115Undue influence (1)A person shall be guilty of a corrupt practice if he is guilty of undue influence.
(2)A person shall be guilty of undue influence—
(a)if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm or loss upon or against any person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of that person having voted or refrained from voting; ...
Spiritual injury???????
Wasn't that what they got Lutfur Rahman for in in Tower Hamlets?
(You're not allowed to say VOTE FOR ME OR YOU'RE GOING TO HELL.)
Whilst I'm here, has anybody noticed that Musk abandoned his committment to go to Mars at the end of this year, and that (due to the alignment of the planets) that will delay it by quite a while
The 30s? Wasn't that when someone called Mosley finally abandoned the mainstream parties and set up the New Party, winning a few defectors along the way? Whatever happened to him?
He was under house arrest during WW2, iirc.
I don't know if he was as rich as Farage has become !!
115Undue influence (1)A person shall be guilty of a corrupt practice if he is guilty of undue influence.
(2)A person shall be guilty of undue influence—
(a)if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm or loss upon or against any person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of that person having voted or refrained from voting; ...
Spiritual injury???????
It's a particular reference to Northern Irish politicians scaring the bejesus out of their opponents.
"I have made a legitimate and peaceful request for cheese and pineapple on a stick!"
I hate to use this phrase but if the Green economic platform is being advised by Gary Stephenson then they must be thick.
Gary doesn’t seem to understand the difference between unrealised gains and income that’s going into my bank account every month. He seeks to think they are the same thing.
I’d never heard of this guy before today, but he seems to be a parody or playing a character. There’s no way he actually worked in the City while being so uninformed about very basic economics.
He’s been on my radar for a while but I’ve only listened to him at length recently.
It becomes very clear very quickly that he doesn’t have a clue what he is talking about.
He didn’t seem to be aware that trusts do pay taxes. I think he honestly believed they were completely free of taxes (in which case, why isn’t he being one?), even though they do.
All his ideas seem to be that there’s plenty of money to tax just for some inconceivable reason nobody has thought to do it before.
I guess some people lap this stuff up but put your critical thinking hat on and it quickly goes up in smoke.
At length?
It took less than two minutes to discover that he doesn’t understand the difference between capital asset values and personal employment income, before anything about trusts.
There’s genuine leftwing arguments to be made about higher asset taxes, but this guy isn’t one to make them.
I watched him on a podcast. I’d only heard tiny 5 second clips about “tax the rich” before.
He really does seem to think that Elon Musk is swimming in a pile of gold like Scrooge McDuck, with ‘wealth’ being a zero-sum game, as opposed to the serial entrepreneur who’s built more than half a dozen business from nothing and generated massive amounts of GDP and ‘wealth’ for others.
I agree with you in principle but Musk is a nasty individual and a bad choice to have used.
Musk is possibly the best example, because he switched his politics after the American left went insane.
The biggest cultural turning point in recent years was when Elon bought Twitter.
Do you think he’s a nasty individual or not?
Some of the dealings he had at PayPal would suggest that he is.
I wouldn’t describe him as ‘nasty’, especially not based on comments from two decades ago, but accept that he’s a divisive character because of his endorsement of, and work for, the current US president.
It is worth noting several of his children would not agree with you.
Several? All of the ones that have come of adulthood.
Then there’s the Nazi salutes, the frequent racism, the lying, the drug problems, calling that diver a “pedo guy”, etc. I don’t know why @Sandpit doesn’t think any of that is “nasty”.
You could have mentioned the friendship with Epstein he insists he absolutely didn't have.
Well, he wanted a friendship with Epstein, but Epstein turned him down!
How could you be such a vile human being even Epstein doesn't want to know you?
Heck, that's Amanda Spielman levels of awfulness.
We are talking Elon Musk - I can't see any redeeming features...
115Undue influence (1)A person shall be guilty of a corrupt practice if he is guilty of undue influence.
(2)A person shall be guilty of undue influence—
(a)if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm or loss upon or against any person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of that person having voted or refrained from voting; ...
Spiritual injury???????
It's a particular reference to Northern Irish politicians scaring the bejesus out of their opponents.
"I have made a legitimate and peaceful request for cheese and pineapple on a stick!"
Not Dennis f*****' Taylor!!!! I'm off. He just has too much to say.
Much prefer him to the late John Virgo.
However, I remember when the Queen's funeral was done with commentary or without on Red Button. I went for without and it was so much better. Maybe time to do the same for live sport?
