So he is accued of embezzling best part of £40k a year. Say £60k a year earnings to generate that.
His wife must have thought him VERY lucky on the lottery.
I just can’t believe a control freak like Sturgeon didn’t know what her husband was doing.
Be interesting to know if this 450k may have been from the 'ring fenced for indyref 2' account. From the charge sheet it appears Mr Murrell has been accused of taking money over an extended period, 12 years rather than a matter of months. I'm not surprised there were questions asked of the party treasurer, odd if he hadnt noticed any money missing.
12 years and no one else in the party noticed?
The Indy supporters in the SNP were sidelined after 2014. The Sturgeonites that took over the party didn’t care about the Indyref account. Independence is a distraction from trans, net zero, etc.
In addition, everyone else at the top of the SNP was being blocked from seeing the party accounts.
But they are published by the Electoral Commission. Who presumably got false returns indicating that money had been spent in ways that was inaccurate.
I honestly have no explanation for any of this, apart from a bunch of money vanished and a number of people behaved in completely inexplicable ways.
It will make a fascinating book - perhaps Robert Harris could write it.
The only thing I can think of is that the SNP (or Murrell) was operating an undeclared slush fund of undeclared donations that Murrell was able to dip in and out of when the need arose and then dipped into these funds for his own benefit. There was some speculation that such a fund had been used to keep the membership figures somewhat higher than they really were. I simply don't understand how this could possibly occur over such a period with the regulated money within the SNP.
A curious experience - the man at one of the local corner shops has just told me you will need a UK Passport to get benefits from now on.
Is this right? Some might say "too right, me old china" while others might take a more nuanced view.
I must confess I've never given it much thought - I assume for instance those with ILDR or with settled status (as EU citizens) can apply for such benefits. I don't know how many of my Tamil neighbours from South India or Sri Lanka hold UK passports in addition to their country of birth.
Sounds a sensible idea.
As others have pointed out, there's no requirement for a British-born person to own a passport unless they travel abroad. Are you suggesting anyone who hasn't travelled abroad shouldn't have access to any benefits so a 67-year old who has always been in Britain all his or her life would be denied a pension?
Given the context I suspect the shopkeeper meant “British citizenship” when he said “passport” rather than the specific document
It seems that many UK Muslims feel increasingly unsafe, with large minorities planning to leave
This is disastrous. What can we do?!
It's awful that anyone should feel unsafe in their own country. Shame on the pedders of hate who have made this happen. And of course if it's Muslims today it'll be somebody else next. This is how fascists operate and it's why they have to be confronted always.
It seems that many UK Muslims feel increasingly unsafe, with large minorities planning to leave
This is disastrous. What can we do?!
It's awful that anyone should feel unsafe in their own country. Shame on the pedders of hate who have made this happen. And of course if it's Muslims today it'll be somebody else next. This is how fascists operate and it's why they have to be confronted always.
First they came for the Jews…
Then they came for the cliché mongers and I was fine about it.
Never kissed a Tory, her T-shirt proclaimed. Didn’t have the heart to tell her.
Love your Avatar
Reminds me of my days in Edinburgh City Police [early 1965] and my box at Tollcross
It was unbelievably cold pounding the streets on the night shift in February
Thank you. I’m Leith-bound mostly these days.
I did wonder if your handle was a reference to the great TV show which first appeared, as an Armchair Cinema, in the seventies .
Ah Regan and Carter. No, more prosaic than that.
As an LFC fan, it actually hurt when I had to register on the hibs website so i could buy tickets to take my daughter to Easter Rd. she’s a proper Leither, not like this aging Scouser.
So he is accued of embezzling best part of £40k a year. Say £60k a year earnings to generate that.
His wife must have thought him VERY lucky on the lottery.
I just can’t believe a control freak like Sturgeon didn’t know what her husband was doing.
Be interesting to know if this 450k may have been from the 'ring fenced for indyref 2' account. From the charge sheet it appears Mr Murrell has been accused of taking money over an extended period, 12 years rather than a matter of months. I'm not surprised there were questions asked of the party treasurer, odd if he hadnt noticed any money missing.
12 years and no one else in the party noticed?
The Indy supporters in the SNP were sidelined after 2014. The Sturgeonites that took over the party didn’t care about the Indyref account. Independence is a distraction from trans, net zero, etc.
In addition, everyone else at the top of the SNP was being blocked from seeing the party accounts.
But they are published by the Electoral Commission. Who presumably got false returns indicating that money had been spent in ways that was inaccurate.
I honestly have no explanation for any of this, apart from a bunch of money vanished and a number of people behaved in completely inexplicable ways.
It will make a fascinating book - perhaps Robert Harris could write it.
The only thing I can think of is that the SNP (or Murrell) was operating an undeclared slush fund of undeclared donations that Murrell was able to dip in and out of when the need arose and then dipped into these funds for his own benefit. There was some speculation that such a fund had been used to keep the membership figures somewhat higher than they really were. I simply don't understand how this could possibly occur over such a period with the regulated money within the SNP.
