Liam Norton from Insulate Britain is challenged following the discovery that he hasn't insulated his own home.
@susannareid100 and Journalist @DawnNeesom question why he hasn't insulated his own home but is putting his own life and others lives at risk by protesting.
If it wasn't for the last 4 years of specifically Macron trying to punish the UK I might feel sorry for him with this pile on, as it stands it is funny to sit and watch him try and squirm his way out of a discussion on France's UNSC seat.
When the UK was in the EU there was no pressure for the French to give the EU the seat because the EU had (most of the time) 2 controllable votes out of the 5 permanent members.
Now they only have a single vote and the justification above that stopped the EU trying to grab the seat has disappeared alongside Brexit.
I suspect we will see continual comments about this throughout the next year as it is definitely worth some votes for French Presidential candidates.
Treating de Gaulle and the French so well during the War by insisting on them having a zone of occupation in Germany and a permanent seat on the Security Council was one of Churchill's biggest blunders. As Bismarck said, is a mistake to count on the gratitude of a nation, especially France.
To avoid deadlock you do need an odd number of permanent members and I suspect when you look back to 1945 there weren't really that many other plausible alternatives.
Since each of the permanent members has a veto there's no advantage to an odd number, as you'll never have something passing 3-2, and there are other non-permanent members of the Security Council who can make the numbers odd if desired.
It made sense for the UK to include France, because otherwise Britain's position as a veto-wielding member would come into question.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
Pret anecdote:
several years ago I used to have the chicken caesar and bacon baguette for lunch every day. Then I went away for a couple of weeks, came back and bought the same again. I could hardly eat it as it tasted as though it had been marinated in salt.
Haven't had one since - there is a *lot* of salt in a lot of the food we buy.
Hiring new workers? Fantastic.
Salt from the food we buy is that missing ingredient that makes it nice... Its laced into all ready meals, bread, everything you can think of. Oh, and in the your curry, pizza whatever. We don't salt our veg in this house, and don't miss it. Can really tell in other peoples cooking.
It stands out most starkly for me when I make bread ("make" - shove the ingredients into a bread maker). At first it seems tasteless because as you say there is so much salt in everything.
Possibly the most redundant item in peoples' households apart from their stash of bottled water is a salt cellar.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
Any sign of a pulse? Perhaps an argument on something might be a good idea,
Plenty of pulse. We don't get much of a hearing these days and it is almost fashionable for people to deliberately not listen and then say "nothing of interest". Its fine, the battle is street by street anyway rebuilding from the ground up.
It will never happen as long as donkeys like Davey are leading the remnants of a once democratic party. If you are in touch with them in Scotland you will have seen how far they have fallen and how dire a state they are in. Struggle to fill a taxi.
The lib dems were strong in Wales at one time but they have virtually disappeared in Welsh politics
It is labour v conservative v plaid
The LDs still have 1 AM in Mid and West Wales which is their strongest region and where they also briefly elected an MP in the August 2019 by election in Brecon and Radnor before losing the seat again at the general election
You live in England I actually live in Wales and the lib dems are not in the mix
Liberal Democrats nearly wiped out in Wales after losing only ... https://www.itv.com › news › wales › 2021-05-07 › lib...
Brecon and Radnorshire is still the LDs 23rd target seat ie higher than any LD targets in the Midlands or North East of England where the LDs also don't have any constituency elected representatives in parliament
The EU has always been about ever greater integration and power shifting from periphery (nation states) to centre (the EU itself). Partly that's due to mechanical necessity (with so many members now vetoes everywhere would make it unworkable) but also down to ideology, trying to manufacture a nation called Europe.
It'd also be quite perverse, given the UK would've really liked the idea of a looser membership.
But losing the UK from their orbit was a massive kick in the nuts to the idea that it is only ever closer union. It is possible they could make the same mistake they made with the UK. But I suspect if confronted with "associate membership - or we're off", they'd fold.
Not only that but once May was replaced with Johnson the negotiations to make Britain hurt absolutely and miserably failed. Instead Britain is going from strength to strength now and not looking back.
Countries in the EU will be able to look at what happened with Brexit, see where mistakes were made, and what went right, and learn lessons if they choose to do the same.
Plus of course few if any other EU members would have issues like the NI border and GFA to consider which has been the only real long term drama from Brexit. Brexit itself is going smoothly.
Mr. Mark, other countries leaving is a bigger step for them due to either their economic size, the eurozone, or both.
The UK was always less into the EU (something eurocrats can be forgiven for misunderstanding given our disproportionally pro-EU political class) than every other member state.
Greece still wanted the euro when it was crushing their economy.
I think it's very unlikely other countries will have serious attempts to leave.
At least I'll never hear about godsdamned chlorinated chicken ever again.
+1 - there are very few upsides to a trade deal with the US and am awful lot of downsides
One of the downsides of no US deal is we have ripped up a local trade deal that was great for British business, and Global Britain and Brexit is built on the promise we can make up anything lost with new agreements elsewhere?
I get so fed up of this. That "great" local trade deal created a trade deficit of £80bn a year which, over 20 years, transformed us from a net creditor nation (that is with a net income flow into this country from foreign investment) into a significantly indebted country (where there is a significant and increasing net outflow of income generated here to other countries).
All of our children and their children will have a lower standard of living as a result.
The possible trade deal with the US has to be subject to the same analysis. Would it damage our existing trade surplus with the US to our detriment? Would it expose significant parts of our own industry to competition they cannot cope with? In the case of the US this would largely be agricultural items where the mass scale of US production makes it pretty much impossible for UK producers to compete. So they get wiped out and a lot of our countryside returns to wild land. Do we really want that? Or do we want to keep what we have, which is a series of mini deals covering areas like finance where we are on a level playing field?
A trade deal with the US was always of dubious value because a red line for the Americans is access for their industrial agricultural producers, who British farmers simply can't compete with in the high volume, low quality segment (which is most of it). But the value of a trade deal doesn't lie in its effect on the bilateral trade surplus (otherwise they could never happen). The trade and current account balances reflect the decisions of millions of consumers and firms. As a country we would need to save more and consume and invest less if we wanted a current account surplus. But with floating exchange rates it's not something I lose sleep about, personally. I would rather we had a "better" trade balance, because it would reflect a more balanced economy with a better mix of jobs, but in the long list of ways that this country falls short of my hopes and expectations this wouldn't even be in the top 10.
I agree somewhat (that the balance of trade is not critical). NZ has run a persistent trade deficit for 25 years and no one there cares, it’s not at all discussed.
Doing so allows NZers to import lovely consumables and so you could argue it maximises overall consumer utility.
Having said that, I do thing in the long term a trade deficit moves you to a “branch economy”. Systemic industries (like banking) in NZ are overseas owned and HQ’d.
Secondly I think there are distribution issues, as exporting drives productivity which means better paid jobs.
If it wasn't for the last 4 years of specifically Macron trying to punish the UK I might feel sorry for him with this pile on, as it stands it is funny to sit and watch him try and squirm his way out of a discussion on France's UNSC seat.
When the UK was in the EU there was no pressure for the French to give the EU the seat because the EU had (most of the time) 2 controllable votes out of the 5 permanent members.
Now they only have a single vote and the justification above that stopped the EU trying to grab the seat has disappeared alongside Brexit.
I suspect we will see continual comments about this throughout the next year as it is definitely worth some votes for French Presidential candidates.
Treating de Gaulle and the French so well during the War by insisting on them having a zone of occupation in Germany and a permanent seat on the Security Council was one of Churchill's biggest blunders. As Bismarck said, is a mistake to count on the gratitude of a nation, especially France.
To avoid deadlock you do need an odd number of permanent members and I suspect when you look back to 1945 there weren't really that many other plausible alternatives.
Since each of the permanent members has a veto there's no advantage to an odd number, as you'll never have something passing 3-2, and there are other non-permanent members of the Security Council who can make the numbers odd if desired.
It made sense for the UK to include France, because otherwise Britain's position as a veto-wielding member would come into question.
Britain's position wasn't a question, Britain was quite rightly a major power of the time and despite many people (especially on the left) thinking little of this country we still are a major power.
Yes, I remember our Talbot Horizon started to exhibit rust inside 18 months.
We still have to do MoTs after 3 years to this day, even though it's probably totally unnecessary and 5 years would easily do.
Everything Australian is now en vogue so we should just do away with MoTs. They seem to manage without them altogether.
My dad bought a new Jaguar XJ6 (Gunmetal Metallic, black interior) in 1988. By Xmas '89 it had significant rust on both A pillars. The dealer actually said, "They all do that" with a straight face. I topped it out at 125mph on my 21st birthday.
So your farther found an honest car dealer?!!! Diogenes can rest at last.....
My dad liked him so much he went back 4 years later and bought an XJ12 in Miscarriage Pearl Red Metallic. That somehow wasn't as unreliable or as shoddy as the XJ6. I never topped that out; it would do 145mph in theory but really didn't have a lot of punch at the top of rev range and it would have needed 20+ miles to get there.
Is it true that the XJ6 was made from a softer grade of steel that was easier to work - stamp, form etc? That also happened to be more prone to rust....
I highly doubt it as that would demonstrate a profundity in production management that would be utterly beyond BL/Jaguar.
One skill that is deeply embedded in British management is the stupid substitution of cheaper materials without understanding the consequences.
I (an IT geek) once stopped an... interesting moment happening. I was attending a meeting at the oil company I worked for (I had a habit of getting myself into all kinds of meetings to see the business). A manager was proudly declaiming on how he'd saved a packet by changing the specification for some wellhead gear from stainless to regular steel.
Which set me thinking about *why* it was stainless in the first place. So I asked some people. Then went to my boss in a hurry.....
The well in question had lots of water in the oil (among other things). And the oil came out very hot. At high temperatures and pressures, murderously corrosive. The regular steel would literally be eaten away....
Apparently the manager had just seen that there was a cheaper option - and made the change without bothering to get an engineer to give an opinion.
The LDs are dead in Wales. It’s sad; I think it used to be their strongest region.
They were very strong at one time and indeed we had a good friend who was a lib dem councillor and worked prodiguosly, indeed she was on two of my non political committees
I see that three migrants yesterday froze to death on the border between Belorussia and Poland - an example of what happens if Priti P deterrent strategies are really implemented, as Poland's rulers are doing. This seems to me a real scandal - yes, migration can be inconvenient and cause all sorts of problems, but allowing people to die of cold within Europe is a different order of magnitude that should be getting much more attention.
I don't doubt there will be people undergoing hardship trying to cross into Poland but surely its far too early in the year for people to freeze to death ?
IIRC the border between Poland and Belarus is forests and marshes not mountains.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
You keep repeating this fake news, presumably because it's reported in the Mail or whatever. Others have referred to it as well - why was she banned? The T-shirt episode was just the icing on the cake, a mere slither of the whole.
From what I can find out, she (Natalie Bird) led a prolonged and public campaign of opposition to Lib Dem policy over a number of years. In particular, she repeatedly argued that even if a man had fully transitioned to being a woman, s(he) was still a (biological) man, and therefore should not be allowed into women's refuges, again in particular. So basically she refused to accept that a trans man could become a woman (although she recognised the right of people to define themselves however they wish). There's more to it than that, but I guess it's sub judice.
As a Labour Party chap, the actions of the Lib Dems don't seem unreasonable to me.
“What words have been added to Ofcom's 'offensive' list?
Karen: A pejorative term for an obnoxious, angry, entitled, and often racist middle-aged white woman
Gammon: A term referring to the colour of a person's flushed face when expressing their strong opinions, associated particularly with right-wing brexiteers
Libtard: A word used to describe people on the political left who are perceived to be easily offended, 'woke' and overly politically correct
Snowflake: Someone perceived as too sensitive, easily offended and outraged
Feminazi: A term used to describe an outspoken and radical feminist
Boomer: An insult for baby boomers who are perceived to be out of touch and dismissive of younger generations
Remoaner: Someone against Brexit perceived to be constantly complaining about it
Terf: A 'trans-exclusionary radical feminist' - used to describe people who reject the assertion that trans women are women and are opposed to trans-rights legislation”
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
Any sign of a pulse? Perhaps an argument on something might be a good idea,
Plenty of pulse. We don't get much of a hearing these days and it is almost fashionable for people to deliberately not listen and then say "nothing of interest". Its fine, the battle is street by street anyway rebuilding from the ground up.
It will never happen as long as donkeys like Davey are leading the remnants of a once democratic party. If you are in touch with them in Scotland you will have seen how far they have fallen and how dire a state they are in. Struggle to fill a taxi.
The lib dems were strong in Wales at one time but they have virtually disappeared in Welsh politics
It is labour v conservative v plaid
The LDs still have 1 AM in Mid and West Wales which is their strongest region and where they also briefly elected an MP in the August 2019 by election in Brecon and Radnor before losing the seat again at the general election
You live in England I actually live in Wales and the lib dems are not in the mix
Liberal Democrats nearly wiped out in Wales after losing only ... https://www.itv.com › news › wales › 2021-05-07 › lib...
Brecon and Radnorshire is still the LDs 23rd target seat ie higher than any LD targets in the Midlands or North East of England where the LDs also don't have any constituency elected representatives in parliament
Not only Brecon and Radnorshire but Ceredigion too, 30th on the LD target list and held by Plaid, are in the top 50 LD target seats ie all within possible range if the LDs had a very good night at the next general election.
On trainee GPs and not working full-time. The research is by King's Fund.
Here is a relevant section:
"The growth of part-time working in general practice has been widely attributed to feminisation of the workforce.
