That is absolutely spot on. Trump pulled a similar trick but with added nastiness. Johnson isn't nasty but, yes, as the article says, he has managed to persuade large numbers of the public that his relentless facetiousness and jokey insincerity somehow makes him more "authentic" than "normal politicians".
It's doing great damage to our politics and I hope he pays for it one day.
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
Yes. They harrassed for years Darren Grimes and others only to have all their allegations thrown out when it reached a real court.
Their treatment of Grimes in particular was dreadful. He asked permission at the time to do what he did, then was prosecuted afterwards by the EC for doing what they’d given him prior permission to do. Three times for the same offence. Thankfully he managed to get some good lawyers, and got the case heard in front of an actual high court judge who threw it out.
My point was that these organisations are only "full of remainers" when they do something "leavers" don't agree with.
The Supreme Court was also "full of remainers" I recall.
So do you think the way that the Electoral Commission treated Grimes and others was above board and impartial?
Or was it a partisan hatchet job that the Courts rightly chucked out in full?
I have no idea — I don't know anything about it.
I was merely making a humorous comment about how "unjust" or "I disagree" turns into "REMAINERS".
It is the worldview according to the followers of Trump et al. I don't agree so blame: remainers/EU/foreigners/Liberals/WHO/UN/The Jewish conspiracy/World Government/aliens/lizard people...(delete as appropriate or make up some other prejudice)
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
It definitely is, their "prosecution" of the Leave campaigns was nakedly political and their "judgement" was struck down by the courts.
If there is nothing to see that will no doubt be the ultimate result. The obfuscation at the moment would suggest that may not be the outcome.
I did NOT have decorating relations with that woman.....(crikey whats her name again) er...er..er..Miss Symonds
Tbh, I don't care one way or the other, I'd rather see Boris get done on something substantial not this kind of tittle tattle. There's so much to go after him on, the whole fucking second wave of the virus, for example and yet here we are arguing about who paid for some wallpaper.
So back from getting 2nd jab (AZ). Will await side effects with interest (1st gave a mild headache about 24 hours later). It was early, so no queues or anything. Cardiac nurse who took my details was volunteering in her holiday. Cannot describe how grateful we should be for all who have stepped up during this time. And now a plea - she was upset at seeing discarded facemasks when out walking. I heartily concur - please - put RUBBISH IN THE BIN. I know its the 5%, but if you are one of them, please, think, and become a better person.
Once again, the Westminster journalists are getting over-excited about process.
Tory MPs are not going to kick out the leader who just delivered them their biggest majority in three decades because of what's probably a failure of paperwork.
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
It definitely is, their "prosecution" of the Leave campaigns was nakedly political and their "judgement" was struck down by the courts.
If there is nothing to see that will no doubt be the ultimate result. The obfuscation at the moment would suggest that may not be the outcome.
I did NOT have decorating relations with that woman.....(crikey whats her name again) er...er..er..Miss Symonds
Tbh, I don't care one way or the other, I'd rather see Boris get done on something substantial not this kind of tittle tattle. There's so much to go after him on, the whole fucking second wave of the virus, for example and yet here we are arguing about who paid for some wallpaper.
As has been said his critics have chosen the wrong thing to die on, when they had the allegations of his comments on covd
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
It definitely is, their "prosecution" of the Leave campaigns was nakedly political and their "judgement" was struck down by the courts.
If there is nothing to see that will no doubt be the ultimate result. The obfuscation at the moment would suggest that may not be the outcome.
I did NOT have decorating relations with that woman.....(crikey whats her name again) er...er..er..Miss Symonds
Tbh, I don't care one way or the other, I'd rather see Boris get done on something substantial not this kind of tittle tattle. There's so much to go after him on, the whole fucking second wave of the virus, for example and yet here we are arguing about who paid for some wallpaper.
Fair point, but, whether it is a fair or unfair analogy, Al Capone was jailed on tax evasion! But to be serious, the wallpaper is not the issue. The lying and obfuscation is a symptom of a wider malaise perhaps?
The Electoral Commission can be lizard people for all that it matters. The question to ask is - has Boris Johnson properly declared (a) his donation from the Conservative Party, and (b) his donation used to repay the now loan from the Conservative Party.
Compliance with the law on political donations is an absolute offence - you are either compliant or you are not. For Ministers there is a very clear set of rules that cover this. The Ministerial Code. With a forward from Boris Johnson stating that he will not accept behaviour like not declaring loans and donations.
My advice is for you to throw yourself into the role and not mention anything until you've been in the job for a few months.
Make sure you're noted for the quality of the work you do not for being the one who complains about the salary.
My first job straight out of university worked out at lower per hour than a paper boy/girl and as a 21/22 year old I also had a mortgage so if I were you just drop that hint to your boss about your rent/mortgage.
If they are good employers they will have processes in place to note you're being in paid sub NMW/plans for reviews, if not, leave after a few months if the situation isn't rectified.
One of the issues in the profession is when you apply for jobs, other than graduate training schemes, is that they always insist on 'experience', so you'll have that from this job.
As I continually point out
GCSEs take you to your A Levels A levels take you to your degree Degree to first job After that the only thing people care about is your previous jobs
Which means when you work out exactly what you want to do and go next ensure you get some experience at your current place so it at least looks like you know how to do it.
Thanks for that, I'm showing your post to my children this evening.
The pressure society puts on kids for their exams does more harm than good. It is sold to them as if their entire future rests of GCSEs and A levels when that is absolutely not the case. With that pressure and social media, on top of normal life and growing up, no wonder the mental health of teenagers is so troubled.
For that Gove has an awful lot to answer for.
GCSEs and A levels prepare people for the world of the 1940s/50s not the 21st century.
Being blunt the important bit is the degree and a good personal statement will give you way better Degree options than the grades. While Oxford and Cambridge no longer have the sit an exam / interview and 2 Es are enough - a good personal statement with outside interests can knock 24+ points off the UCAS offer (child A has an BCC offer for an AAB advertised course).
Kenneth Baker, who introduced CGSEs, recently suggested now is the time to scrap them because they serve no useful purpose. (And iirc some of us here were surprised the government went ahead with them during the pandemic.)