I would be delighted if you were prosecuting, @DavidL. I suspect some of my money is amongst that illegally used.
We're supposed to have a dozen destroyers and over twenty frigates.
Not numbers of both that you can count on one hand, and all largely laid up in port for want of men, fuel, and funds as well.
No wonder we're a sitting duck.
Australia has a better equipped airforce than we do.
It's embarrassing.
We're an island nation and entirely dependent upon freedom of navigation of the seas.
This is utter negligence.
Will you forgive the Tories for getting us to that position?
Tedious, childish, partisan and unhelpful.
Governments of all stripes over the last 25 years own this and, in case you haven't been paying any fucking attention whatsoever, I ripped shreds out of the government at the time due to the 2010 defence review, and cancelled my membership over it.
We're supposed to have a dozen destroyers and over twenty frigates.
Not numbers of both that you can count on one hand, and all largely laid up in port for want of men, fuel, and funds as well.
No wonder we're a sitting duck.
Australia has a better equipped airforce than we do.
It's embarrassing.
We're an island nation and entirely dependent upon freedom of navigation of the seas.
This is utter negligence.
It's also on incompetence, and believing big ticket items - carriers being one example - are more important than combat capacity.
You can't run three world class services (as we've pretended for the last couple of decades) on a shoestring. And the nuclear deterrent takes almost half of the capital budget for weapons systems.
We know ministers don't understand reality - and that service leader lie to them (see the last decade of Ajax).
We're supposed to have a dozen destroyers and over twenty frigates.
Not numbers of both that you can count on one hand, and all largely laid up in port for want of men, fuel, and funds as well.
No wonder we're a sitting duck.
Australia has a better equipped airforce than we do.
It's embarrassing.
We're an island nation and entirely dependent upon freedom of navigation of the seas.
This is utter negligence.
It's also on incompetence, and believing big ticket items - carriers being one example - are more important than combat capacity.
You can't run three world class services (as we've pretended for the last couple of decades) on a shoestring. And the nuclear deterrent takes almost half of the capital budget for weapons systems.
We know ministers don't understand reality - and that service leader lie to them (see the last decade of Ajax).
Reform out to 2.36 from 2.06 last week for most seats at the next GE
Political betting markets are having almost as crazy a week as the politicians are. Reform have been favourite to get most seats in the next GE for a very long time and have been roughly 50% for weeks now. A few minutes ago they dipped to 33% and Labour went favourites at 35%!
All bounced back again now. It's extremely volatile and there are definitely people betting their money on something very bad emerging for Reform shortly.
I this your conclusion on this poll is mistaken. What it tells you is that people on the left are far more hostile to the right than people on the right are to the left. This has been seen again and again in the US polling for a number of years. There is an argument that what this shows is the left being more intolerant to different viewpoints than the right is.
More relevant polling would be leader approval ratings.
I don't know if it has been mentioned on here already but I see Gallup is to stop doing Presidential approval ratings after eight decades. Easy to be despondent but I doubt they be doing it if the numbers were good for the Don.
Reform out to 2.36 from 2.06 last week for most seats at the next GE
Political betting markets are having almost as crazy a week as the politicians are. Reform have been favourite to get most seats in the next GE for a very long time and have been roughly 50% for weeks now. A few minutes ago they dipped to 33% and Labour went favourites at 35%!
All bounced back again now. It's extremely volatile and there are definitely people betting their money on something very bad emerging for Reform shortly.
He's probably been correctly advised that the best way to shore up his position is to give head to the EU.
The best way to ensure Europe and our strategic and economic futures is cooperation. That you don't like Starmer is irrelevant.
I didn't say anything about Starmer.
I'm fine with doing deals in our interests with our neighbours; I'm not with being a supplicant.
Brexit ensured that.
Oh God, you're such a dick.
If you go into every negotiation believing that then, duh, unsurprisingly the other side will cream you, because it will take advantage of your confirmation bias. It will laugh at you, and then make it happen. Because it's massively in theirs interests, and easy.
Now, of course, you'll say that's because it is weak. But that's bollocks. We are a highly advanced economy and one of the Big Three and have big advantages that the EU needs.
There's plenty of scope for equitable deals. We need to work together. You just have to know your own negotiating position and strengths, and then you can get to win-win trade deals.
I know it pains you to hear it, but the EU isn't that strong. It's a bunch of French and German farmers and conglomerates who can't innovate, can't defend themselves and are as effete as an egg souffle.
You need to fucking get over what happened 10 years ago, and generally stop being such a twat.
To this ignoramus it sounds as though anyone who isn't wealthy but owns something that's increased in value will be obliged to sell it to realise the capital gain they want the tax from.
These are not, presumably, stupid people so why are they doing it ?
Australia has been speaking about it, Kamala Harris proposed one, California is implementing one.
