Size does matter in Hartlepool – politicalbetting.com
Comments
-
Anyway, family day for me today.
I'll leave the excitable anti-Johnsonites and Remainers to have a Sunday love-in.0 -
Does Carrie Antoinette have a job?
Why do they need a nanny?
Even if they are both working, they live literally above the shop.1 -
I think it is simple. People struggle to understand the complexity of the Greensill scandal, but do understand an extravagant woman overspending on home improvements, and a spendthrift man cadging loans off his mates. That is why #CarrieAntoinette resonates.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.5 -
Actually, I think leaving the EU probably bought the Union a few more years. Support for Yes in Scotland was rising before the vote, while in the year after the referendum it actually fell somewhat. It has since resumed its gently rising trend.Scott_xP said:
It's really sad that the breakup of the United Kingdom is an inevitable consequence of BrexitSandpit said:It’s sad that so many of the Commentariat seem to be gleefully talking up the dissolution of the country, purely as a means to get back at Johnson and Brexit.
0 -
A lot of Tories who ought to know better have greeted the public's indifference to the cash-for-cushions affair with delight.
https://thecritic.co.uk/nothing-matters-to-careless-people/ https://twitter.com/RobDotHutton/status/1388767392981999626/photo/11 -
Latest pollswing_voter said:
I agree re Scottish Labour they have a good leader it seems, I've not followed the story but would be interested to see how he Scottish Tory vote performs...from my aging scottish relatives, spaffing 58k on kitchens plus other Toryisms (esp BJ) wont have gone down well at all, is there any indications of the SCon vote sliding..?Foxy said:
I think SLAB will be in second place in the popular vote, and possibly seats. Voting SLAB is the way to kick both Sturgeon and Johnson in the arse.Razedabode said:
That could well be the caseFrankBooth said:
Maybe people give the SNP a plus on defence because they like the policies even if they don't have the powers? Which is worrying because it suggests what the SNP is good at requires independence.CarlottaVance said:Some fascinating detail in this, including the bafflingly surreal one that, while Scottish voters think the SNP Scottish Government has done badly on education, they think it has done well on immigration and defence.
Could someone please have a stern word with Scottish voters?
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1388747777031692290?s=20
Have we all done our predictions on here for e Scottish elections yet? I still think SNP will fall short of a majority, but will be very tight.
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1388641572774981632?s=191 -
Hmmm.. my feeling is that people are going to vote for Indy regardless of brexit or not. The only thing keeping the union together is finances now, not emotion or cultural identity. Ultimately that is the issue.Fishing said:
Actually, I think leaving the EU probably bought the Union a few more years. Support for Yes in Scotland was rising before the vote, while in the year after the referendum it actually fell somewhat. It has since resumed its gently rising trend.Scott_xP said:
It's really sad that the breakup of the United Kingdom is an inevitable consequence of BrexitSandpit said:It’s sad that so many of the Commentariat seem to be gleefully talking up the dissolution of the country, purely as a means to get back at Johnson and Brexit.
1 -
Great line in this Laura Kuenssberg piece - aides nickname Boris Johnson "The Trolley"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56624437 https://twitter.com/janemerrick23/status/1388768538031280128/photo/10 -
So, can you do sums? By what factor has Cameron's behaviour cost the country over Johnson'sTheScreamingEagles said:
The taxpayer have so far paid £30k for the flat, and are likely to pay £150k during this parliament for the redecoration of the flat.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
There's another cost to the taxpayer which I flagged up earlier on this week and the Sunday Times have picked up on now.
Boris Johnson was given a loan by the Tory Party, it needed declaring on tax returns as a benefit in kind and there's tax implications, it appears Boris Johnson didn't declare it on his tax return in January, so....
3 billion / (30 k) = 3 x 10^9 /3 X 10^4 = 10^5
By an enormous factor of 100,000, Cameron's behaviour has been the more costly.
Dirty, dirty Dave.0 -
So what, it was finances which helped ensure No got 55% in 2014Razedabode said:
Hmmm.. my feeling is that people are going to vote for Indy regardless of brexit or not. The only thing keeping the union together is finances now, not emotion or cultural identity. Ultimately that is the issue.Fishing said:
Actually, I think leaving the EU probably bought the Union a few more years. Support for Yes in Scotland was rising before the vote, while in the year after the referendum it actually fell somewhat. It has since resumed its gently rising trend.Scott_xP said:
It's really sad that the breakup of the United Kingdom is an inevitable consequence of BrexitSandpit said:It’s sad that so many of the Commentariat seem to be gleefully talking up the dissolution of the country, purely as a means to get back at Johnson and Brexit.
0 -
Bless, you're using Guardian figures when it comes to taxes and finances.YBarddCwsc said:
So, can you do sums? By what factor has Cameron's behaviour cost the country over Johnson'sTheScreamingEagles said:
The taxpayer have so far paid £30k for the flat, and are likely to pay £150k during this parliament for the redecoration of the flat.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
There's another cost to the taxpayer which I flagged up earlier on this week and the Sunday Times have picked up on now.
Boris Johnson was given a loan by the Tory Party, it needed declaring on tax returns as a benefit in kind and there's tax implications, it appears Boris Johnson didn't declare it on his tax return in January, so....
3 billion / (30 k) = 3 x 10^9 /3 X 10^4 = 10^5
By an enormous factor of 100,000, Cameron's behaviour has been the more costly.
Dirty, dirty Dave.
Next you'll be citing Carole Cadwalladr as an authority on the subject.1 -
They are only list seats, not one major fishing community in Scotland has a Conservative constituency MSP. However I think the Conservatives could gain Moray from the SNP, it was 49% Leave, has Ross as its Westminster MP and no major fishing port unlike its neighbour Banffshire and Buchan CoastRochdalePioneers said:
ScotCons are on for losing seats. Last night the Lord of Epping Forest insisted they help no seats in NE fishing towns - because their 4 MSPs here are only list members. With polls showing them losing somewhere round that number of seats, I think HYUFD's prediction is likely accurate - Tories are going to be punished up here for lying to the community.Foxy said:
I think SLAB will be in second place in the popular vote, and possibly seats. Voting SLAB is the way to kick both Sturgeon and Johnson in the arse.Razedabode said:
That could well be the caseFrankBooth said:
Maybe people give the SNP a plus on defence because they like the policies even if they don't have the powers? Which is worrying because it suggests what the SNP is good at requires independence.CarlottaVance said:Some fascinating detail in this, including the bafflingly surreal one that, while Scottish voters think the SNP Scottish Government has done badly on education, they think it has done well on immigration and defence.
Could someone please have a stern word with Scottish voters?
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1388747777031692290?s=20
Have we all done our predictions on here for e Scottish elections yet? I still think SNP will fall short of a majority, but will be very tight.0 -
Hmmm.. my feeling is that people are going to vote for Indy regardless of brexit or not. The only thing keeping the union together is finances now, not emotion or cultural identity. Ultimately that is the issue.Fishing said:
Actually, I think leaving the EU probably bought the Union a few more years. Support for Yes in Scotland was rising before the vote, while in the year after the referendum it actually fell somewhat. It has since resumed its gently rising trend.Scott_xP said:
It's really sad that the breakup of the United Kingdom is an inevitable consequence of BrexitSandpit said:It’s sad that so many of the Commentariat seem to be gleefully talking up the dissolution of the country, purely as a means to get back at Johnson and Brexit.
What is the point of a union based solely on the principle of finances, having eroded a “British” identity over years.HYUFD said:
So what, it was finances which helped ensure No got 55% in 2014Razedabode said:
Hmmm.. my feeling is that people are going to vote for Indy regardless of brexit or not. The only thing keeping the union together is finances now, not emotion or cultural identity. Ultimately that is the issue.Fishing said:
Actually, I think leaving the EU probably bought the Union a few more years. Support for Yes in Scotland was rising before the vote, while in the year after the referendum it actually fell somewhat. It has since resumed its gently rising trend.Scott_xP said:
It's really sad that the breakup of the United Kingdom is an inevitable consequence of BrexitSandpit said:It’s sad that so many of the Commentariat seem to be gleefully talking up the dissolution of the country, purely as a means to get back at Johnson and Brexit.
If I were a Scot, I’d probably agree with the view that ultimately what England wants, it gets. (And I am a unionist).
I’ve seen little action from the conservatives to address this, and quite frankly, Johnson is not the man. He’d leave now if he valued the UK.0 -
Oh sure, that is the reason why it resonates. It is 'Parkinson's Law'.Foxy said:
I think it is simple. People struggle to understand the complexity of the Greensill scandal, but do understand an extravagant woman overspending on home improvements, and a spendthrift man cadging loans off his mates. That is why #CarrieAntoinette resonates.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
I am bewailing Parkinson's Law.
We need a proper inquiry int Greensill/Gupta rather than Carrie's wallpaper.
0 -
Morning all.
There is an interview with Kate Garraway (Derek Draper's partner) on Times Radio at 10am this morning.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/radio/live
I think the interviewer is Gloria de Piero.
0 -
Wrong, if that was true Yes would be on over 60%+ to match the 62% Remain got in Scotland in 2016, instead it is under 50% and barely changed from 2014Scott_xP said:
It's really sad that the breakup of the United Kingdom is an inevitable consequence of BrexitSandpit said:It’s sad that so many of the Commentariat seem to be gleefully talking up the dissolution of the country, purely as a means to get back at Johnson and Brexit.
Little Englanders for the win...0 -
Have you been at the metal polish agin Malc?malcolmg said:
You unionists really are full of green cheese, hate your colony having aspirations.MarqueeMark said:
Indy Scotland is going to be a place where the Scots are asked to believe six impossible things before breakfast.CarlottaVance said:Some fascinating detail in this, including the bafflingly surreal one that, while Scottish voters think the SNP Scottish Government has done badly on education, they think it has done well on immigration and defence.
Could someone please have a stern word with Scottish voters?
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1388747777031692290?s=200 -
So what. Suppose the Guardian's figure is out by a factor of ten or a hundred.TheScreamingEagles said:
Bless, you're using Guardian figures when it comes to taxes and finances.YBarddCwsc said:
So, can you do sums? By what factor has Cameron's behaviour cost the country over Johnson'sTheScreamingEagles said:
The taxpayer have so far paid £30k for the flat, and are likely to pay £150k during this parliament for the redecoration of the flat.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
There's another cost to the taxpayer which I flagged up earlier on this week and the Sunday Times have picked up on now.
Boris Johnson was given a loan by the Tory Party, it needed declaring on tax returns as a benefit in kind and there's tax implications, it appears Boris Johnson didn't declare it on his tax return in January, so....
3 billion / (30 k) = 3 x 10^9 /3 X 10^4 = 10^5
By an enormous factor of 100,000, Cameron's behaviour has been the more costly.
Dirty, dirty Dave.
Next you'll be citing Carole Cadwalladr as an authority on the subject.
There is plenty of slack in 10^5.
It just means that Dirty Dave cost the country only a thousand times more than Carrie Antoinette. Instead of a hundred thousand times.
Shady Dave. Crooked Cameron.1 -
Cameron was a shitty PM who couldn't even win a majority against Gordon Brown for Christ's sake, but at least he got us out of the EU. So you're right to stick up for him. The £5bn that Greensill may have cost us is small compared to the £12bn/year in EU contributions that he saved us.TheScreamingEagles said:
Bless, you're using Guardian figures when it comes to taxes and finances.YBarddCwsc said:
So, can you do sums? By what factor has Cameron's behaviour cost the country over Johnson'sTheScreamingEagles said:
The taxpayer have so far paid £30k for the flat, and are likely to pay £150k during this parliament for the redecoration of the flat.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
There's another cost to the taxpayer which I flagged up earlier on this week and the Sunday Times have picked up on now.
Boris Johnson was given a loan by the Tory Party, it needed declaring on tax returns as a benefit in kind and there's tax implications, it appears Boris Johnson didn't declare it on his tax return in January, so....
3 billion / (30 k) = 3 x 10^9 /3 X 10^4 = 10^5
By an enormous factor of 100,000, Cameron's behaviour has been the more costly.
Dirty, dirty Dave.
