Good news for Farage/bad news for Badenoch, it looks like Suella Braverman won't be defecting

System · July 16

Good news for Farage and bad news for Badenoch, it looks like Suella Braverman won't be defecting to Reform – politicalbetting.com

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 BravermanImmigration Minister: Robert Jenrick

Read the full story here

mwadams · July 16

What if they are a party made up of failed Tory politicians like Sir Jake Berry, Suella Braverman, Liz Truss, and so on and so forth?

eek · July 16

It’s going to be interesting to watch Reform try and run a Government when every minister (both junior and cabinet) have not run anything more than a county council at best

Chancellor Darren Grimes is going to learn a lot very quickly

TheScreamingEagles · July 16

mwadams said:
What if they are a party made up of failed Tory politicians like Sir Jake Berry, Suella Braverman, Liz Truss, and so on and so forth?

They aren’t going to bring in new ideas just the old failed ones.

Leon · July 16

OK so that actually worked a treat

Nextdoor

Advertised free bookcase at 1.20pm, gone by 2.15pm

Nice guy took it for his daughter. Mukesh. Told me his dad used to own and run Gohills, the famous artisan cobblers on Camden High Street, cited by Pink Floyd in the Wall

Leon · July 16

I agree with this take. Reform need to be new and exciting to achieve the Reform-ation. Too many Tory retreads will ruin the brand

Mao didn 't reach the top by hiring ex-imperial eunuchs

Hitler didn't need Hindenberg

Farage is learning from the best

wooliedyed · July 16

Number 10 claiming Starmer was 'angry' when he found out about the data breach. So angry he continued to cover it up for 12 months whilst increasing funding for the scheme set up.
Hes such a fecking toad

numbertwelve · July 16

eek said:
It’s going to be interesting to watch Reform try and run a Government when every minister (both junior and cabinet) have not run anything more than a county council at best

Chancellor Darren Grimes is going to learn a lot very quickly

I’m not particularly convinced that our current crop of well-established Commons politicians make tremendous ministers, either, to be fair, simply by virtue of being in the political game for a while.

I suspect Farage will make a big deal of getting candidates from business etc to stand to try and get a leadership team together.

(That is not to say that I expect the calibre of Reform candidates to be high!)

IanB2 · July 16

FPT

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:
.
Leon said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

boulay said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
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?
'tragically alone' - Do you never read what you write? Does it come as a surprise to you if you read it after you have typed it?

Yes, I could remind Leon of my history, and he’d have to apologise again, but there’s really no need.

What doesn’t seem to have occurred to him is that I am having a go because he is uniquely and particularly ignorant, stupid, and tiresome.

Whereas the attacks he’s throwing back - based on his not having a regular job, about his having lots of money, and of being somehow special because of his contacts or prominence - are generic comments that reveal not only what he thinks of me but what he thinks of pretty much every PB’er. Those other few here who do have money or contacts or prominence have far more class than to keep harping on about it, and enough maturity to know that such things never settle an argument.

Fairliered · July 16

Everyone assumes Reform will only get defections from the Tories. If Labour carry on as they are, they could get some Labour defections before the next election.

Mexicanpete · July 16

Leon said:
OK so that actually worked a treat

Nextdoor

Advertised free bookcase at 1.20pm, gone by 2.15pm

Nice guy took it for his daughter. Mukesh. Told me his dad used to own and run Gohills, the famous artisan cobblers on Camden High Street, cited by Pink Floyd in the Wall

Your life really is a life of celebrity! Or is that anecdote just cobblers?

Battlebus · July 16

TSE is on the money but by nature, politicians will jump on any passing bandwagon to get elected. Reform just happen to be passing by (on their way to?).

Leon · July 16

IanB2 said:
FPT

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:
.
Leon said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

boulay said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
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?
'tragically alone' - Do you never read what you write? Does it come as a surprise to you if you read it after you have typed it?
Yes, I could remind Leon of my history, and he’d have to apologise again, but there’s really no need.

What doesn’t seem to have occurred to him is that I am having a go because he is uniquely and particularly ignorant, stupid, and tiresome.

Whereas the attacks he’s throwing back - based on his not having a regular job, about his having lots of money, and of being somehow special because of his contacts or prominence - are generic comments that reveal not only what he thinks of me but what he thinks of pretty much every PB’er. Those other few here who do have money or contacts or prominence have far more class than to keep harping on about it, and enough maturity to know that such things never settle an argument.

No, I simply do all this to wind you up

After umpteen years of my posting on here, I'd have thought my modus would now be quite clear, but maybe you are genuinely too dim to get it. I get bored easily, I come on here to joust. Is all

Also it keeps me sharp. Like a verbal work out. And sometimes I say stuff and think Oooh, not bad, worth keeping

eg I may reuse my description of you as "the Humbert Humbert of pet husbandry, trafficking his terrified dog across frontiers" somewhere else: it's nice, and also it's accurate about you and your weirdo lifestyle

SandyRentool · July 16

On Sky News, there has just been an advert for Christmas trees.

And they dare to criticise the BBC!

Leon · July 16

Mexicanpete said:

Leon said:
OK so that actually worked a treat

Nextdoor

Advertised free bookcase at 1.20pm, gone by 2.15pm

Nice guy took it for his daughter. Mukesh. Told me his dad used to own and run Gohills, the famous artisan cobblers on Camden High Street, cited by Pink Floyd in the Wall
Your life really is a life of celebrity! Or is that anecdote just cobblers?

No, true, he seemed chuffed that I recalled the song and the reference

Anyway, I have tarried here too long. Radiators don't prime themselves

In I go

IanB2 · July 16

Leon said:

IanB2 said:
FPT

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:
.
Leon said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

boulay said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
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?
'tragically alone' - Do you never read what you write? Does it come as a surprise to you if you read it after you have typed it?
Yes, I could remind Leon of my history, and he’d have to apologise again, but there’s really no need.

What doesn’t seem to have occurred to him is that I am having a go because he is uniquely and particularly ignorant, stupid, and tiresome.

Whereas the attacks he’s throwing back - based on his not having a regular job, about his having lots of money, and of being somehow special because of his contacts or prominence - are generic comments that reveal not only what he thinks of me but what he thinks of pretty much every PB’er. Those other few here who do have money or contacts or prominence have far more class than to keep harping on about it, and enough maturity to know that such things never settle an argument.
No, I simply do all this to wind you up

After umpteen years of my posting on here, I'd have thought my modus would now be quite clear, but maybe you are genuinely too dim to get it. I get bored easily, I come on here to joust. Is all

Also it keeps me sharp. Like a verbal work out.

Do I seem wound up?

I suggest you need to spend a lot more time down the gym….

SandyRentool · July 16

mwadams said:
What if they are a party made up of failed Tory politicians like Sir Jake Berry, Suella Braverman, Liz Truss, and so on and so forth?

Then we'd have two parties made up of failed Tory politicians.

Leon · July 16

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:
FPT

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:
.
Leon said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

boulay said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
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?
'tragically alone' - Do you never read what you write? Does it come as a surprise to you if you read it after you have typed it?
Yes, I could remind Leon of my history, and he’d have to apologise again, but there’s really no need.

