Forum menu
She's on Question Time right now, defending her expenses claims.
I'd like to know how she defends having her security detail (Highly trained gents who have spent a lot of time in Herefordshire and other interesting spots) pushing her shopping trolley around my local Sainsburys. How she thinks that having these poor chaps (decent men, to a T) asking me to move my car so the arrogant **** can park hers.
No, **** off. I've parked there legally, now you do your shopping yourself you troughing, caravan driving, fake smiling, pathetic excuse for a politician.
(And don't even get me started on Labour MPs trying to get me moved out of my favourite table in my favourite local curry house!)
don't even get me started on Labour MPs trying to get me moved out of my favourite table in my favourite local curry house
It sounds like a conspiracy to me Captain - I reckon you're a marked man.
Well, obviously , Ernie! 😀
own her with a copy of the Guardian*
*with a copy of the Socialist Worker rolled up inside
Has there been discussion on here on the idea of a "Green List"?
If MP's are serious about showing rectitude and probity over expenses they should be willing to submit themselves to scrutiny over their expenses claims. They should be transparent about removing all obstacles to FoI enquiries on the subject. Furthermore they should agree (with the "help" of the electorate they represent) on a set of criteria on what constitute "reasonable" claims.
As a result there would be a list of incumbent MPs who are "green", another list who are "amber" and a third list of those who made "honest mistakes" or "accounting errors". This wouldn't preclude anyone from standing for re-election but it might assist the lumpen proletariat in their decisions at the ballot box.
I normally steer clear of political threads on here but this latest round of conceit and hubris really enrages me.
I think I'll write to my MP....
As a result there would be a list of incumbent MPs who are "green", another list who are "amber" and a third list of those who made "honest mistakes" or "accounting errors". This wouldn't preclude anyone from standing for re-election but it might assist the lumpen proletariat in their decisions at the ballot box.
Good thinking.
write to your MP?
what on earth for?
do you not think that posting on an internet forum about mountain biking and Kylie is democracy enough?
do you not think that posting on an internet forum about mountain biking and Kylie is democracy enough?
😀
Yes. Sorry.
(tugs forelock)
Stuartie-c is your MP Gordon Brown too?
do you not think that posting on an internet forum about mountain biking and Kylie is democracy enough?
Kylie?
[b]NEVER! NEVER! NEVER![/b]
A&A is where it's at, when will you lovers of the aged Antipodean faghag realise this? 😉
I suspect that there might a reasonable amount of MPs on your green list stuartie_c. Unfortunately none of them are making the headlines at the moment. Take Jeremy Corbyn for example, he hasn't claimed anything in the seven years to 2007-8 for the additional costs allowance. But that's hardly headline grabbing news is it ?
Stuartie-c is your MP Gordon Brown too?
No, I've got Willie Rennie (Lib Dem). I think I WILL actually write that letter. Can we mobilise the STW troops to do the same?
What patronising hogwash might we get in reply?
Thank God the Tories are beyond reproach in this matters as they are in all things
Ernie - I'd be delighted to see lots of green-list MPs as it might restore my faith in this democracy. My naively optimistic vision is a future parliament where everyone is on the green list and there are new, unambiguous rules in place to regulate expenses.
Junkyard, they're not. They are far from it, in fact. At least, however, Cameron has actually done something about it.
This green list idea is a good one. I like it a lot.
This proposal knows no party boundaries - Labour, Tory, Lib-Dem, other - any politician who is taking the piss will have to face the [s]inqusition[/s] music.
Cameron has actually done something about it.
Yes, but like with all the other politicians only after they got caught with their pants down.
I think it would be best to vote BNP as their MP's havent claimed any expenses whatsoever . . . hang on a mo that will be because there arent any BNP MP's . . . err forget that
😆
El-bent - How exactly would Cameron have known what claims Tory MPs had submitted to the House of Commons Fees Office [i]before[/i] the story broke ?
what we should do is what a group on radio 5 live proposed....
namely to go down to the MP's second home and to request access to do a inventory of all the items claimed for the second home to ensure that they were still there
its brilliant in its simplicity and should have a TV camera crew there to record the moment, don't care what party just alternate
... so why have you replaced your Laura Ashley coffee table with one from Ikea?.... you can already feel the moment
El-bent - How exactly would Cameron have known what claims Tory MPs had submitted to the House of Commons Fees Office before the story broke ?
easy, they have been signing them off for the last 6 months ready for publication
Take Jeremy Corbyn for example, he hasn't claimed anything in the seven years to 2007-8 for the additional costs allowance. But that's hardly headline grabbing news is it ?