To be honest the electoral commission investigation is fine by me and when they report then everything will be in the public domain and not allegations and to be honest even potentially libellous comments
Everyone needs to calm down and let the commission do their job
Mind you, no matter I do not see Boris resigning over this
Absolutely. Why should Boris Johnson resign for breaking the ministerial code authored by Boris Johnson.
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
It definitely is, their "prosecution" of the Leave campaigns was nakedly political and their "judgement" was struck down by the courts.
If there is nothing to see that will no doubt be the ultimate result. The obfuscation at the moment would suggest that may not be the outcome.
I did NOT have decorating relations with that woman.....(crikey whats her name again) er...er..er..Miss Symonds
Tbh, I don't care one way or the other, I'd rather see Boris get done on something substantial not this kind of tittle tattle. There's so much to go after him on, the whole fucking second wave of the virus, for example and yet here we are arguing about who paid for some wallpaper.
They really do all need to get off Twitter for a while, they’re all talking to each other and mistaking that for thinking this is of any interest at all to the public right now.
Once again, the Westminster journalists are getting over-excited about process.
Tory MPs are not going to kick out the leader who just delivered them their biggest majority in three decades because of what's probably a failure of paperwork.
No they wont and there are worse failings, but he should still not make such a failure and wriggling and evading about it hasn't helped (indeed if it is above board then it's just made a story out of nothing).
In our ever-revealing question on what animal each leader would be, the canny Sturgeon emerges as a fox, panther or lion. Alex Salmond, her supposed nemesis, is a warthog, toad, snake or wild boar; Johnson is a panda, sloth, orangutan or pigeon (“a lot of folk don’t like them but that doesn’t stop there being pigeons everywhere”). Keir Starmer is sleepy Bagpuss, or “a rabbit caught in the headlights”.
Tbh, I don't care one way or the other, I'd rather see Boris get done on something substantial not this kind of tittle tattle. There's so much to go after him on, the whole fucking second wave of the virus, for example and yet here we are arguing about who paid for some wallpaper.
The problem, from a political perspective, with the Covid comments is there is (so far) no proof.
The value of wallpapergate is that there are receipts.
My advice is for you to throw yourself into the role and not mention anything until you've been in the job for a few months.
Make sure you're noted for the quality of the work you do not for being the one who complains about the salary.
My first job straight out of university worked out at lower per hour than a paper boy/girl and as a 21/22 year old I also had a mortgage so if I were you just drop that hint to your boss about your rent/mortgage.
If they are good employers they will have processes in place to note you're being in paid sub NMW/plans for reviews, if not, leave after a few months if the situation isn't rectified.
One of the issues in the profession is when you apply for jobs, other than graduate training schemes, is that they always insist on 'experience', so you'll have that from this job.
As I continually point out
GCSEs take you to your A Levels A levels take you to your degree Degree to first job After that the only thing people care about is your previous jobs
Which means when you work out exactly what you want to do and go next ensure you get some experience at your current place so it at least looks like you know how to do it.
Thanks for that, I'm showing your post to my children this evening.
The pressure society puts on kids for their exams does more harm than good. It is sold to them as if their entire future rests of GCSEs and A levels when that is absolutely not the case. With that pressure and social media, on top of normal life and growing up, no wonder the mental health of teenagers is so troubled.
For that Gove has an awful lot to answer for.
GCSEs and A levels prepare people for the world of the 1940s/50s not the 21st century.
Being blunt the important bit is the degree and a good personal statement will give you way better Degree options than the grades. While Oxford and Cambridge no longer have the sit an exam / interview and 2 Es are enough - a good personal statement with outside interests can knock 24+ points off the UCAS offer (child A has an BCC offer for an AAB advertised course).
Kenneth Baker, who introduced CGSEs, recently suggested now is the time to scrap them because they serve no useful purpose. (And iirc some of us here were surprised the government went ahead with them during the pandemic.)
They haven't - it was predicted grades changed to teacher assessment last year and teacher assessed grades this year.
Given that most people will remain in education to 18, there is little point in doing anything at age 16 beyond maths, english and whatever science / humanities you wish to drop going forward.
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
It definitely is, their "prosecution" of the Leave campaigns was nakedly political and their "judgement" was struck down by the courts.
If there is nothing to see that will no doubt be the ultimate result. The obfuscation at the moment would suggest that may not be the outcome.
I did NOT have decorating relations with that woman.....(crikey whats her name again) er...er..er..Miss Symonds
Tbh, I don't care one way or the other, I'd rather see Boris get done on something substantial not this kind of tittle tattle. There's so much to go after him on, the whole fucking second wave of the virus, for example and yet here we are arguing about who paid for some wallpaper.
Fair point, but, whether it is a fair or unfair analogy, Al Capone was jailed on tax evasion! But to be serious, the wallpaper is not the issue. The lying and obfuscation is a symptom of a wider malaise perhaps?
I get where you're coming from, and for Boris haters I'm sure they'd get him on whatever charge necessary. That won't be a lasting victory as you won't have defeated the ideas that Boris represents - complete and utter dishonesty and opportunism at every turn. Getting him on a technicality will continue to store up problems for later, Biden recognised that and beat Trump in the polling booth. This strikes me as desperate from an opposition that has realised they aren't going to be able to do that.
Biden recognised that and beat Trump in the polling booth. This strikes me as desperate from an opposition that has realised they aren't going to be able to do that.
Glad to see some here are still predicting the thousand year reich of BoZo
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
Yes. They harrassed for years Darren Grimes and others only to have all their allegations thrown out when it reached a real court.
Their treatment of Grimes in particular was dreadful. He asked permission at the time to do what he did, then was prosecuted afterwards by the EC for doing what they’d given him prior permission to do. Three times for the same offence. Thankfully he managed to get some good lawyers, and got the case heard in front of an actual high court judge who threw it out.
My point was that these organisations are only "full of remainers" when they do something "leavers" don't agree with.
The Supreme Court was also "full of remainers" I recall.
So do you think the way that the Electoral Commission treated Grimes and others was above board and impartial?
Or was it a partisan hatchet job that the Courts rightly chucked out in full?
Sometimes in the real world matters take on a momentum for good or ill. Not everything is a conspiracy, it is often just cock up. Btw: Have you heard from Q recently?
Partisanly looking into your opponents more than your own side isn't a conspiracy, just partisanship. We see it on here every single day.
