


> What I mean is how far will you stoop to get people to believe your friend CF is the Saviour reborn
> Haw many times are you going to twist what TM is saying
> How many times are you only going to read parts of what is said, the parts you can twist to suit your reasoning


I would guess about as many times as you do for TM.



Bisbow said:


> Corbyn stands for nothing good, he will lead this country to ruin, he won't answer a question with a simple yes or no if his masters have not given him the answer first
> You do only take what suits you from any publication you think will help your cause
> Your experts leave a great deal to be desired
> 
> Don't know why you are bothering now, everyone, or most everyone has made up their mind by now


He stands for nothing good? Seriously? You can find nothing good in the Labour manifesto. Nothing at all. Have you even read it? There is much in there I don't like but there is plenty of good in there too.



stockwellcat said:


> Just checked. His seat is up for re-election like everyone elses in Parliament as Parliament was dissolved for the GE. To remain as speaker of the house he has to win his seat back in his constituency.
> *
> Speaker*
> John Bercow
> 
> *UKIP*
> Brian Mapletoft
> 
> *Independent*
> Scott Raven
> 
> *Party Green Party*
> Michael Sheppard


Exactly the main opposition parties do not stand against him.



stockwellcat said:


> None of them.
> I am able to make my own decisions without listening to anyone from the science world or the press.


:Hilarious:Hilarious



kimthecat said:


> She might really have an underlying illness , I don't like her much but i hope it's not serious.


I think so too, she doesn't look well.


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> Terrorists don't deserve human rights period.


What about people suspected to be terrorists?


----------



## Happy Paws2

stockwellcat said:


> Terrorists don't deserve human rights period.


Nor does anyone close to them, I don't care who they are.

If we don't deport them, we should bring the death sentence back, if only for terrorism.


----------



## rona

Calvine said:


> @rona This any good? It's from the Guardian so they might believe it.
> https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/23/crime-rate-ons-lowest-level-england-wales-police


Well it's almost as out of date as the other links given to back up the claim


----------



## stockwellcat.

Zaros said:


> What about people suspected to be terrorists?


Investigated and deported if they have links to or are foreign terrorists. If they are home grown lock them up before they can harm anyone. Terrorists have one intention and that is to die and they don't care who they take with them.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Zaros said:


> What about people suspected to be terrorists?


They should be deported, before it's to late.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Ok.
> 
> Try to have a debate something and you think I am supporting that particular party. :Hilarious Well ok if you are thinking I will be supporting fox hunting you are so wrong and if you are guessing I am voting a particular way you are wrong again. :Smuggrin


I've already said and have indeed been corrected by yourself which I was happy to apologise for.

Although I have to disagree with much of what you say, and I wouldn't be offended if you thought the same about me, that's democracy. I do admire your anti foxhunting stance which does deserve admiration and respect.

Something most of us agree on.


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> Investigated and deported if they have links to or are foreign terrorists. If they are home grown lock them up before they can harm anyone.


But what if those people suspected to be terrorists are white British Nationals?


----------



## Zaros

Happy Paws said:


> They should be deported, before it's to late.


But what if those people suspected to be terrorists are white British Nationals?


----------



## Odin_cat

Happy Paws said:


> They should be deported, before it's to late.


So you would deport the innocent children of potentially innocent people to countries where they may be tortured?

Brilliant!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Zaros said:


> But what if those people suspected to be terrorists are white British Nationals?


Lock them up away from anywhere with civilisation near it and leave them there to rot and throw away the key. Remove there human rights. They chose to take people's lives so why do they deserve to have theres? I am not saying execute them I am just saying move them far away from civilisation and anyone they could harm and keep them under a strict prison regime.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Zaros said:


> But what if those people suspected to be terrorists are white British Nationals?


Or here's another option my dad mentioned last night. Stick them all on an uninhabited island far away from anywhere and let them kill themselves when they are ready.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Lock them up away from anywhere with civilisation near it and leave them there to rot and throw away the key. Remove there human rights. They chose to take people's lives so why do they deserve to have theres? I am not saying execute them I am just saying remove them far away from civilisation and anyone they could harm and keep them under a strict prison regime.


So you think that someone "suspected" but not found guilty of anything - even plotting something should be locked up and left to rot? Fair comment for people found to be involved in plotting something but surely you want more than suspicion?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Diane Abbott's friend and fellow Labour frontbencher Emily Thornberry says the shadow home secretary is "not well and she hasn't been well for a few days".

Asked whether she had a view on the level of media and social media interest in Ms Abbott during the election campaign, the shadow foreign secretary said:

Speaking as a friend of hers, and not as a politician, I think that she is immensely strong. I think we all get a lot of abuse - but nobody gets as much abuse as Diane - and I personally think people should be ashamed of themselves. We're only human."


----------



## kimthecat

Happy Paws said:


> Nor does anyone close to them, I don't care who they are.
> 
> If we don't deport them, we should bring the death sentence back, if only for terrorism.


 I wouldnt like to see the death sentence brought back. I think ti would cause more problems like making them martyrs . besides most terrorrists blow themselves up so saves us a job , so to speak .


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> I was looking for an example of how the Human Rights Courts stop deportation of foreign terrorists in the UK and lone behold I found one.
> 
> *European Court of Human Rights blocks more deportations from UK than any other country*


Well we've had examples of May's incompetance with legal systems when she was pushing Brexit (on the taxpayers expense). Remember when Theresa May argued that a non-binding referendum meant she had the right to trigger Brexit without a parliamentary vote? She lost but used the exact same argument when taking it to the supreme court obviously not even looking at the original ruling.

The title you posted says it all.. have you thought it's not the human rights issue at all but the fact May cannot argue her case outside her "comfort zone". Soundbites like "strong and stable" and lies don't wash when it comes to court cases. So, she doesn't like the way things work.. get rid of it, it's not her fault. Sums up the way she works always somebody else at fault.


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> Lock them up away from anywhere with civilisation near it and leave them there to rot and throw away the key. Remove there human rights. They chose to take people's lives so why do they deserve to have theres? I am not saying execute them I am just saying remove them far away from civilisation and anyone they could harm and keep them under a strict prison regime.


 Did you read my post correctly or did you read it selectively.

I said 'suspected' A suspect is a person thought to be guilty or suspected of committing or carrying out a crime.

Or do you just favour the idea of locking everyone up guilty or not?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Diane Abbott has a "serious long-term illness" that "she's been coming to terms with", Labour international trade spokesman Barry Gardiner has said.

In an interview with Talk Radio's Julia Hartley-Brewer he said: "Diane is clearly not well and I understand that it's a condition which has been diagnosed and it's long term."

Mr Gardiner said Ms Abbott was a "feisty performer", but her illness was the reason behind recent stumbling TV interviews.

"Everybody is aware that Diane did not perform well on a couple of programmes, but what we didn't know was why and I think that's become clear," he said.

"We haven't been told what the condition is but she's been diagnosed.

"I don't have her medical condition - I'm given to understand she's been diagnosed with a medical condition, which is a long-term condition - and clearly she's been coming to terms with that."


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Well we've had examples of May's incompetance with legal systems when she was pushing Brexit (on the taxpayers expense). Remember when Theresa May argued that a non-binding referendum meant she had the right to trigger Brexit without a parliamentary vote? She lost but used the exact same argument when taking it to the supreme court obviously not even looking at the original ruling.
> 
> The title you posted says it all.. have you thought it's not the human rights issue at all but the fact May cannot adapt to changes. Don't like the way things work.. get rid of it, it's not her fault. Sums up the way she works always somebody else at fault.


Yes but Parliament got a vote and so did the House of Lords in the end and it was agreed upon wasn't it and made law by the Queen. Did you miss that or something?


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> What about people suspected to be terrorists?


There won't be any once we've armed the police and they've shot them all.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Zaros said:


> Did you read my post correctly or did you read it selectively.
> 
> I said 'suspected' A suspect is a person thought to be guilty or suspected of committing or carrying out a crime.
> 
> Or do you just favour the idea of locking everyone up guilty or not?


Well the obvious answer would be investigate them wouldn't it. Doesn't take long to do this because look the 12 people they arrested over the London attack have been released. Obviously they will be watched for a period of time until the authorities are happy they don't actually pose a threat.


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> Or here's another option my dad mentioned last night. Stick them all on an uninhabited island far away from anywhere and let them kill themselves when they are ready.


I'm not interested in what your father has to say. He's not a member. I'm more intrigued by what your answer to my original question is without the influence of your father.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Zaros said:


> I'm not interested in what your father has to say. He's not a member. I'm more intrigued by what your answer to my original question is without the influence of your father.


Well I am very much interested in what he has to say


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> There won't be any once we've armed the police and they've shot them all.


We've shot all the people *suspected *of being terrorists - wow, just wow. Do you recall Jean Charles de Menezes

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33066098


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Yes but Parliament got a vote and so did the House of Lords in the end and it was agreed upon wasn't it and made law by the Queen. Did you miss that or something?


Your point, this is about May and her record, not the EU. May didn't get what she wanted within a legal system. An example where she lost at court as she was unable to argue and "negotiate" within a legal framework.


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> Well the obvious answer would be investigate them wouldn't it. Doesn't take long to do this because look the 12 people they arrested over the London attack have been released. Obviously they will be watched for a period of time until the authorities are happy they don't actually pose a threat.


And what about their '_rights'_ whilst under investigation?


----------



## Zaros

rottiepointerhouse said:


> We've shot all the people *suspected *of being terrorists - wow, just wow. Do you recall Jean Charles de Menezes
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33066098


Forget it RP. I happened to have broached the misfortune of the Late Mr Menezes, amongst others, the other day and no one appeared to be interested in the least..


----------



## stockwellcat.

Goblin said:


> Your point? May didn't get what she wanted within a legal system. An example where she lost at court as she was unable to argue and "negotiate" within a legal framework.


Your point is apart from going over old ground?


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So now we have the truth - since the first time you saw him he has made you shudder with revulsion  his kindness and wish to make life better for the poor and vulnerable doesn't matter but his appearance does


I actually think he's quite good looking for an old boy, even had high hopes of him as you know, but as time has gone on, his true colours have been exposed.
I can just imagine him having a toddler type tantrum if someone in his party disagrees with him.

I really don't know how anyone can defend him on his stance on "terrorists", though he won't call them that because he doesn't think they are, to him they are freedom fighters 



rottiepointerhouse said:


> He stands for nothing good? Seriously? You can find nothing good in the Labour manifesto. Nothing at all. Have you even read it? There is much in there I don't like but there is plenty of good in there too.


Only if you believe it will work, unfortunately it really really won't . It'll just send us further into the shit


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> We've shot all the people *suspected *of being terrorists - wow, just wow. Do you recall Jean Charles de Menezes
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33066098


 That was mistaken mistaken identity . Very sad , poor guy .


----------



## Goblin

stockwellcat said:


> Your point is apart from going over old ground?


Okay, I edited before you posted to try and make it clearer. You used an example of court cases to support removing human rights. I used an example as to how May is unable to work in courts in general. Why is it other countries, with the same legal parameters and legal systems are able to deport people? According to May it's the system at fault. If it was, other countries would not succeed more often.


----------



## Zaros

@stockwellcat I'm still waiting for your answer to this question which I asked you earlier.



Zaros said:


> And what about their '_rights'_ whilst under investigation?


----------



## kimthecat

rona said:


> I really don't know how anyone can defend him on his stance on "terrorists", though he won't call them that because he doesn't think they are, to him they are freedom fighters


When I see him on photos from the early 80s with ken and gerry adams being bezzie mates , it makes me want to puke .


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> I actually think he's quite good looking for an old boy, even had high hopes of him as you know, but as time has gone on, his true colours have been exposed.
> I can just imagine him having a toddler type tantrum if someone in his party disagrees with him.
> 
> I really don't know how anyone can defend him on his stance on "terrorists", though he won't call them that because he doesn't think they are, to him they are freedom fighters


I agree, I find him rather attractive 

I actually think he is quite forgiving of people who disagree with him - he has also taken on boards some policies he doesn't support. Take Lyn Brown who people were asking about earlier - she was one who resigned from the frontbench and wanted JC out yet he took her back with a front bench appointment in October.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-2017-40157259

Here are a few facts about shadow Home Office minister Lyn Brown, who is stepping in to replace Diane Abbott for a time.

She was one of many Labour MPs who resigned from the frontbench last summer and called for Jeremy Corbyn to go, though she said in a statement: "I have enormous respect for him as a person and as a tireless campaigner for the causes we both believe in."

She returned to the front bench in October and her appointment now makes her the most senior resignee to work with Mr Corbyn again.

She also defied the party whip and voted against triggering Article 50 in February.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> And what about their '_rights'_ whilst under investigation?


They temporarily lose them.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> That was mistaken mistaken identity . Very sad , poor guy .


Quite yet we have some gun happy members thinking the answer is to go around shooting people or lock them up and leave them to rot because they are "suspected"of being involved in terrorism. All that will do is fuel more hatred and create more martyrs.


----------



## rona

https://www.politicshome.com/news/u...-labour-mp-accuses-jeremy-corbyn-staff-office

A spokesperson for Mr Corbyn denied any intimidation and said the aide was checking when the office would be vacated.

In a statement Ms Malhotra described several incidents when people from the leader's office used electronic keys to gain "unauthorised entry into my office in parliament".

"The implications of this are extremely serious," she said.

"This is a breach of parliamentary privilege and is a violation of the privacy, security and confidentiality of a member of parliament's office.


----------



## Dr Pepper

rottiepointerhouse said:


> We've shot all the people *suspected *of being terrorists - wow, just wow. Do you recall Jean Charles de Menezes
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33066098


I wasn't exactly being serious, more just having a bit of dig at Zaros because yesterday he was of the opinion we shouldn't arm the police because they would shot almost everything in sight (ok, slight exaggeration).


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I agree, I find him rather attractive
> 
> .


There's no accounting for taste ! I think John McDonnell is much better looking and presentable . I met him once many years ago in the 80s , he was my mate's boss at a children home and he and his then wife , were really good to her when she had some problems.


----------



## havoc

Happy Paws said:


> I still think as soon as someone is flagged up, as a risk, they should be deported


Oh I love it. I could get rid of a couple of neighbours i don't like and the family across the road who let their dog bark for hours. The hotline for reporting doesn't even require the caller to identify themselves so it would be perfect. Important I get in first before anyone reports me out of spite of course.


----------



## rona

Who was MP for Islington who ignored warnings of child abuse?


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> They temporarily lose them.


That's just your intolerant, conservative and narrow minded opinion which, incidentally, adds up to a figure even Dianne Abbott can handle.........0

I asked @stockwellcat and now wonder why he's chosen not to answer for himself.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Zaros said:


> And what about their '_rights'_ whilst under investigation?


Sorry for the delay in responding to you.
Whilst under investigation there should be options to remove some of there rights if say MI5 have intelligence on them until it has been proven without a doubt they are innocent. They do it to prisoners released into society on tag where they restrict there movement by putting them under curfew.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Honeys mum said:


> Were Leicestershire MiffyMoo, theres a nice UKIP canidate here as well. The one standing for labour is a nice guy too. But Nicky Morgan always gets it in this area.
> Weve only had one leaflet up here and that was the tory one. None of the others bother.


My mistake - it's Harborough

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/t...lection-seat/story-30322697-detail/story.html


----------



## Jesthar

The problem with removing human rights for 'terrorists' is that human rights are legally deemed to be universal, so none of the legislation will actually have terrorist specific clauses to rip up.

That means anything that is 'ripped up' will inevitably affect others - maybe not straight away, but you will no doubt have noticed that historically supposedly very specific legislations have ended up being applied to groups that were never originally the target when it becomes useful to the authorities to do so?

For example, what happens if the government du jour decides that people who, say, oppose fracking or campaign for environmental protections or workers rights are harming the economy and can therefore be classified as a threat to the country? And don't think it can't happen, history tells us otherwise...


----------



## Honeys mum

Front page of the Express this morning says,

Vote May or we face disaster.
Also

Don't let it happen,
EU Boss Juncker and his cronies want Corbyn to be Pime Minister.

Good job I take no notice of the papers. you couldn't make it up, but it made me smile.


----------



## Honeys mum

MiffyMoo said:


> My mistake - it's Harborough


No Problem, thanks for that MM. Never see the mercury were no where near Leicester.


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/08/3...pical-of-how-he-picks-and-chooses-his-causes/


Just got to quote some of this 
"After that meeting, we never heard another thing. No letter, no phone call, I never, ever saw him speak about it. In fact, whenever I saw Jeremy afterwards, at Stop The War marches and events like that, I'd always go up to him and say: 'This scandal is still going on, Jeremy.' He'd be very polite, but he never did anything."
These are the words of Liz Davies, a former social worker who tried to blow the whistle on the sexual abuse of children in council-run care homes in Islington in the 1980s and 1990s.

"It's pretty indisputable that throughout this appalling saga, Corbyn remained virtually silent; apart from a couple of brief statements in the early 90s calling for allegations to be investigated, he said next to nothing. This, it should be remembered, was a long-running scandal in Corbyn's own constituency, and over the same decades, Corbyn called for public inquiries into Bloody Sunday, Iraq and the death of anti-nuclear protester Hilda Murrell. Not to mention the tendering process for local bus routes."

"In Corbyn's defence, he was the local MP, not the council, so he bears no direct culpability. In ignoring growing evidence of institutional child abuse, he was hardly unique in Westminster."

"No one doubts Corbyn's political zeal, or his personal decency. But when you look at his track record, and set his repeated denunciations of Israel and the US against his silence over Srebrenica, or IRA atrocities, or Putin's murders of his opponents, you realise his much vaunted commitment to human rights isn't anything of the kind.

The causes, and the victims, dear to Corbyn are simply the ones which fit a hard left template: It's not about whether you're a victim, but about who you're a victim of. For Corbyn, some victims of human rights abuses are more deserving than others."


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> it's just Common sense. Something needs to change and a start would be locking up people.


And before too long you gradually begin to construct and introduce establishments not unlike Guantanamo Bay. A place where a catalogue of brutal interrogation techniques are commonplace. This includes torture, oh sorry, inflicting severe physical pain (torture is now a dirty word and no longer recognised by the western world as a method of extracting truth), sensory deprivation, mental cruelty, persecution, humiliation. and what ever else the sinister mind can invent
An end of the world place where lawyers are often denied access to their clients.... Innocent people. Unpeople. People not treated as humaan beings but more like animals

Yet the post 9/11 era appears to have condoned and authorised Guantanamo as a tool to fight the 'war on terror'

Having already experienced what it feels like to be arrested under the suspicion of terrorism act, I fully understand how it could easily happen to anyone of us going about our daily business and probably with more drastic outcomes.


----------



## kimthecat

@rona has he ever made any statements about this? I know the Daily mail made a big deal out of it but that doesnt mean it should be ignored.

ETA John Mann Labour MP wrote an open letter to him .
http://www.mann4bassetlaw.com/an_open_letter_to_jeremy_corbyn_on_child_abuse
23 July 2015

Dear Jeremy,

As you know, for decades there was widespread child sexual abuse taking place in the London Borough of Islington. The extent of the abuse was only uncovered through the tenacity and bravery of whistle-blowers, journalists and survivors which led to a number of independent inquiries and the damning Ian White report in 1995.

As with the rest of the country, the reality is that child abuse was rampant, ignored, covered up and the extent of it is only just beginning to come to light. The attitude was that of the Head of MI5, who was revealed yesterday to have written about a paedophile MP to the then Cabinet Secretary Sir Robert Armstrong in 1986: 'At the present stage…the risks of political embarrassment to the government is rather greater than the security danger'

At an event I hosted this year in Parliament of 200 child abuse and exploitation survivors, we received public testimony of the scale of abuse in Islington from a whistle-blower who was a leading light in uncovering child abuse in Islington during the 1980s and early 1990s. This social worker confirmed to me that she and others met with you in the early 1990s to raise her concerns about child abuse and cover-ups in Islington. You said that you would raise the matter with Virginia Bottomley, then at the Department of Health, but no indication of whether you followed this up was ever given.

In 1986 MP Geoffrey Dickens raised serious concerns about child abuse in Islington.

Your response was to complain to the Speaker about him visiting your constituency without informing you. I have faced such complaints myself in pursuing corruption issues.

There are many people who also rubbished the idiosyncratic Mr Dickens. They have been proven to be wrong, indeed I have just received details of another list of names of alleged and now proven paedophiles that Dickens provided to Leon Brittan as Home Secretary, not related to Islington, but further corroboration of the scale of the cover up that has taken place.

On February 17th 1986 you had called in Parliament for Geoffrey Dickens to "unreservedly withdraw his allegations of the existence of child brothels in the area (in Islington) and make a public apology." You further called Mr Dickens 'irresponsible''.

You inadvertently helped the rubbishing and the cover up of all of the Dickens allegations. Indeed your actions encouraged others, because a week later the Islington Gazette published a letter attacking Geoffrey Dickens over his allegations from Roger Moody, a prominent pro paedophilia activist.

On May 30th 1995 the Independent reported that: "The Labour Borough (of Islington) has finally put its hands up. Last week an independent report confirmed that pimps, paedophiles and pornographers had for years preyed on children in Islington's homes." The reporters highlights the inaction of the council and notes that: "Some social workers met Islington Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn begging him to influence the council, then still denying everything. Soon after, I met him. He did make inquiries but was reassured. There the matter rested."

You might wish to read, if you have not had the time already, the superb speech made by Ann Clwyd in the House of Commons last Thursday in which she painstakingly explained the insidious role of insurance companies in ensuring that councils' refused and refuse to accept liability or responsibility for children they looked after, including in North Wales, but which can also be extended to my own in Nottinghamshire and nearby Nottingham.

Perhaps most worrying of all are the implications of your question to the Home Secretary on November 3rd 2014.

You stated that 'Finally in my own borough of Islington there have been complaints about Islington children's homes in the past and the council has investigated them.' This statement at first glance is non contentious. However on reflection is an extraordinary statement considering the representations made to you in the past that the council was in fact covering up abuse and not listening to the survivors, issues you were challenged on at the time.

Repeatedly across the country, institutions investigating allegations about themselves over child abuse have heard nothing, seen nothing and known nothing. This is at the very heart of the cover up culture.

I know you through your work on Central African and Latin American human rights issues, and am quite certain that you are a man of the highest personal integrity and ethics. I have not the slightest hesitation in saying that.

My concern is about your politics and how that results in actions, or in this case non-actions. As we have seen with the appalling misjudgements of the NCCL and its allowance of membership to the Paedophile Information Exchange in the 1970s, sections of the left were in denial of the motivations of some campaigners and this unwillingness to face up to unpalatable possibilities clouded judgement over the most serious of allegations.

In fact the allegations were true and are true as survivors increasingly choose to speak out. The establishment and sections of the left stood by and allowed children's lives to be destroyed.

The reason that your response and inactions to these matters is worthy of specific scrutiny is that unlike others who did not see what was happening, or as we saw with Saville, kept their suspicions to themselves rather than speak out or investigate, you are wishing to lead the Labour Party during the period of Goddard inquiry into child abuse and are seeking become Prime Minister.

The so called 'trendy left' politics of the early 1980s was a contributory factor in covering up child abuse. I myself saw that repeatedly at first hand in Lambeth. Meanwhile children were murdered and disappeared, were raped and beaten, forced into prostitution, trafficked around and a significant number of lives destroyed and blighted.

Your inaction in the 1980s and 1990s says a lot, not about your personal character, which I admire, but about your politics which I do not. Your carefully worded excusing of Islington Council in the House of Commons equally demonstrates why it is inappropriate for you to attempt to lead the Labour Party at the critical time of the Goddard Enquiry, as child abuse is the issue that will haunt this Parliament.

Yours Sincerely

John Mann MP


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> Seriously? You'd legitimise the idea that they're fighting a war.


Well don't then, just thought the overly pc brigade would welcome some form of "rights". Frankly when it's without question they intend to harm people then deport them, incarcerate them or whatever, I couldn't care less.

It seems very much like they've declared war against our way of life and liberties.


----------



## rona

kimthecat said:


> @rona has he ever made any statements about this? I know the Daily mail made a big deal out of it but that doesnt mean it should be ignored.


Like he'll never denounce the IRA, or ISIS or a number of other terrorist groups 

It's not what he says that worrying, it's what he doesn't say...........


----------



## kimthecat

rona said: ↑
I can't read that but a social worker apparently went to Corbyn in 1992............................Reminds you of that programme the other night doesn't it? 



rottiepointerhouse said:


> That is scraping the barrel of mud slinging a bit isn't it? There have been lots of claims about child abuse against MPs/Lords from all sides of the house.


I do understand your point about muck raking , its easy to do and its done all the time but this has me very very concerned .
I think this goes beyond the GE and our arguments here . A very serious subject and I wonder what is the truth . As much as I dislike Corbyn , I don't want it to true , if the sufferings of children could have been stopped then and weren't, it doesnt bear thinking about. . 

What is your honest opinion on this , or anyone else ?


----------



## Satori

Dr Pepper said:


> They temporarily lose them.


Agree. Plenty of room in gitmo.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> It seems very much like they've declared war against our way of life and liberties.


And your answer is abandon our way of life and liberties...


----------



## kimthecat

rona said:


> Like he'll never denounce the IRA, or ISIS or a number of other terrorist groups
> 
> It's not what he says that worrying, it's what he doesn't say...........


 he used peace as an excuse for not denouncing the IRA . What excuse does he have for not investigating child abuse , None as far as I can see. he should at least give a reason .


----------



## Satori

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I thought this country operated a legal system based on innocent until proved guilty not the other way round.


Is there a presumption of innocence for enemy combatants? (Genuine question).


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> It seems very much like they've declared war against our way of life and liberties.


That's just what you've been conditioned to believe. :Facepalm

Here's what terrorists look like in lands afar.

Only difference being, they have the government's authoríty and approval to carry out acts of terrorism.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> And your answer is abandon our way of life and liberties...


Nope, never said that. So your happy for flag-waving ISIS fanatics to be walking the streets are you?


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So now we have the truth - since the first time you saw him he has made you shudder with revulsion  his kindness and wish to make life better for the poor and vulnerable doesn't matter but his appearance does
> 
> .


It has nothing to do with his looks
I felt this way about a good looking, charming man but it turned out he abused children
and
A smart lady who ended up murdering her husband
He just makes me feel that way


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> Is there a presumption of innocence for enemy combatants? (Genuine question).


Not as such but there isn't one of guilt either in that a legitimate combatant acting within rules of engagement could not be considered to be acting with criminal intent. The IRA used to try and use this very argument - that they were soldiers fighting a war and therefore were POWs when 'captured' and imprisoned. We didn't accept such nonsense then any more than we should now.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> @rona has he ever made any statements about this? I know the Daily mail made a big deal out of it but that doesnt mean it should be ignored.
> 
> ETA John Mann Labour MP wrote an open letter to him .
> http://www.mann4bassetlaw.com/an_open_letter_to_jeremy_corbyn_on_child_abuse
> 23 July 2015
> 
> Dear Jeremy,
> 
> As you know, for decades there was widespread child sexual abuse taking place in the London Borough of Islington. The extent of the abuse was only uncovered through the tenacity and bravery of whistle-blowers, journalists and survivors which led to a number of independent inquiries and the damning Ian White report in 1995.
> 
> As with the rest of the country, the reality is that child abuse was rampant, ignored, covered up and the extent of it is only just beginning to come to light. The attitude was that of the Head of MI5, who was revealed yesterday to have written about a paedophile MP to the then Cabinet Secretary Sir Robert Armstrong in 1986: 'At the present stage…the risks of political embarrassment to the government is rather greater than the security danger'
> 
> At an event I hosted this year in Parliament of 200 child abuse and exploitation survivors, we received public testimony of the scale of abuse in Islington from a whistle-blower who was a leading light in uncovering child abuse in Islington during the 1980s and early 1990s. This social worker confirmed to me that she and others met with you in the early 1990s to raise her concerns about child abuse and cover-ups in Islington. You said that you would raise the matter with Virginia Bottomley, then at the Department of Health, but no indication of whether you followed this up was ever given.
> 
> In 1986 MP Geoffrey Dickens raised serious concerns about child abuse in Islington.
> 
> Your response was to complain to the Speaker about him visiting your constituency without informing you. I have faced such complaints myself in pursuing corruption issues.
> 
> There are many people who also rubbished the idiosyncratic Mr Dickens. They have been proven to be wrong, indeed I have just received details of another list of names of alleged and now proven paedophiles that Dickens provided to Leon Brittan as Home Secretary, not related to Islington, but further corroboration of the scale of the cover up that has taken place.
> 
> On February 17th 1986 you had called in Parliament for Geoffrey Dickens to "unreservedly withdraw his allegations of the existence of child brothels in the area (in Islington) and make a public apology." You further called Mr Dickens 'irresponsible''.
> 
> You inadvertently helped the rubbishing and the cover up of all of the Dickens allegations. Indeed your actions encouraged others, because a week later the Islington Gazette published a letter attacking Geoffrey Dickens over his allegations from Roger Moody, a prominent pro paedophilia activist.
> 
> On May 30th 1995 the Independent reported that: "The Labour Borough (of Islington) has finally put its hands up. Last week an independent report confirmed that pimps, paedophiles and pornographers had for years preyed on children in Islington's homes." The reporters highlights the inaction of the council and notes that: "Some social workers met Islington Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn begging him to influence the council, then still denying everything. Soon after, I met him. He did make inquiries but was reassured. There the matter rested."
> 
> You might wish to read, if you have not had the time already, the superb speech made by Ann Clwyd in the House of Commons last Thursday in which she painstakingly explained the insidious role of insurance companies in ensuring that councils' refused and refuse to accept liability or responsibility for children they looked after, including in North Wales, but which can also be extended to my own in Nottinghamshire and nearby Nottingham.
> 
> Perhaps most worrying of all are the implications of your question to the Home Secretary on November 3rd 2014.
> 
> You stated that 'Finally in my own borough of Islington there have been complaints about Islington children's homes in the past and the council has investigated them.' This statement at first glance is non contentious. However on reflection is an extraordinary statement considering the representations made to you in the past that the council was in fact covering up abuse and not listening to the survivors, issues you were challenged on at the time.
> 
> Repeatedly across the country, institutions investigating allegations about themselves over child abuse have heard nothing, seen nothing and known nothing. This is at the very heart of the cover up culture.
> 
> I know you through your work on Central African and Latin American human rights issues, and am quite certain that you are a man of the highest personal integrity and ethics. I have not the slightest hesitation in saying that.
> 
> My concern is about your politics and how that results in actions, or in this case non-actions. As we have seen with the appalling misjudgements of the NCCL and its allowance of membership to the Paedophile Information Exchange in the 1970s, sections of the left were in denial of the motivations of some campaigners and this unwillingness to face up to unpalatable possibilities clouded judgement over the most serious of allegations.
> 
> In fact the allegations were true and are true as survivors increasingly choose to speak out. The establishment and sections of the left stood by and allowed children's lives to be destroyed.
> 
> The reason that your response and inactions to these matters is worthy of specific scrutiny is that unlike others who did not see what was happening, or as we saw with Saville, kept their suspicions to themselves rather than speak out or investigate, you are wishing to lead the Labour Party during the period of Goddard inquiry into child abuse and are seeking become Prime Minister.
> 
> The so called 'trendy left' politics of the early 1980s was a contributory factor in covering up child abuse. I myself saw that repeatedly at first hand in Lambeth. Meanwhile children were murdered and disappeared, were raped and beaten, forced into prostitution, trafficked around and a significant number of lives destroyed and blighted.
> 
> Your inaction in the 1980s and 1990s says a lot, not about your personal character, which I admire, but about your politics which I do not. Your carefully worded excusing of Islington Council in the House of Commons equally demonstrates why it is inappropriate for you to attempt to lead the Labour Party at the critical time of the Goddard Enquiry, as child abuse is the issue that will haunt this Parliament.
> 
> Yours Sincerely
> 
> John Mann MP


You are right that is very worrying, sadly I would imagine this is the case with many MP's when whistle blowers come to them about the biggest scandal that is supposed to be local authority care of children taken into its care homes. Whilst I don't condone his inaction I very much doubt he is alone and suspect many more similar cases will come to light in coming years as the authorities have started to listen to these kids more and follow patterns of behaviour.



rona said:


> Like he'll never denounce the IRA, or ISIS or a number of other terrorist groups
> 
> It's not what he says that worrying, it's what he doesn't say...........


He had denounced the IRA and he did sign an EDM - I've posted both several times on this thread.



kimthecat said:


> rona said: ↑
> I can't read that but a social worker apparently went to Corbyn in 1992............................Reminds you of that programme the other night doesn't it?
> 
> I do understand your point about muck raking , its easy to do and its done all the time but this has me very very concerned .
> I think this goes beyond the GE and our arguments here . A very serious subject and I wonder what is the truth . As much as I dislike Corbyn , I don't want it to true , if the sufferings of children could have been stopped then and weren't, it doesnt bear thinking about. .
> 
> What is your honest opinion on this , or anyone else ?


My honest opinion is this letter could have been written to any number of MPs from different parties, as I've said above I believe many more similar cases will come to light of shocking lack of care and abuse within homes for children in the care of the local authorities up and down the country.



Satori said:


> Is there a presumption of innocence for enemy combatants? (Genuine question).


Genuine answer. I don't know


----------



## stockwellcat.

Sorry for my slow replies @Zaros I am not ignoring you. I am in a business meeting...


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Nope, never said that. So your happy for flag-waving ISIS fanatics to be walking the streets are you?


Take a look at the information we have already available. Failures in the implementation of the existing system, not that the system doesn't work. Failures on May's watch.

Edit: You are pushing for the destruction of fundamentals of our life and liberties, that of the belief that people have rights. That is one of the things that make us different and we need to celebrate that fact.


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> You are right that is very worrying, sadly I would imagine this is the case with many MP's when whistle blowers come to them about the biggest scandal that is supposed to be local authority care of children taken into its care homes. Whilst I don't condone his inaction I very much doubt he is alone and suspect many more similar cases will come to light in coming years as the authorities have started to listen to these kids more and follow patterns of behaviour.


I see your point , I feel its different with Corbyn because he could be our MP soon or one day . 
We know that Tories have turn a blind eye but Corbyn's supporters are asking us to vote for him *because* he is a principled man and it seems he turned a blind eye too.


----------



## Elles

The thing with fanatics like these is that they don't usually deny it. So all we need to do is ask them and if they have a record of sympathising with and promoting Isis take their passports, stick them on curfew and monitor them. Forever. Or we can imprison them in a guatanomo bay type of situation. Forever. Or we can deport them to another country so they can group up with other Isis members, overthrow the already weak government and blow up other innocents. Or we can stick them in prison to recruit and radicalise others. Forever. 

Ok. So what do we do with a 19 year old extremist who may or may not be an extremist for the rest of his life? I'm not sure deportation is the right answer. These people have a lot of money behind them, they can probably sneak back in with false papers or find other ways to commit their atrocities. Sometimes people who grow up and change their minds are the best people at persuading youngsters to not follow in their footsteps.

I don't agree with letting preachers espouse their filth and use our money to protect their rights, but the anti terrorism laws are maybe already strong enough, the problem being they aren't used to their fullest? I'm not sure, it's something I'd have to look at, if I could be bothered. My gut reaction is to string them all up and send them to their none existent paradise afterlife, but my mind says it's not that easy. :Wideyed


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> Sorry for my slow replies @Zaros I am not ignoring you. I am at work in a business meeting...
> View attachment 313608


:Wideyed Either you need to see a urologist, or your horse should be taken to see a veterinarian.


----------



## KittenKong

Jesthar said:


> The problem with removing human rights for 'terrorists' is that human rights are legally deemed to be universal, so none of the legislation will actually have terrorist specific clauses to rip up.
> 
> That means anything that is 'ripped up' will inevitably affect others - maybe not straight away, but you will no doubt have noticed that historically supposedly very specific legislations have ended up being applied to groups that were never originally the target when it becomes useful to the authorities to do so?
> 
> For example, what happens if the government du jour decides that people who, say, oppose fracking or campaign for environmental protections or workers rights are harming the economy and can therefore be classified as a threat to the country? And don't think it can't happen, history tells us otherwise...


My thoughts exactly.

Opponents of foxhunting will be included incase they become "potential hunt saboteurs".


----------



## havoc

Goblin said:


> Take a look at the information we have already available. Failures in the implementation of the existing system


We do have an awful lot of law in place already. Just adding more on paper is pointless.


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> The thing with fanatics like these is that they don't usually deny it. So all we need to do is ask them and if they have a record of sympathising with and promoting Isis take their passports, stick them on curfew and monitor them


Who exactly are you going to ask?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> The thing with fanatics like these is that they don't usually deny it. So all we need to do is ask them and if they have a record of sympathising with and promoting Isis take their passports, stick them on curfew and monitor them. Forever. Or we can imprison them in a guatanomo bay type of situation. Forever. Or we can deport them to another country so they can group up with other Isis members, overthrow the already weak government and blow up other innocents. Or we can stick them in prison to recruit and radicalise others. Forever.
> 
> Ok. So what do we do with a 19 year old extremist who may or may not be an extremist for the rest of his life? I'm not sure deportation is the right answer. These people have a lot of money behind them, they can probably sneak back in with false papers or find other ways to commit their atrocities. Sometimes people who grow up and change their minds are the best people at persuading youngsters to not follow in their footsteps.
> 
> I don't agree with letting preachers espouse their filth and use our money to protect their rights, but the anti terrorism laws are maybe already strong enough, the problem being they aren't used to their fullest? I'm not sure, it's something I'd have to look at, if I could be bothered. My gut reaction is to string them all up and send them to their none existent paradise afterlife, but my mind says it's not that easy. :Wideyed


And of course some do reform and try to prevent others getting drawn into extremism like this young man






Adam Deen was previously a senior member of the Islamist extremist organization, Al-Muhajiroun, and utilized universities himself as a key source for recruitment. Adam became disillusioned with his extremist beliefs and began a journey away from Islamist extremism.

Adam now dedicates his work to countering extremism and the Islamist ideology he once subscribed to, which he believes tarnishes the beauty of Islam. Adam's past experiences add tremendous value and insight into ways to counter Islamic extremism.

In 2012, Adam founded the Deen Institute, which teaches Muslims critical thinking skills and increases awareness of Islam's rich intellectual heritage. He has spoken at over 40 university campuses across the UK and has debated with prominent academics on issues surrounding extremism, religious philosophy and theology.

http://www.adamdeen.com/



KittenKong said:


> My thoughts exactly.
> 
> Opponents of foxhunting will be included incase they become "potential hunt saboteurs".


Oh yes, they lump animal rights people in with terrorists. In the US I believe they are not even allowed to do undercover work and publish photographs/videos of animals being abused in intensive farming etc.


----------



## Elles

havoc said:


> Who exactly are you going to ask?


Me personally, no one. The authorities have 3 or 5000 or more, (I'm as good with numbers as Diane) on a list don't they? Ask them. My post was pointing out how impossible it is.


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> The authorities have 3 or 5000 or more


Which they have to evaluate and prioritise because there aren't the resources to do otherwise. As I've pointed out previously, anyone can ring in any name anonymously. There's no consequence for doing so for the wrong reasons. Will you be so keen on rounding people up on nothing more than a accusatory phone call and withdrawing all rights when it's you on the wrong end of it?
That's a general 'you' to those who think it's the answer, not a personal one


----------



## Elles

havoc said:


> Which they have to evaluate and prioritise because there aren't the resources to do otherwise. As I've pointed out previously, anyone can ring in any name anonymously. There's no consequence for doing so for the wrong reasons. Will you be so keen on rounding people up on nothing more than a accusatory phone call when it's you on the wrong end of it?


And that post pointed out that my post was pointing out how impossible it is. No wonder people can't work out what politicians are actually saying, when my two posts on a petforums get carefully snipped to make out I'm saying the opposite of what I actually am. Politicians have the whole newsstand to contend with.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Zaros said:


> :Wideyed Either you need to see a urologist, or your horse should be taken to see a veterinarian.


That's was a lovely pint of John Smith's  now I am having a pint of Doombar


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> That's was a lovely pint of John Smith's  now I am having a pint of Doombar


I don't drink pints cos I've never considered meself working class scum.

Nah. I've allus bin workin' class an am proud to be so.

But I still don't drink pints.:Stop


----------



## stockwellcat.

Zaros said:


> I don't drink pints cos I've never considered meself working class scum.


Ohh but I work very hard. Sealed a deal today  


> I still don't drink pints.:Stop


Shots then?


----------



## Dr Pepper

Elles said:


> And that post pointed out that my post was pointing out how impossible it is. No wonder people can't work out what politicians are actually saying, when my two posts on a petforums get carefully snipped to make out I'm saying the opposite of what I actually am. Politicians have the whole newsstand to contend with.


Ain't that the truth.

Some members are very much like politicians as well, I gave a specific example of a situation that needs addressing and they ignore that and give a generalisation for an answer. It's happened a few times. I've given up.


----------



## kimthecat

I'll bet he deny meeting the Daleks too!


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> Shots then?


A generous glass of Absinthe or Southern Comfort, but not in the same glass because I'm not one of them trendy sorts, who put all sorts of random spirits in a tall glass and then give it some exotic or astonishing name, such as the sh1tter hitter because it opens up the sluice gates at both ends seconds after downing the lethal cocktail. :Vomit


kimthecat said:


> I'll bet he deny meeting the Daleks too!


Jeremy is the new Doctor. He thinks the Tories are next for extermination!:Smuggrin


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> Ain't that the truth.
> 
> Some members are very much like politicians as well, I gave a specific example of a situation that needs addressing and they ignore that and give a generalisation for an answer. It's happened a few times. I've given up.


In reality, though, it is usually very difficult to address a specific situation without impacting on other similar/related situations too. Failure to consider those aspects usually leads to a visit from the Law of Unintended Consequences at a later date, frequently accompanied by it's sidekick That's Not What We Wanted You To Be Able To Do...


----------



## Elles

We all know he's been married 3 times and (allegedly) took a bunch of mates round to his flat to show off that he was sleeping with Diane Abbot don't we? He comes over as some friendly eccentric who doesn't wear a tie and is uncomfortable in a shirt, but he's human not some kind of leftie God. We probably don't get to see his current and third wife because she's 20 years younger than him, a fair trade coffee importer who was embarrassed by the low wages the coffee workers were getting and which would probably be brought up if she ever got in front of a camera. He met her when he was supposed to be helping her get her child back, the child had been abducted by her ex. Anyone else would have been accused of taking advantage of someone vulnerable probably. 

All the fanatical praise of someone who's just another human being and left wing politician I find quite worrying. It's not good to put anyone on a pedestal. You don't get to be leader of a main stream political party by being a nice chap, nor do you get yourself a £1m house by being a poor socialist in a capitalist society.

I think if Corbyn got a landslide victory it wouldn't be quite as bad as May, because half the Labour Party don't agree with him anyway and would probably squash him if he tried to go too far. Not going to happen though.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Not too late to put your candidates under a bit of pressure on these issues - just follow the link below and the website does all the work emailing your candidates for you. Please do it even if it won't affect how you vote as it just might make them think twice before voting to repeal the ban if they have a load of these in their inbox.


You want to keep fox, hare, stag and mink hunting illegal
You want to increase sentencing for animal cruelty, including dog fighting
https://votesforvinny.org.uk/


----------



## Satori

Elles said:


> We all know he's been married 3 times and (allegedly) took a bunch of mates round to his flat to show off that he was sleeping with Diane Abbot don't we? He comes over as some friendly eccentric who doesn't wear a tie and is uncomfortable in a shirt, but he's human not some kind of leftie God. We probably don't get to see his current and third wife because she's 20 years younger than him, a fair trade coffee importer who was embarrassed by the low wages the coffee workers were getting and which would probably be brought up if she ever got in front of a camera. He met her when he was supposed to be helping her get her child back, the child had been abducted by her ex. Anyone else would have been accused of taking advantage of someone vulnerable probably.
> 
> All the fanatical praise of someone who's just another human being and left wing politician I find quite worrying. It's not good to put anyone on a pedestal. You don't get to be leader of a main stream political party by being a nice chap, nor do you get yourself a £1m house by being a poor socialist in a capitalist society.
> 
> I think if Corbyn got a landslide victory it wouldn't be quite as bad as May, because half the Labour Party don't agree with him anyway and would probably squash him if he tried to go too far. Not going to happen though.


Well fwiw I think he's a knob.


----------



## MollySmith

Gosh and there was me thinking it was the UK and we were voting for a political party.... did Trump take over early?

I don't like or dislike any politician, no more than I can make any judgement on any of you. I don't know them. I don't give a rats arse about the age gap in Jeremy Corbyn's marriage especially since his wife would have been the same age as I was when I met my husband who is older than me, I knew my own mind. Likewise I could pledge an allegiance with Theresa May over our parental status, but I don't know them! I am voting on a manifesto.


----------



## noushka05

Imagine her in the brexit negotiations. Cant cope under pressure - weak and scared. Well at least everyone will have to wake up to the fact shes a catastrophe for this country - she can't pin the blame on anyone but herself. The book stops with her.

*Jeremy Vine*‏Verified [email protected]*theJeremyVine* 6h6 hours ago

For the record, this is the first election in 40 years where the Prime Minister has not appeared to be interviewed on @*BBCRadio2*

Channel 4's Jon Snow says Theresa May first PM to refuse him an interview in seven general elections. http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/chann...-him-an-interview-in-seven-general-elections/


----------



## noushka05

*Caroline Lucas*‏Verified [email protected]*CarolineLucas* 2h2 hours ago

Theresa May's plan to scrap human rights is a distraction turned dangerous - she knows it won't make us any safer
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-london-bridge-manchester-safer-a7777216.html

*Theresa May's plan to scrap human rights is a distraction turned dangerous - she knows it won't make us any safer*
Without human rights, ordinary people - like the Hillsborough families and countless people with disabilities - would have no means of exposing wrongdoing and achieving justice. Our ability to protest, our guarantee of a fair trial, and the freedom of our press to hold the powerful to account would fall away


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> *Caroline Lucas*‏Verified [email protected]*CarolineLucas* 2h2 hours ago
> 
> Theresa May's plan to scrap human rights is a distraction turned dangerous - she knows it won't make us any safer
> http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-london-bridge-manchester-safer-a7777216.html
> 
> *Theresa May's plan to scrap human rights is a distraction turned dangerous - she knows it won't make us any safer*
> Without human rights, ordinary people - like the Hillsborough families and countless people with disabilities - would have no means of exposing wrongdoing and achieving justice. Our ability to protest, our guarantee of a fair trial, and the freedom of our press to hold the powerful to account would fall away


You do talk a lot of rot

And she will negotiate far better than a man who is lead by the nose and gets flustered so easily as he has a number of times


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> That's was a lovely pint of John Smith's  now I am having a pint of Doombar


i'm having a pint of Sussex ale made at Goodwood


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> You do talk a lot of rot
> 
> And she will negotiate far better than a man who is lead by the nose and gets flustered so easily as he has a number of times


Would you tell this former Ambassador he talks a lot of rot? This is why we're in the mess we're in. People trust a bunch of dishonest crooks in government over experts. Same in the USA with Trump & his followers.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> *Caroline Lucas*‏Verified [email protected]*CarolineLucas* 2h2 hours ago
> 
> Theresa May's plan to scrap human rights is a distraction turned dangerous - she knows it won't make us any safer
> http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-london-bridge-manchester-safer-a7777216.html
> 
> *Theresa May's plan to scrap human rights is a distraction turned dangerous - she knows it won't make us any safer*
> Without human rights, ordinary people - like the Hillsborough families and countless people with disabilities - would have no means of exposing wrongdoing and achieving justice. Our ability to protest, our guarantee of a fair trial, and the freedom of our press to hold the powerful to account would fall away


The press and scaremongers love blowing what Theresa May said out of proportion  twisting the true version of what she said.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> i'm having a pint of Sussex ale made at Goodwood


I love drinking ale. I'll have to get my hands on some Sussex Ale (not today though).


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> The press and scaremongers love blowing what Theresa May said out of proportion


Caroline Lucas is renowned for her honesty & integrity - the most decent principled politician possible. But your faith lies in the morally bankrupt Theresa May,a pathological liar who is putting millions of lives at risk with her ideological policies.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> You do talk a lot of rot
> 
> And she will negotiate far better than a man who is lead by the nose and gets flustered so easily as he has a number of times


Seriously? That is pretty childish considering she is only posting what Caroline Lucas said. Why do you think she won't get led by the nose and flustered and throw a little tantrum when people challenge her?


----------



## 1290423

Well , not long now


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Caroline Lucas is renowned for her honesty & integrity - the most decent principled politician possible. But your faith lies in the morally bankrupt Theresa May,a pathological liar who is putting millions of lives at risk with her ideological policies.


My faith lies with no one.

Over the past weeks of campaigning the majority of party leaders have proven themselves to be ill equipped to run an honest Government. They all have there weaknesses. You tell me when we had an honest Government last, it hasn't been in my life time?

This has to be the worst election in known history if I am to be honest.


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> I love drinking ale. I'll have to get my hands on some Sussex Ale (not today though).


Make sure it's the right one, there are two. This one is made out of hops from Goodwood

It's this one
https://www.ratebeer.com/beer/goodwood-sussex-ale/192734/

It's rather smooth with no bitter after taste 

Even I have trouble buying it and I'm in Sussex.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> Make sure it's the right one, there are two. This one is made out of hops from Goodwood
> 
> It's this one
> https://www.ratebeer.com/beer/goodwood-sussex-ale/192734/
> 
> It's rather smooth with no bitter after taste
> 
> Even I have trouble buying it and I'm in Sussex.


I'll have to have a look around and find who stocks it


----------



## Dr Pepper

Satori said:


> Well fwiw I think he's a knob.


That's a bit harsh!

At least his not smarmy like Mr Blair, in fact quite the opposite, what's that though, barmy?


----------



## KittenKong

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...r-human-rights-by-scrapping-our-human-rights/


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...r-human-rights-by-scrapping-our-human-rights/
> 
> View attachment 313621
> View attachment 313622


Didn't Cameron also not like the Convention of Human Rights? I am sure he came up with the idea of the British Bill of Rights which never came to fruition. I stand corrected if I am wrong.


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Seriously? That is pretty childish considering she is only posting what Caroline Lucas said. *Why do you think she won't get led by the nose and flustered and throw a little tantrum when people challenge her*?


You mean May? It's kind of worrying, but now I think about it, she seems to have done rather a lot of that already, particularly when it comes to Brexit and being told by the EU there won't be any rule bending during the process...

Hmm, that bears further thought I think.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Summing up:

For next five years we will have "strong and stable".."strong and stable".."strong and stable""...
Sorry...but really do you think those who bought Labour membership counting on Labour supporting Remain will buy into Corbyn again?

Any other candidate, David or even Ed, would be elected...
Five years of "Brexit is Brexit", "strong and stable",
"I believe in Britain"......
Damn...


This is how B***** is panning out...


Best we can hope is no majority....


----------



## Honeys mum

Diane Abbott Replaced As Shadow Home Secretary 'For Period Of Her Ill Health' | HuffPost UK

Thats really sad, after all the nasty things that have been said about her.
Whatever is wrong with her, I hope she has a speedy recovery.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jesthar said:


> You mean May? It's kind of worrying, but now I think about it, she seems to have done rather a lot of that already, particularly when it comes to Brexit and being told by the EU there won't be any rule bending during the process...
> 
> Hmm, that bears further thought I think.


Yes sorry I meant May. I think she comes across as very petulant when she is challenged.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Analysis of the leaders, their campaigns and the parties*









Radio 4 PM

Posted at17:25
BBC assistant editor Norman Smith says on the last day of the election the gulf between the two main parties is greater than it was a generation ago.

Looking at the style of the different leaders, Norman says Jeremy Corbyn's campaign "has surprised many of us", in that he has gone from being "stilted, tetchy and difficult" - to appearing quite outgoing and at ease.

In contrast, Norman says *Theresa May *"*has shrunk, sounded and seemed on the defensive"*, and has seen her status removed from Conservative billboards.

"You sense voters have not warmed to her," said Norman, adding that Tory Team May has been "far too closeted and had a bunker mentality" with the campaign being damaged by the "social care foul-up".

However, despite the Labour rallies, Labour members claim Jeremy Corbyn "remains toxic on the doorstep".

He said the Lib Dems "are very downcast at the thought that their prospects are not great and the Remain revolt hasn't kicked in".


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes sorry I meant May. I think she comes across as very petulant when she is challenged.


She does and I find it deeply unattractive. She can either be strong and stable or play the petulant toddler - they are mutually exclusive to me.


----------



## MollySmith

Honeys mum said:


> Diane Abbott Replaced As Shadow Home Secretary 'For Period Of Her Ill Health' | HuffPost UK
> 
> Thats really sad, after all the nasty things that have been said about her.
> Whatever is wrong with her, I hope she has a speedy recovery.


I think there have been some pretty awful lows in this and this is so sad, I imagine that if there is the smallest ***** in ones health - physical or mental - then it's exploited and weakened in that environment. I can remember how awful it was for Mo Mowlan when she was first ill and the stuff about May and her not being a parent was cruel, whatever my politics may be, it's low. I agree, I hope she is better soon.


----------



## MollySmith

May I say that yes it's been a bit nasty but there has been some brilliant funny things out there on the web too. My fave has to Flash Corbyn, look it up. It's so stupid and very silly.

Today I found this gem from 'Simpsons pictures that I gone and done' It make me laugh. I'm so sick to death of it now, I'm finding anything hysterically funny.


----------



## Calvine

MollySmith said:


> the age gap in Jeremy Corbyn's marriage


I only found out a couple of weeks ago that he was married, then a previous poster informed he had been married thrice, and, like you, @MollySmith, I don't give a rat's arse...not a monkey's. If he was married to a centenarian pensioner I still wouldn't vote for him.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I'll have to have a look around and find who stocks it


Make the most of it we could all be drinking water and eating bread from tomorrow


----------



## 1290423

Honeys mum said:


> Diane Abbott Replaced As Shadow Home Secretary 'For Period Of Her Ill Health' | HuffPost UK
> 
> Thats really sad, after all the nasty things that have been said about her.
> Whatever is wrong with her, I hope she has a speedy recovery.


Dont think they can fix stupid


----------



## 1290423

Did anyone hear the news reporter earlier?
Dropped a right clanger she did, said that there had been a lot of baby shaking. She did recover quickly and corrected it to handshaking


----------



## havoc

DT said:


> Dont think they can fix stupid


I don't like her at all but I do think that's uncalled for.


----------



## 1290423

You definitely know what you doing tomorrow then Stockwell


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> I don't like her at all but I do think that's uncalled for.


Don't worry havoc I seriously do hope she does make a full and speedy recovery after all we are going to need her if labour wins what else are we going to use to block the Channel Tunnel with


----------



## 1290423

opps


----------



## stockwellcat.

11 hours and 57 minutes to go and the polling stations open.


----------



## Guest

I watched the 7 way televised debate was it last week. I was totally gobsmacked that when J.C went outside, he was almost being mobbed by the young people behind the fences. Very strange for a Politician.
He reminds me of Neil Kinnock a little - I swear the only reason he wasn't elected is the ginger hair.
Reading through the posts, I find it really funny that whilst, it seems a lot of you have incredibly strong Political views, you don't seem to realise the obvious. If you are a Labour voter, no amount of quoting how dreadful Theresa May is, will make a Tory voter change their minds & vice versa.
I will vote Labour as I always have & always will. I quite like Jeremy Corbyn. I also feel that it would be great if Nicola Sturgeon was English, she is the best orator of the lot & I would love to see a female Labour PM


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> Dont think they can fix stupid


I can see where you are coming from. If she is unwell, then I wish her better. Maybe she is on medication which affects her...who knows? But she has screwed up a few interviews of late and missed one today, and I'd have thought that, having flunked one, she (or someone else) would have thought that 'enough was enough' (unquote) and advised her to take sick leave. She is well paid to represent the party (I heard £74k but don't quote me on that) and she has done them no favours thus far as far as I can see. 'Britain invented racism' is the one that sticks in my mind.


----------



## 1290423

And I am going to make no apologises and I do have plenty to say one of them being there is only so many times you can cry wolf.
Now can someone remind me please which labour MP missed a very important vote recently due to, was it a migraine attack? And yes I do know, how disabling migraine can be, but lets not forget that MP was active on twitter at the exact time.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> You definitely know what you doing tomorrow then Stockwell


Oh yes absolutely sure, 1,000,000%.
Getting up, having a coffee, going down to the local school (which is my polling station) and voting


----------



## 1290423

Franlow said:


> I watched the 7 way televised debate was it last week. I was totally gobsmacked that when J.C went outside, he was almost being mobbed by the young people behind the fences. Very strange for a Politician.
> He reminds me of Neil Kinnock a little - I swear the only reason he wasn't elected is the ginger hair.
> Reading through the posts, I find it really funny that whilst, it seems a lot of you have incredibly strong Political views, you don't seem to realise the obvious. If you are a Labour voter, no amount of quoting how dreadful Theresa May is, will make a Tory voter change their minds & vice versa.
> I will vote Labour as I always have & always will. I quite like Jeremy Corbyn. I also feel that it would be great if Nicola Sturgeon was English, she is the best orator of the lot & I would love to see a female Labour PM


Do you know! So do I. Can't say I'm for the manifesto but then again neither am I for the Conservatives and yes I do think Jeremy Corbyn is definitely the nicer person I'm going to go a little bit further now and say in view of Diane Abbott stepping down albeit temporarily I personally think that was a good move by whoever decided that, it will pull some votes in for them. Personally I think they've played a blinder here nice one Jeremy


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Do you know! So do I. Can't say I'm for the manifesto but then again neither am I for the Conservatives and yes I do think Jeremy Corbyn is definitely the nicer person I'm going to go a little bit further now and say in view of Diane Abbott stepping down albeit temporarily I personally think that was a good move by whoever decided that, it will pull some votes in for them. Personally I think they've played a blinder here nice one Jeremy


Well she's (Diane Abbott) just tweeted to say


> Touched by all the messages of support. Still standing! Will rejoin the fray soon. Vote Labour!




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/872417084277493761


----------



## ForestWomble

Silly question alert! 

How can I find out who won in my area after the election tomorrow?


----------



## Calvine

Franlow said:


> the ginger hair.


I understand. This is Hamlet. As you can see, he is...ginger (if you will pardon the expression)... he is devastated that he hasn't been elected and reckons it is because he is...ginger...like Neil Kinnock. Am thinking of starting a petition: Justice For Gingers. Actually I think Hamlet would make a great Home Secretary.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Well she's (Diane Abbott) just tweeted to say she is sorry she had to step down temporarily.


Quiet acceptable and normal for someone to use social media even if it the hospital bed I accept that. my remark regarding the previous time was relating to a vital important vote were the same person called in sick yet at the same time was on Twitter the reason for calling in sick was migraine. I don't accept you want to be on Twitter if you've got a really bad migraine attack certainly not one that's bad enough to stop you attending an important vote


----------



## kimthecat

Watching the news with the leaders reminds me of the Lottery ad , Please not them! though I actually like the Lottery people !

I really cant face any of them being PM but definitely not Corbyn .


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Quiet acceptable and normal for someone to use social media even if it the hospital bed I accept that. my remark regarding the previous time was relating to a vital important vote were the same person called in sick yet at the same time was on Twitter the reason for calling in sick was migraine. I don't accept you want to be on Twitter if you've got a really bad migraine attack certainly not one that's bad enough to stop you attending an important vote


I corrected the tweet see above (refresh page)


----------



## Calvine

Animallover26 said:


> How can I find out who won in my area after the election tomorrow?


You won' be able to avoid it...it will be all over the media (at some point)!


----------



## 3dogs2cats

havoc said:


> She does and I find it deeply unattractive. She can either be strong and stable or play the petulant toddler - they are mutually exclusive to me.


 She hopes being petulant will come across as strong and stable, she can`t bear to be put under pressure because she knows she struggles, the petulant act is an attempt at a cover up, not a very effective one though!


----------



## rona

Calvine said:


> I heard £74k


Don't forget the £35k of expenses


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> Am thinking of starting a petition: Justice For Gingers. Actually I think Hamlet would make a great Home Secretary.


 I,ll join you ! my lovely OH is a ginger , though more brown haired nowadays !


----------



## 1290423

Animallover26 said:


> Silly question alert!
> 
> How can I find out who won in my area after the election tomorrow?


Online or they will be counting all night, and the red banner or whatever colour it is at the bottom of the tv channel ,will keep us updated.


----------



## stockwellcat.

There will be things to follow on BBC News and Sky News. The results will be coming in all night and the next morning so it may take all night and the next morning before all results are available


----------



## kimthecat

Animallover26 said:


> Silly question alert!
> 
> How can I find out who won in my area after the election tomorrow?


I expect it will be on the Red Button service on BBC 1

I wonder how much sleep we'll get to tomorrow night . Not much, i bet ,


----------



## Calvine

rona said:


> Don't forget the £35k of expenses


Ah yes...some of which to send her son to *private* school by taxi...that one?


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> I wonder how much sleep we'll get to tomorrow night . Not much, i bet ,


Right! I sat up the whole night for the EU referendum and wasn't even tired. It was amazing.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Stocking up on wine and nibbles tomorrow for tomorrow night to watch the results as they come in.


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> Ah yes...some of which to send her son to *private* school by taxi...that one?


You couldn't make it up could you!


----------



## noushka05

What a surprise.

One of Theresa May's pledges is to scrap the Serious Fraud Office, against the advice of lawyers & anti-corruption campaigners.
Here's why:


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Stocking up on wine and nibbles tomorrow for tomorrow night to watch the results as they come in.


The count this year is at the local sports hall, for the last election I was able to go to the count, as I was the previous, not been asked this year, perhaps because I never went anyway.


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> *Caroline Lucas*‏Verified [email protected]*CarolineLucas* 2h2 hours ago
> 
> Theresa May's plan to scrap human rights is a distraction turned dangerous - she knows it won't make us any safer
> http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-london-bridge-manchester-safer-a7777216.html
> 
> *Theresa May's plan to scrap human rights is a distraction turned dangerous - she knows it won't make us any safer*
> Without human rights, ordinary people - like the Hillsborough families and countless people with disabilities - would have no means of exposing wrongdoing and achieving justice. Our ability to protest, our guarantee of a fair trial, and the freedom of our press to hold the powerful to account would fall away


Caroline Lucas whining about human rights . This from the leader of a party that would introduce a wealth tax. I assume she is either stupid or just having a laugh (or both). It's too much.:Hilarious


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> You couldn't make it up could you!


When asked, Ms Abbott said that:
a) black mothers will 'go the extra mile' for their kids (not white mothers?)
and:
b) black boys will likely join a gang in a state school (?) so he had to be educated privately at City of London College.

If the lady is sick, I wish her a speedy recovery, but really feel she should have backed down before the 'car-crash' interviews.


----------



## kimthecat

DT said:


> Quiet acceptable and normal for someone to use social media even if it the hospital bed I accept that. my remark regarding the previous time was relating to a vital important vote were the same person called in sick yet at the same time was on Twitter the reason for calling in sick was migraine. I don't accept you want to be on Twitter if you've got a really bad migraine attack certainly not one that's bad enough to stop you attending an important vote


We dont know if it was actually a migraine . that could have been a cover story for something more serious or a bit too personal to tell the world.


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> What a surprise.
> 
> One of Theresa May's pledges is to scrap the Serious Fraud Office, against the advice of lawyers & anti-corruption campaigners.
> Here's why:
> 
> View attachment 313641


Psssst @noushka05 you got same phones as us lol. Hope you learn how to use of us will never speak again crying


----------



## 1290423

kimthecat said:


> We dont know if it was actually a migraine . that could have been a cover story for something more serious or a bit too personal to tell the world.


Good point


----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> When asked, Ms Abbott said that:
> a) black mothers will 'go the extra mile' for their kids (not white mothers?)
> and:
> b) black boys will likely join a gang in a state school (?) so he had to be educated privately at City of London College.
> 
> If the lady is sick, I wish her a speedy recovery, but really feel she should have backed down before the 'car-crash' interviews.


I really worry waking up on Friday and she is Home Secretary in waiting. It scares me because she hasn't got a clue what it entails being Home Secretary and she most certainly doesn't do her homework that was proven in her interviews.

I wish her a speedy recovery if she is genuinely unwell.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## kimthecat

@KittenKong :Hilarious That'll work , they wont have to try too hard !


----------



## Guest

Use the internet. Google General election results 2017 it will show your constituency when the votes are in
I tend to stay up all night & watch, which is another choice.


----------



## Guest

Well I have no idea how Fleazanall got on here, meant to quote


----------



## 3dogs2cats

kimthecat said:


> I expect it will be on the Red Button service on BBC 1
> 
> I wonder how much sleep we'll get to tomorrow night . Not much, i bet ,


I try to watch every election night, have done for years it`s just tradition now. If my husband is working away he gets running commentary emails, he is at home this year so I`ll have no email writing to keep me going but I shall definitely be up all night watching the results as they come in.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well I am all set to cast my vote. I have my favourite black pen ready. I know for certain that I know my conscience will be clear when the results are read out on Friday.


----------



## Elles

I've been watching some old video of Maggie T on Question Time type programmes. One woman said all children should get free meals at school, because her friend on social had six children and didn't have time to fill in the forms for free dinners. :Hilarious 

It made a nice break from modern politics.


----------



## JANICE199

*JC will win *


----------



## ForestWomble

Thank you all who answered my question


----------



## MollySmith

DT said:


> Dont think they can fix stupid


You might want to take a quick read of this..I think I took out all the swears in the bit I quoted. Now I don't advocate forgetting stuff but honestly I had no idea what she has done and stupid is the last word I'd apply to Diana Abbott. In fact I'd say the reverse, we are all very stupid for misjudging - regardless of politics the woman has guts and bravery.

https://cookingonabootstrap.com/2017/06/07/we-need-to-talk-about-diane-abbott-now-explicit-content/

_WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT DIANE ABBOTT by Jack Monroe

Right one of us political writer people needs to do this and it looks like it's me. Grab a seat. I wanna talk about Diane.
Diane was first elected as an MP in 1987, the year before I was born. She has been dedicated to serving the British public for longer than I have even been alive. Hold that thought. Understand it.
Diane was the first black woman to have a seat in the House of Commons. She MADE HISTORY. Her father was welder, her mother a nurse. How many working class kids do we have in politics these days? 
Diane went to Cambridge University to study history. IN THE SEVENTIES. In 2017 only 15 black kids went to Cambridge. Sit down and listen.
Diane worked for the Home Office in 1976. She was so smart they put her on a course to fast-track her career. (I'm just getting started.)
Diane was Race Relations Officer at the National Council for Civil Liberties from 1978 to 1980. (Big **** job. Bet you couldn't do it.)
Diane was a TV researcher and reporter from 1978 to 1985. I know a lot of those. They're fast thinkers, avid fact hounds, brilliant minds.
Diane's political career began in 1982, on Westminster City Council. Then in 1987, I'll say it again, she became the first black female MP.

In 2008, her speech on civil liberties in the counterterrorism debate won Parliamentary Speech Of The Year in the Spectator awards.

That speech is here. Watch it, and then come back. https://t.co/qNMvtilMa1

She founded the Black Child initiative, to raise educational achievements among black kids. She shared her damn platform.

She's been the Shadow Minister for Public health, working tirelessly to tackle Tory cuts to children's services, maternity care, all of it.

In September 2011, the Telegraph called her 'one of Labours best frontbench performers'. The same Telegraph now monsters her for clicks.

Diane was one of 16 MPs to write to Miliband in 2015 asking him to commit to opposing further austerity measures. She did that for all of us. Diane was one of a tiny handful of MPs to defy the Labour whip and vote AGAINST Tory austerity cuts. Those cuts are KILLING people.

Diane has consistently voted against a reduction in spending on benefits. She has consistently voted for and campaigned for higher benefits over longer periods for people unable to work due to illness/disability.

In March she raised the issue of cuts to domestic violence services, in the House of Commons: "women and children are turned away daily".

Diane has campaigned to help unaccompanied migrant children travelling from Greece and Italy.

Diane is a skilled orator, a quick thinker, a glorious debater, a genuine public servant and a thoroughly decent woman. I mean reading through Hansard right now is a delight, some of her points and comebacks are glorious. And brilliant. And strong.

31st Jan 2017 - demanding to know why ESOL funding was being cut while the immigration debate focused on the importance of integration…

She has spoken on Leveson, terrorism, education, poverty, welfare, illness, disability, refugees, child sexual abuse, pro-choice abortion. Her campaigns include legal aid, civil liberties, fighting crime, sickle cell thallasemia, public transport, improving education. She has given speeches at Harvard University, for Christ's sake. Have you? She has travelled to Kenya, China, Uganda, all over the world, representing the Government. Representing Britain. HAVE YOU?_


----------



## rona

MollySmith said:


> You might want to take a quick read of this..I think I took out all the swears in the bit I quoted. Now I don't advocate forgetting stuff but honestly I had no idea what she has done and stupid is the last word I'd apply to Diana Abbott. In fact I'd say the reverse, we are all very stupid for misjudging - regardless of politics the woman has guts and bravery.
> 
> https://cookingonabootstrap.com/2017/06/07/we-need-to-talk-about-diane-abbott-now-explicit-content/
> 
> _WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT DIANE ABBOTT by Jack Monroe
> 
> Right one of us political writer people needs to do this and it looks like it's me. Grab a seat. I wanna talk about Diane.
> Diane was first elected as an MP in 1987, the year before I was born. She has been dedicated to serving the British public for longer than I have even been alive. Hold that thought. Understand it.
> Diane was the first black woman to have a seat in the House of Commons. She MADE HISTORY. Her father was welder, her mother a nurse. How many working class kids do we have in politics these days?
> Diane went to Cambridge University to study history. IN THE SEVENTIES. In 2017 only 15 black kids went to Cambridge. Sit down and listen.
> Diane worked for the Home Office in 1976. She was so smart they put her on a course to fast-track her career. (I'm just getting started.)
> Diane was Race Relations Officer at the National Council for Civil Liberties from 1978 to 1980. (Big **** job. Bet you couldn't do it.)
> Diane was a TV researcher and reporter from 1978 to 1985. I know a lot of those. They're fast thinkers, avid fact hounds, brilliant minds.
> Diane's political career began in 1982, on Westminster City Council. Then in 1987, I'll say it again, she became the first black female MP.
> 
> In 2008, her speech on civil liberties in the counterterrorism debate won Parliamentary Speech Of The Year in the Spectator awards.
> 
> That speech is here. Watch it, and then come back. https://t.co/qNMvtilMa1
> 
> She founded the Black Child initiative, to raise educational achievements among black kids. She shared her damn platform.
> 
> She's been the Shadow Minister for Public health, working tirelessly to tackle Tory cuts to children's services, maternity care, all of it.
> 
> In September 2011, the Telegraph called her 'one of Labours best frontbench performers'. The same Telegraph now monsters her for clicks.
> 
> Diane was one of 16 MPs to write to Miliband in 2015 asking him to commit to opposing further austerity measures. She did that for all of us. Diane was one of a tiny handful of MPs to defy the Labour whip and vote AGAINST Tory austerity cuts. Those cuts are KILLING people.
> 
> Diane has consistently voted against a reduction in spending on benefits. She has consistently voted for and campaigned for higher benefits over longer periods for people unable to work due to illness/disability.
> 
> In March she raised the issue of cuts to domestic violence services, in the House of Commons: "women and children are turned away daily".
> 
> Diane has campaigned to help unaccompanied migrant children travelling from Greece and Italy.
> 
> Diane is a skilled orator, a quick thinker, a glorious debater, a genuine public servant and a thoroughly decent woman. I mean reading through Hansard right now is a delight, some of her points and comebacks are glorious. And brilliant. And strong.
> 
> 31st Jan 2017 - demanding to know why ESOL funding was being cut while the immigration debate focused on the importance of integration…
> 
> She has spoken on Leveson, terrorism, education, poverty, welfare, illness, disability, refugees, child sexual abuse, pro-choice abortion. Her campaigns include legal aid, civil liberties, fighting crime, sickle cell thallasemia, public transport, improving education. She has given speeches at Harvard University, for Christ's sake. Have you? She has travelled to Kenya, China, Uganda, all over the world, representing the Government. Representing Britain. HAVE YOU?_


Have you ever actually listened to her talk? I have

Is this the person who wrote that article?
http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle...hes-adding-politician-to-her-cv-a3522251.html


----------



## MollySmith

rona said:


> Have you ever actually listened to her talk? I have
> 
> Is this the person who wrote that article?
> http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle...hes-adding-politician-to-her-cv-a3522251.html


Yes I have, at a couple of book festivals.


----------



## rona

MollySmith said:


> Yes I have, at a couple of book festivals.


You didn't think there was something odd about her?


----------



## MollySmith

rona said:


> You didn't think there was something odd about her?


no more than the general population - define normal


----------



## FeelTheBern

Calvine said:


> When asked, Ms Abbott said that:
> a) black mothers will 'go the extra mile' for their kids (not white mothers?)
> and:
> b) black boys will likely join a gang in a state school (?) so he had to be educated privately at City of London College.
> 
> If the lady is sick, I wish her a speedy recovery, but really feel she should have backed down before the 'car-crash' interviews.


She does tell some whoppers, doesn't she? How can she think ethnicity has an impact on one's mothering abilities? As for the "black boys join gangs in state schools" claim, I don't know where she gets that from. Perhaps black schoolboys being recruited into gangs is an issue elsewhere-such as in some suburbs of Los Angeles-but this is the UK we're talking about. It's hard to imagine someone as idiotic as Diane Abbott in a key government role.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> My faith lies with no one.
> 
> Over the past weeks of campaigning the majority of party leaders have proven themselves to be ill equipped to run an honest Government. They all have there weaknesses. You tell me when we had an honest Government last, it hasn't been in my life time?
> 
> This has to be the worst election in known history if I am to be honest.


Well I'll be voting to save our badgers & our foxes & our NHS & to help the disabled & the poor. I'll be voting against fracking & for renewables. For climate, environmental & social justice. I'll be voting against austerity & for hope over fear & misery. And for my human rights.


----------



## stockwellcat.

FeelTheBern said:


> imagine someone as idiotic as Diane Abbott in a key government role.


I am trying to get the image out of my head


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313643


I can live with that


----------



## noushka05

FeelTheBern said:


> She does tell some whoppers, doesn't she? How can she think ethnicity has an impact on one's mothering abilities? As for the "black boys join gangs in state schools" claim, I don't know where she gets that from. Perhaps black schoolboys being recruited into gangs is an issue elsewhere-such as in some suburbs of Los Angeles-but this is the UK we're talking about. It's hard to imagine someone as idiotic as Diane Abbott in a key government role.


No one tells more whoppers then that utter moron Johnson. Although May & her cabinet might tell more than him - I'll have to fact check it


----------



## 1290423

FeelTheBern said:


> She does tell some whoppers, doesn't she? How can she think ethnicity has an impact on one's mothering abilities? As for the "black boys join gangs in state schools" claim, I don't know where she gets that from. Perhaps black schoolboys being recruited into gangs is an issue elsewhere-such as in some suburbs of Los Angeles-but this is the UK we're talking about. It's hard to imagine someone as idiotic as Diane Abbott in a key government role.


Dunno! Should be brilliant in a roll of security we could always use her to block the Channel Tunnel


----------



## MollySmith

stockwellcat said:


> I am trying to get the image out of my head


Will it replace the vision of Boris Johnson as Foreign Secretary....oh wait...!


----------



## FeelTheBern

stockwellcat said:


> I am trying to get the image out of my head


How you could fit an image of Abbott into your head, I don't know. Maybe Trump should ask her to go over to America-he could roll her onto the US/Mexico border and she could act as the "wall".


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Well *I'll be voting* to save our badgers & our foxes & our NHS & *to help the disabled *& the poor. I'll be voting against fracking & for renewables. For climate, environmental & social justice. I'll be voting against austerity & for hope over fear & misery. And for my human rights.


So, in effect, you will be voting Tory then Noush' 

The mentally disabled.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I am trying to get the image out of my head


The Spitting Image puppet will be brilliant


----------



## MollySmith

DT said:


> Dunno! Should be brilliant in a roll of security we could always use her to block the Channel Tunnel


How?


----------



## FeelTheBern

MollySmith said:


> How?


DT is making a reference to Abbott's size.


----------



## stockwellcat.

FeelTheBern said:


> How you could fit an image of Abbott into your head


  True


----------



## MollySmith

FeelTheBern said:


> DT is making a reference to Abbott's size.


And that has what bearing on politics?


----------



## noushka05

MollySmith said:


> You might want to take a quick read of this..I think I took out all the swears in the bit I quoted. Now I don't advocate forgetting stuff but honestly I had no idea what she has done and stupid is the last word I'd apply to Diana Abbott. In fact I'd say the reverse, we are all very stupid for misjudging - regardless of politics the woman has guts and bravery.
> 
> https://cookingonabootstrap.com/2017/06/07/we-need-to-talk-about-diane-abbott-now-explicit-content/
> 
> _WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT DIANE ABBOTT by Jack Monroe
> 
> Right one of us political writer people needs to do this and it looks like it's me. Grab a seat. I wanna talk about Diane.
> Diane was first elected as an MP in 1987, the year before I was born. She has been dedicated to serving the British public for longer than I have even been alive. Hold that thought. Understand it.
> Diane was the first black woman to have a seat in the House of Commons. She MADE HISTORY. Her father was welder, her mother a nurse. How many working class kids do we have in politics these days?
> Diane went to Cambridge University to study history. IN THE SEVENTIES. In 2017 only 15 black kids went to Cambridge. Sit down and listen.
> Diane worked for the Home Office in 1976. She was so smart they put her on a course to fast-track her career. (I'm just getting started.)
> Diane was Race Relations Officer at the National Council for Civil Liberties from 1978 to 1980. (Big **** job. Bet you couldn't do it.)
> Diane was a TV researcher and reporter from 1978 to 1985. I know a lot of those. They're fast thinkers, avid fact hounds, brilliant minds.
> Diane's political career began in 1982, on Westminster City Council. Then in 1987, I'll say it again, she became the first black female MP.
> 
> In 2008, her speech on civil liberties in the counterterrorism debate won Parliamentary Speech Of The Year in the Spectator awards.
> 
> That speech is here. Watch it, and then come back. https://t.co/qNMvtilMa1
> 
> She founded the Black Child initiative, to raise educational achievements among black kids. She shared her damn platform.
> 
> She's been the Shadow Minister for Public health, working tirelessly to tackle Tory cuts to children's services, maternity care, all of it.
> 
> In September 2011, the Telegraph called her 'one of Labours best frontbench performers'. The same Telegraph now monsters her for clicks.
> 
> Diane was one of 16 MPs to write to Miliband in 2015 asking him to commit to opposing further austerity measures. She did that for all of us. Diane was one of a tiny handful of MPs to defy the Labour whip and vote AGAINST Tory austerity cuts. Those cuts are KILLING people.
> 
> Diane has consistently voted against a reduction in spending on benefits. She has consistently voted for and campaigned for higher benefits over longer periods for people unable to work due to illness/disability.
> 
> In March she raised the issue of cuts to domestic violence services, in the House of Commons: "women and children are turned away daily".
> 
> Diane has campaigned to help unaccompanied migrant children travelling from Greece and Italy.
> 
> Diane is a skilled orator, a quick thinker, a glorious debater, a genuine public servant and a thoroughly decent woman. I mean reading through Hansard right now is a delight, some of her points and comebacks are glorious. And brilliant. And strong.
> 
> 31st Jan 2017 - demanding to know why ESOL funding was being cut while the immigration debate focused on the importance of integration…
> 
> She has spoken on Leveson, terrorism, education, poverty, welfare, illness, disability, refugees, child sexual abuse, pro-choice abortion. Her campaigns include legal aid, civil liberties, fighting crime, sickle cell thallasemia, public transport, improving education. She has given speeches at Harvard University, for Christ's sake. Have you? She has travelled to Kenya, China, Uganda, all over the world, representing the Government. Representing Britain. HAVE YOU?_


Wow that is an impressive record. Hats off to her. I hope she gets well soon,


----------



## stockwellcat.

MollySmith said:


> it replace the vision of Boris Johnson


Well you have a point


----------



## FeelTheBern

MollySmith said:


> And that has what bearing on politics?


I don't think it is supposed to be politically relevant. I guess DT is jokingly suggesting that Diane Abbott could block the tunnel to prevent illegal immigrants from entering the country that way.


----------



## 1290423

Time for me to be serious I have said some nasty things on this thread they are not said out of malice it's just the way I am! The way I approach life I'm happy go lucky, I think they're funny at the time just some may not see life as I do. I'm not a nasty person I care for everyone and every animal on this planet animals more than people if truth be known 10 it's nearly time to place that Cross in that very important box think I'm just going to look at it as a game of spot the ball shut my eyes and hope for the best but to all of you out there I hope things start to look up and life improves for all of us we are only here once we need to make the most of it so quit being serious and let's look on the bright side for once. That's me done here now I'm off to bed hope when I login tomorrow this threads closed.

Xxxxxxx
Until next time


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Stocking up on wine and nibbles tomorrow for tomorrow night to watch the results as they come in.


Hmm, @stockwellcat if you need a sponsor for your meetings get in touch :Hungover

I'll see if I can find one for the pair of us.



stockwellcat said:


> I really worry waking up on Friday and she is Home Secretary in waiting. It scares me because she hasn't got a clue what it entails being Home Secretary and she most certainly doesn't do her homework that was proven in her interviews.
> 
> I wish her a speedy recovery if she is genuinely unwell.


To be honest, and I don't wish her unwell, but she really is better off out of the political arena for everyone's sake. Whatever the reason.


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> So, in effect, you will be voting Tory then Noush'
> 
> The mentally disabled.


Not for a million ££££


----------



## MollySmith

FeelTheBern said:


> I don't think it is supposed to be politically relevant. I guess DT is jokingly suggesting that Diane Abbott could block the tunnel to prevent illegal immigrants from entering the country that way.


Well damm me, I'll put down the biscuit tin and find myself some brains, it's clearly the cause of my stupidly at missing @DT incredibly witty remark.


----------



## 1290423

MollySmith said:


> Well damm me, I'll put down the biscuit tin and find myself some brains, it's clearly the cause of my stupidly at missing @DT incredibly witty remark.


Well if you continue eating the biscuits we could always use you instead


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> And I am going to make no apologises and I do have plenty to say one of them being there is only so many times you can cry wolf.
> Now can someone remind me please which labour MP missed a very important vote recently due to, was it a migraine attack? And yes I do know, how disabling migraine can be, but lets not forget that MP was active on twitter at the exact time.


Oh dear DT I hope you are very sure of your facts to accuse someone of crying wolf. From what I understand she is coming to terms with a long standing illness - its possible those migraines or severe headaches were a symptom of her illness and account for her recent poor performances in debates.

Speaking to _HuffPost UK_, Shadow Secretary of State for International Trade Mr Gardiner said: "I have been told that Diane has been diagnosed with a serious, long-term condition.

"I hope people will simply say 'OK, fair dos, if that's the reason she's been under par, we should back off'."

Ms Abbott has suffered from a series of gaffes and difficult interviews in recent weeks, with the Conservatives increasingly focusing their campaigning on her performance.



Animallover26 said:


> Silly question alert!
> 
> How can I find out who won in my area after the election tomorrow?


I will post it on this thread and tag you in as you are in the same constituency as me  - don't hold your breath for anything other than a Tory win though.



stockwellcat said:


> I really worry waking up on Friday and she is Home Secretary in waiting. It scares me because she hasn't got a clue what it entails being Home Secretary and she most certainly doesn't do her homework that was proven in her interviews.
> 
> I wish her a speedy recovery if she is genuinely unwell.


Can't you just give the poor woman a break and accept she has stood aside and has a serious long term illness.



DT said:


> Dunno! Should be brilliant in a roll of security we could always use her to block the Channel Tunnel





FeelTheBern said:


> How you could fit an image of Abbott into your head, I don't know. Maybe Trump should ask her to go over to America-he could roll her onto the US/Mexico border and she could act as the "wall".


I find both of those statements really rather cruel.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Ok I wonder if this is right?









So we should vote in this circumstance....


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Have you ever actually listened to her talk? I have
> 
> Is this the person who wrote that article?
> http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle...hes-adding-politician-to-her-cv-a3522251.html


Aw she's great Jack Monroe. I loved it when she took that revolting Katie Hopkins to court & won! That was a good day


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Oh dear DT I hope you are very sure of your facts to accuse someone of crying wolf. From what I understand she is coming to terms with a long standing illness - its possible those migraines or severe headaches were a symptom of her illness and account for her recent poor performances in debates.
> 
> Speaking to _HuffPost UK_, Shadow Secretary of State for International Trade Mr Gardiner said: "I have been told that Diane has been diagnosed with a serious, long-term condition.
> 
> "I hope people will simply say 'OK, fair dos, if that's the reason she's been under par, we should back off'."
> 
> Ms Abbott has suffered from a series of gaffes and difficult interviews in recent weeks, with the Conservatives increasingly focusing their campaigning on her performance.
> 
> I will post it on this thread and tag you in as you are in the same constituency as me  - don't hold your breath for anything other than a Tory win though.
> 
> Can't you just give the poor woman a break and accept she has stood aside and has a serious long term illness.
> 
> I find both of those statements really rather cruel.


Well I said I was going to bed but unfortunately I read this post firstly there are lots of people dealing with illnesses illnesses that won't go away many of those people lose their jobs they don't have the luxury of a 78k salary + 35k expenses.
And secondly I am not cruel and never have been


----------



## 1290423

noushka05 said:


> Aw she's great Jack Monroe. I loved it when she took that revolting Katie Hopkins to court & won! That was a good day


Katie Hopkins for Prime Minister


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Well I said I was going to bed but unfortunately I read this post firstly there are lots of people dealing with illnesses illnesses that won't go away many of those people lose their jobs they don't have the luxury of a 78k salary + 35k expenses.
> And secondly I am not cruel and never have been


Oh I feel ill thinking about the Elections tomorrow.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Katie Hopkins for Prime Minister


That would be interesting. Katie Hopkins as PM.


----------



## FeelTheBern

DT said:


> And secondly I am not cruel and never have been


Nor am I, I just like poking fun at the situation.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Well I said I was going to bed but unfortunately I read this post firstly there are lots of people dealing with illnesses illnesses that won't go away many of those people lose their jobs they don't have the luxury of a 78k salary + 35k expenses.
> And secondly I am not cruel and never have been


I know that DT, picked up one or two things about dealing with illness over the years  It will be as much of a worry to her as it is to Joe Bloggs will will happen if she can't carry on doing her job - dare say she has a mortgage much like the rest of us. I didn't say YOU were cruel I said the comments were cruel - that is entirely different.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

FeelTheBern said:


> Nor am I, I just like poking fun at the situation.


I can laugh at poking fun at the situation but not at someone's size.


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I can laugh at poking fun at the situation but not at someone's size.


Where did I mention size? Might be I just saw a use for her!


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I can laugh at poking fun at the situation but not at someone's size.


Would it surprise you if I told you I was bigger than she was


----------



## FeelTheBern

DT said:


> Would it surprise you if I told you I was bigger than she was


I think RPH was also referring to my comment about Abbott.


----------



## 1290423

FeelTheBern said:


> I think RPH was also referring to my comment about Abbott.


Oh heck:Bear dont mind that rph dude as it happens, but come on admit it diane abbot is a liability and not deserving of that hefty salary! Seriously look at the amount of people she has pissed off , if they want value for money I can do a better job than that I can annoy twice as many in half the time


----------



## 1290423

FeelTheBern said:


> Nor am I, I just like poking fun at the situation.


Me to you can either laugh or you can cry I prefer to laugh


----------



## Colliebarmy

DT said:


> Would it surprise you if I told you I was bigger than she was


In what respect?....


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> That would be interesting. Katie Hopkins as PM.[/ reckon we would be on to winner there stockwell


----------



## Colliebarmy

rottiepointerhouse said:


> dare say she has a mortgage much like the rest of us.


her finances will be a well kept secret

and she cant add up anyway


----------



## 1290423

Colliebarmy said:


> In what respect?....


IQ


----------



## FeelTheBern

DT said:


> Me to you can either laugh or you can cry I prefer to laugh


Didn't you say, some time ago, that you were going to bed? Is the political banter of PFs preventing you from logging off and heading off to bed?


----------



## 1290423

FeelTheBern said:


> Didn't you say, some time ago, that you were going to bed? Is the political banter of PFs preventing you from logging off and heading off to bed?


I did but members keep rattling my cage


----------



## Colliebarmy

They reckon May keeps turning?

Abbott stated that Labour could oppose the bill to trigger Article 50 if Labour's amendments are rejected. She abstained from voting on the second reading of the Brexit Bill, after becoming ill hours before the vote, and later voted in favour at the third and final reading.


----------



## 1290423

FeelTheBern said:


> Nor am I, I just like poking fun at the situation.





Colliebarmy said:


> They reckon May keeps turning?
> 
> Abbott stated that Labour could oppose the bill to trigger Article 50 if Labour's amendments are rejected. She abstained from voting on the second reading of the Brexit Bill, after becoming ill hours before the vote, and later voted in favour at the third and final reading.


Yep that's what I said earlier
Fact is she's not worth 78k of anybody's money


----------



## FeelTheBern

DT said:


> Yep that's what I said earlier
> Factors she's not worth 78k of anybody's money


I poke fun at things I shouldn't-I laugh at things I shouldn't and I laugh at things no-one else finds funny. People need to learn this.


----------



## kimthecat




----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I know that DT, picked up one or two things about dealing with illness over the years  It will be as much of a worry to her as it is to Joe Bloggs will will happen if she can't carry on doing her job - dare say she has a mortgage much like the rest of us. I didn't say YOU were cruel I said the comments were cruel - that is entirely different.


Well you know what she gets paid really well and many of the comments against her are justified! For starters can we look at her 35k expenses which included taxi fares for her son to a private school ! Bearing in mind her position this is a Pauline she is a bad example of a labour MP she needs to be got rid of sooner rather than later.


----------



## 1290423

FeelTheBern said:


> I poke fun at things I shouldn't-I laugh at things I shouldn't and I laugh at things no-one else finds funny. People need to learn this.


A bit like me then were we separated at birth


----------



## stockwellcat.

*Which party will leave you better off?*

Watch the video on this link to find out...

Economics Editor Ed Conway explains which party will leave you better off.
http://news.sky.com/video/which-party-will-leave-you-better-off-10907364


----------



## noushka05

Tempted to vote Labour but not sure about Jeremy Corbyn?
Here's a handy guide to help you decide how to vote. (David Schneider)


----------



## FeelTheBern

@DT you think your IQ is higher than that of Diane Abbott? Well, I think it's safe to say that most single-celled organisms have a higher IQ than Abbott. I'm glad to hear that you aren't a single-celled organism.


----------



## 1290423

kimthecat said:


>


Sorry quoted in error xx


----------



## MollySmith

noushka05 said:


> Wow that is an impressive record. Hats off to her. I hope she gets well soon,


Yes I agree.

There are always some who think they know better of course, as is always the way of General Chat on PF.


----------



## 1290423

FeelTheBern said:


> I poke fun at things I shouldn't-I laugh at things I shouldn't and I laugh at things no-one else finds funny. People need to learn this.


Do you know what so do I no not many peoplewould believe this but noushka knows the truth my daughter got married the end of April it was a really big wedding the wedding cake was here waiting for me to take it down the tiers were separate on the table to cut a long story short we had a bit of a problem Millie ate one of the tierss all I could do was laugh I was absolutely hysterical I couldn't stop laughing


----------



## kimthecat

Liking things doesn't mean you will get them . Schnieder forgot to put Magic money tree under things you're not sure about .

Deluded !


----------



## kimthecat

DT said:


> Do you know what so do I no not many people would believe this but noushka knows the truth my daughter got married the end of April it was a really big wedding the wedding cake was here waiting for me to take it down the tiers were separate on the table to cut a long story short we had a bit of a problem Millie ate one of the tierss all I could do was laugh I was absolutely hysterical I couldn't stop laughing


 :Hilarious


----------



## 1290423

MollySmith said:


> Yes I agree.
> 
> There are always some who think they know better of course, as is always the way of General Chat on PF.


Yep! Nothing changes there im afraid


----------



## 1290423

kimthecat said:


> :Hilarious


Quoted you in error sorry xxx noushka and I were laughing like mad about it, it wasn't a simple sponge it was a big expensive wedding cake the poor girl had to go home and make one of the tiersrs overnight


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> Magic money tree


I started growing one but people keep pinching the £5, £10, £20 and £50 notes


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I started growing one but people keep pinching the £5, £10, £20 and £50 notes
> View attachment 313689


----------



## 1290423

Any chance of getting a cutting please at least a packet of seeds


----------



## FeelTheBern

stockwellcat said:


> I started growing one but people keep pinching the £5, £10, £20 and £50 notes
> View attachment 313689


People must have a field day in Autumn-it'll all fall right off and be on the ground, ready for the taking!


----------



## MollySmith

kimthecat said:


>


thank you I've shared - something on this thread that is useful


----------



## kimthecat

MollySmith said:


> thank you I've shared - something on this thread that is useful


I saw it on Twitter. i know none of us would leave our dogs tied up outside , i didn't know we could take our dogs inside though.


----------



## stockwellcat.

FeelTheBern said:


> People must have a field day in Autumn-it'll all fall right off and be on the ground, ready for the taking!


Yeah I seem to be a skint during the Autumn and Winter periods


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Any chance of getting a cutting please


Yeah sure but Corbyn wants to have the tree though from Friday onwards


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> I saw it on Twitter. i know none of us would leave our dogs tied up outside , i didn't know we could take our dogs inside though.


Do people actually take there dogs to the polling stations?


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> Liking things doesn't mean you will get them . Schnieder forgot to out Magic money tree under things you're not sure about .
> 
> Deluded !


Deluded? Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz doesnt think so - https://www.theguardian.com/comment...eoliberalism-reagan-thatcher?CMP=share_btn_tw

Neither do this impressive list of signatories - https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jun/03/the-big-issue-labour-manifesto-what-economy-needs

Nor does Ann Pettifor, Director of Policy Research in macroeconomics

. But what do they know, hey


----------



## FeelTheBern

stockwellcat said:


> Do people actually take there dogs to the polling stations?


No, but people might take *their *dogs to polling stations.


----------



## noushka05

Another deluded soul voting labour.
#


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> Do people actually take there dogs to the polling stations?


Our polling station is the sports club in the playing fields. Elles goes there quite often.


----------



## noushka05

Private Eye nails it! lol


----------



## Elles

I'm voting Labour, because they will be wonderful for everyone, their policies have been fully costed and they always keep their promises and stick to their manifesto. Oh, no one said that? You're voting Labour, because the conservatives are even worse? Gotcha Mr Hawking.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well with just under 8 hours and 40 minutes until polling booths open I am off to bed.


----------



## Elles

I do like the first sentence of the private eye article. :Hilarious


----------



## 1290423

I'm in bed now! Im laid here playing!
Dip dip dip my blue ship.....


----------



## Elles

http://www.progressivealliance.org.uk/


----------



## noushka05

Dave's on a roll.
*David Schneider*‏Verified [email protected]*davidschneider* 5h5 hours ago

Details emerge of what went through Theresa May's mind when asked what she'd done that was naughty.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## noushka05

Judge us on our record they say. OK then.


----------



## kimthecat

FeelTheBern said:


> No, but people might take *their *dogs to polling stations.


 Stockwell cat was referring to a rare breed called There so he is corrected to say There dogs , from the Isle of There :Joyful


----------



## 1290423

But I'm bored wi


Elles said:


> http://www.progressivealliance.org.uk/


But the cons have a majority of 18474 here, I only have the one vote, ok I can steal the other half so but I'm still 18472 short, suggestions please?


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> But I'm bored wi
> 
> But the cons have a majority of 18474 here, I only have the one vote, ok I can steal the other half so but I'm still 18472 short, suggestions please?


I dunno, didn't it tell you who to vote for?


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> I dunno, didn't it tell you who to vote for?


Nope, it said
We recommend that you vote for the progressive party of your choice, and campaign in a nearby target seat. About this recommendat


----------



## Pawscrossed

Good grief this thread sunk to new depths of hopeless behaviour this evening. Diane Abbot is fat and stupid? I've seen more intelligence in a playground of 4 year olds. Mental health and I would possibly assume that this would be the case but stand corrected if not, immeasurable stress, a loss or death .. these affect anyone and everyone and maybe the cause of Diane Abott stepping down and not at all unreasonable, we'd do the same in any job and more fools you if you've never worked in a company where directors on a lot more money that an MP do far little work.. If I had read the uneducated clap trap of trolling on this thread and never mind Twitter that has been directed on this, I think I'd want to step off the planet too. I imagine anywhere where idiot trolllers and arrogant know it alls don't exist is a far brighter place. And no, I am not a Labour voter.


----------



## Jesthar

stockwellcat said:


> Do people actually take there dogs to the polling stations?





FeelTheBern said:


> No, but people might take *their *dogs to polling stations.


I've taken one of my cats to the polling station the last twice I've voted


----------



## kimthecat

Jesthar said:


> I've taken one of my cats to the polling station the last twice I've voted


Seriously ?


----------



## Jesthar

kimthecat said:


> Seriously ?


Yup, seriously!  Harness and carry pouch. She's a bit people shy, so it's a good way of socialising her occasionally


----------



## kimthecat

@Jesthar I'm impressed. Did she tell you who to vote for ? :Hilarious


----------



## Jesthar

kimthecat said:


> @Jesthar I'm impressed. Did she tell you who to vote for ? :Hilarious


Nearly let her pick last time! Only rule would have been the same as this time "Any vote but Tory"


----------



## Jesthar

OK, people. This statement comes from a very, very good doctor I know and trust: 

"I am not allied with any political party. However, what I say here is 100% fact:

Since the end of the coalition government, working in the NHS has got progressively worse for staff. Patient care has been hit hard. These are your children.

We are on our knees.

Vote with care."


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## stockwellcat.

Exciting.

My polling station opens in 40 minutes


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> Stockwell cat was referring to a rare breed called There so he is corrected to say There dogs , from the Isle of There :Joyful


Yep they are a very popular breed around here the There Dogs :Hilarious:Joyful:Hilarious


----------



## stockwellcat.




----------



## stockwellcat.




----------



## stockwellcat.

Last night's closing polls if anyone is interested.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Another deluded soul voting labour.
> #


Do you know what, I for one very much doubt Mr Hawking posted that online. Has there been anything on TV or radio with him actually speaking about how he's voting? Or did someone just make that up?

Oh wait, it's a picture and some words on the internet, must be true.

Disclaimer
He might well have said how he's voting, but a stock photo and some words doesn't make it so.

Edit
Just had a quick Google, see it's reported in the papers. The really bad news for Mr Corbyn though is Russell Brand had also pledged his support, where's all the memes about that :Hilarious


----------



## Elles

Dr Pepper said:


> Do you know what, I for one very much doubt Mr Hawking posted that online. Has there been anything on TV or radio with him actually speaking about how he's voting? Or did someone just make that up?
> 
> Oh wait, it's a picture and some words on the internet, must be true.
> 
> Disclaimer
> He might well have said how he's voting, but a stock photo and some words doesn't make it so.


It's all over the press. Here's one.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...iously-branding-jeremy-corbyn-a-a3557631.html


----------



## Dr Pepper

Elles said:


> It's all over the press. Here's one.
> 
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...iously-branding-jeremy-corbyn-a-a3557631.html


Yes, just did a quick edit to my post


----------



## stockwellcat.

Very large turn out at my local polling station. Queue down the street when I arrived, when I left people still queueing. I have Voted. Now let's wait and see what the results are.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Do you know what, I for one very much doubt Mr Hawking posted that online. Has there been anything on TV or radio with him actually speaking about how he's voting? Or did someone just make that up?
> 
> Oh wait, it's a picture and some words on the internet, must be true.
> 
> Disclaimer
> He might well have said how he's voting, but a stock photo and some words doesn't make it so.
> 
> Edit
> Just had a quick Google, see it's reported in the papers. The really bad news for Mr Corbyn though is Russell Brand had also pledged his support, where's all the memes about that :Hilarious


Another of the worlds brightest minds, Noam Chomsky, also backs Corby, because the tories neoliberalism not only destroys society it is destroying the living planet. This stunning list of signatories also back Corbyn - https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jun/03/the-big-issue-labour-manifesto-what-economy-needs. Everyone who cares about social justice & doesn't want a scorched earth will vote labour (or vote tactically to block the tories), so its natural people with a social & environmental conscience or love animals, like Russell Brand, would throw their weight behind labour. Labour is our ONLY hope for people who care about the things that really matter and the future of our democracy.


----------



## Zaros

*END TORY TREACHERY. VOTE LABOUR 
*
*OR ANY OTHER PARTY, BUT DEFINITELY NOT THE THIEVING TORIES. *​


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> Very large turn out at my local polling station. Queue down the street when I arrived, when I left people still queueing. I have Voted. Now let's wait and see what the results are.


This is why I'm going to wait until after about 10:00, so all the workers and mums can get in there first. Although my station is next door, so I just need to peek over the fence to see how it's doing


----------



## Honeys mum

stockwellcat said:


> . I have Voted. Now let's wait and see what the results are.


 Well done SW .But you forgot to tell us who .?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Honeys mum said:


> Well done SW .But you forgot to tell us who .?


Well it wasn't Conservatives or UKIP or Greens or Lib Dems or the Pirate Party or the Looney Party.


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> *END TORY TREACHERY. VOTE LABOUR
> *
> *OR ANY OTHER PARTY, BUT DEFINITELY NOT THE THIEVING TORIES. *​


*Hear,** flippin, **Hear**!





































*


----------



## stockwellcat.

Ok I'll come clean I voted:









I am not happy with the fact Diane Abbott will be Home Secretary or that Corbyn wants to spend, spend, spend but I thought do I want Conservatives in for the next 5 years? No.

Plus I have a bet on Corbyn winning with a nice return if he wins.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> *Hear,** flippin, **Hear**!
> 
> View attachment 313723
> 
> 
> View attachment 313724
> 
> 
> View attachment 313725
> 
> 
> View attachment 313726
> 
> *


_Another term under Tory rule will be disastrous for the entire country and its not so well off people.
I should know, I'm not half the man I used to be before I met her......................................................................._Philip May.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> *Hear,** flippin, **Hear**!
> 
> View attachment 313723
> 
> 
> View attachment 313724
> 
> 
> View attachment 313725
> 
> 
> View attachment 313726
> 
> *


Thanks for deciding to vote Labour instead of Green Party


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Ok I'll come clean I voted Labour.
> 
> I am not happy with the fact Diane Abbott will be Home Secretary or that Corbyn wants to spend, spend, spend but I thought do I want Conservatives in for the next 5 years? No.


Nice one SWC  But please see what all those academics are saying about Labours anti-austerity economy - we have to spend to grow the economy. Look at the state we've in after 7 years of austerity. Not that labour has a cat in hells chance of getting in like. The tories & their mates in the media have destroyed any hope of that with their propaganda.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Thanks for deciding to vote Labour instead of Green Party


You're welcome I had to put my party allegiance aside for the good of the country


----------



## Calvine

rona said:


> Have you ever actually listened to her talk? I have


No: Never heard of her before yesterday.


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> _Another term under Tory rule will be disastrous for the entire country and its not so well off people.
> I should know, I'm not half the man I used to be before I met her......................................................................._Philip May.


LOL

I think they're a lovely couple myself.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Nice one SWC  But please see what all those academics are saying about Labours anti-austerity economy - we have to spend to grow the economy. Look at the state we've in after 7 years of austerity. Not that labour has a cat in hells chance of getting in like. The tories & their mates in the media have destroyed any hope of that with their propaganda.
> 
> View attachment 313731


Well I look at it this way Noush, Tony Blair didn't think he'd win the elections in 1997 but did. So don't discount things yet. Jeremy Corbyn might stand a chance yet.

Tony Blair was shocked when he won the elections because even he didn't think he'd win.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Green. Or Red. Or Yellow.


But leave Blue for Chelsea.



Who would not want to see Diane talking to Trump?


And foxes need our vote!!!;



Vote for foxes, for badgers, and students.

Else will become extinct.


I can't stand five years of "BrexitisBrexit, strongandstable"....


----------



## noushka05

Wise words from George Monbiot -
_
Our ancestors fought and died for the right to vote. Honour them by going to the polls today. The world belongs to those who turn up.

Danger we face is that the billionaires who own the press, by bombarding people with lies, will win this election for May. Don't let them.
Their interests are the polar opposite of yours. Most of them don't even live in this country_


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> Katie Hopkins for Prime Minister


Haha...and my mother said_ I_ had a warped sense of humour (stretching out the word to waaaaaaarped to get the point home).


----------



## noushka05

Imagine if the Mail told the truth instead of lies today...


----------



## Calvine

FeelTheBern said:


> @DT you think your IQ is higher than that of Diane Abbott? Well, I think it's safe to say that most single-celled organisms have a higher IQ than Abbott. I'm glad to hear that you aren't a single-celled organism.


To give credit where it's due, I believe she has a degree from Cambridge?


----------



## noushka05

.https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/06/vote-jeremy-corbyn-labour-leader-policies


----------



## Calvine

MollySmith said:


> There are always some who think they know better of course, as is always the way of General Chat on PF.


You're telling me; and we all know who they are.


----------



## Lurcherlad

stockwellcat said:


> Oh I feel ill thinking about the Elections tomorrow.


I don't feel ill, but just :Bored:Meh

And a bit :Nailbiting

It will be either a Tory or Labour Government this time tomorrow.

Neither fill me with hope or joy tbh 

But I don't believe that either Party wants to bring the Country to it's knees.

As a woman I feel very strongly that I must vote, however, so I shall be voting Green and at least my conscience will be clear.

Fingers crossed for the future ........


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> Do people actually take there dogs to the polling stations?


They do where I live as the polling station is near to a park popular with dog walkers (two birds [or dogs] with one stone).


----------



## noushka05




----------



## noushka05




----------



## rona

kimthecat said:


>





MollySmith said:


> thank you I've shared - something on this thread that is useful





kimthecat said:


> I saw it on Twitter. i know none of us would leave our dogs tied up outside , i didn't know we could take our dogs inside though.


You can't take them in all of them, in a school for instance. My council actually says you can take your children and your dog but dogs must be left outside


----------



## noushka05

More magic money trees.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Lurcherlad said:


> I don't feel ill, but just :Bored:Meh
> 
> And a bit :Nailbiting
> 
> It will be either a Tory or Labour Government this time tomorrow.
> 
> Neither fill me with hope or joy tbh
> 
> But I don't believe that either Party wants to bring the Country to it's knees.
> 
> As a woman I feel very strongly that I must vote, however, so I shall be voting Green and at least my conscience will be clear.
> 
> Fingers crossed for the future ........


Neither of the Tory or Labour party fill me with joy but you're right one of them will be in power tomorrow.


----------



## noushka05

*When did you last vote for hope?





*


----------



## rona

My my, someones getting desperate


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> I am not happy with the fact Diane Abbott will be Home Secretary or that Corbyn wants to spend, spend, spend


I don't think Diane Abbott will be well enough for ministerial office so that's your first fear allayed. I'll be voting Labour as will my son who earns well over £100k. It's a reflection of how the Conservatives have lost us rather than any love of Corbyn.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> My my, someones getting desperate


Oh I'm in no doubt the tories are going to sweep back in with a landslide Rona. I'm just enjoying this final few hours before hope dies


----------



## MilleD

Calvine said:


> They do where I live as the polling station is near to a park popular with dog walkers (two birds [or dogs] with one stone).


Mine's at the local cricket club and I think people can take their dogs there.


----------



## MilleD

havoc said:


> I don't think Diane Abbott will be well enough for ministerial office so that's your first fear allayed. I'll be voting Labour as will my son who earns well over £100k. It's a reflection of how the Conservatives have lost us rather than any love of Corbyn.


They knackered themselves with me putting the hunting ban thing in the manifesto. I know they thought at the time it was a done deal so didn't have to bribe any voters, but I think that may have backfired.


----------



## JANICE199

noushka05 said:


> Oh I'm in no doubt the tories are going to sweep back in with a landslide Rona. I'm just enjoying this final few hours before hope dies


*Oh please don't say that. My first time voting and i want JC to be our new prime minister.*


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> Another of the worlds brightest minds, Noam Chomsky, also backs Corby, because the tories neoliberalism not only destroys society it is destroying the living planet. This stunning list of signatories also back Corbyn - https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jun/03/the-big-issue-labour-manifesto-what-economy-needs. Everyone who cares about social justice & doesn't want a scorched earth will vote labour (or vote tactically to block the tories), so its natural people with a social & environmental conscience or love animals, like Russell Brand, would throw their weight behind labour. Labour is our ONLY hope for people who care about the things that really matter and the future of our democracy.


Never heard of her.

I have heard of Russell Brand though.


----------



## stockwellcat.

havoc said:


> I don't think Diane Abbott will be well enough for ministerial office so that's your first fear allayed. I'll be voting Labour as will my son who earns well over £100k. It's a reflection of how the Conservatives have lost us rather than any love of Corbyn.


If Corbyn replaces Diane Abbott he should let Chuka Umunna have her position or at least a position back on the front bench.


----------



## rona

Promising utopia is easy, preventing dystopia is a little more difficult. 

Corbyns world is dream, I hope it doesn't turn into the nightmare I predict.

I'm sure he will win


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> Promising utopia is easy, preventing dystopia is a little more difficult.
> 
> Corbyns world is dream, I hope it doesn't turn into the nightmare I predict.
> 
> I'm sure he will win


Well all you heard outside my polling station this morning was Labour being muttered. My area is a Labour strong hold but may fall to Lib Dems.

A recent poll on yougov showed that the majority of Londoners will vote Labour.










London has a history of backing Labour:


----------



## Bisbow

MilleD said:


> They knackered themselves with me putting the hunting ban thing in the manifesto. I know they thought at the time it was a done deal so didn't have to bribe any voters, but I think that may have backfired.


If people are voting labour just because of the hunting ban they obviously think more of foxes than their fellow people because people will suffer more under JC's rule than any fox would
Hunting will never be brought back


----------



## JANICE199

rona said:


> Promising utopia is easy, preventing dystopia is a little more difficult.
> 
> Corbyns world is dream, I hope it doesn't turn into the nightmare I predict.
> 
> I'm sure he will win


*Why a dream? After the 2nd world war this country rebuilt itself, people had a better standard of living, ect ect. So why do you think we cannot do it again?*


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Oh I'm in no doubt the tories are going to sweep back in with a landslide


SHAME!...SHAME!...SHAME!...Ting-a-ling...SHAME!...SHAME!...SHAME! Ting-a-ling.


----------



## rona

JANICE199 said:


> *Why a dream? After the 2nd world war this country rebuilt itself, people had a better standard of living, ect ect. So why do you think we cannot do it again?*


You don't think the politicians then had a very different mindset to Corbyn? They certainly wouldn't have been courting terrorists, not after what they'd just been through


----------



## Goblin

rona said:


> Promising utopia is easy, preventing dystopia is a little more difficult.
> 
> Corbyns world is dream, I hope it doesn't turn into the nightmare I predict.
> 
> I'm sure he will win


You could look at places like norway or australia to show that a caring society, one where money isn't the be all and end all can succeed and improve the standard of life for the majority, not the minority.


----------



## Zaros

Bisbow said:


> *If people are voting labour just because of the hunting ban they obviously think more of foxes than their fellow people*


If people are voting Tory, they obviously think more of themselves than they do their fellow people.....


----------



## JANICE199

rona said:


> You don't think the politicians then had a very different mindset to Corbyn? They certainly wouldn't have been courting terrorists, not after what they'd just been through


*Haha you avoided the question rona. Governments have always courted with terrorists and still do. But back to my question, do you not believe this country can be rebuilt again?*


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> Very large turn out at my local polling station. Queue down the street when I arrived, when I left people still queueing. I have Voted. Now let's wait and see what the results are.


Really! crikey I don`t think I have ever seen a queue at a polling station. On election days I normally attend two polling stations, one is my parents, the other of course is my own, there is never more than one or two voters in there at anytime of the day. Everyone I seem to speak to says they are not bothering with this election but then I read there has been an uptake in people registering to vote, we`ll see later what the turn out is, could be quite high maybe?


----------



## noushka05

JANICE199 said:


> *Oh please don't say that. My first time voting and i want JC to be our new prime minister.*


Nice one Jan! I'm praying I'm wrong But we've been bombarded with anti-corbyn & anti labour propaganda by the tories & in the media. We've now had 5 letters & leaflets addressed to us personally from the Conservatives - all of them scaremongering & slandering labour. Even in my labour stronghold a lot of people have fallen for the lies. Lets just hope the young'uns turn out their droves. My lads & their mates are all geared up - & they're all voting Labour



Dr Pepper said:


> Never heard of *her.*
> 
> I have heard of Russell Brand though.


Why does that not surprise me


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Promising utopia is easy, preventing dystopia is a little more difficult.
> 
> Corbyns world is dream, I hope it doesn't turn into the nightmare I predict.
> 
> I'm sure he will win


Don't fall for the scaremongering Rona.

I think these academics are far better placed to evaluate then either you or I  https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jun/03/the-big-issue-labour-manifesto-what-economy-needs

& lets not forget Hawking & Chomsky, two of the brightest minds on the planet. We should all be praying Labour wins, the alternative is truly terrifying.


----------



## Dr Pepper

JANICE199 said:


> *Haha you avoided the question rona. Governments have always courted with terrorists and still do. But back to my question, do you not believe this country can be rebuilt again?*


What's to be rebuilt, we're actually doing ok and if you think today's lifestyle is anything like that post WW2 you need to speak to a few people who were there.


----------



## noushka05

JANICE199 said:


> *Why a dream? After the 2nd world war this country rebuilt itself, people had a better standard of living, ect ect. So why do you think we cannot do it again?*


I'm starting to think Rona must be secret billionaire


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> I'm sure he will win


I honestly don't think so rona.


----------



## JANICE199

Dr Pepper said:


> What's to be rebuilt, we're actually doing ok and if you think today's lifestyle is anything like that post WW2 you need to speak to a few people who were there.


*What's to rebuild? I am shocked you even ask such a question. As for asking people that were there, haha, i come from a family of nine, was born in 1950, and yes rationing was still in place. Yes this country was better then than it is now.*


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> SHAME!...SHAME!...SHAME!...Ting-a-ling...SHAME!...SHAME!...SHAME! Ting-a-ling.






Zaros said:


> If people are voting Tory, they obviously think more of themselves than they do their fellow people.....


Which leads nicely back to this Irvine Walsh quote.

_When you're not doing so well, vote for a better life for yourself.
If you are doing quite nicely, vote for a better life for others_.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

noushka05 said:


> Nice one Jan! I'm praying I'm wrong But we've been bombarded with anti-corbyn & anti labour propaganda by the tories & in the media. We've now had 5 letters & leaflets addressed to us personally from the Conservatives - all of them scaremongering & slandering labour. Even in my labour stronghold a lot of people have fallen for the lies. Lets just hope the young'uns turn out their droves. My lads & their mates are all geared up - & they're all voting Labour
> 
> Why does that not surprise me


We in this last week have leaflets from our Tory incumbent MP, all anti-Corbyn, which must show they actually think Labour are a threat here for the first time ever. I think the Tories will win without a doubt but remaining hopeful She won`t get the landslide she expected to get when she called this election


----------



## Bisbow

Zaros said:


> If people are voting Tory, they obviously think more of themselves than they do their fellow people.....


Don't be silly
Voting for JC will put us AII of us in jeopardy, ALL of us, That's what I am thinking of, whatever side they voted for


----------



## samuelsmiles

kimthecat said:


> I'll bet he deny meeting the Daleks too!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Haha - a Labour Dalek coalition of chaos. That should get us a good deal from Brexit.


Haha - a Labour Dalek coalition of chaos. That should get us a good deal from Brexit.


----------



## Goblin

Bisbow said:


> Don't be silly
> Voting for JC will put us AII of us in jeopardy, ALL of us, That's what I am thinking of, whatever side they voted for


So tell me @Bisbow.. why is it that May cannot use her record for campaigning and has had to rely on lies and smear? Why is it that she has only really been seen in "safe" environments where random people cannot ask questions? Why is it that many tory candidates avoided attending hustings?


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> If people are voting Tory, they obviously think more of themselves than they do their fellow people.....


That's not true.



JANICE199 said:


> *What's to rebuild? I am shocked you even ask such a question. As for asking people that were there, haha, i come from a family of nine, was born in 1950, and yes rationing was still in place. Yes this country was better then than it is now.*


Neither is that. What was better, what do you want from the 50's today? I think you mistake better for different. Just got starters today we have better health care, less poverty and vastly improved working conditions.


----------



## noushka05

3dogs2cats said:


> We in this last week have leaflets from our Tory incumbent MP, all anti-Corbyn, which must show they actually think Labour are a threat here for the first time ever. I think the Tories will win without a doubt but remaining hopeful She won`t get the landslide she expected to get when she called this election


They are spending millions on propaganda. They are buying this election. As you say, lets just hope they don't get the landslide they were certain they would get.



Bisbow said:


> Don't be silly
> Voting for JC will put us AII of us in jeopardy, ALL of us, That's what I am thinking of, whatever side they voted for


I don't know how you work that out


----------



## JANICE199

Dr Pepper said:


> That's not true.
> 
> Neither is that. What was better, what do you want from the 50's today? I think you mistake better for different. Just got starters today we have better health care, less poverty and vastly improved working conditions.


*What i want, is for my grandchildren and their children to have the opportunities i had. Housing wasn't a issue, school meals were proper school meals, jobs you could leave one and walk into another, The list is endless.*


----------



## JANICE199

*Off to cast my vote *


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Which leads nicely back to this Irvine Walsh quote.
> _When you're not doing so well, vote for a better life for yourself.
> If you are doing quite nicely, vote for a better life for others_.


A united kingdom means the people agree and accept that they all have to work together for a more prosperous future.
A nation working for or towards unity has little need of those with the attitude of, 'Well, I don't have to because I don't need to'

Today is the day of judgement, and I, for one, hope and pray that righteousness and justice are on the side of the beaten down and the down trodden.



Bisbow said:


> Don't be silly
> *Voting for JC *will put us AII of us in jeopardy, ALL of us, That's what I am thinking of, whatever side they voted for


Have you ever thought of the significance behind those initials, Bizzy?

Perhaps Jeremy is the second coming.