What doesn’t seem to have occurred to him is that I am having a go because he is uniquely and particularly ignorant, stupid, and tiresome.

Whereas the attacks he’s throwing back - based on his not having a regular job, about his having lots of money, and of being somehow special because of his contacts or prominence - are generic comments that reveal not only what he thinks of me but what he thinks of pretty much every PB’er. Those other few here who do have money or contacts or prominence have far more class than to keep harping on about it, and enough maturity to know that such things never settle an argument.
No, I simply do all this to wind you up

After umpteen years of my posting on here, I'd have thought my modus would now be quite clear, but maybe you are genuinely too dim to get it. I get bored easily, I come on here to joust. Is all

Also it keeps me sharp. Like a verbal work out.
Do I seem wound up?

I suggest you need to spend a lot more time down the gym….

Why did you snip out the rest of my comment, Mister Not Very Wound Up?

IanB2 · July 16

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:
FPT

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:
.
Leon said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

boulay said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
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?
'tragically alone' - Do you never read what you write? Does it come as a surprise to you if you read it after you have typed it?
Yes, I could remind Leon of my history, and he’d have to apologise again, but there’s really no need.

What doesn’t seem to have occurred to him is that I am having a go because he is uniquely and particularly ignorant, stupid, and tiresome.

Whereas the attacks he’s throwing back - based on his not having a regular job, about his having lots of money, and of being somehow special because of his contacts or prominence - are generic comments that reveal not only what he thinks of me but what he thinks of pretty much every PB’er. Those other few here who do have money or contacts or prominence have far more class than to keep harping on about it, and enough maturity to know that such things never settle an argument.
No, I simply do all this to wind you up

After umpteen years of my posting on here, I'd have thought my modus would now be quite clear, but maybe you are genuinely too dim to get it. I get bored easily, I come on here to joust. Is all

Also it keeps me sharp. Like a verbal work out.
Do I seem wound up?

I suggest you need to spend a lot more time down the gym….
Why did you snip out the rest of my comment, Mister Not Very Wound Up?

Because it was just padding.

Leon · July 16

Leon said:

IanB2 said:
FPT

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:
.
Leon said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

boulay said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
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?
'tragically alone' - Do you never read what you write? Does it come as a surprise to you if you read it after you have typed it?
Yes, I could remind Leon of my history, and he’d have to apologise again, but there’s really no need.

What doesn’t seem to have occurred to him is that I am having a go because he is uniquely and particularly ignorant, stupid, and tiresome.

Whereas the attacks he’s throwing back - based on his not having a regular job, about his having lots of money, and of being somehow special because of his contacts or prominence - are generic comments that reveal not only what he thinks of me but what he thinks of pretty much every PB’er. Those other few here who do have money or contacts or prominence have far more class than to keep harping on about it, and enough maturity to know that such things never settle an argument.
No, I simply do all this to wind you up

After umpteen years of my posting on here, I'd have thought my modus would now be quite clear, but maybe you are genuinely too dim to get it. I get bored easily, I come on here to joust. Is all

Also it keeps me sharp. Like a verbal work out. And sometimes I say stuff and think Oooh, not bad, worth keeping

eg I may reuse my description of you as "the Humbert Humbert of pet husbandry, trafficking his terrified dog across frontiers" somewhere else: it's nice, and also it's accurate about you and your weirdo lifestyle

OK who flagged this. lol

Leon · July 16

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:
FPT

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:
.
Leon said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

boulay said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
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?
'tragically alone' - Do you never read what you write? Does it come as a surprise to you if you read it after you have typed it?
Yes, I could remind Leon of my history, and he’d have to apologise again, but there’s really no need.

What doesn’t seem to have occurred to him is that I am having a go because he is uniquely and particularly ignorant, stupid, and tiresome.

Whereas the attacks he’s throwing back - based on his not having a regular job, about his having lots of money, and of being somehow special because of his contacts or prominence - are generic comments that reveal not only what he thinks of me but what he thinks of pretty much every PB’er. Those other few here who do have money or contacts or prominence have far more class than to keep harping on about it, and enough maturity to know that such things never settle an argument.
No, I simply do all this to wind you up

After umpteen years of my posting on here, I'd have thought my modus would now be quite clear, but maybe you are genuinely too dim to get it. I get bored easily, I come on here to joust. Is all

Also it keeps me sharp. Like a verbal work out.
Do I seem wound up?

I suggest you need to spend a lot more time down the gym….
Why did you snip out the rest of my comment, Mister Not Very Wound Up?

Because it was just padding.

You carefully cut it out

And then you flagged it

Malmesbury · July 16

Mexicanpete said:

Leon said:
OK so that actually worked a treat

Nextdoor

Advertised free bookcase at 1.20pm, gone by 2.15pm

Nice guy took it for his daughter. Mukesh. Told me his dad used to own and run Gohills, the famous artisan cobblers on Camden High Street, cited by Pink Floyd in the Wall
Your life really is a life of celebrity! Or is that anecdote just cobblers?

Don’t be a snob

IanB2 · July 16

Leon said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:
FPT

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:
.
Leon said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

boulay said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
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?
'tragically alone' - Do you never read what you write? Does it come as a surprise to you if you read it after you have typed it?
Yes, I could remind Leon of my history, and he’d have to apologise again, but there’s really no need.

What doesn’t seem to have occurred to him is that I am having a go because he is uniquely and particularly ignorant, stupid, and tiresome.

Whereas the attacks he’s throwing back - based on his not having a regular job, about his having lots of money, and of being somehow special because of his contacts or prominence - are generic comments that reveal not only what he thinks of me but what he thinks of pretty much every PB’er. Those other few here who do have money or contacts or prominence have far more class than to keep harping on about it, and enough maturity to know that such things never settle an argument.
No, I simply do all this to wind you up

After umpteen years of my posting on here, I'd have thought my modus would now be quite clear, but maybe you are genuinely too dim to get it. I get bored easily, I come on here to joust. Is all

Also it keeps me sharp. Like a verbal work out. And sometimes I say stuff and think Oooh, not bad, worth keeping

eg I may reuse my description of you as "the Humbert Humbert of pet husbandry, trafficking his terrified dog across frontiers" somewhere else: it's nice, and also it's accurate about you and your weirdo lifestyle
OK who flagged this. lol

At a guess, someone (other than me) bright enough to have spotted that you clearly don’t know what husbandry means?

Dura_Ace · July 16

numbertwelve said:

eek said:
It’s going to be interesting to watch Reform try and run a Government when every minister (both junior and cabinet) have not run anything more than a county council at best

Chancellor Darren Grimes is going to learn a lot very quickly

eek said:
It’s going to be interesting to watch Reform try and run a Government when every minister (both junior and cabinet) have not run anything more than a county council at best

Chancellor Darren Grimes is going to learn a lot very quickly
I’m not particularly convinced that our current crop of well-established Commons politicians make tremendous ministers, either, to be fair, simply by virtue of being in the political game for a while.

I suspect Farage will make a big deal of getting candidates from business etc to stand to try and get a leadership team together.

This is true. The Fukker cabinet is going to be staffed with Prigozhin type ancaps not cock eyed chav councillors from some dank estuarine fastness in England's East.

