Skip to content

Is Angela Rayner about to experience the wrath of Khan? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,645
edited August 24 in General
Is Angela Rayner about to experience the wrath of Khan? – politicalbetting.com

? Deputy PM’s bill will shut off London Mayor’s main route back to the heart of LabourRead more below ??https://t.co/iTNKgybH8N pic.twitter.com/AdaEnH0y2E

Read the full story here

«1345678

Comments

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,711
    edited August 24
    On topic ( sort of).
    Taz said:

    malcolmg said:

    How dare a working class woman buy a second home. Doesn't she realise that only middle class people are permitted to do this?

    thought it was a 3rd one and 800K, hardly working class old chap
    PB is full of well to do people who think the working class need to see our Ange as aspirational and a working class hero.

    She’s vaping in a dinghy on holiday. What a legend.
    An appropriate cry from PB would perhaps be "strafe the boat(s)".

    OMG! Is this post a first?
  • TazTaz Posts: 20,654
    Star Trek reference. 👍
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,711
    edited August 24
    Beyond the three houses wasn't Rayner also guilty of procuring non-socialist, right wing ear buds? I seem to remember quite a furore on here.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,711
    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,548
    Good Morning one and all. Brighter here now, after a rather dull start, weather-wise!

    Case as stated, I don't see that Khan has a problem. His term finishes in May 2028. He doesn't stand again, and applauds (or not, depends who wins) his successor and takes a short holiday. SKS must go to the country before July 2029, so announces, sometime in Spring 2029 that a) the election will be in May and b) that he's not going to stand. Khan is welcomed into his seat and off we go.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 7,117
    Khan suffers from zero charisma as well as being useless.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 7,117
    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 32,448

    Good Morning one and all. Brighter here now, after a rather dull start, weather-wise!

    Case as stated, I don't see that Khan has a problem. His term finishes in May 2028. He doesn't stand again, and applauds (or not, depends who wins) his successor and takes a short holiday. SKS must go to the country before July 2029, so announces, sometime in Spring 2029 that a) the election will be in May and b) that he's not going to stand. Khan is welcomed into his seat and off we go.

    Ah but if Starmer retires before the next election, as expected, then Sadiq is screwed.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,820

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
    You can save some key strokes by sticking with “illusory”. But your call.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 32,448

    Beyond the three houses wasn't Rayner also guilty of procuring non-socialist, right wing ear buds? I seem to remember quite a furore on here.

    Three houses is an odd move if Angela Rayner wants to succeed Starmer. It puts her on par with Jenrick but he plays for the other side.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,699
    edited August 24

    Beyond the three houses wasn't Rayner also guilty of procuring non-socialist, right wing ear buds? I seem to remember quite a furore on here.

    Three houses is an odd move if Angela Rayner wants to succeed Starmer. It puts her on par with Jenrick but he plays for the other side.
    Not a shade on Jas Athwal (Ilford South), however!
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,699
    Taz said:

    Star Trek reference. 👍

    "To the last I grapple with thee!" :lol:
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 19,534

    Good Morning one and all. Brighter here now, after a rather dull start, weather-wise!

    Case as stated, I don't see that Khan has a problem. His term finishes in May 2028. He doesn't stand again, and applauds (or not, depends who wins) his successor and takes a short holiday. SKS must go to the country before July 2029, so announces, sometime in Spring 2029 that a) the election will be in May and b) that he's not going to stand. Khan is welcomed into his seat and off we go.

    That's assuming that Khan wants the job and is a plausible candidate for Labour leader. I'm not aware of any evidence either way on the first point, and the second looks like a massive stretch.

    There was that other bloke who went from Mayor of London to PM fairly quickly, and he was a disaster, in part because being Mayor is a rubbish preparation for being PM.

    The framing looks like the Telegraph stirring, because that's about all they do these days.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 64,585
    edited August 24

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
    What in the name of God’s holy burning testicles, is a “plan for change in action”

    What does it do? How is it in action? If it’s in action surely it’s no longer a plan?

    I sometimes wonder if Starmer’s young social media team is trolling their insufferably pompous boss, by putting out these quietly ridiculous tweets, which ape his inane, vacuous style, but tip them into self-satire
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,699

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
  • TazTaz Posts: 20,654
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
    What in the name of God’s holy burning testicles, is a “plan for change in action”

    What does it do? How is it in action? If it’s in action surely it’s no longer a plan?

    I sometimes wonder if Starmer’s young social media team is trolling their insufferably pompous boss, by putting out these quietly ridiculous tweets, which ape his inane, vacuous style, but tip them into self-satire
    Probably meant inaction.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,548
    edited August 24

    Good Morning one and all. Brighter here now, after a rather dull start, weather-wise!

    Case as stated, I don't see that Khan has a problem. His term finishes in May 2028. He doesn't stand again, and applauds (or not, depends who wins) his successor and takes a short holiday. SKS must go to the country before July 2029, so announces, sometime in Spring 2029 that a) the election will be in May and b) that he's not going to stand. Khan is welcomed into his seat and off we go.

    Ah but if Starmer retires before the next election, as expected, then Sadiq is screwed.
    If he wants/expects to be PM yes, but I'm not convinced that he suffers from the same delusions as his predecessor. Maybe 'our Anj' will lead Labour into and through the election and for a couple of years afterwards, then hand over to Khan, either as PM and party leader or just the latter.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 32,448

    Khan suffers from zero charisma as well as being useless.

    Sadiq keeps getting re-elected as Mayor of London, though, and the usual Tory excuse of London being a Labour city doesn't wash because Boris won twice (and Ken also beat the official Labour candidate).
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 19,534
    Meanwhile, in "flag fans flagging" news, here's a Reform run council acknowledging reality;

    Although we appreciate people showing their patriotism, we cannot condone painting highways assets in this way," councillor Peter Mason, cabinet member for highways, said.

    "This presents a safety and insurance issue and will have to be removed at the expense of the taxpayer."

    He encouraged residents to "show their love for their country" in other ways such as flying a flag "in a safe way".

    The Reform UK-led authority confirmed it was looking to remove the painting on the crossing as soon as possible.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crr2p9zpg7do.amp
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 30,807
    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Here's the problem - that is a worthy policy goal. Other things have also been worthy - a wholesale makeover of NHS England as an example.

    But nobody notices or cares because there is no vision.

    "I want every young person to realise their full potential" - why? What goals are we chasing?

    I have No Clue what this government wants for Britain.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,548

    Khan suffers from zero charisma as well as being useless.