The lord be praised!:Angelic


----------



## Dr Pepper

JANICE199 said:


> *What i want, is for my grandchildren and their children to have the opportunities i had. Housing wasn't a issue, school meals were proper school meals, jobs you could leave one and walk into another, The list is endless.*


Ah I see, you bought into Mr Corbyn's utopia. Good luck with that.
No go on, let's have some more of that endless list that could apply today.


----------



## Bisbow

Zaros said:


> A
> 
> Have you ever thought of the significance behind those initials, Bizzy?
> 
> Perhaps Jeremy is the second coming.
> 
> The lord be praised!:Angelic


I think it was noush who poo-pooed that idea when I suggested it


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Very large turn out at my local polling station. Queue down the street when I arrived, when I left people still queueing. I have Voted. Now let's wait and see what the results are.


Its all quiet on the western front here. The polling station is in at the school so I assume that parents drop their kids off and then vote. i would expect it to be very busy this evening .


----------



## Zaros

Bisbow said:


> I think it was noush who poo-pooed that idea when I suggested it


@noushka05
*BLASPHEMER!*








​


----------



## kimthecat

Zaros said:


> SHAME!...SHAME!...SHAME!...Ting-a-ling...SHAME!...SHAME!...SHAME! Ting-a-ling.



Shame shame shame hey shame on you
If you can't dance too
I say shame shame shame
Shame shame shame
Shame shame on you
If you can't dance too


----------



## Zaros

kimthecat said:


> Shame shame shame hey shame on you
> If you can't dance too
> I say shame shame shame
> Shame shame shame
> Shame shame on you
> If you can't dance too


Shirley keeps some strange company....


----------



## Calvine

Dr Pepper said:


> I have heard of Russell Brand though.


God yes: he's a luvvie.


----------



## Elles

Neither May nor Corbyn are that great, but it's not about them. I think we'll all be worse off under a Labour government. It's never worked. It sounds great, everyone being rich, no one suffering, no queues for anything and everything is free. It doesn't work like that. People who work end up paying for everything, never able to progress and those who don't work still moan. If you don't work for whatever reason, you need a country that will give you the basics, not more than the workers. We need an efficient NHS, not one that has more and more money thrown at it. We need fair taxation, that encourages growth without giving to the greedy. We're not going to get any of it with either party.

The current conservative government is so bad, people who know labour utopia doesn't work are gritting their teeth and voting labour anyway. I hope enough do to prevent a Tory landslide, but not so many Labour get one. 

I did as I said and voted Green. 

It may be that the recent propaganda causes voters who wouldn't bother to vote to go out and vote after all. We'll find out tomorrow.


----------



## kimthecat

Goblin said:


> You could look at places like norway or australia to show that a caring society, one where money isn't the be all and end all can succeed and improve the standard of life for the majority, not the minority.


australia ? I dont think so ! do you mean Austria ?


----------



## Lurcherlad

Oh and I will go after work.

DS, aged 20 says "there's no point"


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> God yes: he's a luvvie.


he's an exhibitionist . He took all his clothes off on the top of a bus rool


----------



## kimthecat

JANICE199 said:


> *What i want, is for my grandchildren and their children to have the opportunities i had. Housing wasn't a issue, *


i think housing was an issue , people were still living in prefabs here . slum housing allover the country .
wages were poor too.


----------



## kimthecat

Zaros said:


> Shirley keeps some strange company....


:Hilarious i think that's you in the white suit . What would Mrs Zee say


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Last night's closing polls if anyone is interested.
> View attachment 313721


Even if Labour don't win which I very much doubt they will I think they can be proud of their campaign and the amount of ground they have gained back from the Conservatives. We shouldn't forget May and her team had time to plan their campaign and manifesto before declaring their intentions - who knows how long they were working on it whereas the other parties were very much caught on the hop, not expecting another election until 2020, in that short time since she announced it they have had to pull together a manifesto and organise their campaigns.


----------



## Calvine

JANICE199 said:


> *What i want, is for my grandchildren and their children to have the opportunities i had. Housing wasn't a issue, school meals were proper school meals, jobs you could leave one and walk into another, The list is endless.*


A lot of women didn't work then, it was not expected of them and 'child minding' was unheard of; plus today computers can do the work of several people which cuts down the number of jobs available..


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> he's an exhibitionist . He took all his clothes off on the top of a bus rool


How frightful. You mean on the top deck or was the daft bugggger on the roof (I wouldn't put anything past him)?:Vomit


----------



## kimthecat

samuelsmiles said:


> Haha - a Labour Dalek coalition of chaos. That should get us a good deal from Brexit.




That would work , give us a good deal or EXTERMINATE , EXTERMINATE !


----------



## Dr Pepper

Calvine said:


> God yes: he's a luvvie.


Not exactly someone who's support you would seek!



kimthecat said:


> i think housing was an issue , people were still living in prefabs here . slum housing allover the country .
> wages were poor too.


To be fair we all think the decade we grew up in was the best, simply because we generally didn't have the worries of having to provide. For me I thought the 70's were great, pretty sure adults at the time would disagree.


----------



## rona

JANICE199 said:


> *Haha you avoided the question rona. Governments have always courted with terrorists and still do. But back to my question, do you not believe this country can be rebuilt again?*


After we are out of the EU......most certainly, but we are in such a good position to do so because of the safety net we have been given over the last 6 years


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> If people are voting labour just because of the hunting ban they obviously think more of foxes than their fellow people because people will suffer more under JC's rule than any fox would
> Hunting will never be brought back


:Rage:Rage Nothing much makes me angry but that comment does. People who care about animals care about humans too whereas I find most people who can sit aloft a horse and run a pack of hounds after one small wild creature are heartless b---stards. If you care, you care, I give just as much to human charities as I do to animal ones and would help a person in need just as much as I would an animal in need. I find that a deeply ignorant and insulting statement.


----------



## rona

JANICE199 said:


> *.Yes this country was better then than it is now.*


Yes it was but that cannot be revisited unfortunately 

Living in the past like Corbyn helps no one.


----------



## stockwellcat.

12 hours time and the results will start coming in.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Even if Labour don't win which I very much doubt they will I think they can be proud of their campaign and the amount of ground they have gained back from the Conservatives. We shouldn't forget May and her team had time to plan their campaign and manifesto before declaring their intentions - who knows how long they were working on it whereas the other parties were very much caught on the hop, not expecting another election until 2020, in that short time since she announced it they have had to pull together a manifesto and organise their campaigns.


Well Labours Manifesto was ten times better than the Conservatives. I found the Conservatives manifesto hard to read and didn't like the layout. Well done Labour for pulling together a very good manifesto so quickly.


----------



## Elles

rottiepointerhouse said:


> :Rage:Rage Nothing much makes me angry but that comment does. People who care about animals care about humans too whereas I find most people who can sit aloft a horse and run a pack of hounds after one small wild creature are heartless b---stards. If you care, you care, I give just as much to human charities as I do to animal ones and would help a person in need just as much as I would an animal in need. I find that a deeply ignorant and insulting statement.


Bisbow said 'if people'. Clearly you're not, so you're not one of the ifs.

Just like I read 'most' in your post, which is good because I'd have to argue if you said 'all'.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> 12 hours time and the results will start coming in.


You can't wait, can you?


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> How frightful. You mean on the top deck or was the daft bugggger on the roof (I wouldn't put anything past him)?:Vomit


I think it was an open took bus and he was giving a speech at some demo.

Some other of his shocking moments , Alert : not for sensitive souls ! It doesnt have the bus photo but one of him being arrested for indecent exposure in Trafalgar sq at a rally . 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/russell-brands-top-10-most-352295


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> Bisbow said 'if people'. Clearly you're not, so you're not one of the ifs.
> 
> Just like I read 'most' in your post, which is good because I'd have to argue if you said 'all'.


I'm voting Lib Dem because of the hunting ban because they are the only option to defeat the Tory in this seat. If the best option was Labour I would be voting for them - because of the hunting ban. That does not mean I think more of foxes than my fellow humans, as it also happens I think the Tory manifesto is the worst option for my fellow humans.


----------



## kimthecat

Dr Pepper said:


> To be fair we all think the decade we grew up in was the best, simply because we generally didn't have the worries of having to provide. For me I thought the 70's were great, pretty sure adults at the time would disagree.


 That's true . As a child , although my parents weren't well off , the sixties was a more prosperous time and great music ! Then came the 70s  the dreadful clothes and strikes , that's what I remember .


----------



## Happy Paws2

I'll be glad when it's tomorrow or maybe Saturday then hopefully this thread will be closed.


----------



## kimthecat

Happy Paws said:


> I'll be glad when it's tomorrow or maybe Saturday then hopefully this thread will be closed.


Why should it be locked ? You don't have to read it


----------



## Elles

Now is the best time for most people. If it wasn't Labour would be heading for a landslide no questions, because the many would be very unhappy and the very unhappy usually vote for the opposition. I can't even imagine going back to when minorities were persecuted, being gay was illegal and sexism was the norm. Where kids put cardboard in their shoes to cover up the hole in their soles and many disabled struggled in absolute squalor with a very low life expectation. Smog and pea soupers. The slipper and the cane.

The list goes on.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

If it is closed someone will open another thread about the new government - we might have a hung parliament, who knows?


----------



## Happy Paws2

kimthecat said:


> Why should it be locked ? You don't have to read it


Because the election will be over and that's what thread is about.

We don't need it to go on and on like the EU Referendum thread which is still going 12 months after the vote which I understand as all hell will be let loose in the next few weeks.


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> disabled struggled in absolute squalor with a very low life expectation


Or stuck in a bare room in a bare institution and just fed and bathed. Makes me shudder to think of the millions who suffered just because they couldn't communicate "normally"


----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> You can't wait, can you?


I know 

We'll either have "Strong and Stable" on the loop for the next 5 years or a leader who passionately believes he can turn the damaging cuts the Cons have made around. If Theresa May wins I will ban all the news channels and the Parliament channel from my TV in protest.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Ah I see, you bought into Mr Corbyn's utopia. Good luck with that.
> No go on, let's have some more of that endless list that could apply today.





Elles said:


> Neither May nor Corbyn are that great, but it's not about them. I think we'll all be worse off under a Labour government. It's never worked. It sounds great, everyone being rich, no one suffering, no queues for anything and everything is free. It doesn't work like that. People who work end up paying for everything, never able to progress and those who don't work still moan. If you don't work for whatever reason, you need a country that will give you the basics, not more than the workers. We need an efficient NHS, not one that has more and more money thrown at it. We need fair taxation, that encourages growth without giving to the greedy. We're not going to get any of it with either party.
> 
> The current conservative government is so bad, people who know labour utopia doesn't work are gritting their teeth and voting labour anyway. I hope enough do to prevent a Tory landslide, but not so many Labour get one.
> 
> I did as I said and voted Green.
> 
> It may be that the recent propaganda causes voters who wouldn't bother to vote to go out and vote after all. We'll find out tomorrow.


You're not listening to the experts, Labours economic policy is common sense. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jun/03/the-big-issue-labour-manifesto-what-economy-needs

*
Is there a magic money tree? Yes children, there is. But that's the wrong question.
Theresa May knows that the issue isn't whether we can grow money or not (we can), it's that it's then given to banks rather than nurses*
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ree-theresa-may-banks-nurses?CMP=share_btn_tw

]


----------



## noushka05

Just leaving this here...


----------



## samuelsmiles

kimthecat said:


> That's true . As a child , although my parents weren't well off , the sixties was a more prosperous time and great music ! Then came the 70s  the dreadful clothes and strikes , that's what I remember .


Yes, me and my brothers were being brought up as kids through the 70's. I think they were very hard times for mum and dad. I remember having candles for lighting when there were the power cuts, second hand bicycles that had been cleaned and painted to look like new for Christmas, hand made clothes etc. Were we in poverty? I don't know - it didn't feel like poverty.

Would my parents have been getting any sort of child care back in the 70's?


----------



## havoc

Well I've been and voted and had an 'altercation' with the arrogant teller outside the polling station. She demanded my polling card to take my number and took great offence when I asked who she was. Her reply after glaring at me for a few seconds was 'how is that relevant?'. When I suggested that if she wanted my details I was entitled to ask who wanted them and why she got really stroppy. They're not officials but she sure as hell thought she was important and entitled to give the impression of being one.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Happy Paws said:


> I'll be glad when it's tomorrow or maybe Saturday then hopefully this thread will be closed.


I will request this thread to be closed after the results are through tomorrow


----------



## noushka05

I was brought up in the 70s too. We had powercuts but we had security in our social housing, plenty of food. People had hope it was a much more progressive decade.


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> Why should it be locked ? You don't have to read it


@kimthecat, @stockwellcat wants to close it reasonably early to stop it droning on ad nauseam, as far as I recall! We don't need another one that goes on for years after the event (like the EU referendum with the same people people spouting the same old BS).


----------



## stockwellcat.

havoc said:


> She demanded my polling card to take my number


Oh I had the same thing at mine this morning (the girl had a big Lib Dem badge on), I hope she wasn't expecting me to vote Lib Dems because I didn't.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> @kimthecat, @stockwellcat wants to close it reasonably early to stop it droning on ad nauseam, as far as I recall! We don't need another one that goes on for years after the event (like the EU referendum with the same people people spouting the same old BS).


That's right @Calvine


----------



## Zaros

kimthecat said:


> :Hilarious i think that's you in the white suit . *What would Mrs Zee say*


Without upsetting the easily offended, which of her prize phrases would you like me to post...:Nailbiting



stockwellcat said:


> 12 hours time and the results will start coming in.


Something tells me ya'll might be in need of a few of these...







Or, one of these...


.







​Maybe both...


----------



## stockwellcat.

Zaros said:


> Something tells me ya'll might be in need of a few of these...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or, one of these...
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​Maybe both...


----------



## Calvine

havoc said:


> She demanded my polling card to take my number


It states quite clearly on mine that you don't need to take it with you. I always do as I otherwise have to spell my name 2000 times.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> I will request this thread to be closed after the results are through tomorrow


I really don't see why - someone will open another about the new government and surely people who have contributed to this thread over the weeks (what seems like months and months) need somewhere to talk about how they feel. If you get this one closed another will be opened.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> It states quite clearly on mine that you don't need to take it with you. I always do as I otherwise have to spell my name 2000 times.


Well I took my polling card and they gave it me back so I put it through the shredder


----------



## Jesthar

Lurcherlad said:


> Oh and I will go after work.
> 
> DS, aged 20 says "there's no point"


Please tell him (from a former 20yo who had similar dilemmas) that there is ALWAYS a point  Even if you write "Stuff the lot of you!!!" over the paper and spoil it, at least that way your opinion is still counted 

If you can't vote FOR someone, you can use your vote to count AGAINST a candidate you DON'T like. If all non-voters did that, no seat is safe.
If you can't bring yourself to do that, vote for whoever you feel you could support, even if you think they don't stand a chance. At least they might get their deposit back 
And, if you really can't pick who to vote for, at least a spoiled ballot is counted (and these days pretty much counts as a protest vote)


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I really don't see why - someone will open another about the new government and surely people who have contributed to this thread over the weeks (what seems like months and months) need somewhere to talk about how they feel. If you get this one closed another will be opened.


Fair comment.

-----------
Who thinks I should close the thread tomorrow or keep it open?


----------



## Zaros

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I really don't see why - someone will open another about the new government and surely people who have contributed to this thread over the weeks (what seems like months and months) need somewhere to talk about how they feel.* If you get this one closed another will be opened.*


Yeah! You're right.

I certainly intend to open another thread if the Tories win. :Rage


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Fair comment.
> 
> -----------
> Who thinks I should close the thread tomorrow or keep it open?


You need to do a poll


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> @kimthecat, @stockwellcat wants to close it reasonably early to stop it droning on ad nauseam, as far as I recall! We don't need another one that goes on for years after the event (like the EU referendum with the same people people spouting the same old BS).


Sure but then there will be another thread about the results and another thread about brexit that will drone on ad nauseum.

TBH I have a vested interest in the EU ref thread , Im trying to break the record for the longest thread ever on PF .  simple things please simple minds


----------



## Calvine

rottiepointerhouse said:


> If you get this one closed another will be opened


That's fine by him, I'm sure, but at least he won't feel responsible for it!


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> You need to do a poll


Well everyone loves polls


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> Who thinks I should close the thread tomorrow or keep it open?


Maybe have a vote on it, eh?


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> Who thinks I should close the thread tomorrow or keep it open?


I'd see how it goes for a couple of days.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Ok I'll leave it open for a while to let people comment on who wins and who loses


----------



## Calvine

rottiepointerhouse said:


> someone will open another about the new government


There won't be much to say about the new government until they start to do something of note; and that won't be immediately.


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> Im trying to break the record for the longest thread ever on PF .


Thought it already was!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> There won't be much to say about the new government until they start to do something of note; and that won't be immediately.


Well I don't know about that.

TM promises to rip up Human Rights Laws for Terrorists the day after the GE.

Corbyn would have to form a new Government - so there will be plenty to talk about there I guess.


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> I will request this thread to be closed after the results are through tomorrow


noooooo! i think we should have a vote on it ., Can you start a new thread with a poll asking if we want this thread closed or not . 



Calvine said:


> Thought it already was!


 it is ? YESSSS!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Calvine said:


> There won't be much to say about the new government until they start to do something of note; and that won't be immediately.


If there is a hung parliament for instance we may see scurrying around trying to form a coalition and even if there isn't and one side gets a majority there is naming the cabinet etc. I find those early days can be very interesting as you see who they ditch and newcomers appointed.


----------



## Jesthar

Just to prove I wasn't kidding last night, me and my Lorelei this morning doing our civic duty:










#TakeYourCatToVote


----------



## Zaros

I've Just heard some really good news. The Lib Dems claim they are going to legalise weed if the country elects them.  


So, that's it for me, I'm voting Lib Dem. :Happy



My dealer, however, is voting Conservative.


----------



## noushka05

Good message from Louis Theroux I just spotted.

*Louis Theroux*‏Verified [email protected]*louistheroux* 15h15 hours ago

Remember to vote tomorrow and bear in mind
British values of tolerance, fair play, and caring for society's least advantaged


----------



## kimthecat

@ Jesthar aw , shes gorgeous and shes so fluffy . 

I bet she dreams of meeting Larry the cat at 10 Downing street. :Kiss


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Corbyn would have to form a new Government - so there will be plenty to talk about there I guess.


Apparently there would be a new position to fill as well, Minster in charge of the end of the rainbows, money tree's and golden geese.


----------



## Smuge

100 times jeremy corbyn sided with terrorists:


Invited two IRA members to parliament two weeks after the Brighton bombing.
Attended Bloody Sunday commemoration with bomber Brendan McKenna.
Attended meeting with Provisional IRA member Raymond McCartney.
Hosted IRA linked Mitchell McLaughlin in parliament.
Spoke alongside IRA terrorist Martina Anderson.
Attended Sinn Fein dinner with IRA bomber Gerry Kelly.
Chaired Irish republican event with IRA bomber Brendan MacFarlane.
Attended Bobby Sands commemoration honouring IRA terrorists.
Stood in minute's silence for IRA gunmen shot dead by the SAS.
Refused to condemn the IRA in _Sky News_ interview.
Refused to condemn the IRA on _Question Time_.
Refused to condemn IRA violence in _BBC_ radio interview.
Signed EDM after IRA Poppy massacre massacre blaming Britain for the deaths.
Arrested while protesting in support of Brighton bomber's co-defendants.
Lobbied government to improve visiting conditions for IRA killers.
Attended Irish republican event calling for armed conflict against Britain.
Hired suspected IRA man Ronan Bennett as a parliamentary assistant.
Hired another aide closely linked to several convicted IRA terrorists.
Heavily involved with IRA sympathising newspaper _London Labour Briefing_.
Put up £20,000 bail money for IRA terror suspect Roisin McAliskey.
Didn't support IRA ceasefire.
Said Hamas and Hezbollah are his "_friends_".
Called for Hamas to be removed from terror banned list.
Called Hamas "_serious and hard-working_".
Attended wreath-laying at grave of Munich massacre terrorist.
Attended conference with Hamas and PFLP.
Photographed smiling with Hezbollah flag.
Attended rally with Hezbollah and Al-Muhajiroun.
Repeatedly shared platforms with PFLP plane hijacker.
Hired aide who praised Hamas' "_spirit of resistance_".
Accepted £20,000 for state TV channel of terror-sponsoring Iranian regime.
Opposed banning Britons from travelling to Syria to fight for ISIS.
Defended rights of fighters returning from Syria.
Said ISIS supporters should not be prosecuted.
Compared fighters returning from Syria to Nelson Mandela.
Said the death of Osama Bin Laden was a "_tragedy_".
Wouldn't sanction drone strike to kill ISIS leader.
Voted to allow ISIS fighters to return from Syria.
Opposed shoot to kill.
Attended event organised by terrorist sympathising IHRC.
Signed letter defending Lockerbie bombing suspects.
Wrote letter in support of conman accused of fundraising for ISIS.
Spoke of "_friendship_" with Mo Kozbar, who called for destruction of Israel.
Attended event with Abdullah Djaballah, who called for holy war against UK.
Called drone strikes against terrorists "_obscene_".
Boasted about "_opposing anti-terror legislation_".
Said laws banning jihadis from returning to Britain are "_strange_".
Accepted £5,000 donation from terror supporter Ted Honderich.
Accepted £2,800 trip to Gaza from banned Islamist organisation Interpal.
Called Ibrahim Hewitt, extremist and chair of Interpal, a "_very good friend_".
Accepted two more trips from the pro-Hamas group PRC.
Speaker at conference hosted by pro-Hamas group MEMO.
Met Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh several times.
Hosted meeting with Mousa Abu Maria of banned group Islamic Jihad.
Patron of Palestine Solidarity Campaign - marches attended by Hezbollah.
Compared Israel to ISIS, Hamas, Hezbollah and al-Qaeda.
Said we should not make "_value judgements_" about Britons who fight for ISIS.
Received endorsement from Hamas.
Attended event with Islamic extremist Suliman Gani.
Chaired Stop the War, who praised "_internationalism and solidarity_" of ISIS.
Praised Raed Salah, who was jailed for inciting violence in Israel.
Signed letter defending jihadist advocacy group Cage.
Met Dyab Jahjah, who praised the killing of British soldiers.
Shared platform with representative of extremist cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
Compared ISIS to US military in interview on_ Russia Today_.
Opposed proscription of Hizb ut-Tahrir.
Attended conference which called on Iraqis to kill British soldiers.
Attended Al-Quds Day demonstration in support of destruction of Israel.
Supported Hamas and ISIS-linked Viva Palestina group.
Attended protest with Islamic extremist Moazzam Begg.
Made the "_case for Iran_" at event hosted by Khomeinist group. 
Photographed smiling with Azzam Tamimi, who backed suicide bombings.
Photographed with Abdel Atwan, who sympathised with attacks on US troops.
Said Hamas should "_have tea with the Queen_".
Attended 'Meet the Resistance' event with Hezbollah MP Hussein El Haj.
Attended event with Haifa Zangana, who praised Palestinian "_mujahideen_".
Defended the infamous anti-Semitic Hamas supporter Stephen Sizer.
Attended event with pro-Hamas and Hezbollah group Naturei Karta.
Backed Holocaust denying anti-Zionist extremist Paul Eisen.
Photographed with Abdul Raoof Al Shayeb, later jailed for terror offences.
Mocked "_anti-terror hysteria_" while opposing powers for security services.
Named on speakers list for conference with Hamas sympathiser Ismail Patel.
Criticised drone strike that killed Jihadi John.
Said the 7/7 bombers had been denied "_hope and opportunity_".
Said 9/11 was "_manipulated_" to make it look like bin Laden was responsible.
Failed to unequivocally condemn the 9/11 attacks.
Called Columbian terror group M-19 "_comrades_".
Blamed beheading of Alan Henning on Britain.
Gave speech in support of Gaddafi regime.
Signed EDM spinning for Slobodan Milosevic.
Blamed Tunisia terror attack on "_austerity_".
Voted against banning support for the IRA.
Voted against the Prevention of Terrorism Act three times during the Troubles.
Voted against emergency counter-terror laws after 9/11.
Voted against stricter punishments for being a member of a terror group.
Voted against criminalising the encouragement of terrorism.
Voted against banning al-Qaeda.
Voted against outlawing the glorification of terror.
Voted against control orders.
Voted against increased funding for the security services to combat terrorism.
https://order-order.com/2017/06/08/100-times-jeremy-corbyn-sided-terrorists/

This man is dangerous.


----------



## Bisbow

I go out to shop and vote and the thread is 3 pages longer when I get back, won't bother to read them as it has all been said before

I have done my duty to Queen and Country and voted

Didn't realise until someone remarked on it I was wearing red trousers and a blue jacket
She asked if I was voting for both parties 

Now I will sit back and wait for the aftermath


----------



## AlexPed2393

Bisbow said:


> I go out to shop and vote and the thread is 3 pages longer when I get back, won't bother to read them as it has all been said before
> 
> I have done my duty to Queen and Country and voted
> 
> Didn't realise until someone remarked on it I was wearing red trousers and a blue jacket
> She asked if I was voting for both parties
> 
> Now I will sit back and wait for the aftermath


You're trying to flummox them, should have gone in with a yellow hat too to really catch them off guard


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> I go out to shop and vote and the thread is 3 pages longer when I get back, won't bother to read them as it has all been said before
> 
> I have done my duty to Queen and Country and voted
> 
> Didn't realise until someone remarked on it I was wearing red trousers and a blue jacket
> She asked if I was voting for both parties
> 
> Now I will sit back and wait for the aftermath


I'd hate for you to miss my reply to your earlier post so here it is again



rottiepointerhouse said:


> :Rage:Rage Nothing much makes me angry but that comment does. People who care about animals care about humans too whereas I find most people who can sit aloft a horse and run a pack of hounds after one small wild creature are heartless b---stards. If you care, you care, I give just as much to human charities as I do to animal ones and would help a person in need just as much as I would an animal in need. I find that a deeply ignorant and insulting statement.


----------



## Smuge

Jesthar said:


> Just to prove I wasn't kidding last night, me and my Lorelei this morning doing our civic duty:
> 
> View attachment 313773
> 
> 
> #TakeYourCatToVote


I love this. This is always my next thought when I see that hastagh, but I didn't think anyone actually did it lol


----------



## stockwellcat.

Smuge said:


> 100 times jeremy corbyn sided with terrorists:
> 
> 
> Invited two IRA members to parliament two weeks after the Brighton bombing.
> Attended Bloody Sunday commemoration with bomber Brendan McKenna.
> Attended meeting with Provisional IRA member Raymond McCartney.
> Hosted IRA linked Mitchell McLaughlin in parliament.
> Spoke alongside IRA terrorist Martina Anderson.
> Attended Sinn Fein dinner with IRA bomber Gerry Kelly.
> Chaired Irish republican event with IRA bomber Brendan MacFarlane.
> Attended Bobby Sands commemoration honouring IRA terrorists.
> Stood in minute's silence for IRA gunmen shot dead by the SAS.
> Refused to condemn the IRA in _Sky News_ interview.
> Refused to condemn the IRA on _Question Time_.
> Refused to condemn IRA violence in _BBC_ radio interview.
> Signed EDM after IRA Poppy massacre massacre blaming Britain for the deaths.
> Arrested while protesting in support of Brighton bomber's co-defendants.
> Lobbied government to improve visiting conditions for IRA killers.
> Attended Irish republican event calling for armed conflict against Britain.
> Hired suspected IRA man Ronan Bennett as a parliamentary assistant.
> Hired another aide closely linked to several convicted IRA terrorists.
> Heavily involved with IRA sympathising newspaper _London Labour Briefing_.
> Put up £20,000 bail money for IRA terror suspect Roisin McAliskey.
> Didn't support IRA ceasefire.
> Said Hamas and Hezbollah are his "_friends_".
> Called for Hamas to be removed from terror banned list.
> Called Hamas "_serious and hard-working_".
> Attended wreath-laying at grave of Munich massacre terrorist.
> Attended conference with Hamas and PFLP.
> Photographed smiling with Hezbollah flag.
> Attended rally with Hezbollah and Al-Muhajiroun.
> Repeatedly shared platforms with PFLP plane hijacker.
> Hired aide who praised Hamas' "_spirit of resistance_".
> Accepted £20,000 for state TV channel of terror-sponsoring Iranian regime.
> Opposed banning Britons from travelling to Syria to fight for ISIS.
> Defended rights of fighters returning from Syria.
> Said ISIS supporters should not be prosecuted.
> Compared fighters returning from Syria to Nelson Mandela.
> Said the death of Osama Bin Laden was a "_tragedy_".
> Wouldn't sanction drone strike to kill ISIS leader.
> Voted to allow ISIS fighters to return from Syria.
> Opposed shoot to kill.
> Attended event organised by terrorist sympathising IHRC.
> Signed letter defending Lockerbie bombing suspects.
> Wrote letter in support of conman accused of fundraising for ISIS.
> Spoke of "_friendship_" with Mo Kozbar, who called for destruction of Israel.
> Attended event with Abdullah Djaballah, who called for holy war against UK.
> Called drone strikes against terrorists "_obscene_".
> Boasted about "_opposing anti-terror legislation_".
> Said laws banning jihadis from returning to Britain are "_strange_".
> Accepted £5,000 donation from terror supporter Ted Honderich.
> Accepted £2,800 trip to Gaza from banned Islamist organisation Interpal.
> Called Ibrahim Hewitt, extremist and chair of Interpal, a "_very good friend_".
> Accepted two more trips from the pro-Hamas group PRC.
> Speaker at conference hosted by pro-Hamas group MEMO.
> Met Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh several times.
> Hosted meeting with Mousa Abu Maria of banned group Islamic Jihad.
> Patron of Palestine Solidarity Campaign - marches attended by Hezbollah.
> Compared Israel to ISIS, Hamas, Hezbollah and al-Qaeda.
> Said we should not make "_value judgements_" about Britons who fight for ISIS.
> Received endorsement from Hamas.
> Attended event with Islamic extremist Suliman Gani.
> Chaired Stop the War, who praised "_internationalism and solidarity_" of ISIS.
> Praised Raed Salah, who was jailed for inciting violence in Israel.
> Signed letter defending jihadist advocacy group Cage.
> Met Dyab Jahjah, who praised the killing of British soldiers.
> Shared platform with representative of extremist cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
> Compared ISIS to US military in interview on_ Russia Today_.
> Opposed proscription of Hizb ut-Tahrir.
> Attended conference which called on Iraqis to kill British soldiers.
> Attended Al-Quds Day demonstration in support of destruction of Israel.
> Supported Hamas and ISIS-linked Viva Palestina group.
> Attended protest with Islamic extremist Moazzam Begg.
> Made the "_case for Iran_" at event hosted by Khomeinist group.
> Photographed smiling with Azzam Tamimi, who backed suicide bombings.
> Photographed with Abdel Atwan, who sympathised with attacks on US troops.
> Said Hamas should "_have tea with the Queen_".
> Attended 'Meet the Resistance' event with Hezbollah MP Hussein El Haj.
> Attended event with Haifa Zangana, who praised Palestinian "_mujahideen_".
> Defended the infamous anti-Semitic Hamas supporter Stephen Sizer.
> Attended event with pro-Hamas and Hezbollah group Naturei Karta.
> Backed Holocaust denying anti-Zionist extremist Paul Eisen.
> Photographed with Abdul Raoof Al Shayeb, later jailed for terror offences.
> Mocked "_anti-terror hysteria_" while opposing powers for security services.
> Named on speakers list for conference with Hamas sympathiser Ismail Patel.
> Criticised drone strike that killed Jihadi John.
> Said the 7/7 bombers had been denied "_hope and opportunity_".
> Said 9/11 was "_manipulated_" to make it look like bin Laden was responsible.
> Failed to unequivocally condemn the 9/11 attacks.
> Called Columbian terror group M-19 "_comrades_".
> Blamed beheading of Alan Henning on Britain.
> Gave speech in support of Gaddafi regime.
> Signed EDM spinning for Slobodan Milosevic.
> Blamed Tunisia terror attack on "_austerity_".
> Voted against banning support for the IRA.
> Voted against the Prevention of Terrorism Act three times during the Troubles.
> Voted against emergency counter-terror laws after 9/11.
> Voted against stricter punishments for being a member of a terror group.
> Voted against criminalising the encouragement of terrorism.
> Voted against banning al-Qaeda.
> Voted against outlawing the glorification of terror.
> Voted against control orders.
> Voted against increased funding for the security services to combat terrorism.
> https://order-order.com/2017/06/08/100-times-jeremy-corbyn-sided-terrorists/
> 
> This man is dangerous.


May sides with Terrorists as well. Recently went to Saudi Arabia and shook hands with a country in the Arab region that has recently been shunned by the other Arab states for funding terrorism :Muted


----------



## kimthecat

but she doesn't deny doing it .

About Qatar. hypocritical of Saudi to accuse them of funding terrorists. !


----------



## Smuge

stockwellcat said:


> May sides with Terrorists as well. Recently went to Saudi Arabia and shook hands with a country in the Arab region that has recently been shunned by the other Arab states for funding terrorism :Muted


I assume you know how weak this response is? Theresa May is far from ideal and isnt the Prime Minister I would like. But for ***** sake didn't recently defend ISIS supporters.

Visiting Saudi is not the same thing as voting against banning al-Qaeda


----------



## Zaros

Smuge said:


> I assume you know how weak this response is? Theresa May is far from ideal and isnt the Prime Minister I would like. But for ***** sake didn't recently defend ISIS supporters.
> 
> Visiting Saudi is not the same thing as voting against banning al-Qaeda


Gosh, and this thread was slowly becoming a bit light hearted, you know like Christmas eve for grown ups...:Happy


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'd hate for you to miss my reply to your earlier post so here it is again


 As I said, it has all been said before
I care for animals, I've had enough in my life, I care for people as well you would know if you read the recent killings

I have followed hounds behind a laid trail, never a fox, but I still think some people think foxes are more important than people
If you think I am a heartless barsteward, so be it, it bothers me not a jot


----------



## Smuge

Zaros said:


> Gosh, and this thread was slowly becoming a bit light hearted, you know like Christmas eve for grown ups...:Happy


I see nothing to joke about when a political party is proposing putting such a dangerous man in downing street.


----------



## Calvine

Bisbow said:


> She asked if I was voting for both parties


A house in my road has two posters in the window: one red: one blue. Interesting situation.


----------



## Bisbow

Calvine said:


> A house in my road has two posters in the window: one red: one blue. Interesting situation.


Wonder if it will lead to a divorce


----------



## JANICE199

rona said:


> Yes it was but that cannot be revisited unfortunately
> 
> Living in the past like Corbyn helps no one.


*I cannot for the life of me understand that comment. We have the money, we did it before, we can do it again. If you think we can't, why not?*


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> but she doesn't deny doing it .
> 
> About Qatar. hypocritical of Saudi to accuse them of funding terrorists. !


There are quite a few countries involved there now...all that part of the world needs.


----------



## Zaros

Smuge said:


> I see nothing to joke about when a political party is proposing putting such a dangerous man in downing street.


God! You're such a Grinch.

In all probability, you rub shoulders with more dangerous people on the street.

Last night for example, I stayed in a hotel, and in the room there were a couple of red cords hanging from the ceiling with metal handles at their ends. Puzzled by this, I immediately went down to the reception and asked the girl what they were for.

_'They're alarms, in case we get any disabled people in' _she told me. :Jawdrop

I thought to myself, just how dangerous are the disabled people around here?:Wacky


----------



## MollySmith

Calvine said:


> You're telling me; and we all know who they are.


Indeed we do.


----------



## Smuge

Re. voting for two parties? To be fair plenty of people will vote a half dozen times today.

@FraserNelson
Just voted with no polling card and no ID - just gave surname and address. I could go grab a phone book and do this all day.

In NI we have (free) election cards with a picture etc on them


----------



## Calvine

Zaros said:


> Grinch.


I don't grok what this is. Is it a Finnish word?


----------



## MollySmith

rona said:


> You can't take them in all of them, in a school for instance. My council actually says you can take your children and your dog but dogs must be left outside


I am leaving Molly at home. I do wish the press didn't encourage the leaving of dogs alone outside polling stations in their photos of the day.


----------



## Zaros

Calvine said:


> I don't grok what this is. Is it a Finnish word?


*GRRRRR!*


----------



## Calvine

Smuge said:


> @FraserNelson
> Just voted with no polling card and no ID - just gave surname and address. I could go grab a phone book and do this all day.


Fraser Nelson lives two roads away from me and will vote at the same station and our polling cards state quite clearly 'You do not need to bring this card with you'. If you produce it they look at you as tho' you are barking. So you give them your name; then they ask you to spell it; then you produce the card. If someone had impersonated him, they would not suss until he turned up to vote. Funny old game, voting...


----------



## Bisbow

MollySmith said:


> I am leaving Molly at home. I do wish the press didn't encourage the leaving of dogs alone outside polling stations in their photos of the day.


OH is going to vote when he takes Chilli out and she will go into the room with him, there was a dog in there when I was voting


----------



## noushka05

Smuge said:


> I assume you know how weak this response is? Theresa May is far from ideal and isnt the Prime Minister I would like. But for ***** sake didn't recently defend ISIS supporters.
> 
> Visiting Saudi is not the same thing as voting against banning al-Qaeda


Guido Fawkes (aka Paul Staines) is well known propagandist. Hes a peddler of fake news.

Its May putting our country in grave peril with her massive cuts to the police & armed forces. With her support & appeasement of Saudi & her arms dealing. Our 'good friends' are funding Isis & exporting terrorism .https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-findings-may-never-be-published-saudi-arabia





















Bisbow said:


> As I said, it has all been said before
> I care for animals, I've had enough in my life, I care for people as well you would know if you read the recent killings
> 
> I have followed hounds behind a laid trail, never a fox, but I still think some people think foxes are more important than people
> If you think I am a heartless barsteward, so be it, it bothers me not a jot


Millions of people are suffering & dying under tory austerity. The tories are detrimental to both people AND animals.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> As I said, it has all been said before
> I care for animals, I've had enough in my life, I care for people as well you would know if you read the recent killings
> 
> I have followed hounds behind a laid trail, never a fox, but I still think some people think foxes are more important than people
> If you think I am a heartless barsteward, so be it, it bothers me not a jot


What on earth have the recent killings got to do with whether you care for people or not? I judge whether someone cares for people by what they do for them - campaigning for their rights and welfare, helping charities whether that is financially or volunteering, what sort of work they do or have done and their general attitude to people who are vulnerable and less fortunate than themselves. Anyone can write on a forum that they disagree with terrorism. I think the vast majority of the people who oppose hunting so vehemently do so because it is not only vile and wicked but it degrades the humans who partake in it and the rest of us too. I understand now why you are so lacking in concern about whether hunting returns or not and why you have never responded to my very polite suggestions/requests for people to at least email their candidates and ask them where they stand on the issue so they might vote against or abstain when the vote takes place. Oh yes I forget you don't think it will even though its in their manifesto


----------



## KittenKong

And he's not even British!


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> Not exactly someone who's support you would seek!
> 
> To be fair we all think the decade we grew up in was the best, simply because we generally didn't have the worries of having to provide. For me I thought the 70's were great, pretty sure adults at the time would disagree.


Totally agree, during my teen years I lost count how many times my father said words to the effect of. When I was a boy, when I was your age blah blahblah, I used to think ok dad and turn a deaf ear, I never ever thought I would echo those words, but I do, almost daily.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Zaros said:


> Gosh, and this thread was slowly becoming a bit light hearted, you know like Christmas eve for grown ups...:Happy


Oh well the light hearted episode is over it seems.


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> Oh well the light hearted episode is over it seems.


*MEDIC!








*​


----------



## 1290423

I've been and put that all important cross in that all important box. I was never going to not vote but this is the one election when I have been unsure, still don't know if I've done the right thing.

Tbh there are very very few mps that I have much respect for these days, apart that is for this young lady, I know shes scottish, but boy if she were ever in charge I think she would do a splendid job.

Hope I live to see that day.

* Mhairi Black *


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> What on earth have the recent killings got to do with whether you care for people or not? I judge whether someone cares for people by what they do for them - campaigning for their rights and welfare, helping charities whether that is financially or volunteering, what sort of work they do or have done and their general attitude to people who are vulnerable and less fortunate than themselves. Anyone can write on a forum that they disagree with terrorism. I think the vast majority of the people who oppose hunting so vehemently do so because it is not only vile and wicked but it degrades the humans who partake in it and the rest of us too. I understand now why you are so lacking in concern about whether hunting returns or not and why you have never responded to my very polite suggestions/requests for people to at least email their candidates and ask them where they stand on the issue so they might vote against or abstain when the vote takes place. Oh yes I forget you don't think it will even though its in their manifesto


You have no idea what charities I support or what help I have given animals or people in my 70 plus years of life so don't say you understand me, you do not, you also do not know my state of health or ability to go out protesting such, stop being so judgemental
I also do not take orders from you who I email or do not email, have no idea whether I did or not. For your satisfaction I happen to know my candidates reply


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> You have no idea what charities I support or what help I have given animals or people in my 70 plus years of life so don't say you understand me, you do not, you also do not know my state of health or ability to go out protesting such, stop being so judgemental
> I also do not take orders from you who I email or do not email, have no idea whether I did or not. For your satisfaction I happen to know my candidates reply


Please re read my post, I did not ask nor comment on what charities you support - I said I judge how much* people* care about humans (and animals) based on the things I mentioned - I did not pass any comment nor judgement on how much* YOU* care about humans or suggest you should be out protesting. I did not and never have ordered anyone to do anything - as stated in my post I politely suggested/requested and even provided a link to a site that would do it for you (you in general). You have frequently judged those of us who vote according to the hunting ban and have on more than one occasion accused us of caring more about foxes than humans yet I am not allowed to comment on how I judge whether people care about humans or just claim to. How is that fair?


----------



## Jesthar

Smuge said:


> I see nothing to joke about when a political party is proposing putting such a dangerous man in downing street.


As opposed to a political party who are proposing to put policies in place to further disadvantage the already disadvantaged? I know what I consider more dangerous.

Many moons ago I spent two weeks in Northern Ireland as part of a group running a free evening club and other events for local children on a particularly deprived housing estate. Due to the local tensions (this was one of those estates were some streets were Unionist and others Separatist, to the diehard extent where kerbstones got painted red, white and blue or orange, white and green), as facepainter, I was under strict instructions NOT to paint any flags or anything in national flag colours. Generally speaking all went well, and we had a great time with the kids.

However, one night the local Irish chap who headed up the club couldn't make it, so it was just us English. It all went well for a while, and I don't remember what started things kicking off - probably a disagreement between two of the kids. I DO remember having to send all the children home and then wait locked in the youth centre whilst the Separatist kids pelted the building with stones and shouted various foul mouthed things about 'English Scum' etc. until some of the locals could come and rescue us.

And, you know what - I don't blame them. We did some pretty scummy things to the Irish over the centuries, and the anger is justifiable (even if the method of venting is inappropriate, and the anger is generationally handed down and second hand). Not to the extent of making the use of bombs and bullets jusitfiable, of course, but I can also understand how people get to the point where they personally can justify it. I also learned a LOT more about why they reacted that way by talking to people about it afterwards than if we'd simply have banned them all from the club.

What I do know, above all else, is that violence and oppression begets only an escalation violence and oppression. And whilst you are always going to get the hardcore haters who will never want to talk, _most_ people don't fall unto that category. People most often turn to violence when they don't know how to express themselves any other way, or feel that is the only way to get their opinion (or themselves) noticed. And I'd rather be the one brave enough to say 'shall we call a mutual time out and try and talk about this' than letting the behaviour of a few colour my opinion of a whole section of society.


----------



## Smuge

Jesthar said:


> As opposed to a political party who are proposing to put policies in place to further disadvantage the already disadvantaged? I know what I consider more dangerous.
> 
> Many moons ago I spent two weeks in Northern Ireland as part of a group running a free evening club and other events for local children on a particularly deprived housing estate. Due to the local tensions (this was one of those estates were some streets were Unionist and others Separatist, to the diehard extent where kerbstones got painted red, white and blue or orange, white and green), as facepainter, I was under strict instructions NOT to paint any flags or anything in national flag colours. Generally speaking all went well, and we had a great time with the kids.
> 
> However, one night the local Irish chap who headed up the club couldn't make it, so it was just us English. It all went well for a while, and I don't remember what started things kicking off - probably a disagreement between two of the kids. I DO remember having to send all the children home and then wait locked in the youth centre whilst the Separatist kids pelted the building with stones and shouted various foul mouthed things about 'English Scum' etc. until some of the locals could come and rescue us.
> 
> And, you know what - I don't blame them. We did some pretty scummy things to the Irish over the centuries, and the anger is justifiable (even if the method of venting is inappropriate, and the anger is generationally handed down and second hand). Not to the extent of making the use of bombs and bullets jusitfiable, of course, but I can also understand how people get to the point where they personally can justify it. I also learned a LOT more about why they reacted that way by talking to people about it afterwards than if we'd simply have banned them all from the club.
> 
> What I do know, above all else, is that violence and oppression begets only an escalation violence and oppression. And whilst you are always going to get the hardcore haters who will never want to talk, _most_ people don't fall unto that category. People most often turn to violence when they don't know how to express themselves any other way, or feel that is the only way to get their opinion (or themselves) noticed. And I'd rather be the one brave enough to say 'shall we call a mutual time out and try and talk about this' than letting the behaviour of a few colour my opinion of a whole section of society.


You visited NI once for a disco? Cute. Members of My family and several of my parents friends were murdered by the terrorists that Corbyn calls his friends for the crime of not being Catholic. But im glad you enjoyed your disco and dont blame them

But he defends Isis supporters, Hamas etc... why wouldnt he like the IRA?


----------



## Jesthar

Smuge said:


> You visited NI once for a disco? Cute. Members of My family and several of my parents friends were murdered by the terrorists that Corbyn calls his friends for the crime of not being Catholic. But im glad you enjoyed your disco and dont blame them


No, not a disco. I'm sorry about your family members and friends. Both sides did horrible, terrible things to each other in those awful years. But if people like Corbyn and the many others on all sides who eventually got the peace process under way hadn't taken the radical step of starting to talk to their (then) enemies, a lot more people would still be ending up in your position as bombs and bullets would still be going off.


----------



## Guest

IF,
foxhunting was actually being used for pest control only, (instead of chinless wonders in stupid suits with unruly hounds & all the other moronic bloodthirsty barstewards who are to fat to sit a horse & have to watch from the top of a landrover), They would be galloping down Plumstead High st every evening.
There are tens of thousands of urban foxes in London. I see them most nights. Sis lives in Devon - never bloody well seen a single one. Plenty of murderous hunt groupies beggaring up a decent Exmoor walk though.
No hunting with hounds for 13 years - Countryside not over run. HUNTING CLEARLY NOT NEEDED.
How is ripping an animal limb from limb entertainment? Clearly some sick f**** around, call themselves animal lovers Jim Royals favourite expression.
If this offends you - tough shit!


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Please re read my post, I did not ask nor comment on what charities you support - I said I judge how much* people* care about humans (and animals) based on the things I mentioned - I did not pass any comment nor judgement on how much* YOU* care about humans or suggest you should be out protesting. I did not and never have ordered anyone to do anything - as stated in my post I politely suggested/requested and even provided a link to a site that would do it for you (you in general). You have frequently judged those of us who vote according to the hunting ban and have on more than one occasion accused us of caring more about foxes than humans yet I am not allowed to comment on how I judge whether people care about humans or just claim to. How is that fair?


I DO care but if you don't believe me that's your privilege
I am not indulging in this thread any more
Believe the worst of me if you want to


----------



## Smuge

Jesthar said:


> No, not a disco. I'm sorry about your family members and friends. Both sides did horrible, terrible things to each other in those awful years. But if people like Corbyn and the many others on all sides who eventually got the peace process under way hadn't taken the radical step of starting to talk to their (then) enemies, a lot more people would still be ending up in your position as bombs and bullets would still be going off.


I bitterly disagree, but you are entitled to an opinion.

Excuse his support for the IRA if you like. But that doesn't even start to cover his defense of Isis supporters, refusal to ban Al-Qaeda, opposition to shoot to kill, links to Hamas and Hezbollah, crazy comments about 9/11 and Bin Laden, opposition to killing Bin Laden, the sharp rise of antisemitism within Labour under his leadership, opposition to terror laws...


----------



## stockwellcat.

Oh well I have voted now and wouldn't change my mind on a month of Sunday's. The Conservatives have put this country through austerity and cut services in some circumstances unnecessarily and I wasn't prepared to stand back and watch them carry on doing this and possibly drag the UK through the worst possible Brexit deal possible, no deal. If you don't like the way I voted, tough, it was my choice and you made yours.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> If you don't like the way I voted, tough, it was my choice and you made yours.


I've not made my choice yet. I'm seriously considering not voting at all. I have a feeling the turnout will be very poor and that will actually be as good as a "none of the above" vote and a wake up call to them all.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Oh well I have voted now and wouldn't change my mind on a month of Sunday's. The Conservatives have put this country through austerity and cut services in some circumstances unnecessarily and I wasn't prepared to stand back and watch them carry on doing this and possibly drag the UK through the worst possible Brexit deal possible, no deal. If you don't like the way I voted, tough, it was my choice and you made yours.


Whatever you decided that was your decision you do not have to tell anyone how you voted nor make an explanation for why you chose to do as you did 
, that's the point of us having a vote! I found this election one of the most difficult from my perspective neither of the main parties had produced a manifesto that I was totally happy with. Therefore I was not prepared to give,either my vote! Had I have done so it would have been equal to turkeys voting for Christmas


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> I've not made my choice yet. I'm seriously considering not voting at all. I have a feeling the turnout will be very poor and that will actually be as good as a "none of the above" vote and a wake up call to them all.


Actually I was speaking to the election girls at our station the turnout this morning had been huge much more than they had expected. personally and this is just my opinion I don't agree that any vote is wasted my view is that if neither of the main parties are offering a manifesto that you are truly happy with then go ahead and vote for one of the lesser known parties even though they have no chance, providing of course you are happy with their manifesto. at the end of the day I think this is going to be very close run, every vote is counted and next time around all the parties will be looking at how many people voted for the smaller parties and asking themselves why.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> I have a feeling the turnout will be very poor


The turn out at my local polling station this morning was busy and so far has been steady this afternoon with a constant flow of people coming and going.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Jesthar

Smuge said:


> I bitterly disagree, but you are entitled to an opinion.
> 
> Excuse his support for the IRA if you like. But that doesn't even start to cover his defense of Isis supporters, refusal to ban Al-Qaeda, opposition to shoot to kill, links to Hamas and Hezbollah, crazy comments about 9/11 and Bin Laden, opposition to killing Bin Laden, the sharp rise of antisemitism within Labour under his leadership, opposition to terror laws...


I can understand why you disagree, I can't begin to imagine how you feel after what your family has been through.

I'm not sure I could say that Corbyn _supports_ the IRA itself. Supported treating terrorist prisoners like human beings, perhaps (thereby reducing the number of reasons for potential future terrorists to be angry at us), and trying to turn former enemies into friends definitely. As far as I can tell he seems to have tried to treat all sides with equal respect and condemned atrocities equally on all sides, and as all sides were brutally awful to all the others during the troubles, that's no mean feat.

I can understand why he opposed killing Bin Laden - turning a figurehead like that into a martyr (in the eyes of many) had great potential as a recruitment tool for Al Qaeda and as inspiration for their members. Perhaps I can even understand the logic behind not wanting to ban Al Qaeda itself, as historically banning an organisation has usually only resulted in that organisation going underground and being significantly more difficult to monitor.

I can also understand why he might oppose a shoot to kill policy and anti terror laws if he thought they were poorly written and impinged on the rights of ordinary, law abiding citizens too, perhaps to a far greater degree than those they were supposed to target.

Much of the rest I don't know enough about to comment on with any degree of accuracy. But I do know that statistically speaking actual terrorists are a much lesser threat to civil safety in the UK than the continued cuts to the Police force. Restoring enough resources to enforce our existing laws are, at least in my opinion, a far better plan than making yet more legislation, especially if that legislation is poorly written and open to a wide range of interpretation.

Anyway, the terror issue didn't really feature in my voting choice, to be honest. Social and environmental issues were my focus, as those are things we can genuinely do positive and tangible things about.


----------



## AlexPed2393

This will be the second time I have voted, it seems to be in this area more people are willing to vote and will do so, hopefully that is reflected across the country


----------



## Bisbow

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313795
> View attachment 313796


Give it a rest now for goodness sake 
The voting will soon be over so it is a bit late now


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> I've not made my choice yet. I'm seriously considering not voting at all. I have a feeling the turnout will be very poor and that will actually be as good as a "none of the above" vote and a wake up call to them all.


Go and spoil your ballot, then. That's the only way to get your protest actually counted, if you stay in you just get lumped in with the 'can't be bothered' brigade.


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> Actually I was speaking to the election girls at our station the turnout this morning had been huge much more than they had expected. personally and this is just my opinion I don't agree that any vote is wasted my view is that if neither of the main parties are offering a manifesto that you are truly happy with then go ahead and vote for one of the lesser known parties even though they have no chance, providing of course you are happy with their manifesto. at the end of the day I think this is going to be very close run, every vote is counted and next time around all the parties will be looking at how many people voted for the smaller parties and asking themselves why.


Ok you've talked me into then. Think I might vote Lib-Dem to help him save his deposit, at least then something will have been achieved.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> Go and spoil your ballot, then. That's the only way to get your protest actually counted, if you stay in you just get lumped in with the 'can't be bothered' brigade.


Do you know what, for the first time ever I'm swaying towards joining that brigade!


----------



## JANICE199

Bisbow said:


> Give it a rest now for goodness sake
> The voting will soon be over so it is a bit late now


*Nothing wrong with that post. And let's not forget, we still have another 7 hours nearly for people to vote. *


----------



## Bisbow

JANICE199 said:


> *Nothing wrong with that post. And let's not forget, we still have another 7 hours nearly for people to vote. *


And those that are going to bother have already made up their minds


----------



## rona

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok you've talked me into then. Think I might vote Lib-Dem to help him save his deposit, at least then something will have been achieved.


I'm thinking of voting Labour. They haven't got a hope in hell of winning here, I think even the Monster raving loony party would do better.
If I voted Green or Lib Dem there's a frightening possibility that others could be using them as a protest vote and they could squeak in (doubtful)
I want the conservatives to win (this time) because of Brexit, but I would rather they had a fright to pull up their socks and change a few policies


----------



## rona

Bisbow said:


> And those that are going to bother have already made up their minds


They haven't :Shamefullyembarrased


----------



## Bisbow

rona said:


> I'm thinking of voting Labour. They haven't got a hope in hell of winning here, I think even the Monster raving loony party would do better.
> If I voted Green or Lib Dem there's a frightening possibility that others could be using them as a protest vote and they could squeak in (doubtful)
> I want the conservatives to win (this time) because of Brexit, but I would rather they had a fright to pull up their socks and change a few policies


I hope voting labour not come back and bite you in the bum


----------



## JANICE199

rona said:


> I'm thinking of voting Labour. They haven't got a hope in hell of winning here, I think even the Monster raving loony party would do better.
> If I voted Green or Lib Dem there's a frightening possibility that others could be using them as a protest vote and they could squeak in (doubtful)
> I want the conservatives to win (this time) because of Brexit, but I would rather they had a fright to pull up their socks and change a few policies


 Wash your mouth out rona


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

I haven't voted yet and won't until about 9 pm tonight - I could possibly be persuaded to vote Labour instead of Lib Dem if I thought there was a chance they would get in around here but there isn't so I will stick with my first choice.


----------



## rona

Bisbow said:


> I hope voting labour not come back and bite you in the bum


Not in this area it won't I can assure you



JANICE199 said:


> Wash your mouth out rona


Only because they are the only ones that are going to get us out of Europe properly and not halfheartedly


----------



## noushka05

Brian May pulling no punches on Theresa. He's spot on too.

__
http://instagr.am/p/BVE_RqGDChD/
_
"hell bent on establishing herself as a virtual dictator"

"not a shred of compassion for man or beast_"


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> Totally agree, during my teen years I lost count how many times my father said words to the effect of. When I was a boy, when I was your age blah blahblah, I used to think ok dad and turn a deaf ear, I never ever thought I would echo those words, but I do, almost daily.


TBH, @DT, my parents were the opposite. They reckoned that ''the good old days'' were dreadful. My father reckoned that as children, there were only two boiled eggs for four of them so the two boys got the bit sliced off the top. And a load of children had rickets owing to poor diet.


----------



## rona

Calvine said:


> TBH, @DT, my parents were the opposite. They reckoned that ''the good old days'' were dreadful. My father reckoned that as children, there were only two boiled eggs for four of them so the two boys got the bit sliced off the top. And a load of children had rickets owing to poor diet.


Yes, Rickets and Polio where still about


----------



## Calvine

Just went down and voted: there was an ambulance and paramedics there so maybe someone passed out with the sheer excitement of it all. I hope it wasn't @stockwellcat!


----------



## rona

Calvine said:


> Just went down and voted: there was an ambulance and paramedics there so maybe someone passed out with the sheer excitement of it all. I hope it wasn't @stockwellcat!


Just standing by for the punch up I suspect


----------



## cheekyscrip

Calvine said:


> Just went down and voted: there was an ambulance and paramedics there so maybe someone passed out with the sheer excitement of it all. I hope it wasn't @stockwellcat!


Nope. Our favourite Hobbit voted first thing in the morn, by now is nursing well earned pint well recovered form the ordeal.

Never underestimate the Hobbit! They can surprise you, they can even surprise themselves.

In a good way.


----------



## stockwellcat.




----------



## Calvine

rona said:


> Just standing by for the punch up I suspect


Ha yes: there are some rough buggers in Richmond!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Words of support from across the pond:
To all my friends in the UK: learn from us, your stupid American cousins. Get out and vote for Labour. The stakes are too high. #Vote2017

------------

Remember who's telling you to #VoteLabour today: 
- Nurses 
-Firefighters 
-The Police 
-Transport workers 
-Economists

-----------

Just voted for the most transformational manifesto + leader this country has seen for decades. Good luck @jeremycorbyn.

Many more comments here #vote2017:
https://mobile.twitter.com/hashtag/Vote2017?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc^tfw&ref_url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-2017-40171454


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> Words of support from across the pond:
> *To all my friends in the UK: learn from us, your stupid American cousins. Get out and vote for Labour. The stakes are too high. #Vote2017*
> 
> ------------
> 
> Remember who's telling you to #VoteLabour today:
> - Nurses
> -Firefighters
> -The Police
> -Transport workers
> -Economists
> 
> Many more comments here #vote2017:
> https://mobile.twitter.com/hashtag/Vote2017?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc^tfw&ref_url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-2017-40171454


*And Russell Brand*

*Ok just found out how to change colour and font on my mobile. Means I can write annoyingly colourful posts now.*


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> *And Russell Brand*
> 
> *Ok just found out how to change colour and font on my mobile. Means I can write annoyingly colourful posts now.*


Oh, brilliant. _NOW_ I may have to hunt you down as Theresa May would like to do to Foxes...


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Words of support from across the pond:
> *To all my friends in the UK: learn from us, your stupid American cousins. Get out and vote for Labour. The stakes are too high. #Vote2017*
> 
> ------------
> 
> Remember who's telling you to #VoteLabour today:
> - Nurses
> -Firefighters
> -The Police
> -Transport workers
> -Economists
> 
> Many more comments here #vote2017:
> https://mobile.twitter.com/hashtag/Vote2017?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc^tfw&ref_url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-2017-40171454


I do not hold my breath.

Same people voted for Brexit and put TM as a result as PM.

She cannot get any deal.

They think it is a great success of British diplomacy.
Yes, Brexit gave Trump that crucial tiny percent.

Now you can hear corks popping in Kremlin.

Yes, considering the world stability and threats to peace rocking the boat was just what will embolden enemies of Western Democracy.

Sadly people hardly see The Big Picture.

They still believe in all those lies, lies, lies.

Labour could have won. With young leader without baggage of U turns and questionable sympathies.

Labour shot themselves basically.

Very , very sadly I see five more years of wrecking Britain if TM gets what she wants.

Just IMO.


----------



## Guest

In France, you get fined if you don't vote. The ONLY way to make a difference is to get off your bums & put a cross on the paper. The same old excuses for not voting come out time after time - I don't know enough - What have you been doing the past 3 weeks? Can you not read? Do you not watch the news?
They are all as bad as each other - fine, spoil your paper.
Just think of how recently women got the vote - 1928, not even a hundred years ago. Some of us it will be Mums, Grans, Great Grans. They would be turning in their graves knowing you are not going to bother. Just think of how many countries where women do not get the chance to vote,
how many countries where there will never be free & fair democratic elections.
I don't care how other people vote, I just object to listening to all the whingers who don't like the way things are, but, are too damn lazy to take 10 mins max out of one day every 4-5 years to make a difference.
Go and vote & stop making excuses.


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> Remember who's telling you to #VoteLabour today. Nurses Firefighters,The Police, Transport workers Economists & Zaros


----------



## Jesthar

Ok, I _PROMISED _myself that I wasn't going to post any memes. But this one really made me laugh (even if you don't like the last entry  )


----------



## Guest

cheekyscrip said:


> Labour could have won. With young leader without baggage of U turns and questionable sympathies.
> 
> Labour shot themselves basically


How do you know they won't win? I think it is too close to call


----------



## cheekyscrip

Franlow said:


> In France, you get fined if you don't vote. The ONLY way to make a difference is to get off your bums & put a cross on the paper. The same old excuses for not voting come out time after time - I don't know enough - What have you been doing the past 3 weeks? Can you not read? Do you not watch the news?
> They are all as bad as each other - fine, spoil your paper.
> Just think of how recently women got the vote - 1928, not even a hundred years ago. Some of us it will be Mums, Grans, Great Grans. They would be turning in their graves knowing you are not going to bother. Just think of how many countries where women do not get the chance to vote,
> how many countries where there will never be free & fair democratic elections.
> I don't care how other people vote, I just object to listening to all the whingers who don't like the way things are, but, are too damn lazy to take 10 mins max out of one day every 4-5 years to make a difference.
> Go and vote & stop making excuses.


The worst it is that often this is the young and healthy.

Who then complain. Only about one third of youngsters took part in referendum.
Then were very bitter about the result.


----------



## Vanessa131

A colleague has announced that she cannot vote as she is going out for dinner!


----------



## cheekyscrip

Franlow said:


> How do you know they won't win? I think it is too close to call


Trying to be prepared for the worst...after Brexit vote have little faith in English survival instincts...

Even the choice of the leaders...really????

There are much better human beings in Conservative party...
There are better choices in Labour! They might have had David, then no Cameron, no referendum, no May and no election now.
But no, they chose unelectable Ed.
They could have Andy. Went for Corbyn and Abbott.
They do not seem to learn.

Je suis Eeorie


----------



## Elles

I know a firefighter who's a socialist and drumming on about labour. He earns 60k a year, his wife earns 30k, his parents look after the kids for free while they work and they're in so much debt they borrow money from pensioner family and think we should all vote Labour to look after poor people like them, get them a pay rise and pay for their kids to go to uni. They give poor people a bad name. Not everyone who whines about being hard done by are.

I want a political climate that encourages and supports those who want to get on, not throws money at those who don't, to the degree that those who don't are better off than those who do. I worry that's what we'll get with labour. Vote tactically, don't let any of them win.


----------



## noushka05




----------



## stockwellcat.

Vanessa131 said:


> A colleague has announced that she cannot vote as she is going out for dinner!











What an excuse.
Could your friend not go and vote on the way to dinner?


----------



## Elles

The poor should want a party that helps them dig themselves out of the hole they're in, not one that pays for them to dig it deeper. Vote tactically. Don't let any of them win.


----------



## Guest

stockwellcat said:


> Remember who's telling you to #VoteLabour today: Nurses, Firefighters,The Police,Transport workers, Economists, Zaros & MrsZee


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> I know a firefighter who's a socialist and drumming on about labour. He earns 60k a year, his wife earns 30k, his parents look after the kids for free while they work and they're in so much debt they borrow money from pensioner family and think we should all vote Labour to look after poor people like them, get them a pay rise and pay for their kids to go to uni. They give poor people a bad name. Not everyone who whines about being hard done by are.
> 
> I want a political climate that encourages and supports those who want to get on, not throws money at those who don't, to the degree that those who don't are better off than those who do. I worry that's what we'll get with labour. Vote tactically, don't let any of them win.


The fire service has been decimated by tory cuts. Another area they've put our lives at risk.






ETA This >

*Kate Lally*‏Verified [email protected]*katelallyx* Jun 7

_There are currently 26 working police officers in the whole of Southport. That's one police officer per every 3 and a half THOUSAND people








_


----------



## Bisbow

cheekyscrip said:


> I do not hold my breath.
> 
> Same people voted for Brexit and put TM as a result as PM.
> 
> She cannot get any deal.
> 
> for
> 
> IMO.


TM will get a better deal than he ever could he still wants to stay in the EU and will give in to all their demands and we will have a huge divorce bill
Paid for from the corp tax along with every thing else it is supposed to pay


----------



## Elles

Nurses, firefighters, the police and transport workers are telling you to vote Labour so they can have a pay rise. The Zees live in Finland. Vote tactically so none of them win.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> Oh, brilliant. _NOW_ I may have to hunt you down as Theresa May would like to do to Foxes...


Don't worry, I may have the power but will resist the urge to use it.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> TM will get a better deal than he ever could he still wants to stay in the EU and will give in to all their demands and we will have a huge divorce bill
> Paid for from the corp tax along with every thing else it is supposed to pay


May will be a disaster.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well if this election results in a hung Parliament with Labour with the minority win. Corbyn said he will form the first minority Government and request that all the other parties except Conservatives get behind him and guess what? Nicola Sturgeon said she will back a Corbyn led Government on an issue by issue basis.

http://news.sky.com/story/amp/labou...ty-government-if-it-is-largest-party-10901127

http://uk.businessinsider.com/jerem...im-down-in-a-hung-parliament-2017-6?r=UK&IR=T


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> Well if this election results in a hung Parliament with Labour with the minority win. Corbyn said he will form the first minority Government and request that all the other parties except Conservatives get behind him and guess what? Nicola Sturgeon said she will back a Corbyn led Government on an issue by issue basis.


She might, but unless he forces them, half his own MPs won't.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Elles said:


> Nurses, firefighters, the police and transport workers are telling you to vote Labour so they can have a pay rise. The Zees live in Finland. Vote tactically so none of them win.


Well I voted conservative's, it's a done deal here anyway as it's been a landslide Tory seat since God was a lad. And I couldn't bring myself to do a protest/tactical vote as I believe you should vote for who you want to win.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> She might, but unless he forces them, half his own MPs won't.


Oh if Labour win I envisage Corbyn's MP's getting behind him and wanting jobs in Cabinet. Want to set a wager on it?


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> Nurses, firefighters, the police and transport workers are telling you to vote Labour so they can have a pay rise. The Zees live in Finland. Vote tactically so none of them win.


 Have you seen the massive cuts? This isn't just about pay. Public services are on the verge of collapse our NHS will be gone forever. Please see this.


----------



## Guest

I am so looking forward to next week when this is done & dusted. I don't actually think any of the arguments on here are going to make anyone change their mind. I don't understand why people are saying the same thing as said on page 1.
Why not have an exit poll now for a laugh. I will start off
Labour 1


----------



## Elles

Dr Pepper said:


> Well I voted conservative's, it's a done deal here anyway as it's been a landslide Tory seat since God was a lad. And I couldn't bring myself to do a protest vote as I believe you should vote for who you want to win.


I agree and as I don't want any of them to win. Vote tactically so none of them win.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Well I voted conservative's, it's a done deal here anyway as it's been a landslide Tory seat since God was a lad. And I couldn't bring myself to do a protest/tactical vote as I believe you should vote for who you want to win.


So just because you voted Conservatives it means they'll win? Hmmm me thinks not. There's still time to vote.


----------



## Lurcherlad

Jesthar said:


> Please tell him (from a former 20yo who had similar dilemmas) that there is ALWAYS a point  Even if you write "Stuff the lot of you!!!" over the paper and spoil it, at least that way your opinion is still counted
> 
> If you can't vote FOR someone, you can use your vote to count AGAINST a candidate you DON'T like. If all non-voters did that, no seat is safe.
> If you can't bring yourself to do that, vote for whoever you feel you could support, even if you think they don't stand a chance. At least they might get their deposit back
> And, if you really can't pick who to vote for, at least a spoiled ballot is counted (and these days pretty much counts as a protest vote)


Trust me, I've tried 

Told him to write "none of the above" or something but he's an obstinate little b*gger!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Franlow said:


> I am so looking forward to next week when this is done & dusted. I don't actually think any of the arguments on here are going to make anyone change their mind. I don't understand why people are saying the same thing as said on page 1.
> Why not have an exit poll now for a laugh. I will start off
> Labour 1


Labour 1st
Conservatives 2nd
Joint 3rd place Lib Dems & SNP


----------



## Jesthar

Lurcherlad said:


> Trust me, I've tried
> 
> Told him to write "none of the above" or something but he's an obstinate little b*gger!


Maybe challenge him to write something a little more 'fruity' that will keep the vote counters amused?


----------



## Honeys mum

Dr Pepper said:


> And I couldn't bring myself to do a protest/tactical vote as I believe you should vote for who you want to win.


But what if you don't want either of them to win. Then you either have to vote for who you really even though you know they have no chance what so ever. Or do a tactiful vote.
I have to say I caved in at the last minute and did the latter. I just hope I got it right and that doesn't make me a traitor.


----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> So just because you voted Conservatives it means they'll win? Hmmm me thinks not. There's still time to vote.


No you Muppet! What I mean is this seat is guaranteed conservative's, Labour actually lost their deposit in 2010 and just scraped saving it in 2015.


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Remember who's telling you to #VoteLabour today:
> - Nurses
> -Firefighters
> -The Police
> -Transport workers
> -Economists


and teachers !

Its picking up here , more people finishing work coming to vote.


----------



## Elles

I don't care Noush. The NHS will collapse and there'll be rotting bodies on the streets. We're so much worse off than we were in the 50s and 60s and Trump is going to get us all blown up when he presses the button, if he doesn't destroy the environment first. What difference does it make when Brexit is a calamity that will destroy Britain and we can't have another vote on it, even if we wanted one, which we don't. We're all doomed along with the elephants and foxes either way. So vote tactically and don't let any of them win. 

I like the idea of the boring, but effective I've been hearing about. Once this is over with, I'd like to learn more.


----------



## Guest

I have just started an election exit poll on General chat. I am really interested to see if our exit poll will tally with the election results. No comments needed, just a tick in the box


----------



## cheekyscrip

Bisbow said:


> TM will get a better deal than he ever could he still wants to stay in the EU and will give in to all their demands and we will have a huge divorce bill
> Paid for from the corp tax along with every thing else it is supposed to pay


Thus I see it as lesser evil than no deal, crash Brexit, ripped foxes, poorer youth with no access to uni, privatisation of NHS.
I do not trust Corbyn, do not like Corbyn, but still it is lesser evil IMO.

If I could have my pick for PM?
Bercow is brave and honest.
David Miliband was best of Labour.

In this case though the best choice IMO is Caroline Lucas, sadly she would not win.

Gibraltar though we all have British passports, cannot vote in GE.
Only LubDem support our rights to vote campaign.
We would vote if we could.

PM will decide our future, but we are deprive of any , even minimal effect on GE.
So count yourself lucky that you all have a vote.


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> Oh if Labour win I envisage Corbyn's MP's getting behind him and wanting jobs in Cabinet. Want to set a wager on it?


Corbyn's MPs will, but not all the labour MPs.


----------



## KittenKong

cheekyscrip said:


> I do not hold my breath.
> 
> Same people voted for Brexit and put TM as a result as PM.
> 
> She cannot get any deal.
> 
> They think it is a great success of British diplomacy.
> Yes, Brexit gave Trump that crucial tiny percent.
> 
> Now you can hear corks popping in Kremlin.
> 
> Yes, considering the world stability and threats to peace rocking the boat was just what will embolden enemies of Western Democracy.
> 
> Sadly people hardly see The Big Picture.
> 
> They still believe in all those lies, lies, lies.
> 
> Labour could have won. With young leader without baggage of U turns and questionable sympathies.
> 
> Labour shot themselves basically.
> 
> Very , very sadly I see five more years of wrecking Britain if TM gets what she wants.
> 
> Just IMO.


Sadly if past experience has anything to go by the masses look towards Rupert Murdoch and similar for their news and advice who to vote for, regardless of who's leader unless they're prepared to receive instructions from the boss like Blair.

I remember when Andy Burnham was suggested as leader. They absolutely crucified him but think being Liveropudlian had something to do with that seeing the paper's boycotted in the city....

One day, perhaps one day such readers wake up and smell the coffee.

I hope to God I'm wrong this time.

Got to admire the Daily Mirror's front page though, the only tabloid not begging their readers to vote for May.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> I don't care Noush. The NHS will collapse and there'll be rotting bodies on the streets. We're so much worse off than we were in the 50s and 60s and Trump is going to get us all blown up when he presses the button, if he doesn't destroy the environment first. What difference does it make when Brexit is a calamity that will destroy Britain and we can't have another vote on it, even if we wanted one, which we don't. We're all doomed along with the elephants and foxes either way. So vote tactically and don't let any of them win.
> 
> I like the idea of the boring, but effective I've been hearing about. Once this is over with, I'd like to learn more.


If you don't care, that's that then. But I will go down fighting for all those things I care about.


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> TBH, @DT, my parents were the opposite. They reckoned that ''the good old days'' were dreadful. My father reckoned that as children, there were only two boiled eggs for four of them so the two boys got the bit sliced off the top. And a load of children had rickets owing to poor diet.


Thats right, my other half had rickets


----------



## stockwellcat.

Campaign video:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/872768219236507650
School Cuts Video:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/872764184525758466
Sorry for linking them like this but it wouldn't let me embed them on here.


----------



## cheekyscrip

KittenKong said:


> Sadly if past experience has anything to go by the masses look towards Rupert Murdoch and similar for their news and advice who to vote for, regardless of who's leader unless they're prepared to receive instructions from the boss like Blair.
> 
> I remember when Andy Burnham was suggested as leader. They absolutely crucified him but think being Liveropudlian had something to do with that seeing the paper's boycotted in the city....
> 
> One day, perhaps one day such readers wake up and smell the coffee.
> 
> I hope to God I'm wrong this time.
> 
> Got to admire the Daily Mirror's front page though, the only tabloid not begging their readers to vote for May.


Country ruled by Rupert & Friends is practically damned.
Maybe THIS why they do not want free uni for the poor masses?
Students are less keen on Murdoch press?

Open minded , educated masses do not buy lies?

Yes...keep them hardly literate, on The Sun and The Star level....
In overcrowded schools with underpaid teachers ..

With no healthy food, no facilities...no place for games, art, music.
Give them pulp TV, junk food and enough alc to keep them.in stopor.


----------



## stockwellcat.




----------



## stockwellcat.

*IS YOUR SCHOOL ON THE LIST?*
18,329 schools will face further funding cuts. Use our tool to see how your school will be affected. Then ask your local candidates to pledge to oppose school cuts before the General Election on June 8.

*PLEDGES SO FAR -* Lab: 62% | Con: 1% | LD: 46% | PC: 5% | Green: 56%

Fact check school cuts

THE IMPACT BY 2022
93%

OF SCHOOLS WILL HAVE PER-PUPIL FUNDING CUT
*-£86,951*
*Average cut to primary schools*
*-£370,298*
*Average cut to secondary schools*
*-£338*
*Average loss per primary pupil*
*-£436*
*Average loss per secondary pupil*


----------



## Calvine

cheekyscrip said:


> Yes...keep them hardly literate, on The Sun and The Star level....


Oh dear, @cheekyscrip! be careful what you say...we get lots of quotes from 'The Sun' on here. Sometimes they treat us to one from 'The Daily Getsmuchworse' (formerly the Express).


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> *IS YOUR SCHOOL ON THE LIST?*
> 18,329 schools will face further funding cuts. Use our tool to see how your school will be affected. Then ask your local candidates to pledge to oppose school cuts before the General Election on June 8.
> 
> *PLEDGES SO FAR -* Lab: 62% | Con: 1% | LD: 46% | PC: 5% | Green: 56%
> 
> Fact check school cuts
> 
> THE IMPACT BY 2022
> 93%
> 
> OF SCHOOLS WILL HAVE PER-PUPIL FUNDING CUT
> *-£86,951*
> *Average cut to primary schools*
> *-£370,298*
> *Average cut to secondary schools*
> *-£338*
> *Average loss per primary pupil*
> *-£436*
> *Average loss per secondary pupil*


Why do you think English children perform worse in maths, literacy, science than stated educated kids from many much poorer East European countries?

Those often ridiculed states put more effort to provide best education for their children.
Who then in EU were so successful on job market that it scared Britain into Brexit.

Education is for the mind what health care is for the body.


----------



## noushka05

Chomsky endorsed Bernie Sanders now endorses Jeremy Corbyn.


----------



## Satori

cheekyscrip said:


> Why do you think English children perform worse in maths, literacy, science......


Poor parenting.


----------



## KittenKong

Love it!

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...voters-burn-tory-papers-on-rainy-polling-day/


----------



## Satori

KittenKong said:


> Love it!
> 
> http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...voters-burn-tory-papers-on-rainy-polling-day/
> 
> View attachment 313828


Positively side-splitting.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Satori said:


> Poor parenting.


Why?
What makes you think British parents care less about their children than other parents?
Well..voting Brexit will not make their future brighter....if this what you meant...
But how that translates to more crowded schools with worse facilities?


----------



## Satori

cheekyscrip said:


> Why?
> What makes you think British parents care less about their children than other parents?
> Well..voting Brexit will not make their future brighter....if this what you meant...
> But how that translates to more crowded schools with worse facilities?


Blindingly obvious, other than to people who look for scapegoats to their own failures. To anyone who owns their own lives, there's only one place to look if your kids are underperforming; that's the mirror.

Now then, if you are looking for the cause behind the effect that manifests in the disparity between countries I would guess it has something to do with years of UK parents spitting out kids to get more benefits?


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313830


In LA they do actually have police cars like that, we saw a couple in the malls and,around the,exhibition are.that said never seen any elsewhere.
Edited to add not exactly like that they were actually like golf buggies


----------



## stockwellcat.

3 and a half hours to go and the results will start coming through.

If you haven't voted yet there's still time. If you are in the queue at your polling station when they close at 10pm they will still allow you to vote.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Satori said:


> Blindingly obvious, other than to people who look for scapegoats to their own failures. To anyone who owns their own lives, there's only one place to look if your kids are underperforming; that's the mirror.
> 
> Now then, if you are looking for the cause behind the effect that manifests in the disparity between countries I would guess it has something to do with years of UK parents spitting out kids to get more benefits?


Do not think British population is growing, especially if you take out minorities?
Maybe m' dear instead of benefits the money should be used for school meals, uni fees , directly fot the bairns , not their parents?
Other countries do just that.

Do you think that parents then should take kids out for home education, if the classes are 30plus?

What if they are working?

Thirty plus random kids all inclusive with one teacher is a crowd control, not education.
Lectures to big audience work at uni level not for 5 years old.

Children should not be punished for their parents not being able to send them to decent private school.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> 3 and a half hours to go and the results will start coming through.


Midnight before you get the first results the polls don't close until 10. But you will have the exit polls come so maybe before then


----------



## Vanessa131

cheekyscrip said:


> Do not think British population is growing, especially if you take out minorities.
> Maybe m' dear instead of benefits the money should be used for school meals, uni fees , directly fot the bairns , not their parents?
> Other countries do just that.


Why are you taking out us minorities when looking at population growth?


----------



## 1290423

Vanessa131 said:


> Why are you taking out us minorities when looking at population growth?


Who are the minorities these days certainly in primary schools I'd be interested to know


----------



## rona

OMG, This sounds like Corbyn's world 
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...e-brink-a-journey-through-a-country-in-crisis

"When Hugo Chávez came to power in 1999, he took this way of thinking a step further and used petrol dollars to subsidise essential products such as rice, sugar, toilet paper, sanitary towels and medicine"
.
"It was an altruistic, populist move that allowed the poor to finally share in the nation's oil wealth. But it also stifled incentives for producers and created a system of dependency and black-marketing that was already causing economic problems"

"Compared to agriculture, however, that is a relatively small decline. On the roadside are miles and miles of empty, fertile land, and relatively few crops. With prices of many vegetables kept low, there is little incentive for farmers. Between 2012 and 2015, domestic grain production fell by 80%, meat by 40% and vegetables by 18%, according to private sector analysts. Shortfalls were once covered by imports, but the state has to use its remaining petrodollars to service debts.

Private companies are also struggling as a result of the weak bolivar. At the Unicasa Supermercado in El Tigre, there are few customers and little variety. Today there is no rice, sugar, flour, jam, cooking oil, toilet paper, condensed milk, vinegar or baby products."

"We used to only read about malnutrition in medical books, but now we are seeing cases like those in Africa. Things have become far worse over the past year," said one doctor who asked to remain anonymous."

Is this a vision into our future under Labour?


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Midnight before you get the first results the polls don't close until 10. But you will have the exit polls come so maybe before then


Got my wine and nibbles to watch it through the night


----------



## kimthecat

DT said:


> Who are the minorities these days certainly in primary schools I'd be interested to know


 It would depend on the area .


----------



## samuelsmiles

noushka05 said:


> Chomsky endorsed Bernie Sanders now endorses Jeremy Corbyn.
> 
> View attachment 313827


Chomsky also endorsed Chavez's Venezuela.


----------



## 1290423

Satori said:


> Poor parenting.


Not entirely correct depending upon where you are in the country! My daughter had a superb education she went to university and did very well, when she had children she taught them both to read very well prior to going to school. Amber started school in Luton and made absolutely no progress whatsoever during the first year so much so that my daughter went in to see the teacher that particular School was dealing with several languages together with a large number of children who could not even speak English! You may well say that that is down to staffing, but hang on This is England and we speak English.


----------



## Guest

cheekyscrip said:


> Why do you think English children perform worse in maths, literacy, science than stated educated kids from many much poorer East European countries? Those often ridiculed states put more effort to provide best education for their children. Who then in EU were so successful on job market that it scared Britain into Brexit.
> Education is for the mind what health care is for the body.


I agree, good education is also one of the best ways to help both your children and your country to compete in the future. Unless UK is aiming at competing with Vietnam etc. for cheapest labour.



Satori said:


> Poor parenting.


That is just plain stupid. Anyone, who´s ever been teaching knows that there is so much more in learning and influencing children to learn than parents. Naturally not all parents are good and some are downright criminal, but most parents really want the best for their children. So you really say that British are poor parents,, whereas Eastern European, or Scandis are good, because the children perform better in certain subjects? Like I said, plain stupid.


----------



## Honeys mum

Just said on the news the election results will start comimg in at 11o'clock.
So make sure you have your wine & nibbles ready SWC.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Honeys mum said:


> Just said on the news the election results will start comimg in at 11o'clock.
> So make sure you have your wine & nibbles ready SWC.


Oh yeah they are ready and a bottle of moet for tomorrow


----------



## cheekyscrip

MrsZee said:


> I agree, good education is also one of the best ways to help both your children and your country to compete in the future. Unless UK is aiming at competing with Vietnam etc. for cheapest labour.
> 
> That is just plain stupid. Anyone, who´s ever been teaching knows that there is so much more in learning and influencing children to learn than parents. Naturally not all parents are good and some are downright criminal, but most parents really want the best for their children. So you really say that British are poor parents,, whereas Eastern European, or Scandis are good, because the children perform better in certain subjects? Like I said, plain stupid.


Just not an expert, neither on education nor on parenting....

Anyone good, bad or ugly can have a child.
Not everyone can be a teacher.

Every parent is an amateur, far from perfection.
Saying that British parents care less is the same as saying British kids are just dumber...
(present party not included).

They are also more often obese.
Nothing to do with school meals or sport facilities...
Just parents fault?


----------



## Guest

*GO AND VOTE. DO THE RIGHT THING. *


----------



## stockwellcat.

Rise like lions after slumber in unvaquishable number. Shake your chains to earth like dew. That in sleep had fallen on you. We are many they are few. Corbyn speech.
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10155440857063872&id=330250343871&__tn__=C


----------



## Calvine

KittenKong said:


> Love it!
> 
> http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...voters-burn-tory-papers-on-rainy-polling-day/
> 
> View attachment 313828
> View attachment 313829


What a waste of money; and how desperate. You wouldn't mind so much if they recycled them. Tut!


----------



## MilleD

Bisbow said:


> If people are voting labour just because of the hunting ban they obviously think more of foxes than their fellow people because people will suffer more under JC's rule than any fox would
> Hunting will never be brought back


Jeezus no, I wouldn't vote labour if you paid me


----------



## Calvine

cheekyscrip said:


> But how that translates to more crowded schools with worse facilities?


Well, if Labour gets in and puts 20% VAT on private school fees, the state schools will be even more crowded as parents will remove their kids from fee-paying schools as they will no longer be able to afford them. So the state school classes will be bigger, there will be more books and equipment to buy...etc etc.


----------



## noushka05

samuelsmiles said:


> Chomsky also endorsed Chavez's Venezuela.


Here he is speaking about the Venezuela disaster - https://www.democracynow.org/2017/4/5/chomsky_leftist_latin_american_governments_have


----------



## Calvine

cheekyscrip said:


> Thirty plus random kids all inclusive with one teacher is a crowd control, not education.


I was in a class of 30 and managed to get to university. No-one had to control us.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> Well, if Labour gets in and puts 20% VAT on private school fees, the state schools will be even more crowded as parents will remove their kids from fee-paying schools as they will no longer be able to afford them. So the state school classes will be bigger, there will be more books and equipment to buy...etc etc.


Blimey don't you ever look at the facts? Ever Please see what teachers are saying. Schools are in crisis because of tory cuts.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313835
> View attachment 313836
> View attachment 313837
> View attachment 313838


You do know that Maggie isn't standing?

Tell you what, if she was, I wouldn't just be voting I'd be out there campaigning for her


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Just off out now so will have a look at the polling station on our way, if its busy we will walk the dogs first and vote afterwards.


----------



## KittenKong

Calvine said:


> Well, if Labour gets in and puts 20% VAT on private school fees, the state schools will be even more crowded as parents will remove their kids from fee-paying schools as they will no longer be able to afford them. So the state school classes will be bigger, there will be more books and equipment to buy...etc etc.


I would have thought most parents who can afford to have their children educated privately could afford another 20%!

I'm more concerned about the children who'll be deprived of school meals if their parents can't afford it. It can happen with zero hour contracts and the complexities of applying for free school meals complicated by much form filling and delay for the odd week or two for not earning enough.


----------



## Zaros

rona said:


> You do know that Maggie isn't standing?
> 
> Tell you what, if she was, I wouldn't just be voting I'd be out there campaigning for her


It might have escaped your attention but Maggie can't stand for anything.

But I'm sure if you contact the Tories they might review her case, exhume her before morning and deem her fit for work.


----------



## Cleo38

Zaros said:


> It might have escaped your attention but Maggie can't stand for anything.
> 
> But I'm sure if you contact the Tories they might review her case, exhume her before morning and deem her fit for work.


Hahahahahahahaha .... fantastic!!!!


----------



## cheekyscrip

Calvine said:


> I was in a class of 30 and managed to get to university. No-one had to control us.


What about the 29 other kids?

Was it a nice area or inner city?

One snowman does not make winter...

Anecdotal evidence does not get us far...

Did you go to uni when fees were 9k plus?

How many young people just give up because why bother, anyway with all.costs that means about 60 k!

Wasting human potential is one of worst resource wasting....
You want investors to come then provide professional workforce.
Some EU countries understand that, but NOT England.


----------



## FeelTheBern

@stockwellcat you've changed so much! Just a few months ago you posted this:


stockwellcat said:


> Terrible Political Jokes
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn


----------



## Calvine

KittenKong said:


> I would have thought most parents who can afford to have their children educated privately could afford another 20%!


If they have two children at school then likely not. In any case I consider I saved the country a lot of money by privately educating mine so why should they? I worked a lot of overtime to pay the fees.


----------



## stockwellcat.

FeelTheBern said:


> @stockwellcat you've changed so much! Just a few months ago you posted this:


It was a very hard decision to make. So I apologise for changing my mind. I don't necessarily like Corbyn but what other choice is there? Let me think. Strong and Stable on loop for the next 5 years whilst the NHS disappears, schools lose money etc?

I still support Brexit, nothing has changed there.


----------



## samuelsmiles

noushka05 said:


> Here he is speaking about the Venezuela disaster - https://www.democracynow.org/2017/4/5/chomsky_leftist_latin_american_governments_have


Yes, hindsight is a great thing, indeed.


----------



## Calvine

KittenKong said:


> I'm more concerned about the children who'll be deprived of school meals if their parents can't afford it.


I'm not. If they can't afford it they will no doubt have provision made for them.


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> I would have thought most parents who can afford to have their children educated privately could afford another 20%!
> 
> I'm more concerned about the children who'll be deprived of school meals if their parents can't afford it. It can happen with zero hour contracts and the complexities of applying for free school meals complicated by much form filling and delay for the odd week or two for not earning enough.


So not true! I know a few hard working parents who have their children in private schools, they go without themselves to be able to afford it.


----------



## Guest

Calvine said:


> I was in a class of 30 and managed to get to university. No-one had to control us.


Really, you never noticed what the teacher had to do just to keep peace in the class. But then students rarely see how much effort has gone just to make one lesson interesting or how much attention must be paid to keep all interested, as they take it all for granted. Unfortunately they take also bad quality teaching for granted, and blame only themselves if they have problems in learning.

By the way, have you actually taught a group of 30? I have and know the difference in the quality of learning, if you have 20, 30 or 40 in the class.


----------



## Vanessa131

Calvine said:


> I'm not. If they can't afford it they will no doubt have provision made for them.


I'm afraid they wont  we have children living in homeless shelters who are waiting for application approval and many more who don't qualify, we simply cannot afford the £2.40 per day to feed all of our children in need, it's almost £500 per child per year and we need the FSM box ticked to get the funding to help.


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> So not true! I know a few hard working parents who have their children in private schools, they go without themselves to be able to afford it.


Isn't it rather sad that in one of the world biggest economies hard working parents have to go without to provide DECENT education for their kids?

Think you made my point.

Britain can afford good state education ( as much , much poorer countries do).


----------



## 1290423

Vanessa131 said:


> I'm afraid they wont  we have children living in homeless shelters who are waiting for application approval and many more who don't qualify, we simply cannot afford the £2.40 per day to feed all of our children in need, it's almost £500 per child per year and we need the FSM box ticked to get the funding to help.


Sorry did I miss read your post or did our education system fail you at maths I just did a rough calculation and surely £2.40 a day is nearer £900 a year or don't we include weekends

Awh, got it, we are not including weekends and holidays?


----------



## Vanessa131

DT said:


> Sorry did I miss read your post or did our education system fail you at maths I just did a rough calculation and surely £2.40 a day is nearer £900 a year or don't we include weekends


I'm more than capable of 2.40 x 195 thanks.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> 3 and a half hours to go and the results will start coming through.
> 
> If you haven't voted yet there's still time. If you are in the queue at your polling station when they close at 10pm they will still allow you to vote.


The exit poll will give us the result at 10pm, it has proved to be very accurate in the last two GEs I haven`t voted yet, will probably vote around 9ish I`m not overly worried about there being a queue if there is more than one other person in there!



stockwellcat said:


> Got my wine and nibbles to watch it through the night


I`ll be up all night except maybe if a Tory landslide is predicated because the exit poll is so accurate it takes the excitement out of it ifs its not going to be close. I`ll will be online mostly, although I am planning on doing some work, so I`ll keep you company


----------



## noushka05

samuelsmiles said:


> Yes, hindsight is a great thing, indeed.


We don't need hidesight to see the neoliberals are taking us down a suicidal path. Its the tories that are corrupt, not Corbyn. His anti-austerity economy has the support of so many academics & academic institutions & 130 economists


----------



## 1290423

cheekyscrip said:


> Isn't it rather sad that in one of the world biggest economies hard working parents have to go without to provide DECENT education for their kids?
> 
> Think you made my point.
> 
> Britain can afford good state education ( as much , much poorer countries do).


So which of our problems do we solve first? do we prioritise and put first into the health service do with pour more into housing do we improve the Education system, how about social care. Or perhaps we should be thinking more of the disabled fact is every area we look into is broken and everyone wants the money someone somewhere has to pay.


----------



## cheekyscrip

3dogs2cats said:


> The exit poll will give us the result at 10pm, it has proved to be very accurate in the last two GEs I haven`t voted yet, will probably vote around 9ish I`m not overly worried about there being a queue if there is more than one other person in there!
> 
> I`ll be up all night except maybe if a Tory landslide is predicated because the exit poll is so accurate it takes the excitement out of it ifs its not going to be close. I`ll will be online mostly, although I am planning on doing some work, so I`ll keep you company


Like my Boss said today:
" I will have Chinese takeaway today...or else will watch election alone"....


----------



## 1290423

Vanessa131 said:


> I'm more than capable of 2.40 x 195 thanks.


So we are not including weekends then? Thank you


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> It was a very hard decision to make. So I apologise for changing my mind. I don't necessarily like Corbyn but what other choice is there? Let me think. Strong and Stable on loop for the next 5 years whilst the NHS disappears, schools lose money etc?
> 
> I still support Brexit, nothing has changed there.


Strong & stable in a loop:Hilarious You crack me up SWC


----------



## samuelsmiles

Zaros said:


> It might have escaped your attention but Maggie can't stand for anything.
> 
> But I'm sure if you contact the Tories they might review her case, exhume her before morning and deem her fit for work.


Haha. Yes, and she'd still be a dead cert to defeat Corbyn.


----------



## KittenKong

A Polling Station telling you who to vote for?

What next?


----------



## Guest

DT said:


> So which of our problems do we solve first? do we prioritise and put first into the health service do with pour more into housing do we improve the Education system, how about social care. Or perhaps we should be thinking more of the disabled fact is every area we look into is broken and everyone wants the money someone somewhere has to pay.


Why can´t you take care of all, like other wealthy European countries? Don´t British deserve the same quality living than we?


----------



## Vanessa131

DT said:


> So we are not including weekends then? Thank you


Did you go to school at the weekend?

Hang on, does this mean you think there are only 195 none weekend days per year? What was that about my maths


----------



## KittenKong

samuelsmiles said:


> Haha. Yes, and she'd still be a dead cert to defeat Corbyn.


Even if she, ahem, resurrected the Poll Tax?


----------



## Elles

rona said:


> You do know that Maggie isn't standing?
> 
> Tell you what, if she was, I wouldn't just be voting I'd be out there campaigning for her


I'd join you. She makes this lot look like the pg tips chimps holding a tea party. Don't strain yourself 'arry. Maggie's ashes in an urn could do a better job.

Some parents who pay for their kids to have an education do without things others take for granted. I slept on the floor, lived on muesli and took one of mine to school on the back of an old motorbike. We didn't have a tv, or a phone. That was when Maggie was PM. For another I sold my car and took a job working unsocial hours in the local shop, Labour were in power then. I'm lucky though, all 3 of my offspring are useful and caring members of society who work for their living and are doing ok.

I think we can afford to take care of the needy of our society and probably even those who don't want to work. Just as some people get bored of their pups and abandon them to rescues, some people are lazy, don't want to work and cry for handouts, so I don't think we can cry over poor people who can't afford to feed their children. I'm not convinced that many exist. Greedy people who like Oliver Twist want more, but unlike Oliver don't actually need it, are too common. I went without for my children, seems to me too many others want other people to go without for theirs.

As for state schools. Yes, the classes are too big, but also too many bad teachers have too many rights in state schools and get to keep their jobs, plus children don't want to learn and don't all learn in the same way. In areas where education is a luxury or limited, children and families are more enthusiastic. Our school system is too restrictive and linear. Class sizes aren't the only problem, they've been larger and they've been smaller, but smaller has the best chance I'd agree.

If only the genuinely needy and the truly struggling stood up and asked for help, no one avoided paying their taxes and people didn't work cash in hand or employ expensive accountants to get away with making their contributions, NI and tax as it is would cover it all with cash to spare.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Strong & stable in a loop:Hilarious You crack me up SWC


Help my computer is infected  :Hilarious


----------



## 1290423

Vanessa131 said:


> Did you go to school at the weekend?
> 
> Hang on, does this mean you think there are only 195 none weekend days per year? What was that about my maths


Quite a straightforward question love! You claimed it cost almost £500 to feed a child for a year at £2.40 a day each I politely ask you how it was worked out as I roughly worked the calculations to be almost double. My remark relating to the education system was intended to enlighten in view we were discussing that too! 
Obviously, I was mistaken, it is obviously you're reading that you have problems with!


----------



## Calvine

MrsZee said:


> By the way, have you actually taught a group of 30?


yes, I have.


----------



## Vanessa131

DT said:


> Quite a straightforward question love! You claimed it cost almost £500 to feed a child for a year at £2.40 a day each I politely ask you how it was worked out as I roughly worked the calculations to be almost double. My remark relating to the education system was intended to enlighten in view we were discussing that too!
> Obviously, I was mistaken, it is obviously you're reading that you have problems with!


No problems at all reading when replying to a post about FSM, it wasn't your post I quoted.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Help my computer is infected  :Hilarious


:Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> yes, I have.


What are the recommendations these days mrs zee on class sizes and ages please would you know?


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> I'd join you. She makes this lot look like the pg tips chimps holding a tea party. Don't strain yourself 'arry. Maggie's ashes in an urn could do a better job.
> 
> Some parents who pay for their kids to have an education do without things others take for granted. I slept on the floor, lived on muesli and took one of mine to school on the back of an old motorbike. We didn't have a tv, or a phone. That was when Maggie was PM. For another I sold my car and took a job working unsocial hours in the local shop, Labour were in power then. I'm lucky though, all 3 of my offspring are useful and caring members of society who work for their living and are doing ok.
> 
> I think we can afford to take care of the needy of our society and probably even those who don't want to work. Just as some people get bored of their pups and abandon them to rescues, some people are lazy, don't want to work and cry for handouts, so I don't think we can cry over poor people who can't afford to feed their children. I'm not convinced that many exist. Greedy people who like Oliver Twist want more, but unlike Oliver don't actually need it, are too common. I went without for my children, seems to me too many others want other people to go without for theirs.
> 
> As for state schools. Yes, the classes are too big, but also too many bad teachers have too many rights in state schools and get to keep their jobs, plus children don't want to learn and don't all learn in the same way. In areas where education is a luxury or limited, children and families are more enthusiastic. Our school system is too restrictive and linear. Class sizes aren't the only problem, they've been larger and they've been smaller, but smaller has the best chance I'd agree.
> 
> If only the genuinely needy and the truly struggling stood up and asked for help, no one avoided paying their taxes and people didn't work cash in hand or employ expensive accountants to get away with making their contributions, NI and tax as it is would cover it all with cash to spare.


I think at least I Scandi countries people just accept that education, school meals, unis come from taxes, that the society contributes to most important task: Next generation.

For the society own good.

Part times, job sharing, shorter hours are available for working parents.

How actually parents in UK can meaningfully contribute to their kids' upbringing if they spend up to 12 hours daily away from home?


----------



## Calvine

Vanessa131 said:


> Did you go to school at the weekend?


@DT: I think the point being made is that this is for a meal on each school day? They go to school 195 days per year (or should rightly do so).


----------



## 1290423

Vanessa131 said:


> No problems at all reading when replying to a post about FSM, it wasn't your post I quoted.


Actually, tbh, I've totally misunderstood I've just realised you were speaking regarding free school meals I was under the impression you were working in a shelter where children were perhaps homeless or waiting for placement here apologises.


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> @DT: I think the point being made is that this is for a meal on each school day?


Yes, sorry, I only just cottoned on xxxx
Plus I'm without Internet so using my phone and can't use my smilies so everything I'm saying looks to be a bit harsh xx


----------



## Vanessa131

DT said:


> Actually, tbh, I've totally misunderstood I've just realised you were speaking regarding free school meals I was under the impression you were working in a shelter where children were perhaps homeless or waiting for placement here apologises.


No worries, things easily get mixed up on message boards, especially when lots of messages are being posted quite quickly. I did have a giggle when it meant that I thought that you thought there were 195 'working' days though


----------



## Lexiedhb

KittenKong said:


> I would have thought most parents who can afford to have their children educated privately could afford another 20%!
> 
> I'm more concerned about the children who'll be deprived of school meals if their parents can't afford it. It can happen with zero hour contracts and the complexities of applying for free school meals complicated by much form filling and delay for the odd week or two for not earning enough.


Why? I went to private school. I would have been pulled out had fees suddenly gone up 20%. My mother budgeted very carefully in order to be able to afford it, not everyone at private school has thousands in the bank. One could argue that it's not the government s job to feed kids people chose to have. (Kids in dire need aside)


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> everything I'm saying looks to be a bit harsh


Not at all...quite mild compared to many!


----------



## noushka05

Well guess what? I couldn't abide Maggie:Jawdrop. She made greed & selfishness acceptable, she has a lot to answer for does Maggie. That said, she was a good politician not like the current tool we've got for a PM.


----------



## Calvine

Lexiedhb said:


> Why? I went to private school. I would have been pulled out had fees suddenly gone up 20%.


Exactly...imagine if there are two kids at the school.


----------



## 1290423

Vanessa131 said:


> No worries, things easily get mixed up on message boards, especially when lots of messages are being posted quite quickly. I did have a giggle when it meant that I thought that you thought there were 195 'working' days though


I bet there are a few that wish there were. And no problem, but just goes to prove how wires get crossed. fortunately there are a few members that know what I'm like and do try to get me back on the rails x

Normally it starts with me reading the post backwards that's a common occurrence


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Got my wine and nibbles to watch it through the night


 me too except Ive eaten most of them already . No wine though


----------



## 1290423

kimthecat said:


> me too except Ive eaten most of them already . No wine though


Im still watching my waistline so shall have to make do with cardboard and water


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> I was in a class of 30 and managed to get to university. No-one had to control us.


well done ! I was in a class of over 40 and I got o levels . I wouldn't have made uni even if I had been in class of 10 but I'm proud of my o levels.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## 1290423

Will Stockwell what time are you planning on having this thread closed I understand that was your intention don't know if you are still planning to do so


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> I bet there are a few that wish there were. And no problem, but just goes to prove how wires get crossed. fortunately there are a few members that know what I'm like and do try to get me back on the rails x
> 
> Normally it starts with me reading the post backwards that's a common occurrence


I know ...

A most amazing discovery:
DT stands for DianeabbotT.

Hope you will get better soon xxx


----------



## KittenKong

Not to exclude our friends not far from here.

My vote would most certainly have been for the SNP.


----------



## 1290423

cheekyscrip said:


> I know ...
> 
> A most amazing discovery:
> DT stands for DianeabbotT.
> 
> Hope you will get better soon xxx


Lol!
It also stands for
Donald trump


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> Lol!
> It also stands for
> Donald trump


DoubleTrouble ...how prophetic...


----------



## Guest

DT said:


> What are the recommendations these days mrs zee on class sizes and ages please would you know?


I found some information in Finnish: the avarage size for a class in OECD countries was btw 7-13 years 21 and btw 14 and 16 years 24 students. In Finland they were 19 and 20. For kindergardens we had about ten children per teacher, whereas the OECD avérage was 14. But there are schools with more children and parents not happy with that all and protest very loudly. Most schools do very well everywhere though, and kids just choose the closest school, unless some one wants to specialize in music, maths, science, art or sports.

But the size isn´t the only factor affecting results. Food, facilities (versatile rooms), teacher´s skills and type of children. Those with special needs require much smaller classes, where as e.g. music classes can do well even in bigger groups (music alone is a great factor increasing learning, especially learning to play). There must be also regular breaks in fresh air (every 45 mins there is usually a 15 min break, where children must go out).

Hopefully this helps.


----------



## Zaros

samuelsmiles said:


> Haha. Yes, and she'd still be a dead cert to defeat Corbyn.


Now what was it that Vicky Pollard said?

Oh, I remember, 'I soooo can't believe you just said that!'


----------



## kimthecat

samuelsmiles said:


> Haha. Yes, and she'd still be a dead cert to defeat Corbyn.


:Hilarious She'd beat all of them put together.


----------



## Guest

Calvine said:


> yes, I have.


So you know yourself the difference btw class sizes, especially for those who need more attention/ active ways to learn.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Will Stockwell what time are you planning on having this thread closed I understand that was your intention don't know if you are still planning to do so


I got persuaded to keep it open for a while


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> have to make do with cardboard


I like cardboard to :Hilarious


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> Well guess what? I couldn't abide Maggie:Jawdrop. She made greed & selfishness acceptable, she has a lot to answer for does Maggie. That said, she was a good politician not like the current tool we've got for a PM.


I believe she was an exceptional politician and there's greed and selfishness, but there's also promoting ambition and taking responsibility for yourself. Agree with her or not, I think she believed in her policies and believed we'd be the better for them. There's another leader of a political party today who is similar in those respects.

I think Caroline Lucas may have more in common with Maggie than we might think. Judge Judy says 'if you tell the truth you don't need a good memory' and 'um is not an answer'. May has a good memory for sound bites, the other lot say 'um' a lot.  Caroline does mostly come over as very sensible, which is surprising for someone who is supposed to be an alternative hippy type.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> I believe she was an exceptional politician and there's greed and selfishness, but there's also promoting ambition and taking responsibility for yourself. Agree with her or not, I think she believed in her policies and believed we'd be the better for them. There's another leader of a political party today who is similar in those respects.
> 
> I think Caroline Lucas may have more in common with Maggie than we might think. Judge Judy says 'if you tell the truth you don't need a good memory' and 'um is not an answer'. May has a good memory for sound bites, the other lot say 'um' a lot.  Caroline does mostly come over as very sensible, which is surprising for someone who is supposed to be an alternative hippy type.


I like the most. She should have been Labour leader.


----------



## Happy Paws2

noushka05 said:


> Well guess what? I couldn't abide Maggie:Jawdrop. She made greed & selfishness acceptable, she has a lot to answer for does Maggie. That said, she was a good politician not like the current tool we've got for a PM.


She was an evil woman, and they have got another one from the same mould


----------



## 1290423

Happy Paws said:


> She was an evil woman, and they have got another one from the same mould


Love her or hate her, and I can understand why she was disliked so much, but had she have still been around we wouldn't be in the poo we are in now we would still have been in the EU she would have got her way she was a lot stronger than the wishy washy MPs we have today


----------



## stockwellcat.

*EXIT POLLS in 55 minutes.*


----------



## 1290423

My favourite MP on the scene at the moment is that Miari Black the young SNP.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> *EXIT POLLS in 55 minutes.*


Hope you've got your alarm set Stockwell would hate to miss that final minute


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Hope you've got your alarm set Stockwell would hate to miss that final minute


----------



## 1290423

49 minutes

Thats to prove to Vanessa I really can do sums
Xxxxxx


----------



## stockwellcat.

47 Minutes


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> 47 Minutes


Go to bed Stockwell will wake you up when we know the result


----------



## stockwellcat.

I am looking forward to a national holiday on St Geroge's Day if Labour gets in


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Go to bed Stockwell will wake you up when we know the result


Nah. All nighter for me


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I am looking forward to a national holiday on St Geroge's Day if Labour gets in


I'm looking forward to planting one of these here money trees in my garden, in fact I see a,business venture coming on. , I could plant a whole garden , wow!


----------



## stockwellcat.

*General Election live: Broadcasters' exit poll due at 10pm*
http://news.sky.com/story/general-election-live-broadcasters-exit-poll-due-at-10pm-10908978

42 Minutes to go @DT


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> I believe she was an exceptional politician and there's greed and selfishness, but there's also promoting ambition and taking responsibility for yourself. Agree with her or not, I think she believed in her policies and believed we'd be the better for them. There's another leader of a political party today who is similar in those respects.


You're not referring to Theresa May surely?

The only thing Margaret Thatcher and Caroline Lucas have in common is their gender.

Having said that, Thatcher's premiership did inspire other women to take on leadership roles in a previously male only environment.

Barbara Castle would have made an excellent Labour PM had she been given the chance I reckon.


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> You're not referring to Theresa May surely?
> 
> The only thing Margaret Thatcher and Caroline Lucas have in common is their gender.
> 
> Having said that, Thatcher's premiership did inspire other women to take on leadership roles in a previously male only environment.
> 
> Barbara Castle would have made an excellent Labour PM had she been given the chance I reckon.


And edwina curry


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> I'm looking forward to planting one of these here money trees in my garden, in fact I see a,business venture coming on. , I could plant a whole garden , wow!


That's a good idea as it will pay for the garden tax


----------



## stockwellcat.

Live Election Exit Poll feed


----------



## 1290423

Stockwell, just go and stand outside the polling Centre and make sure they don't close early
Then if we don't get the result we want we can always call another election


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Stockwell, just go and stand outside the polling Centre and make sure they don't close early
> Then if we don't get the result we want we can always call another election


Don't need to I can see from my window I am only across the road from my polling station. Still very busy. Very good turn out here


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Don't need to I can see from my window I am only across the road from my polling station. Still very busy. Very good turn out here


Well nip to the next village and make sure they adhere to the rules


----------



## 1290423

DT said:


> Well nip to the next village and make sure they adhere to the rules


I reckon turn out could be as much as 80% myself


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Well nip to the next village and make sure they adhere to the rules


Village  There's none of them around here. Borough's yes. Can't be bothered going to the next borough though it's to far away with a wine glass in my hand


----------



## 1290423

72.2 % turned out for eu election is this one going to beat it?


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> 72.2 % turned out for eu election is this one going to beat it?


I hope there has been a good turn out £79.9% maybe.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Village  There's none of them around here. Borough's yes. Can't be bothered going to the next borough though it's to far away with a wine glass in my hand


Well nip to one of those then, but get your skates on you've only got 25 minutes


----------



## Dr Pepper

Well I'm off to bed, I'll catch up on the conservative's win in the morning, no need to deprive myself of sleep for the inevitable.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Well nip to on of those then, but get your skates on you've only got 25 minutes


Nah I have had one to many glasses for that and get back in 24 minutes.


----------



## rona

Dr Pepper said:


> Well I'm off to bed, I'll catch up on the conservative's win in the morning, no need to deprive myself of sleep for the inevitable.


I sincerely hope you are right

Good night


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> I sincerely hope you are right
> 
> Good night


Well, we may get a hung parliament rona,


----------



## Elles

KittenKong said:


> You're not referring to Theresa May surely?
> 
> The only thing Margaret Thatcher and Caroline Lucas have in common is their gender.
> 
> Having said that, Thatcher's premiership did inspire other women to take on leadership roles in a previously male only environment.
> 
> Barbara Castle would have made an excellent Labour PM had she been given the chance I reckon.


No, I'm talking about Caroline Lucas. She comes over as honest, firm, believing in her policies and a woman of the day, if not ahead of her time. Not some weak willed puppet like May, or a relic of the past like Corbyn seems to me. I don't think anyone would describe Caroline Lucas or Margaret Thatcher as weak willed puppets. Different routes to a different Rome maybe, but similar strides imo. Can you tell Ms Lucas has very much impressed me, a very good speaker and very much stronger than the other bunch.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> No, I'm talking about Caroline Lucas. She comes over as honest, firm, believing in her policies and a woman of the day, if not ahead of her time. Not some weak willed puppet like May, or a relic of the past like Corbyn seems to me. I don't think anyone would describe Caroline Lucas or Margaret Thatcher as weak willed puppets. Different routes to a different Rome maybe, but similar strides imo. Can you tell Ms Lucas has very much impressed me, a very good speaker and very much stronger than the other bunch.


Yes, I very much liked her but we didn't have a green candidate


----------



## emmaviolet

To be honest, I see a Conservative win. 

I have no idea why, brainwashing I presume. I know those who vote that way will deny it, but what else. 

Unless you are the top ten percent, it makes no sense. Unless you can afford to pay for your health care, I don't get it 

The pensioners will vote for them, they will take their homes and fuel allowance and remove the lock on pensions 

I think we're now incapable of helping ourselves, believe things can never be better and we must suffer (well those who vote for them). 

Turkeys always seem to vote for Christmas.


----------



## 1290423

Pssst @stockwellcat you are slipping 10


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Pssst @stockwellcat you are slipping 10


7 minutes to go


----------



## 1290423

6


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> 6


4


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> No, I'm talking about Caroline Lucas. She comes over as honest, firm, believing in her policies and a woman of the day, if not ahead of her time. Not some weak willed puppet like May, or a relic of the past like Corbyn seems to me. I don't think anyone would describe Caroline Lucas or Margaret Thatcher as weak willed puppets. Different routes to a different Rome maybe, but similar strides imo. Can you tell Ms Lucas has very much impressed me, a very good speaker and very much stronger than the other bunch.


I think she's now got control of herself and realised how important it is to not lose her temper in front of the cameras. She lost so much credibility in the referendum debate by being so shrill. I think she's handled herself very well during this election, even if I didn't like all she has to say


----------



## emmaviolet

When you know you're on the other side to the likes of certain people with certain views, like Katie Hopkins. You know you are on the right side of history.


----------



## stockwellcat.

It has started:


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Just got back from voting, they told me the turn out has been very good indeed.


----------



## 1290423

Thats it then guys!


----------



## Guest

Blimey, you cut that fine


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Oh looking like it`s going to be an interesting night! are you ready stocked up with the snacks SWC!


----------



## Satori

Wow. Exit poll (usually pretty good) says Tories lose overall majority.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Skys Exit Poll:

314 Conservatives
266 Labour
34 SNP
14 Lib Dems
0 UKIP

Hung Parliament. Short 22 seats for a win by Conservatives.

Let's see how close they are in reality. This is only a guess.


----------



## Team_Trouble

Stop replying to the thread!  I got 20 pages behind and am trying to catch up! 
Oh I give up. Unsure whether to stay up and watch. I'll be exhausted at work tomorrow, but I don't know how well I'll be able to sleep anyway.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Franlow said:


> Blimey, you cut that fine


 Me? yes we always do if my husband is home, the staff made a big fuss of the dogs so we were there a bit longer than expected


----------



## Guest

Last 2 election exit polls were wildly wrong


----------



## Satori

KatieandOliver said:


> Stop replying to the thread!  I got 20 pages behind and am trying to catch up!
> Oh I give up. Unsure whether to stay up and watch. I'll be exhausted at work tomorrow, but I don't know how well I'll be able to sleep anyway.


Stay up. The result looks far from boring. New leader of the Conservative party tomorrow if this holds up.


----------



## emmaviolet

She shouldn't have been so very greedy.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Skys Exit Poll:
> 
> 314 Conservatives
> 265 Labour
> 34 SNP
> 14 Lib Dems
> 0 UKIP
> 
> Hung Parliament. Short 22 seats for a win by Conservatives.
> 
> Let's see how close they are in reality. This is only a guess.


Well if that is the result, which I doubt it will be, all I can say is bad move and it serves her right!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Managed to get our vote in before the dog walk, not very busy at our polling station but it was chucking down with rain as we arrived, stopped by the time we came out (no queue - we were only ones in there) and lots of cars were arriving. Have emailed out Lib Dem candidate to tell her she got our votes.

Now earlier I spoke to my Mum, lordy what a pickle she got herself into voting. She couldn't find Jeremy Corbyn or Theresa May's names on the voting paper she told me (I tried to explain why they were not on her paper) so she voted Green although she thought about voting UKIP as she agrees with some of their policies but if she could have found Jeremy Corbyn's name she would have voted for him. She is in a pretty safe Tory seat.


----------



## stockwellcat.

BBC News Exit Poll:
Seat prediction: 
CON 314, 
LAB 266, 
SNP 34, 
LD 14

Let's see how accurate these polls are.


----------



## Satori

Franlow said:


> Last 2 election exit polls were wildly wrong


Nonsense. No idea where you got this from.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Well if that is the result, which I doubt it will be, all I can say is bad move and it serves her right!


It's only a guess as they only surveyed 144 people.


----------



## Team_Trouble

I should probably know the answer to this but, if there is a hung parliament, how is it decided who will form a coalition?


----------



## Satori

KatieandOliver said:


> I should probably know the answer to this but, if there is a hung parliament, how is it decided who will form a coalition?


Back room deals in smoke filled rooms. 2010 in particular was very dramatic with more twists than a crime novel.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KatieandOliver said:


> I should probably know the answer to this but, if there is a hung parliament, how is it decided who will form a coalition?


Well if the results are right Lib Dems don't have enough to fill the gap for Conservatives or Labour. SNP have enough to plug the gap for Conservatives to go into coalition and so do Labour. This is if a Conservative win happens.


----------



## kimthecat

Mock The week . The rest of the world isn't interested in our Election , even the Russians haven't hacked it :Smuggrin


----------



## Happy Paws2

3dogs2cats said:


> Oh looking like it`s going to be an interesting night! are you ready stocked up with the snacks SWC!


Yes snacks and a bottle of wine, it's going to be a long night, may stay up until we get an idea how things are going.


----------



## Guest

Satori said:


> Nonsense. No idea where you got this from.


Um, that will be Brexit - exit polls said in & Last General election said no clear majority. Not sure what you have been watching, but, that is fact, not opinion.


----------



## Guest

stockwellcat said:


> It's only a guess as they only surveyed 144 people.


Exit polls surveyed 30,000 people 144 seats!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Franlow said:


> Um, that will be Brexit - exit polls said in & Last General election said no clear majority. Not sure what you have been watching, but, that is fact, not opinion.


The exit polls are a guess by the news channels they only surveyed 144 people.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Franlow said:


> Exit polls surveyed 30,000 people 144 seats!


They aren't accurate though the news channels are saying "if they are right".


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KatieandOliver said:


> I should probably know the answer to this but, if there is a hung parliament, how is it decided who will form a coalition?


Whoever has the biggest number of seats can try and go it alone but it depends on whether the other parties do deals and can therefore form a coalition. If those polls are right Labour would have to do a deal with both the SNP and the Lib Dems I think. Tomorrow could be a very exciting day.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Franlow said:


> Last 2 election exit polls were wildly wrong


I`m pretty certain the exit poll in last two GEs was bloody accurate, I can remember emailing my husband moaning they had taken all the excitement out of the night by giving the results away and it was all over before it started! .


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> The exit polls are a guess by the news channels they only surveyed 144 people.


A report from the Abbott school of mathematics?


----------



## Satori

3dogs2cats said:


> I`m pretty certain the exit poll in last two GEs was bloody accurate, I can remember emailing my husband moaning they had taken all the excitement out of the night by giving the results away and it was all over before it started! .