Leon · July 16

wooliedyed said:
Number 10 claiming Starmer was 'angry' when he found out about the data breach. So angry he continued to cover it up for 12 months whilst increasing funding for the scheme set up.
Hes such a fecking toad

It is the most egregious and insulting shite. He was in all the Cabinet meetings when they agreed to keep the super injunction, and appeal against it being lifted, and he was there when the Cabinet voted to expand the scheme, and he was there when they decided to deliberately lie to the Commons, to the media, to the people, to "cover it up" with a "false narrative"

Now he is "angrily surprised"

He plumbs new depths, daily

IanB2 · July 16

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:
FPT

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:
.
Leon said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

boulay said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
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?
'tragically alone' - Do you never read what you write? Does it come as a surprise to you if you read it after you have typed it?
Yes, I could remind Leon of my history, and he’d have to apologise again, but there’s really no need.

What doesn’t seem to have occurred to him is that I am having a go because he is uniquely and particularly ignorant, stupid, and tiresome.

Whereas the attacks he’s throwing back - based on his not having a regular job, about his having lots of money, and of being somehow special because of his contacts or prominence - are generic comments that reveal not only what he thinks of me but what he thinks of pretty much every PB’er. Those other few here who do have money or contacts or prominence have far more class than to keep harping on about it, and enough maturity to know that such things never settle an argument.
No, I simply do all this to wind you up

After umpteen years of my posting on here, I'd have thought my modus would now be quite clear, but maybe you are genuinely too dim to get it. I get bored easily, I come on here to joust. Is all

Also it keeps me sharp. Like a verbal work out.
Do I seem wound up?

I suggest you need to spend a lot more time down the gym….
Why did you snip out the rest of my comment, Mister Not Very Wound Up?

Because it was just padding.
You carefully cut it out

And then you flagged it

To respond to a particular point or reference in an earlier post, it often helps to trim.

And no, I didn’t flag it.

williamglenn · July 16

Dura_Ace said:

numbertwelve said:

eek said:
It’s going to be interesting to watch Reform try and run a Government when every minister (both junior and cabinet) have not run anything more than a county council at best

Chancellor Darren Grimes is going to learn a lot very quickly

eek said:
It’s going to be interesting to watch Reform try and run a Government when every minister (both junior and cabinet) have not run anything more than a county council at best

Chancellor Darren Grimes is going to learn a lot very quickly
I’m not particularly convinced that our current crop of well-established Commons politicians make tremendous ministers, either, to be fair, simply by virtue of being in the political game for a while.

I suspect Farage will make a big deal of getting candidates from business etc to stand to try and get a leadership team together.

This is true. The Fukker cabinet is going to be staffed with Prigozhin type ancaps not cock eyed chav councillors from some dank estuarine fastness in England's East.

Who will be our Tom Homan?

Leon · July 16

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:
FPT

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:
.
Leon said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

boulay said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
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?
'tragically alone' - Do you never read what you write? Does it come as a surprise to you if you read it after you have typed it?
Yes, I could remind Leon of my history, and he’d have to apologise again, but there’s really no need.

What doesn’t seem to have occurred to him is that I am having a go because he is uniquely and particularly ignorant, stupid, and tiresome.

Whereas the attacks he’s throwing back - based on his not having a regular job, about his having lots of money, and of being somehow special because of his contacts or prominence - are generic comments that reveal not only what he thinks of me but what he thinks of pretty much every PB’er. Those other few here who do have money or contacts or prominence have far more class than to keep harping on about it, and enough maturity to know that such things never settle an argument.
No, I simply do all this to wind you up

After umpteen years of my posting on here, I'd have thought my modus would now be quite clear, but maybe you are genuinely too dim to get it. I get bored easily, I come on here to joust. Is all

Also it keeps me sharp. Like a verbal work out. And sometimes I say stuff and think Oooh, not bad, worth keeping

eg I may reuse my description of you as "the Humbert Humbert of pet husbandry, trafficking his terrified dog across frontiers" somewhere else: it's nice, and also it's accurate about you and your weirdo lifestyle
OK who flagged this. lol
At a guess, someone (other than me) bright enough to have spotted that you clearly don’t know what husbandry means?

OED:

Husbandry, /ˈhʌzb(ə)ndri/, [noun], 3. acting like a husband towards, or taking sexual possession of, a domestic animal, eg a frightened hound in Scandinavia

Scott_xP · July 16

@Geri_E_L_Scott

Excl: Sir Keir Starmer is having a clear out of MPs he believes to have committed "persistent breaches of party discipline". Multiple sources tell me at least three MPs have so far lost the whip - with more to come this afternoon.

williamglenn · July 16

The predicted massive inflation as a result of Trump's tariffs is failing to materialise.

https://x.com/KathyJones/status/1945462769068679170

June’s PPI came in below expectations with headline and core rising by 2.3% and 2.5%, respectively, on a year/year basis.

Leon · July 16

Scott_xP said:
@Geri_E_L_Scott

Excl: Sir Keir Starmer is having a clear out of MPs he believes to have committed "persistent breaches of party discipline". Multiple sources tell me at least three MPs have so far lost the whip - with more to come this afternoon.

Ooer. Big Keir with his Scary Stick

IanB2 · July 16

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:
FPT

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:
.
Leon said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

boulay said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
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?
'tragically alone' - Do you never read what you write? Does it come as a surprise to you if you read it after you have typed it?
Yes, I could remind Leon of my history, and he’d have to apologise again, but there’s really no need.

What doesn’t seem to have occurred to him is that I am having a go because he is uniquely and particularly ignorant, stupid, and tiresome.

Whereas the attacks he’s throwing back - based on his not having a regular job, about his having lots of money, and of being somehow special because of his contacts or prominence - are generic comments that reveal not only what he thinks of me but what he thinks of pretty much every PB’er. Those other few here who do have money or contacts or prominence have far more class than to keep harping on about it, and enough maturity to know that such things never settle an argument.
No, I simply do all this to wind you up

After umpteen years of my posting on here, I'd have thought my modus would now be quite clear, but maybe you are genuinely too dim to get it. I get bored easily, I come on here to joust. Is all

Also it keeps me sharp. Like a verbal work out. And sometimes I say stuff and think Oooh, not bad, worth keeping

eg I may reuse my description of you as "the Humbert Humbert of pet husbandry, trafficking his terrified dog across frontiers" somewhere else: it's nice, and also it's accurate about you and your weirdo lifestyle
OK who flagged this. lol
At a guess, someone (other than me) bright enough to have spotted that you clearly don’t know what husbandry means?
OED:

Husbandry, /ˈhʌzb(ə)ndri/, [noun], 3. acting like a husband towards, or taking sexual possession of, a domestic animal, eg a frightened hound in Scandinavia

QED

Twat

Leon · July 16

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:
FPT

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:
.
Leon said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

boulay said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
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?
'tragically alone' - Do you never read what you write? Does it come as a surprise to you if you read it after you have typed it?
Yes, I could remind Leon of my history, and he’d have to apologise again, but there’s really no need.