    Sadiq keeps getting re-elected as Mayor of London, though, and the usual Tory excuse of London being a Labour city doesn't wash because Boris won twice (and Ken also beat the official Labour candidate).
    Boris was a Borisite, as he proved when he wrecked the Conservative party.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,711

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 5,180

    Khan suffers from zero charisma as well as being useless.

    Sadiq keeps getting re-elected as Mayor of London, though, and the usual Tory excuse of London being a Labour city doesn't wash because Boris won twice (and Ken also beat the official Labour candidate).
    Boris was a liberal Remainer when he won.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 32,448
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
    What in the name of God’s holy burning testicles, is a “plan for change in action”

    What does it do? How is it in action? If it’s in action surely it’s no longer a plan?

    I sometimes wonder if Starmer’s young social media team is trolling their insufferably pompous boss, by putting out these quietly ridiculous tweets, which ape his inane, vacuous style, but tip them into self-satire
    Labour panicked at polling showing da yoof turning to Farage or, worse, JezTana, and this is the loosely-connected string of clichés and slogans the focus-grouped AI bot puked out for that key demographic. Thank heaven the under-18s can't vote. Oh...
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,711
    edited August 24

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Here's the problem - that is a worthy policy goal. Other things have also been worthy - a wholesale makeover of NHS England as an example.

    But nobody notices or cares because there is no vision.

    "I want every young person to realise their full potential" - why? What goals are we chasing?

    I have No Clue what this government wants for Britain.
    Indeed, they have no agenda save for firefighting the last Tory catastrophe to rise phoenix like from the ashes.

    At least Jenrick and Farage have a clear vision, namely to fly flags on every lamp post in the land and whiten the nation for the racists.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,670
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
    What in the name of God’s holy burning testicles, is a “plan for change in action”

    What does it do? How is it in action? If it’s in action surely it’s no longer a plan?

    I sometimes wonder if Starmer’s young social media team is trolling their insufferably pompous boss, by putting out these quietly ridiculous tweets, which ape his inane, vacuous style, but tip them into self-satire
    When it comes to pompous, ridiculous, inane and vacuous trolling, we can only bow to your expertise...
  • malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 32,448

    Khan suffers from zero charisma as well as being useless.

    Sadiq keeps getting re-elected as Mayor of London, though, and the usual Tory excuse of London being a Labour city doesn't wash because Boris won twice (and Ken also beat the official Labour candidate).
    Boris was a liberal Remainer when he won.
    Back in college, we had a lecturer who warned us against puking on the exam paper, and a list of examples. Yours is psychoanalytic puking – word association with isolated parts of the question. You see the word Boris, and reflexively write that he was a liberal Remainer which is true but has the square root of sod all to do with the point that Labour has lost roughly half of all Mayoral elections, so it is not safe to conclude that Sadiq is winning despite being useless, with no charisma but wearing a red rosette.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,712
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
    What in the name of God’s holy burning testicles, is a “plan for change in action”

    What does it do? How is it in action? If it’s in action surely it’s no longer a plan?

    I sometimes wonder if Starmer’s young social media team is trolling their insufferably pompous boss, by putting out these quietly ridiculous tweets, which ape his inane, vacuous style, but tip them into self-satire
    They have employed Chris Morris.

    And Susannah Geckeloids.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 15,844
    https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/25413339.iranian-bots-behind-1-300-pro-independence-x-accounts/

    Now, remember, that this is going to apply for every other contentious political discourse on Twitter.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 9,270
    edited August 24

    Beyond the three houses wasn't Rayner also guilty of procuring non-socialist, right wing ear buds? I seem to remember quite a furore on here.

    Three houses is an odd move if Angela Rayner wants to succeed Starmer. It puts her on par with Jenrick but he plays for the other side.
    Rayner owns a home in her constituency in Ashton-under-Lyne, which she bought in 2016 for £375,000. She also makes use of a grace-and-favour ministerial apartment in Admiralty House (which she doesn't own) when she is in Westminster. She's now bought a holiday home on the South Coast.

    And the Mail, Sun, Express and even the Times have gone bananas over it. Uppity woman. Doesn't she know her place. Telegraph - "Angela Rayner adds to property empire."
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,846

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    A fine ancient tradition of repelling the boats.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Largs
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 13,492

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
    What in the name of God’s holy burning testicles, is a “plan for change in action”

    What does it do? How is it in action? If it’s in action surely it’s no longer a plan?

    I sometimes wonder if Starmer’s young social media team is trolling their insufferably pompous boss, by putting out these quietly ridiculous tweets, which ape his inane, vacuous style, but tip them into self-satire
    They have employed Chris Morris.

    And Susannah Geckeloids.
    Austin Tasseltine has the latest on it, apparently
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,711

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    And your point is?

    Perhaps you could critique my use of tense. "Send" would be more appropriate than "sent". I claim a typo. But my point nonetheless stands, these children on Halfords dinghies are not coming onto my beaches. If they travelled from France they can go back to France.

    I was tempted to play the man again there but I desisted.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,699

    Khan suffers from zero charisma as well as being useless.

    Sadiq keeps getting re-elected as Mayor of London, though, and the usual Tory excuse of London being a Labour city doesn't wash because Boris won twice (and Ken also beat the official Labour candidate).
    "Oh, sir, it was Khan! We picked him up on Ceti Alpha Five... He put... creatures... in our bodies... to control our minds. He made us... say lies... do things. He thought he controlled us, but he did not. The Captain was strong."
  • LeonLeon Posts: 64,585
    Can this possibly be true? Can the PB Scotch brigade confirm? -

    “The Child Winter Heating Payment is:
    - Provided all the way up to 19 (inc. those on *Adult* Disability Payment)
    - Given per PERSON, not per household
    - Available for those in the EEA & Switzerland with "sufficient link" to Scotland
    - Given automatically with no application needed”

    A welfare payment for enduring Scottish winters given to every child, even if you no longer live in Scotland. Or indeed the UK. And even if you’re not a child

    If this is true, it becomes less mystifying as to why we’re bankrupt

    https://x.com/tim_odoherty/status/1957169027576463568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
  • MattWMattW Posts: 29,381
    Barnesian said:

    Beyond the three houses wasn't Rayner also guilty of procuring non-socialist, right wing ear buds? I seem to remember quite a furore on here.

