Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
If the were seemingly willing to lie in the House and to get the ONS to lie in their stats, why wouldn't they be willing to lie to the PAC?
They can try. Sceptical interlocutors who understand numbers, and have some power to compel evidence, are harder to fool.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
Struggle on for no purpose hoping a state that actively despises you - or at best cares not a whit about you - will somehow come good
They can't even blame the Tories on inflation, the previous government left office with inflation down to 2% and generally falling/stable. This is all on Labour and their idiotic tax/spending policies. There's no new external shocks, no COVID, the wars in Ukraine/Israel have already been factored in, Trump's tariffs should make UK prices lower given export diversion by China and other affected countries.
If ever we needed evidence that Labour haven't got a clue how to run the economy this is it. In fairly benign conditions, with no substantial external factors they've let inflation go up from 2.2% when they took over in July to 3.6% last month and still rising. They've caused this, not global conditions, not the previous government, they did. The Tories need to absolutely destroy them on inflation, they actually did the hard work and got inflation back down to acceptable levels, Labour have completely thrown that away.
They weren't great but I've no doubt at all that Sunak and Hunt were a better choice than Starmer and Reeves. Alas post-covid the public were minded to kick out the incumbents, and Labour benefitted from that to win a huge majority with very little real support, which has already withered away to election losing levels.
Labour are alright a diagnosing the problems we face, but don't seem to have any particular idea as to what to do, and are politically inept as well as weak when facing back-bench opposition. I'm not expecting much from this government over the next few years, and fear we could end up with Farage unless Labour can make some real and rapid progress.
Given everything we've just learned about this latest fuck up by the civil service and the subsequent cover up, would you really begrudge the public voting in Farage as PM?
The whole civil service needs burning down and rebooting, neither the Tories nor Labour will deliver that. I don't particularly think Reform will either, yet they have a higher probability of doing it than either of the other two.
I am coming to the same conclusion.
Like the Reformation, or the French Revolution, one can argue whether things were made better or worse, but the current situation is unstainable.
In essence, we need a real small-r reforming government, akin to Attlee or Thatcher, and perhaps even more radical. The problem is that a government of that type needs real guts and drive from those who lead it. They have to make difficult choices, and particularly in the case of Thatcher, hold firm in seeing their ideas through.
From what I see of Reform, I suspect that their MPs will be a fairly chaotic bunch, probably elected on the promise of quite a lot of jam for their voters, and I am not convinced any of them will enter the Commons with a drive to push through unpopular structural reform. Does Farage want to be that kind of leader? I’m very unconvinced.
Instead I suspect that they will go native, fight amongst themselves, maybe achieve one or two popular goals (every government achieves a few relatively positive things) and probably bring the tipping point even closer. But that’s just my view at this point.
The biggest problem with Reform is that they will put off actual reforms of the U.K. state for a generation. The disasters they will create will simply reinforce the - “it has to cost this much” mentality.
DOGE, in the US, is making sure that actual reform and improvement in the budget will be put off for decades.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
If the were seemingly willing to lie in the House and to get the ONS to lie in their stats, why wouldn't they be willing to lie to the PAC?
Assume all government ministers are willing to lie when they feel it "necessary" and all regularly do actively mislead. Then ask which organisation or process is most likely to get to the bottom of stuff? The PAC is towards the top of the plausible answers.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
Struggle on for no purpose hoping a state that actively despises you - or at best cares not a whit about you - will somehow come good
Einstein, madness, definition thereof
Look, I realise that you're frustrated with yourself for voting for both the previous government, and the one you're currently railing about.
Blaming the rest of us for your poor choices might make you feel better, but it's otherwise unproductive.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
Surely you don't prefer copious photos of his breakfast.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
Struggle on for no purpose hoping a state that actively despises you - or at best cares not a whit about you - will somehow come good
Einstein, madness, definition thereof
Didn't Einstein also say, "God does not play Tice"?
Suggests an Almighty opposition to Reform taking over.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
Struggle on for no purpose hoping a state that actively despises you - or at best cares not a whit about you - will somehow come good
Einstein, madness, definition thereof
Look, I realise that you're frustrated with yourself for voting for both the previous government, and the one you're currently railing about.
Blaming the rest of us for your poor choices might make you feel better, but it's otherwise unproductive.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
Struggle on for no purpose hoping a state that actively despises you - or at best cares not a whit about you - will somehow come good
Einstein, madness, definition thereof
Look, I realise that you're frustrated with yourself for voting for both the previous government, and the one you're currently railing about.
Blaming the rest of us for your poor choices might make you feel better, but it's otherwise unproductive.
Is he a unicorn pb-er in backing the Boris, Truss and Starmer trio?
I have never felt such bleak despair for Britain as I do, reading this story. It is a vortex of multiple failures, all meeting at one point: the failure of our legal system, our inept civil service, our incompetent and treacherous politicians, our stupid foreign policies, our self harming elite, our wasteful spending (mainly on foreigners), our bizarre unwanted levels of mass immigration
These ongoing narratives all meet here, in this one toxic story
The only solace I can take from it is that the story is SO bad it may be some kind of nadir. Rock bottom. It cannot get worse
Can it?
Of course it can get worse. What's it like living in Sudan, Gaza, Ukraine, Burma, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq?
I still think we are owed a reasoned account of how Reform are going to make it all better without burning our house down.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
Just had a phone conversation with Pa Woolie and can therefore proclaim the anecdotal impact of Afghanigate thus...... Actually he wasn't as fuming as I thought he would be when I made an unsubtle probing aside about Afghanistan. 'I suppose they didn't have much choice to protect people' but 'pretty convenient shitty way to avoid embarrassment'
In terms of impact - he was MUCH more irate about the Mini budget fallout, and he tends to be exercised about stuff that shifts the dial. Mind you, Chagos was tantamount to upskirting the late Queen to him
I dunno, I think this might push the Tories down to 15% and fourth in some polls and Labour to 20%, or maybe their crapulence is already priced in??
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
Struggle on for no purpose hoping a state that actively despises you - or at best cares not a whit about you - will somehow come good
Einstein, madness, definition thereof
Look, I realise that you're frustrated with yourself for voting for both the previous government, and the one you're currently railing about.
Blaming the rest of us for your poor choices might make you feel better, but it's otherwise unproductive.
Is he a unicorn pb-er in backing the Boris, Truss and Starmer trio?
Don’t forget the baby that was put in an institution and no one wants to talk about, Brexit. A quadriga barely able to drag a wheeless chariot of non credibility.
They can't even blame the Tories on inflation, the previous government left office with inflation down to 2% and generally falling/stable. This is all on Labour and their idiotic tax/spending policies. There's no new external shocks, no COVID, the wars in Ukraine/Israel have already been factored in, Trump's tariffs should make UK prices lower given export diversion by China and other affected countries.
If ever we needed evidence that Labour haven't got a clue how to run the economy this is it. In fairly benign conditions, with no substantial external factors they've let inflation go up from 2.2% when they took over in July to 3.6% last month and still rising. They've caused this, not global conditions, not the previous government, they did. The Tories need to absolutely destroy them on inflation, they actually did the hard work and got inflation back down to acceptable levels, Labour have completely thrown that away.
They weren't great but I've no doubt at all that Sunak and Hunt were a better choice than Starmer and Reeves. Alas post-covid the public were minded to kick out the incumbents, and Labour benefitted from that to win a huge majority with very little real support, which has already withered away to election losing levels.
Labour are alright a diagnosing the problems we face, but don't seem to have any particular idea as to what to do, and are politically inept as well as weak when facing back-bench opposition. I'm not expecting much from this government over the next few years, and fear we could end up with Farage unless Labour can make some real and rapid progress.
Given everything we've just learned about this latest fuck up by the civil service and the subsequent cover up, would you really begrudge the public voting in Farage as PM?
The whole civil service needs burning down and rebooting, neither the Tories nor Labour will deliver that. I don't particularly think Reform will either, yet they have a higher probability of doing it than either of the other two.
I am coming to the same conclusion.
Like the Reformation, or the French Revolution, one can argue whether things were made better or worse, but the current situation is unstainable.
Sadly, I think any upcoming Reform-ation will not be remembered as a shining pinnacle through the ages.
They can't even blame the Tories on inflation, the previous government left office with inflation down to 2% and generally falling/stable. This is all on Labour and their idiotic tax/spending policies. There's no new external shocks, no COVID, the wars in Ukraine/Israel have already been factored in, Trump's tariffs should make UK prices lower given export diversion by China and other affected countries.
If ever we needed evidence that Labour haven't got a clue how to run the economy this is it. In fairly benign conditions, with no substantial external factors they've let inflation go up from 2.2% when they took over in July to 3.6% last month and still rising. They've caused this, not global conditions, not the previous government, they did. The Tories need to absolutely destroy them on inflation, they actually did the hard work and got inflation back down to acceptable levels, Labour have completely thrown that away.