Correct. Remember Nick Clegg eating his hat.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> There was no brexit exit poll. The 2005, 2010 and 2015 exit polls were remarkably accurate. Don't know why you are trying to re-write history when the facts are there for all to check. Do you even know what an exit poll is?


Hung parliament 314 to Conservatives. Exit poll is above or on pervious page.


----------



## Guest

KatieandOliver said:


> I should probably know the answer to this but, if there is a hung parliament, how is it decided who will form a coalition?


The largest party is invited by the Queen to form a Government. They then tart around trying to find enough seats from the other parties to reach the magic number.
Sounds like Amber Rudd may be in trouble  Oh dear!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> A report from the Abbott school of mathematics?


They are a guess for god's sake.


----------



## Satori

KatieandOliver said:


> I should probably know the answer to this but, if there is a hung parliament, how is it decided who will form a coalition?


Channel 4 did a brilliant drama on the 2010 coalition deal. Called "coalition". It is eye opening.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> Hung parliament 314 to Conservatives. Exit poll is above or on pervious page.


?


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> They aren't accurate though the news channels are saying "if they are right".


They have been the most accurate polls in election history actually, not that this means they will be this time of course.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Hung?
Would we be so, so lucky?
Pound crashed though.

Hmmmm...if markets got it right?

Beware, Bojo is waiting round the corner to swap jester's hat for a tiara...

If May ends up in tears....

Wonder if LibDems will clegg again?

Forgetting Brexit, uni fees etc..

Corbyn stays...


----------



## emmaviolet

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Managed to get our vote in before the dog walk, not very busy at our polling station but it was chucking down with rain as we arrived, stopped by the time we came out (no queue - we were only ones in there) and lots of cars were arriving. Have emailed out Lib Dem candidate to tell her she got our votes.
> 
> Now earlier I spoke to my Mum, lordy what a pickle she got herself into voting. She couldn't find Jeremy Corbyn or Theresa May's names on the voting paper she told me (I tried to explain why they were not on her paper) so she voted Green although she thought about voting UKIP as she agrees with some of their policies but if she could have found Jeremy Corbyn's name she would have voted for him. She is in a pretty safe Tory seat.





rottiepointerhouse said:


> Managed to get our vote in before the dog walk, not very busy at our polling station but it was chucking down with rain as we arrived, stopped by the time we came out (no queue - we were only ones in there) and lots of cars were arriving. Have emailed out Lib Dem candidate to tell her she got our votes.
> 
> Now earlier I spoke to my Mum, lordy what a pickle she got herself into voting. She couldn't find Jeremy Corbyn or Theresa May's names on the voting paper she told me (I tried to explain why they were not on her paper) so she voted Green although she thought about voting UKIP as she agrees with some of their policies but if she could have found Jeremy Corbyn's name she would have voted for him. She is in a pretty safe Tory seat.


My Mum wanted to help my Nan, but the man who was there said she couldn't, so he helped her. It was funny as he said she couldn't help as it's private, but he asked her for who does she want to vote and she said, very loudly Labour. 
It was only them in, I walked them down with Alfie and waited outside, I have a postal vote.

We're one of the safest seats in the country, IDS, but we wanted our say, and to contribute to the numbers saying of overall votes at least.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Elles said:


> A report from the Abbott school of mathematics?


Nasty


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> They have been the most accurate polls in election history actually, not that this means they will be this time of course.


We'll see when the actual results are in, in the morning then.


----------



## 1290423

Franlow said:


> The largest party is invited by the Queen to form a Government. They then tart around trying to find enough seats from the other parties to reach the magic number.
> Sounds like Amber Rudd may be in trouble  Oh dear!


Best news i've heard today


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> Hung?
> Would we be so, so lucky?
> Pound crashed.


Yes just saw the massive drop in the currency markets with the pound.

*Pound Sterling Crashing Against Euro and Dollar as Conservatives Lose Majority According to Exit Poll*










Following the exit poll release, Sterling is as follows:


Pound to Euro exchange rate: 1.1341, down 1.87%
Pound to Dollar exchange rate: 1.2746, down 1.62%
Pound to Australian Dollar exchange rate: 1.6923, down 1.42%
https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/g...euro-and-dollar-exchange-rate-election-result


----------



## Guest

*Satori said: ↑*
*There was no brexit exit poll. The 2005, 2010 and 2015 exit polls were remarkably accurate. Don't know why you are trying to re-write history when the facts are there for all to check. Do you even know what an exit poll is?*

*GE 2015 exit poll prediction*

Conservative: 316 NO OVERALL MAJORITY
Labour: 239
SNP: 58
Lib Dems: 10
Others: 27
*GE 2015 results*

Conservative: 331
Labour: 232
SNP: 56
Lib Dems: 8
Others: 23
YES I DO KNOW WHAT AN EXIT POLL IS, CLEARLY IT IS YOU THAT HAS A PROBLEM WITH THEIR MEMORY AND MANNERS.
CLEARLY, YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW TO DO A QUICK GOOGLE SEARCH
More likely one too many vino collapso's

Would you like me to explain the difference between a hung parliament & an overall majority? I;m sure I could manage it in words of 2 syllables, or, less.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

emmaviolet said:


> To be honest, I see a Conservative win.
> 
> I have no idea why, brainwashing I presume. I know those who vote that way will deny it, but what else.
> 
> Unless you are the top ten percent, it makes no sense. Unless you can afford to pay for your health care, I don't get it
> 
> The pensioners will vote for them, they will take their homes and fuel allowance and remove the lock on pensions
> 
> I think we're now incapable of helping ourselves, believe things can never be better and we must suffer (well those who vote for them).
> 
> Turkeys always seem to vote for Christmas.


We are apparently in the top 10% and we have private health care but we did not vote Tory.


----------



## Team_Trouble

So, what happens if none of the other parties want to join up with the conservatives?


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> We'll see when the actual results are in, in the morning then.


Yup. Time to open another bottle. I hope the exit polls are as good as usual. I quite fancied a coalition of chaos. It makes for better tele.


----------



## Elles

Happy Paws said:


> Nasty


Why is it? She made a mistake with numbers too. 

I was so bad at maths, I didn't bother going in for the exam.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Franlow said:


> *Satori said: ↑*
> *There was no brexit exit poll. The 2005, 2010 and 2015 exit polls were remarkably accurate. Don't know why you are trying to re-write history when the facts are there for all to check. Do you even know what an exit poll is?*
> 
> *GE 2015 exit poll prediction*
> 
> Conservative: 316 NO OVERALL MAJORITY
> Labour: 239
> SNP: 58
> Lib Dems: 10
> Others: 27
> *GE 2015 results*
> 
> Conservative: 331
> Labour: 232
> SNP: 56
> Lib Dems: 8
> Others: 23
> YES I DO KNOW WHAT AN EXIT POLL IS, CLEARLY IT IS YOU THAT HAS A PROBLEM WITH THEIR MEMORY AND MANNERS.
> CLEARLY, YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW TO DO A QUICK GOOGLE SEARCH
> More likely one too many vino collapso's


Why you getting nasty?
I will wait for the actual results thanks


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KatieandOliver said:


> So, what happens if none of the other parties want to join up with the conservatives?


Doubt they will so its a case of whether the others can agree anything to work together. I know Labour and the Lib Dems were saying no to any coalitions but who knows they may change their tune if there is a chance they can work with the SNP and form a government.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> Why you getting nasty?
> I will wait for the actual results that's


habit, I guess.


----------



## emmaviolet

rottiepointerhouse said:


> We are apparently in the top 10% and we have private health care but we did not vote Tory.


That's great. I know some like you, most people now look after their own interests first.

I have no idea what the 90%who cannot afford to pay for their health care are thinking when they put that cross on the Tories box.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Satori said:


> Because a troll is posting lies.


Who me?


----------



## Elles

Satori said:


> Yup. Time to open another bottle. I hope the exit polls are as good as usual. I quite fancied a coalition of chaos. It makes for better tele.


If it's accurate, it's just the result I was hoping for. 

Cheers.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> Who me?


No. Never. Sorry if I gave that impression. I quoted the wrong post.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Former Lib Dem leader Lord Campbell says given the history of polls in the past, "it's very, very dangerous to seek to draw conclusions".

He pours cold water on suggestions that his party could go into a coalition, particularly with the Conservatives, which he said would be "impossible".

The Lib Dem experience is the major party gets the credit for anything gets done, and junior party gets the blame when it goes wrong, he says.

He would be "astonished" if leader Tim Farron went down that route, he adds.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Satori said:


> No. Never. Sorry if I gave that impression. I quoted the wrong post.


Too much champagne???


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> We are apparently in the top 10% and we have private health care but we did not vote Tory.


What is the top 10% please, how is it calculated


----------



## Satori

cheekyscrip said:


> Too much champagne???


Wash your mouth out!


----------



## Guest

We were talking about exit polls. I pointed out they were inaccurate, you basically called me a liar & attempted to be patronising. Facts in post above.
Facts do not lie. As for brainless trolling - if the cap fits....


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Another election on the horizon?*

ITV political correspondent tweets...

Posted at22:11

Follow
Carl Dinnen

✔@carldinnen
Ed Balls; "If this is right there'll be another election soon."


----------



## emmaviolet

Elles said:


> Why is it? She made a mistake with numbers too.
> 
> I was so bad at maths, I didn't bother going in for the exam.


She hasn't been well.

As someone with a long term chronic condition, I have a very high IQ, my illness can make me appear illiterate some days as things just slip out of my mind and my eyes cannot focus on things.

There but for the grace of God and all that.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Posted at22:11
> 
> Follow
> Carl Dinnen
> 
> ✔@carldinnen
> Ed Balls; "If this is right there'll be another election soon."


Not another one. I will abstain if we do have another Election again.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> What is the top 10% please, how is it calculated


I think they mean those who will be affected by Labour's tax rises for higher rate tax payers.


----------



## Team_Trouble

Is there a way to find out what the exit poll suggests for individual constituencies?


----------



## kimthecat

Frankie Boyles New world order bbc 2 on now , if you bored with the usual GE stuff. .:Smuggrin


----------



## Elles

Well I hope it's not too far out, it's very close and I don't want to see May's conservatives with a majority. The parties need to know that the British people they're so proud of are not happy.


----------



## emmaviolet

DT said:


> What is the top 10% please, how is it calculated


Top ten percent are those who have the top ten percent of wealth in this country. The very top of the top.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KatieandOliver said:


> Is there a way to find out what the exit poll suggests for individual constituencies?


There are some predictions on here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-...7-40171454&link_location=live-reporting-story


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

emmaviolet said:


> Top ten percent are those who have the top ten percent of wealth in this country. The very top of the top.


Really - take us out then. I thought it meant the people who are affected by higher rate tax bands.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Franlow said:


> We were talking about exit polls. I pointed out they were inaccurate, you basically called me a liar & attempted to be patronising. Facts in post above.
> Facts do not lie. As for brainless trolling - if the cap fits....


C'mon...he is just a bit tipsy...just made another little million on crashing pound...and few bets with his mates ...

( Actually he could be worse sober)

Berlin , Paris, Brussels must be laughing....


----------



## cheekyscrip

Just praying it will stay this way in the morning...


----------



## emmaviolet

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Really - take us out then. I thought it meant the people who are affected by higher rate tax bands.


Haha, yeah, it's the top wealth of the country, well that's what most people's usage is.

No doubt you may have found you have a lot of new friends if you are including yourself with the top 10%!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

emmaviolet said:


> Haha, yeah, it's the top wealth of the country, well that's what most people's usage is.
> 
> No doubt you may have found you have a lot of new friends if you are including yourself with the top 10%!


Nah never discuss our finances with friends and family.


----------



## emmaviolet

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Nah never discuss our finances with friends and family.


Ah then your OK then.


----------



## Team_Trouble

rottiepointerhouse said:


> There are some predictions on here
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-...7-40171454&link_location=live-reporting-story


Thanks. Mine didn't have any predictions, but it did have a fun quiz  I only scored 32 though... :Bag


----------



## picaresque

MollySmith said:


> You might want to take a quick read of this..I think I took out all the swears in the bit I quoted. Now I don't advocate forgetting stuff but honestly I had no idea what she has done and stupid is the last word I'd apply to Diana Abbott. In fact I'd say the reverse, we are all very stupid for misjudging - regardless of politics the woman has guts and bravery.
> 
> https://cookingonabootstrap.com/2017/06/07/we-need-to-talk-about-diane-abbott-now-explicit-content/
> 
> _WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT DIANE ABBOTT by Jack Monroe
> 
> Right one of us political writer people needs to do this and it looks like it's me. Grab a seat. I wanna talk about Diane.
> Diane was first elected as an MP in 1987, the year before I was born. She has been dedicated to serving the British public for longer than I have even been alive. Hold that thought. Understand it.
> Diane was the first black woman to have a seat in the House of Commons. She MADE HISTORY. Her father was welder, her mother a nurse. How many working class kids do we have in politics these days?
> Diane went to Cambridge University to study history. IN THE SEVENTIES. In 2017 only 15 black kids went to Cambridge. Sit down and listen.
> Diane worked for the Home Office in 1976. She was so smart they put her on a course to fast-track her career. (I'm just getting started.)
> Diane was Race Relations Officer at the National Council for Civil Liberties from 1978 to 1980. (Big **** job. Bet you couldn't do it.)
> Diane was a TV researcher and reporter from 1978 to 1985. I know a lot of those. They're fast thinkers, avid fact hounds, brilliant minds.
> Diane's political career began in 1982, on Westminster City Council. Then in 1987, I'll say it again, she became the first black female MP.
> 
> In 2008, her speech on civil liberties in the counterterrorism debate won Parliamentary Speech Of The Year in the Spectator awards.
> 
> That speech is here. Watch it, and then come back. https://t.co/qNMvtilMa1
> 
> She founded the Black Child initiative, to raise educational achievements among black kids. She shared her damn platform.
> 
> She's been the Shadow Minister for Public health, working tirelessly to tackle Tory cuts to children's services, maternity care, all of it.
> 
> In September 2011, the Telegraph called her 'one of Labours best frontbench performers'. The same Telegraph now monsters her for clicks.
> 
> Diane was one of 16 MPs to write to Miliband in 2015 asking him to commit to opposing further austerity measures. She did that for all of us. Diane was one of a tiny handful of MPs to defy the Labour whip and vote AGAINST Tory austerity cuts. Those cuts are KILLING people.
> 
> Diane has consistently voted against a reduction in spending on benefits. She has consistently voted for and campaigned for higher benefits over longer periods for people unable to work due to illness/disability.
> 
> In March she raised the issue of cuts to domestic violence services, in the House of Commons: "women and children are turned away daily".
> 
> Diane has campaigned to help unaccompanied migrant children travelling from Greece and Italy.
> 
> Diane is a skilled orator, a quick thinker, a glorious debater, a genuine public servant and a thoroughly decent woman. I mean reading through Hansard right now is a delight, some of her points and comebacks are glorious. And brilliant. And strong.
> 
> 31st Jan 2017 - demanding to know why ESOL funding was being cut while the immigration debate focused on the importance of integration…
> 
> She has spoken on Leveson, terrorism, education, poverty, welfare, illness, disability, refugees, child sexual abuse, pro-choice abortion. Her campaigns include legal aid, civil liberties, fighting crime, sickle cell thallasemia, public transport, improving education. She has given speeches at Harvard University, for Christ's sake. Have you? She has travelled to Kenya, China, Uganda, all over the world, representing the Government. Representing Britain. HAVE YOU?_


Missed this yesterday (try to avoid this thread!). I see the thread I posted has been closed, I've been offline all day. Didn't expect it to go that way, didn't think there was much to fight about however much some people seem to (totally disproportionately) despise DA. More fool me.
Anyway probably shouldn't comment on a locked thread except I was a bit  to see some posters claiming the moral high ground against those who had read and shared the article, like the real problem is those who acknowledge the abuse. Also disgusted at Diane Abbott's achievements being erased by referring to her as a 'token black', like she couldn't possible have got anywhere on her own merit. Going through a low patch atm anyway so I don't know what possessed me to start the thread. It hasn't helped.
Anyway, I've voted, I am guardedly hopeful.


----------



## Elles

emmaviolet said:


> She hasn't been well.
> 
> As someone with a long term chronic condition, I have a very high IQ, my illness can make me appear illiterate some days as things just slip out of my mind and my eyes cannot focus on things.
> 
> There but for the grace of God and all that.


Oh ok, I thought she was just bad at maths and can't think reasonable numbers on the fly. I'm crap at maths, but for some strange reason all of my children are good at it and my daughter is in the top percent of gifted. She explained it as being able to look at a problem and read it as though it's a sentence in a book, she doesn't have to work it out. So when I look at a bunch of complicated numbers and equations on a board I might as well be looking at an alien language, it's as clear as reading the daily comics to her. It doesn't mean I'm thick and she isn't. Or maybe it does. 

Anyway, once I won a competition to go on tv and ask a pop star 3 questions I had. I had to write them down and read them. I couldn't remember my own questions, I was so overcome. Anyone who goes on tv and can remember their own name is doing better than I did lol.


----------



## emmaviolet

picaresque said:


> Missed this yesterday (try to avoid this thread!). I see the thread I posted has been closed, I've been offline all day. Didn't expect it to go that way, didn't think there was much to fight about however much some people seem to (totally disproportionately) despise DA. More fool me.
> Anyway probably shouldn't comment on a locked thread except I was a bit  to see some posters claiming the moral high ground against those who had read and shared the article, like the real problem is those who acknowledge the abuse. Also disgusted at Diane Abbott's achievements being erased by referring to her as a 'token black', like she couldn't possible have got anywhere on her own merit. Going through a low patch atm anyway so I don't know what possessed me to start the thread. It hasn't helped.
> Anyway, I've voted, I am guardedly hopeful.


My first post was deleted as it referenced another, very nasty post that was deleted.

But I actually logged on to post on your thread because I was shaking with disgust at some of the posts on there. The one you just said, but another that was long removed. A sad situation.


----------



## SusieRainbow

Well, this seems to be turning a bit nasty, please no more insulting each other or it will be closed.
Some posts have been deleted as rude and offensive. 
Thank goodness it will be over in the morning !


----------



## Elles

SusieRainbow said:


> Thank goodness it will be over in the morning !


It might not be yet. If no one can agree and we get another election this could go on for months.


----------



## Guest

Thankyou


----------



## kimthecat

I'm wondering how May or Corbyn will cope health and energy wise as PM , they're both over 60 .
At the end of five years they will 65 and 73.


----------



## SusieRainbow

Elles said:


> It might not be yet. If no one can agree and we get another election this could go on for months.


Oh, please, NO !!!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> I'm wondering how May or Corbyn will cope health and energy wise as PM , they're both over 60 .
> At the end of five years they will 65 and 73.


I shall write to Mr Corbyn and recommend he gets himself on a plant based diet right away


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*May reportedly under pressure already*

Guardian political editor tweets...

Posted at23:06

Follow
Anushka Asthana @GuardianAnushka
Tory MPs saying if this poll is correct then will be "very difficult" for Theresa May to stay in place.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Newcastle Central beats Sunderland to being the first to declare, with Labour's Chi Onwurah holding on to her seat.


----------



## Guest

Very true. Ted Heath & Harold Wilson in the 70's used to look that old, but, I'm pretty sure that was the black & white telly though. They do both seem quite sprightly - was going to say fit, but ..... nah


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I shall write to Mr Corbyn and recommend he gets himself on a plant based diet right away


:Smuggrin Tell him to eat the Greens. Heehee.


----------



## SusieRainbow

kimthecat said:


> I'm wondering how May or Corbyn will cope health and energy wise as PM , they're both over 60 .
> At the end of five years they will 65 and 73.


That's not old ! As long as they have no existing problems they should do fine.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

SusieRainbow said:


> That's not old ! As long as they have no existing problems they should do fine.


Mrs May is a Type 1 Diabetic but she seems to manage it pretty well - hats off to her as it must be difficult with her unpredictable hours/eating times & all the travelling she does.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Lib Dems definitively rule out coalition*
Posted at23:14








AFP/Getty

Definitely no coalition, say the Liberal Democrats.

The party's press office has tweeted: "We are getting a lot of calls so just to be clear: No Coalition. No deals."


----------



## 3dogs2cats

rottiepointerhouse said:


> *May reportedly under pressure already*
> 
> Guardian political editor tweets...
> 
> Posted at23:06
> 
> Follow
> Anushka Asthana @GuardianAnushka
> Tory MPs saying if this poll is correct then will be "very difficult" for Theresa May to stay in place.


I think anything less than a large majority for May is going to cause her problems, that was the whole point of calling this election.


----------



## Lurcherlad

rottiepointerhouse said:


> *Lib Dems definitively rule out coalition*
> Posted at23:14
> View attachment 313858
> 
> AFP/Getty
> 
> Definitely no coalition, say the Liberal Democrats.
> 
> The party's press office has tweeted: "We are getting a lot of calls so just to be clear: No Coalition. No deals."


They should give it another go - they have nothing to lose!


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Mrs May is a Type 1 Diabetic but she seems to manage it pretty well - hats off to her as it must be difficult with her unpredictable hours/eating times & all the travelling she does.


I didn't know that . hats off to her for coping with it .


----------



## cheekyscrip

BoJo will be our next PM?

TM would likely resign...


Unless SNP does better....then they could get it without LibDems, with C.


----------



## kimthecat

The gossip on Twitter is that Amber Rudd might lose her Hastings seat .


----------



## 3dogs2cats

SusieRainbow said:


> That's not old ! As long as they have no existing problems they should do fine.


Have you drawn the short straw and got the job of moderating all night


----------



## Jonescat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I shall write to Mr Corbyn and recommend he gets himself on a plant based diet right away


Isn't he a long time veggie?


----------



## SusieRainbow

3dogs2cats said:


> Have you drawn the short straw and got the job of moderating all night


No, I will retire at my usual hour , do you think this thread will run all night ? Aaaaagggghhhhh !!!


----------



## 3dogs2cats

kimthecat said:


> The gossip on Twitter is that Amber Rudd might lose her Hastings seat .


How do they know this, last time they seemed to know Ed Balls had lost his seat and Nigel Farage hadn`t gained a seat within minutes of the polls closing, they were quite correct of course but how on the earth can they now when the ballots boxes have hardly been opened!


----------



## Guest

Nooooo Bojo, had to put up with the embarrassment of him as London Mayor. Remember the whiff waff comment? Getting stuck on the zip line? How can someoby who cannot find a hairbrush, or, use it be PM????


----------



## kimthecat

3dogs2cats said:


> Have you drawn the short straw and got the job of moderating all night


oh joy  I don't think I'm going to last all night , I'm nearly falling asleep as it is .


----------



## 3dogs2cats

SusieRainbow said:


> No, I will retire at my usual hour , do you think this thread will run all night ? Aaaaagggghhhhh !!!


Well I`m in the long haul but I might end up talking to myself if everyone bails, don`t worry I won`t start any rows with myself


----------



## stockwellcat.

I was going to do an all nighter but I am falling asleep so I am retiring and will check the results in the morning at 6am ish.


----------



## 1290423

emmaviolet said:


> Top ten percent are those who have the top ten percent of wealth in this country. The very top of the top.


Yes but I wanted to know how it was calculated no one knows how much anyone has is assets apart from looking at the Rich List


----------



## SusieRainbow

3dogs2cats said:


> Well I`m in the long haul but I might end up talking to myself if everyone bails, don`t worry I won`t start any rows with myself


That's good to hear !


----------



## Elles

DUP have said they'll back the conservatives if needed


----------



## Guest

Jonescat said:


> Isn't he a long time veggie?


yes he is 50 years apparantly


----------



## kimthecat

3dogs2cats said:


> How do they know this, last time they seemed to know Ed Balls had lost his seat and Nigel Farage hadn`t gained a seat within minutes of the polls closing, they were quite correct of course but how on the earth can they now when the ballots boxes have hardly been opened!


You gov and the bbc I think ,

YouGov predicts that UK Home Secretary *Amber Rudd* will be eliminated in tomorrow's national parliamentary election


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I think they mean those who will be affected by Labour's tax rises for higher rate tax payers.


Sorry I must have misunderstood I read it that you personally had said you were amongst the top 10%, assuming you meant due to wealth


----------



## cheekyscrip

Franlow said:


> Nooooo Bojo, had to put up with the embarrassment of him as London Mayor. Remember the whiff waff comment? Getting stuck on the zip line? How can someoby who cannot find a hairbrush, or, use it be PM????


Ask Americans


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> I was going to do an all nighter but I am falling asleep so I am retiring and will check the results in the morning at 6am ish.


You drank too much wine , I bet .  Its not going to be so much fun without you .


----------



## Guest

Oh God Amber Rudd on strictly???? Poor Anton, sure to be lumbered


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> I was going to do an all nighter but I am falling asleep so I am retiring and will check the results in the morning at 6am ish.


Oh you lightweight


----------



## Guest

cheekyscrip said:


> Ask Americans ;-)


Trump can't use a brush with that syrup


----------



## Guest

Thunder & lightening here, I have a 2 cat lap at the mo


----------



## kimthecat

I dont know which TV channel to watch it on. I have BBC 1 , ITV and Sky 

Which channel are you watching ?


----------



## cheekyscrip

Franlow said:


> Oh God Amber Rudd on strictly???? Poor Anton, sure to be lumbered


No...I want her eating bugs on Celebrity, Get Me Out....

Or....imagine TM in the jungle muttering "Brexit is Brexit", " Strong and Stable"....

If she goes...
Can we hope that the Three Stooges go to the jungle with her?

Too much to hope for!!!


----------



## CRL

sunderland central is labour, by a 10,000 majority


----------



## Guest

Seems like there is a good turnout, especially with youngsters. Really good news


----------



## Guest

Nick Cleggs seat could be at risk.....


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jonescat said:


> Isn't he a long time veggie?


He is but plant based would be better for his long term health and vitality (and in the bedroom too )



DT said:


> Sorry I must have misunderstood I read it that you personally had said you were amongst the top 10%, assuming you meant due to wealth


God no, I was referring to Labour saying their tax rises only affect the top 5% of earners.

*Hastings 'dicey' for Amber Rudd*

BBC political editor tweets...

Posted at23:38

Follow
Laura Kuenssberg

✔@bbclaurak
Hastings v dicey for Amber Rudd - would be quite a scalp for Labour to take the Home Sec down

11:33 PM - 8 Jun 2017


----------



## Guest

Swindon North Con
Newcastle East Lab


----------



## Calvine

Jonescat said:


> Isn't he a long time veggie?


I believe so...he makes his own jam too with what he grows in his allotment.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

I have to say this is the coldest election day I can remember! Usually I`ve got the windows open but tonight I`m all wrapped up in a fleecy blanket!


----------



## kimthecat

I guess if the tories lose the majority , Labour will see this as a victory and keep Corby as Leader rather than seeing it as the failure it really is .


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> I was going to do an all nighter but I am falling asleep so I am retiring and will check the results in the morning at 6am ish.


You peaked too soon. I recommend more spinach next time 

I haven't gone to bed yet - just off for a late dinner and will be back.


----------



## Guest

Sunderland West Lab


----------



## picaresque

rottiepointerhouse said:


> He is but plant based would be better for his long term health and vitality (and in the bedroom too )


Thanks for that image... :Bag


----------



## Guest

Newcastle North - lab


----------



## kimthecat

Swindon North stays Conservative. Labourites on Twitter being abusive to Swindon and seeing it as victory because Labour gained a few
more votes than ususal
Losing is the new victory


----------



## Guest

May be a recount in Hastings


----------



## Guest

Looks like Labour gain Battersea


----------



## Guest

Kettering Con


----------



## Guest

Nuneaton - Con


----------



## Guest

Broxbourne - Con


----------



## Guest

Battersea labour gain ???
Thurrock Lab Gain ????


----------



## Guest

Middlesbrough Lab


----------



## Elles

The reporting is terribly ageist.


----------



## Guest

Basildon & Billericay Con hold


----------



## Guest

Workington Lab Hold


----------



## Jonescat

Allotments rock and there is nothing wrong with jam. ☺
This is far more interesting than I expected.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

I`ve broken into the nuts and considering if a glass of wine might be in order!


----------



## Guest

Isn't it just. Corbyn was getting massive support from the youngsters. Did you see the 7 way debate at Cambridge uni. They were almost mobbing him outside, very unusual
Darlington Lab hold


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Jonescat said:


> Allotments rock and there is nothing wrong with jam. ☺
> This is far more interesting than I expected.


Agree it is far more interesting, I`ve been reading the emails I sent to my husband last GE, by this time I was telling him it was pretty much all over everyone agreed the exit poll was correct Tories had won end of, this time no one seem terrible confident about anything.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Franlow said:


> Isn't it just. Corbyn was getting massive support from the youngsters. Did you see the 7 way debate at Cambridge uni. They were almost mobbing him outside, very unusual
> Darlington Lab hold


And Darlington was one the Conservatives really targeted.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

I'm off to watch Tele in bed. Come on you reds.


----------



## Guest

Could it be like the FA cup final??????
Come on you reds precisely


----------



## Guest

Swindon South Con hold


----------



## Guest

Jarrow Lab Hold


----------



## Guest

Wrexham Lab hold
Llanelli Lab hold


----------



## Guest

North Down Independent hold


----------



## Guest

Rutherglen & Hamilton West Lab GAIN


----------



## Guest

Harrogate Con hold
Stockton North Lab Hold
Basildon south Con hold


----------



## Guest

Leigh Lab Hold


----------



## Guest

Wigan Lab hold


----------



## Jonescat

Amber Rudd didn't look too happy just then


----------



## Guest

Looks like Lab has taken Sheffield Hallam from Nick Clegg - he really shouldn't have messed with the Students
Tooting Lab hold
Makerfield Lab Hold


----------



## Guest

Halton Lab Hold


----------



## Guest

Amber Rudd always looks like a bulldog chewing a wasp. I thought she was completely out of her depth in that 7 way televised debate. I bet TM doesn't get a Christmas card this year1
Birkenhead Lab Hold


----------



## Guest

Strangford DUP hold


----------



## Guest

Lagen Valley DUP hold
Paisley renrewshire south - snp hold Mhairi black
Carlisle Con hold


----------



## Guest

West Brom East Lab Hold Tom Watson Dep Labour leader
Chelmsford Con Hold


----------



## Guest

Knowsley Lab Hold
Rayleigh & Wickford Con hold


----------



## Guest

Vale of Clwyd Lab GAIN
Burnley Lab Hold


----------



## Guest

Dover Con hold
Clywd Soth Lab Hold


----------



## Guest

Putney Justine Greening Con Hold


----------



## Guest

Warley Lab Hold
Dunbartonshire west SNP hold


----------



## Jesthar

Franlow said:


> Putney Justine Greening Con Hold


That was flipping close in Putney! 10% swing to Lab...


----------



## Guest

Hertsmere Con hold
Tynemouth Lab Hold
Havant Con hold


----------



## Guest

Labour are doing brilliantly at the moment. London was always going to be a shoo in, but, gains in Wales & Scotland?


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Jesthar said:


> That was flipping close in Putney! 10% swing to Lab...


Justine must be breathing a huge sigh of relief her majority has been somewhat cut!

Hurrah Jeremy Vine has got his swingometer out


----------



## Guest

Angus Con gain from SNP
Norfolk south Con hold
Stratford on avon con hold
Kilmrnock SNP hold
Newport East Lab Hold
Torfaen Lab Hold
Castle oint Con Hold
Dundee East SNP hold
Yeovil Con hold


----------



## Guest

Folkestone & Hythe Con Hold
Tyneside North Lab Hold
Islwyn Lab Hold


----------



## Guest

sefton central Lab Hold


----------



## 3dogs2cats

What`s happened to the Hasting recount? I thought I saw Amber Rudd getting ready for the results to be announce but that seemed ages ago!


----------



## Guest

Hartlepool Lab Hold
Erewash Con hold
W brom west Lab hold Adrian Bailey


----------



## Guest

Oxford East Lab hold
Warwickshire North Con hold


----------



## Guest

St Helens North Lab hold


----------



## Guest

Pontypridd Lab Hold
Carmarthen East PC hold
Liverpool Riverside Lab hold
Fareham Von Hold
Wolvrhampton NE Lab hold
Arfon PC hold
Dundee West SNP hold
Battersea Lab GAIN
Blaneau Gwent Lab Hold


----------



## Jesthar

10% swing in Battersea too, this time enough to give Labour the seat


----------



## Guest

Stockton South Lab Gain
Bracknell Con hold
Gateshead Lab Hold
East Kilbride SNP hold
Wallasey Lab hold
Newport West Lab hold
Caerphilly Lab hold
Cannock Chack Con hold
St Helens s & Whiston Lab hold
Vale of Glamorgan Con hold
paisley & Renfrew SNP hold
Hemel Hempstead Con hold
ogmore lab hold
Preston Lab hold


----------



## Guest

East Londonderry DUP hold
Ealing central & acton Lab hold


----------



## Guest

Falkirk SNP hold
Delyn Lab hold
Bedfordshire mid Con hold
Heywood & middleton Lab hold
Torbay Con hold
Burton Con hold
Sevenoaks con hold


----------



## Guest

Bury north Lab hold
Rugby Con hold
Barnsley East Lab hold
Epping forest Con hold
somewhere in Scotland! SNP hold
Leicester NW con hold
Hertford &Stortford con hold
Runnymede & weybridges con hold
fylde con hold
newton abbot con hold
hertford ne con hold
Blaydon lab hold
hull north lab hold
Wirral west lab hold
Belfast west sf hold
glentrothes SNP hold
Moray CON GAIN
Sheffield Brightside Lab hold
Rushcliffe con hold
Garston & Halewood lab hold
Wycombe con hold


----------



## Guest

Wellingborough con hold
tamworth con hold
Blackburn lab hold
rhondda lab hold


----------



## Guest

Great Grimsby Lab hold
Huntingdon Con hold
Bootle Lab hold
Inverclyde SNP hold
Amber valley Con hold
Wolves SE lab hold
wyre forest con hold
pendle con hold


----------



## Guest

Sutton Coldfield con hold
Wirral south lab hold


----------



## Guest

Ochil & south Perthshire CON GAIN


----------



## Guest

Bury North Lab GAIN
Midlothian LAB GAIN


----------



## Guest

South antrim DUP gain
Worsc mid con hold
Montgomeryshire con hold
Bridgend Lab hold
Doncaster central Lab hold
Aldershot con hold
Christchurch Con hold
Chorey Lab hold
Aberdeen north SNPhold
Liverpool Wavertree Lab hold
Cambridgeshire suth con hold
cynon valley labhold
ayr n & arran snp hold
southern west con hold
southport CON GAIN
Rochdale lab hold
Ynys mon Lab hold
Dheffield heeley lab hold
durham north lab hold
neath lab hold


----------



## Guest

Wolverhampton sw lab hold
Bristol south lab hold
Blackpool n clevelys con hold


----------



## Guest

Aberconwy con hold
Bury South Lab hold


----------



## Guest

Barnsley Central Lab hold
Swansea West Lab hold
Cardiff central Lab hold
Hull East Lab hold
Foyls SF gain
Westminster North lab hold
bedforshire sw con hold
Bromsgrove con hold
Sheffield SE Lab hold
Monmouth con hold


----------



## Guest

notts south lab hold
Renfrewshire east CON GAIN
Brecon & Radnor con hold
Eastleigh con hold
Coventry south lab hold
North antrim DUP hold
Liverpool w derby lab hold
Aberavon Lab hold


----------



## Guest

Dunbarton east Lib dem GAIN
Harwich con hold
Tonbridge wells con hold
Walthamstow lab hold
Bolton north east lab hold
Ealing north Lab hold
Alyn & Deeside lab hold
Bristil east lab hold
Coventry NE lab hold
Bishop Auckland lab hold
Surrey heath Con hold
Worcester west con hold
High Peak LAB GAIN
Eltham Lab hold
Mitcham & Mordon Lab hold
Solihull Con hold
Stevenage con hold


----------



## Guest

Sheffield Hallam- Lab Gain NICK CLEGG OUT
Glasgow east
Suffolk west con hold


----------



## Guest

Wokingham Lab hold
Leeds north West LABOUR GAIN


----------



## 3dogs2cats

As Clegg goes out Cable comes back in, brutal world is politics


----------



## Jesthar

3dogs2cats said:


> As Clegg goes out Cable comes back in, brutal world is politics


Seems to be fitted with a revolving door sometimes 

Is it me, or is Theresa May's speech just another load of recycled slogans...


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Jesthar said:


> Seems to be fitted with a revolving door sometimes
> 
> Is it me, or is Theresa May's speech just another load of recycled slogans...


I think she realises she has royally cocked up!
Oh Nuttall soundly beaten.


----------



## stockwellcat.

It's 3:54am
Labour 207
Conservatives 198

Come on Labour.

Will check again in two hours. Back to bed I go.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Reece-Mogg - we`re not fickle we will stand by May, he`s having a laugh methinks


----------



## KittenKong

Well, at the start of this thread they were calls for Corbyn to resign with TM predicted to have the landslide she demand from her subjects.

How badly it's backfired.

Even if they scrape an overall majority her days must surely be numbered.

Disappointing night for the SNP of course but they're still the largest party in Scotland.


----------



## Guest

She lost the mandate by refusing to debate. The public saw that as arrogant. I don't actually think she is, but, she is not the best orator & J.C is. How ironic that she, like all the others was baying for Corbyns' blood & telling him to leave. He has triumphed & she is on the way out. We are the ones who will suffer with no senior experienced Politician to negotiate Brexit. I don't think she will resign for that very reason, but, how long can she hold it together?
Back to the Polls in October would be my guess
Brexit negotiations start in 11 days. A Parliament when you are relying on the goodwill of others to force things through is no Government at all.
When she started this election process, she was 20 points ahead in the Polls. She made it about leadership & showed none. I think she could have ridden through the Manchester bombing, but Last Monday was really the last nail in her coffin.
Like Corbyn, or not, he was outstanding.
Just watching Amber Rudd squeak through.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

KittenKong said:


> Well, at the start of this thread they were calls for Corbyn to resign with TM predicted to have the landslide she demand from her subjects.
> 
> How badly it's backfired.
> 
> Even if they scrape an overall majority her days must surely be numbe


It`s a bloody disaster for May overall majority or not, she went for a much increased majority but its looking like she will lose seats! She can`t possible lead the country in brexit talks, she is a laughing stock, strong and stable my arse!


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong

3dogs2cats said:


> It`s a bloody disaster for May overall majority or not, she went for a much increased majority but its looking like she will lose seats! She can`t possible lead the country in brexit talks, she is a laughing stock, strong and stable my arse!


What May wanted:








What May got:


----------



## stockwellcat.

Theresa May wanted a majority and what happened? So far she has lost 12 seats and Labour gained 28 and Lib Dems have gained 5 seats.

Will be interesting to see how the final few hours pan out.

33 seats still left to be declared.

Theresa May can still slip past the magic number 326 to win by the way. I hope Labour make a few more gains yet and stop her.


----------



## Guest

Theresa May will not get past 326without a shadow of a doubt. Labour don't need to make any gains. The rest are safe seats


----------



## KittenKong

Unfortunately it looks as if the DUP will give the Tories the majority to govern.

May will hold on as long as possible no doubt, but her position has irretrievably been weakened.


----------



## Bullbreedlover

I think the old bag is going to win. Gonna cry


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> Theresa May wanted a majority and what happened? So far she has lost 12 seats and Labour gained 28 and Lib Dems have gained 5 seats.
> 
> Will be interesting to see how the final few hours pan out.
> 
> 33 seats still left to be declared.
> 
> Theresa May can still slip past the magic number to win by the way. I hope Labour make a few more gains yet.


Well she has won the most seats as was expected but she has failed completely and utterly in her quest to get an increased majority and has lost seats talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Will she see the day out as leader of the Tories I wouldn`t bet on it!


KittenKong said:


> Unfortunately it looks as if the DUP will give the Tories the majority to govern.
> 
> May will hold on as long as possible no doubt, but her position has irretrievably been weakened.


 Weakened! she looks utterly pathetic


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Unfortunately it looks as if the DUP will give the Tories the majority to govern.
> 
> May will hold on as long as possible no doubt, but her position has irretrievably been weakened.


The Conservatives have ruled out a coalition. They are preparing to form a minority Government according to Sky News. This will mean Theresa May will remain PM until she steps down or her party force her to step down.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> Lib Dems have gained 5 seats.


They are back in Twickenham which is great news as Vince Cable was a great MP from 1997-2015 which is the reason I voted for him. Also, the Green candidate stood down so VC could cop hold of a few more votes.


----------



## Calvine

Turnout estimated at only 69% which surprises me as so many people said there were long queues when they went and they had to go back later.


----------



## Guest

Same thing happened to Ted Heath in 1974. He called a snap election, it was a hung Parliament. It only lasted 8 months before he had to go back to the country & lost.


----------



## Bullbreedlover

I think if she gets in she will go to war with syria within hours or days


----------



## Guest

Turnout estimated at only 69% which surprises me as so many people said there were long queues when they went and they had to go back later.
69.1% is good
65.1% in 2010
66.1% in 2015
61.4% 2005
59.4% 2001
You have to go back to Tony Blair before you get into the 70's


----------



## Guest

Bullbreedlover said:


> I think if she gets in she will go to war with syria within hours or days


She has won, no ifs, no buts & where on earth did you get this idea from? Go to war with Syria, she doesn't have the mandate to do anything, she most certainly will not be going to war with anyone.


----------



## Bullbreedlover

Franlow said:


> She has won, no ifs, no buts & where on earth did you get this idea from? Go to war with Syria, she doesn't have the mandate to do anything, she most certainly will not be going to war with anyone.


I hope your right


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Bullbreedlover said:


> I think if she gets in she will go to war with syria within hours or days


She is `in` as she in she has the largest party so has the right to try to form a government but I think she`s going to have her hands full trying to sort out the absolute mess she has just made!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well Theresa May isn't strong and stable now with the a Hung Parliament.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well done Caroline Lucas for holding Brighton.


----------



## Guest

Bullbreedlover said:


> I hope your right


You don't have to hope. I am. You don't wake up one morning as Prime Minister & think I'll go to war. You need to get it through Parliament - which she most certainly cannot. She also needs a damn good reason to do so. If there wasn't a good reason yesterday, there certainly won't be one today


----------



## Bullbreedlover

If she gets all 19 seats its not a hung parliament is it? She needs 326 to win. She needs every single one to win.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Bullbreedlover said:


> If she gets all 19 seats its not a hung parliament is it? She needs 326 to win. She needs every single one to win.


She can't get enough seats to win now at all. It's a Hung Parliament.


----------



## Guest

Am I right in guessing this is your first election?
She cannot win. Put the BBC on, they will explain why


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> Well Theresa May isn't strong and stable now with the a Hung Parliament.


She never was strong and stable in the first place she just hoped she could fool people into believing she was.


----------



## Bullbreedlover

Hung parliament =/


----------



## Guest

I understand it can be confusing when it looks like the numbers could still add up. The people in the studio are in contact with most of the constituencies. They know when one is close to changing hands. The fact that they have declared a hung Parliament, means they are 100% sure.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Bullbreedlover said:


> Hung parliament =/


Yes.

To win they need 326

If she won the remaining seats they'd be short as they'd only have 323.

Sky predict 318 to Conservatives.


----------



## Calvine

Franlow said:


> Turnout estimated at only 69% which surprises me as so many people said there were long queues when they went and they had to go back later.
> 69.1% is good
> 65.1% in 2010
> 66.1% in 2015
> 61.4% 2005
> 59.4% 2001
> You have to go back to Tony Blair before you get into the 70's


It's average, yes I know that: _my point was_ that so many people had said there were _queues_ some estimates were very high, well into the 70's.


----------



## Calvine

Bullbreedlover said:


> New I think if she gets in she will go to war with syria within hours or days


Where did you hear this? Was it a part of the Tory manifesto?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Franlow said:


> Am I right in guessing this is your first election?
> She cannot win. Put the BBC on, they will explain why


BBC are saying Hung Parliament as well.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> The Conservatives have ruled out a coalition. They are preparing to form a minority Government according to Sky News. This will mean Theresa May will remain PM until she steps down or her party force her to step down.


I think in view of the outcome they'll be determined to stay in power so I reckon they'll take up the DUP's offer.

It'll become Theresa May's very own "Coalition of Chaos"!

Serves her right. Her days as PM must now be numbered. I can't wait for her to stand down. "They've plotted against me". I can just hear it.

Will this be Boris Johnson's chance to become PM (horror at the thought)?

The next few weeks will be interesting.


----------



## Guest

I remember my first election. Margaret Thatchers win in 1983. I couldn't understand why everyone had said she had won when there were hundreds of seats left. It seemed like madness to me. Whilst exit polls can be incorrect, David Dimbleby rarely is. They have all the latest tech with people talking in their ears all the time letting them know who is doing what.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Ding, dong....TM is out....




Maybe avoiding debates was not such a great idea?

I am very pleased, so far foxes won.

Who will have now the cheek to repel fox hunting ban?


What a relief.......


----------



## Calvine

KittenKong said:


> Will this be Boris Johnson's chance to become PM


Do you think he wants to be PM? I'm not sure.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

John Curtice is pretty darn pleased with himself again!


----------



## Guest

cheekyscrip said:


> Maybe avoiding debates was not such a great idea?
> 
> I am very pleased, so far foxes won.
> 
> Who will have now the cheek to repel fox hunting ban?
> 
> I know this will sound totally ignorant, are there foxes on Gibraltar. I have never been - not that you have to have them to want to stop them being hunted, just, genuinely interested. I know you have Barbary macaques, but know absolutely nothing else about it.


----------



## Honeys mum

Well who's strong and stable now. It's come back and bit her in the bum.
Election results 2017: UK wakes up to hung Parliament - BBC News

Follow liveGeneral Election: Hung parliament confirmedThe Conservatives have fallen short of the seats needed for an overall majority.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Will this be Boris Johnson's chance to become PM (horror at the thought)?


No.
I don't think he will stand for leadership challenge again.
It depends if Theresa May has the decency to step down/resign today otherwise she will be PM still.


----------



## noushka05

I thought I'd be waking up to another nightmare result


----------



## Mr Gizmo

Thanks to everyone who didn't vote, we are now in a bad place & a laughing stock going into Brexit.
There should be another election later this year.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Whitehall sources are saying it has become very difficult for Theresa May to carry on. Theresa May is in with her advisors right now at number 10. It's probably going to be a vote of no confidence if she doesn't step down because of the way the campaign was run.


----------



## Calvine

Franlow said:


> Am I right in guessing this is your first election?


You need to clarify at whom your comment is directed. I can more or less guess, but the person it is intended for possibly can not.


----------



## Lurcherlad

What a mess!


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> Whitehall sources are saying it has become very difficult for Theresa May to carry on. Theresa May is in with her advisors right now at number 10. It's probably going to be a vote of no confidence if she doesn't step down because of the way the campaign was run.


If she has any sense she will keep well away from her advisors if there`re the ones who advised her on how to run an election campaign!


----------



## Bullbreedlover

It was aimed at me that comment i think. I very rarely sit biting my nails off watching the results no. I was more hopefull that labour would win this time


----------



## stockwellcat.

There is a chance if the Conservatives are unable to form a Government if Theresa May steps down Corbyn/Labour will be invited to form a Government having the second largest win last night. If neither can do this we will have another GE.

We are heading for a coalition Government or minority Government. Neither party is keen on a coalition Government by the way.


----------



## emmaviolet

Mr Gizmo said:


> Thanks to everyone who didn't vote, we are now in a bad place & a laughing stock going into Brexit.
> There should be another election later this year.


The only person to blame is May. She had a majority and she triggered article 50, then decided to hold an election as she bought her own publicity, and the call for absolute power was huge.

The blame lies with one woman.


----------



## stockwellcat.

The 1922 committee is meeting this morning and will be possibly asking that Theresa May steps down.


----------



## Honeys mum

stockwellcat said:


> There is a chance if the Conservatives are unable to form a Government if Theresa May steps down Corbyn/Labour will be invited to form a Government having the second largest win last night. If neither can do this we will have another GE.
> 
> We are heading for a coalition Government or minority Government. Neither party is keen on a coalition Government by the way.


But what will happen about brexit now.?


----------



## noushka05




----------



## JANICE199

Mr Gizmo said:


> Thanks to everyone who didn't vote, we are now in a bad place & a laughing stock going into Brexit.
> There should be another election later this year.


*Why blame those that didn't vote, try blaming an arrogant TM *


----------



## stockwellcat.

Honeys mum said:


> But what will happen about brexit now.?


The EU negotiations will have to wait until this is sorted out.


----------



## cheekyscrip

The truth though: Labour lost and could have won.
SNP lost.
But Bojobum is the only Con with wide grin on his face....


----------



## Gemmaa

You've got to laugh at the irony of Jeremy Corbyn, calling for someone to resign .


----------



## stockwellcat.

It's rumoured around the media that Theresa May is to give a speech at around 10am.


----------



## noushka05

Gemmaa said:


> You've got to laugh at the irony of Jeremy Corbyn, calling for someone to resign .


Why should he have resigned though? He won the biggest mandate in a leadership contest - twice. And now he has proved the people who tried to undermine him wrong. They said he made labour unelectable - the outcome today says differently.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Lurcherlad

cheekyscrip said:


> The truth though: Labour lost and could have won.
> SNP lost.
> But Bojobum is the only Con with wide grin on his face....


One positive is the SNP lost lots of seats so hopefully that dreadful woman Mrs Sturgeon will shut up now!


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> It's rumoured around the media that Theresa May is to give a speech at around 10am.


She'll blame everyone but herself as she usually does no doubt.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Oh God is this never going to end :Arghh


----------



## Gemmaa

noushka05 said:


> Why should he have resigned though? He won the biggest mandate in a leadership contest - twice. And now he has proved the people who tried to undermine him wrong. They said he made labour unelectable - the outcome today says differently.


I was joking, after he refused to stand down despite basically his entire party wanting him to.


----------



## KittenKong

Lurcherlad said:


> One positive is the SNP lost lots of seats so hopefully that dreadful woman Mrs Sturgeon will shut up now!


I like Nicola Sturgeon and disappointed for her and the SNP.

Having said that it was down to the Scottish people to speak , not Theresa May speaking for them.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Oh God is this never going to end :Arghh


I am sure if Theresa May won it would be those on here that voted Conservatives that would be celebrating


----------



## Lurcherlad

At least the Remainers must be happy now - we shall go into Brexit in an even weaker position! 

RESULT! 

Oh no, hang on ..... Oops! :Meh


----------



## 1290423

Franlow said:


> Um, that will be Brexit - exit polls said in & Last General election said no clear majority. Not sure what you have been watching, but, that is fact, not opinion.


The didnt have an exit poll following the the EU vote. Think they based their predictions,on the polls.


----------



## Lurcherlad

KittenKong said:


> I like Nicola Sturgeon and disappointed for her and the SNP.
> 
> Having said that it was down to the Scottish people to speak , not Theresa May speaking for them.


And they have spoken so hope she stops banging on about Independence now.

And Alex Sammond lost his seat...


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Theresa May has no intention of resigning apparently, just as she had no intention of holding a GE.


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> She'll blame everyone but herself as she usually does no doubt.


Resignation speech


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> those on here that voted Conservatives


There weren't that many I don't think.


----------



## picaresque

I have no idea what's going on but I think I need to go to bed. Wake me up when it's over.


----------



## 1290423

We need to alter the way we vote, the current method is outdated and flawed.

But hang on, how do we do that


----------



## Guest

I don't think TM can resign. Negotiations start in 11 days, there isn't any time for the beggaring around having leadership elections PLUS, I'm sure a part of the reason she went to the country, is that she had never won an election. This would put her successor in exactly the same boat she was in. My prediction & you heard it here,
General election October 5th Labour win majority - call me Mystic Mog


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> The EU negotiations will have to wait until this is sorted out.


They start regardless in eleven days time, this is a ballsup of master proportion


----------



## Lurcherlad

This looks to be likely now...

Conservatives in coalition with DUP

Quote
9 JUNE 2017 • 7:24AM
The Democratic Unionist Party in Northern Ireland could be the key to keeping the Conservatives in Downing Street now that a hung parliament has been confirmed.

However, questions have been raised over whether the party could demand a softer Brexit before providing its vital backing to the Tories hoping to form a government.

Arlene Foster, the DUP leader, is keen to avoid a hard border with Ireland and has spoken against a "hard Brexit." 
Unquote


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Franlow said:


> I don't think TM can resign. Negotiations start in 11 days, there isn't any time for the beggaring around having leadership elections PLUS, I'm sure a part of the reason she went to the country, is that she had never won an election. This would put her successor in exactly the same boat she was in. My prediction & you heard it here,
> General election October 5th Labour win majority - call me Mystic Mog


Oh god not another election - I`m to old to pull two all nighters in one year


----------



## rona

So, Corbyn has already started the destruction of our country and he hasn't even got in 

Bloody stupid woman should have waited until she'd got us out of EU


----------



## Guest

Is that vinegar I smell????, no, just sour grapes


----------



## Dr Pepper

rona said:


> Bloody stupid woman should have waited until she'd got us out of EU


I guess she's still using Mr Cameron's advisors!


----------



## 1290423

Bullbreedlover said:


> I think if she gets in she will go to war with syria within hours or days


don't bet on it!


----------



## 1290423

Tbh, I am totally sick to the back teeth 
Hey look, the door just opened, nigel farage will be back noush￼￼that will really make your day wont it


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> So, Corbyn has already started the destruction of our country and he hasn't even got in
> 
> Bloody stupid woman should have waited until she'd got us out of EU


Very true rona, very true


----------



## emmaviolet

Franlow said:


> I don't think TM can resign. Negotiations start in 11 days, there isn't any time for the beggaring around having leadership elections PLUS, I'm sure a part of the reason she went to the country, is that she had never won an election. This would put her successor in exactly the same boat she was in. My prediction & you heard it here,
> General election October 5th Labour win majority - call me Mystic Mog


She may not even be Pm, she hasn't won and there are other options available.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Tbh, I am totally sick to the back teeth
> Hey look, the door just opened, nigel farage will be back noush￼￼that will really make your day wont it


I'll just leave this with you

*Sue Perkins*‏Verified [email protected]*sueperkins* 3h3 hours ago

_Farage. Not an MP. A member of a party who have no MPs. 
Just a man in a camel coat holding a pint of beer, ranting. 
Treat him thus._


----------



## Lurcherlad

The BBC are discussing all the options .....


----------



## noushka05

_How others see us. Europes glee as tories flag._


----------



## kimthecat

Franlow said:


> She lost the mandate by refusing to debate. The public saw that as arrogant. I don't actually think she is, but, she is not the best orator & J.C is. How ironic that she, like all the others was baying for Corbyns' blood & telling him to leave. He has triumphed & she is on the way out. .


Eh Is losing the new winning ? 
How is the fact that Corbyn LOST an election despite using bribery a triumph? He LOSTan election that very likely could have been won if he had resigned. 
What a frigging mess.


----------



## kimthecat

Bullbreedlover said:


> I think if she gets in she will go to war with syria within hours or days


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> Eh Is losing the new winning ?
> How is the fact that Corbyn LOST an election despite using bribery a triumph? He LOSTan election that very likely could have been won if he had resigned.
> What a frigging mess.


Or .... he could have won had some of his party shown they were united & given him the support he deserved!!


----------



## Happy Paws2

Just heard on the news that the Eu Commission has said, that talks of us leaving the EU on 19th June may not go a head.


----------



## kimthecat

Lurcherlad said:


> The BBC are discussing all the options .....


Veey fe options i would think .

Does anyone remember the Monkee's song

"I knew i should have stayed in bed ,
A pillow wrapped around my head,
Instead of waking up to find ,
A nightmare of another kind ."

Im going back to bed !


----------



## Guest

kimthecat said:


> Eh Is losing the new winning ?
> How is the fact that Corbyn LOST an election despite using bribery a triumph? He LOSTan election that very likely could have been won if he had resigned.
> What a frigging mess


Seriously? Give it a rest.
It was an absolute Triumph for Jeremy Corbyn. Nobody gave him a snowballs chance in hell. He has basically stuck two fingers up to all the nay sayers. Resign when he has such a massive mandate from his own party? Why on earth would, or, should he. I get it that you don't like him, 11 million people do!!!!! and they voted for him


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> Eh Is losing the new winning ?
> How is the fact that Corbyn LOST an election despite using bribery a triumph? He LOSTan election that very likely could have been won if he had resigned.
> What a frigging mess.


He didn't 'bribe' anybody. His manifesto was fully costed & backed by many leading economists & academics. Tories austerity has been an absolute catastrophe for this country.


----------



## Cleo38

noushka05 said:


> He didn't 'bribe' anybody. His manifesto was fully costed & backed by many leading economists & academics. Tories austerity has been an absolute catastrophe for this country.


And considering the appalling smear campaign that was directed against him by certain media sources I think he did a great job!!


----------



## rona

On a bright note. That ruddy awful Scottish woman has also lost her majority and almost third of her seats.

Can anyone find her actual results? For some reason I can't find them


----------



## 1290423

May was stupid to call this election! But had it have not been for the remainers it would NEVER have been called! But is that true? Could this election just have been a massive red herring? Think about it, may never wanted brexit?? Questionable, many of her cabinet didn't want brexit. Was this nothing more then a elaborate plan in part of a last ditch attempt to reverse artical 50 or at the very least remain part of the single market!


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> On a bright note. That ruddy awful Scottish woman has also lost her majority and almost third of her seats.
> 
> Can anyone find her actual results? For some reason I can't find them


Yep, that puts a smile on my face too.


----------



## emmaviolet

It must be so hard for people to see 'the token black' win by a majority of over 35,000.
What a mandate for her.


----------



## Guest

rona said:


> On a bright note. That ruddy awful Scottish woman has also lost her majority and almost third of her seats.
> 
> Can anyone find her actual results? For some reason I can't find them


That's because she is not an MP


----------



## kimthecat

Franlow said:


> Seriously? Give it a rest.
> It was an absolute Triumph for Jeremy Corbyn. Nobody gave him a snowballs chance in hell. He has basically stuck two fingers up to all the nay sayers. Resign when he has such a massive mandate from his own party? Why on earth would, or, should he. I get it that you don't like him, 11 million people do!!!!! and they voted for him


How deluded can you get .
He lost an election , just as predicted . 
People voted LABOUR , that doesnt mean they like him The same as people voted Tory and they dont like May

Ax for giving it a rest , dont read by stuff if you don't like it .


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> May was stupid to call this election! But had it have not been for the remainers it would NEVER have been called! But is that true? Could this election just have been a massive red herring? Think about it, may never wanted brexit?? Questionable, many of her cabinet didn't want brexit. Was this nothing more then a elaborate plan in part of a last ditch attempt to reverse artical 50 or at the very least remain part of the single market!


She was stupid to call the election and what an awful Election campaign she led.


----------



## Zaros

What a disaster. First the shambles of Brexit and now this.

Rule Britannia! 

Not so much anymore, she's been cast adrift without any real direction.

May should resign. Or be kicked out. This is her doing, and her doing alone.


----------



## noushka05

Cleo38 said:


> And considering the appalling smear campaign that was directed against him by certain media sources I think he did a great job!!


Absolutely! Not only has he had the horrendous smears in the right wing gutter press to overcome, but most of the media in general has been against him & his own party have tried to undermine him as well. Imagine how well Labour could have done had Corbyn been treated fairly?


----------



## Guest

kimthecat said:


> How deluded can you get .
> He lost an election , just as predicted .
> People voted LABOUR , that doesnt mean they like him The same as people voted Tory and they dont like May


Dream on - sour grapes He was a triumph. Absolutely everybody on the BBC agrees, all the pundits, every MP they have spoken to, everyone in fact except .... You


----------



## rona

Franlow said:


> That's because she is not an MP


But she has a constituency


----------



## kimthecat

Cleo38 said:


> Or .... he could have won had some of his party shown they were united & given him the support he deserved!!


Dosn't that say anything to you that half his party didn't want him ?

Blaming his party is an excuse for not winning.


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> What a disaster. First the shambles of Brexit and now this.
> 
> Rule Britannia!
> 
> Not so much anymore, she's been cast adrift without any real direction.
> 
> May should resign. Or be kicked out. This is her doing, and her doing alone.


If she had an ounce of decency, she would stand down hand the reigns over to labour. Who at least DO have a plan for brexit. The tories wont do that, they will put their party before the best interests of the country - as per.


----------



## Guest

rona said:


> But she has a constituency


Scotland's First Minister is already a member of the Scottish Parliament and did not stand as a candidate to become a MP.


----------



## 1290423

Franlow said:


> Dream on - sour grapes He was a triumph. Absolutely everybody on the BBC agrees, all the pundits, every MP they have spoken to, everyone in fact except .... You


I happen to be one of those too who believe labour would have don't better maybe even have won under different leadership.


----------



## rona

Franlow said:


> Scotland's First Minister is already a member of the Scottish Parliament and did not stand as a candidate to become a MP.


But she had one before becoming first minister


----------



## kimthecat

Franlow said:


> Dream on - sour grapes He was a triumph. Absolutely everybody on the BBC agrees, all the pundits, every MP they have spoken to, everyone in fact except .... You


Every one in the whole country except me ? :Hilarious Err you believe that you'll believe anything . 
Well there you go A Triumph and Corbyn still not in power when Labour could have been .


----------



## Guest

.


kimthecat said:


> Dosn't that say anything to you that half his party didn't want him ?
> 
> Blaming his party is an excuse for not winning.


The word you need to look carefully at is DIDN'T past, now, they will be bending over backwards to hitch their star to his wagon


----------



## 1290423

Franlow said:


> Dream on - sour grapes He was a triumph. Absolutely everybody on the BBC agrees, all the pundits, every MP they have spoken to, everyone in fact except .... You


But do agree he is a very nice man


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well I guess Brexit will be going ahead if the DUP agree to a coalition as they want Brexit to. May has lost her majority so it won't be as hard of a Brexit as some hoped. May bought this on herself calling the election thinking she'd get a landslide victory she should have waited like she originally said until 2020.

I am still behind Brexit happening by the way.


----------



## 1290423

Franlow said:


> .
> 
> The word you need to look carefully at is DIDN'T past, now, they will be bending over backwards to hitch their star to his wagon


And yes, agree the party will now fall over themselves to get behind him


----------



## Guest

kimthecat said:


> Every one in the whole country except me ? :Hilarious Err you believe that you'll believe anything .
> Well there you go A Triumph and Corbyn still not in power when Labour could have been .


Can I just point out, repeating the same thing over & over again, does not make it true.
I would rather believe D Dimbleby & Co. I'm pretty sure they know a darn site more than you & me combined.


----------



## kimthecat

Franlow said:


> .
> The word you need to look carefully at is DIDN'T past, now, they will be bending over backwards to hitch their star to his wagon


Yes in the past , last year but aren't you saying they didnt back him now at this election and that's why he didnt win ? 
I never got the impression they weren't backing him in the election.


----------



## Cleo38

kimthecat said:


> Dosn't that say anything to you that half his party didn't want him ?
> 
> Blaming his party is an excuse for not winning.


Initially yes .... but now it seems that whilst some of his party may have doubted him the public were a lot more supportive, especially younger voters.

For me I was initially put off by the lack of solidarity in the party but had to support who I truly believed in, I could never have done that with Ed Miliband as leader. Jeremy Corbyn has reignited my support of the party as he is someone who has true morals & passion about the causes he believes in. He is a leader that I fully support & believe has the best interests of the country at heart, including those who are more vulnerable & always seem to get shafted especially by the Tories


----------



## Calvine

emmaviolet said:


> people


What 'people'? I don't give a bugger what colour the winners are. Do you?


----------



## Elles

I don't agree, when you look at how bad the conservative campaign was and how hard done by half the country feel and how hard done by the other half think May's manifesto was going to make them feel, a decent solid Labour with a more popular leader would have wiped the floor with her. Both leaders lost this election. Both main parties lost this election. The British people are not happy. Except the young and the media apparently. They think Corbyn losing is winning. You wouldn't think that, if you had a £100 bet on Labour to win.


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> It's rumoured around the media that Theresa May is to give a speech at around 10am.


For the sake of decency and an attempt to humble herself, she had better begin with an apology.

Something along the lines of; _'I was wrong and unable.'_


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> Every one in the whole country except me ? :Hilarious Err you believe that you'll believe anything .
> Well there you go A Triumph and Corbyn still not in power when Labour could have been .


Labour would NEVER win a general election without the backing of The Sun/Murdoch if previous experience has anything to go by. Nothing to do with Corbyn being leader, they have to be Rupert Murdoch's choice of leader before they'll back them.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> I don't agree, when you look at how bad the conservative campaign was and how hard done by half the country feel and how hard done by the other half think May's manifesto was going to make them feel, a decent solid Labour with a more popular leader would have wiped the floor with her. Both leaders lost this election. Both main parties lost this election. The British people are not happy. Except the young and the media apparently. They think Corbyn losing is winning. You wouldn't think that, if you had a £100 bet on Labour to win.


I totally agree! The nice mr corbyn was for the tories one of their most useful tools. I've said that from the beginning!


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> I don't agree, when you look at how bad the conservative campaign was and how hard done by half the country feel and how hard done by the other half think May's manifesto was going to make them feel, a decent solid Labour with a more popular leader would have wiped the floor with her. Both leaders lost this election. Both main parties lost this election. The British people are not happy. Except the young and the media apparently. They think Corbyn losing is winning. You wouldn't think that, if you had a £100 bet on Labour to win.


The biggest losers are all of us. The stock market will go into free fall, The Brexit negotiations will be a joke and that link I put on about Venezuela looks more and more likely


----------



## kimthecat

Franlow said:


> Can I just point out, repeating the same thing over & over again, does not make it true.
> I would rather believe D Dimbleby & Co. I'm pretty sure they know a darn site more than you & me combined.


 OK . So what *is * true? Oh, Corbyn lead a party that lost an election , despite his wonderful mandate , Labour did not win a majoity right ? Or is that false news. ?


----------



## Guest

Elles said:


> a decent solid Labour with a more popular leader would have wiped the floor with her. Both leaders lost this election. Both main parties lost this election. The British people are not happy. Except the young and the media apparently. They think Corbyn losing is winning. You wouldn't think that, if you had a £100 bet on Labour to win.


You won't get a more popular leader. Popular with the voters. He made up 18 percentage points in 5 weeks, not a triumph, you are having a laugh.


----------



## rona

rona said:


> But she had one before becoming first minister


Ok, found it, down 13%


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> The biggest losers are all of us. The stock market will go into free fall, The Brexit negotiations will be a joke and that link I put on about Venezuela looks more and more likely


Brexit was *always* going to be a disaster. It will be LESS of a disaster if labour were doing the negotiating.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> If she had an ounce of decency, she would stand down hand the reigns over to labour. Who at least DO have a plan for brexit. The tories wont do that, they will put their party before the best interests of the country - as per.


What utter nonsense. How in any way shape or form would the party with most seats handing power to a lesser party be democratic? I can't remember, did you vote remain as well? Just asking because they don't believe in democracy either.


----------



## 1290423

rona said:


> The biggest losers are all of us. The stock market will go into free fall, The Brexit negotiations will be a joke and that link I put on about Venezuela looks more and more likely


And don't forget the pound


----------



## Guest

kimthecat said:


> OK . So what *is * true? Oh, Corbyn lead a party that lost an election , despite his wonderful mandate , Labour did not win a majoity right ? Or is that false news. ?


What IS true, it makes absolutely no difference what anybody says, you are always going to be right aren't you?
Where exactly did I say he won? Triumphed - hell yes, a winner, certainly won - nope not here


----------



## Guest

kimthecat said:


> Yes in the past , last year but aren't you saying they didnt back him now at this election and that's why he didnt win ?
> I never got the impression they weren't backing him in the election.


No not at all


----------



## Calvine

Franlow said:


> you are always going to be right aren't you?


I take it you haven't met some of the other posters!!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> I don't agree, when you look at how bad the conservative campaign was and how hard done by half the country feel and how hard done by the other half think May's manifesto was going to make them feel, a decent solid Labour with a more popular leader would have wiped the floor with her. Both leaders lost this election. Both main parties lost this election. The British people are not happy. Except the young and the media apparently. They think Corbyn losing is winning. You wouldn't think that, if you had a £100 bet on Labour to win.


Not how I see it and I'm happy. Happy that she didn't get her mandate and her landslide, happy that she didn't increase her majority and happy that the NHA party got 12,000 in Jeremy Hunt's constituency which may make the Tories actually listen instead of trying to ride roughshod over the public. I'm thrilled there is unlikely to be a vote on repealing the hunting ban now and if she is stupid enough there are enough to vote it down. The only thing I'm not happy about is the Tory hunt supporter got reelected with an increased majority in our seat  @Animallover26 - here is our result

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000815



KittenKong said:


> Labour would NEVER win a general election without the backing of The Sun/Murdoch if previous experience has anything to go by. Nothing to do with Corbyn being leader, they have to be Rupert Murdoch's choice of leader before they'll back them.


I really don't believe that is the case anymore, they are becoming less and less influential. Corbyn has achieved a fantastic turn around and increases despite the press so it just shows the public at large don't buy what the media tell them these days.


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> I take it you haven't met some of the other posters!!


Guessing not! perhaps we should introduce a few, now where shall we start?


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> What utter nonsense. How in any way shape or form would the party with most seats handing power to a lesser party be democratic? I can't remember, did you vote remain as well? Just asking because they don't believe in democracy either.


I did vote remain & I do believe in democracy but the future of our county is at stake. If Theresa May & her tories weren't a laughing stock in Europe before, they are now! She needs to resign. We should have a government that represents the best interests of the UK. May & her bunch of clowns have 0 credibility, they have proved themselves totally inept.


----------



## havoc

DT said:


> I happen to be one of those too who believe labour would have don't better maybe even have won under different leadership.


I agree 100%. People like Corbyn but that's very different from trusting him to run the country.

Make no mistake - this mess lands squarely on the shoulders of one woman. It isn't because of the 'remainers', it isn't because of the EU, it isn't because there aren't any unicorns or whatever other excuse anyone wants to make for her. There was no need to call an election and she chose to do so.


----------



## Mirandashell

Dr Pepper said:


> Well I'm off to bed, I'll catch up on the conservative's win in the morning, no need to deprive myself of sleep for the inevitable.


----------



## Bisbow

What a mess, sorry she did not win outright but at least JC will not be able to lead the country down hill to an even bigger mess had he won


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> Guessing not! perhaps we should introduce a few, now where shall we start?


Spoilt for choice actually.


----------



## ForestWomble

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not how I see it and I'm happy. Happy that she didn't get her mandate and her landslide, happy that she didn't increase her majority and happy that the NHA party got 12,000 in Jeremy Hunt's constituency which may make the Tories actually listen instead of trying to ride roughshod over the public. I'm thrilled there is unlikely to be a vote on repealing the hunting ban now and if she is stupid enough there are enough to vote it down. The only thing I'm not happy about is the Tory hunt supporter got reelected with an increased majority in our seat  @Animallover26 - here is our result
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000815
> 
> I really don't believe that is the case anymore, they are becoming less and less influential. Corbyn has achieved a fantastic turn around and increases despite the press so it just shows the public at large don't buy what the media tell them these days.


----------



## MilleD

Franlow said:


> Seems like there is a good turnout, especially with youngsters. Really good news


Don't know if anyone else has mentioned this as the thread has got huge, but ALL the music channels on Sky yesterday, instead of saying what 'programme' was on, said "Get out and vote".

Pretty good way to hit the target audience.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Mirandashell said:


>


Now I could say I always thought it would a hung parliament but I'd be lying.

Anyhow must go off and hide before @stockwellcat finds me because I convinced him not to bet on a hung parliament


----------



## Mirandashell

That's one good thing to come out of this mess, then. Voting is a habit you need to get early.


----------



## Lurcherlad

Elles said:


> I don't agree, when you look at how bad the conservative campaign was and how hard done by half the country feel and how hard done by the other half think May's manifesto was going to make them feel, a decent solid Labour with a more popular leader would have wiped the floor with her. Both leaders lost this election. Both main parties lost this election. The British people are not happy. Except the young and the media apparently. They think Corbyn losing is winning. You wouldn't think that, if you had a £100 bet on Labour to win.


My DS had an 8-1 bet on a Hung Parliament, so he won!


----------



## Elles

Well the media seem to think anyone over the age of 25 have never heard of Facebook, twitter or the Internet and like that little girl said in the joke video 'He's as old as pappa and he can't even use an ipad'. 

I think it's highly insulting. Clearly at my age, I don't know what a meme is and voted conservative as directed by the daily fail, which I picked up from the local shop. Now I'll put my feet up and have a cup of tea, totally shocked by a result I couldn't have even guessed at. It must be just my imagination that I'm typing this on an iPad, before dealing with our internet and eBay sales.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Now I could say I always thought it would a hung parliament but I'd be lying.
> 
> Anyhow must go off and hide before @stockwellcat finds me because I convinced him not to be on a hung parliament


I should have placed that bet 
Only joking


----------



## kimthecat

Franlow said:


> What IS true, it makes absolutely no difference what anybody says, you are always going to be right aren't you?
> Where exactly did I say he won? Triumphed - hell yes, a winner, certainly won - nope not here


:Hilarious So its down to a matter of opinion and the definition of triumph and not facts ? I see . What did you say i n another post ? Corbyn triumphed because the BBC and Dimbleby etc said so and they know more about it than us ? I dont know about you but I make up my own opinion .

As to always being right , I don't make up the facts .


----------



## 1290423

Dr Pepper said:


> Now I could say I always thought it would a hung parliament but I'd be lying.
> 
> Anyhow must go off and hide before @stockwellcat finds me because I convinced him not to be on a hung parliament


Well that was the last thing I said before the exit polls came in! So Stockwell is perhaps weeping into his pile of betting slips as we speak


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> Clearly at my age, I don't know what a meme is


OK, now I'll come clean. I've been wanting to ask throughout this thread. What's a meme?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

When I said yesterday this thread should stay open as there could be a hung parliament I never actually thought there would be :Cigar


----------



## stockwellcat.

havoc said:


> What's a meme?


----------



## kimthecat

Elles said:


> I don't agree, when you look at how bad the conservative campaign was and how hard done by half the country feel and how hard done by the other half think May's manifesto was going to make them feel, a decent solid Labour with a more popular leader would have wiped the floor with her. Both leaders lost this election. Both main parties lost this election. The British people are not happy. Except the young and the media apparently. They think Corbyn losing is winning. You wouldn't think that, if you had a £100 bet on Labour to win.


Well said .


----------



## 1290423

kimthecat said:


> :Hilarious So its down to a matter of opinion and the definition of triumph and not facts ? I see . What did you say i n another post ? Corbyn triumphed because the BBC and Dimbleby etc said so and they know more about it than us ? I know about you but I make up my own opinion .
> 
> As to always being right , I don't make up the facts .


You know what Kim, my horse last year in the national came in second, but the way some would see it really is that that horse won as it was an outsider to start with, guess I ought to get on to ladbrooks and arrange to collect my winnings. I wish xxx

Ps. Only joking I don't bet on horses,me specially the national, but get my gist


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> So Stockwell is perhaps weeping into his pile of betting slips as we speak


No. Laughing my head off at some of the funny posts on this thread


----------



## kimthecat

DT said:


> You know what Kim, my horse last year in the national came in second, but the way so would see it really is that that horse won as it was an outsider to start with, guess I ought to get on to ladbrookes and arrange to collect my winnings. I wish xxx


 That horse is like .One year in junior school in the sprint race , I came second . i have the certificate and it says second but now I know Im a winner ! YAY !


----------



## 1290423

kimthecat said:


> That horse is like .One year in junior school in the sprint race , I came second . i have the certificate and it says second but now I know Im a winner ! YAY !


Doesnt always apply you know! But I guess if the one who came first is older than you that could be applied as that would have put you at an unfair advantage to have started with


----------



## Mirandashell

I'm puzzled as to why there's an argument about who won. Nobody won. That's what a hung parliament means. And there's most likely going to be another Election. So 'nyer nyer ner ner ner' arguments are a waste of time.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Reading back I said this:
"strong and stable coalition of chaos"
I didn't think I was going to be right.

Theresa May is in chaos at the moment seeking a coalition with the DUP who said the Conservatives will pay if they go into coalition with them.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Reading back I said this:
> "strong and stable coalition of chaos"
> I didn't think I was going to be right.
> 
> Theresa May is in chaos at the moment seeking a coalition with the DUP who said the Conservatives will pay if they go into coalition with them.


Ooer, she won't like that if she's forced to listen to others and not have complete control will she!


----------



## Guest

I can see this is clearly pointless, a little like the endless Corbyn bashing posts. Your 'facts' endlessly calling me out for saying he is a winner _ I haven't not once, zip, zilch, nada. It is not my fault you cannot seem to grasp the difference between being triumphant & winning .
You were always going to be unhappy without a landslide - just get over it. This is just flagellating an expired equine & it is starting to bore me. Maybe it is because I have been up all night actually watching the election, or, maybe it is because I get the feeling you would start an argument with an empty room.
Bowing out gracefully as I have thirty plus items sold overnight & need to get to the postoffice.


----------



## noushka05

*
Theresa May*‏Verified [email protected]*theresa_may* May 20

_If I lose just six seats I will lose this election and Jeremy Corbyn _
_will be sitting down to negotiate with Europe: _



__ https://www.facebook.com/TheresaMayOfficial/posts/1737355726281193


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Ooer, she won't like that if she's forced to listen to others and not have complete control will she!


The DUP want a stronger hand in Northern Ireland and to be at the Brexit negotiating table in return the DUP will prop up the Conservatives numbers to bring the Conservatives over the 326 mark. So yes this will be interesting if they decide to go into coalitions together.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Considering Labour were 19% behind in the polls when the election was called, had very little time to prepare their manifesto and campaign given the election has been called 3 years early and were pretty much written off by the media I think Jeremy Corbyn and his team can be very proud of what they have achieved. Milliband & co had 30.4 % of the vote in 2015 and Corbyn has turned that around to 40% so far which is a huge improvement. If we do end up having another election which I hope we don't but if we do I believe now people can see the public do indeed warm to him and would trust him then they stand a good chance of getting a majority.


----------



## KittenKong

From Reasons 2 Remain.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> Reading back I said this:
> "strong and stable coalition of chaos"
> I didn't think I was going to be right.
> 
> Theresa May is in chaos at the moment seeking a coalition with the DUP who said the Conservatives will pay if they go into coalition with them.


I should imagine they will be expecting something for helping her form a government.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

3dogs2cats said:


> I should imagine they will be expecting something for helping her form a government.


Yes her head I would imagine.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> The DUP want a stronger hand in Northern Ireland and to be at the Brexit negotiating table in return the DUP will prop up the Conservatives numbers to bring the Conservatives over the 326 mark. So yes this will be interesting if they decide to go into coalitions together.


Yes, It'll give her someone else to blame when things go wrong wouldn't it!


----------



## 1290423

A couple of important issues looking at it from my perspective

there was no need to call an election to start with the big mistake

The tories had a disastrous election campaign.

Labours campaign was much more organised spured on by corbyn connecting with the voter.

JC as nice as he was was still not the right man for the job. Another leader a better choice could have seen labour celebrating today

Neither of the main parties manifestos did I agree with consequently I voted for neither.

Nothing has changed the result is still the same the Conservatives won Labour Lost albeit conservative lost the majority along with the claim to be strong and stable they are now weak and feeble

The rest of the world must be laughing at us today an island full of muppets


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Conservative think tank calls for leadership contest 'this year'*
Posted at9:53

The Bow Group, which describes itself as "the United Kingdom's oldest conservative think tank" and "firmly housed in the Conservative family", has called for the party to rethink Theresa May's position - but not necessarily immediately.


Follow
Laura Kuenssberg

✔@bbclaurak
Note Bow Group says leadership contest this year, not calling for it immediately


----------



## 1290423

DT said:


> A couple of important issues looking at it from my perspective
> 
> there was no need to call an election to start with the big mistake
> 
> The tories had a disastrous election campaign.
> 
> Labours campaign was much more organised spured on by corbyn connecting with the voter.
> 
> JC as nice as he was was still not the right man for the job. Another leader a better choice could have seen labour celebrating today
> 
> Neither of the main parties manifestos did I agree with consequently I voted for neither.
> Nothing has changed conservative still won labour still lost albeit the Conservatives are not strong and stable as they once claimed
> 
> The rest of the world must be laughing at us today an island full of muppets


----------



## 3dogs2cats

noushka05 said:


> *Theresa May*‏Verified [email protected]*theresa_may* May 20
> 
> _If I lose just six seats I will lose this election and Jeremy Corbyn _
> _will be sitting down to negotiate with Europe: _
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/TheresaMayOfficial/posts/1737355726281193


 Fair enough, best get on with clearing your stuff out of No.10 and let JC get on with the negotiations


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> Fair enough, best get on with clearing your stuff out of No.10 and let JC get on with the negotiations


If TM is unable to form a Government ~ over to you JC. At least he has a manifesto which he has been elected on


----------



## 1290423

Franlow said:


> I can see this is clearly pointless, a little like the endless Corbyn bashing posts. Your 'facts' endlessly calling me out for saying he is a winner _ I haven't not once, zip, zilch, nada. It is not my fault you cannot seem to grasp the difference between being triumphant & winning .
> You were always going to be unhappy without a landslide - just get over it. This is just flagellating an expired equine & it is starting to bore me. Maybe it is because I have been up all night actually watching the election, or, maybe it is because I get the feeling you would start an argument with an empty room.
> Bowing out gracefully as I have thirty plus items sold overnight & need to get to the postoffice.


Corbyn has one hell of a lot to be proud of he connected with the voter he pulled back an enormous lead from the Tories he did well, much better the the critics will ever give him credit for he has every right to celebrate


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> If TM is unable to form a Government ~ over to you JC. At least he has a mandate


You are not serious, are you


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> an island full of muppets


You're right - the lunatics really have taken over the asylum.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> You are not serious, are you


TM has no manifesto. She lost last night and so did I.


----------



## kimthecat

Franlow said:


> I can see this is clearly pointless, a little like the endless Corbyn bashing posts. Your 'facts' endlessly calling me out for saying he is a winner _ I haven't not once, zip, zilch, nada. It is not my fault you cannot seem to grasp the difference between being triumphant & winning .
> .


You didnt do a quote so i dont know who you are talking too . In case its me , heres my answer

oh give it a rest .  If you think it pointless why are you still posting?

The difference between winning and triumph

win|ning
[ˈwɪnɪŋ]
victorious · successful · triumphant · vanquishing ·
[more]
tri¦umph|ant
[trʌɪˈʌmf(ə)nt]
victorious · successful · winning · prize-winning · conquering · undefeated · unbeaten · unvanquished

perhaps it depends on what dictionary you use 

We can agree on something though . We're *both* not saying that Corbyn is a winner !

There you go


----------



## stockwellcat.

Looks like TM has negotiated a deal with DUP. TM is seeing the Queen at 12:30pm requesting to form a Government.


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> You're right - the lunatics really have taken over the asylum.


What happened did someone put something in the water of all or are they all been promised wacky backy


----------



## MilleD

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Considering Labour were 19% behind in the polls when the election was called, had very little time to prepare their manifesto and campaign given the election has been called 3 years early and were pretty much written off by the media I think Jeremy Corbyn and his team can be very proud of what they have achieved. Milliband & co had 30.4 % of the vote in 2015 and Corbyn has turned that around to 40% so far which is a huge improvement. If we do end up having another election which I hope we don't but if we do I believe now people can see the public do indeed warm to him and would trust him then they stand a good chance of getting a majority.


I really don't think Labour has achieved anything. The Conservatives made their own coffin.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> TM has no manifesto. She lost last night and so did I.


On a bet? Go and see what odds they are offering on May lasting until the end of next week as PM!


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> On a bet? Go and see what odds they are offering on May lasting until the end of next week as PM!


Nah.
I am done with betting. I have more chance of winning the Euro Millions.


----------



## kimthecat

MilleD said:


> I really don't think Labour has achieved anything. The Conservatives made their own coffin.


I agree with that. We're in a real mess now with Brexit negotations coming up and we can't be sure who will be PM .


----------



## kimthecat

One for @stockwellcat


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> One for @stockwellcat


Ah but I did bet on Theresa May remaining as PM so I won on that one I think


----------



## shadowmare

Well this was an absolute covfefe... To express my disappointment I will now go to run around in the nearest field of wheat to annoy some farmers.


----------



## Mirandashell

shadowmare said:


> Well this was an absolute covfefe... To express my disappointment I will now go to run around in the nearest field of wheat to annoy some farmers.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

[
*BREAKINGPaul Nuttall stands down as UKIP leader*
Posted at10:40

Speaking at his party's headquarters, Paul Nuttall has announced he is standing down as UKIP leader, saying it "has been a honour" to head the party.

"It is clear UKIP requires a new focus and new ideas," he said.


----------



## stockwellcat.

rottiepointerhouse said:


> [
> *BREAKINGPaul Nuttall stands down as UKIP leader*
> Posted at10:40
> 
> Speaking at his party's headquarters, Paul Nuttall has announced he is standing down as UKIP leader, saying it "has been a honour" to head the party.
> 
> "It is clear UKIP requires a new focus and new ideas," he said.


I am not surprised as he lost his seat last night.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Abbott result 'best response' to critics*
Posted at10:36

Diane Abbott's "landslide" in Hackney North and Stoke Newington, where she increased her majority by 12.2% to poll 42,265 votes - three-quarters of the electorate - was "the best response to her critics", according to the Independent's Josh Withey.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> I am not surprised as he lost his seat last night.


He didn't have a seat to lose he was standing for the first time and didn't get elected. Expect to see Nigel return some time soon.


----------



## havoc

MilleD said:


> I really don't think Labour has achieved anything.


Corbyn has achieved a huge personal victory. You may not regard that as the same as a Labour success (I'm not so sure) but it has consolidated his position as leader and there's a whole generation have come out of the woodwork who couldn't give two hoots what happened 30 years ago. That much has been made clear. For the first time ever it isn't all about us oldies who can be relied upon to turn out and vote - we're still around though and pissing off that generation in the middle of an election campaign wasn't the smartest move. All ways round Labour ran the better campaign and it paid off.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Happy Paws2

noushka05 said:


> *If she had an ounce of decency, she would stand down* hand the reigns over to labour. Who at least DO have a plan for brexit. The tories wont do that, they will put their party before the best interests of the country - as per.


She is self centered woman and thinks only of herself and never stand down. With luck her party will make her resign.


----------



## Bullbreedlover

If the queen agrees to Theresa Mays terms that basically means the tories are in doesnt it?


----------



## Calvine

Has TM made her speech which was due at 10 am, @stockwellcat?


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not how I see it and I'm happy. Happy that she didn't get her mandate and her landslide, happy that she didn't increase her majority and happy that the NHA party got 12,000 in Jeremy Hunt's constituency which may make the Tories actually listen instead of trying to ride roughshod over the public. I'm thrilled there is unlikely to be a vote on repealing the hunting ban now and if she is stupid enough there are enough to vote it down. The only thing I'm not happy about is the Tory hunt supporter got reelected with an increased majority in our seat  @Animallover26 - here is our result
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000815
> 
> I really don't believe that is the case anymore, they are becoming less and less influential. Corbyn has achieved a fantastic turn around and increases despite the press so it just shows the public at large don't buy what the media tell them these days.


Agree. I'm delighted that Labour didn't get in, but I'm also delighted that she didn't get a landslide, as she now has another party to [hopefully] keep her in check


----------



## Calvine

Bullbreedlover said:


> New If the queen agrees to Theresa Mays terms that basically means the tories are in doesnt it?


I guess that's the idea. You'd have to laugh if the Queen said no, just p*ss off Theresa, you can't, so there.We could have another thread all about that.


----------



## Jesthar

Oh dear, Theresa. Less 'Strong and Stable', more 'Mandate of Mayhem' it would seem...


----------



## shadowmare

MiffyMoo said:


> Agree. I'm delighted that Labour didn't get in, but I'm also delighted that she didn't get a landslide, as she now has another party to [hopefully] keep her in check


Aaaand she's striking a deal with DUP.
*forgets the running through wheat plan and goes to look for her passport and pack her suitcases*


----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> Has TM made her speech which was due at 10 am, @stockwellcat?


No. She's seeing the Queen at 12:30pm instead to form a Government.


----------



## Jesthar

shadowmare said:


> Aaaand she's striking a deal with DUP.
> *forgets the running through wheat plan and goes to look for her passport and pack her suitcases*


That'll mean hard Brexit is off the cards, though. the DUP do NOT want a hard border in Ireland...


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> No. She's seeing the Queen at 12:30pm instead to form a Government ~ Cons-DUP coalition.


Can't she do both? Lazy sod.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> It must be just my imagination that I'm typing this on an iPad, before dealing with our internet and eBay sales.


Stop fibbing - you wrote it down on your parchment with a quill and an enlightened millennial had to post it online for you!


----------



## Franksthename

Nothing like an election to stir people up


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## stockwellcat.

*Theresa May reaches deal with DUP to form government after shock election result*

May expected to visit Queen to seek permission to form government after agreeing terms with Northern Ireland party.

Theresa May has struck a deal with the Democratic Unionists that will allow her to form a government, sources have confirmed.

The prime minister is expected to see the Queen at about 12.30pm on Friday to confirm that a deal is in place.

It follows extensive talks with the DUP late into the night. Party figures say they have been driven on Friday morning by their dismay at the possibility of Jeremy Corbynbecoming prime minister.

DUP figures insist their relationship with May's team has been close since she became prime minister 11 months ago.

A DUP source said: "We want there to be a government. We have worked well with May. The alternative is intolerable. For as long as Corbyn leads Labour, we will ensure there's a Tory PM."

There has been no decision as yet on whether there will be a formal coalition between the Conservatives and the DUP or if they will operate on a "confidence and supply" arrangement - whereby the Unionists would support a minority government on vital matters in return for some of their policies being enacted.

"There is no absolute majority, so no danger from the combined opposition," a source said. It has been reported that the two parties do not believe it necessary to enter a formal coalition to govern.

The DUP's 'price' for propping up a new Tory government will include a promise that there would be no post-Brexit special status for Northern Ireland, the party's leader in Westminster has confirmed.

Nigel Dodds, re-elected as North Belfast MP, said that among the DUP's preconditions would be an insistence that there was no separate deal that would effectively keep the region with one foot still inside the EU.

The DUP fears that special status after Brexit - a key demand of Sinn Féin - would de-couple Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK.

The party will return to the House of Commons with 10 seats and in all likelihood will only support a Tory administration, Dodds said.

With one eye on the Brexit negotiations that begin within the next 10 to 11 days, Dodds said: "There are special circumstances in Northern Ireland and we will try to make sure these are recognised. As regards demands for special status within the European Union, no. Because that would create tariffs and barriers between Northern Ireland and our single biggest market, which is the rest of the United Kingdom.

"While we will focus on the special circumstances, geography and certain industries of Northern Ireland we will be pressing that home very strongly. Special status, however, within the European Union is a nonsense. Dublin doesn't support it. Brussels doesn't support it. The member states of the EU would never dream of it because it would open the door to a Pandora's box of independence movements of all sorts. The only people who mentioned this are Sinn Féin."

The DUP backed Brexit in last year's EU referendum campaign and regards as sacrosanct the overall UK decision to leave.

Sinn Féin have argued that because the Northern Ireland electorate voted by 56% to remain within Europe last year and that the region will be the only one with a post-Brexit land border with the EU, the area should have special designated status.

When asked about what form of deal the DUP would consider, Dodds ruled out taking ministerial seats in a new Conservative-led cabinet. Rather the DUP is likely to back the Tories in confidence motions and support Conservative budgets.

"No, I am not thinking in those terms I have to say," Dodds said when asked about taking a cabinet seat before joking that he would like to be secretary of state for Northern Ireland.

The North Belfast MP said that "under no circumstances" would the DUP support any alternative coalition led by Jeremy Corbyn given what Dodds called the Labour leader's record of being pro-Irish republican in the past.

Sinn Féin were the other major winners in the local general election battle, winning seven seats and effectively wiping out their nationalist rivals the SDLP, who lost all three of their Westminster seats.

However, Corbyn will be unable to rely on the support of the seven Sinn Féin MPs as the party will continue its historic policy of boycotting Westminster.

Late on Thursday night, Gerry Adams, the Sinn Féin president, said his MPs would not be going to the House of Commons.

A senior Sinn Féin spokesman later told The Guardian there "wasn't a snowball's chance in hell" of the party ditching its abstentionism regarding Westminster.

http://amp.theguardian.com/politics...-after-shock-election-result-northern-ireland


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> OK, now I'll come clean. I've been wanting to ask throughout this thread. What's a meme?


Here you go

*A 'meme' is a virally-transmitted cultural symbol or social idea. *
The majority of modern memes are captioned photos that are intended to be funny, often as a way to publicly ridicule human behavior. Other memes can be videos and verbal expressions. Some memes have heavier and more philosophical content.


----------



## Happy Paws2

I


stockwellcat said:


> No. *She's seeing the Queen at 12:30pm* instead to form a Government ~ Cons-DUP coalition.


Wouldn't it be lovely to be a fly on the wall.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> Can't she do both? Lazy sod.


She will more than likely do a speech after she has seen Her Majesty.


----------



## shadowmare

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313887


They do sound like a bunch who would thrown upon TM for her sinful frolicking in wheat fields!


----------



## Happy Paws2

stockwellcat said:


> She will more than likely do a speech after she has seen Her Majesty.


That's going to be embarrassing :Hilarious


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> She will more than likely do a speech after she has seen Her Majesty.


Probably getting her hair done to meet Ma'am.


----------



## Calvine

MiffyMoo said:


> Some memes have heavier and more philosophical content.


But not many.


----------



## Zaros

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313886


I know it's the Daily Mail and the only people who take any real notice of what appears on bog roll are those who have great concerns about their immediate health.
However, are they serious with such a headline?

_'The constituent assembly which failed to recognise the power of the people, is now dispersed by the will of Soviet power. All power to the Soviet people and we shall crush the saboteurs' _ Vladimir Ilych Lenin.

_Nearly all children nowadays were horrible. What was worst of all was that by means of such organizations as the Spies they were systematically turned into ungovernable little savages, and yet this produced in them no tendency whatever to rebel against the discipline of the Party. On the contrary, they adored the Party and everything connected with it…. _*All their ferocity was turned outwards, against the enemies of the State, against foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, *_*thought-criminals*. It was almost normal for people over thirty to be frightened of their own children...._ Excerpt from 1984 George Orwell


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> *Theresa May reaches deal with DUP to form government after shock election result*
> 
> May expected to visit Queen to seek permission to form government after agreeing terms with Northern Ireland party.
> 
> Theresa May has struck a deal with the Democratic Unionists that will allow her to form a government, sources have confirmed.
> 
> The prime minister is expected to see the Queen at about 12.30pm on Friday to confirm that a deal is in place.
> 
> It follows extensive talks with the DUP late into the night. Party figures say they have been driven on Friday morning by their dismay at the possibility of Jeremy Corbynbecoming prime minister.
> 
> DUP figures insist their relationship with May's team has been close since she became prime minister 11 months ago.
> 
> A DUP source said: "We want there to be a government. We have worked well with May. The alternative is intolerable. For as long as Corbyn leads Labour, we will ensure there's a Tory PM."
> 
> There has been no decision as yet on whether there will be a formal coalition between the Conservatives and the DUP or if they will operate on a "confidence and supply" arrangement - whereby the Unionists would support a minority government on vital matters in return for some of their policies being enacted.
> 
> "There is no absolute majority, so no danger from the combined opposition," a source said. It has been reported that the two parties do not believe it necessary to enter a formal coalition to govern.
> 
> The DUP's 'price' for propping up a new Tory government will include a promise that there would be no post-Brexit special status for Northern Ireland, the party's leader in Westminster has confirmed.
> 
> Nigel Dodds, re-elected as North Belfast MP, said that among the DUP's preconditions would be an insistence that there was no separate deal that would effectively keep the region with one foot still inside the EU.
> 
> The DUP fears that special status after Brexit - a key demand of Sinn Féin - would de-couple Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK.
> 
> The party will return to the House of Commons with 10 seats and in all likelihood will only support a Tory administration, Dodds said.
> 
> With one eye on the Brexit negotiations that begin within the next 10 to 11 days, Dodds said: "There are special circumstances in Northern Ireland and we will try to make sure these are recognised. As regards demands for special status within the European Union, no. Because that would create tariffs and barriers between Northern Ireland and our single biggest market, which is the rest of the United Kingdom.
> 
> "While we will focus on the special circumstances, geography and certain industries of Northern Ireland we will be pressing that home very strongly. Special status, however, within the European Union is a nonsense. Dublin doesn't support it. Brussels doesn't support it. The member states of the EU would never dream of it because it would open the door to a Pandora's box of independence movements of all sorts. The only people who mentioned this are Sinn Féin."
> 
> The DUP backed Brexit in last year's EU referendum campaign and regards as sacrosanct the overall UK decision to leave.
> 
> Sinn Féin have argued that because the Northern Ireland electorate voted by 56% to remain within Europe last year and that the region will be the only one with a post-Brexit land border with the EU, the area should have special designated status.
> 
> When asked about what form of deal the DUP would consider, Dodds ruled out taking ministerial seats in a new Conservative-led cabinet. Rather the DUP is likely to back the Tories in confidence motions and support Conservative budgets.
> 
> "No, I am not thinking in those terms I have to say," Dodds said when asked about taking a cabinet seat before joking that he would like to be secretary of state for Northern Ireland.
> 
> The North Belfast MP said that "under no circumstances" would the DUP support any alternative coalition led by Jeremy Corbyn given what Dodds called the Labour leader's record of being pro-Irish republican in the past.
> 
> Sinn Féin were the other major winners in the local general election battle, winning seven seats and effectively wiping out their nationalist rivals the SDLP, who lost all three of their Westminster seats.
> 
> However, Corbyn will be unable to rely on the support of the seven Sinn Féin MPs as the party will continue its historic policy of boycotting Westminster.
> 
> Late on Thursday night, Gerry Adams, the Sinn Féin president, said his MPs would not be going to the House of Commons.
> 
> A senior Sinn Féin spokesman later told The Guardian there "wasn't a snowball's chance in hell" of the party ditching its abstentionism regarding Westminster.
> 
> http://amp.theguardian.com/politics...-after-shock-election-result-northern-ireland


*Ciaran Jenkins*‏Verified [email protected]*C4Ciaran* 3h3 hours ago

2016: Take back control 
2017: Give it to DUP












Happy Paws said:


> That's going to be embarrassing :Hilarious


I'd love to be a fly on the wall:Hilarious


----------



## Dr Pepper

Well at least no one on PF can crow about how well they predicted the election outcome. So who on here got it most wrong? I'm not sure we should name names but some numpty reckoned the conservative's would definitely win, Mr Corbyn would be resigning today and it'd be a really low turnout. Can anyone beat that?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Well at least no one on PF can crow about how well they predicted the election outcome. So who on here got it most wrong? I'm not sure we should name names but some numpty reckoned the conservative's would definitely win, Mr Corbyn would be resigning today and it'd be a really low turnout. Can anyone beat that?


Well yeah. I put a bet on Theresa May remaining as PM (think I have won that one) and a bet on Corbyn becoming PM (didn't win that one).

Oh well it's all over with. I admittedly backed the wrong side in the elections but had my reasons for choosing Labour. Never mind, I am not a sore loser. That's life. Let's get on with what's coming next. Brexit


----------



## MiffyMoo

shadowmare said:


> Aaaand she's striking a deal with DUP.
> *forgets the running through wheat plan and goes to look for her passport and pack her suitcases*


We knew from the minute the exit polls were announced that she would


----------



## samuelsmiles

*Theresa May reaches deal with DUP to form government after shock election result *

Crikey, the DUP party is further right than the Conservatives, isn't it? What exactly has Corbyn won?


----------



## MiffyMoo

Jesthar said:


> That'll mean hard Brexit is off the cards, though. the DUP do NOT want a hard border in Ireland...


Don't forget that the EU won't want a soft Brexit and may force us into a hard Brexit


----------



## MiffyMoo

Calvine said:


> But not many.


Yes, I find them slightly amusing, but ultimately a waste of time.


----------



## JANICE199

noushka05 said:


> *Ciaran Jenkins*‏Verified [email protected]*C4Ciaran* 3h3 hours ago
> 
> 2016: Take back control
> 2017: Give it to DUP
> 
> View attachment 313888
> 
> 
> I'd love to be a fly on the wall:Hilarious


*They sure know how to pick them. :Rage*


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bullbreedlover said:


> If the queen agrees to Theresa Mays terms that basically means the tories are in doesnt it?


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40209087

Theresa May remains prime minister unless another government is formed. She is heading to Buckingham Palace at 12:30 BST - and is believed to be seeking a minority government with the assistance of the Democratic Unionist Party.

At the moment the first deadline is *Tuesday 13 June*, when the new Parliament meets for the first time. Mrs May has until this date to put together a deal to keep herself in power or resign, according to official guidance issued by the Cabinet Office.

The government then needs to see if it can assemble the votes it needs to get its programme of proposed new laws passed in the Queen's Speech, which is scheduled for *Monday 19 June*.


----------



## Jesthar

MiffyMoo said:


> Don't forget that the EU won't want a soft Brexit and may force us into a hard Brexit


Oh, I don't think it will be a 'soft' Brexit (whatever that means these days). But the DUP will want freedom of movement (to avoid having to build the Great Wall of Ireland between North and South), and possibly retaining access to the Customs Union too, so the chance of an extremely hard Brexit are reduced.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Cabinet reshuffle 'this afternoon'*

Sun deputy political editor tweets

Posted at11:35

Follow
steve hawkes

✔@steve_hawkes
Reshuffle certain for this afternoon - expect Dominic Raab to be promoted as PM fills gaps left by Gummer, Wharton, Ellison

11:30 AM - 9 Jun 2017


----------



## Bisbow

My poor lap top has had a melt down (probably because of the results. This one is borrowed )

TM can't resign before the Brexit talks start or that will cause all sorts of problems. We are in a big enough mess as it is without making more
Sorry if this has already been said I'm all behind this morning and not caught up properly yet


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> *Cabinet reshuffle 'this afternoon'*
> 
> Sun deputy political editor tweets
> 
> Posted at11:35
> 
> Follow
> steve hawkes
> 
> ✔@steve_hawkes
> Reshuffle certain for this afternoon - expect Dominic Raab to be promoted as PM fills gaps left by Gummer, Wharton, Ellison
> 
> 11:30 AM - 9 Jun 2017


Yay, he's my MP!


----------



## stockwellcat.

So what happens now with Nicola Sturgeon's Independence Referendum request? She only has 35 seats and the SNP lost Alex Salmond and Angus Robertson overnight. Does this mean she won't be going on about it all the time now she has a weaker hand in Scotland?


----------



## kimthecat

Happy Paws said:


> She is self centered woman and thinks only of herself and never stand down. With luck her party will make her resign.


I don't think they would make her resign, with all the chaos the last thing we need is a leadership battle.


----------



## noushka05

JANICE199 said:


> *They sure know how to pick them. :Rage*


Shows just how vile & regressive they are.


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> I don't think they would make her resign, with all the chaos the last thing we need is a leadership battle.


The party has no intention of making TM resign and they have no appetite for a leadership contest at the moment or another GE.


----------



## noushka05

What a disaster these two selfish people have been for our country.

*Guy Verhofstadt*‏Verified [email protected]*GuyVerhofstadt* 4h4 hours ago
_
Yet another own goal, after Cameron now May,
will make already complex negotiations even more complicated._


----------



## Calvine

Franksthename said:


> Nothing like an election to stir people up


Yikes...never seen this guy before!


----------



## stockwellcat.

TM has just arrived at Buckingham Palace


----------



## Mirandashell

I would love it if the Queen's first words were 'Well. You made a right old mess of that, didn't you?'


----------



## noushka05

Brilliant by Owen Jones.


----------



## Calvine

Mirandashell said:


> New I would love it if the Queen's first words were 'Well. You made a right old mess of that, didn't you?'


Phil wouldn't be so polite tho'.


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> So what happens now with Nicola Sturgeon's Independence Referendum request? She only has 35 seats and the SNP lost Alex Salmond and Angus Robertson overnight. Does this mean she won't be going on about it all the time now she has a weaker hand in Scotland?


She just admitted that plans for a second referendum were "undoubtedly" a factor in the party losing 21 seats. So I suspect it will be quietly shelved


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> Never mind, I am not a sore loser


Have to agree, you seem quite philosophical about most things.


----------



## Mirandashell

Hubris! That's the word I was trying to think of. 

I've noticed in many areas of life that hubris is a killer of ambition. You see it most often in sport. Some team will say that they are going to wipe the floor with the opposition and you can put money on them losing. Remember that Swedish newspaper that had a headline of Sweden - 2 England - 0 the day before the match? They lost.


----------



## MilleD

stockwellcat said:


> So what happens now with Nicola Sturgeon's Independence Referendum request? She only has 35 seats and the SNP lost Alex Salmond and Angus Robertson overnight. Does this mean she won't be going on about it all the time now she has a weaker hand in Scotland?


I think the SNP result is the most amusing of the day.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Mirandashell said:


> Hubris! That's the word I was trying to think of.
> 
> I've noticed in many areas of life that hubris is a killer of ambition. You see it most often in sport. Some team will say that they are going to wipe the floor with the opposition and you can put money on them losing. Remember that Swedish newspaper that had a headline of Sweden - 2 England - 0 the day before the match? They lost.


Nobody likes smug, and the Tweet where she announced that if she lost 6 seats etc. did it for me. I honestly thought it had to be hacked, as nobody could think that posting something like that would be a good idea. It showed up her mindset that it was all about her, and not the party, which I found extremely distasteful. Yes, I voted Tory, but mainly because I really didn't want Labour in and I like my local Tory MP. I was also very Tory on here because the level of vitriol from some of the Labour supporters really got my back up, but I think I'm a lot more moderate than that in real life.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> So what happens now with Nicola Sturgeon's Independence Referendum request? She only has 35 seats and the SNP lost Alex Salmond and Angus Robertson overnight. Does this mean she won't be going on about it all the time now she has a weaker hand in Scotland?


Think that's dead and buried now. The Scottish people have spoken rather than have TM speaking for them.



stockwellcat said:


> The party has no intention of making TM resign and they have no appetite for a leadership contest at the moment or another GE.


That depends. I'm sure many of the electrolate will be uncomfortable in having a homophobic anti abortion party in coalition with the Conservatives, even from some moderates from her own party.

How would openly Gay MPs within the Tories feel for instance?

Perhaps they'll plan to bring back Clause 28.....


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> I don't agree, when you look at how bad the conservative campaign was and how hard done by half the country feel and how hard done by the other half think May's manifesto was going to make them feel, a decent solid Labour with a more popular leader would have wiped the floor with her. Both leaders lost this election. Both main parties lost this election. The British people are not happy. Except the young and the media apparently. They think Corbyn losing is winning. You wouldn't think that, if you had a £100 bet on Labour to win.


My youngest had a £40 bet on labour winning & hes just phoned me on his dinner break absolutely thrilled with the result. Corbyn may not have won the election, my Son my not have won his bet, but Corbyn has given him hope for the future.



DT said:


> A couple of important issues looking at it from my perspective
> 
> there was no need to call an election to start with the big mistake
> 
> The tories had a disastrous election campaign.
> 
> Labours campaign was much more organised spured on by corbyn connecting with the voter.
> 
> JC as nice as he was was still not the right man for the job. Another leader a better choice could have seen labour celebrating today
> 
> Neither of the main parties manifestos did I agree with consequently I voted for neither.
> 
> Nothing has changed the result is still the same the Conservatives won Labour Lost albeit conservative lost the majority along with the claim to be strong and stable they are now weak and feeble
> 
> The rest of the world must be laughing at us today an island full of muppets





MilleD said:


> I really don't think Labour has achieved anything. The Conservatives made their own coffin.


Labour have achieved great things, they rejected austerity & neoliberalism & people liked it.

Corbyn has increased Labour's share of the vote more than any other leader in any other election since Attlee in 1945


----------



## AlexPed2393

Confirmed on the news there that she will form a coalition with the DUP.... 

Bollocks


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Think that's dead and buried now.


That's good news.



> That depends. I'm sure many of the electrolate will be uncomfortable in having a homophobic anti abortion party in coalition with the Conservatives, even from some moderates from her own party.
> 
> How would openly Gay MPs within the Tories feel for instance?
> 
> Perhaps they'll plan to bring back Clause 28.....


I doubt very much the Tories will allow the DUP to try and do this because they legalised same sex marriage in the UK under a Cameron Government. Going off the Tories previous coalition the party in coalition with them didn't have much say in anything.


----------



## noushka05

*Owen Jones*‏Verified [email protected]*OwenJones84* 39m39 minutes ago

_The broken Tories are now dependent on an anti-gay, anti-women's rights party 
linked to Northern Irish extremists. Just sickening._


----------



## MilleD

noushka05 said:


> My youngest had a £40 bet on labour winning & hes just phoned me on his dinner break absolutely thrilled with the result. Corbyn may not have won the election, my Son my not have won his bet, but Corbyn has given him hope for the future.
> 
> Labour have achieved great things, they rejected austerity & neoliberalism & people liked it.
> 
> Corbyn has increased Labour's share of the vote more than any other leader in any other election since Attlee in 1945
> 
> View attachment 313891


The number of people voting conservative also went up by 5.5%.

I still think some people voted labour because they didn't want to vote conservative, not because they _wanted_ to vote labour.


----------



## Elles

Corbyn did as well as could be expected. I still say that people didn't like May, weren't happy, didn't like the conservative manifesto and if Labour were more united and had a more appealing leader whose promises seemed more possible, Labour would have won. They may still yet, if May and her new friends go too far. I wouldn't be surprised at yet another election before too long.

For today however, we got the result I hoped for and expected, so I'm quite happy. I voted Green once I knew the tories weren't going to get their landslide, I didn't want Corbyn's labour to actually win. Had they a more reasonable manifesto and someone like Caroline speaking for them, I would have voted for them and wanted them to win. As it happens this is one of the better results. A bit of chaos and a wake up call.


----------



## noushka05

MilleD said:


> The number of people voting conservative also went up by 5.5%.
> 
> I still think some people voted labour because they didn't want to vote conservative, not because they _wanted_ to vote labour.


I don't dispute it, but Corbyn has galvanised the young vote And Corbyn has done better then any labour leader since Attlee. Labour now have a growing grassroots following. Its exciting.


----------



## Jesthar

AlexPed2393 said:


> Confirmed on the news there that she will form a coalition with the DUP....
> 
> Bollocks


Well, there go any remaining shreds of her credibility, then.

I wonder how the pro-Tory side of the press are going to spin this one, given they spent most of the election campaign banging on about Corbyn and the IRA?

*grabs popcorn*


----------



## MilleD

noushka05 said:


> *Owen Jones*‏Verified [email protected]*OwenJones84* 39m39 minutes ago
> 
> _The broken Tories are now dependent on an anti-gay, anti-women's rights party
> linked to Northern Irish extremists. Just sickening._


That man seems a bit of an idiot to me.


----------



## noushka05

MilleD said:


> That man seems a bit of an idiot to me.


Says someone who supports a bunch of duplicitous liars


----------



## noushka05

*GeorgeMonbiot*‏@*GeorgeMonbiot* 2h2 hours ago

_ The __#_*DUP*_ is stuffed with climate change deniers, homophobes and misogynists. 
May's alliance is a dishonourable coalition of chaos.

Think of UKIP, supercharged with religious fundamentalism. __#_*CoalitionOfChaos*
_
I trust that the Daily Mail will now devote its first 13 pages
to the __#_*DUP*_'s associations with terrorism_. #*CoalitionOfChaos*


----------



## noushka05

LOL

Theresa May's speech in one picture.


----------



## Elles

MilleD said:


> The number of people voting conservative also went up by 5.5%.
> 
> I still think some people voted labour because they didn't want to vote conservative, not because they _wanted_ to vote labour.


Yes it was mostly votes moving from the smaller parties like ukip to either stop May, or stop Corbyn, than some huge positive swing. Corbyn did very well considering he's an elderly socialist, but considering how bad May was and how she constantly annoyed people with her changes, her fox hunting, her ivory trade, her dementia tax, her strong and stable, Labour should have won and they didn't. I'm happy noushka thinks the British public, especially the young, have suddenly become caring socialists, I'm more skeptical. Sorry.

The conservatives are now on a very downhill slope if this party they're aligning themselves with are what is being said though. I've never looked at them. If it's true, expect demonstrations and riots.


----------



## Jesthar

Bother, I was so going to stop at one meme, but this was too good not to share:


----------



## Mirandashell

MiffyMoo said:


> Nobody likes smug, and the Tweet where she announced that if she lost 6 seats etc. did it for me. I honestly thought it had to be hacked, as nobody could think that posting something like that would be a good idea. It showed up her mindset that it was all about her, and not the party, which I found extremely distasteful. Yes, I voted Tory, but mainly because I really didn't want Labour in and I like my local Tory MP. I was also very Tory on here because the level of vitriol from some of the Labour supporters really got my back up, but I think I'm a lot more moderate than that in real life.


I received two leaflets through my door during the campaigning. One was from my Labour MP and talked about what he'd done for his constituency in the past and what his future plans were for the area. It was quite interesting.

The other leaflet was from the Conservatives. It was all about Theresa May. Not a single mention of the local Tory candidate. Nothing about his or her plans for the area. Not a word. So yeah, it became the Theresa May party.


----------



## Bisbow

Imagine if TM resigned
My might end up with Boris as PM and that would be worse than JC and that would take some doing


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> I doubt very much the Tories will allow the DUP to try and do this because they legalised same sex marriage in the UK under a Cameron Government. Going off the Tories previous coalition the party in coalition with them didn't have much say in anything.


The DUP are somewhat more extreme than the Lib Dems though! May will have to give them what they want or the deal will be off.

Although both are pro Brexit their interpretation of it differs. What if/when May walks out with no deal with the result a hard border between NI and the Republic? Will the DUP allow May to walk away and express her, "No deal is better than a bad deal" soundbite?


----------



## Jesthar

Mirandashell said:


> I received two leaflets through my door during the campaigning. One was from my Labour MP and talked about what he'd done for his constituency in the past and what his future plans were for the area. It was quite interesting.
> 
> The other leaflet was from the Conservatives. It was all about Theresa May. Not a single mention of the local Tory candidate. Nothing about his or her plans for the area. Not a word. So yeah, it became the Theresa May party.


Exactly the same here. Oh, and a 'personal' letter from her that banged on about how _she _needs my vote (Odd, though I, I'm nowhere near your constituency...) for her strong and stable mandate, then went on to say that I mustn't vote Labour because Corbyn would count any vote for Labour as a vote for him... The mind boggles! Did they think we wouldn't spot the irony?


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Although both are pro Brexit their interpretation of it differs. What if/when May walks out with no deal with the result a hard border between NI and the Republic? Will the DUP allow May to walk away and express her, "No deal is better than a bad deal" soundbite?


I think the DUP will make sure May gets a different type of Brexit deal as you said the border in Ireland is at risk and the DUP won't allow that to be lost.


----------



## Jesthar

KittenKong said:


> The DUP are somewhat more extreme than the Lib Dems though! May will have to give them what they want or the deal will be off.
> 
> Although both are pro Brexit their interpretation of it differs. What if/when May walks out with no deal with the result a hard border between NI and the Republic? Will the DUP allow May to walk away and express her, "No deal is better than a bad deal" soundbite?


I very much doubt it. No deal would, of necessity, involve a hard Irish border.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> *Owen Jones*‏Verified [email protected]*OwenJones84* 39m39 minutes ago
> 
> _The broken Tories are now dependent on an anti-gay, anti-women's rights party
> linked to Northern Irish extremists. Just sickening._


Quite amusing really considering how much the press and many members on here made of Corbyn and his extremist "friends". Interesting to see how they square that circle.



MilleD said:


> The number of people voting conservative also went up by 5.5%.
> 
> I still think some people voted labour because they didn't want to vote conservative, not because they _wanted_ to vote labour.


We've got no way of knowing why people voted how they did unless they come on here and tell us. I'm pretty sure the Conservatives picked up a lot of votes in areas where UKIP didn't stand like my constituency where UKIP came 3rd last time with 12% of the vote but didn't stand this time.


----------



## kimthecat

Mirandashell said:


> I would love it if the Queen's first words were 'Well. You made a right old mess of that, didn't you?'


:Smuggrin She might say (as Rene from Allo allo ) you stupid woman !


----------



## MilleD

noushka05 said:


> Says someone who supports a bunch of duplicitous liars


I voted Green actually


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

She is deluded - no reference to losing a chunk of her majority and not achieving the mandate she set out to.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40219030


----------



## kimthecat

Gerry Adams all over the news now . :Vomit Could it get any worse .


----------



## Elles

DUP = Ian Paisley. Although he's no longer their leader, I do now know who they are. 

:Hilarious

Gotta laugh.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Ireland's prime minister-elect Leo Varadkar said the election result in the UK was an opportunity for Ireland.

"We must ensure that the Brexit talks are handled in a smooth and coherent manner to secure the best possible outcome for Ireland, for Europe and the UK," he said.

"The results of the UK election indicate to me that there is no strong mandate to proceed with a hard Brexit, which represents an opportunity for Ireland."


----------



## noushka05

MilleD said:


> I voted Green actually


Oh well I take it back then - big respect to you for that. Even though you do seem to jump to the defence of said liars - _a lot _


----------



## MilleD

noushka05 said:


> Oh well I take it back then - big respect to you for that. Even though you do seem to jump to the defence of said liars - _a lot _


That's because ultimately I am a conservative voter. I rent out houses, which makes me a bit of a capitalist 

But this time round I just couldn't bring myself to vote for them.

The Tories still had a landslide in my constituency like they always do - nearly 70% - but it was my little protest.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> I think the DUP will make sure May gets a different type of Brexit deal as you said the border in Ireland is at risk and the DUP won't allow that to be lost.





Jesthar said:


> I very much doubt it. No deal would, of necessity, involve a hard Irish border.


May will come back on TV after walking out of the EU negotiations with no deal.

Know who she'll blame? The voters for not giving her the huge majority she demanded to give her the mandate to negotiate a, "best possible deal".

The DUP will crucify her if a hard border results and would be the end of their alliance.

I look forward to her downfall.


----------



## MiffyMoo

MilleD said:


> That man seems a bit of an idiot to me.


