Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Osborne – the Volkswagen of British politics – having take

SystemSystem Posts: 12,221
edited October 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Osborne – the Volkswagen of British politics – having taken a reputational hit the question is can he recover?

George Osborne is a bit like Volkswagen – never really loved but until a short time ago highly regarded for reliability and performance. Then came the tax credits – his version of the diesel emissions scandal with the defeat software designed to get round environmental tests.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    First ?
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    Second!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046
    "A problem he has got with the tax credits move is that he could get stuck with the tag of wanting to make the poor poorer."

    He would rather the poor were poorer? Were have I heard that before? :D
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    I am sure Maggie did the children of GB a great favour, the milk we had in "fairies" ( IIRC its the size of the milk bottle @1/3 of a pint ) was either disgustingly luke warm or frozen solid. I always went for the orange juice anyway..

    Noone misses it, it was just a lot of hot air that dissipated quickly.

    Osborne could have avoided the tax credits mess, but he will just have to swerve a bit.

  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    A great "I Have Nothing To Say" space filling thread header.

    Could have picked this to fill some space instead?
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/11958942/The-Liberal-Democrats-have-profaned-their-principles-by-blocking-tax-credits-in-the-Lords.html

    I wonder why that article from William Hague wasn't used instead. It's a mystery.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    Why would someone who wanted to make the poor poorer put up the minimum wage?
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    GeoffM said:

    A great "I Have Nothing To Say" space filling thread header.
    I wonder why that article from William Hague wasn't used instead. It's a mystery.

    Perhaps because the tone of it so very unpleasant. And it´s total nonsense anyway.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Mike Smithson - The Triumph Stag of politics ....

    An ageing British classic with a nohair top .... sorry mohair top .... :smile:
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    I am sure Maggie did the children of GB a great favour, the milk we had in "fairies" ( IIRC its the size of the milk bottle @1/3 of a pint ) was either disgustingly luke warm or frozen solid. I always went for the orange juice anyway..

    Noone misses it, it was just a lot of hot air that dissipated quickly.

    Osborne could have avoided the tax credits mess, but he will just have to swerve a bit.

    School milk was foul. Removing it was certainly popular at my school.

    But Osborne has not done a VW. He just has had a minor setback. We are seeing that a tiny majority is not a licence to pass anything. Some transitional reliefs or "granfather rights" would do wonders. The long term project is one that the party supports.

    I am sceptical about the increasing minimum wage though. It is likely to stress some organisations to the wall financially, especially in social care, and also to push up immigration.
  • JackW said:

    Mike Smithson - The Triumph Stag of politics ....

    An ageing British classic with a nohair top .... sorry mohair top .... :smile:

    ..... and sans VW I suspect.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    PClipp said:

    GeoffM said:

    A great "I Have Nothing To Say" space filling thread header.
    I wonder why that article from William Hague wasn't used instead. It's a mystery.

    Perhaps because the tone of it so very unpleasant. And it´s total nonsense anyway.
    I wouldn't go quite that far.
    Mike's thread header is merely bland.
    Actually yes, reading it again, I agree with you. Mike is talking nonsense.
    It's rather an odd feeling to be on the same side of the fence as you.
  • JackW said:

    Mike Smithson - The Triumph Stag of politics ....

    An ageing British classic with a nohair top .... sorry mohair top .... :smile:

    Is there any wonder we got rid of the Stuarts?
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    JEO said:

    Why would someone who wanted to make the poor poorer put up the minimum wage?

    Don't introduce facts here. They only muddy the waters of blinkered opinion.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    JackW said:

    Mike Smithson - The Triumph Stag of politics ....

    An ageing British classic with a nohair top .... sorry mohair top .... :smile:

    Are you suggesting that he is prone to overheating?
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I'm still chuckling over Geoff Shoebox's home being sold off by Fatcher.
    GeoffM said:

    JEO said:

    Why would someone who wanted to make the poor poorer put up the minimum wage?

    Don't introduce facts here. They only muddy the waters of blinkered opinion.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040
    The debate for the next few months is going to be about welfare reform, the importance of the deficit and, for good measure, discussions about the extent to which the unelected Lords can provide opposition when the Labour party can't.

    There are so many opportunities there to gain something out of this adversity. My expectation is that over the next few months Osborne's dominance of the national narrative will be even greater and Labour will look like they have nothing useful to say. I also suspect that rather more people will have been genuinely shocked at the profligate generosity of Tax Credits than appalled by the cuts.

    Nothing lasts forever of course and (almost) all political careers end in failure but it is a bit premature to be writing Osborne off just yet.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    Mike Smithson - The Triumph Stag of politics ....

    An ageing British classic with a nohair top .... sorry mohair top .... :smile:

    Is there any wonder we got rid of the Stuarts?
    Innocent Abroad - The Trabant of PB ....

    A spluttering two stroke of dubious antecedence .... :wink:

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,745
    edited October 2015
    Watching his interviews last night were struck by two things. How petulant and even childish the Tories sounded .... we’ll get those Lords .... and why Osborne pushed on the way he did. ,As others have pointed out it’s not as if tax credits have been here for years and years, and if nett wages are going to be pushed up anyway, and we’re going to stop subsidising employers, why not devote attention to the consequences of that and phase the tax credits out slowly ..... no new claimants ..... or something like that.

    The opposition has been able to sell it as cruel and that’s the sort of reputation one doesn’t want to earn.
  • JackW said:

    JackW said:

    Mike Smithson - The Triumph Stag of politics ....

    An ageing British classic with a nohair top .... sorry mohair top .... :smile:

    Is there any wonder we got rid of the Stuarts?
    Innocent Abroad - The Trabant of PB ....

    A spluttering two stroke of dubious antecedence .... :wink:

    Funny you should mention that. I had a 2-stroke for a few months, back in the VIth form...

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    Mike Smithson - The Triumph Stag of politics ....

    An ageing British classic with a nohair top .... sorry mohair top .... :smile:

    Are you suggesting that he is prone to overheating?
    Only if his follicular challenged status is noted ....

    I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it ....

  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486

    I'm still chuckling over Geoff Shoebox's home being sold off by Fatcher.

    GeoffM said:

    JEO said:

    Why would someone who wanted to make the poor poorer put up the minimum wage?

    Don't introduce facts here. They only muddy the waters of blinkered opinion.
    Why do you always say "Fatcher" not "Thatcher"? Are you making fun of people with regional accents?
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    Mike Smithson - The Triumph Stag of politics ....

    An ageing British classic with a nohair top .... sorry mohair top .... :smile:

    Are you suggesting that he is prone to overheating?
    Only if his follicular challenged status is noted ....

    I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it ....