Not surprising that, though, is it? He's the MP for Islington North, which is an Inner London constituency, which means he is not entitled to claim it!
http://www.parliament.uk/about_commons/hocallowances/hocallowances06.cfm
At least, however, Cameron has actually done something about it.
Oh the irony of the "do nothing" scum finally "doing something".
stuartie_c, I like your green list.
Here's a nice compare and contrast -
Margret Moran MP for Luton South
Claim for second home (in Southampton)
Additional Costs £22,343
Kelvin Hopkins MP for Luton North
No claim for second home.
Additional Costs £1,242
They both live in the same road.
At least she hasn't tried claiming for her caravan as a second home.
What we need is a big wall, a big gun and a big bag of bullets.
don't even get me started on Labour MPs trying to get me moved out of my favourite table in my favourite local curry house!
Sorry, that's one aspirational step too far. [b]No one[/b] has a favourite table in a curry house.
Hmmm my local Mp <spit> is Nicholas Soames who barely turns up to Parliament let alone have anything to do with voting oiks
In fairness, he's probably having problems squeezing out of the front door on his house.
What we need is a big wall, a big gun and a big bag of bullets.
The Palace of Westminster has a big wall, I've a No.4 Mk1 (T) sat in my gun cabinet and I reckon I've enough .303 to deal with the worst culprits.
Just give me the nod (and the necessary documentation to make taking up this honorable duty legal) and I'll be there within a few hours.
Given the fact it is in fact a constitutional crisis, I would say a date for a General Election should be set straight away, and it be made clear that the electorate expect any MP up for re-election to be prepared to answer publically for their expense claims to their local constituency. (thats all of them, not just their local party).
Should sort the wheat from the chaff.
Incidentally, while we're on about the constitution how about an Abstain box on the ballot paper? I reckon if you had one currently there'd only be about 3 people get re-elected.
I reckon if you had one currently there'd only be about 3 people get re-elected.
Unfortunately if no one votes then the bugger who currently holds the seat remains in it for another term.
But most of these claims are transparent.
As in invisible and can't be seen as opposed to can be seen by all.
I had some dealings with Jeremy Corbyn when I lived in Islington and I discovered he used to channel a significant portion of his salary into the local party. As far as they go, I thought he was pretty straight (joke). No, what I mean is he was a good bloke.
I'd also be interested to see a list of claims that were rejected by the regulators. The Bill Butler one still strikes me as a shining example of these MP's mindset.
[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/may/14/mps-expenses-jackstraw ]In the end, one has to confront the following serious question. What aspect of the restoration of trust in politics would be in the media's interest?[/url]
I think this is interesting. Martin Kettle in the Grauniad.
And this is not a "constitutional crisis" in any meaningful sense. It is a spasm of outrage. It is likely to lead to a minor fascist resurgence in the local elections while we're all on our high horses, but we are a long way off threatening the constitution at this point. 🙂
I am seriously considering standing as an independent in the next election and I think a lot more people should try it as well.
I am not bound to any party, I have no specific leanings to either Tory (sorry Captain), Labour (not really sorry DD) or LibDem (errrrr...) but I am happy to work with them if they have a policy that both fits with what my local area wants and needs, and which I personally have no issues with.
If the whole of Parliment was made up of non-party independents, then I think the whole process of making laws would be better. No party political stuff, just proper debate to convince people that the law is right, just and worthwhile implementing.
How do you think political parties develop?
"proper debate to convince people that the law is right, just and worthwhile implementing."
Politics isn't really about law being right (just), though, is it? Legislation is just a tool for political change.
sootyandjim said
Unfortunately if no one votes then the bugger who currently holds the seat remains in it for another term.
Thats the point of having an abstention vote obviously. Its not that no one has voted, it is that they have rejected the candidates on offer. As things stand at the moment I'm prepared to guarantee you that Abstain would win most seats at the current European and Local elections.
BigDummy - said
And this is not a "constitutional crisis" in any meaningful sense
In what way is a considerable contingent of the governing house being shown to be corrupt, with the attendant public outrage, and the systemic inability to act upon it not a constituional crisis? Point 1 we don't have a written constituion, thus enabling the thieving bastards to duck, dive and make up archaic rules as they go. Point 2 Do you honestly believe this will just die down and go away? (Might I guess from that, that you are close to GB by any chance?)
