Howdy, Stranger!

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

Tory MPs shouldn’t bottle it this time – send the letters in – politicalbetting.com

12346

Comments

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,563

    But there was no conflict between the referendum and any GE.

    2015 election: Majority elected on pledge to hold and respect the referendum.
    2016 referendum: Majority for leave.
    2017 election: Nearly 600 out of 650 MPs elected on pledge to respect the referendum result and implement Brexit.
    2019 election: 80 seat majority to Get Brexit Done.

    Leavers essentially had to win 4 elections or referendum and they won all 4 of them. Had any of the 4 elections or referendum turned out differently, we'd have never left.

    The conflict in 2017 was the hundreds of MPs elected promising to respect the results, but who didn't. They paid the price electorally for their deceit two years later.
    Yes, democratically. So all is well. And the MPs in parliament behaved democratically also. They disagreed about the type of Brexit, which is perfectly legitimate.

    If the 650 MPs had wanted 650 versions of Brexit that would have been perfectly democratic and all anyone would have done would be to oppose everyone else. As I said, it is indicative of the tension of a referendum within a parliamentary democracy.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,063

    "Remain MPs should have accepted May's deal".

    In one sentence you have absolved Team Johnson/ Team ERG of the fiasco that is Brexit.
    It doesnt absolve them for their own actions and choices, but it would have closed off a number of options.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,563
    edited May 2022
    Leon said:

    Agitating to overturn a referendum because you don't like the answer, without even enacting the first vote - the biggest vote in British political history - is so far from democracy it disappears up the backside of Jolyon Maugham and THEN weirdly disappears up the colon of Keir Starmer, whence it appears out of his tiny mouth, in the mealy mouthed words "a people's vote!"

    The German parliament passed the Enabling Act. "Democratically". The supporters of Trump marched on the Capitol, as is their "democratic" right

    Neither of these was democratic, in essence

    We need a truth and reconciliation committee in which Remainers confess their sins before being publicly horse-whipped for 6 solid weeks, 18 hours a day, in Fitzroy Square W1, while Leavers will have to admit that the whole bus thing was *kinda stretching it*, and they aren't allowed proper coffee for 3 days

    Never say I am not balanced and fair

    A model of balance and fairness although I might quibble with some of the detail.

    Your essay question, meanwhile, is to explain how a vote by all the people can be undemocratic.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,773
    kle4 said:

    It doesnt absolve them for their own actions and choices, but it would have closed off a number of options.
    Indeed it would. Not least it would have shown the ERG to be an irrelevant box of frogs in terms of fixing the UK's future relationships with the EU rather than putting them in charge of it. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,932

    It was tested. The ECJ ruled in 2018 it could be.
    Yes, you're right. I'd forgotten that. Silly Remainers then - we should have stormed Westminster and lynched Jacob Rees-Mogg as Leon suggested we were poised to.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,709

    Daniel Hewitt
    @DanielHewittITV
    ·
    16m
    NEW: Head of Ofgem says he will be writing to Rishi Sunak today to inform him the price cap is expected to be £2,800 in October, up from £1,971.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,970
    The embarrassing and ridiculous arguments from the palsied Remoaners on here that the referendum was advisory and it was fine to try and get it overturned blah blah blah fucking blah would not be so risibly and offensively stupid if ONE SINGLE REMAIN POLITICIAN had said, during the actual referendum campaign, that "oh, by the way, this vote is just advisory, we don't have to obey it and if you vote Leave we might ignore you and have a second vote, hope that's OK"

    But they didn't did they? Not one single person ever said that because it is so plainly absurd and wanky. They would have got thrown into Lake Windermere

    No one said it, because it is bollocks. Everyone agreed, at the time, with David Cameron in his speech to the entire British nation:

    'So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum"

    The Leavers agreed that this was it, their one and only chance for a generation. The Remainers agreed this was it, the one and only vote - BECAUSE THEY ARROGANTLY EXPECTED TO WIN IT, EASILY

    All else is chaff. PFF
  • TOPPING said:

    Yes, democratically. So all is well. And the MPs in parliament behaved democratically also. They disagreed about the type of Brexit, which is perfectly legitimate.

    If the 650 MPs had wanted 650 versions of Brexit that would have been perfectly democratic and all anyone would have done would be to oppose everyone else. As I said, it is indicative of the tension of a referendum within a parliamentary democracy.
    Except some duplicitous MPs like Grieve and Starmer didn't just reject a form of Brexit, they decided to reject every form of Brexit.

    MPs like Grieve and Starmer being duplicitous liars is constitutionally or democratically acceptable, but voters like Leon are within their rights to be aggrieved at MPs who are duplicitous liars. That is a universal concept, I am aggrieved at Boris for being a duplicitous liar too, so Starmer and Grieve etc aren't the only ones that applies to.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,608
    edited May 2022
    DavidL said:

    Indeed it would. Not least it would have shown the ERG to be an irrelevant box of frogs in terms of fixing the UK's future relationships with the EU rather than putting them in charge of it. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
    But you voted to put the performing frogs in charge of the circus.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,063

    The principle is simple. We have regular elections and irregular referendums. The latter do not have primacy over the former. We can *choose* to add weight. But even if it was a legally binding one - say Scotland's devolution deal - it can be overturned at any time by any parliament referendum or not.
    Parliamentary supremacy in action.

    And indeed, in its limitations, since ignore them and people will pick a parliament that wont.