They weren't great but I've no doubt at all that Sunak and Hunt were a better choice than Starmer and Reeves. Alas post-covid the public were minded to kick out the incumbents, and Labour benefitted from that to win a huge majority with very little real support, which has already withered away to election losing levels.
Labour are alright a diagnosing the problems we face, but don't seem to have any particular idea as to what to do, and are politically inept as well as weak when facing back-bench opposition. I'm not expecting much from this government over the next few years, and fear we could end up with Farage unless Labour can make some real and rapid progress.
Given everything we've just learned about this latest fuck up by the civil service and the subsequent cover up, would you really begrudge the public voting in Farage as PM?
The whole civil service needs burning down and rebooting, neither the Tories nor Labour will deliver that. I don't particularly think Reform will either, yet they have a higher probability of doing it than either of the other two.
I am coming to the same conclusion.
Like the Reformation, or the French Revolution, one can argue whether things were made better or worse, but the current situation is unstainable.
In essence, we need a real small-r reforming government, akin to Attlee or Thatcher, and perhaps even more radical. The problem is that a government of that type needs real guts and drive from those who lead it. They have to make difficult choices, and particularly in the case of Thatcher, hold firm in seeing their ideas through.
From what I see of Reform, I suspect that their MPs will be a fairly chaotic bunch, probably elected on the promise of quite a lot of jam for their voters, and I am not convinced any of them will enter the Commons with a drive to push through unpopular structural reform. Does Farage want to be that kind of leader? I’m very unconvinced.
Instead I suspect that they will go native, fight amongst themselves, maybe achieve one or two popular goals (every government achieves a few relatively positive things) and probably bring the tipping point even closer. But that’s just my view at this point.
The biggest problem with Reform is that they will put off actual reforms of the U.K. state for a generation. The disasters they will create will simply reinforce the - “it has to cost this much” mentality.
DOGE, in the US, is making sure that actual reform and improvement in the budget will be put off for decades.
The Reform manifesto 2029 will be one of the most interesting documents for ages. Their choices are: say nothing much and embrace a few popular generalisations relying on the vain belief of Leon and friends but like Labour have no real plan; do an honest properly costed and fairly detailed 'plan for UK next 10 years' which has to be unpopulist because of the nature of reality; say nothing and have a secret sensible/silly plan; go all out populist nonsense and try to do it.
It won't be dull. Part of me wants them to win (though I think the chance is fairly low) just to see how they deal with the reality.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
I’ve got some good news about your stalker, he’s going to have his passport seized.
Reading all his old posts boasting about prostitution, drugs, and travel I was obligated under the Online Safety Act to report that to the authorities.
The poor fecker will never be allowed to leave the UK.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
I’ve got some good news about your stalker, he’s going to have his passport seized.
Reading all his old posts boasting about prostitution, drugs, and travel I was obligated under the Online Safety Act to report that to the authorities.
The poor fecker will never be allowed to leave the UK.
Couldn't you have waited?
Time it for when he's out of the country, he'd never have been able to come back.
Just had a phone conversation with Pa Woolie and can therefore proclaim the anecdotal impact of Afghanigate thus...... Actually he wasn't as fuming as I thought he would be when I made an unsubtle probing aside about Afghanistan. 'I suppose they didn't have much choice to protect people' but 'pretty convenient shitty way to avoid embarrassment'
In terms of impact - he was MUCH more irate about the Mini budget fallout, and he tends to be exercised about stuff that shifts the dial. Mind you, Chagos was tantamount to upskirting the late Queen to him
I dunno, I think this might push the Tories down to 15% and fourth in some polls and Labour to 20%, or maybe their crapulence is already priced in??
Steady as she goes until the budget now, I think. We're about to hit silly season, for Labour's sake I hope they've learned the lesson of just shutting up for the next 6-8 weeks rather than floating unpopular policy proposals and generating more endless debate around tax, like they incomprehensibly did last year.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
I’ve got some good news about your stalker, he’s going to have his passport seized.
Reading all his old posts boasting about prostitution, drugs, and travel I was obligated under the Online Safety Act to report that to the authorities.
The poor fecker will never be allowed to leave the UK.
I really, truly hope you are taking the piss.
If the Online Safety act obligated you to report him for boasts about those things then we are in a very very worrying world.
If it didn’t actually obligate you but you did then, well, we’re on a very worrying site.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
I’ve got some good news about your stalker, he’s going to have his passport seized.
Reading all his old posts boasting about prostitution, drugs, and travel I was obligated under the Online Safety Act to report that to the authorities.
The poor fecker will never be allowed to leave the UK.
I really, truly hope you are taking the piss.
If the Online Safety act obligated you to report him for boasts about those things then we are in a very very worrying world.
If it didn’t actually obligate you but you did then, well, we’re on a very worrying site.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
" I get paid for my "ceaseless twattish hysteria" " An interesting but unsurprising revelation.
I guess PB.com should be flattered that it is worth flyposting with paid "ceaseless twattish hysteria"
Could speculate on who might be paying with a high degree of certainty, I think.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
" I get paid for my "ceaseless twattish hysteria" " An interesting but unsurprising revelation.
I guess PB.com should be flattered that it is worth flyposting with paid "ceaseless twattish hysteria"
Could speculate on who might be paying with a high degree of certainty, I think.
I’ve never hidden the fact I work for the Knapper’s Gazette, which has surprisingly high rates for a magazine dedicated to the arguably niche world of stone-based artisanal sex toys
Talking of payments, how hard is it to give away free stuff?
I’m trying to give away a solid Oakwood 6 foot John Lewis bookcase. Almost as new. Worth £300 when I bought it maybe more
Could she really not have known about this? And what is ‘an huge’ all about?
I am shocked by the secrecy and cover-up over the admission of thousands of Afghans to Britain at the cost of £7bn to the taxpayer. A decision that was in itself wrong.
It is an huge betrayal of public trust.
Those responsible in both Governments and the bureaucracy need to be held to account.
Technically in formal English 'an huge' is correct, as is 'an hotel' 'an hearing' etc. H was for centuries treated as a silent letter, in effect a glottal stop, so it was common to take the vowel sound from after it (in some dialects it still is, of course).
It's just it's very seldom used as it 'feels' wrong so I'm assuming it's a typo.
(This is your PB crazy fact for this morning.)
Dropping haitches has always struck me, in wannabe posh circles, as purely haffectation.
In Artford, Ereford and Ampshire, Urricanes Ardly Hever Appen
Labour has completely lost control of inflation and I don't think they know how to get it back down again.
Every other day Keir Starmer says he's putting money in people's pockets, so it's not surprising if it's causing inflation.
There are very few ways out of a sovereign debt crisis which don't include quite a lot of inflation. This is supposed always to take governments by surprise.
IANAE but do any governments issue 'inflation proof bonds' at the moment. Or recently?
We've touched on accessibility this morning. Here's my photo quota with a corker of a cockup.
This is the local mainline station, post £6.75 million spent to make it accessible for the first time in 31 years. Generally it is good, and most welcome - about 7/10.
Here however, is the wheelchair ramp from the car park to the station building area, complete with bollards at a 90cm spacing which forces a good chunk of mobility aids to use the car park entrance on the right where there are hundreds of car movements every day. It should be 1.5m by Govt Guidance. Network Rail are ... not the best.
(The station building is like some of the Network South East ones - 1970s CLASP system, which is designed to be resilient to subsidence.)
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
" I get paid for my "ceaseless twattish hysteria" " An interesting but unsurprising revelation.
I guess PB.com should be flattered that it is worth flyposting with paid "ceaseless twattish hysteria"
Could speculate on who might be paying with a high degree of certainty, I think.
I’ve never hidden the fact I work for the Knapper’s Gazette, which has surprisingly high rates for a magazine dedicated to the arguably niche world of stone-based artisanal sex toys
Talking of payments, how hard is it to give away free stuff?
I’m trying to give away a solid Oakwood 6 foot John Lewis bookcase. Almost as new. Worth £300 when I bought it maybe more
No takers. It’s free!
Don't know about London but in the grim north there are lots of charity shops specialising in large furniture items, with vans that deliver.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
I’ve got some good news about your stalker, he’s going to have his passport seized.
Reading all his old posts boasting about prostitution, drugs, and travel I was obligated under the Online Safety Act to report that to the authorities.
The poor fecker will never be allowed to leave the UK.
I really, truly hope you are taking the piss.
If the Online Safety act obligated you to report him for boasts about those things then we are in a very very worrying world.
If it didn’t actually obligate you but you did then, well, we’re on a very worrying site.
So I had breakfast with a journalist who has said if you parse parts of the Online Safety Act in conjunction with other parts and given the prevalence of women who have been trafficked/are under age into prostitution then when any mention of it comes up then you should report significant harms.
Ditto people who post similar on WhatsApp groups/social media.