Next you'll be citing Carole Cadwalladr as an authority on the subject.3 -
Indeed and there are far more working class Tory MPs now than there have ever been and fewer Tory bankers and barristers post the 2019 general election while most Labour MPs now have professional backgroundsydoethur said:
That was probably true when he said it. I don’t think that’s necessarily true now. Starmer, for example, must have been on better money as DPP than he was as an ordinary MP. Nick Thomas-Symonds probably earned about the same as a senior Fellow of St Edmund Hall as he does now.DecrepiterJohnL said:
That reminds me of an old observation by Ken Livingstone, talking about MPs' salaries. For most Conservatives, it's a pay cut. For most Labour MPs, it's the most they've earned in their lives.Foxy said:
Starmer is slightly older than Johnson. Both are likely to to be the last Boomer party leaders.DecrepiterJohnL said:
That is true. Retiring from Number 10 is a one-shot deal.rkrkrk said:
Whenever he leaves he can go back to earning the big money.AlistairM said:From reading the last thread it is clear that Boris can't afford to stay PM. He was just about financially viable before being PM when he could have other sources of income such as his Telegraph column. Without that the can't afford his lifestyle, particularly with Carrie's very high standards for interior decor.
I think there is a reasonable likelihood that Boris will step down after the country opens up again. Claim to be the PM who led the vaccine programme and start on the newly re-opened speech circuit making millions.
If he did so then the money spent on the Downing Street flat will turn out to be a collosal waste of money as I doubt it is to many others taste.
But he will find it pretty difficult if not impossible to become PM again.
On the other hand, does Boris want to get bogged down in the minutiae of post-Brexit trade, Scottish independence and Northern Ireland border issues? Boris has done, or at least announced, the fun stuff already. And he had to be leant on to run for a second term as Mayor.
Boris is not old. He will turn 57 in June. But that is already older than David Cameron and Tony Blair when they retired.
I do not expect Boris to contest the 2024 election. I should not be surprised if he steps down this year.0 -
Another car crash interview from Douglas Ross on Marr .
I’m wondering whether he’s an undercover SNP operative !0 -
It is, currently English money is spent in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, rather than in poorer English regions. There are two problems from this:Razedabode said:
Hmmm.. my feeling is that people are going to vote for Indy regardless of brexit or not. The only thing keeping the union together is finances now, not emotion or cultural identity. Ultimately that is the issue.Fishing said:
Actually, I think leaving the EU probably bought the Union a few more years. Support for Yes in Scotland was rising before the vote, while in the year after the referendum it actually fell somewhat. It has since resumed its gently rising trend.Scott_xP said:
It's really sad that the breakup of the United Kingdom is an inevitable consequence of BrexitSandpit said:It’s sad that so many of the Commentariat seem to be gleefully talking up the dissolution of the country, purely as a means to get back at Johnson and Brexit.
1) Because he who pays the piper calls the tune, those 3 countries resent being financially dependent on England. I think too that that this "aid" distorts economies to perpetuate dependence, much as poorly designed foreign aid does.
2) Increasingly English nationalists will resent paying the bills for people who abuse them in thanks. As austerity bites again, and the SE English taxpayer is expected to stump up the funds, I can only see that discontent getting worse.
1 -
Spot on - i think one of the major failures of devolution was the “English issue”.Foxy said:
It is, currently English money is spent in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, rather than in poorer English regions. There are two problems from this:Razedabode said:
Hmmm.. my feeling is that people are going to vote for Indy regardless of brexit or not. The only thing keeping the union together is finances now, not emotion or cultural identity. Ultimately that is the issue.Fishing said:
Actually, I think leaving the EU probably bought the Union a few more years. Support for Yes in Scotland was rising before the vote, while in the year after the referendum it actually fell somewhat. It has since resumed its gently rising trend.Scott_xP said:
It's really sad that the breakup of the United Kingdom is an inevitable consequence of BrexitSandpit said:It’s sad that so many of the Commentariat seem to be gleefully talking up the dissolution of the country, purely as a means to get back at Johnson and Brexit.
1) Because he who pays the piper calls the tune, those 3 countries resent being financially dependent on England. I think too that that this "aid" distorts economies to perpetuate dependence, much as poorly designed foreign aid does.
2) Increasingly English nationalists will resent paying the bills for people who abuse them in thanks. As austerity bites again, and the SE English taxpayer is expected to stump up the funds, I can only see that discontent getting worse.
Totally fudged, never addressed, hence we are where we are1 -
If they are "only list seats" then you will be happy to lose them. You keep saying these list MSPs don't represent the fishing area. When I put my details into They Work For You it states - amazingly enough - that I have a stack of MSPs representing me including these 4 Tories:HYUFD said:
They are only list seats, not one major fishing community in Scotland has a Conservative constituency MSP. However I think the Conservatives could gain Moray from the SNP, it was 49% Leave, has Ross as its Westminster MP and no major fishing port unlike its neighbour Banffshire and Buchan CoastRochdalePioneers said:
ScotCons are on for losing seats. Last night the Lord of Epping Forest insisted they help no seats in NE fishing towns - because their 4 MSPs here are only list members. With polls showing them losing somewhere round that number of seats, I think HYUFD's prediction is likely accurate - Tories are going to be punished up here for lying to the community.Foxy said:
I think SLAB will be in second place in the popular vote, and possibly seats. Voting SLAB is the way to kick both Sturgeon and Johnson in the arse.Razedabode said:
That could well be the caseFrankBooth said:
Maybe people give the SNP a plus on defence because they like the policies even if they don't have the powers? Which is worrying because it suggests what the SNP is good at requires independence.CarlottaVance said:Some fascinating detail in this, including the bafflingly surreal one that, while Scottish voters think the SNP Scottish Government has done badly on education, they think it has done well on immigration and defence.
Could someone please have a stern word with Scottish voters?
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1388747777031692290?s=20
Have we all done our predictions on here for e Scottish elections yet? I still think SNP will fall short of a majority, but will be very tight.
Your MP (Member of Parliament) is David Duguid, Banff and Buchan
Your constituency MSP (Member of the Scottish Parliament) is Gillian Martin, Aberdeenshire East
Your North East Scotland MSPs are:
Peter Chapman
Liam Kerr
Lewis Macdonald
Jenny Marra
Mike Rumbles
Bill Bowman
Tom Mason
You really are a clueless fool.0 -
Well Boris is plastering Union Jacks all over the place but a Union based on finances is pretty important as people will lose their jobs, the economy will see slower growth and spending would have to be slashed in Scotland if it went.Razedabode said:
Hmmm.. my feeling is that people are going to vote for Indy regardless of brexit or not. The only thing keeping the union together is finances now, not emotion or cultural identity. Ultimately that is the issue.Fishing said:
Actually, I think leaving the EU probably bought the Union a few more years. Support for Yes in Scotland was rising before the vote, while in the year after the referendum it actually fell somewhat. It has since resumed its gently rising trend.Scott_xP said:
It's really sad that the breakup of the United Kingdom is an inevitable consequence of BrexitSandpit said:It’s sad that so many of the Commentariat seem to be gleefully talking up the dissolution of the country, purely as a means to get back at Johnson and Brexit.
What is the point of a union based solely on the principle of finances, having eroded a “British” identity over years.HYUFD said:
So what, it was finances which helped ensure No got 55% in 2014Razedabode said:
Hmmm.. my feeling is that people are going to vote for Indy regardless of brexit or not. The only thing keeping the union together is finances now, not emotion or cultural identity. Ultimately that is the issue.Fishing said:
Actually, I think leaving the EU probably bought the Union a few more years. Support for Yes in Scotland was rising before the vote, while in the year after the referendum it actually fell somewhat. It has since resumed its gently rising trend.Scott_xP said:
It's really sad that the breakup of the United Kingdom is an inevitable consequence of BrexitSandpit said:It’s sad that so many of the Commentariat seem to be gleefully talking up the dissolution of the country, purely as a means to get back at Johnson and Brexit.
If I were a Scot, I’d probably agree with the view that ultimately what England wants, it gets. (And I am a unionist).
I’ve seen little action from the conservatives to address this, and quite frankly, Johnson is not the man. He’d leave now if he valued the UK.
It is also a myth that what England wants it always gets, indeed on the latest Survation poll Starmer would become UK PM in a hung parliament with support from the SNP and Welsh Labour MPs even despite another Tory majority in England and with no English Parliament as the Scots have either.
It would therefore be England disenfranchised, not Scotland1 -
It is very rare that one persons taste is the same as another. A new neighbour recently ripped out a beautiful new kitchen @ circa 15k that had recently been installed about a year previously because she didn't like it, and spent probably 25k on a new one. Utter madness imho but there you go.
Always good to look for. I got a free John Lewis kitchen like that
.
2nd hand kitchens off ebay are fantastic value.0 -
Why is that any business of your or anyone else's for that matter.? Before you answer. It isn't.Scott_xP said:Does Carrie Antoinette have a job?
Why do they need a nanny?
Even if they are both working, they live literally above the shop.0 -
KGB Cameron? We know the Russki spies tried to recruit him.YBarddCwsc said:
So what. Suppose the Guardian's figure is out by a factor of ten or a hundred.TheScreamingEagles said:
Bless, you're using Guardian figures when it comes to taxes and finances.YBarddCwsc said:
So, can you do sums? By what factor has Cameron's behaviour cost the country over Johnson'sTheScreamingEagles said:
The taxpayer have so far paid £30k for the flat, and are likely to pay £150k during this parliament for the redecoration of the flat.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
There's another cost to the taxpayer which I flagged up earlier on this week and the Sunday Times have picked up on now.
Boris Johnson was given a loan by the Tory Party, it needed declaring on tax returns as a benefit in kind and there's tax implications, it appears Boris Johnson didn't declare it on his tax return in January, so....
3 billion / (30 k) = 3 x 10^9 /3 X 10^4 = 10^5
By an enormous factor of 100,000, Cameron's behaviour has been the more costly.
Dirty, dirty Dave.
Next you'll be citing Carole Cadwalladr as an authority on the subject.
There is plenty of slack in 10^5.
It just means that Dirty Dave cost the country only a thousand times more than Carrie Antoinette. Instead of a hundred thousand times.
Shady Dave. Crooked Cameron.0 -
It's not the case that no one is very interested. The Greensill/Gupta/Cameron affair is being looked into by various Select Committees, the NAO, and an 'independent' (joke) inquiry set up by the PM under Nigel Boardman. There's not much to say on it until these various inquiries report, but the work is ongoing. It is obviously a much bigger scandal than redecoration, but it's also much more complex and therefore less accessible to the public. I'm sure it will be whitewashed in due course.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
https://news.sky.com/story/cameron-greensill-row-the-seven-inquiries-looking-into-government-lobbying-122764390 -
If the nanny is paid for by a rich donor who expects favours from the PM in return, then hell yes.squareroot2 said:Why is that any business of your or anyone else's for that matter.?
4 -
From the Scottish Parliament's website: "You're represented by 8 MSPs. One constituency MSP who represents your local area and 7 regional MSPs who represent your larger area."
https://www.parliament.scot/msps/current-and-previous-msps/search-results?postcode=ab436nf
As 4 of these MSPs are Tory, I am represented by 4 Tory MPs. As are the rest of the 22% of Scottish food production that is the north east. In the real world these Tories are under threat having betrayed the brexit voters who wanted a boost for farming and fishing. In HYUFD world these MSPs don't exist.
Why do we bother listening to a word this fool writes about Scotland when he doesn't even know how the electoral system works or how many MSPs his own party has?
0 -
Not one represents a Holyrood fishing constituency of any significant size, every resident of Scotland has a Tory MSP on the list, Banffshire and Buchan coast which is where the largest fishing ports in Scotland are has an SNP constituency MSP, the next largest fishing ports in Shetland have a LD constituency MSP.RochdalePioneers said:
If they are "only list seats" then you will be happy to lose them. You keep saying these list MSPs don't represent the fishing area. When I put my details into They Work For You it states - amazingly enough - that I have a stack of MSPs representing me including these 4 Tories:HYUFD said:
They are only list seats, not one major fishing community in Scotland has a Conservative constituency MSP. However I think the Conservatives could gain Moray from the SNP, it was 49% Leave, has Ross as its Westminster MP and no major fishing port unlike its neighbour Banffshire and Buchan CoastRochdalePioneers said:
ScotCons are on for losing seats. Last night the Lord of Epping Forest insisted they help no seats in NE fishing towns - because their 4 MSPs here are only list members. With polls showing them losing somewhere round that number of seats, I think HYUFD's prediction is likely accurate - Tories are going to be punished up here for lying to the community.Foxy said:
I think SLAB will be in second place in the popular vote, and possibly seats. Voting SLAB is the way to kick both Sturgeon and Johnson in the arse.Razedabode said:
That could well be the caseFrankBooth said:
Maybe people give the SNP a plus on defence because they like the policies even if they don't have the powers? Which is worrying because it suggests what the SNP is good at requires independence.CarlottaVance said:Some fascinating detail in this, including the bafflingly surreal one that, while Scottish voters think the SNP Scottish Government has done badly on education, they think it has done well on immigration and defence.