However, our survey showed that intentions for part-time or portfolio working are common across both sexes. Although a greater proportion of female than male respondents intend to work part-time and fewer intend to work full-time, these differences diminish over progressive career points. Looking ahead to 10 years after qualification, the proportion of male and female respondents intending to work full-time was 13 per cent and 8 per cent respectively while the proportion intending to work part-time was 20 per cent and 26 per cent respectively. By contrast, a greater proportion of male respondents than female respondents reported that they would choose a portfolio career although again these differences diminish over time. 25 per cent of male respondents and 14 per cent of females respondents plan to have a portfolio career 1 year after qualifying, rising to 51 per cent of male respondents and 48 per cent of female respondents 10 years after qualification. The most commonly cited reason for not pursuing full time clinical work was ‘intensity of the working day’ rather than ‘family commitments’ "
(My bolding)
I don't think it's always realised how emotionally demanding 'seeing patients' all day can be. Especially when combined with some at least responsible;lity for managing the practice.
Yep. The King's Fund note that a lot of the part time working is to free up one or two days a week to manage the local commissioning group and do other admin and so on.
We are not training anywhere near enough medics if they plan to only work part-time.
I would suggest that Primary Care Trusts did a much better job than CCG's; full time managers rather than part-time GP's running them.
Is there a single aspect of the utter dog's breakfast that Cameron allowed Lansley to create that should be kept?
I did not understand at the time, and still do not, why Cameron allowed Lansley free rein. As far as I could see Lansley was largely paying off some personal debts. Sadly no-one on the LibDem side of the Coalition had the nous to realise what Lansley was doing.
I’m not a health systems expert, but on the face of it, Lansley’s reforms seemed like a good way of decentralising the NHS and improving incentives within the system.
It turned out to be a disaster, but I’m not sure why.
It was full of perverse incentives.
Take one example: Hospital discharges a patient, they return as an emergency admission within 28 (was it*) days then the hospital does not get paid for the return admission (and maybe the original, I forget). Thinking being that they discharged too early so should be incentivised to not do that by sending sick people home.
Perverse incentives: 1. Be over cautious about discharge - keep some people in hospital if they're at a stage in life where they may well come back within 28 days even if they don't actually need hospital care (bed blockers) 2. GPs can bounce the patient back into hospital within 28 days of a dishcarge without the CCG having to pick up the bill (as the hospital pays instead)
*when I was doing research in this kind of area, the reforms were just coming in/announced but not yet in place. These were some issue identified at the time, but some could be innaccurate or never actually enacted
Mr. Mark, other countries leaving is a bigger step for them due to either their economic size, the eurozone, or both.
The UK was always less into the EU (something eurocrats can be forgiven for misunderstanding given our disproportionally pro-EU political class) than every other member state.
Greece still wanted the euro when it was crushing their economy.
I think it's very unlikely other countries will have serious attempts to leave.
Sweden and a few other nations could potentially leave that aren't in the Eurozone.
And there's the possibility that Norway and Switzerland could leave the EEA/EFTA respectively.
If it wasn't for the last 4 years of specifically Macron trying to punish the UK I might feel sorry for him with this pile on, as it stands it is funny to sit and watch him try and squirm his way out of a discussion on France's UNSC seat.
When the UK was in the EU there was no pressure for the French to give the EU the seat because the EU had (most of the time) 2 controllable votes out of the 5 permanent members.
Now they only have a single vote and the justification above that stopped the EU trying to grab the seat has disappeared alongside Brexit.
I suspect we will see continual comments about this throughout the next year as it is definitely worth some votes for French Presidential candidates.
Treating de Gaulle and the French so well during the War by insisting on them having a zone of occupation in Germany and a permanent seat on the Security Council was one of Churchill's biggest blunders. As Bismarck said, is a mistake to count on the gratitude of a nation, especially France.
To avoid deadlock you do need an odd number of permanent members and I suspect when you look back to 1945 there weren't really that many other plausible alternatives.
No because when a permanent member votes against a substantive resolution, it is automatically a veto. The potential for deadlock is the same whether there is an odd or an even number of SC members.
Though if we had to lose China as well, it wouldn't have been a tragedy. That was Roosevelt's mistake.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
Any source for that (the idea that Pret couldn’t survive) or did you just make it up like all your other posts?
I am pleasantly surprised to see Pret expanding given the blow they’ve received during Covid. I take this as a vote of confidence in the revival of cities.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
Obviously you have an absolute right to vote any way you like, but I don't think I'm going to expend energy battling with Rochdale Pioneers over which of us has the best chance of winning you over. The project to make hell freeze over is more urgent.
Nick in most constituencies the answer to Labour or LibDem is "whichever has the best chance of winning". Both parties should run in all seats - I am not a fan of dodgy deals. But the targeting can be explicit - LibDem candidates in seats where Labour have the best chance should target Tory voters. And vice-versa.
I see that three migrants yesterday froze to death on the border between Belorussia and Poland - an example of what happens if Priti P deterrent strategies are really implemented, as Poland's rulers are doing. This seems to me a real scandal - yes, migration can be inconvenient and cause all sorts of problems, but allowing people to die of cold within Europe is a different order of magnitude that should be getting much more attention.
I don't doubt there will be people undergoing hardship trying to cross into Poland but surely its far too early in the year for people to freeze to death ?
IIRC the border between Poland and Belarus is forests and marshes not mountains.
You can get exposure and die from it in remarkably mild weather, if you don't have the right clothing or shelter.
Trying to stop such tragedies was the reason behind the idea of getting people to make their asylum claims from refugee camps.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
Surely there must be more to that story, than simply wearing a T-shirt?
Now clearly she was a feminist campaigner, but the punishment certainly doesnt appear to match the crime from what we have heard.
Yep. Which is why I am not remotely phased by the allegation that she was "banned for wearing a t-shirt". This is what the toxified culture war trans issue does - creates absolute straw man positions which both extremes fight over.
Meanwhile in the real world, the issue needs debate and for a balance to be found.
So what was she banned for?
I don't think it's necessarily wrong for a party to ban members for expressing opinions. There have to be boundaries to what publicly stated beliefs are and aren't compatible with party membership. This is, after all, the process Labour is going through with anti-semitism. But it does concern me that the apparent belief that a woman is an adult human female is judged to be beyond the pale for Britain's third largest party.
I don't know what she was banned for. But the idea that a liberal party has banned someone for wearing a t-shirt is so laughable as to be obvious that there is a lot more to it than that.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
Surely there must be more to that story, than simply wearing a T-shirt?
Now clearly she was a feminist campaigner, but the punishment certainly doesnt appear to match the crime from what we have heard.
Yep. Which is why I am not remotely phased by the allegation that she was "banned for wearing a t-shirt". This is what the toxified culture war trans issue does - creates absolute straw man positions which both extremes fight over.
Meanwhile in the real world, the issue needs debate and for a balance to be found.
It needs something, but I'm not sure that debate is the word to describe what it needs. Fairly or not, the word debate is too tied up at the moment with ideas of getting what you want by using rhetoric to win the argument, where "win the argument" means 51% beats 49%. And that's what's getting us into this mess (among others) in the first place.
Unfortunately, I don't have an answer beyond "wouldn't it be great to be nice to people for a change" and Douglas Adams fans will recognise what happened last time that was suggested.
Invading a motorway is reckless & puts lives at risk. I asked National Highways to seek an injunction against M25 protestors which a judge granted last night. Effective later today, activists will face contempt of court with possible imprisonment if they flout.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
Surely there must be more to that story, than simply wearing a T-shirt?
Now clearly she was a feminist campaigner, but the punishment certainly doesnt appear to match the crime from what we have heard.
Yep. Which is why I am not remotely phased by the allegation that she was "banned for wearing a t-shirt". This is what the toxified culture war trans issue does - creates absolute straw man positions which both extremes fight over.
Meanwhile in the real world, the issue needs debate and for a balance to be found.
So what was she banned for?
I don't think it's necessarily wrong for a party to ban members for expressing opinions. There have to be boundaries to what publicly stated beliefs are and aren't compatible with party membership. This is, after all, the process Labour is going through with anti-semitism. But it does concern me that the apparent belief that a woman is an adult human female is judged to be beyond the pale for Britain's third largest party.
I don't know what she was banned for. But the idea that a liberal party has banned someone for wearing a t-shirt is so laughable as to be obvious that there is a lot more to it than that.
It wouldn't be the first time that the Liberal Democrats have been justifiably accused of not being a liberal party.
Considering this has come out and got them criticism its noteworthy that no more has been said on the matter yet.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
Any sign of a pulse? Perhaps an argument on something might be a good idea,
Plenty of pulse. We don't get much of a hearing these days and it is almost fashionable for people to deliberately not listen and then say "nothing of interest". Its fine, the battle is street by street anyway rebuilding from the ground up.
It will never happen as long as donkeys like Davey are leading the remnants of a once democratic party. If you are in touch with them in Scotland you will have seen how far they have fallen and how dire a state they are in. Struggle to fill a taxi.
The lib dems were strong in Wales at one time but they have virtually disappeared in Welsh politics
It is labour v conservative v plaid
The LDs still have 1 AM in Mid and West Wales which is their strongest region and where they also briefly elected an MP in the August 2019 by election in Brecon and Radnor before losing the seat again at the general election
You live in England I actually live in Wales and the lib dems are not in the mix
Liberal Democrats nearly wiped out in Wales after losing only ... https://www.itv.com › news › wales › 2021-05-07 › lib...
Brecon and Radnorshire is still the LDs 23rd target seat ie higher than any LD targets in the Midlands or North East of England where the LDs also don't have any constituency elected representatives in parliament
Not only Brecon and Radnorshire but Ceredigion too, 30th on the LD target list and held by Plaid, are in the top 50 LD target seats ie all within possible range if the LDs had a very good night at the next general election.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
Pret anecdote:
several years ago I used to have the chicken caesar and bacon baguette for lunch every day. Then I went away for a couple of weeks, came back and bought the same again. I could hardly eat it as it tasted as though it had been marinated in salt.
Haven't had one since - there is a *lot* of salt in a lot of the food we buy.
Hiring new workers? Fantastic.
Salt from the food we buy is that missing ingredient that makes it nice... Its laced into all ready meals, bread, everything you can think of. Oh, and in the your curry, pizza whatever. We don't salt our veg in this house, and don't miss it. Can really tell in other peoples cooking.
It stands out most starkly for me when I make bread ("make" - shove the ingredients into a bread maker). At first it seems tasteless because as you say there is so much salt in everything.
Possibly the most redundant item in peoples' households apart from their stash of bottled water is a salt cellar.
Yes, whenever we cook our own food, little if no salt goes into it. One teaspoon in the bread-maker bread. The stuff is terrible for you.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
Obviously you have an absolute right to vote any way you like, but I don't think I'm going to expend energy battling with Rochdale Pioneers over which of us has the best chance of winning you over. The project to make hell freeze over is more urgent.
It doesn't matter which of them he votes for as far as I am concerned either a Labour or a LD vote would not be a Tory vote and given the LDs would prop up a Starmer government both votes would therefore be anti Boris
Voting Lib Dem has had only one notable impact: propping up a Tory government that shredded the social fabric of the country and went on to give us Brexit.
The biggest mis-step by Clegg and the Coalition was in demanding all discussion of UK in the EU be closed down for five years.
If in 2010 Cameron and Clegg had stood in the Rose Garden, announcing that within the year the British people would be given the chance to vote again on our remaining in the EU, Miliband would have enthusiastically campaigned with them - and Farage would not have had time to get his shit together. Boris would have almost certainly stayed inside the tent, waiting his time. We would have voted at least 60-40 to stay, is my estimate.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
Obviously you have an absolute right to vote any way you like, but I don't think I'm going to expend energy battling with Rochdale Pioneers over which of us has the best chance of winning you over. The project to make hell freeze over is more urgent.
It doesn't matter which of them he votes for as far as I am concerned either a Labour or a LD vote would not be a Tory vote and given the LDs would prop up a Starmer government both votes would therefore be anti Boris
Voting Lib Dem has had only one notable impact: propping up a Tory government that shredded the social fabric of the country and went on to give us Brexit.
The biggest mis-step by Clegg and the Coalition was in demanding all discussion of UK in the EU be closed down for five years.
If in 2010 Cameron and Clegg had stood in the Rose Garden, announcing that within the year the British people would be given the chance to vote again on our remaining in the EU, Miliband would have enthusiastically campaigned with them - and Farage would not have had time to get his shit together. Boris would have almost certainly stayed inside the tent, waiting his time. We would have voted at least 60-40 to stay, is my estimate.
The LibDems gave us Brexit.
Which is ironic since in 2010 the LibDems literally stood on a platform of having an in/out referendum to settle the issue. Then they ran screaming away from the idea the second they got into government.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
Pret anecdote:
several years ago I used to have the chicken caesar and bacon baguette for lunch every day. Then I went away for a couple of weeks, came back and bought the same again. I could hardly eat it as it tasted as though it had been marinated in salt.
Haven't had one since - there is a *lot* of salt in a lot of the food we buy.
Hiring new workers? Fantastic.
The 'traffic lights' data on food is very useful IMO.
People can stuff themselves full of sugars, saturated fat and salt if they want to but they can't say they weren't warned.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
Surely there must be more to that story, than simply wearing a T-shirt?
Now clearly she was a feminist campaigner, but the punishment certainly doesnt appear to match the crime from what we have heard.
Yep. Which is why I am not remotely phased by the allegation that she was "banned for wearing a t-shirt". This is what the toxified culture war trans issue does - creates absolute straw man positions which both extremes fight over.
Meanwhile in the real world, the issue needs debate and for a balance to be found.
If the issue needs debate then why have the Lib Dems banned her from the party? You must be loving this new authoritarianism in the Lib Dems, clearly the ex-Labour members such as yourself are changing the nature of the Lib Dems already. Even Labour don't seem to be doing anything as stupid as this.
*giggles* I do love some of these posts. It is alleged that someone has been banned from a liberal party for the sole crime of wearing a t-shirt. So why am I backing these authoritarians hmmm?
Because its bollocks. I don't know the woman. I don't know the issue. The only reporting I can find are right wing newspapers reporting her line as she complains about it. I'll take that all with a large pinch of salt.