Surely it is going to be easy to avoid as a lot of it will be portable.
I would not be adverse to a small wealth tax: like 0.25% or so on all assets above 1m.
But unrealised capital gains is dumb because the spot price of an asset, and the price at which you could sell a meaningful quantity of an asset are very different.
And what happens if, the next year, the price of the asset halves? Do I get all my money back from the tax man?
BREAKING: ICE director Todd LYONS says the two officers involved in the Jan. 14 chase/shooting incident appear to have lied under oath and are being investigated by DOJ. This comes after DHS Secretary Kristi Noem defended them as firing in self-defense.
We're supposed to have a dozen destroyers and over twenty frigates.
Not numbers of both that you can count on one hand, and all largely laid up in port for want of men, fuel, and funds as well.
No wonder we're a sitting duck.
Australia has a better equipped airforce than we do.
It's embarrassing.
We're an island nation and entirely dependent upon freedom of navigation of the seas.
This is utter negligence.
Will you forgive the Tories for getting us to that position?
Tedious, childish, partisan and unhelpful.
Governments of all stripes over the last 25 years own this and, in case you haven't been paying any fucking attention whatsoever, I ripped shreds out of the government at the time due to the 2010 defence review, and cancelled my membership over it.
I’m sorry for introducing partisanship to such an impartial chap as yourself, and for not remembering what you were busting a forehead vein over 16 years ago.
To this ignoramus it sounds as though anyone who isn't wealthy but owns something that's increased in value will be obliged to sell it to realise the capital gain they want the tax from.
Correct: but what if the asset is illiquid and/or hard to subdivide?
Though only 1% more of GenZ said they would not date a Kemi supporter than a Starmer supporter with Farage supporters being viewed less favourably than both with that age group
Though only 1% more of GenZ said they would not date a Kemi supporter than a Starmer supporter with Farage supporters being viewed less favourably than both with that age group
I'd date a Kemi supporter... But that's a bit theoretical isn't it? I mean, you'd have to find one first.
Kemi did say she only joined the Tories for the social life and presumably to find a nice lad.
Rather sums up the image of Young Conservatives.
In the 1950s pre internet and iphones, joining the YCs was one of the best ways for an upper middle class young gent to meet an upper middle class young lady when class defined our politics more
These are not, presumably, stupid people so why are they doing it ?
Australia has been speaking about it, Kamala Harris proposed one, California is implementing one.
Surely it is going to be easy to avoid as a lot of it will be portable.
I would not be adverse to a small wealth tax: like 0.25% or so on all assets above 1m.
But unrealised capital gains is dumb because the spot price of an asset, and the price at which you could sell a meaningful quantity of an asset are very different.
And what happens if, the next year, the price of the asset halves? Do I get all my money back from the tax man?
Kemi did say she only joined the Tories for the social life and presumably to find a nice lad.
Rather sums up the image of Young Conservatives.
In the 1950s pre internet and iphones, joining the YCs was one of the best ways for an upper middle class young gent to meet an upper middle class young lady when class defined our politics more
Kemi's not that old and all this class stuff is rather sad
To this ignoramus it sounds as though anyone who isn't wealthy but owns something that's increased in value will be obliged to sell it to realise the capital gain they want the tax from.
Correct: but what if the asset is illiquid and/or hard to subdivide?
You either find the cash or go bankrupt or just hand over 'your' asset to them, I suppose.
To this ignoramus it sounds as though anyone who isn't wealthy but owns something that's increased in value will be obliged to sell it to realise the capital gain they want the tax from.
Correct: but what if the asset is illiquid and/or hard to subdivide?
You either find the cash or go bankrupt or just hand over 'your' asset to them, I suppose.
Or they simply apply a charge to it so when you do sell they take their cut
Apologies if this has been posted elsewhere but an interesting post script to the ousting of Sussan Ley by Angus Taylor as Liberal Party leader in Australia:
It appears Ley is going to quit Parliament and force a by-election in her Farrar seat which Pauline Hanson's One Nation will be fighting hard.
It's an interesting thought - what if an ousted leader had to resign his or her seat so a by-election in Finchley in early 1991 or in Chingford in early 2004 or what about South West Norfolk in late 2022?
The Independents were a strong second in Farrar and will fancy their chances to be better than One Nation in the wealthy middle class seat
To this ignoramus it sounds as though anyone who isn't wealthy but owns something that's increased in value will be obliged to sell it to realise the capital gain they want the tax from.
Correct: but what if the asset is illiquid and/or hard to subdivide?
You either find the cash or go bankrupt or just hand over 'your' asset to them, I suppose.
Or they simply apply a charge to it so when you do sell they take their cut
I think they need the money now, rather than later. Is expropriation a word?
To this ignoramus it sounds as though anyone who isn't wealthy but owns something that's increased in value will be obliged to sell it to realise the capital gain they want the tax from.