You're the one who sees conspiracies everywhere not me. I've never had the time of day for Trump or his supporters and I made my opinion on him abundantly clear - even if you're functionally illiterate and can't tell the difference between someone backing Biden and someone backing Trump.
A smokescreen for your very close alignment with Trump and his populist world view, or just an indicator of your immaturity, lack of political understanding and intellectual confusion perhaps? I certainly don't sees "conspiracies everywhere" you silly boy, I leave that to folks who spend their whole day rattling away on their keyboard and dreaming of Q. Oh sorry does that apply to you?
You are so obsessed with "remainers" it is really very sad, particularly as your little England view prevailed in large part. Move on Philip. One day your politics of division will creep up and damage something you hold dear no doubt. Good day to you, I must go and do some work!
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
Yes. They harrassed for years Darren Grimes and others only to have all their allegations thrown out when it reached a real court.
Their treatment of Grimes in particular was dreadful. He asked permission at the time to do what he did, then was prosecuted afterwards by the EC for doing what they’d given him prior permission to do. Three times for the same offence. Thankfully he managed to get some good lawyers, and got the case heard in front of an actual high court judge who threw it out.
My point was that these organisations are only "full of remainers" when they do something "leavers" don't agree with.
The Supreme Court was also "full of remainers" I recall.
So do you think the way that the Electoral Commission treated Grimes and others was above board and impartial?
Or was it a partisan hatchet job that the Courts rightly chucked out in full?
If one was a cynic you could be forgiven for thinking the electoral commission releasing this just before PMQs was, at least, a stunt.
Tbh, I don't care one way or the other, I'd rather see Boris get done on something substantial not this kind of tittle tattle. There's so much to go after him on, the whole fucking second wave of the virus, for example and yet here we are arguing about who paid for some wallpaper.
The problem, from a political perspective, with the Covid comments is there is (so far) no proof.
The value of wallpapergate is that there are receipts.
Rubbish, the reason they can't go for COVID is because Starmer has been completely useless and supported all of the rubbish decisions the government has made. If Labour had actually properly opposed some of the bad decisions on not having managed quarantine for all incoming travel then they'd have a narrative.
This is going to end up as something that blue ticks on twitter wank themselves silly over but passes the wider public by completey.
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
It definitely is, their "prosecution" of the Leave campaigns was nakedly political and their "judgement" was struck down by the courts.
If there is nothing to see that will no doubt be the ultimate result. The obfuscation at the moment would suggest that may not be the outcome.
I did NOT have decorating relations with that woman.....(crikey whats her name again) er...er..er..Miss Symonds
Tbh, I don't care one way or the other, I'd rather see Boris get done on something substantial not this kind of tittle tattle. There's so much to go after him on, the whole fucking second wave of the virus, for example and yet here we are arguing about who paid for some wallpaper.
Fair point, but, whether it is a fair or unfair analogy, Al Capone was jailed on tax evasion! But to be serious, the wallpaper is not the issue. The lying and obfuscation is a symptom of a wider malaise perhaps?
The one thing that is saving Boris at present is the success of the vaccine rollout across the UK and the opening of the economy
I was in town this morning and there was a huge queue at the vaccination centre of quite young looking people
Many of his opponents want him gone and mainly as a legacy of Brexit that they do not like, but as long as he is popular his MPs will not remove him , but if that changes he could swiftly be replaced
We're at herd immunity already I expect. The big questions to be asked should be why its still illegal to meet others indoors for another three weeks.
No chance restrictions should be coming back once they're removed already. Well done UK and the Government have done a great job on the real issues of the day.
In our ever-revealing question on what animal each leader would be, the canny Sturgeon emerges as a fox, panther or lion. Alex Salmond, her supposed nemesis, is a warthog, toad, snake or wild boar; Johnson is a panda, sloth, orangutan or pigeon (“a lot of folk don’t like them but that doesn’t stop there being pigeons everywhere”). Keir Starmer is sleepy Bagpuss, or “a rabbit caught in the headlights”.
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
Yes. They harrassed for years Darren Grimes and others only to have all their allegations thrown out when it reached a real court.
Their treatment of Grimes in particular was dreadful. He asked permission at the time to do what he did, then was prosecuted afterwards by the EC for doing what they’d given him prior permission to do. Three times for the same offence. Thankfully he managed to get some good lawyers, and got the case heard in front of an actual high court judge who threw it out.
My point was that these organisations are only "full of remainers" when they do something "leavers" don't agree with.
The Supreme Court was also "full of remainers" I recall.
So do you think the way that the Electoral Commission treated Grimes and others was above board and impartial?
Or was it a partisan hatchet job that the Courts rightly chucked out in full?
If one was a cynic you could be forgiven for thinking the electoral commission releasing this just before PMQs was, at least, a stunt.
I'd suggest if they came to their decision on the basis of evidence received delaying it even briefly because of political events would have been unreasonable favouritism.
I doubt Boris gives a single shit how 10 DS is decorated to be honest.
Carrie, I'd have thought. Wonder if he told her he couldn't afford it or pretended he could? If the latter, what kind of man would be so deceitful to his partner and mother of his young child? If the former, why did Carrie insist? Is this not on the face of it somewhat mercenary and unfeeling? And if she did insist, why did he give in? Can he not stand up to his girlfriend? Does he just sack key advisors or get into hock with dodgy donors for a home makeover just because Carrie tells him to? Is our PM, to get down to brass tacks, a man or a mouse?
This is the line of probing I'd like to see from Starmer at PMQs today.
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
Yes. They harrassed for years Darren Grimes and others only to have all their allegations thrown out when it reached a real court.
Their treatment of Grimes in particular was dreadful. He asked permission at the time to do what he did, then was prosecuted afterwards by the EC for doing what they’d given him prior permission to do. Three times for the same offence. Thankfully he managed to get some good lawyers, and got the case heard in front of an actual high court judge who threw it out.
My point was that these organisations are only "full of remainers" when they do something "leavers" don't agree with.
The Supreme Court was also "full of remainers" I recall.
So do you think the way that the Electoral Commission treated Grimes and others was above board and impartial?
Or was it a partisan hatchet job that the Courts rightly chucked out in full?
Sometimes in the real world matters take on a momentum for good or ill. Not everything is a conspiracy, it is often just cock up. Btw: Have you heard from Q recently?