Could someone please have a stern word with Scottish voters?
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1388747777031692290?s=20
Have we all done our predictions on here for e Scottish elections yet? I still think SNP will fall short of a majority, but will be very tight.
Your MP (Member of Parliament) is David Duguid, Banff and Buchan
Your constituency MSP (Member of the Scottish Parliament) is Gillian Martin, Aberdeenshire East
Your North East Scotland MSPs are:
Peter Chapman
Liam Kerr
Lewis Macdonald
Jenny Marra
Mike Rumbles
Bill Bowman
Tom Mason
You really are a clueless fool.
So yet again a completely irrelevant point from you0 -
What makes it even worse is that the EU regional development money has gone. As the government aren't going to spend targeted money in the poorer areas as the EU did, people will really start to feel the effects.Foxy said:
It is, currently English money is spent in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, rather than in poorer English regions. There are two problems from this:Razedabode said:
Hmmm.. my feeling is that people are going to vote for Indy regardless of brexit or not. The only thing keeping the union together is finances now, not emotion or cultural identity. Ultimately that is the issue.Fishing said:
Actually, I think leaving the EU probably bought the Union a few more years. Support for Yes in Scotland was rising before the vote, while in the year after the referendum it actually fell somewhat. It has since resumed its gently rising trend.Scott_xP said:
It's really sad that the breakup of the United Kingdom is an inevitable consequence of BrexitSandpit said:It’s sad that so many of the Commentariat seem to be gleefully talking up the dissolution of the country, purely as a means to get back at Johnson and Brexit.
1) Because he who pays the piper calls the tune, those 3 countries resent being financially dependent on England. I think too that that this "aid" distorts economies to perpetuate dependence, much as poorly designed foreign aid does.
2) Increasingly English nationalists will resent paying the bills for people who abuse them in thanks. As austerity bites again, and the SE English taxpayer is expected to stump up the funds, I can only see that discontent getting worse.0 -
So do these MSPs represent me or not? The Scottish Parliament says Yes.. You say No.HYUFD said:
Not one represents a Holyrood fishing constituency of any size, every resident of Scotland has a Tory MSP on the list, Banffshire and Buchan coast which is where the largest fishing ports in Scotland are has an SNP constituency MSP, the second largest fishing ports around Orkney and Shetland have LD constituency MSPs.RochdalePioneers said:
If they are "only list seats" then you will be happy to lose them. You keep saying these list MSPs don't represent the fishing area. When I put my details into They Work For You it states - amazingly enough - that I have a stack of MSPs representing me including these 4 Tories:HYUFD said:
They are only list seats, not one major fishing community in Scotland has a Conservative constituency MSP. However I think the Conservatives could gain Moray from the SNP, it was 49% Leave, has Ross as its Westminster MP and no major fishing port unlike its neighbour Banffshire and Buchan CoastRochdalePioneers said:
ScotCons are on for losing seats. Last night the Lord of Epping Forest insisted they help no seats in NE fishing towns - because their 4 MSPs here are only list members. With polls showing them losing somewhere round that number of seats, I think HYUFD's prediction is likely accurate - Tories are going to be punished up here for lying to the community.Foxy said:
I think SLAB will be in second place in the popular vote, and possibly seats. Voting SLAB is the way to kick both Sturgeon and Johnson in the arse.Razedabode said:
That could well be the caseFrankBooth said:
Maybe people give the SNP a plus on defence because they like the policies even if they don't have the powers? Which is worrying because it suggests what the SNP is good at requires independence.CarlottaVance said:Some fascinating detail in this, including the bafflingly surreal one that, while Scottish voters think the SNP Scottish Government has done badly on education, they think it has done well on immigration and defence.
Could someone please have a stern word with Scottish voters?
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1388747777031692290?s=20
Have we all done our predictions on here for e Scottish elections yet? I still think SNP will fall short of a majority, but will be very tight.
Your MP (Member of Parliament) is David Duguid, Banff and Buchan
Your constituency MSP (Member of the Scottish Parliament) is Gillian Martin, Aberdeenshire East
Your North East Scotland MSPs are:
Peter Chapman
Liam Kerr
Lewis Macdonald
Jenny Marra
Mike Rumbles
Bill Bowman
Tom Mason
You really are a clueless fool.
So yet again a completely irrelevant point from you
Who is right? You? Or the Scottish parliament?0 -
While England does have a higher Gross Household Disposeable Income (GHDI) than the other nations, when this is broken down more locally, the difference is stark. Leicester is second lowest, behind Nottingham.Razedabode said:
Spot on - i think one of the major failures of devolution was the “English issue”.Foxy said:
It is, currently English money is spent in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, rather than in poorer English regions. There are two problems from this:Razedabode said:
Hmmm.. my feeling is that people are going to vote for Indy regardless of brexit or not. The only thing keeping the union together is finances now, not emotion or cultural identity. Ultimately that is the issue.Fishing said:
Actually, I think leaving the EU probably bought the Union a few more years. Support for Yes in Scotland was rising before the vote, while in the year after the referendum it actually fell somewhat. It has since resumed its gently rising trend.Scott_xP said:
It's really sad that the breakup of the United Kingdom is an inevitable consequence of BrexitSandpit said:It’s sad that so many of the Commentariat seem to be gleefully talking up the dissolution of the country, purely as a means to get back at Johnson and Brexit.
1) Because he who pays the piper calls the tune, those 3 countries resent being financially dependent on England. I think too that that this "aid" distorts economies to perpetuate dependence, much as poorly designed foreign aid does.
2) Increasingly English nationalists will resent paying the bills for people who abuse them in thanks. As austerity bites again, and the SE English taxpayer is expected to stump up the funds, I can only see that discontent getting worse.
Totally fudged, never addressed, hence we are where we are
"In terms of GDHI per head in 2018, all the top 10 NUTS3 local areas were in London or the South East NUTS1 regions, the top six of which were in London; the bottom 10 local areas were all within the North West, Yorkshire and The Humber, East Midlands, West Midlands, and Northern Ireland regions"
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/regionalaccounts/grossdisposablehouseholdincome/bulletins/regionalgrossdisposablehouseholdincomegdhi/1997to2018
Supposedly this government is redistributing to level up the North of England. How much of that is to be squeezed out of the SE taxpayer, and how much from reducing other forms of regional aid, such as farming and other subsidies? I can see further discontent with that.1 -
The header says "Size Matters"Northern_Al said:
It's not the case that no one is very interested. The Greensill/Gupta/Cameron affair is being looked into by various Select Committees, the NAO, and an 'independent' (joke) inquiry set up by the PM under Nigel Boardman. There's not much to say on it until these various inquiries report, but the work is ongoing. It is obviously a much bigger scandal than redecoration, but it's also much more complex and therefore less accessible to the public. I'm sure it will be whitewashed in due course.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
The thing about corruption is that "Size Doesn't Matter".
A politician caught dodging a train ticket would have to resign. A politician instigating a multi-billion pound fraud would not. 0 -
Quite, "Imperial purple makes the best burial sheet" and a couple of years in the job does not make him the kind of transformational Prime Minister that he aspires to be. Also it misses the point that he is stunningly entitled "I am so important to the country that I should have my chaotic finances looked after and my needs fulfilled", then there is Lady Macbeth, she is as much a political animal as he is and adores the power and the perquisites. So I do not think that he will go willingly any time soon.Dura_Ace said:
He has just procured and had painted (at vast expense and with taxpayers' money) a VVIP A321 - not to be confused with VIP A330 and its million quid paint job. There is zero chance he (and FLOTUK) are going to relinquish the post-covid junkets in that to the Goldman-Sachs Elf and his Mrs any time soon.AlistairM said:
I think there is a reasonable likelihood that Boris will step down after the country opens up again. Claim to be the PM who led the vaccine programme and start on the newly re-opened speech circuit making millions.
Unwillingly, however, he could soon be hanging by a thread. There are plenty of rumours and after a while the MPs will get restive. This will be epecially true if the electorate gets bored with the current clown show and delivers regular kickings in locals and by elections. I think the Tories will not enjoy this weeks results but there will be a solid year of nasties followed by awful results in 2022 before they would do anything about it. So point of max danger is summer next year, unless the camel he is found in bed with sells the story of how he defrauded the Queen and took money from Putin for a new gazebo (and of course such a shit storm can not be ruled out).1 -
Deleted, double post
1 -
FPT
The green madness that means in 10 years time I probably won't be able to buy an affordable car that's suitable for my needs.rcs1000 said:
The Green madness that stops you from buying a car with a petrol engine?theProle said:
It's interesting politics. The Tory core vote hates it passionately. Maybe it appeals to the more middle of the road types, its hard to tell. I suspect it turns as many off as it gains.Casino_Royale said:@Gallowgate
I've had two through the door. They mention climate change a lot.
It's the mood music and what underlies it that worries people.
People will vote for it if it makes their lives better. If it entails lots of sacrifices, taxes and restrictions then they will tell them to get stuffed, regardless of what they tell pollsters now.
The problem for those who think this is unbounded stupidity is that this is the political concensus. There is no serious alternative party to the green/vegan/woke lunacy currently being rammed down our throats - the best we can do is to sit on our hands, which doesn't show up nearly as clearly in the results. We need a UKIP type force which allows us to register our disapproval by eating into the Tory vote in the same way that UKIP's ever growing vote set in motion our path out of the EU, against the wishes of almost every front-bench politican from every party.
I'm quite surprised Farrage isn't making the running on this - he'd be well placed to do so, there is a substantial overlap between being a Brexiter and not being into eco nonsense, with potential for a strong sideswipe at continuing social distancing/mask wear etc after the pandemic has obviously run its course. He also knows a thing or two about how to launch a "pressure group" party from scratch. If he couldn't knock 10% off the Tories poll lead a month after launch I'd probably be willing to fry and eat my flat cap. Maybe he believes in green hair-shirtism, or feels its someone else's turn to shake up British politics.
The Green madness that prevents you from buying a steak or a McDonalds?
What Green madness?
The UK offers some fairly modest tax benefits for cutting down your carbon consumption. But you know what, even if global warming wasn't a thing, they would still be a good idea, because they'd reduce our dependence on foreigners who don't like us very much. Minimising the amount of British pounds shipped off the Middle East to buy oil sounds like quite a sensible strategy, irrespective of whether global warming is real or not.
And for all the talk of woke, I struggle to see any actual "woke" in my actual life.
The sum total of people who have asked me to call the by an obscure pronoun is... ummmm... none. I read more about woke on-line, and here people bewailing it, but the reality is that outside the fevered imagination of Meghan, it doesn't really exist for 99% of people. But you know what, if someone said to me, please call me "she" I'd do it anyway. That's not woke, that's common courtesy, just as I'd call someone Moon Unit, if that was what they wanted to be called.
And vegans? They exist. So what? In my 46 years on Planet Earth, exactly one person (a rather attractive young German lady) has ever prostheliyzed veganism. Which led me to say "show me a man who's a vegan, and I'll show you a man who's trying to shag a vegan". Suffice to say, it didn't go down well.
It seems that you (and Farage these days as well) like railing against a threat that doesn't really exist.
The green madness that is currently making my electricity so expensive I might as well be generating it from natural gas myself (we've discussed this before).
The green madness that has passed binding future commitments on emissions that if followed through mean an end to natural gas for home heating in the next 20 years.
The green madness that's just prevented a coal mine being opened in Cumbria, because that's the sort of job we'd rather export abroad.
The green madness that is about to outlaw the use of domestic house coal (mainly used by a small number of older people in rural areas) despite there being no real alternative that works in most of the appliances that burn it.
Currently there is an obvious concerted effort to shift the Overton window on stuff like meat eating - give it 10 years, and there will probably be a special meat tax of some sort.