I reckon this country is actually nearer to open revolution against the system than at any time in my life, which is a loooong time, and the key issue is that unlike the miners strike and the poll tax thing, this is cross class, cross party and unifying the great unwashed in a way I've never seen before.
Pshaw, hardly. There will never be revolution in England - things have been much worse in the last 300 years than they are now and yet it never took place. Compare that to almost everywhere else in Europe.
"In what way is a considerable contingent of the governing house being shown to be corrupt, with the attendant public outrage, and the systemic inability to act upon it not a constituional crisis?"
Because it's not a dispute over power/authority/legitimacy between different parts of the state that ought to be brokered by the constitution (or, perhaps, law) but isn't, either because the constitution isn't clear or is being ignored.
I reckon this country is actually nearer to open revolution against the system......
A little far fetched methinks.
As long as the general public have their flat-screen TV's and a shiny new car paid on tick outside they'll do nothing to upset the apple cart.
If you shove enough microphones under people's noses and ask enough leading questions its easy to whip up a hysteria, but once Saturday rolls around and Britain's Got Talentless or some such tripe is on people soon forget.
Can you really see Mr and Mrs Smith of Dudley forgoing their weekly trip to the supermarket in order to take part in a civil disturbance?
G, you're clearly very worked up about this in a way I'm not, but what we're seeing is simply not the precursor to a change in the way we are governed as far as I can see. The local elections on June 4th will go ahead. People will vote, votes will be counted. Because of all the angry nonsense about politicians being "all the same" being spouted, the BNP will do rather well, as will the Liberal Democrats.
The general election will go ahead in about a year's time. It will be held in exactly the same way as every general election in your lifetime. Labour will take a massive pasting, for a wide range of reasons including but not limited to the expenses fuss. The conservatives will form a majority government, but there will be large gains for the Liberal Democrats, and a surprising number of independents and fascists will be returned. The Queen will invite the leader of the largest party in the commons to form a government, which he will do.
At some time between now and then, the speaker will have been forced out, there will be a widespread consultation on MPs salaries and expenses and Cameron and Clegg will form a united front and will succeed in forcing Brown to accept their proposals, which will be rather hair-shirted. The incoming government will swiftly pass legislation creating an independent body to review MPs remuneration and parliamentary privilege, and will ahve to appoint someone genuinely heavyweight to lead it. (they will at least ask Martin Bell if he is not in parliament).
There will simply not be any constitutional change, and it will die down. This is my sense of it, anyway. We may all rise up, march on Westminster and burn parliament, but I'm really not seeing it at the moment.
We may be differing on what we mean by "constitutional crisis". What I am seeing, and what I've described above isn't one, as far as I'm concerned. EDIT: I am happy to adopt konabunny's definition of a "constitutional crisis".
I am nothing whatever to do with the prime minister's office or the government. I am an irritated labour member, but that is as close as I get. 🙂
Do you remember the Poll tax riots?
If not you will find that it did actually force a stornger government to climb down and change direction. The reason that happened is because there was a wide spread sense of injustice over the policy, not just a few "oiks" getting stroppy in Trafalagar Square. The ground swell over this one is far greater than it ever was with the Poll Tax. The difference here is that a policy change will not cut it. You really have got an issue, where its almost impossible to resolve the matter satisfactorily under the current system. Parliamentry Privilige makes it very difficult to take action against an MP, and once people figure out that they are pretty much going to get away with it the level of outrage will grow, especially at a time when everyone else is losing jobs, and belt tightening. Apart from GB demanding all MP's expose their expense records, and then going to the polls once that information is out I can't see how anything else will do.
Right now you are looking at the possibility of some pretty strange election results, which may well leave us with the BNP or perhaps worse UKIP representing us in Europe. How much of a crisis do you need before you call it one?
PS: The GB jibe was tongue in cheek BD, never personal, hope that was obvious.
caravan driving
[pedant] you can't drive a caravan, unless it's in the desert and it's a lot of camels in a line[/pedant]
Government changing its policy, alterations to parliamentary procedures, or surprising election results, do not count as constitutional crisis while the consitution is intact and functioning, which it is.