    Three houses is an odd move if Angela Rayner wants to succeed Starmer. It puts her on par with Jenrick but he plays for the other side.
    Rayner owns a home in her constituency in Ashton-under-Lyne, which she bought in 2016 for £375,000. She also makes use of a grace-and-favour ministerial apartment in Admiralty House (which she doesn't own) when she is in Westminster. She's now bought a holiday home on the South Coast.

    And the Mail, Sun, Express and even the Times have gone bananas over it. Uppity woman. Doesn't she know her place. Telegraph - "Angela Rayner adds to property empire."
    Jenrick has three that belong to him (or it could be 4).

    Which of these tabloids have made a front page story of that?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 13,492
    Leon said:

    Can this possibly be true? Can the PB Scotch brigade confirm? -

    “The Child Winter Heating Payment is:
    - Provided all the way up to 19 (inc. those on *Adult* Disability Payment)
    - Given per PERSON, not per household
    - Available for those in the EEA & Switzerland with "sufficient link" to Scotland
    - Given automatically with no application needed”

    A welfare payment for enduring Scottish winters given to every child, even if you no longer live in Scotland. Or indeed the UK. And even if you’re not a child

    If this is true, it becomes less mystifying as to why we’re bankrupt

    https://x.com/tim_odoherty/status/1957169027576463568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Since the 1970s and early 80s children have lost access to the radioactive glow of Ready Brek, so this payment compensates
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,699
    MattW said:

    Barnesian said:

    Beyond the three houses wasn't Rayner also guilty of procuring non-socialist, right wing ear buds? I seem to remember quite a furore on here.

    Three houses is an odd move if Angela Rayner wants to succeed Starmer. It puts her on par with Jenrick but he plays for the other side.
    Rayner owns a home in her constituency in Ashton-under-Lyne, which she bought in 2016 for £375,000. She also makes use of a grace-and-favour ministerial apartment in Admiralty House (which she doesn't own) when she is in Westminster. She's now bought a holiday home on the South Coast.

    And the Mail, Sun, Express and even the Times have gone bananas over it. Uppity woman. Doesn't she know her place. Telegraph - "Angela Rayner adds to property empire."
    Jenrick has three that belong to him (or it could be 4).

    Which of these tabloids have made a front page story of that?
    That's nothing. Labour's Jas Athwal (who represents Ilford South - next door to the North Ilford Ghetto, natch) owns no less than 15 - FIFTEEN - flats.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 29,381
    edited August 24

    Meanwhile, in "flag fans flagging" news, here's a Reform run council acknowledging reality;

    Although we appreciate people showing their patriotism, we cannot condone painting highways assets in this way," councillor Peter Mason, cabinet member for highways, said.

    "This presents a safety and insurance issue and will have to be removed at the expense of the taxpayer."

    He encouraged residents to "show their love for their country" in other ways such as flying a flag "in a safe way".

    The Reform UK-led authority confirmed it was looking to remove the painting on the crossing as soon as possible.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crr2p9zpg7do.amp

    There's no money ; it's being spent on byelections :tongue: .
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,699

    Leon said:

    Can this possibly be true? Can the PB Scotch brigade confirm? -

    “The Child Winter Heating Payment is:
    - Provided all the way up to 19 (inc. those on *Adult* Disability Payment)
    - Given per PERSON, not per household
    - Available for those in the EEA & Switzerland with "sufficient link" to Scotland
    - Given automatically with no application needed”

    A welfare payment for enduring Scottish winters given to every child, even if you no longer live in Scotland. Or indeed the UK. And even if you’re not a child

    If this is true, it becomes less mystifying as to why we’re bankrupt

    https://x.com/tim_odoherty/status/1957169027576463568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Since the 1970s and early 80s children have lost access to the radioactive glow of Ready Brek, so this payment compensates
    "Barr's Irn-Bru - made in Scotland from girders."
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,711

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
  • TazTaz Posts: 20,654
    MattW said:

    Barnesian said:

    Beyond the three houses wasn't Rayner also guilty of procuring non-socialist, right wing ear buds? I seem to remember quite a furore on here.

    Three houses is an odd move if Angela Rayner wants to succeed Starmer. It puts her on par with Jenrick but he plays for the other side.
    Rayner owns a home in her constituency in Ashton-under-Lyne, which she bought in 2016 for £375,000. She also makes use of a grace-and-favour ministerial apartment in Admiralty House (which she doesn't own) when she is in Westminster. She's now bought a holiday home on the South Coast.

    And the Mail, Sun, Express and even the Times have gone bananas over it. Uppity woman. Doesn't she know her place. Telegraph - "Angela Rayner adds to property empire."
    Jenrick has three that belong to him (or it could be 4).

    Which of these tabloids have made a front page story of that?
    Why’s that so important to you ? Deflection from Saint Ange. It’s not a binary choice.

    She’s lamenting a shortage of housing, while in charge of it. She’s a hypocrite.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/25/the-three-housing-controversies-robert-jenrick-is-facing-down
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 13,492

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    Whence came such adulation? Shocking. Whither next PB? Whither next??
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,699

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    Hmmm... let me guess :innocent:
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 23,282

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Here's the problem - that is a worthy policy goal. Other things have also been worthy - a wholesale makeover of NHS England as an example.

    But nobody notices or cares because there is no vision.

    "I want every young person to realise their full potential" - why? What goals are we chasing?

    I have No Clue what this government wants for Britain.
    Indeed, they have no agenda save for firefighting the last Tory catastrophe to rise phoenix like from the ashes.

    At least Jenrick and Farage have a clear vision, namely to fly flags on every lamp post in the land and whiten the nation for the racists.
    When it comes to racists, an alternative use for lampposts is also available...
  • LeonLeon Posts: 64,585
    Taz said:

    MattW said:

    Barnesian said:

    Beyond the three houses wasn't Rayner also guilty of procuring non-socialist, right wing ear buds? I seem to remember quite a furore on here.

    Three houses is an odd move if Angela Rayner wants to succeed Starmer. It puts her on par with Jenrick but he plays for the other side.
    Rayner owns a home in her constituency in Ashton-under-Lyne, which she bought in 2016 for £375,000. She also makes use of a grace-and-favour ministerial apartment in Admiralty House (which she doesn't own) when she is in Westminster. She's now bought a holiday home on the South Coast.

    And the Mail, Sun, Express and even the Times have gone bananas over it. Uppity woman. Doesn't she know her place. Telegraph - "Angela Rayner adds to property empire."
    Jenrick has three that belong to him (or it could be 4).

    Which of these tabloids have made a front page story of that?
    Why’s that so important to you ? Deflection from Saint Ange. It’s not a binary choice.