An Australian government lost office over much milder attempt at emission reduction via a carbon tax. "The great big tax on everything" the successful opposition dubbed it, so this is definitely can have electoral salience - it just requires a fairly politically skillful operator to smash the current political concensus. As I say, I'm surprised Farage isn't up for this gig - it wouldn't sweep him to power, but it would force the Tories to change tack pretty promptly.1 -
Your defence of Johnson and condemnation of Cameron is fascinating. I am old enough to remember political scandals going back to Polson, T. Dan Smith and of course closer to home Graham Jenkins. Scoundrels with both red and blue stripes. I call them all out.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
The Cameron/ Greensill affair stinks to high heaven, and the pong seems to be circling Downing Street. From what we have heard of Greensill so far, Johnson seems to have avoided it which is great, and Cameron is a busted flush anyway, so nothing to see until the inquiry and/or court cases tell us more. Any allegations of Greensill impropriety amongst Ministers counld and should be dealt with today by Johnson.
So what of the wallpaper? I, like you, up until last night thought there was nothing to see. Fifty grand on curtains? My wife could manage that, if only I had it, and Carrie's chap just saved 67m people from imminent death, so what's the fuss? However TSE's revelations regarding donors paying contractors directly adds a new and very alarming dimension to the case. Johnson can survive the tasteless wallpaper, but should he survive the deceipt and rulebreaking?
Excepting that cell in The Hague with Blair's name on it, we don't want to see serving and former Prime Ministers in handcuffs (this is not France). But a life of charitable recantation, a la John Profumo, might be called for, and for both Cameron and Johnson.2 -
No, devolution has little to do with it.Razedabode said:
Spot on - i think one of the major failures of devolution was the “English issue”.Foxy said:
It is, currently English money is spent in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, rather than in poorer English regions. There are two problems from this:Razedabode said:
Hmmm.. my feeling is that people are going to vote for Indy regardless of brexit or not. The only thing keeping the union together is finances now, not emotion or cultural identity. Ultimately that is the issue.Fishing said:
Actually, I think leaving the EU probably bought the Union a few more years. Support for Yes in Scotland was rising before the vote, while in the year after the referendum it actually fell somewhat. It has since resumed its gently rising trend.Scott_xP said:
It's really sad that the breakup of the United Kingdom is an inevitable consequence of BrexitSandpit said:It’s sad that so many of the Commentariat seem to be gleefully talking up the dissolution of the country, purely as a means to get back at Johnson and Brexit.
1) Because he who pays the piper calls the tune, those 3 countries resent being financially dependent on England. I think too that that this "aid" distorts economies to perpetuate dependence, much as poorly designed foreign aid does.
2) Increasingly English nationalists will resent paying the bills for people who abuse them in thanks. As austerity bites again, and the SE English taxpayer is expected to stump up the funds, I can only see that discontent getting worse.
Totally fudged, never addressed, hence we are where we are
Northern Ireland is hard because it is hard with Brexit, the border and the GFA, and recent SoS Karen Bradley and Boris who never watched the news during the troubles.
Scotland goes back to Mrs Thatcher spaffing the oil money up the wall and imposing the poll tax. Until then between a quarter and third of Scottish seats were Conservative but the 1980s saw this drop by half and then to zero.0 -
Surely reviews are really only necessary when there is a complex tangle of factors & people involved in a situation that needs to be teased out? Not a straight question of who initially paid for a flat refurb.
Then there’s the total irony in the Foreign Sec saying the PM has been “crystal clear” over who paid for the refurb but also saying that there are a number of reviews looking at unanswered questions. Both can’t be true.
https://twitter.com/robpowellnews/status/13887753639632445442 -
Deleted, double post0
-
UK's Raab: 'no idea' if donor was asked to pay for Johnson's childcare http://reut.rs/3nCFKVI https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1388776565585190912/photo/11
-
Panelbase today has the Tories holding all 4 of their North East list seats anyway.RochdalePioneers said:
So do these MSPs represent me or not? The Scottish Parliament says Yes.. You say No.HYUFD said:
Not one represents a Holyrood fishing constituency of any size, every resident of Scotland has a Tory MSP on the list, Banffshire and Buchan coast which is where the largest fishing ports in Scotland are has an SNP constituency MSP, the second largest fishing ports around Orkney and Shetland have LD constituency MSPs.RochdalePioneers said:
If they are "only list seats" then you will be happy to lose them. You keep saying these list MSPs don't represent the fishing area. When I put my details into They Work For You it states - amazingly enough - that I have a stack of MSPs representing me including these 4 Tories:HYUFD said:
They are only list seats, not one major fishing community in Scotland has a Conservative constituency MSP. However I think the Conservatives could gain Moray from the SNP, it was 49% Leave, has Ross as its Westminster MP and no major fishing port unlike its neighbour Banffshire and Buchan CoastRochdalePioneers said:
ScotCons are on for losing seats. Last night the Lord of Epping Forest insisted they help no seats in NE fishing towns - because their 4 MSPs here are only list members. With polls showing them losing somewhere round that number of seats, I think HYUFD's prediction is likely accurate - Tories are going to be punished up here for lying to the community.Foxy said:
I think SLAB will be in second place in the popular vote, and possibly seats. Voting SLAB is the way to kick both Sturgeon and Johnson in the arse.Razedabode said:
That could well be the caseFrankBooth said:
Maybe people give the SNP a plus on defence because they like the policies even if they don't have the powers? Which is worrying because it suggests what the SNP is good at requires independence.CarlottaVance said:Some fascinating detail in this, including the bafflingly surreal one that, while Scottish voters think the SNP Scottish Government has done badly on education, they think it has done well on immigration and defence.
Could someone please have a stern word with Scottish voters?
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1388747777031692290?s=20
Have we all done our predictions on here for e Scottish elections yet? I still think SNP will fall short of a majority, but will be very tight.
Your MP (Member of Parliament) is David Duguid, Banff and Buchan
Your constituency MSP (Member of the Scottish Parliament) is Gillian Martin, Aberdeenshire East
Your North East Scotland MSPs are:
Peter Chapman
Liam Kerr
Lewis Macdonald
Jenny Marra
Mike Rumbles
Bill Bowman
Tom Mason
You really are a clueless fool.
So yet again a completely irrelevant point from you
Who is right? You? Or the Scottish parliament?
https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1388641177226944515?s=200 -
For me the issue isn’t the wallpaper - ultimately (yada yada) that becomes an asset owned by the state. I think we should provide a better standard of living for the PM anyway.Mexicanpete said:
Your defence of Johnson and condemnation of Cameron is fascinating. I am old enough to remember political scandals going back to Polson, T. Dan Smith and of course closer to home Graham Jenkins. Scoundrels with both red and blue stripes. I call them all out.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
The Cameron/ Greensill affair stinks to high heaven, and the pong seems to be circling Downing Street. From what we have heard of Greensill so far, Johnson seems to have avoided it which is great, and Cameron is a busted flush anyway, so nothing to see until the inquiry and/or court cases tell us more. Any allegations of Greensill impropriety amongst Ministers counld and should be dealt with today by Johnson.
So what of the wallpaper? I, like you, up until last night thought there was nothing to see. Fifty grand on curtains? My wife could manage that, if only I had it, and Carrie's chap just saved 67m people from imminent death, so what's the fuss? However TSE revelations regarding donors paying contractors directly adds a new and very alarming dimension to the case. He can survive the tasteless wallpaper, but should he survive the receipt and rulebreaking?
Excepting that cell in The Hague with Blair's name on it, we don't want to see serving and former Prime Ministers in handcuffs (this is not France). But a life of charitable recantation, a la John Profumo, might be called for,, and for both Cameron and Johnson.
If true, the “pay the nanny’s wages” story is far more disturbing. That’s just a straight payment to the PM.3 -
Just ask Richard Nixon. Watergate was a failed break-in to fix a phone bug. No-one died. No-one got rich. Nixon won the following election by the American equivalent of Boris's 80 seats.YBarddCwsc said:
The header says "Size Matters"Northern_Al said:
It's not the case that no one is very interested. The Greensill/Gupta/Cameron affair is being looked into by various Select Committees, the NAO, and an 'independent' (joke) inquiry set up by the PM under Nigel Boardman. There's not much to say on it until these various inquiries report, but the work is ongoing. It is obviously a much bigger scandal than redecoration, but it's also much more complex and therefore less accessible to the public. I'm sure it will be whitewashed in due course.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
The thing about corruption is that "Size Doesn't Matter".
A politician caught dodging a train ticket would have to resign. A politician instigating a multi-billion pound fraud would not.0 -
Full story here ...
Scottish Tory leader says Boris Johnson should resign if he broke ministerial rules
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/scottish-tory-leader-says-boris-johnson-should-resign-if-he-broke-ministerial-rules_uk_608e611ee4b04620270878041 -
Your defence of Johnson and condemnation of Cameron ....Mexicanpete said:
Your defence of Johnson and condemnation of Cameron is fascinating. I am old enough to remember political scandals going back to Polson, T. Dan Smith and of course closer to home Graham Jenkins. Scoundrels with both red and blue stripes. I call them all out.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
The Cameron/ Greensill affair stinks to high heaven, and the pong seems to be circling Downing Street. From what we have heard of Greensill so far, Johnson seems to have avoided it which is great, and Cameron is a busted flush anyway, so nothing to see until the inquiry and/or court cases tell us more. Any allegations of Greensill impropriety amongst Ministers counld and should be dealt with today by Johnson.
So what of the wallpaper? I, like you, up until last night thought there was nothing to see. Fifty grand on curtains? My wife could manage that, if only I had it, and Carrie's chap just saved 67m people from imminent death, so what's the fuss? However TSE revelations regarding donors paying contractors directly adds a new and very alarming dimension to the case. He can survive the tasteless wallpaper, but should he survive the receipt and rulebreaking?
Excepting that cell in The Hague with Blair's name on it, we don't want to see serving and former Prime Ministers in handcuffs (this is not France). But a life of charitable recantation, a la John Profumo, might be called for,, and for both Cameron and Johnson.
I am not defending Johnson. I think he is a chancer. I am pointing out that there is a little crook and a big crook. Let's spend some time on the infamous Mr Big.
However TSE revelations regarding donors paying contractors directly ....
I wasn't aware that TSE was on the spot ..... although he always has a bit of hearsay gossip, for sure.
As a "caller out" of corruption, you might look into the purchase of that airport by the Welsh Government
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-56350712
It is in your patch.0 -
Boris Johnson’s version of the “let the bodies pile high” story is that he didn’t say it - he just agreed with it. Not sure that makes things much better! https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0351acfa-aa8f-11eb-acd8-e39d812fcf8b?shareToken=22576abf84beff3017686745f81bfba9 https://twitter.com/henrymance/status/1388777395226923010/photo/10
-
Is the proposal to spend £200 million on another Royal Yacht a serious one?
If so, just no.
The Royal Family can buy their own bloody yacht. And government ministers don't need one.3 -
As always you prove pretty ignorant about Scotland, the workings of the Scottish Parliament, the constitutional position of the Parliament and indeed the economics and politics of fishing. I think the Blues are not going to enjoy the results as they come in next weekend and am curious as to how you will manage to spin them from your point of view of relentless but one eyed partisanship. The only poll that matters is happening now and when the reuslts come in I think there will be some interesting surprises.HYUFD said:
Not one represents a Holyrood fishing constituency of any significant size, every resident of Scotland has a Tory MSP on the list, Banffshire and Buchan coast which is where the largest fishing ports in Scotland are has an SNP constituency MSP, the next largest fishing ports in Shetland have a LD constituency MSP.RochdalePioneers said:
If they are "only list seats" then you will be happy to lose them. You keep saying these list MSPs don't represent the fishing area. When I put my details into They Work For You it states - amazingly enough - that I have a stack of MSPs representing me including these 4 Tories:HYUFD said:
They are only list seats, not one major fishing community in Scotland has a Conservative constituency MSP. However I think the Conservatives could gain Moray from the SNP, it was 49% Leave, has Ross as its Westminster MP and no major fishing port unlike its neighbour Banffshire and Buchan CoastRochdalePioneers said:
ScotCons are on for losing seats. Last night the Lord of Epping Forest insisted they help no seats in NE fishing towns - because their 4 MSPs here are only list members. With polls showing them losing somewhere round that number of seats, I think HYUFD's prediction is likely accurate - Tories are going to be punished up here for lying to the community.Foxy said:
I think SLAB will be in second place in the popular vote, and possibly seats. Voting SLAB is the way to kick both Sturgeon and Johnson in the arse.Razedabode said:
That could well be the caseFrankBooth said:
Maybe people give the SNP a plus on defence because they like the policies even if they don't have the powers? Which is worrying because it suggests what the SNP is good at requires independence.CarlottaVance said:Some fascinating detail in this, including the bafflingly surreal one that, while Scottish voters think the SNP Scottish Government has done badly on education, they think it has done well on immigration and defence.