Partisanly looking into your opponents more than your own side isn't a conspiracy, just partisanship. We see it on here every single day.
You're the one who sees conspiracies everywhere not me. I've never had the time of day for Trump or his supporters and I made my opinion on him abundantly clear - even if you're functionally illiterate and can't tell the difference between someone backing Biden and someone backing Trump.
A smokescreen for your very close alignment with Trump and his populist world view, or just an indicator of your immaturity, lack of political understanding and intellectual confusion perhaps? I certainly don't sees "conspiracies everywhere" you silly boy, I leave that to folks who spend their whole day rattling away on their keyboard and dreaming of Q. Oh sorry does that apply to you?
You are so obsessed with "remainers" it is really very sad, particularly as your little England view prevailed in large part. Move on Philip. One day your politics of division will creep up and damage something you hold dear no doubt. Good day to you, I must go and do some work!
The idea someone would smokescreen their Trump support to anonymous internet people by making hundreds of unequivocably anti Trump comments, is too ludicrous for words. To what purpose?
If doing that theyd be a 'I dont support Trump, but' person.
Biden recognised that and beat Trump in the polling booth. This strikes me as desperate from an opposition that has realised they aren't going to be able to do that.
Glad to see some here are still predicting the thousand year reich of BoZo
Do you understand the concept of owning property? Or rather the difference between owning and not owning something?
Do you understand buying things you can't afford with other peoples' money?
And the thing you "buy" isn't your asset.
I live in a rented flat. If I ask someone to lend me £10k to redecorate it, when I leave the landlord has the benefit of it. Not me. I haven't benefitted financially at all. I don't have the money in the bank to spend on anything else. I'm in the same position when I leave as when I arrived. The landlord has been "enriched".
What is it you're not understanding?
The real answer is the benefit is split.
Decorating probably has a life expectancy of 5-20 years depending on whats done. The tenancy deposit schemes have guidelines for the various life span of wallpaper, flooring, chairs, sofas etc.
If a £10k sofa has a life span of 10 years and the PM stays in office for 5 of them, then using the process that impacts deposits for other tenants across the land, he would have had £5k value, and the other £5k goes to future PMs.
It is incorrect to say he has the full benefit, but also incorrect to say he does not benefit.
Objection: If the PM’s apartment is really being decorated according to the tastes of Carrie Symonds’ favourite interior decoration then the next PM is going to view having to put up with that decor as a net disbenefit & demand to have it replaced immediately.
Tbh, I don't care one way or the other, I'd rather see Boris get done on something substantial not this kind of tittle tattle. There's so much to go after him on, the whole fucking second wave of the virus, for example and yet here we are arguing about who paid for some wallpaper.
The problem, from a political perspective, with the Covid comments is there is (so far) no proof.
The value of wallpapergate is that there are receipts.
Rubbish, the reason they can't go for COVID is because Starmer has been completely useless and supported all of the rubbish decisions the government has made. If Labour had actually properly opposed some of the bad decisions on not having managed quarantine for all incoming travel then they'd have a narrative.
This is going to end up as something that blue ticks on twitter wank themselves silly over but passes the wider public by completey.
So, we are (on the majority view) going to pay more tax, have more unemployment, less investment from UK based businesses but only 35% think their standard of living will decrease? Eliminating economics as a subject in State schools continues to pay dividends...
Tbh, I don't care one way or the other, I'd rather see Boris get done on something substantial not this kind of tittle tattle. There's so much to go after him on, the whole fucking second wave of the virus, for example and yet here we are arguing about who paid for some wallpaper.
The problem, from a political perspective, with the Covid comments is there is (so far) no proof.
The value of wallpapergate is that there are receipts.
Rubbish, the reason they can't go for COVID is because Starmer has been completely useless and supported all of the rubbish decisions the government has made. If Labour had actually properly opposed some of the bad decisions on not having managed quarantine for all incoming travel then they'd have a narrative.
This is going to end up as something that blue ticks on twitter wank themselves silly over but passes the wider public by completey.
They needed to say it in June and say it everyday until the policy changed or until the second wave was imported. This is why Starmer is captain hindsight. Useless.
Just had my 7th piece of literature from the LDs (over 5 separate drops). Priority 1? A cleaner, greener town.
Either they are blanketed the area intentionally or they are not giving good info to those delivering.
Kudos for effort.
Edit: all 7 are different, btw.
Scottish LibDems are well organised. I'll have put out three separate leaflets for the local candidates, and there's been two national leaflets sent out as a postal.
On the topic of first jobs. I worked Saturdays on the checkouts in Waitrose in 1994. £2.40/hour.
Student nurse, 1968, £360 per annum.
Good morning, everyone.
IT analyst, Ciba-Geigy Switzerland, 1977. £29,000/year - I asked for £25K and their HR guy smiled gently and said "we can do better than that". I was gobsmacked - I'd been unemployed for nearly 2 years after getting my PhD and was living off my parents. People with good careers sometimes think it just reflected their personal merits - I've never underestimated the importance of sheer luck. A few years later I was asked to set up the internet systems management unit just as the internet was taking off, which was a job that couldn't possibly go wrong, and by 1997 I was getting £90K and took a 50% pay cut to come back to the UK for Parliament.
Good luck to @Gallowgate - my advice is head down and graft but with your eyes open. Just get past that magic one year experience to clean up your cv then do one to a much better paid role unless they massively improve your deal. Taking notes is good advice but really you are looking to run down the clock past 12 months.
I'd suggest 1.5-2 years as a prospective employer, but if it's really awful you can probably get away with 12 months and then 12-18 months again at a slightly better job with the the third one being a longer term bet.
The short-term aim is to secure a training contract, hopefully at the firm I'll be working at. That'll pull my salary up to the mid-to-high 20s straight away. My new manager knows this is my goal, and paralegals are expected to jump ship ASAP if they get offered a training contract, so that works in my favour.
I cannot see what the problem is.
You, as a newly qualified or underqualified person sign a contract to work for a certain number of hours at the minimum wage.
You then decide to put in extra hours, free of charge, in order to impress your employer. You do this in the hope/expectation that they will be so impressed by your enthusiasm, ability etc etc that they offer you something more highly paid.
You then come on here complaining about being paid less than the minimum wage, and wondering how to use the law to force your employers to pay you more.
If I were your employer and were aware of all this, I do not think I would renew our contract.