What doesn’t seem to have occurred to him is that I am having a go because he is uniquely and particularly ignorant, stupid, and tiresome.

Whereas the attacks he’s throwing back - based on his not having a regular job, about his having lots of money, and of being somehow special because of his contacts or prominence - are generic comments that reveal not only what he thinks of me but what he thinks of pretty much every PB’er. Those other few here who do have money or contacts or prominence have far more class than to keep harping on about it, and enough maturity to know that such things never settle an argument.
No, I simply do all this to wind you up

After umpteen years of my posting on here, I'd have thought my modus would now be quite clear, but maybe you are genuinely too dim to get it. I get bored easily, I come on here to joust. Is all

Also it keeps me sharp. Like a verbal work out. And sometimes I say stuff and think Oooh, not bad, worth keeping

eg I may reuse my description of you as "the Humbert Humbert of pet husbandry, trafficking his terrified dog across frontiers" somewhere else: it's nice, and also it's accurate about you and your weirdo lifestyle
OK who flagged this. lol
At a guess, someone (other than me) bright enough to have spotted that you clearly don’t know what husbandry means?
OED:

Husbandry, /ˈhʌzb(ə)ndri/, [noun], 3. acting like a husband towards, or taking sexual possession of, a domestic animal, eg a frightened hound in Scandinavia
QED

Twat

*smiles contentedly*

Job done

algarkirk · July 16

eek said:
It’s going to be interesting to watch Reform try and run a Government when every minister (both junior and cabinet) have not run anything more than a county council at best

Chancellor Darren Grimes is going to learn a lot very quickly

Are Reform prepared to answer really simple questions about how they would actually govern, given that they are sure that everything is terrible, and sure they can fix it.

Take a really simple one: Do they plan in the fifth year of the Reform government (2033-4 or 2034-5 perhaps) for TME to be lower than it is now as % of GDP, the same, or more. And roughly how much more or less?

JohnLilburne · July 16

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:
FPT

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:
.
Leon said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

boulay said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
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?
'tragically alone' - Do you never read what you write? Does it come as a surprise to you if you read it after you have typed it?
Yes, I could remind Leon of my history, and he’d have to apologise again, but there’s really no need.

What doesn’t seem to have occurred to him is that I am having a go because he is uniquely and particularly ignorant, stupid, and tiresome.

Whereas the attacks he’s throwing back - based on his not having a regular job, about his having lots of money, and of being somehow special because of his contacts or prominence - are generic comments that reveal not only what he thinks of me but what he thinks of pretty much every PB’er. Those other few here who do have money or contacts or prominence have far more class than to keep harping on about it, and enough maturity to know that such things never settle an argument.
No, I simply do all this to wind you up

After umpteen years of my posting on here, I'd have thought my modus would now be quite clear, but maybe you are genuinely too dim to get it. I get bored easily, I come on here to joust. Is all

Also it keeps me sharp. Like a verbal work out. And sometimes I say stuff and think Oooh, not bad, worth keeping

eg I may reuse my description of you as "the Humbert Humbert of pet husbandry, trafficking his terrified dog across frontiers" somewhere else: it's nice, and also it's accurate about you and your weirdo lifestyle
OK who flagged this. lol
At a guess, someone (other than me) bright enough to have spotted that you clearly don’t know what husbandry means?

Meaning #5 seems to cover it, with an example relating to tortoises husbandry - Wiktionary, the free dictionary https://share.google/IqptyF9RSiBGZRCxq

OldKingCole · July 16

Dura_Ace said:

numbertwelve said:

eek said:
It’s going to be interesting to watch Reform try and run a Government when every minister (both junior and cabinet) have not run anything more than a county council at best

Chancellor Darren Grimes is going to learn a lot very quickly

eek said:
It’s going to be interesting to watch Reform try and run a Government when every minister (both junior and cabinet) have not run anything more than a county council at best

Chancellor Darren Grimes is going to learn a lot very quickly
I’m not particularly convinced that our current crop of well-established Commons politicians make tremendous ministers, either, to be fair, simply by virtue of being in the political game for a while.

I suspect Farage will make a big deal of getting candidates from business etc to stand to try and get a leadership team together.

This is true. The Fukker cabinet is going to be staffed with Prigozhin type ancaps not cock eyed chav councillors from some dank estuarine fastness in England's East.

Hey, that's my backstory. Mind, I think I could do (have done, got to accept it) a better job in government than many I could name, especially recently.

wooliedyed · July 16

Leon said:

Scott_xP said:
@Geri_E_L_Scott

Excl: Sir Keir Starmer is having a clear out of MPs he believes to have committed "persistent breaches of party discipline". Multiple sources tell me at least three MPs have so far lost the whip - with more to come this afternoon.
Ooer. Big Keir with his Scary Stick

Dried fruitists!

Mexicanpete · July 16

Malmesbury said:

Mexicanpete said:

Leon said:
OK so that actually worked a treat

Nextdoor

Advertised free bookcase at 1.20pm, gone by 2.15pm

Nice guy took it for his daughter. Mukesh. Told me his dad used to own and run Gohills, the famous artisan cobblers on Camden High Street, cited by Pink Floyd in the Wall
Your life really is a life of celebrity! Or is that anecdote just cobblers?
Don’t be a snob

I wasn't.

Scott_xP · July 16

@mikeysmith

For a guy who wants everyone to shut up about Jeffrey Epstein, Trump sure is talking about Jeffrey Epstein a lot.

https://x.com/mikeysmith/status/1945481222747984234

eek · July 16

Leon said:

Scott_xP said:
@Geri_E_L_Scott

Excl: Sir Keir Starmer is having a clear out of MPs he believes to have committed "persistent breaches of party discipline". Multiple sources tell me at least three MPs have so far lost the whip - with more to come this afternoon.
Ooer. Big Keir with his Scary Stick

I think it’s more - let’s force Corbyn to create his new left left wing party and see how things play out

eek · July 16

OldKingCole said:

Dura_Ace said:

numbertwelve said:

eek said:
It’s going to be interesting to watch Reform try and run a Government when every minister (both junior and cabinet) have not run anything more than a county council at best

Chancellor Darren Grimes is going to learn a lot very quickly

eek said:
It’s going to be interesting to watch Reform try and run a Government when every minister (both junior and cabinet) have not run anything more than a county council at best

Chancellor Darren Grimes is going to learn a lot very quickly
I’m not particularly convinced that our current crop of well-established Commons politicians make tremendous ministers, either, to be fair, simply by virtue of being in the political game for a while.

I suspect Farage will make a big deal of getting candidates from business etc to stand to try and get a leadership team together.

This is true. The Fukker cabinet is going to be staffed with Prigozhin type ancaps not cock eyed chav councillors from some dank estuarine fastness in England's East.
Hey, that's my backstory. Mind, I think I could do (have done, got to accept it) a better job in government than many I could name, especially recently.

To be honest I think any of the posters on here (bar a couple of exceptions) could have done a better job than most cabinet ministers in the past 20 years

And even those exceptions would have done a better job than some cabinet ministers

Leon · July 16

Can you even have a functioning democracy when the government can simply take out a superinjunction to hide a policy that it finds embarrassing, and which it knows will be unpopular, but which nonetheless it wants to enact?