Parties do not ban people for 10 years if all they did was wear a t-shirt. And if some of you clown-apologists lifted your head out from him bum crack for a minute for a breath of clean air, you'd realise how absurd you sound.
Mr. Pioneers, some people are quite fundamentalist on such things. It's led to idiocy like having biological men competing against women in sport (including, I think, MMA).
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
Any sign of a pulse? Perhaps an argument on something might be a good idea,
Plenty of pulse. We don't get much of a hearing these days and it is almost fashionable for people to deliberately not listen and then say "nothing of interest". Its fine, the battle is street by street anyway rebuilding from the ground up.
It will never happen as long as donkeys like Davey are leading the remnants of a once democratic party. If you are in touch with them in Scotland you will have seen how far they have fallen and how dire a state they are in. Struggle to fill a taxi.
The lib dems were strong in Wales at one time but they have virtually disappeared in Welsh politics
It is labour v conservative v plaid
The LDs still have 1 AM in Mid and West Wales which is their strongest region and where they also briefly elected an MP in the August 2019 by election in Brecon and Radnor before losing the seat again at the general election
You live in England I actually live in Wales and the lib dems are not in the mix
Liberal Democrats nearly wiped out in Wales after losing only ... https://www.itv.com › news › wales › 2021-05-07 › lib...
Brecon and Radnorshire is still the LDs 23rd target seat ie higher than any LD targets in the Midlands or North East of England where the LDs also don't have any constituency elected representatives in parliament
1. The govt believes that the EU has a high degree of influence over the US/Joe Biden "..they are reading what the EU is saying about Northern Ireland".
2. Look at where we are "trade to continue between GB and Northern Ireland" in terms of roadmap to unification. UK govt ministers have already separated out NI from the UK.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
You keep repeating this fake news, presumably because it's reported in the Mail or whatever. Others have referred to it as well - why was she banned? The T-shirt episode was just the icing on the cake, a mere slither of the whole.
From what I can find out, she (Natalie Bird) led a prolonged and public campaign of opposition to Lib Dem policy over a number of years. In particular, she repeatedly argued that even if a man had fully transitioned to being a woman, s(he) was still a (biological) man, and therefore should not be allowed into women's refuges, again in particular. So basically she refused to accept that a trans man could become a woman (although she recognised the right of people to define themselves however they wish). There's more to it than that, but I guess it's sub judice.
As a Labour Party chap, the actions of the Lib Dems don't seem unreasonable to me.
It seems Marr does not think it is fake news nor multiple other sources and she is litigating over her ban.
But then Rosie Duffield is so scared of going to the labour conference the Speaker of the HOC has to intervene
I could see a bloc forming looking for a looser, associate membership.
It should be an implicit objective of U.K. foreign policy to find some kind of associate EU membership that works for us, along with Switzerland, Norway, the non-Euro countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Sweden), and perhaps Italy.
Why?
Is NZ seeking to find some kind of Australia membership? Is Canada seeking to find some kind of USA membership?
Why can't the objective of our policy be to become friendly neighbours of the EU instead?
European market integration is fantastic, in my opinion, but I don’t believe in the case for a single currency.
Therefore I favour an outer ring of closely integrated European economies outside the Euro.
Call it associate EU membership, call it something else, I don’t care. The severing of the U.K. from the single market will see our economy fucked for years (cf the bet we have).
1. The govt believes that the EU has a high degree of influence over the US/Joe Biden "..they are reading what the EU is saying about Northern Ireland".
2. Look at where we are "trade to continue between GB and Northern Ireland" in terms of roadmap to unification. UK govt ministers have already separated out NI from the UK.
On 2 that's nothing new. NI has been separated from GB since at least 1997.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
“What words have been added to Ofcom's 'offensive' list?
Karen: A pejorative term for an obnoxious, angry, entitled, and often racist middle-aged white woman
Gammon: A term referring to the colour of a person's flushed face when expressing their strong opinions, associated particularly with right-wing brexiteers
Libtard: A word used to describe people on the political left who are perceived to be easily offended, 'woke' and overly politically correct
Snowflake: Someone perceived as too sensitive, easily offended and outraged
Feminazi: A term used to describe an outspoken and radical feminist
Boomer: An insult for baby boomers who are perceived to be out of touch and dismissive of younger generations
Remoaner: Someone against Brexit perceived to be constantly complaining about it
Terf: A 'trans-exclusionary radical feminist' - used to describe people who reject the assertion that trans women are women and are opposed to trans-rights legislation”
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
You keep repeating this fake news, presumably because it's reported in the Mail or whatever. Others have referred to it as well - why was she banned? The T-shirt episode was just the icing on the cake, a mere slither of the whole.
From what I can find out, she (Natalie Bird) led a prolonged and public campaign of opposition to Lib Dem policy over a number of years. In particular, she repeatedly argued that even if a man had fully transitioned to being a woman, s(he) was still a (biological) man, and therefore should not be allowed into women's refuges, again in particular. So basically she refused to accept that a trans man could become a woman (although she recognised the right of people to define themselves however they wish). There's more to it than that, but I guess it's sub judice.
As a Labour Party chap, the actions of the Lib Dems don't seem unreasonable to me.
It seems Marr does not think it is fake news nor multiple other sources and she is litigating over her ban.
But then Rosie Duffield is so scared of going to the labour conference the Speaker of the HOC has to intervene
Big G, the fake news is the idea that she was banned over the T-shirt. That's not true. She was banned because of a number of episodes over a number of years, of which the T-shirt was a minor feature, as I outlined in my post. Why can't you acknowledge that?
Mind you, I've no idea why I'm on here speaking up for the Lib Dems.
1. The govt believes that the EU has a high degree of influence over the US/Joe Biden "..they are reading what the EU is saying about Northern Ireland".
2. Look at where we are "trade to continue between GB and Northern Ireland" in terms of roadmap to unification. UK govt ministers have already separated out NI from the UK.
On 2 that's nothing new. NI has been separated from GB since at least 1997.
Hmm not as some would see it. Certainly not our beloved PM.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
I see that three migrants yesterday froze to death on the border between Belorussia and Poland - an example of what happens if Priti P deterrent strategies are really implemented, as Poland's rulers are doing. This seems to me a real scandal - yes, migration can be inconvenient and cause all sorts of problems, but allowing people to die of cold within Europe is a different order of magnitude that should be getting much more attention.
I don't doubt there will be people undergoing hardship trying to cross into Poland but surely its far too early in the year for people to freeze to death ?
IIRC the border between Poland and Belarus is forests and marshes not mountains.
You can get exposure and die from it in remarkably mild weather, if you don't have the right clothing or shelter.
Trying to stop such tragedies was the reason behind the idea of getting people to make their asylum claims from refugee camps.
Death from a combination of hunger, hypothermia, exposure and exhaustion is certainly possible.
I could see a bloc forming looking for a looser, associate membership.
It should be an implicit objective of U.K. foreign policy to find some kind of associate EU membership that works for us, along with Switzerland, Norway, the non-Euro countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Sweden), and perhaps Italy.
Why?
Is NZ seeking to find some kind of Australia membership? Is Canada seeking to find some kind of USA membership?
Why can't the objective of our policy be to become friendly neighbours of the EU instead?
European market integration is fantastic, in my opinion, but I don’t believe in the case for a single currency.
Therefore I favour an outer ring of closely integrated European economies outside the Euro.
Call it associate EU membership, call it something else, I don’t care. The severing of the U.K. from the single market will see our economy fucked for years (cf the bet we have).
Why?
Why is the UK vis-a-vis Europe any different to Canada vis-a-vis the USA? Or New Zealand vis-a-vis Australia?
Why is a trade agreement insufficient, why do we need membership but those other nations don't?
I could see a bloc forming looking for a looser, associate membership.
It should be an implicit objective of U.K. foreign policy to find some kind of associate EU membership that works for us, along with Switzerland, Norway, the non-Euro countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Sweden), and perhaps Italy.
Why?
Is NZ seeking to find some kind of Australia membership? Is Canada seeking to find some kind of USA membership?
Why can't the objective of our policy be to become friendly neighbours of the EU instead?
European market integration is fantastic, in my opinion, but I don’t believe in the case for a single currency.
Therefore I favour an outer ring of closely integrated European economies outside the Euro.
Call it associate EU membership, call it something else, I don’t care. The severing of the U.K. from the single market will see our economy fucked for years (cf the bet we have).
Why?
Why is the UK vis-a-vis Europe any different to Canada vis-a-vis the USA? Or New Zealand vis-a-vis Australia?
Why is a trade agreement insufficient, why do we need membership but those other nations don't?
You haven’t read my post properly, as befitting an anti-EU zealot.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
You keep repeating this fake news, presumably because it's reported in the Mail or whatever. Others have referred to it as well - why was she banned? The T-shirt episode was just the icing on the cake, a mere slither of the whole.
From what I can find out, she (Natalie Bird) led a prolonged and public campaign of opposition to Lib Dem policy over a number of years. In particular, she repeatedly argued that even if a man had fully transitioned to being a woman, s(he) was still a (biological) man, and therefore should not be allowed into women's refuges, again in particular. So basically she refused to accept that a trans man could become a woman (although she recognised the right of people to define themselves however they wish). There's more to it than that, but I guess it's sub judice.
As a Labour Party chap, the actions of the Lib Dems don't seem unreasonable to me.
It seems Marr does not think it is fake news nor multiple other sources and she is litigating over her ban.
But then Rosie Duffield is so scared of going to the labour conference the Speaker of the HOC has to intervene
Big G, the fake news is the idea that she was banned over the T-shirt. That's not true. She was banned because of a number of episodes over a number of years, of which the T-shirt was a minor feature, as I outlined in my post. Why can't you acknowledge that?
Mind you, I've no idea why I'm on here speaking up for the Lib Dems.
I think the take away for me is - if you can reply to this point, why didn't the Lib Dem leader, live on national TV? He must have known about it?
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
However they are now doing a very nice vanilla milkshake.
What’s with all the salt-bashing this morning?
The Japanese eat a lot of salt and live to a ripe old age.
1. The govt believes that the EU has a high degree of influence over the US/Joe Biden "..they are reading what the EU is saying about Northern Ireland".
2. Look at where we are "trade to continue between GB and Northern Ireland" in terms of roadmap to unification. UK govt ministers have already separated out NI from the UK.
2 Direct rule from Westminster over NI will likely be restored in months given Unionist parties led by the DUP have said they will resign from the Stormont executive unless the NI Protocol is amended to remove the Irish Sea border.
At that point with devolution in NI effectively suspended NI will be closer under Westminster control than Scotland or Wales politically even if not still in trade terms
I see that three migrants yesterday froze to death on the border between Belorussia and Poland - an example of what happens if Priti P deterrent strategies are really implemented, as Poland's rulers are doing. This seems to me a real scandal - yes, migration can be inconvenient and cause all sorts of problems, but allowing people to die of cold within Europe is a different order of magnitude that should be getting much more attention.
I don't doubt there will be people undergoing hardship trying to cross into Poland but surely its far too early in the year for people to freeze to death ?
IIRC the border between Poland and Belarus is forests and marshes not mountains.
You can get exposure and die from it in remarkably mild weather, if you don't have the right clothing or shelter.
Trying to stop such tragedies was the reason behind the idea of getting people to make their asylum claims from refugee camps.
Death from a combination of hunger, hypothermia, exposure and exhaustion is certainly possible.
It was the description freezing which seemed odd.
Probably a translation thing.
Incidentally, if you get wet and don't have dry clothes or a fire, your chances of hypothermia go up immensely. The modern universality of wearing jeans makes this worse.
The number of people who manage to get themselves into serious trouble, in this country, when walking on Dartmoor (or similar)......
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
Surely there must be more to that story, than simply wearing a T-shirt?
Now clearly she was a feminist campaigner, but the punishment certainly doesnt appear to match the crime from what we have heard.
Yep. Which is why I am not remotely phased by the allegation that she was "banned for wearing a t-shirt". This is what the toxified culture war trans issue does - creates absolute straw man positions which both extremes fight over.
Meanwhile in the real world, the issue needs debate and for a balance to be found.
If the issue needs debate then why have the Lib Dems banned her from the party? You must be loving this new authoritarianism in the Lib Dems, clearly the ex-Labour members such as yourself are changing the nature of the Lib Dems already. Even Labour don't seem to be doing anything as stupid as this.
*giggles* I do love some of these posts. It is alleged that someone has been banned from a liberal party for the sole crime of wearing a t-shirt. So why am I backing these authoritarians hmmm?
Because its bollocks. I don't know the woman. I don't know the issue. The only reporting I can find are right wing newspapers reporting her line as she complains about it. I'll take that all with a large pinch of salt.
Parties do not ban people for 10 years if all they did was wear a t-shirt. And if some of you clown-apologists lifted your head out from him bum crack for a minute for a breath of clean air, you'd realise how absurd you sound.
I find it strange that you say you do not know the issue or the lady concerned, but then accuse right wing newspapers of causing trouble which is a nonsense when it was Andrew Marr of the BBC directly challenged Davey using the actual words and he had no response
This interview was broadcast UK wide and other posters have commented on it
And as for your last offensive sentence it does look like you are losing the plot as that kind of language is wholly unnecessary in any debate
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
Any sign of a pulse? Perhaps an argument on something might be a good idea,
Plenty of pulse. We don't get much of a hearing these days and it is almost fashionable for people to deliberately not listen and then say "nothing of interest". Its fine, the battle is street by street anyway rebuilding from the ground up.
It will never happen as long as donkeys like Davey are leading the remnants of a once democratic party. If you are in touch with them in Scotland you will have seen how far they have fallen and how dire a state they are in. Struggle to fill a taxi.
The lib dems were strong in Wales at one time but they have virtually disappeared in Welsh politics
It is labour v conservative v plaid
The LDs still have 1 AM in Mid and West Wales which is their strongest region and where they also briefly elected an MP in the August 2019 by election in Brecon and Radnor before losing the seat again at the general election
You live in England I actually live in Wales and the lib dems are not in the mix
Liberal Democrats nearly wiped out in Wales after losing only ... https://www.itv.com › news › wales › 2021-05-07 › lib...