    The Stag was often seen topless but with its hood up!
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Mr Hague isn't impressed by LDs http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/11958942/The-Liberal-Democrats-have-profaned-their-principles-by-blocking-tax-credits-in-the-Lords.html
    Not so in the House of Lords, where, when I am introduced as a member at the end of next month, I will find more than 100 Liberal Democrats stalking the corridors, like ghosts of a ruined civilisation still wandering the catacombs and remembering the happy days in the sunlight when people above ground used to like them.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    If Osborne makes a bid for the leadership and loses, it won't primarily be because of policy, it'll be because like Miliband, he doesn't look or sound like a leader.As Cameron shows, you can be as smug as you like as long as you also have the required charm, George doesn't
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    edited October 2015

    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    Mike Smithson - The Triumph Stag of politics ....

    An ageing British classic with a nohair top .... sorry mohair top .... :smile:

    Is there any wonder we got rid of the Stuarts?
    Innocent Abroad - The Trabant of PB ....

    A spluttering two stroke of dubious antecedence .... :wink:

    Funny you should mention that. I had a 2-stroke for a few months, back in the VIth form...

    Kindly keep your schoolboy masturbatory reminiscences to the privacy of the "Daily Star" agony aunt column .... :astonished:

  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Isn't it a bit early to be boarding the outrage bus?
    Freggles said:

    I'm still chuckling over Geoff Shoebox's home being sold off by Fatcher.

    GeoffM said:

    JEO said:

    Why would someone who wanted to make the poor poorer put up the minimum wage?

    Don't introduce facts here. They only muddy the waters of blinkered opinion.
    Why do you always say "Fatcher" not "Thatcher"? Are you making fun of people with regional accents?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    Mike Smithson - The Triumph Stag of politics ....

    An ageing British classic with a nohair top .... sorry mohair top .... :smile:

    Are you suggesting that he is prone to overheating?
    Only if his follicular challenged status is noted ....

    I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it ....

    The Stag was often seen topless but with its hood up!
    Good show Mrs foxinsoxuk ...

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,739
    Off topic, Cameron off to Iceland to tell the leaders of Iceland and Norway that the EEA is a load of crap, and wouldn't suit the UK:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34654797

    He seems to be campaigning to stay in the EU before he's even got his 'deal'. Not that I'm surprised.
  • If UK collected more Corporation Tax the need to cut welfare would lessen.

    Sadly companies like Osborne and Little with a turnover since 2008 of 200m have creatively manage to pay nothing, ZERO, actually claiming a Corporation Tax refund. The Baronet running it gets about 600k a year.

    If you wonder why the books of the country do not balance start with the Chancellor and his family and work your way down.

    It IS legal. Fair enough. Whether it should be is a moot point.

    Imagine if companies paid a fairer share? Even a 0.5% revenue tax would turn it around.

    If I was Labour I would promote this farce in the MSM at every opportunity and Osborne would not even be a Dinky car toy let alone a VW.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040

    Mr Hague isn't impressed by LDs http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/11958942/The-Liberal-Democrats-have-profaned-their-principles-by-blocking-tax-credits-in-the-Lords.html

    Not so in the House of Lords, where, when I am introduced as a member at the end of next month, I will find more than 100 Liberal Democrats stalking the corridors, like ghosts of a ruined civilisation still wandering the catacombs and remembering the happy days in the sunlight when people above ground used to like them.
    Hague is having a laugh. That fine upstanding man of principle...Lloyd George. Right.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Off topic, Cameron off to Iceland ....

    First Morrisons and now Iceland. Is Dave on a supermarket sweep ??

    Clearly stocking up on Artic Roll for Christmas lunch at Chequers.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040

    If UK collected more Corporation Tax the need to cut welfare would lessen.

    Sadly companies like Osborne and Little with a turnover since 2008 of 200m have creatively manage to pay nothing, ZERO, actually claiming a Corporation Tax refund. The Baronet running it gets about 600k a year.

    If you wonder why the books of the country do not balance start with the Chancellor and his family and work your way down.

    It IS legal. Fair enough. Whether it should be is a moot point.

    Imagine if companies paid a fairer share? Even a 0.5% revenue tax would turn it around.

    If I was Labour I would promote this farce in the MSM at every opportunity and Osborne would not even be a Dinky car toy let alone a VW.

    We have a revenue tax. It is 20% not 0.5%. Its called VAT
    The Baronet will be paying nearly £300,000 in tax from the money he gets from the company. The company will be paying Employers NI for good measure.

    As with the WTC taking one measure in isolation gives a highly distorted view.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    :smiley:
    A more skilful Treasury might make more of such statistics rather than letting the Left dominate airwaves with its Dickensian wails about starving children being denied new shoes to the extent that their toes become sore (copyright Lady Hollis in her Tiny Tim speech on Monday).

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3292763/Is-touch-old-man-Steptoe-Labour-s-leader-QUENTIN-LETTS-yesterday-Parliament.html#ixzz3pqRyF4vB
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    edited October 2015

    Off topic, Cameron off to Iceland to tell the leaders of Iceland and Norway that the EEA is a load of crap, and wouldn't suit the UK:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34654797

    He seems to be campaigning to stay in the EU before he's even got his 'deal'. Not that I'm surprised.

    "Unlike the UK, Norway has no veto in the European Council, no votes in the EU's council of ministers, no MEPs or votes in the European Parliament, and no European commissioner to help," the source said

    This seems to be a really dishonest argument, given that Norway gets a veto over whether EU laws get in enforced in the EEA. It's like arguing France gets no influence in the EU because it doesn't have any MPs at Westminster.

    Also, how stupid is Cameron at negotiating if he is to argue against alternatives before the negotiation is done? It's like he wants to reduce our leverage.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046
    Freggles said:

    I'm still chuckling over Geoff Shoebox's home being sold off by Fatcher.

    GeoffM said:

    JEO said:

    Why would someone who wanted to make the poor poorer put up the minimum wage?

    Don't introduce facts here. They only muddy the waters of blinkered opinion.
    Why do you always say "Fatcher" not "Thatcher"? Are you making fun of people with regional accents?
    I think they are making fun of lefties. :)
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    “According to the principle of unanimity applied in the EEA Joint Committee, all the EFTA states must agree in order for new EU legislation to be integrated into the EEA Agreement and for it to apply to cooperation between the EFTA states and the EU. If one EFTA state opposes integration, this also affects the other EFTA states in that the rules will not apply to them either, neither in the individual states nor between the EFTA states themselves nor in their relations with the EU. This possibility that each EFTA state has to object to new rules that lie within the scope of the EEA Agreement becoming applicable to the EFTA pillar is often referred to as these parties’ right of veto.”

    https://www.regjeringen.no/en/find-document/dep/UD/reports-to-the-storting/20002001/report_no-12_to_the_storting_2000-2001/7/id193725/

    Ugh, it really will toxify the debate if senior figures on one side start using dishonest arguments to deceive the British public.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486

    Isn't it a bit early to be boarding the outrage bus?

    Freggles said:

    I'm still chuckling over Geoff Shoebox's home being sold off by Fatcher.