How is that even a democracy any more? A superinjunction means no one is even allowed to mention the policy, worse, no one is even allowed to mention that they're not allowed to mention the policy, on pain of a long jail term. The policy is magically non-existent, and if any rumours get out, HMG can and will just lie in the Commons and lie to the people and slam anyone in prison who dares to question this

And we claim to be a beacon of free speech? Of liberty? The mother of parliaments? The more you look at the Afghan scandal the worse it is. What makes us different from Honecker's East Germany, except they had less litter?

Absolute shame of it all. We are lost

rottenborough · July 16

Leon said:

Scott_xP said:
@Geri_E_L_Scott

Excl: Sir Keir Starmer is having a clear out of MPs he believes to have committed "persistent breaches of party discipline". Multiple sources tell me at least three MPs have so far lost the whip - with more to come this afternoon.
Ooer. Big Keir with his Scary Stick

One party source said the MPs had been suspended for “persistent knobheadery”

Guardian blog

OldKingCole · July 16

eek said:

Leon said:

Scott_xP said:
@Geri_E_L_Scott

Excl: Sir Keir Starmer is having a clear out of MPs he believes to have committed "persistent breaches of party discipline". Multiple sources tell me at least three MPs have so far lost the whip - with more to come this afternoon.
Ooer. Big Keir with his Scary Stick
I think it’s more - let’s force Corbyn to create his new left left wing party and see how things play out

Well he couldn't do a lot worse in government, could he. Personally I laws thought Corbyn was the quintessential opposition politician; bit like the late Michael Foot.
Who also couldn't do a thing right, as far as the Tory press were concerned.

bondegezou · July 16

Ref lead of 6pts
Westminster voting intention

REF: 28% (+2)
LAB: 22% (-2)
CON: 17% (+1)
LDEM: 16% (+1)
GRN: 12% (+1)

via @YouGov
Chgs. w/ 07 Jul

HYUFD · July 16

The civil servant would still have made the data leak error even if Reform were in government. Tjr superinjunction was needed to protect the Afghans identity.

Reform will also need the support of ex Tories like Mr Braverman and Berry for a majority

OldKingCole · July 16

bondegezou said:
Ref lead of 6pts
Westminster voting intention

REF: 28% (+2)
LAB: 22% (-2)
CON: 17% (+1)
LDEM: 16% (+1)
GRN: 12% (+1)

via @YouGov
Chgs. w/ 07 Jul

Just a point or two more from somewhere and the LibDems are ahead of the Tories!

HYUFD · July 16

rottenborough said:

Leon said:

Scott_xP said:
@Geri_E_L_Scott

Excl: Sir Keir Starmer is having a clear out of MPs he believes to have committed "persistent breaches of party discipline". Multiple sources tell me at least three MPs have so far lost the whip - with more to come this afternoon.
Ooer. Big Keir with his Scary Stick

One party source said the MPs had been suspended for “persistent knobheadery”

Guardian blog

Starmer forcing the Corbynites out before they defect anyway

Stuartinromford · July 16

rottenborough said:

Leon said:

Scott_xP said:
@Geri_E_L_Scott

Excl: Sir Keir Starmer is having a clear out of MPs he believes to have committed "persistent breaches of party discipline". Multiple sources tell me at least three MPs have so far lost the whip - with more to come this afternoon.
Ooer. Big Keir with his Scary Stick

One party source said the MPs had been suspended for “persistent knobheadery”

Guardian blog

Put like that- they're not wrong, are they?

(Cue the old joke, I think I first heard it in the Kinnock years, that you can't just expel MPs for being nutters because there would be nobody left.)

My question is whether this is an attempt to bury the Afghanistan story, or intended to be buried in the Afghanistan story.

HYUFD · July 16

Leon said:
Can you even have a functioning democracy when the government can simply take out a superinjunction to hide a policy that it finds embarrassing, and which it knows will be unpopular, but which nonetheless it wants to enact?

How is that even a democracy any more? A superinjunction means no one is even allowed to mention the policy, worse, no one is even allowed to mention that they're not allowed to mention the policy, on pain of a long jail term. The policy is magically non-existent, and if any rumours get out, HMG can and will just lie in the Commons and lie to the people and slam anyone in prison who dares to question this

And we claim to be a beacon of free speech? Of liberty? The mother of parliaments? The more you look at the Afghan scandal the worse it is. What makes us different from Honecker's East Germany, except they had less litter?

Absolute shame of it all. We are lost

You can elect MPs who oppose super injunctions but for now they are lehal

rottenborough · July 16

Aaron Rupar
‪@atrupar.com‬

Trump calls the Epstein scandal “bullshit” and says he no longer wants the support of “weaklings” who care about it

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lu3ki6k2v22a

MarqueeMark · July 16

Fairliered said:
Everyone assumes Reform will only get defections from the Tories. If Labour carry on as they are, they could get some Labour defections before the next election.

Wot, as well as all their voters?

Mexicanpete · July 16

Starmer was hammered by Kemi at PMQs, except she lost the plot a bit by question six.

However, Starmer coming out of the blocks and blaming the Tories for the Afghan fiasco is how that story is now being reported on LBC News on every bulletin. That might be nonsense and it might be entirely his fault but that is not how it is being reported now. Davey also blaming the Tories.

eek · July 16

Stuartinromford said:

rottenborough said:

Leon said:

Scott_xP said:
@Geri_E_L_Scott

Excl: Sir Keir Starmer is having a clear out of MPs he believes to have committed "persistent breaches of party discipline". Multiple sources tell me at least three MPs have so far lost the whip - with more to come this afternoon.
Ooer. Big Keir with his Scary Stick

One party source said the MPs had been suspended for “persistent knobheadery”

Guardian blog
Put like that- they're not wrong, are they?

(Cue the old joke, I think I first heard it in the Kinnock years, that you can't just expel MPs for being nutters because there would be nobody left.)

My question is whether this is an attempt to bury the Afghanistan story, or intended to be buried in the Afghanistan story.

Chucking a few MPs out of the Labour Party isn’t going to be big news so it’s intended to be completely buried by the Afghanistan story

wooliedyed · July 16

Suella comes out swinging
https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/1945481895040442631?t=CQ0aJEKC3CAE4fvLLJ-CTg&s=19

bondegezou · July 16

HYUFD said:
The civil servant would still have made the data leak error even if Reform were in government. Tjr superinjunction was needed to protect the Afghans identity.

Reform will also need the support of ex Tories like Mr Braverman and Berry for a majority

I think that's an important point. Reform UK want to be outsiders and piss off everyone, but you need done allies somewhere.

rottenborough · July 16

wooliedyed said:
Suella comes out swinging
https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/1945481895040442631?t=CQ0aJEKC3CAE4fvLLJ-CTg&s=19

Time to form her own right wing party?

wooliedyed · July 16

rottenborough said:

wooliedyed said:
Suella comes out swinging
https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/1945481895040442631?t=CQ0aJEKC3CAE4fvLLJ-CTg&s=19
Time to form her own right wing party?