Not Dennis f*****' Taylor!!!! I'm off. He just has too much to say.
Much prefer him to the late John Virgo.
However, I remember when the Queen's funeral was done with commentary or without on Red Button. I went for without and it was so much better. Maybe time to do the same for live sport?
The Tennis on Sky has many matches which have no commentary at all. I think Sky have a very limited commentary team.
Not Dennis f*****' Taylor!!!! I'm off. He just has too much to say.
Much prefer him to the late John Virgo.
However, I remember when the Queen's funeral was done with commentary or without on Red Button. I went for without and it was so much better. Maybe time to do the same for live sport?
The Tennis on Sky has many matches which have no commentary at all. I think Sky have a very limited commentary team.
There are lots of sports with very limited commentary teams who nevertheless commentate on every match. Football springs to mind.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Nigel Farage has committed prosecutable election offences with this video under the Representation of the People Act 1983.
The Act prohibits inducing voters through the threat of “temporal injury”, which includes material disadvantage such as the targeted imposition of government burdens.
Threatening to specifically house illegal migrants in a constituency if it does not vote Reform is coercive and constitutes a criminal offence.
Nigel Farage has committed prosecutable election offences with this video under the Representation of the People Act 1983.
The Act prohibits inducing voters through the threat of “temporal injury”, which includes material disadvantage such as the targeted imposition of government burdens.
Threatening to specifically house illegal migrants in a constituency if it does not vote Reform is coercive and constitutes a criminal offence.
Nigel Farage has committed prosecutable election offences with this video under the Representation of the People Act 1983.
The Act prohibits inducing voters through the threat of “temporal injury”, which includes material disadvantage such as the targeted imposition of government burdens.
Threatening to specifically house illegal migrants in a constituency if it does not vote Reform is coercive and constitutes a criminal offence.
Nigel Farage has committed prosecutable election offences with this video under the Representation of the People Act 1983.
The Act prohibits inducing voters through the threat of “temporal injury”, which includes material disadvantage such as the targeted imposition of government burdens.
Threatening to specifically house illegal migrants in a constituency if it does not vote Reform is coercive and constitutes a criminal offence.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
Kemi Badenoch is increasingly impressive. This is exactly the firm, politely "fuck you" kind of attitude we need towards the evil Jew hating Left, and maybe only a black woman with confidence can bring it off, in the modern Tory party
She could persuade me away from Reform if her brand wasn't so Ratnered and she wasn't surrounded by dreadful Tory Woke Wets who need to be expelled. But, she really has grown in "office", and good for her
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
I suppose you could try buying an empty house on Bishops Avenue, and try building a 100 story tower block. But those things are actually rather expensive. And the cost of trying to do one on a fairly suburban street would be fun - getting thousands of tons of stuff in and out would be insanely expensive.
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
Herne Bay is in the Canterbury City council area but part of one of the Thanet Parliamentary constituencies. That means it’s possible that it will be in a Green controlled district but represented by a Reform MP. There must be dozens of similar situations up and down the country. How would that work? The West Lothian Question of our time.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
A point I made earlier when I said ‘keep dumping them in Rochdale and Gateshead’.
You have the green deputy leader wanting them all to stay but objecting when they want to put some in her neck of the woods, Crowborough. Share them around the country. AFAIC.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But then wouldn't people complain about them getting to live where I can't afford to?
115Undue influence (1)A person shall be guilty of a corrupt practice if he is guilty of undue influence.
(2)A person shall be guilty of undue influence—
(a)if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm or loss upon or against any person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of that person having voted or refrained from voting; ...
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Nigel Farage has committed prosecutable election offences with this video under the Representation of the People Act 1983.
The Act prohibits inducing voters through the threat of “temporal injury”, which includes material disadvantage such as the targeted imposition of government burdens.
Threatening to specifically house illegal migrants in a constituency if it does not vote Reform is coercive and constitutes a criminal offence.
(a)if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm or loss upon or against any person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of that person having voted or refrained from voting..
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But how can you get housing in the posh areas?
You can
1) Buy existing properties. Insanely expensive. 2) Rent existing properties. Insanely expensive. This is why, under Blair, they started looking at cheaper places. This led to a comic law suit, where lawyers for a refugee organisation tried to claim that sending refugees to live in Edinburgh was against their human rights. 3) Build on parks, green bits. Most of which are owned by someone or something already. 4) Expropriate stuff
115Undue influence (1)A person shall be guilty of a corrupt practice if he is guilty of undue influence.