Well, he can't even make up his mind on his own leader:

*March 2017
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/01/corbyn-staying-not-good-enough

June 2017
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/09/jeremy-corbyn-prime-minister-labour?CMP=twt_gu*


----------



## MiffyMoo

Bisbow said:


> Imagine if TM resigned
> My might end up with Boris as PM and that would be worse than JC and that would take some doing


I think that Ruth Davidson would be a rather good replacement


----------



## shadowmare

Mirandashell said:


> I received two leaflets through my door during the campaigning. One was from my Labour MP and talked about what he'd done for his constituency in the past and what his future plans were for the area. It was quite interesting.
> 
> The other leaflet was from the Conservatives. It was all about Theresa May. Not a single mention of the local Tory candidate. Nothing about his or her plans for the area. Not a word. So yeah, it became the Theresa May party.


I got two leaflets: one for SNP with the lady's plans and the other from conservatives with some woman asking to help her stop sturgeon. Guess who won here


----------



## Bisbow

KittenKong said:


> May will come back on TV after walking out of the EU negotiations with no deal.
> 
> Know who she'll blame? The voters for not giving her the huge majority she demanded to give her the mandate to negotiate a, "best possible deal".
> 
> The DUP will crucify her if a hard border results and would be the end of their alliance.
> 
> I look forward to her downfall.


The election is over, but not the way anyone really wanted it
But still the vitriol continues
Please let us get on and try to make the best of a bad job

Or is that really too much too ask, or am I being over optimistic


----------



## MiffyMoo

shadowmare said:


> I got two leaflets: one for SNP with the lady's plans and the other from conservatives with some woman asking to help her stop sturgeon. Guess who won here


It astounds me. It is so well known that negative advertising or campaigning is the quickest way to turn people off you - so why on earth do it? I think that Lynton Crosby has a lot to answer for, in letting those go out


----------



## 3dogs2cats

KittenKong said:


> May will come back on TV after walking out of the EU negotiations with no deal.
> 
> Know who she'll blame? The voters for not giving her the huge majority she demanded to give her the mandate to negotiate a, "best possible deal".
> 
> The DUP will crucify her if a hard border results and would be the end of their alliance.
> 
> I look forward to her downfall.


I don`t think May is going to be making herself overly comfortable in No.10, they may not risk removing her for now but she is surely damaged by this mess she has created!


----------



## Elles

MiffyMoo said:


> I think that Ruth Davidson would be a rather good replacement


I agree. She was suggested before though and said she'd rather not. Plus the tories wouldn't let her be.


----------



## stockwellcat.

I have closed the poll as there is no need for it anymore.

Feel free to carry on commenting.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

3dogs2cats said:


> I don`t think May is going to be making herself overly comfortable in No.10, they may not risk removing her for now but she is surely damaged by this mess she has created!


I read somewhere last night that she didn't want to call the election but gave in to pressure from her team. Wonder if she will be getting shot of them now or if that was just a rumour to cover up for her poor judgement.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Is Osborne trolling May?*
Posted at14:18








Evening Standard










They might be former Cabinet colleagues but there's been no love lost between George Osborne and Prime Minister Theresa May since she replaced him as chancellor last July.

Mr Osborne, who now edits London's Evening Standard, has tweeted a selection of front pages bearing grim headlines for the PM.

How many actually hit the streets of London remains to be seen...


----------



## KittenKong

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/vote-of-no-confidence-in-a-conservative-government


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/vote-of-no-confidence-in-a-conservative-government
> View attachment 313901


This won't go anywhere. There needs to be a vote of no confidence in the Conservative Party against May but they have made their position clear. No leadership contest in the near future and they don't want TM to step down. A vote of no confidence from the public will be ignored that's why we have General Elections every 5 years next one scheduled for 2022.


----------



## havoc

It's going to get very messy. It's part of the peace agreement that Westminster stays neutral over NI government. How can she get into bed with the DUP and guarantee that?


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> but they have made their position clear. No leadership contest in the near future and they don't want TM to step down.


Is that clear in the same way it was clear she wouldn't call an election etc.


----------



## Bisbow

Bisbow said:


> The election is over, but not the way anyone really wanted it
> But still the vitriol continues
> Please let us get on and try to make the best of a bad job
> 
> Or is that really too much too ask, or am I being over optimistic


l
Obviously I am asking to much
Shame, I thought tis forum was made up of mainly decent people that cared for others
How wrong can I be


----------



## stockwellcat.

havoc said:


> Is that clear in the same way it was clear she wouldn't call an election etc.


The Queen won't interfere with politics either and this is whom this petition is directed at.

Petition entitled:
*Her Majesty the Queen and UK Parliament*
*Vote of no confidence in a Conservative government*


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> This won't go anywhere. There needs to be a vote of no confidence in the Conservative Party against May but they have made their position clear. No leadership contest in the near future and they don't want TM to step down. A vote of no confidence from the public will be ignored that's why we have General Elections every 5 years next one scheduled for 2022.


What is it with this country? Every time there's a vote or referendum, certain people throw a tantrum and insist that it's wrong and needs to be redone. Anyone would think they didn't understand the concept of democracy


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> This won't go anywhere. There needs to be a vote of no confidence in the Conservative Party against May but they have made their position clear. No leadership contest in the near future and they don't want TM to step down.


I should imagine they very much want Theresa to step down, some of them would probably be happy never to set eyes on her again but they are pretty much stuck with the situation at the moment.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> I agree. She was suggested before though and said she'd rather not. Plus the tories wouldn't let her be.


Oh, that's a pity


----------



## Jesthar

This is very interesting. It's a map of who won where, with all the seats where 'Apathy' (those who didn't vote) had the largest overall count in black:










https://www.indy100.com/article/ele...hung-parliament-theresa-may-corbyn-pm-7781251


----------



## stockwellcat.

MiffyMoo said:


> What is it with this country? Every time there's a vote or referendum, certain people throw a tantrum and insist that it's wrong and needs to be redone. Anyone would think they didn't understand the concept of democracy


I know it gets a bit tedious.

The Conservatives still have the majority of seats in Parliament and have formed a coalition to make the rest up so have not broke any rules they are over the 326 marker. Conservatives 318 + DUP 10 = 328.


----------



## Lurcherlad

stockwellcat said:


> The Queen won't interfere with politics either and this is whom this petition is directed at.
> 
> Petition entitled:
> *Her Majesty the Queen and UK Parliament*
> *Vote of no confidence in a Conservative government*


It's done.

We had an election.

We have a result.

The future is Blue with a smattering of Orange for the time being at least.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> This won't go anywhere. There needs to be a vote of no confidence in the Conservative Party against May but they have made their position clear. No leadership contest in the near future and they don't want TM to step down. A vote of no confidence from the public will be ignored that's why we have General Elections every 5 years next one scheduled for 2022.


Yes, indeed such petitions are usually ignored, but will be interesting to see how many sign it.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Lurcherlad said:


> It's done.
> 
> We had an election.
> 
> We have a result.
> 
> The future is Blue with a smattering of Orange for the time being at least.


I know. I said before I am not a sore loser. We have a Government in Parliament so now we move away from this onto the next thing which is Brexit.


----------



## Lurcherlad

stockwellcat said:


> I know. I said before I am not a sore loser. We have a Government in Parliament so now we move away from this onto the next thing which is Brexit.


LOL!

This will rumble on for a few more pages yet! 

:Yawn


----------



## stockwellcat.

Lurcherlad said:


> LOL!
> 
> This will rumble on for a few more pages yet!
> 
> :Yawn


I know.

I will request that it is closed on Monday, giving time for people to respond to the election results and aftermath. It will be up to mods if they close the thread


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Dr Pepper

stockwellcat said:


> This won't go anywhere. There needs to be a vote of no confidence in the Conservative Party against May but they have made their position clear. No leadership contest in the near future and they don't want TM to step down. A vote of no confidence from the public will be ignored that's why we have General Elections every 5 years next one scheduled for 2022.


Right, as you know I'm pretty much a expert on politics so you can take me at my word on this. She won't be stepping down or forced out. They have Brexit to get on with almost immediately. So I can't see her going before the next election.



Jesthar said:


> This is very interesting. It's a map of who won where, with all the seats where 'Apathy' (those who didn't vote) had the largest overall count in black:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.indy100.com/article/ele...hung-parliament-theresa-may-corbyn-pm-7781251


Kinda paints a different picture on the extent of support for labour across the UK.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> She won't be stepping down or forced out. They have Brexit to get on with almost immediately. So I can't see her going before the next election.


Thanks for clarifying this @Dr Pepper.

See @KittenKong the protests and petitions are pretty pointless. We have a Government now until 2022 and Brexit to contend with as well.


----------



## Satori

KittenKong said:


> Yes, indeed such petitions are usually ignored, but will be interesting to see how many sign it.


Ooh yes, it will be positively fascinating to see that. I can hardly contain my excitement.


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> Kinda paints a different picture on the extent of support for labour across the UK.


Only from a geographical point of view, though, really. Most Labour support was in the densely populated areas and cities that have a lot of seats crammed into them, whereas the Tories as usual claimed many more of the physically larger but much less densely populated countryside areas.

I thought it was more interesting from a perspective of I wondered how many people in those areas figured their vote couldn't make a difference


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Thanks for clarifying this @Dr Pepper.
> 
> See @KittenKong the protests and petitions are pretty pointless. We have a Government now until 2022 and Brexit to contend with as well.


You think they wouldn't be objections to May even if she'd won her expected majority? Yes, it would have to be respected she was PM but....

Would you have sat back and let her re-introduce foxhunting for example without protest or signing a petition because she'd won? Would people have sat back and ignored the scrapping of the human rights act?

When Blair joined Bush's Iraq war there was a huge protest, as they were after the EU referendum and the Poll Tax before that.

The governments in question had large parliamentary majorities but that didn't stop people from protesting. And so it shouldn't.

Me thinks they'll be another general election long before 2022!


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> Thanks for clarifying this @Dr Pepper.
> 
> See @KittenKong the protests and petitions are pretty pointless. We have a Government now until 2022 and Brexit to contend with as well.


Don`t get carried away SWC, Dr. Pepper said he couldn`t see her going until the next election


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Me thinks they'll be another general election before 2022!


Well the Conservatives won't be calling a GE who happen to be the party who has to ask to call it. If another party tries to call one the Conservatives with the majority and the DUP coalition will block it.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Where`s Larry the Cat? I haven`t seen him for a while.


----------



## Dr Pepper

3dogs2cats said:


> Don`t get carried away SWC, Dr. Pepper said he couldn`t see her going until the next election


She's probably packing her bags, pinching a bit of memorabilia and kicking the cat as I type.


----------



## stockwellcat.

stockwellcat said:


> Well the Conservatives won't be calling a GE who happen to be the party who has to ask to call it. If another party tries to call one the Conservatives with the majority and the DUP coalition will block it.


Oh I forgot there's a fixed term Parliament act in force.


----------



## KittenKong

George Osborne's certainly enjoying this!


----------



## shadowmare

Does anyone know this... when they give the percentages of how many people came out to vote, they don't simply look at how many people are on the roll and how many came to vote? Just curious as obviously I'm on the roll but am not allowed to vote in the general election as do the rest of the EU citizens living here but registered for voting.


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> Where`s Larry the Cat? I haven`t seen him for a while.


I am sure I saw the police man stroking him the other day.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Dr Pepper said:


> She's probably packing her bags, pinching a bit of memorabilia and kicking the cat as I type.


Nope..
She is being kicked by The Bow Group.

The same one, who went to Russia and discussed shared investments in East Ukraine, when Russians get it....

Today in Gibraltar little merry dance with animal lovers on behalf of foxes...

Some hope for expats, some hope for access to single market.

But blue dotted orange is blerghhhh....

If we had red, yellow and green we can go Rasta ....

Though I firmly believe that more mainstream Labour leader like Andy B.would have won.

Labour gained as a result of negative choice as you could see even on this thread ...
Ruth Davidson asked if she wants to lead the Cons...
If anyone in this camp she looked strong and stable ...

Feel for SNP.

Now Conservatives depend on DUP....that would be most interesting....would DUP Clegg?

Will May be able to actually listen?

This election proved one thing: People are not keen on extremes.

To form really strong and stable government we need " middle of the road" consensus.


----------



## stockwellcat.

3dogs2cats said:


> Where`s Larry the Cat? I haven`t seen him for a while.


I am sure I saw the police man stroking him the other day.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Dr Pepper said:


> She's probably packing her bags, pinching a bit of memorabilia and kicking the cat as I type.


Poor Larry! do you think he was responsible for the manifesto, maybe she`ll take him as her bit of memorabilia.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Well the Conservatives won't be calling a GE who happen to be the party who has to ask to call it. If another party tries to call one the Conservatives with the majority and the DUP coalition will block it.





stockwellcat said:


> Oh I forgot there's a fixed term Parliament act in force.


I'm a bit confused as I'm aware there's a fixed term rule, but that didn't stop TM calling another General Election after only two years in power. It backfired badly as they had a parliamentary majority which they would have still had if they stuck to the rules!


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> I'm a bit confused as I'm aware there's a fixed term rule, but that didn't stop TM calling another General Election after only two years in power. It backfired badly as they had a parliamentary majority which they would have still had if they stuck to the rules!


The PM and only the PM can request to call an early GE and Parliament have to agree with a majority vote. May thought the time was right to call one as the polls were indicating she would win. Only she can call one again before the next scheduled GE and do you think she will fall for it again?

http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06111


----------



## 3dogs2cats

stockwellcat said:


> The PM and only the PM can request to call an early GE and Parliament have to agree with a majority vote. May thought the time was right to call one as the polls were indicating she would win. Only she can call one again before the next scheduled GE and do you think she will fall for it again?
> 
> http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06111


No! not her, the new leader will potentially be wanting one to get their mandate! All I ask is the shellfish bugger checks the weather for proposed election night next time, while they were swanning about in warm town halls and being chauffeured in warm limos I was bloody well freezing watching them! I demand a heatwave for the next election night


----------



## Calvine

Mirandashell said:


> It was all about Theresa May.


Come to think of it, you're right. I got about four posted to me in the last few days. her photo was on each one.


----------



## Calvine

Just heard from Vince Cable (Lib Dem who got in) that Twickenham had an estimated 80% turnout.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> do you think she will fall for it again?


You have to hope not.


----------



## Satori

shadowmare said:


> Does anyone know this... when they give the percentages of how many people came out to vote, they don't simply look at how many people are on the roll and how many came to vote? Just curious as obviously I'm on the roll but am not allowed to vote in the general election as do the rest of the EU citizens living here but registered for voting.


The denominator is registered electorate.


----------



## Mirandashell

I think the Fixed Term also stops any party doing more than 5 years in power without re-election.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> l
> Obviously I am asking to much
> Shame, I thought tis forum was made up of mainly decent people that cared for others
> How wrong can I be


I don't get what you mean Bisbow. We had an election, the result was a hung parliament so there are bound to be lots of people wanting to express their opinions about why and about what should happen going forward and how they view the Tories getting into bed with the DUP and what effect that might have in Ireland etc etc. Why does it mean we are not decent and don't care for others in any way shape or form to still want to discuss these issues.



stockwellcat said:


> I know.
> 
> I will request that it is closed on Monday, giving time for people to respond to the election results and aftermath. It will be up to mods if they close the thread


Again why do you need to request it is closed at any time, when people have stopped having things to say or ask or about it the thread will become inactive and fall off the 1st page, in the meantime if this one is closed another will be opened so what is the point?



stockwellcat said:


> Thanks for clarifying this @Dr Pepper.
> 
> See @KittenKong the protests and petitions are pretty pointless. We have a Government now until 2022 and Brexit to contend with as well.


We know no such thing. We voted in 2015 and elected a government with a bigger majority than this one and two years later we were back at the polling stations.



stockwellcat said:


> Well the Conservatives won't be calling a GE who happen to be the party who has to ask to call it. If another party tries to call one the Conservatives with the majority and the DUP coalition will block it.


That is assuming that all remains rosy and cosy in the Conservative Party - there could well be a power struggle yet - a lot of Tories are seething that she called the election in the first place, about their lack of input into the manifesto and into the way their campaign was run not to mention the result so there could well be a vote of no confidence in her as leader at some point.



3dogs2cats said:


> Where`s Larry the Cat? I haven`t seen him for a while.


He was sat outside No 10 this morning, he was shown on Good Morning Britain for some time before he mooched off up the road.



stockwellcat said:


> The PM and only the PM can request to call an early GE and Parliament have to agree with a majority vote. May thought the time was right to call one as the polls were indicating she would win. Only she can call one again before the next scheduled GE and do you think she will fall for it again?
> 
> http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06111


If and its only an if she is ousted as leader then the new leader could call an earlier election just as this one did.


----------



## emmaviolet

[QUOTE="stockwellcat said:


> The PM and only the PM can request to call an early GE and Parliament have to agree with a majority vote. May thought the time was right to call one as the polls were indicating she would win. Only she can call one again before the next scheduled GE and do you think she will fall for it again?
> 
> http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06111


A new leader may, but I doubt they would risk it.
There was a few Tories and execs who said that she is in power now, as the caretaker of the role. It most likely will not be long term after this.
They also do not have a majority and then with this alliance, it is really too small. It's impossible not to have any by-elections, and then she would have nothing again, not that this will work to put through anything extreme anyway.

It seems crazy she would risk Ireland and more conflict just to cling onto what little power is left. Cameron wouldn't do it and no other would.

The DUP have quite shocking views, against women's rights, the right to choose and anti gay rights. Lovely bunch.

Who knew, vote Tories, get the backwards thinking of DUP.


----------



## cheekyscrip

emmaviolet said:


> A new leader may, but I doubt they would risk it.
> There was a few Tories and execs who said that she is in power now, as the caretaker of the role. It most likely will not be long term after this.
> They also do not have a majority and then with this alliance, it is really too small. It's impossible not to have any by-elections, and then she would have nothing again, not that this will work to put through anything extreme anyway.
> 
> It seems crazy she would risk Ireland and more conflict just to cling onto what little power is left. Cameron wouldn't do it and no other would.
> 
> The DUP have quite shocking views, against women's rights, the right to choose and anti gay rights. Lovely bunch.
> 
> Who knew, vote Tories, get the backwards thinking of DUP.


I do not like the look of them at all.

Much as I like the Irish....really do.

But to be govern by Ballymena Bible Belt ....


----------



## Mirandashell

Most of the Irish don't like them either.


----------



## Jesthar

Mirandashell said:


> Most of the Irish don't like them either.


But not to the extent of not voting for them, it would seem...


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

They think its all over ....

*Sinn Fein to hold press conference*

BBC political editor tweets...

Posted at15:57

Follow
Laura Kuenssberg

✔@bbclaurak
Sinn Fein about to hold a press conference, just imagine if they suddenly said they were to take their seats.....

3:53 PM - 9 Jun 2017


----------



## noushka05

:Hilarious :Hilarious

*Robert Peston*‏Verified [email protected]*Peston* 23m23 minutes ago

_Senior Tory MP: "We all f***ing hate her. _
_But there is nothing we can do. _
_She has totally f***ed us"._


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Kuenssberg: Reshuffle now expected tomorrow*

BBC political editor tweets...

Posted at16:21

Follow
Laura Kuenssberg

✔@bbclaurak
Reshuffle now expected tomorrow

4:18 PM - 9 Jun 2017


----------



## Mirandashell

Jesthar said:


> But not to the extent of not voting for them, it would seem...


There's actually quite a lot of Irish people who can't vote in the British General Election........


----------



## kimthecat

3dogs2cats said:


> Where`s Larry the Cat? I haven`t seen him for a while.


Tweeting away on Twitter . Still living at No 10 .


----------



## Elles

And they're calling May 'The Tin Lady'

The wizard of oz seems quite popular in politics.


----------



## emmaviolet

Bisbow said:


> l
> Obviously I am asking to much
> Shame, I thought tis forum was made up of mainly decent people that cared for others
> How wrong can I be


Are people not decent because they wish to discuss the state of the country on the day after one of the most shocking elections we've ever had? 
Are you decent if you keep quite and obey the powers that be?


----------



## kimthecat

Good to see Zac Goldsmith back at Richmond, London. he won by 45 votes , Now that's what I call close! 
One of those times where every vote _does _count.


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I don't get what you mean Bisbow. We had an election, the result was a hung parliament so there are bound to be lots of people wanting to express their opinions about why and about what should happen going forward and how they view the Tories getting into bed with the DUP and what effect that might have in Ireland etc etc. Why does it mean we are not decent and don't care for others in any way shape or form to still want to discuss these issues. .


Of course there will be discussions and debates, would expect nothing else
But I see no need for the vitriol and more character assassination
The result was not what we all hoped for but be big enough to admit it, I have and other decent people on here have without turning to insults
Just because someone backs the tories or is o tory mp does not make it right to belittle them
Healthy debate is one thing but some remarks are not healthy debate


----------



## Mirandashell

Any news of Kensington and Chelsea?


----------



## shadowmare

kimthecat said:


> Good to see Zac Goldsmith back at Richmond, London. he won by 45 votes , Now that's what I call close!
> One of those times where every vote _does _count.


One of the SNP places was one by 2 points!


----------



## shadowmare

Mirandashell said:


> Any news of Kensington and Chelsea?


Thought they're starting recounting at 6pm


----------



## kimthecat

shadowmare said:


> One of the SNP places was one by 2 points!


 That must be one of the closest ever.


----------



## Mirandashell

Is it that late? Fair enough. Be fascinating to see the result.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> I am sure I saw the police man stroking him the other day.












You're right...you did!


----------



## kimthecat

Mirandashell said:


> Any news of Kensington and Chelsea?


 I uderstand that kensington is the constituency that is being recounted . Kensington and Chelsea is the borough


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> Of course there will be discussions and debates, would expect nothing else
> But I see no need for the vitriol and more character assassination
> The result was not what we all hoped for but be big enough to admit it, I have and other decent people on here have without turning to insults
> Just because someone backs the tories or is o tory mp does not make it right to belittle them
> Healthy debate is one thing but some remarks are not healthy debate


Isn't that censorship though? You are trying to dictate what people can discuss and what they can post. You did your fair share of belittling not only of Corbyn but of those of us who cared about hunting and had that high on our list of important issues. If it upsets you why not give the thread a miss, I dare say in a few days the fuss will have died down and people will have moved on to talking about something else - just let it run its course.



Mirandashell said:


> Any news of Kensington and Chelsea?


Not starting recount until this evening.


----------



## Mirandashell

Thanks Rottie!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

From the League Against Cruel Sports 

If you Voted for Vinny to contact your candidates, you were one of many who made sure that those standing for election knew exactly how strong feeling is on our key issues. In fact, around 85,000 emails were sent to candidates! Many of those candidates told us that they received more communication about hunting than any other issue.

Alongside the Votes for Vinny campaign we continued our usual work in the media and in Parliament. Our polling showing that 84% of the public are opposed to legalising fox hunting was published everywhere. We know that some pro-hunting candidates publicly switched their position, potentially because of this work.

We also commissioned a poll which showed that half of all voters would switch their vote to a candidate of another party if the local candidate from their preferred party was pro-repeal. That’s quite a devastating figure when you consider how close the election was. This information will help us understand the scale of the threat against the Hunting Act.

Other polling showed that hunting was one of the most talked about issues of the entire election, second only to social care. Hunting was truly a hot topic, and I firmly believe the League can take a lot of credit for keeping it in the public eye.

But to the future – what will the election result mean? Honestly, we don’t know yet!

There is a chance that hunting has become so toxic that no government will touch it for a while. But there is also the threat of an attempt to re-write environmental legislation – including the Hunting Act.


----------



## kimthecat

out of the mouth of babes -

 *Jess Phillips*‏Verified [email protected]*jessphillips* 11m11 minutes ago

My twelve year old son "To be honest it's sad we didn't win, but I think at least it might sort out the Labour Party a bit."

23 replies 6 retweets 74 likes


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> Good to see Zac Goldsmith back at Richmond, London. he won by 45 votes , Now that's what I call close!
> One of those times where every vote _does _count.


Indeed. You have to wonder how the 132 who spoilt their ballots feel about it


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> I uderstand that kensington is the constituency that is being recounted . Kensington and Chelsea is the borough


They are only recounting because the tellers left exhausted.
*Kensington count suspended after tellers left 'exhausted' *
*







*
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/09/kensington-count-suspended-tellers-left-exhausted/amp/

*Labour's Emma Dent Coad poised to win seat from Conservatives after third recount*
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/kensington-election-results-labours-emma-dent-coad-poised-to-win-seat-from-conservatives-after-third-a3561386.html?amp

Takes the results to:
Conservatives 318
Labour 262
This is providing Labour win the seat.


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> I uderstand that kensington is the constituency that is being recounted . Kensington and Chelsea is the borough


Exactly. It used to be K&C, but It's now Chelsea and Fulham, and Ken has gone it alone


----------



## stockwellcat.

@rottiepointerhouse Ok I get what you are saying. I know you are fuming because of the election results. I'll leave the thread and leave it open just like moggiebaby did on the EU one.


----------



## Happy Paws2

kimthecat said:


> I don't think they would make her resign, with all the chaos the last thing we need is a leadership battle.


I give her to the Autumn and they find a way to get get her out.


----------



## Calvine

MiffyMoo said:


> Exactly. It used to be K&C, but It's now Chelsea and Fulham, and Ken has gone it alone


They change everything: my son lived in Fulham a few years back, fairly sure then it was Hammersmith and Fulham.


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> @Bisbow Ok I get what you are saying. I know you are fuming because of the election results. I'll leave the thread and leave it open just like moggiebaby did on the EU one.


I really don't think it's the result she's fuming about. Lets face it, the conservatives actually increased there percentage of the overall vote, as did Labour.

It's just a sad state of affairs from whatever side you were on and the whole country is the loser


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> I really don't think it's the result she's fuming about. Lets face it, the conservatives actually increased there percentage of the overall vote, as did Labour.
> 
> It's just a sad state of affairs from whatever side you were on and the whole country is the losers


Sorry quoted wrong person have corrected it


----------



## Calvine

rona said:


> the whole country is the loser


You're right, there are no real 'winners' at all (except that we got our great Lib Dem MP back who was here for 18 years from 1997 and was pipped at the post in 2015). He got a huge majority too.


----------



## Team_Trouble

Why all the censorship and talk of thread closing, leaving the thread, etc? I don't know if posts have been removed, but I haven't seen any vitriol recently on the thread. I find it very interesting to read other people's opinions and thoughts and have asked myself some important questions about my politics as a direct result of reading something on this thread. I don't think @rottiepointerhouse wants the thread left open for her own sake nor does she appear to be fuming to me. I just don't think one person has the right to say 'that's it, I don't want anyone to talk about this anymore, it's my theread' just because they started it.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Diane Abbott is safe....
Glad. I would have missed her....


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> @rottiepointerhouse Ok I get what you are saying. I know you are fuming because of the election results. I'll leave the thread and leave it open just like moggiebaby did on the EU one.


Where do you get that idea from? I said way back early this morning that I was happy that they didn't get their landslide victory and that I doubted the free vote on hunting would go ahead without a significant majority and that I think Jeremy Corbyn should be very proud of what he has achieved. I'm not fuming at all (although I wish my incumbent hunting supporting Tory had not got back in with an increased majority). There is still so much to unravel that I just don't see the point in closing the thread when so many of us are still using it


----------



## kimthecat

@MiffyMoo said: ↑
Exactly. It used to be K&C, but It's now Chelsea and Fulham, and Ken has gone it alone



Calvine said:


> They change everything: my son lived in Fulham a few years back, fairly sure then it was Hammersmith and Fulham.


I can't keep up with it all.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Of course there will be discussions and debates, would expect nothing else
> But I see no need for the vitriol and more character assassination
> The result was not what we all hoped for but be big enough to admit it, I have and other decent people on here have without turning to insults
> Just because someone backs the tories or is o tory mp does not make it right to belittle them
> Healthy debate is one thing but some remarks are not healthy debate


As someone who called Corbyn a terrorist sympathiser, how do you feel about the tories getting into bed with the DUP, Bisbow?


----------



## noushka05

*Robert Harris*‏@*Robert___Harris* 5h5 hours ago

_No hint of apology or regret in PM's statement. No humility. 
Full North Korean mode. She won't last long_

..


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Isn't that censorship though? You are trying to dictate what people can discuss and what they can post. You did your fair share of belittling not only of Corbyn but of those of us who cared about hunting and had that high on our list of important issues. If it upsets you why not give the thread a miss, I dare say in a few days the fuss will have died down and people will have moved on to talking about something else - just let it run its course.
> 
> Not starting recount until this evening.


Is asking people not to be rude regarded as censorship,
I would not have thought so was
It is bad manners now and I have not be belittled anyone except Boris
It is all over now and is history, It is not I wanted but that is life and I have to live with it
I was belittled as well but it is over and gone and I hold no grudges so lets start afresh


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> As someone who called Corbyn a terrorist sympathiser, how do you feel about the tories getting into bed with the DUP, Bisbow?


I don't like it but unfortunately I can do nothing about it


----------



## Mirandashell

It's just been said on the BBC that none of the top Tories have agreed to be interviewed.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Calvine said:


> They change everything: my son lived in Fulham a few years back, fairly sure then it was Hammersmith and Fulham.


I used to live there! Miss it so much


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> I don't like it but unfortunately I can do nothing about it


You could rip them to bits like you did Jeremy Corbyn.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> Is asking people not to be rude regarded as censorship,
> I would not have thought so was
> It is bad manners now and I have not be belittled anyone except Boris
> It is all over now and is history, It is not I wanted but that is life and I have to live with it
> I was belittled as well but it is over and gone and I hold no grudges so lets start afresh


No just asking people not to be rude isn't censorship and hopefully we can all respect each other and not resort to being rude or nasty to each other. You are quite right we should all start afresh and learn to walk away from the thread if we don't agree with how its going. Life is too short.


----------



## shadowmare

Mirandashell said:


> It's just been said on the BBC that none of the top Tories have agreed to be interviewed.


Not a little bit surprised  they first need to agree on what bs they will be pushing before opening their mouths! if everyone is saying different things - no one would continue believing the "strong and stable" crap.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> You could rip them to bits like you did Jeremy Corbyn.


As I said it is all over and ripping them to bits will do no good
I could still find things to rip JC apart with but that will do no good either


----------



## noushka05




----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Wow surprised to see this

Philip Hammond

✔@PhilipHammondUK
Pleased to be re-appointed so we can now get on and negotiate a Brexit deal that supports British jobs, business and prosperity.

5:27 PM - 9 Jun 2017

Not so surprised by this

Boris Johnson

✔@BorisJohnson
Delighted to be reappointed Foreign Secretary. Lots of great work to do for greatest country on earth. Let's get cracking for Global Britain

5:26 PM - 9 Jun 2017

*Hammond, Rudd, Johnson, Davis and Fallon to stay on*
Posted at17:23

The following Cabinet posts have been confirmed by No 10:


Chancellor of the Exchequer - Philip Hammond
Home Secretary - Amber Rudd
Foreign Secretary - Boris Johnson
Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union - David Davis
Defence Secretary - Sir Michael Fallon


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> No just asking people not to be rude isn't censorship and hopefully we can all respect each other and not resort to being rude or nasty to each other. You are quite right we should all start afresh and learn to walk away from the thread if we don't agree with how its going. Life is too short.


Quite agree, all is forgotten as far as I am concerned, as you say, life is too short


----------



## havoc

shadowmare said:


> no one would continue believing the "strong and stable" crap.


Is there anyone left still clinging onto that?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jonathan Powell, a former chief government negotiator on Northern Ireland, has told the BBC that a Conservative coalition with the DUP will make it virtually impossible to resolve the political crisis in Northern Ireland and risked "undoing 20 years of good work" there.

The [Conservative government] have made themselves dependent on the DUP. Every morning when they wake up, the only way the government can go on is if the DUP agrees to support it.

Since 1991, for good reasons, the British government has always been neutral in Northern Ireland. We haven't taken sides between unionists and nationalists and republicans. Theresa May has made herself a hostage to the DUP. That means she can't be an independent mediator between the two sides.

We've got to set this executive up, the British government has been trying to go backwards and forwards between the two sides. Now we are on one side. The DUP can pull the chain at any moment.

Mr Powell said he believed the prospects of establishing power "are almost zero" without a neutral party as go-between.

The political deadlock in Northern Ireland came about after the collapse of a DUP-Sinn Fein coalition.

A snap election in March brought an end to Stormont's unionist majority and the DUP's lead over Sinn Féin was cut from 10 seats to one.

Earlier Michelle O'Neill, Sinn Fein's leader in Northern Ireland, said the party was eager to get back to power-sharing.


----------



## Mirandashell

MiffyMoo said:


> Exactly. It used to be K&C, but It's now Chelsea and Fulham, and Ken has gone it alone


Ah! I said K + C cos that's what was said on the BBC. I don't pay much attention to changes in London districts so wasn't aware of the change.


----------



## Guest

My summary of this election and Brexit

 Election about Brexit was just a part of Tory campaign, which went badly wrong.
 Brexit was sold to people as the promised land By Murdoch and Tories, who claimed that EU and immigrants are the reason UK can´t afford decent NHS, education or social benefits or anything really.

Question. After Brexit there should be more money to use, surely, and Tories could have promised lots more money for NHS etc. But instead they said if they had so little money before Brexit, in the future there will be even less, because mean EU doesn´t just give the free ticket for UK to deal business as usual (=while part of EU). I smell something rotten.
3. May called GE because she wanted increase her power, which went badly wrong. She lost the majority.​
Question. As she obviously lost even the majority, she should resing. Or I smell something rotten,
Question. Should we interpret the result so that once people realized the promised land was never going to happen, and Brexit is not going to bring any money for UK, but it is going to cost a lot of money for UK, many would have voted remain. (my question marks etc. are missing, sorry)

Question. If May is making a deal with climate deniers, how bad a deal it will be, what do you really think_

Question. A coalition goverment would have meant everyone would have needed to discuss and have proper arguments to back up their policies. That usually means good decisions. Surely tha would have been the best solution. No looneys, no false promises and no lies.
​


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> As I said it is all over and ripping them to bits will do no good
> I could still find things to rip JC apart with but that will do no good either


The tories are in a different league altogether, but I didn't think you'd have anything to say tbh.

_To be fair Theresa May warned of coalition of chaos propped up by extremist terrorist sympathisers. 
She just didn't say she'd be leading it._


----------



## shadowmare

havoc said:


> Is there anyone left still clinging onto that?


Judging by today's results there's still plenty of believers


----------



## noushka05

This is what you call humility 

*Ed Miliband*‏Verified [email protected]*Ed_Miliband* 4h4 hours ago

Congratulations to @*jeremycorbyn* for his inspired campaign.
He showed people a vision of a fairer society and millions voted for change.

.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Mirandashell said:


> Ah! I said K + C cos that's what was said on the BBC. I don't pay much attention to changes in London districts so wasn't aware of the change.


Oh hang on, now I've confused myself. Hang on, just off to double check


----------



## Mirandashell

Someone else on the BBC just confirmed that it's just Kensington now.


----------



## shadowmare

Oh god I think my lunch is about to come back up... :Wtf


----------



## MiffyMoo

Mirandashell said:


> Ah! I said K + C cos that's what was said on the BBC. I don't pay much attention to changes in London districts so wasn't aware of the change.


Right, I think that may have been a slip on their behaves. It used to be Ken and Chelsea, and Hammersmith and Fulham. Then it changed to Fulham and Chelsea, Kensington, and Hammersmith


----------



## Mirandashell

Oh dear god..... Bojo.


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> The tories are in a different league altogether, but I didn't think you'd have anything to say tbh.
> 
> _To be fair Theresa May warned of coalition of chaos propped up by extremist terrorist sympathisers.
> She just didn't say she'd be leading it._


I could but I won't
Do you hold grudges
I have just said nice things about your beautiful dog, makes me wonder why I bothered


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> _To be fair Theresa May warned of coalition of chaos propped up by extremist terrorist sympathisers.
> She just didn't say she'd be leading it._


:Hilarious


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*End of tabloids as arbiters as UK politics?*

BBC world affairs editor tweets...

Posted at17:43

Follow
John Simpson

✔@JohnSimpsonNews
I suspect we've seen the end of the tabloids as arbiters of UK politics. Sun, Mail & Express threw all they had into backing May, & failed.

4:47 PM - 9 Jun 2017

I think he makes a very interesting point - I was watching an interview with a student who had voted Labour in Canterbury (Labour ousted a long term Tory MP there) and he said young people just do not believe or rely on newspapers for their information anymore.


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> I could but I won't
> Do you hold grudges
> I have just said nice things about your beautiful dog, makes me wonder why I bothered


I don't hold grudge. And I don't want to upset you, so lets leave it there 

I haven't posted any pics of my dogs lately, so I think you might have got muddled up. They are beautiful though


----------



## Mirandashell

rottiepointerhouse said:


> https://twitter.com/JohnSimpsonNews
> I think he makes a very interesting point - I was watching an interview with a student who had voted Labour in Canterbury (Labour ousted a long term Tory MP there) and he said young people just do not believe or rely on newspapers for their information anymore.


I think he's right. There's a lot more sources of information available now and few of them are owned by Murdoch.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

noushka05 said:


> I don't hold grudge. And I don't want to upset you, so lets leave it there
> 
> I haven't posted any pics of my dogs lately, so I think you might have got muddled up. They are beautiful though


Yes why don't we get to see your dogs Noush?


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> I don't hold grudge. And I don't want to upset you, so lets leave it there
> 
> I haven't posted any pics of my dogs lately, so I think you might have got muddled up. They are beautiful though


Lets start again
Hello noushka, hope you ae well

I saw a pic of your lovely girl on dog chat today, is it an old one

Please excuse any confusion but my lap top is obviously not at all well and I am struggling to get it to behave

I think I must be the Grim Reaper to lap tops, they always play me up


----------



## kimthecat

someones started a change .org petition "No confidence in a Conservative and DUP Coalition"

It has nearly 60.000 sigs already .


----------



## kirksandallchins

After the election results wouldn't it be great if all political parties could work together for the good of the country?

I found it hard to vote as I liked some policies from most of the main parties, but do not trust either Corbyn or May over others. I wish in a way it had been a hung Parliament with the Queen bashing the heads of the party leaders together if they did not play nicely together


----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> I don't hold grudge. And I don't want to upset you, so lets leave it there
> 
> I haven't posted any pics of my dogs lately, so I think you might have got muddled up. They are beautiful though


Sorry noush , got you mixed up with someone else, this thing gave me a split screen and I read it wrong
All dogs are beautiful, mine is and I'm sure yours are too


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Calvine

Bisbow said:


> I think I must be the Grim Reaper to lap tops, they always play me up


My son would say, accusingly: 'What have you done with it?' or: 'Have you tried turning it off then back on?'. Here is the birthday card I got from him.


----------



## cheekyscrip

How many times May made fun of Corbyn about his lack of support from his party?

We are in for quite lively Question Time....


----------



## Happy Paws2

Anyone else not comfortable with the thought of the tories and DUP forming a government.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Happy Paws said:


> Anyone else not comfortable with the thought of the tories and DUP forming a government.


Like Sinn Fein?
Very....


----------



## shadowmare

cheekyscrip said:


> How many times May made fun of Corbyn about his lack of support from his party?
> 
> We are in for quite lively Question Time....


Slightly ot but I wish Corbyn could sack Dugdale. After urging Scots to vote Tory just to stop SNP she shouldn't deserve to now walk around grinning all happy about labour's winnings. Nasty little snake. Wish she'd get a comfy seat surrounded with anti-gay DUP crew.


----------



## Zaros

Happy Paws said:


> Anyone else not comfortable with the thought of the tories and DUP forming a government.


I'm not comfortable about any government in particular HP, because they're all a pack of bleedin' liars, excellent at U turns and famed for breaking promises.

However, I don't think May had much of a choice and has found herself caught between the devil and the DUP.:Arghh


----------



## cheekyscrip

Zaros said:


> I'm not comfortable about any government in particular HP, because they're all a pack of bleedin' liars, excellent at U turns and famed for breaking promises.
> 
> However, I don't think May had much of a choice and has found herself caught between the devil and the DUP.:Arghh


Rather devil, you know ...


----------



## Zaros

cheekyscrip said:


> Rather devil, you know ...


We'd still get DUPed regardless


----------



## shadowmare

Zaros said:


> I'm not comfortable about any government in particular HP, because they're all a pack of bleedin' liars, excellent at U turns and famed for breaking promises.
> 
> However, I don't think May had much of a choice and has found herself caught between the devil and the DUP.:Arghh


But had to settle for DUP because the devil has no interest in doing business with someone like May? :Wacky


----------



## havoc

Happy Paws said:


> Anyone else not comfortable with the thought of the tories and DUP forming a government


Me big time. I don't believe it's possible to do this and ensure the neutrality required for the peace agreement.
On a personal level I have plenty of experience of the rigid bigotry and sense of entitlement of NI 'loyalists'. They're actually a very good fit with May but will make most of the party very uncomfortable.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*May campaign 'pretty shambolic' - former comms chief*









BBC Radio 5 live

Posted at19:16
Theresa May's former director of communications, Katie Perrior, has told Radio 5 live that the Conservatives' election campaign was "pretty shambolic".

She said the party had tried to run a presidential-style campaign with a politician who is shy and doesn't like doing media - and didn't use the party's other big hitters until it was too late.

If you're going to run a presidential-style campaign with one person at the front who is shy on media and doesn't like doing it, then you're going to have to do all those media interviews that you don't want to do.

She should have spent much more time showing off her team… they were wheeled out in the last week when it started looking rocky and it was too late by then."

Ms Perriror, who resigned when the election was called, went on to describe how she "used to have to beg" Mrs May to do media when she worked for her, as she never wanted to do it.


----------



## Bisbow

Calvine said:


> My son would say, accusingly: 'What have you done with it?' or: 'Have you tried turning it off then back on?'. Here is the birthday card I got from him.


Brilliant, I have tied that, no luck
\my tame computer Dr has taken it away and is sending back to the maker
Keep your fingers crossed for me I don't kill this one as well, it's on loan


----------



## kimthecat

Happy Paws said:


> Anyone else not comfortable with the thought of the tories and DUP forming a government.


 Theres a petition about it so I guess a lot of people not happy. I'm depressed about it , or rather the w hole thing .
If i could go back I time, id tell Cam not to have the EU referendum


----------



## Bisbow

Happy Paws said:


> Anyone else not comfortable with the thought of the tories and DUP forming a government.


Yes,me
After akk I said about JC it makes me cringe


----------



## rona

Happy Paws said:


> Anyone else not comfortable with the thought of the tories and DUP forming a government.


Not comfortable at all, but if none of the others will put the country's interests before their own then it doesn't look as if there's any other option.

If May stands down it will screw us completely



kimthecat said:


> If i could go back I time, id tell Cam not to have the EU referendum


I wouldn't, that's the only bit of hope I've still got and the reason I wanted the Conservatives to win. I still feel it's most important that we get out properly and not half in


----------



## 1290423

Bisbow said:


> Lets start again
> Hello noushka, hope you ae well
> 
> I saw a pic of your lovely girl on dog chat today, is it an old one
> 
> Please excuse any confusion but my lap top is obviously not at all well and I am struggling to get it to behave
> 
> I think I must be the Grim Reaper to lap tops, they always play me up


Nousha is perhaps one of the nicest people I know, perhaps the nicest, she cares,for every animal on this planet, and,I have never heard her say a bad thing about the human race either, shes also a giver and not a taker, and ive lost count of the good causes she donates too.
Just wanted to say like, 
xxxxx


----------



## kimthecat

*BeccyBeccyWhite* 6hQuick guide to NI political parties. Been serving me well for a while. No prizes for guessing the author. #*dupcoalition* #*hungparliament*


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> Not comfortable at all, but if none of the others will put the country's interests before their own then it doesn't look as if there's any other option.
> 
> If May stands down it will screw us completely
> 
> I wouldn't, that's the only bit of hope I've still got and the reason I wanted the Conservatives to win. I still feel it's most important that we get out properly and not half in


Do we know that she asked any of the others to work with her? I doubt it somehow.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Jon Snow*‏Verified [email protected]
One of the most extreme political entities in the British Isles, the 10 MPs of the DUP, is to wag the tail of Mrs May's minority Government


----------



## Dr Pepper

kimthecat said:


> someones started a change .org petition "No confidence in a Conservative and DUP Coalition"
> 
> It has nearly 60.000 sigs already .


Not many really considering nearly 13 million voted labour. When it gets above thirteen million it might carry some weight. Until then it's just a labour supporters protest/moan.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Summing up: When Cameron called referendum he had support of Gove, Johnson , May...
Who betrayed him.
Who lied, lied,lied to feather their career and please some party donors and other Murdochs...

Then Brexit brought May into power after spectacular feast of mutual betrayals. ..

Now as she promised we have coalition of chaos.
Soon Bojo, The Only Actually Scary Clown will become PM...should Frankenstein of DUPed May fail....

Taking all that into consideration Cameron was lesser evil, EU was lesser evil.


Do hope our young somehow will straighten the sins of the fathers...

Youth does not read Murdoch press...
There is hope....


----------



## rona

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Do we know that she asked any of the others to work with her? I doubt it somehow.


I don't think she asked the DUP either, didn't they offer?


----------



## noushka05

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes why don't we get to see your dogs Noush?


I don't go in dog chat much these days, I don't have time really as I'm always stuck on threads like this:Hilarious Here they are though RPH  (the ferrets were safely in the shed lol)



Bisbow said:


> Lets start again
> Hello noushka, hope you ae well
> 
> I saw a pic of your lovely girl on dog chat today, is it an old one
> 
> Please excuse any confusion but my lap top is obviously not at all well and I am struggling to get it to behave
> 
> I think I must be the Grim Reaper to lap tops, they always play me up





Bisbow said:


> Sorry noush , got you mixed up with someone else, this thing gave me a split screen and I read it wrong
> All dogs are beautiful, mine is and I'm sure yours are too


Hello Bisbow, thank you & I hope you're well too x

Oh tell me about laptops! Everyone I've had has been a pain, including this one. I can sympathise. 
That's something we can both agree on - all dogs are beautiful  When I joined this forum( many moons ago), we had 8 dogs. Sadly all but 2 have since passed away.

This is our remaining two. Noushka & Shadow  - they are litter sister & will be 12 in August.



















@DT thank you xx


----------



## Calvine

rona said:


> I don't think she asked the DUP either, didn't they offer?


That's what I read too, and pretty early on I remember (I won't say 'with indecent haste' but one wondered if they might be after something).


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Not comfortable at all, *but if none of the others will put the country's interests before their own* then it doesn't look as if there's any other option.
> 
> If May stands down it will screw us completely
> 
> I wouldn't, that's the only bit of hope I've still got and the reason I wanted the Conservatives to win. I still feel it's most important that we get out properly and not half in


Irony just died.


----------



## Calvine

I wonder what they will call themselves? LibLab sounded a bit like a designer dog. Any smart, snappy, roll-off-your-tongue ideas?


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Bisbow

noushka05 said:


> I don't go in dog chat much these days, I don't have time really as I'm always stuck on threads like this:Hilarious Here they are though RPH  (the ferrets were safely in the shed lol)
> 
> Hello Bisbow, thank you & I hope you're well too x
> 
> Oh tell me about laptops! Everyone I've had has been a pain, including this one. I can sympathise.
> That's something we can both agree on - all dogs are beautiful  When I joined this forum( many moons ago), we had 8 dogs. Sadly all but 2 have since passed away.
> 
> This is our remaining two. Noushka & Shadow  - they are litter sister & will be 12 in August.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @DT thank you xx


Beautiful girls, both of them, sorry about the rest


----------



## noushka05

Bisbow said:


> Beautiful girls, both of them, sorry about the rest


Thank you, as is your beautiful Chilli x


----------



## kimthecat

WTF Corbyn is following me on twitter 

All, current page.

 Mentions 
 Settings 



  
  
  
*Jeremy Corbin MP*, *Bobby Monroe* and *Jason C.* followed you


1h
Oh panic over , its not the real one ! Phew !!

https://twitter.com/CorbynSnap


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> WTF Corbyn is following me on twitter
> 
> All, current page.
> 
> Mentions
> Settings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Jeremy Corbin MP*, *Bobby Monroe* and *Jason C.* followed you
> 
> 
> 1h
> Oh panic over , its not the real one ! Phew !!
> 
> https://twitter.com/CorbynSnap


You'll need a drink after a shock like that.


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> You'll need a drink after a shock like that.


Yeah , a strong cup of tea. I was really fooled until I noticed the background in the photo of Corbyn .


----------



## shadowmare

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ces-dup-deal-tweeting-link-gay-pride-lecture/
*"Ruth Davidson distances herself from DUP deal by tweeting a link to her gay pride lecture"*
Oh how ironic it is that both Kezia and Ruth have been leading their campaigns in Scotland to oppose Sturgeon, painting her as the evil herself, and now they will have to bite their tongues and welcome 10 people who are openly homophobic :Hilarious enjoy the taste of bittersweet victory, ladies


----------



## KittenKong

What goes around comes around...


----------



## Elles

Instead of linking the usual boring memes what would you like us to do about it?


----------



## Cleo38

Is anyone watching Question Time? .... can't believe I am tbh


----------



## Elles

Cleo38 said:


> Is anyone watching Question Time? .... can't believe I am tbh


Yep.


----------



## havoc

Kensington goes Labour.


----------



## samuelsmiles

Can anyone clarify the DUP's position on fox hunting? Maggie, one of my collies, rolled in a fresh pile of fox poo this evening and, despite cleaning the filthy bitch, I've still got a blinding headache.


----------



## noushka05

David Schneider:Hilarious

Full version of *Downing Street* press release confirming that the top 5 in the cabinet keep their jobs.


----------



## Cleo38

Have I Got News For You is particularly funny tonight


----------



## noushka05

Cleo38 said:


> Have I Got News For You is particularly funny tonight


That's what I'm watching


----------



## MilleD

kimthecat said:


> WTF Corbyn is following me on twitter
> 
> All, current page.
> 
> Mentions
> Settings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Jeremy Corbin MP*, *Bobby Monroe* and *Jason C.* followed you
> 
> 
> 1h
> Oh panic over , its not the real one ! Phew !!
> 
> https://twitter.com/CorbynSnap


Thank goodness, otherwise he's spelt his own name wrong.


----------



## MilleD

noushka05 said:


> David Schneider:Hilarious
> 
> Full version of *Downing Street* press release confirming that the top 5 in the cabinet keep their jobs.
> 
> View attachment 313937


 Is he the guy that played Ross in Friends?


----------



## MilleD

Calvine said:


> That's what I read too, and pretty early on I remember (I won't say 'with indecent haste' but one wondered if they might be after something).


Lovely Dog, is the cage for the ferrets?


----------



## noushka05

MilleD said:


> Is he the guy that played Ross in Friends?


No hes an British comedian He does bear a resemblance to Ross I suppose 



MilleD said:


> Lovely Dog, is the cage for the ferrets?


Thank you, she's an absolute menace though, the one on the settee is a good girl lol . Yes that's the out door enclosure for the ferrets - they've got the shed to themselves as well.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> I don't think she asked the DUP either, didn't they offer?


Not sure - this is the version of events I read on the BBC live feed (my bold)

In a short statement outside Downing Street after an audience with the Queen, Mrs May said she would join with her DUP "friends" to "get to work" on Brexit.

Referring to the "strong relationship" she had with the DUP but giving little detail of how their arrangement might work, she said she intended to form a government which could "provide certainty and lead Britain forward at this critical time for our country".

"Our two parties have enjoyed a strong relationship over many years," she said.

"And this gives me the confidence to believe that we will be able to work together in the interests of the whole United Kingdom."

*It is thought Mrs May will seek* some kind of informal arrangement with the DUP that could see it "lend" its support to the Tories on a vote-by-vote basis, known as "confidence and supply".

DUP leader Arlene Foster confirmed that she had spoken to Mrs May and that they would speak further to "explore how it may be possible to bring stability to this nation at this time of great challenge".

While always striving for the "best deal" for Northern Ireland and its people, she said her party would always have the best interests of the UK at heart.
*
Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson has since sought assurances from Mrs May that any deal with the DUP will not affect LGBTI rights across the UK*. Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK where same-sex marriage is not legal.

A source close to Ms Davidson, who is gay, told the BBC: "The PM needs to remember there are more Scottish Conservatives than DUP MPs."


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Ms Davidson, who is gay, told Reporting Scotland she had spoken to the prime minister this evening.

I was fairly straightforward with her. I told her there are number of things that count to me more than party. One of them is country, one of the others is LGBTI rights. I asked for a categoric assurance that if any deal or scoping deal was done with the DUP there would be absolutely no rescinsion of LGBTI rights in the rest of UK and Great Britain."



noushka05 said:


> I don't go in dog chat much these days, I don't have time really as I'm always stuck on threads like this:Hilarious Here they are though RPH  (the ferrets were safely in the shed lol)
> 
> Hello Bisbow, thank you & I hope you're well too x
> 
> Oh tell me about laptops! Everyone I've had has been a pain, including this one. I can sympathise.
> That's something we can both agree on - all dogs are beautiful  When I joined this forum( many moons ago), we had 8 dogs. Sadly all but 2 have since passed away.
> 
> This is our remaining two. Noushka & Shadow  - they are litter sister & will be 12 in August.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @DT thank you xx


Beautiful dogs Noush. I don't go in dog chat nearly as much these days either.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*DUP deal 'puts N Ireland peace at risk'*









BBC Question Time

Posted at20:50
Alastair Campbell strongly criticises a potential coalition between the Conservatives and Northern Ireland's DUP.

"Our government is the mediator between the DUP and Sinn Fein. How can the government be the mediator when the DUP are going to be part of our government?" he asks.

He says Theresa May is putting peace in Northern Ireland at risk with a "sordid, dangerous, disgraceful deal".

Transport Secretary Chris Grayling responds by saying that the Conservatives are going to have "sensible conversations" with the DUP.


----------



## Zaros

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313926


LMAO.

So May swings a deal with the DUP just to ensure the country doesn't get saddled with that other Irish terrorist supporter, Jeremy Corbyn....

Sweet.:Hilarious


----------



## kimthecat

MilleD said:


> Thank goodness, otherwise he's spelt his own name wrong.




I didnt even notice til you pointed it out .


----------



## shadowmare

So I was reading some 'discussions' on some of my friends' fb pages and sort of ended up on a couple of far right pages supporting tories - found it quite funny how immediately post results they were all having a laugh about how Corbyn should resign etc etc... but the laughter stopped around 10hrs ago when the announcements about DUP came about  literally - the groups have been dead since around that time :Hilarious so then I thought "I wonder what the infamous Britain First group chat has been... So apparently they were discussing the possibility of the group going political if UKIP crash and burn in the election... nothing else in their chat really. And then, suddenly, while having a giggle at their endless bigoted memes, I came across a post about the low birth rates in Britain: 









If they will go into politics, they could have a slogan "Strong and pregnant for Britain!" :Hilarious


----------



## kimthecat

looking back at the choices for leadership of the Tories , I wonder how it would have been different. She seemed the best choice at the time.
According to the news , Boris was against a General Election so ( dont laugh! ) we might have been better off with him .


----------



## Elles

I suggest we all write to our MPs and no 10 to express how we feel about this Northern Irish alliance. Whether against, or in favour. I fear that people who did vote conservative would have thought again, if they knew a hung parliament would mean this coalition.

I would worry that Adams' speech held a veiled threat, we can do without an unstable Ireland.

https://www.change.org/p/may-out-no-coalition-with-the-d-u-p


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well my Labour MP retained her seat. Well done Kate Hoey.

@rottiepointerhouse I apologise for earlier I am not falling out with anyone. Very, very, very tired.

I have contacted my local Tory Candidate about the Tories getting into bed with the DUP and explained to them I am disgusted that they have asked a party that is more far right than the Tories are to have a coalition with them. Issues that concern me about the DUP is there stances on homosexuality, same sex marriage, abortion and climate change. I also want to know what the DUP's stance is on fox hunting. Then I asked to clarify when the next general election is in 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 months or in 5 years time. I then ask her to please give me an indication as to when Theresa May will step down or when the party intend to have a no confidence vote against her as I have a bottle of moet I want to open in celebration. Do you think I will get a reply?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Well my Labour MP retained her seat. Well done Kate Hoey.
> 
> @rottiepointerhouse I apologise for earlier I am not falling out with anyone. Very, very, very tired.
> 
> I have contacted my local Tory MP about the Tories getting into bed with the DUP and explained to them I am disgusted that they have asked a party that is more far right than the Tories are to have a coalition with them. Issues that concern me about the DUP is there stances on homosexuality, same sex marriage, abortion and climate change. I also want to know what the DUP's stance is on fox hunting. Then I asked to clarify when the next general election is in 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 months or in 5 years time. I then ask him to please give me an indication as to when Theresa May will step down or when the party intend to have a no confidence vote against her as I have a bottle of moet I want to open in celebration. Do you think I will get a reply?


Thats OK no offence taken, its been a funny old day  I think you will get a reply but not answering your specific concerns.

Police Community

✔@PolComForum
Dear Theresa, it's not the number of MPs that counts it's how you use them. You have to do more with less that's all























3:33 PM - 9 Jun 2017


----------



## Elles

They still fox hunt in NI. The DUP were expected to back Theresa May's repeal. (The Interwebz)


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> They still fox hunt in NI. The DUP were expected to back Theresa May's repeal. (The Interwebz)


Not surprising given their other archaic views


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> Well my Labour MP retained her seat. Well done Kate
> 
> I have contacted my local Tory MP ?


How come you get one of each?


----------



## noushka05

Labour winning the wealthiest constituency of Kensington on a socialist program is awesome enough - booting out Lady Victoria Borwick is the icing on the cake


----------



## noushka05

This letter to the Mails Paul Dacre made me laugh

Following the results so far, I'm writing a letter of support to @*DailyMailUK* editor Paul Dacre.
How's it looking so far?


----------



## Honeys mum

Almost 300,000 people sign petition against the Tory-DUP deal in just 12 hours | The Independent

I have just sent an email to our MP Nicky Morgan to say I am not happy with the coalition with the DUP and also sent her a copy of the above article. I understand she is one of the MPs who thinks T.M. should resign.


----------



## Cleo38

Worrying ....

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...on-paramilitaries-peace-process-a7782631.html

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...after-loyalist-murder-in-bangor-35776873.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-38011001

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ire...-friends-the-dup-come-from-1.3114315?mode=amp


----------



## stockwellcat.

havoc said:


> How come you get one of each?


Dolly Theis Conservative candidate runs the Conservative Party in my local area.


> Dolly has a strong background in outreach and advocacy for a number of community and equality campaigns, including 'Landshare', a campaign that sought to equip people to grow their own food and encouraging councils to provide sufficient land in London for community growing spaces, Women2Win, #AskHerToStand, and LGBTQ rights. She currently works for the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ), leading policy work on childhood obesity and grassroots sport for social transformation.


 I know she isn't the local MP but she was the candidate for the Conservatives in my area and is in the local Conservative party.


----------



## samuelsmiles

I still fail to see why there was such rejoicing from Labour over the result on Friday morning. Any moderate left wing leader would have completely trounced the appalling Theresa May and swept to power with a huge majority. Then we would have had something to celebrate. .


----------



## Guest

DT said:


> Nousha is perhaps one of the nicest people I know, perhaps the nicest, she cares,for every animal on this planet, and,I have never heard her say a bad thing about the human race either, shes also a giver and not a taker, and ive lost count of the good causes she donates too. Just wanted to say like, xxxxx


I agree with you 100%. Always on the side of goodness. If all were like her, we´d have a pretty good place to live, animals and humans alike.


----------



## KittenKong

Hmmm........


----------



## samuelsmiles

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 313958
> 
> 
> Hmmm........


Oh Christ. Another year of political memes.

Over and out.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Great news paper headline Mr Osborne.


----------



## stockwellcat.

*Theresa May told she has six months in Downing Street as PM picks top team*

*Theresa May was today set to name the rest of her top team as a bitter civil war threatened to engulf her party.*

The PM has positions to fill in her government after a humiliating election in which the Conservatives shed seats as Labour made stunning gains across the country.

In London, two ministers were ousted in Battersea and Croydon Central as blue constituencies turned red.

Eight MPs short of a majority, Mrs May now has limited room for manoeuvre after her presidential-style campaign left senior figures keen to pin the blame on the party leader.

Amid reports that senior Tories were sounding out potential replacements for Mrs May, prominent Conservative MP Heidi Allen said the Prime Minister had six months at most left in Downing Street.












Return: Theresa May received a warm welcome back to Downing Street on Friday despite her election humiliation Getty Images
Theresa May was today set to name the rest of her top team as a bitter civil war threatened to engulf her party.

The PM has positions to fill in her government after a humiliating election in which the Conservatives shed seats as Labour made stunning gains across the country.

In London, two ministers were ousted in Battersea and Croydon Central as blue constituencies turned red.

Eight MPs short of a majority, Mrs May now has limited room for manoeuvre after her presidential-style campaign left senior figures keen to pin the blame on the party leader.

General Election 2017: The final results
Amid reports that senior Tories were sounding out potential replacements for Mrs May, prominent Conservative MP Heidi Allen said the Prime Minister had six months at most left in Downing Street.

Former minister Anna Soubry called on Mrs May to sack her joint chiefs of staff, Fiona Hill and Nick Timothy, after she complained about their central roles in the campaign.

The PM has already confirmed that key names will keep their jobs in her new government, which is set to be propped up by Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party (DUP).

After speculation the PM would use a solid win in the election to move Philip Hammond from the Treasury, he and other potential successors as Tory leader, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, and Home Secretary Amber Rudd, remained in place.

With Brexit Secretary David Davis and Defence Secretary Sir Michael Fallon also staying put, there were suggestions changes could just centre on replacing the eight ministers who lost their seats as the Tory Commons tally fell to 318.

Mrs May's decision to seek a deal with the DUP, and the role of her two closest advisers in the faltering election campaign drew criticism in Tory ranks.

In an apparent side-swipe at a hook-up with the DUP, a party which strongly opposes marriage equality, Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson tweeted a link to a speech she made in Belfast in support of same-sex marriage.

Ms Davidson, who became engaged to partner Jen Wilson in May 2016, later said she had received assurances from the PM over gay rights.

She told the BBC: "I was fairly straightforward with her (Mrs May) and I told her that there were a number of things that count to me more than the party.

"One of them is country, one of the others is LGBTI rights.

"I asked for a categoric assurance that if any deal or scoping deal was done with the DUP there would be absolutely no rescission of LGBTI rights in the rest of the UK, in Great Britain, and that we would use any influence that we had to advance LGBTI rights in Northern Ireland."

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...ing-street-as-pm-picks-top-team-a3561791.html


----------



## Elles

samuelsmiles said:


> Oh Christ. Another year of political memes.
> 
> Over and out.


Is there some way of hiding them? It's annoying having to scroll past dozens of huge, mostly meaningless, often inaccurate pictures every time someone posts.  Just post what it said, or a link, instead of a photoshop, or half a newspaper.

Would be nice if petforums banned memes and copy/paste of long news articles. There's the occasional humorous one, but I'd gladly miss out on those, if it meant not suffering the others.


----------



## havoc

samuelsmiles said:


> Any moderate left wing leader would have completely trounced the appalling Theresa May and swept to power with a huge majority.


What did happen was that the young voted and showed that when they do they make a difference. Every seat where the young turned out in numbers went Labour. I suspect this will motivate far more to register and vote next time which just could be the tipping point.


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> Would be nice if petforums banned memes and copy/paste of long news articles. There's the occasional humorous one, but I'd gladly miss out on those, if it meant not suffering the others.


I don't love them either but I'll defend members rights to post anything which isn't against forum rules.


----------



## Elles

havoc said:


> I don't love them either but I'll defend members rights to post anything which isn't against forum rules.


I'm asking for a change in the rules aren't I. If the majority enjoy the scrolling and don't care about those who might find it difficult to do, so be it.

I also asked if there was a way of hiding them.


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> looking back at the choices for leadership of the Tories , I wonder how it would have been different. She seemed the best choice at the time.
> According to the news , Boris was against a General Election so ( dont laugh! ) we might have been better off with him .


I used to be a Boris fan, but the way he switched his views on Brexit, just to get himself in the driving seat, and with a chance at leadership really p***ed me off. Then when he dumped us after it all became a bit too difficult was the nail in the coffin.

I'm heart broken the Ruth won't consider leadership, I think she would be wonderful. I know I've said it before, but in my head, if I keep going on about it, at some point she'll log onto PF and see the error of her ways....


----------



## Creativecat

Wow what a turn up for the books
I think JC came out looking ok .
I think most on here thought TM had alienated so many core voters with her u turns and just thought she could rail rode the electorate into her way if thinking . Bad move . It was funny when Peter mandelson said JC did better than first thought he was asked maybe if you had backed him vocally he might of had a better turn out he
just shrugged his shoulders and said well yes lol . Funny eddie izzard was no where to be seen either . And many others I'm guessing could of been more vocal . It's sad the government seem more fragile and exposed than before she decided to set this election how crazy in my view


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> I'm asking for a change in the rules aren't I.


Fair enough ask the mods. If this forum goes down the route of banning posts because scrolling past those some others don't want to read is too much effort it could end up a pretty quiet place though don't you think


----------



## Satori

samuelsmiles said:


> I still fail to see why there was such rejoicing from Labour over the result on Friday morning. Any moderate left wing leader would have completely trounced the appalling Theresa May and swept to power with a huge majority. Then we would have had something to celebrate. .


This. Corbyn basically missed an open goal. He couldn't even win the election when Theresa May seemed to be on his side.


----------



## Happy Paws2

samuelsmiles said:


> I still fail to see why there was such rejoicing from Labour over the result on Friday morning. Any moderate left wing leader would have completely trounced the appalling Theresa May and swept to power with a huge majority. Then we would have had something to celebrate. .


I think it's because the tories and the media wrote them off and that TM was going to get her land side, but it didn't work out like that, Labour got 40% of the vote which no one expected.

I know they didn't win but she hasn't either, having to whore herself to the DUP is disgusting.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Theresa May warned us against Jeremy Corbyn's coalition of chaos when in fact she was actually warning us about her coalition of chaos with the DUP and the chaos at Downing Street at the moment and amongst the Conservative party. Her party colleagues are furious with her but the head of the 1922 committee has said Theresa May is the right person to lead the UK at the moment. What a mess.


----------



## Elles

havoc said:


> What did happen was that the young voted and showed that when they do they make a difference. Every seat where the young turned out in numbers went Labour. I suspect this will motivate far more to register and vote next time which just could be the tipping point.


We haven't had the breakdown yet, that will be next week. However, according to reports, where the young were interviewed, many, the same as everyone else, said that they were voting tactically, against the conservatives and would vote green, or lib dem if they weren't. The more people are asked, the more it seems May is to blame. Even people who did vote conservative felt she made a lot of mistakes, not least refusing to debate and explain and defend her manifesto promises.

I remember a great game called toonstruck where the advertising policy was not to tell anyone anything in their ads. They thought it would pique everyone's interest, but that backfired on them too.


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> This. Corbyn basically missed an open goal. He couldn't even win the election when Theresa May seemed to be on his side.


Will it pull the party together ready for the next one though? Next time they'll be ready and unless May either leaves or changes her tone they could do even better.


----------



## Satori

stockwellcat said:


> Theresa May warned us against Jeremy Corbyn's coalition of chaos when in fact she was actually warning us about her coalition of chaos with the DUP and the chaos at Downing Street at the moment and amongst the Conservative party. Her party colleagues are furious with her but the head of the 1922 committee has said Theresa May is the right person to lead the UK at the moment.


If he actually used the phrase "at the moment" that is pretty damming language.


----------



## Satori

havoc said:


> Will it pull the party together ready for the next one though? Next time they'll be ready and unless May either leaves or changes her tone they could do even better.


Yes. Labour will win in 2022 though I doubt Corbyn will be in the frame.


----------



## Satori

Elles said:


> We haven't had the breakdown yet, that will be next week. However, according to reports, where the young were interviewed, many, the same as everyone else, said that they were voting tactically, against the conservatives and would vote green, or lib dem if they weren't. The more people are asked, the more it seems May is to blame. Even people who did vote conservative felt she made a lot of mistakes, not least refusing to debate and explain and defend her manifesto promises.
> 
> I remember a great game called toonstruck where the advertising policy was not to tell anyone anything in their ads. They thought it would pique everyone's interest, but that backfired on them too.


Best game ever.


----------



## Calvine

Elles said:


> I also asked if there was a way of hiding them


It would be handy if you could put them on 'ignore' like irritating posters!


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> We haven't had the breakdown yet, that will be next week.


Think there has been on that. Can't be 100% sure which report I heard it on but it was stated that in every constituency where the under 30s were more than a given percentage of the vote the result was a Labour win. The figures may have been taken from the number who were newly registered, not sure but either way it's made a difference.


----------



## Calvine

MiffyMoo said:


> I'm heart broken the Ruth won't consider leadership, I think she would be wonderful. I know I've said it before, but in my head, if I keep going on about it, at some point she'll log onto PF and see the error of her ways


More likely she'll see all the pictures of Theresa May and think she's logged on to her fan club by mistake!:Hilarious


----------



## Happy Paws2

I wonder how long it will be before a *no confidence vote *in the government will take place.


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> Yes. Labour will win in 2022 though I doubt Corbyn will be in the frame.


If it's that long before the next one. I hope so but I wouldn't put money on it 'at the moment'


----------



## stockwellcat.

It shows how arrogant Theresa May really is as she wasn't going to apologise:


> it was claimed the Prime Minister had to be told to apologise to her defeated MPs and ministers, by the chairman of the Tory backbench 1922 Committee, Graham Brady.


http://news.sky.com/story/theresa-may-and-inner-circle-face-backlash-from-furious-tory-mps-10910560


----------



## stockwellcat.

Happy Paws said:


> I wonder how long it will be before a *no confidence vote *in the government will take place.


The Conservative back benchers are going to try and oust her within 6 months.


----------



## Lurcherlad

Unless anyone has got one of these, it's all speculation.

I plan to prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

Not much else I can do realistically.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Why haven't we seen any of the tory big guns (Boris ect...)out supporting her. It looks like she has no friends left. :Hilarious


----------



## havoc

We've now reached the point where both leaders are a liability rather than an asset to their respective parties.


----------



## Happy Paws2

Lurcherlad said:


> View attachment 313962
> 
> 
> Unless anyone has got one of these, it's all speculation.
> 
> I plan to prepare for the worst and *hope for the best.*
> 
> Not much else I can do realistically.


That's easier said than done at the moment.


----------



## KittenKong

samuelsmiles said:


> Oh Christ. Another year of political memes.
> 
> Over and out.





Elles said:


> Is there some way of hiding them? It's annoying having to scroll past dozens of huge, mostly meaningless, often inaccurate pictures every time someone posts.  Just post what it said, or a link, instead of a photoshop, or half a newspaper.
> 
> Would be nice if petforums banned memes and copy/paste of long news articles. There's the occasional humorous one, but I'd gladly miss out on those, if it meant not suffering the others.


While arguably some may appear quite strong I fail to understand the objection to the DUP Billboard poster I uploaded.

To the best of my knowledge this was genuine, please correct me if I'm wrong. It'll be interesting to hear what the people of NI, especially DUP voters, think of the Tory/DUP coalition as much of what's already been commented on has been from the English side.

No, I don't believe uploading of memes or expressing an opinion to be banned, but it's ultimately upto the moderators and forum owner to decide whatever way. Most forums I'm on strictly prohibit any discussion on politics and other matters not related to the forum subject. I can understand why!

It's a bit hypocritical of some, not suggesting yourselves personally, who took pleasure in calling Corbyn a terrorist sympathiser and not forgetting the abuse shown towards Diane Abbott (the thread got closed) yet bitterly complain when criticism is made of the former Strong and Stable one.

Having said that I think the message has been made loud and clear.


----------



## Calvine

havoc said:


> the under 30s


The under-30's, of course, include thousands of students and Corbyn was smart enough to say that tuition fees might be scrapped, which they would obviously find attractive.


----------



## Calvine

KittenKong said:


> other matters not related to the forum subject. I can understand why!


Some who regularly (very regularly) post on this and other political threads are scarcely seen on the pet-related threads, you're right there1


----------



## Mirandashell

noushka05 said:


> Labour winning the wealthiest constituency of Kensington on a socialist program is awesome enough - booting out Lady Victoria Borwick is the icing on the cake


OMG! Labour won Kensington? Really? That's fantastic! Another thing I never thought I would see in my lifetime. These are indeed interesting times.


----------



## Elles

havoc said:


> Think there has been on that. Can't be 100% sure which report I heard it on but it was stated that in every constituency where the under 30s were more than a given percentage of the vote the result was a Labour win. The figures may have been taken from the number who were newly registered, not sure but either way it's made a difference.


There's this one?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40220032

I think it's more interesting that people being interviewed (whatever their age) were more likely to be voting against May, or for the Conservatives, than for Corbyn, or for Labour. Of course that could be biased reporting.

I'm not convinced that Corbyn greatly inspired the young. I think it is more likely to have been twitter and Facebook. But then I think twitter and Facebook and forums had an influence on everyone and people are likely to be skeptical of the papers these days. There are always young activists who tend to go overboard in their enthusiasms and no doubt Corbyn used them, but I don't think younger voters are more or less gullible than the rest of us when it comes to promises and fairy stories.


----------



## Lurcherlad

Happy Paws said:


> That's easier said than done at the moment.


Well the alternative is to stress and worry - something I'm not going to do over something I can't control.


----------



## Calvine

Happy Paws said:


> Why haven't we seen any of the tory big guns (Boris ect


From what you read, BJ is refusing to say anything at all except that 'it's early days' He likely knows anything he says will be taken out of context; also when he opens his mouth he tends to put his foot in it, so he's playing safe!


----------



## Bisbow

Any one any idea what the political map would look like if we used proportional representation

Just curious


----------



## Happy Paws2

Calvine said:


> From what you read, BJ is refusing to say anything at all except that 'it's early days' He likely knows anything he says will be taken out of context; also when he opens his mouth he tends to put his foot in it, so he's playing safe!


coward!!!


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> In an apparent side-swipe at a hook-up with the DUP, a party which strongly opposes marriage equality, Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson tweeted a link to a speech she made in Belfast in support of same-sex marriage.
> 
> Ms Davidson, who became engaged to partner Jen Wilson in May 2016, later said she had received assurances from the PM over gay rights.
> 
> She told the BBC: "I was fairly straightforward with her (Mrs May) and I told her that there were a number of things that count to me more than the party.]


She's learning. Had a feeling the huge grin on Ruth Davison's face at the expense of Nicola Sturgeon would soon be wiped off.

Will she really believe in May's reassurance?

Perhaps Davison should be sent a copy of "Liar Liar"!


----------



## havoc

Calvine said:


> The under-30's, of course, include thousands of students


I was expecting for the new young voters to be those under 25 and then I agree much could be put down to the student vote. especially if the constituencies affected had universities. Including those up to 30 doesn't make it so clear.


----------



## KittenKong

I wasn't going to post this again, but seems so much more appropriate now....


----------



## Mirandashell

I think the Tories in Scotland have a lot more love for Davidson than they do for May. She is pretty much the only reason the Tories have gained support again.


----------



## lullabydream

Calvine said:


> The under-30's, of course, include thousands of students and Corbyn was smart enough to say that tuition fees might be scrapped, which they would obviously find attractive.


If you are already a student, you are already paying...or will be paying...having the debt with interest over 25 years. Even students realise things getting scrapped by the government isn't just done ASAP, and hey look we did the right thing to vote...it's not as simple as buying votes for claims... They all saw brexit, and claims mean nothing.

As already been said on here most young people do not read news papers, so don't get swayed as much by bias there. If you look at students, as you mentioned them, critical thinking skills are used more and more through out their education, so they are used to analyse, good, bad data well before university lives begin. Policies matter to younger people as anybody else.


----------



## stockwellcat.

This gets interesting.

The following is going to happen:

*The 1922 Committee :*

Mrs May's first major test is just days away, with Conservative MPs due to assemble for a meeting of the influential 1922 Committee, which is expected on Tuesday night.

It is here where she will come face to face with her angry backbenchers who will want answers over how she lost a 20 point lead to lead them to electoral disaster.

Some have already broken cover and demanded that Mrs May axe her top aides Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill - the PM's closest confidants.

Under Tory Party rules, if 15 per cent of Conservative MPs send a letter to the Graham Brady, chairman of 'the 22', demanding she goes then vote will be called. This means just 48 MPs would be able to trigger a vote of no confidence and potentially oust her.

This is being reported in other media outlets but I used this one:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...sa-faces-bleak-future-nightmare-election.html

If the above happens Theresa May won't be in Downing Street very long at all.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Bisbow said:


> Any one any idea what the political map would look like if we used proportional representation
> 
> Just curious


I found this. Which perfectly proves the reason why it could never be workeable, as it diminishes the smaller parties


----------



## Elles

havoc said:


> I was expecting for the new young voters to be those under 25 and then I agree much could be put down to the student vote. especially if the constituencies affected had universities. Including those up to 30 doesn't make it so clear.


Young is normally 18-25 as in the BBC article I linked about young voters.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40220032

Labour talked about scrapping the fees for current as well as future students. They were going to backdate some of it, or so they said. Not that we'll know now. Most of their manifesto would probably change once they got in and 'realised how bad a mess the tories had left them', or some other excuse, I don't doubt.


----------



## Honeys mum

I have a friend who is a local labour Cllr and have just seen this on her FB Page.
Does anyone know if this is correct.

It says,
I'm probably repeating old news but in case people don't know yet;
Two points;
-The DUP can't vote on English laws (due to the EVEL law passed in 2015) this meant the tories only have a majority when it comes to Brexit and the DUP promised a soft Brexit in their manifesto (due to the border with Ireland). This means the tories can't vote through their manifesto without the consent of other parties MPs (and it looks like a lot of their own MPs will vote against anyway).
-if it becomes evident they can't pass bills then there will be a vote of no confidence and there will be another election (hence boris getting ready to oppose her)
-technically there can't be a coalition with the DUP due to the peace agreement and our promise of neutrality, so there is a "supply of consent"- so the tories are a minority government.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Honeys mum said:


> I have a friend who is a local labour Cllr and have just seen this on her FB Page.
> Does anyone know if this is correct.
> 
> It says,
> I'm probably repeating old news but in case people don't know yet;
> Two points;
> -The DUP can't vote on English laws (due to the EVEL law passed in 2015) this meant the tories only have a majority when it comes to Brexit and the DUP promised a soft Brexit in their manifesto (due to the border with Ireland). This means the tories can't vote through their manifesto without the consent of other parties MPs (and it looks like a lot of their own MPs will vote against anyway).
> -if it becomes evident they can't pass bills then there will be a vote of no confidence and there will be another election (hence boris getting ready to oppose her)
> -technically there can't be a coalition with the DUP due to the peace agreement and our promise of neutrality, so there is a "supply of consent"- so the tories are a minority government.


Tories have a majority in England


----------



## stockwellcat.

The EU highlight the urgency to start EU negotiations after congratulating the PM.


----------



## KittenKong

Calvine said:


> Some who regularly (very regularly) post on this and other political threads are scarcely seen on the pet-related threads, you're right there1


Actually you are right. I joined PF to discuss cats, not discuss politics. These are exceptional times but that's no excuse.

I'm sure a lot of us are guilty of that, myself very much included.


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> Labour talked about scrapping the fees for current as well as future students.


My youngest is 28, hasn't been a student for years and still voted Labour. I am going to be interested in a detailed analysis and what proportion were students because I'm really not so sure tuition fees were quite the reason the young voted as they did. Now if we gave the vote to 16-18 year olds that would be a whole other story - they'd have a real vested interest in that particular policy.


----------



## Elles

havoc said:


> My youngest is 28, hasn't been a student for years and still voted Labour. I am going to be interested in a detailed analysis and what proportion were students because I'm really not so sure tuition fees were quite the reason the young voted as they did. Now if we gave the vote to 16-18 year olds that would be a whole other story - they'd have a real vested interest in that particular policy.


I don't think it was entirely either, but 28 isn't young.  From interviews of the under 25s I'm seeing, they are saying they voted tactically, or for various other reasons, same as the rest of us. I think it's unfair on the young to say they voted for free uni places, or because they liked Corbyn and socialism. The young are different people, with different views, same as everyone else. Can't stand ageism. All the young were enthused and inspired by a new and inspiring socialism and all the old are stuffy conservative bats. Bah! Young and old alike, we all wound each other up on the Internet lol.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

samuelsmiles said:


> I still fail to see why there was such rejoicing from Labour over the result on Friday morning. Any moderate left wing leader would have completely trounced the appalling Theresa May and swept to power with a huge majority. Then we would have had something to celebrate. .


I don't agree with that at all, Corbyn has attracted thousands upon thousands of new Labour Party members and engaged a lot of people previously totally disillusioned with politics. I don't believe there is anyone else within the Labour Party who could have done that or achieved more.



Elles said:


> Is there some way of hiding them? It's annoying having to scroll past dozens of huge, mostly meaningless, often inaccurate pictures every time someone posts.  Just post what it said, or a link, instead of a photoshop, or half a newspaper.
> 
> Would be nice if petforums banned memes and copy/paste of long news articles. There's the occasional humorous one, but I'd gladly miss out on those, if it meant not suffering the others.


I hate memes too especially the ones that are not informative just poking fun but I would not want to see them or newspaper articles banned. If you just post a link a lot of people say they don't click on links so it makes sense to be able to cut and paste some bits from an article. It would be a pretty boring old thread/forum if it was just peoples opinions and you can't ask to see the evidence they base emphatic statements on.



havoc said:


> We've now reached the point where both leaders are a liability rather than an asset to their respective parties.


Don't agree Corbyn is a liability, he pulled back from a massive tory lead in the polls, attracted lots of new people to get out and vote and has got young people interested in politics again. Who in the Labour Party would make a better leader?



KittenKong said:


> Actually you are right. I joined PF to discuss cats, not discuss politics. These are exceptional times but that's no excuse.
> 
> I'm sure a lot of us are guilty of that, myself very much included.


I don't see as it matters, surely we all use different parts of the forum more at different times. I used to use dog chat far more than general chat but now its the other way round but I dare say it will change again in the future.


----------



## KittenKong

I won't publish the full article (I hear sighs of relief!), but a link to this interesting view from the Washington Post.

Not sure where the paper stands politically but an interesting article all the same.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ners/?tid=ss_fb-bottom&utm_term=.c8c8164e312f


----------



## Bisbow

MiffyMoo said:


> I found this. Which perfectly proves the reason why it could never be workeable, as it diminishes the smaller parties
> 
> View attachment 313971


Thank you, that is very interesting, some of the smaller parties would have been better off


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Actually you are right. I joined PF to discuss cats, not discuss politics. These are exceptional times but that's no excuse.
> 
> I'm sure a lot of us are guilty of that, myself very much included.


I still use Chat Chat and Cat Health & Nutrition when I have something to contribute without having to repeat myself over and over again in the many threads on the same or similar topics in these areas and if my cat is unwell which isn't very often. I have found I use General Chat more nowadays as there are some interesting topics up here.


----------



## Elles

It's not the odd picture or snippet. It's a post with the full article, where no effort has been made to snip anything, not even spaces and adverts, followed by another post with 6 full sized pictures poking fun at someone, with nothing informative. Usually followed by another post complaining about how mean everyone is. Drives me nuts. I'm sure some of my posts drive people nuts too, though I expect they're too dull to inspire too much emotion.  I'm just one person though and this isn't a dictatorship, much less a dictatorship ruled by me. :Cigar

Talking about young people, my own youngest, my daughter, didn't vote. She said it was because she didn't have time to sift through all the issues and manifestos and wasn't about to vote based on what her friends on Facebook said. So she's the exception that broke my own rule. :Hilarious


----------



## cheekyscrip

Still...foxes are safe for the moment.
Tories have not enough MPs who support the fox hunt and they really do not need more bad press.


I cannot believe that May will put her party interest above the peace in NI, but it only confirms my opinion of her.


I was neutral at the beginning and prefered her to BoJo.

He will be a total disaster, he just cannot take anything seriously, except his ambition.


----------



## lullabydream

Elles said:


> I don't think it was entirely either, but 28 isn't young.  From interviews of the under 25s I'm seeing, they are saying they voted tactically, or for various other reasons, same as the rest of us. I think it's unfair on the young to say they voted for free uni places, or because they liked Corbyn and socialism. The young are different people, with different views, same as everyone else. Can't stand ageism. All the young were enthused and inspired by a new and inspiring socialism and all the old are stuffy conservative bats. Bah! Young and old alike, we all wound each other up on the Internet lol.


Young voting...getting out there I am glad you like their attitude because I do too..They obviously care about what is going on around them.

Then you have the total flip of that..ITV pulls morning TV..the likes of this morning, and Jeremy Kyle on the day after the election naturally....the comments I read about them being pulled...because of 'that blooming election's words were not that kind I am paraphrasing, then maybe it's these people who need targeting...just hope and pray none of the morning TV presenters decide to become MPs...just to keep their clientele happy.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Bisbow said:


> Thank you, that is very interesting, some of the smaller parties would have been better off


True. Then the middle smaller parties... *hopeful that I'm right this time face*


----------



## Elles

Who is Chukka Umunna? (Sp) I'm seeing some positive mutterings about him. Anyone got any views?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> Who is Chukka Umunna? (Sp) I'm seeing some positive mutterings about him. Anyone got any views?


He was a very out spoken MP during the triggering of article 50 bill.

Here is his website page:
http://www.chuka.org.uk









Here's his parliament page:
https://www.parliament.uk/biographies/commons/mr-chuka-umunna/4128

He was previously on the front bench under Ed Milliband as Shadow Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills 2011 to 2015.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> Who is Chukka Umunna? (Sp) I'm seeing some positive mutterings about him. Anyone got any views?


I vaguely remember that he was very anti Corbyn and ran against him, but then pulled out because of the press intrusion into his family


----------



## KittenKong

cheekyscrip said:


> Still...foxes are safe for the moment.
> Tories have not enough MPs who support the fox hunt and they really do not need more bad press.
> 
> I cannot believe that May will put her party interest above the peace in NI, but it only confirms my opinion of her.
> 
> I was neutral at the beginning and prefered her to BoJo.
> 
> He will be a total disaster, he just cannot take anything seriously, except his ambition.


As it turned out May is as disastrous as Johnson was predicted to be, probably a lot more as it turned out.

They differ only by BoJo using jokes and May using soundbites to distract from their lies and incompetence.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Elles said:


> Who is Chukka Umunna? (Sp) I'm seeing some positive mutterings about him. Anyone got any views?


He put himself forward for the Labour leadership following the 2015 GE, he then withdrew from standing before any voting had taken place citing media intrusion into family.


----------



## Elles

3dogs2cats said:


> He put himself forward for the Labour leadership following the 2015 GE, he then withdrew from standing before any voting had taken place citing media intrusion into family.


Ah yes, I remember that now, Ta. A couple of people have said he'll be the next labour pm, after Jeremy is gone. Probably a bit optimistic, though possible I suppose.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> Ah yes, I remember that now, Ta. A couple of people have said he'll be the next labour pm, after Jeremy is gone. Probably a bit optimistic, though possible I suppose.


Not sure Jeremy is going anywhere TBH. He got through the last vote of no confidence and everyone is now rallying around him


----------



## 3dogs2cats

MiffyMoo said:


> I vaguely remember that he was very anti Corbyn and ran against him, but then pulled out because of the press intrusion into his family


I don`t think Corybn had entered the leadership election at the point Chukka pulled out.


----------



## Elles

MiffyMoo said:


> Not sure Jeremy is going anywhere TBH. He got through the last vote of no confidence and everyone is now rallying around him


Well he'll be gone eventually, even the original JC didn't stay forever. I don't think they're talking about next week.


----------



## MiffyMoo

3dogs2cats said:


> I don`t think Corybn had entered the leadership election at the point Chukka pulled out.


That's the problem, so much happens in politics now, it's impossible to keep up with it!


----------



## Calvine

havoc said:


> Think there has been on that. Can't be 100% sure which report I heard it on but it was stated that in every constituency where the under 30s were more than a given percentage of the vote the result was a Labour win. The figures may have been taken from the number who were newly registered, not sure but either way it's made a difference.


I read after the EU vote that many 'could not be bothered' to vote as they were certain remain would win. I also read, if you can believe it, that they 'voted _out_ for a laugh'. So, as we know, after the result there was much petulant indignation. Maybe this time round they sussed that if you don't vote you can only blame yourself (and others like you) for getting the result you didn't want.


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> The under-30's, of course, include thousands of students and Corbyn was smart enough to say that tuition fees might be scrapped, which they would obviously find attractive.


Theresa should have offered free larger to under 21s , that would have clinched it 

ETA I meant lager


----------



## MiffyMoo

Bisbow said:


> Thank you, that is very interesting, some of the smaller parties would have been better off


I just found this from the previous election, and it really does seem that PR is a far more representative system


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Don't agree Corbyn is a liability, he pulled back from a massive tory lead in the polls,


Not like he was and he ran a stonking campaign. He is now on the way up but he isn't viewed as a leader of the country quite yet. If the party play it right I'm sure it will come. I don't know where the Conservatives will look to ensure their future but they'll have to do something, either change their leader or change her attitude.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Calvine said:


> I read after the EU vote that many 'could not be bothered' to vote as they were certain remain would win. I also read, if you can believe it, that they 'voted _out_ for a laugh'. So, as we know, after the result there was much petulant indignation. Maybe this time round they sussed that if you don't vote you can only blame yourself (and others like you) for getting the result you didn't want.


I think that we have been safe and well looked after for so long, it really is not difficult to take voting for granted. It's only huge upsets that make people sit up and realise that they need to take it seriously


----------



## kimthecat

About jerry ( again ) , Ive not been able to keep up with the posts ,

Questions I have for his supporters :

Did he ever meet with "the other side " in Ireland? I can t find any mention of him meeting the Ulster Defence Association or Ulster Freedom fighters .

I don't know of the DUP Mps that might be joining us , do any of them have links with the terrorists or been in the terrorists groups.

AS many other people are, I'm concerend about the Tories joining ranks with the DUP .


----------



## Satori

kimthecat said:


> Theresa should have offered free larger to under 21s , that would have clinched it


Larger what though?


----------



## kimthecat

Elles said:


> Is there some way of hiding them? It's annoying having to scroll past dozens of huge, mostly meaningless, often inaccurate pictures every time someone posts.  Just post what it said, or a link, instead of a photoshop, or half a newspaper.
> 
> Would be nice if petforums banned memes and copy/paste of long news articles. There's the occasional humorous one, but I'd gladly miss out on those, if it meant not suffering the others.


 That would be good ! you can use Ignore , if you use Ignore you can click on Show Ignore posts if you want to see a particular post.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Strong & Stable Theresa May said over and over again.

Google Translator: Weak & Wonky.


----------



## kimthecat

Satori said:


> Larger what though?


:Hilarious I meant lager , must have been thinking of something else !


----------



## havoc

kimthecat said:


> Did he ever meet with "the other side " in Ireland? I can t find any mention of him meeting the Ulster Defence Association or Ulster Freedom fighters .


It's unlikely as they weren't the underdogs.



kimthecat said:


> I don't know of the DUP Mps that might be joining us , do any of them have links with the terrorists or been in the terrorists groups.


No idea, probably unlikely in the way you're asking but it's rarely that simple where the island of Ireland is concerned. It went well beyond an 'us' and 'them' situation and thinking back I probably sat in the same restaurant/pub/maybe even living room of someone with 'connections'.


----------



## kimthecat

havoc said:


> It's unlikely as they weren't the underdogs.
> No idea, probably unlikely in the way you're asking but it's rarely that simple where the island of Ireland is concerned. It went well beyond an 'us' and 'them' situation and thinking back I probably sat in the same restaurant/pub/maybe even living room of someone with 'connections'.


Thanks for this ,
Really, I should know this because I did a project at school about it but that was over 40 years ago . Also my BIL is irish catholic from NI , I was talking to my niece the other week and they used to go there for holidays and she still remembers the sound of bombs going off.


----------



## Bisbow

MiffyMoo said:


> I just found this from the previous election, and it really does seem that PR is a far more representative system
> 
> View attachment 313984


Agreed but I can't the main parties agreeing to implement it
Shame


----------



## 3dogs2cats

MiffyMoo said:


> That's the problem, so much happens in politics now, it's impossible to keep up with it!


To be truthful the only reason why I remember is due to writing emails to my husband, he gets a full run down plus my analysis of everything going on at home, so glad he is at home at the moment or I would still be his writing Thursday night/Friday edition  I think because I have written about certain events I can recall them otherwise there is no way.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Bisbow said:


> Agreed but I can't the main parties agreeing to implement it
> Shame


And therein lies our problem. Ultimately, it's never for the good of the country, it's for the good of the party


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Bisbow said:


> Agreed but I can't the main parties agreeing to implement it
> Shame


We were asked in 2011 via a referendum if we wanted PR, it was part of the Lib Dem manifesto, we rejected changing our currant system.


----------



## MiffyMoo

3dogs2cats said:


> We were asked in 2011 via a referendum if we wanted PR, it was part of the Lib Dem manifesto, we rejected changing our currant system.


That wasn't for PR, it was for AV


----------



## Bisbow

3dogs2cats said:


> We were asked in 2011 via a referendum if we wanted PR, it was part of the Lib Dem manifesto, we rejected changing our currant system.


I don't remember that,


----------



## kimthecat

lullabydream said:


> As already been said on here most young people do not read news papers, so don't get swayed as much by bias there. If you look at students, as you mentioned them, critical thinking skills are used more and more through out their education, so they are used to analyse, good, bad data well before university lives begin. Policies matter to younger people as anybody else.


I would like to see student student fees reduced .
I think whatever media you use will have bias , I think young people are more influence by their friends or other young people online .


----------



## Elles

Bisbow said:


> I don't remember that,


You're not the only one. I expect if it was for PR it would have been more controversial and more people might have noticed. AV is a rubbish idea.


----------



## kimthecat

Elles said:


> Who is Chukka Umunna? (Sp) I'm seeing some positive mutterings about him. Anyone got any views?


 I really liked him . I was disappointed when he changed his mind about running for Leadership . I would have voted for him .


----------



## stockwellcat.

According to Sky News A survey has been done within the Conservative Party 2 3rds want her to go. So if these MP's write to the 1922 Committee they have enough to trigger a leadership contest. So Tuesday's 1922 committee meeting will be interesting.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

MiffyMoo said:


> That wasn't for PR, it was for AV


Was It, oh right, there was something about ranking candidates in order, don`t remember much campaigning been done to explain it all.


----------



## Elles

And the real Jon Snow says 'I know nothing' Should have been reading petforums and Facebook, they might have got a slight inkling that the conservatives weren't getting their landslide. I'm more surprised that the media is surprised, than I am at the result, which doesn't surprise me at all.


----------



## 3dogs2cats

Bisbow said:


> I don't remember that,





Elles said:


> You're not the only one. I expect if it was for PR it would have been more controversial and more people might have noticed. AV is a rubbish idea.


The referendum was held at the same time as Local Elections, turn out was probably poor, as they tend to be for LEs.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> You're not the only one. I expect if it was for PR it would have been more controversial and more people might have noticed. AV is a rubbish idea.


Apparently there was only a 42% turnout and they rolled it into a fair few local elections. Clearly didn't want it going through


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

We are having a politics discussion break in our house  I'm thankful to Theresa May and to our local Tory MP for being so open about their support for hunting and him for telling us he would definitely vote to repeal the ban as at least it stopped my OH voting for them but I would be pushing my luck to try and convert him to the Corbyn supporters club :Hilarious:Hilarious although give me time, he does at least accept the man talks a lot of sense and is engaging the public far more that the Tories did.


----------



## MiffyMoo

3dogs2cats said:


> Was It, oh right, there was something about ranking candidates in order, don`t remember much campaigning been done to explain it all.


Yeah, that's AV, which such a weird idea. I reckon the count for that would take days and would be fraught with so many errors


----------



## Elles

I think all the political parties will be scared of holding any more referendums on anything. The public are throwing off their sheep's clothing and although they may not all be wolves underneath it, they aren't all lemmings either.


----------



## Jonescat

I rather like this:
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-book-of-jeremy-corbyn

(amusing comment on our position from America)


----------



## Elles

Jonescat said:


> I rather like this:
> http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-book-of-jeremy-corbyn
> 
> (amusing comment on our position from America)


That gets my vote as the funniest article on the whole thing. Love it! :Hilarious :Hilarious :Hilarious


----------



## MiffyMoo

Jonescat said:


> I rather like this:
> http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-book-of-jeremy-corbyn
> 
> (amusing comment on our position from America)


Haha, I really like that!


----------



## kimthecat

@rottiepointerhouse Is there any news about Diane Abbott, I hope shes recovering and able to take her place as MP ,


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> @rottiepointerhouse Is there any news about Diane Abbott, I hope shes recovering and able to take her place as MP ,


Haven't heard anything since results night. I hope she gets some peace and quiet now its over and can get some rest.


----------



## KittenKong

Typical May, blames everyone but herself.

BBC source.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Writing on the ConservativeHome website Mr Timothy said that while the general result was "a huge disappointment", the Conservatives had won more than 13.6 million votes, which was an "historically high number, and more than Tony Blair won in all three of his election victories".

Mr Timothy said the reason for the disappointing result was "not the absence of support for Theresa May and the Conservatives but an unexpected surge in support for Labour".

The former aide said that Britain was a "divided country".

He said:

The simple truth is that Britain is a divided country: many are tired of austerity, many remain frustrated or angry about Brexit, and many younger people feel they lack the opportunities enjoyed by their parents' generation. Ironically, the prime minister is the one political leader who understands this division, and who has been working to address it since she became prime minister last July."

I take responsibility for my part in this election campaign, which was the oversight of our policy programme. In particular, I regret the decision not to include in the manifesto a ceiling as well as a floor in our proposal to help meet the increasing cost of social care. But I would like to make clear that the bizarre media reports about my own role in the policy's inclusion are wrong: it had been the subject of many months of work within Whitehall, and it was not my personal pet project. I chose not to rebut these reports as they were published, as to have done so would have been a distraction for the campaign. But I take responsibility for the content of the whole manifesto, which I continue to believe is an honest and strong programme for government."


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Interesting points made by this guy - have to agree I get fed up to the back teeth listening to journalists and presenters telling us what they think rather than the facts or what is actually happening.

"In light of repeated failures on the part of pollsters and the media to read the runes of public opinion ahead of elections, Prof Charlie Beckett, of the London School of Economics, wonders whether it's time for an agenda for a new political journalism.

"Are we too obsessed by the horse-race of the opinion polls and ignoring policy and social trends?" he wonders in a blog post. "There's lots of partisan argument but is there any truly critical independent insight?"

Prof Beckett concludes that the media must both "re-double efforts on the traditional journalism functions of fact-checking, investigation and revelation" and become more empathetic.

Too much of the coverage of the 2017 election was journalists saying what they think rather than reporting what voters felt."


----------



## Honeys mum

The Latest saga, She had been warned she had got till Monday to sack them or else. They have saved her the trouble.

Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill quit No 10 after election criticism - BBC News


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> According to Sky News A survey has been done within the Conservative Party 2 3rds want her to go. So if these MP's write to the 1922 Committee they have enough to trigger a leadership contest. So Tuesday's 1922 committee meeting will be interesting.


*Conservativehome survey of party members on May's future*
Posted at10:46

A snap survey of more than 1,500 party members by the ConservativeHome website suggests that a majority believe Theresa May should resign as leader. The site says 59% believe she should go, with just 36% preferring her to remain in power.

"Obviously, party members and our readers are angry in the election's aftermath, and it may be that if the question is asked again in a week's time, it gets a different answer," the site reports.


----------



## KittenKong

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Writing on the ConservativeHome website Mr Timothy said that while the general result was "a huge disappointment", the Conservatives had won more than 13.6 million votes, which was an "historically high number, and more than Tony Blair won in all three of his election victories".
> 
> Mr Timothy said the reason for the disappointing result was "not the absence of support for Theresa May and the Conservatives but an unexpected surge in support for Labour".
> 
> The former aide said that Britain was a "divided country".
> 
> He said:
> 
> The simple truth is that Britain is a divided country: many are tired of austerity, many remain frustrated or angry about Brexit, and many younger people feel they lack the opportunities enjoyed by their parents' generation. Ironically, the prime minister is the one political leader who understands this division, and who has been working to address it since she became prime minister last July."
> 
> I take responsibility for my part in this election campaign, which was the oversight of our policy programme. In particular, I regret the decision not to include in the manifesto a ceiling as well as a floor in our proposal to help meet the increasing cost of social care. But I would like to make clear that the bizarre media reports about my own role in the policy's inclusion are wrong: it had been the subject of many months of work within Whitehall, and it was not my personal pet project. I chose not to rebut these reports as they were published, as to have done so would have been a distraction for the campaign. But I take responsibility for the content of the whole manifesto, which I continue to believe is an honest and strong programme for government."


All fair and well for them to take some responsibility and resign but pity TM won't accept any of it. It's only a matter of time before the party faithful lose faith in her and kick her out.

At the start of this thread it was predicted May would receive the huge landslide she demanded, sorry desired with Corbyn suffering the worst defeat in the history of the Labour Party.

Had that happened I would be the first person to call for him to resign.


----------



## Mirandashell

Jonescat said:


> I rather like this:
> http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-book-of-jeremy-corbyn
> 
> (amusing comment on our position from America)


This is my favourite bit:



> And the elders rose up and said to the young people, If ye choose Jeremy, he will bring distress in your toils and wailing upon your streets. Do ye not remember the nineteen-seventies?
> 
> And the young people said, The what?
> 
> And the elders spake again, and said to the young people, Beware, for he gave succor in days of yore to the I.R.A.
> 
> And the young people said, The what?
> 
> And the young people said, Jeremy shall bring peace unto all nations, for he hateth the engines of war that take wing across the heavens. And he showeth respect for all peoples, even unto the transgender community.
> 
> And the elders said, The what?


----------



## Bisbow

I don't think she can resign with the brexit negotiations waiting in the wings
Who else could take it on
Boris
No I don't think so


----------



## JANICE199

Bisbow said:


> I don't think she can resign with the brexit negotiations waiting in the wings
> Who else could take it on
> Boris
> No I don't think so


*She should and should have, done the decent thing and handed the country over to JC. Her government are in a shambles.*


----------



## kimthecat

@JANICE199 Thats not how it works. . Besides , why should she do that when the majority did *not* vote for Corbyn !


----------



## Dr Pepper

JANICE199 said:


> *She should and should have, done the decent thing and handed the country over to JC. Her government are in a shambles.*


A little thing called democracy would hamper that.


----------



## JANICE199

Dr Pepper said:


> A little thing called democracy would hamper that.


*You're having a laugh. Let's have a vote now then and see who would vote tory, knowing who she has teamed up with.*


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

JANICE199 said:


> *She should and should have, done the decent thing and handed the country over to JC. Her government are in a shambles.*


Sadly he didn't win enough seats for that Janice, our system doesn't work like that. Whether she should resign and put the country through the turmoil of having no prime minister in charge while a leadership contest takes place is another matter. Personally I think that would probably cause more harm than good just at the moment but I think she will be challenged in 6 months time.


----------



## Guest

kimthecat said:


> @JANICE199 Thats not how it works. . Besides , why should she do that when the majority did *not* vote for Corbyn !


Majority didn't vote Theresa Maybe either.


----------



## stockwellcat.

*Ruth Davidson given DUP gay rights assurance*

Ruth Davidson has been told by the prime minister that any Conservative deal with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) will not affect LGBTI rights.

The Scottish Conservative leader, who is gay, plans to marry her partner in the near future.

The DUP opposes same-sex marriage, with Northern Ireland the only part of the UK where it is not legal.

Ms Davidson said she had been given an assurance that gay rights would not be eroded in return for DUP support.

In a tweet sent on Friday afternoon, Ms Davidson highlighted a speech she made in Belfast about the importance of equal marriage.

She told the BBC's Reporting Scotland programme that she had spoken about the issue with Theresa May on Friday evening.

Ms Davidson said: "I was fairly straightforward with her and I told her that there were a number of things that count to me more than party.

"One of them is country, one of the others is LGBTI rights."

The Scottish Tory leader said she had asked for, and received, a "categoric assurance" from Mrs May that any arrangement between the Conservatives and the DUP would see "absolutely no rescission of LGBTI rights in the rest of the UK".

And she said the prime minister agreed to try to use her influence to advance LGBTI rights in Northern Ireland.

Ms May, whose party lost its majority at Westminster in Thursday's general election, says she will put together a minority government with the support of the DUP to guide the UK through crucial Brexit talks.

The DUP, which returned 10 MPs to Westminster, has garnered a reputation for its strong and controversial views on a number of social issues.

It opposes same-sex marriage and is anti-abortion - with abortion remaining illegal in Northern Ireland, except in specific medical cases.

In a short statement outside Downing Street after an audience with the Queen, Mrs May said she would join with her DUP "friends" to "get to work" on Brexit.

She referred to the "strong relationship" she had with the DUP, but gave little detail of how their arrangement might work.

It is thought Mrs May will seek some kind of informal arrangement with the DUP that could see it "lend" its support to the Tories on a vote-by-vote basis, known as "confidence and supply".

When asked whether she was comfortable about the arrangement given the DUP's views, Ms Davidson said there was "no suggestion" that the Conservative government would be dependent on the support of the DUP.

*'Open Brexit'*

She added: "The prime minister has already made it clear that it is not going to be a formal coalition, so let's see how the future days go ahead."

Ms Davidson, who backed Remain in the EU referendum, has called for the Tories to listen to other parties to deliver an "open Brexit", which she defines as ensuring that free trade is at the heart of the Brexit negotiations.

She said: "I want to make sure that Scottish businesses can trade as freely as possible with the other 27 countries in the EU as well as the other countries around the world."

Ms Davidson's party won 13 seats in Scotland as its vote surged across the country. Scottish Labour and the Liberal Democrats returned seven and four MPs respectively, with the SNP winning 35 - a drop of 21 from the 56 the party won two years ago.

The DUP are pro-union (not Europe but UK), pro-Brexit and socially conservative.

The party, which returned 10 MPs to Westminster, has garnered a reputation for its strong, sometimes controversial views.

It opposes same-sex marriage and is anti-abortion - abortion remains illegal in Northern Ireland, except in specific medical cases.

One MP is a devout climate change denier, while a former MP once called for creationism - the belief that human life did not evolve over millions of years but was created by God - to be taught alongside evolution in science classes.

During the election campaign, the DUP's Emma Little-Pengelly was endorsed by the three biggest loyalist paramilitary organisations.

Read more about the DUP here and meet their MPs here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/40229826


----------



## JANICE199

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Sadly he didn't win enough seats for that Janice, our system doesn't work like that. Whether she should resign and put the country through the turmoil of having no prime minister in charge while a leadership contest takes place is another matter. Personally I think that would probably cause more harm than good just at the moment but I think she will be challenged in 6 months time.


*I was speaking my mind out loud. But i do believe this country ( which she isn't thinking about) would be better off with JC. *


----------



## Zaros

JANICE199 said:


> *You're having a laugh. Let's have a vote now then and see who would vote tory, knowing who she has teamed up with.*


It's a bleedin' conspiracy Janice! The world is slowly being taken over by orange men. First the unhinged one in the USA, and now we have an unstable bunch of fruits in the UK.:Nailbiting


----------



## Bisbow

JANICE199 said:


> *You're having a laugh. Let's have a vote now then and see who would vote tory, knowing who she has teamed up with.*


If another vote was called for I think the whole county would revolt
"Not another one" as the lady said


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

JANICE199 said:


> *You're having a laugh. Let's have a vote now then and see who would vote tory, knowing who she has teamed up with.*


That could work both ways though - you might find more people would vote Tory to stop her having to team up with anyone else - so that she had a working majority, who knows :Nailbiting I say let her get on with it with her new friends - it will either go OK or completely t-ts up in which case another election will be called.



danielled said:


> Majority didn't vote Theresa Maybe either.


No but sadly she won more seats than he did so she gets to form a government - even with the help of all the other parties put together he can't outnumber them.


----------



## JANICE199

Bisbow said:


> If another vote was called for I think the whole county would revolt
> "Not another one" as the lady said


*Sadly, i believe this country is about to revolt anyway.*


----------



## Guest

rottiepointerhouse said:


> That could work both ways though - you might find more people would vote Tory to stop her having to team up with anyone else - so that she had a working majority, who knows :Nailbiting I say let her get on with it with her new friends - it will either go OK or completely t-ts up in which case another election will be called.
> 
> No but sadly she won more seats than he did so she gets to form a government - even with the help of all the other parties put together he can't outnumber them.


She may have won more seats but it is still a hung parliment. Nobody won nobody lost.


----------



## Dr Pepper

JANICE199 said:


> *You're having a laugh. Let's have a vote now then and see who would vote tory, knowing who she has teamed up with.*


You might well get the opportunity. In five years you definitely will.


----------



## JANICE199

rottiepointerhouse said:


> That could work both ways though - you might find more people would vote Tory to stop her having to team up with anyone else - so that she had a working majority, who knows :Nailbiting I say let her get on with it with her new friends - it will either go OK or completely t-ts up in which case another election will be called.
> 
> *As many on here already know, this was my first time voting, and i did it because, for once i could see something that was worth voting for. Now as i see it. if at my age i can change my mind, i'm damn sure others will do too. Call another election is what i say.*


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

danielled said:


> She may have won more seats but it is still a hung parliment. Nobody won nobody lost.


Oh please Danielle I do know what a hung parliament is. The party that get to form the government is the one with the most seats, it was not a tie, she got the most seats but not a big enough majority to comfortably govern with so she had to come to an agreement with a smaller party so that they will support her when needed in crucial votes. Therefore she won much as I don't like it, she won. Corbyn could not equal her even if he went into alliance with all of the remaining parties - the Lib Dems, the SNP, Greens etc etc. even assuming those other parties would do that which the Lib Dems said they wouldn't. Therefore he could not form a majority.


----------



## Dr Pepper

danielled said:


> She may have won more seats but it is still a hung parliment. Nobody won nobody lost.


They got the most seats, they won. They could form a government without a majority but it'd be hard work getting anything done.


----------



## JANICE199

Dr Pepper said:


> You might well get the opportunity. In five years you definitely will.


*Haha, i don't think it will take that long. But, if it does, so be it *


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

@JANICE199 Yes of course others can change their mind - me and OH voted Lib Dems for the first time ever having always said we never would - we voted tactically but it didn't pay off. Like it or not we have the result now we have to see if they can make it work or not. If they make a pigs ear of it there will be another election soon enough but that isn't good for the country or the economy.


----------



## Guest

danielled said:


> She may have won more seats but it is still a hung parliment. Nobody won nobody lost.


That is true, and no one will gain from this situation. Not stable at all. And to team up with a party so vile is showing their true tory values. Instead of trying to change the tory policies and making alliances with "normal" parties, they chose this path. How low can you go?


----------



## kimthecat

.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Lets rewind: One year ago we had strong and stable country, strong and stable currency, growing economy and still quite a lot to do...which could have been sorted come next GE if not earlier ..
But the "old" gave ear to liars, crowd pleasers and believed in what is on the buses...

Young stayed on their ipads, or went to vote Brexit for a joke...
To complain bitterly at the results and organise protest marches...


So where is of Brexit Farage?
So far up Trump's colon that probe into Russian connections might not reach him?

Pound crashed, Britain is ruled by lying Muppets, now propped by sanctimonious hoophobes .., economy is slowing down, country is a mess.

Experts told you so, but " who needs experts?"...


Millions EU nationals, expats, Gibraltar face fear and uncertainty.

Banks and businesses leaving Britain.
WTO rules looming as crash Brexit is still on cards.
No one can make success of Brexit.
Labour can deliver damage limitations.

There was no victory on Thursday.

Britain is no longer neither strong not stable as it was.

Bojo is coming....


----------



## Guest

MrsZee said:


> That is true, and no one will gain from this situation. Not stable at all. And to team up with a party so vile is showing their true tory values. Instead of trying to change the tory policies and making alliances with "normal" parties, they chose this path. How low can you go?


Lib dems are no better either. Definately not going to gain anything. They have a few screws loose to team up with yet another vilr party. Thesea talks about strong and stable, weak and wobbly more like.


----------



## lullabydream

kimthecat said:


> I would like to see student student fees reduced .
> I think whatever media you use will have bias , I think young people are more influence by their friends or other young people online .


The point I made about young people...is critical thinking is an important part in education today, and rightly so...

This means influence by peers, and celebs and other figures in the media would not sway votes...but their own wills and interpretation of what they read and perceive will. No longer is education purely academic..but is teaching children from very young ages to be independently..see bias...before this was never taught...

Children will always follow peers and media, this is all social learning..but important matters they have the techniques available to them to make valid choices like never before.


----------



## Honeys mum

Don't panic, Larry the cat is in charge and looking after things.

Larry the cat holds the fort outside Number 10 as country is plunged into chaos


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> New @JANICE199 Thats not how it works. . Besides , why should she do that when the majority did *not* vote for Corbyn !


I don't pretend to know the first thing about politics, but apparently Chris Grayling said that 'TM won the largest vote share that a Tory PM has for a generation' which actually sounds quite impressive, considering the fallout. Anyone knowledgeable enough to explain what exactly he was getting at? Also, how long is a generation supposed to be


----------



## Calvine

JANICE199 said:


> You're having a laugh. Let's have a vote now then and see who would vote tory,


It would be something to do, @Janice, but tbh it wouldn't change anything.


----------



## Calvine

JANICE199 said:


> *Haha, i don't think it will take that long. But, if it does, so be it *


I think her own party might ditch her before then if they can get someone prepared to take over the Brexit negotiations. But at the moment I think she's dug her heels in...for how long? Maybe they will make things so awful that she will go of her own accord. Watch this space, as they say.


----------



## Calvine

Bisbow said:


> If another vote was called for I think the whole county would revolt
> "Not another one" as the lady said


Spoilsport, @Bisbow! Let's have another two...and another EU one while we're about it. Maybe synchronise them and have everything on one enormous ballot form. I'm all for it.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MrsZee said:


> That is true, and no one will gain from this situation. Not stable at all. And to team up with a party so vile is showing their true tory values. Instead of trying to change the tory policies and making alliances with "normal" parties, they chose this path. How low can you go?


None of the "normal" parties would have formed an alliance with her though - Lib Dems got their fingers badly burnt after the 2010 coalition and lost so many seats at the 2015 election because their own voters no longer trusted them.


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> None of the "normal" parties would have formed an alliance with her though - Lib Dems got their fingers badly burnt after the 2010 coalition and lost so many seats at the 2015 election because their own voters no longer trusted them.


Because Clegg just rolled over and after promising " no uni fees" allowed as Deputy PM to rise them triple!!!

Now the slime is gone.

Imagine if Sturgeon had a bit better judgment and held 50 seats in Scotland...with more positive campaign...
Then Tories would have had no chance to form government, and joined Labour and SNP would.

Basically unfortunately losing only 1.7% votes they lost on third of their seats...
It was so close....

Tories are bruised, but still there.


----------



## KittenKong

Another great article from George Osborne's Evening Standard.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Calvine said:


> I don't pretend to know the first thing about politics, but apparently Chris Grayling said that 'TM won the largest vote share that a Tory PM has for a generation' which actually sounds quite impressive, considering the fallout. Anyone knowledgeable enough to explain what exactly he was getting at? Also, how long is a generation supposed to be


Well this is a surprise, but it's the largest Tory majority since 79

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....jority-statistics-show-increase-Tory-vote/amp


----------



## Calvine

MiffyMoo said:


> Well this is a surprise, but it's the largest Tory majority since 79


Thank you!


----------



## havoc

The two 'advisers' who were closest to her have resigned. It's being reported she was told it's get rid of them or you go.


----------



## KittenKong

Interesting....


----------



## Honeys mum

Saw this, just about sums up the mess we are in.


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> Well this is a surprise, but it's the largest Tory majority since 79
> 
> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....jority-statistics-show-increase-Tory-vote/amp


What matters is where those votes are and my constituency is a good example. The Conservative here gets more votes than all the others combined and his share actually increased on Thursday. It adds to those numbers but makes not one jot of difference in terms of seats. His extra votes came from previous UKIP voters.


----------



## Zaros

..............


Honeys mum said:


> Saw this, just about sums up the mess where in.


Doublethink. :Facepalm


----------



## KittenKong

This made me smile. I wonder what Enoch would have thought of this!

http://www.voice-online.co.uk/article/enoch-powells-old-seat-filled-midlands-first-black-mp

Didn't Powell join the DUP? The Tories turned out to be too left wing for him.


----------



## havoc

KittenKong said:


> Didn't Powell join the DUP? The Tories turned out to be too left wing for him.


I think it was the Ulster Unionists - different lot


----------



## Mirandashell

Honeys mum said:


> Saw this, just about sums up the mess we are in.


It reads like the explanation of the Laws of Cricket!


----------



## KittenKong

If this is true will it be Gay marriage next?


----------



## KittenKong

havoc said:


> I think it was the Ulster Unionists - different lot


Cheers Havoc.


----------



## havoc

Sad thing is you're going to know more about the DUP than you ever thought you'd need and I can't think of one thing which will please any reasonable person


----------



## kimthecat

Honeys mum said:


> Saw this, just about sums up the mess we are in.


I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at this . perhaps both .


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 314062
> 
> 
> If this is true will it be Gay marriage next?


She won't see this, as she has me on ignore, but it's incorrect


----------



## kimthecat

havoc said:


> Sad thing is you're going to know more about the DUP than you ever thought you'd need and I can't think of one thing which will please any reasonable person


i mentioned this in another thread , Im surprised that there hasn't been more dirt dished up on them including any links they may have with terrorists . I couldn't find any info connecting the current DUP MPS with them but it was suggested that there are .
If that is true then i hope it comes to ,light .

Another thing is that when it comes to things like gay marriages and abortion , other parties have similar thoughts to DUP in Northern and Southern Ireland . So if people condemn DUP perhaps they should condemn the other parties too.


----------



## Jesthar

MiffyMoo said:


> Well this is a surprise, but it's the largest Tory majority since 79
> 
> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....jority-statistics-show-increase-Tory-vote/amp


Majority or vote count? I always thought 'majority' usually referred to the number of MP seats a party outnumbered all the rest by?


----------



## Dr Pepper

Do you know what, I've finished work for the day, I'm sat in the field with two dogs mooching about, two horses grazing, six chickens happily pecking about, half a dozen rabbits sat about keeping a eye on their young, and a partridge in a..... oops sorry. Also have a glass (bottle) of wine and do you know what, I'm pretty sure this time next year, and the years after I'll be doing the same regardless of politics.