Brecon and Radnorshire is still the LDs 23rd target seat ie higher than any LD targets in the Midlands or North East of England where the LDs also don't have any constituency elected representatives in parliament
Yeah @Big_G_NorthWales stop talking to us about politics in Wales. @HYUFD is the expert on Wales because he lives there and you don't.
Just facts and I lived in Wales for a year when I did my masters at Aberystwyth which had a LD MP at the time and is still in the top 50 LD target seats
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
I first went to work in London back in 1999. My first exposure to Pret and "JESUS CHRIST HOW MUCH" sandwiches. Whilst they have done well, they aren't remotely as universal in choice of locations as the big 3 coffee outlets / tax dodgers.
They aren't remotely as well-distributed across the country as their competitors. Opening 200 new outlets is I suspect a push into the sticks as opposed to opening their 127th store in London. Despite the "big return to the city" spin. They would say that - the twatty coffee sector has lobbied hard to force people back into the office.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
I first went to work in London back in 1999. My first exposure to Pret and "JESUS CHRIST HOW MUCH" sandwiches. Whilst they have done well, they aren't remotely as universal in choice of locations as the big 3 coffee outlets / tax dodgers.
They aren't remotely as well-distributed across the country as their competitors. Opening 200 new outlets is I suspect a push into the sticks as opposed to opening their 127th store in London. Despite the "big return to the city" spin. They would say that - the twatty coffee sector has lobbied hard to force people back into the office.
Why are you calling it the “twatty coffee sector”?
Do you think people who buy coffee are to be looked down upon?
I see that three migrants yesterday froze to death on the border between Belorussia and Poland - an example of what happens if Priti P deterrent strategies are really implemented, as Poland's rulers are doing. This seems to me a real scandal - yes, migration can be inconvenient and cause all sorts of problems, but allowing people to die of cold within Europe is a different order of magnitude that should be getting much more attention.
I don't doubt there will be people undergoing hardship trying to cross into Poland but surely its far too early in the year for people to freeze to death ?
IIRC the border between Poland and Belarus is forests and marshes not mountains.
You can get exposure and die from it in remarkably mild weather, if you don't have the right clothing or shelter.
Trying to stop such tragedies was the reason behind the idea of getting people to make their asylum claims from refugee camps.
Death from a combination of hunger, hypothermia, exposure and exhaustion is certainly possible.
It was the description freezing which seemed odd.
Probably a translation thing.
Incidentally, if you get wet and don't have dry clothes or a fire, your chances of hypothermia go up immensely. The modern universality of wearing jeans makes this worse.
The number of people who manage to get themselves into serious trouble, in this country, when walking on Dartmoor (or similar)......
It’s the same the other way too. Only needs to be 30°C or so, before the body can get lethally dehydrated on a sunny day.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
You keep repeating this fake news, presumably because it's reported in the Mail or whatever. Others have referred to it as well - why was she banned? The T-shirt episode was just the icing on the cake, a mere slither of the whole.
From what I can find out, she (Natalie Bird) led a prolonged and public campaign of opposition to Lib Dem policy over a number of years. In particular, she repeatedly argued that even if a man had fully transitioned to being a woman, s(he) was still a (biological) man, and therefore should not be allowed into women's refuges, again in particular. So basically she refused to accept that a trans man could become a woman (although she recognised the right of people to define themselves however they wish). There's more to it than that, but I guess it's sub judice.
As a Labour Party chap, the actions of the Lib Dems don't seem unreasonable to me.
It seems Marr does not think it is fake news nor multiple other sources and she is litigating over her ban.
But then Rosie Duffield is so scared of going to the labour conference the Speaker of the HOC has to intervene
Big G, the fake news is the idea that she was banned over the T-shirt. That's not true. She was banned because of a number of episodes over a number of years, of which the T-shirt was a minor feature, as I outlined in my post. Why can't you acknowledge that?
Mind you, I've no idea why I'm on here speaking up for the Lib Dems.
I think the take away for me is - if you can reply to this point, why didn't the Lib Dem leader, live on national TV? He must have known about it?
Why would he? The complaints process is not something he is involved in as he said.
And his response was spot on. The party believes in human rights and individualism so supports the "trans women are women" position. But it is not remotely absolutist and ramming a position down other people's throats - the issue needs to be detoxified and debated until a balance is found.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
I first went to work in London back in 1999. My first exposure to Pret and "JESUS CHRIST HOW MUCH" sandwiches. Whilst they have done well, they aren't remotely as universal in choice of locations as the big 3 coffee outlets / tax dodgers.
They aren't remotely as well-distributed across the country as their competitors. Opening 200 new outlets is I suspect a push into the sticks as opposed to opening their 127th store in London. Despite the "big return to the city" spin. They would say that - the twatty coffee sector has lobbied hard to force people back into the office.
Round where I live, WFH seems to have given the local coffee/sandwich shops more trade. Talking to people, they like going out at lunchtime, a change from cooking at home. It also helps protect the lunch break from evaporating.
Perhaps this is a repositioning by Pret? Moving to where their customers are, now...
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
Surely there must be more to that story, than simply wearing a T-shirt?
Now clearly she was a feminist campaigner, but the punishment certainly doesnt appear to match the crime from what we have heard.
Yep. Which is why I am not remotely phased by the allegation that she was "banned for wearing a t-shirt". This is what the toxified culture war trans issue does - creates absolute straw man positions which both extremes fight over.
Meanwhile in the real world, the issue needs debate and for a balance to be found.
If the issue needs debate then why have the Lib Dems banned her from the party? You must be loving this new authoritarianism in the Lib Dems, clearly the ex-Labour members such as yourself are changing the nature of the Lib Dems already. Even Labour don't seem to be doing anything as stupid as this.
*giggles* I do love some of these posts. It is alleged that someone has been banned from a liberal party for the sole crime of wearing a t-shirt. So why am I backing these authoritarians hmmm?
Because its bollocks. I don't know the woman. I don't know the issue. The only reporting I can find are right wing newspapers reporting her line as she complains about it. I'll take that all with a large pinch of salt.
Parties do not ban people for 10 years if all they did was wear a t-shirt. And if some of you clown-apologists lifted your head out from him bum crack for a minute for a breath of clean air, you'd realise how absurd you sound.
I find it strange that you say you do not know the issue or the lady concerned, but then accuse right wing newspapers of causing trouble which is a nonsense when it was Andrew Marr of the BBC directly challenged Davey using the actual words and he had no response
This interview was broadcast UK wide and other posters have commented on it
And as for your last offensive sentence it does look like you are losing the plot as that kind of language is wholly unnecessary in any debate
To be fair, Big G, you know nothing about the issue except from what you’ve gleaned from the sudoku pages of the Daily Mail.
This “issue” is just a pathetic gotcha by the media who are incapable of performing the role we need them to, which is to understand Lib Dem’s positioning on the current economic situation.
Max was complaining last night that he doesn’t know about Lib Dem policy, and in part this is because the media - and even Marr - is too lazy to go into it.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
I first went to work in London back in 1999. My first exposure to Pret and "JESUS CHRIST HOW MUCH" sandwiches. Whilst they have done well, they aren't remotely as universal in choice of locations as the big 3 coffee outlets / tax dodgers.
They aren't remotely as well-distributed across the country as their competitors. Opening 200 new outlets is I suspect a push into the sticks as opposed to opening their 127th store in London. Despite the "big return to the city" spin. They would say that - the twatty coffee sector has lobbied hard to force people back into the office.
Why are you calling it the “twatty coffee sector”?
Do you think people who buy coffee are to be looked down upon?
Because of their twatty complaining that the world changed taking away their built in customer base.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
I first went to work in London back in 1999. My first exposure to Pret and "JESUS CHRIST HOW MUCH" sandwiches. Whilst they have done well, they aren't remotely as universal in choice of locations as the big 3 coffee outlets / tax dodgers.
They aren't remotely as well-distributed across the country as their competitors. Opening 200 new outlets is I suspect a push into the sticks as opposed to opening their 127th store in London. Despite the "big return to the city" spin. They would say that - the twatty coffee sector has lobbied hard to force people back into the office.
Round where I live, WFH seems to have given the local coffee/sandwich shops more trade. Talking to people, they like going out at lunchtime, a change from cooking at home. It also helps protect the lunch break from evaporating.
Perhaps this is a repositioning by Pret? Moving to where their customers are, now...
In the towns and more rural areas, more of the coffee/sandwich shops are locally-owned, than in London. As you say, this is going after that business.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
I first went to work in London back in 1999. My first exposure to Pret and "JESUS CHRIST HOW MUCH" sandwiches. Whilst they have done well, they aren't remotely as universal in choice of locations as the big 3 coffee outlets / tax dodgers.
They aren't remotely as well-distributed across the country as their competitors. Opening 200 new outlets is I suspect a push into the sticks as opposed to opening their 127th store in London. Despite the "big return to the city" spin. They would say that - the twatty coffee sector has lobbied hard to force people back into the office.
Why are you calling it the “twatty coffee sector”?
Do you think people who buy coffee are to be looked down upon?
Because of their twatty complaining that the world changed taking away their built in customer base.
This doesn’t make sense.
Some fantastic businesses have gone under during covid through no fault of their own.
On NI, I don’t know whether Biden is right or wrong. Hasn’t he just said we can’t compromise they GFA?
There’s nothing controversial in what Eustace is saying, the NIP as drafted and implemented is a fucking disaster, and it needs changing.
The other issue, is that in the US politics, trade deals are not popular at the moment.
Trumpets are protectionists. A large chunk of the Democratic party (especially the Left) believes that NAFTA sold out American workers and caused the rise of Trump.
Given that the Senate has to approve any such deal (by 2/3rds), the Democrats have a bare majority and the GOP is proclaiming that they will block anything that Biden tries to do....
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I'm not spinning it merely pointing out the irony of a business which is so dependent upon low paid migrant workers recruiting 3k new low paid migrant workers when we're continually told that the low paid migrant workers have all 'gone home'.
As for the various purveyors of 'twatty coffee' the only thing I can say is that their ever increasing numbers exposes the bollox of 'austerity' claims.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
Surely there must be more to that story, than simply wearing a T-shirt?
Now clearly she was a feminist campaigner, but the punishment certainly doesnt appear to match the crime from what we have heard.
Yep. Which is why I am not remotely phased by the allegation that she was "banned for wearing a t-shirt". This is what the toxified culture war trans issue does - creates absolute straw man positions which both extremes fight over.
Meanwhile in the real world, the issue needs debate and for a balance to be found.
If the issue needs debate then why have the Lib Dems banned her from the party? You must be loving this new authoritarianism in the Lib Dems, clearly the ex-Labour members such as yourself are changing the nature of the Lib Dems already. Even Labour don't seem to be doing anything as stupid as this.
*giggles* I do love some of these posts. It is alleged that someone has been banned from a liberal party for the sole crime of wearing a t-shirt. So why am I backing these authoritarians hmmm?
Because its bollocks. I don't know the woman. I don't know the issue. The only reporting I can find are right wing newspapers reporting her line as she complains about it. I'll take that all with a large pinch of salt.
Parties do not ban people for 10 years if all they did was wear a t-shirt. And if some of you clown-apologists lifted your head out from him bum crack for a minute for a breath of clean air, you'd realise how absurd you sound.
I find it strange that you say you do not know the issue or the lady concerned, but then accuse right wing newspapers of causing trouble which is a nonsense when it was Andrew Marr of the BBC directly challenged Davey using the actual words and he had no response
This interview was broadcast UK wide and other posters have commented on it
And as for your last offensive sentence it does look like you are losing the plot as that kind of language is wholly unnecessary in any debate
I have no idea who the woman is or her issue. When you google it you find the Telegraph and the Times and the Hate Mail reporting that she is suing the party. And that is all the coverage - no howls of outrage from when she was allegedly banned for wearing a tshirt.
Because she wasn't. Others upthread who know more than I do have said what she has been on about. I assume she was banned for that, not the tshirt.
And Marr? He used a live TV interview to try an ambush question. Kept going back to it when Davey swept it aside to talk about the actual issue. Kept failing to gain any ground.
So yes, if you are a right wing newspaper worried about the Tory exposure in the home countries of course you will try and spin out a story that actually the liberals are illiberal and actually its that nice Mr Johnson standing up for women by betraying and dumping so many of them so why not forget your dalliance with voting LibDem and stick with the Tories?
Its a non-story. People aren't talking about it outside a few stories in those newspapers from 1 side only. The party hasn't risen to it knowing the story hasn't got legs and this activist isn't going to find friends with her efforts.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
Surely there must be more to that story, than simply wearing a T-shirt?
Now clearly she was a feminist campaigner, but the punishment certainly doesnt appear to match the crime from what we have heard.
Yep. Which is why I am not remotely phased by the allegation that she was "banned for wearing a t-shirt". This is what the toxified culture war trans issue does - creates absolute straw man positions which both extremes fight over.
Meanwhile in the real world, the issue needs debate and for a balance to be found.
If the issue needs debate then why have the Lib Dems banned her from the party? You must be loving this new authoritarianism in the Lib Dems, clearly the ex-Labour members such as yourself are changing the nature of the Lib Dems already. Even Labour don't seem to be doing anything as stupid as this.
*giggles* I do love some of these posts. It is alleged that someone has been banned from a liberal party for the sole crime of wearing a t-shirt. So why am I backing these authoritarians hmmm?
Because its bollocks. I don't know the woman. I don't know the issue. The only reporting I can find are right wing newspapers reporting her line as she complains about it. I'll take that all with a large pinch of salt.
Parties do not ban people for 10 years if all they did was wear a t-shirt. And if some of you clown-apologists lifted your head out from him bum crack for a minute for a breath of clean air, you'd realise how absurd you sound.