It maybe The Editor of the Spectator may have been responsible for the most draconian piece of legislation in living memory and then some.
You can see why some sites have shut down completely.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
" I get paid for my "ceaseless twattish hysteria" " An interesting but unsurprising revelation.
I guess PB.com should be flattered that it is worth flyposting with paid "ceaseless twattish hysteria"
Could speculate on who might be paying with a high degree of certainty, I think.
I’ve never hidden the fact I work for the Knapper’s Gazette, which has surprisingly high rates for a magazine dedicated to the arguably niche world of stone-based artisanal sex toys
Talking of payments, how hard is it to give away free stuff?
I’m trying to give away a solid Oakwood 6 foot John Lewis bookcase. Almost as new. Worth £300 when I bought it maybe more
No takers. It’s free!
Don't know about London but in the grim north there are lots of charity shops specialising in large furniture items, with vans that deliver.
Round here, furniture items would be the Salvation Army shop who would I think collect.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
" I get paid for my "ceaseless twattish hysteria" " An interesting but unsurprising revelation.
I guess PB.com should be flattered that it is worth flyposting with paid "ceaseless twattish hysteria"
Could speculate on who might be paying with a high degree of certainty, I think.
I’ve never hidden the fact I work for the Knapper’s Gazette, which has surprisingly high rates for a magazine dedicated to the arguably niche world of stone-based artisanal sex toys
Talking of payments, how hard is it to give away free stuff?
I’m trying to give away a solid Oakwood 6 foot John Lewis bookcase. Almost as new. Worth £300 when I bought it maybe more
No takers. It’s free!
Don't know about London but in the grim north there are lots of charity shops specialising in large furniture items, with vans that deliver.
British Heart Foundation run the big ones in most places I think.
Labour has completely lost control of inflation and I don't think they know how to get it back down again.
Every other day Keir Starmer says he's putting money in people's pockets, so it's not surprising if it's causing inflation.
There are very few ways out of a sovereign debt crisis which don't include quite a lot of inflation. This is supposed always to take governments by surprise.
IANAE but do any governments issue 'inflation proof bonds' at the moment. Or recently?
Around a quarter (?) of our government debt is index linked, I think.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
I’ve got some good news about your stalker, he’s going to have his passport seized.
Reading all his old posts boasting about prostitution, drugs, and travel I was obligated under the Online Safety Act to report that to the authorities.
The poor fecker will never be allowed to leave the UK.
I really, truly hope you are taking the piss.
If the Online Safety act obligated you to report him for boasts about those things then we are in a very very worrying world.
If it didn’t actually obligate you but you did then, well, we’re on a very worrying site.
Labour has completely lost control of inflation and I don't think they know how to get it back down again.
Every other day Keir Starmer says he's putting money in people's pockets, so it's not surprising if it's causing inflation.
There are very few ways out of a sovereign debt crisis which don't include quite a lot of inflation. This is supposed always to take governments by surprise.
IANAE but do any governments issue 'inflation proof bonds' at the moment. Or recently?
Around a quarter (?) of our government debt is index linked, I think.
Conversely that means three quarters of debt is not index linked.
Labour has completely lost control of inflation and I don't think they know how to get it back down again.
Every other day Keir Starmer says he's putting money in people's pockets, so it's not surprising if it's causing inflation.
There are very few ways out of a sovereign debt crisis which don't include quite a lot of inflation. This is supposed always to take governments by surprise.
IANAE but do any governments issue 'inflation proof bonds' at the moment. Or recently?
Around a quarter (?) of our government debt is index linked, I think.
That’s stock not flow. I think it’s much lower as a percentage of recent issuance.
They can't even blame the Tories on inflation, the previous government left office with inflation down to 2% and generally falling/stable. This is all on Labour and their idiotic tax/spending policies. There's no new external shocks, no COVID, the wars in Ukraine/Israel have already been factored in, Trump's tariffs should make UK prices lower given export diversion by China and other affected countries.
If ever we needed evidence that Labour haven't got a clue how to run the economy this is it. In fairly benign conditions, with no substantial external factors they've let inflation go up from 2.2% when they took over in July to 3.6% last month and still rising. They've caused this, not global conditions, not the previous government, they did. The Tories need to absolutely destroy them on inflation, they actually did the hard work and got inflation back down to acceptable levels, Labour have completely thrown that away.
They weren't great but I've no doubt at all that Sunak and Hunt were a better choice than Starmer and Reeves. Alas post-covid the public were minded to kick out the incumbents, and Labour benefitted from that to win a huge majority with very little real support, which has already withered away to election losing levels.
Labour are alright a diagnosing the problems we face, but don't seem to have any particular idea as to what to do, and are politically inept as well as weak when facing back-bench opposition. I'm not expecting much from this government over the next few years, and fear we could end up with Farage unless Labour can make some real and rapid progress.
Given everything we've just learned about this latest fuck up by the civil service and the subsequent cover up, would you really begrudge the public voting in Farage as PM?
The whole civil service needs burning down and rebooting, neither the Tories nor Labour will deliver that. I don't particularly think Reform will either, yet they have a higher probability of doing it than either of the other two.
I am coming to the same conclusion.
Like the Reformation, or the French Revolution, one can argue whether things were made better or worse, but the current situation is unstainable.
In essence, we need a real small-r reforming government, akin to Attlee or Thatcher, and perhaps even more radical. The problem is that a government of that type needs real guts and drive from those who lead it. They have to make difficult choices, and particularly in the case of Thatcher, hold firm in seeing their ideas through.
From what I see of Reform, I suspect that their MPs will be a fairly chaotic bunch, probably elected on the promise of quite a lot of jam for their voters, and I am not convinced any of them will enter the Commons with a drive to push through unpopular structural reform. Does Farage want to be that kind of leader? I’m very unconvinced.
Instead I suspect that they will go native, fight amongst themselves, maybe achieve one or two popular goals (every government achieves a few relatively positive things) and probably bring the tipping point even closer. But that’s just my view at this point.
The biggest problem with Reform is that they will put off actual reforms of the U.K. state for a generation. The disasters they will create will simply reinforce the - “it has to cost this much” mentality.
DOGE, in the US, is making sure that actual reform and improvement in the budget will be put off for decades.
The Reform manifesto 2029 will be one of the most interesting documents for ages. Their choices are: say nothing much and embrace a few popular generalisations relying on the vain belief of Leon and friends but like Labour have no real plan; do an honest properly costed and fairly detailed 'plan for UK next 10 years' which has to be unpopulist because of the nature of reality; say nothing and have a secret sensible/silly plan; go all out populist nonsense and try to do it.
It won't be dull. Part of me wants them to win (though I think the chance is fairly low) just to see how they deal with the reality.
It just makes me sad. Another wasted decade or 2
Tell me I’m wrong, for the NHS….
1) decade long process to increase the training of NHS staff to exceed 100% of requirements. 2) reform of staffing to eliminate agency working almost completely. 3) reform working practises so that there is stability in the staff-patient relationship. See 2) 4) incremental roll out of systems connecting the patients to the various parts of their care - so the home visit team can find out if the patient has been discharged. As a start. 5) do the changes via internalising consultancy and process change rather than another KPMG project 6)….
So we now have just 2 PMQs before mid October - 3rd and 10th Sept and just another 3 sitting days before a couple weeks in early September then off again for Conferences till Oct 13th and we are into the Budget
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
Another of your logic fails.
a) @IanB2 doesn't get paid here, but then neither do you and you post a hell of a lot more.
b) You get paid for writing elsewhere, but then others get paid for doing other stuff elsewhere.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
Struggle on for no purpose hoping a state that actively despises you - or at best cares not a whit about you - will somehow come good
Einstein, madness, definition thereof
Look, I realise that you're frustrated with yourself for voting for both the previous government, and the one you're currently railing about.
Blaming the rest of us for your poor choices might make you feel better, but it's otherwise unproductive.
I’m painting my radiator, thanks very much
I’ve just realised i can do that AND post on here
Hands free radiator painting. The mind boggles. Is it one of those olde worlde ones with gaps in it?
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
I’ve got some good news about your stalker, he’s going to have his passport seized.
Reading all his old posts boasting about prostitution, drugs, and travel I was obligated under the Online Safety Act to report that to the authorities.
The poor fecker will never be allowed to leave the UK.
I really, truly hope you are taking the piss.
If the Online Safety act obligated you to report him for boasts about those things then we are in a very very worrying world.
If it didn’t actually obligate you but you did then, well, we’re on a very worrying site.
Obliged.
Obligate is the preferred verb here, as it implies a legal imperative, which oblige does not.
I'm happy to oblige your appeal for advice on the finer points of grammar.
Michael Gove is responsible for the Online Safety Act and the Afghan coverup, no right thinking journalist should be working for him.
Various stupidities while at Education, plus Brexit, too. For a guy obviously brighter than Boris, he managed little more in the way of judgment.