----------



## Satori

cheekyscrip said:


> Lets rewind: One year ago we had strong and stable country, strong and stable currency, growing economy and still quite a lot to do...which could have been sorted come next GE if not earlier ..
> But the "old" gave ear to liars, crowd pleasers and believed in what is on the buses...
> 
> Young stayed on their ipads, or went to vote Brexit for a joke...
> To complain bitterly at the results and organise protest marches...
> 
> So where is of Brexit Farage?
> So far up Trump's colon that probe into Russian connections might not reach him?
> 
> Pound crashed, Britain is ruled by lying Muppets, now propped by sanctimonious hoophobes .., economy is slowing down, country is a mess.
> 
> Experts told you so, but " who needs experts?"...
> 
> Millions EU nationals, expats, Gibraltar face fear and uncertainty.
> 
> Banks and businesses leaving Britain.
> WTO rules looming as crash Brexit is still on cards.
> No one can make success of Brexit.
> Labour can deliver damage limitations.
> 
> There was no victory on Thursday.
> 
> Britain is no longer neither strong not stable as it was.
> 
> Bojo is coming....


Don't you just love it when a plan comes together?

Thing is the uk economy was going to tank anyway. We are in the middle of another credit bubble. Brexit will precipitate it though, for sure. Input inflation will break BoE guidelines and the inevitable response will heavily impact on the housing markets which will in turn cause another financial crisis. Bound to happen.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Jesthar said:


> Majority or vote count? I always thought 'majority' usually referred to the number of MP seats a party outnumbered all the rest by?


Apologies, votes


----------



## MiffyMoo

Dr Pepper said:


> Do you know what, I've finished work for the day, I'm sat in the field with two dogs mooching about, two horses grazing, six chickens happily pecking about, half a dozen rabbits sat about keeping a eye on their young, and a partridge in a..... oops sorry. Also have a glass (bottle) of wine and do you know what, I'm pretty sure this time next year, and the years after I'll be doing the same regardless of politics.


That sounds like heaven!


----------



## cheekyscrip

Satori said:


> Don't you just love it when a plan comes together?
> 
> Thing is the uk economy was going to tank anyway. We are in the middle of another credit bubble. Brexit will precipitate it though, for sure. Input inflation will break BoE guidelines and the inevitable response will heavily impact on the housing markets which will in turn cause another financial crisis. Bound to happen.


How much do I hate when have to agree with you...
:'(
Are you connected to Bond or Bow group???


----------



## Jesthar

MiffyMoo said:


> Apologies, votes


Cheers, just as long as I'm not going doolally! This whole thing has been enough to make anyone confused...


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 314062
> 
> 
> If this is true will it be Gay marriage next?


I dont know any details of this , of what limit they want to reduce it to .

Its relatively easy to get abortions under 12 weeks.

The limit of legal abortions in this country is 24 weeks , later abortions would be mainly on medical grounds , the thing is now that babies of this age can be alive and breathe , nowadays we are advanced in care and they can survive .

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/wo...-week-old-babies-are-now-able-to-survive.html


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> What did happen was that the young voted and showed that when they do they make a difference. Every seat where the young turned out in numbers went Labour. I suspect this will motivate far more to register and vote next time which just could be the tipping point.


Shame they have,no experience of life! Head sand buried springs,to mind


----------



## havoc

kimthecat said:


> i mentioned this in another thread , Im surprised that there hasn't been more dirt dished up on them including any links they may have with terrorists . I couldn't find any info connecting the current DUP MPS with them but it was suggested that there are .


I wish there was a simple answer to this but there can't be. What are links? Are you linked to ISIS because someone you've known for years turns out to have let a neighbour store stuff in their garage and later it turns out they commit a terrorist atrocity? There was no such thing as neutral and every sociopath could satisfy their need for violence by carrying out their crimes under the banner of some organisation. The fighting between factions supposedly with the same aims, was horrendous. Think more in terms of gang culture.


----------



## kimthecat

Dr Pepper said:


> Do you know what, I've finished work for the day, I'm sat in the field with two dogs mooching about, two horses grazing, six chickens happily pecking about, half a dozen rabbits sat about keeping a eye on their young, and a partridge in a..... oops sorry. Also have a glass (bottle) of wine and do you know what, I'm pretty sure this time next year, and the years after I'll be doing the same regardless of politics.


I hope so . can we see photos of your horses to cheer us up ?


----------



## havoc

DT said:


> Shame they have,no experience of life!


But they have every right to have a say in determining how their life might be.


----------



## Dr Pepper

kimthecat said:


> I hope so . can we see photos of your horses to cheer us up ?












Edit
If that worked it was remarkably easy, if it didn't I apologise.


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> But they have every right to have a say in determining how their life might be.


Well lets hope they can learn how to get their hands dirty that they can go without, and are prepared to work until they have one foot in the,grave!


----------



## kimthecat

Dr Pepper said:


> View attachment 314071


now there's a sight for sore eyes . Thank you


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> But they have every right to have a say in determining how their life might be.


And personally I think voting age should be 21 at the very lowest


----------



## havoc

Anyone interested could do worse than start by looking at this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shankill_Butchers

It wasn't news across here because they weren't attacking us - they were 'loyalists'.


----------



## 1290423

And perhaps we should bring back subscription, let them vote once they,ve spent two years learning to take orders, or if they are unlucky shot at!


----------



## Elles




----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> Anyone interested could do worse than start by looking at this
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shankill_Butchers
> 
> It wasn't news across here because they weren't attacking us - they were 'loyalists'.


God, that's horrendous!

I'm afraid that there were so many different groups, I'm thoroughly confused as to who, why, where etc


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> View attachment 314076


That yours elles?


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> View attachment 314076


People need to stop posting photos of their horses! I was meant to get one when I was 13, and 30 years later I'm still waiting!


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> That yours elles?


I couldn't work out how to link the pic and say something at the same time. 

Yes. That's her today, I was giving her a bath.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> I couldn't work out how to link the pic and say something at the same time.
> 
> Yes. That's her today, I was giving her a bath.


Very nice elles, I need to get myself back in the saddle.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Dr Pepper said:


> Frankly I no longer give a flying monkey's anymore and probably won't even bother to vote. I understand why she's done it though.


I will be abstaining if there is another GE.

What a country we live in. It seems to be the norm to let dosile idiots into power who like to control people and squeeze them for every penny they have whilst shaking hands with a country leader that finances ISIS and brokers a deal with the DUP so they can sit comfortably in Downing Street. The best bit is, it doesn't matter which party is elected they either side with terrorists or have sided with terrorists. So this is what the UK is to become, terrorists sympathisers (well at least that's what it probably looks like at the moment).

Again I am abstaining if there is another GE


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> I found this. Which perfectly proves the reason why it could never be workeable, as it diminishes the smaller parties
> 
> View attachment 313971


It doesn't diminish smaller parties, its the fairest system. The Green Party would have 11 MPs if we had PR 












Jonescat said:


> I rather like this:
> http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-book-of-jeremy-corbyn
> 
> (amusing comment on our position from America)


I love this

There are some great write ups on Corbyn in the New York Times today. Including this one.

*How Jeremy Corbyn Proved the Haters Wrong* https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/09/opinion/how-jeremy-corbyn-proved-the-haters-wrong.html?_r=0

(I'm so touched by yours & DTs kind words, thank you @MrsZee xx)


----------



## 1290423

MiffyMoo said:


> People need to stop posting photos of their horses! I was meant to get one when I was 13, and 30 years later I'm still waiting!





noushka05 said:


> It doesn't diminish smaller parties, its the fairest system. The Green Party would have 11 MPs if we had PR
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I love this
> 
> There are some great write ups on Corbyn in the New York Times today. Including this one.
> 
> *How Jeremy Corbyn Proved the Haters Wrong* https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/09/opinion/how-jeremy-corbyn-proved-the-haters-wrong.html?_r=0
> 
> (I'm so touched by yours & DTs kind words, thank you @MrsZee xx)


So would have UKIP last time around ,xx


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> It doesn't diminish smaller parties, its the fairest system. The Green Party would have 11 MPs if we had PR
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I love this
> 
> There are some great write ups on Corbyn in the New York Times today. Including this one.
> 
> *How Jeremy Corbyn Proved the Haters Wrong* https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/09/opinion/how-jeremy-corbyn-proved-the-haters-wrong.html?_r=0
> 
> (I'm so touched by yours & DTs kind words, thank you @MrsZee xx)


Yeah, posted later


----------



## stockwellcat.

This is the only person speaking an ounce of sense in the Conservative party at the moment:

*Ruth Davidson: Tories need to listen to other parties on Brexit*

Ruth Davidson has told Sky News the Conservatives need to "listen" to other parties when it comes to Brexit.

http://news.sky.com/story/ruth-davidson-tories-need-to-listen-to-other-parties-on-brexit-10911078


----------



## MiffyMoo

So it seems they're not going into coalition; the DUP have agreed to support the Tories on a supply & confidence basis


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> This is the only person speaking an ounce of sense in the Conservative party at the moment:
> 
> *Ruth Davidson: Tories need to listen to other parties on Brexit*
> 
> Ruth Davidson has told Sky News the Conservatives need to "listen" to other parties when it comes to Brexit.
> 
> http://news.sky.com/story/ruth-davidson-tories-need-to-listen-to-other-parties-on-brexit-10911078


Rarely do politicians come along like Ruth, if they did, we wouldn't be in this mess


----------



## rona

MiffyMoo said:


> So it seems they're not going into coalition; the DUP have agreed to support the Tories on a supply & confidence basis
> 
> View attachment 314088


What does that even mean?


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> What does that even mean?


They are going to prop up Tory numbers (to give the Tories the majority) with there MP's for favours basically but won't interfere with Tory politics.


----------



## MiffyMoo

rona said:


> What does that even mean?


God knows. Still frantically searching to try and find out. I'm hoping it means that they have no influence beyond what we ask of them. Wonder what we had to offer in exchange...


----------



## stockwellcat.

MiffyMoo said:


> God knows. Still frantically searching to try and find out. I'm hoping it means that they have no influence beyond what we ask of them. Wonder what we had to offer in exchange...


They won't have any influence in Parliament they will basically be propping up Tory numbers so the Tories have the majority. This doesn't come for free as the Tories will owe them favours for doing this which is probably what they have been agreeing on. They only have an influence in Parliament if they go into coalition with the Tories which they have decided against.

The favours the DUP will want is power in Northern Ireland or there numbers boosting or favouritism over Sinn Fein by the UK Government. These are just examples of what they may have asked as favours.


----------



## Mirandashell

And those favours mostly likely have a lot to do with the Peace Process. And Sinn Fein will be keeping a close eye on what has been agreed between the Tories and the DUP. So that's peace in Northern Ireland up the spout.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Mirandashell said:


> And those favours mostly likely have a lot to do with the Peace Process. And Sinn Fein will be keeping a close eye on what has been agreed between the Tories and the DUP. So that's peace in Northern Ireland up the spout.


I guess we'll find out on Monday. I agree though, I can't see it being a happy time for NI


----------



## stockwellcat.

*DUP agrees to principles of 'confidence and supply' deal with Tories*










The DUP has agreed to the principles of a proposal to back the Tories on a "confidence and supply basis", Downing Street says.

Such an agreement would see the Northern Irish party's 10 MPs support the Conservatives on crucial votes when Parliament returns next week.

Number 10 said the arrangement will be put to the Cabinet for discussion on Monday.

A Downing Street spokesman added: "We welcome this commitment, which can provide the stability and certainty the whole country requires as we embark on Brexit and beyond."

Prime Minister Theresa May had sent Gavin Williamson, her chief whip, to Belfast to lead talks with the party's officials.

Earlier, she had made clear of her desire to secure support from "friends and allies" in the DUP ahead of the Queen's Speech on 19 June.

An online petition demanding a Tory-DUP minority government is stopped has amassed more than 580,000 signatures, amid concerns over its stance on gay rights, abortion and the death penalty.

Senior Tories have also expressed concern over the prospect of closer links with the DUP - with one MP, Sarah Wollaston, tweeting: "I will always oppose the death penalty & would resign if others imposed it. They won't.

"I will always support the right for women to choose & access safe termination of pregnancy & will oppose any change to the legislation.

"I will never agree to any dilution of LGBT rights. Creationism in schools? Hell no.

"If any of that is a condition of confidence and supply it simply won't work."

A "confidence and supply" arrangement is a far looser deal than a formal coalition or pact.

It would mean the DUP backing the Government on its Budget and prevent it being brought down by motions of no confidence, but could potentially lead to other issues being decided on a vote-by-vote basis.

http://news.sky.com/story/dup-agree...nfidence-and-supply-deal-with-tories-10911387


----------



## stockwellcat.

.


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> I dont know any details of this , of what limit they want to reduce it to .
> 
> Its relatively easy to get abortions under 12 weeks.
> 
> The limit of legal abortions in this country is 24 weeks , later abortions would be mainly on medical grounds , the thing is now that babies of this age can be alive and breathe , nowadays we are advanced in care and they can survive .
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/wo...-week-old-babies-are-now-able-to-survive.html


The issue of abortion is a very difficult matter and, being male, I don't consider myself qualified to discuss it.

Having said that I strongly believe in a woman's right to choose and, men especially, should not dictate their anti abortion stance on women. One of the reasons why I strongly opposed the Catholic Lib Dems David Alton's attempt to either outlaw or reduce the time limit in his private members bill in the '80s.

This wasn't the point I was trying to make however.

The impression I'm getting is, if May is so desperate to hold onto power she might succumb to the demands of the DUP who are extremist in many areas such as abortion and gay rights.

David Cameron, for all his faults, should be applauded for his partially successful attempt to bring the party into the 21st century with his support for Gay marriage against much opposition within his own party.

My concern is, a seriously weakened TM may be threatened with no co-operation from the DUP if she refuses to concede to their demands.

If I was a typical centre right Conservative voter I would be extremely worried personally, let alone for a moderate lefty like myself.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> They won't have any influence in Parliament they will basically be propping up Tory numbers so the Tories have the majority. This doesn't come for free as the Tories will owe them favours for doing this which is probably what they have been agreeing on. They only have an influence in Parliament if they go into coalition with the Tories which they have decided against.
> 
> The favours the DUP will want is power in Northern Ireland or there numbers boosting or favouritism over Sinn Fein by the UK Government. These are just examples of what they may have asked as favours.


It's these favours that worry me as I mentioned earlier.


----------



## Honeys mum

Theres been a protest in London already today.

Hundreds descend on Parliament to protest Theresa May's DUP deal


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> It's these favours that worry me as I mentioned earlier.
> View attachment 314107


They aren't going into coalition with the DUP @KittenKong.


----------



## havoc

I can't think of a more unholy alliance. However they've worded it, the DUP will have their pound of flesh.


----------



## KittenKong

Honeys mum said:


> Theres been a protest in London already today.
> 
> Hundreds descend on Parliament to protest Theresa May's DUP deal


Even the May worshipping Express covered it much to my surprise, especially the photo.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Even the May worshipping Express covered it much to my surprise, especially the photo.
> 
> View attachment 314111
> View attachment 314112


They haven't gone into coalition though so this will be ignored.

They have come to a "confidence and supply agreement" which is alot different to a coalition. For a start the DUP won't have any influence in Parliament.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> They aren't going into coalition with the DUP @KittenKong.


Really? Different opinions from different sources. Even if you're right they can still demand their influence on the entire UK in favour of their support to this frail Tory administration.

They're not pussycats like the Clegg fronted Lib Dems were with Cameron's government.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Really? Different opinions from different sources. Even if you're right they can still demand their influence on the entire UK in favour of their support to this frail Tory administration.
> 
> They're not pussycats like the Clegg fronted Lib Dems were with Cameron's government.


You told us the Express newspaper wasn't a reliable source of information presented Brexit Referendum and post Referendum now you expect us to believe this as a source of factual information?


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Really? Different opinions from different sources. Even if you're right they can still demand their influence on the entire UK in favour of their support to this frail Tory administration.
> 
> They're not pussycats like the Clegg fronted Lib Dems were with Cameron's government.


A coalition gives a party influence with the ruling party a supply and confidence agreement doesn't. Do your research first.


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> For a start the DUP won't have any influence in Parliament


Worse - they'll have dangerous influence behind the scenes.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Don't get me wrong I would love to see the back of May, but I am abstaining if there's another GE as there has been to many in the last 3 years.

The reason why I am abstaining is because another terrorist sympathetiser would get into power. Enough said.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> You told us the Express newspaper wasn't a reliable source of information presented Brexit Referendum and post Referendum now you expect us to believe this as a source of factual information?


Actually no. I've heard this from several mainly left of centre sources. I was very surprised the Express covered it actually in view of their support for May.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Don't get me wrong I would love to see the back of May, but I am abstaining if there's another GE as there has been to many in the last 3 years.
> 
> The reason why I am abstaining is because another terrorist sympathetiser would get into power. Enough said.


You could argue that, but May revealing herself to support terrorist sympathisers yet condemn another for being labeled a terrorist sympathiser doesn't make it right!


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> You could argue that, but May revealing herself to support terrorist sympathisers yet condemn another for being labeled a terrorist sympathiser doesn't make it right!


No it doesn't make it right. I didn't say it did. It makes the UK look like it sympathises with terrorism shaking hands with a country that finances terrorism and siding with the DUP. The opposite party leader isn't innocent either but in all fairness brokered a peace deal in Ireland. So as we enter into the big wide world the UK looks like it will do deals with terrorists. Do you see my point?

The Labour leader isn't as innocent as he pretends to be.

The current Conservative leader isn't either.


----------



## stockwellcat.

BBC News or Sky News are not running a story on this mass demonstration @KittenKong and sky news is normally first on the scene of such things.

Edited. Just found out it happened yesterday and it was only hundreds not thousands of people that attended the demonstration.


----------



## Elles

Tbh it just makes them look as though they'll do anything and say anything to be in charge. 

Can we have some new politicians with some sensible manifestos please, if we really do have to have another go. Change it to some kind of PR first. It's a shambles.

The demonstration is also in The Mail, but the photos don't look like hundreds. It looks like something you'd see from sabs at a hunt, with the balaclavas and sticks. Rentamob in force?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> Tbh it just makes them look as though they'll do anything and say anything to be in charge.
> 
> Can we have some new politicians with some sensible manifestos please, if we really do have to have another go. Change it to some kind of PR first. It's a shambles.
> 
> The demonstration is also in The Mail, but the photos don't look like hundreds. It looks like something you'd see from sabs at a hunt, with the balaclavas and sticks. Rentamob in force?


I agree as the current politics is so out dated and tbh is annoying as they never stick to their manifesto's and the politicians are forever u-turning instead of being honest and saying they lied or cannot fulfill their pledges. They think they can pull the wool over the public's eyes.


----------



## Jesthar

KittenKong said:


> Actually no. I've heard this from several mainly left of centre sources. I was very surprised the Express covered it actually in view of their support for May.


I'm not that surprised. May has failed the media barons that heavily supported the Tories both financially and journalistically. They will not be happy with such a mediocre return on their investment. So I'd regard this as a shot across the bows: keep failing us and we will take our support elsewhere...


----------



## Guest

So how will this union help fighting terrorism and extreme fundamentalists? Isn´t this just a showcase how a small group could hold a whole country as ransom? It´s like Manchester never meant anything really, apart from a few speeches.

Don´t kid yourself, DUP will want to increase it´s power in Nothern Ireland, and that will activate groups wanting to start war again. They know this is the only chance they have to gain real power and they will abuse it. Or do you think they are interested in making whole Britain a better place to live? Or that they suddenly turned nice?


----------



## Satori

cheekyscrip said:


> Are you connected to Bond or Bow group???


I've been found out. I am the third from the left, scratching my ar5e.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Sinn Fein Leader in the North Michelle O'Neill has accused the DUP of betraying the interests of the people of Northern Ireland in its agreement with the Conservative government.

"They have once again betrayed the interests of the people of the north by supporting a Tory party which has cut funding to our public services year on year to the tune of hundreds of millions of pounds.

"Experience shows us that unionists have minimal influence on any British government.

"This new arrangement between the DUP and the Tories will be transitory and will end in tears.

"But it will be the people of the North who will have to pay the price for the DUP's support for Brexit and for cuts."

*Fears over Northern Ireland stability*

Warning from Downing Street's chief of staff under Tony Blair...

Posted at21:11










Follow
BBC Newsnight

✔@BBCNewsnight
"It could undermine all that we've achieved over the last several decades in NI" - Jonathan Powell says relying on DUP support is a mistake

8:27 PM - 10 Jun 2017


----------



## MollySmith

I'm on holiday and my reaction so far to the election results are thus explained as:

:Banghead:Bag:Finger:Mooning:Nailbiting


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Yvette Cooper: Four questions on DUP deal*

Labour MP Yvette Cooper tweets...

Posted at20:38


Follow
Yvette Cooper

✔@YvetteCooperMP
Q1 What did they promise DUP? Q2 What will they offer for each vote? Q3 Is abortion/lgbt a red line? Q4 How is this neutral on NI peace?


----------



## Calvine

MiffyMoo said:


> Wonder what we had to offer in exchange


Well, they say there is no such thing as a free lunch.


----------



## Calvine

KittenKong said:


> I was very surprised the Express covered it actually in view of their support for May.


Not seen owt in DM about it tho'. Had a quick look...


----------



## Elles

DM being daily mail? It was in there earlier


----------



## Elles

Calvine said:


> Not seen owt in DM about it tho'. Had a quick look...


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ch-Downing-Street-protest-Tory-coalition.html


----------



## kimthecat

MollySmith said:


> I'm on holiday and my reaction so far to the election results are thus explained as:
> 
> :Banghead:Bag:Finger:Mooning:Nailbiting




This is how i feel at the moment -


----------



## kimthecat

Elles said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ch-Downing-Street-protest-Tory-coalition.html


I'm surprised more didn't turn up . Only several hundred .

Love the balaclava ! :Hilarious ETA I bet he's thinking Shit! wrong rally !


----------



## Calvine

Elles said:


> DM being daily mail? It was in there earlier


I missed it, must try harder...loads there about the unholy alliance etc (as you can imagine).


----------



## stockwellcat.

So be warned folks the next 5 years will look like this:

Theresa May strikes deal with DUP
Brexit happens with no deal in place.
Troubles in Northern Ireland again and British soldiers on the ground.
Constant threats and terror attacks in the United Kingdom as we shake hands with countries that side with or fiance deals with terrorist.
What about the impending fox hunting vote?
Protests on the street to protect LGBTI rights and right to same sex marriage.
Protests to oust May.
May imposes more taxes and cuts with no manifesto in place.
So do you still want strong and stable leadership heading to disaster?
5 years time the EU will now leave us financially as worse off as Greece.
Get rid of May quickly she is a nightmare in waiting.

End May this week. Come on 1922 you are our only hope.


----------



## Elles

kimthecat said:


> I'm surprised more didn't turn up . Only several hundred .
> 
> Love the balaclava ! :Hilarious ETA I bet he's thinking Shit! wrong rally!


Yeah, I think he's expecting the other hunt. I said a few pages ago I predict a riot. Wasn't expecting it so soon.


----------



## Elles

So what do we think of Boris? Apparently he's champing at the bit.


----------



## kimthecat

@Elles I thought he was keeping schtum,

ETA From the MOS
"Boris Johnson is preparing a new bid to become Prime Minister as Theresa May's grip on No 10 becomes increasingly fragile.

A close ally of the Foreign Secretary said last night it was 'go-go-go' for Mr Johnson's leadership push, adding: 'We need Bojo. We need a Brexiteer. We need somebody who can talk and connect with people like Jeremy Corbyn does. We need someone who can make Britain believe in itself again.'

Mr Johnson's supporters are being careful to say that he will not take any action while Mrs May remains in No 10 - but the fact that his allies are actively briefing about his virtues will be seen in Downing Street as destabilising. "

I dunno ! Gossip or part of his cunning plan ?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Johnson's spokesman rejects leadership speculation*
Posted at21:5810 Jun

A spokesman for Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson's office has described as "simply wrong" a report in the Mail on Sunday suggesting a Tory leadership bid was being lined up.

"The Foreign Secretary is 100% supporting the prime minister and working with her to get the best deal for Britain," he said.

Where have we heard that before :Hilarious:Hilarious


----------



## kimthecat

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-vows-oust-theresa-10601306

Fired-up Jeremy Corbyn today vows to finish what he started by getting rid of Theresa May within a matter of days.

He plans to use the Queen's Speech as his first opportunity to topple the floundering PM.

In an exclusive interview with the Sunday Mirror, Mr Corbyn is champing at the bit and buzzing with enthusiasm.

And over a cappucino he says it is time for Mrs May to wake up and smell the coffee.

The Labour leader says: "I can still be Prime Minister. This is still on. Absolutely. Theresa Mayhas been to the Palace. She's attempting to form a government.

Fired-up Jeremy Corbyn today vows to finish what he started by getting rid of Theresa May within a matter of days.

He plans to use the Queen's Speech as his first opportunity to topple the floundering PM.

In an exclusive interview with the Sunday Mirror, Mr Corbyn is champing at the bit and buzzing with enthusiasm.

And over a cappucino he says it is time for Mrs May to wake up and smell the coffee.

The Labour leader says: "I can still be Prime Minister. This is still on. Absolutely. Theresa May
She's then got to present a programme to Parliament.

"We will - obviously - amend the Queen's Speech. There's a possibility of voting it down it and we're going to push that all the way.


----------



## Elles

He's a bit of a sore loser. He does know that most of the country didn't actually vote for him doesn't he?


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> *Johnson's spokesman rejects leadership speculation*
> Posted at21:5810 Jun
> 
> A spokesman for Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson's office has described as "simply wrong" a report in the Mail on Sunday suggesting a Tory leadership bid was being lined up.
> 
> "The Foreign Secretary is 100% supporting the prime minister and working with her to get the best deal for Britain," he said.
> 
> Where have we heard that before :Hilarious:Hilarious


Sounds very much like when a football club announces the manager has the full backing and confidence of the board - usual translation: "the pink slip is in the post"


----------



## havoc

I'd imagine Boris learned valuable lessons about the art of backstabbing last time.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Embarrassing for Theresa May as there is no deal with the DUP as yet. DUP have not agreed on anything yet. The press office at number 10 had released the wrong press release. The DUP have said all that Arlene Foster had agreed to was to have a discussion and nothing else yet.


----------



## Calvine

Elles said:


> Apparently he's champing at the bit.





kimthecat said:


> Mr Corbyn is champing at the bit


How many more are 'champing at the bit'?


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> So be warned folks the next 5 years will look like this:
> 
> Theresa May strikes deal with DUP
> Brexit happens with no deal in place.
> Troubles in Northern Ireland again and British soldiers on the ground.
> Constant threats and terror attacks in the United Kingdom as we shake hands with countries that side with or fiance deals with terrorist.
> What about the impending fox hunting vote?
> Protests on the street to protect LGBTI rights and right to same sex marriage.
> Protests to oust May.
> May imposes more taxes and cuts with no manifesto in place.
> So do you still want strong and stable leadership heading to disaster?
> 5 years time the EU will now leave us financially as worse off as Greece.
> Get rid of May quickly she is a nightmare in waiting.
> 
> End May this week. Come on 1922 you are our only hope.


There is a massive amount of assumption and attempting to whip people up in your post. I'm not a fan of the DUP deal, but I'm also not a fan of people making such wild assumptions and putting them as fact, it's not helpful.

We will hopefully find out on Monday what the deal is, and then make informed decisions, and hopefully not knee jerk reactions that only hurt us in the long run


----------



## Honeys mum

Well looks like TM has made yet another good choice to help her in Gavin Barwell , who happens to be a remainer.

Theresa May's new chief of staff Gavin Barwell thoughts on Brexit REVEALED | UK | News | Express.co.uk


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> @Elles I thought he was keeping schtum,
> 
> ETA From the MOS
> "Boris Johnson is preparing a new bid to become Prime Minister as Theresa May's grip on No 10 becomes increasingly fragile.
> 
> A close ally of the Foreign Secretary said last night it was 'go-go-go' for Mr Johnson's leadership push, adding: 'We need Bojo. We need a Brexiteer. We need somebody who can talk and connect with people like Jeremy Corbyn does. We need someone who can make Britain believe in itself again.'
> 
> Mr Johnson's supporters are being careful to say that he will not take any action while Mrs May remains in No 10 - but the fact that his allies are actively briefing about his virtues will be seen in Downing Street as destabilising. "
> 
> I dunno ! Gossip or part of his cunning plan ?


He's not even a brexiteer though. I know he ran the campaign, but he was very much a remainer until he realised that it could be a short cut to the holy grail. I'd far prefer someone else, but am actually pretty hard pressed to know who right now :-(


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyn-vows-oust-theresa-10601306
> 
> Fired-up Jeremy Corbyn today vows to finish what he started by getting rid of Theresa May within a matter of days.
> 
> He plans to use the Queen's Speech as his first opportunity to topple the floundering PM.
> 
> In an exclusive interview with the Sunday Mirror, Mr Corbyn is champing at the bit and buzzing with enthusiasm.
> 
> And over a cappucino he says it is time for Mrs May to wake up and smell the coffee.
> 
> The Labour leader says: "I can still be Prime Minister. This is still on. Absolutely. Theresa Mayhas been to the Palace. She's attempting to form a government.
> 
> Fired-up Jeremy Corbyn today vows to finish what he started by getting rid of Theresa May within a matter of days.
> 
> He plans to use the Queen's Speech as his first opportunity to topple the floundering PM.
> 
> In an exclusive interview with the Sunday Mirror, Mr Corbyn is champing at the bit and buzzing with enthusiasm.
> 
> And over a cappucino he says it is time for Mrs May to wake up and smell the coffee.
> 
> The Labour leader says: "I can still be Prime Minister. This is still on. Absolutely. Theresa May
> She's then got to present a programme to Parliament.
> 
> "We will - obviously - amend the Queen's Speech. There's a possibility of voting it down it and we're going to push that all the way.


Fixed it for you:

The Labour leader says: "I can still be Prime Minister. I have worked too hard to give up on my dream, and not even democracy will stop me comrades


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> Love the balaclava ! :Hilarious ETA I bet he's thinking Shit! wrong rally !


Obviously from 'Rent-a mob'! He'll be at a different one next week.


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> Embarrassing for Theresa May as there is no deal with the DUP as yet. DUP have not agreed on anything yet. The press office at number 10 had released the wrong press release. The DUP have said all that Arlene Foster had agreed to was to have a discussion and nothing else yet.


I'm sure reports I saw all said about positive talks, but they were ongoing


----------



## Honeys mum

MiffyMoo said:


> I'm sure reports I saw all said about positive talks, but they were ongoing


This is in The Guardian today.
Theresa May's plan to govern with DUP support thrown into confusion | Politics | The Guardian


----------



## Dr Pepper

Well apparently all the DUP are asking for (at the moment) is the pension triple lock and winter fuel payments. Not so frightening really.


----------



## stockwellcat.

MiffyMoo said:


> I'm sure reports I saw all said about positive talks, but they were ongoing


*Downing Street made statement on DUP deal in error*

Theresa May's bid to do a deal with the Democratic Unionist Party to save her premiership has been plunged into uncertainty.

In a move that could jeopardise her frantic attempts to remain as Prime Minister, the DUP is accusing Downing Street of announcing a deal on its MPs voting with the Tories in the Commons before an agreement has been reached.

------
But in a dramatic twist just before midnight on Saturday, Sky sources said No.10's account of the talks had been issued in error and the DUP had not yet reached any agreement with the Tories.

http://news.sky.com/story/dup-and-c...deal-on-minority-government-alliance-10911773


----------



## stockwellcat.

*General Election »*
*DUP talks to continue next week to finalise 'confidence and supply' deal with Theresa May government*

June 11 2017

*Theresa May's grip on power appears far from secure amid confusion around a potential deal with the Democratic Unionist Party to support her in Parliament.*

Downing Street initially said an outline agreement on a "confidence and supply" arrangement had been reached with the DUP which will be put to the Cabinet for discussion on Monday.

But it later emerged no deal has yet been finalised and talks on the arrangement will continue during the week as Mrs May desperately tries to shore up her position after losing her Commons majority in the election.

http://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/new...eal-with-theresa-may-government-35813041.html


----------



## stockwellcat.

MiffyMoo said:


> helpful.
> 
> We will hopefully find out on Monday what the deal is, and then make informed decisions, and hopefully not knee jerk reactions that only hurt us in the long run


Well here's a knee jerk for you from Downing Street who apologised over night for releasing the wrong statement as no deal has been reached and even the DUP have said there is no deal at the moment. See no one has to do a knee jerk for them they do it themselves and hurt themselves in the long run.

Let's hope the 1922 committee put an end to this all on Tuesday at their meeting. They currently have 56% support for a leadership contest to oust May. She should have done the honourable thing and stood down for losing the GE.


----------



## Happy Paws2

She really is showing her colours isn't she, and we are suppose it believe she can run the country. She wants locking up for her own safety and ours.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## noushka05

In the last 3 days 150,000 people have joined the labour party.


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 314149


So do I :Hilarious


----------



## noushka05

Rupert's not happy. Hes going for the jugular.


----------



## noushka05

I thought Cameron had got this title in the bag, but there you go.
*
Theresa May made laughable errors and she'll now go down as the worst prime minister in modern British history* http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-jeremy-corbyn-campaign-results-a7780351.html


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> Well here's a knee jerk for you from Downing Street who apologised over night for releasing the wrong statement as no deal has been reached and even the DUP have said there is no deal at the moment. See no one has to do a knee jerk for them they do it themselves and hurt themselves in the long run.
> 
> Let's hope the 1922 committee put an end to this all on Tuesday at their meeting. They currently have 56% support for a leadership contest to oust May. She should have done the honourable thing and stood down for losing the GE.


You know full well that your original post had nothing to do with the latest instalment on the talks.

And please explain exactly how she "lost the GE"? Tories got more votes than anyone else and had the highest % of votes since 1979. I'm quite shocked and disappointed that you're following the crowds calling for her head with that reasoning


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Well apparently all the DUP are asking for (at the moment) is the pension triple lock and winter fuel payments. *Not so frightening really*.


You have got to be joking I cant believe anyone with an ounce of common decency would accept this revolting alliance. Putting aside all their backward views, what about the Good Friday agreement? Don't you care this puts peace in Ireland in grave jeopardy? The tories should step down, they cannot form a government with these extremists!


----------



## suewhite

Sorry to say this but I am sick of the in fighting and name calling within the parties, the Country is going down the tubes and all they can do is name call and blame each other the whole lot of them, they are making us a laughing stock they need to grow up and sort this Country out together instead of point scoring.


----------



## JANICE199

MiffyMoo said:


> You know full well that your original post had nothing to do with the latest instalment on the talks.
> 
> And please explain exactly how she "lost the GE"? Tories got more votes than anyone else and had the highest % of votes since 1979. I'm quite shocked and disappointed that you're following the crowds calling for her head with that reasoning


*Considering how much better off the tories were than labour at the start of this election, i would call her a loser. And that fact that she has now caused so much unrest in the country, she has a lot to answer for.*


----------



## noushka05

suewhite said:


> Sorry to say this but I am sick of the in fighting and name calling within the parties, the Country is going down the tubes and all they can do is name call and blame each other the whole lot of them, they are making us a laughing stock they need to grow up and sort this Country out together instead of point scoring.


There's only one party that has made us a global laughing stock.

*Jon Snow*‏Verified [email protected]*jonsnowC4* Jun 8

Twice now the TORIES have put party before country - first the Referendum and
then this unnecessary election. It may have a cost....


----------



## noushka05

If the tories think they can still negotiate 'a new partnership in Europe', they are wrong. This is what Europe thinks.


----------



## JANICE199

suewhite said:


> Sorry to say this but I am sick of the in fighting and name calling within the parties, the Country is going down the tubes and all they can do is name call and blame each other the whole lot of them, they are making us a laughing stock they need to grow up and sort this Country out together instead of point scoring.


*To be fair Sue, i think JC has handled his campaign with dignity, unlike TM. Also, if this country is a laughing stock, that can be laid at no 10, and TM.*


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> I thought Cameron had got this title in the bag, but there you go.
> *
> Theresa May made laughable errors and she'll now go down as the worst prime minister in modern British history* http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-jeremy-corbyn-campaign-results-a7780351.html


Na, that'll almost certainly go to G.W.Bush's warmongering puppet Mr Blair.


----------



## Team_Trouble

MiffyMoo said:


> Fixed it for you:
> 
> The Labour leader says: "I can still be Prime Minister. I have worked too hard to give up on my dream, and not even democracy will stop me comrades


I am really disappointed in Jeremy Corbyn for this attitude 



noushka05 said:


> I thought Cameron had got this title in the bag, but there you go.
> *
> Theresa May made laughable errors and she'll now go down as the worst prime minister in modern British history* http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-jeremy-corbyn-campaign-results-a7780351.html


I feel really sad for Theresa at the moment. I admire her for having the courage to get out of bed and carry on through all this, that shows more strength than she has shown through her entire campaign.



suewhite said:


> Sorry to say this but I am sick of the in fighting and name calling within the parties, the Country is going down the tubes and all they can do is name call and blame each other the whole lot of them, they are making us a laughing stock they need to grow up and sort this Country out together instead of point scoring.


I agree with you.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Na, that'll almost certainly go to G.W.Bush's warmongering puppet Mr Blair.


Blairs foreign policy was dire - and he was backed 100% by May & Cameron. Blairs domestic policies were head & shoulders above the tories. The tories are responsible for mess they have got the UK in.


----------



## Mirandashell

I wouldn't take anything said in the media as truth. They lie and fabricate and obfuscate on a daily basis. They are going to be even worse right now with so many half-truths and rumours flying around. I would wait for the dust to settle and see what shakes out.


----------



## noushka05

KatieandOliver said:


> I am really disappointed in Jeremy Corbyn for this attitude
> 
> I feel really sad for Theresa at the moment. I admire her for having the courage to get out of bed and carry on through all this, that shows more strength than she has shown through her entire campaign.
> 
> I agree with you.


Don't feel sorry for her Katie. She called this election to crush dissent & to destroy the opposition. Corbyn has the best interests of the country at heart May never has.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> There's only one party that has made us a global laughing stock.
> 
> *Jon Snow*‏Verified [email protected]*jonsnowC4* Jun 8
> 
> Twice now the TORIES have put party before country - first the Referendum and
> then this unnecessary election. It may have a cost....


Well Mr Snow is wrong about the referendum, the public wanted it, the turnout proves that, add to that the result and it was very much the right democratic thing to do. The problem is how it's been handled since.


----------



## Zaros

kimthecat said:


> I'm surprised more didn't turn up . Only several hundred .
> 
> Love the balaclava ! :Hilarious ETA I bet he's thinking Shit! wrong rally !


Media stooge!

Under the anti mask/masking law, I thought it was forbidden for a person to wear a balaclava/ski mask in a public place/place of demonstration or riot. Police officers can order the wearer to remove it.
This includes balaclavas worn by motorcyclists.


----------



## 1290423

KatieandOliver said:


> I am really disappointed in Jeremy Corbyn for this attitude
> 
> I feel really sad for Theresa at the moment. I admire her for having the courage to get out of bed and carry on through all this, that shows more strength than she has shown through her entire campaign.
> 
> I agree with you.


Totally agree with everything you have said!
But you know what I think too? I think there are people out there and on this,forum too that are hoping and praying that teresa may ends,up with a bad deal .


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Well Mr Snow is wrong about the referendum, the public wanted it, the turnout proves that, add to that the result and it was very much the right democratic thing to do. The problem is how it's been handled since.


Nothing about the referendum was democratic when the public were not only ill informed but blatantly lied to.


----------



## noushka05

DT said:


> Totally agree with everything you have said!
> But you know what I think too? I think there are people out there and on this,forum too that are hoping and praying that teresa may ends,up with a bad deal .


She was never going to get a good deal Sue.


----------



## Calvine

JANICE199 said:


> i would call her a loser


I thought most of us would agree that there were no winners?


----------



## JANICE199

Calvine said:


> I thought most of us would agree that there were no winners?


*I the true sense of the word Calvine, i agree with you. But my own opinion is, she is a loser.*


----------



## Zaros

DT said:


> I think there are people out there and on this,forum too that are hoping and praying that teresa may ends,up with a bad deal .


That's one of the most preposterous statements I've ever read.

If you're being self destructive, then I might understand it.

But no one in their right mind would wish ill on themselves.


----------



## stockwellcat.

MiffyMoo said:


> And please explain exactly how she "lost the GE"?


Well there was no win. What's a hung Parliament? It's a situation when neither party wins the majority vote, both Conservatives and Labour are below the 326 threshold to declare a win. At the moment yes her party has most seats in Parliament but they aren't winners.

I have a feeling that another general election will be called soon.


----------



## KittenKong

KatieandOliver said:


> I feel really sad for Theresa at the moment. I admire her for having the courage to get out of bed and carry on through all this, that shows more strength than she has shown through her entire campaign.


You are joking, right?

Despite several promises not to hold a General Election before 2020 she did as she thought a majority of 17 wasn't enough.

It backfired badly, end of.

There is only one person to blame and that's Theresa May herself.


----------



## MiffyMoo

JANICE199 said:


> *Considering how much better off the tories were than labour at the start of this election, i would call her a loser. And that fact that she has now caused so much unrest in the country, she has a lot to answer for.*


You do know that Labour were courting the DUP in 2010? Doesn't make me any happier about the current situation, but let's not continue to pretend that it's just the Tories who are the "nasty party"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ele...ion-2010-DUP-now-being-courted-by-Labour.html


----------



## havoc

KatieandOliver said:


> I am really disappointed in Jeremy Corbyn for this attitude


It's called politics and I'd have been disappointed if he hadn't reacted this way. I'd have expected from the other side it had things been the other way round. It's his job.


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> Well there was no win. What's a hung Parliament? It's a situation when neither party wins the majority vote, both Conservatives and Labour are below the 326 threshold to declare a win. At the moment yes her party has most seats in Parliament but they aren't winners.
> 
> I have a feeling that another general election will be called soon.


I certainly hope not. Purely because we need a bl**dy rest!


----------



## JANICE199

MiffyMoo said:


> You do know that Labour were courting the DUP in 2010? Doesn't make me any happier about the current situation, but let's not continue to pretend that it's just the Tories who are the "nasty party"
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ele...ion-2010-DUP-now-being-courted-by-Labour.html


*Haha, i don't recall mentioning the DUP Time to move forward, don't you think? As for the tory party, i believe 100% they are not just a nasty party, they are down right evil. How can a party that is supposed . to be there and look after its people, see so much hardship going on? *


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> It's called politics and I'd have been disappointed if he hadn't reacted this way. I'd have expected from the other side it had things been the other way round. It's his job.


So you're perfectly happy with his apparent complete disregard for democracy?


----------



## Mirandashell

Zaros said:


> Media stooge!
> 
> Under the anti mask/masking law, I thought it was forbidden for a person to wear a balaclava/ski mask in a public place/place of demonstration or riot. Police officers can order the wearer to remove it.
> This includes balaclavas worn by motorcyclists.


That photo isn't from a demonstration at Whitehall or any other Government building in London. That looks more like somewhere in Spain to me.


----------



## Team_Trouble

MiffyMoo said:


> So you're perfectly happy with his apparent complete disregard for democracy?


That's what I thought, I would certainly prefer him over Theresa May for PM, but he has to play by the rules.


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> You do know that Labour were courting the DUP in 2010? Doesn't make me any happier about the current situation, but let's not continue to pretend that it's just the Tories who are the "nasty party"
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ele...ion-2010-DUP-now-being-courted-by-Labour.html


I haven't looked into this so don't know anything about it beyond the Telegraph article, but this labour have ditched neoliberalism - they are not new labour. We have a very different, progressive labour party now


----------



## Honeys mum

stockwellcat said:


> I have a feeling that another general election will be called soon.


I agree swc, could be very interesting if there is.

Nigel Farage to decide in the next seven days if he will lead Ukip for the fourth time after electoral wipeout


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> So you're perfectly happy with his apparent complete disregard for democracy?


I am perfectly happy with a hung parliament that ANY party which thinks it could form a government saying so. That's what happens.

eta If you think back to 2010 we were waiting days while the Lib Dems were courted into a coalition with the Conservatives and *then* it was announced. Until that was in place it was anybody's game - because that's the process.


----------



## Mirandashell

Dear oh lor....... can someone please explain to me why so many of you are suddenly believing anything the press has to say?


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> So you're perfectly happy with his apparent complete disregard for democracy?


The tories can only form a government with the DUP - are you happy with that? Would you prefer a dangerous alliance or a progressive alliance? That's the choice.


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> I haven't looked into this so don't know anything about it beyond the Telegraph article, but this labour have ditched neoliberalism - they are not new labour. We have a very different, progressive labour party now


Indeed, but my point was that it's not just the Tories who are "evil". And I'm sorry but, however much you dislike the fact, there are still quite a few of the old guard in Labour, so it's not a completely new, fresh political party


----------



## Calvine

JANICE199 said:


> she is a loser


I know what you mean Janice: that personally she is a total loser. To be honest I don't think she will ever recover from this mess.


----------



## cheekyscrip

We do not need a harpy, a clown or donors' sidekick to run the country.

Bojo is a funny journalist. Liar, backstabbing clown and really no one in EU can see him as figure of authority.
Hope it will not be Tories next offering.


"I need a hero...."...


There are decent Tories, but seems they backed Remain....


----------



## KittenKong

.


----------



## Calvine

MiffyMoo said:


> You do know that Labour were courting the DUP in 2010?


I never knew that.


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> Indeed, but my point was that it's not just the Tories who are "evil". And I'm sorry but, however much you dislike the fact, there are still quite a few of the old guard in Labour, so it's not a completely new, fresh political party


Labour have done some evil things - & the Iraq war tops the list. The tories however, are toxic right across the board. From their foreign policy & their domestic policy to their environmental policies.
Neoliberalism is dead within Labour


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> The tories can only form a government with the DUP - are you happy with that? Would you prefer a dangerous alliance or a progressive alliance? That's the choice.


I'm not happy at the moment (as I have said multiple times on this thread), but can we step back and wait for the results of their talks? And no, I think that Corbyn would take us to hell in a handcart, but that just my personal view (obvs)


----------



## 1290423

Zaros said:


> That's one of the most preposterous statements I've ever read.
> 
> If you're being self destructive, then I might understand it.
> 
> But no one in their right mind would wish ill on themselves.


Totally agree on the first and second sentences but on your last one, sadly I believe,that there are those in this country that hope it all goes belly up, for whatever reason im lost. But maybe to some,the cost of getting rid of tm perhaps, they think is worth paying


----------



## JANICE199

* Wise words. *

*







*


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> I am perfectly happy with a hung parliament that ANY party which thinks it could form a government saying so. That's what happens.
> 
> eta If you think back to 2010 we were waiting days while the Lib Dems were courted into a coalition with the Conservatives and *then* it was announced. Until that was in place it was anybody's game - because that's the process.


But he didn't get enough votes, whichever way you look at it


----------



## Mirandashell

Calvine said:


> I never knew that.


You never knew that cos it's not true.

Here's a BBC article from the day after the election. The coalition was with the Lib Dems. The question was who they would go with. They went with the Tories and we all know what happened next.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8667071.stm

And here's the Wiki page on the negotiations for a coalition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_Kingdom_government_formation

No mention of the DUP there either.

There's an awful of lot of misinformation on this thread.


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> I'm not happy at the moment (as I have said multiple times on this thread), but can we step back and wait for the results of their talks? And no, I think that Corbyn would take us to hell in a handcart, but that just my personal view (obvs)


I'm shocked that people think its ok for the tories to have talks with the DUP when peace in Northern Ireland is at stake. Look at the state of this country? Its never been in such a state - all thanks to the selfishness & the greed of the tories.


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> But he didn't get enough votes, whichever way you look at it


At this stage, with this result that's irrelevant. It's about who can form a government. The incumbent PM gets first chance but it isn't a given and until a deal is in place which allows them to do so the other parties can (and should) be jockeying for position. That's how it works.


----------



## Bisbow

MiffyMoo said:


> I'm not happy at the moment (as I have said multiple times on this thread), but can we step back and wait for the results of their talks? And no, I think that Corbyn would take us to hell in a handcart, but that just my personal view (obvs)


Got to agree 100% with you, I don't like the situation as it is
And my opinion of Corbyn has not changed one iota and the thought of him as PM scares me silly


----------



## MiffyMoo

Mirandashell said:


> You never knew that cos it's not true.
> 
> Here's a BBC article from the day after the election. The coalition was with the Lib Dems. The question was who they would go with. They went with the Tories and we all know what happened next.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8667071.stm
> 
> And here's the Wiki page on the negotiations for a coalition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_Kingdom_government_formation
> 
> No mention of the DUP there either.
> 
> There's an awful of lot of misinformation on this thread.


I'm not sure any references should be taken from Wiki.


----------



## Mirandashell

Ok. Provide the reference that shows evidence for your claim that Labour negotiated with the DUP in 2010.


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> How many more are 'champing at the bit'?


I don't even remember writing that  What does it even mean , champing ?


----------



## Mirandashell

It's what horses do when they are excited. You most often see it at the start of a race.


----------



## Team_Trouble

havoc said:


> At this stage, with this result that's irrelevant. It's about who can form a government. The incumbent PM gets first chance but it isn't a given and until a deal is in place which allows them to do so the other parties can (and should) be jockeying for position. That's how it works.


But even if labour teamed up with all the other parties he STILL wouldn't have a majority.


----------



## Mirandashell

MiffyMoo said:


> I'm not sure any references should be taken from Wiki.


Ok, please provide evidence for your claim that Labour negotiated with the DUP in 2010.

This is the second post on this in case you missed the first one that was at the bottom of the page.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Mirandashell said:


> Ok. Provide the reference that shows evidence for your claim that Labour negotiated with the DUP in 2010.


Well I provided the news report


----------



## MiffyMoo

Mirandashell said:


> Ok, please provide evidence for your claim that Labour negotiated with the DUP in 2010.
> 
> This is the second post on this in case you missed the first one that was at the bottom of the page.


It's moving so fast, I suspect I'm missing quite a few posts


----------



## Mirandashell

I didn't see that on your post. Could you provide it again? Is it from a reputable source?


----------



## Mirandashell

MiffyMoo said:


> It's moving so fast, I suspect I'm missing quite a few posts


I thought you might cos I've missed a few myself. I'm not having a go at you BTW, I'm genuinely interested on where you saw the Labour/DUP info cos it's the first I've heard of it and can't find any info on it myself.


----------



## kimthecat

JANICE199 said:


> *To be fair Sue, i think JC has handled his campaign with dignity, unlike TM. Also, if this country is a laughing stock, that can be laid at no 10, and TM.*


I wish his supporters would act with the same dignity , the abuse from his "liberal" fans is appalling. One writer put on facebook , anyone who votes Tory is a c***. You only have to check out Twitter to see this behaviour . Its filled with anti tory and pro corbyn trends and rabid nasty posts. I think their behaviour would put others off from voting labour , I dont want to be associated with people who believe they are liberal and democratic and that they have the right to abuse anyone who disagrees with them .


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> What does it even mean , champing ?


Like when horses are ready to take off and they grab hold of the bit...chewing.


----------



## kimthecat

Zaros said:


> Media stooge!
> 
> Under the anti mask/masking law, I thought it was forbidden for a person to wear a balaclava/ski mask in a public place/place of demonstration or riot. Police officers can order the wearer to remove it.
> This includes balaclavas worn by motorcyclists.


 there was more than one in the photos , I bet the police didn't want to cause a to do so just left it .


----------



## noushka05

Over 52% of voters voted for progressive parties. Good article here by Caroline Lucas - https://www.theguardian.com/comment...sa-may-coalition-of-chaos-left-caroline-lucas


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> Like when horses are ready to take off and they grab hold of the bit...chewing.


of course , i know that , my body has woken up but my brain hasnt .


----------



## kimthecat

MiffyMoo said:


> It's moving so fast, I suspect I'm missing quite a few posts


Me too . There are pages I havent read . The sun is shining so I'm off out . all this politics is doing my head in .


----------



## JANICE199

kimthecat said:


> I wish his supporters would act with the same dignity , the abuse from his "liberal" fans is appalling. One writer put on facebook , anyone who votes Tory is a c***. You only have to check out Twitter to see this behaviour . Its filled with anti tory and pro corbyn trends and rabid nasty posts. I think their behaviour would put others off from voting labour , I dont want to be associated with people who believe they are liberal and democratic and that they have the right to abuse anyone who disagrees with them .


*To be fair, JC cannot be blamed for the few that behave in this manner. But i think, with all the name calling and bias behaviour JC has had to put up with, i don't find it surprising some feel the need to return the favour *


----------



## Mirandashell

MiffyMoo said:


> Well I provided the news report


Ok I found it. And it's not quite how you represented it....

Gordon Brown wrote a letter to all the parties in the Good Friday Agreement before the election pledging his continued financial support to Northen Ireland. Here's the bit of the letter quoted in the Telegraph Article. (my bold)



> In the letter released by the DUP, Mr Brown writes: ''I am writing to confirm my continued commitment to the block grant for Northern Ireland for the current financial year and to confirm the financial settlement for the budget of the newly established Department of Justice.
> 
> '*'As I have made repeatedly clear to you and the Leaders of all the political parties in the Assembly, *I continue to recognise the unique problems that arose as a direct consequence of the years of The Troubles. It is essential that the recently established political recovery is not put at risk.
> 
> ''As you know, I believe it is an imperative to stabilise the economic recovery in Northern Ireland. It is very clear to me from my repeated visits and from meetings with you and the Deputy First Minister, we cannot take this recovery for granted. The work undertaken by all the Assembly parties to ensure political as well as economic stability remains equally vital.
> 
> ''I want to see a growing and strong private sector in Northern Ireland. However, I recognise that the legacy of the past will make this more difficult to achieve in the coming months than we may expect in other parts of the United Kingdom. This is a challenge we must all meet.
> 
> ''The achievements made by you and the political leaders of Northern Ireland have been an example to us all. I remain firmly committed to doing all I can to support this momentous progress and you can count on my continued support.''


The DUP released the letter to thumb the nose at the UUP who were going to join up with the Tories.

So no, Labour didn't offer a coaltition with the DUP.


----------



## Calvine

DT said:


> for whatever reason


So they can gloat at another's discomfiture? It's called Schadenfreude.


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> I wish his supporters would act with the same dignity , the abuse from his "liberal" fans is appalling. One writer put on facebook , anyone who votes Tory is a c***. You only have to check out Twitter to see this behaviour . Its filled with anti tory and pro corbyn trends and rabid nasty posts. I think their behaviour would put others off from voting labour , I dont want to be associated with people who believe they are liberal and democratic and that they have the right to abuse anyone who disagrees with them .


Corbyn has never resorted to lies & smear that the tories & their right wing friends poured down on him & on labour & he isn't responsible for individuals labour supporters who let themselves down - in fact he has urged people not to be nasty . He has led an honourable campaign - the same cannot be said about the tory party. They have been a disgrace.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Mirandashell said:


> Ok. Provide the reference that shows evidence for your claim that Labour negotiated with the DUP in 2010.


Here's another:

http://www.irishnews.com/news/2015/...mails-labour-sought-dup-election-pact-248668/

And Ian Paisley said they revisited in 2015:


----------



## MiffyMoo

Mirandashell said:


> I didn't see that on your post. Could you provide it again? Is it from a reputable source?


The original was from the Telegraph


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> Me too . There are pages I havent read . The sun is shining so I'm off out . all this politics is doing my head in .


I'm watching Marr now, but keep missing bits because I'm flipping between that, PF and Twitter. I miss the days of just telly (showing my age)


----------



## Mirandashell

MiffyMoo said:


> Here's another:


Seriously! You do know the Irish News is their version of the Daily Mail? And you mock Wiki......



And as for Hilary Clinton's emails..... if she emailed everything people claimed she did, the Internet would have broken.

And honestly, Twitter?


----------



## MiffyMoo

Mirandashell said:


> Seriously! You do know the Irish News is their version of the Daily Mail? And you mock Wiki......
> 
> 
> 
> And as for Hilary Clinton's emails..... if she emailed everything people claimed she did, the Internet would have broken.
> 
> And honestly, Twitter?


Are we going to call a moratorium on using anything from Twitter? I have no problem with that, but suspect a few people on here will be thoroughly stuck for things to post. I haven't noticed you having a go at them for posting people's Twitter updates


----------



## Zaros

Mirandashell said:


> That photo isn't from a demonstration at Whitehall or any other Government building in London. That looks more like somewhere in Spain to me.


It is still forbidden to wear ski masks/balaclavas in a public place in Spain too. There's the question of an immediate fine to settle..



kimthecat said:


> there was more than one in the photos , I bet the police didn't want to cause a to do so just left it .


Stooges then. 



DT said:


> Totally agree on the first and second sentences but on your last one, sadly I believe,that there are those in this country that hope it all goes belly up, for whatever reason im lost.* But maybe to some,the cost of getting rid of tm perhaps, they think is worth paying*


There's nothing better I'd like to see than the back of TM, she's earned her downfall and bloody well deserves it. But, and this is a big but, maybe these individuals you speak of are just those who sit in wait for the moment when they can utter that pathetic phrase,_ 'I told you so!:Smug_
Thing is politicians never lose even when they get it catastrophically wrong. They still have their comfortable lifestyles, but the likes of you and me and millions of others are always the ones who pay the penalty and forfeit for their failures.
Right at this moment in time, the country definitely requires an individual who is _'strong and stable' _but Treason May is not the right candidate and her recent history has already shown this as evidence.


----------



## Mirandashell

People can post Twitter updates. But you are using Twitter, a known source of lies and misinformation, as evidence of something that isn't true. And yet mocked me for using Wiki. If I can't use a scholarly, referenced and reviewed piece on Wikipedia you certainly can't use Twitter!


----------



## havoc

KatieandOliver said:


> But even if labour teamed up with all the other parties he STILL wouldn't have a majority.


I know that, he knows that, everyone knows that but it's how the game is played. What's saving TM at the moment is 7 seats which aren't taken up. It's all only theoretical posturing but I wouldn't expect anything different until a deal is in place.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well betfair isn't paying out any winning bets at the moment until Theresa May declares who her new Government ministers are. Well that's what they told me. :Bored


----------



## Calvine

Just asked my son how long he gives TM and his reply was :'The way things are going she will likely be out before Trump.'


----------



## MiffyMoo

Mirandashell said:


> People can post Twitter updates. But you are using Twitter, a known source of lies and misinformation, as evidence of something that isn't true. And yet mocked me for using Wiki. If I can't use a scholarly, referenced and reviewed piece on Wikipedia you certainly can't use Twitter!


I used an article that, yes, was posted on Twitter, but is still an article at the end of the day, and I'm sure I could have found it if I could be bothered searching.


----------



## Mirandashell

I'm sure you could have. But still.... using Twitter instead of Wiki? Really? And how come you suddely believe everything the newspapers say? Cos they agree with what you want to believe?

Anyway, obviously I won't be getting an apology for the mockery at using Wiki so I'll leave it there.


----------



## JANICE199

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...orne-says-theresa-may-is-a-dead-woman-walking

*George Osborne says Theresa May is a 'dead woman walking'*


----------



## Mirandashell

He's a nasty piece of work, isn't he? No grace or dignity about him at all.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Mirandashell said:


> I'm sure you could have. But still.... using Twitter instead of Wiki? Really? And how come you suddely believe everything the newspapers say? Cos they agree with what you want to believe?
> 
> Anyway, obviously I won't be getting an apology for the mockery at using Wiki so I'll leave it there.


Why should I? Wiki is probably as tenuous as Twitter. I'm not sure where I'm meant to get my information from, if not from the press, can you advise?


----------



## KittenKong

Mirandashell said:


> He's a nasty piece of work, isn't he? No grace or dignity about him at all.


That's why he was in the Nasty Party. As it got nastier still under TM she didn't consider Osborne to be nasty enough so sacked him.

But isn't revenge sweet?! He must be enjoying being editor of the Standard!


----------



## Odin_cat

I honestly wish that all the parties would work together on the issue of Brexit- that really would be in the interest of the country! 

The results show that people haven't backed one version of Brexit overwhelming so there should be discussion.

Whoever goes to negotiate is going to look weak and the clock is ticking.

Not going to happen but it would be positive for the country!


----------



## KittenKong

Odin_cat said:


> I honestly wish that all the parties would work together on the issue of Brexit- that really would be in the interest of the country!
> 
> The results show that people haven't backed one version of Brexit overwhelming so there should be discussion.
> 
> Whoever goes to negotiate is going to look weak and the clock is ticking.
> 
> Not going to happen but it would be positive for the country!


As a solid remainer I think you know what my answer to that will be!

If it wasn't for the referendum the country wouldn't be the laughing stock it now is!

If only the clock could be turned back.....


----------



## Odin_cat

KittenKong said:


> As a solid remainer I think you know what my answer to that will be!
> 
> If it wasn't for the referendum the country wouldn't be the laughing stock it now is!
> 
> If only the clock could be turned back.....


I agree, but now we have to make the best of it. A bad deal won't benefit anyone.


----------



## kimthecat

JANICE199 said:


> *To be fair, JC cannot be blamed for the few that behave in this manner. But i think, with all the name calling and bias behaviour JC has had to put up with, i don't find it surprising some feel the need to return the favour *


 It certainly is not a few , it is many !  dunno about blame but the very least he could do is tweet to them not to be abusive .

Returning the favour ? what happened to talking and having a cup of tea . Seems the Corbynites dont follow his policies then!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> I honestly wish that all the parties would work together on the issue of Brexit- that really would be in the interest of the country!
> 
> The results show that people haven't backed one version of Brexit overwhelming so there should be discussion.
> 
> Whoever goes to negotiate is going to look weak and the clock is ticking.
> 
> Not going to happen but it would be positive for the country!


Do you know that what have said makes perfect sense. May's version of a hard Brexit has been rejected but she is determined to carry on trying to enforce it. Hopefully next week this will all be stopped and the parties can start to work together to form an alternative Brexit deal that will work for everyone.


----------



## kimthecat

I have a solution , looking at the results it say s the results for , Cons , labour and Other , now Other has 32 seats so though I dont know their policies , i think may should form a coalition with them Con Others , sounds good . :Hilarious


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> As a solid remainer I think you know what my answer to that will be!
> 
> If it wasn't for the referendum the country wouldn't be the laughing stock it now is!
> 
> If only the clock could be turned back.....


Well being such a hard remainer that you are that I knew you wouldn't like any kind of Brexit. But what @Odin_cat says makes sense. We need to make the best out of the situation we are in.

Nothing changes as we will still be leaving the EU and the parties in Parliament need to come together to offer an alternative Brexit deal instead of in fighting with each other and acting like a bunch of school children in a play ground.


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> Hopefully next week this will all be stopped and the parties can start to work together to form an alternative Brexit deal that will work for everyone.


Unfortunately she set the tone (I believe the wrong tone) early on and I'm not sure we'll get the best deal with her in place - whilst on the other hand, much as I cannot stand the woman, theoretically the party could do with pulling together and carrying on with least upset. Well they could if she'd show the slightest hint of competence but I'm not holding my breath on that one.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> So be warned folks the next 5 years will look like this:
> 
> Theresa May strikes deal with DUP
> Brexit happens with no deal in place.
> Troubles in Northern Ireland again and British soldiers on the ground.
> Constant threats and terror attacks in the United Kingdom as we shake hands with countries that side with or fiance deals with terrorist.
> What about the impending fox hunting vote?
> Protests on the street to protect LGBTI rights and right to same sex marriage.
> Protests to oust May.
> May imposes more taxes and cuts with no manifesto in place.
> So do you still want strong and stable leadership heading to disaster?
> 5 years time the EU will now leave us financially as worse off as Greece.
> Get rid of May quickly she is a nightmare in waiting.
> 
> End May this week. Come on 1922 you are our only hope.


As much as we disagree from time to time I nominate this post as one of the best on this thread! Spot on!


----------



## kimthecat

Mirandashell said:


> That photo isn't from a demonstration at Whitehall or any other Government building in London. That looks more like somewhere in Spain to me.


 the photo with the masked man is near parliament sq not Spain though the weather looks too good for England ! If you look closely in the photo below , you can just see the two distinctive statues, next to the green where the giant IF is , that are in the other photo,


----------



## kimthecat

Honeys mum said:


> This is in The Guardian today.
> Theresa May's plan to govern with DUP support thrown into confusion | Politics | The Guardian


The sunday Observer , the actual paper, was absolutely scathing about her .


----------



## Bisbow

Odin_cat said:


> I honestly wish that all the parties would work together on the issue of Brexit- that really would be in the interest of the country!
> 
> The results show that people haven't backed one version of Brexit overwhelming so there should be discussion.
> 
> Whoever goes to negotiate is going to look weak and the clock is ticking.
> 
> Not going to happen but it would be positive for the country!


Agree about the parties working together
It won't happen though,
Corbyn is strutting about as though he is the gift of God
May is sitting licking her wounds
The others are not bothered , they are all only interested in the power they might get in the near future
Combined they all look like idiots fighting to be top dog

The EU talks should be top of the agenda for them all, for the sake of the country, not themselves


----------



## Elles

Why totally blame May? It's not as though she came from nowhere and they chose her as leader. She was encouraged and promoted as another Margaret Thatcher by people who didn't know what Margaret Thatcher was and newspapers who didn't seem to understand that the public are fed up with anti politics. Don't they understand the British public and their love of the underdog? You need a charismatic leader to overcome the power of the derided and downtrodden as Corbyn seemed to be. Corbyn needs to be careful, or his crowing could be seen as arrogance and Labour will lose what little hold it has. Politics is still about personalities as much as it's about policies in many sectors and the public are fickle.


----------



## havoc

Bisbow said:


> for the sake of the country, not themselves


If that were the aim we wouldn't have had an election would we


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> Why totally blame May?


Because it's her fault. She had a small but workable majority, the vote to trigger article 50 went through with a huge cross party majority and she didn't need to plunge the country into chaos. This mess lies firmly at her feet.


----------



## kimthecat

Mirandashell said:


> That photo isn't from a demonstration at Whitehall or any other Government building in London. That looks more like somewhere in Spain to me.





Zaros said:


> It is still forbidden to wear ski masks/balaclavas in a public place in Spain too. There's the question of an immediate fine to settle..
> Stooges then.


 Its not Spain , its parliament square , and you are right !they were the three stooges , who were later arrested 

.


----------



## JANICE199

Elles said:


> Why totally blame May? It's not as though she came from nowhere and they chose her as leader. She was encouraged and promoted as another Margaret Thatcher by people who didn't know what Margaret Thatcher was and newspapers who didn't seem to understand that the public are fed up with anti politics. Don't they understand the British public and their love of the underdog? You need a charismatic leader to overcome the power of the derided and downtrodden as Corbyn seemed to be. Corbyn needs to be careful, or his crowing could be seen as arrogance and Labour will lose what little hold it has. Politics is still about personalities as much as it's about policies in many sectors and the public are fickle.


*Why do you say Corbyn is crowing? Surely he is acting just as i would expect him to. He is mearly carrying on his fight, which i personally would not expect him to do anything less.*


----------



## Elles

havoc said:


> Because it's her fault. She had a small but workable majority, the vote to trigger article 50 went through with a huge cross party majority and she didn't need to plunge the country into chaos. This mess lies firmly at her feet.


I doubt the not so strong and stable May acted alone, or even with just her two now resigned advisors and she didn't take charge, she was given it. It's a democracy not a dictatorship.


----------



## Elles

JANICE199 said:


> *Why do you say Corbyn is crowing? Surely he is acting just as i would expect him to. He is mearly carrying on his fight, which i personally would not expect him to do anything less.*


He's being reported as crowing. He needs to be careful, he's not won yet and not everyone who voted labour voted for him.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Summing up : DUP won, Tories still there, May personally lost.

Now Tories have the ball, but if they replace TM with Bojo then it will be their own goal.


Can Tories find one just man in Gomorrah?
Competent and personable, must be Blue's fan....


Corbyn rather be careful. It was very much negative vote against TM and this terrible manifesto.


Other Labour leader like David Miliband would be forming new government right now...


----------



## Team_Trouble

JANICE199 said:


> *Why do you say Corbyn is crowing? Surely he is acting just as i would expect him to. He is mearly carrying on his fight, which i personally would not expect him to do anything less.*


Even I would say he is crowing a bit.

'I can still be Prime minister'
'I am the most generous person in the world'


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> I doubt the not so strong and stable May acted alone, or even with just her two now resigned advisors and she didn't take charge, she was given it. It's a democracy not a dictatorship


Whether she took advice from others or not it's her decision and the buck stops there. She said she'd made the decision whilst out walking - that's what she told us when she announced the election. Was she lying to us?


----------



## Bisbow

Elles said:


> He's being reported as crowing. He needs to be careful, he's not won yet and not everyone who voted labour voted for him.


Yes, he is crowing like the cockerel I have living next door, as I said he thinks he is a gift from God but in my opinion he came from the other end of the spectrum
When he falls it will be a much bigger drop than TM's

( I love hearing next doors cockerel but not JC)


----------



## JANICE199

KatieandOliver said:


> Even I would say he is crowing a bit.
> 
> 'I can still be Prime minister'
> 'I am the most generous person in the world'


*When he said he can still be PM, he was telling the truth. As for your 2nd quote, i haven't seen that. *


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KatieandOliver said:


> Even I would say he is crowing a bit.
> 
> 'I can still be Prime minister'
> 'I am the most generous person in the world'


I saw him say that on Andrew Marr but it was in relation to "forgiving" some of the previous high profile Labour big wigs who turned against him and wanted him out. Marr asked him if he would have them back - people like Yvette Cooper and Chuka Umunna. Corbyn replied that he is the most generous person in the world in the context of forgiving people who have previously criticised him and refused to work with him


----------



## Team_Trouble

JANICE199 said:


> *When he said he can still be PM, he was telling the truth. As for your 2nd quote, i haven't seen that. *


I didn't see it, I heard it, on the Andrew Marr show or Sunday Politics, I'm not sure which.

Thanks RPH - Andrew Marr. That'll teach me to reply before reading all the Posts!


----------



## KittenKong

havoc said:


> Whether she took advice from others or not it's her decision and the buck stops there. She said she'd made the decision whilst out walking - that's what she told us when she announced the election. Was she lying to us?


Absolutely. It was also reported May didn't want to repeat the "mistake" Brown made when he refused to call an election soon after taking over from Blair despite being well ahead in the polls.

Opponents called him, "Bottler Brown".

How right he turned out to be!


----------



## Team_Trouble

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I saw him say that on Andrew Marr but it was in relation to "forgiving" some of the previous high profile Labour big wigs who turned against him and wanted him out. Marr asked him if he would have them back - people like Yvette Cooper and Chuka Umunna. Corbyn replied that he is the most generous person in the world in the context of forgiving people who have previously criticised him and refused to work with him


Ohhh. I feel better about this now, I don't think I understood the context in which he said it. Thanks


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> Whether she took advice from others or not it's her decision and the buck stops there. She said she'd made the decision whilst out walking - that's what she told us when she announced the election. Was she lying to us?


Whether it was all her decision or not, we'll never know. But the fact that the whole election centred around her has to land squarely at her feet. And if it wasn't her idea and she was railroaded by her advisers or PR or whoever, well I think it points to her weakness.

One can only hope that her successor will have more of a "party" outlook, and a backbone.


----------



## JANICE199

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I saw him say that on Andrew Marr but it was in relation to "forgiving" some of the previous high profile Labour big wigs who turned against him and wanted him out. Marr asked him if he would have them back - people like Yvette Cooper and Chuka Umunna. Corbyn replied that he is the most generous person in the world in the context of forgiving people who have previously criticised him and refused to work with him


*Thank you for clearing that up. *


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Nicky Morgan: Leadership contest likely over summer*
Posted at10:59

The Conservative MP and former Education Secretary Nicky Morgan has said she thinks a Conservative leadership election is likely to happen over the summer.

Speaking on Peston on Sunday, she said Theresa May could not lead the party into another election.

"If we're having another leadership contest in the Tory party, then we cannot have another coronation like last summer," she said.

To shut members of the party out of a future contest would be "deeply discourteous" to them, she said.

Asked when she thought a leadership contest would take place, Ms Morgan said she suspected it could be over the summer, and it should involve the party conference, with contenders able to present their platforms there.

Ms Morgan said she herself had given "no thought" as to whether she might stand in any leadership contest, saying it was "too early" to consider her position.


----------



## Happy Paws2

I said when she was vote in as PM *"not a another woman"* I think my point has been made, what a bl**dy mess.


----------



## havoc

rottiepointerhouse said:


> The Conservative MP and former Education Secretary Nicky Morgan has said she thinks a Conservative leadership election is likely to happen over the summer.


The summer recess is the obvious time. I can't see May staying but there's no point causing even more chaos with the summer break so close.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Happy Paws said:


> I said when she was vote in as PM *"not a another woman"* I think my point has been made, what a bl**dy mess.


Excuse me. Are you saying that it messed up because she's a woman?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Happy Paws said:


> I said when she was vote in as PM *"not a another woman"* I think my point has been made, what a bl**dy mess.


What on earth has being a woman got to do with anything? Both of the main party leaders in Scotland are women and the leader of the DUP is a woman. There are quite a few strong women in both the Conservative and Labour parties so who is to say there won't be another woman in charge if Theresa May is ousted. It would be nice if it was a more "reasonable" woman of course.


----------



## havoc

Happy Paws said:


> I said when she was vote in as PM *"not a another woman"* I think my point has been made, what a bl**dy mess


There is a certain irony - this election has resulted in more women MPs than ever before.


----------



## Elles

havoc said:


> Whether she took advice from others or not it's her decision and the buck stops there. She said she'd made the decision whilst out walking - that's what she told us when she announced the election. Was she lying to us?


I have no idea. If she said 5 or 7 or however many times that there wouldn't be a GE she was obviously being pressured about it and eventually I don't doubt her people encouraged her to go for it, given the massive lead they were supposed to have. I blame them and the papers as much as her, because they knew May and they made big mistakes in how she was promoted and how the manifesto was promoted.

The election should not have been called, but given how many were asking for one, to consolidate the tories lead, I don't see that she had much choice. Are we seriously verging on a dictatorship with one party one person? Labour is Corbyn, Conservative is May and lib dem is Farron? I've watched Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister and many a true word is spoken in jest imo. 

It's as much the men in grey suits as the woman in a blue one, even Maggie had to compromise and May is no Maggie. 

Of course she has to go though. She's nothing like good enough.


----------



## Team_Trouble

Happy Paws said:


> I said when she was vote in as PM *"not a another woman"* I think my point has been made, what a bl**dy mess.


I don't know what to say. :Wideyed:Banghead:Facepalm:Wtf:Hungover:Bored

Now I do. Ed Milliband. Never say men can't make just as great a bloody mess as women. That's sexist :Cigar


----------



## Elles

It's nothing to do with gender. Other PMs and parties have made an even worse mess. Repeatedly. You don't need to be female to cock up. 

It's a ridiculous thing to say.


----------



## JANICE199

MiffyMoo said:


> Excuse me. Are you saying that it messed up because she's a woman?


*I personally would not want to see another tory woman as PM. It's a personal opinion and i'm sticking to it. *


----------



## MiffyMoo

JANICE199 said:


> *I personally would not want to see another tory woman as PM. It's a personal opinion and i'm sticking to it. *


I think you just mean Tory. Let's not get sexist about this


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

JANICE199 said:


> *I personally would not want to see another tory woman as PM. It's a personal opinion and i'm sticking to it. *


Would you still vote Labour if they had a female leader?


----------



## JANICE199

MiffyMoo said:


> I think you just mean Tory. Let's not get sexist about this


*Oh please, it has nothing to do with being sexist so let's not get into a useless debate on that subject. I hated Maggie, as PM as i hate TM as PM. It is one thing watching so many people go without in this country, it's another when it's down to a woman causing it.*
*Now before anyone jumps on the band wagon, i am not saying a woman cannot do the job.*


----------



## Team_Trouble

JANICE199 said:


> *Oh please, it has nothing to do with being sexist so let's not get into a useless debate on that subject. I hated Maggie, as PM as i hate TM as PM. It is one thing watching so many people go without in this country, it's another when it's down to a woman causing it.*
> *Now before anyone jumps on the band wagon, i am not saying a woman cannot do the job.*


Well you did start a debate on sexism. You say you hate these tory MP's because they are women, I don't see how that can't be sexist.


----------



## MiffyMoo

JANICE199 said:


> *Oh please, it has nothing to do with being sexist so let's not get into a useless debate on that subject. I hated Maggie, as PM as i hate TM as PM. It is one thing watching so many people go without in this country, it's another when it's down to a woman causing it.*
> *Now before anyone jumps on the band wagon, i am not saying a woman cannot do the job.*


By your statement, you were quite keen on all the male Tory MPs


----------



## kimthecat

Mirandashell said:


> I'm sure you could have. But still.... using Twitter instead of Wiki? Really? And how come you suddely believe everything the newspapers say? Cos they agree with what you want to believe?
> 
> Anyway, obviously I won't be getting an apology for the mockery at using Wiki so I'll leave it there.


It depends on how you use these resources, I use all of them and they are useful . I stay on the safe side and assume they are not totally accurate and check out the info they give. They're handy because they can give a direction as to where to look , such as names of people etc .


----------



## Lurcherlad

Deleted. Point already covered


----------



## JANICE199

KatieandOliver said:


> Well you did start a debate on sexism. You say you hate these tory MP's because they are women, I don't see how that can't be sexist.


*Where did i say that? *


----------



## Elles

Of course it's sexist. Substitute the word 'female' with 'male' it would still be sexist. Substitute it with the word 'black' and we'd have no doubt what it is. You people are sexist and don't even realise it.


----------



## JANICE199

Elles said:


> Of course it's sexist. Substitute the word 'female' with 'male' it would still be sexist. Substitute it with the word 'black' and we'd have no doubt what it is. You people are sexist and don't even realise it.


*Talk about twisting my words. But hey, carry on. *


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> I have no idea. If she said 5 or 7 or however many times that there wouldn't be a GE she was obviously being pressured about it and eventually I don't doubt her people encouraged her to go for it, given the massive lead they were supposed to have. I blame them and the papers as much as her, because they knew May and they made big mistakes in how she was promoted and how the manifesto was promoted.
> 
> The election should not have been called, but given how many were asking for one, to consolidate the tories lead, I don't see that she had much choice. Are we seriously verging on a dictatorship with one party one person? Labour is Corbyn, Conservative is May and lib dem is Farron? I've watched Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister and many a true word is spoken in jest imo.
> 
> It's as much the men in grey suits as the woman in a blue one, even Maggie had to compromise and May is no Maggie.
> 
> Of course she has to go though. She's nothing like good enough.


Labour is not Corbyn. Corbyn isn't an authoritarian like May, he believes in democracy from the grassroots not concentrated in the hands of a few. He believes the labour party should represent the best interests of the people - and so do I.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Labour is not Corbyn. Corbyn isn't an authoritarian like May, he believes in democracy from the grassroots not concentrated in the hands of a few. He believes the labour party should represent the best interests of the people - and so do I.


Would you ditch your party loyalties if there was another GE this year and vote Labour? Just asking, not wanting to cause any friction or misunderstanding


----------



## Mirandashell

kimthecat said:


> It depends on how you use these resources, I use all of them and they are useful . I stay on the safe side and assume they are not totally accurate and check out the info they give. They're handy because they can give a direction as to where to look , such as names of people etc .


I agree. Twitter can be useful for that. As can Wiki. I don't use a Wiki entry until I've checked that it has references to decent sources. Which the one I used did.

That's why I laughed when the poster who mocked me for the above used Twitter as evidence she is right. Twitter is hardly ever referenced and is known as a hotbed of lies and misinformation. And the article her twitter post contained was the same article in the newspaper she linked to before.

If you are going claim something is true you need to back it up better than that.

There is so much misinformation and inaccurate history on this thread, it's ridiculous.


----------



## suewhite

stockwellcat said:


> Would you ditch your party loyalties if there was another GE this year and vote Labour? Just asking, not wanting to cause any friction or misunderstanding


No I would never vote Labour.:Smug


----------



## Zaros

stockwellcat said:


> Would you ditch your party loyalties if there was another GE this year and vote Labour?


I'm a working lad. I'd never vote anything other than labour.


----------



## JANICE199

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...me-minister-a7784231.html?cmpid=facebook-post

*Theresa May faces meeting with backbench Tory MPs tomorrow that could decide her fate.*

This could be interesting.


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> Labour is not Corbyn. Corbyn isn't an authoritarian like May, he believes in democracy from the grassroots not concentrated in the hands of a few. He believes the labour party should represent the best interests of the people - and so do I.


More than half his party don't like Corbyn and a lot less than half the country voted for him. The many ruled by the politics of the few? We need PR. I voted Green, I would rather have voted Tory than Corbyn's Labour, if they hadn't been so keen on fracking, even if I do quite like our local labour mp. Why should I have Corbyn's policies forced down my throat? That's the trouble with leftie socialism, it doesn't work, but its proponents think it's best and that anyone who doesn't agree don't know what's good for them.


----------



## 1290423

Mirandashell said:


> It's what horses do when they are excited. You most often see it at the start of a race.


Thought that were chomping not champing


----------



## stockwellcat.

JANICE199 said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...me-minister-a7784231.html?cmpid=facebook-post
> 
> *Theresa May faces meeting with backbench Tory MPs tomorrow that could decide her fate.*
> 
> This could be interesting.


That's right and on Tuesday she has a meeting with the 1922 committee who could trigger a leadership challenge if they have received enough MP's willing to vote against her.

Very interesting few days ahead.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> More than half his party don't like Corbyn and a lot less than half the country voted for him. The many ruled by the politics of the few? We need PR. I voted Green, I would rather have voted Tory than Corbyn's Labour, if they hadn't been so keen on fracking, even if I do quite like our local labour mp. Why should I have Corbyn's policies forced down my throat? That's the trouble with leftie socialism, it doesn't work, but its proponents think it's best and that anyone who doesn't agree don't know what's good for them.


Think perhaps some of those will get behind him now though


----------



## kimthecat

Ruth Davidson would get my vote. lets start a petition to have her as a contender .


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> Ruth Davidson would get my vote. lets start a petition to have her as a contender .


She'd have to become an English MP first as she is a Scottish MP. I agree though she is my favourite to.


----------



## Calvine

_My priority will be to serve the constituency well and to be available to all local residents regardless of their politics. The debates amongst the candidates were always civil and good natured and we rose above the fractious nastiness seen elsewhere. That is a tradition I wish to maintain.
_
Email from our MP: A couple of sentences here from Sir Vince Cable (Lib Dem) who was an excellent MP here from 1997-2015 when he narrowly lost. He won this time with a 10,000 majority.


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> Think perhaps some of those will get behind him now though


Are you suggesting half the Labour Party are a bunch of hypocrites? Surely not.


----------



## Mirandashell

Would she? We've had Scottish MPs before as PM. Gordon Brown held a seat in Scotland, didn't he?


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> That's right and on Tuesday she has a meeting with the 1922 committee who could trigger a leadership challenge if they have received enough MP's willing to vote against her.
> 
> Very interesting few days ahead.


If you read the article it says she wants to bring the 1922 forward to tomorrow. That's what it's about.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Mirandashell said:


> Would she? We've had Scottish MPs before as PM. Gordon Brown held a seat in Scotland, didn't he?


Brown wasn't a real PM he was a squatter in Downing Street. He was never voted in via a GE.

According to the media yes she would have to become an English MP first.


----------



## Mirandashell

But he still became PM. So I don't see why Ruth Davidson couldn't go the same route if she wanted to. Which she doesn't


----------



## stockwellcat.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/06/ruth-davidson-not-answer-english-tory-prayers/



> To become leader, Ms Davidson would need to find a seat in the Commons


.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Mirandashell said:


> But he still became PM. So I don't see why Ruth Davidson couldn't go the same route if she wanted to. Which she doesn't


She'd have to get a seat in the House of Commons first as she doesn't have one Gordon Brown did have one.


----------



## Odin_cat

Ruth Davidson sits in the Scottish Parliament as an MSP whereas Gordon Brown represented a Scottish constituency at Westminster.

Only a Westminster MP can become PM.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Zaros said:


> I'm a working lad. I'd never vote anything other than labour.


I think that's close but no cigar. I'm a working man to, as is the majority of the UK. The way I see it though is (massive generalisation coming!) Labour supporters feel they are forced to work and as such want every union, human right, employee right, free pension, every statutory payment/right going and see their bosses as the enemy exploiting them. Conservative supports want to work and better themselves so they don't need any of the above and see the company they work for as their way forward. Both are hard working men and women it's just a difference in attitude and goals.

Almost certainly they are exceptions in both cases.


----------



## Mirandashell

Ah.... now I got you. Of course, the Scottish Parliament is a seperate institution to Westminster.


----------



## kimthecat

What a palaver that would be . So no Ruth then !

I think I'll move to Scotland , there's more room there and beautiful scenery , London has a higher population than the whole of Scotland .


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> She'd have to become an English MP first as she is a Scottish MP. I agree though she is my favourite to.


She was one of the suggested contenders before, but the Scottish say we can't have her and she says she doesn't want us, so even if it was made possible at the moment she doesn't want to be pm. I think if she abandoned Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon might get it back and get her independence wish.

I think Scotland was particularly interesting. Ruth managed to promote Tory policies in Scotland and take votes from Nicola Sturgeon, which was a big achievement considering Tory is supposed to be a 4 letter word north of the border. Mind you, the Scots always did like 4 letter words, ask Billy Connelly.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> Are you suggesting half the Labour Party are a bunch of hypocrites? Surely not.


Feel free to twist my words


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> Feel free to twist my words


Of course, it's a free country. I think. :Hilarious


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> More than half his party don't like Corbyn and a lot less than half the country voted for him. The many ruled by the politics of the few? We need PR. I voted Green, I would rather have voted Tory than Corbyn's Labour, if they hadn't been so keen on fracking, even if I do quite like our local labour mp. Why should I have Corbyn's policies forced down my throat? That's the trouble with leftie socialism, it doesn't work, but its proponents think it's best and that anyone who doesn't agree don't know what's good for them.


Over half of the previous labour big wigs or ex cabinet ministers might not have liked him but he has always done very well in the leadership elections

2015

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34223157

The veteran left-winger got almost 60% of more than 400,000 votes cast, trouncing his rivals Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall.

2016

http://www.labour.org.uk/pages/labour-party-leadership-election-2016

Corbyn 61.8% Owen Smith 38.2%

A lot of his previous detractors within the Labour Party have now admitted they were wrong and that he ran a good campaign and I think we will see more of them breaking cover now and wanting to be involved in his team.


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Would you ditch your party loyalties if there was another GE this year and vote Labour? Just asking, not wanting to cause any friction or misunderstanding


I just voted for labour  We didn't have a green candidate SWC. That said, even if we had one, I would have voted tactically anyway. Even the green party urged people to do that. The Green party isn't selfish, all it wants is the best interests of the people & the environment. Preventing a tory landslide was top priority. Labour have now adopted many of the Greens progressive policies, though not all.The Green party is where my heart lies



Elles said:


> More than half his party don't like Corbyn and a lot less than half the country voted for him. The many ruled by the politics of the few? We need PR. I voted Green, I would rather have voted Tory than Corbyn's Labour, if they hadn't been so keen on fracking, even if I do quite like our local labour mp. Why should I have Corbyn's policies forced down my throat? That's the trouble with leftie socialism, it doesn't work, but its proponents think it's best and that anyone who doesn't agree don't know what's good for them.


I don't think you get it. He was voted in by the grassroots supporters - twice. He has a massive mandate. And that is because Corbyn offered a clear alternative to tory light of new labour. No one is forced to vote for labour. But what about tory neoliberalism & their austerity con we have had shoved down our throats? You may choose to stick your head in the sand & ignore the dire consequences of this destructive ideology but millions of us won't do that. People are suffering, the environment is suffering - our whole society is suffering. Socialism gave us our NHS, our welfare state. It gave us social housing, public services - it works. Look what 30 years of neoliberalism have achieved? Our living planet on the verge of collapse, what could possibly be worse than that?


----------



## Elles

No labour government has offered anything like the extremes Corbyn has, nor have they fulfilled it. Tory extremes and a terrible campaign should have made it an easy matter for an alternative to be voted in. Both sides go too far. We need a moderate middle as a viable alternative. People don't trust lib dems after they joined with the conservatives unfortunately and it does appear that people would rather vote for the two brexit parties, than the possible remain Party, so lib dems are currently out. Its a shambles.

My point is that the conservatives are probably more than happy to shove their policies down your throat, but you say Labour aren't. So why is Corbyn rattling on about being Prime Minister despite his party not getting anything like a majority? It wouldn't be hypocritical of a so called nasty party, but it would be for a party who talk about for the many not the few, when so far the many have said no thank you.


----------



## kimthecat

Did anyone see Peston this morning ?

Saw this on twitter 
*ChristianMoon1* 5h5 hours ago

John McDonnell confirming Labour committed to leave Single Market. A lot of Labour voters will feel betrayed #*Peston*

I thought labour wanted to stay in the single market? 
https://twitter.com/hashtag/Peston?src=hash


----------



## JANICE199

Elles said:


> No labour government has offered anything like the extremes Corbyn has, nor have they fulfilled it. Tory extremes and a terrible campaign should have made it an easy matter for an alternative to be voted in. *Both sides go too far*. We need a moderate middle as a viable alternative. People don't trust lib dems after they joined with the conservatives unfortunately and it does appear that people would rather vote for the two brexit parties, than the possible remain Party, so lib dems are currently out. Its a shambles.
> 
> My point is that the conservatives are probably more than happy to shove their policies down your throat, but you say Labour aren't. So why is Corbyn rattling on about being Prime Minister despite his party not getting anything like a majority? It wouldn't be hypocritical of a so called nasty party, but it would be for a party who talk about for the many not the few, when so far the many have said no thank you.


*I disagree, i don't think Labour went too far, and that's why people like myself voted for them.*


----------



## MiffyMoo

Mirandashell said:


> I agree. Twitter can be useful for that. As can Wiki. I don't use a Wiki entry until I've checked that it has references to decent sources. Which the one I used did.
> 
> That's why I laughed when the poster who mocked me for the above used Twitter as evidence she is right. Twitter is hardly ever referenced and is known as a hotbed of lies and misinformation. And the article her twitter post contained was the same article in the newspaper she linked to before.
> 
> If you are going claim something is true you need to back it up better than that.
> 
> There is so much misinformation and inaccurate history on this thread, it's ridiculous.


Erm, would you like to revisit? Shall we go around in circles again? I posted two articles and then a status update from Ian Paisley, which was extremely relevant to the point I was making, and you jumped on the one status update. I understand you don't like what I posted, but let's not change the facts here


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> Ruth Davidson would get my vote. lets start a petition to have her as a contender .


She doesn't want to, unfortunately


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

@noushka05 and others who expressed an interest I've started the plant based thread I've been promising to.


----------



## Mirandashell

MiffyMoo said:


> I understand you don't like what I posted, but let's not change the facts here


Wow! You are so funny! You use Twitter as evidence after mocking me for using a referenced scholarly article from Wiki and somehow I'm the one not using facts! Haha!

Mate the posts are there for people to read.

And I wasn't going around with you again, I was replying to someone else.

Boy, you have some brass neck!


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> Of course, it's a free country. I think. :Hilarious


But shame on you if you twist it to the truth that's not allowed unless of course it's in the newspapers


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> @noushka05 and others who expressed an interest I've started the plant based thread I've been promising to.


Was is aldi today, they have some new lines,a beetroot and mushroom burger, in the free veg section-plus they have milk free,coconut icecream


----------



## MiffyMoo

Mirandashell said:


> Wow! You are so funny! You use Twitter as evidence after mocking me for using a referenced scholarly article from Wiki and somehow I'm the one not using facts! Haha!
> 
> Mate the posts are there for people to read.
> 
> And I wasn't going around with you again, I was replying to someone else.
> 
> Boy, you have some brass neck!


You're right, the evidence is there. I first posted an article from the Telegraph which you somehow failed to see, yet managed to see my post enough to demand I post proof. So I then posted another article and the tweet. Anything else there love?


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> No labour government has offered anything like the extremes Corbyn has, nor have they fulfilled it. Tory extremes and a terrible campaign should have made it an easy matter for an alternative to be voted in. Both sides go too far. We need a moderate middle as a viable alternative. People don't trust lib dems after they joined with the conservatives unfortunately and it does appear that people would rather vote for the two brexit parties, than the possible remain Party, so lib dems are currently out. Its a shambles.
> 
> My point is that the conservatives are probably more than happy to shove their policies down your throat, but you say Labour aren't. So why is Corbyn rattling on about being Prime Minister despite his party not getting anything like a majority? It wouldn't be hypocritical of a so called nasty party, but it would be for a party who talk about for the many not the few, when so far the many have said no thank you.


Theres nothing 'extreme' about it & other governments have achieved such a progressive vision. Take Attlees government  Look what economists are saying about this labour party's anti-austerity economy

Theresa May promised multiple times if she lost just 6 seats Jeremy Corbyn would be Prime Minister 

She's a LIAR, LIAR...


----------



## Mirandashell

You're alright love, don't worry about it.


----------



## JANICE199

noushka05 said:


> Theres nothing 'extreme' about it & other governments have achieved such a progressive vision. Take Attlees government  Look what economists are saying about this labour party's anti-austerity economy
> 
> Theresa May promised multiple times if she lost just 6 seats Jeremy Corbyn would be Prime Minister
> 
> She's a LIAR, LIAR...
> 
> View attachment 314177


*I find it sad noushka that people still think we cannot improve this country. Where the hell has the British spirit gone?*


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Was is aldi today, they have some new lines,a beetroot and mushroom burger, in the free veg section-plus they have milk free,coconut icecream


Thanks DT - I have posted a recipe for a really easy home made ice cream on the thread I mentioned


----------



## Happy Paws2

JANICE199 said:


> *I personally would not want to see another tory woman as PM. It's a personal opinion and i'm sticking to it. *


That's just how I feel, we have had two of them and look at the mess as have left us with. Both self centered, will not take advise from their party and both have got the country in a mess.


----------



## rona

JANICE199 said:


> *I find it sad noushka that people still think we cannot improve this country. Where the hell has the British spirit gone?*


We can by getting out of the EU. At least we'll have a chance then to dream


----------



## JANICE199

rona said:


> We can by getting out of the EU. At least we'll have a chance then to dream


*I want out, always have. *


----------



## noushka05

JANICE199 said:


> *I find it sad noushka that people still think we cannot improve this country. Where the hell has the British spirit gone?*


Very sad that people can be persuaded the powerful elite have their best interests at heart. Same in the USA with Trump & the Republicans & their followers. Millions of people voting against even their own best interests - Its mad Maybe the young generation will save us Jan


rona said:


> We can by getting out of the EU. At least we'll have a chance then to dream


A chance to dream? With a hard right government in bed with Trump & other extremists - your dreams are obviously not for a better society & a protected environment like mine are.


----------



## Goblin

rona said:


> We can by getting out of the EU. At least we'll have a chance then to dream


If the current mess shows anything it's that the UK can only blame itself rather than scapegoating the EU.

The problem is that Brexit talks about to start. Just how much preparation work has gone on and if key people are replaced, what does that mean for all the previous work? Haven't heard anything but the sensible way forward would be a step back, sort out the UK government before talks. Doubt this is possible and another example of how May has completely messed things up by calling the election in the first place. Throw in the French having their election and the expected result and it's looking more and more like no deal (or worse deal), something which means dreams are all the UK can look forward to.

UK has a more fundamental problem though, the open division on display. You see it on social media as well as displayed by politicians. It seems to no longer be UK but idealogy front and center and damn the rest. This isn't good for anyone.


----------



## JANICE199

http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/11/theresa-may-announces-new-top-team-in-cabinet-reshuffle-67014

*Cabinet reshuffle live*


----------



## Bisbow

I go out to lunch and the thread moves on 3 pages, I will be out most of tomorrow and I expect it to move on at least 10 pages

I would have thought it would have calmed down by now so I think I will forget all about it


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> I go out to lunch and the thread moves on 3 pages, I will be out most of tomorrow and I expect it to move on at least 10 pages
> 
> I would have thought it would have calmed down by now so I think I will forget all about it


It ain't over till the fat lady sings (or the slim one come to that)  Think there are a lot more twists and turns to come before everything settles down.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jeremy Hunt has just arrived - will she move him from health? :Nailbiting:Nailbiting


----------



## stockwellcat.

JANICE199 said:


> *Cabinet reshuffle live*


Larry the cat gets to keep his job as chief mouse catcher at Downing Street


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elizabeth Truss has been appointed as Chief Secretary to the Treasury


----------



## stockwellcat.

Damian Green (Secretary of state to the Department of Works and Pensions)
has been appointed First Secretary of State and Cabinet Secretary.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> Larry the cat gets to keep his job as chief mouse catcher at Downing Street


One of mine applied for the job but was turned down.


----------



## stockwellcat.

David Gauke Secretary of state to the Department of Works and Pensions


----------



## stockwellcat.

Liam Fox remains as Secretary of State For International Trade


----------



## stockwellcat.

Sajid Javid remains in his position as Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> David Gauke


I admit to never having heard of this one.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> I admit to never having heard of this one.


Me neither.
https://www.gov.uk/government/people/david-gauke

http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/commons/david-gauke/1529


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> Me neither.


Thank you - it's not just me then. Where did they find him?


----------



## stockwellcat.

David Lidington (Previously Leader of the Commons) Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary

https://www.parliament.uk/biographies/commons/david-lidington/15


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Reshuffle will end badly' - former Labour MP*

Andy Reed tweets...

Posted at16:48

Follow
Andy Reed @AndyJReed_OBE
Reshuffles usually a time for a PM to wield their patronage & power -this #Reshuffe shows May is a prisoner not leader. This will end badly

4:43 PM - 11 Jun 2017 · Quorn, England


----------



## stockwellcat.

Greg Clark remains as Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.


----------



## Mirandashell

stockwellcat said:


> Me neither.
> https://www.gov.uk/government/people/david-gauke
> 
> http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/commons/david-gauke/1529


Another Old Oxbridgian. There's a surprise.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Patel, Hunt and Grayling all inside Number 10*

Sky News correspondent tweets...

Posted at16:58

Follow
Beth Rigby

✔@BethRigby
So... Hunt, Patel, Grayling all inside still -- job swaps!!???

4:55 PM - 11 Jun 2017


----------



## stockwellcat.

Jeremy Hunt remains as Secretary of State for Health


----------



## noushka05

NEWS FLASH!

PROTESTS TOMORROW: No coalition with DUP! Please share.

https://www.facebook.com/events/290268031384019

*Details*

The Tories launched a general election to destroy Labour. They waged a campaign of fear against a campaign of hope. And they failed.

Now a disgraced Theresa May is trying to cling on to power with an alliance with the Democratic Unionist Party, the most extreme party in Parliament. They are anti-gay. They are anti-choice. They are climate change deniers. And they have a history of links to and sympathies for Northern Irish loyalist terrorism - after smearing Labour and Jeremy Corbyn over terrorism.

The Tories are themselves riddled with homophobes, opponents of women's rights to choose, and climate change deniers. Now they'll be strengthened with an alliance with the right-wing extremists of the DUP. This Coalition of Chaos and Hatred is a threat to all of us.

Take to the streets in London and all over Britain. Set up your own Facebook events for your towns and cities and I'll share them. Let's bring down Theresa May - and stop a Coalition of Chaos and Hatred taking power.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

stockwellcat said:


> Jeremy Hunt remains as Secretary of State for Health


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> NEWS FLASH!
> 
> PROTESTS TOMORROW: No coalition with DUP! Please share.
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/events/290268031384019
> 
> *Details*
> 
> The Tories launched a general election to destroy Labour. They waged a campaign of fear against a campaign of hope. And they failed.
> 
> Now a disgraced Theresa May is trying to cling on to power with an alliance with the Democratic Unionist Party, the most extreme party in Parliament. They are anti-gay. They are anti-choice. They are climate change deniers. And they have a history of links to and sympathies for Northern Irish loyalist terrorism - after smearing Labour and Jeremy Corbyn over terrorism.
> 
> The Tories are themselves riddled with homophobes, opponents of women's rights to choose, and climate change deniers. Now they'll be strengthened with an alliance with the right-wing extremists of the DUP. This Coalition of Chaos and Hatred is a threat to all of us.
> 
> Take to the streets in London and all over Britain. Set up your own Facebook events for your towns and cities and I'll share them. Let's bring down Theresa May - and stop a Coalition of Chaos and Hatred taking power.


Unfortunately the Tories won the most seats in the election so have the right to form a Government. No rules have been broken regarding this. TM has a meeting tomorrow with DUP and on Tuesday she is infront of the 1922 committee.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Editor of Buzzfeed reacts to Hunt reappointment*
Posted at17:07

Follow
Janine Gibson

✔@janinegibson

Raising the question of what you have to do to get fired from this cabinet https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/873934061525446656 …

5:05 PM - 11 Jun 2017


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> Unfortunately the Tories won the most seats in the election so have the right to form a Government. No rules have been broken regarding this. She has a meeting tomorrow with DUP and on Tuesday she is infront of the 1922 committee.


Its about standing up for what is right. This is a very dangerous alliance.


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Its about standing up for what is right. This is a very dangerous alliance.


All we can do is hope enough conservative MP's have come forward to trigger a leadership challenge. We won't know until late Tuesday after the 1922 committee meeting or Wednesday.


----------



## Mirandashell

stockwellcat said:


> All we can do is hope enough conservative MP's have come forward to trigger a leadership challenge. We won't know until late Tuesday after the 1922 committee meeting or Wednesday.


For those still interested, here is an article in the Grauniad about the 10 MPs and the leader of the DUP. It's only short pieces but it gives you a starting point for further research if you want to.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-who-party-members-prop-up-tories-theresa-may


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> The way I see it though is (massive generalisation coming!) Labour supporters feel they are forced to work and as such want every union, human right, employee right, free pension, every statutory payment/right going and see their bosses as the enemy exploiting them. Conservative supports want to work and better themselves so they don't need any of the above and see the company they work for as their way forward. Both are hard working men and women it's just a difference in attitude and goals. Almost certainly they are exceptions in both cases.


Is this what you really think? You don´t think that this just a bit out of time, like 100 years? Also, what is wrong for wanting to have rights? Aren´t improved working conditions one of the corner stones for most people? E.g. you cannot make people work in dangerous conditions without proper protection and precautions (e.g . poisonous atmosphere, mechanical accident zone, too hot/cold), you must have bathrooms, time to eat and limit the normal working hours to 8. You must pay agreed wages, you can´t fire somebody just because you don´t like someone, if they do their job right etc. For me making the world a better place is way more important than just getting a promotion.

You said conservatives support want to work - do you mean that they support the idea that if your job doesn´t give you satisfaction, you don´t have to work? Or did I get that wrong? Did you mean that most people don´t enjoy work and that is why they vote labour? Is this something that applies all people then? Like Germans and Scandi countries with very strong unions, don´t like to work? That is a bit confusing, as that is the opposite what I have learned. Most people like to work, as long as the boss isn´t a total w..ker. What do you mean that conservatives work so that they don´t need to have human rights or employee rights? This I just don´t understand at all.

Lastly I don´t understand what you mean by better themselves? Do you mean educating themselves? Or setting one´s own business? Or getting promoted? So Labour voters don´t like to do that? But didn´t Jeremy get lots of votes from students, who are bettering themselves and TM from elderly, retired people, who are actually enjoying their pensions and having no intention whatsoever to better themselves anymore?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Chris Grayling remains as Transport Secretary.


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> I think that's close but no cigar. I'm a working man to, as is the majority of the UK. The way I see it though is (massive generalisation coming!) Labour supporters feel they are forced to work and as such want every union, human right, employee right, free pension, every statutory payment/right going and see their bosses as the enemy exploiting them. Conservative supports want to work and better themselves so they don't need any of the above and see the company they work for as their way forward. Both are hard working men and women it's just a difference in attitude and goals.
> Almost certainly they are exceptions in both cases.


And from what era did you steal this belief?

I've always worked under the flagship of my own free will, completely liberated from the old world notion that I'm being forced to by an opportunistic and exploitative employer. Just as many of my work colleagues have.
I don't recall any of us turning up for work, cloth caps in hands or having to prostrate ourselves to the man thought to be charitable enough to provide us with a livelihood.
Working life for me has always be regarded as a partnership. The man wants something I have (skills) and I want something the man has (Money) And right there is the trade. Each observing and respecting the others requirements.
No union required.

The only right we observed was the right to work and to earn a decent standard of living that couldn't be slowly whittled away by a conniving and thieving government.


----------



## stockwellcat.

*



Irish PM Enda Kenny warns Theresa May over deal talks with DUP

Click to expand...

*


> Taoiseach Enda Kenny tells the Prime Minister he is concerned a Conservative-DUP pact could "challenge" the peace process.
> 
> Irish PM Enda Kenny has warned Theresa May that any pact with the DUP must not put the Good Friday Agreement at risk.
> 
> In a call with the Prime Minister, Mr Kenny spoke of his concern that talks between the Conservatives and DUP over a "confidence and supply" agreement could harm the peace process.
> 
> The 1998 Good Friday accord commits the UK and Irish governments to demonstrate "rigorous impartiality" over differing political traditions in Northern Ireland.
> 
> Mr Kenny told Mrs May a Conservative-DUP deal would "challenge" this commitment and raised concerns that there are no longer any Irish nationalist MPs in Westminster after the SDLP lost all three of its seats.
> 
> Earlier, DUP leader Arlene Foster told Sky News she would meet Mrs May for discussions in London on Tuesday.
> 
> She said her party had "very good" talks with chief whip Gavin Williamson, who was sent by the PM to Belfast to negotiate a deal to keep the Conservatives in power.
> 
> It comes after the DUP denied it had agreed a pact with the Conservatives - despite Number 10 announcing an agreement had been clinched.
> 
> Sky sources said Number 10's account of the talks *had been issued in error*.
> 
> On the DUP's approach to discussions, Ms Foster told Sky News: "We will of course act in the national interest and do what is right for the United Kingdom as a whole and of course Northern Ireland in particular.
> 
> "There's been a lot of hyperbole about the DUP since Thursday, a lot of things said, a lot of people who really don't know what we stand for but, just to be clear, we will act in the national interest.
> 
> "We want to do what's right for the whole of the UK and bring stability to the government of the United Kingdom."
> 
> Some Tories, including the party's Scottish leader Ruth Davidson, are unhappy about a deal with the DUP because of the party's opposition to gay marriage and abortion.
> 
> In an apparent criticism of the move, Ms Davidson tweeted a link to a speech she made in Belfast in favour of marriage equality.
> 
> Later, the Scottish Tory leader said she had received "categoric assurances" from the PM over LGBTI rights.
> 
> Asked about the DUP's stance on LGBTI rights, Defence Secretary Sir Michael Fallon said the Conservatives "do not share their views and we do not have to".
> 
> "They are going to back us on the big issues," he told the BBC's Andrew Marr.


http://news.sky.com/story/amp/there...-dup-leader-arlene-foster-on-tuesday-10911888


----------



## stockwellcat.

Priti Patel remains in her position as Secretary of State for International Development.


----------



## rona

Just over inflated egos and power crazies playing games with our lives and futures. None of them will suffer the consequences of this debacle, but you can bet your bottom dollar, all of us will.

They need their ruddy heads banging together and told to just get on with it. What's Corbyn doing but putting the boot in so that he can get power at the expense of the country. I suppose he's too old to wait just 2 years. Why isn't he putting us first?


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> Just over inflated egos and power crazies playing games with our lives and futures.


No more than normal. They're always far more concerned with their own lives and futures than ours. Why anyone would think otherwise baffles me.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

rona said:


> Just over inflated egos and power crazies playing games with our lives and futures. None of them will suffer the consequences of this debacle, but you can bet your bottom dollar, all of us will.
> 
> They need their ruddy heads banging together and told to just get on with it. What's Corbyn doing but putting the boot in so that he can get power at the expense of the country. I suppose he's too old to wait just 2 years. Why isn't he putting us first?


One would assume he thinks he is putting the country and us first as he clearly doesn't believe Mrs May and the Conservatives are. Like the rest of us he probably has serious misgivings about getting in bed with the DUP and therefore feels he should try to do something about it.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Just over inflated egos and power crazies playing games with our lives and futures. None of them will suffer the consequences of this debacle, but you can bet your bottom dollar, all of us will.
> 
> They need their ruddy heads banging together and told to just get on with it. What's Corbyn doing but putting the boot in so that he can get power at the expense of the country. I suppose he's too old to wait just 2 years. Why isn't he putting us first?


This whole debacle lies firmly at the feet of the tories who TWICE now have gambled & lost, putting party before country. Gambled & lost with brexit. Gambled & lost with this election. They are now gambling with peace in Northern Ireland. They will risk ANYTHING for themselves. They are reprehensible.

*Ed Miliband*‏Verified [email protected]*Ed_Miliband* Jun 9

_We know Theresa May can't now negotiate Brexit for Britain because
she told us losing majority would destroy her authority---and it has_


----------



## noushka05

I love this


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> NEWS FLASH!
> 
> PROTESTS TOMORROW: No coalition with DUP! Please share.
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/events/290268031384019
> 
> *Details*
> 
> The Tories launched a general election to destroy Labour. They waged a campaign of fear against a campaign of hope. And they failed.
> 
> Now a disgraced Theresa May is trying to cling on to power with an alliance with the Democratic Unionist Party, the most extreme party in Parliament. They are anti-gay. They are anti-choice. They are climate change deniers. And they have a history of links to and sympathies for Northern Irish loyalist terrorism - after smearing Labour and Jeremy Corbyn over terrorism.
> 
> The Tories are themselves riddled with homophobes, opponents of women's rights to choose, and climate change deniers. Now they'll be strengthened with an alliance with the right-wing extremists of the DUP. This Coalition of Chaos and Hatred is a threat to all of us.
> 
> Take to the streets in London and all over Britain. Set up your own Facebook events for your towns and cities and I'll share them. Let's bring down Theresa May - and stop a Coalition of Chaos and Hatred taking power.


Nope, won't be sharing.



MrsZee said:


> Is this what you really think? You don´t think that this just a bit out of time, like 100 years? Also, what is wrong for wanting to have rights? Aren´t improved working conditions one of the corner stones for most people? E.g. you cannot make people work in dangerous conditions without proper protection and precautions (e.g . poisonous atmosphere, mechanical accident zone, too hot/cold), you must have bathrooms, time to eat and limit the normal working hours to 8. You must pay agreed wages, you can´t fire somebody just because you don´t like someone, if they do their job right etc. For me making the world a better place is way more important than just getting a promotion.
> 
> You said conservatives support want to work - do you mean that they support the idea that if your job doesn´t give you satisfaction, you don´t have to work? Or did I get that wrong? Did you mean that most people don´t enjoy work and that is why they vote labour? Is this something that applies all people then? Like Germans and Scandi countries with very strong unions, don´t like to work? That is a bit confusing, as that is the opposite what I have learned. Most people like to work, as long as the boss isn´t a total w..ker. What do you mean that conservatives work so that they don´t need to have human rights or employee rights? This I just don´t understand at all.
> 
> Lastly I don´t understand what you mean by better themselves? Do you mean educating themselves? Or setting one´s own business? Or getting promoted? So Labour voters don´t like to do that? But didn´t Jeremy get lots of votes from students, who are bettering themselves and TM from elderly, retired people, who are actually enjoying their pensions and having no intention whatsoever to better themselves anymore?


Sorry, I did say "massive generalisation"! Yes you do misunderstand, probably my fault for not elaborating. I'll try it another way (I'm on my phone so long posts are awkward!). Labour appeal to those in employment who have no desire to become a employer or self-employed. Conservative's appeal to the employer and those that want to climb a career ladder and see the benefits of supporting and encouraging business.

I've still got my spade if you want me to dig deeper


----------



## Odin_cat

rona said:


> Just over inflated egos and power crazies playing games with our lives and futures. None of them will suffer the consequences of this debacle, but you can bet your bottom dollar, all of us will.
> 
> They need their ruddy heads banging together and told to just get on with it. What's Corbyn doing but putting the boot in so that he can get power at the expense of the country. I suppose he's too old to wait just 2 years. Why isn't he putting us first?


Not sure you can place the blame purely on Corbyn. I don't recall May reaching out to him.


----------



## noushka05

Demand proportional representation - https://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> Nope, won't be sharing.
> 
> Sorry, I did say "massive generalisation"! Yes you do misunderstand, probably my fault for not elaborating. I'll try it another way (I'm on my phone so long posts are awkward!). Labour appeal to those in employment who have no desire to become a employer or self-employed. Conservative's appeal to the employer and those that want to climb a career ladder and see the benefits of low supporting and encouraging business.
> 
> I've still got my spade if you want me to dig deeper


That´s ok, I just wanted to understand what you meant. Still don´t agree with this, at least I understand what you mean.  Besides, my posts are often really bad, as it´ll take ages to check my spelling and sentences, and mostly I don´t have ages.


----------



## Elles

The country voted to leave the Eu. We were asked not told. The government is abiding by our decision. We were then asked to back May and the conservatives with an increased majority. The country spoke and said no. Corbyn said what about this instead and the country said no to that too.

You think it's wrong to ask people questions in case they don't give you the answer you want?

This time next year, I won't be a millionaire I expect. Same as it ever was.

Vote for PR. We keep getting these kind of results, just maybe PR is what we actually want.


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> Demand proportional representation - https://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/
> 
> View attachment 314189


Hear Hear!


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> The country voted to leave the Eu. We were asked not told. The government is abiding by our decision. We were then asked to back May and the conservatives with an increased majority. The country spoke and said no. Corbyn said what about this instead and the country said no to that too.
> 
> You think it's wrong to ask people questions in case they don't give you the answer you want?
> 
> This time next year, I won't be a millionaire I expect. Same as it ever was.
> 
> Vote for PR. We keep getting these kind of results, just maybe PR is what we actually want.


Is this directed at me? If so I'm happy to debate, If I don't agree with your answers I will put my case forward.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Nope, won't be sharing.
> 
> Sorry, I did say "massive generalisation"! Yes you do misunderstand, probably my fault for not elaborating. I'll try it another way (I'm on my phone so long posts are awkward!). Labour appeal to those in employment who have no desire to become a employer or self-employed. Conservative's appeal to the employer and those that want to climb a career ladder and see the benefits of supporting and encouraging business.
> 
> I've still got my spade if you want me to dig deeper


And that's generalisation. A lot of business owners have a social conscience & vote for labour. Small businesses hate the tories manifeso.


----------



## kimthecat

just saw the BBC news . Jerry says ( not ad verbatim) we cant go on with uncertainty and unstability and then says he wants to fight in a general election ! 

I feel I don't understand English anymore , has the dictionary been re written ? 

fighting another GE will bring more uncertainty and instability !


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Labour appeal to those in employment who have no desire to become a employer or self-employed.


This time round every person I know who voted Labour is self-employed and/or earning over the threshold at which higher tax would kick in. Like me they have never voted Labour before and until relatively recently would have said they'd never vote Labour. Whereas mine was an anti May vote (I've not made my views on here secret from very soon after she became leader) most others I know were anti austerity votes with quite rich people prepared to pay more tax if it meant a fairer society. I suppose you can factor in that if taxation became very unfair i.e. we stop seeing a return for our money, we are the very people in a position to avoid paying more than we're happy with. I don't pretend for one moment I wouldn't do exactly that if it all got too silly. What most of us agree on is that it would probably make little difference to us whoever is in power - it's the world which matters these days, not Westminster.


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> Is this directed at me? If so I'm happy to debate, If I don't agree with your answers I will put my case forward.


General 'you'  I think PR would change the way we vote, (and the way politicians behave) so the results may be very different.

I also think it's the obvious choice given recent results, though I could be wrong.


----------



## noushka05

The coming disaster foretold. From Robert Harris.


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> just saw the BBC news . Jerry says ( not ad verbatim) we cant go on with uncertainty and unstability and then says he wants to fight in a general election !
> 
> I feel I don't understand English anymore , has the dictionary been re written ?
> 
> fighting another GE will bring more uncertainty and instability !


Everybody needs to calm down.

Jeremy Corbyn wanting to fight another GE won't happen anytime soon. We'll have to make do with the current situation and the *only *way Theresa May will be ousted will be by her own party and they have no appetite for a leadership contest at present. We'll all have to wait and see what happens at the 1922 Committee meeting, if they say no, it's no to a leadership contest. The Conservatives won the election with the most seats and no majority so they are legally allowed to form a Government by finding another party to prop up the missing seats, which is what they are doing. There are no grounds to call another Election and under the fixed term Parliament act only the PM can request to Parliament to call one.

The media are not helping with all the hype. The Conservatives and Theresa May have not broken any rules. Jeremy Corbyn did not win the Election even though he thinks in his mind he has.


----------



## kimthecat

noushka05 said:


> The coming disaster foretold. From Robert Harris.
> 
> View attachment 314192




I read that John Mcdonnell said on Peston that Labour wouldn't remain in a single market, is that correct ?


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Everybody needs to calm down.
> 
> .


Calm down , CALM DOWN , what do you bloody well mean , I AM CALM !!!
:Hilarious


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> Calm down , CALM DOWN , what do you bloody well mean , I AM CALM !!!
> :Hilarious


 :Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious


----------



## stockwellcat.

Michael Gove in 10 Downing Street.


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Michael Gove in 10 Downing Street.


:Vomit


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> The coming disaster foretold. From Robert Harris.
> 
> View attachment 314192











Mine has started working all of a sudden to :Hilarious


----------



## stockwellcat.

Michael Gove Environment Secretary


----------



## stockwellcat.

Andrea Leadsom Leader of the House of Commons


----------



## stockwellcat.

James Brokenshire Northern Ireland Secretary


----------



## cheekyscrip

stockwellcat said:


> Michael Gove Environment Secretary


Yes...look what reshake drawn out of woodwork. ..
Are they short of slimey backstabbers?
Is TM trying to wipe this grinnoff Bojo's fat face?


----------



## stockwellcat.

cheekyscrip said:


> Yes...look what reshake drawn out of woodwork. ..
> Are they short of slimey backstabbers?
> Is TM trying to wipe this grinnoff Bojo's fat face?


She's making sure Bojo doesn't launch a leadership contest against her as Gove stood in the way of Bojo last time.