Correct: but what if the asset is illiquid and/or hard to subdivide?
You either find the cash or go bankrupt or just hand over 'your' asset to them, I suppose.
Or they simply apply a charge to it so when you do sell they take their cut
Never kissed a Tory, her T-shirt proclaimed. Didn’t have the heart to tell her.
For a young leftie lady at least kissing a Tory they are likely to be reasonably high earners, probably a bit posh, have a degree and be reasonably well groomed. They might even live in Chelsea or the Cotswolds.
Whereas a Reform voter is likely to be, in their eyes, a bit of an oik, uncouth and racist and probably lives in some provincial town north of Watford
He's probably been correctly advised that the best way to shore up his position is to give head to the EU.
The best way to ensure Europe and our strategic and economic futures is cooperation. That you don't like Starmer is irrelevant.
I didn't say anything about Starmer.
I'm fine with doing deals in our interests with our neighbours; I'm not with being a supplicant.
Brexit ensured that.
Oh God, you're such a dick.
If you go into every negotiation believing that then, duh, unsurprisingly the other side will cream you, because it will take advantage of your confirmation bias. It will laugh at you, and then make it happen. Because it's massively in theirs interests, and easy.
Now, of course, you'll say that's because it is weak. But that's bollocks. We are a highly advanced economy and one of the Big Three and have big advantages that the EU needs.
There's plenty of scope for equitable deals. We need to work together. You just have to know your own negotiating position and strengths, and then you can get to win-win trade deals.
I know it pains you to hear it, but the EU isn't that strong. It's a bunch of French and German farmers and conglomerates who can't innovate, can't defend themselves and are as effete as an egg souffle.
You need to fucking get over what happened 10 years ago, and generally stop being such a twat.
Brexit made both Europe and us weaker. But the EU is still a market comparable in size to the US. As for can't innovate, how many biotechs have become pharmas worth billions in the UK in the last thirty years ? Zero. How many manufacturing companies essential to the world chip industry do we have ? Whose nuclear reactor design are we building (at nearly double the cost they've done) ?
The electorate agrees with me, not you. You can tell them they need to fucking get over it and stop being twats if you want, but good luck with that electoral pitch.
"McLevy is a British radio crime drama series, written by David Ashton, about the 19th century Edinburgh police detective James McLevy. Broadcast on BBC Radio 4 as part of its Afternoon Drama slot, the drama stars Brian Cox and Siobhan Redmond".
Some very enjoyable episodes and little local/historical nods.
Never kissed a Tory, her T-shirt proclaimed. Didn’t have the heart to tell her.
For a young leftie lady at least kissing a Tory they are likely to be reasonably high earners, probably a bit posh, have a degree and be reasonably well groomed. They might even live in Chelsea or the Cotswolds.
Whereas a Reform voter is likely to be, in their eyes, a bit of an oik, uncouth and racist and probably lives in some provincial town north of Watford
He's probably been correctly advised that the best way to shore up his position is to give head to the EU.
The best way to ensure Europe and our strategic and economic futures is cooperation. That you don't like Starmer is irrelevant.
I didn't say anything about Starmer.
I'm fine with doing deals in our interests with our neighbours; I'm not with being a supplicant.
Brexit ensured that.
Oh God, you're such a dick.
If you go into every negotiation believing that then, duh, unsurprisingly the other side will cream you, because it will take advantage of your confirmation bias. It will laugh at you, and then make it happen. Because it's massively in theirs interests, and easy.
Now, of course, you'll say that's because it is weak. But that's bollocks. We are a highly advanced economy and one of the Big Three and have big advantages that the EU needs.
There's plenty of scope for equitable deals. We need to work together. You just have to know your own negotiating position and strengths, and then you can get to win-win trade deals.
I know it pains you to hear it, but the EU isn't that strong. It's a bunch of French and German farmers and conglomerates who can't innovate, can't defend themselves and are as effete as an egg souffle.
You need to fucking get over what happened 10 years ago, and generally stop being such a twat.
Brexit made both Europe and us weaker. But the EU is still a market comparable in size to the US. As for can't innovate, how many biotechs have become pharmas worth billions in the UK in the last thirty years ? Zero. How many manufacturing companies essential to the world chip industry do we have ? Whose nuclear reactor design are we building (at nearly double the cost they've done) ?
The electorate agrees with me, not you. You can tell them they need to fucking get over it and stop being twats if you want, but good luck with that electoral pitch.
"The electorate agrees with me, not you."
Single issue polling doesn't work like that, unless you think the electorate would vote for a party promising to restore the death penalty?
It seems that many UK Muslims feel increasingly unsafe, with large minorities planning to leave
This is disastrous. What can we do?!
From that article 'We are seriously considering our plans to leave the UK should a more right-wing government come into power.'