Also responsible for me having to find storage space for 28 large bags of seasoned logs every time I have delivery because meddlin' mikey Gove wrote a law to ban smaller deliveries.
Michael Gove is responsible for the Online Safety Act and the Afghan coverup, no right thinking journalist should be working for him.
Various stupidities while at Education, plus Brexit, too. For a guy obviously brighter than Boris, he managed little more in the way of judgment.
Also responsible for me having to find storage space for 28 large bags of seasoned logs every time I have delivery because meddlin' mikey Gove wrote a law to ban smaller deliveries.
They can't even blame the Tories on inflation, the previous government left office with inflation down to 2% and generally falling/stable. This is all on Labour and their idiotic tax/spending policies. There's no new external shocks, no COVID, the wars in Ukraine/Israel have already been factored in, Trump's tariffs should make UK prices lower given export diversion by China and other affected countries.
If ever we needed evidence that Labour haven't got a clue how to run the economy this is it. In fairly benign conditions, with no substantial external factors they've let inflation go up from 2.2% when they took over in July to 3.6% last month and still rising. They've caused this, not global conditions, not the previous government, they did. The Tories need to absolutely destroy them on inflation, they actually did the hard work and got inflation back down to acceptable levels, Labour have completely thrown that away.
They weren't great but I've no doubt at all that Sunak and Hunt were a better choice than Starmer and Reeves. Alas post-covid the public were minded to kick out the incumbents, and Labour benefitted from that to win a huge majority with very little real support, which has already withered away to election losing levels.
Labour are alright a diagnosing the problems we face, but don't seem to have any particular idea as to what to do, and are politically inept as well as weak when facing back-bench opposition. I'm not expecting much from this government over the next few years, and fear we could end up with Farage unless Labour can make some real and rapid progress.
Given everything we've just learned about this latest fuck up by the civil service and the subsequent cover up, would you really begrudge the public voting in Farage as PM?
The whole civil service needs burning down and rebooting, neither the Tories nor Labour will deliver that. I don't particularly think Reform will either, yet they have a higher probability of doing it than either of the other two.
I am coming to the same conclusion.
Like the Reformation, or the French Revolution, one can argue whether things were made better or worse, but the current situation is unstainable.
In essence, we need a real small-r reforming government, akin to Attlee or Thatcher, and perhaps even more radical. The problem is that a government of that type needs real guts and drive from those who lead it. They have to make difficult choices, and particularly in the case of Thatcher, hold firm in seeing their ideas through.
From what I see of Reform, I suspect that their MPs will be a fairly chaotic bunch, probably elected on the promise of quite a lot of jam for their voters, and I am not convinced any of them will enter the Commons with a drive to push through unpopular structural reform. Does Farage want to be that kind of leader? I’m very unconvinced.
Instead I suspect that they will go native, fight amongst themselves, maybe achieve one or two popular goals (every government achieves a few relatively positive things) and probably bring the tipping point even closer. But that’s just my view at this point.
The biggest problem with Reform is that they will put off actual reforms of the U.K. state for a generation. The disasters they will create will simply reinforce the - “it has to cost this much” mentality.
DOGE, in the US, is making sure that actual reform and improvement in the budget will be put off for decades.
The Reform manifesto 2029 will be one of the most interesting documents for ages. Their choices are: say nothing much and embrace a few popular generalisations relying on the vain belief of Leon and friends but like Labour have no real plan; do an honest properly costed and fairly detailed 'plan for UK next 10 years' which has to be unpopulist because of the nature of reality; say nothing and have a secret sensible/silly plan; go all out populist nonsense and try to do it.
It won't be dull. Part of me wants them to win (though I think the chance is fairly low) just to see how they deal with the reality.
It just makes me sad. Another wasted decade or 2
Tell me I’m wrong, for the NHS….
1) decade long process to increase the training of NHS staff to exceed 100% of requirements. 2) reform of staffing to eliminate agency working almost completely. 3) reform working practises so that there is stability in the staff-patient relationship. See 2) 4) incremental roll out of systems connecting the patients to the various parts of their care - so the home visit team can find out if the patient has been discharged. As a start. 5) do the changes via internalising consultancy and process change rather than another KPMG project 6)….
This might end up saving money.
Doesn't seem wrong to me. There's lots of talk of broken Britain, so burn it down and start again and only Reform can do this and so on.
The reality is this: In the olden days Year Nought people like Napoleon, William the Conqueror and various fascists and marxists could break stuff and reset. But there's a price for all this they were willing to pay. The death of millions of peasants or young men in wars was simply collateral damage and all fine.
Not even Reform's supporters are going to accept that style of reset, the sort Mao did in China.
So the ship of Theseus has to be repaired while at sea in a heavy storm. You can't stop paying pensions and running an NHS and close all the schools and let out all the prisoners while you fix it.
It's bureaucratic and incremental. Reform have not yet set out their costed and sane bureaucratic and incremental aspirations and plans. I cannot take them seriously until they do. Boring but true.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
" I get paid for my "ceaseless twattish hysteria" " An interesting but unsurprising revelation.
I guess PB.com should be flattered that it is worth flyposting with paid "ceaseless twattish hysteria"
Could speculate on who might be paying with a high degree of certainty, I think.
I’ve never hidden the fact I work for the Knapper’s Gazette, which has surprisingly high rates for a magazine dedicated to the arguably niche world of stone-based artisanal sex toys
Talking of payments, how hard is it to give away free stuff?
I’m trying to give away a solid Oakwood 6 foot John Lewis bookcase. Almost as new. Worth £300 when I bought it maybe more
No takers. It’s free!
You're in London - just stick it next to wherever the wheelie bins for your block of bedsits are kept, with a post-it note 'FREE' stuck to it, and it will be gone.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
Another of your logic fails.
a) @IanB2 doesn't get paid here, but then neither do you and you post a hell of a lot more.
b) You get paid for writing elsewhere, but then others get paid for doing other stuff elsewhere.
Your point is?
If one was so minded - which I am not - I imagine this would be quite a good place to “road test” ideas and memes before selling them on for folding money. If you were really evil you could simply lift clever phrases, slogans, insights
As I say I would never do this, I have integrity, but I’m afraid few have my intrinsic sense of honour
Trump is perhaps partly responsible. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/05/the-base-neo-nazi-russia-ukraine ...The Base, which has a web of cells all over the world, was founded in 2018 and became the subject of a relentless FBI counter-terrorism investigation that led to several arrests and world governments officially designating it as a terrorist organization.
Now, with the Trump administration pulling the FBI from pursuing the far right, the Base, left unchecked, is trying to export its violence abroad.
This is the first time the Base has openly allied itself with the Kremlin’s broader geopolitical goals, a sudden change experts say signals its likely involvement in Russian sabotage and propaganda operations now being carried out across Europe.
The Base founder and leader, Rinaldo Nazzaro, a semi-defected American who worked with US special forces during the war on terror and now lives in Saint Petersburg, has for years garnered suspicions of being a Russian intelligence asset. Even members of the Base mused that he was a spy and grew wary of the source of his cash flow...
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
" I get paid for my "ceaseless twattish hysteria" " An interesting but unsurprising revelation.
I guess PB.com should be flattered that it is worth flyposting with paid "ceaseless twattish hysteria"
Could speculate on who might be paying with a high degree of certainty, I think.
I’ve never hidden the fact I work for the Knapper’s Gazette, which has surprisingly high rates for a magazine dedicated to the arguably niche world of stone-based artisanal sex toys
Talking of payments, how hard is it to give away free stuff?
I’m trying to give away a solid Oakwood 6 foot John Lewis bookcase. Almost as new. Worth £300 when I bought it maybe more
No takers. It’s free!
Put it on the pavement with a note saying "Take me. I'm yours". I did this recently with an unwanted chair. Someone took the note but left the chair!
So we now have just 2 PMQs before mid October - 3rd and 10th Sept and just another 3 sitting days before a couple weeks in early September then off again for Conferences till Oct 13th and we are into the Budget
Scrutiny? No time for that
Scrutiny happens, if at all, in committee. PMQs never scrutinises anything at all to any effect.
So we now have just 2 PMQs before mid October - 3rd and 10th Sept and just another 3 sitting days before a couple weeks in early September then off again for Conferences till Oct 13th and we are into the Budget
Scrutiny? No time for that
Scrutiny happens, if at all, in committee. PMQs never scrutinises anything at all to any effect.
Nothing happens at all whilst they are off on holiday
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
Another of your logic fails.
a) @IanB2 doesn't get paid here, but then neither do you and you post a hell of a lot more.
b) You get paid for writing elsewhere, but then others get paid for doing other stuff elsewhere.
Your point is?
Equally to the point, I don't need to be paid to be travelling about, and have the freedom and time to linger and learn that being on a whistle stop assignment will never offer.