    It was hell, but the Brexit wrangling tested but did not damage our system. The chosen parliament grappled with what the people wanted, failed to find a way through, then got replaced by one which did. The knock on effects need dealing with of course.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,656
    kinabalu said:

    Perhaps we'd have won sooner if he'd drank less. Interesting counterfactual. Sober on-the-ball Churchill, Nazis beaten by late 43. So many lives saved. And buildings.
    Churchill drank whisky so diluted it was called mouthwash by his staff. He picked up the habit serving in India and North Africa where water was not always to be trusted. It was the pint of champagne and several brandies each day that meant he was probably half cut.
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379
    DavidL said:

    Indeed it would. Not least it would have shown the ERG to be an irrelevant box of frogs in terms of fixing the UK's future relationships with the EU rather than putting them in charge of it. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
    This was just a corollorary of the bigger decision straight after the referendum by prominent Remainers - Cameron not least amongst them - to wash their hands of it instead of working for a type of Leave that might have had 70% or 80% support.
  • But you voted to put the performing frogs I'm charge of the circus.
    The EU might be a circus but I didn't think it was politically correct to refer to Macron as that anymore.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,010
    The biggest issue with the referendum was this. Most MPs only realise they've truly lost an argument when they're out of a job. So obviously if they (The 2017 lot) were in parliament, their view was more important than their constituents.
    This is one of the reasons Labour isn't in the mid 40s and 10+ points ahead facing a shambolic gov't.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,221


    Daniel Hewitt
    @DanielHewittITV
    ·
    16m
    NEW: Head of Ofgem says he will be writing to Rishi Sunak today to inform him the price cap is expected to be £2,800 in October, up from £1,971.

    The government is going to be so unpopular when that kicks in.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,031
    Leon said:

    Agitating to overturn a referendum because you don't like the answer, without even enacting the first vote - the biggest vote in British political history - is so far from democracy it disappears up the backside of Jolyon Maugham and THEN weirdly disappears up the colon of Keir Starmer, whence it appears out of his tiny mouth, in the mealy mouthed words "a people's vote!"

    The German parliament passed the Enabling Act. "Democratically". The supporters of Trump marched on the Capitol, as is their "democratic" right

    Neither of these was democratic, in essence

    We need a truth and reconciliation committee in which Remainers confess their sins before being publicly horse-whipped for 6 solid weeks, 18 hours a day, in Fitzroy Square W1, while Leavers will have to admit that the whole bus thing was *kinda stretching it*, and they aren't allowed proper coffee for 3 days

    Never say I am not balanced and fair

    Can the horse-whipping be undertaken atop THAT bus? Please?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,138
    It is amusing to see Brexiteers continue to completely lose their shit over a vote that never took place, without a moments regard for the vote that will eventually take place to reverse the damage of Brexit...
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,138
    One thing I've heard a couple of times now is that Sue Gray wasn't going to necessarily directly nail the PM - that it would be a damning report for the civil service and senior officials. But also that she was willing to harden that up - and may be doing exactly that.
    https://twitter.com/AnushkaAsthana/status/1529058967422377984
  • Leon said:

    Agitating to overturn a referendum because you don't like the answer, without even enacting the first vote - the biggest vote in British political history - is so far from democracy it disappears up the backside of Jolyon Maugham and THEN weirdly disappears up the colon of Keir Starmer, whence it appears out of his tiny mouth, in the mealy mouthed words "a people's vote!"

    The German parliament passed the Enabling Act. "Democratically". The supporters of Trump marched on the Capitol, as is their "democratic" right

    Neither of these was democratic, in essence

    We need a truth and reconciliation committee in which Remainers confess their sins before being publicly horse-whipped for 6 solid weeks, 18 hours a day, in Fitzroy Square W1, while Leavers will have to admit that the whole bus thing was *kinda stretching it*, and they aren't allowed proper coffee for 3 days

    Never say I am not balanced and fair

    You animal! 😱
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,138
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,539
    Leon said:

    The embarrassing and ridiculous arguments from the palsied Remoaners on here that the referendum was advisory and it was fine to try and get it overturned blah blah blah fucking blah would not be so risibly and offensively stupid if ONE SINGLE REMAIN POLITICIAN had said, during the actual referendum campaign, that "oh, by the way, this vote is just advisory, we don't have to obey it and if you vote Leave we might ignore you and have a second vote, hope that's OK"

    But they didn't did they? Not one single person ever said that because it is so plainly absurd and wanky. They would have got thrown into Lake Windermere

    No one said it, because it is bollocks. Everyone agreed, at the time, with David Cameron in his speech to the entire British nation:

    'So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum"

    The Leavers agreed that this was it, their one and only chance for a generation. The Remainers agreed this was it, the one and only vote - BECAUSE THEY ARROGANTLY EXPECTED TO WIN IT, EASILY

    All else is chaff. PFF

    1. I am a leaver, not a remoaner
    2. The referendum was legally advisory. You mas dislike this but its true
    3. Its fine for any parliament to overturn anything it choses to vote for
    4. Cameron was relevant as long he remained PM. Which wasn't very long
    5. Its absolutely true that remain expected to win easily. But they lost. And you - and I - won. So why are you so angry having won both the referendum and the confirmatory election in 2019?
  • Scott_xP said:

    One thing I've heard a couple of times now is that Sue Gray wasn't going to necessarily directly nail the PM - that it would be a damning report for the civil service and senior officials. But also that she was willing to harden that up - and may be doing exactly that.
    https://twitter.com/AnushkaAsthana/status/1529058967422377984

    So what you're suggesting Scott is that Sue Gray may be engaging in politics rather than sticking with the original report? So we should discount whatever she comes out with as politically motivated?

    I'm surprised to see you saying that Scott rather than someone else.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,608

    The EU might be a circus but I didn't think it was politically correct to refer to Macron as that anymore.
    Never accuse me of using cheap racial stereotypical slurs.

    I was simply batting DavidL's analogous reference back to him by using a cheap slur against Johnson and the ERG.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,968
    edited May 2022

    No they are not, and I have explained my masonic irrationality in this and other posts.