I find it strange that you say you do not know the issue or the lady concerned, but then accuse right wing newspapers of causing trouble which is a nonsense when it was Andrew Marr of the BBC directly challenged Davey using the actual words and he had no response
This interview was broadcast UK wide and other posters have commented on it
And as for your last offensive sentence it does look like you are losing the plot as that kind of language is wholly unnecessary in any debate
To be fair, Big G, you know nothing about the issue except from what you’ve gleaned from the sudoku pages of the Daily Mail.
This “issue” is just a pathetic gotcha by the media who are incapable of performing the role we need them to, which is to understand Lib Dem’s positioning on the current economic situation.
Max was complaining last night that he doesn’t know about Lib Dem policy, and in part this is because the media - and even Marr - is too lazy to go into it.
Again you insult rather than address the issue
I do not read the daily mail and my source was Marrs interview that you simply try to blank out
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
I first went to work in London back in 1999. My first exposure to Pret and "JESUS CHRIST HOW MUCH" sandwiches. Whilst they have done well, they aren't remotely as universal in choice of locations as the big 3 coffee outlets / tax dodgers.
They aren't remotely as well-distributed across the country as their competitors. Opening 200 new outlets is I suspect a push into the sticks as opposed to opening their 127th store in London. Despite the "big return to the city" spin. They would say that - the twatty coffee sector has lobbied hard to force people back into the office.
Why are you calling it the “twatty coffee sector”?
Do you think people who buy coffee are to be looked down upon?
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I'm not spinning it merely pointing out the irony of a business which is so dependent upon low paid migrant workers recruiting 3k new low paid migrant workers when we're continually told that the low paid migrant workers have all 'gone home'.
As for the various purveyors of 'twatty coffee' the only thing I can say is that their ever increasing numbers exposes the bollox of 'austerity' claims.
I rather suspect people about to lose UC are not prime Pret customers.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
Surely there must be more to that story, than simply wearing a T-shirt?
Now clearly she was a feminist campaigner, but the punishment certainly doesnt appear to match the crime from what we have heard.
Yep. Which is why I am not remotely phased by the allegation that she was "banned for wearing a t-shirt". This is what the toxified culture war trans issue does - creates absolute straw man positions which both extremes fight over.
Meanwhile in the real world, the issue needs debate and for a balance to be found.
If the issue needs debate then why have the Lib Dems banned her from the party? You must be loving this new authoritarianism in the Lib Dems, clearly the ex-Labour members such as yourself are changing the nature of the Lib Dems already. Even Labour don't seem to be doing anything as stupid as this.
*giggles* I do love some of these posts. It is alleged that someone has been banned from a liberal party for the sole crime of wearing a t-shirt. So why am I backing these authoritarians hmmm?
Because its bollocks. I don't know the woman. I don't know the issue. The only reporting I can find are right wing newspapers reporting her line as she complains about it. I'll take that all with a large pinch of salt.
Parties do not ban people for 10 years if all they did was wear a t-shirt. And if some of you clown-apologists lifted your head out from him bum crack for a minute for a breath of clean air, you'd realise how absurd you sound.
I find it strange that you say you do not know the issue or the lady concerned, but then accuse right wing newspapers of causing trouble which is a nonsense when it was Andrew Marr of the BBC directly challenged Davey using the actual words and he had no response
This interview was broadcast UK wide and other posters have commented on it
And as for your last offensive sentence it does look like you are losing the plot as that kind of language is wholly unnecessary in any debate
To be fair, Big G, you know nothing about the issue except from what you’ve gleaned from the sudoku pages of the Daily Mail.
This “issue” is just a pathetic gotcha by the media who are incapable of performing the role we need them to, which is to understand Lib Dem’s positioning on the current economic situation.
Max was complaining last night that he doesn’t know about Lib Dem policy, and in part this is because the media - and even Marr - is too lazy to go into it.
Again you insult rather than address the issue
I do not read the daily mail and my source was Marrs interview that you simply try to blank out
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
I first went to work in London back in 1999. My first exposure to Pret and "JESUS CHRIST HOW MUCH" sandwiches. Whilst they have done well, they aren't remotely as universal in choice of locations as the big 3 coffee outlets / tax dodgers.
They aren't remotely as well-distributed across the country as their competitors. Opening 200 new outlets is I suspect a push into the sticks as opposed to opening their 127th store in London. Despite the "big return to the city" spin. They would say that - the twatty coffee sector has lobbied hard to force people back into the office.
Why are you calling it the “twatty coffee sector”?
Do you think people who buy coffee are to be looked down upon?
Hell no. The shops are twatty, not the people. £4 for a fucking latte is an egregious pisstake. Then insisting that you actually make a loss so pay no taxes is even more so.
I have no problem with consumer choice and coffee shops will come and go. What has been telling over the last 18 months is how happy so many people have been with dropping the daily grind of pay lots of money to have a grinding commute and buying a £4 latte every day.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
Surely there must be more to that story, than simply wearing a T-shirt?
Now clearly she was a feminist campaigner, but the punishment certainly doesnt appear to match the crime from what we have heard.
Yep. Which is why I am not remotely phased by the allegation that she was "banned for wearing a t-shirt". This is what the toxified culture war trans issue does - creates absolute straw man positions which both extremes fight over.
Meanwhile in the real world, the issue needs debate and for a balance to be found.
If the issue needs debate then why have the Lib Dems banned her from the party? You must be loving this new authoritarianism in the Lib Dems, clearly the ex-Labour members such as yourself are changing the nature of the Lib Dems already. Even Labour don't seem to be doing anything as stupid as this.
*giggles* I do love some of these posts. It is alleged that someone has been banned from a liberal party for the sole crime of wearing a t-shirt. So why am I backing these authoritarians hmmm?
Because its bollocks. I don't know the woman. I don't know the issue. The only reporting I can find are right wing newspapers reporting her line as she complains about it. I'll take that all with a large pinch of salt.
Parties do not ban people for 10 years if all they did was wear a t-shirt. And if some of you clown-apologists lifted your head out from him bum crack for a minute for a breath of clean air, you'd realise how absurd you sound.
I find it strange that you say you do not know the issue or the lady concerned, but then accuse right wing newspapers of causing trouble which is a nonsense when it was Andrew Marr of the BBC directly challenged Davey using the actual words and he had no response
This interview was broadcast UK wide and other posters have commented on it
And as for your last offensive sentence it does look like you are losing the plot as that kind of language is wholly unnecessary in any debate
To be fair, Big G, you know nothing about the issue except from what you’ve gleaned from the sudoku pages of the Daily Mail.
This “issue” is just a pathetic gotcha by the media who are incapable of performing the role we need them to, which is to understand Lib Dem’s positioning on the current economic situation.
Max was complaining last night that he doesn’t know about Lib Dem policy, and in part this is because the media - and even Marr - is too lazy to go into it.
Again you insult rather than address the issue
I do not read the daily mail and my source was Marrs interview that you simply try to blank out
I could see a bloc forming looking for a looser, associate membership.
It should be an implicit objective of U.K. foreign policy to find some kind of associate EU membership that works for us, along with Switzerland, Norway, the non-Euro countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Sweden), and perhaps Italy.
Why?
Is NZ seeking to find some kind of Australia membership? Is Canada seeking to find some kind of USA membership?
Why can't the objective of our policy be to become friendly neighbours of the EU instead?
European market integration is fantastic, in my opinion, but I don’t believe in the case for a single currency.
Therefore I favour an outer ring of closely integrated European economies outside the Euro.
Call it associate EU membership, call it something else, I don’t care. The severing of the U.K. from the single market will see our economy fucked for years (cf the bet we have).
Why?
Why is the UK vis-a-vis Europe any different to Canada vis-a-vis the USA? Or New Zealand vis-a-vis Australia?
Why is a trade agreement insufficient, why do we need membership but those other nations don't?
You haven’t read my post properly, as befitting an anti-EU zealot.
Yes I have. You've said the UK should seek single market membership (as opposed to a trade agreement with the single market) as a foreign policy objective.
But unless I'm very much mistaken you don't think New Zealand should seek membership of Australia, or the Canada should seek membership with the USA. Trade agreements etc are sufficient for them with their neighbours - why not the same with the UK?
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
You keep repeating this fake news, presumably because it's reported in the Mail or whatever. Others have referred to it as well - why was she banned? The T-shirt episode was just the icing on the cake, a mere slither of the whole.
From what I can find out, she (Natalie Bird) led a prolonged and public campaign of opposition to Lib Dem policy over a number of years. In particular, she repeatedly argued that even if a man had fully transitioned to being a woman, s(he) was still a (biological) man, and therefore should not be allowed into women's refuges, again in particular. So basically she refused to accept that a trans man could become a woman (although she recognised the right of people to define themselves however they wish). There's more to it than that, but I guess it's sub judice.
As a Labour Party chap, the actions of the Lib Dems don't seem unreasonable to me.
It seems Marr does not think it is fake news nor multiple other sources and she is litigating over her ban.
But then Rosie Duffield is so scared of going to the labour conference the Speaker of the HOC has to intervene
Big G, the fake news is the idea that she was banned over the T-shirt. That's not true. She was banned because of a number of episodes over a number of years, of which the T-shirt was a minor feature, as I outlined in my post. Why can't you acknowledge that?
Mind you, I've no idea why I'm on here speaking up for the Lib Dems.
It was the issue Marr presented to Davey and Marr actually read the wording on the T shirt 'Woman.Adult.Human.Female' to Davey and he had no answer
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I'm not spinning it merely pointing out the irony of a business which is so dependent upon low paid migrant workers recruiting 3k new low paid migrant workers when we're continually told that the low paid migrant workers have all 'gone home'.
As for the various purveyors of 'twatty coffee' the only thing I can say is that their ever increasing numbers exposes the bollox of 'austerity' claims.
I rather suspect people about to lose UC are not prime Pret customers.
You really are an arsehole.
Except in central central London, the majority of such jobs were (and probably are) done by UK residents, IIRC.
This is why we have a labour shortage, not a labour absence.
“What words have been added to Ofcom's 'offensive' list?
Karen: A pejorative term for an obnoxious, angry, entitled, and often racist middle-aged white woman
Gammon: A term referring to the colour of a person's flushed face when expressing their strong opinions, associated particularly with right-wing brexiteers
Libtard: A word used to describe people on the political left who are perceived to be easily offended, 'woke' and overly politically correct
Snowflake: Someone perceived as too sensitive, easily offended and outraged
Feminazi: A term used to describe an outspoken and radical feminist
Boomer: An insult for baby boomers who are perceived to be out of touch and dismissive of younger generations
Remoaner: Someone against Brexit perceived to be constantly complaining about it
Terf: A 'trans-exclusionary radical feminist' - used to describe people who reject the assertion that trans women are women and are opposed to trans-rights legislation”
Those words will all be broadcast many times over the next year, they are not banned, just identified as offensive, so editors and producers consider the context. Generally they are meant as insults.
Doesn't seem controversial to me. Anyone who disagrees is a snowflake.
I could see a bloc forming looking for a looser, associate membership.
It should be an implicit objective of U.K. foreign policy to find some kind of associate EU membership that works for us, along with Switzerland, Norway, the non-Euro countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Sweden), and perhaps Italy.
Why?
Is NZ seeking to find some kind of Australia membership? Is Canada seeking to find some kind of USA membership?
Why can't the objective of our policy be to become friendly neighbours of the EU instead?
European market integration is fantastic, in my opinion, but I don’t believe in the case for a single currency.
Therefore I favour an outer ring of closely integrated European economies outside the Euro.
Call it associate EU membership, call it something else, I don’t care. The severing of the U.K. from the single market will see our economy fucked for years (cf the bet we have).
Why?
Why is the UK vis-a-vis Europe any different to Canada vis-a-vis the USA? Or New Zealand vis-a-vis Australia?
Why is a trade agreement insufficient, why do we need membership but those other nations don't?
You haven’t read my post properly, as befitting an anti-EU zealot.
Yes I have. You've said the UK should seek single market membership (as opposed to a trade agreement with the single market) as a foreign policy objective.
But unless I'm very much mistaken you don't think New Zealand should seek membership of Australia, or the Canada should seek membership with the USA. Trade agreements etc are sufficient for them with their neighbours - why not the same with the UK?
Australia and NZ are very closely integrated, and even have FOM. But NZ has not “joined Australia”.
I guess US and Canada do too, not sure about Mexico and whether this is a NAFTA provision.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I'm not spinning it merely pointing out the irony of a business which is so dependent upon low paid migrant workers recruiting 3k new low paid migrant workers when we're continually told that the low paid migrant workers have all 'gone home'.
As for the various purveyors of 'twatty coffee' the only thing I can say is that their ever increasing numbers exposes the bollox of 'austerity' claims.
Lets pick this apart. The absolutism you are putting out is the problem. Nobody has said that ALL the migrant workers have gone home. More people registered with the EU settlement scheme than the government thought were here in the first place.
It is also true that the departure of migrant labour has created huge gaps in the labour force in a number of industries including leisure and QSR. With the culling of a stack of jobs in both smaller outlets and big chains there are people out there who still want the work and Pret are concentrated in areas easier to recruit for.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
I first went to work in London back in 1999. My first exposure to Pret and "JESUS CHRIST HOW MUCH" sandwiches. Whilst they have done well, they aren't remotely as universal in choice of locations as the big 3 coffee outlets / tax dodgers.
They aren't remotely as well-distributed across the country as their competitors. Opening 200 new outlets is I suspect a push into the sticks as opposed to opening their 127th store in London. Despite the "big return to the city" spin. They would say that - the twatty coffee sector has lobbied hard to force people back into the office.
Why are you calling it the “twatty coffee sector”?
Do you think people who buy coffee are to be looked down upon?
Hell no. The shops are twatty, not the people. £4 for a fucking latte is an egregious pisstake. Then insisting that you actually make a loss so pay no taxes is even more so.