'I grew up with racism and Islamophobia back in the 80s. Then life felt good. I felt part of the fabric of society. My contributions felt valued and impactful. Now I do not admit to being from the UK, because the UK government and many people in power and the media make me feel unwanted and less than. Instead I say I’m from Liverpool. The only place in the UK I do feel part of and valued within'
These are not, presumably, stupid people so why are they doing it ?
Australia has been speaking about it, Kamala Harris proposed one, California is implementing one.
Surely it is going to be easy to avoid as a lot of it will be portable.
I would not be adverse to a small wealth tax: like 0.25% or so on all assets above 1m.
But unrealised capital gains is dumb because the spot price of an asset, and the price at which you could sell a meaningful quantity of an asset are very different.
And what happens if, the next year, the price of the asset halves? Do I get all my money back from the tax man?
He's probably been correctly advised that the best way to shore up his position is to give head to the EU.
The best way to ensure Europe and our strategic and economic futures is cooperation. That you don't like Starmer is irrelevant.
I didn't say anything about Starmer.
I'm fine with doing deals in our interests with our neighbours; I'm not with being a supplicant.
Brexit ensured that.
Oh God, you're such a dick.
If you go into every negotiation believing that then, duh, unsurprisingly the other side will cream you, because it will take advantage of your confirmation bias. It will laugh at you, and then make it happen. Because it's massively in theirs interests, and easy.
Now, of course, you'll say that's because it is weak. But that's bollocks. We are a highly advanced economy and one of the Big Three and have big advantages that the EU needs.
There's plenty of scope for equitable deals. We need to work together. You just have to know your own negotiating position and strengths, and then you can get to win-win trade deals.
I know it pains you to hear it, but the EU isn't that strong. It's a bunch of French and German farmers and conglomerates who can't innovate, can't defend themselves and are as effete as an egg souffle.
You need to fucking get over what happened 10 years ago, and generally stop being such a twat.
Brexit made both Europe and us weaker. But the EU is still a market comparable in size to the US. As for can't innovate, how many biotechs have become pharmas worth billions in the UK in the last thirty years ? Zero. How many manufacturing companies essential to the world chip industry do we have ? Whose nuclear reactor design are we building (at nearly double the cost they've done) ?
The electorate agrees with me, not you. You can tell them they need to fucking get over it and stop being twats if you want, but good luck with that electoral pitch.
The fact that GDP growth's worst decade in a century is congrous to the decade of Brexit is not a co-incidence.
He's probably been correctly advised that the best way to shore up his position is to give head to the EU.
The best way to ensure Europe and our strategic and economic futures is cooperation. That you don't like Starmer is irrelevant.
I didn't say anything about Starmer.
I'm fine with doing deals in our interests with our neighbours; I'm not with being a supplicant.
Brexit ensured that.
Oh God, you're such a dick.
If you go into every negotiation believing that then, duh, unsurprisingly the other side will cream you, because it will take advantage of your confirmation bias. It will laugh at you, and then make it happen. Because it's massively in theirs interests, and easy.
Now, of course, you'll say that's because it is weak. But that's bollocks. We are a highly advanced economy and one of the Big Three and have big advantages that the EU needs.
There's plenty of scope for equitable deals. We need to work together. You just have to know your own negotiating position and strengths, and then you can get to win-win trade deals.
I know it pains you to hear it, but the EU isn't that strong. It's a bunch of French and German farmers and conglomerates who can't innovate, can't defend themselves and are as effete as an egg souffle.
You need to fucking get over what happened 10 years ago, and generally stop being such a twat.
Brexit made both Europe and us weaker. But the EU is still a market comparable in size to the US. As for can't innovate, how many biotechs have become pharmas worth billions in the UK in the last thirty years ? Zero. How many manufacturing companies essential to the world chip industry do we have ? Whose nuclear reactor design are we building (at nearly double the cost they've done) ?
The electorate agrees with me, not you. You can tell them they need to fucking get over it and stop being twats if you want, but good luck with that electoral pitch.
The fact that GDP growth's worst decade in a century is congrous to the decade of Brexit is not a co-incidence.
Sunlit uplands hey?
You may have noticed a pandemic and a war in the last decade too?
We're supposed to have a dozen destroyers and over twenty frigates.
Not numbers of both that you can count on one hand, and all largely laid up in port for want of men, fuel, and funds as well.
No wonder we're a sitting duck.
Australia has a better equipped airforce than we do.
It's embarrassing.
We're an island nation and entirely dependent upon freedom of navigation of the seas.
This is utter negligence.
Will you forgive the Tories for getting us to that position?
Tedious, childish, partisan and unhelpful.
Governments of all stripes over the last 25 years own this and, in case you haven't been paying any fucking attention whatsoever, I ripped shreds out of the government at the time due to the 2010 defence review, and cancelled my membership over it.
I’m sorry for introducing partisanship to such an impartial chap as yourself, and for not remembering what you were busting a forehead vein over 16 years ago.
Good man. At least my vein will be healed well before yours with your decades of disappointment over your compatriots failing to vote for your pet project.