    GeoffM said:

    JEO said:

    Why would someone who wanted to make the poor poorer put up the minimum wage?

    Don't introduce facts here. They only muddy the waters of blinkered opinion.
    Why do you always say "Fatcher" not "Thatcher"? Are you making fun of people with regional accents?
    Mornings are a very popular time for buses....?

    If someone was on here saying Camoron or Gidiot you'd be decrying the decline of intelligent political debate, or telling us how much you hate stereotypes...
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Unusually good piece on Radio Leicester this morning.

    21 000 people in Leics could be lifted out of poverty by giving up smoking. Vox pops from people buying ciggies on the Saffron Lane estate often spending £70-100 per week on an early death.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    Norwegian politician: “No, we are not governed by fax because the European agreement, the single market agreement, that has a clause when we can veto a directive if we don’t like it; and we have done that.”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsz7gIfALpU
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    *rolls eyes*
    Freggles said:

    Isn't it a bit early to be boarding the outrage bus?

    Freggles said:

    I'm still chuckling over Geoff Shoebox's home being sold off by Fatcher.

    GeoffM said:

    JEO said:

    Why would someone who wanted to make the poor poorer put up the minimum wage?

    Don't introduce facts here. They only muddy the waters of blinkered opinion.
    Why do you always say "Fatcher" not "Thatcher"? Are you making fun of people with regional accents?
    Mornings are a very popular time for buses....?

    If someone was on here saying Camoron or Gidiot you'd be decrying the decline of intelligent political debate, or telling us how much you hate stereotypes...
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    JackW said:

    Off topic, Cameron off to Iceland ....

    First Morrisons and now Iceland. Is Dave on a supermarket sweep ??

    Clearly stocking up on Artic Roll for Christmas lunch at Chequers.

    I didn't think that they had an Iceland in Harpenden - a bit like having your high Street having lots of £ stores.
  • JEO said:

    “According to the principle of unanimity applied in the EEA Joint Committee, all the EFTA states must agree in order for new EU legislation to be integrated into the EEA Agreement and for it to apply to cooperation between the EFTA states and the EU. If one EFTA state opposes integration, this also affects the other EFTA states in that the rules will not apply to them either, neither in the individual states nor between the EFTA states themselves nor in their relations with the EU. This possibility that each EFTA state has to object to new rules that lie within the scope of the EEA Agreement becoming applicable to the EFTA pillar is often referred to as these parties’ right of veto.”

    https://www.regjeringen.no/en/find-document/dep/UD/reports-to-the-storting/20002001/report_no-12_to_the_storting_2000-2001/7/id193725/

    Ugh, it really will toxify the debate if senior figures on one side start using dishonest arguments to deceive the British public.

    Unlike General Elections, when all sides do just that :o

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    Unusually good piece on Radio Leicester this morning.

    21 000 people in Leics could be lifted out of poverty by giving up smoking. Vox pops from people buying ciggies on the Saffron Lane estate often spending £70-100 per week on an early death.


    Don't know if its true but I was told that cigs are so expensive now (a packet of B and H I am told is now circa TEN POUNDS ) that the fag co's are introducing smaller size packs...

    I was a 20+ a day smoker and I save 200 a month plus since I gave up. Worst life decision I ever made was to take that first puff.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    It's weird how things stick in one's mind. We had a teacher at my primary school back in the 70s who used her smoking habit to illustrate a maths multiplication question = her fags over 5yrs = cost of new car!

    Unusually good piece on Radio Leicester this morning.

    21 000 people in Leics could be lifted out of poverty by giving up smoking. Vox pops from people buying ciggies on the Saffron Lane estate often spending £70-100 per week on an early death.


    Don't know if its true but I was told that cigs are so expensive now (a packet of B and H I am told is now circa TEN POUNDS ) that the fag co's are introducing smaller size packs...

    I was a 20+ a day smoker and I save 200 a month plus since I gave up. Worst life decision I ever made was to take that first puff.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,842
    GeoffM said:

    A great "I Have Nothing To Say" space filling thread header.

    Could have picked this to fill some space instead?
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/11958942/The-Liberal-Democrats-have-profaned-their-principles-by-blocking-tax-credits-in-the-Lords.html

    I wonder why that article from William Hague wasn't used instead. It's a mystery.

    No-one discusses the future of the dodo.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,267
    Radio 4 were saying that Team Boris are happy with Osbo's problems, as they see a boost for their man's chances of the leadership.

    I might also add that it gives a boost to another leadership candidate with the initials PP.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656

    JEO said:

    “According to the principle of unanimity applied in the EEA Joint Committee, all the EFTA states must agree in order for new EU legislation to be integrated into the EEA Agreement and for it to apply to cooperation between the EFTA states and the EU. If one EFTA state opposes integration, this also affects the other EFTA states in that the rules will not apply to them either, neither in the individual states nor between the EFTA states themselves nor in their relations with the EU. This possibility that each EFTA state has to object to new rules that lie within the scope of the EEA Agreement becoming applicable to the EFTA pillar is often referred to as these parties’ right of veto.”

    https://www.regjeringen.no/en/find-document/dep/UD/reports-to-the-storting/20002001/report_no-12_to_the_storting_2000-2001/7/id193725/

    Ugh, it really will toxify the debate if senior figures on one side start using dishonest arguments to deceive the British public.

    Unlike General Elections, when all sides do just that :o

    This is more important than a general election, as it will making a decision for 30 years, not 5. And general elections often cause animosity between parties. If the pro-EU Tories want to cause similar animosity between eurosceptics and themselves it will tear our party apart. And they will be on the losing side of the resulting civil war.

    We need a clean, honest debate. And it will be appalling if Cameron himself is the one that starts the dishonest at a high level.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,267
    JEO said:

    JEO said:

    “According to the principle of unanimity applied in the EEA Joint Committee, all the EFTA states must agree in order for new EU legislation to be integrated into the EEA Agreement and for it to apply to cooperation between the EFTA states and the EU. If one EFTA state opposes integration, this also affects the other EFTA states in that the rules will not apply to them either, neither in the individual states nor between the EFTA states themselves nor in their relations with the EU. This possibility that each EFTA state has to object to new rules that lie within the scope of the EEA Agreement becoming applicable to the EFTA pillar is often referred to as these parties’ right of veto.”

    https://www.regjeringen.no/en/find-document/dep/UD/reports-to-the-storting/20002001/report_no-12_to_the_storting_2000-2001/7/id193725/

    Ugh, it really will toxify the debate if senior figures on one side start using dishonest arguments to deceive the British public.

    Unlike General Elections, when all sides do just that :o

    This is more important than a general election, as it will making a decision for 30 years, not 5. And general elections often cause animosity between parties. If the pro-EU Tories want to cause similar animosity between eurosceptics and themselves it will tear our party apart. And they will be on the losing side of the resulting civil war.