I agree that it might usefully be called a political crisis, but it is not currently a consitutional one. Neither were the poll tax riots, although I don't think you are were necessarily suggesting they were.
Edit: no offence taken!
All true enough, I just think that this may just be a bridge too far for people to stomach, given all the other crepe they are having to pay out for... Fred Goodwins Pension, bailing out city slickers etc etc, and for that reason I think the absence of proper clear cut rules, (i.e. no formal constitution), will lead to many MP's who ought to be hung out to dry, escaping without real punishment. My senses tell me that if that happens Mr and Mrs Average's piss will spontaneously boil.
At some point the worm will turn! Can't happen soon enough IMHO
Of course, if we accept the parallels being drawn between the banking crisis and the crash of 1929, then there would be a precedent for some rather vigorous politics, against which some vigilance is needed.
While I don't much like the current spectacle, I'd be very suspicious of the sort of government we might get if all the anger floating around at the moment got channelled into active politics...
On that basis, I hope I am right and you aren't, but we shall see. 🙂
The press have lifted the lid of "The machine" and have indeed found that quite a large percentage of it is greased by the Public Purse. This is not something that most of are surprised by.
For my part, the loss of a few thousand tax pounds is more than off set by the rather public humiliation that some of the seedier elements in the system are being exposed too, some of whom will undoubtedly lose their seats come the next election.
Absolutely agree there BD.
Thats why I think its really important that the issue gets headed off at the pass, but I fear that between lack of effective leadership, and the stupidty of the "I'm going to vote for the BNP/UKIP to teach them a lesson" brigade its going to get worse before it gets better.
I do however, hope that at the end of it the fundamental rottenness in our society has taken a bit of a hiding.
BG
I also hope as an electorate we dont "throw the baby out with the bath water" however I suspect this is potentially more damaging than almost any political crisis in recent times.
Simply because it is an easily understandable manifestation of greed at a time when the publics consciousness is full of high unemployment and an economic slowdown.
"Take Jeremy Corbyn for example, he hasn't claimed anything ......"He's the MP for Islington North, which is an Inner London constituency, which means he is not entitled to claim it
Fair enough, I wasn't aware that Islington North was very much nearer to Westminster than Harrow East. And there the employment minister Tony McNulty parents' have a home for which he has claimed £60,000 - even though he lives in Hammersmith which is only three miles from the House of Commons.
[url= http://www.****/news/article-1163792/Ministers-60-000-expenses-parents-home-Rumbled-Tony-McNulty-drops-claim--calls-curtailed.html ]McNulty drops claim... then calls for it to be curtailed[/url]
I guess that means that all of inner London's MPs will automatically go on stuartie_c's 'Green List' then .....
What winds me up is the lack of morals that many of these MPs have. Saying "sorry" because you got caught (exposed) and then offering to pay it back stating that the system was at fault just shows how little respect these people have for us. The banks and these MPs seem to think that by saying "sorry" is all that's needed and accountability doesn't apply to them. I think well done the DT for exposing this info to the public.
well done the DT for exposing this info to the public
All of the information, barring the addresses, was going to be released to the public in July anyway.
ernie, I think the key here is the Telegraph got it all out there before there was a chance for any other challenges and/or "redactions" of the details, but otherwise, yes that is the case.
I don't think that there has ever been any suggestion that the details in the information would have been 'tampered with' before they were released Captain.
Given the squirming that the Commons had been going through to try and avoid/defer publication, would you be so sure they wouldn't have tried, Ernie?
Given the squirming that the Commons had been going through to try and avoid/defer publication
Well in that case Captain it must have really bad when the Tories were in power, because they categorically refused to make public MPs expenses.
And of course not forgetting, we all know who to blame for mess, don't we ?
[i]"Thatcher ordered an independent review which recommended rises that would make even Jacqui Smith blush. But that would have enraged voters. So a squalid little deal to appease parliamentarians was brokered. Less pay, but more cash by the back door."[/i]
[url= http://www.people.co.uk/news/tm_headline=blame-thatcher-for-this&method=full&objectid=21346871&siteid=93463-name_page.html ]Former Tory MP Jerry Hayes says "Blame Thatcher for this"[/url]
How did I know it would be Thatcher's fault eventually! 😀
ernie, I think this goes across the parties. It's the individuals not the parties that are at fault IMO. I would like many of these people to be fined and replaced ASAP.