Not the greatest surprise in all honesty and the end of his prospects (you'd think) of a Westminster career. I wonder if he has made the calculation Labour will lose in 2029 and he will be one of the higher-profile Labour figures left. He got that wrong before of course and could easily be wrong again.
It's fair to say he has antagonised a lot of people in London but he'll likely face a number of opponents who will likely split the anti-Labour vote allowing him to win - for example, even if May's local elections are a disaster (which they probably will be), Labour will probably still poll more votes in London than Reform let alone the Conservatives.
We know Laila Cunningham will be the Reform candidate and as for the Conservatives, it could be Sebastian Coe (though I doubt it) or James Cleverley (I doubt that too) but there'sa big risk said candidate will start in third and face being squeezed.
Cunningham is Muslim, much as the average Reform voter may love to vote for a Muslim woman I can't really see her storming home some how and most Londoners won't vote for her as she is Reform.
Coe would have a chance or Cleverly if he is not Tory leader by 2028
He's probably been correctly advised that the best way to shore up his position is to give head to the EU.
The best way to ensure Europe and our strategic and economic futures is cooperation. That you don't like Starmer is irrelevant.
I didn't say anything about Starmer.
I'm fine with doing deals in our interests with our neighbours; I'm not with being a supplicant.
Brexit ensured that.
Oh God, you're such a dick.
If you go into every negotiation believing that then, duh, unsurprisingly the other side will cream you, because it will take advantage of your confirmation bias. It will laugh at you, and then make it happen. Because it's massively in theirs interests, and easy.
Now, of course, you'll say that's because it is weak. But that's bollocks. We are a highly advanced economy and one of the Big Three and have big advantages that the EU needs.
There's plenty of scope for equitable deals. We need to work together. You just have to know your own negotiating position and strengths, and then you can get to win-win trade deals.
I know it pains you to hear it, but the EU isn't that strong. It's a bunch of French and German farmers and conglomerates who can't innovate, can't defend themselves and are as effete as an egg souffle.
You need to fucking get over what happened 10 years ago, and generally stop being such a twat.
Brexit made both Europe and us weaker. But the EU is still a market comparable in size to the US. As for can't innovate, how many biotechs have become pharmas worth billions in the UK in the last thirty years ? Zero. How many manufacturing companies essential to the world chip industry do we have ? Whose nuclear reactor design are we building (at nearly double the cost they've done) ?
The electorate agrees with me, not you. You can tell them they need to fucking get over it and stop being twats if you want, but good luck with that electoral pitch.
The fact that GDP growth's worst decade in a century is congrous to the decade of Brexit is not a co-incidence.
Sunlit uplands hey?
You may have noticed a pandemic and a war in the last decade too?
Don't encourage him, or they'll be because of Brexit as well
He's probably been correctly advised that the best way to shore up his position is to give head to the EU.
The best way to ensure Europe and our strategic and economic futures is cooperation. That you don't like Starmer is irrelevant.
I didn't say anything about Starmer.
I'm fine with doing deals in our interests with our neighbours; I'm not with being a supplicant.
Brexit ensured that.
Oh God, you're such a dick.
If you go into every negotiation believing that then, duh, unsurprisingly the other side will cream you, because it will take advantage of your confirmation bias. It will laugh at you, and then make it happen. Because it's massively in theirs interests, and easy.
Now, of course, you'll say that's because it is weak. But that's bollocks. We are a highly advanced economy and one of the Big Three and have big advantages that the EU needs.
There's plenty of scope for equitable deals. We need to work together. You just have to know your own negotiating position and strengths, and then you can get to win-win trade deals.
I know it pains you to hear it, but the EU isn't that strong. It's a bunch of French and German farmers and conglomerates who can't innovate, can't defend themselves and are as effete as an egg souffle.
You need to fucking get over what happened 10 years ago, and generally stop being such a twat.
Brexit made both Europe and us weaker. But the EU is still a market comparable in size to the US. As for can't innovate, how many biotechs have become pharmas worth billions in the UK in the last thirty years ? Zero. How many manufacturing companies essential to the world chip industry do we have ? Whose nuclear reactor design are we building (at nearly double the cost they've done) ?
The electorate agrees with me, not you. You can tell them they need to fucking get over it and stop being twats if you want, but good luck with that electoral pitch.
We're supposed to have a dozen destroyers and over twenty frigates.
Not numbers of both that you can count on one hand, and all largely laid up in port for want of men, fuel, and funds as well.
No wonder we're a sitting duck.
Australia has a better equipped airforce than we do.
It's embarrassing.
We're an island nation and entirely dependent upon freedom of navigation of the seas.
This is utter negligence.
Will you forgive the Tories for getting us to that position?
Tedious, childish, partisan and unhelpful.
Governments of all stripes over the last 25 years own this and, in case you haven't been paying any fucking attention whatsoever, I ripped shreds out of the government at the time due to the 2010 defence review, and cancelled my membership over it.