I suspect she will try and get back to the top table via Jenrick and bugger off if not

Luckyguy1983 · July 16

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:
FPT

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:
.
Leon said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

boulay said:

Nigelb said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Mexicanpete said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
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?
'tragically alone' - Do you never read what you write? Does it come as a surprise to you if you read it after you have typed it?
Yes, I could remind Leon of my history, and he’d have to apologise again, but there’s really no need.

What doesn’t seem to have occurred to him is that I am having a go because he is uniquely and particularly ignorant, stupid, and tiresome.

Whereas the attacks he’s throwing back - based on his not having a regular job, about his having lots of money, and of being somehow special because of his contacts or prominence - are generic comments that reveal not only what he thinks of me but what he thinks of pretty much every PB’er. Those other few here who do have money or contacts or prominence have far more class than to keep harping on about it, and enough maturity to know that such things never settle an argument.
No, I simply do all this to wind you up

After umpteen years of my posting on here, I'd have thought my modus would now be quite clear, but maybe you are genuinely too dim to get it. I get bored easily, I come on here to joust. Is all

Also it keeps me sharp. Like a verbal work out. And sometimes I say stuff and think Oooh, not bad, worth keeping

eg I may reuse my description of you as "the Humbert Humbert of pet husbandry, trafficking his terrified dog across frontiers" somewhere else: it's nice, and also it's accurate about you and your weirdo lifestyle
OK who flagged this. lol
At a guess, someone (other than me) bright enough to have spotted that you clearly don’t know what husbandry means?
OED:

Husbandry, /ˈhʌzb(ə)ndri/, [noun], 3. acting like a husband towards, or taking sexual possession of, a domestic animal, eg a frightened hound in Scandinavia

Terrier.

Mexicanpete · July 16

wooliedyed said:
Suella comes out swinging
https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/1945481895040442631?t=CQ0aJEKC3CAE4fvLLJ-CTg&s=19

Can I precis?

"I don't believe (or certainly remember) that I was ever in Government.

The elitists running Governments for the last fifteen years (none of which I had any association with) are rubbish! So sod off!"

bondegezou · July 16

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:
The civil servant would still have made the data leak error even if Reform were in government. Tjr superinjunction was needed to protect the Afghans identity.

Reform will also need the support of ex Tories like Mr Braverman and Berry for a majority
I think that's an important point. Reform UK want to be outsiders and piss off everyone, but you need done allies somewhere.

*some, not done

Mexicanpete · July 16

rottenborough said:

wooliedyed said:
Suella comes out swinging
https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/1945481895040442631?t=CQ0aJEKC3CAE4fvLLJ-CTg&s=19
Time to form her own right wing party?

What about a Suella- Corbyn dream ticket? Hoovering up votes from the far left and far right of British politics.

LostPassword · July 16

Leon said:
Can you even have a functioning democracy when the government can simply take out a superinjunction to hide a policy that it finds embarrassing, and which it knows will be unpopular, but which nonetheless it wants to enact?

How is that even a democracy any more? A superinjunction means no one is even allowed to mention the policy, worse, no one is even allowed to mention that they're not allowed to mention the policy, on pain of a long jail term. The policy is magically non-existent, and if any rumours get out, HMG can and will just lie in the Commons and lie to the people and slam anyone in prison who dares to question this

And we claim to be a beacon of free speech? Of liberty? The mother of parliaments? The more you look at the Afghan scandal the worse it is. What makes us different from Honecker's East Germany, except they had less litter?

Absolute shame of it all. We are lost

I do not expect you to go to prison for this comment, thus invalidating your argument.

wooliedyed · July 16

Lol Starmer suspends 3 of his new intake from 2024

Dura_Ace · July 16

rottenborough said:

wooliedyed said:
Suella comes out swinging
https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/1945481895040442631?t=CQ0aJEKC3CAE4fvLLJ-CTg&s=19
Time to form her own right wing party?

The feasibility of that will depend on whether there are any good org.uk domains starting with 'Re' left.

williamglenn · July 16

Dura_Ace said:

rottenborough said:

wooliedyed said:
Suella comes out swinging
https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/1945481895040442631?t=CQ0aJEKC3CAE4fvLLJ-CTg&s=19
Time to form her own right wing party?
The feasibility of that will depend on whether there are any good org.uk domains starting with 'Re' left.

https://reinvigorate.org.uk/

wooliedyed · July 16

Brian Leishman, Chris Hinchliff and Neil Duncan-Jordan are the boys suspended from games this week

MaxPB · July 16

rottenborough said:

Aaron Rupar
‪@atrupar.com‬

Trump calls the Epstein scandal “bullshit” and says he no longer wants the support of “weaklings” who care about it

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lu3ki6k2v22a

The MAGA coalition is fracturing very badly over this issue, lots of people who supported Trump not just for the release of the Epstein documents but on anti-woke, anti-DEI are turning their backs on MAGA. I think they see this as a sell out too far. It's got everything in it they hate, a Jewish banker paedophile, very powerful people all over the world implicated, multiple cover up attempts, Trump winning them over on the basis of being transparent and now becoming part of the globalist establishment covering it up.

He's gone from "we're going to release the names in full" to "we're investigating the list" to "what list, there is no list" to "oh that list, nothing to see on it really, honest". To millions of MAGA voters this is the last straw.

Stuartinromford · July 16

Dura_Ace said:

rottenborough said:

wooliedyed said:
Suella comes out swinging
https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/1945481895040442631?t=CQ0aJEKC3CAE4fvLLJ-CTg&s=19
Time to form her own right wing party?
The feasibility of that will depend on whether there are any good org.uk domains starting with 'Re' left.

looks like Repent is still available.

Ideal for former ministers who want to distance themselves from their 2019-24 records.

wooliedyed · July 16

Rachel Maskell currently in with whips and may also be suspended

Mexicanpete · July 16

wooliedyed said:
Lol Starmer suspends 3 of his new intake from 2024

If the Tories had turned Pincher, Parish and several others into independents before they misbehaved they would not have caused the Conservatives the heartache they did.

Starmer hedging his bets.

Battlebus · July 16

rottenborough said:

wooliedyed said:
Suella comes out swinging
https://x.com/SuellaBraverman/status/1945481895040442631?t=CQ0aJEKC3CAE4fvLLJ-CTg&s=19
Time to form her own right wing party?

The Braver Man Party?

malcolmg · July 16

williamglenn said:
The predicted massive inflation as a result of Trump's tariffs is failing to materialise.

https://x.com/KathyJones/status/1945462769068679170

June’s PPI came in below expectations with headline and core rising by 2.3% and 2.5%, respectively, on a year/year basis.

he has not put any tariffs on yet, keeps kicking them down the road

rottenborough · July 16

wooliedyed said:
Rachel Maskell currently in with whips and may also be suspended

She called for mass increased migration the other day iirc.

Got to be gone.

Stuartinromford · July 16

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

Aaron Rupar
‪@atrupar.com‬

Trump calls the Epstein scandal “bullshit” and says he no longer wants the support of “weaklings” who care about it

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lu3ki6k2v22a
The MAGA coalition is fracturing very badly over this issue, lots of people who supported Trump not just for the release of the Epstein documents but on anti-woke, anti-DEI are turning their backs on MAGA. I think they see this as a sell out too far. It's got everything in it they hate, a Jewish banker paedophile, very powerful people all over the world implicated, multiple cover up attempts, Trump winning them over on the basis of being transparent and now becoming part of the globalist establishment covering it up.