Could someone please have a stern word with Scottish voters?
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1388747777031692290?s=20
Have we all done our predictions on here for e Scottish elections yet? I still think SNP will fall short of a majority, but will be very tight.
Your MP (Member of Parliament) is David Duguid, Banff and Buchan
Your constituency MSP (Member of the Scottish Parliament) is Gillian Martin, Aberdeenshire East
Your North East Scotland MSPs are:
Peter Chapman
Liam Kerr
Lewis Macdonald
Jenny Marra
Mike Rumbles
Bill Bowman
Tom Mason
You really are a clueless fool.
So yet again a completely irrelevant point from you0 -
We need one to help with our trade deals post Brexit and it will also help sell global Britain.Cyclefree said:Is the proposal to spend £200 million on another Royal Yacht a serious one?
If so, just no.
The Royal Family can buy their own bloody yacht. And government ministers don't need one.
An excellent Tory idea from this Tory majority government and backed by 51% of Tory voters to just 31% opposed.
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/wpapp9bzh5/Internal_RoyalYacht_210414 .pdf0 -
Is the nanny for the father, not the child?Scott_xP said:Does Carrie Antoinette have a job?
Why do they need a nanny?
Even if they are both working, they live literally above the shop.2 -
I agree with you Charles, and we had this concersation a week or two ago. A sensible salary and pension for the PM, and a post PM non-profiteering clause in the pension contract.Charles said:
For me the issue isn’t the wallpaper - ultimately (yada yada) that becomes an asset owned by the state. I think we should provide a better standard of living for the PM anyway.Mexicanpete said:
Your defence of Johnson and condemnation of Cameron is fascinating. I am old enough to remember political scandals going back to Polson, T. Dan Smith and of course closer to home Graham Jenkins. Scoundrels with both red and blue stripes. I call them all out.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
The Cameron/ Greensill affair stinks to high heaven, and the pong seems to be circling Downing Street. From what we have heard of Greensill so far, Johnson seems to have avoided it which is great, and Cameron is a busted flush anyway, so nothing to see until the inquiry and/or court cases tell us more. Any allegations of Greensill impropriety amongst Ministers counld and should be dealt with today by Johnson.
So what of the wallpaper? I, like you, up until last night thought there was nothing to see. Fifty grand on curtains? My wife could manage that, if only I had it, and Carrie's chap just saved 67m people from imminent death, so what's the fuss? However TSE revelations regarding donors paying contractors directly adds a new and very alarming dimension to the case. He can survive the tasteless wallpaper, but should he survive the receipt and rulebreaking?
Excepting that cell in The Hague with Blair's name on it, we don't want to see serving and former Prime Ministers in handcuffs (this is not France). But a life of charitable recantation, a la John Profumo, might be called for,, and for both Cameron and Johnson.
If true, the “pay the nanny’s wages” story is far more disturbing. That’s just a straight payment to the PM.
I am not sure the (alleged) five years of maintenance to the flat is blown on lurid wallpaper sits well with me, but I can live with that. What makes me nervous is the impression given by the direct payment from donors to contractors and nannies. If I was paying, I would expect something in return. Now in Boris' defence, this is how he has lived his life to date, a call from a creditor and a lucrative collumnists 'job' turns up and pays the bill. It's not how the rest of us roll, and it certainly isn't how someone with the highest office in the land should behave.3 -
I will go cut the plug off the radio tout suite then, thanks for warningMattW said:Morning all.
There is an interview with Kate Garraway (Derek Draper's partner) on Times Radio at 10am this morning.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/radio/live
I think the interviewer is Gloria de Piero.0 -
But, I think Watergate had not been tied to the Republicans by the election of 72, no?DecrepiterJohnL said:
Just ask Richard Nixon. Watergate was a failed break-in to fix a phone bug. No-one died. No-one got rich. Nixon won the following election by the American equivalent of Boris's 80 seats.YBarddCwsc said:
The header says "Size Matters"Northern_Al said:
It's not the case that no one is very interested. The Greensill/Gupta/Cameron affair is being looked into by various Select Committees, the NAO, and an 'independent' (joke) inquiry set up by the PM under Nigel Boardman. There's not much to say on it until these various inquiries report, but the work is ongoing. It is obviously a much bigger scandal than redecoration, but it's also much more complex and therefore less accessible to the public. I'm sure it will be whitewashed in due course.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
The thing about corruption is that "Size Doesn't Matter".
A politician caught dodging a train ticket would have to resign. A politician instigating a multi-billion pound fraud would not.
McGovern was always behind, but the 'Eagleton Scandal' turned it into a historic defeat. At least as judged from Fear and Loathing o t C T.0 -
I think the Tories will hold all their Holyrood constituencies except maybe Edinburgh Central (which I think Labour would win not the SNP anyway) and the Tories will also gain Moray from the SNPCicero said:
As always you prove pretty ignorant about Scotland, the workings of the Scottish Parliament, the constitutional position of the Parliament and indeed the economics and politics of fishing. I think the Blues are not going to enjoy the results as they come in next weekend and am curious as to how you will manage to spin them from your point of view of relentless but one eyed partisanship. The only poll that matters is happening now and when the reuslts come in I think there will be some interesting surprises.HYUFD said:
Not one represents a Holyrood fishing constituency of any significant size, every resident of Scotland has a Tory MSP on the list, Banffshire and Buchan coast which is where the largest fishing ports in Scotland are has an SNP constituency MSP, the next largest fishing ports in Shetland have a LD constituency MSP.RochdalePioneers said:
If they are "only list seats" then you will be happy to lose them. You keep saying these list MSPs don't represent the fishing area. When I put my details into They Work For You it states - amazingly enough - that I have a stack of MSPs representing me including these 4 Tories:HYUFD said:
They are only list seats, not one major fishing community in Scotland has a Conservative constituency MSP. However I think the Conservatives could gain Moray from the SNP, it was 49% Leave, has Ross as its Westminster MP and no major fishing port unlike its neighbour Banffshire and Buchan CoastRochdalePioneers said:
ScotCons are on for losing seats. Last night the Lord of Epping Forest insisted they help no seats in NE fishing towns - because their 4 MSPs here are only list members. With polls showing them losing somewhere round that number of seats, I think HYUFD's prediction is likely accurate - Tories are going to be punished up here for lying to the community.Foxy said:
I think SLAB will be in second place in the popular vote, and possibly seats. Voting SLAB is the way to kick both Sturgeon and Johnson in the arse.Razedabode said:
That could well be the caseFrankBooth said:
Maybe people give the SNP a plus on defence because they like the policies even if they don't have the powers? Which is worrying because it suggests what the SNP is good at requires independence.CarlottaVance said:Some fascinating detail in this, including the bafflingly surreal one that, while Scottish voters think the SNP Scottish Government has done badly on education, they think it has done well on immigration and defence.
Could someone please have a stern word with Scottish voters?
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1388747777031692290?s=20
Have we all done our predictions on here for e Scottish elections yet? I still think SNP will fall short of a majority, but will be very tight.
Your MP (Member of Parliament) is David Duguid, Banff and Buchan
Your constituency MSP (Member of the Scottish Parliament) is Gillian Martin, Aberdeenshire East
Your North East Scotland MSPs are:
Peter Chapman
Liam Kerr
Lewis Macdonald
Jenny Marra
Mike Rumbles
Bill Bowman
Tom Mason
You really are a clueless fool.
So yet again a completely irrelevant point from you0 -
It seems to be real.Cyclefree said:Is the proposal to spend £200 million on another Royal Yacht a serious one?
If so, just no.
The Royal Family can buy their own bloody yacht. And government ministers don't need one.
Do the Royals actually want one? Apart from Philip, I don't think anyone else was bothered about boats and the sea.
It is just another plaything for the PM and government ministers on foreign jollies.6 -
I'm not a Herald subscriber so can't give any more detail than the Constituency vote but I see the SNP are actually up in the latest BMG poll to 49% from BMG's mid March poll.0
-
State will be delighted we have some horrific second hand wallpaper asset. He lives in the lap of luxury as it is , pays for nothing and has 150K pocket money. I would rather tar and feather the pair of them and run them out of town.Charles said:
For me the issue isn’t the wallpaper - ultimately (yada yada) that becomes an asset owned by the state. I think we should provide a better standard of living for the PM anyway.Mexicanpete said:
Your defence of Johnson and condemnation of Cameron is fascinating. I am old enough to remember political scandals going back to Polson, T. Dan Smith and of course closer to home Graham Jenkins. Scoundrels with both red and blue stripes. I call them all out.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
The Cameron/ Greensill affair stinks to high heaven, and the pong seems to be circling Downing Street. From what we have heard of Greensill so far, Johnson seems to have avoided it which is great, and Cameron is a busted flush anyway, so nothing to see until the inquiry and/or court cases tell us more. Any allegations of Greensill impropriety amongst Ministers counld and should be dealt with today by Johnson.
So what of the wallpaper? I, like you, up until last night thought there was nothing to see. Fifty grand on curtains? My wife could manage that, if only I had it, and Carrie's chap just saved 67m people from imminent death, so what's the fuss? However TSE revelations regarding donors paying contractors directly adds a new and very alarming dimension to the case. He can survive the tasteless wallpaper, but should he survive the receipt and rulebreaking?
Excepting that cell in The Hague with Blair's name on it, we don't want to see serving and former Prime Ministers in handcuffs (this is not France). But a life of charitable recantation, a la John Profumo, might be called for,, and for both Cameron and Johnson.
If true, the “pay the nanny’s wages” story is far more disturbing. That’s just a straight payment to the PM.0 -
Is FLOTUK First Lady of the UK?Dura_Ace said:
He has just procured and had painted (at vast expense and with taxpayers' money) a VVIP A321 - not to be confused with VIP A330 and its million quid paint job. There is zero chance he (and FLOTUK) are going to relinquish the post-covid junkets in that to the Goldman-Sachs Elf and his Mrs any time soon.AlistairM said:
I think there is a reasonable likelihood that Boris will step down after the country opens up again. Claim to be the PM who led the vaccine programme and start on the newly re-opened speech circuit making millions.0 -
Certainly, if I were #CarrieAntoinette, I would employ a Mrs Doubtfire rather than a Swedish au-pair!OldKingCole said:
Is the nanny for the father, not the child?Scott_xP said:Does Carrie Antoinette have a job?
Why do they need a nanny?
Even if they are both working, they live literally above the shop.3 -
What do you care? These Tory MSPs don't exist according to you.HYUFD said:
Panelbase today has the Tories holding all 4 of their North East list seats anyway.RochdalePioneers said:
So do these MSPs represent me or not? The Scottish Parliament says Yes.. You say No.HYUFD said:
Not one represents a Holyrood fishing constituency of any size, every resident of Scotland has a Tory MSP on the list, Banffshire and Buchan coast which is where the largest fishing ports in Scotland are has an SNP constituency MSP, the second largest fishing ports around Orkney and Shetland have LD constituency MSPs.RochdalePioneers said:
If they are "only list seats" then you will be happy to lose them. You keep saying these list MSPs don't represent the fishing area. When I put my details into They Work For You it states - amazingly enough - that I have a stack of MSPs representing me including these 4 Tories:HYUFD said:
They are only list seats, not one major fishing community in Scotland has a Conservative constituency MSP. However I think the Conservatives could gain Moray from the SNP, it was 49% Leave, has Ross as its Westminster MP and no major fishing port unlike its neighbour Banffshire and Buchan CoastRochdalePioneers said:
ScotCons are on for losing seats. Last night the Lord of Epping Forest insisted they help no seats in NE fishing towns - because their 4 MSPs here are only list members. With polls showing them losing somewhere round that number of seats, I think HYUFD's prediction is likely accurate - Tories are going to be punished up here for lying to the community.Foxy said:
I think SLAB will be in second place in the popular vote, and possibly seats. Voting SLAB is the way to kick both Sturgeon and Johnson in the arse.Razedabode said:
That could well be the caseFrankBooth said:
Maybe people give the SNP a plus on defence because they like the policies even if they don't have the powers? Which is worrying because it suggests what the SNP is good at requires independence.CarlottaVance said:Some fascinating detail in this, including the bafflingly surreal one that, while Scottish voters think the SNP Scottish Government has done badly on education, they think it has done well on immigration and defence.