I’m sorry for introducing partisanship to such an impartial chap as yourself, and for not remembering what you were busting a forehead vein over 16 years ago.
It’s partisan, but it’s an important point.
Defence is an area where the Conservatives all too often talk right, but act left. Ditto criminal justice, ditto immigration.
About the only conviction they had in office, over 14 years, was defending the economic interests of better off pensioners.
He's probably been correctly advised that the best way to shore up his position is to give head to the EU.
The best way to ensure Europe and our strategic and economic futures is cooperation. That you don't like Starmer is irrelevant.
I didn't say anything about Starmer.
I'm fine with doing deals in our interests with our neighbours; I'm not with being a supplicant.
Brexit ensured that.
Oh God, you're such a dick.
If you go into every negotiation believing that then, duh, unsurprisingly the other side will cream you, because it will take advantage of your confirmation bias. It will laugh at you, and then make it happen. Because it's massively in theirs interests, and easy.
Now, of course, you'll say that's because it is weak. But that's bollocks. We are a highly advanced economy and one of the Big Three and have big advantages that the EU needs.
There's plenty of scope for equitable deals. We need to work together. You just have to know your own negotiating position and strengths, and then you can get to win-win trade deals.
I know it pains you to hear it, but the EU isn't that strong. It's a bunch of French and German farmers and conglomerates who can't innovate, can't defend themselves and are as effete as an egg souffle.
You need to fucking get over what happened 10 years ago, and generally stop being such a twat.
Brexit made both Europe and us weaker. But the EU is still a market comparable in size to the US. As for can't innovate, how many biotechs have become pharmas worth billions in the UK in the last thirty years ? Zero. How many manufacturing companies essential to the world chip industry do we have ? Whose nuclear reactor design are we building (at nearly double the cost they've done) ?
The electorate agrees with me, not you. You can tell them they need to fucking get over it and stop being twats if you want, but good luck with that electoral pitch.
The fact that GDP growth's worst decade in a century is congrous to the decade of Brexit is not a co-incidence.
Sunlit uplands hey?
You may have noticed a pandemic and a war in the last decade too?
I never hafd you down as a Reeves apologist.
Every decade has its events. The GFC of 2007, Black Wednesday in the 90's, the fuel crises of the Seventies etc etc.
The fact is that GDP growth has been significantly below historic trend since 2016 points to one thing, and one obvious way to get back to historic growth rates.
We're supposed to have a dozen destroyers and over twenty frigates.
Not numbers of both that you can count on one hand, and all largely laid up in port for want of men, fuel, and funds as well.
No wonder we're a sitting duck.
Australia has a better equipped airforce than we do.
It's embarrassing.
We're an island nation and entirely dependent upon freedom of navigation of the seas.
This is utter negligence.
Will you forgive the Tories for getting us to that position?
Tedious, childish, partisan and unhelpful.
Governments of all stripes over the last 25 years own this and, in case you haven't been paying any fucking attention whatsoever, I ripped shreds out of the government at the time due to the 2010 defence review, and cancelled my membership over it.
I’m sorry for introducing partisanship to such an impartial chap as yourself, and for not remembering what you were busting a forehead vein over 16 years ago.
It’s partisan, but it’s an important point.
Defence is an area where the Conservatives all too often talk right, but act left. Ditto criminal justice, ditto immigration.
About the only conviction they had in office, over 14 years, was defending the economic interests of better off pensioners.
If Reform destroy them, I’ll shed no tears.
And, that's why they're at where we're at.
I just find it funny that regular posters feel the need to point it out to me as if I'm @HYUFD when I've regularly criticised the Conservatives on all those subjects over the last 15+ years, and well they know it.
Comments
Reminds me of my days in Edinburgh City Police [early 1965] and my box at Tollcross
It was unbelievably cold pounding the streets on the night shift in February
If we had real leadership and bold rising to the challenge, then I think the electorate would respond to that.
I’m Leith-bound mostly these days.
Fucking pathetic.
We're supposed to have a dozen destroyers and over twenty frigates.
Not numbers of both that you can count on one hand, and all largely laid up in port for want of men, fuel, and funds as well.
No wonder we're a sitting duck.
https://x.com/bundeskanzler/status/2022371844020457634
The Armchair Cinema, Regan, which preceded it was shown in 1974
We're an island nation and entirely dependent upon freedom of navigation of the seas.
This is utter negligence.
That you don't like Starmer is irrelevant.
https://x.com/kobeissiletter/status/2022400407344157120?s=61
I'm fine with doing deals in our interests with our neighbours; I'm not with being a supplicant.
Well indeed but they are planning to.
California are doing the same.
Governments of all stripes over the last 25 years own this and, in case you haven't been paying any fucking attention whatsoever, I ripped shreds out of the government at the time due to the 2010 defence review, and cancelled my membership over it.