    However when a police investigation appears so irreconcilably incompetent I smell a (quite probably non existent) rat. I have no idea whether Mr Johnson is a Freemason or for that matter a Girl Guide. The positive element of him being a Girl Guide would be the notion that at least he belongs to an open and transparent organisation.
    I was a girl guide. And the secret things we were taught remain secret to us, I’m not sharing them with you despite your obvious problem you need to get over. Your obvious problem is if it’s secret your instinct (which I would say is immaturely developed) obviously means it’s bad, secret = bad, so you would have no secrets in the world? You completely misrepresent freemasonry on history you may well be benefitting from - no Freemasons no English civil war, no US war of independence, no French Revolution, both the failed Decembrist’s and more successful Lenin were Freemasons. How did all this work without the ability to be keep secrets?

    How many German Freemasons died fighting Hitler? More than fingers on your hand and toes on your feet, you are going to need an abacus.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,108

    The government is going to be so unpopular when that kicks in.
    Indeed… but, to be honest, I remain unclear why a right-wing Conservative government beloved of libertarians even got to a point where they felt that the state should set the price of a commodity.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,608

    The government is going to be so unpopular when that kicks in.
    Don't panic. Anti-woke culture wars are more important to the RedWall voter than penury.
  • Never accuse me of using cheap racial stereotypical slurs.

    I was simply batting DavidL's analogous reference back to him by using a cheap slur against Johnson and the ERG.
    I know that, it was a joke. Sorry if you took it badly. 😕
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,563

    Except some duplicitous MPs like Grieve and Starmer didn't just reject a form of Brexit, they decided to reject every form of Brexit.

    MPs like Grieve and Starmer being duplicitous liars is constitutionally or democratically acceptable, but voters like Leon are within their rights to be aggrieved at MPs who are duplicitous liars. That is a universal concept, I am aggrieved at Boris for being a duplicitous liar too, so Starmer and Grieve etc aren't the only ones that applies to.
    I'm sure each had a form of Brexit they preferred and were holding out for that. What is the problem with that?
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,771
    Leon said:

    The embarrassing and ridiculous arguments from the palsied Remoaners on here that the referendum was advisory and it was fine to try and get it overturned blah blah blah fucking blah would not be so risibly and offensively stupid if ONE SINGLE REMAIN POLITICIAN had said, during the actual referendum campaign, that "oh, by the way, this vote is just advisory, we don't have to obey it and if you vote Leave we might ignore you and have a second vote, hope that's OK"

    But they didn't did they? Not one single person ever said that because it is so plainly absurd and wanky. They would have got thrown into Lake Windermere

    No one said it, because it is bollocks. Everyone agreed, at the time, with David Cameron in his speech to the entire British nation:

    'So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum"

    The Leavers agreed that this was it, their one and only chance for a generation. The Remainers agreed this was it, the one and only vote - BECAUSE THEY ARROGANTLY EXPECTED TO WIN IT, EASILY

    All else is chaff. PFF

    Speaking as an earnest Remainer, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU. The Remain campaign should be utterly, utterly ashamed of themselves in approximately every regard, especially this one.

    As should Leave - leaving aside the fact that by hook or by crook (at least 25% crook) they actually won. Which gives them the edge.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,773
    Applicant said:

    This was just a corollorary of the bigger decision straight after the referendum by prominent Remainers - Cameron not least amongst them - to wash their hands of it instead of working for a type of Leave that might have had 70% or 80% support.
    Yes, and inevitably the more that remainers wriggled and sought to stop implementation of the vote the more the extremists on the other side got heard and power. It was an enormous failure of our democratic process on both sides. There were a range of options that respected the vote but were better than where we are now. We have a government with a comfortable majority led by a blatant liar and with a significant part of the intellectual stuffing of the Conservative party removed. I am not happy with this, I do not think that the majority are. But the refusal to accept consensus and the political ineptitude of May led us here.

    Inevitably, I reflect on the outcome of a possible yes vote in Scotland. If the SNP sneak home 52:48 what then? The precedents are not good. By far the most prosperous part of the electorate will have voted No. How would such a country be brought together and make a success of itself? I just don't see it.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,081
    Interesting

    BREAKING: Tory Tom Tugendhat has told @MattChorley on @TimesRadio that he is "talking to colleagues" about the Prime Minister's position today.

    Adds that this is a "time for all of us to look at what this country needs" and we should be "pretty ruthless in our views."
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,063
    Leon said:

    The embarrassing and ridiculous arguments from the palsied Remoaners on here that the referendum was advisory and it was fine to try and get it overturned blah blah blah fucking blah would not be so risibly and offensively stupid if ONE SINGLE REMAIN POLITICIAN had said, during the actual referendum campaign, that "oh, by the way, this vote is just advisory, we don't have to obey it and if you vote Leave we might ignore you and have a second vote, hope that's OK"

    But they didn't did they? Not one single person ever said that because it is so plainly absurd and wanky. They would have got thrown into Lake Windermere

    No one said it, because it is bollocks. Everyone agreed, at the time, with David Cameron in his speech to the entire British nation:

    'So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum"

    The Leavers agreed that this was it, their one and only chance for a generation. The Remainers agreed this was it, the one and only vote - BECAUSE THEY ARROGANTLY EXPECTED TO WIN IT, EASILY

    All else is chaff. PFF

    Amusing, but unconvincing, your heart doesnt seem in it. Likely because you're choosing to pretend to be stupid and not be able to grasp a technical legal position vs practical political and/or moral position, and you're certainly not stupid so we know you could understand that.

    DavidL I think has the practical position, which is no more and no less than the classic British position of "You can, technically, but you really really shouldn't"

    No one likes people getting off crimes on a legal technicality, and the British public didn't like trying to reverse Brexit on a legal technicality. What people said beforehand is irrelevant to both the legal position and what people felt afterwards -

    The public didnt care about legal technicalities and cut down those who tried them. So why are you bursting a blood vessel about it? Its irrelevant.