(2)A person shall be guilty of undue influence—
(a)if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm or loss upon or against any person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of that person having voted or refrained from voting; ...
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
Is that true? My rough understanding is that asylum seekers came in sufficiently low numbers to be housed evenly around the UK.
That is until about 2022 when there was an enormous surge in small boats and the Conservative government desperately tried to find a way to house them - and the cheapest place to do that was always going to be the kind of place you describe.
Since then the government has done a decent job reducing the numbers in hotels - by about 45%.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But how can you get housing in the posh areas?
You can
1) Buy existing properties. Insanely expensive. 2) Rent existing properties. Insanely expensive. This is why, under Blair, they started looking at cheaper places. This led to a comic law suit, where lawyers for a refugee organisation tried to claim that sending refugees to live in Edinburgh was against their human rights. 3) Build on parks, green bits. Most of which are owned by someone or something already. 4) Expropriate stuff
Which one(s) do you like?
This is spot on. Where have migrants been housed? In the cheapest possible places. Why have they been housed there? Because it's cheap.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Don't ask sensible questions.
Ok. I will have a couple of Stingers. Then I will ask some insensible questions.
Nigel Farage has committed prosecutable election offences with this video under the Representation of the People Act 1983.
The Act prohibits inducing voters through the threat of “temporal injury”, which includes material disadvantage such as the targeted imposition of government burdens.
Threatening to specifically house illegal migrants in a constituency if it does not vote Reform is coercive and constitutes a criminal offence.
(a)if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm or loss upon or against any person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of that person having voted or refrained from voting..
@Nigelb - you’re looking at the old section 115 as originally enacted. The current version only applies to Scotland -
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But how can you get housing in the posh areas?
You can
1) Buy existing properties. Insanely expensive. 2) Rent existing properties. Insanely expensive. This is why, under Blair, they started looking at cheaper places. This led to a comic law suit, where lawyers for a refugee organisation tried to claim that sending refugees to live in Edinburgh was against their human rights. 3) Build on parks, green bits. Most of which are owned by someone or something already. 4) Expropriate stuff
Which one(s) do you like?
This is spot on. Where have migrants been housed? In the cheapest possible places. Why have they been housed there? Because it's cheap.
It's a deal, it's a steal, it's the sale...
Seriously, if you could build cheaply on "the most expensive roads", @rcs1000 would have rounded up some investors. Imagine being able to magic up a few hundred flats in Knightsbridge....
Nigel Farage has committed prosecutable election offences with this video under the Representation of the People Act 1983.
The Act prohibits inducing voters through the threat of “temporal injury”, which includes material disadvantage such as the targeted imposition of government burdens.
Threatening to specifically house illegal migrants in a constituency if it does not vote Reform is coercive and constitutes a criminal offence.
(a)if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm or loss upon or against any person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of that person having voted or refrained from voting..
Doesn't seem to cover inducing someone to vote for a different party (and how could it?).
The entire premise of the Labour party is "Vote for us, and we'll tax the kind of people who don't vote for us and give the money to you" and we could hardly outlaw that.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But then wouldn't people complain about them getting to live where I can't afford to?
Back in the 90s, Blair faced questions about government paying vast sums for big houses in expensive parts of London - refugees/asylum seekers with big families.
So they started trying to distribute them outside London. Which led to lots of lawsuits claiming that there was almost a right to live in London.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
Is that true? My rough understanding is that asylum seekers came in sufficiently low numbers to be housed evenly around the UK.
That is until about 2022 when there was an enormous surge in small boats and the Conservative government desperately tried to find a way to house them - and the cheapest place to do that was always going to be the kind of place you describe.
Since then the government has done a decent job reducing the numbers in hotels - by about 45%.
Where did the Mirpuri Pakistanis go? Where did the European Roma go after Accession? I'm not just talking about asylum, I'm talking - note - about difficult and problematic immigration overall. It has overwhelmingly impacted on poor white working class areas, with all the sins and evils that attend it, some of which we cannot even discuss here, they are so explosive
Enough. These people have to go back, one way or another, and the next government has to lay down the law for a seriously skilled based migrant policy, from now on. No one else gets to come
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But then wouldn't people complain about them getting to live where I can't afford to?