Since he's so sadly money driven, perhaps we could organise a whip round for him to **** off?
Rael Braverman resigns from Reform with immediate effect
Do we know why?
Zia Yousaf and other senior Reform people spent yesterday criticising Suella Braverman for her role in the Afghan coverup, she was after all Attorney General and Home Secretary during the period.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
Another of your logic fails.
a) @IanB2 doesn't get paid here, but then neither do you and you post a hell of a lot more.
b) You get paid for writing elsewhere, but then others get paid for doing other stuff elsewhere.
Your point is?
Equally to the point, I don't need to be paid to be travelling about, and have the freedom and time to linger and learn that being on a whistle stop assignment will never offer.
Since he's so sadly money driven, perhaps we could organise a whip round for him to **** off?
I don’t need to be paid. I would travel for free because I love it. But the happy fact is, I DO get paid, indeed sometimes I get paid to do insanely luxurious travel in £6000 a night hotels
It’s dark and lonely work, but someone has to do it. Etc
Rael Braverman resigns from Reform with immediate effect
Do we know why?
Zia Yousaf and other senior Reform people spent yesterday criticising Suella Braverman for her role in the Afghan coverup, she was after all Attorney General and Home Secretary during the period.
Reform are right here. If she was in those positions then she is irredeemably compromised
If this is going to be a Reform-action/revolution then it needs to be the real deal, as far as possible
Rael Braverman resigns from Reform with immediate effect
Do we know why?
Could be to do with this:
The British government learnt of the data leak in August 2023. 24k Afghans secretly granted asylum, costing British taxpayers up to £7 billion. The government covered it up. Who was in government? Home Secretary: Suella Braverman Immigration Minister: Robert Jenrick
Rael Braverman resigns from Reform with immediate effect
Do we know why?
Could be to do with this:
The British government learnt of the data leak in August 2023. 24k Afghans secretly granted asylum, costing British taxpayers up to £7 billion. The government covered it up. Who was in government? Home Secretary: Suella Braverman Immigration Minister: Robert Jenrick
Rael Braverman resigns from Reform with immediate effect
Do we know why?
Zia Yousaf and other senior Reform people spent yesterday criticising Suella Braverman for her role in the Afghan coverup, she was after all Attorney General and Home Secretary during the period.
So at least we see now why he joined and she didn't, waiting to see how her little secret would play our?
Rael Braverman resigns from Reform with immediate effect
Do we know why?
Could be to do with this:
The British government learnt of the data leak in August 2023. 24k Afghans secretly granted asylum, costing British taxpayers up to £7 billion. The government covered it up. Who was in government? Home Secretary: Suella Braverman Immigration Minister: Robert Jenrick
As I remember it, there was a lot clear publicity about people needing to be brought back here, and the duties we had to them after the conflict, around the time that Biden pulled out.
The only thing I remember being a bit different was the climate on non-EU immigration, because the Tory press was busy indulging the government of the time.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
Another of your logic fails.
a) @IanB2 doesn't get paid here, but then neither do you and you post a hell of a lot more.
b) You get paid for writing elsewhere, but then others get paid for doing other stuff elsewhere.
Your point is?
Equally to the point, I don't need to be paid to be travelling about, and have the freedom and time to linger and learn that being on a whistle stop assignment will never offer.
Since he's so sadly money driven, perhaps we could organise a whip round for him to **** off?
I don’t need to be paid. I would travel for free because I love it. But the happy fact is, I DO get paid, indeed sometimes I get paid to do insanely luxurious travel in £6000 a night hotels
It’s dark and lonely work, but someone has to do it. Etc
And had you even average intelligence, insight and understanding, just think what a wise fellow you might have become.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
" I get paid for my "ceaseless twattish hysteria" " An interesting but unsurprising revelation.
I guess PB.com should be flattered that it is worth flyposting with paid "ceaseless twattish hysteria"
Could speculate on who might be paying with a high degree of certainty, I think.
I’ve never hidden the fact I work for the Knapper’s Gazette, which has surprisingly high rates for a magazine dedicated to the arguably niche world of stone-based artisanal sex toys
Talking of payments, how hard is it to give away free stuff?
I’m trying to give away a solid Oakwood 6 foot John Lewis bookcase. Almost as new. Worth £300 when I bought it maybe more
No takers. It’s free!
I swear to God, you will end up needing somebody to wipe your bottom for you. (Not me)
BHF British Heart Foundation Furniture and Electrical will have a shop near you. Go here: https://www.bhf.org.uk/search?tab=locations Find your local shop Contact them They will take it away from you for free
Gumtree Go here: https://www.gumtree.com/ Create an account Put an entry on there for your bookcase. Charge something like £10 (not free). If it's free they'll want you to deliver it for free. People are bad.
Today I learned there is an Irish right wing group called “MEGA” (Make Eire Great Again) and it’s infiltrated my YouTube shorts feed. Which is a worrying reflection on my browsing habits perhaps.
Michael Gove is responsible for the Online Safety Act and the Afghan coverup, no right thinking journalist should be working for him.
Various stupidities while at Education, plus Brexit, too. For a guy obviously brighter than Boris, he managed little more in the way of judgment.
Also responsible for me having to find storage space for 28 large bags of seasoned logs every time I have delivery because meddlin' mikey Gove wrote a law to ban smaller deliveries.
Odd , on web you can get anything from a bag of kindling to huge crates etc delivered
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
Another of your logic fails.
a) @IanB2 doesn't get paid here, but then neither do you and you post a hell of a lot more.
b) You get paid for writing elsewhere, but then others get paid for doing other stuff elsewhere.
Your point is?
Equally to the point, I don't need to be paid to be travelling about, and have the freedom and time to linger and learn that being on a whistle stop assignment will never offer.
Since he's so sadly money driven, perhaps we could organise a whip round for him to **** off?
I don’t need to be paid. I would travel for free because I love it. But the happy fact is, I DO get paid, indeed sometimes I get paid to do insanely luxurious travel in £6000 a night hotels
It’s dark and lonely work, but someone has to do it. Etc
And had you even average intelligence, insight and understanding, just think what a wise fellow you might have become.
I do sometimes think Would I have had a more fulfilling life and career if I'd gone into a job like what @IanB2 did, accountancy, or quantity surveying, or whatever the fuck it was, and then I think HAHAHAHAHAHAH LOL NO
Rael Braverman resigns from Reform with immediate effect
Do we know why?
I am not aware of the reason but no doubt all will be revealed in due course
Wouldn't William of Ockham be saying "Mr Yusuf dissed Mr Braverman's missus, and it's as simple as that"? Except probably more classily, what with him being a Franciscan friar.
(There is a genuine challenge for Reform here. If they become a home for disillusioned Tories, they can't help but take on some of the blame for the state we are collectively in. If they don't- and I don't think that's the Farage/Yusuf plan and they're probably right to be careful- they risk being horribly short on people capable of running a government.)
A stunning and shameful PMQs. Parliament has been denied its right to scrutinise the government for two years via a constitutionally unprecedented superinjunction. Huge amounts of public money has been spent in secret. 100,000 Afghans put in danger. Did any backbench MP get up and ask the PM about it? Express any outrage as a democratically elected politician? Ask the PM to rule out it ever happening again? No. Not a word. Pathetic.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
" I get paid for my "ceaseless twattish hysteria" " An interesting but unsurprising revelation.
I guess PB.com should be flattered that it is worth flyposting with paid "ceaseless twattish hysteria"
Could speculate on who might be paying with a high degree of certainty, I think.
I’ve never hidden the fact I work for the Knapper’s Gazette, which has surprisingly high rates for a magazine dedicated to the arguably niche world of stone-based artisanal sex toys
Talking of payments, how hard is it to give away free stuff?
I’m trying to give away a solid Oakwood 6 foot John Lewis bookcase. Almost as new. Worth £300 when I bought it maybe more
No takers. It’s free!
I swear to God, you will end up needing somebody to wipe your bottom for you. (Not me)
BHF British Heart Foundation Furniture and Electrical will have a shop near you. Go here: https://www.bhf.org.uk/search?tab=locations Find your local shop Contact them They will take it away from you for free
Gumtree Go here: https://www.gumtree.com/ Create an account Put an entry on there for your bookcase. Charge something like £10 (not free). If it's free they'll want you to deliver it for free. People are bad.
I've got it on Nextdoor, alongside my tumble dryer. The tumble dryer is proving IMMENSELY POPULAR
Chris Mason and Sarah Montague blaming the current Government more than the last and bigging up Reform's claim that the Cons are also a bit guilty, but according to CM & SM Cons NDA was legitimate but continuation since this time last year is a Labour coverup. Pretty much the PB analysis.
In summary, a great day for Reform, a terrible day for Labour and a bit of a meh day for the Tories.