    But I look forward to how you will reinterpret this comment and fire off. Tedious screed, milquetoast remoaner perhaps. I'll have to check back later, but I'll be disheartened if I didnt even merit that.
  • TOPPING said:

    I'm sure each had a form of Brexit they preferred and were holding out for that. What is the problem with that?
    They didn't, those two said they were rejecting every form of Brexit. After being elected on a platform saying the opposite.

    MPs have the right to be duplicitous liars who say one thing to get elected and do the opposite when in office, but that doesn't justify it or mean the public can't decide they'd rather get rid of the duplicitous liars.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,221

    Indeed… but, to be honest, I remain unclear why a right-wing Conservative government beloved of libertarians even got to a point where they felt that the state should set the price of a commodity.
    This is a socialist government, high taxes, high spending, price caps, and a windfall tax looming.

    I’m fully expecting rent controls.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,771

    1. I am a leaver, not a remoaner
    2. The referendum was legally advisory. You mas dislike this but its true
    3. Its fine for any parliament to overturn anything it choses to vote for
    4. Cameron was relevant as long he remained PM. Which wasn't very long
    5. Its absolutely true that remain expected to win easily. But they lost. And you - and I - won. So why are you so angry having won both the referendum and the confirmatory election in 2019?
    Not speaking for Leon, of course, but I'm angry because the whole thing was a multi-sided clusterfuck of lies, half truths and general bullshit.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,539
    Pulpstar said:

    The biggest issue with the referendum was this. Most MPs only realise they've truly lost an argument when they're out of a job. So obviously if they (The 2017 lot) were in parliament, their view was more important than their constituents.
    This is one of the reasons Labour isn't in the mid 40s and 10+ points ahead facing a shambolic gov't.

    One of the more amusing things we did in the 2017 parliament was the "Brexitometer". This was a big board with various ideas and options on it about what we should do to resolve the unresolved Brexit issue. Grab a sticker, place it on the board for what you want. All options from no deal to scrap Brexit without even a referendum.

    So we (the Labour MP, the LibDems, the continuity Better In campaign) went out into various high streets in the constituency and asked people for their views.

    Even in the mainly Tory areas the views were largely that the more extreme options at both ends were out but people did not support May's deal or various other ideas that got voted on. It was about as pro-remain as it could have been and it really surprised us.

    Then I pointed out to the team that it was completely self-selecting. We got shouted abuse from a few passers by but most of the hostiles came and placed a sticker. But it wasn't representative - most of the people supporting "just get out" didn't engage with us at all and walked past.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,347

    Churchill, I believe, said that he took more out of drink than the other way round. And the whisky was well-watered down. I guess he had to live a regime which allowed him to function optimally and it suited him to have a drink presumably as stimulant or relaxant as circumstances required.

    Been reading the Chips Channon diaries recently which cover the war years. He was no fan of Churchill (Chamberlainite) but certainly gave WSC credit for his bravura performances in the Commons and his enormous energy. If he had a perceptible alcohol problem it would certainly have been mentioned.
    A high functioning alcoholic. And given his career and long marriage and lifespan I guess it wouldn't be accurate to call it a problem.
  • This is a socialist government, high taxes, high spending, price caps, and a windfall tax looming.

    I’m fully expecting rent controls.
    And I'm fully expecting some loyalists (not naming names) to try to justify them too.

    The sooner Boris is out of office, the better.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,078
    Leon said:

    The embarrassing and ridiculous arguments from the palsied Remoaners on here that the referendum was advisory and it was fine to try and get it overturned blah blah blah fucking blah would not be so risibly and offensively stupid if ONE SINGLE REMAIN POLITICIAN had said, during the actual referendum campaign, that "oh, by the way, this vote is just advisory, we don't have to obey it and if you vote Leave we might ignore you and have a second vote, hope that's OK"

    But they didn't did they? Not one single person ever said that because it is so plainly absurd and wanky. They would have got thrown into Lake Windermere

    No one said it, because it is bollocks. Everyone agreed, at the time, with David Cameron in his speech to the entire British nation:

    'So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum"

    The Leavers agreed that this was it, their one and only chance for a generation. The Remainers agreed this was it, the one and only vote - BECAUSE THEY ARROGANTLY EXPECTED TO WIN IT, EASILY

    All else is chaff. PFF

    It doesn’t change the fact that Brexit is a f*cking calamity.

    Why oh why did Cameron think it was a good idea to give the people a vote on this. Did he really think the average uneducated lazy moron who lives in sh*tholes like Scunthorpe would understand the nuisances of international trade?

    David Cameron = worst PM in history.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,608
    edited May 2022

    The government is going to be so unpopular when that kicks in.
    I am in the car listening to "You and yours" on R4 as I have my socially distanced lunch. There are tearful PENSIONERS who are cancelling direct debits and have turned off the heating since Christmas, people living in single rooms, people considering selling their homes and people renting out spare rooms to pay for non- energy essentials. This looks like, as you might suggest, "Stepmom" territory.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,539
    mwadams said:

    Not speaking for Leon, of course, but I'm angry because the whole thing was a multi-sided clusterfuck of lies, half truths and general bullshit.
    As I said earlier, holding a referendum on this subject was hubristic arrogance by Cameron. In a single brilliant leap he would shoot the UKIP fox and the "fruitcakes and loonies" in his own party and keep going with his modern looking but basically a nasty sneering bunch of toffs government. And he lost.

    Whilst Johnson and Mogg stay representing the Toff wing of the party it is clear and unambiguous that the Tories are less toff than they were pre 2019. The policies are even worse, but now they have almost working class types in the ranks for HY to sneer at.
  • murali_s said:

    It doesn’t change the fact that Brexit is a f*cking calamity.

    Why oh why did Cameron think it was a good idea to give the people a vote on this. Did he really think the average uneducated lazy moron who lives in sh*tholes like Scunthorpe would understand the nuisances of international trade?

    David Cameron = worst PM in history.
    Nick Clegg thought it was a good idea too, in 2010.