I have no problem with consumer choice and coffee shops will come and go. What has been telling over the last 18 months is how happy so many people have been with dropping the daily grind of pay lots of money to have a grinding commute and buying a £4 latte every day.
Well, I like Pret. And have never paid £4 for a coffee.
I guess your reference to tax is a swipe at Starbucks, who I’ll concede are selling disgusting swill at an astonishing premium.
I could see a bloc forming looking for a looser, associate membership.
It should be an implicit objective of U.K. foreign policy to find some kind of associate EU membership that works for us, along with Switzerland, Norway, the non-Euro countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Sweden), and perhaps Italy.
Why?
Is NZ seeking to find some kind of Australia membership? Is Canada seeking to find some kind of USA membership?
Why can't the objective of our policy be to become friendly neighbours of the EU instead?
European market integration is fantastic, in my opinion, but I don’t believe in the case for a single currency.
Therefore I favour an outer ring of closely integrated European economies outside the Euro.
Call it associate EU membership, call it something else, I don’t care. The severing of the U.K. from the single market will see our economy fucked for years (cf the bet we have).
Why?
Why is the UK vis-a-vis Europe any different to Canada vis-a-vis the USA? Or New Zealand vis-a-vis Australia?
Why is a trade agreement insufficient, why do we need membership but those other nations don't?
You haven’t read my post properly, as befitting an anti-EU zealot.
Yes I have. You've said the UK should seek single market membership (as opposed to a trade agreement with the single market) as a foreign policy objective.
But unless I'm very much mistaken you don't think New Zealand should seek membership of Australia, or the Canada should seek membership with the USA. Trade agreements etc are sufficient for them with their neighbours - why not the same with the UK?
Australia and NZ are very closely integrated, and even have FOM. But NZ has not “joined Australia”.
I guess US and Canada do too, not sure about Mexico and whether this is a NAFTA provision.
I don’t accept your framing, it is bullshit.
US and Canada have free trade via the USMCA just like we have free trade with the EU via the TCA.
That you don't accept the framing just shows you are in denial.
“What words have been added to Ofcom's 'offensive' list?
Karen: A pejorative term for an obnoxious, angry, entitled, and often racist middle-aged white woman
Gammon: A term referring to the colour of a person's flushed face when expressing their strong opinions, associated particularly with right-wing brexiteers
Libtard: A word used to describe people on the political left who are perceived to be easily offended, 'woke' and overly politically correct
Snowflake: Someone perceived as too sensitive, easily offended and outraged
Feminazi: A term used to describe an outspoken and radical feminist
Boomer: An insult for baby boomers who are perceived to be out of touch and dismissive of younger generations
Remoaner: Someone against Brexit perceived to be constantly complaining about it
Terf: A 'trans-exclusionary radical feminist' - used to describe people who reject the assertion that trans women are women and are opposed to trans-rights legislation”
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
Any sign of a pulse? Perhaps an argument on something might be a good idea,
Plenty of pulse. We don't get much of a hearing these days and it is almost fashionable for people to deliberately not listen and then say "nothing of interest". Its fine, the battle is street by street anyway rebuilding from the ground up.
It will never happen as long as donkeys like Davey are leading the remnants of a once democratic party. If you are in touch with them in Scotland you will have seen how far they have fallen and how dire a state they are in. Struggle to fill a taxi.
The lib dems were strong in Wales at one time but they have virtually disappeared in Welsh politics
It is labour v conservative v plaid
The LDs still have 1 AM in Mid and West Wales which is their strongest region and where they also briefly elected an MP in the August 2019 by election in Brecon and Radnor before losing the seat again at the general election
You live in England I actually live in Wales and the lib dems are not in the mix
Liberal Democrats nearly wiped out in Wales after losing only ... https://www.itv.com › news › wales › 2021-05-07 › lib...
Brecon and Radnorshire is still the LDs 23rd target seat ie higher than any LD targets in the Midlands or North East of England where the LDs also don't have any constituency elected representatives in parliament
Yeah @Big_G_NorthWales stop talking to us about politics in Wales. @HYUFD is the expert on Wales because he lives there and you don't.
Just facts and I lived in Wales for a year when I did my masters at Aberystwyth which had a LD MP at the time and is still in the top 50 LD target seats
You lived in Wales for a year when you did your degree and that makes you an expert on politics in Wales in 2021 v someone who has lived in Wales for 56 years, has children and grandchildren requiring the Wales NHS and schooling and myriads of other issues
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
I first went to work in London back in 1999. My first exposure to Pret and "JESUS CHRIST HOW MUCH" sandwiches. Whilst they have done well, they aren't remotely as universal in choice of locations as the big 3 coffee outlets / tax dodgers.
They aren't remotely as well-distributed across the country as their competitors. Opening 200 new outlets is I suspect a push into the sticks as opposed to opening their 127th store in London. Despite the "big return to the city" spin. They would say that - the twatty coffee sector has lobbied hard to force people back into the office.
Round where I live, WFH seems to have given the local coffee/sandwich shops more trade. Talking to people, they like going out at lunchtime, a change from cooking at home. It also helps protect the lunch break from evaporating.
Perhaps this is a repositioning by Pret? Moving to where their customers are, now...
In the towns and more rural areas, more of the coffee/sandwich shops are locally-owned, than in London. As you say, this is going after that business.
It is totally this. Pret spun the story with "Tuesday - Thursday are our busiest days for their city outlets. That isn't good - shows the hollowing out of full time office work. However hard they lobby for the return to the office that world has gone and isn't coming back to the extent it was.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
Any sign of a pulse? Perhaps an argument on something might be a good idea,
Plenty of pulse. We don't get much of a hearing these days and it is almost fashionable for people to deliberately not listen and then say "nothing of interest". Its fine, the battle is street by street anyway rebuilding from the ground up.
It will never happen as long as donkeys like Davey are leading the remnants of a once democratic party. If you are in touch with them in Scotland you will have seen how far they have fallen and how dire a state they are in. Struggle to fill a taxi.
The lib dems were strong in Wales at one time but they have virtually disappeared in Welsh politics
It is labour v conservative v plaid
The LDs still have 1 AM in Mid and West Wales which is their strongest region and where they also briefly elected an MP in the August 2019 by election in Brecon and Radnor before losing the seat again at the general election
You live in England I actually live in Wales and the lib dems are not in the mix
Liberal Democrats nearly wiped out in Wales after losing only ... https://www.itv.com › news › wales › 2021-05-07 › lib...
Brecon and Radnorshire is still the LDs 23rd target seat ie higher than any LD targets in the Midlands or North East of England where the LDs also don't have any constituency elected representatives in parliament
Not only Brecon and Radnorshire but Ceredigion too, 30th on the LD target list and held by Plaid, are in the top 50 LD target seats ie all within possible range if the LDs had a very good night at the next general election.
I could see a bloc forming looking for a looser, associate membership.
It should be an implicit objective of U.K. foreign policy to find some kind of associate EU membership that works for us, along with Switzerland, Norway, the non-Euro countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Sweden), and perhaps Italy.
Why?
Is NZ seeking to find some kind of Australia membership? Is Canada seeking to find some kind of USA membership?
Why can't the objective of our policy be to become friendly neighbours of the EU instead?
European market integration is fantastic, in my opinion, but I don’t believe in the case for a single currency.
Therefore I favour an outer ring of closely integrated European economies outside the Euro.
Call it associate EU membership, call it something else, I don’t care. The severing of the U.K. from the single market will see our economy fucked for years (cf the bet we have).
Why?
Why is the UK vis-a-vis Europe any different to Canada vis-a-vis the USA? Or New Zealand vis-a-vis Australia?
Why is a trade agreement insufficient, why do we need membership but those other nations don't?
You haven’t read my post properly, as befitting an anti-EU zealot.
Yes I have. You've said the UK should seek single market membership (as opposed to a trade agreement with the single market) as a foreign policy objective.
But unless I'm very much mistaken you don't think New Zealand should seek membership of Australia, or the Canada should seek membership with the USA. Trade agreements etc are sufficient for them with their neighbours - why not the same with the UK?
Australia and NZ are very closely integrated, and even have FOM. But NZ has not “joined Australia”.
I guess US and Canada do too, not sure about Mexico and whether this is a NAFTA provision.
I don’t accept your framing, it is bullshit.
US and Canada have free trade via the USMCA just like we have free trade with the EU via the TCA.
That you don't accept the framing just shows you are in denial.
A single market, as you should know (but who knows, you are deliberately obtuse most of the time) > a standard trade agreement.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
I first went to work in London back in 1999. My first exposure to Pret and "JESUS CHRIST HOW MUCH" sandwiches. Whilst they have done well, they aren't remotely as universal in choice of locations as the big 3 coffee outlets / tax dodgers.
They aren't remotely as well-distributed across the country as their competitors. Opening 200 new outlets is I suspect a push into the sticks as opposed to opening their 127th store in London. Despite the "big return to the city" spin. They would say that - the twatty coffee sector has lobbied hard to force people back into the office.
Why are you calling it the “twatty coffee sector”?
Do you think people who buy coffee are to be looked down upon?
Hell no. The shops are twatty, not the people. £4 for a fucking latte is an egregious pisstake. Then insisting that you actually make a loss so pay no taxes is even more so.
I have no problem with consumer choice and coffee shops will come and go. What has been telling over the last 18 months is how happy so many people have been with dropping the daily grind of pay lots of money to have a grinding commute and buying a £4 latte every day.
Well, I like Pret. And have never paid £4 for a coffee.
I guess your reference to tax is a swipe at Starbucks, who I’ll concede are selling disgusting swill at an astonishing premium.
Indeed, the advantage of Pret is that it sells a normal cup of filter coffee, quite cheaply (£1, I think). One of my most frequent interactions in buying coffee is as follows:
Cookie: Can I have a cup of coffee please. Just a normal filter coffee. Barista: Americano? Cookie (silently, in head): NO! Just a normal filter coffee. The simplest coffee drink to prepare. Not a British version of an Italian version of an American version of coffee, which is going to take you a minute to prepare and cost me twice as much. Just coffee. Cookie (out loud): Ok.
Other pet hate about coffee - frothy milk in the top.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
Surely there must be more to that story, than simply wearing a T-shirt?
Now clearly she was a feminist campaigner, but the punishment certainly doesnt appear to match the crime from what we have heard.
Yep. Which is why I am not remotely phased by the allegation that she was "banned for wearing a t-shirt". This is what the toxified culture war trans issue does - creates absolute straw man positions which both extremes fight over.
Meanwhile in the real world, the issue needs debate and for a balance to be found.
If the issue needs debate then why have the Lib Dems banned her from the party? You must be loving this new authoritarianism in the Lib Dems, clearly the ex-Labour members such as yourself are changing the nature of the Lib Dems already. Even Labour don't seem to be doing anything as stupid as this.
*giggles* I do love some of these posts. It is alleged that someone has been banned from a liberal party for the sole crime of wearing a t-shirt. So why am I backing these authoritarians hmmm?
Because its bollocks. I don't know the woman. I don't know the issue. The only reporting I can find are right wing newspapers reporting her line as she complains about it. I'll take that all with a large pinch of salt.
Parties do not ban people for 10 years if all they did was wear a t-shirt. And if some of you clown-apologists lifted your head out from him bum crack for a minute for a breath of clean air, you'd realise how absurd you sound.
I find it strange that you say you do not know the issue or the lady concerned, but then accuse right wing newspapers of causing trouble which is a nonsense when it was Andrew Marr of the BBC directly challenged Davey using the actual words and he had no response
This interview was broadcast UK wide and other posters have commented on it
And as for your last offensive sentence it does look like you are losing the plot as that kind of language is wholly unnecessary in any debate
To be fair, Big G, you know nothing about the issue except from what you’ve gleaned from the sudoku pages of the Daily Mail.
This “issue” is just a pathetic gotcha by the media who are incapable of performing the role we need them to, which is to understand Lib Dem’s positioning on the current economic situation.
Max was complaining last night that he doesn’t know about Lib Dem policy, and in part this is because the media - and even Marr - is too lazy to go into it.
Again you insult rather than address the issue
I do not read the daily mail and my source was Marrs interview that you simply try to blank out
It is not going away
I literally mentioned Marr in my post.
Do you know the actual story?
No.
Stop wasting everyone’s time.
I will speak as I wish and will not be closed down by those who are trying to blank out the story
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
Surely there must be more to that story, than simply wearing a T-shirt?
Now clearly she was a feminist campaigner, but the punishment certainly doesnt appear to match the crime from what we have heard.
Yep. Which is why I am not remotely phased by the allegation that she was "banned for wearing a t-shirt". This is what the toxified culture war trans issue does - creates absolute straw man positions which both extremes fight over.
Meanwhile in the real world, the issue needs debate and for a balance to be found.
If the issue needs debate then why have the Lib Dems banned her from the party? You must be loving this new authoritarianism in the Lib Dems, clearly the ex-Labour members such as yourself are changing the nature of the Lib Dems already. Even Labour don't seem to be doing anything as stupid as this.
*giggles* I do love some of these posts. It is alleged that someone has been banned from a liberal party for the sole crime of wearing a t-shirt. So why am I backing these authoritarians hmmm?
Because its bollocks. I don't know the woman. I don't know the issue. The only reporting I can find are right wing newspapers reporting her line as she complains about it. I'll take that all with a large pinch of salt.
Parties do not ban people for 10 years if all they did was wear a t-shirt. And if some of you clown-apologists lifted your head out from him bum crack for a minute for a breath of clean air, you'd realise how absurd you sound.
I find it strange that you say you do not know the issue or the lady concerned, but then accuse right wing newspapers of causing trouble which is a nonsense when it was Andrew Marr of the BBC directly challenged Davey using the actual words and he had no response
This interview was broadcast UK wide and other posters have commented on it
And as for your last offensive sentence it does look like you are losing the plot as that kind of language is wholly unnecessary in any debate
To be fair, Big G, you know nothing about the issue except from what you’ve gleaned from the sudoku pages of the Daily Mail.