    We need a clean, honest debate. And it will be appalling if Cameron himself is the one that starts the dishonest at a high level.
    I expect both sides to exploit the ignorance and general disinterest of the electorate to promote a simplistic (and not entirely accurate) picture. Detailed analysis will be restricted to us lot, not the wider public.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,842

    I am sure Maggie did the children of GB a great favour, the milk we had in "fairies" ( IIRC its the size of the milk bottle @1/3 of a pint ) was either disgustingly luke warm or frozen solid. I always went for the orange juice anyway..

    Noone misses it, it was just a lot of hot air that dissipated quickly.

    Osborne could have avoided the tax credits mess, but he will just have to swerve a bit.

    The tag stuck for years. Some people still use it - but those people would never have voted for her in a month of Sundays anyway.

    The question is whether the tax credit issue would stick to Osborne. I suspect not. Cutting welfare is what people expect Tory chancellors to do in a deficit reduction programme. "Making the poor poorer" is a campaign slogan but one that can be - and is being - countered with tax thresholds and the minimum wage. I suspect that such a campaign would reinforce existing prejudices on both sides rather than swinging many people from one camp to the other.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    Off topic, Cameron off to Iceland ....

    First Morrisons and now Iceland. Is Dave on a supermarket sweep ??

    Clearly stocking up on Artic Roll for Christmas lunch at Chequers.

    I didn't think that they had an Iceland in Harpenden - a bit like having your high Street having lots of £ stores.
    Iceland was banished from Harpenden several years back and replaced by M&S and the only £shop decided to move out after the good burghers of the town said they preferred a guinea shop.

    We do have a proliferation of charity shops where folk on the Harpenden Living Wage of £100K a year are forced to shop for the bare essentials of local life - old AGA cookery books, vintage Chanel suits and silver entrée dishes.

    Don't forget Mike ..... we're all in this together.



  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,739
    JackW said:

    Off topic, Cameron off to Iceland ....

    First Morrisons and now Iceland. Is Dave on a supermarket sweep ??

    Clearly stocking up on Artic Roll for Christmas lunch at Chequers.

    Every Lidl helps.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,739

    Radio 4 were saying that Team Boris are happy with Osbo's problems, as they see a boost for their man's chances of the leadership.

    I might also add that it gives a boost to another leadership candidate with the initials PP.

    Why don't you just send her a love letter!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,980
    Good morning, everyone.

    Not sure I buy the comparison, given Volkswagen deliberately broke rules to get around emissions legislation by providing a misleading picture.

    No criticism for the House of Lords throwing a century of convention in the bin by voting down a finance matter passed three times by the democratically elected government?
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Well said. Who is your local MP BTW? I noticed your split loyalty when Priti minced them. :sunglasses:

    JEO said:

    JEO said:

    “According to the principle of unanimity applied in the EEA Joint Committee, all the EFTA states must agree in order for new EU legislation to be integrated into the EEA Agreement and for it to apply to cooperation between the EFTA states and the EU. If one EFTA state opposes integration, this also affects the other EFTA states in that the rules will not apply to them either, neither in the individual states nor between the EFTA states themselves nor in their relations with the EU. This possibility that each EFTA state has to object to new rules that lie within the scope of the EEA Agreement becoming applicable to the EFTA pillar is often referred to as these parties’ right of veto.”

    https://www.regjeringen.no/en/find-document/dep/UD/reports-to-the-storting/20002001/report_no-12_to_the_storting_2000-2001/7/id193725/

    Ugh, it really will toxify the debate if senior figures on one side start using dishonest arguments to deceive the British public.

    Unlike General Elections, when all sides do just that :o

    This is more important than a general election, as it will making a decision for 30 years, not 5. And general elections often cause animosity between parties. If the pro-EU Tories want to cause similar animosity between eurosceptics and themselves it will tear our party apart. And they will be on the losing side of the resulting civil war.

    We need a clean, honest debate. And it will be appalling if Cameron himself is the one that starts the dishonest at a high level.
    I expect both sides to exploit the ignorance and general disinterest of the electorate to promote a simplistic (and not entirely accurate) picture. Detailed analysis will be restricted to us lot, not the wider public.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    We're a few years off from the change of Conservative leadership: two at a minimum. So short term ups and downs aren't that important. George Osborne's problems with tax credits wouldn't matter at all if they didn't reinforce the previously held view of him.

    Meanwhile, he continues to have a huge support base in the Parliamentary party and in all likelihood David Cameron will discreetly try to assist his friend by timing his own resignation for the most helpful moment. If George Osborne wants the job, he is almost certainly going to be in the last two. The market has overreacted.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,739
    FPT - TSE has already seen Spectre four times in the last day?!

    Does he have a job? Or does he just not require sleep, like Toby Stephens in Die Another Day?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,834


    Sadly companies like Osborne and Little with a turnover since 2008 of 200m have creatively manage to pay nothing, ZERO, actually claiming a Corporation Tax refund. The Baronet running it gets about 600k a year.
    ...If you wonder why the books of the country do not balance start with the Chancellor and his family and work your way down...Imagine if companies paid a fairer share? Even a 0.5% revenue tax would turn it around.

    I'd like some more precision in these figures. First of all, that [£]200m. Is that £200m per year? Or over the seven years? Second, the £600k for the Chairman. Is that all in cash? In shares? In expenses? Thirdly, why just talk about the Conservatives? Why not Margaret Hodge and her £20 million fortune which she put into various offshore trusts for her children so she would not pay tax on them? Or Hilary Benn and his creative property taxes? Or Shaun Woodward, who could be included in both parties of course, and his property empire? Unfortunately, all rich people find ways to minimise their tax burdens, and there are plenty of them in politics.

    All that being said, there are several very good reasons why we do not tax revenue instead of profits. Profits are by definition surplus to requirements. Companies can manage without the money they have. So there is no hardship involved in taking them off. However, revenue/turnover (depending on definition) come in even at a struggling company that is barely breaking even or even making heavy losses. The time that is likeliest to happen is, oooh, maybe during a trade slump like the one we've been in for several years. Adding an additional tax burden on such companies would probably make them unviable and put all their workers out of work. While there is a good capitalist argument for unviable companies to collapse, there is a good social argument for keeping them going in difficult times and letting them slide when work is easier to find. A 0.5% revenue tax, for example, would have completely ruined RBS in 2008 - it would, literally, have gone bankrupt even after the government intervention - and left the country very much worse off than it currently is.

    The key problem, and it undoubtedly is a problem, is that companies find ingenious ways to whack lots of goodies on expenses and therefore take them off the profits before paying tax. Unfortunately, there is no easy way of dealing with that except to have an exhaustive list of what is or is not permitted as expenses. Since our tax code is already the longest in Western Europe, that would probably be a bad idea. Osborne's new law on taxes 'reasonably expected to pay' is a bit of a paper tiger, because it does not define what is reasonable.