    You might think its a shame Plebs get votes, but you're pissing into the wind with that one.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,563

    They didn't, those two said they were rejecting every form of Brexit. After being elected on a platform saying the opposite.

    MPs have the right to be duplicitous liars who say one thing to get elected and do the opposite when in office, but that doesn't justify it or mean the public can't decide they'd rather get rid of the duplicitous liars.
    Ah. Did they say all that before the election? Did Grieve say he would implement Brexit? Or did he always voice his dissent.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,709

    Interesting

    BREAKING: Tory Tom Tugendhat has told @MattChorley on @TimesRadio that he is "talking to colleagues" about the Prime Minister's position today.

    Adds that this is a "time for all of us to look at what this country needs" and we should be "pretty ruthless in our views."

    Yeh right. I'm sure he is. But nothing will actually happen.

  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,785
    Leon said:

    The embarrassing and ridiculous arguments from the palsied Remoaners on here that the referendum was advisory and it was fine to try and get it overturned blah blah blah fucking blah would not be so risibly and offensively stupid if ONE SINGLE REMAIN POLITICIAN had said, during the actual referendum campaign, that "oh, by the way, this vote is just advisory, we don't have to obey it and if you vote Leave we might ignore you and have a second vote, hope that's OK"

    But they didn't did they? Not one single person ever said that because it is so plainly absurd and wanky. They would have got thrown into Lake Windermere

    No one said it, because it is bollocks. Everyone agreed, at the time, with David Cameron in his speech to the entire British nation:

    'So to those who suggest that a decision in the referendum to leave would merely produce another stronger renegotiation, and then a second referendum in which Britain would stay, I say: think again. The renegotiation is happening right now. And the referendum that follows will be a once in a generation choice. An in or out referendum. When the British people speak, their voice will be respected – not ignored. If we vote to leave, then we will leave. There will not be another renegotiation and another referendum"

    The Leavers agreed that this was it, their one and only chance for a generation. The Remainers agreed this was it, the one and only vote - BECAUSE THEY ARROGANTLY EXPECTED TO WIN IT, EASILY

    All else is chaff. PFF

    It's Windermere. No need for the "Lake".

    Fatally undermined your argument I'm afraid.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,347
    Applicant said:

    The problem was, by 2017-8 there was essentially only one Brexit possible as May had ruled out most possibilities before the 2017 election and negotiated on that basis. So calls in the 2017-19 parliament for any other form of Brexit were, in essence, a call for the negotiations to restart from square one, which was never going to happen and they knew it was never going to happen.
    The exit deal was agreed but not the future relationship. The backstop steered us to close alignment - certainly closer than Johnson's last minute barebones affair - but it wasn't a given. We just don't know what the outcome would have been. Probably better, smoother, more organised, more cooperative, less willy waving nonsense, but, like I say, who knows.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,773
    murali_s said:

    It doesn’t change the fact that Brexit is a f*cking calamity.

    Why oh why did Cameron think it was a good idea to give the people a vote on this. Did he really think the average uneducated lazy moron who lives in sh*tholes like Scunthorpe would understand the nuisances of international trade?

    David Cameron = worst PM in history.
    Or even the word nuance, perhaps?
  • .
    TOPPING said:

    Ah. Did they say all that before the election? Did Grieve say he would implement Brexit? Or did he always voice his dissent.
    I believe he said that he would, yes, and I know that Starmer said that Labour would too, before the election.

    After the election they did differently, but I've never seen a single quote from Grieve before the election to say anything other than he would respect the vote, which I believe is what he campaigned on.

    The Lib Dems and SNP campaigned on overturning the vote. They got their mandate for their MPs, as an extremely small minority of the Commons, but that's it for them. Grieve and Starmer etc is different though.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,644

    I am in the car listening to "You and yours" on R4 as I have my socially distanced lunch. There are tearful PENSIONERS who are cancelling direct debits and have turned off the heating since Christmas, people living in single rooms, people considering selling their homes and people renting out spare rooms to pay for non- energy essentials. This looks like, as you might suggest, "Stepmom" territory.
    So what's the solution? Because as far as I can see the wholesale price of gas is outside the ability of government to influence. The state could subsidise it, but then the state would have to massively increase taxation to pay for it.

    Of course, the solution is to have built a bunch of tidal lagoons five years ago. And we should still do that. But that doesn't really help right now.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,150
    edited May 2022
    Leon said:

    Agitating to overturn a referendum because you don't like the answer, without even enacting the first vote - the biggest vote in British political history - is so far from democracy it disappears up the backside of Jolyon Maugham and THEN weirdly disappears up the colon of Keir Starmer, whence it appears out of his tiny mouth, in the mealy mouthed words "a people's vote!"

    The German parliament passed the Enabling Act. "Democratically". The supporters of Trump marched on the Capitol, as is their "democratic" right

    Neither of these was democratic, in essence

    We need a truth and reconciliation committee in which Remainers confess their sins before being publicly horse-whipped for 6 solid weeks, 18 hours a day, in Fitzroy Square W1, while Leavers will have to admit that the whole bus thing was *kinda stretching it*, and they aren't allowed proper coffee for 3 days

    Never say I am not balanced and fair

    My only quibble would be that switching the punishments is probably more proportionate, to fully punish the remainers. Well'ard salt of the earth leavers can shrug off a good horsewhipping, I reckon. Poncey liberal elite remainers would rather die than go without fancy coffee. :wink:
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,785
    edited May 2022
    murali_s said:

    It doesn’t change the fact that Brexit is a f*cking calamity.

    Why oh why did Cameron think it was a good idea to give the people a vote on this. Did he really think the average uneducated lazy moron who lives in sh*tholes like Scunthorpe would understand the nuisances of international trade?

    David Cameron = worst PM in history.
    The Scunthorpe morons did have a feel for the labour market though, and since then we've seen an incredibly tight one. That might not be down to Brexit, but what they thought would happen did occur, in the end.