This “issue” is just a pathetic gotcha by the media who are incapable of performing the role we need them to, which is to understand Lib Dem’s positioning on the current economic situation.
Max was complaining last night that he doesn’t know about Lib Dem policy, and in part this is because the media - and even Marr - is too lazy to go into it.
Again you insult rather than address the issue
I do not read the daily mail and my source was Marrs interview that you simply try to blank out
It is not going away
I literally mentioned Marr in my post.
Do you know the actual story?
No.
Stop wasting everyone’s time.
I will speak as I wish and will not be closed down by those who are trying to blank out the story
I could see a bloc forming looking for a looser, associate membership.
It should be an implicit objective of U.K. foreign policy to find some kind of associate EU membership that works for us, along with Switzerland, Norway, the non-Euro countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Sweden), and perhaps Italy.
Why?
Is NZ seeking to find some kind of Australia membership? Is Canada seeking to find some kind of USA membership?
Why can't the objective of our policy be to become friendly neighbours of the EU instead?
European market integration is fantastic, in my opinion, but I don’t believe in the case for a single currency.
Therefore I favour an outer ring of closely integrated European economies outside the Euro.
Call it associate EU membership, call it something else, I don’t care. The severing of the U.K. from the single market will see our economy fucked for years (cf the bet we have).
Why?
Why is the UK vis-a-vis Europe any different to Canada vis-a-vis the USA? Or New Zealand vis-a-vis Australia?
Why is a trade agreement insufficient, why do we need membership but those other nations don't?
You haven’t read my post properly, as befitting an anti-EU zealot.
Yes I have. You've said the UK should seek single market membership (as opposed to a trade agreement with the single market) as a foreign policy objective.
But unless I'm very much mistaken you don't think New Zealand should seek membership of Australia, or the Canada should seek membership with the USA. Trade agreements etc are sufficient for them with their neighbours - why not the same with the UK?
Australia and NZ are very closely integrated, and even have FOM. But NZ has not “joined Australia”.
I guess US and Canada do too, not sure about Mexico and whether this is a NAFTA provision.
I don’t accept your framing, it is bullshit.
US and Canada have free trade via the USMCA just like we have free trade with the EU via the TCA.
That you don't accept the framing just shows you are in denial.
A single market, as you should know (but who knows, you are deliberately obtuse most of the time) > a standard trade agreement.
As Thatcher well understood.
And yet you don't advocate Canada joining a Single Market with the USA. Why?
At the time that Thatcher sought a Single Market the European nations were in the words of Thatcher the 'richest and most prosperous people' in the planet, 'richer even than the USA'. Fast forward the better part of half a century later and the facts have changed. The EU isn't richer than the USA, its barely seven tenths of the USA in size. The richest and most prosperous people are now across the planet and not in Europe so we should pivot to deal with the world as it exists today not the world that existed four decades ago.
When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?
“What words have been added to Ofcom's 'offensive' list?
Karen: A pejorative term for an obnoxious, angry, entitled, and often racist middle-aged white woman
Gammon: A term referring to the colour of a person's flushed face when expressing their strong opinions, associated particularly with right-wing brexiteers
Libtard: A word used to describe people on the political left who are perceived to be easily offended, 'woke' and overly politically correct
Snowflake: Someone perceived as too sensitive, easily offended and outraged
Feminazi: A term used to describe an outspoken and radical feminist
Boomer: An insult for baby boomers who are perceived to be out of touch and dismissive of younger generations
Remoaner: Someone against Brexit perceived to be constantly complaining about it
Terf: A 'trans-exclusionary radical feminist' - used to describe people who reject the assertion that trans women are women and are opposed to trans-rights legislation”
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
You keep repeating this fake news, presumably because it's reported in the Mail or whatever. Others have referred to it as well - why was she banned? The T-shirt episode was just the icing on the cake, a mere slither of the whole.
From what I can find out, she (Natalie Bird) led a prolonged and public campaign of opposition to Lib Dem policy over a number of years. In particular, she repeatedly argued that even if a man had fully transitioned to being a woman, s(he) was still a (biological) man, and therefore should not be allowed into women's refuges, again in particular. So basically she refused to accept that a trans man could become a woman (although she recognised the right of people to define themselves however they wish). There's more to it than that, but I guess it's sub judice.
As a Labour Party chap, the actions of the Lib Dems don't seem unreasonable to me.
It seems Marr does not think it is fake news nor multiple other sources and she is litigating over her ban.
But then Rosie Duffield is so scared of going to the labour conference the Speaker of the HOC has to intervene
Big G, the fake news is the idea that she was banned over the T-shirt. That's not true. She was banned because of a number of episodes over a number of years, of which the T-shirt was a minor feature, as I outlined in my post. Why can't you acknowledge that?
Mind you, I've no idea why I'm on here speaking up for the Lib Dems.
It was the issue Marr presented to Davey and Marr actually read the wording on the T shirt 'Woman.Adult.Human.Female' to Davey and he had no answer
This was the catalyst of the controversy
I'm not sure what Davey was supposed to say when someone says 4 words to him. He said himself he wasn't involved in the disciplinary case.
I could see a bloc forming looking for a looser, associate membership.
It should be an implicit objective of U.K. foreign policy to find some kind of associate EU membership that works for us, along with Switzerland, Norway, the non-Euro countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Sweden), and perhaps Italy.
Why?
Is NZ seeking to find some kind of Australia membership? Is Canada seeking to find some kind of USA membership?
Why can't the objective of our policy be to become friendly neighbours of the EU instead?
European market integration is fantastic, in my opinion, but I don’t believe in the case for a single currency.
Therefore I favour an outer ring of closely integrated European economies outside the Euro.
Call it associate EU membership, call it something else, I don’t care. The severing of the U.K. from the single market will see our economy fucked for years (cf the bet we have).
Why?
Why is the UK vis-a-vis Europe any different to Canada vis-a-vis the USA? Or New Zealand vis-a-vis Australia?
Why is a trade agreement insufficient, why do we need membership but those other nations don't?
You haven’t read my post properly, as befitting an anti-EU zealot.
Yes I have. You've said the UK should seek single market membership (as opposed to a trade agreement with the single market) as a foreign policy objective.
But unless I'm very much mistaken you don't think New Zealand should seek membership of Australia, or the Canada should seek membership with the USA. Trade agreements etc are sufficient for them with their neighbours - why not the same with the UK?
Australia and NZ are very closely integrated, and even have FOM. But NZ has not “joined Australia”.
I guess US and Canada do too, not sure about Mexico and whether this is a NAFTA provision.
I don’t accept your framing, it is bullshit.
US and Canada have free trade via the USMCA just like we have free trade with the EU via the TCA.
That you don't accept the framing just shows you are in denial.
A single market, as you should know (but who knows, you are deliberately obtuse most of the time) > a standard trade agreement.
As Thatcher well understood.
And yet you don't advocate Canada joining a Single Market with the USA. Why?
At the time that Thatcher sought a Single Market the European nations were in the words of Thatcher the 'richest and most prosperous people' in the planet, 'richer even than the USA'. Fast forward the better part of half a century later and the facts have changed. The EU isn't richer than the USA, its barely seven tenths of the USA in size. The richest and most prosperous people are now across the planet and not in Europe so we should pivot to deal with the world as it exists today not the world that existed four decades ago.
When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?
I would advocate a single market between Canada and the US.
As for your stuff about the EU, you can huff and puff all you like but Europe is on our doorstep and economics 101 is that you are going to trade with your neighbours.
The idea that Britain can tow itself to somewhere just east of Malacca is cloud cuckoo land.
A victim of domestic abuse was removed as a judge of a radical thinking prize and “hounded” out of her role within the Liberal Democrats for saying that she did not believe that men who identified as women should have access to women’s refuges.
Natalie Bird, 38, a mother of two who fled an abusive former partner, was accused of “dangerous transphobia” by transgender activists in the party. She had said that opening up safe spaces without proper safeguards to anyone who said that they were female could put women at risk.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
I first went to work in London back in 1999. My first exposure to Pret and "JESUS CHRIST HOW MUCH" sandwiches. Whilst they have done well, they aren't remotely as universal in choice of locations as the big 3 coffee outlets / tax dodgers.
They aren't remotely as well-distributed across the country as their competitors. Opening 200 new outlets is I suspect a push into the sticks as opposed to opening their 127th store in London. Despite the "big return to the city" spin. They would say that - the twatty coffee sector has lobbied hard to force people back into the office.
Round where I live, WFH seems to have given the local coffee/sandwich shops more trade. Talking to people, they like going out at lunchtime, a change from cooking at home. It also helps protect the lunch break from evaporating.
Perhaps this is a repositioning by Pret? Moving to where their customers are, now...
In the towns and more rural areas, more of the coffee/sandwich shops are locally-owned, than in London. As you say, this is going after that business.
One of the things I love about wfh is being able to patronise the local sandwich shops and coffee shops - the food is better and more interesting, you get to know the proprietors, and you get a vague feeling of satisfaction that the £4 you have just spent on a coffee and a cake isn't frittered away on an indulgence, it's Supporting The Local Economy.
Off-topic, I can't help but compare and contrast my party's conference last week and the growing shitshow that is the labour conference. LibDems are feeling energised, happy, forward looking. Labour are fighting the Corbyn War round 17.
As I said at the time, Starmer should have booted Corbyn the instant the anti-semitism report came out, and then booted anyone who came out supporting the racist old wazzock. Cut off the gangrenous limb, save the patient.
"Oh no" I was told, "Labour can't have a big factional battle". Are they not having it now? And again through the winter? And next year? The trot loons are leaving in small numbers, being expelled in tiny numbers, but are still embedded in the party and successfully hijacking the entire agenda.
Then we have the other problem. Yesterday all the loony union heads popped up. We had months of coverage of the Corbynite war in Unite. And now people like Manuel Cortez foaming on. I can't be the only one who looks at the union leaders and feels repelled by them and anyone associated with them. I support trade unions who represent and empower their members, but the union movement is like a stone chained to Labour dragging it to the sea bed.
Did the Lib Dems have a conference? Entirely missed that.
1. It was online 2. We didn't have any mega rows
The only indication lib dems were having a conference was Davey's appearance on Marr and his troubles with trans rights in the party from an activists who has been banned for 10 years for wearing a T shirt with the slogan 'Woman, Adult, Human, Female '
As I said if you want to cling to that t-shirt as your excuse for voting Tory you cling away.
I'd rather vote Labour than Lib Dem. The latter are worth less than the dirt on my shoes after expelling a member for expressing an opinion. I guess this new authoritarian Lib Dem party suits you as an ex-Labour member.
And they are now involved in litigation over this lady activist's 10 year banning order for wearing a T shirt
You keep repeating this fake news, presumably because it's reported in the Mail or whatever. Others have referred to it as well - why was she banned? The T-shirt episode was just the icing on the cake, a mere slither of the whole.
From what I can find out, she (Natalie Bird) led a prolonged and public campaign of opposition to Lib Dem policy over a number of years. In particular, she repeatedly argued that even if a man had fully transitioned to being a woman, s(he) was still a (biological) man, and therefore should not be allowed into women's refuges, again in particular. So basically she refused to accept that a trans man could become a woman (although she recognised the right of people to define themselves however they wish). There's more to it than that, but I guess it's sub judice.
As a Labour Party chap, the actions of the Lib Dems don't seem unreasonable to me.
It seems Marr does not think it is fake news nor multiple other sources and she is litigating over her ban.
But then Rosie Duffield is so scared of going to the labour conference the Speaker of the HOC has to intervene
Big G, the fake news is the idea that she was banned over the T-shirt. That's not true. She was banned because of a number of episodes over a number of years, of which the T-shirt was a minor feature, as I outlined in my post. Why can't you acknowledge that?
Mind you, I've no idea why I'm on here speaking up for the Lib Dems.
It was the issue Marr presented to Davey and Marr actually read the wording on the T shirt 'Woman.Adult.Human.Female' to Davey and he had no answer
This was the catalyst of the controversy
I'm not sure what Davey was supposed to say when someone says 4 words to him. He said himself he wasn't involved in the disciplinary case.
How about - "its more complex than it looks, there is a wider context and I am not involved in the disciplinary process".
There is no point to Brexit. People who haven't realised that by now never will. There's rhetoric about Brexit that sounds somewhat plausible but none of the rationales withstand serious scrutiny.
A victim of domestic abuse was removed as a judge of a radical thinking prize and “hounded” out of her role within the Liberal Democrats for saying that she did not believe that men who identified as women should have access to women’s refuges.
Natalie Bird, 38, a mother of two who fled an abusive former partner, was accused of “dangerous transphobia” by transgender activists in the party. She had said that opening up safe spaces without proper safeguards to anyone who said that they were female could put women at risk.
Is that the same Pret A Manger who we were told in 2017 couldn't survive Brexit because it is so dependent upon low paid immigrant workers ?
The same low paid immigrant workers we're told who have all left the UK ?
I'm not sure this is the good news you are spinning it as. By the time they finish this recruitment push it only puts their workforce back where it started. Pret's strategy is "last man standing" and it seems reasonable - the fall in city working / travel means less demand for twatty coffee which means other outlets will fail. As Pret don't have as strong a coverage as Costa, Staxfbucks and Nero, this is their chance to mop up.
I went into Pret for the first time in a year and a half last week. They've dramatically reduced their range of tasty cakes. I had thought the reason I frequented Pret for lunch was cheap coffee. Turns out what was really motivating me was tasty cakes.
I first went to work in London back in 1999. My first exposure to Pret and "JESUS CHRIST HOW MUCH" sandwiches. Whilst they have done well, they aren't remotely as universal in choice of locations as the big 3 coffee outlets / tax dodgers.