How did I know it would be Thatcher's fault eventually
Because you had already read what the former Tory MP had said ?
Here, let me remind you again what he said :
[i]"As the great Westminster gravy train shudders to a halt, Gordon Brown has one consolation as he hurls Nokias at cowering officials.
He is not to blame for the greed that has corroded public confidence. [b]The person responsible for filling more boots than Imelda Marcos, is Margaret Thatcher[/b]."[/i]
It's a little beauty isn't it ?
How did I know it would be Thatcher's fault eventually!
Come on, Flashy; it's [b]ALWAYS[/b] Facha's fault!
Seeing as how she was a nasty, evil, greedy self-serving bitch, I'm not surprised at this.
Please, Maggie; just die. Please.
Amen
Must be Maggie...never took a pay rise from the day she entered no.10 to the day she left...and famously decorated no.10 out of her own pocket.
Bitch
Must be Maggie...never took a pay rise from the day she entered no.10 to the day she left...and famously decorated no.10 out of her own pocket.
Christ, you have your priorities all sorted luv...
I wasn't aware that Islington North was very much nearer to Westminster than Harrow East. And there the employment minister Tony McNulty parents' have a home for which he has claimed £60,000 - even though he lives in Hammersmith which is only three miles from the House of Commons.
McNulty is a scumbag. If a huge chunk of his constituents can make it in/out/across London every day, so can he (for the part of the year when Parliament is in session).
But don't feel too generous towards the "Inner" London MPs (including Corbyn) - they all get generous London weighting.
I am an irritated labour member, but that is as close as I get.
Jeebus - how bad would it have to get before you'd actually leave the party? What more could they possibly do to make you lose your trust/faith? I speak as a former member who would now semi-tactically vote against Labour in favour of the Lib Dems.
Must be Maggie...never took a pay rise from the day she entered no.10 to the day she left...and famously decorated no.10 out of her own pocket.
[CITATION NEEDED]
'Ye sordid prostitutes have you defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices?
Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole Nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievance redress'd, are yourselves become the greatest grievance....I command ye therefore, upon peril of your lives, to depart immediately out of this place; go, get you out! Ye venal slaves be gone!'
Oliver Cromwell to the Rump Parliament 1653
It is so gratifying to see how far we've come....
Hear hear, vote Lib-Dem they're squeaky clean... Hell their honourable leader (my MP) even spent money on his garden in order to do us a favour in the future. Thanks Nick.
It is a fact that is too little known or remembered that throughout her time as Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher did not take the salary she was entitled to as Prime Minister and instead drew the salary of an ordinary cabinet Minister.
Recently I was talking to her about the current debate on Member´s allowances and I asked her why she had not taken her full salary as PM. I knew the answer. "We didn´t need it. DT had done well and our outgoings were not that great. We lived above the shop and worked and worked and worked. And in any case it was taxpayers' hard-earned money." The last four words were given particular force. Perhaps another example of a part of ´Thatcherism´ that could do with copying by today´s politicians?
Well, that's terribly interesting and has completely changed my memory of Tory sleaze (now replaced by Labour sleaze), apart, of course, from it saying a different thing to what you said, and still not having a citation...
The bitch din't take her full PM's salary, as compared to the return on her and her family's business investments, the difference was probbly peanuts. Ok to appear altruistic, when you can afford too..
was not as if she had a family to feed, from an income dependent on an industry which was about to be shut down, with no opportunity to gain sufficient income from employment elsewhere.
Bitch. Is she still alive? Every day she lingers on this Earth, is another day Britain mourns....
Not the mines again surely....think you need to look abit harder.The mine closing was well under way before maggie was anywhere near power !
Throughout the 1960s, with a Labour Government in office from 1964, the pit closure programme accelerated; it decimated the industry. During this period, nearly 300 more pits were closed, and the total workforce slumped from over 750,000 in the late 1950s down to 320,000 by 1968. In many parts of Britain, miners now became known as ?industrial gypsies? as pit closures forced them to move from coalfield to coalfield in search of secure jobs.
roddersrambler - you are really talking sh1te (and who was talking about the mines btw?) no one but the Thatcher government was responsible for the destruction of the British coal industry.