He's gone from "we're going to release the names in full" to "we're investigating the list" to "what list, there is no list" to "oh that list, nothing to see on it really, honest". To millions of MAGA voters this is the last straw.

How does that matter, though?

Either Trump isn't running again (in which case, what does he care what the voters think), or he is running again (which, given how much he would have to bend the constitution to do so, means that the next election will be pretty phoney-baloney in which case what does he care what the voters think).

Remember his 2016 comment about shooting someone in Fifth Avenue? Then it was swagger, now it's a governing principle. And he's pretty much spot-on.

rottenborough · July 16

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

Aaron Rupar
‪@atrupar.com‬

Trump calls the Epstein scandal “bullshit” and says he no longer wants the support of “weaklings” who care about it

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lu3ki6k2v22a
The MAGA coalition is fracturing very badly over this issue, lots of people who supported Trump not just for the release of the Epstein documents but on anti-woke, anti-DEI are turning their backs on MAGA. I think they see this as a sell out too far. It's got everything in it they hate, a Jewish banker paedophile, very powerful people all over the world implicated, multiple cover up attempts, Trump winning them over on the basis of being transparent and now becoming part of the globalist establishment covering it up.

He's gone from "we're going to release the names in full" to "we're investigating the list" to "what list, there is no list" to "oh that list, nothing to see on it really, honest". To millions of MAGA voters this is the last straw.

Hope so.

OldKingCole · July 16

malcolmg said:

williamglenn said:
The predicted massive inflation as a result of Trump's tariffs is failing to materialise.

https://x.com/KathyJones/status/1945462769068679170

June’s PPI came in below expectations with headline and core rising by 2.3% and 2.5%, respectively, on a year/year basis.
he has not put any tariffs on yet, keeps kicking them down the road

Not just repeated threats, though, is it. Some tariffs have been imposed.
You wouldn't want to do business with the wretched country ATM, would you. My son's firm would increase production there, but QC of the finished product is, apparently, a problem. Product made elsewhere, not China, is much better.

rottenborough · July 16

‪Aaron Rupar‬
‪@atrupar.com‬
· 9m

Q: Is it the position of the Trump administration that every single one of the 320,000 undocumented immigrants working on farms should be deported?

KRISTI NOEM: There aren't going to be any safe places

wooliedyed · July 16

rottenborough said:

wooliedyed said:
Rachel Maskell currently in with whips and may also be suspended
She called for mass increased migration the other day iirc.

Got to be gone.

That video was from 2015 I believe

Dura_Ace · July 16

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

Aaron Rupar
‪@atrupar.com‬

Trump calls the Epstein scandal “bullshit” and says he no longer wants the support of “weaklings” who care about it

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lu3ki6k2v22a
The MAGA coalition is fracturing very badly over this issue, lots of people who supported Trump not just for the release of the Epstein documents but on anti-woke, anti-DEI are turning their backs on MAGA. I think they see this as a sell out too far. It's got everything in it they hate, a Jewish banker paedophile, very powerful people all over the world implicated, multiple cover up attempts, Trump winning them over on the basis of being transparent and now becoming part of the globalist establishment covering it up.

He's gone from "we're going to release the names in full" to "we're investigating the list" to "what list, there is no list" to "oh that list, nothing to see on it really, honest". To millions of MAGA voters this is the last straw.

Just DJT running errands for Netanyahu as usual.

IanB2 · July 16

wooliedyed said:
Lol Starmer suspends 3 of his new intake from 2024

The luxury of a large majority.

I know someone who went through Labour’s approval process to be a candidate, and apparently you effectively have to make a promise of unconditional loyalty, and promise never to rebel, in order to make it through. Which of course enables them later to expel you for the slightest infringement.

numbertwelve · July 16

IDK, I thought Starmer was playing cynical but smart politics by getting ahead of the Tories on the Afghanistan story, only to then make a new headline by removing the whip from people. Seems a bit foolish.

glw · July 16

Scott_xP said:
@mikeysmith

For a guy who wants everyone to shut up about Jeffrey Epstein, Trump sure is talking about Jeffrey Epstein a lot.

https://x.com/mikeysmith/status/1945481222747984234

He's now calling it a "hoax" which decoded into English means that it is broadly true and ought to lead to criminal investigations and charges. Other hoaxes include the 2016 Russian election interference with GOP coordination, and the January 6th 2021 coup attempt.

kinabalu · July 16

Stuartinromford said:

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

Aaron Rupar
‪@atrupar.com‬

Trump calls the Epstein scandal “bullshit” and says he no longer wants the support of “weaklings” who care about it

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lu3ki6k2v22a
The MAGA coalition is fracturing very badly over this issue, lots of people who supported Trump not just for the release of the Epstein documents but on anti-woke, anti-DEI are turning their backs on MAGA. I think they see this as a sell out too far. It's got everything in it they hate, a Jewish banker paedophile, very powerful people all over the world implicated, multiple cover up attempts, Trump winning them over on the basis of being transparent and now becoming part of the globalist establishment covering it up.

He's gone from "we're going to release the names in full" to "we're investigating the list" to "what list, there is no list" to "oh that list, nothing to see on it really, honest". To millions of MAGA voters this is the last straw.
How does that matter, though?

Either Trump isn't running again (in which case, what does he care what the voters think), or he is running again (which, given how much he would have to bend the constitution to do so, means that the next election will be pretty phoney-baloney in which case what does he care what the voters think).

Remember his 2016 comment about shooting someone in Fifth Avenue? Then it was swagger, now it's a governing principle. And he's pretty much spot-on.

Indeed. So some of the Maga crazies have at long last realised that Trump is about only Trump - whoopidoo. I'd be excited about it if we could enter a time machine and flip back to before the election but we cannot. We're as we were. He's in and he's trashing the place.

Foss · July 16

wooliedyed said:
Rachel Maskell currently in with whips and may also be suspended

If she ends up going Corbyn then that might make the inner York seat interesting for the first time since the 90s.

williamglenn · July 16

kinabalu said:

Stuartinromford said:

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

Aaron Rupar
‪@atrupar.com‬

Trump calls the Epstein scandal “bullshit” and says he no longer wants the support of “weaklings” who care about it

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lu3ki6k2v22a
The MAGA coalition is fracturing very badly over this issue, lots of people who supported Trump not just for the release of the Epstein documents but on anti-woke, anti-DEI are turning their backs on MAGA. I think they see this as a sell out too far. It's got everything in it they hate, a Jewish banker paedophile, very powerful people all over the world implicated, multiple cover up attempts, Trump winning them over on the basis of being transparent and now becoming part of the globalist establishment covering it up.

He's gone from "we're going to release the names in full" to "we're investigating the list" to "what list, there is no list" to "oh that list, nothing to see on it really, honest". To millions of MAGA voters this is the last straw.
How does that matter, though?