Once again, the Westminster journalists are getting over-excited about process.
Tory MPs are not going to kick out the leader who just delivered them their biggest majority in three decades because of what's probably a failure of paperwork.
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
It definitely is, their "prosecution" of the Leave campaigns was nakedly political and their "judgement" was struck down by the courts.
If there is nothing to see that will no doubt be the ultimate result. The obfuscation at the moment would suggest that may not be the outcome.
I did NOT have decorating relations with that woman.....(crikey whats her name again) er...er..er..Miss Symonds
Tbh, I don't care one way or the other, I'd rather see Boris get done on something substantial not this kind of tittle tattle. There's so much to go after him on, the whole fucking second wave of the virus, for example and yet here we are arguing about who paid for some wallpaper.
Fair point, but, whether it is a fair or unfair analogy, Al Capone was jailed on tax evasion! But to be serious, the wallpaper is not the issue. The lying and obfuscation is a symptom of a wider malaise perhaps?
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
It definitely is, their "prosecution" of the Leave campaigns was nakedly political and their "judgement" was struck down by the courts.
If there is nothing to see that will no doubt be the ultimate result. The obfuscation at the moment would suggest that may not be the outcome.
I did NOT have decorating relations with that woman.....(crikey whats her name again) er...er..er..Miss Symonds
Tbh, I don't care one way or the other, I'd rather see Boris get done on something substantial not this kind of tittle tattle. There's so much to go after him on, the whole fucking second wave of the virus, for example and yet here we are arguing about who paid for some wallpaper.
Fair point, but, whether it is a fair or unfair analogy, Al Capone was jailed on tax evasion! But to be serious, the wallpaper is not the issue. The lying and obfuscation is a symptom of a wider malaise perhaps?
Let's list the possibilities.
1a Boris is shamed out of office for personal reasons, along the lines of David Mellor or Robin Cook. Not going to happen, because he's shameless.
1b Boris has such a calamitous policy failure that he's shamed out of office, along the lines of David Cameron. Not going to happen, because yada yada.
2 Boris is toppled by the party, as happened to Mrs T. That needs the party to decide that he's failed and that there's a plausible successor out there. Not going to happen for a long time.
3 Boris loses a general election. Not before 2024 at the earliest, he doesn't.
Conclusion: Boris won't go quickly for normal political reasons, because he's not a normal politician. That leaves two possibilities I can see.
4 Boris goes off in a huff when "we hail King Boris" turns into "we hate King Boris". Unlikely, but less unlikely with BoJo than with most of his predecessors, I suspect.
5 He does something that gets him into trouble with someone with external power and immunity to his blundering charm. Like the Electoral Commission or the District Auditor.
So, we are (on the majority view) going to pay more tax, have more unemployment, less investment from UK based businesses but only 35% think their standard of living will decrease? Eliminating economics as a subject in State schools continues to pay dividends...
Also, surprised at the contrast between more tax and more unemployment, but also more immigation.
And odd also that the consensus seems to be that it will be good for tourism.
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
It definitely is, their "prosecution" of the Leave campaigns was nakedly political and their "judgement" was struck down by the courts.
If there is nothing to see that will no doubt be the ultimate result. The obfuscation at the moment would suggest that may not be the outcome.
I did NOT have decorating relations with that woman.....(crikey whats her name again) er...er..er..Miss Symonds
Biden recognised that and beat Trump in the polling booth. This strikes me as desperate from an opposition that has realised they aren't going to be able to do that.
Glad to see some here are still predicting the thousand year reich of BoZo
Keep the faith, lads.
I remember when some tedious nullities were predicting his end over the Supreme Court affair.
Good luck to @Gallowgate - my advice is head down and graft but with your eyes open. Just get past that magic one year experience to clean up your cv then do one to a much better paid role unless they massively improve your deal. Taking notes is good advice but really you are looking to run down the clock past 12 months.
I'd suggest 1.5-2 years as a prospective employer, but if it's really awful you can probably get away with 12 months and then 12-18 months again at a slightly better job with the the third one being a longer term bet.
The short-term aim is to secure a training contract, hopefully at the firm I'll be working at. That'll pull my salary up to the mid-to-high 20s straight away. My new manager knows this is my goal, and paralegals are expected to jump ship ASAP if they get offered a training contract, so that works in my favour.
I cannot see what the problem is.
You, as a newly qualified or underqualified person sign a contract to work for a certain number of hours at the minimum wage.
You then decide to put in extra hours, free of charge, in order to impress your employer. You do this in the hope/expectation that they will be so impressed by your enthusiasm, ability etc etc that they offer you something more highly paid.
You then come on here complaining about being paid less than the minimum wage, and wondering how to use the law to force your employers to pay you more.
If I were your employer and were aware of all this, I do not think I would renew our contract.
I wasn't complaining — I was asking for advice on the best way to approach the situation from people on here who have many years experience in working in similar environments. If you hadn't immediately started frothing with rage, you would have noticed that I didn't ask how to use "the law to force my employers to pay me more".
You'll also have noticed that I stated that I anticipated the best course of action was to do nothing.
On your generic point, rather than my personal situation, the issue is the fine line between "decide to put in extra hours, free of charge" and an expectation of extra hours.
Thanks for your unwanted and unwarranted judgement.
Biden recognised that and beat Trump in the polling booth. This strikes me as desperate from an opposition that has realised they aren't going to be able to do that.
Glad to see some here are still predicting the thousand year reich of BoZo
Keep the faith, lads.
I remember when some tedious nullities were predicting his end over the Supreme Court affair.
How did that work out for you again?
He behaved atrociously but was not harmed politically.
I remember the whiplash of his actions not being about Brexit, apparently, but the court's judgement being them part of the remainer conspiracy to stop Brexit.
Good luck to @Gallowgate - my advice is head down and graft but with your eyes open. Just get past that magic one year experience to clean up your cv then do one to a much better paid role unless they massively improve your deal. Taking notes is good advice but really you are looking to run down the clock past 12 months.
I'd suggest 1.5-2 years as a prospective employer, but if it's really awful you can probably get away with 12 months and then 12-18 months again at a slightly better job with the the third one being a longer term bet.