Could someone please have a stern word with Scottish voters?
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1388747777031692290?s=20
Have we all done our predictions on here for e Scottish elections yet? I still think SNP will fall short of a majority, but will be very tight.
Your MP (Member of Parliament) is David Duguid, Banff and Buchan
Your constituency MSP (Member of the Scottish Parliament) is Gillian Martin, Aberdeenshire East
Your North East Scotland MSPs are:
Peter Chapman
Liam Kerr
Lewis Macdonald
Jenny Marra
Mike Rumbles
Bill Bowman
Tom Mason
You really are a clueless fool.
So yet again a completely irrelevant point from you
Who is right? You? Or the Scottish parliament?
https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1388641177226944515?s=200 -
Yeah but...YBarddCwsc said:
Your defence of Johnson and condemnation of Cameron ....Mexicanpete said:
Your defence of Johnson and condemnation of Cameron is fascinating. I am old enough to remember political scandals going back to Polson, T. Dan Smith and of course closer to home Graham Jenkins. Scoundrels with both red and blue stripes. I call them all out.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
The Cameron/ Greensill affair stinks to high heaven, and the pong seems to be circling Downing Street. From what we have heard of Greensill so far, Johnson seems to have avoided it which is great, and Cameron is a busted flush anyway, so nothing to see until the inquiry and/or court cases tell us more. Any allegations of Greensill impropriety amongst Ministers counld and should be dealt with today by Johnson.
So what of the wallpaper? I, like you, up until last night thought there was nothing to see. Fifty grand on curtains? My wife could manage that, if only I had it, and Carrie's chap just saved 67m people from imminent death, so what's the fuss? However TSE revelations regarding donors paying contractors directly adds a new and very alarming dimension to the case. He can survive the tasteless wallpaper, but should he survive the receipt and rulebreaking?
Excepting that cell in The Hague with Blair's name on it, we don't want to see serving and former Prime Ministers in handcuffs (this is not France). But a life of charitable recantation, a la John Profumo, might be called for,, and for both Cameron and Johnson.
I am not defending Johnson. I think he is a chancer. I am pointing out that there is a little crook and a big crook. Let's spend some time on the infamous Mr Big.
However TSE revelations regarding donors paying contractors directly ....
I wasn't aware that TSE was on the spot ..... although he always has a bit of hearsay gossip, for sure.
As a "caller out" of corruption, you might look into the purchase of that airport by the Welsh Government
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-56350712
It is in your patch.
As I recall (and I haven't looked up your link) the airport purchase had the unpleasant aroma of an ageing Peter's pie about it. If Carwyn and Drakeford should be locked away forever, so be it. I don't see how that lets your boy off the hook though.0 -
0
-
The Conservative, Labour and LD votes combined though are also on 49%, so I think the Unionist parties will win significantly more than the 1 Conservative and 4 LD constituency seats they are projected via Unionist tactical voting to beat the SNPAlistair said:I'm not a Herald subscriber so can't give any more detail than the Constituency vote but I see the SNP are actually up in the latest BMG poll to 49% from BMG's mid March poll.
https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1388776663689965568?s=20
https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1388779988632100866?s=200 -
So supported by a minority of all voters then.HYUFD said:
We need one to help with our trade deals post Brexit and it will also help sell global Britain.Cyclefree said:Is the proposal to spend £200 million on another Royal Yacht a serious one?
If so, just no.
The Royal Family can buy their own bloody yacht. And government ministers don't need one.
An excellent Tory idea from this Tory majority government and backed by 51% of Tory voters to just 31% opposed.
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/wpapp9bzh5/Internal_RoyalYacht_210414 .pdf
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.3 -
Leaving England with 100% of the power was and even more so now is the issue. Even fearties will only take so much before they grow a backbone of sorts.Razedabode said:
Spot on - i think one of the major failures of devolution was the “English issue”.Foxy said:
It is, currently English money is spent in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, rather than in poorer English regions. There are two problems from this:Razedabode said:
Hmmm.. my feeling is that people are going to vote for Indy regardless of brexit or not. The only thing keeping the union together is finances now, not emotion or cultural identity. Ultimately that is the issue.Fishing said:
Actually, I think leaving the EU probably bought the Union a few more years. Support for Yes in Scotland was rising before the vote, while in the year after the referendum it actually fell somewhat. It has since resumed its gently rising trend.Scott_xP said:
It's really sad that the breakup of the United Kingdom is an inevitable consequence of BrexitSandpit said:It’s sad that so many of the Commentariat seem to be gleefully talking up the dissolution of the country, purely as a means to get back at Johnson and Brexit.
1) Because he who pays the piper calls the tune, those 3 countries resent being financially dependent on England. I think too that that this "aid" distorts economies to perpetuate dependence, much as poorly designed foreign aid does.
2) Increasingly English nationalists will resent paying the bills for people who abuse them in thanks. As austerity bites again, and the SE English taxpayer is expected to stump up the funds, I can only see that discontent getting worse.
Totally fudged, never addressed, hence we are where we are0 -
"For a government struggling with the perception that lucrative opportunities are available if you know the right people — rules and merit be damned — not requiring an interrogation of Vennells and her senior colleagues under oath is, to put it lightly, not a great look.
Sub-postmasters and their families are not calling for an indiscriminate witch-hunt — that, after all, would make them no different from the faceless bureaucracy at the Post Office that pursued them so relentlessly without care for evidence or consequence. But “lessons learnt” without any repercussions for those who necessitated those lessons in the first place is not justice; it is absolution. We need a full, statutory inquiry, empowered by the state to hear all pertinent evidence and testimony."
From this harrowing article on the human cost of the Post Office Horizon scandal - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/post-office-scandal-justice-was-delivered-too-late-for-my-uncle-q6q0tk8zs.3 -
That is paywalled. Is there a report of the Poll elsewhere?Alistair said:Oh, and SLab into second place
https://twitter.com/heraldscotland/status/13887663956645847090 -
No she doesn't - I do know about the animal welfare sector. She's a patron of the Conservative Animal Welfare Foundation, which is literally just lending her name to a voluntary campaign group (the counterpart to the Labour Animal Welfare Society), at a salary of £0.Dura_Ace said:
She has one as Head of Something Or Other at an animal charity. Presumably her nightly exposure to Johnson on the vinegars was good preparation for working with gorillas.Foxy said:
Additionally, there is no problem with Ms Symmonds getting a job if she wants to decorate the flat at one go, rather than do a few rooms at a time.
As I said yesterday, the attempt to have a go at Johnson's partner as a proxy for attacking him is dodgy and has an element of misogyny. She's keen on animals, but to be fair he has quite a good record on the issue too (as I expect we shall see on Tuesday week in the Queen's Speech). Others may disagree, but if so they should criticise Johnson. not his partner who happens to be of similar mind on this.0 -
We Tories have a majority of 80, all that matters is what Tory voters think until 2024Cyclefree said:
So supported by a minority of all voters then.HYUFD said:
We need one to help with our trade deals post Brexit and it will also help sell global Britain.Cyclefree said:Is the proposal to spend £200 million on another Royal Yacht a serious one?
If so, just no.
The Royal Family can buy their own bloody yacht. And government ministers don't need one.
An excellent Tory idea from this Tory majority government and backed by 51% of Tory voters to just 31% opposed.
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/wpapp9bzh5/Internal_RoyalYacht_210414 .pdf
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.0 -
Size does matter in Hartlepool.....
https://metro.co.uk/video/women-s-brawl-overshadows-ukip-rally-1455657/0 -
Why do we need a boat to do trade? We aren’t living in the 19th centuryCyclefree said:
So supported by a minority of all voters then.HYUFD said:
We need one to help with our trade deals post Brexit and it will also help sell global Britain.Cyclefree said:Is the proposal to spend £200 million on another Royal Yacht a serious one?
If so, just no.
The Royal Family can buy their own bloody yacht. And government ministers don't need one.
An excellent Tory idea from this Tory majority government and backed by 51% of Tory voters to just 31% opposed.
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/wpapp9bzh5/Internal_RoyalYacht_210414 .pdf
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.1 -
"...your boy ..." ??????????????????Mexicanpete said:
Yeah but...YBarddCwsc said:
Your defence of Johnson and condemnation of Cameron ....Mexicanpete said:
Your defence of Johnson and condemnation of Cameron is fascinating. I am old enough to remember political scandals going back to Polson, T. Dan Smith and of course closer to home Graham Jenkins. Scoundrels with both red and blue stripes. I call them all out.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
The Cameron/ Greensill affair stinks to high heaven, and the pong seems to be circling Downing Street. From what we have heard of Greensill so far, Johnson seems to have avoided it which is great, and Cameron is a busted flush anyway, so nothing to see until the inquiry and/or court cases tell us more. Any allegations of Greensill impropriety amongst Ministers counld and should be dealt with today by Johnson.
So what of the wallpaper? I, like you, up until last night thought there was nothing to see. Fifty grand on curtains? My wife could manage that, if only I had it, and Carrie's chap just saved 67m people from imminent death, so what's the fuss? However TSE revelations regarding donors paying contractors directly adds a new and very alarming dimension to the case. He can survive the tasteless wallpaper, but should he survive the receipt and rulebreaking?
Excepting that cell in The Hague with Blair's name on it, we don't want to see serving and former Prime Ministers in handcuffs (this is not France). But a life of charitable recantation, a la John Profumo, might be called for,, and for both Cameron and Johnson.
I am not defending Johnson. I think he is a chancer. I am pointing out that there is a little crook and a big crook. Let's spend some time on the infamous Mr Big.
However TSE revelations regarding donors paying contractors directly ....
I wasn't aware that TSE was on the spot ..... although he always has a bit of hearsay gossip, for sure.
As a "caller out" of corruption, you might look into the purchase of that airport by the Welsh Government
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-56350712
It is in your patch.
As I recall (and I haven't looked up your link) the airport purchase had the unpleasant aroma of an ageing Peter's pie about it. If Carwyn and Drakeford should be locked away forever, so be it. I don't see how that lets your boy off the hook though.
I don't have any boy.
My only thesis is most people are mainly interested in corruption from a partisan, party political POV.
Johnson is the PM, and so minor misdemeanours from him are of vastly more interest than major misdemeanours by Cameron.
From the information in the public domain, Cameron seems to have behaved in a much more grave manner.1 -
New Scottish Parliament poll, BMG 27 - 30 Apr (changes vs 16 - 19 Mar):Foxy said:
That is paywalled. Is there a report of the Poll elsewhere?Alistair said:Oh, and SLab into second place
https://twitter.com/heraldscotland/status/1388766395664584709
List:
SNP ~ 37% (-5)
Con ~ 22% (nc)
Lab ~ 17% (nc)
Grn ~ 9% (+1)
LD ~ 8% (nc)
Alba ~ 4% (+4)
Constituency:
SNP ~ 49% (+1)
Lab ~ 21% (+1)
Con ~ 19% (-2)
LD ~ 9% (+1)0 -
I responded to you last night and will do so again as you quite clearly do not get itHYUFD said:
Not one represents a Holyrood fishing constituency of any significant size, every resident of Scotland has a Tory MSP on the list, Banffshire and Buchan coast which is where the largest fishing ports in Scotland are has an SNP constituency MSP, the next largest fishing ports in Shetland have a LD constituency MSP.RochdalePioneers said:
If they are "only list seats" then you will be happy to lose them. You keep saying these list MSPs don't represent the fishing area. When I put my details into They Work For You it states - amazingly enough - that I have a stack of MSPs representing me including these 4 Tories:HYUFD said:
They are only list seats, not one major fishing community in Scotland has a Conservative constituency MSP. However I think the Conservatives could gain Moray from the SNP, it was 49% Leave, has Ross as its Westminster MP and no major fishing port unlike its neighbour Banffshire and Buchan CoastRochdalePioneers said:
ScotCons are on for losing seats. Last night the Lord of Epping Forest insisted they help no seats in NE fishing towns - because their 4 MSPs here are only list members. With polls showing them losing somewhere round that number of seats, I think HYUFD's prediction is likely accurate - Tories are going to be punished up here for lying to the community.Foxy said:
I think SLAB will be in second place in the popular vote, and possibly seats. Voting SLAB is the way to kick both Sturgeon and Johnson in the arse.Razedabode said:
That could well be the caseFrankBooth said:
Maybe people give the SNP a plus on defence because they like the policies even if they don't have the powers? Which is worrying because it suggests what the SNP is good at requires independence.CarlottaVance said:Some fascinating detail in this, including the bafflingly surreal one that, while Scottish voters think the SNP Scottish Government has done badly on education, they think it has done well on immigration and defence.