If coal production was cut back in the late 50s and 60s it was because demand coal had fallen (for obvious reasons such people not using coal for heating and BR becoming fully electric/diesel). The pit closures of the 1980s had nothing whatsoever to do with a fall in demand for coal, in fact Britain uses today approximately the same amount of coal as it used in the 1980s. And yet we no longer have a coal industry to speak of.
The pit closures carried out in the 1980s were purely for nasty, vindictive, class-based, political reasons. Thatcher's deep hatred for organised British workers is well known.
Furthermore, Labour was only in power for 4 years in the period from the late 50s until 1968. And of course this was a period of full employment, so that any hardships which pit closures might of caused pale into insignificance compared to pit closures in the 1980s - remember that was a period when due to deliberate government policies, unemployment reached 3 million, the highest levels since the Great Depression.
Here you are roddersrambler, have a read of this quote :
"[i]Robens, in his 10 years (1961-71) as Coal Board chairman, closed 400 pits and made 300,000 men redundant. Yet he did it with great care, immense social provision to cushion the human impact and with the co-operation of the NUM and its outstanding general secretary, Will Paynter, another Communist. Of course, this was at a time when the general level of unemployment was low. It was never easy but it was handled with political skill and sympathy.[/i]"
Note it's comment that it was done with the co-operation of the NUM and it's communist general secretary. Miners were always prepared to accept pit closures if they were carried for economic reasons and the social consequences were dealt with. This however, was far from the case with Thatcher.
Do any of the Tories on here genuinely believe that that evil bitch truly acted, at all times, in the best interests of ALL British people?
Deep down, you know that she din't. Mind, most politicians don't, let's be fair, but Thatcher treated the working class backbone of this country like shit, and instilled a greedy, insecure, selfish mentality in the minds of a nation divided by class, race, culture and ideology. Set people against each other, divide and rule, dog eat dog.
There was no humanity, no caring, no compassion, within Thatcher, or her politics. Only a megalomaniacal desire to destroy the will of the masses, to rule over a people too weak and frightened to resist. And she used whatever means she could, to achieve her aims.
Sadly, we are still suffering very much, from the legacy of her tyranny.
Please. Maggie; I beseech you; just die.
I'll even build the coffin...
The pit closures of the 1980s had nothing whatsoever to do with a fall in demand for coal, in fact Britain uses today approximately the same amount of coal as it used in the 1980s. And yet we no longer have a coal industry to speak of.
I think you're answering your own questions here !
The reason so many jobs were lost in the 80's were due to advancement in technology.It did people a favour.Would you like to work down a pit ?
Industries evolve,are the cornish still going on about the loss of tin mines ? Or the ship builders of Liverpool or Newcastle ? If there is no longer a market for such things why keep them open ? LDV vans is a good example,no one wants them cos they are shite and know one needs/wants them.
was not as if she had a family to feed, from an income dependent on an industry which was about to be shut down, with no opportunity to gain sufficient income from employment elsewhere.
Rudeboy was referring to the mines i think.
I think you're answering your own questions here !
I wasn't asking any questions.
I was challenging your absurd claim that what happened to the coal industry in the 1980s was exactly the same as what happened to it in the 50's to 60s.
BTW the coal which we are using today isn't British coal which is being mined by robots, it's foreign coal which is being mined by foreign miners.
I was challenging your absurd claim that what happened to the coal industry in the 1980s was exactly the same as what happened to it in the 50's to 60s.
I was simply pointing out that it was not solely Mrs T that closed mines down.I think some people think that she was the only person to close pits.
BTW the coal which we are using today isn't British coal which is being mined by robots, it's foreign coal which is being mined by foreign miners
Thank god for that,i wouldn't want anybody i know be subjected to working in such conditions.The sooner we become dependent on other energy sources the better.The stuff is dangerous to get at...and it stinks !
Thank god for that,i wouldn't want anybody i know be subjected to working in such conditions
So it's ok for other people in foreign lands to mine it, then?
Pull yer head out of her arse. It must surely stink.
See, we've made it all nice and comy for you! In you get, Maggie...
[img] 
[/img]
(Eco-friendly bamboo coffin. She'd be doing her bit for the environment)
I hope Michael Foot dies a painful early death. When he does, I shall sip champagne and dance a little jig.
Actually, I won't because I'm not that utterly pathetic. You sad, sad little man, RudeFred. Pathetic.
Fine, disagree with someone's politics and policies, I know I do with the current shower in government, but this pathetic wish for someone to die is just that, pathetic.