    Whether that leads to real earnings growth for those on lower incomes (and reduced inequality) is yet to be seen.

    You might be right that the trade deals were better for people on low incomes compared with what we have now but it's pretty hard to prove.
  • LDLFLDLF Posts: 162
    edited May 2022

    .

    I believe he said that he would, yes, and I know that Starmer said that Labour would too, before the election.

    After the election they did differently, but I've never seen a single quote from Grieve before the election to say anything other than he would respect the vote, which I believe is what he campaigned on.

    The Lib Dems and SNP campaigned on overturning the vote. They got their mandate for their MPs, as an extremely small minority of the Commons, but that's it for them. Grieve and Starmer etc is different though.
    We can be critical of Dominic Grieve from both a Remain and Leave perspective.

    Clarke voted against Article 50, and made no secret during the election of his preferences on Brexit (as he has done for his whole career). During the 2017-19 parliament he voted for Theresa May's deal.

    Grieve voted for Article 50, and stood on a platform in 2017 supportive of May's negotiation strategy. He then voted against every single deal presented to him - making him more hardline than most ERG members.

    Which of these two men did more to avoid No Deal? It is a mystery to me why Grieve is so lauded.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,935

    Except some duplicitous MPs like Grieve and Starmer didn't just reject a form of Brexit, they decided to reject every form of Brexit.

    MPs like Grieve and Starmer being duplicitous liars is constitutionally or democratically acceptable, but voters like Leon are within their rights to be aggrieved at MPs who are duplicitous liars. That is a universal concept, I am aggrieved at Boris for being a duplicitous liar too, so Starmer and Grieve etc aren't the only ones that applies to.
    False on Starmer. Voted in favour of both Custom Union and Common Markets on second indicative votes. (Grieve abstained on both, but was close to the only Tory MP who did not vote for at least one flavour of Brexit, a complete outlier not representative of the parliament as a whole).
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,563

    .

    I believe he said that he would, yes, and I know that Starmer said that Labour would too, before the election.

    After the election they did differently, but I've never seen a single quote from Grieve before the election to say anything other than he would respect the vote, which I believe is what he campaigned on.

    The Lib Dems and SNP campaigned on overturning the vote. They got their mandate for their MPs, as an extremely small minority of the Commons, but that's it for them. Grieve and Starmer etc is different though.
    On a quick google (quick, mind) I see a lot of "stopping no deal Brexit" on his wiki page. Plus he hated it, obvs. But I don't know or remember whether that was translated into anything other than voting with dozens of others of all stripes against whatever Brexit bill was put in front of him in the presumed hope of coming up with a "better" deal.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,287
    Details of the leaving party emerging on W@1 pretty devastating for the Big Barnacle.

    30 plus packed into the room, sitting on laps; “the PM grabbed a drink and joined us.” etc.
    Sure it was a work event.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,539
    Cookie said:

    So what's the solution? Because as far as I can see the wholesale price of gas is outside the ability of government to influence. The state could subsidise it, but then the state would have to massively increase taxation to pay for it.

    Of course, the solution is to have built a bunch of tidal lagoons five years ago. And we should still do that. But that doesn't really help right now.
    In the UK many of us buy our energy from EDF. Who charge the market rate and make a bucket of money.

    In France most people buy their energy from EDF. Who as they are owned by the French government take the profits made here to order a tight cost cap for French consumers.

    What could we do here and now? Nail to the floor the price cap. That will drive even some of the bigger companies out of the market with infrastructure that can then be handed to our own StateCo.

    I keep saying this - the solution is across the channel.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,935
    LDLF said:

    We can be critical of Dominic Grieve from both a Remain and Leave perspective.

    Clarke voted against Article 50, and made no secret during the election of his preferences on Brexit (as he has done for his whole career). During the 2017-19 parliament he voted for Theresa May's deal.

    Grieve voted for Article 50, and stood on a platform in 2017 supportive of May's negotiation strategy. He then voted against every single deal presented to him - making him more hardline than most ERG members.

    Which of these two men did more to avoid No Deal? It is a mystery to me why Grieve is so lauded.
    Where is Grieve lauded? Clarke is the best PM we never had.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,287
    edited May 2022
    Cookie said:

    So what's the solution? Because as far as I can see the wholesale price of gas is outside the ability of government to influence. The state could subsidise it, but then the state would have to massively increase taxation to pay for it.

    Of course, the solution is to have built a bunch of tidal lagoons five years ago. And we should still do that. But that doesn't really help right now.
    The one thing which might have made a small difference (too late for this winter now) would have been to have lifted the height restrictions on onshore wind. You could probably have doubled onshore capacity this year, just by replacing existing turbines.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,824
    Eabhal said:

    The Scunthorpe morons did have a feel for the labour market though, and since then we've seen an incredibly tight one. That might not be down to Brexit, but what they thought would happen did occur, in the end.

    Whether that leads to real earnings growth for those on lower incomes (and reduced inequality) is yet to be seen.

    You might be right that the trade deals were better for people on low incomes compared with what we have now but it's pretty hard to prove.
    It is being seen. It hasn't and it isn't.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,773
    It is interesting that the Ukraine government is now describing the battle being waged in the Donbass as the largest in Europe since WW2. There are a number of indications that the intensity of the fighting has reached a new level with high casualties on both sides but the story is drifting down the news agenda here because of the lack of pictures from the front. Presumably our media, entirely understandably, consider the risks to their staff just too high to take.

    Its hard to imagine either side can keep this up for long. The winner is a lot more uncertain than some of the Ukranian propaganda would have us believe.
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,921
    edited May 2022

    Nick Clegg thought it was a good idea too, in 2010.