Could someone please have a stern word with Scottish voters?
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1388747777031692290?s=20
Have we all done our predictions on here for e Scottish elections yet? I still think SNP will fall short of a majority, but will be very tight.
Your MP (Member of Parliament) is David Duguid, Banff and Buchan
Your constituency MSP (Member of the Scottish Parliament) is Gillian Martin, Aberdeenshire East
Your North East Scotland MSPs are:
Peter Chapman
Liam Kerr
Lewis Macdonald
Jenny Marra
Mike Rumbles
Bill Bowman
Tom Mason
You really are a clueless fool.
So yet again a completely irrelevant point from you
'Take it from me who married the daughter of one of the most successful Scottish fishing skippers and has a fishing heritage going back to the Stotfield fishing disaster that you do not know what you are talking about'
Indeed, it is for this connection with the Scottish Fishing Community going back 60 years provides the answer to why I have such an interest in Scotland and its politics1 -
Genuine question, to my fellow Essex man, and not trying to make a political point. What evidence is there for significant tactical pro-Unionist voting?HYUFD said:
The Conservative, Labour and LD votes combined though are also on 49%, so I think the Unionist parties will win significantly more than the 1 Conservative and 4 LD constituency seats they are projected via Unionist tactical voting to beat the SNPAlistair said:I'm not a Herald subscriber so can't give any more detail than the Constituency vote but I see the SNP are actually up in the latest BMG poll to 49% from BMG's mid March poll.
https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1388776663689965568?s=20
https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1388779988632100866?s=200 -
So Unionist parties on 49% on the constituency vote combined and equal to the 49% the SNP are on, so Unionist tactical voting on Thursday for the party best placed to beat the SNP in each constituency will be keyLeon said:
New Scottish Parliament poll, BMG 27 - 30 Apr (changes vs 16 - 19 Mar):Foxy said:
That is paywalled. Is there a report of the Poll elsewhere?Alistair said:Oh, and SLab into second place
https://twitter.com/heraldscotland/status/1388766395664584709
List:
SNP ~ 37% (-5)
Con ~ 22% (nc)
Lab ~ 17% (nc)
Grn ~ 9% (+1)
LD ~ 8% (nc)
Alba ~ 4% (+4)
Constituency:
SNP ~ 49% (+1)
Lab ~ 21% (+1)
Con ~ 19% (-2)
LD ~ 9% (+1)0 -
Looks like a narrow Nat majority
Fireworks ahoy0 -
I am a Herald subscriber, so let me help. BMG show the SNP winning 68 seats, the Greens 9 seats and Alba 2 seats (including the NE, presumably taking one of HYUFD's "these aren't MSPs" Tory seats).Alistair said:I'm not a Herald subscriber so can't give any more detail than the Constituency vote but I see the SNP are actually up in the latest BMG poll to 49% from BMG's mid March poll.
That means 70 of 129 MSPs elected on a platform of independence. The full list:
SNP 68 (+5)
Tories 25 (-6 hahaha HYUFD)
Labour 18 (-6)
Greens 9 (+3)
LibDems 7 (+2)
Al(a)ba 2 (+2)
The interesting line from a betting perspective is this: "The margin of error - a feature of all polls - means there is the possibility that Alba could achieve closer to 6%, the number required for a more widespread electoral breakthrough."0 -
Not what the polls are saying. We will say when the results come in.HYUFD said:
I think the Tories will hold all their Holyrood constituencies except maybe Edinburgh Central (which I think Labour would win not the SNP anyway) and the Tories will also gain Moray from the SNPCicero said:
As always you prove pretty ignorant about Scotland, the workings of the Scottish Parliament, the constitutional position of the Parliament and indeed the economics and politics of fishing. I think the Blues are not going to enjoy the results as they come in next weekend and am curious as to how you will manage to spin them from your point of view of relentless but one eyed partisanship. The only poll that matters is happening now and when the reuslts come in I think there will be some interesting surprises.HYUFD said:
Not one represents a Holyrood fishing constituency of any significant size, every resident of Scotland has a Tory MSP on the list, Banffshire and Buchan coast which is where the largest fishing ports in Scotland are has an SNP constituency MSP, the next largest fishing ports in Shetland have a LD constituency MSP.RochdalePioneers said:
If they are "only list seats" then you will be happy to lose them. You keep saying these list MSPs don't represent the fishing area. When I put my details into They Work For You it states - amazingly enough - that I have a stack of MSPs representing me including these 4 Tories:HYUFD said:
They are only list seats, not one major fishing community in Scotland has a Conservative constituency MSP. However I think the Conservatives could gain Moray from the SNP, it was 49% Leave, has Ross as its Westminster MP and no major fishing port unlike its neighbour Banffshire and Buchan CoastRochdalePioneers said:
ScotCons are on for losing seats. Last night the Lord of Epping Forest insisted they help no seats in NE fishing towns - because their 4 MSPs here are only list members. With polls showing them losing somewhere round that number of seats, I think HYUFD's prediction is likely accurate - Tories are going to be punished up here for lying to the community.Foxy said:
I think SLAB will be in second place in the popular vote, and possibly seats. Voting SLAB is the way to kick both Sturgeon and Johnson in the arse.Razedabode said:
That could well be the caseFrankBooth said:
Maybe people give the SNP a plus on defence because they like the policies even if they don't have the powers? Which is worrying because it suggests what the SNP is good at requires independence.CarlottaVance said:Some fascinating detail in this, including the bafflingly surreal one that, while Scottish voters think the SNP Scottish Government has done badly on education, they think it has done well on immigration and defence.
Could someone please have a stern word with Scottish voters?
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1388747777031692290?s=20
Have we all done our predictions on here for e Scottish elections yet? I still think SNP will fall short of a majority, but will be very tight.
Your MP (Member of Parliament) is David Duguid, Banff and Buchan
Your constituency MSP (Member of the Scottish Parliament) is Gillian Martin, Aberdeenshire East
Your North East Scotland MSPs are:
Peter Chapman
Liam Kerr
Lewis Macdonald
Jenny Marra
Mike Rumbles
Bill Bowman
Tom Mason
You really are a clueless fool.
So yet again a completely irrelevant point from you0 -
Though presumably that margin of error works both ways I.e overestimates SNP and they don’t hit a majorityRochdalePioneers said:
I am a Herald subscriber, so let me help. BMG show the SNP winning 68 seats, the Greens 9 seats and Alba 2 seats (including the NE, presumably taking one of HYUFD's "these aren't MSPs" Tory seats).Alistair said:I'm not a Herald subscriber so can't give any more detail than the Constituency vote but I see the SNP are actually up in the latest BMG poll to 49% from BMG's mid March poll.
That means 70 of 129 MSPs elected on a platform of independence. The full list:
SNP 68 (+5)
Tories 25 (-6 hahaha HYUFD)
Labour 18 (-6)
Greens 9 (+3)
LibDems 7 (+2)
Al(a)ba 2 (+2)
The interesting line from a betting perspective is this: "The margin of error - a feature of all polls - means there is the possibility that Alba could achieve closer to 6%, the number required for a more widespread electoral breakthrough."2 -
If you google 'Romney booed' you can access what has to be some of the most remarkable political footage in some time.
Mitt Romney takes the stage to address the Republican convention in his home backyard state of Utah. It is like Kamala Harris took the stage. Actually Kamala might have got a better reception. Reports say the booing and insults were so bad at one point the moderator had to intervene to ask the crowd to show respect to Romney.
Civil war has erupted in the Republican Party between the Trump base and the neo-con leadership, and currently the party is a basket case.
This set me to wondering what reception Boris Johnson might get if he entered a tory convention in, say, Henley or Uxbridge. Outwardly all is sweetness and light. But I reckon tory canvassing has unearthed some very disturbing trends. I got approached by mail to do some legwork because I used to deliver leaflets for the conservatives. You may imagine from my posts on here what my response was. And I made sure I sent it.
Hence the 'return to freedom' mood music this week. A massive attempt to hold the Johnson coalition together. Whatever the result, its clear that what the conservatives fear is not labour. It is vote strikes and splintering.
0 -
Thats not what you said in the first place and you're only surmisingScott_xP said:
If the nanny is paid for by a rich donor who expects favours from the PM in return, then hell yes.squareroot2 said:Why is that any business of your or anyone else's for that matter.?
0 -
So she doesn’t have a full time job, but still needs a full time nanny?NickPalmer said:
No she doesn't - I do know about the animal welfare sector. She's a patron of the Conservative Animal Welfare Foundation, which is literally just lending her name to a voluntary campaign group (the counterpart to the Labour Animal Welfare Society), at a salary of £0.Dura_Ace said:
She has one as Head of Something Or Other at an animal charity. Presumably her nightly exposure to Johnson on the vinegars was good preparation for working with gorillas.Foxy said:
Additionally, there is no problem with Ms Symmonds getting a job if she wants to decorate the flat at one go, rather than do a few rooms at a time.
As I said yesterday, the attempt to have a go at Johnson's partner as a proxy for attacking him is dodgy and has an element of misogyny. She's keen on animals, but to be fair he has quite a good record on the issue too (as I expect we shall see on Tuesday week in the Queen's Speech). Others may disagree, but if so they should criticise Johnson. not his partner who happens to be of similar mind on this.0 -
The real point HY doesn't understand is that fishing - and to a much lesser extent farming - has a symbolic importance beyond just the number of people working in it, which objectively is tiny. An odd point to miss, for anyone who has been paying attention.RochdalePioneers said:
What do you care? These Tory MSPs don't exist according to you.HYUFD said:
Panelbase today has the Tories holding all 4 of their North East list seats anyway.RochdalePioneers said:
So do these MSPs represent me or not? The Scottish Parliament says Yes.. You say No.HYUFD said:
Not one represents a Holyrood fishing constituency of any size, every resident of Scotland has a Tory MSP on the list, Banffshire and Buchan coast which is where the largest fishing ports in Scotland are has an SNP constituency MSP, the second largest fishing ports around Orkney and Shetland have LD constituency MSPs.RochdalePioneers said:
If they are "only list seats" then you will be happy to lose them. You keep saying these list MSPs don't represent the fishing area. When I put my details into They Work For You it states - amazingly enough - that I have a stack of MSPs representing me including these 4 Tories:HYUFD said:
They are only list seats, not one major fishing community in Scotland has a Conservative constituency MSP. However I think the Conservatives could gain Moray from the SNP, it was 49% Leave, has Ross as its Westminster MP and no major fishing port unlike its neighbour Banffshire and Buchan CoastRochdalePioneers said:
ScotCons are on for losing seats. Last night the Lord of Epping Forest insisted they help no seats in NE fishing towns - because their 4 MSPs here are only list members. With polls showing them losing somewhere round that number of seats, I think HYUFD's prediction is likely accurate - Tories are going to be punished up here for lying to the community.Foxy said:
I think SLAB will be in second place in the popular vote, and possibly seats. Voting SLAB is the way to kick both Sturgeon and Johnson in the arse.Razedabode said:
That could well be the caseFrankBooth said:
Maybe people give the SNP a plus on defence because they like the policies even if they don't have the powers? Which is worrying because it suggests what the SNP is good at requires independence.CarlottaVance said:Some fascinating detail in this, including the bafflingly surreal one that, while Scottish voters think the SNP Scottish Government has done badly on education, they think it has done well on immigration and defence.
Could someone please have a stern word with Scottish voters?
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1388747777031692290?s=20
Have we all done our predictions on here for e Scottish elections yet? I still think SNP will fall short of a majority, but will be very tight.
Your MP (Member of Parliament) is David Duguid, Banff and Buchan
Your constituency MSP (Member of the Scottish Parliament) is Gillian Martin, Aberdeenshire East
Your North East Scotland MSPs are:
Peter Chapman
Liam Kerr
Lewis Macdonald
Jenny Marra
Mike Rumbles
Bill Bowman
Tom Mason
You really are a clueless fool.