    If there are any reasonably practicable way of getting round this difficulty, I have yet to hear it. So we're stuck with what we've got.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    GeoffM said:

    A great "I Have Nothing To Say" space filling thread header.

    Could have picked this to fill some space instead?
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/11958942/The-Liberal-Democrats-have-profaned-their-principles-by-blocking-tax-credits-in-the-Lords.html

    I wonder why that article from William Hague wasn't used instead. It's a mystery.

    No-one discusses the future of the dodo.
    A little harsh to determine William Hague as an extinct flightless old bird even as he joins the dinosaurs of the HoL.

  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    I'd be interested to hear from the well connected Tories on here how Osborne is viewed amongst his colleagues. It seems from the outside that recently he's been preparing himself to take over from Cameron when he steps down, I can't imagine that arrogance pleases everybody.

    I'll say it till I'm blue in the face, the Tories since May have been displaying an unseemly smugness, that ALWAYS ends in tears, it seems things are beginning to unravel already. As others point out below, Cameron's EU stance is floundering before it's really begun.

    The Tory response to the tax credits farce is to blame the Lords.

    I'd suggest a little more modesty and humility from some would soften the eventual fall.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,739
    JEO said:

    Off topic, Cameron off to Iceland to tell the leaders of Iceland and Norway that the EEA is a load of crap, and wouldn't suit the UK:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34654797

    He seems to be campaigning to stay in the EU before he's even got his 'deal'. Not that I'm surprised.

    "Unlike the UK, Norway has no veto in the European Council, no votes in the EU's council of ministers, no MEPs or votes in the European Parliament, and no European commissioner to help," the source said

    This seems to be a really dishonest argument, given that Norway gets a veto over whether EU laws get in enforced in the EEA. It's like arguing France gets no influence in the EU because it doesn't have any MPs at Westminster.

    Also, how stupid is Cameron at negotiating if he is to argue against alternatives before the negotiation is done? It's like he wants to reduce our leverage.
    Come and join us Leavers, JEO.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,709
    Lemon
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    And Tories are making lemonade with yours :wink:
    Jonathan said:

    Lemon

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,834

    I'd be interested to hear from the well connected Tories on here how Osborne is viewed amongst his colleagues. It seems from the outside that recently he's been preparing himself to take over from Cameron when he steps down, I can't imagine that arrogance pleases everybody.

    I'll say it till I'm blue in the face, the Tories since May have been displaying an unseemly smugness, that ALWAYS ends in tears, it seems things are beginning to unravel already. As others point out below, Cameron's EU stance is floundering before it's really begun.

    The Tory response to the tax credits farce is to blame the Lords.

    I'd suggest a little more modesty and humility from some would soften the eventual fall.

    I'm not well connected, but I did have one friend who used to work for David Cameron as a research assistant. He said this was not pleasant, as Cameron was very arrogant and snobbish towards him. However, he then paused and said: 'Mind you, it could have been worse. I could have been working for George Osborne.'

    I think he's sometimes admired, often respected, even feared, but not loved. It's the key reason why I remain very doubtful that he will be the next PM. If there's anyone who knows differently I'd be interested to hear more.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656

    JEO said:

    Off topic, Cameron off to Iceland to tell the leaders of Iceland and Norway that the EEA is a load of crap, and wouldn't suit the UK:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34654797

    He seems to be campaigning to stay in the EU before he's even got his 'deal'. Not that I'm surprised.

    "Unlike the UK, Norway has no veto in the European Council, no votes in the EU's council of ministers, no MEPs or votes in the European Parliament, and no European commissioner to help," the source said

    This seems to be a really dishonest argument, given that Norway gets a veto over whether EU laws get in enforced in the EEA. It's like arguing France gets no influence in the EU because it doesn't have any MPs at Westminster.

    Also, how stupid is Cameron at negotiating if he is to argue against alternatives before the negotiation is done? It's like he wants to reduce our leverage.
    Come and join us Leavers, JEO.
    You can be assured that I will be furious at any leading Tory leavers that start making deceptive arguments too. To date, the dishonesty on this debate from within the part has mainly come from people who will likely be on the Remain side, however.

    But however frustrated I get at one side or another, I will be determining my judgment not on how I feel personally towards the current generation of politicians, but what the Leave and Remain options look like tangibly, after the negotiation and after I have learnt more from the campaign.
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    JEO said:

    “According to the principle of unanimity applied in the EEA Joint Committee, all the EFTA states must agree in order for new EU legislation to be integrated into the EEA Agreement and for it to apply to cooperation between the EFTA states and the EU. If one EFTA state opposes integration, this also affects the other EFTA states in that the rules will not apply to them either, neither in the individual states nor between the EFTA states themselves nor in their relations with the EU. This possibility that each EFTA state has to object to new rules that lie within the scope of the EEA Agreement becoming applicable to the EFTA pillar is often referred to as these parties’ right of veto.”

    https://www.regjeringen.no/en/find-document/dep/UD/reports-to-the-storting/20002001/report_no-12_to_the_storting_2000-2001/7/id193725/

    Ugh, it really will toxify the debate if senior figures on one side start using dishonest arguments to deceive the British public.

    Problem is, the eyes of the vast majority of the British public will glaze over long before you even finished the second sentence of that. They have better things to do while their lives are slowly changed by unelected representatives and bureaucrats on a mission.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,709

    And Tories are making lemonade with yours :wink:

    Jonathan said:

    Lemon

    Sweeter, popular and fizzing.

  • FPT - TSE has already seen Spectre four times in the last day?!

    Does he have a job? Or does he just not require sleep, like Toby Stephens in Die Another Day?

    It is half term this week. So I'm off work. Except for today.

    So won't be able to watch it today or tomorrow as I'm seeing One Direction tomorrow.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,739
    antifrank said:

    We're a few years off from the change of Conservative leadership: two at a minimum. So short term ups and downs aren't that important. George Osborne's problems with tax credits wouldn't matter at all if they didn't reinforce the previously held view of him.

    Meanwhile, he continues to have a huge support base in the Parliamentary party and in all likelihood David Cameron will discreetly try to assist his friend by timing his own resignation for the most helpful moment. If George Osborne wants the job, he is almost certainly going to be in the last two. The market has overreacted.

    Your third sentence is the problem for GO.

    If he wants it, he will probably make the last two. But he has to win the membership vote too and, of that, I'm not so sure.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    My eyes glazed over at the acronym soup. I've decided on Leave. What we do post result is too far away and suffers from Expertitis.
    Moses_ said:

    JEO said:

    “According to the principle of unanimity applied in the EEA Joint Committee, all the EFTA states must agree in order for new EU legislation to be integrated into the EEA Agreement and for it to apply to cooperation between the EFTA states and the EU. If one EFTA state opposes integration, this also affects the other EFTA states in that the rules will not apply to them either, neither in the individual states nor between the EFTA states themselves nor in their relations with the EU. This possibility that each EFTA state has to object to new rules that lie within the scope of the EEA Agreement becoming applicable to the EFTA pillar is often referred to as these parties’ right of veto.”

    https://www.regjeringen.no/en/find-document/dep/UD/reports-to-the-storting/20002001/report_no-12_to_the_storting_2000-2001/7/id193725/

    Ugh, it really will toxify the debate if senior figures on one side start using dishonest arguments to deceive the British public.