----------



## kimthecat

Is Bojo is still Foreign secretary?


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> I read that John Mcdonnell said on Peston that Labour wouldn't remain in a single market, is that correct ?


I believe they would like to negotiate a deal outside the single market. Do I agree with that? No I don't. But at least the labour team can be reasoned with and Kier Starmer is a very smart man & fine politician.



stockwellcat said:


> View attachment 314193
> 
> Mine has started working all of a sudden to :Hilarious


You don't need a crystal ball to see May is weak & incompetent. The EU 27 are going to eat her for breakfast, we are going to pay dearly for this.


----------



## 1290423

cheekyscrip said:


> Yes...look what reshake drawn out of woodwork. ..
> Are they short of slimey backstabbers?
> Is TM trying to wipe this grinnoff Bojo's fat face?


Think shes replacing them with those in favour of brexit


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> Is Bojo is still Foreign secretary?


Yes. The top 5 ministers stayed in their positions.


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> Think shes replacing them with those in favour of brexit


I beg to differ. David Lidington is a remainer.


----------



## Zaros

Can I be minister for foreign affairs.

I'm good at affairs?:Cigar

Right at this moment in time I'm on with a Finnish bird but still have eyes for a lovely little Ukrainian, and an Estonian who cuts and styles my hair superbly.:Woot


----------



## kimthecat

noushka05 said:


> I believe they would like to negotiate a deal outside the single market. Do I agree with that? No I don't. But at least the labour team can be reasoned with and Kier Starmer is a very smart man & fine politician.


So they've broken an election promise already after three days ! That must be a record . They've let down the people who voted for them, the Remainers because they wanted a soft brexit. 

ETA , you can't trust anybody  Im glad I trusted my instinct about Corbyn .


----------



## cheekyscrip

EU would rather have Hammond or Rudd to talk to, 
Or Davis at worst. No Bojo. They distrust him and dislike him. 
For the talks we need someone, who is well regarded, even as opponent.

You may disagree but have respect for each other nevertheless.


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> Think shes replacing them with those in favour of brexit


Bojo was Brexit's frontrunner...
She gathers his enemies round her...


----------



## havoc

kimthecat said:


> So they've broken an election promise already after three days


You can only keep or break an election promise if you're in government surely.


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> I beg to differ. David Lidington is a remainer.


You can beg alI you like! I was thinking of gove and leadsom


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## 1290423

Zaros said:


> Can I be minister for foreign affairs.
> 
> I'm good at affairs?:Cigar
> 
> Right at this moment in time I'm on with a Finnish bird but still have eyes for a lovely little Ukrainian, and an Estonian who cuts and styles my hair superbly.:Woot


And im best friends with mrs zee


----------



## stockwellcat.

DT said:


> You can beg alI you like! I was thinking of gove and leadsom


I am not into the habit of begging but you are right


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> So they've broken an election promise already after three days !


I have never known a Government to keep there Election promises.


----------



## 1290423

Not in the Habit of posting links but is there any truth in this

http://uk.businessinsider.com/juncker-reportedly-urged-may-to-hold-election-2017-6?r=US&IR=T


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> So they've broken an election promise already after three days ! That must be a record . They've let down the people who voted for them, the Remainers because they wanted a soft brexit.
> 
> ETA , you can't trust anybody  Im glad I trusted my instinct about Corbyn .


I'm a remainer, my hubby & children are remainers, most of my family are remainers  Remainers wanted to remain in the EU full stop. Corbyn said before the referendum he would respect the wishes of the majority & I believe this is what he feels he is doing re the single market. Personally I think this is a grave error on labours part & have signed this petition to tell Corbyn how I feel. https://www.change.org/p/jeremy-corbyn-mp-my-vote-for-labour-is-not-a-vote-for-brexit My hubby is a labour member & I'm going to ask him if he'll write to Jeremy. Its all hypothetical anyway, the tories are in charge, they are going to drag us off that cliff - not labour.
.Whatever your thoughts on Corbyn he has more principles & integrity in his little finger than the entire tory cabinet put together.

..................


----------



## havoc

DT said:


> Not in the Habit of posting links but is there any truth in this
> 
> http://uk.businessinsider.com/juncker-reportedly-urged-may-to-hold-election-2017-6?r=US&IR=T


If there is then it means the woman who was claiming to be the one to stand up to Europe and make them give in to her demands wasn't capable of making p her own mind over something which was never an issue for the Brexit negotiations.

Please god it isn't true because if it is she's way beyond incompetent - she's unhinged.


----------



## MiffyMoo

DT said:


> Not in the Habit of posting links but is there any truth in this
> 
> http://uk.businessinsider.com/juncker-reportedly-urged-may-to-hold-election-2017-6?r=US&IR=T


Who can say. It could be legit or Jean Claude Drunker's idea of really funny because we've upset his little emperor plans


----------



## Jonescat

Gove at Environment??
This Gove?
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/jul/05/michael-gove-climate-change-geography-curriculum

I shall be at the bottom of a gin bottle if you want me


----------



## stockwellcat.

Jonescat said:


> Gove at Environment??
> This Gove?
> https://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/jul/05/michael-gove-climate-change-geography-curriculum
> 
> I shall be at the bottom of a gin bottle if you want me


Yes that Gove.
Enjoy the Gin.


----------



## cheekyscrip

DT said:


> Not in the Habit of posting links but is there any truth in this
> 
> http://uk.businessinsider.com/juncker-reportedly-urged-may-to-hold-election-2017-6?r=US&IR=T


Lets blame the EUz?

Zem made her de-elect herself!

Thought she said she went for a walk with OH on sunny afternoon thinking happy thoughts and one of them was the election?


----------



## rona

stockwellcat said:


> Michael Gove Environment Secretary


The woman has gone stark raving bonkers ............


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> And that's generalisation. A lot of business owners have a social conscience & vote for labour. Small businesses hate the tories manifeso.


Nope, every SME I know support Conservatives and their pro-business attitude. Don't know one who support Labours anti-business policy.

Maybe it's a regional thing.


----------



## kimthecat

havoc said:


> You can only keep or break an election promise if you're in government surely.


I see your point , what would it be called , a manifesto promise. ? It still feels like a betrayal to me .


----------



## stockwellcat.

rona said:


> The woman has gone stark raving bonkers ............


Can't see her lasting this next week.


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> I have never known a Government to keep there Election promises.


Well ,Cam kept one ! 
The point is that much has been made of Corbyn , people keep telling me that he's a man of integrity etc etc , a principled man etc etc . It came up over and over again . No wonder he didn't make Brexit part of his campaign , no wonder he and Mcdonnell avoided answering questions about it . He made a promise he knew he wouldn't keep . 
I don't feel angry , I actually feel sad . I'm glad that I trusted myself and not the members on here who said to believe in him .


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Nope, every SME I know support Conservatives and their pro-business attitude. Don't know one who support Labours anti-business policy.
> 
> Maybe it's a regional thing.


Maybe it's more to do with the type of business.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Deleted.


----------



## kimthecat

rona said:


> The woman has gone stark raving bonkers ............


She's had her wings clipped by the old Tory brigade .

I bet the song in her head is Everytime
Everytime I try to fly I fall, without my wings
I feel so small


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> Is it me or have I got this wrong? Theresa May is a megalomaniac (a person who has an obsessive desire for power)
> she craves power and refused to step down even though the electorate voted against her and her hard Brexit she is determined to carry on. I hope the 1922 Committee step in and stop this power grab she has embarked on.


The electorate didn't vote against her


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> Is it me or have I got this wrong? Theresa May is a megalomaniac (a person who has an obsessive desire for power)
> she craves power and refused to step down even though the electorate voted against her and her hard Brexit she is determined to carry on. I hope the 1922 Committee step in and stop this power grab she has embarked on.


----------



## stockwellcat.

MiffyMoo said:


> The electorate didn't vote against her


Well she didn't get the majority and should have in all fairness stepped down.


----------



## kimthecat

She got a majority , but not a big enough one

so should jerry for losing . She snot been asked to resign yet either.

ETA My spelling ! snot


----------



## rona

Just an interesting little snippet


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> Well she didn't get the majority and should have in all fairness stepped down.


Why? Oh God, I can't believe we're going over this again. Not sure who posted this earlier, but thank you!


----------



## 1290423

stockwellcat said:


> Well she didn't get the majority and should have in all fairness stepped down.


Whats good for the goose springs,to mind!


----------



## kimthecat

Just a reminder of what Majority means

ma¦jor|ity
[məˈdʒɒrɪti]
NOUN

the greater number:
"in the majority of cases all will go smoothly" ·
[more]
synonyms: larger part/number · greater part/number · major part ·
[more]
BRITISH
the number by which the votes cast for one party or candidate exceed those for the next:

a party or group receiving the greater number of votes.


----------



## stockwellcat.

*The DUP could insist on Nigel Farage having a role in Brexit negotiations*

Nigel Farage could become a bargaining chip in talks between the DUP and the Conservatives.

Theresa May wants the support of the Democratic Unionist Party to form a coalition.

But the Northern Irish party reportedly wants Farage to be brought into Brexit negotiations.

'They hold a few cards,' a source told the Sunday Times. 'They want Farage as a lord or a role in government or he and Arron will put something together that will cause trouble for May.'

http://www.metro.co.uk/2017/06/11/t...ng-a-role-in-brexit-negotiations-6701540/amp/

Could you imagine Nigel Farage in the Brexit Negotiations :Hilarious:Hilarious

This must be fake news.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> Enjoy the Gin.


Heavens..is it that time of day already?


----------



## stockwellcat.

MiffyMoo said:


> Why? Oh God, I can't believe we're going over this again. Not sure who posted this earlier, but thank you!
> 
> View attachment 314227


Fair enough.
That's an informative meme 
I apologise.


----------



## kimthecat

rona said:


> Just an interesting little snippet
> View attachment 314226


That is scary . such a small thing but big repercussions .


----------



## MiffyMoo

stockwellcat said:


> Fair enough.
> That's an informative meme
> I apologise.


 Touché!


----------



## Elles

Nige? The Northern Irish want Theresa May to employ Nige for brexit and to get him a peerage?

Bwaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaa!

:Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious

You couldn't make it up. :Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious

Ok, metro is like Private Eye? Fake news? Has to be Shirley.

Are they sure the DUP don't mean their own Nigel? Unbelievable.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> Nige? The Northern Irish want Theresa May to employ Nige for brexit and to get him a peerage?
> 
> Bwaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaa!
> 
> :Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious
> 
> You couldn't make it up. :Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious
> 
> Ok, metro is like Private Eye? Fake news? Has to be Shirley.
> 
> Are they sure the DUP don't mean their own Nigel? Unbelievable.


Think its come from steve peers elles
But it wont happen


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> Maybe it's more to do with the type of business.


No it's not that. Through a previous life as chair of a chamber of commerce I still regularly chat to it's 158 members who are from all types of businesses. Multinational, retail, service etc. So must be regional. I am in a very Tory strong-hold though with our local MP getting over 60% of the vote and Labour coming in third with just 14%.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> The woman has gone stark raving bonkers ............


Every decent environmentalist, green NGO warned us this government would be a disaster for the environment. Its no shock to me she's appointed a disaster like Gove.



kimthecat said:


> Well ,Cam kept one !
> The point is that much has been made of Corbyn , people keep telling me that he's a man of integrity etc etc , a principled man etc etc . It came up over and over again . No wonder he didn't make Brexit part of his campaign , no wonder he and Mcdonnell avoided answering questions about it . He made a promise he knew he wouldn't keep .
> I don't feel angry , I actually feel sad . I'm glad that I trusted myself and not the members on here who said to believe in him .


He is principled, he is someone who actually _lives_ by his principles. And his voting history is more proof he has principles & integrity  He made no secret he was a EU sceptic but he was in a very difficult position with the PLP. The labour party has always been pro- EU & Corbyn would have to compromise & respect the democratic position of PLP. He was in a very difficult position. He got slated for saying he was 7/10 in favour of the EU & saying it needed to be reformed. And this is pretty much where I stood, this & the fact that the tories were in power swayed me to vote remain after much deliberation. I felt we were better changing the EU from within. I wouldn't feel sad if I were you Kim. Something very exciting happened on Thursday

(WARNING: Swear word alert)
Tory tribute act:Hilarious


----------



## JANICE199

Calvine said:


> Thank you - it's not just me then. Where did they find him?





rona said:


> Just over inflated egos and power crazies playing games with our lives and futures. None of them will suffer the consequences of this debacle, but you can bet your bottom dollar, all of us will.
> 
> They need their ruddy heads banging together and told to just get on with it. What's Corbyn doing but putting the boot in so that he can get power at the expense of the country. I suppose he's too old to wait just 2 years. Why isn't he putting us first?


*I think your anger is aimed at the wrong person. What would you do in his position, give up and hand the job to the tories? :Nailbiting*


----------



## rona

JANICE199 said:


> *I think your anger is aimed at the wrong person. What would you do in his position, give up and hand the job to the tories? :Nailbiting*


i'm not angry but he's the one been going on about reaching out and talking things out. We knew where we stood with May and that is well behind money and her and her buddies interests. She's not the one been promising the earth and then spitting on us all

He's trying to cause more instability at a time that it could cripple our country


----------



## JANICE199

rona said:


> i'm not angry but he's the one been going on about reaching out and talking things out. We knew where we stood with May and that is well behind money and her and her buddies interests. She's not the one been promising the earth and then spitting on us all


*We knew where we stood? wow rona you are really surprising me. Thousands in this country do not know where they stand in our society, and why? because the tories have no regard for those less fortunate.*


----------



## rona

JANICE199 said:


> *We knew where we stood? wow rona you are really surprising me. Thousands in this country do not know where they stand in our society, and why? because the tories have no regard for those less fortunate.*


Don't know why you are surprised 
We all know where we stand with May. The bottom of the barrel


----------



## Zaros

DT said:


> And im best friends with mrs zee


Is that so.

Which one are you then, Wednesday, Thursday or Friday.?


----------



## JANICE199

rona said:


> Don't know why you are surprised
> We all know where we stand with May. The bottom of the barrel


 I;m glad we got that sorted.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> No it's not that. Through a previous life as chair of a chamber of commerce I still regularly chat to it's 158 members who are from all types of businesses. Multinational, retail, service etc. So must be regional


I've seen a difference between SMEs and micro businesses I'd put it down to the micro business owners being conservative in every sense. If they weren't they'd have grown the business on into an SME at least.


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> Just a reminder of what Majority means
> 
> ma¦jor|ity
> [məˈdʒɒrɪti]
> NOUN
> 
> the greater number:
> "in the majority of cases all will go smoothly" ·
> [more]
> synonyms: larger part/number · greater part/number · major part ·
> [more]
> BRITISH
> the number by which the votes cast for one party or candidate exceed those for the next:
> 
> a party or group receiving the greater number of votes.


But she didn't gain a 'working' majority - so for that it looks like she is prepared to sacrifice peace in Northern Ireland to stay in power. She said on numerous occasions if she lost just six seats Corbyn would be PM. She even sent a stamped personally addressed letter to us stating it I assume everyone in the country got one! She has proved once again what a morally bankrupt liar she is. She is reckless & dangerous.


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> Ruth Davidson would get my vote. lets start a petition to have her as a contender .


Only problem about Ruth Davidson is her stance on Brexit for some. She favours the single market over immigration control, (actually not unlike Nicola Sturgeon's position).

And I don't think she would be prepared to work with the DUP and vice versa!


----------



## Honeys mum

stockwellcat said:


> *The DUP could insist on Nigel Farage having a role in Brexit negotiations*


DUP ready to demand that NIGEL FARAGE takes part in Brexit negotiations - Your Brexit

I also saw it somewhere else yesterday I think it may have been the Sunday Times, I can't remember.
It also said DU were concered about him taking votes from the tories at the next election which IMO he would . Which can only be good.

He is also considering coming back to be be the leader of UKIP again. Which I think would be the better of the two.
I'm a firm believer there would have been no Brexit without NF. and we still want out more so than ever now.


----------



## KittenKong

https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news...oses-gay-rights-wants-scrap-human-rights-act/

Well it looks like David Cameron's respectable efforts to bring his party in to the 21st century has all been in vain.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Somebody on my Facebook just said that Kezia Dugdale was telling voters to pretty much vote for anyone bar SNP; which could be seen as a direct link to Corbyn losing. Not sure how true that really is, but if it is, I suspect she's in a world of trouble


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news...oses-gay-rights-wants-scrap-human-rights-act/
> 
> Well it looks like David Cameron's respectable efforts to bring his party in to the 21st century has all been in vain.
> View attachment 314249


So?
He was in another position with the Tories before as Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons and nobody picked on him then. He is a senior Tory MP.

I don't see how digging stuff up on him is going to affect his current position. He has been in various positions in Parliament for years:

Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons Jul 2016 - May 2017
Minister of State (Foreign and Commonwealth Office) (European issues and NATO) May 2010 - Jul 2016
Shadow Minister (Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs) Jul 2007 - May 2010
Shadow Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Jul 2003 - Jul 2007
Shadow Minister (Food, Farming and Environment) Sep 2002 - Dec 2002
Shadow Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Jul 2002 - Jul 2003
Shadow Financial Secretary Oct 2001 - Oct 2002
Shadow Spokesperson (Home Affairs) Apr 1999 - Oct 2001

https://www.parliament.uk/biographies/commons/david-lidington/15

I don't see why you have to point to out his stances on things. He is a very well respected MP.


----------



## rona

......................


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> So?
> He was in another position with the Tories before as Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons and nobody picked on him then. He is a senior Tory MP.
> 
> I do this see how digging stuff up on him is going to affect his current position. He has been in various positions in Parliament for years:
> 
> Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons Jul 2016 - May 2017
> Minister of State (Foreign and Commonwealth Office) (European issues and NATO) May 2010 - Jul 2016
> Shadow Minister (Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs) Jul 2007 - May 2010
> Shadow Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Jul 2003 - Jul 2007
> Shadow Minister (Food, Farming and Environment) Sep 2002 - Dec 2002
> Shadow Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Jul 2002 - Jul 2003
> Shadow Financial Secretary Oct 2001 - Oct 2002
> Shadow Spokesperson (Home Affairs) Apr 1999 - Oct 2001
> 
> https://www.parliament.uk/biographies/commons/david-lidington/15
> 
> I don't see why you have to point to out his stances on things.


Just thought it was significant seeing they're probably don't want to upset the DUP!

Sorry, but I don't understand how anyone can respect someone with such archaic views. For all Cameron's faults I certainly respected him for his in this respect.
And like Cameron I'm not gay.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Just thought it was significant seeing they're probably don't want to upset the DUP!


They aren't going into coalition with the DUP and it was released last night the Gay Rights will be protected in England, Scotland and Wales with any type of deal with the DUP. The DUP will not be able to make any demands on this issue.


----------



## KittenKong

In case any North East based members are interested there's a rally at Greys Monument in Newcastle between 17.30-18.30 this evening.

I'll be there!


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> They aren't going into coalition with the DUP and it was released last night the Gay Rights will be protected in England, Scotland and Wales with any type of deal with the DUP. The DUP will not be able to make any demands on this issue.


No, but they obviously don't want to upset them in any way in return for their support.

Their insistence that the unelected Nigel Farage participates in Brexit negotiations is evidence how strong the DUP's demands are going to be as an example.

May has made "reassurances". Does anyone still believe a word she says?


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> No, but they obviously don't want to upset them in any way in return for their support.


?

They have told the DUP that this issue is not open for discussion. We'll have to wait until tomorrow won't we what agreement they come to. The DUP or Tories could say no yet.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> In case any North East based members are interested there's a rally at Greys Monument in Newcastle between 17.30-18.30 this evening.
> 
> I'll be there!
> View attachment 314250


As of now Theresa May isn't going anywhere and why should she. The Conservatives won the most seats in Parliament and won the election. She is being grilled by the 1922 committee tonight. She has to change her stance on things as she doesn't have the majority. The likelihood is she will remain as PM and it looks the remainers will get the Brexit they want which is a soft Brexit, she is going to have to change her stance as her manifesto was rejected. Theresa May is in for a rough ride over the next 5 years to appease the other parties and electorate.


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> Only problem about Ruth Davidson is her stance on Brexit for some. She favours the single market over immigration control, (actually not unlike Nicola Sturgeon's position).
> 
> And I don't think she would be prepared to work with the DUP and vice versa!


I wouldn't say that was the only problem with Ruth Davidson. She tells blatant lies & have you seen her voting history She supports the rape clause & cutting disability benefits to mention but two.

.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> They aren't going into coalition with the DUP


Is it a 'coalition' tho', @stockwellcat? I read it was being called an ''alliance'' (unholy alliance?)


----------



## stockwellcat.

Calvine said:


> Is it a 'coalition' tho', @stockwellcat? I read it was being called an ''alliance'' (unholy alliance?)


No they said it was a "supply and demand agreement". They won't go into coalition as this would give the DUP authority in Parliament. This might not come to fruition yet though this agreement as either side can say no and pull out.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> As of now Theresa May isn't going anywhere and why should she


Boris has denied being after her job and maintains he has texted others to back her; whether that is true we don't know, of course.


----------



## Jonescat

noushka05 said:


> I assume everyone in the country got one!


No - I didn't - can only assume it didn't go to safe seats.



stockwellcat said:


> I don't see why you have to point to out his stances on things. He is a very well respected MP.


Surely so that we can see what direction we are going in? Legitimate enquiry in the absence of anything from Downing Street other than that appalling speech the day after the election, which incidentally contained no reference to us, the electorate.

A government is known by the company they keep:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...h-negotiations-with-theresa-may-a7785026.html


----------



## MiffyMoo

Calvine said:


> Boris has denied being after her job and maintains he has texted others to back her; whether that is true we don't know, of course.


Yup, he did text. We know this because "someone" (definitely not Boris, noooo) leaked it


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> ?
> 
> They have told the DUP that this issue is not open for discussion. We'll have to wait until tomorrow won't we what agreement they come to. The DUP or Tories could say no yet.


They should not be forming any sort of alliance with this dangerous bunch of extremists. What about the real threat to peace in Northern Ireland?

The Irish PM, Enda Kenny, has phoned May to express concern that her alliance with the DUP could put peace at risk. We must stand up & rail against this dangerous alliance.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Jonescat said:


> No - I didn't - can only assume it didn't go to safe seats.
> 
> Surely so that we can see what direction we are going in? Legitimate enquiry in the absence of anything from Downing Street other than that appalling speech the day after the election, which incidentally contained no reference to us, the electorate.
> 
> A government is known by the company they keep:
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...h-negotiations-with-theresa-may-a7785026.html


I suspect they'll get slapped down. Can I just say, their acronym is LOL! Do you think they even get the irony?


----------



## Calvine

MiffyMoo said:


> Yup, he did text. We know this because "someone" (definitely not Boris, noooo) leaked


I'd better check if he's texted me then.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Jonescat said:


> Surely so that we can see what direction we are going in? Legitimate enquiry in the absence of anything from Downing Street other than that appalling speech the day after the election, which incidentally contained no reference to us, the electorate.
> 
> A government is known by the company they keep:
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...h-negotiations-with-theresa-may-a7785026.html


I think you are reading into this to much. I am sure Theresa May didn't sit there and look at David Lidington's previous stances before promoting him, she would have been interested in his career record as he is well respected.

The media have been asked to stop hyping things up as well.

We will only know tonight after the 1922 committee meeting what happens next.


----------



## CuddleMonster

I'm puzzled by the number of people calling for Corbyn to be PM - I know the Tories didn't get a majority but they still got the most seats and the most votes, so how can another party rule in their stead? Surely unless we have another election, the Tories have to have some kind of input in the government?


----------



## noushka05

Jonescat said:


> No - I didn't - can only assume it didn't go to safe seats.
> 
> Surely so that we can see what direction we are going in? Legitimate enquiry in the absence of anything from Downing Street other than that appalling speech the day after the election, which incidentally contained no reference to us, the electorate.
> 
> A government is known by the company they keep:
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...h-negotiations-with-theresa-may-a7785026.html


Ahh yes, that's probably why then. We were bombarded with anti corbyn propaganda - we also received emails from 'Theresa'.


----------



## Calvine

CuddleMonster said:


> I'm puzzled by the number of people calling for Corbyn to be PM


Yes, me too.


----------



## stockwellcat.

CuddleMonster said:


> I'm puzzled by the number of people calling for Corbyn to be PM - I know the Tories didn't get a majority but they still got the most seats and the most votes, so how can another party rule in their stead? Surely unless we have another election, the Tories have to have some kind of input in the government?


I know Corbyn lost and the Conservatives won, they won by the amount of seats they have and not the majority so it is up to the Conservatives to form a Government. The only why Corbyn can get in is if there is another GE but only the PM can request one early under the fixed term Parliament act and the Conservatives said they don't want another one or a leadership challenge yet.

If you remember Cameron was in the same situation when he came to power and had to form a coalition Government.


----------



## noushka05

Did anyone see her Sky interview?  I'm sure she is a robot - she's emotionally dead!

She actually answered four questions with the SAME answer.:Jawdrop


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> I wouldn't say that was the only problem with Ruth Davidson. She tells blatant lies & have you seen her voting history She supports the rape clause & cutting disability benefits to mention but two.
> 
> .


Absolutely true, but I was seeing it from a hard Brexiteers point of view.


----------



## Calvine

stockwellcat said:


> a "supply and demand agreement".


As in: the DUH demands and the Tories supply? That's me being cynical again I guess!


----------



## havoc

Calvine said:


> Boris has denied being after her job and maintains he has texted others to back her


Has he used the term 'she has my full and unqualified support'? If we get that we'll his know his intentions for sure


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Absolutely true, but I was seeing it from a hard Brexiteers point of view.


It looks like we'll be getting a softer Brexit as May's hard Brexit was rejected. So May is going to have to tone this down and appease those who want a soft Brexit.

Keir Starmer is asking to be on the Brexit team or involved in it in some way as he is a well respected QC in the UK and EU.


----------



## CuddleMonster

stockwellcat said:


> I know Corbyn lost and the Conservatives won, they won by the amount of seats they have and not the majority so it is up to the Conservatives to form a Government. The only why Corbyn can get in is if there is another GE but only the PM can request one early under the fixed term Parliament act and the Conservatives said they don't want another one or a leadership challenge yet.
> 
> If you remember Cameron was in the same situation when he came to power and had to form a coalition Government.


Thanks for clarifying! I got totally confused the morning after election because first they were saying the Tories had won the most votes/seats and then they interviewed Corbyn talking about how ready he was to be PM and what he was going to do...So I was left wondering WHO had actually won!

I remember the 'con-dem' coalition, but don't recall Labour talking about ruling the country then. It was Corbyn talking as if he were going to be PM that really confused me!


----------



## havoc

CuddleMonster said:


> I'm puzzled by the number of people calling for Corbyn to be PM - I know the Tories didn't get a majority but they still got the most seats and the most votes, so how can another party rule in their stead?


Because they have yet to form a workable government.
There are those calling for Corbyn because that's what they want rather than they have any real understanding of what's going on for sure but the same could be said of many Tory supporters. Labour are fired up and understandably so - it's not so long ago that general wisdom said Labour were unelectable because of Corbyn and this election says otherwise.


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> Ahh yes, that's probably why then. We were bombarded with anti corbyn propaganda - we also received emails from 'Theresa'.


Surprisingly, not only did we not receive any postal correspondence from the Tories I also never received Tory Emails nor website advertisements.

I had many from Tim Farron and the Lib Dems though! They must have taken my internet history into consideration and my vocal anti Brexit stance on social media?



havoc said:


> Has he used the term 'she has my full and unqualified support'? If we get that we'll his know his intentions for sure


From a man who promised £350m for the NHS. Not only lie to the public, they probably lie amongst themselves too!



stockwellcat said:


> It looks like we'll be getting a softer Brexit as May's hard Brexit was rejected. So May is going to have to tone this down and appease those who want a soft Brexit.
> 
> Kier Starmer is asking to be on the Brexit team as he is a well respected QC.


That I very much doubt. TM will not be able to stomach anything that threatens her anti immigration stance.

The future of ex pats and EU citizens living here remains very much uncertain. Anyone honestly believe she wants to guarantee their rights? I certainly don't.


----------



## noushka05

@Zaros:Hilarious


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> That I very much doubt. TM will not be able to stomach anything that threatens her anti immigration stance.
> 
> The future of ex pats and EU citizens living here remains very much uncertain.


But you aren't listening to what is being said. She isn't going to get away with making demands anymore and trying to stamp her authority down without permission from her back benchers and possibly the rest of parliament and the 1922 Committee. She has weakened her hand in Government significantly. Regarding Brexit Keir Starmer wants a Brexit sub committee who approves everything first so making sure the UK gets a deal as opposed to a no deal or putting the UK at risk of being in a worse off situation when we break ties with the EU.


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> Surprisingly, not only did we not receive any postal correspondence from the Tories I also never received Tory Emails nor website advertisements.
> 
> I had many from Tim Farron and the Lib Dems though! They must have taken my internet history into consideration and my vocal anti Brexit stance on social media?
> 
> From a man who promised £350m for the NHS. Not only lie to the public, they probably lie amongst themselves too!
> 
> That I very much doubt. TM will not be able to stomach anything that threatens her anti immigration stance.
> 
> The future of ex pats and EU citizens living here remains very much uncertain.


Gosh that is interesting. I'm up't North in a labour stronghold that voted leave. I wonder if its just constituencies like this they were concentrating on? Because all they mention in their correspondence is brexit & slandering Corbyn - nothing about their policies The tories must think we're all thick as planks up here:Hilarious


----------



## KittenKong

Ah yes, I can just hear it:

"Strong and stable leadership with me and the DUP"

"Brexit means Brexit, No deal is better than a bad deal"

"Let me bang the drum for Britain".............


----------



## havoc

stockwellcat said:


> She has weakened he hand in Government significantly.


She has in terms of keeping her job but I doubt there's a single Tory MP going to risk a no confidence vote in the near future.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> But you aren't listening to what is being said. She isn't going to get away with making demands anymore and trying to stamp her authority down without permission from her back benchers and possibly the rest of parliament and the 1922 Committee. She has weakened he hand in Government significantly. Regarding Brexit Keir Starmer wants a Brexit sub committee who approves everything first so making sure the UK gets a deal as opposed to a no deal or putting the UK at risk of being in a worse off situation when we break ties with the EU.
> 
> So what options will that leave us with Swiss/Norway deal or remains in the EEA.


You could be right but May is a control freak from what we've seen by her whinging on National television about not accepting her no compromise demands. I don't believe for a moment she'll be able to stomach her reduction in absolute control for very long.



noushka05 said:


> Gosh that is interesting. I'm up't North in a labour stronghold that voted leave. I wonder if its just constituencies like this they were concentrating on? Because all they mention in their correspondence is brexit & slandering Corbyn - nothing about their policies The tories must think we're all thick as planks up here:Hilarious


Seems they didn't make much of an effort in Tynemouth either. It was a secure Tory seat which fell to Labour in 1992 and has remained Labour ever since.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Theresa May isn't the first PM to have no majority or a low majority:

*Harold Wilson - *
February 1974 to October 1974
*John Major - *
December 1996 to May 1997
*David Cameron - *
May 2010 to May 2015
*How PM's Have Fared Without An Overall Majoirty *read the report on the link below.

http://news.sky.com/story/minority-report-how-pms-fared-without-an-overall-majority-10911881


----------



## KittenKong

Who said protesting was a waste of time?

This is good news but to the best of my knowledge the Trump visit to the UK is still on.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/11/donald-trump-state-visit-to-britain-put-on-hold


----------



## Mirandashell

Wrong thread


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 314256
> 
> 
> Ah yes, I can just hear it:
> 
> "Strong and stable leadership with me and the DUP"
> 
> "Brexit means Brexit, No deal is better than a bad deal"
> 
> "Let me bang the drum for Britain".............


So what would Corbyns plans for Brexit be?

@noushka05


> I believe they would like to negotiate a deal outside the single market. Do I agree with that? No I don't.


That's one way of putting it , rather lame . If this had been May , you'd be hysterical .

So a principled man with integrity misleads the voting public, in their manifesto they promise to negotiate a single market and now they don't ,
Its strangely quiet from his disciples on Twitter
A single market means freedom of movement for Eu workers and he doesnt want that , those who voted Brexit were called racist .
He has always wanted to leave the EU and gives a weak performance campaigning for Remain , What a sly old fox he is ! You can't trust him as PM , he can drop any of his manifesto , as Tommy Cooper said , just like that !!


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> Because they have yet to form a workable government.
> There are those calling for Corbyn because that's what they want rather than they have any real understanding of what's going on for sure but the same could be said of many Tory supporters. Labour are fired up and understandably so - it's not so long ago that general wisdom said Labour were unelectable because of Corbyn and this election says otherwise.


Well he's never been elected PM so if he's actually electable still waits to be seen. I reckon most of his support came from tactical/protest votes which probably wouldn't happen if there's a election (god forbid) anytime soon.


----------



## havoc

Some came from protest votes but I'm not sure we could say for sure it was most. Even if that were true I reckon they'd still be there unless the Tories make a LOT more effort to engage with the electorate which definitely means ditching May.


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> So what would Corbyns plans for Brexit be?


Thought that was well known. As it stands I do NOT agree with Corbyn's stance on Brexit, or any for that matter.

Having said that it was widely documented priory would be given to allowing EU citizens already living and working in the UK a guaranteed right to stay which is an excellent start. May point blank refuses which could result in many citizens living and working in the UK legally for many years becoming, "Illegal immigrants" overnight.

I'm sure the 27 member states would prefer to negotiate someone like Keith Sterner, a respected QC rather than May's clowns plus possibly Farage on insistence from the DUP!

Plus "No deal" is not on the agenda with Labour.

Needless to say, as much as I'm against Brexit I'm confident Labour would get a good deal.

Compromise is the answer.


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> Thought that was well known. As it stands I do NOT agree with Corbyn's stance on Brexit, or any for that matter.


it only became apparent on Sunday when McDonnell admitted they did not support the single market when they said in their manifesto they did . . So no right to work here or freedom of movement for future EU people with out a single market .



> Having said that it was widely documented priory would be given to allowing EU citizens already living and working in the UK a guaranteed right to stay which is an excellent start. May point blank refuses which could result in many citizens living and working in the UK legally for many years becoming, "Illegal immigrants" overnight.


Thats a good start , May isnt refusing to guarantee it , she hasnt said because she wants to wait to see what the EU will do about ex pats first . I thing that is wrong .


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Thought that was well known. As it stands I do NOT agree with Corbyn's stance on Brexit, or any for that matter.
> 
> Having said that it was widely documented priory would be given to allowing EU citizens already living and working in the UK a guaranteed right to stay which is an excellent start. May point blank refuses which could result in many citizens living and working in the UK legally for many years becoming, "Illegal immigrants" overnight.
> 
> I'm sure the 27 member states would prefer to negotiate someone like Keith Sterner, a respected QC rather than May's clowns plus possibly Farage on insistence from the DUP!
> 
> Plus "No deal" is not on the agenda with Labour.
> 
> Needless to say, as much as I'm against Brexit I'm confident Labour would get a good deal.
> 
> Compromise is the answer.


Keir Starmer is talking about setting up a cross party negotiating team as Brexit now needs to be reset as the hard Brexit was voted against in the GE. So it looks like the negotiations need to go back to the drawing board. He is going to insist that Theresa May delays the negotiations for 2 weeks whilst a new cross party negotiating team is put together. Of course the Conservatives can say no and carry on, but in my opinion I feel that Theresa May's hand has been weakened some what she's going to have to comprise somewhere with this.


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> So what would Corbyns plans for Brexit be?
> 
> @noushka05
> 
> That's one way of putting it , rather lame . If this had been May , you'd be hysterical .
> 
> So a principled man with integrity misleads the voting public, in their manifesto they promise to negotiate a single market and now they don't ,
> Its strangely quiet from his disciples on Twitter
> A single market means freedom of movement for Eu workers and he doesnt want that , those who voted Brexit were called racist .
> He has always wanted to leave the EU and gives a weak performance campaigning for Remain , What a sly old fox he is ! You can't trust him as PM , he can drop any of his manifesto , Tommy Cooper said , just like that !!


Sorry but I'm not convinced Theresa May and her bunch of clowns will get a good Brexit deal.

Labour might not either, but at least, "No deal" isn't on the agenda so they're far more likely to compromise. Something TM doesn't believe in.

No deal with the EU will suit everyone, even amongst Brexiteers with many wanting hard with others soft.

I don't believe in Brexit full stop. Whatever ones views Cameron's gamble has left the mess and the laughing stock this country's become in the eyes of many of its own citizens and abroad. They should have been prepared for the outcome of a leave victory which they clearly weren't.

Still, I'll try not to drift off topic as that's really for the EU referendum thread.

This despicable government have gambled twice now in the interests of their party, not the country, at considerable expense to the taxpayer.


----------



## 1290423

CuddleMonster said:


> I'm puzzled by the number of people calling for Corbyn to be PM - I know the Tories didn't get a majority but they still got the most seats and the most votes, so how can another party rule in their stead? Surely unless we have another election, the Tories have to have some kind of input in the government?


Because that's how some people are if the vote doesn't go their way they just want to do it again and again and again until they get the right result. personally I'm sick to death of the lot of it, especially the whingers. Theresa May needs to get her back into it and Buckle down to do the job now, sooner rather than later. and if she makes that bad a t job of it as everybody keeps saying I'm sure Mr corbyn will have his chance eventually, that's how politics works. now I've had an idea why don't we run the Eurovision Song Contest again or the football or even X Factor if you like


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> Thats a good start , May isnt refusing to guarantee it , she hasnt said because she wants to wait to see what the EU will do about ex pats first . I thing that is wrong .


The problem with May is, she's so obsessed in reducing immigration having failed to do so since becoming Home Secretary I think she would be prepared to sacrifice EU citizens rights to continue living in the UK if it shows a reduction in immigration numbers by getting them to leave.

I can see those, "Go home or face arrest" vans returning.


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> Sorry but I'm not convinced Theresa May and her bunch of clowns will get a good Brexit deal.
> 
> Labour might not either, but at least, "No deal" isn't on the agenda so they're far more likely to compromise. Something TM doesn't believe in.
> 
> No deal with the EU will suit everyone, even amongst Brexiteers with many wanting hard with others soft.
> 
> I don't believe in Brexit full stop. Whatever ones views Cameron's gamble has left the mess and the laughing stock this country's become in the eyes of many of its own citizens and abroad. They should have been prepared for the outcome of a leave victory which they clearly weren't.
> 
> Still, I'll try not to drift off topic as that's really for the EU referendum thread.
> 
> This despicable government have gambled twice now in the interests of their party, not the country, at considerable expense to the taxpayer.


Doesn't matter whether you are for brexit or not we had a vote! remember.


----------



## Happy Paws2

DT said:


> Because that's how some people are if the vote doesn't go their way they just want to do it again and again and again until they get the right result. personally I'm sick to death of the lot of it, especially the whingers. Theresa May needs to get her back into it and Buckle down to do the job now, sooner rather than later. and if she makes that bad a t job of it as everybody keeps saying I'm sure Mr corbyn will have his chance eventually, that's how politics works. now I've had an idea why don't we run the Eurovision Song Contest again or the football or even X Factor if you like


And maybe, some of us are sick to death of the leavers who just love rubbing our faces in the fact that you won. It's nothing to be proud of.


----------



## KittenKong

They are so deluded.
















Source- BBC


----------



## 1290423

Happy Paws said:


> And maybe, some of us are sick to death of the leavers who just love rubbing our faces in the fact that you won. It's nothing to be proud of.


No one is rubbing anyones faces in it! Certainly no one I know. one can only assume you move within an odd circle of Friends.


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> They are so deluded.
> View attachment 314269
> View attachment 314270
> 
> 
> Source- BBC


OK, we're clearly living in opposite world, where winners are losers and told to resign, and losers are winners and everyone else is told they should be in charge, but what is wrong with an MP saying that they hope that the DUP will change their views on homosexuality and abortion? Is this a bad thing? And then what is wrong with the leader of the DUP saying that they will use their position responsibly?


----------



## Jesthar

Jonescat said:


> No - I didn't - can only assume it didn't go to safe seats.


I got one of the TM 'Vote for me!' MailMerge specials, and I'm in a nailed on die hard Tory area (no, not her area). I posted about receiving it on the thread, if memory serves.

It was that missive that 100% convinced me I was NOT voting Tory...


----------



## kimthecat

MiffyMoo said:


> OK, we're clearly living in opposite world, where winners are losers and told to resign, and losers are winners and everyone else is told they should be in charge, ?


 Strange isn't it , it feels like everyone has thrown their dictionaries away and making words mean whatever they want them to mean .


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> She has in terms of keeping her job but I doubt there's a single Tory MP going to risk a no confidence vote in the near future.


Lets hope so, we don't need the country destabilised any more than it already is.

I still think the Conservatives are best to get us out of the EU, purely because they are all so protective of their own financial affairs and that is tied up so much in how well the UK does.

Once they've got us out, I'd love to try Cobyns utopia By then I'll be on the verge of getting the first money I've ever claimed in my pension


----------



## emmaviolet

DT said:


> Doesn't matter whether you are for brexit or not we had a vote! remember.


Does it matter if people didn't know what it was they were voting for? Which they didn't because even the MPs didn't lay out what it really meant.

Would we rather screw our country just to say we left?

The news today is that applications of nurses from the EU fell 96% since last year. We don't have enough nurses to fill these positions. Thousands have left already from the EU and there are tens of thousands of positions unfilled for nurses as we cannot fill them ourselves.

Is it really worth risking our lives and NHS for a soundbite of 'brexit'?


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> Sorry but I'm not convinced Theresa May and her bunch of clowns will get a good Brexit deal.
> 
> .


I'm not saying they will . i think many will agree with you . A right ruddy mess.

My post wasnt about May , I asked what Corbyns plans were . 
This is about Corbyn and what he didn't say about Brexit .eg he promised a single market but had no intention of negotiating one and avoided questions on it until the GE was over . Is he fit to be PM? does saying nothing mean you lying ?

What the police say when they arrest you
" You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defense if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."

In my court he's Guilty M'lud !


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> The problem with May is, she's so obsessed in reducing immigration having failed to do so since becoming Home Secretary I think she would be prepared to sacrifice EU citizens rights to continue living in the UK if it shows a reduction in immigration numbers by getting them to leave.
> 
> I can see those, "Go home or face arrest" vans returning.


  She might have done that but for the GE but her wings have been clipped now and she wont get a way with it . The meeting this afternoon ,we will know more after .


----------



## rona

emmaviolet said:


> Does it matter if people didn't know what it was they were voting for? Which they didn't because even the MPs didn't lay out what it really meant.
> 
> Would we rather screw our country just to say we left?
> 
> The news today is that applications of nurses from the EU fell 96% since last year. We don't have enough nurses to fill these positions. Thousands have left already from the EU and there are tens of thousands of positions unfilled for nurses as we cannot fill them ourselves.
> 
> Is it really worth risking our lives and NHS for a soundbite of 'brexit'?


Couldn't be because they'll have to prove they can be understood? Something they haven't had to do under EU laws 
https://www.rcseng.ac.uk/news-and-events/blog/unfair-language-testing/


----------



## rona

kimthecat said:


> I'm not saying they will . i think many will agree with you . A right ruddy mess.
> 
> My post wasnt about May , I asked what Corbyns plans were .
> This is about Corbyn and what he didn't say about Brexit .eg he promised a single market but had no intention of negotiating one and avoided questions on it until the GE was over . Is he fit to be PM? does saying nothing mean you lying ?
> 
> What the police say when they arrest you
> " You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defense if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."
> 
> In my court he's Guilty M'lud !


It's as I said before. You don't listen to what he does say but take note of what he refuses to say


----------



## emmaviolet

rona said:


> Couldn't be because they'll have to prove they can be understood? Something they haven't had to do under EU laws
> https://www.rcseng.ac.uk/news-and-events/blog/unfair-language-testing/


I doubt it, 96% of them. Most well educated europeans speak better English than those educated in England. 
It's because there's no point coming here, starting up a life and job if they have to move back again. There's too much at steak. I know many people in this area who had good businesses who moved back as they felt too unstable since the vote.


----------



## Calvine

rona said:


> It's as I said before. You don't listen to what he does say but take note of what he refuses to say


So true and well worded, @rona: some people are very adept at 'lying by omission', aren't they!


----------



## MiffyMoo

rona said:


> It's as I said before. You don't listen to what he does say but take note of what he refuses to say


At the end of the day, he's a career politician and should be trusted about as much as any other politician. He's terribly clever at saying all the right things, but as you pointed out, will skirt around questions when he's being duplicitous.


----------



## Calvine

Jesthar said:


> I got one of the TM 'Vote for me!' MailMerge specials,


God yes, so many to go into the recycling box, I got those almost daily the last week plus emails from Vince Cable (Lib Dem) ... the Cons lost their seat here by a big margin.


----------



## Odin_cat

emmaviolet said:


> I doubt it, 96% of them. Most well educated europeans speak better English than those educated in England.
> It's because there's no point coming here, starting up a life and job if they have to move back again. There's too much at steak. I know many people in this area who had good businesses who moved back as they felt too unstable since the vote.


Absolutely, to register as a nurse, EU nationals have to have a C1 level of English. This is a high level, many native speakers would fail the exam.


----------



## Creativecat

I'm confused abt the queens s speech. Is the queen having to adress the populus regarding the governments intention or is it a youthermism for what Teresa may has to spell out to the electorate .


----------



## kimthecat

Odin_cat said:


> Absolutely, to register as a nurse, EU nationals have to have a C1 level of English. This is a high level, many native speakers would fail the exam.


I expect many natives would but not the british nurses , or i hope not . dont they have to have english and maths exams to qualify to train in the first place?

ETA I didnt know what C1 meant , Im out of touch with exams and found this exam

https://www.newschool.co.uk/courses/test-your-english/advanced-english-test

I might give it a go .

ETA 21 out of 25  Some of correct answers are dodgy i think


----------



## rona

Odin_cat said:


> Absolutely, to register as a nurse, EU nationals have to have a C1 level of English. This is a high level, many native speakers would fail the exam.


http://www.nhsemployers.org/your-wo...n-checks/copy-of-language-competency-guidance
* Can all applicants be tested?*
No. Systematic testing on all applicants from the EEA is currently not permissible under European law.

However, employers do have a key role in ensuring that prospective employees have the necessary language skills to perform their professional duties. Decisions about what evidence is required to satisfy the employer about the applicant's English language knowledge must be proportionate and made on a case-by-case basis - particularly in relation to the work the individual is going to undertake, and taking into consideration other evidence the individual has been able to provide.

Also, wasn't the ability to test introduced at about the same time as Brexit vote?


----------



## Jesthar

Been reading around a bit on the DUP, and come to the conclusion they're a bit... well - how would you descibe an individual who wants to ban alcohol at a _beer _festival?


----------



## Odin_cat

rona said:


> http://www.nhsemployers.org/your-wo...n-checks/copy-of-language-competency-guidance
> * Can all applicants be tested?*
> No. Systematic testing on all applicants from the EEA is currently not permissible under European law.
> 
> However, employers do have a key role in ensuring that prospective employees have the necessary language skills to perform their professional duties. Decisions about what evidence is required to satisfy the employer about the applicant's English language knowledge must be proportionate and made on a case-by-case basis - particularly in relation to the work the individual is going to undertake, and taking into consideration other evidence the individual has been able to provide.
> 
> Also, wasn't the ability to test introduced at about the same time as Brexit vote?


This is link I got my information from, it was introduced before the Brexit vote.
https://www.nmc.org.uk/registration...-the-eu-or-eea/english-language-requirements/


----------



## Calvine

_Is it fair that a doctor from New Zealand will have to prove their English language skills in a clinical setting to be able to practise in the UK while a doctor from the EU only has to prove their everyday English skills?_

@emmaviolet: The point being made is that their English should be adequate to work in a hospital setting, not just general vocabulary and conversation. No-one is doubting that they speak English. I have a degree in German, but am unfamiliar with the vocabulary that I would need working as a doctor or nurse. Or a car mechanic for that matter. That is how I read what the guy is saying.


----------



## Odin_cat

kimthecat said:


> I expect many natives would but not the british nurses , or i hope not . dont they have to have english and maths exams to qualify to train in the first place?
> 
> ETA I didnt know what C1 meant , Im out of touch with exams and found this exam
> 
> https://www.newschool.co.uk/courses/test-your-english/advanced-english-test
> 
> I might give it a go .


Yes I hope they would. If you want to give a test a go I would recommend the Cambridge CAE


----------



## kimthecat

Odin_cat said:


> Yes I hope they would. If you want to give a test a go I would recommend the Cambridge CAE


 i need to re read my grammer book first I Used To Know That ( stuff you forgot from school by Caroline Taggart


----------



## emmaviolet

Calvine said:


> _Is it fair that a doctor from New Zealand will have to prove their English language skills in a clinical setting to be able to practise in the UK while a doctor from the EU only has to prove their everyday English skills?_
> 
> @emmaviolet: The point being made is that their English should be adequate to work in a hospital setting, not just general vocabulary and conversation. No-one is doubting that they speak English. I have a degree in German, but am unfamiliar with the vocabulary that I would need working as a doctor or nurse. Or a car mechanic for that matter. That is how I read what the guy is saying.


With the amount of applications, there would be enough who can speak English well enough.

As it now stands we cannot fill these roles that are essential to the running of the NHS and getting adequate treatment.


----------



## Calvine

emmaviolet said:


> With the amount of applications, there would be enough who can speak English well enough


I'll take your word for it; you clearly have checked your facts to be so confident.


----------



## Odin_cat

Calvine said:


> _Is it fair that a doctor from New Zealand will have to prove their English language skills in a clinical setting to be able to practise in the UK while a doctor from the EU only has to prove their everyday English skills?_
> 
> @emmaviolet: The point being made is that their English should be adequate to work in a hospital setting, not just general vocabulary and conversation. No-one is doubting that they speak English. I have a degree in German, but am unfamiliar with the vocabulary that I would need working as a doctor or nurse. Or a car mechanic for that matter. That is how I read what the guy is saying.


It's a fair point, but if you had a sudden desire to a mechanic In Germany how long do you think it would take you to learn the specific vocabulary? Not long if you already have a near fluent language level.

Add to this that C1 students will have studied medical/ health vocab and I can't see it being a problem.

Has anyone here every had trouble communicating with an EU nurse?


----------



## stockwellcat.

Queens speech has been delayed from Monday 19th June for a few extra days.


----------



## Calvine

Odin_cat said:


> Has anyone here every had trouble communicating with an EU nurse?


I have no idea.


----------



## Odin_cat

stockwellcat said:


> Queens speech has been delayed from Monday for a few extra days.


I guess that means no Brexit talks either...


----------



## MiffyMoo

Jesthar said:


> Been reading around a bit on the DUP, and come to the conclusion they're a bit... well - how would you descibe an individual who wants to ban alcohol at a _beer _festival?


Wow, that's the definition of jobsworth! I hope he got told off for wasting everyone's time and being a killjoy


----------



## stockwellcat.

Odin_cat said:


> I guess that means no Brexit talks either...


Shrugs shoulders. I don't know. We will know better later on today after 1922 Committee meeting.

Brussels are preparing for a possible delay.


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> Wow, that's the definition of jobsworth!


I'm not even surprised. It's exactly what I'd have expected. There's a whole breed like that who would dearly love to take NI (and anywhere else they can influence) back to the days of puritan living.


----------



## Bisbow

I wish the Queen was allowed to write her own speech. I would love to know what she thinks


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> I'm not saying they will . i think many will agree with you . A right ruddy mess.
> 
> My post wasnt about May , I asked what Corbyns plans were .
> This is about Corbyn and what he didn't say about Brexit .eg he promised a single market but had no intention of negotiating one and avoided questions on it until the GE was over . Is he fit to be PM? does saying nothing mean you lying ?
> 
> What the police say when they arrest you
> " You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defense if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."
> 
> In my court he's Guilty M'lud !


But Corbyn's priority was protecting the NHS and ending austerity, not Brexit.

On that matter, did May not give clear answers, "Brexit means Brexit" and, "No deal is better than a bad deal" to name a couple?

Not forgetting her refusal to answer where the Dementia Tax cap and means tested winter fuel allowances will be set at, "Until after the election"......


----------



## Mirandashell

I just turned the TV on and saw Michael Gove. I need a shower.....

:Wtf


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> I'm not even surprised. It's exactly what I'd have expected. There's a whole breed like that who would dearly love to take NI (and anywhere else they can influence) back to the days of puritan living.


Some sections of South Africa are like that - A lot of Afrikaaners are Calvinists (more mental Protestantism)


----------



## noushka05

*Caroline Lucas*‏Verified [email protected]*CarolineLucas* 5h5 hours ago

Beggars belief. One look at Gove's voting record shows him unfit for this job: https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/11858/michael_gove/surrey_heath/votes#environment…

*Green Party*‏Verified [email protected]*TheGreenParty* 4h4 hours ago

"Evidence of *Theresa May*'s complete disregard for the environment"
@*CarolineLucas* on appointment of Gove as environment secretary


----------



## 1290423

Bisbow said:


> I wish the Queen was allowed to write her own speech. I would love to know what she thinks


Me too


----------



## rona

Mirandashell said:


> I just turned the TV on and saw Michael Gove. I need a shower.....
> 
> :Wtf


Make my skin crawl too :Vomit


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> But Corbyn's priority was protecting the NHS and ending austerity, not Brexit.
> 
> ...


What does priority have to do with it ? hes not actually PM yet . 
Are you defending Corbyn lying ? I'm surprised because a single market would benefit you , you would still be able to travel and live in spain easily .
I'm just repeating myself here , it was in his manifesto and there are people who voted for Labour because of it . I would be very angry if he tricked me like that .

ETA my point isnt about how may behaves or a comparison between may and Corbyn .
its about Corbyns behaviour . just because May does worse stuff , it doesn't make it ok for him to mislead . Honourable people dont do that .


----------



## Mirandashell

May is doing her best to get on Maj's nerves....



> *The Queen may have to miss part of Royal Ascot *- one of her favourite annual events - if the Queen's speech is delayed by a few days, the Press Association reports.
> 
> She particularly looks forward to heading to the Berkshire racecourse each June, where she keeps a close eye on the form and the winners from the royal enclosure.
> 
> The state opening of parliament had been planned for Monday 19 June, but it is reported to have been shifted to a few days later as Theresa May's Conservatives continue talks with the Democratic Unionist party to secure their support.
> 
> Royal Ascot begins on Tuesday 20 June 20 the Queen is due to attend all five days of the event.
> 
> She rides in the daily royal carriage procession and sometimes presents trophies to winning jockeys, as thousands flock to the summer social gathering.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Mirandashell said:


> May is doing her best to get on Maj's nerves....


I am sure if her horse wins she won't be bothered


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> What does priority have to do with it ? hes not actually PM yet .
> Are you defending Corbyn lying ? I'm surprised because a single market would benefit you , you would still be able to travel and live in spain easily .
> I'm just repeating myself here , it was in his manifesto and there are people who voted for Labour because of it . I would be very angry if he tricked me like that .
> 
> ETA my point isnt about how may behaves or a comparison between may and Corbyn .
> its about Corbyns behaviour . just because May does worse stuff , it doesn't make it ok for him to mislead . Honourable people dont do that .


Are you sure the manifesto says we will stay in the single market? Because I definitely read 'freedom of movement will end' in it


----------



## Mirandashell

stockwellcat said:


> I am sure if her horse wins she won't be bothered


She bloody will! I'm not sure she's missed an Royal Ascot meeting since the War. And you can see she's really enjoying herself when she's on the TV. The one thing she actually likes to do rather than it being a duty and May has buggered that up as well.


----------



## kimthecat

paraphrasing the Quo 

I aint gonna vote 
I aint gonna vote no more

I could go back
To the vote I had
But the same old thing
Only drives me mad, so

I ain't gonna vote 
I ain't gonna vote no more
Never again
Will I have to be..down

Read more: Status Quo - Softer Ride Lyrics | MetroLyrics


----------



## kimthecat

wheres that bloody May woman !


----------



## Mirandashell

One is not amused!
http://


----------



## kimthecat

noushka05 said:


> Are you sure the manifesto says we will stay in the single market? Because I definitely read 'freedom of movement will end' in it


I don't know . Why are you asking me ? you're the one knows every thing 

ETA Im reading it now ,

http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php/manifesto2017/brexit

"We will scrap the Conservatives' Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union - which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first. "

Hmmm its a bit vague . What does everyone else think ?

It said "Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union. Britain's immigration system will change, but Labour will not scapegoat migrants nor blame them for economic failures. "

he's stating a fact - freedom ends when we leave the EU . so therefore Freedom of movement has to be negotiated under " a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the single market.

 What ever that means , its still sneaky and vague and misleading .


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> wheres that bloody May woman !


More like I'm not in.


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> I don't know . Why are you asking me ? you're the one knows every thing


Obviously I'm asking you because you seem confident its in the manifesto & I haven't seen it. If you're tying to discredit someone the least you could do is fact check first I would have thought

Maybe you should actually read the manifesto - it is pretty damned good!


----------



## Calvine

Bisbow said:


> I wish the Queen was allowed to write her own speech


Especially if Philip helps her!


----------



## stockwellcat.

noushka05 said:


> Obviously I'm asking you because you seem confident its in the manifesto & I haven't seen it. If you're tying to discredit someone the least you could do is fact check first I would have thought
> 
> Maybe you should actually read the manifesto - it is pretty damned good!


But Corbyn did put in the Labour Manifesto that free movement would end when the UK leaves the EU. Open Europe even picked up on it in his Manifesto:


> 17MAY 2017
> *Labour Party manifesto pledges to end free movement, while it rules out leaving without a deal*
> Yesterday, the Labour Party released its manifesto, which reiterates the party's commitment to oppose a "no deal" Brexit. The manifesto states that Labour's vision of Brexit would prioritise jobs, and would "have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union." On immigration, the manifesto states that "freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union" and "Britain's immigration system will change."


http://openeurope.org.uk/daily-shak...end-free-movement-rules-leaving-without-deal/


----------



## noushka05

stockwellcat said:


> But Corbyn did put in the Labour Manifesto that free movement would end when the UK leaves the EU. Open Europe even picked up on it in his Manifesto:
> 
> http://openeurope.org.uk/daily-shak...end-free-movement-rules-leaving-without-deal/


Exactly


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> But Corbyn did put in the Labour Manifesto that free movement would end when the UK leaves the EU. Open Europe even picked up on it in his Manifesto:
> http://openeurope.org.uk/daily-shak...end-free-movement-rules-leaving-without-deal/


From the manifesto itself (already posted in reply to noush )

http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php/manifesto2017/brexit

"We will scrap the Conservatives' Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union - which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first. "

I t said "Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union. Britain's immigration system will change, but Labour will not scapegoat migrants nor blame them for economic failures. "

he's stating a fact - freedom ends when we leave the EU . Yes it would d o , so therefore Freedom of movement etc has to be negotiated. his words from the manifesto " a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the single market."

 What ever that means , its still sneaky and vague and misleading .


----------



## Mirandashell

Mother of god.... does it really matter now? This argument is getting very tedious. None of you are going to agree about it and it makes no difference anyway. 

Give over for gawd's sake!


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> But Corbyn did put in the Labour Manifesto that free movement would end when the UK leaves the EU. Open Europe even picked up on it in his Manifesto:
> 
> http://openeurope.org.uk/daily-shak...end-free-movement-rules-leaving-without-deal/


Ah, another have your cake and eat it promise. The Eu have already said that Britain will not be better off outside the Eu and this deal would make us better off. Empty promises.


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> From the manifesto itself
> 
> I t said "Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union. Britain's immigration system will change, but Labour will not scapegoat migrants nor blame them for economic failures. "
> 
> he's stating a fact - freedom ends when we leave the EU . Yes it would d o , so therefore Freedom of movement etc has to be negotiated. his words from the manifesto " a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the single market."
> 
> What ever that means , its still sneaky and vague and misleading .


I didn't think it was misleading. We cant end freedom of movement AND stay in the single market.


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> From the manifesto itself (already posted in reply to noush )
> 
> http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php/manifesto2017/brexit
> 
> "We will scrap the Conservatives' Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union - which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first. "
> 
> I t said "Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union. Britain's immigration system will change, but Labour will not scapegoat migrants nor blame them for economic failures. "
> 
> he's stating a fact - freedom ends when we leave the EU . Yes it would d o , so therefore Freedom of movement etc has to be negotiated. his words from the manifesto " a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the single market."
> 
> What ever that means , its still sneaky and vague and misleading .


He could not have been clearer.


----------



## Mirandashell

I give up. A shame cos there has been some wit and good debate on this thread but now it's just going around a circle and that's leeching all the interest out of it. 

Honestly, so much happening and all you can do is argue over something that doesn't matter. ALL POLITICIANS LIE. All of them. And you are all old enough to have worked that out.


----------



## Elles

Personally I don't think anyone should have voted for Labour on a specific manifesto promise, but rather on the overall philosophy. Manifesto promises are never kept exactly as they are. Labour made a lot of promises they simply can't keep, but if you like the overall feel of it, then it was probably worth voting for. If someone wanted to vote for staying in the single market, they were probably best voting lib dem who were at least going to ask what the public generally thought once they'd negotiated a deal. 

Too late now.


----------



## kimthecat

noushka05 said:


> He could not have been clearer.


I cant hear it but I take your word for it .

well, that spoilt my fun ! I was just getting into my stride . there was a split between him and mcdonnell about this , mcdonnell wanted to stay in the single market .

ETA his heart was never in staying with the EU , he never fought for it .

latest from the guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-in-single-market-after-brexit-says-labour-mp
Labour would like the possibility of continued membership of the single market to be one of the starting points of negotiations to leave the EU, the party's shadow Brexit secretary, Keir Starmer, has said.

While he conceded this would be difficult to achieve while also imposing restrictions on the free movement of people, Starmer criticised the government for pre-emptively ruling out single market membership - even though this is what his own leader has done.

Asked on Sunday whether he was clear that Brexit would mean an end to single market membership, Jeremy Corbyn told BBC1's Andrew Marr Show: "Absolutely."

Speaking later on ITV's Peston on Sunday, John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, said of single market membership: "I can't see it even being on the table in the negotiations, I don't think it's feasible."

But asked about this on Monday, Starmer told BBC Radio 4's The World at One he would like to see a "different tone and approach" to talks with the EU, including not pre-emptively ruling out continued single


----------



## cheekyscrip

So this is what we are leaving EU for?
To be ruled by puppet whose strings are pulled by Murdoch?

Well done indeed.
The government of " talent"....like Gove ..









Sorry, just venting helpless anger ....

And DUP bringing Farage back....

I really try not to post anything any more...

But that makes me feel sick....
Who is actually in power....


----------



## kimthecat

cheekyscrip said:


> So this is what we are leaving EU for?
> To be ruled by puppet whose strings are pulled by Murdoch?


Labours Tom Watson is saying it was suggested to him . We dont know if its true .


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> What does priority have to do with it ? hes not actually PM yet .
> Are you defending Corbyn lying ? I'm surprised because a single market would benefit you , you would still be able to travel and live in spain easily .
> I'm just repeating myself here , it was in his manifesto and there are people who voted for Labour because of it . I would be very angry if he tricked me like that .
> 
> ETA my point isnt about how may behaves or a comparison between may and Corbyn .
> its about Corbyns behaviour . just because May does worse stuff , it doesn't make it ok for him to mislead . Honourable people dont do that .


I repeat, I do not agree with Corbyn's stance on Brexit. All I was saying is, his government would be more likely to compromise and get a deal that would be acceptable to most.

It's funny how some people focus on the slightest errors from Labour, notably the awful Diane Abbott performance yet defend May in every way.

I decided to put Brexit to one side for the sake of this election. Technically I should have voted Lib Dem but even they have abandoned a cancellation of Brexit in preference for a second referendum on the Brexit deal with the option to remain.

Now we have a government that can't govern itself, let alone negotiate a best possible Brexit deal!


----------



## cheekyscrip

kimthecat said:


> Labours Tom Watson is saying it was suggested to him . We dont know if its true .


I am quite sure that Murdoch has lot to answer for. He got Sky didn't he?
He is the " kingmaker"...not even in the shadows ...
Abominable man.
Sorry.
Still venting....

So glad youngsters do not touch his rags...


----------



## kimthecat

@KittenKong yes perhaps we've talked enough about Brexit but the reason May called the GE was because of it and she fought her campaign on it so its in context i think .

Im alarmed at the state of affairs now , how easy it is for events to spiral out of control !


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...h-negotiations-with-theresa-may-a7785026.html

And the Nasty party just gets nastier.....

1967 was the summer of love. Fifty years later it's becoming Bigotry and hate.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> Personally I don't think anyone should have voted for Labour on a specific manifesto promise, but rather on the overall philosophy. Manifesto promises are never kept exactly as they are. Labour made a lot of promises they simply can't keep, but if you like the overall feel of it, then it was probably worth voting for. If someone wanted to vote for staying in the single market, they were probably best voting lib dem who were at least going to ask what the public generally thought once they'd negotiated a deal.
> 
> Too late now.


I would have voted labour whoever was leading the party tbqh. Preventing a tory landslide was crucial to stop their power grab. The tories wanted to wipe out opposition leaving us with pretty much a one party state. We should all be relieved it backfired on them. Labour's anti-austerity manifesto being so fantastically progressive was an added bonus (& it is fully costed & supported by a host of top economists  ). Have to say I am surprised the lib dems didn't do better with their pro EU stance though.


----------



## Guest

noushka05 said:


> I didn't think it was misleading. We cant end freedom of movement AND stay in the single market.


That is the point, and I´m surprised most people didn´t know that when voting for Brexit. (well, not surprised, as the amount of misinformation was huge). But the fact is that you can´t have both. If you want free market, it will cost you more than before, unless you want to follow current EU - rules about freedom of movement. Pity that only now many start understanding what you actually are about to lose.


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> Im alarmed at the state of affairs now , how easy it is for events to spiral out of control !


Yes, the election was bad enough...but the ensuing fallout beggars belief, it really does!


----------



## cheekyscrip

MrsZee said:


> That is the point, and I´m surprised most people didn´t know that when voting for Brexit. (well, not surprised, as the amount of misinformation was huge). But the fact is that you can´t have both. If you want free market, it will cost you more than before, unless you want to follow current EU - rules about freedom of movement. Pity that only now many start understanding what you actually are about to lose.


No, they still haven't understood.
They still think being out of custom union is a good thing!!!!
Or being out of single market!!!
Or hard border for NI and Gibraltar.

What worries me , that if hard Tories stay in power for next five years, the backlash will throw us unto communist kind of utopia, which as we know cannot work and never did.
Extremes are never good but for tiny minority.
Middle of the way works for majority.


----------



## kimthecat

noushka05 said: ↑
I didn't think it was misleading. We cant end freedom of movement AND stay in the single market.



MrsZee said:


> That is the point, and I´m surprised most people didn´t know that when voting for Brexit. (well, not surprised, as the amount of misinformation was huge). But the fact is that you can´t have both. If you want free market, it will cost you more than before, unless you want to follow current EU - rules about freedom of movement. Pity that only now many start understanding what you actually are about to lose.


I think people do know that. I didnt think that . did members here think that ? Noushs post was in reply to mine about the way the Labour manifesto was written . Ive already explained in that post .


----------



## Guest

kimthecat said:


> noushka05 said: ↑
> I didn't think it was misleading. We cant end freedom of movement AND stay in the single market.
> 
> I think people do know that. I didnt think that did members here think that ? Noushs post was in reply to mine about the way the Labour manifesto was written .


Yes, I read your post, but still thought that most really don´t know what is possible and what is not to achieve. That is why I quoted noushka, as that was so clearly put. I didn´t mean to confuse this with the manifesto, sorry if I did that.

(sorry, wrote your most, and meant post)


----------



## kimthecat

MrsZee said:


> Yes, I read your most, but still thought that most really don´t know what is possible and what is not to achieve. That is why I quoted noushka, as that was so clearly put. I didn´t mean to confuse this with the manifesto, sorry if I did that.


Oh I see. Sorry . lots of confusion on my part today . <tip toes off >


----------



## Guest

and very bad spelling... :Facepalm

your m(p)ost humble MrsZee


----------



## KittenKong

Hilarious!
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_593e9f76e4b02402687b25ae


----------



## kimthecat

cheekyscrip said:


> What worries me , that if hard Tories stay in power for next five years, the backlash will throw us unto communist kind of utopia, which as we know cannot work and never did.
> Extremes are never good but for tiny minority.
> Middle of the way works for majority.


I'm with you there. I'm a middle of the road person . I'm not sure the Tories will last five years . I hope not.


----------



## Guest

Just a comparison: Our conservative goverment just resigned, because they refused to cooperate with the newly elected leader of our UKIP (Basic Finns), whose only aim was to throw foreigners out and leave EU. Our Tories (Center party and Conservatives both said that they cannot work with them and they rather form a new goverment. Let´s see if there will be an election or just another coalition government (with the Swedish party and Christians).

I wonder what it takes for May to resign?

(And the government unresigned, becoming partners with the NewChoice, when BasicFinns split up. But that is another story, which I try to explain later on another post. Confusing stuff. At least the nazis are out. Added later 13.6)


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...h-negotiations-with-theresa-may-a7785026.html
> 
> And the Nasty party just gets nastier.....
> 
> 1967 was the summer of love. Fifty years later it's becoming Bigotry and hate.
> View attachment 314337


How is it May's fault that people are popping out of the woodwork to ask for favours? This was asked of the DUP, not Tories.


----------



## kimthecat

seen on twitter . this cant be true ! #goatgate

some wag tweeted : The Queen's Speech should be written on a pig's ear . 
he has a point


----------



## havoc

It isn't her fault but they are about to be in a position to effectively hold her to ransom over just about anything.


----------



## Zaros

MrsZee said:


> I wonder what it takes for May to resign?


The storming of parliament?

No 10?

Taking Philip hostage?


----------



## 3dogs2cats

MiffyMoo said:


> How is it May's fault that people are popping out of the woodwork to ask for favours? This was asked of the DUP, not Tories.


Well I guess that is what you get when you weaken your position and have to rely on help.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Do you know I used to never give two hoots about politics until the EU Referendum vote last year. I can see how politics rips friendships and families apart and sows divisions in society. British politics right this moment in time does not represent me and the state it currently is in is shameful.

Politics never used to bother me, I used to never get involved and I am not going to let it interfere with my life anymore.


----------



## KittenKong

MiffyMoo said:


> How is it May's fault that people are popping out of the woodwork to ask for favours? This was asked of the DUP, not Tories.


It's every way May's fault. Her decision to seek the assistance from a bunch of bigots to save her own neck.

They'll want something in return for their support, just you wait.


----------



## MiffyMoo

3dogs2cats said:


> Well I guess that is what you get when you weaken your position and have to rely on help.


It's ridiculous - for a start I doubt the DUP will weaken their hand by asking for such silly concessions as that.


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> I wonder what it takes for May to resign?


Nuclear Armageddon, which unfortunately isn't the very remote possibility it was just a year ago.


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> It's every way May's fault. Her decision to rely on a bunch of bigots.
> 
> They'll want something in return for their support, just you wait.


Of course they will, but I suspect a march will not factor high on their list


----------



## havoc

kimthecat said:


> some wag tweeted : The Queen's Speech should be written on a pig's ear .
> he has a point


Sure does


----------



## Satori

Mirandashell said:


> I give up. A shame cos there has been some wit and good debate on this thread but now it's just going around a circle and that's leeching all the interest out of it.
> 
> Honestly, so much happening and all you can do is argue over something that doesn't matter. ALL POLITICIANS LIE. All of them. And you are all old enough to have worked that out.


Nobody is forcing you to read it.


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> Nobody is forcing you to read it.


Well that will be you on the naughty chair


----------



## kimthecat

It will be time to start a new thread soon . perhaps @stockwellcat could start one after the 1922 comitee meeting but leave this one open in case any latecomers want to make any replies.


----------



## stockwellcat.

kimthecat said:


> It will be time to start a new thread soon . perhaps @stockwellcat could start one after the 1922 comitee meeting but leave this one open in case any latecomers want to make any replies.


I quit with politics @kimthecat . I'll leave it to you if you fancy opening another thread


----------



## kimthecat

stockwellcat said:


> I quit with politics @kimthecat . I'll leave it to you if you fancy opening another thread


 oh go on .

Not me , it needs someone with their head on straight .
@KittenKong ? How about you ?
Anyone ?


----------



## havoc

Not me but I think it should be entitled 'No Prime Minister is better than a bad Prime Minister'.


----------



## Elles

Might as well wait and start a new thread for the next GE. Might not have to wait that long.


----------



## emmaviolet

MiffyMoo said:


> Of course they will, but I suspect a march will not factor high on their list


It could well be high up on their list.

It's much more than just a march to them and it's a deep part of their history which also ties into their conflicts.


----------



## Jesthar

stockwellcat said:


> I quit with politics @kimthecat . I'll leave it to you if you fancy opening another thread


If that decision is as strong and stable as when you were deciding who to vote for, we can expect three new threads by the end of the week...


----------



## Jonescat

havoc said:


> Not me but I think it should be entitled 'No Prime Minister is better than a bad Prime Minister'.


Ah where is Porps when we need him?


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> It's ridiculous - for a start I doubt the DUP will weaken their hand by asking for such silly concessions as that.


There's no way their position can be weakened,that's why this is so worrying and nothing is quite as simple as those writing the headlines would have you believe. Take the border issue. They're saying they want a soft border between north and south. Well it's the obvious thing to say but behind that they absolutely do not want that hard border to therefore move to between NI and the mainland. If you voted leave and control of our borders is something that matters to you then I'd keep a very close eye on this one.


----------



## KittenKong

"She's a liar liar liar"...............


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Do you know I used to never give two hoots about politics until the EU Referendum vote year. I can see how politics rips friendships and families apart and sows divisions in society. British politics right this moment in time does not represent me and the state it currently is in is shameful.
> 
> Politics never used to bother me, I used to never get involved and I am not going to let it interfere with my life anymore.


Likewise with myself. The last time I did anything political before the EU referendum was a march against the Poll Tax.

I can understand what you're saying but when politics and decisions by them affect you, your family and friends interferes with your life/lives have to take a stand and fight back.

Your stance against the repeal of the hunting with dogs act for example is/was highly admirable. I say that for a lot of people on this forum.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong

How?

Yet another useless soundbite......


----------



## havoc

You really couldn't make it up. Two women, each responsible for creating governmental chaos and now they're teaming up.


----------



## Jonescat

And talking of chaos: 
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...t-theresa-may-conservative-deal-a7786021.html

I find it inconceivable that an ex-mayor of Ballymoney wouldn't know which flag he was using. This is going from farce to frightening.


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ights-britain-is-in-for-a-shock-a7785436.html


----------



## KittenKong

havoc said:


> You really couldn't make it up. Two women, each responsible for creating governmental chaos and now they're teaming up.


A true coalition of chaos.

I expect we'll see the return of Clause 28 too, (Act under Thatcher's Tories to "Prevent the "promotion" of homosexually", repealed under the Blair government).


----------



## KittenKong

What a laughing stock May has become with Europe, with apologies for the few fans she has left....

Significant perhaps one of the images came from a Swiss newspaper. They're not in the EU as we know.


----------



## 1290423

Really did like Ruth Davidson wouldn't give her the time of day now banging on about gay and lesbian rights, not that I'm against either I add, but she's obviously just thinking of herself and her klang just like the rest of them. But seriously what's that got to do with the other issues that the UK currently face? serious issues that is, not trivial issues like two men or two woman being allowed to marry in church blah blah blah


----------



## cheekyscrip

Good news for May: Immigrants from EU are not coming anymore...

According to Sky News the number of nurses from EU applying for work in UK fell by 94%.

Number of EU students fell dramatically as well.

EU finance sector is moving out, Marcon is inviting them to Paris...

So there is progress....ye people of little faith!!!


----------



## KittenKong

MrsZee said:


> I wonder what it takes for May to resign?


Don't mean to sound none PC but in view of May returning us to the dark ages I'll make an exception.

I expect she'll have a visit from the men in white coats in due course.....

Perhaps they'll update this to, "They're Coming to Take May Away".....


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ights-britain-is-in-for-a-shock-a7785436.html
> View attachment 314437


Ill be kind here!
You have a,very good imagination, maybe you should start writing fairytales


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> Likewise with myself. The last time I did anything political before the EU referendum was a march against the Poll Tax.
> 
> I can understand what you're saying but when politics and decisions by them affect you, your family and friends interferes with your life/lives have to take a stand and fight back.
> 
> Your stance against the repeal of the hunting with dogs act for example is/was highly admirable. I say that for a lot of people on this forum.


From where im sitting poll Tax were a brilliant thing, financially I would be quids in,


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> Really did like Ruth Davidson wouldn't give her the time of day now banging on about gay and lesbian rights, not that I'm against either I add, but she's obviously just thinking of herself and her klang just like the rest of them. But seriously what's that got to do with the other issues that the UK currently face? serious issues that is, not trivial issues like two men or two woman being allowed to marry in church blah blah blah


She's been talking to May about Brexit, wanting a cross party group and a softer brexit. If the press are concentrating on her taking issue with the DUP that's not her fault is it. Did you know she and her partner cancelled their wedding when their dog was injured? Can't be all bad.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Really did like Ruth Davidson wouldn't give her the time of day now banging on about gay and lesbian rights, not that I'm against either I add, but she's obviously just thinking of herself and her klang just like the rest of them. But seriously what's that got to do with the other issues that the UK currently face? serious issues that is, not trivial issues like two men or two woman being allowed to marry in church blah blah blah


Those rights were hard fought for and have taken many many years of campaigning, I don't blame her for being worried that some of those rights might be used as a bargaining tool to keep the DUP on side. If you had suffered years of discrimination because of your sexuality I'm sure you would be worried too.


----------



## 1290423

Elles said:


> She's been talking to May about Brexit, wanting a cross party group and a softer brexit. If the press are concentrating on her taking issue with the DUP that's not her fault is it. Did you know she and her partner cancelled their wedding when their dog was injured? Can't be all bad.


So what! Its her job! Its what she gets paid for Ask the working man in the street, hes lucky if he can afford to take time off work let alone postpone his wedding if his dog is hurt!
Two sets of Rules I guess


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Those rights were hard fought for and have taken many many years of campaigning, I don't blame her for being worried that some of those rights might be used as a bargaining tool to keep the DUP on side. If you had suffered years of discrimination because of your sexuality I'm sure you would be worried too.


Well I'll remember that in the hope that their rights are guarded when everything else goes tits up, afterall that is the most important thing we have to worry about isn't it


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> She's been talking to May about Brexit, wanting a cross party group and a softer brexit. If the press are concentrating on her taking issue with the DUP that's not her fault is it. Did you know she and her partner cancelled their wedding when their dog was injured? Can't be all bad.


I didn't know that.


DT said:


> So what! Its her job! Its what she gets paid for Ask the working man in the street, hes lucky if he can afford to take time off work let alone postpone his wedding if his dog is hurt!
> Two sets of Rules I guess


You've lost me there DT - she gets paid to be an MP/leader of the Conservatives in Scotland. She is presumably allowed holiday the same as the rest of them when parliament is in recess. She was due to get married and postponed it because her dog was injured. What is wrong with that? I would take time off if my dog got injured or was sick too and have done on several occasions in the past - at the time I couldn't have given a stuff whether I lost money or was disciplined over it. They are my family and they come first.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> Well I'll remember that in the hope that their rights are guarded when everything else goes tits up, afterall that is the most important thing we have to worry about isn't it


I would think its a pretty important thing if it is your rights up for bargaining. I know how livid I was when I heard her say she was going to hold the free vote on hunting and fully supported hunting herself. It felt like all the campaigning we did for years might be thrown away and it was pretty much out of our control. Daresay plenty of people think we have more important things to worry about than foxes but for a lot of us that is a very important issue and one we will literally fight over. I can't pretend to know what it feels like to be discriminated against for being gay but I do know it would be a terrible step backwards to use see those rights eroded.


----------



## KittenKong

DT said:


> From where im sitting poll Tax were a brilliant thing, financially I would be quids in,


Ahem, but a family of four individual 18+ in a council house paying exactly the same as four living in a mansion with countless other properties in their name was rather unfair!

The Council Tax compromise allows a discount for single people living alone which roughly amounts to what they would have paid in Poll Tax, assuming they live in Band A accommodation.

Several years ago a single friend of mine told me what he paid in Council Tax. Being over £100 a month I asked him if he was claiming the single person's discount. Turned out he wasn't on enquiring and got the overpayments refunded. Lucky we acted when we did as he was told if he left it any longer he wouldn't have been able to claim the money back.

My first Poll Tax bill was £52 a month from April 1990. A lot of money in those days. I was doing casual work at the time, including London but being registered to vote in Newcastle I got my bills from them!


----------



## 1290423

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I didn't know that.
> 
> You've lost me there DT - she gets paid to be an MP/leader of the Conservatives in Scotland. She is presumably allowed holiday the same as the rest of them when parliament is in recess. She was due to get married and postponed it because her dog was injured. What is wrong with that? I would take time off if my dog got injured or was sick too and have done on several occasions in the past - at the time I couldn't have given a stuff whether I lost money or was disciplined over it. They are my family and they come first.


So are mine! I paid 12k for one of my dogs a 4 year old, she was with an European soft tissue specialist and then at cambridge, but thats us! Many working people cannot dare do that for fear of losing there income. Did you not read the other day of the two poor cats left in a carrier bag to die just because they needed flea treatment and the owner couldn't afford 
Im not against gays nor lesbians in any way shape or form but bloody hell it's the last thing I want to hear about from my MP at this moment


----------



## 1290423

KittenKong said:


> Ahem, but a family of four individual 18+ in a council house paying exactly the same as four living in a mansion with countless other properties in their name was rather unfair!
> 
> The Council Tax compromise allows a discount for single people living alone which roughly amounts to what they would have paid in Poll Tax, assuming they live in Band A accommodation.
> 
> Several years ago a single friend of mine told me what he paid in Council Tax. Being over £100 a month I asked him if he was claiming the single person's discount. Turned out he wasn't on enquiring and got the overpayments refunded. Lucky we acted when we did as he was told if he left it any longer he wouldn't have been able to claim the money back.
> 
> My first Poll Tax bill was £52 a month from April 1990. A lot of money in those days. I was doing casual work at the time, including London but being registered to vote in Newcastle I got my bills from them!


How is it unfair? Did you pay for that mansion do you do the Gardens and tend the hedges do you clean their windows and look after it fix the roof etc pay to heat it? no you don't those two people living in that Mansion are far less burden on resourses than 4 people living in a small terraced house and that is my problem with the rating system at the moment


----------



## emmaviolet

DT said:


> So are mine! I paid 12k for one of my dogs a 4 year old, she was with an European soft tissue specialist and then at cambridge, but thats us! Many working people cannot dare do that for fear of losing there income. Did you not read the other day of the two poor cats left in a carrier bag to die just because they needed flea treatment and the owner couldn't afford
> Im not against gays nor lesbians in any way shape or form but bloody hell it's the last thing I want to hear about from my MP at this moment


As RPH said, if it were your civil liberties at steak, I doubt you'd feel the same.

Imagine if just because you were straight you had to live in constant worry that this government would deny you the right to be with who you loved? Could remove your right to marry, even make who you are illegal.

We all deserve equal rights, before anything else.


----------



## Calvine

Elles said:


> cancelled their wedding when their dog was injured?


Why? Was he going to be Best Man?


----------



## Honeys mum

Odin_cat said:


> I guess that means no Brexit talks either...


Formal start of Brexit negotiations delayed in wake of Theresa May's election turmoil

Something else which is her fault.


----------



## KittenKong

cheekyscrip said:


> Good news for May: Immigrants from EU are not coming anymore...
> 
> According to Sky News the number of nurses from EU applying for work in UK fell by 94%.
> 
> Number of EU students fell dramatically as well.
> 
> EU finance sector is moving out, Marcon is inviting them to Paris...
> 
> So there is progress....ye people of little faith!!!


Yes indeed, May's xenophobic anti immigration stance is finally working after seven long years of planning to reduce it. She must be so proud.

Perhaps we'll soon hear a new aoundbite from her,

"No NHS staff is better than EU NHS staff".....


----------



## Honeys mum

Just watching, Have I got more Election News for you on BBC .with Jo Brand.
Very funny.


----------



## 1290423

emmaviolet said:


> As RPH said, if it were your civil liberties at steak, I doubt you'd feel the same.
> 
> Imagine if just because you were straight you had to live in constant worry that this government would deny you the right to be with who you loved? Could remove your right to marry, even make who you are illegal.
> 
> We all deserve equal rights, before anything else.


But hang on no one said that yet! Have they? Yet Ruths put that at the top of the list that's the thing she's banging on about, is that right? If it is been mentioned all well and good


----------



## emmaviolet

DT said:


> But hang on no one said that yet! Have they? Yet Ruths put that at the top of the list that's the thing she's banging on about, is that right? If it is been mentioned all well and good


When a party stands for being anti LGBT, then you have to put your foot down first,before they ask May for anything like that. They've said it many times over in their party it's out there, rights need to be secured. 
It's a shame we live in a world where it even needs to be asked or ensured. Nobody has to check anyone's standing on straight rights.


----------



## 1290423

emmaviolet said:


> When a party stands for being anti LGBT, then you have to put your foot down first,before they ask May for anything like that. They've said it many times over in their party it's out there, rights need to be secured.
> It's a shame we live in a world where it even needs to be asked or ensured. Nobody has to check anyone's standing on straight rights.


----------



## 1290423

Your having a laugh now right! Do we have any rights? We have disability rights, we have l&g rights, we have animal rights, ethnic minorities have rights gypsies have rights, council tenets have rights, prisons have rights, I'm still looking for mine can't find em, lol sorry couldn't resist, Gil


----------



## Elles

Don't forget women's rights and the human rights act. Are you an interplanetary alien? I should campaign for ET rights if I were you. :Blackalien


----------



## 1290423

Opps I feel another link coming on,Wonder what this is all about?
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/81...Student__told_he_could_vote_twice_/?ref=fbshr. C


----------



## Elles

Anyway, most people are concerned about the Conservatives and the DUP. Ruth being gay will be asked about her views, that her partner is Irish Catholic, makes it even more likely that journalists will try to wind her up about it. She's not the only one worrying about the DUP, she just seems to be getting the most publicity about it. She got asked if she was friends with the DUP ffs. What kind of question is that.


----------



## Elles

DT said:


> Opps I feel another link coming on,Wonder what this is all about?
> http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/81...Student__told_he_could_vote_twice_/?ref=fbshr. C


I wondered when someone would spot that lol. It's been all over Facebook.


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> Why? Was he going to be Best Man?


Just brilliant!


----------



## Elles

The apparent truth of it is that in local council elections, students can vote where they are at uni, but also get a postal vote at home. Some have used it to vote for their uni area council and their home council, but it's not been considered worth worrying about. It is illegal for them to do it in a GE and there are supposed to be safeguards, where their in person voting is cancelled when their postal vote is received, but there's been some mutterings that it hasn't happened and more than one student has bragged on twitter and Facebook that they've voted twice. It's been doing the rounds for a couple of days now.


----------



## kimthecat

Elles said: ↑
cancelled their wedding when their dog was injured?

so how was the dog ? was he ok ?


----------



## 1290423

One of the main reasons why people have turned from the conservative to labour apart from brexit is the NHS I know this is old news but let's not forget Tony Blair's stance on pfi. And feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't it Tony Blair started this private funding
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/hea...efends-PFI-as-NHS-trusts-face-bankruptcy.html


----------



## Jonescat

DT said:


> Im not against gays nor lesbians in any way shape or form but bloody hell it's the last thing I want to hear about from my MP at this moment


Ruth D also knows that someone has to rescue the Tories from themselves - no youngster will ever vote for the nasty party again if they don't get on board with what matters to them, and this matters to them very much indeed. They absolutely expect their MP to be on board with equality in every form.


----------



## 1290423

Jonescat said:


> Ruth D also knows that someone has to rescue the Tories from themselves - no youngster will ever vote for the nasty party again if they don't get on board with what matters to them, and this matters to them very much indeed. They absolutely expect their MP to be on board with equality in every form.


Valid point


----------



## emmaviolet

DT said:


> Your having a laugh now right! Do we have any rights? We have disability rights, we have l&g rights, we have animal rights, ethnic minorities have rights gypsies have rights, council tenets have rights, prisons have rights, I'm still looking for mine can't find em, lol sorry couldn't resist, Gil


Who is this 'we'? The human race? Yes we all have rights.

Or do you mean the white and straight people, who have always had the right to marry who they like and not be persecuted for that.

Do you not think that those you listed deserve equal treatment? There are still many who want to treat them unfairly just because of who they are.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Better no coalition than bad coalition.



Better no government than bad government. ...



Better no Brexit than bad Brexit....


----------



## noushka05

I don't know the source of this so have no idea how accurate it is - but...


----------



## 1290423

emmaviolet said:


> Who is this 'we'? The human race? Yes we all have rights.
> 
> Or do you mean the white and straight people, who have always had the right to marry who they like and not be persecuted for that.
> 
> Do you not think that those you listed deserve equal treatment? There are still many who want to treat them unfairly just because of who they are.


Your view! Of which you are entitled !and where did I say they weren't or the they shouldn't have any?? Please show me! My point is roof is being pretty vocal about something that affects her directly. If you want my opinion , and its coming anyway, she is no different from the rest of them they are all out for their own needs and to feather their own NESTS , peeing in the same pot as they always have, bugger you jack im alright!


----------



## 1290423

emmaviolet said:


> Who is this 'we'? The human race? Yes we all have rights.
> 
> Do you not think that those you listed deserve equal treatment? There are still many who want to treat them unfairly just because of who they are.


But society has always been that way, if you are difference you get treated differently, not acceptable I agree but make as many rules and pass as many as you like you wont change how some people are


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> I don't know the source of this so have no idea how accurate it is - but...
> 
> View attachment 314474
> 
> 
> View attachment 314473


It is nearly accurate. The PM does not have to resign if a deal is not reached, thoughs she can if she wants to of course. She has to resign if she goes ahead with the Queen's speech and it is amended. The PM has the option to instruct the Queen to give a Queen's speech even if she has no agreement to a working majority. This would in effect be daring the house to vote down the speech and has been done once before (though that was a King's speech of course).


----------



## emmaviolet

DT said:


> But society has always been that way, if you are difference you get treated differently, not acceptable I agree but make as many rules and pass as many as you like you wont change how some people are


But you questioned if 'we' had any rights. I still don't know who you meant by we. If you could elaborate please. You also said you couldn't find your rights.

'Equal rights for others does not mean less for you. It's not a pie'


----------



## havoc

DT said:


> But society has always been that way, if you are difference you get treated differently, not acceptable I agree but make as many rules and pass as many as you like you wont change how some people are


You can change how people behave, at least in public or you can change the public view on certain behaviour. You can stop people peddling bigotry.


----------



## havoc

emmaviolet said:


> 'Equal rights for others does not mean less for you. It's not a pie'


Love this - it should be a poster. Is it?


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> Anyway, most people are concerned about the Conservatives and the DUP. Ruth being gay will be asked about her views, that her partner is Irish Catholic, makes it even more likely that journalists will try to wind her up about it. She's not the only one worrying about the DUP, she just seems to be getting the most publicity about it. She got asked if she was friends with the DUP ffs. What kind of question is that.


They're bound to though, aren't they.
Thirty years ago Ruth Davidson wouldn't have considered joining the Tories with their homophobic stance.

She's quite young so won't remember those days. It's right she should be told of them.

In those days gay MPs had to keep quiet. If exposed as being Gay they had to resign and have their "sinful" private lives exposed on tabloid front pages.

It wasn't only MPs of course......

Ah the days when the elderly were told to wear wooly hats if they couldn't afford to heat their homes and, "Good Christians don't get AIDS".......

Fast forward 25 years. We had a Tory PM who did well in attempting to bring his party into the 21st century. In view of the Tories past record, Clause 28 and all that this surprised me but admired Cameron for doing so.

Now the party has moved to the far right, the wing of the party where many don't recognise Gay rights. Several in May's cabinet (Andrea Leadsome for example) share these views and the attempt to team up with the DUP could well reverse the efforts of the past.

I wonder what Ruth Davidson will do if Gay rights end? Attempt to break the Scottish Conservatives away from the main party (not unlike a form of Scottish independence come to think of it!), or resign?

Interesting times ahead!


----------



## emmaviolet

havoc said:


> Love this - it should be a poster. Is it?


I do too.

I've seen it around, you can get t-shirts with it on. It sums it up so well to others who seem to be worried about others having the same rights as they have always been entitled to and take for granted.


----------



## havoc

KittenKong said:


> Interesting times ahead!


OH commented last night on how many times in the last year he's said or thought 'well at least it can't get any worse' - and has been wrong every single time.


----------



## JANICE199

havoc said:


> Love this - it should be a poster. Is it?


----------



## Calvine

Zaros said:


> Taking Philip hostage?


Why not? At least the old boy would give us a laugh; and there are few enough of those around this week .


----------



## Dr Pepper

DT said:


> Your having a laugh now right! Do we have any rights? We have disability rights, we have l&g rights, we have animal rights, ethnic minorities have rights gypsies have rights, council tenets have rights, prisons have rights, I'm still looking for mine can't find em, lol sorry couldn't resist, Gil


Rubbish, you have plenty of rights over the gay unemployed ethnic minority chap living on benefits. You have the right to pay your tax and NI, you have the right to tax, mot and insure your vehicle, you have the right to pay your council tax. If you run a business you get even more rights, you get the right to pay into someone else's pension, the right to pay for people not to work and go on holiday, the right to pay tax on any profit, the right to pay employer's NI, the right to pay business rates, the right to pay for your rubbish to be collected, the right to be a unpaid tax collector on any sales you make.

See the hard working person supporting themselves has far more rights than anyone else, and if you have a business the extra rights you get obviously mean you should be first to take a hit when it comes to paying for those with lesser rights


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

DT said:


> But society has always been that way, if you are difference you get treated differently, not acceptable I agree but make as many rules and pass as many as you like you wont change how some people are


Passing laws might not change the way some people "think" but it can stop they way they "behave" or in other words it can stop discrimination and punish those who abuse or discriminate against others.


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> See the hard working person supporting themselves has far more rights than anyone else, and if you have a business the extra rights you get obviously mean you should be first to take a hit when it comes to paying for those with lesser rights


What does allowing same sex marriage cost you?


----------



## Calvine

emmaviolet said:


> But you questioned if 'we' had any rights. I still don't know who you meant by we. If you could elaborate please. You also said you couldn't find your rights.


Well, the way I have read @DT's posts is that she feels too much emphasis is put on certain issues including: rights for gay people; same-sex marriages for the same group of people; and abortion, and that there are other important issues to worry about. There are other issues which affect us all (yes...'we' are not all affected by the above but they seem to be top of the list). Their rights are not going to change. We do not throw gay people of high buildings. And a lot of people question why unborn babies have no rights. There is a clinic not far from here which constantly has people outside protesting...


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> What does allowing same sex marriage cost you?


Nothing, why how much are you paying?


----------



## havoc

Dr Pepper said:


> Nothing, why how much are you paying?


You appeared to be claiming that equal rights for minorities were a financial burden on tax paying individuals and businesses.


----------



## Calvine

Dr Pepper said:


> Nothing, why how much are you paying?


Hahaha...light relief! Made me laugh anyway!


----------



## JANICE199

http://yourbrexit.co.uk/news/breaki...minster-take-seats-topple-torydup-government/

*BREAKING: Sinn Fein MPs fly to Westminster to 'take seats and topple Tory/DUP government'*

I have no idea if this is a reliable source


----------



## KittenKong

JANICE199 said:


> http://yourbrexit.co.uk/news/breaki...minster-take-seats-topple-torydup-government/
> 
> *BREAKING: Sinn Fein MPs fly to Westminster to 'take seats and topple Tory/DUP government'*
> 
> I have no idea if this is a reliable source


Fantastic if it's true!


----------



## emmaviolet

Calvine said:


> Well, the way I have read @DT's posts is that she feels too much emphasis is put on certain issues including: rights for gay people; same-sex marriages for the same group of people; and abortion, and that there are other important issues to worry about. There are other issues which affect us all (yes...'we' are not all affected by the above but they seem to be top of the list). Their rights are not going to change. We do not throw gay people of high buildings. And a lot of people question why unborn babies have no rights. There is a clinic not far from here which constantly has people outside protesting...


Yes, that was one post, but the other questioned where her rights were as she couldn't see them.

These rights are fundamental. You need to ensure people's rights before you look at other things.

If you think that people are no longer persecuted for being homosexual then you're quite wrong. Hate crimes are actually on the rise. The DUP do not want gay people to have rights, they will be in a huge position of power now. People are right to be worried.


----------



## havoc

KittenKong said:


> Fantastic if it's true!


No it isn't. We really don't need it. We need to get to the summer recess and let the Conservatives fight it out among themselves.


----------



## Zaros

Calvine said:


> Why not? At least the old boy would give us a laugh; and there are few enough of those around this week .


No comment.


----------



## KittenKong

Before the General Election.....

They need to question May's own stance on Gay rights from this voting record. Fancy voting against repealing the Section (Clause) 28 act for example?

No wonder she's keen to work with the DUP.


----------



## Calvine

emmaviolet said:


> If you think that people are no longer persecuted for being homosexual


I didn't say that...you do tend to cherry-pick don't you?



emmaviolet said:


> you're quite wrong.


And I imagine that you, as ever, are quite right.:Yawn


----------



## emmaviolet

Calvine said:


> I didn't say that...you do tend to cherry-pick don't you?
> 
> And I imagine that you, as ever, are quite right.:Yawn


Not really, you said homosexuals were not thrown from buildings, I believe that's not the only form of persecution for them.


----------



## KittenKong

havoc said:


> No it isn't. We really don't need it. We need to get to the summer recess and let the Conservatives fight it out among themselves.


The Daily Express reported this too.

They aren't fighting amongst themselves though are they. As expected they're rallying around her to give them Strong and Stable leadership. They fell for her new soundbites.

They obviously saw the reappointment of Michael Gove as a way of improving their popularity too.

Dear God.....


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

How sad that we are even having this discussion  Why do we want to even consider, remotely, such backward steps when we should be looking forwards. What message does it give out to bigots and extremists and what next? Whether or not the abortion limit should be lowered by a few weeks is something that needs to be debated in the proper way - for a start it should be in the manifesto of any party intending to do it so that people have the chance to take into account when voting. Do we really want to see the return to back street abortionists and young women being forced to go through labour then give their babies away? Seriously it is not democratic and not right to have the DUP holding any power/sway.


----------



## Elles

I thought we were all so much better off in the 50s and 60s? 

It wasn't just politicians, homosexuality was against the law (for men, women couldn't be gay), we've come a long way since then. No one is talking about taking rights from gays, the discussion is about whether they can get married in church. Personally I think it should be up to the church, they should be allowed to if they want, but not forced to and it should be left to the church elders to thrash it out, not the government.

I doubt the DUP will have much influence over abortion either. They've been asked to back May on Brexit, not take Britain back to the dark ages and Ruth Davidson has more MPs on her side than the DUP anyway, so if Scotland conservatives vote against, May still won't get her majority.

If Sinn Fein have decided to bring down the government, it'll all be yesterday's news anyway.


----------



## Elles

KittenKong said:


> Fantastic if it's true!


No it isn't. May's government have their hands tied and cannot implement the more extreme of their policies, the political face of the IRA bringing down the British government, is a disaster. We need PR and less extremism, not more.


----------



## Calvine

emmaviolet said:


> Not really, you said homosexuals were not thrown from buildings, I believe that's not the only form of persecution for them.


Add 'nit-picking' to 'cherry-picking'.


----------



## havoc

KittenKong said:


> They aren't fighting amongst themselves though are they. As expected they're rallying around her


Do you think? What else do you expect them to say?


----------



## emmaviolet

Calvine said:


> Add 'nit-picking' to 'cherry-picking'.


Oh I see, no comprehensive argument, so just random insults.

Fair play to you.


----------



## Jesthar

DT said:


> One of the main reasons why people have turned from the conservative to labour apart from brexit is the NHS I know this is old news but let's not forget Tony Blair's stance on pfi. And feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't it Tony Blair started this private funding
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/hea...efends-PFI-as-NHS-trusts-face-bankruptcy.html


PFI was actually introduced by the preceding Tory government. Blair and co. simply used it in ways it wasn't originally intended, which has resulted in the current situation. I have a family member involved in hostpital design who warned about it as they could see where it would lead, but New Labour were far too busy trying to be Tory Lite and get into bed with big business to worry about the long term consequences...



Dr Pepper said:


> Rubbish, you have plenty of rights over the gay unemployed ethnic minority chap living on benefits. You have the right to pay your tax and NI, you have the right to tax, mot and insure your vehicle, you have the right to pay your council tax. If you run a business you get even more rights, you get the right to pay into someone else's pension, the right to pay for people not to work and go on holiday, the right to pay tax on any profit, the right to pay employer's NI, the right to pay business rates, the right to pay for your rubbish to be collected, the right to be a unpaid tax collector on any sales you make.
> 
> See the hard working person supporting themselves has far more rights than anyone else, and if you have a business the extra rights you get obviously mean you should be first to take a hit when it comes to paying for those with lesser rights


I think you are confusing the word 'right' with 'responsibility'


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> Do you think? What else do you expect them to say?


Would that be in the same way as Labour MPs suddenly rallying around Corbyn, despite 172 of them trying to boot him less than a year ago?


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> Would that be in the same way as Labour MPs suddenly rallying around Corbyn, despite 172 of them trying to boot him less than a year ago?


It's 180 degrees out. Those rallying round Corbyn now are doing so individually because he's on the up whereas the official statements from Tories about supporting May are the official line and there's no other statement can be made. There's nothing quite as worrying as public support from Tory MPs - they are absolutely ruthless.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Jesthar said:


> I think you are confusing the word 'right' with 'responsibility'


It's a common error, there's a whole bunch of people that get confused about having a responsibility to work and provide for themselves, because they have the right to £20,000 a year in tax payer handouts for doing nothing and have been doing just that for generations.


----------



## Calvine

JANICE199 said:


> I have no idea if this is a reliable source


I have no idea, @JANICE199: you can never be sure, can you. If you look online there's obviously a lot of 'clickbait'. 'Orrible Osborne is now editor of the Evening Standard, he hates TM because she sacked him, so you have to take _his_ headlines with a pinch or two of salt. Or a salt mine. BBC and Sky are biased.


----------



## Calvine

emmaviolet said:


> just random insults.


Is that the best you can manage! Stay on the thread a bit longer, you will see plenty of REAL insults...maybe you wouldn't recognise them as such tho. Please don't bother to reply as I shan't bother to read your comment as I find you somewhat irritating..


----------



## emmaviolet

Calvine said:


> Is that the best you can manage! Stay on the thread a bit longer, you will see plenty of REAL insults...maybe you wouldn't recognise them as such tho. Please don't bother to reply as I shan't bother to read your comment as I find you somewhat irritating..


I actually was not going to reply to you anymore, but thank you, for you to call me irritating I find a great compliment.

Calling someone out on their crap is not nitpicking. Persecution and discrimination are about more than chucking people off buildings and still exist today.

Anyway, I won't bother to carry on with this line of discussion or reply further to you. Much better things to do today, thankfully.


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> No it isn't. May's government have their hands tied and cannot implement the more extreme of their policies, the political face of the IRA bringing down the British government, is a disaster. We need PR and less extremism, not more.


My worry, or should I say May worry is with her position seriously weakened she may succumb to some of the more extreme demands from the DUP to gain their support. Rock the boat with that lot and the co-operation is over.

I have waited over 30 years for PR. It isn't going to happen, not now nor in the next 30 years. Probably too late for me then. The, "First past the post" method is decidedly British. They wouldn't want a more continental system would they, especially now the UK is leaving the EU.

Whatever people think of Sinn Fein they have as much right to take their seats in parliament should they choose to as the DUP have.

The impression I'm getting from some, not suggesting yourself as I agree they should be less extremism, is they find it ok for the DUP and not Sinn Fein.

Both parties have a rather despicable past.....


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> It's 180 degrees out. Those rallying round Corbyn now are doing so individually because he's on the up whereas the official statements from Tories about supporting May are the official line and there's no other statement can be made. There's nothing quite as worrying as public support from Tory MPs - they are absolutely ruthless.


To be fair, I would say all MPs are ruthless. Just have a look at people like Clive Lewis, who has the cheek to launch into Chris Leslie, despite looking for support to topple Corbyn only four months ago. That's a huge volte-face in a very short amount of time.


----------



## Jesthar

Dr Pepper said:


> It's a common error, there's a whole bunch of people that get confused about having a responsibility to work and provide for themselves, because they have the right to £20,000 a year in tax payer handouts for doing nothing and have been doing just that for generations.


I would rather have a tiny, tiny minority exploit the system than see it shut down and many who need aid through no fault of their own be left unsupported.

Besides, benefit fraud costs a mere drop in the national financial bucket, especially compared with the large scale tax evasion and avoidance practised by many big corporations. But for some reason, the other end of the spectrum comes in for far less scruitiny...


----------



## Elles

I'm not at all impressed with either DUP or Sinn Fein, but I'm sure Ruth and her Scottish Conservatives will be having none of it. She doesn't look to be a doormat and May needs her now more than ever. If she hadn't taken the Scottish seats from Nicola, the Conservatives would be in an even worse mess. 

Of course May appears ruthless, she'd team up with practically anyone it seems and didn't care one jot what the public think about ivory and foxhunting. She thought the public were racist, after all they voted for brexit so they must be, and that her stance on immigration and her hard brexit would swing it for her. 

It didn't, because we're not. Racism, or xenophobia was not the number 1 reason people wanted to leave the Eu. They wanted Brussels to have less muscle and didn't like the idea of a European super state with their own army and Britain giving them money. I'd say that was the number 1 reason, with immigration, but not necessarily racism, being number 2. Of course there are racists and xenophobes, but they're not the majority.

May promised arsenic when the public wanted apple pie and cream. We all know politicians lie, why change the habit of centuries. Ironically May didn't lie. She said she'd hold a vote to repeal fox hunting. True. She said she'd not ban the Ivory trade. True. She said she was going to continue with austerity. True. She said a lot of things people didn't like, all of them were true. It was her truths people didn't like, not her lies.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Sir John Major: I am 'wary' about DUP deal*









The World at One

BBC Radio 4

Posted at13:55
Sir John Major has said he is "wary" and "dubious" about a deal with the DUP.

The former prime minister, who was one of the architects of the peace process in Northern Ireland, told Martha Kearney that he understands why Theresa May "wants to shore up her parliamentary position", but that a "fundamental part of the peace process" in Northern Ireland is that the UK government "needs to remain impartial".

He added "people shouldn't regard [the peace process] as a given" and that "we cannot know if that impartiality is going to be crucial at some stage in the future".


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> To be fair, I would say all MPs are ruthless. Just have a look at people like Clive Lewis, who has the cheek to launch into Chris Leslie, despite looking for support to topple Corbyn only four months ago. That's a huge volte-face in a very short amount of time.


He isn't being ruthless he is being honest. It was looking like Corbyn wasn't going to live up to expectations. Even my hubby who joined labour because of Corbyn was disappointed in him & worried the labour party might implode. Corbyn proved everyone wrong. And like Clive Lewis, my hubby couldn't be happier about that. Chris Leslie has done nothing but undermine Corbyn from day one. He lacks the humility of Harriett Harmond, in acknowledging Corbyn's incredible achievement. Chris Leslie should get behind Corbyn now.


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> He isn't being ruthless he is being honest. It was looking like Corbyn wasn't going to live up to expectations. Even my hubby who joined labour because of Corbyn was disappointed in him & worried the labour party might implode. Corbyn proved everyone wrong. And like Clive Lewis, my hubby couldn't be happier about that. Chris Leslie has done nothing but undermine Corbyn from day one. He lacks the humility of Harriett Harmond, in acknowledging Corbyn's incredible achievement. Chris Leslie should get behind Corbyn now.


Everyone sees things differently. I think that an awful lot of Labour MPs have suddenly realised that there's a possibility that they may be in power soon and are now desperately jockeying for position. Do they think that he will ignore their previous behaviour? I actually feel a little sorry for him, it must be extremely lonely up there, and he can only trust one other person. At least Chris Leslie has remained honest.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

View image on Twitter









Follow
George Osborne

✔@George_Osborne

As the DUP leadership turn up in Downing Street this lunchtime, here's our second edition @EveningStandard ...

1:21 PM - 13 Jun 2017


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn began his remarks by saying Ken Clarke, the new father of the House, seemed to him to be "a very well established MP" when he entered Parliament 34 years ago.

To roars of laughter, he said:

I've never quite forgotten the image of the Member for Rushcliffe in the tearoom wearing Hush Puppies, eating bacon sandwiches, drinking super strength lager and carrying a cigar while taking a break from a debate on healthy living."

Mr Corbyn then congratulates the prime minister and invites her to reflect that "democracy is a wondrous thing and can throw up some unexpected results".

He looks forward to a Queen's Speech "just as soon as the coalition of chaos" is put together.

Otherwise, he adds, Labour is ready "to provide strong and stable leadership in the national interest".


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> *Sir John Major: I am 'wary' about DUP deal*
> He added "people shouldn't regard [the peace process] as a given" and that "we cannot know if that impartiality is going to be crucial at some stage in the future".


He would know about peace talks , he managed his wife and Edwina Currie at the same time !


----------



## rona

kimthecat said:


> He would know about peace talks , he managed his wife and Edwina Currie at the same time !


Same as Cobyn and his wife Jane and Diane Abbott


----------



## kimthecat

rona said:


> Same as Cobyn and his wife Jane and Diane Abbott


At the same time ? I didn't know that . I assumed Diane was a lover but not while he was married .


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> He would know about peace talks , he managed his wife and Edwina Currie at the same time !


Then spilled the beans about it in her autobiography; nasty thing to do. I also read that John Major was carrying on with one of the domestic staff?


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> Then spilled the beans about it in her autobiography; nasty thing to do. I also read that John Major was carrying on with one of the domestic staff?


 and to think they called him the Grey man . Must be something to do with power being an aphrodisiac,


----------



## emmaviolet

kimthecat said:


> At the same time ? I didn't know that . I assumed Diane was a lover but not while he was married .


It was when he and his wife had split up.


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> Everyone sees things differently. I think that an awful lot of Labour MPs have suddenly realised that there's a possibility that they may be in power soon and are now desperately jockeying for position. Do they think that he will ignore their previous behaviour? I actually feel a little sorry for him, it must be extremely lonely up there, and he can only trust one other person. At least Chris Leslie has remained honest.


Of course he will, he has always tried to reach out, even to Blairites like Leslie. Clive Lewis backed Corbyn to be labours leader. Naturally he was extremely worried when labours polling was nose diving. Chris Leslie is anything but honest, he doesn't have the good grace admit he wrong about Corbyn. If the likes of him hadn't done everything to undermine Corbyn, Labour might be in government now.

This is what you call honest. Owen Smith graciously saying 'I was wrong'.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-wal...-s-owen-smith-i-was-wrong-about-jeremy-corbyn


----------



## emmaviolet

kimthecat said:


> He would know about peace talks , he managed his wife and Edwina Currie at the same time !


Well he would know very well because he is credited to the peace deal. If there was ever one person to listen to about peace in Ireland, it would be him. 
He's very level headed and his perspective on this is highly respected.


----------



## 1290423

Calvine said:


> Is that the best you can manage! Stay on the thread a bit longer, you will see plenty of REAL insults...maybe you wouldn't recognise them as such tho. Please don't bother to reply as I shan't bother to read your comment as I find you somewhat irritating..


Only ssomewhat


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> I'm not at all impressed with either DUP or Sinn Fein, but I'm sure Ruth and her Scottish Conservatives will be having none of it. She doesn't look to be a doormat and May needs her now more than ever. If she hadn't taken the Scottish seats from Nicola, the Conservatives would be in an even worse mess.
> 
> Of course May appears ruthless, she'd team up with practically anyone it seems and didn't care one jot what the public think about ivory and foxhunting. She thought the public were racist, after all they voted for brexit so they must be, and that her stance on immigration and her hard brexit would swing it for her.
> 
> It didn't, because we're not. Racism, or xenophobia was not the number 1 reason people wanted to leave the Eu. They wanted Brussels to have less muscle and didn't like the idea of a European super state with their own army and Britain giving them money. I'd say that was the number 1 reason, with immigration, but not necessarily racism, being number 2. Of course there are racists and xenophobes, but they're not the majority.
> 
> May promised arsenic when the public wanted apple pie and cream. We all know politicians lie, why change the habit of centuries. Ironically May didn't lie. She said she'd hold a vote to repeal fox hunting. True. She said she'd not ban the Ivory trade. True. She said she was going to continue with austerity. True. She said a lot of things people didn't like, all of them were true. It was her truths people didn't like, not her lies.


Indeed, May assumed the typical representation of UK citizens are Sun, Mail and Express readers.

How wrong she was.



rottiepointerhouse said:


> View image on Twitter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Follow
> George Osborne
> 
> ✔@George_Osborne
> 
> As the DUP leadership turn up in Downing Street this lunchtime, here's our second edition @EveningStandard ...
> 
> 1:21 PM - 13 Jun 2017


. Serves May right for sacking Osborne.

She does look a broken woman doesn't she.

Me thinks Arlene Foster will have the upper hand in this "government".

I can see the sparks flying.

May this coalition of chaos end badly.


----------



## havoc

KittenKong said:


> Whatever people think of Sinn Fein they have as much right to take their seats in parliament should they choose to as the DUP have


Their stance has always been that as nationalists they don't believe Westminster has any right to dictate policy on any part of the island of Ireland and in return they don't have any reason ( as Irish nationalists) to vote on British policy.

Even my OH who was brought up an NI loyalist sees this as a principled move - he nearly chokes on saying so mind you . We would hate to see them dragged in to this mess but we would understand it if they were taunted into doing so.


----------



## Arnie83

Perhaps someone can help me with this ...

May specifically called the election the Brexit election. It was so that the voters could endorse her Brexit approach.

The voters clearly did nothing of the sort.

Michael Howard today said that the government's Brexit approach couldn't change because a year ago the people (or pee-pull as he put it) voted in a referendum.

Who does he think voted in the general election? Shouldn't their current views be respected even though the Tory Brexiteers don't like them?


----------



## kimthecat

emmaviolet said:


> It was when he and his wife had split up.


I thought so .


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> and to think they called him the Grey man . Must be something to do with power being an aphrodisiac,


Well let's not forget about David Mellor :Yuck


----------



## kimthecat

MiffyMoo said:


> Well let's not forget about David Mellor :Yuck


 I wish I could ! :Vomit


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Of course he will, he has always tried to reach out, even to Blairites like Leslie. Clive Lewis backed Corbyn to be labours leader. Naturally he was extremely worried when labours polling was nose diving. Chris Leslie is anything but honest, he doesn't have the good grace admit he wrong about Corbyn. If the likes of him hadn't done everything to undermine Corbyn, Labour might be in government now.
> 
> This is what you call honest. Owen Smith graciously saying 'I was wrong'.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-wal...-s-owen-smith-i-was-wrong-about-jeremy-corbyn


As I said, we all see it differently, and you seem to be remarkably good at spinning for someone you like. To be honest, I don't think Leslie is wrong


----------



## emmaviolet

Arnie83 said:


> Perhaps someone can help me with this ...
> 
> May specifically called the election the Brexit election. It was so that the voters could endorse her Brexit approach.
> 
> The voters clearly did nothing of the sort.
> 
> Michael Howard today said that the government's Brexit approach couldn't change because a year ago the people (or pee-pull as he put it) voted in a referendum.
> 
> Who does he think voted in the general election? Shouldn't their current views be respected even though the Tory Brexiteers don't like them?


This is what John Major hit on earlier, he really is very measured compared to other PM's.
He said that there is still 48% of the nation who need to be listened to and represented and we've been ignored.

Even people who voted leave didn't know the full ramifications of what the vote meant. They couldn't, as the MPs didn't either.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Arnie83 said:


> Perhaps someone can help me with this ...
> 
> May specifically called the election the Brexit election. It was so that the voters could endorse her Brexit approach.
> 
> The voters clearly did nothing of the sort.
> 
> Michael Howard today said that the government's Brexit approach couldn't change because a year ago the people (or pee-pull as he put it) voted in a referendum.
> 
> Who does he think voted in the general election? Shouldn't their current views be respected even though the Tory Brexiteers don't like them?


Nobody can say outright why anyone voted for any party. This was a general election, not another referendum on Brexit.


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> I wish I could ! :Vomit


Wasn't it Moppy or something like that? I could Google it, but I'm too scared to


----------



## kimthecat

MiffyMoo said:


> Wasn't it Moppy or something like that? I could Google it, but I'm too scared to


 I dont know , I dont want to know


----------



## kimthecat

John Bercow is re-elected as Speaker for the third time .


----------



## Elles

MiffyMoo said:


> Well let's not forget about David Mellor :Yuck


And what about Jeremy Thorpe? Norman Scott is a nice chap.

I wouldn't want to even think of politicians like Cyril Smith. 

There have been some very bad people in positions of power.


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> John Bercow is re-elected as Speaker for the third time .


 Poison dwarf


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> As I said, we all see it differently, and you seem to be remarkably good at spinning for someone you like. To be honest, I don't think Leslie is wrong


You're the one doing the spinning. There's nothing honest about Chris Leslie, he is a cut & dried neoliberal, he hates everything Corbyn stands for. He seemed more disappointed than the tories with the result lol


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> And what about Jeremy Thorpe? Norman Scott is a nice chap.
> 
> I wouldn't want to even think of politicians like Cyril Smith.
> 
> There have been some very bad people in positions of power.


What's the saying "Power tends to corrupt and Absolute power corrupts absolutely". Not quite absolute, but obviously near enough


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> You're the one doing the spinning. There's nothing honest about Chris Leslie, he is a cut & dried neoliberal, he hates everything Corbyn stands for. He seemed more disappointed than the tories with the result lol
> 
> View attachment 314532


Once again we will have to agree to disagree


----------



## Elles

'Neoliberal' is soup du jour isn't it.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> 'Neoliberal' is soup du jour isn't it.


Gotta crowbar it in somehow!


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> Once again we will have to agree to disagree


What's new


----------



## rona

kimthecat said:


> At the same time ? I didn't know that . I assumed Diane was a lover but not while he was married .