A stunning and shameful PMQs. Parliament has been denied its right to scrutinise the government for two years via a constitutionally unprecedented superinjunction. Huge amounts of public money has been spent in secret. 100,000 Afghans put in danger. Did any backbench MP get up and ask the PM about it? Express any outrage as a democratically elected politician? Ask the PM to rule out it ever happening again? No. Not a word. Pathetic.
We are a debased nation. He's right
I noticed how on NewsAgents that when Lewis G discussed this story, Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis looked DEEPLY uncomfortable, because of course this story plays badly for the Woke liberal left just as it plays badly for the idiotic Tories
My respect for Mr Goodall has soared. He's a proper journalist, the other two are... not
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
Another of your logic fails.
a) @IanB2 doesn't get paid here, but then neither do you and you post a hell of a lot more.
b) You get paid for writing elsewhere, but then others get paid for doing other stuff elsewhere.
Your point is?
Equally to the point, I don't need to be paid to be travelling about, and have the freedom and time to linger and learn that being on a whistle stop assignment will never offer.
Since he's so sadly money driven, perhaps we could organise a whip round for him to **** off?
I don’t need to be paid. I would travel for free because I love it. But the happy fact is, I DO get paid, indeed sometimes I get paid to do insanely luxurious travel in £6000 a night hotels
It’s dark and lonely work, but someone has to do it. Etc
And had you even average intelligence, insight and understanding, just think what a wise fellow you might have become.
I do sometimes think Would I have had a more fulfilling life and career if I'd gone into a job like what @IanB2 did, accountancy, or quantity surveying, or whatever the fuck it was, and then I think HAHAHAHAHAHAH LOL NO
Becoming Karl Pilkington with added booze and without the cameras is hardly an achievement.
To have travelled the world and yet still have the views of someone who has never been more than ten miles from Jaywick is a truly tragic fail.
Rael Braverman resigns from Reform with immediate effect
Do we know why?
I am not aware of the reason but no doubt all will be revealed in due course
Wouldn't William of Ockham be saying "Mr Yusuf dissed Mr Braverman's missus, and it's as simple as that"? Except probably more classily, what with him being a Franciscan friar.
(There is a genuine challenge for Reform here. If they become a home for disillusioned Tories, they can't help but take on some of the blame for the state we are collectively in. If they don't- and I don't think that's the Farage/Yusuf plan and they're probably right to be careful- they risk being horribly short on people capable of running a government.)
Rael was posting yesterday 'next 24 hours will be interesting' and ticking clocks. Maybe somethings about to come out, but plenty of 'talk' about dissatisfaction with Yusuf behind the scenes. Farage has been very quiet on the scandal. A short video response and a retweet of Tices article
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
Another of your logic fails.
a) @IanB2 doesn't get paid here, but then neither do you and you post a hell of a lot more.
b) You get paid for writing elsewhere, but then others get paid for doing other stuff elsewhere.
Your point is?
Equally to the point, I don't need to be paid to be travelling about, and have the freedom and time to linger and learn that being on a whistle stop assignment will never offer.
Since he's so sadly money driven, perhaps we could organise a whip round for him to **** off?
I don’t need to be paid. I would travel for free because I love it. But the happy fact is, I DO get paid, indeed sometimes I get paid to do insanely luxurious travel in £6000 a night hotels
It’s dark and lonely work, but someone has to do it. Etc
And had you even average intelligence, insight and understanding, just think what a wise fellow you might have become.
I do sometimes think Would I have had a more fulfilling life and career if I'd gone into a job like what @IanB2 did, accountancy, or quantity surveying, or whatever the fuck it was, and then I think HAHAHAHAHAHAH LOL NO
Becoming Karl Pilkington with added booze and without the cameras is hardly an achievement.
To have travelled the world and yet still have the views of someone who has never been more than ten miles from Jaywick is a truly tragic fail.
What was it you did? Chartered management or something? Widget supply analysis? Now you wander the world, tragically alone, trafficking your dog across borders like the Humbert Humbert of pet husbandry
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
Another of your logic fails.
a) @IanB2 doesn't get paid here, but then neither do you and you post a hell of a lot more.
b) You get paid for writing elsewhere, but then others get paid for doing other stuff elsewhere.
Your point is?
Equally to the point, I don't need to be paid to be travelling about, and have the freedom and time to linger and learn that being on a whistle stop assignment will never offer.
Since he's so sadly money driven, perhaps we could organise a whip round for him to **** off?
I don’t need to be paid. I would travel for free because I love it. But the happy fact is, I DO get paid, indeed sometimes I get paid to do insanely luxurious travel in £6000 a night hotels
It’s dark and lonely work, but someone has to do it. Etc
And had you even average intelligence, insight and understanding, just think what a wise fellow you might have become.
I do sometimes think Would I have had a more fulfilling life and career if I'd gone into a job like what @IanB2 did, accountancy, or quantity surveying, or whatever the fuck it was, and then I think HAHAHAHAHAHAH LOL NO
Becoming Karl Pilkington with added booze and without the cameras is hardly an achievement.
To have travelled the world and yet still have the views of someone who has never been more than ten miles from Jaywick is a truly tragic fail.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
Another of your logic fails.
a) @IanB2 doesn't get paid here, but then neither do you and you post a hell of a lot more.
b) You get paid for writing elsewhere, but then others get paid for doing other stuff elsewhere.
Your point is?
Equally to the point, I don't need to be paid to be travelling about, and have the freedom and time to linger and learn that being on a whistle stop assignment will never offer.
Since he's so sadly money driven, perhaps we could organise a whip round for him to **** off?
I don’t need to be paid. I would travel for free because I love it. But the happy fact is, I DO get paid, indeed sometimes I get paid to do insanely luxurious travel in £6000 a night hotels
It’s dark and lonely work, but someone has to do it. Etc
And had you even average intelligence, insight and understanding, just think what a wise fellow you might have become.
I do sometimes think Would I have had a more fulfilling life and career if I'd gone into a job like what @IanB2 did, accountancy, or quantity surveying, or whatever the fuck it was, and then I think HAHAHAHAHAHAH LOL NO
Becoming Karl Pilkington with added booze and without the cameras is hardly an achievement.
To have travelled the world and yet still have the views of someone who has never been more than ten miles from Jaywick is a truly tragic fail.
What was it you did? Chartered management or something? Widget supply analysis? Now you wander the world, tragically alone, trafficking your dog across borders like the Humbert Humbert of pet husbandry
Michael Gove is responsible for the Online Safety Act and the Afghan coverup, no right thinking journalist should be working for him.
Various stupidities while at Education, plus Brexit, too. For a guy obviously brighter than Boris, he managed little more in the way of judgment.
Also responsible for me having to find storage space for 28 large bags of seasoned logs every time I have delivery because meddlin' mikey Gove wrote a law to ban smaller deliveries.
You could get firewood by the bookcase from Leon...
Rael Braverman resigns from Reform with immediate effect
Do we know why?
I am not aware of the reason but no doubt all will be revealed in due course
Wouldn't William of Ockham be saying "Mr Yusuf dissed Mr Braverman's missus, and it's as simple as that"? Except probably more classily, what with him being a Franciscan friar.
(There is a genuine challenge for Reform here. If they become a home for disillusioned Tories, they can't help but take on some of the blame for the state we are collectively in. If they don't- and I don't think that's the Farage/Yusuf plan and they're probably right to be careful- they risk being horribly short on people capable of running a government.)
Occam's razor goes too far for comfort. The simplest, least entity filled explanation for everything is that the only existent is the experience of the experiencer. No need for a Yusuf or any Bravermen to be real at all. As his successors including Descartes, Berkeley, Hume and Kant all noticed.
Rael Braverman resigns from Reform with immediate effect
Do we know why?
I am not aware of the reason but no doubt all will be revealed in due course
Wouldn't William of Ockham be saying "Mr Yusuf dissed Mr Braverman's missus, and it's as simple as that"? Except probably more classily, what with him being a Franciscan friar.
(There is a genuine challenge for Reform here. If they become a home for disillusioned Tories, they can't help but take on some of the blame for the state we are collectively in. If they don't- and I don't think that's the Farage/Yusuf plan and they're probably right to be careful- they risk being horribly short on people capable of running a government.)
Rael was posting yesterday 'next 24 hours will be interesting' and ticking clocks. Maybe somethings about to come out, but plenty of 'talk' about dissatisfaction with Yusuf behind the scenes. Farage has been very quiet on the scandal. A short video response and a retweet of Tices article
But the video was impressive, marred only by a little partisan sniping at the end
He delivered a punchy analysis better than anyone, in 2 minutes. He is good at this shit
Rael Braverman resigns from Reform with immediate effect
Do we know why?
I am not aware of the reason but no doubt all will be revealed in due course
Wouldn't William of Ockham be saying "Mr Yusuf dissed Mr Braverman's missus, and it's as simple as that"? Except probably more classily, what with him being a Franciscan friar.