    Problem is, the eyes of the vast majority of the British public will glaze over long before you even finished the second sentence of that. They have better things to do while their lives are slowly changed by unelected representatives and bureaucrats on a mission.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040

    FPT - TSE has already seen Spectre four times in the last day?!

    Does he have a job? Or does he just not require sleep, like Toby Stephens in Die Another Day?

    Someone with the moniker of Casino_Royale is complaining about someone else's Bond obsession?

    Seriously?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,994
    edited October 2015

    I'd be interested to hear from the well connected Tories on here how Osborne is viewed amongst his colleagues. It seems from the outside that recently he's been preparing himself to take over from Cameron when he steps down, I can't imagine that arrogance pleases everybody.

    I'll say it till I'm blue in the face, the Tories since May have been displaying an unseemly smugness, that ALWAYS ends in tears, it seems things are beginning to unravel already. As others point out below, Cameron's EU stance is floundering before it's really begun.

    The Tory response to the tax credits farce is to blame the Lords.

    I'd suggest a little more modesty and humility from some would soften the eventual fall.

    George is liked on a personal level and admired as a Chancellor although his expanding tentacles do annoy some ministers.

    Boris is actively disliked more by the parliamentary party which is a real hindrance.

    It comes from his previous stint as an MP. Most MPs have to walk on egg shells and not say the wrong thing whereas Boris can say what he likes and doesn't gets into trouble.

    Plus on Tory MP away days he turned up in very expensive cars (he was the motoring correspondent of GQ) and that didn't go down to well either nor the fact he was able to earn vast amounts elsewhere.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    It is half term this week. So I'm off work. Except for today.

    So won't be able to watch it today or tomorrow as I'm seeing One Direction tomorrow.

    Going back to work on a week off to avoid seeing Spectre.

    Solid plan...
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040

    antifrank said:

    We're a few years off from the change of Conservative leadership: two at a minimum. So short term ups and downs aren't that important. George Osborne's problems with tax credits wouldn't matter at all if they didn't reinforce the previously held view of him.

    Meanwhile, he continues to have a huge support base in the Parliamentary party and in all likelihood David Cameron will discreetly try to assist his friend by timing his own resignation for the most helpful moment. If George Osborne wants the job, he is almost certainly going to be in the last two. The market has overreacted.

    Your third sentence is the problem for GO.

    If he wants it, he will probably make the last two. But he has to win the membership vote too and, of that, I'm not so sure.
    The Tory membership not selecting Osborne would be at least as ridiculous as the Labour party rejecting Healey for Foot. I mean its possible but it would come with a terrible price.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    edited October 2015
    Moses_ said:

    JEO said:

    “According to the principle of unanimity applied in the EEA Joint Committee, all the EFTA states must agree in order for new EU legislation to be integrated into the EEA Agreement and for it to apply to cooperation between the EFTA states and the EU. If one EFTA state opposes integration, this also affects the other EFTA states in that the rules will not apply to them either, neither in the individual states nor between the EFTA states themselves nor in their relations with the EU. This possibility that each EFTA state has to object to new rules that lie within the scope of the EEA Agreement becoming applicable to the EFTA pillar is often referred to as these parties’ right of veto.”

    https://www.regjeringen.no/en/find-document/dep/UD/reports-to-the-storting/20002001/report_no-12_to_the_storting_2000-2001/7/id193725/

    Ugh, it really will toxify the debate if senior figures on one side start using dishonest arguments to deceive the British public.

    Problem is, the eyes of the vast majority of the British public will glaze over long before you even finished the second sentence of that. They have better things to do while their lives are slowly changed by unelected representatives and bureaucrats on a mission.
    Yes, but it can be pithily summed up by "If we were in Norway's position, we'd get a veto over EU laws".

    It is just so dishonest to argue that we wouldn't have control over EU laws when we don't have councillors, commisioners etc when we would have a bloody veto. It's like saying the US military is in a poor position compared to Russia because they don't have any MiGs.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    DavidL said:

    antifrank said:

    We're a few years off from the change of Conservative leadership: two at a minimum. So short term ups and downs aren't that important. George Osborne's problems with tax credits wouldn't matter at all if they didn't reinforce the previously held view of him.

    Meanwhile, he continues to have a huge support base in the Parliamentary party and in all likelihood David Cameron will discreetly try to assist his friend by timing his own resignation for the most helpful moment. If George Osborne wants the job, he is almost certainly going to be in the last two. The market has overreacted.

    Your third sentence is the problem for GO.

    If he wants it, he will probably make the last two. But he has to win the membership vote too and, of that, I'm not so sure.
    The Tory membership not selecting Osborne would be at least as ridiculous as the Labour party rejecting Healey for Foot. I mean its possible but it would come with a terrible price.
    That depends who they selected instead. The Conservatives have quite a few entirely viable candidates.

    I'm still not at all sure that George Osborne will ultimately run. If he can carry on doing what he's doing now, he'd probably prefer to see a protege in Number 10. So look closely at his political friends. The successor to David Cameron may be one of those.
  • On topic the best vehicle I've ever owned/driven was part of the VW group.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,980
    Abbott (ex-Aussie PM) reckons Europe should close its borders:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-34654460

    More sensible than mad Merkel's siren call. I especially enjoy the graph. Just have a look how big the Syrian bar is (for asylum seeker origins). And then marvel how 14% of claimants is made to look so very massive :p
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,834

    I'd be interested to hear from the well connected Tories on here how Osborne is viewed amongst his colleagues. It seems from the outside that recently he's been preparing himself to take over from Cameron when he steps down, I can't imagine that arrogance pleases everybody.

    I'll say it till I'm blue in the face, the Tories since May have been displaying an unseemly smugness, that ALWAYS ends in tears, it seems things are beginning to unravel already. As others point out below, Cameron's EU stance is floundering before it's really begun.

    The Tory response to the tax credits farce is to blame the Lords.

    I'd suggest a little more modesty and humility from some would soften the eventual fall.

    George is liked on a personal level and admired as a Chancellor although his expanding tentacles do annoy some ministers.

    Boris is actively disliked more by the parliamentary party which is a real hindrance.

    It comes from his previous stint as an MP. Most MPs have to walk on egg shells and not say the wrong thing whereas Boris can say what he likes and doesn't gets into trouble.