So yet again a completely irrelevant point from you
Who is right? You? Or the Scottish parliament?
https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1388641177226944515?s=20
The fisherfolk down these parts would love to meet the likes of our Philip for a little chat, so that he could explain to them in person his proposition that 'shit happens'.1 -
Of course! Though the SNP not quote making it to 65 has been widely billed so wouldn't be a surprise. Going the other way and Alaba having "a more widespread electoral breakthrough" would be a real surprise.Razedabode said:
Though presumably that margin of error works both ways I.e overestimates SNP and they don’t hit a majorityRochdalePioneers said:
I am a Herald subscriber, so let me help. BMG show the SNP winning 68 seats, the Greens 9 seats and Alba 2 seats (including the NE, presumably taking one of HYUFD's "these aren't MSPs" Tory seats).Alistair said:I'm not a Herald subscriber so can't give any more detail than the Constituency vote but I see the SNP are actually up in the latest BMG poll to 49% from BMG's mid March poll.
That means 70 of 129 MSPs elected on a platform of independence. The full list:
SNP 68 (+5)
Tories 25 (-6 hahaha HYUFD)
Labour 18 (-6)
Greens 9 (+3)
LibDems 7 (+2)
Al(a)ba 2 (+2)
The interesting line from a betting perspective is this: "The margin of error - a feature of all polls - means there is the possibility that Alba could achieve closer to 6%, the number required for a more widespread electoral breakthrough."0 -
The authentic and repellent voice of Toryism today.HYUFD said:
We Tories have a majority of 80, all that matters is what Tory voters think until 2024Cyclefree said:
So supported by a minority of all voters then.HYUFD said:
We need one to help with our trade deals post Brexit and it will also help sell global Britain.Cyclefree said:Is the proposal to spend £200 million on another Royal Yacht a serious one?
If so, just no.
The Royal Family can buy their own bloody yacht. And government ministers don't need one.
An excellent Tory idea from this Tory majority government and backed by 51% of Tory voters to just 31% opposed.
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/wpapp9bzh5/Internal_RoyalYacht_210414 .pdf
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.
Go away and look up what follows hubris.5 -
BMG has Labour losing all 3 of its constituency seats and the Tories losing 6 out of 7 of their constituencies to get to those numbers which is highly unlikely once you factor in Unionist tactical voting. The LDs could also gain Caithness and Sutherland from the SNP with Unionist tactical voting as they did in 2019 at Westminster.RochdalePioneers said:
I am a Herald subscriber, so let me help. BMG show the SNP winning 68 seats, the Greens 9 seats and Alba 2 seats (including the NE, presumably taking one of HYUFD's "these aren't MSPs" Tory seats).Alistair said:I'm not a Herald subscriber so can't give any more detail than the Constituency vote but I see the SNP are actually up in the latest BMG poll to 49% from BMG's mid March poll.
That means 70 of 129 MSPs elected on a platform of independence. The full list:
SNP 68 (+5)
Tories 25 (-6 hahaha HYUFD)
Labour 18 (-6)
Greens 9 (+3)
LibDems 7 (+2)
Al(a)ba 2 (+2)
The interesting line from a betting perspective is this: "The margin of error - a feature of all polls - means there is the possibility that Alba could achieve closer to 6%, the number required for a more widespread electoral breakthrough."
Those numbers also see the Tories holding all 4 of their NE list seats however, Alba would not elect a single MSP
https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1388779988632100866?s=200 -
The Princess Royal is keen on sailing. She opened disabled facilities at the sailing club my family belongs to and apparently she had a long natter with members there about sailing. But I doubt if this yacht proposal is the result of her lobbying.Foxy said:
It seems to be real.Cyclefree said:Is the proposal to spend £200 million on another Royal Yacht a serious one?
If so, just no.
The Royal Family can buy their own bloody yacht. And government ministers don't need one.
Do the Royals actually want one? Apart from Philip, I don't think anyone else was bothered about boats and the sea.
It is just another plaything for the PM and government ministers on foreign jollies.0 -
We have a full inquiry into Grenfell, and I don't think there's much difference as far as 'lives ruined' are concerned.Cyclefree said:"For a government struggling with the perception that lucrative opportunities are available if you know the right people — rules and merit be damned — not requiring an interrogation of Vennells and her senior colleagues under oath is, to put it lightly, not a great look.
Sub-postmasters and their families are not calling for an indiscriminate witch-hunt — that, after all, would make them no different from the faceless bureaucracy at the Post Office that pursued them so relentlessly without care for evidence or consequence. But “lessons learnt” without any repercussions for those who necessitated those lessons in the first place is not justice; it is absolution. We need a full, statutory inquiry, empowered by the state to hear all pertinent evidence and testimony."
From this harrowing article on the human cost of the Post Office Horizon scandal - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/post-office-scandal-justice-was-delivered-too-late-for-my-uncle-q6q0tk8zs.
Even if a number of middle rank Post Office staff are convicted of perjury, that still doesn't absolve the people at the top who must have had questions.3 -
Scottish local by electionsOldKingCole said:
Genuine question, to my fellow Essex man, and not trying to make a political point. What evidence is there for significant tactical pro-Unionist voting?HYUFD said:
The Conservative, Labour and LD votes combined though are also on 49%, so I think the Unionist parties will win significantly more than the 1 Conservative and 4 LD constituency seats they are projected via Unionist tactical voting to beat the SNPAlistair said:I'm not a Herald subscriber so can't give any more detail than the Constituency vote but I see the SNP are actually up in the latest BMG poll to 49% from BMG's mid March poll.
https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1388776663689965568?s=20
https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1388779988632100866?s=200 -
And it is not mine though I am a conservative memberCyclefree said:
The authentic and repellent voice of Toryism today.HYUFD said:
We Tories have a majority of 80, all that matters is what Tory voters think until 2024Cyclefree said:
So supported by a minority of all voters then.HYUFD said:
We need one to help with our trade deals post Brexit and it will also help sell global Britain.Cyclefree said:Is the proposal to spend £200 million on another Royal Yacht a serious one?
If so, just no.
The Royal Family can buy their own bloody yacht. And government ministers don't need one.
An excellent Tory idea from this Tory majority government and backed by 51% of Tory voters to just 31% opposed.
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/wpapp9bzh5/Internal_RoyalYacht_210414 .pdf
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.
Go away and look up what follows hubris.1 -
Elections have consequences, we Tories won a majority of 80 in 2019 and as a consequence legally and constitutionally will deliver our manifesto and what our voters want regardless of what anyone else thinks until the next general election in 2024. ToughCyclefree said:
The authentic and repellent voice of Toryism today.HYUFD said:
We Tories have a majority of 80, all that matters is what Tory voters think until 2024Cyclefree said:
So supported by a minority of all voters then.HYUFD said:
We need one to help with our trade deals post Brexit and it will also help sell global Britain.Cyclefree said:Is the proposal to spend £200 million on another Royal Yacht a serious one?
If so, just no.
The Royal Family can buy their own bloody yacht. And government ministers don't need one.
An excellent Tory idea from this Tory majority government and backed by 51% of Tory voters to just 31% opposed.
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/wpapp9bzh5/Internal_RoyalYacht_210414 .pdf
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.
Go away and look up what follows hubris.-1 -
One of those rare occasions when I absolutely agree with Charles.Charles said:
For me the issue isn’t the wallpaper - ultimately (yada yada) that becomes an asset owned by the state. I think we should provide a better standard of living for the PM anyway.Mexicanpete said:
Your defence of Johnson and condemnation of Cameron is fascinating. I am old enough to remember political scandals going back to Polson, T. Dan Smith and of course closer to home Graham Jenkins. Scoundrels with both red and blue stripes. I call them all out.YBarddCwsc said:
Cost of redecoration of flat ~ 100k, paid for -- after a bit of fuss -- apparently by the PM. Cost to taxpayers -- zero. Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ billions.
Cost of mahossive Greensill Capital / Gupta corruption to taxpayers ~ up to 5 billion (source: Guardian). Total amount of postings on blogs and words in newspapers ~ at most a few hundred.
It is Filthy, Greedy Cameron who should be under the spotlight.
It is proof that most people are not actually interested in tackling serious fraud or corruption. They are only interested in using corruption as a party political stick.
Now that Cameron is no longer a front line politician -- and despite his behaviour being massively more expensive for the taxpayer -- no-one is very interested.
The Cameron/ Greensill affair stinks to high heaven, and the pong seems to be circling Downing Street. From what we have heard of Greensill so far, Johnson seems to have avoided it which is great, and Cameron is a busted flush anyway, so nothing to see until the inquiry and/or court cases tell us more. Any allegations of Greensill impropriety amongst Ministers counld and should be dealt with today by Johnson.
So what of the wallpaper? I, like you, up until last night thought there was nothing to see. Fifty grand on curtains? My wife could manage that, if only I had it, and Carrie's chap just saved 67m people from imminent death, so what's the fuss? However TSE revelations regarding donors paying contractors directly adds a new and very alarming dimension to the case. He can survive the tasteless wallpaper, but should he survive the receipt and rulebreaking?
Excepting that cell in The Hague with Blair's name on it, we don't want to see serving and former Prime Ministers in handcuffs (this is not France). But a life of charitable recantation, a la John Profumo, might be called for,, and for both Cameron and Johnson.
If true, the “pay the nanny’s wages” story is far more disturbing. That’s just a straight payment to the PM.
If proven, Nannygate could spell the end. Millions of working couples really struggle with the cost of childcare, and it would not go down well if the PM was shown not be able to afford appropriate childcare on his household salary.1 -
TBF, the fishing industry is also important because Food Security.IanB2 said:
The real point HY doesn't understand is that fishing - and to a much lesser extent farming - has a symbolic importance beyond just the number of people working in it, which objectively is tiny. An odd point to miss, for anyone who has been paying attention.RochdalePioneers said:
What do you care? These Tory MSPs don't exist according to you.HYUFD said:
Panelbase today has the Tories holding all 4 of their North East list seats anyway.RochdalePioneers said:
So do these MSPs represent me or not? The Scottish Parliament says Yes.. You say No.HYUFD said:
Not one represents a Holyrood fishing constituency of any size, every resident of Scotland has a Tory MSP on the list, Banffshire and Buchan coast which is where the largest fishing ports in Scotland are has an SNP constituency MSP, the second largest fishing ports around Orkney and Shetland have LD constituency MSPs.RochdalePioneers said:
If they are "only list seats" then you will be happy to lose them. You keep saying these list MSPs don't represent the fishing area. When I put my details into They Work For You it states - amazingly enough - that I have a stack of MSPs representing me including these 4 Tories:HYUFD said:
They are only list seats, not one major fishing community in Scotland has a Conservative constituency MSP. However I think the Conservatives could gain Moray from the SNP, it was 49% Leave, has Ross as its Westminster MP and no major fishing port unlike its neighbour Banffshire and Buchan CoastRochdalePioneers said:
ScotCons are on for losing seats. Last night the Lord of Epping Forest insisted they help no seats in NE fishing towns - because their 4 MSPs here are only list members. With polls showing them losing somewhere round that number of seats, I think HYUFD's prediction is likely accurate - Tories are going to be punished up here for lying to the community.Foxy said:
I think SLAB will be in second place in the popular vote, and possibly seats. Voting SLAB is the way to kick both Sturgeon and Johnson in the arse.Razedabode said:
That could well be the caseFrankBooth said:
Maybe people give the SNP a plus on defence because they like the policies even if they don't have the powers? Which is worrying because it suggests what the SNP is good at requires independence.CarlottaVance said:Some fascinating detail in this, including the bafflingly surreal one that, while Scottish voters think the SNP Scottish Government has done badly on education, they think it has done well on immigration and defence.
Could someone please have a stern word with Scottish voters?
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1388747777031692290?s=20
Have we all done our predictions on here for e Scottish elections yet? I still think SNP will fall short of a majority, but will be very tight.
Your MP (Member of Parliament) is David Duguid, Banff and Buchan
Your constituency MSP (Member of the Scottish Parliament) is Gillian Martin, Aberdeenshire East
Your North East Scotland MSPs are:
Peter Chapman
Liam Kerr
Lewis Macdonald
Jenny Marra
Mike Rumbles
Bill Bowman
Tom Mason
You really are a clueless fool.
So yet again a completely irrelevant point from you
Who is right? You? Or the Scottish parliament?
https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1388641177226944515?s=20
The fisherfolk down these parts would love to meet the likes of our Philip for a little chat, so that he could explain to them in person his proposition that 'shit happens'.
I was wondering how HYUFD would react to the recent polling - after his assurances that the ScoTories would be sswept to triumph by the voting of the fishing industry (which he based on a single survey by a non BPC actor, an academic, of self-selected skippers of larger fishing boats).0