They aren't remotely as well-distributed across the country as their competitors. Opening 200 new outlets is I suspect a push into the sticks as opposed to opening their 127th store in London. Despite the "big return to the city" spin. They would say that - the twatty coffee sector has lobbied hard to force people back into the office.
Why are you calling it the “twatty coffee sector”?
Do you think people who buy coffee are to be looked down upon?
Hell no. The shops are twatty, not the people. £4 for a fucking latte is an egregious pisstake. Then insisting that you actually make a loss so pay no taxes is even more so.
I have no problem with consumer choice and coffee shops will come and go. What has been telling over the last 18 months is how happy so many people have been with dropping the daily grind of pay lots of money to have a grinding commute and buying a £4 latte every day.
Well, I like Pret. And have never paid £4 for a coffee.
I guess your reference to tax is a swipe at Starbucks, who I’ll concede are selling disgusting swill at an astonishing premium.
The irony is that Starbucks, terrible as they are in many ways, have probably got a better handle on the coffee shop as a place to go and take a break from working at home for a bit, rather than the rushed grab'n'go takeaway thing.
A victim of domestic abuse was removed as a judge of a radical thinking prize and “hounded” out of her role within the Liberal Democrats for saying that she did not believe that men who identified as women should have access to women’s refuges.
Natalie Bird, 38, a mother of two who fled an abusive former partner, was accused of “dangerous transphobia” by transgender activists in the party. She had said that opening up safe spaces without proper safeguards to anyone who said that they were female could put women at risk.
Comments
It made sense for the UK to include France, because otherwise Britain's position as a veto-wielding member would come into question.
Possibly the most redundant item in peoples' households apart from their stash of bottled water is a salt cellar.
Countries in the EU will be able to look at what happened with Brexit, see where mistakes were made, and what went right, and learn lessons if they choose to do the same.
Plus of course few if any other EU members would have issues like the NI border and GFA to consider which has been the only real long term drama from Brexit. Brexit itself is going smoothly.
The UK was always less into the EU (something eurocrats can be forgiven for misunderstanding given our disproportionally pro-EU political class) than every other member state.
Greece still wanted the euro when it was crushing their economy.
I think it's very unlikely other countries will have serious attempts to leave.
Doing so allows NZers to import lovely consumables and so you could argue it maximises overall consumer utility.
Having said that, I do thing in the long term a trade deficit moves you to a “branch economy”.
Systemic industries (like banking) in NZ are overseas owned and HQ’d.
Secondly I think there are distribution issues, as exporting drives productivity which means better paid jobs.
I (an IT geek) once stopped an... interesting moment happening. I was attending a meeting at the oil company I worked for (I had a habit of getting myself into all kinds of meetings to see the business). A manager was proudly declaiming on how he'd saved a packet by changing the specification for some wellhead gear from stainless to regular steel.
Which set me thinking about *why* it was stainless in the first place. So I asked some people. Then went to my boss in a hurry.....
The well in question had lots of water in the oil (among other things). And the oil came out very hot. At high temperatures and pressures, murderously corrosive. The regular steel would literally be eaten away....
Apparently the manager had just seen that there was a cheaper option - and made the change without bothering to get an engineer to give an opinion.
IIRC the border between Poland and Belarus is forests and marshes not mountains.
From what I can find out, she (Natalie Bird) led a prolonged and public campaign of opposition to Lib Dem policy over a number of years. In particular, she repeatedly argued that even if a man had fully transitioned to being a woman, s(he) was still a (biological) man, and therefore should not be allowed into women's refuges, again in particular. So basically she refused to accept that a trans man could become a woman (although she recognised the right of people to define themselves however they wish). There's more to it than that, but I guess it's sub judice.
As a Labour Party chap, the actions of the Lib Dems don't seem unreasonable to me.
“What words have been added to Ofcom's 'offensive' list?
Karen: A pejorative term for an obnoxious, angry, entitled, and often racist middle-aged white woman
Gammon: A term referring to the colour of a person's flushed face when expressing their strong opinions, associated particularly with right-wing brexiteers
Libtard: A word used to describe people on the political left who are perceived to be easily offended, 'woke' and overly politically correct
Snowflake: Someone perceived as too sensitive, easily offended and outraged
Feminazi: A term used to describe an outspoken and radical feminist
Boomer: An insult for baby boomers who are perceived to be out of touch and dismissive of younger generations
Remoaner: Someone against Brexit perceived to be constantly complaining about it
Terf: A 'trans-exclusionary radical feminist' - used to describe people who reject the assertion that trans women are women and are opposed to trans-rights legislation”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10015349/Gammon-remoaner-Karen-snowflake-words-added-Ofcoms-list-offensive-terms.html
By contrast there is not a single Midlands or North East seat in the top 50 LD target seats, so the LDs are more in the mix in Wales still than they are in the Midlands or North East of England
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat
Take one example:
Hospital discharges a patient, they return as an emergency admission within 28 (was it*) days then the hospital does not get paid for the return admission (and maybe the original, I forget). Thinking being that they discharged too early so should be incentivised to not do that by sending sick people home.
Perverse incentives:
1. Be over cautious about discharge - keep some people in hospital if they're at a stage in life where they may well come back within 28 days even if they don't actually need hospital care (bed blockers)
2. GPs can bounce the patient back into hospital within 28 days of a dishcarge without the CCG having to pick up the bill (as the hospital pays instead)
*when I was doing research in this kind of area, the reforms were just coming in/announced but not yet in place. These were some issue identified at the time, but some could be innaccurate or never actually enacted
And there's the possibility that Norway and Switzerland could leave the EEA/EFTA respectively.
But listen to what he said: doesn’t feel like a slip of the tongue, even if it’s not an official government position https://twitter.com/kayburley/status/1440575160654856196
Though if we had to lose China as well, it wouldn't have been a tragedy. That was Roosevelt's mistake.
I am pleasantly surprised to see Pret expanding given the blow they’ve received during Covid. I take this as a vote of confidence in the revival of cities.
Trying to stop such tragedies was the reason behind the idea of getting people to make their asylum claims from refugee camps.
Unfortunately, I don't have an answer beyond "wouldn't it be great to be nice to people for a change" and Douglas Adams fans will recognise what happened last time that was suggested.
Considering this has come out and got them criticism its noteworthy that no more has been said on the matter yet.
Maybe stick to English politics
If in 2010 Cameron and Clegg had stood in the Rose Garden, announcing that within the year the British people would be given the chance to vote again on our remaining in the EU, Miliband would have enthusiastically campaigned with them - and Farage would not have had time to get his shit together. Boris would have almost certainly stayed inside the tent, waiting his time. We would have voted at least 60-40 to stay, is my estimate.
The LibDems gave us Brexit.
People can stuff themselves full of sugars, saturated fat and salt if they want to but they can't say they weren't warned.
Because its bollocks. I don't know the woman. I don't know the issue. The only reporting I can find are right wing newspapers reporting her line as she complains about it. I'll take that all with a large pinch of salt.
Parties do not ban people for 10 years if all they did was wear a t-shirt. And if some of you clown-apologists lifted your head out from him bum crack for a minute for a breath of clean air, you'd realise how absurd you sound.
1. The govt believes that the EU has a high degree of influence over the US/Joe Biden "..they are reading what the EU is saying about Northern Ireland".
2. Look at where we are "trade to continue between GB and Northern Ireland" in terms of roadmap to unification. UK govt ministers have already separated out NI from the UK.
But then Rosie Duffield is so scared of going to the labour conference the Speaker of the HOC has to intervene
Therefore I favour an outer ring of closely integrated European economies outside the Euro.
Call it associate EU membership, call it something else, I don’t care. The severing of the U.K. from the single market will see our economy fucked for years (cf the bet we have).
Mind you, I've no idea why I'm on here speaking up for the Lib Dems.
It was the description freezing which seemed odd.
Why is the UK vis-a-vis Europe any different to Canada vis-a-vis the USA? Or New Zealand vis-a-vis Australia?
Why is a trade agreement insufficient, why do we need membership but those other nations don't?
What’s with all the salt-bashing this morning?
The Japanese eat a lot of salt and live to a ripe old age.
At that point with devolution in NI effectively suspended NI will be closer under Westminster control than Scotland or Wales politically even if not still in trade terms
Incidentally, if you get wet and don't have dry clothes or a fire, your chances of hypothermia go up immensely. The modern universality of wearing jeans makes this worse.
The number of people who manage to get themselves into serious trouble, in this country, when walking on Dartmoor (or similar)......
This interview was broadcast UK wide and other posters have commented on it
And as for your last offensive sentence it does look like you are losing the plot as that kind of language is wholly unnecessary in any debate
They aren't remotely as well-distributed across the country as their competitors. Opening 200 new outlets is I suspect a push into the sticks as opposed to opening their 127th store in London. Despite the "big return to the city" spin. They would say that - the twatty coffee sector has lobbied hard to force people back into the office.
There’s nothing controversial in what Eustace is saying, the NIP as drafted and implemented is a fucking disaster, and it needs changing.
Do you think people who buy coffee are to be looked down upon?
And his response was spot on. The party believes in human rights and individualism so supports the "trans women are women" position. But it is not remotely absolutist and ramming a position down other people's throats - the issue needs to be detoxified and debated until a balance is found.
Perhaps this is a repositioning by Pret? Moving to where their customers are, now...
This “issue” is just a pathetic gotcha by the media who are incapable of performing the role we need them to, which is to understand Lib Dem’s positioning on the current economic situation.
Max was complaining last night that he doesn’t know about Lib Dem policy, and in part this is because the media - and even Marr - is too lazy to go into it.
Some fantastic businesses have gone under during covid through no fault of their own.
The other issue, is that in the US politics, trade deals are not popular at the moment.
Trumpets are protectionists. A large chunk of the Democratic party (especially the Left) believes that NAFTA sold out American workers and caused the rise of Trump.
Given that the Senate has to approve any such deal (by 2/3rds), the Democrats have a bare majority and the GOP is proclaiming that they will block anything that Biden tries to do....
As for the various purveyors of 'twatty coffee' the only thing I can say is that their ever increasing numbers exposes the bollox of 'austerity' claims.
Because she wasn't. Others upthread who know more than I do have said what she has been on about. I assume she was banned for that, not the tshirt.
And Marr? He used a live TV interview to try an ambush question. Kept going back to it when Davey swept it aside to talk about the actual issue. Kept failing to gain any ground.
So yes, if you are a right wing newspaper worried about the Tory exposure in the home countries of course you will try and spin out a story that actually the liberals are illiberal and actually its that nice Mr Johnson standing up for women by betraying and dumping so many of them so why not forget your dalliance with voting LibDem and stick with the Tories?
Its a non-story. People aren't talking about it outside a few stories in those newspapers from 1 side only. The party hasn't risen to it knowing the story hasn't got legs and this activist isn't going to find friends with her efforts.
I do not read the daily mail and my source was Marrs interview that you simply try to blank out
It is not going away
You really are an arsehole.
Do you know the actual story?
No.
Stop wasting everyone’s time.
I have no problem with consumer choice and coffee shops will come and go. What has been telling over the last 18 months is how happy so many people have been with dropping the daily grind of pay lots of money to have a grinding commute and buying a £4 latte every day.
But unless I'm very much mistaken you don't think New Zealand should seek membership of Australia, or the Canada should seek membership with the USA. Trade agreements etc are sufficient for them with their neighbours - why not the same with the UK?
This was the catalyst of the controversy
This is why we have a labour shortage, not a labour absence.
Doesn't seem controversial to me. Anyone who disagrees is a snowflake.
I guess US and Canada do too, not sure about Mexico and whether this is a NAFTA provision.
I don’t accept your framing, it is bullshit.
It is also true that the departure of migrant labour has created huge gaps in the labour force in a number of industries including leisure and QSR. With the culling of a stack of jobs in both smaller outlets and big chains there are people out there who still want the work and Pret are concentrated in areas easier to recruit for.
And have never paid £4 for a coffee.
I guess your reference to tax is a swipe at Starbucks, who I’ll concede are selling disgusting swill at an astonishing premium.
That you don't accept the framing just shows you are in denial.
As I said before stick to English politics
As Thatcher well understood.
One of my most frequent interactions in buying coffee is as follows:
Cookie: Can I have a cup of coffee please. Just a normal filter coffee.
Barista: Americano?
Cookie (silently, in head): NO! Just a normal filter coffee. The simplest coffee drink to prepare. Not a British version of an Italian version of an American version of coffee, which is going to take you a minute to prepare and cost me twice as much. Just coffee.
Cookie (out loud): Ok.
Other pet hate about coffee - frothy milk in the top.
At the time that Thatcher sought a Single Market the European nations were in the words of Thatcher the 'richest and most prosperous people' in the planet, 'richer even than the USA'. Fast forward the better part of half a century later and the facts have changed. The EU isn't richer than the USA, its barely seven tenths of the USA in size. The richest and most prosperous people are now across the planet and not in Europe so we should pivot to deal with the world as it exists today not the world that existed four decades ago.
When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?
https://twitter.com/LocalFR_Emma/status/1440599474695405573?s=20
As for your stuff about the EU, you can huff and puff all you like but Europe is on our doorstep and economics 101 is that you are going to trade with your neighbours.
The idea that Britain can tow itself to somewhere just east of Malacca is cloud cuckoo land.
https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/natalie-bird-legal-fund/
And from earlier:
A victim of domestic abuse was removed as a judge of a radical thinking prize and “hounded” out of her role within the Liberal Democrats for saying that she did not believe that men who identified as women should have access to women’s refuges.
Natalie Bird, 38, a mother of two who fled an abusive former partner, was accused of “dangerous transphobia” by transgender activists in the party. She had said that opening up safe spaces without proper safeguards to anyone who said that they were female could put women at risk.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/lib-dem-trans-activists-hounded-abuse-victim-b6dx39tv3
There is no point to Brexit. People who haven't realised that by now never will. There's rhetoric about Brexit that sounds somewhat plausible but none of the rationales withstand serious scrutiny.