Apparently she threatened his wife and told her to go away


----------



## MiffyMoo

rona said:


> Apparently she threatened his wife and told her to go away


No way! That's so rude. And aggressive. No man should give another woman that much power over his wife


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> Gotta crowbar it in somehow!


Neoliberalism is why many people were sick of new labour - they didn't want tory light, that was never the founding principles of the party. Labour would never have adopted PFIs if they had rejected neoliberalism & then people like you wouldn't have been able to use against labour to excuse the tories trashing our NHS


----------



## kimthecat

Rona said: ↑
Apparently she threatened his wife and told her to go away



MiffyMoo said:


> No way! That's so rude. And aggressive. No man should give another woman that much power over his wife


I expect that's just gossip .  Why two woman would want to fight over Jerry is beyond me .


----------



## Arnie83

MiffyMoo said:


> Nobody can say outright why anyone voted for any party. This was a general election, not another referendum on Brexit.


When May calls it the Brexit election, specifically called so that she can get endorsement for her negotiating stance it's a bit hard for the Tories to dismiss the result as anything other than a rejection of that negotiating stance. Isn't it?


----------



## rona

kimthecat said:


> Rona said: ↑
> Apparently she threatened his wife and told her to go away
> 
> I expect that's just gossip .  Why two woman would want to fight over Jerry is beyond me .


Well everyone else uses gossip/headlines as fact


----------



## havoc

Arnie83 said:


> When May calls it the Brexit election, specifically called so that she can get endorsement for her negotiating stance it's a bit hard for the Tories to dismiss the result as anything other than a rejection of that negotiating stance. Isn't it?


Well you would think so but having announced it as a Brexit election she then never gave any further detail, never told us any plans, never mentioned a future outside the EU. Some of that is because the electorate decided what this election was about but TM never made any effort to get it back on her stated track. Looking back it's quite baffling and it's going to make interesting reading in the history books.


----------



## rona

Arnie83 said:


> When May calls it the Brexit election, specifically called so that she can get endorsement for her negotiating stance it's a bit hard for the Tories to dismiss the result as anything other than a rejection of that negotiating stance. Isn't it?


As she actually got more votes than any other Tory government since the 1970s even with austerity, I think that's a pretty big endorsement for Brexit


----------



## kimthecat

I blame the planets for this mess. they've been retrograding and at opposite angles or something like that .


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> Rona said: ↑
> Apparently she threatened his wife and told her to go away
> 
> I expect that's just gossip .  Why two woman would want to fight over Jerry is beyond me .


Well that is a very valid point


----------



## Elles

After 10 years of the public voting for Tony Blair's new labour, he was ousted by the Iraq war and 9/11 and that people thought he was becoming too arrogant, not because of neoliberalism (which is an exaggerated insult, not a true description ). 

The only reason Corbyn appeared to technically do better with the numbers than Blair is because we've returned pretty much to a two party state. The lib dems haven't recovered from the coalition, which lib dem voters saw as a betrayal and ukip was brexit and Nigel. Don't forget too, I believe in some areas Greens and lib dems didn't field a representative, if they thought it would boost Labour. 

The conservatives also did better if we count numbers, so when it came down to it, our first past the post didn't give Labour enough seats, despite all the promises and tactics. However, for all of these reasons, counting numbers doesn't give us a fair comparison against past efforts.

The Conservatives think it was a mistake to call it a brexit election and think they lost their majority on local issues, not brexit. They think we still want the brexit they offered, because it's pretty much what Jeremy offered too. He too said out of the single market and was a bit vague about immigration and free movement, so there was nothing there to change their mind. The lib dems offered a softer option with a choice and few voted for them.

However, our Scottish friends did better than expected and with a weakened government, Ruth Davidson may have some say. She is against a hard brexit and pressing the PM for a softer agreement, as are other 'remainer' MPs. There is some talk of a cross party brexit. We'll have to see.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Arnie83 said:


> When May calls it the Brexit election, specifically called so that she can get endorsement for her negotiating stance it's a bit hard for the Tories to dismiss the result as anything other than a rejection of that negotiating stance. Isn't it?


So did you vote purely on Brexit? I know that nobody else on here did


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> So did you vote purely on Brexit? I know that nobody else on here did


I think that's rather the point, the electorate rejected her attempt to make it a single issue election.


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> I think that's rather the point, the electorate rejected her attempt to make it a single issue election.


Except that's the argument that Arnie is putting forward.


----------



## Elles

The conservatives were doing fine until their manifesto said death to the foxes, elephants and old people and Theresa May started behaving like one of the Stepford wives crossed with a Dalek. Their performance in the local council elections wasn't too shabby. I don't think people are quite ready to give up on neoliberalism just yet. 

We need a British version of Macron. Ex Investment banker and now joint prince of Andorra or some such thing as French president, not that up on French politics, he doesn't sound like a Corbyn and he's better looking and better dressed. We'd soon see if folk have given up on bankers and princes then. :Artist


----------



## Arnie83

rona said:


> As she actually got more votes than any other Tory government since the 1970s even with austerity, I think that's a pretty big endorsement for Brexit


A laudable interpretation!

Of course Brexit itself is not in need of any endorsement because we all accept that it's going to happen. It was the Tory approach on which the electorate passed judgement when they didn't give May the large majority she asked for, but instead reduced the one she already had.


----------



## Arnie83

MiffyMoo said:


> So did you vote purely on Brexit? I know that nobody else on here did


Of course not, though it was a factor. But that doesn't invalidate the point I was making, as your avoidance of actually answering it suggests.


----------



## Calvine

MiffyMoo said:


> Well let's not forget about David Mellor :Yuck


In his football strip?


----------



## Arnie83

MiffyMoo said:


> Except that's the argument that Arnie is putting forward.


No it isn't. The point I'm making is that Theresa May called it the Brexit election, and Theresa May cannot now say that her Brexit approach is still valid by claiming that the election wasn't about Brexit.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Arnie83 said:


> No it isn't. The point I'm making is that Theresa May called it the Brexit election, and Theresa May cannot now say that her Brexit approach is still valid by claiming that the election wasn't about Brexit.


What? I'm well and truly confused now


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> Why two woman would want to fight over Jerry is beyond me


Well, he grows fruit on his allotment and makes jam!


----------



## MiffyMoo

Arnie83 said:


> Of course not, though it was a factor. But that doesn't invalidate the point I was making, as your avoidance of actually answering it suggests.


Not avoiding answering it at all, I just have no clue what you're on about


----------



## MiffyMoo

Calvine said:


> Well, he grows fruit on his allotment and makes jam!


Good with his hands?


----------



## Calvine

MiffyMoo said:


> Good with his hands?


@MiffyMoo: behave please!.


----------



## stuaz

kimthecat said:


> John Bercow is re-elected as Speaker for the third time .


Shock horror. Long live democracy..


----------



## Guest

Could this happen in UK? Our Basic Finn Party (our version of UKIP with "normal populists" and hard wing nazis) chose a new leadership: 

The chairman is hard core nazi (was sentenced for hate speech), spoke about family values (was caught having a child with his mistress and his wife), the second in rank believes in creatism + was charged with hate speech, the third had been arrested for stealing church silver (when younger) + for hate speech, the fourth put a video of himself and his missus on Youtube, acting "a rock star", wearing almost nothing, holding a black dil*o and whipping a topless woman in black leather + charges with hate speech. Our present conservative government didn´t want to form government with them and told in public they´ll resign and start new negotiations with other parties. 

But then the remains of the BasicFinns, the old leadership, who have three ministers and who are not chagred with hate speech, decided that they´ll resign from BasicFinns and start their own group in parliament, the NewChoice. Now our prime minister said that, hey, no need to resign, business as usual, but instead of the BasicFinns, they work with the NewChoice. All ministers will be the same. 

Who said politics is boring? Maybe this is the best thing that could have happened to get the new generation interested in politics.At least it was fun to watch the gloating faces of the nazis change into sour faces

p.s if anyone is interested in the video, I´ll find the link. But be warned, it is utterly stupid. True colours of nazis, though IMO.


----------



## noushka05

MrsZee said:


> That is the point, and I´m surprised most people didn´t know that when voting for Brexit. (well, not surprised, as the amount of misinformation was huge). But the fact is that you can´t have both. If you want free market, it will cost you more than before, unless you want to follow current EU - rules about freedom of movement. Pity that only now many start understanding what you actually are about to lose.


We were so badly informed & people were deliberately lied to by the vote leave camp - no one could call the referendum a democratic vote when we didn't know what we were voting for & many were duped by the lies. Even with the best deal possible we are going to be so much poorer outside the EU. I think labour are wrong on this issue - but people call me undemocratic for saying they should keep us in the EU.

Have a look at this though, by Mike Galsworthy of the Scientists for the EU, Mrs Zee x








Satori said:


> It is nearly accurate. The PM does not have to resign if a deal is not reached, thoughs she can if she wants to of course. She has to resign if she goes ahead with the Queen's speech and it is amended. The PM has the option to instruct the Queen to give a Queen's speech even if she has no agreement to a working majority. This would in effect be daring the house to vote down the speech and has been done once before (though that was a King's speech of course).


Thank you for this Satori, tis very interesting.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

*Age now the dividing line in British politics, not class*

More from pollster's breakdown...

Posted at18:04
Some of the snippets YouGov pick out - the wording is theirs:


Class is no longer the dividing line in British politics - ABC1 and C2DE vote for any party is about the same…
whereas age matters much more - Britain's young overwhelmingly vote Labour, while older Brits vote Tory
Young people still far less likely to vote than their elders - 58% among 18-24-year-olds compared to 79% among 60+
Education level another key divider: the more highly educated someone is, the more likely they are to vote Lab/LD
Working people were more likely to vote Lab than Con - retired people were the only group that backed the Tories
Men were more likely to vote Tory than Labour (45/39), while women were evenly split 43/43


----------



## cheekyscrip

rottiepointerhouse said:


> *Age now the dividing line in British politics, not class*
> 
> More from pollster's breakdown...
> 
> Posted at18:04
> Some of the snippets YouGov pick out - the wording is theirs:
> 
> 
> Class is no longer the dividing line in British politics - ABC1 and C2DE vote for any party is about the same…
> whereas age matters much more - Britain's young overwhelmingly vote Labour, while older Brits vote Tory
> Young people still far less likely to vote than their elders - 58% among 18-24-year-olds compared to 79% among 60+
> Education level another key divider: the more highly educated someone is, the more likely they are to vote Lab/LD
> Working people were more likely to vote Lab than Con - retired people were the only group that backed the Tories
> Men were more likely to vote Tory than Labour (45/39), while women were evenly split 43/43


That will make Tories to double the uni fees, to make sure no more English kids get corrupted and vote Labour!

Suddenly I feel very young again!!!

Five years from now two cheeklets will be able to vote!!!

My eldest asked for books he can relate to Marxism!!! (Advised Tolstoy, Soviets did good job of that...)..

Will we end in relation to EU like Cuba to USA?


----------



## Elles

Your nazi Finn party sounds more like BNP and the National Front than UKIP.


----------



## noushka05

MrsZee said:


> Could this happen in UK? Our Basic Finn Party (our version of UKIP with "normal populists" and hard wing nazis) chose a new leadership:
> 
> The chairman is hard core nazi (was sentenced for hate speech), spoke about family values (was caught having a child with his mistress and his wife), the second in rank believes in creatism + was charged with hate speech, the third had been arrested for stealing church silver (when younger) + for hate speech, the fourth put a video of himself and his missus on Youtube, acting "a rock star", wearing almost nothing, holding a black dil*o and whipping a topless woman in black leather + charges with hate speech. Our present conservative government didn´t want to form government with them and told in public they´ll resign and start new negotiations with other parties.
> 
> But then the remains of the BasicFinns, the old leadership, who have three ministers and who are not chagred with hate speech, decided that they´ll resign from BasicFinns and start their own group in parliament, the NewChoice. Now our prime minister said that, hey, no need to resign, business as usual, but instead of the BasicFinns, they work with the NewChoice. All ministers will be the same.
> 
> Who said politics is boring? Maybe this is the best thing that could have happened to get the new generation interested in politics.At least it was fun to watch the gloating faces of the nazis change into sour faces
> 
> p.s if anyone is interested in the video, I´ll find the link. But be warned, it is utterly stupid. True colours of nazis, though IMO.


I'm not sure that could happen here, though nothing would surprise me anymore lol

I'd love to see that video. Surely they can't be worse than the DUP. The more I look into these fruit cakes the more horrified I am by them.

Had to laugh at this video of the DUP someone has tampered with:Hilarious


----------



## noushka05

This is awesome. Poor old Chris Leslie, I bet he felt like a cuckoo in the nest








*Faisal Islam*‏Verified [email protected]*faisalislam* 8h8 hours ago

Jeremy Corbyn receiving rapturous applause from Opposition benches, 
as bemused Conservatives watch on as Commons returns:


----------



## Elles

Corbyn is being a bit bitchy isn't he. It's really bad how our representatives behave. They should all grow up.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> Corbyn is being a bit bitchy isn't he. It's really bad how our representatives behave. They should all grow up.


I think his ribbing was in good humour considering the malicious treatment he has received from May & the tories.


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> I think his ribbing was in good humour considering the malicious treatment he has received from May & the tories.


Of course you do lol.  He should have risen above it. They're all just as bad though. The country is going down the pan, we're facing a crisis, but that lot have to jeer and cheer and point score.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> Of course you do lol.  He should have risen above it. They're all just as bad though. The country is going down the pan, we're facing a crisis, but that lot have to jeer and cheer and point score.


They're not all just as bad Elles. The tories are greedy bunch of pathological liars. They have trashed this country. Corbyn has given people hope.


----------



## noushka05

*If Austerity Has Been So Necessary Why End It Now, Asks James O'Brien*.

Theresa May is going to abandon austerity despite the Tories telling us it was absolutely necessary for the past seven years - so what's changed?

This is James O'Brien's blistering take on the debacle.


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> They're not all just as bad Elles. The tories are greedy bunch of pathological liars. They have trashed this country. Corbyn has given people hope.


The Conservatives told the truth about a lot of things. We didn't like it. Now if they'd promised what Corbyn did, then they'd be liars. They're not socialists.

Did they lie when they said they want to bring back foxhunting? Did they lie when they said they want to keep the antique ivory trade? Did they lie when they said they want to cut immigration and take us out of the single market? Did they lie when they said they want your house bar 100k when you die? Did they lie when they said they want more austerity? I could go on. No they didn't lie about many things. And many said No thanks. So now the people have spoken and they have to change. Mostly.

We don't know about Corbyn. He's not PM and never has been. He doesn't know whether he can balance the books. Nor do all his experts and analysts. The Conservatives didn't know 'There's no money left'. Why would he be better informed in opposition? He's guessing basing his numbers on today, not tomorrow. What about interest rates? Borrowing? Inflation? The stock market? Brexit? It's all guesswork.

But like you say, you're a lefty. 

Perhaps I should put cynical skeptic in my avatar. 'Trust no one' is my motto.


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> Well, he grows fruit on his allotment and makes jam!


Wow , now I'm strangely attracted to him !


----------



## kimthecat

Elles said:


> Perhaps I should put cynical skeptic in my avatar. 'Trust no one' is my motto.


Mine too ! As for Corbyn giving hope , he might just as well have told everyone to buy lottery tickets because all he is offering is false hope ,


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> They're not all just as bad Elles. The tories are greedy bunch of pathological liars. They have trashed this country. Corbyn has given people hope.


No, the Conservative's told it as it actually is, Labour promised a utopia that could never be achieved. One party was living in fantasy the other reality.

Me thinks tactical and protest voting may just be a thing of the past.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Dr Pepper said:


> No, the Conservative's told it as it actually is, Labour promised a utopia that could never be achieved. One party was living in fantasy the other reality.
> 
> Me thinks tactical and protest voting may just be a thing of the past.


Interested to know what you base that on. I'm really a Conservative voter deep down but until they remove the pledge to hold a vote on the hunting ban and a few other things I strongly disagree with (triple lock on pensions being removed, winter fuel allowance & social care funding for starters) I will continue to vote for alternative parties especially as I can't stand the arrogance of our current Tory MP - he will not be getting my vote again, I'd rather abstain that vote for him. So this Tory who actually likes Jeremy Corbyn will continue to vote for the Lib Dems :Hilarious:Hilarious


----------



## Zaros

Dr Pepper said:


> the Conservative's may just be a thing of the past.


For the sake of the many, one can only hope this to be true.

They're a twisted version of Robin Hood, stealing from the poor and sharing the proceeds amongst themselves.
And if and when the poor have been stolen into non existence, they'll start stealing from each other because they just won't be able to help themselves.

Damn!:Facepalm

Of course they will. You can't change the habit of a lifetime.:Smug


----------



## Satori

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Interested to know what you base that on. I'm really a Conservative voter deep down but until they remove the pledge to hold a vote on the hunting ban and a few other things I strongly disagree with (triple lock on pensions being removed, winter fuel allowance & social care funding for starters) I will continue to vote for alternative parties especially as I can't stand the arrogance of our current Tory MP - he will not be getting my vote again, I'd rather abstain that vote for him. So this Tory who actually likes Jeremy Corbyn will continue to vote for the Lib Dems :Hilarious:Hilarious


I have the same sense as Dr Pepper on this. If, as is quite likely, there is to be another General Election within the year, many of those who voted tactically this time will get off the fence and choose a real party or face years of election after election. The looney stuff in the Tory manifesto will disappear and the likes of UKIP will not have the funds to field candidates in every seat.


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/feeding-homeless-to-be-banned-by-tory-run-westminster-113433

Can this vile government get much worse? Not content with putting the NI peace process in jeopardy plus reports May's going ahead with hard Brexit they now want to starve the most vulnerable in society too.

So much for, "Do not feed the pigeons".

They'll be, "Do not feed the homeless" signs as well.


----------



## Zaros

KittenKong said:


> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/feeding-homeless-to-be-banned-by-tory-run-westminster-113433
> 
> Can this vile government get much worse? Not content with putting the NI peace process in jeopardy plus reports May's going ahead with hard Brexit they now want to starve the most vulnerable in society too.
> 
> So much for, "Do not feed the pigeons".
> 
> They'll be, "Do not feed the homeless" signs as well.
> View attachment 314587
> View attachment 314588
> View attachment 314589


Aye. As I've repeatedly stated, Britain, fast becoming little America. A place where even tourists can be hauled away for handing out their holiday money to the desperate and the needy.
Tell you what, why don't they just make it an offence for disadvantaged and impoverished people to be ill whilst they're about it. That's sure to save the NHS a nice bit of cash.
The self serving, over ripe, pompous pack of little 845t4rd5!:Rage


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> Did they lie when they said they want to bring back foxhunting? Did they lie when they said they want to keep the antique ivory trade? Did they lie when they said they want to cut immigration and take us out of the single market? Did they lie when they said they want your house bar 100k when you die? Did they lie when they said they want more austerity? I could go on. No they didn't lie about many things. And many said No thanks. So now the people have spoken and they have to change.:


The difference between the Leave campaign and the general election however is, May was so convinced she would get her landslide thanks to 98% of the media backing her and the constant smear campaign against Corbyn and co it didn't matter how bad her proposals were.

She didn't believe the proposals were bad and thought they would be popular. With some people they actually are.

The Dementia Tax was disguised as upping the rate to £100k, Foxhunting is a British tradition. Patriots would love to see it back surely. Why should everyone subsidise free school meals and the winter fuel allowance? That will be popular. Tough on terror, until,thanks to YouTube footage of her belittling the police emerged from 2015 dismissing concerns about cutting police numbers.

Not forgetting Hard Brexit and cutting immigration, very popular with many of course.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> The Conservatives told the truth about a lot of things. We didn't like it. Now if they'd promised what Corbyn did, then they'd be liars. They're not socialists.
> 
> Did they lie when they said they want to bring back foxhunting? Did they lie when they said they want to keep the antique ivory trade? Did they lie when they said they want to cut immigration and take us out of the single market? Did they lie when they said they want your house bar 100k when you die? Did they lie when they said they want more austerity? I could go on. No they didn't lie about many things. And many said No thanks. So now the people have spoken and they have to change. Mostly.
> 
> We don't know about Corbyn. He's not PM and never has been. He doesn't know whether he can balance the books. Nor do all his experts and analysts. The Conservatives didn't know 'There's no money left'. Why would he be better informed in opposition? He's guessing basing his numbers on today, not tomorrow. What about interest rates? Borrowing? Inflation? The stock market? Brexit? It's all guesswork.
> 
> But like you say, you're a lefty.
> 
> Perhaps I should put cynical skeptic in my avatar. 'Trust no one' is my motto.





Dr Pepper said:


> No, the Conservative's told it as it actually is, Labour promised a utopia that could never be achieved. One party was living in fantasy the other reality.
> 
> Me thinks tactical and protest voting may just be a thing of the past.


No, what they did was show their true colours of what they would do to conservative voters if they thought they could get away with it. Conservative voters should beware  And then they had to u turned on just about every pledge They are completely untrustworthy.

Their austerity has been on of the greatest con tricks pulled on the people of this country. All it was was a transfer of wealth of public money, in the form of taxes & cuts to public services, into private pockets. I could write a list as long of my arm of the lies the tories have told & their smear campaign against Corbyn was pure propaganda it was absolutely vicious .

Labour's manifesto isnt a fantasy, their utopia could actually be our reality  Top economists understand the economy far better than we do. They support Corbyns progressive anti-austerity economy (the same austerity tories now say they are abandoning when they said is was essential) The tories are shameless liars. I cant stand liars.

Maybe people are fed up with the politics of hate & greed & think they deserve something better.

The tories are toxic, they & they alone have trashed this country. They will have to own this mess.


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/feeding-homeless-to-be-banned-by-tory-run-westminster-113433
> 
> Can this vile government get much worse? Not content with putting the NI peace process in jeopardy plus reports May's going ahead with hard Brexit they now want to starve the most vulnerable in society too.
> 
> So much for, "Do not feed the pigeons".
> 
> They'll be, "Do not feed the homeless" signs as well.
> View attachment 314587
> View attachment 314588
> View attachment 314589


OMG you do know how old that is?

Did it ever happen? I reckon the homeless are still being fed in Westminster.

In fact they are, I've just looked on two up to date sights of people who are running soup runs/kitchens


----------



## Cleo38

KittenKong said:


> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/feeding-homeless-to-be-banned-by-tory-run-westminster-113433
> 
> Can this vile government get much worse? Not content with putting the NI peace process in jeopardy plus reports May's going ahead with hard Brexit they now want to starve the most vulnerable in society too.
> 
> So much for, "Do not feed the pigeons".
> 
> They'll be, "Do not feed the homeless" signs as well.
> View attachment 314587
> View attachment 314588
> View attachment 314589


OMG, is this true? That is absolutely heartless ..... how can it be an offense to be poor & without a place to live??? It should mean that people are helped not bloody criminalised


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> The difference between the Leave campaign and the general election however is, May was so convinced she would get her landslide thanks to 98% of the media backing her and the constant smear campaign against Corbyn and co it didn't matter how bad her proposals were.
> 
> She didn't believe the proposals were bad and thought they would be popular. With some people they actually are.
> 
> The Dementia Tax was disguised as upping the rate to £100k, Foxhunting is a British tradition. Patriots would love to see it back surely. Why should everyone subsidise free school meals and the winter fuel allowance? That will be popular. Tough on terror, until,thanks to YouTube footage of her belittling the police emerged from 2015 dismissing concerns about cutting police numbers.
> 
> Not forgetting Hard Brexit and cutting immigration, very popular with many of course.


I didn't actually hear anything anti Corbyn come out of her mouth, whereas Corbyn never missed a chance to slag her


----------



## rona

Cleo38 said:


> OMG, is this true? That is absolutely heartless ..... how can it be an offense to be poor & without a place to live??? It should mean that people are helped not bloody criminalised


It's not true and it never happened


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> Mine too ! As for Corbyn giving hope , he might just as well have told everyone to buy lottery tickets because all he is offering is false hope ,


No, its the tories that conned us with their austerity. That's why millions of people are suffering, our public services & NHS are collapsing whilst the wealth of the richest doubled 

Labours vision is perfectly possible - https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jun/03/the-big-issue-labour-manifesto-what-economy-needs


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> I didn't actually hear anything anti Corbyn come out of her mouth, whereas Corbyn never missed a chance to slag her


:Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Calvine




----------



## MiffyMoo

Arnie83 said:


> Of course not, though it was a factor. But that doesn't invalidate the point I was making, as your avoidance of actually answering it suggests.


Here you go

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/...he-election-result-was-a-vote-against-brexit/


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> Your nazi Finn party sounds more like BNP and the National Front than UKIP.


Ugh, the idea of a naked Nick Griffin wielding a massive dildo :Vomit


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> It's not true and it never happened


If it didn't happen why was this FOI submitted in 2014?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCOLxNCUIAETduX.jpg

Dear Home Office,

Due to it now being illegal to feed homeless people on the streets (in a ruling a judge recently said "it was feeding a lifestyle"), please provide information or guidance as to how the public can help homeless people and stay within the law.

It is my understanding that it's Theresa May's new Policing Act in which people can be arrested for feeding homeless people.

Yours faithfully,

Mr Glynne Powell.


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/feeding-homeless-to-be-banned-by-tory-run-westminster-113433
> 
> Can this vile government get much worse? Not content with putting the NI peace process in jeopardy plus reports May's going ahead with hard Brexit they now want to starve the most vulnerable in society too.
> 
> So much for, "Do not feed the pigeons".
> 
> They'll be, "Do not feed the homeless" signs as well.
> View attachment 314587
> View attachment 314588
> View attachment 314589


Did you check the date on the article? 2011....


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> I didn't actually hear anything anti Corbyn come out of her mouth


We heard next to nothing come out of her mouth at all - that was a main failing of the Tory campaign. She only opened her mouth to change feet and then retreated back behind closed doors.


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> We heard next to nothing come out of her mouth at all - that was a main failing of the Tory campaign. She only opened her mouth to change feet and then retreated back behind closed doors.


Maybe she was actually aware that that is one of her weak points


----------



## MiffyMoo

rona said:


> OMG you do know how old that is?
> 
> Did it ever happen? I reckon the homeless are still being fed in Westminster.
> 
> In fact they are, I've just looked on two up to date sights of people who are running soup runs/kitchens


So annoying! We're constantly being shouted at to prove our source, yet this is apparently acceptable. An acquaintance of mine did exactly the same with an article from 7 years ago. Although there was no mea culpa when I pointed out how old it was


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> Maybe she was actually aware that that is one of her weak points


Oh it is I agree. Turns out it's a weak point that risks throwing elections.


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Maybe she was actually aware that that is one of her weak points


Does she actually have ANY strong points?


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> Oh it is I agree. Turns out it's a weak point that risks throwing elections.


Did you see my link that gave figures to show that if just 75 people had voted differently, she would have had a majority?
With the amount of votes the Tories got in this election, more than at any time since 1970s, it's purely a statistically anomaly


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> Does she actually have ANY strong points?


"Strong and Stable" of course.........


----------



## noushka05

This is absolutely damning by Historian Simon Schama on Theresa May negotiating brexit: _"you might as well pick someone at random from the yellow pages, they'd be better then her"






_


----------



## havoc

noushka05 said:


> Does she actually have ANY strong points


She must have but if they don't come across to the electorate then she's a liability to the party.


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> "Strong and Stable" of course.........


How could I forget


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> Did you see my link that gave figures to show that if just 75 people had voted differently, she would have had a majority?
> With the amount of votes the Tories got in this election, more than at any time since 1970s, it's purely a statistically anomaly


But they didn't - and there's a bit more to it than just 75 more votes.


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> If it didn't happen why was this FOI submitted in 2014?
> 
> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCOLxNCUIAETduX.jpg
> 
> Dear Home Office,
> 
> Due to it now being illegal to feed homeless people on the streets (in a ruling a judge recently said "it was feeding a lifestyle"), please provide information or guidance as to how the public can help homeless people and stay within the law.
> 
> It is my understanding that it's Theresa May's new Policing Act in which people can be arrested for feeding homeless people.
> 
> Yours faithfully,
> 
> Mr Glynne Powell.


The bans are at local level, not government. Not acceptable, but not to be blamed on the Government

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.in...eless-people-with-new-rules-a6903611.html?amp


----------



## noushka05

havoc said:


> She must have but if they don't come across to the electorate then she's a liability to the party.


This is brilliant by Fintan O'Toole. Just have a read at this Havoc - http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2017/06/10/britain-the-end-of-a-fantasy/


----------



## Calvine

http://www.vineyardcommunity.org/

We have this in Richmond and it's been going for as long as I can remember.


----------



## rona

MiffyMoo said:


> The bans are at local level, not government. Not acceptable, but not to be blamed on the Government
> 
> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/one-in-ten-local-councils-are-criminalising-homeless-people-with-new-rules-a6903611.html?amp


From that Hackney tried to introduce it and they are very much a Labour council. They only stopped because of the backlash

https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/criminalising-the-homeless-is-a-new-low-for-london-733


----------



## rona

Also Oxford City Council which is Labour


----------



## noushka05

MiffyMoo said:


> The bans are at local level, not government. Not acceptable, but not to be blamed on the Government
> 
> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/one-in-ten-local-councils-are-criminalising-homeless-people-with-new-rules-a6903611.html?amp


Its disgusting. As is Mays policing act & the root cause of the massive increase in homelessness. No one should be sleeping on the streets in one of the wealthiest countries on the planet.


----------



## rona

Also Newport Labour


----------



## rona

Chester Labour

those damn Tories


----------



## noushka05

*UK election: Bernie Sanders congratulates Jeremy Corbyn, saying he is 'delighted' at the result*
http://www.independent.co.uk/News/u...eats-increase-us-senator-leader-a7780771.html


----------



## rona

havoc said:


> But they didn't - and there's a bit more to it than just 75 more votes.


Please explain?


----------



## noushka05

rona said:


> Chester Labour
> 
> those damn Tories


Yes damn those tories, they have created this homeless crisis with their cuts to benefits & council budgets. And damn any labour council that makes life even harder for these desperate people.

https://www.theguardian.com/society...uts-more-people-sleeping-rough-charities-warn

Huge cuts to homelessness services will trigger a surge in the number of people forced to sleep on the streets and pile more pressure on hard-pressed NHS and social care services, charities have said.

Several councils are preparing to axe housing support services, including hostel beds, refuges and sheltered housing, as they struggle to meet the demands of a fresh round of multimillion-pound budget cuts from April.


----------



## Team_Trouble

Hasn't the population grown significantly since the 1970s, and therefore there are more votes to go Around? That doesn't seem to be an accurate way of measuring their current popularity to me.


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> Its disgusting. As is Mays policing act & the root cause of the massive increase in homelessness. No one should be sleeping on the streets in one of the wealthiest countries on the planet.


Aye! And it doesn't matter who's imposing the laws or where they're imposing them.

If the government isn't stepping in to protect the homeless people from such draconian laws, then they automatically become accomplices.

SHAME!...SHAME!...SHAME!...Ting-a-ling..


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Its disgusting. As is Mays policing act & the root cause of the massive increase in homelessness. No one should be sleeping on the streets in one of the wealthiest countries on the planet.


You're right and I agree with you, but you're yet again sidestepping your original statement and throwing a new claim in


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Its disgusting. As is Mays policing act & the root cause of the massive increase in homelessness. No one should be sleeping on the streets in one of the wealthiest countries on the planet.


Can you also show how one act is the root cause of the increase? From what I've read, there are many complex reasons from people becoming homeless


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> This is absolutely damning by Historian Simon Schama on Theresa May negotiating brexit: _"you might as well pick someone at random from the yellow pages, they'd be better then her"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


LMAO @_ 'Yellow pages'
_
Yeah! Let your fingers do the walking........and the talking...


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> Aye! And it doesn't matter who's imposing the laws or where they're imposing them.
> 
> If the government isn't stepping in to protect the homeless people from such draconian laws, then they automatically become accomplices.
> 
> SHAME!...SHAME!...SHAME!...Ting-a-ling..


Absolutely Mr!



MiffyMoo said:


> You're right and I agree with you, but you're yet again sidestepping your original statement and throwing a new claim in


I'm not side stepping anything. I'll never be an apologist for labour failings. But you would have to be wilfully blind not to see the tories policies are having a devastating impact on peoples lives.



MiffyMoo said:


> Can you also show how one act is the root cause of the increase? From what I've read, there are many complex reasons from people becoming homeless


Plenty of info out there by respected NGOs. Austerity is a major factor.

https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/cs-true-cost-austerity-inequality-uk-120913-en.pdf


----------



## noushka05

Zaros said:


> LMAO @_ 'Yellow pages'
> _
> Yeah! Let your fingers do the walking........and the talking...


:Hilarious

I dont know why I'm laughing because we are SO screwed:Hilarious


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Yes damn those tories, they have created this homeless crisis with their cuts to benefits & council budgets. And damn any labour council that makes life even harder for these desperate people.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/society...uts-more-people-sleeping-rough-charities-warn
> 
> Huge cuts to homelessness services will trigger a surge in the number of people forced to sleep on the streets and pile more pressure on hard-pressed NHS and social care services, charities have said.
> 
> Several councils are preparing to axe housing support services, including hostel beds, refuges and sheltered housing, as they struggle to meet the demands of a fresh round of multimillion-pound budget cuts from April.


Interesting how the cuts to Sunderland mean closing essential services, but at least the councillors are being well paid

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.su...-received-more-than-100k-a-year-1-8486107/amp


----------



## havoc

rona said:


> Please explain


Your assertion was that it would only have taken 75 more people to vote differently for TM to have a majority. I could have mobilised 75 more Tory votes where I live - wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference so it isn't as simple as just 75 votes.


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> :Hilarious
> 
> I dont know why I'm laughing because we are SO screwed:Hilarious


Because, try as they might chuck, they can't take your sense of humour away and, in the end, that's all you'll have left by the time they've finished.

We can then join everyone across the world in laughing at us.


----------



## MiffyMoo

noushka05 said:


> Absolutely Mr!
> 
> I'm not side stepping anything. I'll never be an apologist for labour failings. But you would have to be wilfully blind not to see the tories policies are having a devastating impact on peoples lives.
> 
> Plenty of info out there by respected NGOs. Austerity is a major factor.
> 
> https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/cs-true-cost-austerity-inequality-uk-120913-en.pdf


Absolute poverty has fallen over the last 10 years

https://fullfact.org/economy/poverty-uk-guide-facts-and-figures/


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> This is absolutely damning by Historian Simon Schama on Theresa May negotiating brexit: _"you might as well pick someone at random from the yellow pages, they'd be better then her"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Hmmm, never heard of him. Probably because he's so out of touch with life in the present day. Yellow Pages are a business directory.


----------



## KittenKong

MiffyMoo said:


> Did you check the date on the article? 2011....


No I didn't! Thanks for pointing it out.
I wonder how many have been added to the homeless numbers since it was written.....


----------



## KittenKong

MiffyMoo said:


> Absolute poverty has fallen over the last 10 years
> 
> https://fullfact.org/economy/poverty-uk-guide-facts-and-figures/


Facts and figures are no good if stuck in the cycle of poverty. Like a reduction in the unemployment figures doesn't make it easier to find a job, or a decent well paid one at least.

If poverty numbers have indeed gone down they'll be up again when free school meals are abolished and the winter fuel allowance becomes means tested.

And inflation is on the rise but no pay rise for the 7th year in a row for many of us.


----------



## havoc

Does anyone know what a general election costs?


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> Absolute poverty has fallen over the last 10 years


Poverty is measured as under 60% of the median household income and incomes have been static or fallen. Statistics again


----------



## Dr Pepper

havoc said:


> Does anyone know what a general election costs?


Yes, the Conservative party majority.


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> Facts and figures are no good if stuck in the cycle of poverty. Like a reduction in the unemployment figures doesn't make it easier to find a job, or a decent well paid one at least.
> 
> If poverty numbers have indeed gone down they'll be up again when free school meals are abolished and the winter fuel allowance becomes means tested.
> 
> And inflation is on the rise but no pay rise for the 7th year in a row for many of us.


You're working on supposition purely because the posted facts don't fit your rhetoric.


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> Does anyone know what a general election costs?


I saw somewhere that it cost £150m. Have no idea of the veracity of that claim though


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> Poverty is measured as under 60% of the median household income and incomes have been static or fallen. Statistics again


Nope, that's relative poverty. Read the article and it explains


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> I saw somewhere that it cost £150m. Have no idea of the veracity of that claim though


That's less than I thought but it's still money that would have been better spent elsewhere.


----------



## KittenKong

Anyone remember David Steel in David Owen's pocket in the days of the SDP/Liberal alliance on, "Spitting Image" in the '80s?


----------



## KittenKong

MiffyMoo said:


> You're working on supposition purely because the posted facts don't fit your rhetoric.


I remember in the '80s when it was reported the country was doing well with prosperity and affluence. Only we didn't see that up North and in Scotland.

It was the early days of the Blair government where fortunes for many of us improved dramatically.


----------



## havoc

KatieandOliver said:


> Hasn't the population grown significantly since the 1970s, and therefore there are more votes to go Around?


That's part of it, turnout matters too as do other things. Where I live the Tory MP polls more votes than all the other candidates combined. This time he got around 4k more than last time. This time the UKIP vote went from around 5k to under 500. Those UKIP votes were previously Tory votes. As it happens the Labour vote increased by a higher percentage than the Tory guy. but this doesn't mean he's any threat. After every election everyone crunches the numbers to show whatever they want.


----------



## Elles

In the old days if you were homeless you signed on every day and were given money. You sign on in the morning, then they'd print out the giros and you'd queue up until your name was called. If you were from say Liverpool and decided homeless in Devon or Cornwall sounds better, you'd go to sign on and be given a train ticket back to Liverpool. Do they do this now? The homeless beggars from Europe could get a train ticket back home. That would reduce numbers in London a bit.


----------



## KittenKong

MiffyMoo said:


> I saw somewhere that it cost £150m. Have no idea of the veracity of that claim though


Someone needs to tell May there's no magic money tree for unnecessary general elections......


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40237833

You've probably seen this but I enjoy re-reading it!


----------



## Bisbow

I think this thread has run it's course now
Everybody knows how everybody else feels and the same things are being repeated time and time again

I feel a sense of unfriendliness is creeping in and bad feelings are emerging

This is a pet friendly forum in case you had forgotten

Lets keep our opinions to our selves now, there is nothing we can do to change the situation

Lets all be friends again and leave the rest to the politicians

PLEASE


----------



## kimthecat

Zaros said:


> LMAO @_ 'Yellow pages'
> _
> Yeah! Let your fingers do the walking........and the talking...


Thats Zaros as a lad . he hasn't changed a bit


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> Someone needs to tell May there's no magic money tree for unnecessary general elections......


Dont worry , she's borrowed Corbyns .


----------



## Arnie83

MiffyMoo said:


> Here you go
> 
> https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/...he-election-result-was-a-vote-against-brexit/


I would certainly not expect everyone to agree with me, and especially a right wing magazine like the Spectator. But even the piece you quote refers to the TImes, FT, leading politicians within and without the Tory party 'and many others' who see it as a repudiation of May's plans for a hard Brexit.

Of course people voted on many different issues, but if they wanted a hard Brexit so much then they would surely have put that top of their list, just as May encouraged them to do by calling it the Brexit election and demanding a landslide.

I do find it slightly odd that a number of people seem to have used their vote as a protest against austerity and its damage to the economy and their wages but who still seem happy that we leave the EU which will do the same thing, and in spades if we fall off the 'no deal' cliff edge.


----------



## emmaviolet

Bisbow said:


> I think this thread has run it's course now
> Everybody knows how everybody else feels and the same things are being repeated time and time again
> 
> I feel a sense of unfriendliness is creeping in and bad feelings are emerging
> 
> This is a pet friendly forum in case you had forgotten
> 
> Lets keep our opinions to our selves now, there is nothing we can do to change the situation
> 
> Lets all be friends again and leave the rest to the politicians
> 
> PLEASE


I doubt anybody ever changed the world by keeping their opinions to themselves and just letting things be.

People are rightly worried and angry or not, but they can express that if they wish.

Our country is on the edge of a precipice and things are really going to change in the next few years, one way or another. I doubt people will be keeping quiet about it. People are becoming engaged in politics and the discussions are continuing everywhere.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> I think this thread has run it's course now
> Everybody knows how everybody else feels and the same things are being repeated time and time again
> 
> I feel a sense of unfriendliness is creeping in and bad feelings are emerging
> 
> This is a pet friendly forum in case you had forgotten
> 
> Lets keep our opinions to our selves now, there is nothing we can do to change the situation
> 
> Lets all be friends again and leave the rest to the politicians
> 
> PLEASE


I don't think its realistic to ask people to stop posting and I'm not even sure it is fair to. Its early days after the election and a lot of news is still coming through about how things are going to work, we don't even know for sure which Tory policies will be dropped from the Queens Speech and quite how the whole DUP thing is going to work. For many people this forum is one of the main places they get to discuss their worries about it or ask questions or just have a moan. I think on the whole this thread has stayed relatively polite, a few spats but on the whole people have apologised and no offence has been taken


----------



## JANICE199

Bisbow said:


> I think this thread has run it's course now
> Everybody knows how everybody else feels and the same things are being repeated time and time again
> 
> I feel a sense of unfriendliness is creeping in and bad feelings are emerging
> 
> This is a pet friendly forum in case you had forgotten
> 
> Lets keep our opinions to our selves now, there is nothing we can do to change the situation
> 
> Lets all be friends again and leave the rest to the politicians
> 
> PLEASE


*You don't have to read or follow the thread. Also until things are sorted re the election it isn't over... Just saying *


----------



## Bisbow

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I don't think its realistic to ask people to stop posting and I'm not even sure it is fair to. Its early days after the election and a lot of news is still coming through about how things are going to work, we don't even know for sure which Tory policies will be dropped from the Queens Speech and quite how the whole DUP thing is going to work. For many people this forum is one of the main places they get to discuss their worries about it or ask questions or just have a moan. I think on the whole this thread has stayed relatively polite, a few spats but on the whole people have apologised and no offence has been taken


I have nothing against people discussing and debating and talking about their worries but it is all getting a bit unfriendly with some people ae jumping down other peoples throats it they disagree

I just don't like the way things ae going and I will not be reading any more


----------



## havoc

Bisbow said:


> I have nothing against people discussing and debating and talking about their worries but it is all getting a bit unfriendly with some people ae jumping down other peoples throats it they disagree
> 
> I just don't like the way things ae going


I think this has been a reasonably well mannered thread and in the main it's stayed a discussion. That posters will have different interpretations of events is rather the point of having the discussion.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Bisbow said:


> I have nothing against people discussing and debating and talking about their worries but it is all getting a bit unfriendly with some people ae jumping down other peoples throats it they disagree
> 
> I just don't like the way things ae going and I will not be reading any more


Yes I understand but we are all adults (at least I think we are) and grown ups can and do have heated debates but can still be friends afterwards.


----------



## Team_Trouble

I am becoming increasingly disappointed in Jeremy Corbyn, I thought he knew better than to crow and gloat.


----------



## Elles

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes I understand but we are all adults (at least I think we are) and grown ups can and do have heated debates but can still be friends afterwards.


On the whole it's ok, (so long as we don't get pages of memes and copied news reports ). Have to chuckle sometimes when we get a huge linked report and it's clear the poster hasn't read it themselves. I do think some of us have more of an agenda than others though. It's much easier to stomach when you don't like any of the parties and think they're all as bad as each other. I wouldn't want to be a true blue Tory on petforums that's for sure.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KatieandOliver said:


> I am becoming increasingly disappointed in Jeremy Corbyn, I thought he knew better than to crow and gloat.


Why Katie? What has he said that makes you think that?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Elles said:


> On the whole it's ok, (so long as we don't get pages of memes and copied news reports ). Have to chuckle sometimes when we get a huge linked report and it's clear the poster hasn't read it themselves. I do think some of us have more of an agenda than others though. It's much easier to stomach when you don't like any of the parties and think they're all as bad as each other. I wouldn't want to be a true blue Tory on petforums that's for sure.


I was that person in 2015 and I took a fair whack of abuse - called a Nazi sympathiser and that I had foxes blood on my hands etc etc. The main person who got overly personal/nasty is no longer posting but I really haven't seen that kind of nastiness on this thread.


----------



## kimthecat

can we post photo memes that take the P ? Its sort of fun 










.









Just *so *embarrassing !


----------



## Team_Trouble

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Why Katie? What has he said that makes you think that?


Now he's said

Corbyn said that he looked forwards to a Queen's speech "just as soon as the coalition of chaos has been negotiated", before adding, to laughter: "Just to let the house and the rest of the nation know, if that's not possible the Labour party stands ready to offer strong and stable leadership in the national interest."

Maybe I'm being unfair and hold him to a higher standard than May, I just expect better of him.


----------



## suewhite




----------



## kimthecat

songs Mrs May is singing 

Yesterday by the Beatles 

Yesterday all my troubles seemed so far away, 
Now it looks as though they're here to stay
Oh, I believe in yesterday

to DUP 

Without You by David Guetta 

I can't win, I can't reign
I will never win this game without you, without you
I am lost, I am vain,
I will never be the same without you, without you

Add your own !


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

KatieandOliver said:


> Now he's said
> 
> Corbyn said that he looked forwards to a Queen's speech "just as soon as the coalition of chaos has been negotiated", before adding, to laughter: "Just to let the house and the rest of the nation know, if that's not possible the Labour party stands ready to offer strong and stable leadership in the national interest."
> 
> Maybe I'm being unfair and hold him to a higher standard than May, I just expect better of him.


Oh right, yes I saw that yesterday. To be fair I think there was quite a lot of joking and leg pulling going on at the time - Mrs May even said to The Speaker "at least someone was elected with a landslide" . Guess he is just human like the rest of us


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...election-campaign-labour-corbyn-a7788781.html

Diane Abbott was suffering from out of control blood sugars during the election campaign due to Type 2 diabetes/not eating regularly. Apparently much better now and ready to return to work.


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...election-campaign-labour-corbyn-a7788781.html
> 
> Diane Abbott was suffering from out of control blood sugars during the election campaign due to Type 2 diabetes/not eating regularly. Apparently much better now and ready to return to work.


I'm glad she's better, but I really do resent her having a go at people for targetting her. She effectively made herself a target - she's extremely high up in the Labour machine and shadow home secretary, so the fact is that there will be a huge amount of scrutiny on her responses in interviews. She messed up more than once and she, rightly, got hauled over the coals for it. If she knew that she was so ill that she would be a liability, she ought to have stepped aside long before she did, and explain about her illness, which would have gone a lot further than keeping quiet and then whining about all the meanies afterwards.

Just look at the amount of grief Amber Rudd got after the BBC debate, despite the fact that her dad died only two days before. She shouldn't have done the debate, so is every bit as culpable as Abbott is for the backlash.


----------



## Satori

KatieandOliver said:


> I am becoming increasingly disappointed in Jeremy Corbyn, I thought he knew better than to crow and gloat.


Yes, me too. I have always found his politics vile and abhorrent but he himself seemed quite a nice chap. Watching him with Andrew Marr on Sunday he was slimy and gloating; made me want to puke tbh. I think he was trying to look cool and confident but all that taking the p1ss and grinning like a village idiot was rather off-putting. I doubt it did him any favours.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

MiffyMoo said:


> I'm glad she's better, but I really do resent her having a go at people for targetting her. She effectively made herself a target - she's extremely high up in the Labour machine and shadow home secretary, so the fact is that there will be a huge amount of scrutiny on her responses in interviews. She messed up more than once and she, rightly, got hauled over the coals for it. If she knew that she was so ill that she would be a liability, she ought to have stepped aside long before she did, and explain about her illness, which would have gone a lot further than keeping quiet and then whining about all the meanies afterwards.
> 
> Just look at the amount of grief Amber Rudd got after the BBC debate, despite the fact that her dad died only two days before. She shouldn't have done the debate, so is every bit as culpable as Abbott is for the backlash.


I can see where you are coming from but I think its a very sad state of affairs when we can't cut people some slack for being ill or being bereaved. Reading the article Diane makes the point she wasn't really aware of how ineffective/hesitant she was coming across until her brother who had seen the interview told her. I hadn't heard any criticism about Amber Rudd. I wouldn't imagine many MPs take a great deal of care over their health - physical or mental which is a shame. I must suggest a plant based diet to Diane Abbot


----------



## kimthecat

On BBC news interview with Corbyn about Tower block fire , blaming local authority cuts . The elections over, mate , not really the right time for blame yet until the inquest


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...election-campaign-labour-corbyn-a7788781.html
> 
> Diane Abbott was suffering from out of control blood sugars during the election campaign due to Type 2 diabetes/not eating regularly. Apparently much better now and ready to return to work.


Glad she's ok . 
you have to take great care with diabetes .
Mrs May has type 1 diabetes and she seems to have managed .


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I can see where you are coming from but I think its a very sad state of affairs when we can't cut people some slack for being ill or being bereaved. Reading the article Diane makes the point she wasn't really aware of how ineffective/hesitant she was coming across until her brother who had seen the interview told her. I hadn't heard any criticism about Amber Rudd. I wouldn't imagine many MPs take a great deal of care over their health - physical or mental which is a shame. I must suggest a plant based diet to Diane Abbot


Haha, I'm sure she'll be delighted! The point is though, as nobody knew she was ill, it's understandable to assume that she's in well over her head. I find it extremely difficult to understand how she can't know that she was a car crash on at least two occasions


----------



## kimthecat

MiffyMoo said:


> I
> Just look at the amount of grief Amber Rudd got after the BBC debate, despite the fact that her dad died only two days before. She shouldn't have done the debate, so is every bit as culpable as Abbott is for the backlash.


No one knew at the time . I admire her for going ahead with it .


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> Glad she's ok .
> you have to take great care with diabetes .
> Mrs May has type 1 diabetes and she seems to have managed .


Yes in many respects type 1 is easier to manage because they tend to be in a regular routine of checking blood sugars/injecting insulin and know when and how much they need to eat to keep everything in balance whereas its more common for type 2 suffers to not bother checking their blood regularly and be less careful with what and when they eat as they are not expecting the extreme highs and lows that are more common with insulin use. It doesn't sound like she is a type 2 using insulin so it may be she needs proper reassessment of her management.


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> No one knew at the time . I admire her for going ahead with it .


I didn't realise that she as AA Gill's "blonde" either. Poor girl really has had a really horrible six months


----------



## MiffyMoo

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes in many respects type 1 is easier to manage because they tend to be in a regular routine of checking blood sugars/injecting insulin and know when and how much they need to eat to keep everything in balance whereas its more common for type 2 suffers to not bother checking their blood regularly and be less careful with what and when they eat as they are not expecting the extreme highs and lows that are more common with insulin use. It doesn't sound like she is a type 2 using insulin so it may be she needs proper reassessment of her management.


I was just giggling at the thought of both of them sporting those diabetes tattoos that I posted about last week. All of a sudden parliament becomes cool?


----------



## kimthecat

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes in many respects type 1 is easier to manage because they tend to be in a regular routine of checking blood sugars/injecting insulin and know when and how much they need to eat to keep everything in balance whereas its more common for type 2 suffers to not bother checking their blood regularly and be less careful with what and when they eat as they are not expecting the extreme highs and lows that are more common with insulin use. It doesn't sound like she is a type 2 using insulin so it may be she needs proper reassessment of her management.


She was diagnosed two years ago so she should be aware of that . Still I expect stress would have an affect as well .
I wish her well , though I'm still going to criticise her


----------



## kimthecat

MiffyMoo said:


> I didn't realise that she as AA Gill's "blonde" either. Poor girl really has had a really horrible six months


Whaaat !  have I missed ( or forgotten ) something ?


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

kimthecat said:


> She was diagnosed two years ago so she should be aware of that . Still I expect stress would have an affect as well .
> I wish her well , though I'm still going to criticise her


Yes she should be but you would be shocked at how many Type 2 diabetics don't take management seriously enough and don't understand what low blood sugars feel like (as theirs tend to be running high). If the blood sugar goes low enough the person can come across as spaced out or drunk but have no awareness of it themselves and the diabetic services are now totally over run with ever increasing numbers of new diabetics (its our modern day epidemic ) so not everyone gets decent advice/follow up and monitoring.


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> Whaaat !  have I missed ( or forgotten ) something ?


Erm, scrap that. I obviously didn't look too deeply into that report. The blonde was Nicola Formy, but he was married to Rudd from 1990 - 1995


----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> Just look at the amount of grief Amber Rudd got after the BBC debate, despite the fact that her dad died only two days before. She shouldn't have done the debate,


I agree she shouldn't have been there but I'm cross at a boss who caused her to be.

As to the rest of the name calling and jeering in the chamber - that's gone on forever and is traditional. If you're actually interested in watching the real work some of the committees are televised now.


----------



## Mirandashell

I have naturally low blood sugar so I have to be careful about not eating and having it drop too far. And yeah, you do feel spaced out and disorientated.  So if that's what she has, I can understand what happened in the interviews. It must be really difficult to stick to regular mealtimes when campaigning.


----------



## Jesthar

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes in many respects type 1 is easier to manage because they tend to be in a regular routine of checking blood sugars/injecting insulin and know when and how much they need to eat to keep everything in balance whereas its more common for type 2 suffers to not bother checking their blood regularly and be less careful with what and when they eat as they are not expecting the extreme highs and lows that are more common with insulin use. It doesn't sound like she is a type 2 using insulin so it may be she needs proper reassessment of her management.


Even type 1 sufferers can misjudge it. I used to work in a team with an insulin dependent gentleman, and every now and then he'd have a hypo and we'd have to quickly get him something sugary. He used to describe it as the brain shutting down segment by segment, starting with logical thought and coherency, then the ability to speak at all. You learned to spot the signs and ask after you'd know him a while - thankfully he never had a problem accepting sugar having always been insulin dependent.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jesthar said:


> Even type 1 sufferers can misjudge it. I used to work in a team with an insulin dependent gentleman, and every now and then he'd have a hypo and we'd have to quickly get him something sugary. He used to describe it as the brain shutting down segment by segment, starting with logical thought and coherency, then the ability to speak at all. You learned to spot the signs and ask after you'd know him a while - thankfully he never had a problem accepting sugar having always been insulin dependent.


Yes - hopefully in the future with more sophisticated monitoring and insulin delivery devices that will be less common. My Mum usually gets a tingling/numbness around her lips when she is going hypo but not always and often its someone else saying you sound strange that alerts her.


----------



## havoc

Jesthar said:


> Even type 1 sufferers can misjudge it


Very easily done when you've accepted the interviews. How it works with the BBC is that a person agrees to be booked for a national spot and then the stations who want to broadcast a segment ask for one. The interviewee doesn't know much in advance how they've been shared out so on the day may be attending some in person with phone interviews for local radio in between. On breakfast radio many guests do the interviews from their bed


----------



## Calvine

Bisbow said:


> I think this thread has run it's course now
> Everybody knows how everybody else feels and the same things are being repeated time and time again
> 
> I feel a sense of unfriendliness is creeping in and bad feelings are emerging
> 
> This is a pet friendly forum in case you had forgotten
> 
> Lets keep our opinions to our selves now, there is nothing we can do to change the situation
> 
> Lets all be friends again and leave the rest to the politicians
> 
> PLEASE


I can see what you're saying...the threads which are actually about pets don't seem to be getting many posts (or maybe that's my imagination).


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> I agree she shouldn't have been there but I'm cross at a boss who caused her to be.
> 
> As to the rest of the name calling and jeering in the chamber - that's gone on forever and is traditional. If you're actually interested in watching the real work some of the committees are televised now.


You cut off the end of my quote. Yes, you're right that May shouldn't have made her, but the same goes for Corbyn with Abbott.

I've watched plenty of PMQs, so I'm well aware of the jeering


----------



## kimthecat

Mirandashell said:


> I have naturally low blood sugar so I have to be careful about not eating and having it drop too far. And yeah, you do feel spaced out and disorientated. So if that's what she has, I can understand what happened in the interviews. It must be really difficult to stick to regular mealtimes when campaigning.


glucose tablets are handy . i always carry some in my bag .


----------



## havoc

Calvine said:


> I can see what you're saying...the threads which are actually about pets don't seem to be getting many posts


Maybe not but I'm still reading them. I used to post a lot more in cats when I was still breeding but tend to leave it to others now as I don't keep up with developments the same so don't reckon to have useful up to date knowledge. Have to say those posts which answer questions on animals with 'don't know the answer' or 'I've kept three cats over my lifetime so I'm an expert' are as annoying to me as links and memes are to others on here. I've always thought of general chat as the place for - well general chat for those without in-depth or specialist knowledge.


----------



## KittenKong

KatieandOliver said:


> I am becoming increasingly disappointed in Jeremy Corbyn, I thought he knew better than to crow and gloat.


After all the abuse he'd gone through who can blame him. Thought his speech was excellent.

No one complained when Cameron taunted Brown for not holding a general election after taking over from Tony Blair.



kimthecat said:


> On BBC news interview with Corbyn about Tower block fire , blaming local authority cuts . The elections over, mate , not really the right time for blame yet until the inquest


Just awful. As with the terror attacks Corbyn was right to speak out against cuts to the police in much the same way Fire experts warned this could happen.

Yes, the election is over for now at any rate. It's the job of the opposition to point these things out, as the Tories would of course do if Labour were in power.








https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...g-to-happen-fire-expert-slams-uk-tower-blocks

https://skwawkbox.org/2017/06/14/video-boris-johnson-telling-fire-safety-panel-get-stuffed-grenfell/


----------



## KittenKong

I must say I'm very disappointed to hear this. Definitely the best leader they had since Paddy Ashdown.

Will Vince Cable put himself forward now he's back in government?

Source BBC


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> Just awful. As with the terror attacks Corbyn was right to speak out against cuts to the police in much the same way Fire experts warned this could happen.
> 
> Yes, the election is over for now at any rate. It's the job of the opposition to point these things out, as the Tories would of course do if Labour were in power.


AFAIK The fire brigade arrived within minutes and two hundred firefighters were there, 9 million was spent on the tower blocks last year , Corbyn blaming the local council cuts before he knows the facts and the truth in less than 24 hours is cashing in on it . Shameful point scoring .

The time to blame is when the full facts are apparent .


----------



## Elles

Who are these construction companies (company?) refurbishing the buildings and being paid millions to do it? Surely they too must be held responsible, when they've been warned about this cladding and that the buildings are a fire hazard? If it comes out that any politicians are related to them, heads should roll. Clearly they need to rip the stuff back off any other buildings and replace it with sprinkler systems. I thought old concrete buildings suffered concrete cancer, or is that just the ones from the 50s? It does seem as though millions is being spent to improve these blocks and they look very nice with gyms and playgrounds, but it's no use if they aren't safe.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40281300

Tim Farron has stepped down as leader of the Liberal Democrats after the general election.

In a statement, he said he was "torn between living as a faithful Christian and serving as a political leader".

He said he should have dealt "more wisely" with questions relating to his faith during the election campaign, including his views on gay sex.

He insisted he had taken the decision voluntarily and he retained the support of his party.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Jessica Elgot

✔@jessicaelgot
Senior Lib Dems understood to be considering asking Farron to step down, but party split, still popular with members https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/14/lib-dem-peer-brian-paddick-resigns-over-farrons-views-on-gay-sex?CMP=share_btn_tw …

5:08 PM - 14 Jun 2017

*Lib Dem peer resigns over Farron's views on homosexuality*
Brian Paddick, who was UK's most senior gay officer, quits home affairs role citing concerns highlighted during election

theguardian.com


----------



## Mirandashell

Reports now coming in that Farron has quit.

http://redirect.viglink.com/?format...g-tim-farron-resigns-liberal-democrat-leader/


----------



## cheekyscrip

I wonder how we are going to cope and if British government will step in while we are losing our key industry with insurance to follow...
@Elles I hope none of yours work for gaming or financial sector....


----------



## grumpy goby

Elles said:


> Who are these construction companies (company?) refurbishing the buildings and being paid millions to do it? Surely they too must be held responsible, when they've been warned about this cladding and that the buildings are a fire hazard? If it comes out that any politicians are related to them, heads should roll. Clearly they need to rip the stuff back off any other buildings and replace it with sprinkler systems. I thought old concrete buildings suffered concrete cancer, or is that just the ones from the 50s? It does seem as though millions is being spent to improve these blocks and they look very nice with gyms and playgrounds, but it's no use if they aren't safe.


There will be a lot of bodies involved in this failure to investigate... there will be an architect (who unbelievably throw their weight in buildability vs aesthetics), design consultants who spec materials used and structure, the manufacturer of the cladding and their specified installation method, the builder (and if they complied to the above) and then the maintenance company who looks after the building. (You can build a great work of art but what's stopping anyone breaking passive fire protection post sign off... and maintaining the standard), the. There is the fire risk assessment and whether that's been followed.

There are a lot of variables to investigate. And it will be messy and long winded. But a construction company is often the face in front of several parties involved.


----------



## Elles

cheekyscrip said:


> I wonder how we are going to cope and if British government will step in while we are losing our key industry with insurance to follow...
> @Elles I hope none of yours work for gaming or financial sector....
> View attachment 314668


Will they stop because they have to pay uk tax? Were they using Gibraltar for tax evasion purposes? We haven't left the Eu yet, but we know Gibraltar belongs to Britain at the moment and the tax laws were brought in in 2014. We're still not sure what is going to happen with Gib and Ireland in particular yet.

http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/gibraltar-tax.13sd


----------



## stockwellcat.

Tim Farron quits as leader of the Lib Dems.

*Tim Farron has resigned as the leader of the Lib Dems, saying he can't continue in the face of continuing questions over his faith.*
http://news.sky.com/story/amp/tim-farron-resigns-as-leader-of-liberal-democrats-10915873


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> Will they stop because they have to pay uk tax? Were they using Gibraltar for tax evasion purposes? We haven't left the Eu yet, but we know Gibraltar belongs to Britain at the moment and the tax laws were brought in in 2014. We're still not sure what is going to happen with Gib and Ireland in particular yet.
> 
> http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/gibraltar-tax.13sd


No. Not evasion. Evasion is a crime. But it I about being our own jurisdiction, entity like Channel Islands for example.

They have their own status and that is the backbone of their economy.
Same goes for Monaco, Andorra etc...

We wanted to be recognised as such.
In this case gaming industry will move out.
To Malta, Luxembourg, also more far afield like Asia ...
We are not competitive with UK tax. Thousands of jobs lost in very small territory. 
Means as most are British they would have to repatriate.
Domino effect will hit all services too.


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> Will they stop because they have to pay uk tax? Were they using Gibraltar for tax evasion purposes? We haven't left the Eu yet, but we know Gibraltar belongs to Britain at the moment and the tax laws were brought in in 2014. We're still not sure what is going to happen with Gib and Ireland in particular yet.
> 
> http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/gibraltar-tax.13sd


Well hopefully they'll take the same stance when we take Gibraltar out of the EU and not allow Spain to claim some sort of hold


----------



## cheekyscrip

rona said:


> Well hopefully they'll take the same stance when we take Gibraltar out of the EU and not allow Spain to claim some sort of hold


Gibraltar will be ruined.
Once we lose jurisdiction and EU right 80% jobs go. 
There will be just no work.
Rock will stay , obviously as it stood, but what about the people who live here?
Their houses and mortgages if they have to go?
Not only homeless and jobless but with debts to pay....
What about those 300 cats we managed to find homes for? Dogs?

Not joking. You know the situation of homeless dogs and cats in nearby Andalusia....


----------



## Elles

According to reports on gambling news and other agencies the gambling sector in Gibraltar continued to grow this year and spokespeople from Ladbrokes and William Hill have said they will continue to invest and have no intention of leaving. So it's ok at the moment. Virtual gambling employ around 12% of the local workforce and around 3k people. I shouldn't panic just yet. See what the reports say over the next few days.


----------



## FeelTheBern

Tim Farron has resigned.


----------



## 1290423

havoc said:


> Does anyone know what a general election costs?


Around 160 million


----------



## 1290423

FeelTheBern said:


> Tim Farron has resigned.


Dont know anyone of that name do you mean dim Farron?


----------



## FeelTheBern

DT said:


> Dont know anyone of that name do you mean dim Farron?


Yes, that's what I meant. Sorry.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> According to reports on gambling news and other agencies the gambling sector in Gibraltar continued to grow this year and spokespeople from Ladbrokes and William Hill have said they will continue to invest and have no intention of leaving. So it's ok at the moment. Virtual gambling employ around 12% of the local workforce and around 3k people. I shouldn't panic just yet. See what the reports say over the next few days.


We had meeting today. ...awaiting for the ruling....very worrying times...


----------



## Elles

cheekyscrip said:


> We had meeting today. ...awaiting for the ruling....very worrying times...


This would have happened with or without brexit though. Still have no idea what is going to happen when we actually leave the Eu. If the conservatives go for a milder brexit and keep some free movement it might still not change. I expect the Spanish who work from Gib are really worried too.


----------



## Guest

Elles said:


> Your nazi Finn party sounds more like BNP and the National Front than UKIP.


The BasicFinns was UKIP´s "ally", but it split now into the hard nazis and the softer populists, who have a new name "NewChoice" But those, who remained, are like UKIP with even less brains and morals. Now they don´t talk to each other and the first law suit is already coming up.



noushka05 said:


> I'm not sure that could happen here, though nothing would surprise me anymore lol
> I'd love to see that video. Surely they can't be worse than the DUP. The more I look into these fruit cakes the more horrified I am by them.
> Had to laugh at this video of the DUP someone has tampered with:Hilarious


It is worse than any political video I´ve seen, as it contains illegal white powder, really bad music, and really stupid, half naked people. The first minute or so is just bad music but then it gets worse. If someone wants to see, go Youtube and write Juha Eerola video. I won´t post the link as that would not be allowed on PF. And rightly so. But as he is now among the leaders of BasicFinn party, I can´t help but feel happy that finally all can see what they great bunch they are. Could I send them to UK to support May (they are all for Brexit, and pretty right wing)? Surely she´ll accept anybody supporting her politics?


----------



## Elles

MrsZee said:


> Could I send them to UK to support May (they are all for Brexit, and pretty right wing)? Surely she´ll accept anybody supporting her politics?


No thanks. My favourite politician and heroine came out of Finland. Very different people from the same education system.


----------



## Guest

Elles said:


> No thanks. My favourite politician and heroine came out of Finland. Very different people from the same education system.


Now that made me curious? Who? I understand why you said no to him though. :Bag


----------



## Elles

Fadumo Q. Dayib

https://fqdayib.com/


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> This would have happened with or without brexit though. Still have no idea what is going to happen when we actually leave the Eu. If the conservatives go for a milder brexit and keep some free movement it might still not change. I expect the Spanish who work from Gib are really worried too.


No. This only happens if we are out of EU.
Before Brexit EU was happy with Gibraltar and kept PP on a leash.

We won quite a few cases.
But UK standing was different then.
It is not about 30 mil and 33 companies.

It is a show for Britain's sake.

Like kicking neighbour's cat.


----------



## kimthecat

Just what we need right now , eh John !

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/a-million-people-should-take-10623852
John McDonnell has called for a million people to take to the streets to force Theresa May from power.

"The firebrand Shadow Chancellor urged protesters to "get out on the streets" in support of Labour's anti-austerity message and build pressure for another election.
We need people doing everything they can to ensure the election comes as early as possible," he said.

It comes as left-wing groups plan a mass protest on July 1 aiming to pile the pressure on "Theresa and the terrorists" - meaning the PM and her new pals in Northern Ireland's hardline DUP .

Speaking at the annual conference of the food-workers union the BFAWU, Mr McDonnell backed urged the wider TUC to mobilise workers across the land. "


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> Just what we need right now , eh John !
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/a-million-people-should-take-10623852
> John McDonnell has called for a million people to take to the streets to force Theresa May from power.
> 
> "The firebrand Shadow Chancellor urged protesters to "get out on the streets" in support of Labour's anti-austerity message and build pressure for another election.
> We need people doing everything they can to ensure the election comes as early as possible," he said.
> 
> It comes as left-wing groups plan a mass protest on July 1 aiming to pile the pressure on "Theresa and the terrorists" - meaning the PM and her new pals in Northern Ireland's hardline DUP .
> 
> Speaking at the annual conference of the food-workers union the BFAWU, Mr McDonnell backed urged the wider TUC to mobilise workers across the land. "


unchunch I can't write on here what I'm shouting because I'll get banned


----------



## Elles

Still heading towards riots then.


----------



## Zaros

kimthecat said:


> Just what we need right now
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/a-million-people-should-take-10623852
> John McDonnell has called for a million people to take to the streets to force Theresa May from power.


Just as I suggested earlier, the storming of parliament it is then.:Rage

It's about time we had one of those emoticon things holding a pitch fork and a flaming torch.


----------



## Calvine

Elles said:


> New Still heading towards riots then.


Another few days out for rent-a-mob!



kimthecat said:


> We need people doing everything they can to ensure the election comes as early as possible," he said.


Paid for out of Labour Party funds I hope?


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> Mr McDonnell backed urged the wider TUC to mobilise workers across the land.


I imagine what he actually means if he's honest which, being a politician, he won't be, is immobilise workers across the land. Crap like this makes me want to heave. Does he know what a national strike costs the country! Yes, he knows. Does he care? Obviously not.


----------



## cheekyscrip

I do not think national strike or riots are on the cards....yet...


Hope not. This country needs strong and stable opposition.


Parties working together NOT rocking the boat.

Please, is ANYONE capable to put country's interest above their party's for once???


So fed up.


----------



## MiffyMoo

cheekyscrip said:


> I do not think national strike or riots are on the cards....yet...
> 
> Hope not. This country needs strong and stable opposition.
> 
> Parties working together NOT rocking the boat.
> 
> Please, is ANYONE capable to put country's interest above their party's for once???
> 
> 
> So fed up.


Speaking of Strong and Stable, this made me laugh


----------



## Calvine

cheekyscrip said:


> I do not think national strike


Mobilising 'workers' sounds very ominous? I thought so anyway! 'Workers' as opposed to whom?


----------



## Satori

Calvine said:


> Mobilising 'workers' sounds very ominous? I thought so anyway! 'Workers' as opposed to whom?


As opposed to students and assorted layabouts, coz there'll be none of those at the riots.


----------



## rona

Satori said:


> As opposed to students and assorted layabouts, coz there'll be none of those at the riots.


Well the rest of us wouldn't notice or suffer if it was only the students and layabouts and they want us all to suffer

Got to bring the country to it's knees


----------



## cheekyscrip

I do not understand that putting students ( aka your future doctors, teachers, lawyers) in the same category as layabouts?

Why such attitude to young people who actually try to better themselves?
Then you complain bitterly about employing foreigners.

Many countries have noble tradition of taking care of students.

Britain used to be one of them.

Sad.


----------



## rona

Just because they are mentioned together it doesn't mean they are seen as the same


----------



## Elles

I thought this was supposed to be a wonderful caring Labour, different from before, with a benevolent leader? Sounds the same as before to me. Do they think we're in Russia where we need marches on Moscow to bring about change. Just leave us alone, you'll get your chance without mobs taking to the streets. Labour's true colours. If they do this and the rent a mobs do start riots, Labour will not get voted in and the Conservatives will be able to do practically anything they want to.

In this context students are the same as layabouts. A student going on strike and marching on the capital, will not have anything like the effect nurses, doctors, fire fighters, council staff and other workers going on strike and marching on the capital would have. It doesn't mean students are actually the same as layabouts, I was a student once, I dare say all of us were.


----------



## Satori

cheekyscrip said:


> I do not understand that putting students ( aka your future doctors, teachers, lawyers) in the same category as layabouts?
> 
> Why such attitude to young people who actually try to better themselves?
> Then you complain bitterly about employing foreigners.
> 
> Many countries have noble tradition of taking care of students.
> 
> Britain used to be one of them.
> 
> Sad.


But they are all off their faces on the new psychotropics (no jealousy here then) and tend to fall prey to crazed ideological cultish ideas like voting Labour. Plus, let's face it, being an undergraduate involves about 16 hours of work per week, max, so they have plenty of time to lay about, attend protests/riots etc.

(Disclaimer: I spend most of my days just laying about too before you accuse me of lazyism).


----------



## Calvine

cheekyscrip said:


> I do not understand that putting students ( aka your future doctors, teachers, lawyers) in the same category as layabouts?


I think what was meant was that both groups have more free time than people who work 9-6 and commute for another two hours on top. So when they have their few free hours they have probably got a lot of other things to catch up with and fill their time?


----------



## havoc

Satori said:


> Plus, let's face it, being an undergraduate involves about 16 hours of work per week, max, so they have plenty of time to lay about, attend protests/riots etc.


Oooh - gotta pull you up there. Depends on what you're studying.


----------



## KittenKong

havoc said:


> Oooh - gotta pull you up there. Depends on what you're studying.


Indeed. When I was at the anti May/DUP rally on Monday a heckler shouted, "Why don't you get a job"! Typical Daily Mail obeying Tory voter no doubt.

The event was at 1730 hours after work time for many people. I'm on annual leave this week so I'm probably not entitled to that.

Still, he gave up very quickly when he got laughed at.

They were people of all ages there, not all, in fact very few were "typical stereotyped students".


----------



## MilleD

Calvine said:


> Another few days out for rent-a-mob!


I often wonder if it's the same people that turn up to these things whatever the 'cause'.


----------



## MiffyMoo

MilleD said:


> I often wonder if it's the same people that turn up to these things whatever the 'cause'.


Renta-mob


----------



## kimthecat

Being treated badly by a government is no excuse for the IRA choosing to murder their own people .  http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/8/newsid_2515000/2515113.stm












JANICE199 said:


> http://yourbrexit.co.uk/news/breaki...minster-take-seats-topple-torydup-government/
> I have no idea if this is a reliable source


No point in reading it then


----------



## kimthecat

,


----------



## MilleD

cheekyscrip said:


> I do not understand that putting students ( aka your future doctors, teachers, lawyers) in the same category as layabouts?
> 
> Why such attitude to young people who actually try to better themselves?


You really can't tar them all with this brush either. Raising the participation age means that they _have_ to either have a training job, an apprenticeship or be a student doesn't it?

I'm not saying they are all lazy, but equally you can't say they are all bettering themselves either.


----------



## Elles

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-40278371

Meetings with Theresa May and in answer to the question about Sinn Fein taking their seats they said 'absolutely not'


----------



## Arnie83

havoc said:


> Oooh - gotta pull you up there. Depends on what you're studying.


And / or on how serious you are about studying it.

(Hence my Bishop ... )


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> Being treated badly by a government is no excuse for the IRA choosing to murder their own people .  http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/8/newsid_2515000/2515113.stm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No point in reading it then


----------



## cheekyscrip

MilleD said:


> You really can't tar them all with this brush either. Raising the participation age means that they _have_ to either have a training job, an apprenticeship or be a student doesn't it?
> 
> I'm not saying they are all lazy, but equally you can't say they are all bettering themselves either.


I should say lazy are in all walks of life...

Fees should be much , much lower..like initial 3 k, to deter " lazy", courses should be sensible, no " David Beckham" studies and some such.
This is what Ministry of Education is for - recognise what skills, what professionals are needed and act accordingly.
Saying that social sciences, humanities, languages, arts have their place too in cultured, educated nation, not only for our country's image but to create modern society.

Else we will stay in realm of reality TV and Murdoch media.

British universities already falling behind German ones ...


----------



## MiffyMoo

cheekyscrip said:


> I should say lazy are in all walks of life...
> 
> Fees should be much , much lower..like initial 3 k, to deter " lazy", courses should be sensible, no " David Beckham" studies and some such.
> This is what Ministry of Education is for - recognise what skills, what professionals are needed and act accordingly.
> Saying that social sciences, humanities, languages, arts have their place too in cultured, educated nation, not only for our country's image but to create modern society.
> 
> Else we will stay in realm of reality TV and Murdoch media.
> 
> British universities already falling behind German ones ...


THIS!! Exactly this!


----------



## stockwellcat.

Well the Queens speech has been confirmed as Wednesday 21st June 2017 if the DUP are ready to strike a deal or not with the Conservatives. Monday 19th June 2017 EU Negotiations start.

There is suggestion that David Davis will be securing EU nationals rights in the UK straight away and using the 29th March 2017 as a suggested cut off date for any new EU nationals wishing to reside in the UK (the EU Leaders have to agree to this date).


----------



## MilleD

cheekyscrip said:


> This is what Ministry of Education is for - recognise what skills, what professionals are needed and act accordingly.


I deal with the Department for Education in my work. Pretty sure the above is not happening there.


----------



## cheekyscrip

MilleD said:


> I deal with the Department for Education in my work. Pretty sure the above is not happening there.


Sadly.
They take nice salaries there.
But this is what other countries do!
State unis have to provide professional employable work force.
Funding for courses depends on country's needs for now and foreseeable future.
Courses have to adapt accordingly.

Private colleges can do as they please.

There is money per student...varies as science and medicine gets more,
but there is a budget etc...

Unis have to be competitive too ..if their courses are not filled...could be closed.

There are ways of getting rid of lazy buggers, first exams and first year being the time of culling them...trimming about 20% off....


----------



## Elles

I'm not sure the government should get to decide what you do based on what the country needs. I reckon students would rather end up with loans than be a square box forced into a round hole.


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> Well the Queens speech has been confirmed as Wednesday 21st June 2017 if the DUP are ready to strike a deal or not with the Conservatives. Thursday 22nd June 2017 EU Negotiations start.
> 
> There is suggestion that David Davis will be securing EU nationals rights in the UK straight away and using the 29th March 2017 as a suggested cut off date for any new EU nationals wishing to reside in the UK (the EU Leaders have to agree to this date).


Backdated? Or do you mean 2018 or beyond?


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> I'm not sure the government should get to decide what you do based on what the country needs. I reckon students would rather end up with loans than be a square box forced into a round hole.


But if you study something that is simply not needed on job market, then anyhow you end up in square hole doing something else, you could do with no degree at all!
Private colleges etc..can offer whatever they find takers for...but funny thing...they only do well if offer courses that make you employable!!!
Question is also how many placements ? How many anthropologists and how many dentists?

We have plenty of primary school teachers in Gibraltar, who studied this and that, could not find jobs, got a year " conversion" course and teach.
They would have made much better teachers if they actually studied that properly, for three, four years.

We cannot make market demands cut to what people wish or like to study ..
Or pay them benefits because they cannot find jobs in their profession.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> Backdated? Or do you mean 2018 or beyond?


Backdated of course to the day Article 50 was triggered. There is rumour the EU leaders will push for 2019 though.



> Britain wants the cut-off point for citizens' rights to be March 29 this year, when the UK notified its intention to leave the EU, but is expected to accede to EU demands that the date should be Brexit day itself in 2019.


http://amp.ft.com/content/3bcf4306-5108-11e7-a1f2-db19572361bb


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> Backdated of course to the day Article 50 was triggered. There is rumour the EU leaders will push for 2019 though.
> 
> http://amp.ft.com/content/3bcf4306-5108-11e7-a1f2-db19572361bb


Can't see the article. I expect the Eu may want notice at least up to the date we actually leave the Eu and for those who left before they were pushed to be allowed back. We'll see, at least it's now been prioritised which is about time. So long as Labour don't rally the country into riots before it gets settled.


----------



## havoc

Elles said:


> I'm not sure the government should get to decide what you do based on what the country needs. I reckon students would rather end up with loans than be a square box forced into a round hole.


That's exactly how it works. Extra grants and bursaries are made available for those who train in skills we need. Nobody forces square pegs into round holes.


----------



## stockwellcat.

Elles said:


> Can't see the article. I expect the Eu may want notice at least up to the date we actually leave the Eu and for those who left before they were pushed to be allowed back. We'll see, at least it's now been prioritised which is about time. So long as Labour don't rally the country into riots before it gets settled.


Here is the entire article.

I think you are exaggerating riots etc this isn't the 1980's/1990's.

The FT is a bit more of a credible source of information than the Sun, Daily Mail, Mirror, Express and the other papers some like reading on here.

News article:


> June 14, 2017 5:15 pm by George Parker in London andAlex Barker in Brussels
> 
> The UK Brexit secretary David Davis will start talks in Brussels next week with plans to make a "very generous" offer on rights for the 3m EU citizens living in the UK and with officials insisting Britain enters the negotiations with "head held high".
> 
> British officials will travel to Brussels on Thursday hoping to finalise arrangements for the start of formal talks on Monday and Mr Davis is said by colleagues to be "determined to get started".
> 
> The UK's offer to EU nationals living in Britain will guarantee them the rights they currently have and aim to treat them "as fairly as they have been to this point", according to Whitehall officials.
> *
> Britain wants the cut-off point for citizens' rights to be March 29 this year, when the UK notified its intention to leave the EU, but is expected to accede to EU demands that the date should be Brexit day itself in 2019.*
> 
> Mr Davis has been irritated by reports that the UK Brexit negotiating team is chaotic, has no clear mandate and is not ready to negotiate following the country's inconclusive election.
> 
> But while he wants to show that it is "business as usual", UK prime minister Theresa May is under pressure from cabinet colleagues to pursue a "softer" exit from the EU.
> 
> Mrs May will on Thursday preside over the cabinet's Brexit committee, with chancellor Philip Hammond leading calls for Britain to negotiate a significant transitional deal to smooth the UK's exit from the customs union and the single market.
> 
> Some senior Conservatives say it will be impossible for Mrs May to pass the legislation needed to enact Brexit in a hung parliament, but for now Downing Street says it is sticking to its original plans.
> 
> Mr Hammond will set out his concerns about the economic risk of crashing out of the EU in a speech to a City audience at Mansion House on Thursday evening; he has repeatedly warned about the dangers of an abrupt exit from the customs union and single market.
> 
> Earlier this week Michel Barnier, the EU's chief Brexit negotiator, told Britain to get on with the talks. "We haven't negotiated, we haven't progressed. Thus we must begin this negotiation. We are ready as soon as the UK itself is ready."
> 
> Mr Davis expects that as part of a compromise deal on citizens' rights, Brussels will drop its demand that after Brexit, EU citizens in the UK will retain access to the European Court of Justice to uphold their rights in Britain, a "red line" for the UK.
> 
> The EU's concern is that giving EU migrants permanent UK residence would cause them to lose EU rights, from family reunion to access to benefits. "I don't know if it is generous to preserve the rights of people and families who are worried," Mr Barnier said.
> 
> Diplomats on the EU side accept that they would struggle to argue against a proposal to give EU nationals the same rights as UK nationals in Britain, even if it involved them losing some EU rights.
> 
> They expect the UK to offer a status similar to "indefinite leave to remain" in the UK, which would still in effect reduce some of their rights and put them at a disadvantage compared with British nationals.
> 
> The EU side acknowledges it will be easier to make progress on citizens' rights than on the financial settlement. But the details are complex and the Brussels negotiators are seeking line-by-line guarantees on rights and the legal status of migrants.


----------



## Elles

cheekyscrip said:


> But if you study something that is simply not needed on job market, then anyhow you end up in square hole doing something else, you could do with no degree at all!
> Private colleges etc..can offer whatever they find takers for...but funny thing...they only do well if offer courses that make you employable!!!
> Question is also how many placements ? How many anthropologists and how many dentists?
> 
> We have plenty of primary school teachers in Gibraltar, who studied this and that, could not find jobs, got a year " conversion" course and teach.
> They would have made much better teachers if they actually studied that properly, for three, four years.
> 
> We cannot make market demands cut to what people wish or like to study ..
> Or pay them benefits because they cannot find jobs in their profession.


My daughter wanted to study for a degree in music, but was refused further education in music, because they needed more female maths students and she's good at maths. She did her music degrees at an academy with loans and scholarships and a bit of help from mum, I took a part time job in a local late opening shop to pay towards it. It's her life and I didn't want it wrecked before it started.

So maybe I'm biased, but I think students should be advised and given choices not forced. They can vote and get married, they can choose their own course so long as it's a course they're capable of. The loans rather than free for all places can allow and encourage it imo.


----------



## Elles

stockwellcat said:


> Here is the entire article.
> 
> I think you are exaggerating riots etc this isn't the 1980's/1990's.
> 
> The FT is a bit more of a credible source of information than the Sun, Daily Mail, Mirror, Express and the other papers some like reading on here.
> 
> News article:


I don't think I am. There are still activists, extremists and idiots who'd love to be given an excuse for a good old riot. The easiest way for them to do it is poke a few people and a couple of police officers at large, angry gatherings. I hope it will be peaceful protest if at all, but I'll be waiting with bated breath until we know more. It concerns me a little bit, but maybe you're right and people don't have the stomach for it today.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> My daughter wanted to study for a degree in music, but was refused further education in music, because they needed more female maths students and she's good at maths. She did her music degrees at an academy with loans and scholarships and a bit of help from mum, I took a part time job in a local late opening shop to pay towards it. It's her life and I didn't want it wrecked before it started.
> 
> So maybe I'm biased, but I think students should be advised and given choices not forced. They can vote and get married, they can choose their own course so long as it's a course they're capable of. The loans rather than free for all places can allow and encourage it imo.


I see place for music and for maths.

Some choices would more popular, but they would be open to all.

Where I come from every uni had own exams, sometimes students tried year after year until got placement.

Music is actually fairly popular as every school needs music teacher plus obviously musicians are needed too.
It does not work like in Divergent!
When you put your name down fir exams you make your own choice.
You could try different places if exams are on different days. .
Then you pass it or you do not.
Next time you might try again or rethink and go for something less popular, where threshold is lower, or different entry exams.

Anecdote coming upon me: My friend wanted to study painting, very hard to get in, so he pretended he has his high school finished and went for entry exams a year earlier as a " dry run"...
Then he actually passed!!!
He had portfolio anyhow and uni allowed him to finish his high school externally and study painting!
He is a well known artist by now...


----------



## Elles

Oh? Who is he?


----------



## shadowmare

Satori said:


> But they are all off their faces on the new psychotropics (no jealousy here then) and tend to fall prey to crazed ideological cultish ideas like voting Labour. Plus, let's face it, being an undergraduate involves about 16 hours of work per week, max, so they have plenty of time to lay about, attend protests/riots etc.


Actually, majority of undergrads work much more than that. Unless you live at home and have no bills to pay or get a huge student loan, it is pretty impossible to live off 16hrs pay. I started working in second term of my 1st year and would work 20-24hrs. My shifts started at 11pm and my paid hours finished at 3am. However, we cleaned the bar until 4-4.30am. In 2nd year I worked from 9pm to 4am. In 3rd and 4th year (my honours year) I worked between 35 and 45hrs per week. All of these jobs were 0 hours contracts. It really pees me off that people genuinely think that undergrads are able to live off 16hrs max pay.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> Oh? Who is he?










No names dropping  ...more that we met in a bit embarrassing circumstances....many moons ago...


----------



## cheekyscrip

shadowmare said:


> Actually, majority of undergrads work much more than that. Unless you live at home and have no bills to pay or get a huge student loan, it is pretty impossible to live off 16hrs pay. I started working in second term of my 1st year and would work 20-24hrs. My shifts started at 11pm and my paid hours finished at 3am. However, we cleaned the bar until 4-4.30am. In 2nd year I worked from 9pm to 4am. In 3rd and 4th year (my honours year) I worked between 35 and 45hrs per week. All of these jobs were 0 hours contracts. It really pees me off that people genuinely think that undergrads are able to live off 16hrs max pay.


Absolutely second that.

Many students work hard, nights, summers...

Some degrees are hard work without any extra.

Layabouts are those who do nothing and sponge benefits, not students.


----------



## Satori

Elles said:


> Oh? Who is he?


?


----------



## Satori

shadowmare said:


> Actually, majority of undergrads work much more than that. Unless you live at home and have no bills to pay or get a huge student loan, it is pretty impossible to live off 16hrs pay. I started working in second term of my 1st year and would work 20-24hrs. My shifts started at 11pm and my paid hours finished at 3am. However, we cleaned the bar until 4-4.30am. In 2nd year I worked from 9pm to 4am. In 3rd and 4th year (my honours year) I worked between 35 and 45hrs per week. All of these jobs were 0 hours contracts. It really pees me off that people genuinely think that undergrads are able to live off 16hrs max pay.


Actually, I meant 16 hours of studying but, fair point, many will likely have a job too.


----------



## MiffyMoo

That's it, I have decided that Theresa is actually a Labour stooge. She's trying her utmost to p*** everyone off. Very difficult to defend her after her visit to Grenfell today


----------



## Happy Paws2

MiffyMoo said:


> That's it, I have decided that Theresa is actually a Labour stooge. She's trying her utmost to p*** everyone off. *Very difficult to defend her after her visit to Grenfell today*


That was disgusting, she didn't even bother to go and see the people, just proves what she really thinks of normal working people.

She is just cold and heartless.

At least JC spent some time with them and listened to what they had to say.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Happy Paws said:


> That was disgusting, she didn't even bother to go and see the people, just proves what she really thinks of normal working people.
> 
> She is just cold and heartless.
> 
> At least JC spent some time with them and listened to what they had to say.


Don't get me wrong, I'm disgusted with all of their behaviour right now, not just TM. I think I feel more hit by her behaviour as I voted Tory (although not because of her) and I can't imagine that she hasn't had a damn good talking to over the past few days


----------



## Happy Paws2

MiffyMoo said:


> Don't get me wrong, I'm disgusted with all of their behaviour right now, not just TM. I think I feel more hit by her behaviour as I voted Tory (although not because of her) and *I can't imagine that she hasn't had a damn good talking to over the past few days*


Well if she did it didn't work, this morning proves she's a cold heart woman.


----------



## kimthecat

Happy Paws said:


> That was disgusting, she didn't even bother to go and see the people, just proves what she really thinks of normal working people.
> 
> She is just cold and heartless.
> 
> At least JC spent some time with them and listened to what they had to say.


I thought it very strange . I wonder what reason they will give. I dont think she is cold hearted , 
Even if she was cold hearted , she would have visited for appearance sake , surely.


----------



## MiffyMoo

kimthecat said:


> I thought it very strange . I wonder what reason they will give. I dont think she is cold hearted ,
> Even if she was cold hearted , she would have visited for appearance sake , surely.


I just read that she was only ever meant to meet with fire and police to discuss business. If that's the case, her PR needs sacking.

Send her on a mini tour of the three collection points, meet the people, take the abuse on the chin, and then meet with fire and police.


----------



## Elles

Satori said:


> Marcin Rupiewicz ?


According to the link, yep. Never heard of him, sorry. 

I was hoping scrip would be besties with the famous Gibraltar one. :Artist


----------



## Satori

Elles said:


> According to the link, yep. Never heard of him, sorry.


I hadn't either until Cheekyscrip posted. I was looking at his currently for sale stuff. I like the look of 'Charlie'. Then that led me to another artist I had not heard of, Rafal Knop, likely also Polish. Someone hide my credit cards, quick.


----------



## cheekyscrip




----------



## havoc

MiffyMoo said:


> I just read that she was only ever meant to meet with fire and police to discuss business. If that's the case, her PR needs sacking


I don't think there's a PR guru on this earth can make her look good. One of the things a leader needs is luck and lucky she ain't.


----------



## MiffyMoo

havoc said:


> I don't think there's a PR guru on this earth can make her look good. One of the things a leader needs is luck and lucky she ain't.


I'm currently watching Veep. I think we need to draft Armando Iannuci (spelling) in


----------



## Elles

cheekyscrip said:


> View attachment 314868


They don't earn a lot with their degrees then. My daughter has paid hers off and is now saving for her first house. Is it worth going to university for most people? My middle son left school at 16 and now runs his own business. He's just hit his 30s and is looking at buying a flat or house in Spain and is doing some downhill thing in the alps next month. He's a bit of an adrenaline freak. I don't know how the uk is so bad for so many.

I'm not sure taxpayers should be paying the 100bn plus that uni students have built up, but not earned enough to pay back. Is there any point? What do graduates end up doing with their degrees? Still never mind, it's written off after 25 years, or if you're permanently unable to work anyway. Sorry to sound so unsympathetic, but it seems a lot of money to educate people into jobs where they earn less than 20k a year. What's going on?


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> They don't earn a lot with their degrees then. My daughter has paid hers off and is now saving for her first house. Is it worth going to university for most people? My middle son left school at 16 and now runs his own business. He's just hit his 30s and is looking at buying a flat or house in Spain and is doing some downhill thing in the alps next month. He's a bit of an adrenaline freak. I don't know how the uk is so bad for so many.
> 
> I'm not sure taxpayers should be paying the 100bn plus that uni students have built up, but not earned enough to pay back. Is there any point? What do graduates end up doing with their degrees? Still never mind, it's written off after 25 years, or if you're permanently unable to work anyway. Sorry to sound so unsympathetic, but it seems a lot of money to educate people into jobs where they earn less than 20k a year. What's going on?


Seems other countries just get on with it?
Poorer than UK?
Find it beneficial for their nations.
Simply investment in the young generation and making full of your kids potential is worth it.
What if your girl had less sympathetic parents?

What if your grandchildren might be less lucky?

Imagine she could have tried for state funded degree n music and obtained it for free?
Failing that paid openings still available.


----------



## Elles

cheekyscrip said:


> Seems other countries just get on with it?
> Poorer than UK?
> Find it beneficial for their nations.
> Simply investment in the young generation and making full of your kids potential is worth it.
> What if your girl had less sympathetic parents?
> 
> What if your grandchildren might be less lucky?
> 
> Imagine she could have tried for state funded degree n music and obtained it for free?


Dunno Scrip.  One of the reasons we're supposed to vote labour and give people free university places is because then they'll get fabulous jobs, pay lots of tax and lead fulfilled, useful, happy lives. It doesn't sound like it does it? Paying the fees is only part of it anyway. I wonder how motivated people are. My kids make me feel knackered just talking to them, with their go faster stripes and more than one thing on the go at once. I just hope they carry on.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> Dunno Scrip.  One of the reasons we're supposed to vote labour and give people free university places is because then they'll get fabulous jobs, pay lots of tax and lead fulfilled, useful, happy lives. It doesn't sound like it does it? Paying the fees is only part of it anyway. I wonder how motivated people are. My kids make me feel knackered just talking to them, with their go faster stripes and more than one thing on the go at once. I just hope they carry on.


Never said that everyone should study for free, whatever they want...
But that opportunity should be there, for talented and hard working.
It really benefits us all...

Not all people with degree are
high earners...
In many fields you are lucky to scrape a living.....
Especially in yearly years...but even later...


----------



## Satori

cheekyscrip said:


> Seems other countries just get on with it?
> Poorer than UK?
> Find it beneficial for their nations.
> Simply investment in the young generation and making full of your kids potential is worth it.
> What if your girl had less sympathetic parents?
> 
> What if your grandchildren might be less lucky?
> 
> Imagine she could have tried for state funded degree n music and obtained it for free?
> Failing that paid openings still available.


I quite like the UK system tbh. £100bn in debt to the treasury and approx 2/3 will never be paid back according to some analysts. Apart from the fact that the government cheats and doesn't do the bad debt write-offs that's not such a bad situation, is it? Doesn't that say a numbers of graduates are entering fields where salaries are low should they choose, perhaps vocational careers or those on the back off humanities, arts, etc? They don't have to pay for their higher education. Whereas the doctors, lawyers, accountants (and let's not forget bankers, tax cheat advisors and politicians) pay back what they can well afford to.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Satori said:


> I quite like the UK system tbh. £100bn in debt to the treasury and approx 2/3 will never be paid back according to some analysts. Apart from the fact that the government cheats and doesn't do the bad debt write-offs that's not such a bad situation, is it? Doesn't that say a numbers of graduates are entering fields where salaries are low should they choose, perhaps vocational careers or those on the back off humanities, arts, etc? They don't have to pay for their higher education. Whereas the doctors, lawyers, accountants (and let's not forget bankers, tax cheat advisors and politicians) pay back what they can well afford to.


We need arts and humanities too, we need teachers, scientists , nurses...
Many of whom earn not much , but imagine place of only doctors, accounts and lawyers plus tax cheat advisors...sounds a bit Singapore.

Young people drop out because they have no dream. They see no point of trying.
I might be biased, it is my professional experience. Worked in education for years in different roles. Six members of my nearest family are or were in teaching profession on different levels in different countries.

Human resources are among most important riches of any nation.
Education is as essential as health care.
Body and mind are one.
I


----------



## Elles

cheekyscrip said:


> Never said that everyone should study for free, whatever they want...
> But that opportunity should be there, for talented and hard working.
> 
> Not all people with degree are
> high earners...
> In many fields you are lucky to scrape a living.....
> Especially in yearly years...but even later...


Ok. Labour want to pay 11bn a year for free university places for all. Even labour supporters who are wealthy have said why should the poor pay for our kids to go to university and I've seen university students who have said the loan system is better and Scots saying they'd prefer it and more poor go to uni in England than they do in Scotland where the universities target wealthy foreign students they can get more money from.

I think Satori was making the point that those in humanitarian based, or art based professions who don't earn a ton of money, will in the end have gone to uni for free, including their keep, as eventually the debt will be written off and they'll never have to pay it. Nasty lawyers and bankers will earn enough to pay theirs back. Lol. Bonus.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Talking about something else: I wonder if actually EU will let us stay in single market, without putting on absurd price?
Macron has his eye on Euro clearing business, so do Germans... They now have free hand with smaller countries , now squashing opposition from Poland, Hungary and Czek...
Trump is poised to then get US dollar clearing to USA.
The City will diminish and that will have great impact on the budget.

In a way Brexit might bring revival of EU if they get what they wish, at our expense, 
Somehow cannot see how TMwith DUP will get us " good Brexit".


No Brexit better than bad Brexit.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## KittenKong

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ons-on-personal-response-to-grenfell-disaster


----------



## Elles

Personally I think Corbyn is having the time of his life. Riling up youngsters, attacking the government, going to festivals, hugging people, his picture in the papers, people hanging onto his every word and getting blamed for nothing. It's his dream come true. 

I'm not a huggy person and nor is the Queen. Of course Theresa May had a police escort, people were out for her blood. What is she supposed to say? She's not coming over well, she's awkward in her interviews. She's been PM for 5 minutes and the troubles of the country and the world are being laid at her feet, the blame for the deaths of dozens of people put squarely on her shoulders. I don't envy her one bit.


----------



## KittenKong

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...told-they-voted-for-it-as-ae-closes-at-night/


----------



## Elles

KittenKong said:


> http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...told-they-voted-for-it-as-ae-closes-at-night/
> View attachment 315026
> View attachment 315027


If there's no doctors they can't keep it open can they? That's more likely to be the fault of Brexit, or former governments. You can't train surgeons and doctors in five minutes and the Eu ones are leaving maybe. The government should have been quicker to confirm the status of Eu nationals for one, but parts of the NHS has been crap for years. There's little status in being an NHS doctor these days. Weston S Mare is a damned awkward place to get to. It's a shame.


----------



## JANICE199

Elles said:


> Personally I think Corbyn is having the time of his life. Riling up youngsters, attacking the government, going to festivals, hugging people, his picture in the papers, people hanging onto his every word and getting blamed for nothing. It's his dream come true.
> 
> I'm not a huggy person and nor is the Queen. Of course Theresa May had a police escort, people were out for her blood. What is she supposed to say? She's not coming over well, she's awkward in her interviews. She's been PM for 5 minutes and the troubles of the country and the world are being laid at her feet, the blame for the deaths of dozens of people put squarely on her shoulders. I don't envy her one bit.


*I don't see it as JC is riling up anyone. He speaks from the heart and hits more than one chord with the people. He was the only reason i voted for the first time this year. *


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/...told-they-voted-for-it-as-ae-closes-at-night/


 it says closed because of a shortage of doctors not because they have cut funding to the hospital . The doctor shortage needs to be sorted.

According to to Hutton parish council . The closure is* temporary* from July 4 th but doesnt say hpw long it will be closed ofr . Until they get more staff i expect .

http://www.huttonsomerset.org.uk/news/Night-Time-Closure-of-Hospital-Aamp3bE-Department.aspx


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> it says closed because of a shortage of doctors not because they have cut funding to the hospital . The doctor shortage needs to be sorted.
> 
> According to to Hutton parish council . The closure is* temporary* from July 4 th but doesnt say hpw long it will be closed ofr . Until they get more staff i expect .
> 
> http://www.huttonsomerset.org.uk/news/Night-Time-Closure-of-Hospital-Aamp3bE-Department.aspx


I would be asking WHY is there a shortage of doctors. The department has been open for many years. Has they always been a shortage of doctors or is it a recent problem?

If this has occurred due to the uncertainty surrounding the future of EU citizens being allowed to remain post Brexit the government should take full responsibility for this. They won't as they have to blame someone else as they always do.


----------



## kimthecat

@kittonkong I expect there is more than one reason for a shortage of doctors there . As i said my post , it needs to be sorted 

However ,the info in your link is misleading and the source not reliable .


----------



## Elles

Yeah, it seems like some people think everyone else is stupid and need bombarding with socialist propaganda. I can't stand either of the main parties and haven't voted for either of them since Margaret Thatcher's time, but the Corbyn love in is vomit worthy on here. :Vomit  I suspect that as he's a Labour politician and given his past history, he's pulling the wool over a lot of eyes. He's not some benevolent Wolfie Smith. I think it's wiser to be suspicious of all of them and even wiser to be more suspicious of the 'nice' ones. Timeo Danaos et dona ferentis.


----------



## KittenKong

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ned-over-theresa-mays-grenfell-response#img-1


----------



## kimthecat

I tell you who _shouldn't_ have resigned is Cameron. he should have stayed and faced the music. he would have dealt with this much better than May . if she resigns , who will take place ? Brexit talks soon and all this mess.
Saw on the news , locals moving back to their homes next to Grenfell , a man in a small block of flats said their alarms hadnt worked for five years !


----------



## Elles

Look up who the councillor is that Jeremy Corbyn is pictured hugging. He's a councillor not a survivor btw. Then look up who his daughter is and the controversy surrounding her, also a councillor for the area. Then look up the unedited film of Corbyn's visit. Then come back and tell me that Corbyn visited Grenfell house and hugged and sympathised with the survivors. It was an organised photo shoot and the guy he hugged for the photo is a labour councillor Corbyn has known for 40 years.

Look up who was responsible for the tower block and others in the area.

The group responsible for Grenfell Tower
http://www.kctmo.org.uk/sub/about-us/20/the-board

The company they paid £3 million for the cladding went bust in 2015 shortly after completion. I wouldn't be surprised if they face criminal charges.

It's all propaganda as usual. Joe Public are being had by the lot of them imo.


----------



## kimthecat

@Elles  can you give the name of the councilor or any links , I don't know who it is .


----------



## Elles

kimthecat said:


> @Elles  can you give the name of the councilor or any links , I don't know who it is .


Darn it, I was hoping no one would ask. I'll have to try to find him again. Mushtaq Lasharie (sp). The unedited video of the visit is on YouTube.

I'm not saying that Corbyn doesn't care, or that he shouldn't be hugging his besties, I'm saying we shouldn't be had and manipulated by people playing us.


----------



## kimthecat

@Elles  I try to remember to bookmark my links , I have hundreds .

The name is right . 

https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/committees/members/tabid/62/ctl/viewcmis_person/mid/384/id/216/default.aspx




















Beinazar Lasharie
https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/committees/...4/id/400/ScreenMode/Alphabetical/Default.aspx


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...ntestant-suspended-from-labour-party-over-ant


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


>


I did as search on Twitter and found the member Very Brexit problems but couldnt see that tweet or the photos .
would you be able to find it for me ?

ETA it does say in the Mail that the man Corbyn is hugging is a councillor .
I dont know who the young woman is . i dont know if its BL or not .

this is beinazar lasharie


----------



## KittenKong

kimthecat said:


> I did as search on Twitter and found the member Very Brexit problems but couldnt see that tweet or the photos .
> would you be able to find it for me ?
> 
> ETA it does say in the Mail that the man Corbyn is hugging is a councillor .
> I dont know who the young woman is . i dont know if its BL or not .
> 
> this is beinazar lasharie


Very Brexit Problems is a Facebook site. A search on Facebook will find it.


----------



## Elles

Yes, it is. It's the hugged man's daughter who was suspended for anti Semitism.



kimthecat said:


> I did as search on Twitter and found the member Very Brexit problems but couldnt see that tweet or the photos .
> would you be able to find it for me ?
> 
> ETA it does say in the Mail that the man Corbyn is hugging is a councillor .
> I dont know who the young woman is . i dont know if its BL or not .
> 
> this is beinazar lasharie


----------



## kimthecat

@Elles Thx . the photos are in the DM but they dont know her name.

Im all googled out now . 

@kittonkong

THX Found it. I dont do FB ,

I thought perhaps there might be more info . Bit strange , they show him hugging councillors , Youd think they show him hugging survivors .


----------



## Calvine

Elles said:


> It was an organised photo shoot


I can absolutely believe you, truly I can. But I saw this suggested by a poster on another forum and they were shouted down and told they were being disrespectful. Corbyn is an expert at playing up to the cameras; unfortunately TM isn't, but the last photo I saw of her she looked like death warmed up, totally grey and distraught.


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> I try to remember to bookmark my links , I have hundreds


I wouldn't have a clue how to do that so I have none...absolute zilch.


----------



## rona

Calvine said:


> I can absolutely believe you, truly I can. But I saw this suggested by a poster on another forum and they were shouted down and told they were being disrespectful. Corbyn is an expert at playing up to the cameras; unfortunately TM isn't, but the last photo I saw of her she looked like death warmed up, totally grey and distraught.


Poor woman has so much to cope with,much more than any since the war. I do hope her MPs are supporting her


----------



## Elles

There's a full unedited film of Corbyn's visit on YouTube. It was an organised 20 minute visit. He has a little banter and hug with his buddy when the photos were taken, then he's introduced to church officials and other labour councillors, before being introduced to volunteers, in the church hall. Anyone can look for themselves. 

May was meeting with the fire services. May was expected to face the survivors and victims who are rightly upset and angry, and with no protection. They want her hung drawn and quartered, it would be stupid of her. Corbyn was not walking randomly among survivors and hugging them, though I'm sure he could. No one blames him. But in this instance it was disingenuous to tell us he was hugging one of the 'people'. 

The people responsible for the building were tenants (of the area, not the building I believe, not sure), independents and at least one labour councillor. They could be recent of course and nothing to do with the refurb, I don't know. The actual council is currently mostly conservative. It looks like someone may have been had by the company paid for the cladding. They've done other buildings though. BBC news said those in those buildings would be temporarily moved out. Are they? I haven't heard anything.

What happens now is important. From what I can see, nothing much. It must be so far behind the scenes no one can see it. If I was a victim wanting to know where to go and what to do I'd be furious too. Where are the officials and agencies? There should be a centralised disaster agency. Pull in uninvolved expert people from other areas, the army if necessary. It's ridiculous. I hope the news reports are wrong, but, forget Corbyn, it's not looking good without pimping his ride.

I agree, May looks to have lost weight and is looking grey and drained and I think it's going to get worse yet.


----------



## stockwellcat.

KittenKong said:


> Very Brexit Problems is a Facebook site. A search on Facebook will find it.
> View attachment 315093


Yes but if we stay we have been told by EU leaders this week gone that we stay on worse terms.

*Britain could only stay in EU on worse terms, Guy Verhofstadt says*
European Parliament's Brexit coordinator says the "door is open", but "like Alice in Wonderland, not all the doors are the same".

http://news.sky.com/story/amp/brita...-on-worse-terms-guy-verhofstadt-says-10915293

The UK voted to leave so let's get on with it. Oh yes the negotiations start on Monday btw.


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Yes but if we stay we have been told by EU leaders this week gone that we stay on worse terms.
> 
> *Britain could only stay in EU on worse terms, Guy Verhofstadt says*
> European Parliament's Brexit coordinator says the "door is open", but "like Alice in Wonderland, not all the doors are the same".
> 
> http://news.sky.com/story/amp/brita...-on-worse-terms-guy-verhofstadt-says-10915293
> 
> The UK voted to leave so let's get on with it. Oh yes the negotiations start on Monday btw.


Wasn't actually a Brexit related post my post referred to, even if it came from the "Very Brexit Problem" FB page.
Let's see how the clowns get on on Monday.


----------



## kimthecat

Calvine said:


> I wouldn't have a clue how to do that so I have none...absolute zilch.


Aw , My browser is icedragon . along the top on the same level as the webpage address is a star . i click on that and it sends it too bookmarks , some browsers call them favourites .


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> Yeah, it seems like some people think everyone else is stupid and need bombarding with socialist propaganda. I can't stand either of the main parties and haven't voted for either of them since Margaret Thatcher's time, but the Corbyn love in is vomit worthy on here. :Vomit  I suspect that as he's a Labour politician and given his past history, he's pulling the wool over a lot of eyes. He's not some benevolent Wolfie Smith. I think it's wiser to be suspicious of all of them and even wiser to be more suspicious of the 'nice' ones. Timeo Danaos et dona ferentis.


I really don't think all those academics who have spoken out in support of labour under Corbyn are that stupid Elles - after all evaluating evidence is what they do best. And millions of people suffering under the cosh of austerity or who just care about social & environmental justice have been desperate for someone like Corbyn to along. All across the globe Corbyn is highly regarded by respected figures - like America's Bernie Sanders is  . In Corbyn we have someone who offers a clear alternative to (heres that word again) _neoliberalism (Thatcherism if you prefer _.) Neoliberalism is an ideology. It lies behind austerity, the failure to tackle climate change, gross inequality - _deregulation! _Its the politics of greed. Corbyn has always represented the masses, he has never been in bed with corporate interests or the elite. He only put his name forward on the ballot paper for the labour leadership contest to put an alternative to the greedy ideology on the agenda, never believing he would win - but he did & by a landslide at that!. And that's how sick traditional labour voters were of the way labour had been dragged to the right by Blair adopting neoliberalism. People warm to Corbyn because, for all his faults, he is a principled man. Theres a stack of evidence to prove May is that cold & heartless creature she comes across as. She is a pathological liar & her voting history, her policies are there for all to see. She doesn't care about the poor or disabled or defenceless animals, she doesn't care about climate change or refugees - she is a warmonger. The ideology she practises is a danger to every living thing.


----------



## KittenKong

noushka05 said:


> Theres a stack of evidence to prove May is that cold & heartless creature she comes across as. She is a pathological liar & her voting history, her policies are there for all to see. She doesn't care about the poor or disabled or defenceless animals, she doesn't care about climate change or refugees - she is a warmonger. The ideology she practises is a danger to every living thing.


----------



## Satori

noushka05 said:


> I really don't think all those academics who have spoken out in support of labour under Corbyn are that stupid Elles - after all evaluating evidence is what they do best. And millions of people suffering under the cosh of austerity or who just care about social & environmental justice have been desperate for someone like Corbyn to along. All across the globe Corbyn is highly regarded by respected figures - like America's Bernie Sanders is  . In Corbyn we have someone who offers a clear alternative to (heres that word again) _neoliberalism (Thatcherism if you prefer _.) Neoliberalism is an ideology. It lies behind austerity, the failure to tackle climate change, gross inequality - _deregulation! _Its the politics of greed. Corbyn has always represented the masses, he has never been in bed with corporate interests or the elite. He only put his name forward on the ballot paper for the labour leadership contest to put an alternative to the greedy ideology on the agenda, never believing he would win - but he did & by a landslide at that!. And that's how sick traditional labour voters were of the way labour had been dragged to the right by Blair adopting neoliberalism. People warm to Corbyn because, for all his faults, he is a principled man. Theres a stack of evidence to prove May is that cold & heartless creature she comes across as. She is a pathological liar & her voting history, her policies are there for all to see. She doesn't care about the poor or disabled or defenceless animals, she doesn't care about climate change or refugees - she is a warmonger. The ideology she practises is a danger to every living thing.


Bullshit.


----------



## kimthecat

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 315130


Why would she laugh ? Its not really a laughing matter at the moment, is it ?


----------



## kimthecat

Tell me this is a joke !

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/music/news/hero-hour-jeremy-corbyn-speak-main-stage-glastonbury/
tep aside, Ed Sheeran. The main event at Glastonbury this year looks set to be "hero of the hour" Jeremy Corbyn.

The Labour leader is due to appear on the Pyramid Stage on Saturday June 24 to introduce US rap duo Run the Jewels, it was announced today (Friday June 16).

Run the Jewels, a highly politicised rap duo who have also voiced their support for Bernie Sanders, are scheduled to perform at 4.15pm, with Corbyn speaking to the crowd beforehand.

:Vomit


----------



## Elles

I can't find anything that says tower blocks had sprinklers and fire escapes that were taken out during refurbishment, or that they were planned, but abandoned when those responsible ran out of money as is being suggested elsewhere.

Only 1% of council tower blocks have been fitted with sprinklers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-40293035

When will the residents of tower blocks, particularly those refurbished and with cladding know that they aren't also at risk? I think sprinklers, despite the cost and disruption, will become very popular. Residents have wanted cladding to warm their homes, they might be thinking again and wanting reassurances that extra attention will now be paid to fire protection and new laws introduced, rather than the current recommendations.  Blocks have had cladding fitted to comply with current environmental targets and at tenant groups' requests, not just to prettify the outside, in areas that are cheap and ugly, not just rich and attractive. Hopefully it is all being checked and that any blocks at risk are evacuated and fixed.

Were May or Corbyn personally contacted about these tower blocks? Neither seem to have mentioned them prior to this. It would have happened regardless of who won the recent election, neither of them personally knew anything about it and neither Labour nor Conservative governments or councils retro fitted sprinklers. I doubt Corbyn would have either. You'd think May built them herself and went up a ladder with superglue to read some of the stuff on the 'net.



Satori said:


> Bullshit.


Got it in one? :Hilarious


----------



## Elles

kimthecat said:


> Tell me this is a joke !
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/music/news/hero-hour-jeremy-corbyn-speak-main-stage-glastonbury/
> tep aside, Ed Sheeran. The main event at Glastonbury this year looks set to be "hero of the hour" Jeremy Corbyn.
> 
> The Labour leader is due to appear on the Pyramid Stage on Saturday June 24 to introduce US rap duo Run the Jewels, it was announced today (Friday June 16).
> 
> Run the Jewels, a highly politicised rap duo who have also voiced their support for Bernie Sanders, are scheduled to perform at 4.15pm, with Corbyn speaking to the crowd beforehand.
> 
> :Vomit


Nope, that's why I said this a few pages ago. 



Elles said:


> Personally I think Corbyn is having the time of his life. Riling up youngsters, attacking the government, going to festivals, hugging people, his picture in the papers, people hanging onto his every word and getting blamed for nothing. It's his dream come true.


----------



## kimthecat

@Elles and to think "he only put his name forward on the ballot paper for the labour leadership contest to put an alternative to the greedy ideology on the agenda, "

Reminds me of Blair and Cool Britania


----------



## stockwellcat.

Theresa May given 10 days to shape up or leave by her own parties MP's.








There are enough Tory MP's now to vote a vote of no confidence against Theresa May if she doesn't get her act together.









A stalking horse leadership challenge was last used to oust Maggie Thatcher by Tory MP's.

Tory MP's believe that Theresa May's response to the Tower block fire was not good enough and Theresa May herself has recognised she could have done more.


----------



## Lurcherlad

Elles said:


> Darn it, I was hoping no one would ask. I'll have to try to find him again. Mushtaq Lasharie (sp). The unedited video of the visit is on YouTube.
> 
> I'm not saying that Corbyn doesn't care, or that he shouldn't be hugging his besties, I'm saying we shouldn't be had and manipulated by people playing us.


A bit like the photo of him sitting on the floor in a "crowded" train - that wasn't?

Spin - again


----------



## noushka05

Satori said:


> Bullshit.


Neoliberalism.


----------



## Calvine

_He really is the hero of the hour._

I can't see it myself...


----------



## Calvine

kimthecat said:


> Tell me this is a joke !
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/music/news/hero-hour-jeremy-corbyn-speak-main-stage-glastonbury/
> tep aside, Ed Sheeran. The main event at Glastonbury this year looks set to be "hero of the hour" Jeremy Corbyn.
> 
> The Labour leader is due to appear on the Pyramid Stage on Saturday June 24 to introduce US rap duo Run the Jewels, it was announced today (Friday June 16).
> 
> Run the Jewels, a highly politicised rap duo who have also voiced their support for Bernie Sanders, are scheduled to perform at 4.15pm, with Corbyn speaking to the crowd beforehand.
> 
> :Vomit


I've heard it all now...just when you think it couldn't get any worse!


----------



## Calvine

Elles said:


> It would have happened regardless of who won the recent election,
> 
> You hit the nail on the head there, @Elles. Of course it would. They'll be blaming Donald Trump as well given half a chance.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> I've heard it all now...just when you think it couldn't get any worse!


Worse than getting into bed with the DUP?


----------



## KittenKong

stockwellcat said:


> Theresa May given 10 days to shape up or leave by her own parties MP's.
> View attachment 315149
> 
> There are enough Tory MP's now to vote a vote of no confidence against Theresa May if she doesn't get her act together.
> 
> View attachment 315150
> 
> A stalking horse leadership challenge was last used to oust Maggie Thatcher by Tory MP's.
> 
> Tory MP's believe that Theresa May's response to the Tower block fire was not good enough and Theresa May herself has recognised she could have done more.


Damn. Ten days. Thought it said ten minutes......


----------



## JANICE199

KittenKong said:


> Damn. Ten days. Thought it said ten minutes......


*Wishful thinking. haha *


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> @Elles and to think "he only put his name forward on the ballot paper for the labour leadership contest to put an alternative to the greedy ideology on the agenda, "
> 
> Reminds me of Blair and Cool Britania


Except Blair is a neoliberal & Corbyn isn't


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...heresa-may-ministers-threaten-stalking-horse/










Easy for her, but what would the DUP say?!


----------



## kimthecat

*CorbynSnap* 1h1 hour ago

The qualities of leadership are best measured by who best has that instinctive, relaxed way of being at ease with the people.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Now officials blame the residents, or even better: Blame Brexit for no Tim for fire safety meetings...

Shambolic response to this tragedy is very telling...very symbolic.

Describes our leaders perfectly.

Only Sadiq Khan faced angrry, desperate people withcourage , ashen faced himself. No crocodile tears .

The most disgusting: Bojo himself Mayor of London for years - criticising Khan.


New summit of hypocrisy, even for him.


----------



## Elles

People are becoming genuinely worried about there being a what next.

Corbyn saying that people should be rehomed in rich people's luxury homes that they aren't currently living in..

A bit of research on this idea brings up his brothers. One in particular who is a scientist and climate change denier and actively involved in squatters rights. According to him, the idea of climate change being our fault was used by Margaret Thatcher to bring down the coal and steel industries and gain support for nuclear power. He agrees with Trump. When asked by the Independent, he said Jeremy was very open to debate about climate change, but has to support the Green and Labour take on it publicly. He thought it probably wasn't wise for him to say what was said at family Christmas dinners.