Either Trump isn't running again (in which case, what does he care what the voters think), or he is running again (which, given how much he would have to bend the constitution to do so, means that the next election will be pretty phoney-baloney in which case what does he care what the voters think).

Remember his 2016 comment about shooting someone in Fifth Avenue? Then it was swagger, now it's a governing principle. And he's pretty much spot-on.
Indeed. So some of the Maga crazies have at long last realised that Trump is about only Trump - whoopidoo. I'd be excited about it if we could enter a time machine and flip back to before the election but we cannot. We're as we were. He's in and he's trashing the place.

When will the MAGA crazies cotton on to the association between Epstein and the British ambassador?

Mexicanpete · July 16

numbertwelve said:
IDK, I thought Starmer was playing cynical but smart politics by getting ahead of the Tories on the Afghanistan story, only to then make a new headline by removing the whip from people. Seems a bit foolish.

It's called "burying bad news".

wooliedyed · July 16

numbertwelve said:
IDK, I thought Starmer was playing cynical but smart politics by getting ahead of the Tories on the Afghanistan story, only to then make a new headline by removing the whip from people. Seems a bit foolish.

Perhaps some of the hinted other injunctions can less easily be put at the Tory door and he's trying to move the cycle on?

Taz · July 16

The mostly peaceful Israeli Army attack the Syrian presidential palace

https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1945471179352899673?s=61

Taz · July 16

Foss said:

wooliedyed said:
Rachel Maskell currently in with whips and may also nbe suspended
If she ends up going Corbyn then that might make the inner York seat interesting for the first time since the 90s.

Do most of the students live there ?

Taz · July 16

Dura_Ace said:

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

Aaron Rupar
‪@atrupar.com‬

Trump calls the Epstein scandal “bullshit” and says he no longer wants the support of “weaklings” who care about it

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lu3ki6k2v22a
The MAGA coalition is fracturing very badly over this issue, lots of people who supported Trump not just for the release of the Epstein documents but on anti-woke, anti-DEI are turning their backs on MAGA. I think they see this as a sell out too far. It's got everything in it they hate, a Jewish banker paedophile, very powerful people all over the world implicated, multiple cover up attempts, Trump winning them over on the basis of being transparent and now becoming part of the globalist establishment covering it up.

He's gone from "we're going to release the names in full" to "we're investigating the list" to "what list, there is no list" to "oh that list, nothing to see on it really, honest". To millions of MAGA voters this is the last straw.
Just DJT running errands for Netanyahu as usual.

I misread that as DLT.

williamglenn · July 16

Taz said:
The mostly peaceful Israeli Army attack the Syrian presidential palace

https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1945471179352899673?s=61

There have been reports that the Syrian Defense Minister was killed.

IanB2 · July 16

Foss said:

wooliedyed said:
Rachel Maskell currently in with whips and may also be suspended
If she ends up going Corbyn then that might make the inner York seat interesting for the first time since the 90s.

Guardian reporting she is gone

Daveyboy1961 · July 16

Taz said:

Dura_Ace said:

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

Aaron Rupar
‪@atrupar.com‬

Trump calls the Epstein scandal “bullshit” and says he no longer wants the support of “weaklings” who care about it

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lu3ki6k2v22a
The MAGA coalition is fracturing very badly over this issue, lots of people who supported Trump not just for the release of the Epstein documents but on anti-woke, anti-DEI are turning their backs on MAGA. I think they see this as a sell out too far. It's got everything in it they hate, a Jewish banker paedophile, very powerful people all over the world implicated, multiple cover up attempts, Trump winning them over on the basis of being transparent and now becoming part of the globalist establishment covering it up.

He's gone from "we're going to release the names in full" to "we're investigating the list" to "what list, there is no list" to "oh that list, nothing to see on it really, honest". To millions of MAGA voters this is the last straw.
Just DJT running errands for Netanyahu as usual.
I misread that as DLT.

Not quite the hairy happening.

wooliedyed · July 16

Looks like Maskell also gone.
More of a problem i think, ex shadow cabibet, has a lot more pull in the party than the new boys. Blows his 'i listened' shit out of the water on welfare as hes now meting out beatings

Taz · July 16

williamglenn said:

Taz said:
The mostly peaceful Israeli Army attack the Syrian presidential palace

https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1945471179352899673?s=61
There have been reports that the Syrian Defense Minister was killed.

I’m sure it’s totally justifiable and not at all unreasonable.

IanB2 said:

Foss said:

wooliedyed said:
Rachel Maskell currently in with whips and may also be suspended
If she ends up going Corbyn then that might make the inner York seat interesting for the first time since the 90s.
Guardian reporting she is gone

Nadia Whittome next please !

IanB2 · July 16

Taz said:

williamglenn said:

Taz said:
The mostly peaceful Israeli Army attack the Syrian presidential palace

https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1945471179352899673?s=61
There have been reports that the Syrian Defense Minister was killed.
I’m sure it’s totally justifiable and not at all unreasonable.
IanB2 said:

Foss said:

wooliedyed said:
Rachel Maskell currently in with whips and may also be suspended
If she ends up going Corbyn then that might make the inner York seat interesting for the first time since the 90s.
Guardian reporting she is gone
Nadia Whittome next please !

For those who know they are almost certainly one term wonders, being expelled could be seen as something of a liberation

williamglenn · July 16

wooliedyed said:
Looks like Maskell also gone.
More of a problem i think, ex shadow cabibet, has a lot more pull in the party than the new boys. Blows his 'i listened' shit out of the water on welfare as hes now meting out beatings

Number 10 comms all over the place again:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y7zqdwzqyo

Senior Labour sources have not ruled out further MPs, including from earlier parliamentary intakes, being suspended later today.

Duncan-Jordan, Leishman and Hinchliff were all elected as Labour MPs for the first time last year.

It is not yet known specifically why the three MPs have lost the party whip, but the move comes after 47 Labour MPs rebelled against the government's proposed cuts to welfare and forced ministers to water down their plans.

numbertwelve · July 16

wooliedyed said:
Looks like Maskell also gone.
More of a problem i think, ex shadow cabibet, has a lot more pull in the party than the new boys. Blows his 'i listened' shit out of the water on welfare as hes now meting out beatings

All a bit odd.

Not sure how it helps party unity, or in trying to minimise the damage of the possible New Jezza Front.

OldKingCole · July 16

IanB2 said:

wooliedyed said:
Lol Starmer suspends 3 of his new intake from 2024
The luxury of a large majority.

I know someone who went through Labour’s approval process to be a candidate, and apparently you effectively have to make a promise of unconditional loyalty, and promise never to rebel, in order to make it through. Which of course enables them later to expel you for the slightest infringement.

A fingers crossed behind the back job, I think. Do they have to swear on the Manifesto?

Foss · July 16

Taz said:

Foss said:

wooliedyed said:
Rachel Maskell currently in with whips and may also nbe suspended
If she ends up going Corbyn then that might make the inner York seat interesting for the first time since the 90s.
Do most of the students live there ?

A good number of them. But there are also a number of ex-council estates (Kingsway, Tanghall) that might be tricker for her to peel away to a Corbyn party.

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Categories

Good news for Farage/bad news for Badenoch, it looks like Suella Braverman won't be defecting

Comments