Of course they would! All of this performative outrage is fucking ridiculous. And how do you define a posh area? Half the houses in my street are divided into flats, many are council housing, but our house is worth £1.5mn. So is this a posh area or not? Are we awful posh rich people sneering at the good honest people of England or are we awful welfare addicted poor people sucking the country dry? It's so hard to figure out who to hate and why. Thank God the assorted public school boys of Reform are here to help us figure out these conundrums! In any case, I'd rather have refugees living here than people who tie St George crosses to lampposts, any day of the week. So please, send them all here.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But then wouldn't people complain about them getting to live where I can't afford to?
And it’s not push areas where people are voting Green (that’s Labour, with a few Conservatives clinging on).
They are proposing to house them where it’s predominantly young people renting in densely populated cities. It’s probably just another ploy to shovel more money at slum landlords, who from recent reporting make up a number of Reform councillors.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But how can you get housing in the posh areas?
You can
1) Buy existing properties. Insanely expensive. 2) Rent existing properties. Insanely expensive. This is why, under Blair, they started looking at cheaper places. This led to a comic law suit, where lawyers for a refugee organisation tried to claim that sending refugees to live in Edinburgh was against their human rights. 3) Build on parks, green bits. Most of which are owned by someone or something already. 4) Expropriate stuff
Which one(s) do you like?
How about processing them and returning those who fail? Then you don't need to house as many. That seems to be where it went wrong.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But then wouldn't people complain about them getting to live where I can't afford to?
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But then wouldn't people complain about them getting to live where I can't afford to?
And it’s not push areas where people are voting Green (that’s Labour, with a few Conservatives clinging on).
They are proposing to house them where it’s predominantly young people renting in densely populated cities. It’s probably just another ploy to shovel more money at slum landlords, who from recent reporting make up a number of Reform councillors.
I thought the slum landlords were Labour MPs?
Or does that just represent the diversity of landlords?
I always loved the fact that the British Communist Party derives a lot of income from property it owns and rents out.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But how can you get housing in the posh areas?
You can
1) Buy existing properties. Insanely expensive. 2) Rent existing properties. Insanely expensive. This is why, under Blair, they started looking at cheaper places. This led to a comic law suit, where lawyers for a refugee organisation tried to claim that sending refugees to live in Edinburgh was against their human rights. 3) Build on parks, green bits. Most of which are owned by someone or something already. 4) Expropriate stuff
Which one(s) do you like?
This is spot on. Where have migrants been housed? In the cheapest possible places. Why have they been housed there? Because it's cheap.
Blair build Yarl's Wood in a leafy Tory seat and they had a policy of dispersal after asylum seekers burnt it down.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
I suppose you could try buying an empty house on Bishops Avenue, and try building a 100 story tower block. But those things are actually rather expensive. And the cost of trying to do one on a fairly suburban street would be fun - getting thousands of tons of stuff in and out would be insanely expensive.
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
Just park caravans all down the road like in Bristol.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
I suppose you could try buying an empty house on Bishops Avenue, and try building a 100 story tower block. But those things are actually rather expensive. And the cost of trying to do one on a fairly suburban street would be fun - getting thousands of tons of stuff in and out would be insanely expensive.
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
Just park caravans all down the road like in Bristol.
You obviously haven't met the Sturmabteilung in charge of parking enforcement in Hampstead.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But then wouldn't people complain about them getting to live where I can't afford to?
And it’s not push areas where people are voting Green (that’s Labour, with a few Conservatives clinging on).
They are proposing to house them where it’s predominantly young people renting in densely populated cities. It’s probably just another ploy to shovel more money at slum landlords, who from recent reporting make up a number of Reform councillors.
I thought the slum landlords were Labour MPs?
Or does that just represent the diversity of landlords?
I always loved the fact that the British Communist Party derives a lot of income from property it owns and rents out.
There was a particularly grim case for a Labour MP too - Jas Athwal? But based on current stats Labour has the lowest rate of landlordism.
Anyway, still think a smart policy from Badenoch would be to go after slum landlords. Enough millennials like me still rent or have dark memories of it and it would be a nod to the next generation of prime voters.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
Is that true? My rough understanding is that asylum seekers came in sufficiently low numbers to be housed evenly around the UK.
That is until about 2022 when there was an enormous surge in small boats and the Conservative government desperately tried to find a way to house them - and the cheapest place to do that was always going to be the kind of place you describe.