    She’s lamenting a shortage of housing, while in charge of it. She’s a hypocrite.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/25/the-three-housing-controversies-robert-jenrick-is-facing-down
    Yes. They are surely both worthy of interest. Rayner does seem surprisingly well off. So does Jenrick

    It’s the job of the 5th estate to scrutinise them all
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,618
    edited August 24
    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    StarmerBot managed to get a Community Note for yesterday’s bollocks about bus fares, and still hasn’t deleted it.

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959145113948410230

    Our Plan for Change is about putting working people first.

    The £3 bus fare cap has already cut costs for families.

    We’re extending it — making travel simpler, cheaper and better for everyone.


    Note, with link to government source:
    The bus fare cap rose from £2 to £3 in January 2025, under Keir Starmer's government.

    Therefore bus fare costs have actually risen for families.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/national-bus-fare-cap
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 23,282
    MattW said:

    Barnesian said:

    Beyond the three houses wasn't Rayner also guilty of procuring non-socialist, right wing ear buds? I seem to remember quite a furore on here.

    Three houses is an odd move if Angela Rayner wants to succeed Starmer. It puts her on par with Jenrick but he plays for the other side.
    Rayner owns a home in her constituency in Ashton-under-Lyne, which she bought in 2016 for £375,000. She also makes use of a grace-and-favour ministerial apartment in Admiralty House (which she doesn't own) when she is in Westminster. She's now bought a holiday home on the South Coast.

    And the Mail, Sun, Express and even the Times have gone bananas over it. Uppity woman. Doesn't she know her place. Telegraph - "Angela Rayner adds to property empire."
    Jenrick has three that belong to him (or it could be 4).

    Which of these tabloids have made a front page story of that?
    But Generic is the right sort of chap to own multiple homes.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 32,448
    Barnesian said:

    Beyond the three houses wasn't Rayner also guilty of procuring non-socialist, right wing ear buds? I seem to remember quite a furore on here.

    Three houses is an odd move if Angela Rayner wants to succeed Starmer. It puts her on par with Jenrick but he plays for the other side.
    Rayner owns a home in her constituency in Ashton-under-Lyne, which she bought in 2016 for £375,000. She also makes use of a grace-and-favour ministerial apartment in Admiralty House (which she doesn't own) when she is in Westminster. She's now bought a holiday home on the South Coast.

    And the Mail, Sun, Express and even the Times have gone bananas over it. Uppity woman. Doesn't she know her place. Telegraph - "Angela Rayner adds to property empire."
    That's not really the point. In order to succeed Keir Starmer, Rayner needs Labour MPs, and perhaps later, party members, to vote for her. She should therefore avoid doing anything that might give them pause.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,699
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    StarmerBot managed to get a Community Note for yesterday’s bollocks about bus fares, and still hasn’t deleted it.

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959145113948410230

    Our Plan for Change is about putting working people first.

    The £3 bus fare cap has already cut costs for families.

    We’re extending it — making travel simpler, cheaper and better for everyone.


    Note, with link to government source:
    The bus fare cap rose from £2 to £3 in January 2025, under Keir Starmer's government.

    Therefore bus fare costs have actually risen for families.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/national-bus-fare-cap
    Luckily, still only £1.75 for one hour's travel (any no. of buses) in London.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 46,956
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
    What in the name of God’s holy burning testicles, is a “plan for change in action”

    What does it do? How is it in action? If it’s in action surely it’s no longer a plan?

    I sometimes wonder if Starmer’s young social media team is trolling their insufferably pompous boss, by putting out these quietly ridiculous tweets, which ape his inane, vacuous style, but tip them into self-satire
    To: PB Leon
    From: Kuntibula English Comprehension Services

    It's not a 'plan for change in action'. That would be gobbledegook.

    It's our Plan for Change ... in action. Some tangible results from our Plan for Change. The caps are key here. Note the caps.

    £5.95 inc VAT
    30 days
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 32,448

    MattW said:

    Barnesian said:

    Beyond the three houses wasn't Rayner also guilty of procuring non-socialist, right wing ear buds? I seem to remember quite a furore on here.

    Three houses is an odd move if Angela Rayner wants to succeed Starmer. It puts her on par with Jenrick but he plays for the other side.
    Rayner owns a home in her constituency in Ashton-under-Lyne, which she bought in 2016 for £375,000. She also makes use of a grace-and-favour ministerial apartment in Admiralty House (which she doesn't own) when she is in Westminster. She's now bought a holiday home on the South Coast.

    And the Mail, Sun, Express and even the Times have gone bananas over it. Uppity woman. Doesn't she know her place. Telegraph - "Angela Rayner adds to property empire."
    Jenrick has three that belong to him (or it could be 4).

    Which of these tabloids have made a front page story of that?
    That's nothing. Labour's Jas Athwal (who represents Ilford South - next door to the North Ilford Ghetto, natch) owns no less than 15 - FIFTEEN - flats.
    TSE turned down my header on why Jas should be laid for next Prime Minister. It turns out Jas is not even quoted in the betting.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 23,282

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    StarmerBot managed to get a Community Note for yesterday’s bollocks about bus fares, and still hasn’t deleted it.

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959145113948410230

    Our Plan for Change is about putting working people first.

    The £3 bus fare cap has already cut costs for families.

    We’re extending it — making travel simpler, cheaper and better for everyone.


    Note, with link to government source:
    The bus fare cap rose from £2 to £3 in January 2025, under Keir Starmer's government.

    Therefore bus fare costs have actually risen for families.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/national-bus-fare-cap
    Luckily, still only £1.75 for one hour's travel (any no. of buses) in London.
    Another example of the rest of the country subsidising that London.

    Top tip: With cheap advances on Northern, the train can be cheaper than the bus.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 11,619
    edited August 24
    Leon said:

    Can this possibly be true? Can the PB Scotch brigade confirm? -

    “The Child Winter Heating Payment is:
    - Provided all the way up to 19 (inc. those on *Adult* Disability Payment)
    - Given per PERSON, not per household
    - Available for those in the EEA & Switzerland with "sufficient link" to Scotland
    - Given automatically with no application needed”

    A welfare payment for enduring Scottish winters given to every child, even if you no longer live in Scotland. Or indeed the UK. And even if you’re not a child

    If this is true, it becomes less mystifying as to why we’re bankrupt

    https://x.com/tim_odoherty/status/1957169027576463568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Not true - it's not all children. It's a piggy-back benefit based on eligibility for other benefits, typically Child Disability Payment.