    You might think its a shame Plebs get votes, but you're pissing into the wind with that one.
    Thing as as most of us just move on with our lives however we voted, I was remain, bitter jokers like this person will just become even more bitter and even more angry and just spend their time howling about it and to what point. It may make them feel happy to moan about the result incessantly but what will it achieve ultimately aside from making them even more embittered. Captain Cut n paste from Twitter is in the same boat. Life really is too precious and valuable..
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,287

    Where is Grieve lauded? ...
    In @Leon ’s fevered dreams.
  • Hitler was an election winner too, people just thought eventually that it was more than just winning
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,563
    DavidL said:

    It is interesting that the Ukraine government is now describing the battle being waged in the Donbass as the largest in Europe since WW2. There are a number of indications that the intensity of the fighting has reached a new level with high casualties on both sides but the story is drifting down the news agenda here because of the lack of pictures from the front. Presumably our media, entirely understandably, consider the risks to their staff just too high to take.

    Its hard to imagine either side can keep this up for long. The winner is a lot more uncertain than some of the Ukranian propaganda would have us believe.

    Careful. That kind of talk will get you cancelled on PB.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,935
    Nigelb said:

    In @Leon ’s fevered dreams.
    In which case it would not matter, as the world is always about to end.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,010
    edited May 2022
    Hmm even a very liquid working lunch doesn't extend to "empties left out overnight", "overnight stays" and "sitting in each others laps". !!!
    Will Boris stand up and say he didn't mislead the Commons about a party because it was actually an orgy ?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 16,269
    Took a little Day 1 trip on the central section of the Elizabeth Line in my lunch hour. Wow. Really incredible. It even smells new. Next time I will take the crazy funicular style lift at Liverpool Street.
    With interchanges at Farringdon and Whitechapel both providing access to our patch of SE London, this will be our new way of getting to the West End. It was worth the wait.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,287
    DavidL said:

    It is interesting that the Ukraine government is now describing the battle being waged in the Donbass as the largest in Europe since WW2. There are a number of indications that the intensity of the fighting has reached a new level with high casualties on both sides but the story is drifting down the news agenda here because of the lack of pictures from the front. Presumably our media, entirely understandably, consider the risks to their staff just too high to take.

    Its hard to imagine either side can keep this up for long. The winner is a lot more uncertain than some of the Ukranian propaganda would have us believe.

    There were journalists on the front a couple of days back. Looked pretty hairy even then.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    Eabhal said:

    It's Windermere. No need for the "Lake".

    Fatally undermined your argument I'm afraid.
    Quite, like saying Walden Pond Lake.
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379
    murali_s said:

    It doesn’t change the fact that Brexit is a f*cking calamity.

    Why oh why did Cameron think it was a good idea to give the people a vote on this.
    Because denying people a vote repeatedly - from Maastricht through to Lisbon - was no longer tenable.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,138
    Taz said:

    Thing as as most of us just move on with our lives however we voted

    Bollocks

    A we have seen, Brexiteers are obsessed by the vote.

    Others are more interested in the outcome, the ongoing and ever deepening shitshow that Brexit has become.

    Instead of addressing the issues, Brexiteers can only whine "but we won....."
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,608

    I know that, it was a joke. Sorry if you took it badly. 😕
    I am very precious. Behave!😉
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,982
    edited May 2022
    BBC News - Partygate: Insiders tell of packed No 10 lockdown parties
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61566410

    Boris got to be in really serious danger now. People doing on the record interviews saying Boris regularly popped in for a drink at the regular WTF parties.
  • dixiedean said:

    It is being seen. It hasn't and it isn't.
    In the last official figures I saw many low income earners were actually getting above inflation pay rises thanks to the tightness of the labour market.

    Since then, inflation has risen even higher thanks to commodity prices rather than thanks to the labour market. Whether real wages continue to rise in these circumstances is yet to be seen.

    Of course the labour market reforms are structural changes, while the global inflationary environment is temporary due to the conflict in Ukraine and the aftermaths of Covid. So it will take many years to see whether we get real pay rises or not, especially for lower income earners in industries favoured by free movement in the past.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,354

    1. I am a leaver, not a remoaner
    2. The referendum was legally advisory. You mas dislike this but its true
    3. Its fine for any parliament to overturn anything it choses to vote for
    4. Cameron was relevant as long he remained PM. Which wasn't very long
    5. Its absolutely true that remain expected to win easily. But they lost. And you - and I - won. So why are you so angry having won both the referendum and the confirmatory election in 2019?
    6. While it was democratic to seek another referendum, millions in the country regarded it as rather poor form, as they believed the first vote should be honoured.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,221
    edited May 2022

    Hitler was an election winner too, people just thought eventually that it was more than just winning

    Ken, is that you?

    Hitler really wasn't an election winner, he managed to outwit an 87 year old guy, became Chancellor, and after that....
  • Ken, is that you?

    Hitler really wasn't an election winner, he managed to outwit an 87 year old guy, became Chancellor, and after that....
    TSE, is it you that posts on Digital Spy under TSE?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,785
    This Panorama tonight 🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,608
    Cookie said:

    So what's the solution? Because as far as I can see the wholesale price of gas is outside the ability of government to influence. The state could subsidise it, but then the state would have to massively increase taxation to pay for it.

    Of course, the solution is to have built a bunch of tidal lagoons five years ago. And we should still do that. But that doesn't really help right now.
    That's not my problem. Or that of the opposition parties.

    Incumbency can be a bit of a b******!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,221

    TSE, is it you that posts on Digital Spy under TSE?
    Yes.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,970

    Where is Grieve lauded? Clarke is the best PM we never had.
    Grieve is an odious snob. He doesn't even try to hide it
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,935
    Cookie said:

    So what's the solution? Because as far as I can see the wholesale price of gas is outside the ability of government to influence. The state could subsidise it, but then the state would have to massively increase taxation to pay for it.

    Of course, the solution is to have built a bunch of tidal lagoons five years ago. And we should still do that. But that doesn't really help right now.
    Options are:

    1. That state can subsidise it and provide short term relief to those who need it.
    2. Lots of excess deaths over the winter through lack of heating and food combined with a crime epidemic and boom for loan sharks.