    Plus on Tory MP away days he turned up in very expensive cars (he was the motoring correspondent of GQ) and that didn't go down to well either nor the fact he was able to earn vast amounts elsewhere.
    But then, how likely is it that Boris Johnson will be a serious contender when Cameron resigns? He's not even in the Cabinet and his practical ministerial experience is zero. His record as mayor of London is also by all accounts decidedly mixed. Driving Porsches and announcing 'I'm going to Bond' is probably the least of his worries.

    It's Osborne against whoever emerges. That's what we still don't know.

    However, imagine a Johnson-Corbyn TV debate, where neither of them could string a coherent sentence together and kept forgetting why they were there. All it would need is to be surrounded by men in white coats carrying straitjackets to be the classic 'select lunatic to run asylum' gig!
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Does Cameron being in Iceland mean Osbo will be taking PMQs today??
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865

    Unusually good piece on Radio Leicester this morning.

    21 000 people in Leics could be lifted out of poverty by giving up smoking. Vox pops from people buying ciggies on the Saffron Lane estate often spending £70-100 per week on an early death.


    Don't know if its true but I was told that cigs are so expensive now (a packet of B and H I am told is now circa TEN POUNDS ) that the fag co's are introducing smaller size packs...

    I was a 20+ a day smoker and I save 200 a month plus since I gave up. Worst life decision I ever made was to take that first puff.
    I mentioned a few days ago visitors to food banks could still light up before and afterwards. They had money to spend on ciggies so WTF were they at a food bank collecting free food.

    You only had to watch programmes like Benefits St and Skint (two different parts of the country) to see everyone smoking and drinking from cans of beer. I am not stereotyping here it was there right in front of you and it was constant all day long The issue is I could never afford to smoke at the prices as they were even then which was close to 9 quid a pack. ( not that I would even want to)

    My point is They were basically burning mine and many others hard earned cash. Poverty in some households is not being able to afford a lighter to ignite your next ciggie. Despite the bleating of the left. My view is you are caught smoking then benefits are cut and no food banks to bale you out.

    More than happy to help and give a leg up to anyone genuine down on their luck and needing welfare to get by while they get back on track. . However, If you can afford to smoke and drink you don't need the help of those of all of the rest of us grafting day in and day out to support your life style choice while they sit around and bemoan their lot.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Does that mean Watson will do it too? Or Eagle?
    Danny565 said:

    Does Cameron being in Iceland mean Osbo will be taking PMQs today??

  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,366

    The EU referendum already has the feel of deja vu. The PM and most of the media pretending to get a good deal for the UK while hiding the real facts. Just like forty years ago, when I took a great deal of interest.

    This time I'm bored. It worked once so they're repeating the trick. And assuming the young are gullible.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046

    On topic the best vehicle I've ever owned/driven was part of the VW group.

    Was it a Type 770? :D
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091

    Does that mean Watson will do it too? Or Eagle?

    Danny565 said:

    Does Cameron being in Iceland mean Osbo will be taking PMQs today??

    I think they made Eagle his stand-in when they were rushing to solve Corbyn's "women problem" in the reshuffle.
  • ydoethur said:

    I'd be interested to hear from the well connected Tories on here how Osborne is viewed amongst his colleagues. It seems from the outside that recently he's been preparing himself to take over from Cameron when he steps down, I can't imagine that arrogance pleases everybody.

    I'll say it till I'm blue in the face, the Tories since May have been displaying an unseemly smugness, that ALWAYS ends in tears, it seems things are beginning to unravel already. As others point out below, Cameron's EU stance is floundering before it's really begun.

    The Tory response to the tax credits farce is to blame the Lords.

    I'd suggest a little more modesty and humility from some would soften the eventual fall.

    George is liked on a personal level and admired as a Chancellor although his expanding tentacles do annoy some ministers.

    Boris is actively disliked more by the parliamentary party which is a real hindrance.

    It comes from his previous stint as an MP. Most MPs have to walk on egg shells and not say the wrong thing whereas Boris can say what he likes and doesn't gets into trouble.

    Plus on Tory MP away days he turned up in very expensive cars (he was the motoring correspondent of GQ) and that didn't go down to well either nor the fact he was able to earn vast amounts elsewhere.
    But then, how likely is it that Boris Johnson will be a serious contender when Cameron resigns? He's not even in the Cabinet and his practical ministerial experience is zero. His record as mayor of London is also by all accounts decidedly mixed. Driving Porsches and announcing 'I'm going to Bond' is probably the least of his worries.

    It's Osborne against whoever emerges. That's what we still don't know.

    However, imagine a Johnson-Corbyn TV debate, where neither of them could string a coherent sentence together and kept forgetting why they were there. All it would need is to be surrounded by men in white coats carrying straitjackets to be the classic 'select lunatic to run asylum' gig!
    It will all depend on the polling and the economy at the time of the leadership contest. If it's doing well it'll be George.

    18 months before they became Tory leaders Cameron, Howard, IDS, Hague, Major and Thatcher were all longish odds/not the favourite.

    Someone will emerge. They always do

    For the Tories to win in 2020 they need to retain all those Lib Dem switchers, so hopefully they'll go for someone who appeals to them. We like being in power.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,980
    Mr. CD13, lots of young people think Russell Brand or Jeremy Corbyn are worth listening to.

    Of course, many more do not.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,834
    edited October 2015

    Does that mean Watson will do it too? Or Eagle?

    Danny565 said:

    Does Cameron being in Iceland mean Osbo will be taking PMQs today??

    Surely it would be Eagle as shadow FSoS? They would be better off with Watson though as Eagle has neither rhetorical talent, understanding of tax affairs or for that matter intelligence. Memorably, in one her forays into religion she got confused between Catholics and Evangelical Protestants. She could easily end up confusing tax credits and the minimum wage. Watson could at least land a few thuggish blows on Watson Osborne (Freudian slip)!
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    RobD said:

    On topic the best vehicle I've ever owned/driven was part of the VW group.

    Was it a Type 770? :D

    I think I know the answer to this.. TSE is being duplicitous as it wasn't a VW....
  • RobD said:

    On topic the best vehicle I've ever owned/driven was part of the VW group.

    Was it a Type 770? :D
    Cayenne.

    Basically a sports car on a 4x4 floor plan.

    Every time you put your foot down it felt like a beautiful lady was putting her hands down your pants and having a good old rummage.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    How on Earth did she manage that?
    ydoethur said:

    Does that mean Watson will do it too? Or Eagle?

    Danny565 said:

    Does Cameron being in Iceland mean Osbo will be taking PMQs today??

    Surely it would be Eagle as shadow FSoS? They would be better off with Watson though as Eagle has neither rhetorical talent, understanding of tax affairs or for that matter intelligence. Memorably, in one her forays into religion she got confused between Catholics and Evangelical Protestants. She could easily end up confusing tax credits and the minimum wage. Watson could at least land a few thuggish blows on Watson.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,834

    How on Earth did she manage that?

    ydoethur said:

    Does that mean Watson will do it too? Or Eagle?

    Danny565 said:

    Does Cameron being in Iceland mean Osbo will be taking PMQs today??