You can't run three world class services (as we've pretended for the last couple of decades) on a shoestring.
And the nuclear deterrent takes almost half of the capital budget for weapons systems.
We know ministers don't understand reality - and that service leader lie to them (see the last decade of Ajax).
I know.
More relevant polling would be leader approval ratings.
I don't know if it has been mentioned on here already but I see Gallup is to stop doing Presidential approval ratings after eight decades. Easy to be despondent but I doubt they be doing it if the numbers were good for the Don.
https://x.com/bitcoinnewscom/status/2021978390870347923?s=61
Australia has been speaking about it, Kamala Harris proposed one, California is implementing one.
Surely it is going to be easy to avoid as a lot of it will be portable.
They've gone to end their careers as we watch. Bless.
If you go into every negotiation believing that then, duh, unsurprisingly the other side will cream you, because it will take advantage of your confirmation bias. It will laugh at you, and then make it happen. Because it's massively in theirs interests, and easy.
Now, of course, you'll say that's because it is weak. But that's bollocks. We are a highly advanced economy and one of the Big Three and have big advantages that the EU needs.
There's plenty of scope for equitable deals. We need to work together. You just have to know your own negotiating position and strengths, and then you can get to win-win trade deals.
I know it pains you to hear it, but the EU isn't that strong. It's a bunch of French and German farmers and conglomerates who can't innovate, can't defend themselves and are as effete as an egg souffle.
You need to fucking get over what happened 10 years ago, and generally stop being such a twat.
But unrealised capital gains is dumb because the spot price of an asset, and the price at which you could sell a meaningful quantity of an asset are very different.
And what happens if, the next year, the price of the asset halves? Do I get all my money back from the tax man?
BREAKING: ICE director Todd LYONS says the two officers involved in the Jan. 14 chase/shooting incident appear to have lied under oath and are being investigated by DOJ. This comes after DHS Secretary Kristi Noem defended them as firing in self-defense.
https://x.com/kyledcheney/status/2022384030797435124?s=20
Restore > Reform
The right vote will be splitting further
I’m sorry for introducing partisanship to such an impartial chap as yourself, and for not remembering what you were busting a forehead vein over 16 years ago.
https://x.com/DenisPayre/status/2022204982087344299
Are you @HYUFD ?
Advance UK, Restore Britain, Reform UK, Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, Labour, Workers Party of Britain, Your Party, Greens
Hmmm, OK, remove 'from right to left'
Yet again you think you've made a clever point but it only reveals your backward moral instincts.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5734288-carrie-boller-removed-commission/
I wonder if he can get McMurdock to join him?
Whereas a Reform voter is likely to be, in their eyes, a bit of an oik, uncouth and racist and probably lives in some provincial town north of Watford
As for can't innovate, how many biotechs have become pharmas worth billions in the UK in the last thirty years ?
Zero.
How many manufacturing companies essential to the world chip industry do we have ?
Whose nuclear reactor design are we building (at nearly double the cost they've done) ?
The electorate agrees with me, not you.
You can tell them they need to fucking get over it and stop being twats if you want, but good luck with that electoral pitch.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McLevy
"McLevy is a British radio crime drama series, written by David Ashton, about the 19th century Edinburgh police detective James McLevy. Broadcast on BBC Radio 4 as part of its Afternoon Drama slot, the drama stars Brian Cox and Siobhan Redmond".
Some very enjoyable episodes and little local/historical nods.
Single issue polling doesn't work like that, unless you think the electorate would vote for a party promising to restore the death penalty?
Sliding headfirst down a hill is coming home
'I grew up with racism and Islamophobia back in the 80s. Then life felt good. I felt part of the fabric of society. My contributions felt valued and impactful. Now I do not admit to being from the UK, because the UK government and many people in power and the media make me feel unwanted and less than. Instead I say I’m from Liverpool. The only place in the UK I do feel part of and valued within'
Sunlit uplands hey?
https://x.com/GabrielAttal/status/2022371745290703063
https://x.com/J_Bardella/status/2022353404144603179
Never mind, eh.
Coe would have a chance or Cleverly if he is not Tory leader by 2028
Never mind, eh.
Defence is an area where the Conservatives all too often talk right, but act left. Ditto criminal justice, ditto immigration.
About the only conviction they had in office, over 14 years, was defending the economic interests of better off pensioners.
If Reform destroy them, I’ll shed no tears.
Every decade has its events. The GFC of 2007, Black Wednesday in the 90's, the fuel crises of the Seventies etc etc.
The fact is that GDP growth has been significantly below historic trend since 2016 points to one thing, and one obvious way to get back to historic growth rates.
I just find it funny that regular posters feel the need to point it out to me as if I'm @HYUFD when I've regularly criticised the Conservatives on all those subjects over the last 15+ years, and well they know it.
I am today launching Restore Britain as a national political party.
Join us.'
https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/2022394419685822647?s=20