Since then the government has done a decent job reducing the numbers in hotels - by about 45%.
I believe it was one Robert Jenrick who boasted about the hotels he’d opened.
So Reform folks on here, why should we listen to you now?
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
Is that true? My rough understanding is that asylum seekers came in sufficiently low numbers to be housed evenly around the UK.
That is until about 2022 when there was an enormous surge in small boats and the Conservative government desperately tried to find a way to house them - and the cheapest place to do that was always going to be the kind of place you describe.
Since then the government has done a decent job reducing the numbers in hotels - by about 45%.
Where did the Mirpuri Pakistanis go? Where did the European Roma go after Accession? I'm not just talking about asylum, I'm talking - note - about difficult and problematic immigration overall. It has overwhelmingly impacted on poor white working class areas, with all the sins and evils that attend it, some of which we cannot even discuss here, they are so explosive
Enough. These people have to go back, one way or another, and the next government has to lay down the law for a seriously skilled based migrant policy, from now on. No one else gets to come
Well, by definition a (current) white working class area hasn’t had the kind of immigration you describe.
I think that’s parts of the toxicity of the hotels though - these areas have had no direct experience of immigration other than young men from the world’s poorest countries - while my experience has been quite the opposite.
The whole sequence of events - collapse of EU migration to university cities followed by explosion in small boats and dodgy student visas to seaside towns - is like a sick joke.
Nigel Farage has committed prosecutable election offences with this video under the Representation of the People Act 1983.
The Act prohibits inducing voters through the threat of “temporal injury”, which includes material disadvantage such as the targeted imposition of government burdens.
Threatening to specifically house illegal migrants in a constituency if it does not vote Reform is coercive and constitutes a criminal offence.
(a)if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm or loss upon or against any person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of that person having voted or refrained from voting..
@Nigelb - you’re looking at the old section 115 as originally enacted. The current version only applies to Scotland -
You want section 114A which is the current position in the rUK. The website’s hard to handle and a lot of people get this wrong.
Substantively though these sections are designed to catch personal threats not policy promises.
Fair point, my mistake. But the updated bit says substantially the same. ..(4)The following activities fall within this subsection—
(a)using or threatening to use violence against a person;
(b)damaging or destroying, or threatening to damage or destroy, a person’s property;
(c)damaging or threatening to damage a person’s reputation;
(d)causing or threatening to cause financial loss to a person;
(e)causing spiritual injury to, or placing undue spiritual pressure on, a person;
(f)doing any other act designed to intimidate a person;
(g)doing any act designed to deceive a person in relation to the administration of an election...
Policy promises which are targeted specifically and solely at constituencies which elect the candidates of a particular party, if they can be construed as damaging to property, would I think fall under this section.
It would be a test case, since afaik, no one until now has been idiotic enough to pledge a policy on this basis (and Farage seems also to have endorsed Yusuf's piece of stupidity).
The harder point would be demonstrating that b/d/f might apply here, but I don't think it impossible.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But then wouldn't people complain about them getting to live where I can't afford to?
And it’s not push areas where people are voting Green (that’s Labour, with a few Conservatives clinging on).
They are proposing to house them where it’s predominantly young people renting in densely populated cities. It’s probably just another ploy to shovel more money at slum landlords, who from recent reporting make up a number of Reform councillors.
I thought the slum landlords were Labour MPs?
Or does that just represent the diversity of landlords?
I always loved the fact that the British Communist Party derives a lot of income from property it owns and rents out.
There was a particularly grim case for a Labour MP too - Jas Athwal? But based on current stats Labour has the lowest rate of landlordism.
Anyway, still think a smart policy from Badenoch would be to go after slum landlords. Enough millennials like me still rent or have dark memories of it and it would be a nod to the next generation of prime voters.
It comes back to enforcement of the vast pile of useless regulations.
What we need is a balance between regulation and enforcement.
In the case of slum landlords, most of their crap has been illegal for decades. But the response to problems has been to pile on regulation - which makes it actually worse.
This is because decent landlords try and fulfil all the rules. But they have to charge more to do so. And are undercut by the slum landlords. Who get to carry on, unperturbed.
It's the difference between the law abiding, who sleep soundly only if they have obeyed all the rules and laws. And those who treat being taken to court as a gamble/business expense.