(There is a genuine challenge for Reform here. If they become a home for disillusioned Tories, they can't help but take on some of the blame for the state we are collectively in. If they don't- and I don't think that's the Farage/Yusuf plan and they're probably right to be careful- they risk being horribly short on people capable of running a government.)
Would bringing on board people who were fairly recently Conservative ministers actually help with a shortage of people capable of running a government, do you think?
Rael Braverman resigns from Reform with immediate effect
Do we know why?
I am not aware of the reason but no doubt all will be revealed in due course
Wouldn't William of Ockham be saying "Mr Yusuf dissed Mr Braverman's missus, and it's as simple as that"? Except probably more classily, what with him being a Franciscan friar.
(There is a genuine challenge for Reform here. If they become a home for disillusioned Tories, they can't help but take on some of the blame for the state we are collectively in. If they don't- and I don't think that's the Farage/Yusuf plan and they're probably right to be careful- they risk being horribly short on people capable of running a government.)
Rael was posting yesterday 'next 24 hours will be interesting' and ticking clocks. Maybe somethings about to come out, but plenty of 'talk' about dissatisfaction with Yusuf behind the scenes. Farage has been very quiet on the scandal. A short video response and a retweet of Tices article
But the video was impressive, marred only by a little partisan sniping at the end
He delivered a punchy analysis better than anyone, in 2 minutes. He is good at this shit
The video is fine. Id just expect him to have been more visible on this - an editorial maybe
Afghan story currently ninth most read story on the BBC news website.
Beaten by Emma Watson, Trans, an advert bring banned, hosepipe ban, inflation.
Not surprised. It has some of the qualities of a story which is important and depressing (see Leon passim on this) but doesn't have the quality of going anywhere interesting or engaging or empathetic. I can't see the next 10 installments of this one, nor the counter full of popcorn.
For good or ill Afghanistan remains a far away country of which we know little. All we know is that we should never have gone near it either in the 19th century or the 21st.
Starmer got a bit lucky with the rebellion over welfare cuts. Imagine if a couple of weeks after voting to take £5bn off disabled people, it came out they had agreed £7bn for thr Afghan scheme.
Would Healey and Hoyle suffice, or do you need Starmer too? Fantastic opportunity for your team. Will Kemi take the win?
Why does Healey have to go?
Because he's sat on the story for a year, and (for now) appears to have continued to approve the super injunction. He certainly needs to explain himself better than he has so far.
As much as it makes me self-loathe I have to defend Healey if the advice he was getting from civil servants and/or government lawyers was along the lines of “you need to keep this super injunction and shell out loads of money or people will die” then what else is he supposed to do? Is he supposed to say “sorry guys, I know much more about the situation in my one year in charge than you do and I know the law better than government lawyers so drop it now”?
We get angry about the idea of Ministers making decisions based on their own prejudices or interests and ignoring advice so if Healey has followed what he can only consider the best advice then he can’t be blamed.
What is vital is that, if the advice from CC and legal was to continue (to both parties over the period) then how do we avoid bad advice, is there independent oversight etc to stop such a situation in the future.
No no no
The government as recently as June was eager to maintain the super injunction and indeed EXPAND the scheme to even more Afghans. Thus spending £7bn at least
They also connived in keeping the figures out of the ONS migration stats and it was the Labour government that decided to deliberately lie to the public, in the Commons, as to why all these afghans are arriving. They wanted to set a “false narrative”
This was one reason the judge lost his cool and decided it had all gone too far. Absolutely outrageous contempt for electors and democracy and a sacking offence in itself
What the F are you doing defending these people. They all need to go
I’m not defending these people, it’s a shit show by both parties but it also makes me wonder about the effects/power of legal and civil service advice over democratically elected politicians and will be interested what comes out.
If you are a minister/government and your own lawyers are telling you that you really have to continue doing something for important legal reasons the are you going to just pull the pin and say “bollocks I’m going public whatever the legal implications”?
BTW the minister said on Today that the figures weren’t kept out of the immigrations Stats and the reporter was wrong - brave move and resigning matter (hahaha) if he is lying.
I’d wager money he’s lying - in some form
Your defence of these people is pitiful and grotesque
I'll wager money your numbers are balls too.
But I’m the one quoting the judge in the transcript. Who seems the only reliable actor here. All the other numbers - which vary wildly from £400m to £800m to £2bn to £7bn to £10bn (and up) come from politicians with an agenda, and we KNOW these people are lying. They admitted it. “We want to set a false narrative as cover”
Why is the judge's number authoritative in any sense ? He has no powers of audit, and no more information than he has been given, so it's a number which came second hand from the politicians whose numbers you don't believe. He can clearly speak with authority on the legal position, but has little more idea than do you on what this is costing.
FWIW, the cost estimate for this particular mess is around an order of magnitude less https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8zy78787o The government also revealed on Tuesday: The MoD believes 600 Afghan soldiers included in the leak, plus 1,800 of their family members, are still in Afghanistan The scheme is being closed down, but relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan will be honoured The secret scheme - officially called the Afghan Relocation Route - has cost £400m so far, and is expected to cost a further £400m to £450m The breach was committed mistakenly by an unnamed official at the MoD People whose details were leaked were only informed on Tuesday
As I noted upthread, the sensible way to deal with this is for the PAC to get to work and ferret out the actual numbers.
Your syllogism "everyone is lying, so I am right" is a load of nonsense.
And yet you blindly trust the new numbers given by a government which ADMITS IT IS LYING ON THIS EXACT ISSUE
You’re never the smartest but this is a new level of intellectual mediocrity
Are you seriously of such low IQ that you're incapable of comprehending some quite simple posts of mine ?
I've repeatedly said that the only way to get to the true figures is for them to be ferreted out. The Commons Pubic Accounts Committee is one of the better bodies for the task, as it has a pretty good record, and won't take a dozen years to get a result. I'm entirely open to better suggestions, of which you have produced ... approximately zero.
Get them in court and sling them all in jail. For a long long time. But first sack the woke lawyers and judges so we make sure the courts are hard and fair - but hard
I’m done with “inquiries” and “committees” and all this self serving, bullshitting nonsense where no one ever pays a price for anything. The Nu10k. They all need to be in prison; they are destroying the country and they seem to be doing it deliberately. They cannot even defend our beaches from invaders
I want a revolution (peaceful, please). I want to see lots of pro politicians facing 20 year jail terms. I want to tear it all down and start again. I’m done
Yes, you just want a Leon dictatorship. You keep your fantasies; the rest of us will struggle on.
His ceaseless twattish hysteria enlightens no-one and is just tiresome. We just know that whatever is next week's story will also be the worst thing ever and also presage the end of times, rinsed and repeated over and over until Farage doesn't become prime minister in four years time ...
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
Another of your logic fails.
a) @IanB2 doesn't get paid here, but then neither do you and you post a hell of a lot more.
b) You get paid for writing elsewhere, but then others get paid for doing other stuff elsewhere.
Your point is?
Equally to the point, I don't need to be paid to be travelling about, and have the freedom and time to linger and learn that being on a whistle stop assignment will never offer.
Since he's so sadly money driven, perhaps we could organise a whip round for him to **** off?
I don’t need to be paid. I would travel for free because I love it. But the happy fact is, I DO get paid, indeed sometimes I get paid to do insanely luxurious travel in £6000 a night hotels
It’s dark and lonely work, but someone has to do it. Etc
And had you even average intelligence, insight and understanding, just think what a wise fellow you might have become.
I do sometimes think Would I have had a more fulfilling life and career if I'd gone into a job like what @IanB2 did, accountancy, or quantity surveying, or whatever the fuck it was, and then I think HAHAHAHAHAHAH LOL NO
Becoming Karl Pilkington with added booze and without the cameras is hardly an achievement.
To have travelled the world and yet still have the views of someone who has never been more than ten miles from Jaywick is a truly tragic fail.
What was it you did? Chartered management or something? Widget supply analysis? Now you wander the world, tragically alone, trafficking your dog across borders like the Humbert Humbert of pet husbandry
Do you think this is a life well spent?
I used to want to be a travel writer. It was based on reading a lot of Bill Bryson as a teenager. I thought I could quite happily travel the world experiencing different places and stringing the process out into amusing doggerel. It struck me as both agreeable and conducive to my skillset. Then I started reading more widely and it struck me that most travel writers seem to go to places rather more challenging than Belgium or Maine, and have to actually write creatively about those places rather than just their thoughts on the idiosyncrasies of the lifts or the peculiarities of the individuals along the way, and my enthusiasm and self-belief dwindled.
Comments
Sceptical interlocutors who understand numbers, and have some power to compel evidence, are harder to fool.
Einstein, madness, definition thereof
DOGE, in the US, is making sure that actual reform and improvement in the budget will be put off for decades.
Blaming the rest of us for your poor choices might make you feel better, but it's otherwise unproductive.