    It's not really means-tested benefits like this that are causing us issues though in Scotland, and it's likely the best "bang for your buck" you could go for in terms of reducing child poverty and helping vulnerable kids.

    It costs about £10 million a year. Meanwhile the WFP costs about £2000 million per year.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 64,585
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
    What in the name of God’s holy burning testicles, is a “plan for change in action”

    What does it do? How is it in action? If it’s in action surely it’s no longer a plan?

    I sometimes wonder if Starmer’s young social media team is trolling their insufferably pompous boss, by putting out these quietly ridiculous tweets, which ape his inane, vacuous style, but tip them into self-satire
    To: PB Leon
    From: Kuntibula English Comprehension Services

    It's not a 'plan for change in action'. That would be gobbledegook.

    It's our Plan for Change ... in action. Some tangible results from our Plan for Change. The caps are key here. Note the caps.

    £5.95 inc VAT
    30 days
    Why not an Action Plan for change?

    Or a Change for Action Planning Plan?

    Or a Plan For Plans In Action Change Investment?

    In fact what’s wrong with actually doing something? Actually doing a total Action Change for Plans Investment Government Plans In Action Change in Plan for Young People Tomorrow Planned Action Change Investment?

    Why the fuck can’t they just do that?
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 7,117
    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
    You can save some key strokes by sticking with “illusory”. But your call.
    Or you can blame predictive text.
  • TazTaz Posts: 20,654
    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    MattW said:

    Barnesian said:

    Beyond the three houses wasn't Rayner also guilty of procuring non-socialist, right wing ear buds? I seem to remember quite a furore on here.

    Three houses is an odd move if Angela Rayner wants to succeed Starmer. It puts her on par with Jenrick but he plays for the other side.
    Rayner owns a home in her constituency in Ashton-under-Lyne, which she bought in 2016 for £375,000. She also makes use of a grace-and-favour ministerial apartment in Admiralty House (which she doesn't own) when she is in Westminster. She's now bought a holiday home on the South Coast.

    And the Mail, Sun, Express and even the Times have gone bananas over it. Uppity woman. Doesn't she know her place. Telegraph - "Angela Rayner adds to property empire."
    Jenrick has three that belong to him (or it could be 4).

    Which of these tabloids have made a front page story of that?
    Why’s that so important to you ? Deflection from Saint Ange. It’s not a binary choice.

    She’s lamenting a shortage of housing, while in charge of it. She’s a hypocrite.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/25/the-three-housing-controversies-robert-jenrick-is-facing-down
    Yes. They are surely both worthy of interest. Rayner does seem surprisingly well off. So does Jenrick

    It’s the job of the 5th estate to scrutinise them all
    Exactly. Surprised at Matt as he’s usually pretty balanced. The view ‘scrutinise the person I don’t like not the person I like’.
  • TazTaz Posts: 20,654
    Anyway, nice to be here as it is we’re off to the toon. Quayside market then Newcastle Mela.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 13,492
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
    What in the name of God’s holy burning testicles, is a “plan for change in action”

    What does it do? How is it in action? If it’s in action surely it’s no longer a plan?

    I sometimes wonder if Starmer’s young social media team is trolling their insufferably pompous boss, by putting out these quietly ridiculous tweets, which ape his inane, vacuous style, but tip them into self-satire
    To: PB Leon
    From: Kuntibula English Comprehension Services

    It's not a 'plan for change in action'. That would be gobbledegook.

    It's our Plan for Change ... in action. Some tangible results from our Plan for Change. The caps are key here. Note the caps.

    £5.95 inc VAT
    30 days
    Why not an Action Plan for change?

    Or a Change for Action Planning Plan?

    Or a Plan For Plans In Action Change Investment?

    In fact what’s wrong with actually doing something? Actually doing a total Action Change for Plans Investment Government Plans In Action Change in Plan for Young People Tomorrow Planned Action Change Investment?

    Why the fuck can’t they just do that?
    People's Change of Judea
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,804
    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    Can this possibly be true? Can the PB Scotch brigade confirm? -

    “The Child Winter Heating Payment is:
    - Provided all the way up to 19 (inc. those on *Adult* Disability Payment)
    - Given per PERSON, not per household
    - Available for those in the EEA & Switzerland with "sufficient link" to Scotland
    - Given automatically with no application needed”

    A welfare payment for enduring Scottish winters given to every child, even if you no longer live in Scotland. Or indeed the UK. And even if you’re not a child

    If this is true, it becomes less mystifying as to why we’re bankrupt

    https://x.com/tim_odoherty/status/1957169027576463568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Not true - it's not all children. It's a piggy-back benefit based on eligibility for other benefits, typically Child Disability Payment.

    It's not really means-tested benefits like this that are causing us issues though in Scotland, and it's likely the best "bang for your buck" you could go for in terms of reducing child poverty and helping vulnerable kids.

    It seems to me that this is exactly the sort of thing a government should be doing with its money rather than, say, buying nuclear weapons or giving it to the royals.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 64,585
    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    Can this possibly be true? Can the PB Scotch brigade confirm? -

    “The Child Winter Heating Payment is:
    - Provided all the way up to 19 (inc. those on *Adult* Disability Payment)
    - Given per PERSON, not per household
    - Available for those in the EEA & Switzerland with "sufficient link" to Scotland
    - Given automatically with no application needed”

    A welfare payment for enduring Scottish winters given to every child, even if you no longer live in Scotland. Or indeed the UK. And even if you’re not a child

    If this is true, it becomes less mystifying as to why we’re bankrupt

    https://x.com/tim_odoherty/status/1957169027576463568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Not true - it's not all children. It's a piggy-back benefit based on eligibility for other benefits, typically Child Disability Payment.

    It's not really means-tested benefits like this that are causing us issues though in Scotland, and it's likely the best "bang for your buck" you could go for in terms of reducing child poverty and helping vulnerable kids.

    It costs about £10 million a year. Meanwhile the WFP costs about £2000 million per year.
    Why is it paid to kids who now live abroad??!
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,172

    MattW said:

    Barnesian said:

    Beyond the three houses wasn't Rayner also guilty of procuring non-socialist, right wing ear buds? I seem to remember quite a furore on here.

    Three houses is an odd move if Angela Rayner wants to succeed Starmer. It puts her on par with Jenrick but he plays for the other side.
    Rayner owns a home in her constituency in Ashton-under-Lyne, which she bought in 2016 for £375,000. She also makes use of a grace-and-favour ministerial apartment in Admiralty House (which she doesn't own) when she is in Westminster. She's now bought a holiday home on the South Coast.