The short-term aim is to secure a training contract, hopefully at the firm I'll be working at. That'll pull my salary up to the mid-to-high 20s straight away. My new manager knows this is my goal, and paralegals are expected to jump ship ASAP if they get offered a training contract, so that works in my favour.
I cannot see what the problem is.
You, as a newly qualified or underqualified person sign a contract to work for a certain number of hours at the minimum wage.
You then decide to put in extra hours, free of charge, in order to impress your employer. You do this in the hope/expectation that they will be so impressed by your enthusiasm, ability etc etc that they offer you something more highly paid.
You then come on here complaining about being paid less than the minimum wage, and wondering how to use the law to force your employers to pay you more.
If I were your employer and were aware of all this, I do not think I would renew our contract.
It is illegal for employers to structure work like this. It is up to them to manage the number of hours an employee works to stay within NMW guidelines. That is definitely an issue, albeit one which it is not in the employee's interest to tackle.
The societal impact is less social mobility as it is easier for those with wealthy families to take on these gateway jobs.
Tbh, I don't care one way or the other, I'd rather see Boris get done on something substantial not this kind of tittle tattle. There's so much to go after him on, the whole fucking second wave of the virus, for example and yet here we are arguing about who paid for some wallpaper.
The problem, from a political perspective, with the Covid comments is there is (so far) no proof.
The value of wallpapergate is that there are receipts.
Rubbish, the reason they can't go for COVID is because Starmer has been completely useless and supported all of the rubbish decisions the government has made. If Labour had actually properly opposed some of the bad decisions on not having managed quarantine for all incoming travel then they'd have a narrative.
This is going to end up as something that blue ticks on twitter wank themselves silly over but passes the wider public by completey.
That only goes half way, if that. Why not close the borders. No entry to non-residents other than for very limited essential humanitarian reasins, for which proof is required. Residents required to obtain exit visa before leaving, again for limited essential reasons (or if they don't intend returning)
Pity they didn't ask "The UK government would pay Scottish pensions":
Overall 51% opposed to independence and 49% in favour excluding undecideds and it is No 45% and Yes 44% including don't knows and most surprisingly Scottish Green Party voters oppose independence by 46% to just 43% in favour (p19).
With 84% of SNP voters in favour of independence but 95% of Scottish Conservative voters, 75% of Scottish Labour and 79% of Scottish LD voters opposed to independence then clearly anything less than an SNP or SNP and Alba majority could not be claimed by Sturgeon as a mandate for indyref2. An SNP and Green majority again would not do with most Green voters against independence https://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Lord-Ashcroft-Polls-Scottish-Political-Research-April-2021-2.pdf
So, we are (on the majority view) going to pay more tax, have more unemployment, less investment from UK based businesses but only 35% think their standard of living will decrease? Eliminating economics as a subject in State schools continues to pay dividends...
Also, surprised at the contrast between more tax and more unemployment, but also more immigation.
And odd also that the consensus seems to be that it will be good for tourism.
In fairness, when the Scottish pound collapses we may well be excellent value for tourism.
I think Scotland would not be harmed by more immigration, our population growth has been painfully slow. The problem in the UK is that they all bugger off to London sharpish but once we have the hard border at Carlisle this would be less of an issue.
So, we are (on the majority view) going to pay more tax, have more unemployment, less investment from UK based businesses but only 35% think their standard of living will decrease? Eliminating economics as a subject in State schools continues to pay dividends...
Hmmm - not sure how that seems all that positive for an Indy Scotland. Though you can see the emotional argument there - increase Scotland’s standing / inequality. But presumably inequality reduced as more people would be poorer.
Biden recognised that and beat Trump in the polling booth. This strikes me as desperate from an opposition that has realised they aren't going to be able to do that.
Glad to see some here are still predicting the thousand year reich of BoZo
Keep the faith, lads.
I remember when some tedious nullities were predicting his end over the Supreme Court affair.
How did that work out for you again?
He's definitely not going to win another election until next Thursday, that's for sure.
Tbh, I don't care one way or the other, I'd rather see Boris get done on something substantial not this kind of tittle tattle. There's so much to go after him on, the whole fucking second wave of the virus, for example and yet here we are arguing about who paid for some wallpaper.
The problem, from a political perspective, with the Covid comments is there is (so far) no proof.
The value of wallpapergate is that there are receipts.
Rubbish, the reason they can't go for COVID is because Starmer has been completely useless and supported all of the rubbish decisions the government has made. If Labour had actually properly opposed some of the bad decisions on not having managed quarantine for all incoming travel then they'd have a narrative.
This is going to end up as something that blue ticks on twitter wank themselves silly over but passes the wider public by completey.
They needed to say it in June and say it everyday until the policy changed or until the second wave was imported. This is why Starmer is captain hindsight. Useless.
Starmer while not perfect has consistently been ahead of the govt, normally by a couple of months.
If the govt had listened to him, we could have prevented a lot of the second wave deaths.
Even now - the govt is not doing hotel quarantine for all arrivals, months after Starmer has been calling for it.
Boris in top form in PMQs taking each question and moving it on to other issues like housing costs etc - every answer is like the usual 6th question response.
Good luck to @Gallowgate - my advice is head down and graft but with your eyes open. Just get past that magic one year experience to clean up your cv then do one to a much better paid role unless they massively improve your deal. Taking notes is good advice but really you are looking to run down the clock past 12 months.
I'd suggest 1.5-2 years as a prospective employer, but if it's really awful you can probably get away with 12 months and then 12-18 months again at a slightly better job with the the third one being a longer term bet.
The short-term aim is to secure a training contract, hopefully at the firm I'll be working at. That'll pull my salary up to the mid-to-high 20s straight away. My new manager knows this is my goal, and paralegals are expected to jump ship ASAP if they get offered a training contract, so that works in my favour.
I cannot see what the problem is.
You, as a newly qualified or underqualified person sign a contract to work for a certain number of hours at the minimum wage.
You then decide to put in extra hours, free of charge, in order to impress your employer. You do this in the hope/expectation that they will be so impressed by your enthusiasm, ability etc etc that they offer you something more highly paid.
You then come on here complaining about being paid less than the minimum wage, and wondering how to use the law to force your employers to pay you more.
If I were your employer and were aware of all this, I do not think I would renew our contract.
It is illegal for employers to structure work like this. It is up to them to manage the number of hours an employee works to stay within NMW guidelines. That is definitely an issue, albeit one which it is not in the employee's interest to tackle.