    We will end up with mostly 1, although the government will only get there in small steps rather than seeing it is blatantly obviously going to happen so they may as well be ahead of the curve for once.

    It is not a time for ideology but pragmatism.
  • Yes.
    Nice, I didn't know you were such a techy. I've over there too
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022
    DavidL said:

    It is interesting that the Ukraine government is now describing the battle being waged in the Donbass as the largest in Europe since WW2. There are a number of indications that the intensity of the fighting has reached a new level with high casualties on both sides but the story is drifting down the news agenda here because of the lack of pictures from the front. Presumably our media, entirely understandably, consider the risks to their staff just too high to take.

    Its hard to imagine either side can keep this up for long. The winner is a lot more uncertain than some of the Ukranian propaganda would have us believe.

    There’s very intense fighting going on there now, and as you say not a lot of journalists around.

    Everyone needs to remember that next winter’s energy prices are determined by whether this war is done by the autumn. Keep the weapons and training coming to Ukraine.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,855
    murali_s said:

    It doesn’t change the fact that Brexit is a f*cking calamity.

    Why oh why did Cameron think it was a good idea to give the people a vote on this. Did he really think the average uneducated lazy moron who lives in sh*tholes like Scunthorpe would understand the nuisances of international trade?

    David Cameron = worst PM in history.
    Who or what made Scunthorpe a sh*thole, if that's what it is?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,138
    "They were every week... wine time Fridays"

    Insiders who attended lockdown gatherings in Downing Street tell @bbcLauraK that social events were held regularly and the prime minister was there "grabbing a glass for himself"
    https://bbc.in/3wFbe3q https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1529072707299684353/video/1
  • Where is Grieve lauded? Clarke is the best PM we never had.
    Clarke, to be fair, also voted against having the referendum in the first place IIRC
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,221

    Nice, I didn't know you were such a techy. I've over there too
    I'm very techy.

    In a previous job BT/Cellnet/o2 were clients, as were a few other tech companies.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,153
    edited May 2022

    That's not my problem. Or that of the opposition parties.

    Incumbency can be a bit of a b******!
    Cynically honest, but entirely truthful.

    A Conservative solution might have been to cut taxes, so that people would have more of their take home pay to spend on the rising bills. Instead Rishi and Boris chose to tax and spend, raising taxes even further and using Gordon Brown's preferred tax to do so.

    They didn't cause the inflation, but they are making matters worse for working people by raising taxes in order to featherbed the inheritances of those who aren't working for it.
  • I wonder who is leaking this stuff.

    It went oddly quiet for a few weeks and now it has appeared again.

    This must be planned, I see no other explanation.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,935

    Clarke, to be fair, also voted against having the referendum in the first place IIRC
    One of the very few MPs to come out of that parliament with any credit. Stewart another.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333
    edited May 2022

    Where is Grieve lauded? Clarke is the best PM we never had.
    Or Rab Butler or Dennis Healey
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,824

    In the last official figures I saw many low income earners were actually getting above inflation pay rises thanks to the tightness of the labour market.

    Since then, inflation has risen even higher thanks to commodity prices rather than thanks to the labour market. Whether real wages continue to rise in these circumstances is yet to be seen.

    Of course the labour market reforms are structural changes, while the global inflationary environment is temporary due to the conflict in Ukraine and the aftermaths of Covid. So it will take many years to see whether we get real pay rises or not, especially for lower income earners in industries favoured by free movement in the past.
    Yes but.
    No one was promised "in many years". It was sold as a magical solution to all ills. It isn't.
    Energy price cap predicted to rise to £2800 pa.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,287
    .

    In the UK many of us buy our energy from EDF. Who charge the market rate and make a bucket of money.

    In France most people buy their energy from EDF. Who as they are owned by the French government take the profits made here to order a tight cost cap for French consumers.

    What could we do here and now? Nail to the floor the price cap. That will drive even some of the bigger companies out of the market with infrastructure that can then be handed to our own StateCo.

    I keep saying this - the solution is across the channel.
    That’s an interesting, if radical idea.
    Problem is that the generators and the retailers are not one and the same, so I doubt it would work as easily as you suggest.
    And the ability of this government to manage the consequences ….

    Don’t be daft.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,982

    I wonder who is leaking this stuff.

    It went oddly quiet for a few weeks and now it has appeared again.

    This must be planned, I see no other explanation.

    The whole thing has been a perfect example of how to run a story through the media in the most damaging way.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,608
    Leon said:

    Grieve is an odious snob. He doesn't even try to hide it
    I quite like Grieve. He's a one nation feudal Tory.

    A snob? I suspect he'd be more comfortable in a branch of Greggs than either BigDog or Mogg.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,221

    I wonder who is leaking this stuff.

    It went oddly quiet for a few weeks and now it has appeared again.

    This must be planned, I see no other explanation.

    You're going to be pretty miffed if you get fined for an event where the organiser didn't.

    The other thing is whilst a FPN isn't a criminal record, it will be need to be declared on a future government focused/based jobs.

    There's going to be a lot of pissed off people.
  • I'm very techy.

    In a previous job BT/Cellnet/o2 were clients, as were a few other tech companies.
    I used to work for one of their competitors, on the Red team
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,824

    Ken, is that you?

    Hitler really wasn't an election winner, he managed to outwit an 87 year old guy, became Chancellor, and after that....
    Pity they didn't have FPTP.
  • dixiedean said:

    Yes but.
    No one was promised "in many years". It was sold as a magical solution to all ills. It isn't.
    Energy price cap predicted to rise to £2800 pa.
    I don't think anyone sold it as a magical solution to all ills.

    Inflation is rising due to global conditions, not Brexit. You could argue that without the tight labour market bringing pay rises to people, that the cost of living crisis would be even worse now.
This discussion has been closed.