In the absence of enforcement, bad drives out good.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
I suppose you could try buying an empty house on Bishops Avenue, and try building a 100 story tower block. But those things are actually rather expensive. And the cost of trying to do one on a fairly suburban street would be fun - getting thousands of tons of stuff in and out would be insanely expensive.
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
Just park caravans all down the road like in Bristol.
You obviously haven't met the Sturmabteilung in charge of parking enforcement in Hampstead.
Compulsory purchase the derelict plots on Bishops Avenue etc
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
I suppose you could try buying an empty house on Bishops Avenue, and try building a 100 story tower block. But those things are actually rather expensive. And the cost of trying to do one on a fairly suburban street would be fun - getting thousands of tons of stuff in and out would be insanely expensive.
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
Just park caravans all down the road like in Bristol.
You obviously haven't met the Sturmabteilung in charge of parking enforcement in Hampstead.
Compulsory purchase the derelict plots on Bishops Avenue etc
Still expensive to build in London. Even if you give yourself permission for tower blocks. There's a reason that flat new starts have virtually stopped. And that's in areas where access for construction is easy.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But then wouldn't people complain about them getting to live where I can't afford to?
And it’s not push areas where people are voting Green (that’s Labour, with a few Conservatives clinging on).
They are proposing to house them where it’s predominantly young people renting in densely populated cities. It’s probably just another ploy to shovel more money at slum landlords, who from recent reporting make up a number of Reform councillors.
I thought the slum landlords were Labour MPs?
Or does that just represent the diversity of landlords?
I always loved the fact that the British Communist Party derives a lot of income from property it owns and rents out.
There was a particularly grim case for a Labour MP too - Jas Athwal? But based on current stats Labour has the lowest rate of landlordism.
Anyway, still think a smart policy from Badenoch would be to go after slum landlords. Enough millennials like me still rent or have dark memories of it and it would be a nod to the next generation of prime voters.
It comes back to enforcement of the vast pile of useless regulations.
What we need is a balance between regulation and enforcement.
In the case of slum landlords, most of their crap has been illegal for decades. But the response to problems has been to pile on regulation - which makes it actually worse.
This is because decent landlords try and fulfil all the rules. But they have to charge more to do so. And are undercut by the slum landlords. Who get to carry on, unperturbed.
It's the difference between the law abiding, who sleep soundly only if they have obeyed all the rules and laws. And those who treat being taken to court as a gamble/business expense.
In the absence of enforcement, bad drives out good.
[Checks who is responsible for enforcing regulations on landlords. Wonders how much capacity they have left after managing social care and occaisonally emptying the bins.]
Am I saying that society's woes are entirely down to our unwillingness to fund social care except through capped council tax?
No, no, no, no, of course not... yes. Don't forget to vote on Thursday.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
I suppose you could try buying an empty house on Bishops Avenue, and try building a 100 story tower block. But those things are actually rather expensive. And the cost of trying to do one on a fairly suburban street would be fun - getting thousands of tons of stuff in and out would be insanely expensive.
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
Just park caravans all down the road like in Bristol.
You obviously haven't met the Sturmabteilung in charge of parking enforcement in Hampstead.
Surely you’d love that kind of effective enforcement?
Nigel Farage has committed prosecutable election offences with this video under the Representation of the People Act 1983.
The Act prohibits inducing voters through the threat of “temporal injury”, which includes material disadvantage such as the targeted imposition of government burdens.
Threatening to specifically house illegal migrants in a constituency if it does not vote Reform is coercive and constitutes a criminal offence.
(a)if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm or loss upon or against any person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of that person having voted or refrained from voting..
@Nigelb - you’re looking at the old section 115 as originally enacted. The current version only applies to Scotland -
You want section 114A which is the current position in the rUK. The website’s hard to handle and a lot of people get this wrong.
Substantively though these sections are designed to catch personal threats not policy promises.
Fair point, my mistake. But the updated bit says substantially the same. ..(4)The following activities fall within this subsection—
(a)using or threatening to use violence against a person;
(b)damaging or destroying, or threatening to damage or destroy, a person’s property;
(c)damaging or threatening to damage a person’s reputation;
(d)causing or threatening to cause financial loss to a person;
(e)causing spiritual injury to, or placing undue spiritual pressure on, a person;
(f)doing any other act designed to intimidate a person;
(g)doing any act designed to deceive a person in relation to the administration of an election...
Policy promises which are targeted specifically and solely at constituencies which elect the candidates of a particular party, if they can be construed as damaging to property, would I think fall under this section.