Suggests an Almighty opposition to Reform taking over.
I’ve just realised i can do that AND post on here
I still think we are owed a reasoned account of how Reform are going to make it all better without burning our house down.
On the other hand, I get paid for my “ ceaseless twattish hysteria” and you DON’T get paid for your bizarre if touching dog-based sex travelogues
In other news I’ve noticed that my stalker has just published a Spectator article comparing the British to hillbillies. The man pilfers without shame
Actually he wasn't as fuming as I thought he would be when I made an unsubtle probing aside about Afghanistan.
'I suppose they didn't have much choice to protect people' but 'pretty convenient shitty way to avoid embarrassment'
In terms of impact - he was MUCH more irate about the Mini budget fallout, and he tends to be exercised about stuff that shifts the dial. Mind you, Chagos was tantamount to upskirting the late Queen to him
I dunno, I think this might push the Tories down to 15% and fourth in some polls and Labour to 20%, or maybe their crapulence is already priced in??
It won't be dull. Part of me wants them to win (though I think the chance is fairly low) just to see how they deal with the reality.
Reading all his old posts boasting about prostitution, drugs, and travel I was obligated under the Online Safety Act to report that to the authorities.
The poor fecker will never be allowed to leave the UK.
Time it for when he's out of the country, he'd never have been able to come back.
If the Online Safety act obligated you to report him for boasts about those things then we are in a very very worrying world.
If it didn’t actually obligate you but you did then, well, we’re on a very worrying site.
I guess PB.com should be flattered that it is worth flyposting with paid "ceaseless twattish hysteria"
Could speculate on who might be paying with a high degree of certainty, I think.
Talking of payments, how hard is it to give away free stuff?
I’m trying to give away a solid Oakwood 6 foot John Lewis bookcase. Almost as new. Worth £300 when I bought it maybe more
No takers. It’s free!
Rael Braverman resigns from Reform with immediate effect
IANAE but do any governments issue 'inflation proof bonds' at the moment. Or recently?
This is the local mainline station, post £6.75 million spent to make it accessible for the first time in 31 years. Generally it is good, and most welcome - about 7/10.
Here however, is the wheelchair ramp from the car park to the station building area, complete with bollards at a 90cm spacing which forces a good chunk of mobility aids to use the car park entrance on the right where there are hundreds of car movements every day. It should be 1.5m by Govt Guidance. Network Rail are ... not the best.
(The station building is like some of the Network South East ones - 1970s CLASP system, which is designed to be resilient to subsidence.)
Nigel loves Zia
Ditto people who post similar on WhatsApp groups/social media.
It maybe The Editor of the Spectator may have been responsible for the most draconian piece of legislation in living memory and then some.
You can see why some sites have shut down completely.
Another Osborne “clever idea”
Tell me I’m wrong, for the NHS….
1) decade long process to increase the training of NHS staff to exceed 100% of requirements.
2) reform of staffing to eliminate agency working almost completely.
3) reform working practises so that there is stability in the staff-patient relationship. See 2)
4) incremental roll out of systems connecting the patients to the various parts of their care - so the home visit team can find out if the patient has been discharged. As a start.
5) do the changes via internalising consultancy and process change rather than another KPMG project
6)….
This might end up saving money.
Canadian unemployment down to 6.9%. Was expected to be 7.1%.
Trump is blasting away at the USA's feet with high caibre weaponry. The world economy is pivoting away from America - and fast.
Scrutiny? No time for that
a) @IanB2 doesn't get paid here, but then neither do you and you post a hell of a lot more.
b) You get paid for writing elsewhere, but then others get paid for doing other stuff elsewhere.
Your point is?
Of all of the classes of 2010 and 2016, he has somehow survived with his reputation relatively intact.
I'm happy to oblige your appeal for advice on the finer points of grammar.
In 2016 he rightly said Boris Johnson was unfit to be PM then three years later he made Boris Johnson Prime Minister.
The reality is this: In the olden days Year Nought people like Napoleon, William the Conqueror and various fascists and marxists could break stuff and reset. But there's a price for all this they were willing to pay. The death of millions of peasants or young men in wars was simply collateral damage and all fine.
Not even Reform's supporters are going to accept that style of reset, the sort Mao did in China.
So the ship of Theseus has to be repaired while at sea in a heavy storm. You can't stop paying pensions and running an NHS and close all the schools and let out all the prisoners while you fix it.
It's bureaucratic and incremental. Reform have not yet set out their costed and sane bureaucratic and incremental aspirations and plans. I cannot take them seriously until they do. Boring but true.
money. If you were really evil you could simply lift clever phrases, slogans, insights
As I say I would never do this, I have integrity, but I’m afraid few have my intrinsic sense of honour
The Base, a far-right group with suspected links to Russia, said killing of Ivan Voronych was ‘only the beginning’
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jul/16/the-base-terrorist-group-ukraine-assassination
Trump is perhaps partly responsible.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/05/the-base-neo-nazi-russia-ukraine
...The Base, which has a web of cells all over the world, was founded in 2018 and became the subject of a relentless FBI counter-terrorism investigation that led to several arrests and world governments officially designating it as a terrorist organization.
Now, with the Trump administration pulling the FBI from pursuing the far right, the Base, left unchecked, is trying to export its violence abroad.
This is the first time the Base has openly allied itself with the Kremlin’s broader geopolitical goals, a sudden change experts say signals its likely involvement in Russian sabotage and propaganda operations now being carried out across Europe.
The Base founder and leader, Rinaldo Nazzaro, a semi-defected American who worked with US special forces during the war on terror and now lives in Saint Petersburg, has for years garnered suspicions of being a Russian intelligence asset. Even members of the Base mused that he was a spy and grew wary of the source of his cash flow...
I did this recently with an unwanted chair. Someone took the note but left the chair!
Since he's so sadly money driven, perhaps we could organise a whip round for him to **** off?
It’s dark and lonely work, but someone has to do it. Etc
If this is going to be a Reform-action/revolution then it needs to be the real deal, as far as possible
The British government learnt of the data leak in August 2023.
24k Afghans secretly granted asylum, costing British taxpayers up to £7 billion.
The government covered it up.
Who was in government?
Home Secretary: Suella Braverman
Immigration Minister: Robert Jenrick
https://x.com/ZiaYusufUK/status/1945140968690266573
Beaten by Emma Watson, Trans, an advert bring banned, hosepipe ban, inflation.
The whole thing remains deeply mysterious
The only thing I remember being a bit different was the climate on non-EU immigration, because the Tory press was busy indulging the government of the time.
BHF
British Heart Foundation Furniture and Electrical will have a shop near you.
Go here: https://www.bhf.org.uk/search?tab=locations
Find your local shop
Contact them
They will take it away from you for free
Gumtree
Go here: https://www.gumtree.com/
Create an account
Put an entry on there for your bookcase. Charge something like £10 (not free). If it's free they'll want you to deliver it for free. People are bad.
It is also the headline political news on Guardian, Telegraph, Times and Mail
So your prediction, yesterday, that it would be "gone by tomorrow" was well wide of the mark
Kemi addressing the 1922 at 5pm might be connected.........
Its all going swimmingly
(There is a genuine challenge for Reform here. If they become a home for disillusioned Tories, they can't help but take on some of the blame for the state we are collectively in. If they don't- and I don't think that's the Farage/Yusuf plan and they're probably right to be careful- they risk being horribly short on people capable of running a government.)
A stunning and shameful PMQs. Parliament has been denied its right to scrutinise the government for two years via a constitutionally unprecedented superinjunction. Huge amounts of public money has been spent in secret. 100,000 Afghans put in danger. Did any backbench MP get up and ask the PM about it? Express any outrage as a democratically elected politician? Ask the PM to rule out it ever happening again? No. Not a word. Pathetic.
Not so the bookcase
Oooh, wait, a nibble
In summary, a great day for Reform, a terrible day for Labour and a bit of a meh day for the Tories.
I noticed how on NewsAgents that when Lewis G discussed this story, Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis looked DEEPLY uncomfortable, because of course this story plays badly for the Woke liberal left just as it plays badly for the idiotic Tories
My respect for Mr Goodall has soared. He's a proper journalist, the other two are... not
To have travelled the world and yet still have the views of someone who has never been more than ten miles from Jaywick is a truly tragic fail.
Farage has been very quiet on the scandal. A short video response and a retweet of Tices article
Do you think this is a life well spent?
He delivered a punchy analysis better than anyone, in 2 minutes. He is good at this shit
For good or ill Afghanistan remains a far away country of which we know little. All we know is that we should never have gone near it either in the 19th century or the 21st.
Then I started reading more widely and it struck me that most travel writers seem to go to places rather more challenging than Belgium or Maine, and have to actually write creatively about those places rather than just their thoughts on the idiosyncrasies of the lifts or the peculiarities of the individuals along the way, and my enthusiasm and self-belief dwindled.