The societal impact is less social mobility as it is easier for those with wealthy families to take on these gateway jobs.
Maybe I shouldn't be surprised that what is presumably a firm of solicitors is prepared to break the law in this way. They certainly can't claim ignorance of the law.
So, we are (on the majority view) going to pay more tax, have more unemployment, less investment from UK based businesses but only 35% think their standard of living will decrease? Eliminating economics as a subject in State schools continues to pay dividends...
Hmmm - not sure how that seems all that positive for an Indy Scotland. Though you can see the emotional argument there - increase Scotland’s standing / inequality. But presumably inequality reduced as more people would be poorer.
It's an interesting analysis and certainly highlights what buttons the Unionists should be looking to press. Given the detailed findings I can only guess that the yes/no question was the first one asked. You would expect that to avoid any element of push polling but I wonder what it would have been had they done it at the end.
Glad to hear that Liar is being very clear that he has [now] covered the cost. And because he is so clear that he paid the money at the start he has asked the Permanent Secretary to find out who paid the invoice and will make whatever declarations he is required to do.
Electoral Commission on No11: “We are now satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred. We will therefore continue this work as a formal investigation to establish whether this is the case." https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1387345549716860930
the Electoral Commission is probably full of remainers or something
Yes. They harrassed for years Darren Grimes and others only to have all their allegations thrown out when it reached a real court.
Their treatment of Grimes in particular was dreadful. He asked permission at the time to do what he did, then was prosecuted afterwards by the EC for doing what they’d given him prior permission to do. Three times for the same offence. Thankfully he managed to get some good lawyers, and got the case heard in front of an actual high court judge who threw it out.
My point was that these organisations are only "full of remainers" when they do something "leavers" don't agree with.
The Supreme Court was also "full of remainers" I recall.
So do you think the way that the Electoral Commission treated Grimes and others was above board and impartial?
Or was it a partisan hatchet job that the Courts rightly chucked out in full?
Sometimes in the real world matters take on a momentum for good or ill. Not everything is a conspiracy, it is often just cock up. Btw: Have you heard from Q recently?
Partisanly looking into your opponents more than your own side isn't a conspiracy, just partisanship. We see it on here every single day.
You're the one who sees conspiracies everywhere not me. I've never had the time of day for Trump or his supporters and I made my opinion on him abundantly clear - even if you're functionally illiterate and can't tell the difference between someone backing Biden and someone backing Trump.
A smokescreen for your very close alignment with Trump and his populist world view, or just an indicator of your immaturity, lack of political understanding and intellectual confusion perhaps? I certainly don't sees "conspiracies everywhere" you silly boy, I leave that to folks who spend their whole day rattling away on their keyboard and dreaming of Q. Oh sorry does that apply to you?
You are so obsessed with "remainers" it is really very sad, particularly as your little England view prevailed in large part. Move on Philip. One day your politics of division will creep up and damage something you hold dear no doubt. Good day to you, I must go and do some work!
The idea someone would smokescreen their Trump support to anonymous internet people by making hundreds of unequivocably anti Trump comments, is too ludicrous for words. To what purpose?
If doing that theyd be a 'I dont support Trump, but' person.
Not one to leap to Philip's defence but I'm not even 100% convinced he's a proper Eng Nat. Did not get his flag out on St George's Day, offering the (to my ears) very thin excuse of having "lost his pole".
The flat is clearly the bigger issue than the pile the bodies high comment. I actually think Boris could be in trouble on this.
I think the flat issue is far too technical. Even I don't fully understand it.
I figured the issue was the lack of proper declarations rather than the fact someone else was paying for it? However we seem to be arguing about whether it was right for someone else to pay for it at all, which, to me, is a different issue.
On the topic of first jobs. I worked Saturdays on the checkouts in Waitrose in 1994. £2.40/hour.
Student nurse, 1968, £360 per annum.
Good morning, everyone.
IT analyst, Ciba-Geigy Switzerland, 1977. £29,000/year - I asked for £25K and their HR guy smiled gently and said "we can do better than that". I was gobsmacked - I'd been unemployed for nearly 2 years after getting my PhD and was living off my parents. People with good careers sometimes think it just reflected their personal merits - I've never underestimated the importance of sheer luck. A few years later I was asked to set up the internet systems management unit just as the internet was taking off, which was a job that couldn't possibly go wrong, and by 1997 I was getting £90K and took a 50% pay cut to come back to the UK for Parliament.
That's generous. But they were and are. Expensive place to live.
Software Engineer, straight from 4 year sponsored Uni course to UK telecomms company, Nottingham, 1988 - £9.4k .
Good luck to @Gallowgate - my advice is head down and graft but with your eyes open. Just get past that magic one year experience to clean up your cv then do one to a much better paid role unless they massively improve your deal. Taking notes is good advice but really you are looking to run down the clock past 12 months.
I'd suggest 1.5-2 years as a prospective employer, but if it's really awful you can probably get away with 12 months and then 12-18 months again at a slightly better job with the the third one being a longer term bet.
The short-term aim is to secure a training contract, hopefully at the firm I'll be working at. That'll pull my salary up to the mid-to-high 20s straight away. My new manager knows this is my goal, and paralegals are expected to jump ship ASAP if they get offered a training contract, so that works in my favour.
I cannot see what the problem is.
You, as a newly qualified or underqualified person sign a contract to work for a certain number of hours at the minimum wage.
You then decide to put in extra hours, free of charge, in order to impress your employer. You do this in the hope/expectation that they will be so impressed by your enthusiasm, ability etc etc that they offer you something more highly paid.
You then come on here complaining about being paid less than the minimum wage, and wondering how to use the law to force your employers to pay you more.
If I were your employer and were aware of all this, I do not think I would renew our contract.
It is illegal for employers to structure work like this. It is up to them to manage the number of hours an employee works to stay within NMW guidelines. That is definitely an issue, albeit one which it is not in the employee's interest to tackle.
The societal impact is less social mobility as it is easier for those with wealthy families to take on these gateway jobs.
Maybe I shouldn't be surprised that what is presumably a firm of solicitors is prepared to break the law in this way. They certainly can't claim ignorance of the law.