It would be a test case, since afaik, no one until now has been idiotic enough to pledge a policy on this basis (and Farage seems also to have endorsed Yusuf's piece of stupidity).
The harder point would be demonstrating that b/d/f might apply here, but I don't think it impossible.
I think it would be a brave prosecutor who would seek to argue that before a court.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
I suppose you could try buying an empty house on Bishops Avenue, and try building a 100 story tower block. But those things are actually rather expensive. And the cost of trying to do one on a fairly suburban street would be fun - getting thousands of tons of stuff in and out would be insanely expensive.
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
Just park caravans all down the road like in Bristol.
You obviously haven't met the Sturmabteilung in charge of parking enforcement in Hampstead.
Surely you’d love that kind of effective enforcement?
It depends how you define "effective"
The West Midland Serious Crime Squad was effective, by some measures.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
I suppose you could try buying an empty house on Bishops Avenue, and try building a 100 story tower block. But those things are actually rather expensive. And the cost of trying to do one on a fairly suburban street would be fun - getting thousands of tons of stuff in and out would be insanely expensive.
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
Just park caravans all down the road like in Bristol.
You obviously haven't met the Sturmabteilung in charge of parking enforcement in Hampstead.
Compulsory purchase the derelict plots on Bishops Avenue etc
Still expensive to build in London. Even if you give yourself permission for tower blocks. There's a reason that flat new starts have virtually stopped. And that's in areas where access for construction is easy.
AIUI that's also because prices for flats are static or dropping
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
I suppose you could try buying an empty house on Bishops Avenue, and try building a 100 story tower block. But those things are actually rather expensive. And the cost of trying to do one on a fairly suburban street would be fun - getting thousands of tons of stuff in and out would be insanely expensive.
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
Just park caravans all down the road like in Bristol.
You obviously haven't met the Sturmabteilung in charge of parking enforcement in Hampstead.
Compulsory purchase the derelict plots on Bishops Avenue etc
Still expensive to build in London. Even if you give yourself permission for tower blocks. There's a reason that flat new starts have virtually stopped. And that's in areas where access for construction is easy.
I suspect that it is the cost of the land not the cost of the building.
Comments
(You're not allowed to say VOTE FOR ME OR YOU'RE GOING TO HELL.)
https://youtu.be/h0UVXBkqA4I?si=ynlr88Jiv1_sGKcJ
I don't know if he was as rich as Farage has become !!
Inside the Quiet Republican Effort to Flip Fetterman
As the Pennsylvania Democrat increasingly is isolated within his own party, Republicans are quietly trying to win him over.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2026/05/04/fetterman-switch-parties-republican-00904177
The Met Police is seeking to extradite German suspect Christian Brueckner to face trial for the murder of Madeleine McCann
However, I remember when the Queen's funeral was done with commentary or without on Red Button. I went for without and it was so much better. Maybe time to do the same for live sport?
Unless they mean 'extradite him to Portugal,' but even so that's bugger all to do with the Met.
The German authorities are not obliged to extradite Bruckner to the UK because we are no longer an EU country.
Weird
"It’s my strong personal view that the international order will be rebuilt — but it will be rebuilt out of Europe."
https://x.com/clashreport/status/2051238437928210792
The Act is online and this isn’t in there AFAICT.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/2/contents
The closest is section 114A that is designed to catch personal intimidation not policy pledges -
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/2/section/114A
A brave prosecutor might look at paragraph (4)(f) but I don’t see it getting anywhere.
He hates migrant hotels and people on boats. Despite boasting he’d opened the hotels in the first place!
And the British courts would surely have no jurisdiction.
An extradition brokering scheme, no matter how farcical, could provide 3 years of that, I reckon.
https://x.com/kevinhollinrake/status/2051356537491181742?s=20
She could persuade me away from Reform if her brand wasn't so Ratnered and she wasn't surrounded by dreadful Tory Woke Wets who need to be expelled. But, she really has grown in "office", and good for her
I shall watch, with interest
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
You have the green deputy leader wanting them all to stay but objecting when they want to put some in her neck of the woods, Crowborough. Share them around the country. AFAIC.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/2/section/115/enacted
115Undue influence
(1)A person shall be guilty of a corrupt practice if he is guilty of undue influence.
(2)A person shall be guilty of undue influence—
(a)if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm or loss upon or against any person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of that person having voted or refrained from voting..