I don't know whether this old article has been linked before:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...my-Corbyns-rule-it-turned-me-into-a-Tory.html

People being housed in wealthy people's investment or holiday homes in the area isn't going to happen. It would take a change in law, or the generosity of Russian oligarchs or similar. I think it's worrying even mentioning it as a possible, what is the agenda with that?

Unfortunately we do still have 2 extremes. It doesn't work. Supporting the poor to extreme creates resentment, complacency and entitlement, as people who work hard start to feel taken advantage of. Supporting the wealthy to extreme creates envy, bitterness and anger, as wealthy corporates take advantage of unbridled power. Hence companies like Amazon and JDSports. We need a middle ground. Currently there isn't one, but I'm not a socialist so the more I read about Corbyn, the more I swing towards May.

If Jeremy is a Eu sceptic who wanted brexit, a climate change denier, anti nuclear (weapon and power) and a squatter supporter, he ain't half compromising his principles to be labour leader and potential pm isn't he.


----------



## Elles

I hope it doesn't turn out that some greedy people have illegally sublet their council flats in wealthy areas. It is starting to look like it when people mention landlords and there are rumours of up to 600 people in the flats and accusations of underestimates of the actual death toll. 

If people escaping did leave fire doors and windows open too, that needs to be considered. Not to put any blame on them, but so that future builds and projects and the ongoing inspections can take the human factor into account. It's sounding more and more as though sprinklers are the only way. It's no use talking containment, if people have wedged their door open because the weather's hot.

I can't imagine how people must feel. The horror of it is bad enough without people being made to feel guilty. They will be feeling 'why me' and guilty about surviving when so many didn't, as it is. Those responsible for the refurbishments should have taken human error into account. Tower blocks have been around for years. I worked in a two floor office building where they propped the self closing doors open when it was hot. It's wrong, but it's normal and it doesn't matter how many fire drills are done. It has to be taken into account. Get sprinklers into them. There's no excuse not to at this stage and there was no excuse not to after the first fires.


----------



## Jonescat

Meanwhile - we didn't give the answer we were supposed to in the election, so the rules are changed to suit - No Queen's Speech next year - was that in the manifesto?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40317814


----------



## Elles

cheekyscrip said:


> The most disgusting: Bojo himself Mayor of London for years - criticising Khan.
> 
> .


I don't know how he ended up mayor. He seems worse and worse to me and that's from watching film of him, not reading press reports and labourite interpretations. If May is brought down and he's made PM even I might have to vote for hypocrite Corbyn.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> People are becoming genuinely worried about there being a what next.
> 
> Corbyn saying that people should be rehomed in rich people's luxury homes that they aren't currently living in..
> 
> A bit of research on this idea brings up his brothers. One in particular who is a scientist and climate change denier and actively involved in squatters rights. According to him, the idea of climate change being our fault was used by Margaret Thatcher to bring down the coal and steel industries and gain support for nuclear power. He agrees with Trump. When asked by the Independent, he said Jeremy was very open to debate about climate change, but has to support the Green and Labour take on it publicly. He thought it probably wasn't wise for him to say what was said at family Christmas dinners.
> 
> I don't know whether this old article has been linked before:
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...my-Corbyns-rule-it-turned-me-into-a-Tory.html
> 
> People being housed in wealthy people's investment or holiday homes in the area isn't going to happen. It would take a change in law, or the generosity of Russian oligarchs or similar. I think it's worrying even mentioning it as a possible, what is the agenda with that?
> 
> Unfortunately we do still have 2 extremes. It doesn't work. Supporting the poor to extreme creates resentment, complacency and entitlement, as people who work hard start to feel taken advantage of. Supporting the wealthy to extreme creates envy, bitterness and anger, as wealthy corporates take advantage of unbridled power. Hence companies like Amazon and JDSports. We need a middle ground. Currently there isn't one, but I'm not a socialist so the more I read about Corbyn, the more I swing towards May.
> 
> If Jeremy is a Eu sceptic who wanted brexit, a climate change denier, anti nuclear (weapon and power) and a squatter supporter, he ain't half compromising his principles to be labour leader and potential pm isn't he.


Wouldn't it be nice if rich occupants of Buckingham invited the homeless residents for time being?

No, you cannot use someone's house unless it is legally deemed abandoned.

No Brexit better than bad Brexit.

I am afraid the backlash against the hard Brexit and the ruin it will bring to ordinary people will send them to the streets and into Marxist version of extreme socialism which as we know never worked for any economy.

If Britain does not stop that madness, EU would take euro clearing to Paris etc.Trump will take dollar, City will no longer be the World Centre of Commerce and UK would became quite isolated , impoverished state.

It is like heading to become next North Korea for all that spiel of " global Britain".

Global Britain we are right now. Most interconnected country in the world.

EU will seize the opportunity to shift the power to them.

We will stay with wonky pound, custom tariffs and back to recession.

I do not blame the people.

I blame Bojo, Gove, May, Cameron even Merkel.

Their decisions dropped us in that mess


----------



## Arnie83

*Secret plot to oust Theresa May as ministers threaten 'stalking horse' if PM fails to deliver 'hard' Brexit*

So now the small cabal of prehistoric Tory Brexiteers are threatening to bring down the government unless May totally ignores the message of the election result and sticks to the most economically calamitous and isolationist plan. What a bunch of self-serving dinosaurs.


----------



## KittenKong

Arnie83 said:


> *Secret plot to oust Theresa May as ministers threaten 'stalking horse' if PM fails to deliver 'hard' Brexit*
> 
> So now the small cabal of prehistoric Tory Brexiteers are threatening to bring down the government unless May totally ignores the message of the election result and sticks to the most economically calamitous and isolationist plan. What a bunch of self-serving dinosaurs.


The way May is behaving you'd think she'd won a landslide. We've all united behind her of course haven't we?!

I don't think the hard Brexiteers within the Tory party need worry. They'll get their hard Brexit.

Having said that it could cause complications with the proposed deal with the DUP where some differences of opinion exist!


----------



## cheekyscrip

Arnie83 said:


> *Secret plot to oust Theresa May as ministers threaten 'stalking horse' if PM fails to deliver 'hard' Brexit*
> 
> So now the small cabal of prehistoric Tory Brexiteers are threatening to bring down the government unless May totally ignores the message of the election result and sticks to the most economically calamitous and isolationist plan. What a bunch of self-serving dinosaurs.


Why do you insult dinosaurs!!!!

They are self serving and party donors serving vassals.

They are very, very dangerous if they win...

People will realise how betrayed they are and where they would go?

I do not trust communism, I actually lived in that fairy tale and it was a nightmare.

Only the balance works.

Now both major parties should find that balance together if any of them care about this country at all.


----------



## KittenKong

cheekyscrip said:


> Only the balance works.
> 
> Now both major parties should find that balance together if any of them care about this country at all.


I wasn't going to bring Brexit in to this but it is relevant.

One of the reasons why I'm so against it. It'll allow individual countries to become extreme politically as would have been seen in Holland and France if the relevant parties were elected. Thankfully they weren't which has left May feeling rather isolated no doubt.

Anyone think Hitler would have achieved what he did had they been an EU in the 1930s? He was the reason why the CM/EEC/EU was established in the first place. It has ensured peace amongst our nations for 70 years whatever the Daily Mail/Express and Sun say.

And former Iron Curtain countries were quick to join ASAP for similar reasons.


----------



## Elles

Theresa May has pulled out the council staff and replaced them with government officials, civil servants. She's brought in more staff on the ground wearing hi viz so they are easily recognised and increased the number manning phones so that people can get information more easily. The government is arranging to fast track families of the deceased into the Uk.

She asked people what they wanted, they told her, she gave them it. The council staff were the ones supposed to be dealing with the actual situation while May was talking to fire officials and visiting hospitals and the thousand other things one woman can do at once. Everyone has been let down by the council, before, during and after. It looks as though the council will be the fall guy, the scapegoat. Remains to be seen whether they deserve the label. It seems that the actual victims blame the council and wanted more from them and that's why they protested at the council building. 

Not all protests involve those affected, or victims. Others, it's said, are using the tragedy to promote their own agenda and personally I don't doubt it.


----------



## Elles

Jeremy Corbyn was reportedly and quite openly anti Europe until he became labour leader. Apparently upgrading his website meant some of his anti Eu articles were deleted. Becoming labour leader changed his mind and he decided the Eu could be worked on from within, even though some of its core (unelected, links to NATO) hadn't changed.

May has always wanted to stay in the Eu, Corbyn has always wanted to leave.

If Britain had voted to stay in the Eu, the anti Eu parties in other countries may have won their elections. People in Europe think Britain looks a mess because of brexit, they don't want to be in the same position, which may have influenced some of the voters.



KittenKong said:


> I wasn't going to bring Brexit in to this but it is relevant.
> 
> One of the reasons why I'm so against it. It'll allow individual countries to become extreme politically as would have been seen in Holland and France if the relevant parties were elected. Thankfully they weren't which has left May feeling rather isolated no doubt.
> 
> Anyone think Hitler would have achieved what he did had they been an EU in the 1930s? He was the reason why the CM/EEC/EU was established in the first place. It has ensured peace amongst our nations for 70 years whatever the Daily Mail/Express and Sun say.
> 
> And former Iron Curtain countries were quick to join ASAP for similar reasons.


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> Jeremy Corbyn was reportedly and quite openly anti Europe until he became labour leader. Apparently upgrading his website meant some of his anti Eu articles were deleted. Becoming labour leader changed his mind and he decided the Eu could be worked on from within, even though some of its core (unelected, links to NATO) hadn't changed.
> 
> May has always wanted to stay in the Eu, Corbyn has always wanted to leave.
> 
> If Britain had voted to stay in the Eu, the anti Eu parties in other countries may have won their elections. People in Europe think Britain looks a mess because of brexit, they don't want to be in the same position, which may have influenced some of the voters.


Yes indeed, but I disagree May has always wanted to remain in the EU. Her "support" for remain always seemed half hearted. I suppose her position depended on what would give her power.

Besides she based her election gamble on her hard Brexit stance. She lost her majority as a result which shows not everyone agrees.

Yes, the UK voting for Brexit has done the EU and other countries within it a huge favour!


----------



## cheekyscrip

Elles said:


> Jeremy Corbyn was reportedly and quite openly anti Europe until he became labour leader. Apparently upgrading his website meant some of his anti Eu articles were deleted. Becoming labour leader changed his mind and he decided the Eu could be worked on from within, even though some of its core (unelected, links to NATO) hadn't changed.
> 
> May has always wanted to stay in the Eu, Corbyn has always wanted to leave.
> 
> If Britain had voted to stay in the Eu, the anti Eu parties in other countries may have won their elections. People in Europe think Britain looks a mess because of brexit, they don't want to be in the same position, which may have influenced some of the voters.


No, I don't think other countries would have gone for exit, maybe if referendum happened like in Britain right after Merkel flooding Germany with refugees , then ordering other countries to take them or else EU punish them.
Merkel putting herself in position of unelected EU ruler.
That would not go down well...but Britain united with others could have faced to Merkel instead of running g for the door.

This is Brexit election, this is how it will be played.


----------



## Elles

KittenKong said:


> Yes indeed, but I disagree May has always wanted to remain in the EU. Her "support" for remain always seemed half hearted. I suppose her position depended on what would give her power.


I think you mean someone else.



KittenKong said:


> Yes, the UK voting for Brexit has done the EU and other countries within it a huge favour!


For the many, not the few?


----------



## cheekyscrip

Now ( " The Sunday Times" today) Bojo wants " open Brexit"...
Poised to become next PM, over dead bodies if must be...

TM hiding behind Gove, who wants his Brexit hard....

Ironic...now she knows how fox hunt feels like... For the fox ....


----------



## kimthecat

Elles said:


> Jeremy Corbyn was reportedly and quite openly anti Europe until he became labour leader. Apparently upgrading his website meant some of his anti Eu articles were deleted. Becoming labour leader changed his mind and he decided the Eu could be worked on from within, even though some of its core (unelected, links to NATO) hadn't changed.
> 
> May has always wanted to stay in the Eu, Corbyn has always wanted to leave.


He was against staying in the Common Market back in 70s when the first referendum .

he reminds me of the saying , I used to uncertain , now I'm not so sure .

After he as elected leader in sept 2105

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/12/what-does-jeremy-corbyn-think
*On Europe*
Corbyn has indicated that he is likely to support the campaign to stay in the European Union, but has refused to rule out campaigning for a no vote because:

Cameron quite clearly follows an agenda which is about trading away workers' rights ... environment protection ... much of what is in the social chapter.

He maintains that Britain should play a crucial role in Europe by making demands on issues such as workers' rights, the environment, tax and wage protection "rather than saying blanketly we're going to support whatever Cameron comes out with whenever he finally decides to hold this referendum".

When pressed, Corbyn has said his preferred position is to stay in a reformed EU. But he has also cited the union's treatment of Greece as a justification for potential exit. He said:

Look at it another way: if we allow unaccountable forces to destroy an economy like Greece, when all that bailout money isn't going to the Greek people, it's going to carious banks all across Europe, then I think we need to think very, very carefully about what role [the EU] are playing and what role we are playing in that.


----------



## Elles

Corbyn is still going on about rehousing people in luxury homes that are owned, but empty. Pressing the government to take them over, make requisitions and compulsory purchase orders of investment properties belonging to billionaires. He's crazy. 

Can he not use his imagination and think just for one minute what might be the result of that? 

I don't like my council house, just set it alight mate and get a better one. Not every person in those blocks are wonderful, caring people. If they start showing pictures of people rehoused in luxury, those who tend towards the psychopathic tendencies we were talking about earlier, could see it as just the opportunity they've been looking for. Please, please don't do it! 

People do need caring for and a roof over their head, they don't need to be seen as living like millionaires.

Maybe I'm being too cynical? Tell me I am please. :Arghh


----------



## Arnie83

cheekyscrip said:


> Now ( " The Sunday Times" today) *Bojo wants " open Brexit"...*


I don't suppose he's done us the favour of defining what he means by that, has he?


----------



## KittenKong

cheekyscrip said:


> TM hiding behind Gove, who wants his Brexit hard... ....


----------



## Calvine

Elles said:


> Maybe I'm being too cynical?


No; just realistic. It's the sort of suggestion that will encourage squatters to move in.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Dr Pepper

Elles said:


> Theresa May has pulled out the council staff and replaced them with government officials, civil servants. She's brought in more staff on the ground wearing hi viz so they are easily recognised and increased the number manning phones so that people can get information more easily. The government is arranging to fast track families of the deceased into the Uk.
> 
> She asked people what they wanted, they told her, she gave them it. The council staff were the ones supposed to be dealing with the actual situation while May was talking to fire officials and visiting hospitals and the thousand other things one woman can do at once. Everyone has been let down by the council, before, during and after. It looks as though the council will be the fall guy, the scapegoat. Remains to be seen whether they deserve the label. It seems that the actual victims blame the council and wanted more from them and that's why they protested at the council building.
> 
> Not all protests involve those affected, or victims. Others, it's said, are using the tragedy to promote their own agenda and personally I don't doubt it.


It's shocking, almost like she'd rather get on and get things done to actually help, rather than just go round publicly hugging people for the camera's and giving away other people's property.

I feel Mrs May is probably misunderstood because she doesn't come across well publicly, she's more of a "get things done" person rather than "all show and no go". It is a failing for a politician, unfortunately.


----------



## Calvine

Dr Pepper said:


> she's more of a "get things done" person


One of the people involved did say,'We want help, not handshakes' and I can sort of relate to that.


----------



## KittenKong

http://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top...o-cling-to-power-1-5066826?platform=hootsuite


----------



## MiffyMoo

KittenKong said:


> http://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top...o-cling-to-power-1-5066826?platform=hootsuite
> 
> View attachment 315308
> View attachment 315309
> View attachment 315310


Are we really going to take notice of anything that monstrous liar says?


----------



## Calvine

MiffyMoo said:


> Are we really going to take notice of anything that monstrous liar says?


This was written by...Alastair Campbell? Truly? Oh the irony...the bludddy irony! Maybe he will write another article and tell us what Tony Blair's 'legacy' was? TB is one of the most hated people in the country, so I would love to know what his 'legacy' was..


----------



## rona

Calvine said:


> This was written by...Alastair Campbell? Truly? Oh the irony...the bludddy irony! Maybe he will write another article and tell us what Tony Blair's 'legacy' was? TB is one of the most hated people in the country, so I would love to know what his 'legacy' was..


Terrorism on UK streets


----------



## KittenKong

Calvine said:


> This was written by...Alastair Campbell? Truly? Oh the irony...the bludddy irony! Maybe he will write another article and tell us what Tony Blair's 'legacy' was? TB is one of the most hated people in the country, so I would love to know what his 'legacy' was..


I'm not exactly keen on Campbell myself but, like George Osborne, he's now a journalist.

I think he's absolutely spot on here. I'll always give credit when it's due, even to a Tory if need be.


----------



## Calvine

rona said:


> Terrorism on UK streets


And the years of total instability in the Middle East _causing_ the terrorism on UK (and French/German/other) streets. TB was lucky not to be charged with war crimes IMHO.


----------



## KittenKong

Dr Pepper said:


> I feel Mrs May is probably misunderstood because she doesn't come across well publicly, she's more of a "get things done" person rather than "all show and no go". It is a failing for a politician, unfortunately.


Same goes for Gordon Brown in retrospect.

Perhaps you can enlighten us on what Theresa May has actually done and/or achieved during her time as PM?


----------



## Elles

And Corbyn wants people to take empty properties instead of helping them get the help they need from the government. 

And then compares them to people whose flight has been delayed. They were nearly burned to death in a tower block you idiot. The last thing they want is a room in a high rise hotel like their holiday to Torremolinos was delayed. Of course it makes it more difficult to find them somewhere. 

It's all right for him swanning around patting people and going to music festivals. He hasn't got a proper job.

Smug git.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Elles said:


> And Corbyn wants people to take empty properties instead of helping them get the help they need from the government.
> 
> And then compares them to people whose flight has been delayed. They were nearly burned to death in a tower block you idiot. The last thing they want is a room in a high rise hotel like their holiday to Torremolinos was delayed. Of course it makes it more difficult to find them somewhere.
> 
> It's all right for him swanning around patting people and going to music festivals. He hasn't got a proper job.
> 
> Smug git.


I'm going off him by the day, he's beginning to look a bit of a prat and obviously believing in his own hype. Can just imagine what he'd be doing (or not doing) if he were PM.


----------



## MiffyMoo

Elles said:


> And Corbyn wants people to take empty properties instead of helping them get the help they need from the government.
> 
> And then compares them to people whose flight has been delayed. They were nearly burned to death in a tower block you idiot. The last thing they want is a room in a high rise hotel like their holiday to Torremolinos was delayed. Of course it makes it more difficult to find them somewhere.
> 
> It's all right for him swanning around patting people and going to music festivals. He hasn't got a proper job.
> 
> Smug git.


Ahh, but don't forget, he cares more than anyone else, so that makes him better. And it appears that swanning around and bleating out the odd sound bite is apparently all you need to do to become PM, according to some


----------



## MollySmith

Diane Abbott. 
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/19/diane-abbott-diabetes-labour-diabetic


----------



## MollySmith

MiffyMoo said:


> Ahh, but don't forget, he cares more than anyone else, so that makes him better. And it appears that swanning around and bleating out the odd sound bite is apparently all you need to do to become PM, according to some


You don't want to know that 'his' boat won the Cardboard Boat Race yesterday then and that Strong and Stable sunk first?


----------



## MiffyMoo

MollySmith said:


> You don't want to know that 'his' boat won the Cardboard Boat Race yesterday then and that Strong and Stable sunk first?
> 
> View attachment 315332


Jeremy Corboat, I love it!!


----------



## Jesthar

MollySmith said:


> You don't want to know that 'his' boat won the Cardboard Boat Race yesterday then and that Strong and Stable sunk first?
> 
> View attachment 315332


There's a cardboard boat race? How did I not know this?!?


----------



## MollySmith

Jesthar said:


> There's a cardboard boat race? How did I not know this?!?


One of the more peaceful celebrations we have here (May Balls not withstanding), here's some video


----------



## rona

KittenKong said:


> Same goes for Gordon Brown in retrospect.
> 
> Perhaps you can enlighten us on what Theresa May has actually done and/or achieved during her time as PM?


She's taken over from the debacle of a new labour council that seemed to be incapable of helping from those in Notting Hill whose lives have been disrupted.


----------



## Zaros

Calvine said:


> And the years of total instability in the Middle East _causing_ the terrorism on UK (and French/German/other) streets. TB was lucky not to be charged with war crimes IMHO.


 '_Things can only get better!'_

Well, as we all know now, the lies got better (and more heinous) and Blair's life got better, so too, did the lives of his verminous followers, and his big bully buddies across the Atlantic.

Things got much worse for thousands upon thousands of Iraqi people and, of course, the late Dr David Kelly. 

One simply must not forget Dr David Kelly........

Blair is truly a pedigree low life.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> And Corbyn wants people to take empty properties instead of helping them get the help they need from the government.
> 
> And then compares them to people whose flight has been delayed. They were nearly burned to death in a tower block you idiot. The last thing they want is a room in a high rise hotel like their holiday to Torremolinos was delayed. Of course it makes it more difficult to find them somewhere.
> 
> It's all right for him swanning around patting people and going to music festivals. He hasn't got a proper job.
> 
> Smug git.


Blimey, this could be straight out of the daily mail. Talk about putting your own spin on it. He is urging government to all they can to help. He made a point that if accommodation can be found for stranded passengers then why not for the residents of Grenfell. And even 40% of tories support Corbyns proposal to requisition empty accommodation.






























rona said:


> She's taken over from the debacle of a new labour council that seemed to be incapable of helping from those in Notting Hill whose lives have been disrupted.


More fake news
*
Labour-led council takes over centre for homeless Grenfell families from 'chaotic' Tory Kensington Council*

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...cism-chaotic-kensington-council-a7796266.html


----------



## Jesthar

rona said:


> She's taken over from the debacle of a new labour council that seemed to be incapable of helping from those in Notting Hill whose lives have been disrupted.


Eh? Kensington and Chelsea council is overwhelmingly Conservative (40 out of 50 seats). Always has been since it was formed back in the 1960s...


----------



## Elles

My opinion is my own. Taken from actual video and factual reports, not potentially biased news reports, hearsay, not even necessarily witness accounts. What I see in front of my own nose and hear with my own ears. You may note that I have criticised politicians from both sides of the fence and checked their claims against factual papers, such as building and fire regulations. I don't take anyone's word for anything most of the time. I don't care who they are, or who they think they are.

I don't read the Mail and if I did I'd take anything in there with a very large pinch of salt. People here can think what they like of any conclusions I may have drawn at a particular moment, but they are my conclusions, not someone else's.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> My opinion is my own. Taken from actual video and factual reports, not potentially biased news reports, hearsay, not even necessarily witness accounts. What I see in front of my own nose and hear with my own ears. You may note that I have criticised politicians from both sides of the fence and checked their claims against factual papers, such as building and fire regulations. I don't take anyone's word for anything most of the time. I don't care who they are, or who they think they are.
> 
> I don't read the Mail and if I did I'd take anything in there with a very large pinch of salt. People here can think what they like of any conclusions I may have drawn at a particular moment, but they are my conclusions, not someone else's.


You're clearly not neutral Elles:Hilarious Most of your criticism is loaded against Corbyn - despite May & her governments dire record.


----------



## rona

Jesthar said:


> Eh? Kensington and Chelsea council is overwhelmingly Conservative (40 out of 50 seats). Always has been since it was formed back in the 1960s...


Oh sorry, their newly elected Labour MP.


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> You're clearly not neutral Elles:Hilarious Most of your criticism is loaded against Corbyn - despite May & her governments dire record.


You haven't noticed my criticising various conservative MPs and supporting Corbyn when I feel he's being unfairly criticised then? It's not my fault he's a hypocrite, shocked me with some of his statements and newspapers and supporters have lied about what he's doing to make him look good is it?

You keep saying things like May is a pathological liar, when she isn't. If she lied we might actually like what she said. If she's a liar, maybe she lied to get votes from the fox hunters and the ivory trade and actually wanted to keep the ban on fox hunting, knowing a free vote would fail and has every intention of banning all ivory trade. No? I didn't think so. She's not a liar, she's just mean and lived in an ivory tower surrounded by sycophants. 

However she didn't win her landslide, her sycophants have been kicked out and she's been brought into the real world with a few very painful bumps. Let's see what happens and have the revolution next year if we still need it.


----------



## rona

rona said:


> Oh sorry, their newly elected Labour MP.


Mind you, I could quite happily have punched this pompous idiot


----------



## Jesthar

rona said:


> Mind you, I could quite happily have punched this pompous idiot


Can't watch the vid at work, but is that the one where he basically says it was the residents fault for not wanting fire prevention measures?


----------



## Dr Pepper

Elles said:


> You haven't noticed my criticising various conservative MPs and supporting Corbyn when I feel he's being unfairly criticised then? It's not my fault he's a hypocrite, shocked me with some of his statements and newspapers and supporters have lied about what he's doing to make him look good is it?
> 
> You keep saying things like May is a pathological liar, when she isn't. If she lied we might actually like what she said. If she's a liar, maybe she lied to get votes from the fox hunters and the ivory trade and actually wanted to keep the ban on fox hunting, knowing a free vote would fail and has every intention of banning all ivory trade. No? I didn't think so. She's not a liar, she's just mean and lived in an ivory tower surrounded by sycophants.
> 
> However she didn't win her landslide, her sycophants have been kicked out and she's been brought into the real world with a few very painful bumps. Let's see what happens and have the revolution next year if we still need it.


You've nailed it. Mrs May isn't a liar, that's her trouble. She may not be adverse to a U-turn or six but that's not lying it's actually being very truthful, upfront and showing she can and will change her mind.

She's still a rubbish public speaker who lacks emotion when speaking. But do we really want a PM who sheds tears, crocodile or otherwise, at every trouble and sickening event they have to face?

I actually feel sorry for the poor woman, she's been give the poison chalice that is Brexit, then screwed up an election and rounded it all off with terrorism and a massive fire of unprecedented scale. She's not had chance to actually get on and do anything worthwhile since being in office.


----------



## rona

Jesthar said:


> Can't watch the vid at work, but is that the one where he basically says it was the residents fault for not wanting fire prevention measures?


Yep. Idiot


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> My opinion is my own. Taken from actual video and factual reports, not potentially biased news reports, hearsay, not even necessarily witness accounts. What I see in front of my own nose and hear with my own ears. You may note that I have criticised politicians from both sides of the fence and checked their claims against factual papers, such as building and fire regulations. I don't take anyone's word for anything most of the time. I don't care who they are, or who they think they are.
> 
> I don't read the Mail and if I did I'd take anything in there with a very large pinch of salt. People here can think what they like of any conclusions I may have drawn at a particular moment, but they are my conclusions, not someone else's.


I know its your opinion lol But Iets not forget its the tories busy trashing this country - not Corbyn. The people of Grenfell are thankful he is speaking out for them & that should be all that matters. Fingers crossed the labour party & the masses will pressure this government into doing the right thing by these poor people.


----------



## Elles

Jesthar said:


> Can't watch the vid at work, but is that the one where he basically says it was the residents fault for not wanting fire prevention measures?


I expect it's true. The residents would likely have asked for sprinklers, given recent history with these upgrades. They will likely have been told about these clever confinement measures that will keep them safe and some will probably have reluctantly believed it. It seems councillors and politicians were happy to believe it, rather than the evidence that sprinklers were a necessary disruption. 

I doubt tbh that anyone responsible really believed that this would happen. They probably thought those warning of it were scaremongering and they could get away with it.  Some of those sleeping in a tinderbox didn't take human error and greed into account.

Officials really are digging holes. They should put down their shovels and get out the sackcloth and ashes. Then darn well make sure they do know how many towers may be at risk. That's the worse thing, days later and they still don't seem to know and nothing appears to have been done.


----------



## rona

Elles said:


> That's the worse thing, days later and they still don't seem to know and nothing appears to have been done.


And they are blaming the fire service for holding it up :Banghead


----------



## Jesthar

Elles said:


> I expect it's true. The residents would likely have asked for sprinklers, given recent history with these upgrades. They will likely have been told about these clever confinement measures that will keep them safe and some will probably have reluctantly believed it. It seems councillors and politicians were happy to believe it, rather than the evidence that sprinklers were a necessary disruption.
> 
> I doubt tbh that anyone responsible really believed that this would happen. They probably thought those warning of it were scaremongering and they could get away with it.  Some of those sleeping in a tinderbox didn't take human error and greed into account.
> 
> Officials really are digging holes. They should put down their shovels and get out the sackcloth and ashes. Then darn well make sure they do know how many towers may be at risk. That's the worse thing, days later and they still don't seem to know and nothing appears to have been done.


If it's the interview I think it is, he basically said that the residents didn't want sprinklers fitted as it would take too long and be too much disruption, and they were more interested in having new boilers etc. fitted anyway.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> You haven't noticed my criticising various conservative MPs and supporting Corbyn when I feel he's being unfairly criticised then? It's not my fault he's a hypocrite, shocked me with some of his statements and newspapers and supporters have lied about what he's doing to make him look good is it?
> 
> You keep saying things like May is a pathological liar, when she isn't. If she lied we might actually like what she said. If she's a liar, maybe she lied to get votes from the fox hunters and the ivory trade and actually wanted to keep the ban on fox hunting, knowing a free vote would fail and has every intention of banning all ivory trade. No? I didn't think so. She's not a liar, she's just mean and lived in an ivory tower surrounded by sycophants.
> 
> However she didn't win her landslide, her sycophants have been kicked out and she's been brought into the real world with a few very painful bumps. Let's see what happens and have the revolution next year if we still need it.





Dr Pepper said:


> You've nailed it. Mrs May isn't a liar, that's her trouble. She may not be adverse to a U-turn or six but that's not lying it's actually being very truthful, upfront and showing she can and will change her mind.
> 
> She's still a rubbish public speaker who lacks emotion when speaking. But do we really want a PM who sheds tears, crocodile or otherwise, at every trouble and sickening event they have to face?
> 
> I actually feel sorry for the poor woman, she's been give the poison chalice that is Brexit, then screwed up an election and rounded it all off with terrorism and a massive fire of unprecedented scale. She's not had chance to actually get on and do anything worthwhile since being in office.


I'm absolutely gobsmacked that people can be in such denial.  Of course shes a pathological liar, very worrying you can't recognise one despite there being a mountain range of evidence proving it. May thought she'd got the election in the bag. She thought she could get away with putting any crap in the manifesto and people would be stupid enough to vote for her - this doesn't mean that she isn't completely dishonest & untrustworthy.

Her whole election campaign was based on a pack of lies  Poor woman....


----------



## Happy Paws2

[QUOTE="noushka05, post: 1064896380, member: 2189"
Her whole election campaign was based on a pack of lies  Poor woman....

[/QUOTE]

Don't you mean.... *deluded* woman....


----------



## Elles

"PL is characterized by a long history (maybe lifelong) of frequent and repeated lying for which no apparent psychological motive or external benefit can be discerned. "

Maybe you aren't sure what a pathological liar is? All politicians lie on occasion, but they expect to benefit from it. May lied less often than most. Her telling lies wasn't the problem.


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> I'm absolutely gobsmacked that people can be in such denial.  Of course shes a pathological liar, very worrying you can't recognise one despite there being a mountain range of evidence proving it. May thought she'd got the election in the bag. She thought she could get away with putting any crap in the manifesto and people would be stupid enough to vote for her - this doesn't mean that she isn't completely dishonest & untrustworthy.
> 
> Her whole election campaign was based on a pack of lies  Poor woman....
> 
> View attachment 315360


Take your blinkers off. Mrs May's manifesto was actually honest enough to include many things that would be unpopular.

Mr Corbyn's was packed full of giveaways to buy votes, which due credit did work for him.

I don't think you can say the Conservative manifesto was nothing if not honest. Brave, maybe stupid, but honest and we all knew exactly what we would be getting, good and bad.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> "PL is characterized by a long history (maybe lifelong) of frequent and repeated lying for which no apparent psychological motive or external benefit can be discerned. "
> 
> Maybe you aren't sure what a pathological liar is? All politicians lie on occasion, but they expect to benefit from it. May lied less often than most. Her telling lies wasn't the problem.


Even someone on the opposite end of the political spectrum, like Satori, recognises her as a pathological liar Elles. She is what she is.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> Take your blinkers off. Mrs May's manifesto was actually honest enough to include many things that would be unpopular.
> 
> Mr Corbyn's was packed full of giveaways to buy votes, which due credit did work for him.
> 
> I don't think you can say the Conservative manifesto was nothing if not honest. Brave, maybe stupid, but honest and we all knew exactly what we would be getting, good and bad.


I don't think you read my post at all. She didn't think she could lose the election. She thought she could get away with an uncosted manifesto & hideous policies & people would be dense enough to vote for her. That does not somehow negate all blatant lies she tells.

I'm sure it will sink in one day because I've posted the link for you several times But that brilliant labour manifesto was fully costed & backed by a stunning list of academics & economists


----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> I don't think you read my post at all. She didn't think she could lose the election. She thought she could get away with an uncosted manifesto & hideous policies & people would be dense enough to vote for her. That does not somehow negate all blatant lies she tells.
> 
> I'm sure it will sink in one day because I've posted the link for you several times But that brilliant labour manifesto was fully costed & backed by a stunning list of academics & economists


If you say so. At what cost though was the Labour manifesto? You know unemployment, businesses going under, massive price rises, interest rates sky high etc etc. Where was the ONE negative (bar corporation tax, which no doubt you see as a positive) in Labour's manifesto?

But I give up, you prefer a fantasy manifesto rather than a realistic one, warts and all. Yet you call Mrs May the lier.


----------



## Calvine

Dr Pepper said:


> Yet you call Mrs May the lier.


It appears that this thread and the Awful Fire thread have both turned (predictably) into excuses for Theresa May-bashing.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> If you say so. At what cost though was the Labour manifesto? You know unemployment, businesses going under, massive price rises, interest rates sky high etc etc. Where was the ONE negative (bar corporation tax) in Labour's manifesto?
> 
> But I give up, you prefer a fantasy manifesto rather a realistic one, warts and all. Yet you call Mrs Mary the lier.


You're scaremongering again. I know you like to deride experts but you really do need to check out what they are saying.

From 2015 - http://www.pieria.co.uk/articles/letter_to_the_ft_corbyns_economic_policies_are_sensible

& 2017 - https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jun/03/the-big-issue-labour-manifesto-what-economy-needs

Ann Pettifor supports labour manifesto. Why not see what she thinks.


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> It appears that this thread and the Awful Fire thread have both turned (predictably) into excuses for Theresa May-bashing.


You're ok with Corbyn bashing though? Only I haven't seen you mention anything about that.


----------



## KittenKong




----------



## Dr Pepper

noushka05 said:


> You're scaremongering again. I know you like to deride experts but you really do need to check out what they are saying.
> 
> From 2015 - http://www.pieria.co.uk/articles/letter_to_the_ft_corbyns_economic_policies_are_sensible
> 
> & 2017 - https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jun/03/the-big-issue-labour-manifesto-what-economy-needs
> 
> Ann Pettifor supports labour manifesto. Why not see what she thinks.


You've got your "experts" from Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. I've got mine from real life and independent judgement. BUT I can also see a manifesto that's built on buying votes and one that's not.

I have nothing else to say to you on this matter as you have your view point and I have mine. You are wrong though


----------



## Zaros

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 315364


I read the people are pressing for an inquest, which means the Government lose control of the 'proceedings'

But yeah, lets hand it over to those who will ultimately protect the guilty parties for the next 50/60/70 years the inquiry takes to complete.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> If you say so. At what cost though was the Labour manifesto? You know unemployment, businesses going under, massive price rises, interest rates sky high etc etc. Where was the ONE negative (bar corporation tax, which no doubt you see as a positive) in Labour's manifesto?
> 
> But I give up, you prefer a fantasy manifesto rather than a realistic one, warts and all. Yet you call Mrs May the lier.


I supplied you with references - look at what experts think about about labours anti-austerity economy. Austerity not only has a terrible impact on millions of peoples lives & the environment - but on the economy too. Please open your mind. This country has never been in such a mess & if we carry on down the same path its set to get a whole lot worse.


----------



## noushka05

KittenKong said:


> View attachment 315364





Zaros said:


> I read the people are pressing for an inquest, which means the Government lose control of the 'proceedings'
> 
> But yeah, lets hand it over to those who will ultimately protect the guilty parties for the next 50/60/70 years the inquiry takes to complete.


----------



## Elles

This kind of relates to Brexit, but there's so much information and misinformation, anyone interested will have to look it up really. I'll try to explain what I'm reading and hearing, sorry if it gets long. It might particularly interest our socialist friends.

I'm writing about the terrible wild fires in Portugal. 

Social media friends are giving each other advice and posting images. Advice like write your mobile number in indelible ink on your horses' hooves and take their fly sheets off ready for speedy evacuation. People in Portugal asking why we aren't helping them and of course people trying to explain about britain's recent problems.

The discussions are similar to Grenfell. Big business, America, the Eu, corruption, austerity, poor people neglected. Large areas of Portugal, particularly Northern Portugal the area affected by these fires, is covered in Australian eucalyptus trees, forestry grown for paper. It's controversial, because of of the environmental impact and flammability and that it's big business based outside of Portugal, the main company being American. The large trucks needed to transport the logs were given special dispensation. They're too heavy for the local roads and destroy them, other businesses can't take such large, heavy lorries on these roads. The trees take over the landscape, dry out the land and are highly flammable.

Due to austerity (forced on Portugal by the Eu, Portugal needed bailing out) the government couldn't afford to maintain fire services and take precautionary measures. They have to pay Spain to cover some of it (outsourcing?) People are complaining and say there have been protests there and in Spain, but nothing was done. They are saying that people are dying due to years of government neglect and big business. There are ways to maintain forestry with native species that would have prevented this disaster, or at least reduced the impact and slowed the fire, but the advice was ignored.

Portugal has a new socialist government and they have ruled that there will be no new areas of Eucalyptus forests. There's more to it, but people are not happy. 

It seems to me that corruption and neglect is everywhere there is money. There's a lot of money in the Eu and we may well be better off out of it. People who like Corbyn and want a socialist government could be happy about brexit. There are complaints that Portugal's new socialist government (and friends of Corbyn) have their hands tied by the Eu. Corbyn's government might not have. If he makes it that is and that would be up to us. On saying that there's a small movement in Europe (communist and leftie) that Corbyn was hoping Portugal's socialist example would promote. So maybe he did want to stay in after all.


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> View attachment 315368


And, try as I might, I could never quite picture her majesty's government being prosecuted for any crime in her majesty's courts.

​


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> I supplied you with references - look at what experts think about about labours anti-austerity economy. *Austerity* not only* has a terrible impact on millions of peoples lives* & the environment - but on the economy too. Please open your mind. This country has never been in such a mess & if we carry on down the same path its set to get a whole lot worse.


But Noush', aren't you forgetting something rather more important than the virtually worthless lower classes? 

Britain's super rich elite are crying out for our help because, without it, those even poor 845t4rd5 would suffer terribly and unduly.

This week I'm selling one of Oscar's kidneys just so that some snot nosed uppity class completely ignorant d1ck head can feed his clamouring for more snot nosed family and still be able to afford a bottle of Goût de Diamants to wash it all down with.


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> This kind of relates to Brexit, but there's so much information and misinformation, anyone interested will have to look it up really. I'll try to explain what I'm reading and hearing, sorry if it gets long. It might particularly interest our socialist friends.
> 
> I'm writing about the terrible wild fires in Portugal.
> 
> Social media friends are giving each other advice and posting images. Advice like write your mobile number in indelible ink on your horses' hooves and take their fly sheets off ready for speedy evacuation. People in Portugal asking why we aren't helping them and of course people trying to explain about britain's recent problems.
> 
> The discussions are similar to Grenfell. Big business, America, the Eu, corruption, austerity, poor people neglected. Large areas of Portugal, particularly Northern Portugal the area affected by these fires, is covered in Australian eucalyptus trees, forestry grown for paper. It's controversial, because of of the environmental impact and flammability and that it's big business based outside of Portugal, the main company being American. The large trucks needed to transport the logs were given special dispensation. They're too heavy for the local roads and destroy them, other businesses can't take such large, heavy lorries on these roads. The trees take over the landscape, dry out the land and are highly flammable.
> 
> Due to austerity (forced on Portugal by the Eu, Portugal needed bailing out) the government couldn't afford to maintain fire services and take precautionary measures. They have to pay Spain to cover some of it (outsourcing?) People are complaining and say there have been protests there and in Spain, but nothing was done. They are saying that people are dying due to years of government neglect and big business. There are ways to maintain forestry with native species that would have prevented this disaster, or at least reduced the impact and slowed the fire, but the advice was ignored.
> 
> Portugal has a new socialist government and they have ruled that there will be no new areas of Eucalyptus forests. There's more to it, but people are not happy.
> 
> It seems to me that corruption and neglect is everywhere there is money. There's a lot of money in the Eu and we may well be better off out of it. People who like Corbyn and want a socialist government could be happy about brexit. There are complaints that Portugal's new socialist government (and friends of Corbyn) have their hands tied by the Eu. Corbyn's government might not have. If he makes it that is and that would be up to us. On saying that there's a small movement in Europe (communist and leftie) that Corbyn was hoping Portugal's socialist example would promote. So maybe he did want to stay in after all.


I'm aware of the dreadful fires in Portugal & the terrible eucalyptus monoculture driving those fires. Surely its good news the government want action on these forests? This would never happen under a Conservative government. Look at the degradation grouse moors have on our uplands & the flooding downstream they cause? Look how they have deregulated the dangerous fracking industry. How they maliciously tried to sabotage EU climate measures despite us leaving it https://www.theguardian.com/environ...rope-to-dilute-flagship-energy-efficiency-law I could go on.

Austerity kills who ever imposes it but EU directives actually protects our environment from our government. Why do you think this hard right government are chomping at the bit to get out of the EU? Surely you've heard them say they are sick of all those regulation & that red tape?

This was left outside the offices of the right wing think tanks that have called for a bonfire of red tape. Labour & the other progressive parties like the Greens are opposed to deregulation & the shrinking of the state - because these things keep us all safe.











Zaros said:


> And, try as I might, I could never quite picture her majesty's government being prosecuted for any crime in her majesty's courts.
> 
> ​


Its never gunna happen it it?. Justice doesn't apply to them, we've seen it time after time.



Zaros said:


> But Noush', aren't you forgetting something rather more important than the virtually worthless lower classes?
> 
> Britain's super rich elite are crying out for our help because, without it, those even poor 845t4rd5 would suffer terribly and unduly.
> 
> This week I'm selling one of Oscar's kidneys just so that some snot nosed uppity class completely ignorant d1ck head can feed his clamouring for more snot nosed family and still be able to afford a bottle of Goût de Diamants to wash it all down with.


My heart bleeds for the greedy 845t4rd5 (I love how you spell that! )

They'd let you sell one as well

The short term greed of the tory party & their rich mates perfectly summed up in one cartoon.


----------



## noushka05

Dr Pepper said:


> You've got your "experts" from Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. I've got mine from real life and independent judgement. BUT I can also see a manifesto that's built on buying votes and one that's not.
> 
> I have nothing else to say to you on this matter as you have your view point and I have mine. You are wrong though


Typical Trumpesque mindset:Meh


----------



## Zaros

noushka05 said:


> My heart bleeds for the greedy 845t4rd5 (I love how you spell that! )
> They'd let you sell one as well
> The short term greed of the tory party & their rich mates perfectly summed up in one cartoon.
> View attachment 315408


 Come, come now Noush', sharing is caring...

About profit rather than people unfortunately..

I don't understand why the super rich elite can't be more open about their ideals for this _'brave new world'_. It's quite evident by now that they want fewer poor people on their streets. Of course they can't eradicate us all because they'll want a few just to carry out the menial and degrading tasks in life such as wiping their smug rich 4r535.
And won't we be grateful too.
Perhaps there'll be something we can take home home and share with our own family?
This slow burning democide needs to be stopped before it gets completely out of control.


----------



## Elles

I think chances are when they cut the ribbon and did their photocall outside Grenfell they were quite proud. Look at the pretty building, the new gym and crèche and the new kitchens and boilers and extra flats. They probably thought the complainers were ungrateful moaners, who didn't know how it all worked and were too stupid to understand why sprinklers weren't necessary. All big projects like this have teething problems, they should just stop complaining and exaggerating and let the experts do their job.

I bet they were as shocked as we were that it burned down and have no idea how to respond. That they live on a different planet to the rest of us meant their responses were almost child like, 'but I didn't do it, it wasn't me'. We rely on these people.


----------



## KittenKong

Elles said:


> I think chances are when they cut the ribbon and did their photocall outside Grenfell they were quite proud. Look at the pretty building, the new gym and crèche and the new kitchens and boilers and extra flats. They probably thought the complainers were ungrateful moaners, who didn't know how it all worked and were too stupid to understand why sprinklers weren't necessary. All big projects like this have teething problems, they should just stop complaining and exaggerating and let the experts do their job.
> 
> I bet they were as shocked as we were that it burned down and have no idea how to respond. That they live on a different planet to the rest of us meant their responses were almost child like, 'but I didn't do it, it wasn't me'. We rely on these people.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-mariem-elgwahry-nadia-choucair-a7795586.html


----------



## Elles

KittenKong said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-mariem-elgwahry-nadia-choucair-a7795586.html
> View attachment 315420


They assume, but don't know whether the two ladies also got the letter which was sent out, regarding protests over the leisure centre and the council illegally taking space to build on and access issues. Protests and campaigns on Grenfell were over the contractors, planning, residents not being consulted and things like cheap windows. However, fears were also raised over the possibility of fires.

Mention of the fear of fire is in this blog page of the Grenfell Action Group. I'm sorry, I didn't look for criticism aimed at Labour, it was just where I found reported that fears had actually been put forward and swept under the carpet. How can people be treated this way for so many years and what is being done to safeguard the rest? Past projects and future. 

*DON'T MENTION THE "SLUM" WORD.*
Posted on February 12, 2014
For some strange reason our local Labour Councillor, Judith Blakeman, gets very upset when anyone refers disparagingly to the current state of the housing stock on Lancaster West Estate and, in particular she does not like the Estate being described as a "slum".

We find it strange for Councillor Blakeman to have any views about the wellbeing of residents on Lancaster West or the state of our homes as the general consensus is that the Leader of RBKC Labour Party betrayed and abandoned our community's interests a long time ago when she sacrificed her soul at the alter of KALC and we certainly don't think that Cllr Blakeman has the right to ban us from describing our housing as we see fit!

Still, we thought that she might enjoy our portrayal of life in a 21st Century slum with respect to an old comedy sketch of Monty Python:

Resident 1: Hah! A torn plastic bag. We dream of living in a torn plastic bag. It would have been a palace to us.

Resident 2: You are lucky, we are forced to live in a rolled up newspaper in a sceptic tank.

Resident 3: A rolled up newspaper in a sceptic tank would be luxury to us, We dream about living in a rolled up newspaper in a sceptic tank. We live on Lancaster West Estate where residents are forced to block off the rotting wood of their door frames at night with bits of cardboard to stop vermin entering our homes.Where there has been no significant investment in our housing infrastructure for nearly forty years and our windows and heating system are no longer fit for purpose.

Where fuel poverty and financial hardship are rife. Where the Council tell us they have no money to invest in our properties but then find £30 million to spend on paving stones for Exhibition Road and a £1 million yearly subsidy of the Opera in Holland Park.

Where if you are two seconds late with your rent the TMO are on to you like a rabid pit-bull chasing their "arrears" and making tenant's lives a misery.

Where if you require a repair service from the TMO you can expect a long and stressful wait followed by endless grief.

Where our hot water and heating are constantly not working but our landlord, the TMO, keeps demanding extortionate service charges.

Where it is only ever possible to have about 3″ of hot bath water to bathe in.

Where residents of Grenfell Tower were recently terrified by an 18 day long power surge that could have caused a fire disaster akin to Lakanal House and had the very real potential to have burnt us all to death..

Where the seriousness of this danger to residents was hushed up by a TMO report to the Scrutiny Committee that denies fire risk and claims smoke was caused by steam rising from a hot surface!

Where residents are refused justice and have their legitimate claims for compensation for destroyed electrical equipment denied them by an uncaring Council and a heartless TMO.

Where Lancaster West Estate has become a cash cow for outside TMO contractors and a "carcass" for them to feed and get fat on.

Where residents legitimate complaints are marginalised and those brave enough to seek justice are subject to seeming harassment from RBKC Legal

Dept.and unwarranted smears from Councillors and Council Officers.

Where our green space and residential amenity have been brutally stolen from us by the local Council and we now have nowhere to get fresh air, nowhere for our children to play and no-one who is interested in addressing these issues.

Where our long standing "rights of way" from the Estate up towards Ladbroke Grove and Portabello Rd were taken from us by the Council without care or consideration and we now have one path covered in dog excrement as you enter into our Estate and one concrete path covered in dog excrement as you leave the Estate and that is all.

THIS IS SLUM LIFE THAT COUNCILLOR BLAKEMAN FORBIDS US TO MENTION WHILE SHE LIVES COMFORTABLY AWAY FROM THIS BRUTAL NEGLECT AND THE "SOCIAL APARTHEID" EXPERIENCED BY RESIDENTS ON LANCASTER WEST ESTATE.

SHAME ON HER AND ALL THOSE AT THE COUNCIL/TMO WHO THINK THAT LANCASTER WEST ESTATE RESIDENTS SHOULD SIMPLY ACCEPT THE "MANAGED DECLINE" OF OUR HOMES WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROTEST.


----------



## Elles

And this one from 2016 which I won't copy and paste.

https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2016/01/24/grenfell-tower-still-a-fire-risk/


----------



## Elles

Years of blog posts can't be denied surely.


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> Mrs May isn't a liar, that's her trouble. She may not be adverse to a U-turn or six but that's not lying it's actually being very truthful, upfront and showing she can and will change her mind.


So what caused her to change her mind from pre-referendum, when Brexit was apparently damaging to the UK economy, to post-referendum, when it is apparently nothing of the sort?


----------



## rona

Arnie83 said:


> So what caused her to change her mind from pre-referendum, when Brexit was apparently damaging to the UK economy, to post-referendum, when it is apparently nothing of the sort?


Because the majority of people who voted told her that's what they want and she is trying to make the best possible deal and not talk the country down.


----------



## Arnie83

rona said:


> Because the majority of people who voted told her that's what they want and she is trying to make the best possible deal and not talk the country down.


So she's not saying what she actually believes any more. In which case, she's lying.


----------



## Goblin

rona said:


> Because the majority of people who voted told her that's what they want and she is trying to make the best possible deal and not talk the country down.


Totally irresponsible of her then wasn't it. Should have left the job to people who believe in it.

You forget, the referendum was non-binding. Plenty of options to address many of the issues raised by the referendum without leaving the EU. Instead weaknesses and division in society has increased under her watch. She's polarised elements in society rather than uniting it.


----------



## rona

Arnie83 said:


> So she's not saying what she actually believes any more. In which case, she's lying.


Maybe she believes that politicians are servants of the people and that belief is more important to her than her own views


----------



## Arnie83

rona said:


> Maybe she believes that politicians are servants of the people and that belief is more important to her than her own views


Well perhaps she should say that instead of lying, then.


----------



## rona

Arnie83 said:


> Well perhaps she should say that instead of lying, then.


I've not heard her lie. She didn't want to come out but seems to be trying to make the best she can of it. I've not heard her say it will be great or easy, just that she will do what she can to make a success of our futures

I have however seen headlines saying she's lied, not heard it myself


----------



## Elles

Arnie83 said:


> Well perhaps she should say that instead of lying, then.


She did. For the British people and The British people have spoken and all that. About Brexit.

It was one of the occasions she was lying. Not as a pathological liar, but to benefit herself.

How do we know this? I'll point you at fox hunting and the ivory trade. She didn't care about The British People then. Because she thought she could get away with it. How wrong she was. I hope her ivory tower wasn't too tall and she can sell it before it's a white elephant.

(Sorry Rona )


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Totally irresponsible of her then wasn't it. Should have left the job to people who believe in it.
> 
> You forget, the referendum was non-binding. Plenty of options to address many of the issues raised by the referendum without leaving the EU. Instead weaknesses and division in society has increased under her watch. She's polarised elements in society rather than uniting it.


*********** WARNING THIS POST CONTAINS SWEARING ***********

Of course the bloody referendum was binding, it's why every law in the land has agreed it's binding. For the love of everything holy give it a rest with "it's non binding", it's been f***ing well and truly bound.

I apologise for my language


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> *********** WARNING THIS POST CONTAINS SWEARING ***********
> 
> Of course the bloody referendum was binding, it's why every law in the land has agreed it's binding. For the love of everything holy give it a rest with "it's non binding", it's been f***ing well and truly bound.
> 
> I apologise for my language


No, law of the UK is referendums are not binding, they are an opinion poll, nothing more. Only one referendum in the UK has been binding, decided beforehand. Even Farage stated that the referendum was not binding. Try looking up facts.



rona said:


> Maybe she believes that politicians are servants of the people and that belief is more important to her than her own views


Did she actually check what people actually expected and wanted when she pushed for a hard brexit? Why hasn't she actually provided details and prepared the country for the reality of brexit instead of "brexit means brexit" and empty promises?


----------



## Arnie83

rona said:


> I've not heard her lie. She didn't want to come out but seems to be trying to make the best she can of it. I've not heard her say it will be great or easy, just that she will do what she can to make a success of our futures
> 
> I have however seen headlines saying she's lied, not heard it myself


April 2016 "Remaining inside the European Union does make us more secure, it does make us more prosperous and it does make us more influential beyond our shores."

January 2017 Brexit will make us "safer, more secure and more prosperous".

One of those is not what she really thinks. One of those, therefore, is a lie.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> One of those is not what she really thinks. One of those, therefore, is a lie.


Or a change of mind now that it's inevitable and we have to get on with it. I'd rather Mrs May went in with a positive attitude rather than "oooh no, this is terrible, we're all doomed".


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> Or a change of mind now that it's inevitable and we have to get on with it. I'd rather Mrs May went in with a positive attitude rather than "oooh no, this is terrible, we're all doomed".


Facts don't change if you change your mind, though your chances of becoming Prime Minister sometimes do.


----------



## rona

Arnie83 said:


> April 2016 "Remaining inside the European Union does make us more secure, it does make us more prosperous and it does make us more influential beyond our shores."
> 
> January 2017 Brexit will make us "safer, more secure and more prosperous".
> 
> One of those is not what she really thinks. One of those, therefore, is a lie.


Links please that aren't just paper headlines


----------



## rona

Arnie83 said:


> Facts don't change if you change your mind, though your chances of becoming Prime Minister sometimes do.


She may have more insight now she's PM


----------



## leashedForLife

*Quote, *Elles:

So, don't make parking free, work out a discount scheme for in-patients & [their] close relatives.

Free parking costs money, the NHS can't afford [to give it away], & *selfish shoppers & commuters take the spaces*. *Policing *[the parking lot / garage]* would cost even more* money.

/QUOTE
.
.
Why can't the hospital issue electronically-readable vouchers?

A local hospital [where my Lexington client is, currently - he had surgery to repair his broken femur, another fall! ] issues vouchers for 1 car per family in the E.R. / A&E.
As U exit the lot / garage, U insert the parking ticket issued when U entered, then insert the voucher in the same machine - no charge, the gate lifts.

For admitted patients, parking-fees are capped at $7 per day - that adds up, yes, but for NON-family, 8 to 10-hours of parking is TWENTY-FIVE BUCKS.
less than a third of the cost?... That's pretty good, & under 10 bucks, while not 'free', isn't exorbitant.

U don't need to waste personnel 'policing' a lot that is gated-entry only, & gated-exit only. // If someone smashes the barrier, the CC-TV will get the car make & model, color, & tags / other identifying features.

As for transport for poor folks, most ppl today have a smart phone - a cheapie Android can download an app for Lyft / Uber / other ride-share companies, & they are often far-cheaper than standard taxis. FOR WOMEN in the U.S., there's Safr - female drivers, serving a female clientele.
.
.
.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Arnie83 said:


> Facts don't change if you change your mind,.


No, but circumstances may. And you either get on with the current circumstances and try your best, or bugger off into the horizon like Mr Cameron. Which would you prefer?


----------



## leashedForLife

Dr Pepper said:

_Many people see corporation tax*es* as fair game, & think businesses like Amazon, Starbucks, Tesco, [& similar national or multi-national corporations] can easily afford [to pay higher taxes].
__________________________________________
.
.
Corporate taxes in the U.S.A. comprised just over 60% of the Federal govt's incoming taxes, in the 1950s & '60s. Thus, just under 40% of Federal income in the form of tax levies was paid by *citizens.*
By 1980, that ratio had flipped entirely: 60% of the Federal taxes came from ordinary citizens; 40% came from corporations, & that fraction is *falling.*
*Three-fourths of the Fortune-500* in the U-S, the top-grossing businesses in the nation, don't pay a DIME in taxes. They employ a bevy of specialists to tell them precisely how to claim enormous costs to justify padded losses, rearrange their earnings, spend more now to save taxes later, & find the tiniest of loopholes to evade any tax.

The average citizen cannot employ a tax-specialist full-time, to tell them how to avoid taxes, magnify losses, & minimize their tax liability - nor can the Average Citizen pore over insanely-complex tax codes written in Legalese, to find exploitable loopholes. // Corporations can easily do both - & have the staff to do it.



Dr Pepper said:
_
[Raising taxes will] also have a dramatic effect on your local shop/ post office, public house [bar / restaurant], taxi driver, back street garage... even possibly your window cleaner, & dog walker. 
____________________________________________
.
.
No, it won't. // Raising taxes on corporations who currently PAY NONE doesn't do a thing to the taxes paid by Mom-n-Pop businesses, such as corner shops, local pubs, etc, & it certainly has zero effect on independent service businesses, such as gardeners, landscape service [mow / rake / shovel snow...], household help [nanny, home-care aide, mother's help...], dog walkers, window washers, et al.
.
A *national* company such as Handyman, with a roster of local specialists that they employ, MIGHT be affected - but it all depends on how the taxes are re-written, & which specific bloc of corporations is included - Taxes are usually based on GROSS EARNINGS, businesses that make between X & Y dollars per year are clustered together, those earning from W to X dollars annually are treated as a group, etc.
A single operator is utterly unaffected by tax-changes to the Fortune-500, unless s/he is a shareholder, in which case the monthly dividend [assuming that the stock they own pays one] will shrink. But it has no effect on their own business taxes, as a business owner.
.
My Lexington client employs a local landscape service - one owner, a small crew; they mow, weed-whack, leaf-blow in autumn, plow the driveway. // Their business taxes will be unchanged by laws that would RAISE taxes on corporations who've paid very little for the past 30 to 50 years, or would RESTORE taxes on corporations who've evaded them for decades.
Literally *billions of dollars *in corporate profits evade U-S taxes by being stashed overseas - meanwhile, these corporations suck plenty of citizen taxpayers' money out of the public till, for their "personal" / corporate gain.
.
.

Dr Pepper said:

_...as long Tesco & Sainsbury's pay more tax, who cares? Not Mr Corbyn.

Also, *everyone's day to day shopping *[*costs*] *will go up -- yep, your bread, milk, & nappies.* 
Large supermarkets (& your corner independent grocery store) have a net profit of around 5%. That means for every £100 extra tax they pay, they [must] sell £2,000 of goods. That can only mean increased prices for the big boys, & the last straw for many a independent.

So if you want increased prices on your groceries & utilities, plus small businesses going bust, vote Labour._
______________________________________
.
.
Again - which businesses are affected would be entirely down to how the tax revisions are written.
Just because massive corporations such as Amazon pay more taxes, it doesn't follow that the corner grocery store will be paying higher taxes! - a Mom-n-Pop outfit that has a single location is completely unaffected by tax changes to massive multinationals, UNLESS that Mom-n-Pop store *buys their sellable stock *from that massive multinational.
If Amazon pays more taxes, & raises their prices across the board, the effect will still be miniscule - they sell a sh!tload of goods every day of the year, & raising prices a fraction of a penny would cover a helluva lot of a tax-increase. // If the Mom-n-Pop store is buying from Amazon, & disposable diapers cost an extra 5-cents per package in a case of 10 bags, that's 50-cents more per case. Raising their price per bag the same 5-cents will cover their increased cost..
.
Grocery margins are small, yes - selling quantity is how they make their profit, if any. That's why monsters make the big-bucks, along with their oversized power in the capitol & with legislators, & corner shops make small profits, & have small political weight. Only by banding together can single-shop operations gain some strength politically, & have a voice nationally.
.
Raising taxes on a national corporation isn't going to cause the local pub to go t!ts-up. // It will, however, seriously p!ss off the shareholders, the BoD, the lobbyists that the corporation employs, & their bought-&-paid-for legislators.
.
.
.


----------



## Dr Pepper

leashedForLife said:


> Dr Pepper said:
> 
> _Many people see corporation tax*es* as fair game, & think businesses like Amazon, Starbucks, Tesco, [& similar national or multi-national corporations] can easily afford [to pay higher taxes].
> __________________________________________
> .
> .
> Corporate taxes in the U.S.A. comprised just over 60% of the Federal govt's incoming taxes, in the 1950s & '60s. Thus, just under 40% of Federal income in the form of tax levies was paid by *citizens.*
> By 1980, that ratio had flipped entirely: 60% of the Federal taxes came from ordinary citizens; 40% came from corporations, & that fraction is *falling.*
> *Three-fourths of the Fortune-500* in the U-S, the top-grossing businesses in the nation, don't pay a DIME in taxes. They employ a bevy of specialists to tell them precisely how to claim enormous costs to justify padded losses, rearrange their earnings, spend more now to save taxes later, & find the tiniest of loopholes to evade any tax.
> 
> The average citizen cannot employ a tax-specialist full-time, to tell them how to avoid taxes, magnify losses, & minimize their tax liability - nor can the Average Citizen pore over insanely-complex tax codes written in Legalese, to find exploitable loopholes. // Corporations can easily do both - & have the staff to do it.
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Pepper said:
> _
> [Raising taxes will] also have a dramatic effect on your local shop/ post office, public house [bar / restaurant], taxi driver, back street garage... even possibly your window cleaner, & dog walker.
> ____________________________________________
> .
> .
> No, it won't. // Raising taxes on corporations who currently PAY NONE doesn't do a thing to the taxes paid by Mom-n-Pop businesses, such as corner shops, local pubs, etc, & it certainly has zero effect on independent service businesses, such as gardeners, landscape service [mow / rake / shovel snow...], household help [nanny, home-care aide, mother's help...], dog walkers, window washers, et al.
> .
> A *national* company such as Handyman, with a roster of local specialists that they employ, MIGHT be affected - but it all depends on how the taxes are re-written, & which specific bloc of corporations is included - Taxes are usually based on GROSS EARNINGS, businesses that make between X & Y dollars per year are clustered together, those earning from W to X dollars annually are treated as a group, etc.
> A single operator is utterly unaffected by tax-changes to the Fortune-500, unless s/he is a shareholder, in which case the monthly dividend [assuming that the stock they own pays one] will shrink. But it has no effect on their own business taxes, as a business owner.
> .
> My Lexington client employs a local landscape service - one owner, a small crew; they mow, weed-whack, leaf-blow in autumn, plow the driveway. // Their business taxes will be unchanged by laws that would RAISE taxes on corporations who've paid very little for the past 30 to 50 years, or would RESTORE taxes on corporations who've evaded them for decades.
> Literally *billions of dollars *in corporate profits evade U-S taxes by being stashed overseas - meanwhile, these corporations suck plenty of citizen taxpayers' money out of the public till, for their "personal" / corporate gain.
> .
> .
> 
> Dr Pepper said:
> 
> _...as long Tesco & Sainsbury's pay more tax, who cares? Not Mr Corbyn.
> 
> Also, *everyone's day to day shopping *[*costs*] *will go up -- yep, your bread, milk, & nappies.*
> Large supermarkets (& your corner independent grocery store) have a net profit of around 5%. That means for every £100 extra tax they pay, they [must] sell £2,000 of goods. That can only mean increased prices for the big boys, & the last straw for many a independent.
> 
> So if you want increased prices on your groceries & utilities, plus small businesses going bust, vote Labour._
> ______________________________________
> .
> .
> Again - which businesses are affected would be entirely down to how the tax revisions are written.
> Just because massive corporations such as Amazon pay more taxes, it doesn't follow that the corner grocery store will be paying higher taxes! - a Mom-n-Pop outfit that has a single location is completely unaffected by tax changes to massive multinationals, UNLESS that Mom-n-Pop store *buys their sellable stock *from that massive multinational.
> If Amazon pays more taxes, & raises their prices across the board, the effect will still be miniscule - they sell a sh!tload of goods every day of the year, & raising prices a fraction of a penny would cover a helluva lot of a tax-increase. // If the Mom-n-Pop store is buying from Amazon, & disposable diapers cost an extra 5-cents per package in a case of 10 bags, that's 50-cents more per case. Raising their price per bag the same 5-cents will cover their increased cost..
> .
> Grocery margins are small, yes - selling quantity is how they make their profit, if any. That's why monsters make the big-bucks, along with their oversized power in the capitol & with legislators, & corner shops make small profits, & have small political weight. Only by banding together can single-shop operations gain some strength politically, & have a voice nationally.
> .
> Raising taxes on a national corporation isn't going to cause the local pub to go t!ts-up. // It will, however, seriously p!ss off the shareholders, the BoD, the lobbyists that the corporation employs, & their bought-&-paid-for legislators.
> .
> .
> .


You don't understand business and how a raise in corporation tax will effect everyone and finish off small corner shops.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> You don't understand business and how a raise in corporation tax will effect everyone and finish off small corner shops.


Maybe I don't understand why, after all germany with a higher business rate still has things like family run bakers for fresh bread rolls in the morning, small independent butchers around the corner etc... In fact they still have highstreets which consist of more than charity shops.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Maybe I don't understand why, after all germany with a higher business rate still has things like family run bakers for fresh bread rolls in the morning, small independent butchers around the corner etc... In fact they still have highstreets which consist of more than charity shops.


What are the business rates? That's for starter's. I don't actually know so I'm genuinely interested. Charity shops in the UK don't pay business rates, hence there take over of our high streets.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> What are the business rates? That's for starter's. I don't actually know so I'm genuinely interested. Charity shops in the UK don't pay business rates, hence there take over of our high streets.


https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/corporate-tax-rate?continent=europe

Lack of consumer spending and debt is going to affect business far more than business rates.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/corporate-tax-rate?continent=europe
> 
> Lack of consumer spending and debt is going to affect business far more than business rates.


I wasn't on about corporation tax but business rates, do you have those figures?


----------



## leashedForLife

*Elles* said:

_So the problem isn't free parking. It's accessibility.

Another elderly, or disabled person will be saying it's all well and good giving the fit and wealthy car drivers free parking, what about us, when we have to get 3 buses or a taxi and spend 4 hours getting there.

Instead of spending money on free parking for all at hospitals, how about a bus service, drivers, transport and more local community hospitals?... 
I know there are voluntary drivers at rd&e who collect the elderly and disabled, but I don't know how hit or miss it is, as to whether you can get one. People shouldn't need to rely on neighbours and volunteers to get them to hospital appointments._
_____________________________
.
.
here in liberal-Mass, practically every town with more than 2-dozen households has a volunteer system for medical transport. Rural villages are another category of difficulty, but all the small towns i've lived in have both volunteer med-transport, AND senior / disabled / low-income vouchers for taxi cabs.
Most of the vouchers are a flat $5 rate for any trip within town limits - a huge savings.
.
.
.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> I wasn't on about corporation tax but business rates, do you have those figures?


Only an internet search engine.. If you mean money to "use a premises for business" I am not aware of one specifically. Anybody owning a property pays "tax" each quarter for the use of the "ground", its not specific to business. Probably one of the reasons renting is far more common.


----------



## Jonescat

Do you think the Queen's Speech will be passed?


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> Only an internet search engine.. If you mean money to "use a premises for business" I am not aware of one specifically. Anybody owning a property pays "tax" each quarter for the use of the "ground", its not specific to business. Probably one of the reasons renting is far more common.


Ok, you don't understand UK business rates. Maybe when you do you'll have a better understanding of the taxes imposed on UK businesses.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Ok, you don't understand UK business rates. Maybe when you do you'll have a better understanding of the taxes imposed on UK businesses.


So, explain. Should be fairly simple as you're declaring yourself an expert. Wait.. you don't believe experts. How about detailing facts which you constantly fail to provide.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> So, explain. Should be fairly simple as you're declaring yourself an expert. Wait.. you don't believe experts. How about detailing facts which you constantly fail to provide.


It's easy enough to find out, Google is your friend.

Basically any business that occupies a premises pays business rates. This is a tax that as a one man band, with small business relief, will add about 40% of your annual rent to be paid in tax just for the pleasure of being in business. If you dare to have more than one business address this then pretty much doubles. So, and I think I've given this real life example before, a out of town average size gymnasium can pay £80,000 plus per annum in business rates on top of corporation tax. Move into any high street and national chain of shops/coffee houses/public bars will easily see their annual rent matched by business rates, so £100,000's in tax per retail outlet for nothing bar having the pleasure to employ people and pay further taxes. This tax applies if you own or rent the premises, it also applied if the premises is trading or empty.

What is the equivalent tax in Germany?

Business rates are a huge deal in the UK.


----------



## leashedForLife

*Elles *said,

_Why? Generosity [in pay rates] isn't a sin. Wealthy corporations shouldn't be paying minimum wage and letting the rest of us supplement their crap rates of pay & reluctance to pay tax. They're just as bad as someone who has ten kids, so they can sponge off the state and never work._
...
____________________________________
.
.
Here in the U.S., we've been setting productivity records off & on - not continuously, but frequently - since *the 1981 recession*, when POTUS Ronnie Ray-gun's domestic policies of de-regulate, cut social nets, & spend money on military weapons, bore their rotting fruit.
.What's POTUS Trumpling doing?... 
much the same as Ray-gun did: de-regulate business & industry, allow financial firms & Wall St to have free rein, build the military, buy more weapons, pump more oil, kill renewable energy as an industry, de-fund renewable energy research.
.
after the 2008 Great Recession [CAUSED in large part by Ronnie's deregulation of the financial sector & banking / mortgage industries], U-S workers were once again setting productivity records. Why?... because THREE workers were being forced to do the work of FIVE. Not being *paid *to do the work of 5 people, mind! - 3 persons, paid the same wages as before, working half-again as hard.
.
Shareholders were delighted. [Dividends rose.] Employers were thrilled. [Workers were afraid to leave even awful job situations, for fear of having no job whatever.]
.
This is something to be proud of?... To BRAG about? - Not in my opinion, nor in my personal experience.
During those 'belt-tightening' times, we lost 6 workers from the commercial kitchen where I worked - 4 quit for better wages, 1 died [heart], 1 was fired.
That was in SEPTEMBER. // No one told the remaining staff there was a hiring freeze on. // None of those ppl were replaced until JANUARY. What a bl**dy mizrable 3 months plus, that was!... that kitchen was a slice of H***, with overworked, frustrated, cranky staff busting their chops to get the work done, to the same high standard as before, AND IN EVEN-LESS TIME.
It was awful. 
.
"Productivity" is fine - but only so far. Wage slavery is not a brag-worthy state. Underpaying ppl is not something to be proud of.
.
My current employer is a health-care agency, with dozens - possibly hundreds - of underpaid, overworked, undervalued employees, myself among them.
We work with fragile elderly, disabled adults, clients recovering from injuries / illness / surgeries - adults & children who need our help.
We are paid MINIMUM WAGE - with no benefits, including zero unemployment [we can't claim U-I if we're laid off, even if this is our sole job, & it's full-time.]
.
All the agency's PCAs qualify for food-stamps, even those lucky enuf to work 36 to 40-hrs per week [the few, the proud, the exhausted]. // Unless they are married, & their spouse has good wages & great benefits, they're all struggling.
No one who works 60-hours a week should be *unable* to afford a lease, & a roof over one's head. [That's me - homeless since mid-October 2015.]
.
This is the current economic reality for the working poor, in the U-S.
.
.
.


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> What is the equivalent tax in Germany?
> 
> Business rates are a huge deal in the UK.


My understanding is as I previously stated. There isn't one. All properties are taxed regardless of if you have a business or are private. I think of it as you don't own the ground, the state retains it and you effectively rent it. German businesses pay only corporation tax, no equivalent of UK business rate. They are, after all already paying corporation tax. Why make them pay twice?


----------



## Arnie83

rona said:


> Links please that aren't just paper headlines


They aren't newspaper headlines, they were quotes from May speeches. Google is your friend.


----------



## Arnie83

rona said:


> She may have more insight now she's PM


Oh, please. 

Insight that was unavailable to her as Home Secretary, and which came to her in a flash after the referendum voted to leave? Insight - economic in nature - that was and is unavailable to both the Chancellor and the Governor of the Bank of England?


----------



## Arnie83

Dr Pepper said:


> No, but circumstances may. And you either get on with the current circumstances and try your best, or bugger off into the horizon like Mr Cameron. Which would you prefer?


I'd prefer someone who didn't change what they purported to believe in order to further their own career. I would have preferred it if she had said "I still think we'll be damaging ourselves economically but I respect the will of the people and do my damnedest to implement it to the greatest UK benefit possible" rather than suddenly changing from Brexit making us "less prosperous" to making us "more prosperous", with personal ambition to the fore.

I prefer integrity.


----------



## Goblin

Arnie83 said:


> I'd prefer someone who didn't change what they purported to believe in order to further their own career. I would have preferred it if she had said "I still think we'll be damaging ourselves economically but I respect the will of the people and do my damnedest to implement it to the greatest UK benefit possible" rather than suddenly changing from Brexit making us "less prosperous" to making us "more prosperous", with personal ambition to the fore.
> 
> I prefer integrity.


I think this is going to be one of the biggest problems going forward. The UK should be preparing for what is going to happen in the future. To do that it needs information based on reality, not feel good slogans.


----------



## leashedForLife

*noushka05* said,

Land Value Tax isn't a garden tax :Hilarious Its one of the fairest ways to tax people. 
Why should billionaires with their massive estates pay the same council tax as you or I ? 
LVT is a progressive form of taxation.

I'm shocked to see so many on here have fallen for tory scaremongering.
____________________________________
.
.
I was curious about this tax-form, which is new to me, so I looked it up re UK farmers -

*Wealth and Want theme: Farmers and Land Value Taxation*
www.wealthandwant.com/themes/Farmers.html
_Farmers and LVT. _
_When people first learn about Land Value Taxation, one of their first reactions is often "wouldn't it be extremely tough on farmers?" It turns out ..._


*Killer Arguments Against Land Value Tax, Not: R. Farmers will go ...*
kaalvtn.blogspot.com/2013/01/r-farmers-will-all-go-bankrupt.html
_Jan 17, 2013 - _
_LVT will push up food prices (skip to article) • What about the ... Farm and forestry land = 80% of the UK by surface area, rental value approx._


*Tax Research UK » What is Land Value Taxation?*
www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2012/03/12/what-is-land-value-taxation/
_Mar 12, 2012 - _
_People are asking what land value taxation is, which given the ... So a full LVT would pull all the EU farm subsidy back to the UK coffers._


*Small farmers have nothing to fear from LVT - continued | Frequently ...*
www.landvaluetax.org › FAQ
_Aug 16, 2013 - _
_To see the effect of LVT on farmers, consider the UK as an example. Under the present regime of taxation on labour, goods and services, ..._
_._
.
.
As U can see from the dates, LVT isn't a concept that just arose during this election - it's been chewed-on considerably for years.
From what i've read, the bigger the land-owner, the bigger the tax --- as Noush said, it's progressive. It's not going to "bankrupt small farmers" unless they are already on the verge of bankruptcy - which means it might hasten their fall, but they're already on the cliff's edge.
.
.
.


----------



## Dr Pepper

Goblin said:


> My understanding is as I previously stated. There isn't one. All properties are taxed regardless of if you have a business or are private. I think of it as you don't own the ground, the state retains it and you effectively rent it. German businesses pay only corporation tax, no equivalent of UK business rate. They are, after all already paying corporation tax. Why make them pay twice?


Exactly, and we pay twice in the UK. Not nice. So it's difficult to compare how the small retail business is thriving in Germany with the heavily taxed one in the UK. You've got it easy over there.

I used to have a few shops. Business rates alone (forget corporation tax) accounted for approximately £150,000 - £200,000 of sales per annum, per shop to pay. At least corporation tax is only paid on profit, business rates are paid no matter if you make a huge profit, a loss or leave the shop empty.


----------



## leashedForLife

@cheekyscrip said,

...
Holding hands with Trump, & inviting him for a "state visit", are her only achievements, so far?
_______________________________
.
.
I was looking at the cropped photo of hand-holding in close-up... Is it just me, or is this the MOST-Awkward 'hand-holding' U've ever seen?
I blew it up, to make the details easier to make out.
.








.
.
to my eyes, that clutching looks downright bizarre, with Trumpling's hand tense & strangely posed, while May's is fairly relaxed & open. // It's as if the photo caught just the initial contact that was made as they fumbled for a comfortable grasp WHILE trying to keep their eyes on the cameras, as opposed to gazing at what their hands were doing & thus make their hands meet much-more gracefully -- but that would mean breaking eye-contact with the cameras.
.
It looks extraordinarily clumsy. Very odd moment.
.
.
.


----------



## Guest

Dr Pepper said:


> What are the business rates? That's for starter's. I don't actually know so I'm genuinely interested. Charity shops in the UK don't pay business rates, hence there take over of our high streets.


This is a link of business tax rate https://tradingeconomics.com/euro-area/corporate-tax-rate, where UK has a bit lower corporation tax than many EU countries,

And link to business property tax in OECD, which on the other hand is much higher in UK than in OECD countries in average. A link (and really easy way to compare countries, for once)

https://data.oecd.org/tax/tax-on-property.htm


----------



## Calvine

leashedForLife said:


> Is it just me, or is this the MOST-Awkward 'hand-holding' U've ever seen?


Why are you interested? Does it make either one of them more or less suitable for office? You've lost me TBH.


----------



## cheekyscrip

Sorry! Wrong thread!!!


----------



## Dr Pepper

MrsZee said:


> This is a link of business tax rate https://tradingeconomics.com/euro-area/corporate-tax-rate, where UK has a bit lower corporation tax than many EU countries,
> 
> And link to business property tax in OECD, which on the other hand is much higher in UK than in OECD countries in average. A link (and really easy way to compare countries, for once)
> 
> https://data.oecd.org/tax/tax-on-property.htm


Thank you, I'll have a look when I'm on the laptop. I'm genuinely interested in how our business tax compares to others (don't worry, it's not something I'd bring up at a dinner party!).


----------



## Zaros

Oh for God's sake, it's just one of those secret handshakes between two loyal members of an elite subculture. 
There's nothing awkward/bizarre/strange or weird about it.

Except, perhaps, the worshipping of large wooden owls, sacrificing the odd child and being buggered in a coffin.

@Calvine Hope you kin grok that.

Personally, I think it's a grok of sh1t.


----------



## leashedForLife

*Elles* said,

_The problem with this thread, IMO, is it's very pro labour, but then it's easy to defend & promote a party that's promising the world. _
*
The poor generally haven't got poorer. They've always got richer, or they'd still be using mangles and watching black & white TV, if they had a TV. *
_

Some sections of our society are struggling and that needs addressing, but I'm sorry, I don't believe it's all doom and gloom and I don't believe Jeremy Corbyn is the saviour of Britain. Maybe he'll prove me wrong._
______________________________________
.
.
I don't know whether this is also true in the UK, but all the TVs on sale in retail shops & on-line are 99.99% color sets - B&W sets are antiques, & cost MORE than a new HD-TV or LED-screen set, which can be downright cheap.
Also, like all tech, TVs became much cheaper over time from their initial introduction, relative to one's income. // Our old mahogany furniture-grade closed door cabinet TV weighed a ton, was very bulky, had double reed-style doors that split to roll away inside to reveal the TV screen, a built-in monaural turntable to the left behind a 3rd door with room below to store the records, & cost a bundle when my parents bought it - around 1948 / '50.
.
Remember that post about "generosity [decent wages] is not illegal"? --- Henry Ford raised the wages he paid to line-workers AND kept the costs of his basic-model auto low, & when asked why he paid them more, he said, "so they can buy a car". He recognized that even his laborers were potential customers, & saw them as part of his market.
.
When TVs were 1st introduced, few ppl in the U-S could afford them - just like radio, unless YOU BUILT A WIRELESS from parts, when radios 1st came into retail, they were expensive - relatively speaking. // 5-years on, *lots* of ppl had radios. // 10-years after TVs were 1st marketed, they were still a novelty - but the middle-class, which was then a solid & growing segment of the U-S popn, had embraced TV as the successor to radio.
.
"How many TVs in the U-S" by time period:
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2007/TamaraTamazashvili.shtml
.
some early TVs for sale on e-Bay --- note that one vintage set commands almost $500.
https://www.ebay.com/b/Philco-Vintage-Televisions/73374/bn_2832469
.
.
*a brand-new hi-def LED low-energy flat-screen TV of decent quality* now costs about $85, & moreover, they're lightweight and portable - move it with U when U move house; if it's under 20" diagonally, pack it into a suitcase & roll it along. // That monster double-door mahogany cabinet TV took FOUR MEN to pick up & carry out to the moving truck, & they were straining.
.
a few LED hi-def flat-screens at Best Buy:
*http://tinyurl.com/y9fz56cu*
.
.
As for mangles, so far as i know, they're all antiques - no one manufactures them, anymore. 
http://www.findmypast.com/1939register/the-home-1939-laundry
.
Perhaps it will comfort U to know that i still hand-wash some items in the sink - but most clothes washers nowadays include a 'lingerie' setting for delicates, & many also boast a "woolens" cycle for sweaters, vests, blankets, etc [which do not go in the dryer, but are laid on a rack or hung to dry].
.
I did without commercial-TV for the 3-years that i lived in Norfolk [2009 - 2012], using only an OTA antenna - all the cable services in that neighborhood were exorbitant rip-offs, & i couldn't afford any of them. // The only channels i could receive OTA were Public Broadcasting Stations, so that's what i watched. *shrug* Total of 5 channels - PBS #2, #44, World, Create, Kids.
.
poverty comes in all guises, but whether U've got a TV or not, or whether U use a mangle to wring-out wet laundry, aren't currently applicable criteria.
What might be far-more telling is, HOW FAR MUST U GO TO FIND A GROCERY STORE? - not a convenience store or Mom-n-Pop corner shop, a full-scale grocer's with dry goods, chill, frozen, fresh produce, baked goods, cleaning products, etc?
Food deserts are common in low-income neighborhoods, across the US - where the only foods within a reasonable distance are fast-food restaurants or 7-11 junk.
.
.
.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
*noushka05* said: ↑

_Tell me, what will nuclear Armageddon solve?_
_________________________


*Dr Pepper *replied,

_The financial crisis
The NHS crisis
Terrorism
Global warming
National debt
Personal debt
Housing crisis
Unemployment
Brexit
Child obesity
Care for the elderly
Poverty
Etc, etc_
___________________________
.
.
well, for that matter, a fair-sized nuclear missile that hit NYC would mean Bostonians could stop worrying about higher electric-bills from more AC use during these increasingly-sultry summers... nor would they be concerned about migraine headaches, getting their kids into good schools, the rise in obesity, or sea-level rise & the threat to private property / city infrastructure from tidal floods or seawater incursions.
.
In fact, Boston residents could stop worrying about anything & everything, as they'd be dead. // But that seems to me to be an extreme 'solution' for any of those worries.
It eliminates them, yes, but it doesn't fix them - & creates a whole bunch of new worries, from massive immediate fallout to long-term persistent radioactive contamination, uninhabitable areas, radioactive soil / water flowing into local streams & thence to the ocean, sea life contaminated, etc.
.
Radioactivity does not respect national boundaries - any nuclear weapons affect the WORLD, not just "the target".
Chernobyl & 3-Mile Island & Fukushima weren't only "Ukrainian", "American", or "Japanese" disasters - Chernobyl forced Lapps to kill entire herds of their beloved & critically needed reindeer, who provide milk, meat, & furs. // Thousands of square-miles of soil, water, & air were contaminated, & still are today. // It's been over 30-years, & a large region is still uninhabitable.
.
.
.


----------



## leashedForLife

*DT* said,

_[Don't] know why it's so important that everyone go to university, myself! -- They already stay at school until they're 18. 
Reckon that's plenty long enough to get an education, personally.

I think apprenticeships should be brought back for all, with the exception of doctors, dentists, etc._
________________________
.
.
*The Neglected Majority: What Americans Without A College Degree ...*
https://www.forbes.com/.../the-neglected-majority-what-americans-without-a-college-...
_Apr 28, 2015 - _
_Most Americans don't have a college degree. The latest data show that just 40 percent ofAmericans have finished an associate's degree or ..._


*Educational attainment in the United States - Wikipedia*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_attainment_in_the_United_States
_The educational attainment of the U.S. population is similar to that of many other industrialized .... The numbers of both men and women receiving a bachelor's degree have increased significantly, but the increasing ... Asian Americans had the highest educational attainment of any race, followed by whites who had a higher ..._


‎General attainment of degrees ... · ‎Gender · ‎Ethnicity and race · ‎Income
*[PDF] Educational Attainment in the United States: 2015 - Census Bureau*
https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2016/.../p20-578.pdf
by CL Ryan - ‎2016 - ‎Cited by 282 - ‎Related articles
_...adults (33 percent) held a bachelor's or higher degree. 2 ... were more likely than non-Hispanic Whites to have at ... African American Educational Attainment,"._


*Percentage of Americans with a college degree | WTOP*
wtop.com › Latest News › Business & Finance
_Apr 3, 2017 - _
_The Census Bureau says the percentage of adults with a bachelor's degree or more ... *If education counts, Americans have never been smarter."
.*_
.
.
To get any sort of decent job, U need a college degree - UNLESS that is, U want to work *construction*, or other well-paid laboring jobs [landscape, operating heavy equipment, road construction, bridge building, etc] but that's a young man's gig & it can't be done for an entire working lifetime. Ur back, among other body-parts, will give out after a couple decades of overuse & abuse. // Construction is well-paid -- when jobs exist; but it's seasonal, a boom-n-bust market, & cannot be counted on to provide jobs consistently.
.
A trade is another option, but union-scale trades are hard to get into, & discriminate against women, ppl of color, & other non-male / non-white groups.
.
.
.


----------



## Elles

I wouldn't want to be poor or unemployed in the USA. I think your ghettos, slums and trailer parks are probably worse than anything here and you don't have a NHS or welfare state like ours. When you consider how small the uk is, most people live quite close to a number of shops and supermarkets. You might not if you live in the country, but that would usually be a bonus, not a sign of poverty. I'm not sure how comparable most of the us is to the uk. Not very I suspect.


----------



## leashedForLife

*Elles* said,

_More people are using food banks, *because there are food banks. *
The poor are *a lot better off [now] * than they were *20, 30, 40, 50 years ago,* when *there were no food banks.*_
...
_________________________________
.
.
"food banks" have existed in the USA for quite a long time - in the Great Depression [1929 - 1935], there were soup kitchens serving meals on demand.
.
A food-bank provides canned goods & shelf-stable items, some offer locally-sourced fresh veg & fruit as well, often overripe or damaged [bruises, broken skin, cut, etc], but mostly it's dry pasta, canned veg / fruit, peanut butter, & other simple staples - NO milk, cheese, or other chilled products, no frozen, & often no fresh veg / fruit.
.
It's not a healthy long-term diet, unless it's the bare foundation & U add a lot to the food-bank items - it's low protein, short on vitamins, low fiber, etc.
.
During POTUS Ray-gun's terms in office, food banks across the USA began seeing a whole new class of needy applicants: families, often with children in tow. // Food banks USED TO BE supplying the needs of elderly / homeless singles, mostly male / unemployed singles of both sexes.
Starting in 1981, families - with 2 adults & one or more children - suddenly became frequent shoppers at food banks all over the U-S, urban, suburbs, rural, Rust Belt, Sun Belt, Ecotopia, Midwest, S'west, S'east, everywhere.
.
the 1st U-S food bank opened in 1967. Originally, most were run by churches or religious service groups; nowadays, many are municipal offices with the usual bureaucratic overhead of administrators & forms, waiting lists, strict income guidelines, etc.
.
.
*U.S. Food Bank Network| Feeding America History*
www.feedingamerica.org/about-us/about-feeding-america/our-history/?_ga=1...
_With that, an industry was born. Van Hengel established St. Mary's Food Bank in Phoenix, AZ as the nation's first food bank. ... Today, Feeding America is the nation's largest domestic hunger-relief organization-a powerful and efficient network of 200 food banks across the country._


*History of Food Banking - Second Harvest Food Bank of Northwest NC*
www.hungernwnc.org/about-us/history%20of%20food%20banking.html
_In 2008, America's Second Harvest changed its name to Feeding America. As the nation's largest domestic hunger-relief charity, Feeding America's network members supply food to more than 25 million Americans each year, including 9 million children and 3 million seniors._


*Food bank - Wikipedia*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_bank
_Jump to *History* - _
_The world's first food bank was the St. Mary's Food Bank Alliance in ... Food banks spread across the United States, and to Canada._
‎Standard model · ‎North America · ‎Europe · ‎Asia


*Our History | St. Mary's Food Bank | The world's first food bank*
www.firstfoodbank.org/learn-more/our-history
_Our History. 
"The poor we shall always have with us, but why the hungry?" - John van Hengel, founder, St. Mary's Food Bank Alliance. Founded in 1967, St. Mary's..._
.
.
____________________________________________
.
.
food banks & USAGE in the U.S.A.:
.
*Hunger in America: 1 in 7 rely on food banks - USA Today*
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/17/hunger...food/14195585/
_Aug 17, 2014 - _
_Nationwide, 25% of military families - 620,000 households - need help putting food on the table, according to a study by Feeding America, a network of 200 food banks. ... One in seven Americans - 46 million people - rely on food pantries and meal service programs to feed ..._


*How Do Food Banks Work? | Feeding America*
www.feedingamerica.org/about-us/how-we-work/food-bank-network/
_Feeding America is a nationwide network of 200 food banks and 60,000 food pantries and meal programs that provides food and services to people each year. ... A food bank is a non-profit organization that collects and distributes food to hunger-relief charities. ... The Feeding America ..._


*Hunger Facts & Poverty Statistics | Feeding America®*
www.feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america/.../hunger-and-poverty-fact-sheet.html
_Interested in more hunger facts and poverty statistics? ... Poverty in the United States is only one of many factors associated with food insecurity. .... Each year, the Feeding America network of food banks helps 46.5 million people in need, ..._
.
.
___________________________
.
.
a telling statistic:
Over 90% of the food banks that were operating in 2002 were ESTABLISHED after 1981 - that Ronnie Ray-gun watershed year, the created economic recession.
.
.
.


----------



## leashedForLife

*havoc* said,

_Trump would be shouting about being assaulted at the top of his voice, had it been the other way 'round._ 
__________________________________________
.
.
POTUS Comb-over also thinks that it's OK to grab a woman's genitalia, since he claims, _"...when U're a star, they let U do *any*thing!"_
.
It couldn't, of course, be true that he simply grabbed crotches, & didn't ASK the women beforehand if they'd "*Let*" him do that?...
Could it? // "LET" means to be permitted. Grabbing has nothing to do with being 'allowed' to touch, & is by definition, assault.
.
But he's too ignorant to understand that - just as waltzing into a roomful of beauty-pageant contestants to ogle them as they are dressing / changing is, in fact, criminal activity, & he brags about it. // Many of the women he referred to as "amazing bodies!..." were, in fact, under-18-YO.
The man's grotesque.
.
.
.


----------



## leashedForLife

*Elles* said,

._.. We probably don't get to see [Corbyn's] current & third wife because she's 20 years younger than him, a fair trade coffee importer who was embarrassed by the low wages the coffee workers were getting, & which would probably be brought up if she ever got in front of a camera. 
He met her *when he was supposed to be helping her get her child back*, the child had been abducted by her ex. *Anyone else would have been accused of taking advantage of someone vulnerable, probably. *
..._
______________________________
.
.
he was helping her ELDER SISTER locate her kidnapped dotter - in 1999. The sister introduced them, understandably. // They married in 2013, which is 14-years after they 1st met. That's hardly a bum's-rush during an emotionally-vulnerable window of opportunity, was it?!
.
her sister, Marcela, said that without Corbyn's help, she'd _"...never have been re-united with [her] daughter"._
http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/811123/Jeremy-Corbyn-wife-who-is-Laura-Alvarez-third-wife
.
The article says nothing about "FairTrade coffee importer" - at the time they met, she worked in a bank in Mexico, & was just visiting London. // Per the article, Laura Alvarez is "a Mexican-born human rights lawyer". // Whether she got her law degree before or after they met, deponent knoweth not - but in 14 years, she had time to start & finish a D.J.
.
2017 = 48-YO
1999 = 30-YO
He wasn't cradle-robbing. 
.
.


----------



## Elles

Oh ok. I don't know where they got the coffee criticism in the articles I read. I just picked it up from the rags tbh. There's enough Corbyn fans on here for me to think it would be picked up if it was an error. Thanks for putting it right. 



leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> he was helping her ELDER SISTER locate her kidnapped dotter - in 1999. The sister introduced them, understandably. // They married in 2013, which is 14-years after they 1st met. That's hardly a bum's-rush during an emotionally-vulnerable window of opportunity, was it?!
> .
> her sister, Marcela, said that without Corbyn's help, she'd _"...never have been re-united with [her] daughter"._
> http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/811123/Jeremy-Corbyn-wife-who-is-Laura-Alvarez-third-wife
> .
> The article says nothing about "FairTrade coffee importer" - at the time they met, she worked in a bank in Mexico, & was just visiting London. // Per the article, Laura Alvarez is "a Mexican-born human rights lawyer". // Whether she got her law degree before or after they met, deponent knoweth not - but in 14 years, she had time to start & finish a D.J.
> .
> 2017 = 48-YO
> 1999 = 30-YO
> He wasn't cradle-robbing.
> .
> .


----------



## Calvine

Zaros said:


> Oh for God's sake, it's just one of those secret handshakes between two loyal members of an elite subculture.
> There's nothing awkward/bizarre/strange or weird about it.
> 
> Except, perhaps, the worshipping of large wooden owls, sacrificing the odd child and being buggered in a coffin.
> 
> @Calvine Hope you kin grok that.
> 
> Personally, I think it's a grok of sh1t.












It's one of these, @Zaros. (Masonic.)


----------



## 1290423

MiffyMoo said:


> Renta-mob


If you bother to look very closely you may find a decent one, speechless , I actually found one who looked like they could have had a wash


----------



## noushka05

kimthecat said:


> *CorbynSnap* 1h1 hour ago
> 
> The qualities of leadership are best measured by who best has that instinctive, relaxed way of being at ease with the people.


A couple of obvious massive flaws with that comparison. Corbyn isn't an authoritarian - unlike May he wants to give MORE power to ordinary people not less. Unlike May he has always sought peace - not war.



Elles said:


> People are becoming genuinely worried about there being a what next.
> 
> Corbyn saying that people should be rehomed in rich people's luxury homes that they aren't currently living in..
> 
> A bit of research on this idea brings up his brothers. One in particular who is a scientist and climate change denier and actively involved in squatters rights. According to him, the idea of climate change being our fault was used by Margaret Thatcher to bring down the coal and steel industries and gain support for nuclear power. He agrees with Trump. When asked by the Independent, he said Jeremy was very open to debate about climate change, but has to support the Green and Labour take on it publicly. He thought it probably wasn't wise for him to say what was said at family Christmas dinners.
> 
> I don't know whether this old article has been linked before:
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...my-Corbyns-rule-it-turned-me-into-a-Tory.html
> 
> People being housed in wealthy people's investment or holiday homes in the area isn't going to happen. It would take a change in law, or the generosity of Russian oligarchs or similar. I think it's worrying even mentioning it as a possible, what is the agenda with that?
> 
> Unfortunately we do still have 2 extremes. It doesn't work. Supporting the poor to extreme creates resentment, complacency and entitlement, as people who work hard start to feel taken advantage of. Supporting the wealthy to extreme creates envy, bitterness and anger, as wealthy corporates take advantage of unbridled power. Hence companies like Amazon and JDSports. We need a middle ground. Currently there isn't one, but I'm not a socialist so the more I read about Corbyn, the more I swing towards May.
> 
> If Jeremy is a Eu sceptic who wanted brexit, a climate change denier, anti nuclear (weapon and power) and a squatter supporter, he ain't half compromising his principles to be labour leader and potential pm isn't he.


Gosh, more smears.

Corbyn called for government action & it happened - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-403572...=social&ns_campaign=bbcnews&ns_source=twitter

Piers Corbyn is a well known climate denying idiot - right wing loons love him. Corbyn believes in science so knows we must take urgent action on climate change - why do you think environmentalists were heralding Labours manifesto as very progressive? Labour would ban fracking & invest in a clean renewable future. Labour are clearly our only hope of tackling climate change yet you seek to deride them whilst saying nothing negative about the despicable tories in bed with the fossil fuel industry & doing their utmost to exacerbate climate change with their scorched earth policies Why do you think the Greens could never back a tory government but would go into coalition with labour?

Trident _is _obsolete & dangerous & though Corbyn is anti nuclear/Trident the labour party aren't. Caroline Lucas is bang on - as per.

*Theresa May will humiliate Britain at the UN this week because of her party's emotional attachment to Trident*
This week, more than 120 countries are gathered at the United Nations to agree a treaty to ban nuclear weapons. Theresa May, true to form, has not even bothered to turn up and the UK will, shamefully, have no official representative. Meanwhile, we know that Trident does nothing to protect us from modern threats

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...is-brother-suggests-he-could-be-a6760346.html


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> Corbyn is still going on about rehousing people in luxury homes that are owned, but empty. Pressing the government to take them over, make requisitions and compulsory purchase orders of investment properties belonging to billionaires. He's crazy.
> 
> Can he not use his imagination and think just for one minute what might be the result of that?
> 
> I don't like my council house, just set it alight mate and get a better one. Not every person in those blocks are wonderful, caring people. If they start showing pictures of people rehoused in luxury, those who tend towards the psychopathic tendencies we were talking about earlier, could see it as just the opportunity they've been looking for. Please, please don't do it!
> 
> People do need caring for and a roof over their head, they don't need to be seen as living like millionaires.
> 
> Maybe I'm being too cynical? Tell me I am please. :Arghh


No words...


----------



## Calvine

@Elles: this is from the Telegraph and may well be what you refer to?

*4. She runs a coffee company*
These days, Alvarez runs fairtrade coffee company Cafe Mam, importing beans from her native Mexico.

In 2015, the business came under scrutiny after reports that the coffee was produced by farmers in the country's poorest state, who earned 93p for each 500g bag (sold here for £10).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/politics/7-things-didnt-know-laura-alvarez-jeremy-corbyns-wife/

And, as ever, my apologies to those who only believe it if it's printed in the Guardian!


----------



## noushka05

Calvine said:


> @Elles: this is from the Telegraph and may well be what you refer to?
> 
> *4. She runs a coffee company*
> These days, Alvarez runs fairtrade coffee company Cafe Mam, importing beans from her native Mexico.
> 
> In 2015, the business came under scrutiny after reports that the coffee was produced by farmers in the country's poorest state, who earned 93p for each 500g bag (sold here for £10).
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/politics/7-things-didnt-know-laura-alvarez-jeremy-corbyns-wife/
> 
> And, as ever, my apologies to those who only believe it if it's printed in the Guardian!


The Telegraph is owned by the billionaire non dom Barcley brothers - who have their own agenda & use their paper to influence readers  And that certainly doesn't mean that everything in the Guardian is accurate either - but at least they are clear which articles are 'opinion' pieces. The right wing rags present 'opinion' as news. Hence why many people just take them with a pinch of salt.


----------



## Zaros

Calvine said:


> View attachment 315678
> 
> 
> It's one of these, @Zaros. (Masonic.)


She says to Trump; _'Philip hasn't been paying me much attention of late, so there's a tenner in it if you hold my hand and make him jealous.' 
_
He says too May; _'How about I grab hold of something else instead and get him seething!'_


----------



## Goblin

Dr Pepper said:


> Exactly, and we pay twice in the UK. Not nice. So it's difficult to compare how the small retail business is thriving in Germany with the heavily taxed one in the UK. You've got it easy over there.


In terms of elections, we are talking about a small corporation tax increase.



> I used to have a few shops. Business rates alone (forget corporation tax) accounted for approximately £150,000 - £200,000 of sales per annum, per shop to pay. At least corporation tax is only paid on profit, business rates are paid no matter if you make a huge profit, a loss or leave the shop empty.


So any increase affects profits. Preferably not letting big corporations get away with only 3% while small business suffer the full amount.


----------



## Elles

noushka05 said:


> No words...


No, I probably shouldn't have shared my feelings on that here, but it does genuinely worry me. I've met a few nutjobs in my day who wouldnt think twice if they thought they'd benefit. Don't forget one said nutjob is in prison, there was a programme about him on tv not long ago. It only takes one greedy, selfish nutjob out of the 4-600 people living in these buildings to have a warped sense of envy and entitlement for another disaster and that's without taking accident into account. People need to be protected from rich, greedy, cost cutting, shortcut taking millionaires and envious nutjobs, not relying on chance, or provoked into taking stupid actions.

I'm very happy to read that people will instead be placed in new, comfortable social housing, not millionaire's pads and look forward to seeing other social housing brought up to scratch or people rehomed, though I'm not holding my breath on that tbh. 

I agree with you on climate change, Trident and fracking. I just can't trust Labour. Jeremy Corbyn is too hard left for me, unlike you I'm not a leftie. I think the magic money tree is the tax payer and however much the experts insist it's fully costed, the unexpected, the unforeseeable and Brexit makes it too volatile and unpredictable, so they're either naive, gambling or lying. Some of it will just be throwing good money after bad. Labour will keep Trident and tax the workers, I don't know how strong Corbyn is, or how long he'll last. Like the little girl said in the spoof, he's too old.

If Boris ends up PM, I'm tempted to sell up and leave the country myself though. :Arghh


----------



## noushka05

Elles said:


> No, I probably shouldn't have shared my feelings on that here, but it does genuinely worry me. I've met a few nutjobs in my day who wouldnt think twice if they thought they'd benefit. Don't forget one said nutjob is in prison, there was a programme about him on tv not long ago. It only takes one greedy, selfish nutjob out of the 4-600 people living in these buildings to have a warped sense of envy and entitlement for another disaster and that's without taking accident into account. People need to be protected from rich, greedy, cost cutting, shortcut taking millionaires and envious nutjobs, not relying on chance, or provoked into taking stupid actions.
> 
> I'm very happy to read that people will instead be placed in new, comfortable social housing, not millionaire's pads and look forward to seeing other social housing brought up to scratch or people rehomed, though I'm not holding my breath on that tbh.
> 
> I agree with you on climate change, Trident and fracking. I just can't trust Labour. Jeremy Corbyn is too hard left for me, unlike you I'm not a leftie. I think the magic money tree is the tax payer and however much the experts insist it's fully costed, the unexpected, the unforeseeable and Brexit makes it too volatile and unpredictable, so they're either naive, gambling or lying. Some of it will just be throwing good money after bad. Labour will keep Trident and tax the workers, I don't know how strong Corbyn is, or how long he'll last. Like the little girl said in the spoof, he's too old.
> 
> If Boris ends up PM, I'm tempted to sell up and leave the country myself though. :Arghh


This has nothing to do with being envious of anyone - this is about having a society that works for all, where lives are valued equally.

Well his green credentials are very real, check out his voting history - if you choose to ignore them, that is your prerogative of course. In countries such as Norway he isn't even considered extreme left - he would be just a bog standard socialist over there. The problem over here is the overton window had shifted so far to the right that genuine socialism seemed extreme. How impressive that Corbyn( & also credit to Caroline Lucas) has shifted the window back to the left. Maybe progressive policies have a chance now.

Ditto if Johnson ends up PM!


----------



## Guest

noushka05 said:


> . In countries such as Norway he isn't even considered extreme left - he would be just a bog standard socialist over there. The problem over here is the overton window had shifted so far to the right that genuine socialism seemed extreme. How impressive that Corbyn( & also credit to Caroline Lucas) has shifted the window back to the left. Maybe progressive policies have a chance now.
> Ditto if Johnson ends up PM!


I agree with Corbyn and extreme left, to me his ideas are the same than Swedish conservatives or social democrats. The difference with left and right is not very big in Finland too between the biggest parties. Naturally there are people in those parties, who have more extreme views, but they are minority. Real communists have different manifesto all together and Corbyn/Labour has none of that. And if I compare the wellbeing of people in Nordic countries and UK, I must say that for the average person, our moderate wellfare system is better. People still can be rich, but the state provides much more for poor than in UK. So even if you or your family is doing badly, all have more chance of improving their lives, because of the good school system is good for everybody, even fort adults. But then equality is a very important value in all Nordic countries.


----------



## MollySmith

I though there would be at least some mention of Boris Johnson and his Radio 4 interview with Eddie Mair. Boris who wasn't able to tell the difference between the manifesto and the Queen's Speech but is meant to be in the cabinet. After all a few leapt on Abbott.


----------



## Mirandashell

And there's the rub. When Abbot does it, she's incompetent. When Boris does it, he's funny bumbling Boris, bless him!


----------



## DoodlesRule

noushka05 said:


> I'm aware of the dreadful fires in Portugal & the terrible eucalyptus monoculture driving those fires. Surely its good news the government want action on these forests? This would never happen under a Conservative government. Look at the degradation grouse moors have on our uplands & the flooding downstream they cause? Look how they have deregulated the dangerous fracking industry. How they maliciously tried to sabotage EU climate measures despite us leaving it https://www.theguardian.com/environ...rope-to-dilute-flagship-energy-efficiency-law I could go on.
> 
> Austerity kills who ever imposes it but EU directives actually protects our environment from our government. Why do you think this hard right government are chomping at the bit to get out of the EU? Surely you've heard them say they are sick of all those regulation & that red tape?
> 
> This was left outside the offices of the right wing think tanks that have called for a bonfire of red tape. Labour & the other progressive parties like the Greens are opposed to deregulation & the shrinking of the state - because these things keep us all safe.
> 
> View attachment 315407
> 
> 
> Its never gunna happen it it?. Justice doesn't apply to them, we've seen it time after time.
> 
> My heart bleeds for the greedy 845t4rd5 (I love how you spell that! )
> 
> They'd let you sell one as well
> 
> The short term greed of the tory party & their rich mates perfectly summed up in one cartoon.
> 
> View attachment 315408


I don't understand the logic of this Noush - Portugal is in the EU so how as it protected their environment from the eucalyptus monoculture ?


----------



## Elles

Personally I don't see the point in the uk renewing Trident. We're small players in this game. 

People like Boris just confirm what a game politics is for most of them. Diane Abbot made herself ill and it's not worth it.


----------



## noushka05

MrsZee said:


> I agree with Corbyn and extreme left, to me his ideas are the same than Swedish conservatives or social democrats. The difference with left and right is not very big in Finland too between the biggest parties. Naturally there are people in those parties, who have more extreme views, but they are minority. Real communists have different manifesto all together and Corbyn/Labour has none of that. And if I compare the wellbeing of people in Nordic countries and UK, I must say that for the average person, our moderate wellfare system is better. People still can be rich, but the state provides much more for poor than in UK. So even if you or your family is doing badly, all have more chance of improving their lives, because of the good school system is good for everybody, even fort adults. But then equality is a very important value in all Nordic countries.


Sadly many people don't want a fairer society even though they too would benefit. I think they hate Corbyn more than they love our NHS or a healthy environment. Our terrible media has a lot to answer for peddling anti Corbyn propaganda. On a positive note the young generation seem to very savvy & are far better informed then many of the older generation. I think many have realised if they don't stand up & be counted they wont have the benefit of an NHS, or decent housing - they will be the ones disproportionately affected by climate change. At last they have hope of something better.



DoodlesRule said:


> I don't understand the logic of this Noush - Portugal is in the EU so how as it protected their environment from the eucalyptus monoculture ?


The EU doesn't protect all countries from all of their own domestic policies. But the EU directives for birds & habitat has been one of the most important & successful pieces of legislation in the world for protecting nature. One of the main reasons the tory hard right pushed to leave the EU was to rid the UK of the tough environmental legislation imposed by the EU - they are desperate to rip up that red tape & those regulations which protect us & our environment.

This is the twisted mentality of these tories with their war on nature.
*
Tories aim to block full EU ban on bee-harming pesticides*

Move to block EU ban comes despite environment secretary Michael Gove saying, 'I don't want to water down' EU protections

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...-aim-block-full-eu-ban-bee-harming-pesticides

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...state-wildlife-tories-do-nothing-michael-gove


----------



## leashedForLife

*kimthecat* said,

_I don't even remember writing that.  What does it even mean, '*champing*'?
__________________________________________
.
._
to 'Champ' - champing, s/he champed, etc - verb.
Said of a horse or reminiscent of a horse trying to take the bit in their teeth, repeatedly opening & closing jaws on it impatiently - the mount tugs at the reins whilst pulling on the bit, barely-restrained excitement.
.
.
*'Champ at the bit' - the meaning and origin of this phrase*
www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/champ-at-the-bit.html
_Of course, it was horses that were first said to be 'champing at the bit'; the bit being the mouthpiece of a horse's bridle. The earliest citation of 'champ at the bit' ..._

*champ at the bit - Wiktionary*
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/champ_at_the_bit
_From champ (verb) ("to chew noisily") + bit ("part of horse's harness held in its ... _
_when said (of a person) to show impatience or frustration when delayed [quotations ▽]_..
.
.


----------



## Zaros

MrsZee said:


> I must say that for the average person, our moderate welfare system is better. People still can be rich, but the state provides much more for poor than in UK.


That's because the British and their class system have always viewed poverty and being poor as things to be ashamed of and disgraced.
Hardly stigmas the ruling classes would be willing to support.


----------



## Arnie83

Zaros said:


> That's because the British and their class system have always viewed poverty and being poor as *things to be ashamed of and disgraced.*
> Hardly stigmas the ruling classes would be willing to support.


Not to mention, thoroughly deserved.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
I've plowed from page 183 to 416, & need a break, LOL.
.
.
.


----------



## leashedForLife

*Dr Pepper* said,
_
I wasn't [discussing] corporation taxes, but business rates -- *do you have those figures*?_
_________________________________________
.
.
off the cuff?... Of course not! - OTOH, they're hardly difficult to find.
.
https://www.thebalance.com/corporate-tax-rates-and-tax-calculation-397647
.









.
.
However, in Ur original post, I believe U mentioned Amazon, Tesco, & Sainsbury's. // Aren't all 3 legal corporations?
Don't they have a Board of Directors, shareholders, & publicly-traded stock?
.
Sainsbury's stock graph -
.








.
.
.


----------



## MollySmith

I think the naysayers have picked up on Corbyn and started to bash him about his ideaology over the release of houses and I thought it would be better to hear from someone else about it. John Bird, Big Issue and I respect him so much of his work and of course a very close connection with this topic. And of course they show their politics very clearly but there is a good reason for it, support the party that does the most.

https://www.bigissue.com/news/john-bird-housing-crisis-declared-state-emergency/


----------



## Zaros

Arnie83 said:


> Not to mention, thoroughly deserved.


How terribly remiss of me. :Facepalm


----------



## MilleD

MollySmith said:


> I think the naysayers have picked up on Corbyn and started to bash him about his ideaology over the release of houses and I thought it would be better to hear from someone else about it. John *Bird, Big* Issue and I respect him so much of his work and of course a very close connection with this topic. And of course they show their politics very clearly but there is a good reason for it, support the party that does the most.
> 
> https://www.bigissue.com/news/john-bird-housing-crisis-declared-state-emergency/


Sorry, read that at first as Big Bird

I think I need glasses.


----------



## MollySmith

MilleD said:


> Sorry, read that at first as Big Bird
> 
> I think I need glasses.


And the letter today on Pet Forum is....


----------



## Mirandashell

Don't know how true this is but Channel 4 News are investigating possible dodgy practises by the Tories during the campaign.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...arty-call-centre-may-have-broken-election-law


----------



## Guest

Noush, on the aubject of polotics you might like to look at the video I linked you too. Lets say Mrs May made an undortunate oops joke. The jokes on her. I left it on your profile.


----------



## Elles

Do we need a new brexit thread to discuss ongoing negotiations? 

So, the new proposal, Eu citizens can stay if they've been here for 5 years. Nice one.

Only if Brits get the same in Europe..

Has she learned nothing? People are not bargaining chips.
You Stupid Woman. :Rage

Did no one teach you that you don't give to receive.


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> Do we need a new brexit thread to discuss ongoing negotiations?
> 
> So, the new proposal, Eu citizens can stay if they've been here for 5 years. Nice one.
> 
> Only if Brits get the same in Europe..
> 
> Has she learned nothing? People are not bargaining chips.
> You Stupid Woman. :Rage
> 
> Did no one teach you that you don't give to receive.


Fortunately British nationals in the EU can already get permanent residence after 5 years.


----------



## Elles

Odin_cat said:


> Fortunately British nationals in the EU can already get permanent residence after 5 years.


That might change if the Eu think they're being blackmailed.

It's besides the point though, it's how it looks. Theresa May cannot afford to look as though she's using people as pawns in a game at this stage. Even if they are. Jmho


----------



## Zaros

MollySmith said:


> And the letter today on Pet Forum is....


LMAO.

And Pet Forums was brought to you today by the letters B&H and the number 20.


----------



## Odin_cat

Elles said:


> That might change if the Eu think they're being blackmailed.
> 
> It's besides the point though, it's how it looks. Theresa May cannot afford to look as though she's using people as pawns in a game at this stage. Even if they are. Jmho


True.

May has proved consistently that she views people as pawns. I have no faith in the woman at all.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
still over 20 pages to go, but i'm making [slow] progress.  Eventually, i may catch up!
.
.
.


----------



## leashedForLife

*Elles* said,

_... neoliberalism ... is an exaggerated insult, not a true description._ 

___________________________________________
.
.
I'm pretty sure that Neo-Lib is an actual label for a real set of ideas that form a political & economic philosophy. :Bag
In fact, i think Keynesian economics is often a subset of Neo-Lib beliefs. // So i looked it up...
.
.
book:
*Neoliberalism in Britain: From Thatcherism to Cameronism | Fuchs ...*
www.triple-c.at › Home › Vol 14, No 1 (2016)
by C Fuchs - ‎2016 - ‎Cited by 2 - ‎Related articles
_Neoliberalism in Britain: From Thatcherism to Cameronism. Christian Fuchs. University of Westminster: Communication and Media Research Institute (CAMRI), ..._


*Neoliberalism - Wikipedia*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
Jump to *United Kingdom* - 
_Currently, *neoliberalism* is most commonly used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "*eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers*", and *reducing state influence on the economy, especially through privatization & austerity.'*_
‎Keynesian economics · ‎Austerity · ‎International relations · ‎Social market economy


book:
*Neoliberalism - the ideology at the root of all our problems | Books ...*
https://www.theguardian.com › Arts › Books › Economics
_Apr 15, 2016 - _
_Perhaps it's unsurprising that Britain, in which neoliberal ideology has been most rigorously applied, is the loneliness capital of Europe. We are all neoliberals now. *** The term neoliberalism was coined at a meeting in Paris in 1938._


*The march of the neoliberals | Politics | The Guardian*
https://www.theguardian.com › Politics › Liberal-Conservative coalition
_Sep 12, 2011 - 
The coalition's neoliberal agenda is the most radical social revolution in decades - with the dismantling of the tyrannical state at its heart._


*Neoliberalism is increasing inequality and stunting economic growth ...*
www.independent.co.uk › News › UK › UK Politics
_May 27, 2016 - _
_Key parts of neoliberal economic policy have increased inequality and risk ... Margaret Thatcher championed neoliberal policies in Britain in the ..._.
.
Sounds to me largely like a new name for unfettered capitalism - & we all know how well that works for the average citizen / worker ... the 99% in the USA, who are non-wealthy, not politically connected, ordinary folks. :Meh Neolib is a way of convincing the Average Jane & Joe that U are representing their interests --- while U systematically fleece & disempower them at every turn.
.
.
.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
DONE! - thank God... & now I'll go fetch groceries. :Happy Whew, that was a slog...
.
.
.


----------



## Dr Pepper

leashedForLife said:


> *Dr Pepper* said,
> _
> I wasn't [discussing] corporation taxes, but business rates -- *do you have those figures*?_
> _________________________________________
> .
> .
> off the cuff?... Of course not! - OTOH, they're hardly difficult to find.
> .
> https://www.thebalance.com/corporate-tax-rates-and-tax-calculation-397647
> .
> 
> View attachment 315713
> 
> .
> .
> However, in Ur original post, I believe U mentioned Amazon, Tesco, & Sainsbury's. // Aren't all 3 legal corporations?
> Don't they have a Board of Directors, shareholders, & publicly-traded stock?
> .
> Sainsbury's stock graph -
> .
> View attachment 315715
> 
> .
> .
> .


I was talking about Business Rates :Banghead

Yes those three businesses are all Ltd companies, but I forget in what context I mentioned them so not sure what your point is.


----------



## Guest

Hey you lot, who wants a laugh.


----------



## Zaros

danielled said:


> Hey you lot, who wants a laugh.


Why don't you just share what you have, Dan?


----------



## Guest

Who knew May had a sense of humour because I never knew. 



 The jokes on her.


----------



## Guest

Zaros said:


> Why don't you just share what you have, Dan?


Well I just did. The jokes on her.


----------



## Calvine

Poor guy, having a name like Bone must make him SUCH an easy target for jokes...I hope his first name isn't 'Ivor'.


----------



## Arnie83

Calvine said:


> Poor guy, having a name like Bone must make him SUCH an easy target for jokes...I hope his first name isn't 'Ivor'.


And I hope they didn't call their daughter Nora.


----------



## Calvine

Arnie83 said:


> And I hope they didn't call their daughter Nora.


The possibilities are limitless!


----------



## noushka05

Here's the video of Johnsons latest car crash interview:Hilarious

.


----------



## KittenKong

http://newsthump.com/2017/06/22/cau...c&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=socialnetwork


----------