    And the Mail, Sun, Express and even the Times have gone bananas over it. Uppity woman. Doesn't she know her place. Telegraph - "Angela Rayner adds to property empire."
    Jenrick has three that belong to him (or it could be 4).

    Which of these tabloids have made a front page story of that?
    That's nothing. Labour's Jas Athwal (who represents Ilford South - next door to the North Ilford Ghetto, natch) owns no less than 15 - FIFTEEN - flats.
    Not very nice ones:

    A Labour MP rents out flats with black mould and ant infestations, the BBC has discovered.

    Jas Athwal, the newly-elected MP for Ilford South, owns 15 rental flats, making him the biggest landlord in the House of Commons.

    In one block of seven flats owned by Mr Athwal nearly half the tenants said they had to regularly clean their bathroom ceilings to remove mould.

    Mr Athwal has now also admitted his flats do not have the correct property licences required under a scheme he introduced as Redbridge Council leader.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyg1j0lv1go
  • kjhkjh Posts: 13,106
    edited August 24
    For those that didn't listen to it can I recommend 'The Reunion' on Radio 4 this week covering 'Live TV'. I haven't laughed so much for ages. As politically incorrect as it is possible to be and Kelvin MacKenzie is hilarious on it. I'm not a fan of KM, but this was brilliant. I would love to rewatch some of Live TV, especially knowing some of the background.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 46,956
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
    What in the name of God’s holy burning testicles, is a “plan for change in action”

    What does it do? How is it in action? If it’s in action surely it’s no longer a plan?

    I sometimes wonder if Starmer’s young social media team is trolling their insufferably pompous boss, by putting out these quietly ridiculous tweets, which ape his inane, vacuous style, but tip them into self-satire
    To: PB Leon
    From: Kuntibula English Comprehension Services

    It's not a 'plan for change in action'. That would be gobbledegook.

    It's our Plan for Change ... in action. Some tangible results from our Plan for Change. The caps are key here. Note the caps.

    £5.95 inc VAT
    30 days
    Why not an Action Plan for change?

    Or a Change for Action Planning Plan?

    Or a Plan For Plans In Action Change Investment?

    In fact what’s wrong with actually doing something? Actually doing a total Action Change for Plans Investment Government Plans In Action Change in Plan for Young People Tomorrow Planned Action Change Investment?

    Why the fuck can’t they just do that?
    I think you're a bit thrown by the absence of "enough is enough" in there.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,005
    Off topic. Whilst neither is going to be super cheap, Milan in early December is going to be more reasonable than Paris the week after Easter in April I think ?
  • malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 37,105
    edited August 24
    kjh said:

    For those that didn't listen to it can I recommend 'The Reunion' on Radio 4 this week covering 'Live TV'. I haven't laughed so much for ages. As politically incorrect as it is possible to be and Kelvin MacKenzie is hilarious on it. I'm not a fan of KM, but this was brilliant. I would love to rewatch some of Live TV, especially knowing some of the background.

    I heard the end of it. Going to listen to the whole thing. Just scrolling through the other episodes over the years such as one on the Millennium Dome.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00tf9bl
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 15,332
    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
    You can save some key strokes by sticking with “illusory”. But your call.
    'Illulu' is shorter still and has recent precedent.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,936
    edited August 24
    I hope we're all off to join the anti demo demos.

    Watching the Faragists parade outside hotels is as close to an all time low as it gets. Moreso when you see what demonising 'the other' looks like on our TVs every night.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 15,332
    edited August 24

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Shakespeare sonnet 48, an ignorant attempt at erudition:


    How careful was I, when I took my way,
    Each trifle under truest bars to thrust,
    That to my use it might unused stay
    From hands of falsehood, in sure wards of trust!
    But thou, to whom my jewels trifles are,
    Most worthy comfort, now my greatest grief,
    Thou, best of dearest and mine only care,
    Art left the prey of every vulgar thief.
    Thee have I not lock’d up in any chest,
    Save where thou art not, though I feel thou art,
    Within the gentle closure of my breast,
    From whence at pleasure thou mayst come and part;
    And even thence thou wilt be stol’n, I fear,
    For truth proves thievish for a prize so dear.
  • algarkirk said:

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Shakespeare sonnet 48, an ignorant attempt at erudition:


    How careful was I, when I took my way,
    Each trifle under truest bars to thrust,
    That to my use it might unused stay
    From hands of falsehood, in sure wards of trust!
    But thou, to whom my jewels trifles are,
    Most worthy comfort, now my greatest grief,
    Thou, best of dearest and mine only care,
    Art left the prey of every vulgar thief.
    Thee have I not lock’d up in any chest,
    Save where thou art not, though I feel thou art,
    Within the gentle closure of my breast,
    From whence at pleasure thou mayst come and part;
    And even thence thou wilt be stol’n, I fear,
    For truth proves thievish for a prize so dear.
    He's famous for making stuff up
  • kjhkjh Posts: 13,106
    Andy_JS said:

    kjh said:

    For those that didn't listen to it can I recommend 'The Reunion' on Radio 4 this week covering 'Live TV'. I haven't laughed so much for ages. As politically incorrect as it is possible to be and Kelvin MacKenzie is hilarious on it. I'm not a fan of KM, but this was brilliant. I would love to rewatch some of Live TV, especially knowing some of the background.

    I heard the end of it. Going to listen to the whole thing. Just scrolling through the other episodes over the years such as one on the Millennium Dome.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00tf9bl
    What amazes me is the number of well known presenters that came out of it. I mean what the hell was Bethany Hughes doing on it? What was she presenting? It couldn't been history and it doesn't seem to be the topless darts. When asked how much it cost to show topless darts Kelvin responded that the darts cost 49p each and I definitely want to see the weather presenter who bounces up and down to present the weather and can't reach Scotland.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 13,492
    Roger said:

    I hope we're all off to join the anti demo demos.

    Watching the Faragists parade outside hotels is as close to an all time low as it gets. Moreso when you see what demonising 'the other' looks like on our TVs every night.

    I thought I might spend some time with my family
  • kjhkjh Posts: 13,106

    Roger said:

    I hope we're all off to join the anti demo demos.

    Watching the Faragists parade outside hotels is as close to an all time low as it gets. Moreso when you see what demonising 'the other' looks like on our TVs every night.

    I thought I might spend some time with my family
    Why are you demonstrating in front of them?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 13,492
    kjh said:

    Roger said:

    I hope we're all off to join the anti demo demos.