You can
1) Buy existing properties. Insanely expensive.
2) Rent existing properties. Insanely expensive. This is why, under Blair, they started looking at cheaper places. This led to a comic law suit, where lawyers for a refugee organisation tried to claim that sending refugees to live in Edinburgh was against their human rights.
3) Build on parks, green bits. Most of which are owned by someone or something already.
4) Expropriate stuff
Which one(s) do you like?
@malcolmg will go postal.
That is until about 2022 when there was an enormous surge in small boats and the Conservative government desperately tried to find a way to house them - and the cheapest place to do that was always going to be the kind of place you describe.
Since then the government has done a decent job reducing the numbers in hotels - by about 45%.
Where have migrants been housed?
In the cheapest possible places.
Why have they been housed there?
Because it's cheap.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/2/section/115
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/2/section/115
You want section 114A which is the current position in the rUK. The website’s hard to handle and a lot of people get this wrong.
Substantively though these sections are designed to catch personal threats not policy promises.
Seriously, if you could build cheaply on "the most expensive roads", @rcs1000 would have rounded up some investors. Imagine being able to magic up a few hundred flats in Knightsbridge....
The entire premise of the Labour party is "Vote for us, and we'll tax the kind of people who don't vote for us and give the money to you" and we could hardly outlaw that.
Everton 2 City 1
75 mins
So they started trying to distribute them outside London. Which led to lots of lawsuits claiming that there was almost a right to live in London.
Enough. These people have to go back, one way or another, and the next government has to lay down the law for a seriously skilled based migrant policy, from now on. No one else gets to come
They are proposing to house them where it’s predominantly young people renting in densely populated cities. It’s probably just another ploy to shovel more money at slum landlords, who from recent reporting make up a number of Reform councillors.
Then you don't need to house as many. That seems to be where it went wrong.
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN01403/SN01403.pdf And how much it cost ....
Or does that just represent the diversity of landlords?
I always loved the fact that the British Communist Party derives a lot of income from property it owns and rents out.
And that was scarce better.
At least Starmer has a consolation prize coming by the looks of it
Or maybe not ...
Anyway, still think a smart policy from Badenoch would be to go after slum landlords. Enough millennials like me still rent or have dark memories of it and it would be a nod to the next generation of prime voters.
So not far away.
So Reform folks on here, why should we listen to you now?
I think that’s parts of the toxicity of the hotels though - these areas have had no direct experience of immigration other than young men from the world’s poorest countries - while my experience has been quite the opposite.
The whole sequence of events - collapse of EU migration to university cities followed by explosion in small boats and dodgy student visas to seaside towns - is like a sick joke.
But the updated bit says substantially the same.
..(4)The following activities fall within this subsection—
(a)using or threatening to use violence against a person;
(b)damaging or destroying, or threatening to damage or destroy, a person’s property;
(c)damaging or threatening to damage a person’s reputation;
(d)causing or threatening to cause financial loss to a person;
(e)causing spiritual injury to, or placing undue spiritual pressure on, a person;
(f)doing any other act designed to intimidate a person;
(g)doing any act designed to deceive a person in relation to the administration of an election...
Policy promises which are targeted specifically and solely at constituencies which elect the candidates of a particular party, if they can be construed as damaging to property, would I think fall under this section.
It would be a test case, since afaik, no one until now has been idiotic enough to pledge a policy on this basis (and Farage seems also to have endorsed Yusuf's piece of stupidity).
The harder point would be demonstrating that b/d/f might apply here, but I don't think it impossible.
What we need is a balance between regulation and enforcement.
In the case of slum landlords, most of their crap has been illegal for decades. But the response to problems has been to pile on regulation - which makes it actually worse.
This is because decent landlords try and fulfil all the rules. But they have to charge more to do so. And are undercut by the slum landlords. Who get to carry on, unperturbed.
It's the difference between the law abiding, who sleep soundly only if they have obeyed all the rules and laws. And those who treat being taken to court as a gamble/business expense.
In the absence of enforcement, bad drives out good.
3 - 3 FT
Arsenal in driving seat
Am I saying that society's woes are entirely down to our unwillingness to fund social care except through capped council tax?
No, no, no, no, of course not... yes. Don't forget to vote on Thursday.
The West Midland Serious Crime Squad was effective, by some measures.
Just the deciding frame left!
Yize is bottling this.