To be fair we dont know that his bosses wont pull Gallowgate aside and say you are contracted to work 40 hours and are working 55 hours, thats too high and you need to stay under 50 hours (or whatever hours take it to the correct level). They may have processes in place to avoid breaking the law that Gallowgate is so far unaware of.
The flat is clearly the bigger issue than the pile the bodies high comment. I actually think Boris could be in trouble on this.
I think the flat issue is far too technical. Even I don't fully understand it.
I figured the issue was the lack of proper declarations rather than the fact someone else was paying for it? However we seem to be arguing about whether it was right for someone else to pay for it at all, which, to me, is a different issue.
Yes, the loan isn't the issue, its the lack of declaration of the loan. It is explicitly both illegal and a resignation offence to have taken such monies and not declared it.
Comments
Lord Geidt, former private secretary to the Queen, appointed as the independent adviser on Minister's interest
It's doing great damage to our politics and I hope he pays for it one day.
It was early, so no queues or anything. Cardiac nurse who took my details was volunteering in her holiday. Cannot describe how grateful we should be for all who have stepped up during this time.
And now a plea - she was upset at seeing discarded facemasks when out walking. I heartily concur - please - put RUBBISH IN THE BIN. I know its the 5%, but if you are one of them, please, think, and become a better person.
Once again, the Westminster journalists are getting over-excited about process.
Tory MPs are not going to kick out the leader who just delivered them their biggest majority in three decades because of what's probably a failure of paperwork.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1387352648781897729?s=20
Either they are blanketed the area intentionally or they are not giving good info to those delivering.
Kudos for effort.
Edit: all 7 are different, btw.
Compliance with the law on political donations is an absolute offence - you are either compliant or you are not. For Ministers there is a very clear set of rules that cover this. The Ministerial Code. With a forward from Boris Johnson stating that he will not accept behaviour like not declaring loans and donations.
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2021/04/my-new-scottish-research-finds-independence-in-the-balance/
The value of wallpapergate is that there are receipts.
Given that most people will remain in education to 18, there is little point in doing anything at age 16 beyond maths, english and whatever science / humanities you wish to drop going forward.
Keep the faith, lads.
Remember the only reason the EU are doing this is to point the blame at anyone apart from themselves.
Good morning, everyone.
You are so obsessed with "remainers" it is really very sad, particularly as your little England view prevailed in large part. Move on Philip. One day your politics of division will creep up and damage something you hold dear no doubt. Good day to you, I must go and do some work!
This is going to end up as something that blue ticks on twitter wank themselves silly over but passes the wider public by completey.
I was in town this morning and there was a huge queue at the vaccination centre of quite young looking people
Many of his opponents want him gone and mainly as a legacy of Brexit that they do not like, but as long as he is popular his MPs will not remove him , but if that changes he could swiftly be replaced
That is why the conservative party wins elections
We're at herd immunity already I expect. The big questions to be asked should be why its still illegal to meet others indoors for another three weeks.
No chance restrictions should be coming back once they're removed already. Well done UK and the Government have done a great job on the real issues of the day.
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Lord-Ashcroft-Polls-Scottish-Political-Research-April-2021-2.pdf
This is the line of probing I'd like to see from Starmer at PMQs today.
If doing that theyd be a 'I dont support Trump, but' person.
You, as a newly qualified or underqualified person sign a contract to work for a certain number of hours at the minimum wage.
You then decide to put in extra hours, free of charge, in order to impress your employer. You do this in the hope/expectation that they will be so impressed by your enthusiasm, ability etc etc that they offer you something more highly paid.
You then come on here complaining about being paid less than the minimum wage, and wondering how to use the law to force your employers to pay you more.
If I were your employer and were aware of all this, I do not think I would renew our contract.
1.8 million, 2.5m total jabs done to date.
1a Boris is shamed out of office for personal reasons, along the lines of David Mellor or Robin Cook. Not going to happen, because he's shameless.
1b Boris has such a calamitous policy failure that he's shamed out of office, along the lines of David Cameron. Not going to happen, because yada yada.
2 Boris is toppled by the party, as happened to Mrs T. That needs the party to decide that he's failed and that there's a plausible successor out there. Not going to happen for a long time.
3 Boris loses a general election. Not before 2024 at the earliest, he doesn't.
Conclusion: Boris won't go quickly for normal political reasons, because he's not a normal politician. That leaves two possibilities I can see.
4 Boris goes off in a huff when "we hail King Boris" turns into "we hate King Boris". Unlikely, but less unlikely with BoJo than with most of his predecessors, I suspect.
5 He does something that gets him into trouble with someone with external power and immunity to his blundering charm. Like the Electoral Commission or the District Auditor.
Have I missed anything?
And odd also that the consensus seems to be that it will be good for tourism.
Why be fair ?
How did that work out for you again?
You'll also have noticed that I stated that I anticipated the best course of action was to do nothing.
On your generic point, rather than my personal situation, the issue is the fine line between "decide to put in extra hours, free of charge" and an expectation of extra hours.
Thanks for your unwanted and unwarranted judgement.
I remember the whiplash of his actions not being about Brexit, apparently, but the court's judgement being them part of the remainer conspiracy to stop Brexit.
The societal impact is less social mobility as it is easier for those with wealthy families to take on these gateway jobs.
With 84% of SNP voters in favour of independence but 95% of Scottish Conservative voters, 75% of Scottish Labour and 79% of Scottish LD voters opposed to independence then clearly anything less than an SNP or SNP and Alba majority could not be claimed by Sturgeon as a mandate for indyref2. An SNP and Green majority again would not do with most Green voters against independence
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Lord-Ashcroft-Polls-Scottish-Political-Research-April-2021-2.pdf
I think Scotland would not be harmed by more immigration, our population growth has been painfully slow. The problem in the UK is that they all bugger off to London sharpish but once we have the hard border at Carlisle this would be less of an issue.
If the govt had listened to him, we could have prevented a lot of the second wave deaths.
Even now - the govt is not doing hotel quarantine for all arrivals, months after Starmer has been calling for it.
Partisanship cuts both ways.
I figured the issue was the lack of proper declarations rather than the fact someone else was paying for it? However we seem to be arguing about whether it was right for someone else to pay for it at all, which, to me, is a different issue.
Software Engineer, straight from 4 year sponsored Uni course to UK telecomms company, Nottingham, 1988 - £9.4k .
I love it