    Watching the Faragists parade outside hotels is as close to an all time low as it gets. Moreso when you see what demonising 'the other' looks like on our TVs every night.

    I thought I might spend some time with my family
    Why are you demonstrating in front of them?
    Because its my turn to pay for the takeaway
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 45,057

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Er .... wouldn't 'whither' be the correct usage for returning someone to where they came?

    "I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them whither they came."
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 15,332

    Barnesian said:

    Beyond the three houses wasn't Rayner also guilty of procuring non-socialist, right wing ear buds? I seem to remember quite a furore on here.

    Three houses is an odd move if Angela Rayner wants to succeed Starmer. It puts her on par with Jenrick but he plays for the other side.
    Rayner owns a home in her constituency in Ashton-under-Lyne, which she bought in 2016 for £375,000. She also makes use of a grace-and-favour ministerial apartment in Admiralty House (which she doesn't own) when she is in Westminster. She's now bought a holiday home on the South Coast.

    And the Mail, Sun, Express and even the Times have gone bananas over it. Uppity woman. Doesn't she know her place. Telegraph - "Angela Rayner adds to property empire."
    That's not really the point. In order to succeed Keir Starmer, Rayner needs Labour MPs, and perhaps later, party members, to vote for her. She should therefore avoid doing anything that might give them pause.
    No views really except to comment that though I have nothing in common at all with Rayner being a middle class One Nation Tory, SFAICS, she has got a touch of something really likeable.

    Secondly that, either way round, Farage v Rayner at PMQs would have us queueing round the block. Proper box office. Better even than the underused and underrated Angela Eagle in her prime, or Hague.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 13,492
    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Er .... wouldn't 'whither' be the correct usage for returning someone to where they came?

    "I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them whither they came."
    Whither they came whence perhaps
  • FffsFffs Posts: 108
    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Er .... wouldn't 'whither' be the correct usage for returning someone to where they came?

    "I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them whither they came."
    No, wither means "where to", which is why taxi drivers always start by saying "wither, mate?"
  • isamisam Posts: 42,361
    John Rentoul 2023

    All hail, Rachel Reeves! Labour would be nowhere without her

    The shadow chancellor is the reason Keir Starmer stands on the brink of power



    https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/rachel-reeves-labour-keir-starmer-b2429769.html
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 13,492

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Er .... wouldn't 'whither' be the correct usage for returning someone to where they came?

    "I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them whither they came."
    Whither they came whence perhaps
    Wherefore does it matter though
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 45,057

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Er .... wouldn't 'whither' be the correct usage for returning someone to where they came?

    "I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them whither they came."
    Whither they came whence perhaps
    Mm, on reflection, yes! But 'whither they started' would avoid the vector element within the verb in the dependent clause.
  • TazTaz Posts: 20,654
    Roger said:

    I hope we're all off to join the anti demo demos.

    Watching the Faragists parade outside hotels is as close to an all time low as it gets. Moreso when you see what demonising 'the other' looks like on our TVs every night.

    No, fuck that. I’m waiting for a bus to Newcastle to go to the market then the Mela.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 15,332
    edited August 24

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Er .... wouldn't 'whither' be the correct usage for returning someone to where they came?

    "I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them whither they came."
    Whither they came whence perhaps
    Wherefore is this being asked?

    (Edit: I see I am second to that one)
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 45,057
    Fffs said:

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Er .... wouldn't 'whither' be the correct usage for returning someone to where they came?

    "I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them whither they came."
    No, wither means "where to", which is why taxi drivers always start by saying "wither, mate?"
    But the verb send has priority in the sentence structure over the verb come.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 13,492
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Er .... wouldn't 'whither' be the correct usage for returning someone to where they came?

    "I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them whither they came."
    Whither they came whence perhaps
    Mm, on reflection, yes! But 'whither they started' would avoid the vector element within the verb in the dependent clause.
    If I'm turned on and cant work out what caused it have I got the Whorn?
    These are important questions.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 45,057
    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Er .... wouldn't 'whither' be the correct usage for returning someone to where they came?

    "I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them whither they came."
    Whither they came whence perhaps
    Wherefore is this being asked?

    (Edit: I see I am second to that one)
    Wheretofore everyone is arguing about whither.
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 2,235
    Leon said:

    Can this possibly be true? Can the PB Scotch brigade confirm? -

    “The Child Winter Heating Payment is:
    - Provided all the way up to 19 (inc. those on *Adult* Disability Payment)
    - Given per PERSON, not per household
    - Available for those in the EEA & Switzerland with "sufficient link" to Scotland
    - Given automatically with no application needed”

    A welfare payment for enduring Scottish winters given to every child, even if you no longer live in Scotland. Or indeed the UK. And even if you’re not a child

    If this is true, it becomes less mystifying as to why we’re bankrupt

    https://x.com/tim_odoherty/status/1957169027576463568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Child Winter Heating Payment is a benefit from the Scottish Government. It was first paid in 2020.

    It’s a payment to help disabled children and young people and their families with increased heating costs over winter.

    Children and young people in Scotland can get the assistance if they're under 19 years old and get one of the following 'qualifying benefits':

    the highest rate of the care component of Child Disability Payment
    the highest rate of the care component of Disability Living Allowance for children
    the enhanced daily living component of Personal Independence Payment
    the enhanced rate of the daily living component of Adult Disability Payment

    Never let fact get in the way of a rabble-rousing argument, but it’s what I would expect from a fiction writer.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 45,057

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Er .... wouldn't 'whither' be the correct usage for returning someone to where they came?

    "I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them whither they came."
    Whither they came whence perhaps
    Mm, on reflection, yes! But 'whither they started' would avoid the vector element within the verb in the dependent clause.
    If I'm turned on and cant work out what caused it have I got the Whorn?
    These are important questions.
    Especially if it is relevant to going shopping for some Quorn mince or a Quorn pastie.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 13,492
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Er .... wouldn't 'whither' be the correct usage for returning someone to where they came?

    "I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them whither they came."
    Whither they came whence perhaps
    Mm, on reflection, yes! But 'whither they started' would avoid the vector element within the verb in the dependent clause.
    If I'm turned on and cant work out what caused it have I got the Whorn?
    These are important questions.
    Especially if it is relevant to going shopping for some Quorn mince or a Quorn pastie.
    On a personal level those purchases will neither happen nor give me an unexpected stiffy but the point is valid.
    It might have something to do with Rip Torn
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,417
    Roger said:

    I hope we're all off to join the anti demo demos.