    Surely it would be Eagle as shadow FSoS? They would be better off with Watson though as Eagle has neither rhetorical talent, understanding of tax affairs or for that matter intelligence. Memorably, in one her forays into religion she got confused between Catholics and Evangelical Protestants. She could easily end up confusing tax credits and the minimum wage. Watson could at least land a few thuggish blows on Watson.
    Don't ask me - I teach RE, I know the difference! But basically, it seems she did not understand that there is a difference between 'Biblical literalists' or 'Creationists' as they are often called, and 'Evangelical Christians'. So she described a Catholic she believed took the Biblical creation story literally (wrongly, as it happens) as an 'Evangelical.'

    However, it was a speech to the board of the BHA, so none of them will have known the difference anyway!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,421
    I've updated my blog:

    http://ponyonthetories.blogspot.co.uk/

    Still backing George.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516
    The GO problem is quite simple

    - is he a good politician ? You pays your money and makes your choice, he likes wheezes, does short term dividing lines etc.

    - is he a good CoE, no. He doesn't attack vested interest, doesn't reform and uses his office as a political platform rather than for the good of the country.

    Gordon Brown's Mini-me
  • @MichaelLCrick: Socialist Workers Party reports on how several of its members attended recent meetings of pro-Corbyn group Momentum https://t.co/M0RrdjaT1o
  • Moses_ said:

    Unusually good piece on Radio Leicester this morning.

    21 000 people in Leics could be lifted out of poverty by giving up smoking. Vox pops from people buying ciggies on the Saffron Lane estate often spending £70-100 per week on an early death.


    Don't know if its true but I was told that cigs are so expensive now (a packet of B and H I am told is now circa TEN POUNDS ) that the fag co's are introducing smaller size packs...

    I was a 20+ a day smoker and I save 200 a month plus since I gave up. Worst life decision I ever made was to take that first puff.
    I mentioned a few days ago visitors to food banks could still light up before and afterwards. They had money to spend on ciggies so WTF were they at a food bank collecting free food.

    You only had to watch programmes like Benefits St and Skint (two different parts of the country) to see everyone smoking and drinking from cans of beer. I am not stereotyping here it was there right in front of you and it was constant all day long The issue is I could never afford to smoke at the prices as they were even then which was close to 9 quid a pack. ( not that I would even want to)

    My point is They were basically burning mine and many others hard earned cash. Poverty in some households is not being able to afford a lighter to ignite your next ciggie. Despite the bleating of the left. My view is you are caught smoking then benefits are cut and no food banks to bale you out.

    More than happy to help and give a leg up to anyone genuine down on their luck and needing welfare to get by while they get back on track. . However, If you can afford to smoke and drink you don't need the help of those of all of the rest of us grafting day in and day out to support your life style choice while they sit around and bemoan their lot.
    If only you were the UK's dictator, why, it would be paradise on earth.

  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    JEO said:

    JEO said:

    “According to the principle of unanimity applied in the EEA Joint Committee, all the EFTA states must agree in order for new EU legislation to be integrated into the EEA Agreement and for it to apply to cooperation between the EFTA states and the EU. If one EFTA state opposes integration, this also affects the other EFTA states in that the rules will not apply to them either, neither in the individual states nor between the EFTA states themselves nor in their relations with the EU. This possibility that each EFTA state has to object to new rules that lie within the scope of the EEA Agreement becoming applicable to the EFTA pillar is often referred to as these parties’ right of veto.”

    https://www.regjeringen.no/en/find-document/dep/UD/reports-to-the-storting/20002001/report_no-12_to_the_storting_2000-2001/7/id193725/

    Ugh, it really will toxify the debate if senior figures on one side start using dishonest arguments to deceive the British public.

    Unlike General Elections, when all sides do just that :o

    This is more important than a general election, as it will making a decision for 30 years, not 5. And general elections often cause animosity between parties. If the pro-EU Tories want to cause similar animosity between eurosceptics and themselves it will tear our party apart. And they will be on the losing side of the resulting civil war.

    We need a clean, honest debate. And it will be appalling if Cameron himself is the one that starts the dishonest at a high level.
    Cameron is either incrediblly dishonest or has a poor grasp of Norway's relationship with the EU. Neither are forgivable for a senior politician. I have no doubt this is a taste of things to come. It is clear Cameron is panicking and is trying to discreetly campaign to remain in the EU before the negotiations have even finished.

    The media and UK politicians love to quote Norwegian politicians stating that they have no influence. However, the Norwegian politicians, for the most part, are rabidly Europhile. What is important is that the Norwegian people are happy with their relationship with the EU and have no expressed a desire to join it.

    If Cameron comes back with a second class associate membership with all the downsides of remaining in the EU and none of the benefits of a looser relationship he will be entirely to blame for splitting the Tories.
  • @PickardJE: Volkswagen posts a third-quarter loss of E3.5 bn (or E1.6bn after-tax loss)
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865

    My eyes glazed over at the acronym soup. I've decided on Leave. What we do post result is too far away and suffers from Expertitis.

    Moses_ said:

    JEO said:

    “According to the principle of unanimity applied in the EEA Joint Committee, all the EFTA states must agree in order for new EU legislation to be integrated into the EEA Agreement and for it to apply to cooperation between the EFTA states and the EU. If one EFTA state opposes integration, this also affects the other EFTA states in that the rules will not apply to them either, neither in the individual states nor between the EFTA states themselves nor in their relations with the EU. This possibility that each EFTA state has to object to new rules that lie within the scope of the EEA Agreement becoming applicable to the EFTA pillar is often referred to as these parties’ right of veto.”

    https://www.regjeringen.no/en/find-document/dep/UD/reports-to-the-storting/20002001/report_no-12_to_the_storting_2000-2001/7/id193725/

    Ugh, it really will toxify the debate if senior figures on one side start using dishonest arguments to deceive the British public.

    Problem is, the eyes of the vast majority of the British public will glaze over long before you even finished the second sentence of that. They have better things to do while their lives are slowly changed by unelected representatives and bureaucrats on a mission.
    Welcome on board. I have been a BOO for only a short time myself mmmm.... around nearly 40 years now. The vote was held shortly before my 18th. I have had to live with the consequences ever since.
  • Corbyn's first betrayal. Caught with a copy of The Sun. Bootle is now a Tory target.

    @MichaelPDeacon: The first betrayal. Via @JamesManning https://t.co/3QjdMf85D4
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,834

    @PickardJE: Volkswagen posts a third-quarter loss of E3.5 bn (or E1.6bn after-tax loss)

    I think that's only going to be the start, and it will surely finish with VW either being wound up or asset-stripped and sold off. Which is rather sad in many ways - I've done 100,000 miles in Skodas in the last ten years and they are superb cars.

    That being said, the wound is entirely self-inflicted so they deserve no actual sympathy.
Sign In or Register to comment.