    Watching the Faragists parade outside hotels is as close to an all time low as it gets. Moreso when you see what demonising 'the other' looks like on our TVs every night.

    I’d rather stick needles in my eyes.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 13,492
    Sean_F said:

    Roger said:

    I hope we're all off to join the anti demo demos.

    Watching the Faragists parade outside hotels is as close to an all time low as it gets. Moreso when you see what demonising 'the other' looks like on our TVs every night.

    I’d rather stick needles in my eyes.
    We all saw you chasing Nick Tenconi down the street in Liverpool yesterday Sean
  • Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Er .... wouldn't 'whither' be the correct usage for returning someone to where they came?

    "I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them whither they came."
    Well..

    "return them whence they came" has about 150 Google Books search results (granted, some repeats from different editions of the same book)

    "return them whither they came" has zero
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 15,332
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I can’t believe the new thread isn’t about Starmer’s latest tweet. I know he’s normally quite dull, but this one is potentially a game changer. Maybe they are finally taking things seriously in Labour HQ?

    I don’t know why, but this feels qualitatively different. New. Urgent.

    Just read it:

    “I want every young person to have the opportunity to realise their full potential.

    From training to apprenticeships, my government is building Britain’s future by investing in the next generation.

    Our Plan for Change in action.“

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1959536235703136568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Illusionary
    What in the name of God’s holy burning testicles, is a “plan for change in action”

    What does it do? How is it in action? If it’s in action surely it’s no longer a plan?

    I sometimes wonder if Starmer’s young social media team is trolling their insufferably pompous boss, by putting out these quietly ridiculous tweets, which ape his inane, vacuous style, but tip them into self-satire
    To: PB Leon
    From: Kuntibula English Comprehension Services

    It's not a 'plan for change in action'. That would be gobbledegook.

    It's our Plan for Change ... in action. Some tangible results from our Plan for Change. The caps are key here. Note the caps.

    £5.95 inc VAT
    30 days
    Why not an Action Plan for change?

    Or a Change for Action Planning Plan?

    Or a Plan For Plans In Action Change Investment?

    In fact what’s wrong with actually doing something? Actually doing a total Action Change for Plans Investment Government Plans In Action Change in Plan for Young People Tomorrow Planned Action Change Investment?

    Why the fuck can’t they just do that?
    Politicians never quite get that what people usually want is not change but the same, only run better and more of it.

    Running what there is already brilliantly well would be a very popular move; people distrust 'change' as a concept when aired by people who don't do the current job all that well.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,846
    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Er .... wouldn't 'whither' be the correct usage for returning someone to where they came?

    "I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them whither they came."
    After checking their passports to see exactly whither they came I hope, unless anywhere not here was the only objective.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,936
    Taz said:

    Roger said:

    I hope we're all off to join the anti demo demos.

    Watching the Faragists parade outside hotels is as close to an all time low as it gets. Moreso when you see what demonising 'the other' looks like on our TVs every night.

    No, fuck that. I’m waiting for a bus to Newcastle to go to the market then the Mela.
    Don't forget yer tabs...
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,548
    sarissa said:

    Leon said:

    Can this possibly be true? Can the PB Scotch brigade confirm? -

    “The Child Winter Heating Payment is:
    - Provided all the way up to 19 (inc. those on *Adult* Disability Payment)
    - Given per PERSON, not per household
    - Available for those in the EEA & Switzerland with "sufficient link" to Scotland
    - Given automatically with no application needed”

    A welfare payment for enduring Scottish winters given to every child, even if you no longer live in Scotland. Or indeed the UK. And even if you’re not a child

    If this is true, it becomes less mystifying as to why we’re bankrupt

    https://x.com/tim_odoherty/status/1957169027576463568?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Child Winter Heating Payment is a benefit from the Scottish Government. It was first paid in 2020.

    It’s a payment to help disabled children and young people and their families with increased heating costs over winter.

    Children and young people in Scotland can get the assistance if they're under 19 years old and get one of the following 'qualifying benefits':

    the highest rate of the care component of Child Disability Payment
    the highest rate of the care component of Disability Living Allowance for children
    the enhanced daily living component of Personal Independence Payment
    the enhanced rate of the daily living component of Adult Disability Payment

    Never let fact get in the way of a rabble-rousing argument, but it’s what I would expect from a fiction writer.
    To be fair to Leon his grouse (should I used that term about a Scottish benefit?) is whether the benefit is still payable if the recipient has been moved out of the UK.
    To be honest I can see that if a parent of child eligible for such a benefit takes a job somewhere else in Europe then there's a case for the benefit being paid, although if the parent has moved the family somewhere like Spain then the likelihood of increased heating costs in winter seems lower.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 15,332
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    Paddy O'Connell talking to Lords Dubs.

    'You're situation with the kinder transport was obviously different from the small boat chancers.'

    Wanker.

    I have always wondered why this incompetent nincompoop keeps being promoted on Radio 4, Radio 2 and BBC News, now I know. He understands how to load a question to the direction Tim Davie would most likely approve.

    I don't want boat people rocking up to Great Yarmouth anymore than Rupert Lowe does. However, was the suffix "chancers" absolutely necessary unless a specific and political point was being made?
    He could just have said illegal law breaking economic immigrants
    Like Rupert Lowe found them arriving on the beaches at Great Yarmouth and repelled them successfully, have you got a Home Guard scrambled to fight them off the beaches at Troon and Largs?
    Mexicanpete - soft on illegal immigration, soft on the causes of illegal immigration :lol:
    Not at all. On a nightly basis, like Rupert in Great Yarmouth I patrol the beaches of Southerdown and Ognore by Sea to repel the boat people. I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them from whence they came. Presumably France.
    Whence means 'from where'
    What strange poster gave you a like for this post?
    "From where" sounds fine
    "Whence" sounds a little more erudite
    "From whence" sounds like an ignorant attempt at erudition

    Just a handy hint for you
    Er .... wouldn't 'whither' be the correct usage for returning someone to where they came?

    "I've already dragged fifty youngsters back into the Bristol Channel and sent them whither they came."
    Whither they came whence perhaps
    Mm, on reflection, yes! But 'whither they started' would avoid the vector element within the verb in the dependent clause.
    If I'm turned on and cant work out what caused it have I got the Whorn?
    These are important questions.
    Especially if it is relevant to going shopping for some Quorn mince or a Quorn pastie.
    How old do you have to be to assume, as I do, born 1954, that 'Quorn mince' must be made of fox meat?
Sign In or Register to comment.