MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
He won't know what one is.
His many cars are always immaculately clean but it happens by magic, like so many other things such as the perpetually full petrol tank and the view of the driver from the back seat
I could see my Tory MP getting her face on screen a bit during PM Q's... God, I hope we can get her out next election.
FFS haven't we done this?
Simple economics is a bit more nuanced. Who knew?
https://fullfact.org/immigration/immigration-and-jobs-labour-market-effects-immigration/
It's difficult to see how sectors like care could be automated. But you know - small boats 🤷
I mean, did you see Rishi Sunak trying to buy petrol?! He needed that supposedly low-skilled worker to tell him where to tap his **** debit card…
Hold on a minute. I'm no fan of Sunak, Tories or the status quo, but knowing where to tap a debit card isn't exactly a difficult skill to learn. That anecdote doesn't appear to prove what you are trying to use it to prove.
dazh Full Member
What’s his position on car washes though?
I would have thought that Rishi Sunak fully supports the well established Tory position on the issue - let them get on with it:
"The latest findings on continuing poor treatment of workers in carwashes come after the government in early 2019 rejected the idea of a national licensing scheme for the sector."
And as the Guardian article points also points out:
"Only 6% of the carwashes had written contracts with workers while just 11% handed out payslips so that they could prove they were paying the legal minimum wage, holiday pay or sick pay. Less than half (41%) were registered companies, indicating most are not registered with the tax authorities."
It is hard to believe that many fluent English speaking UK born workers, whatever their race, would put up with that sort of shit. So you can see the attraction of importing cheap foreign labour.
Otherwise no one will wash your car for you without charging you a ridiculous amount of money to do it and you will be forced to either use an automated car wash, which won't clean and dry your car properly, or to get a bucket of water and do it yourself.
When an enterprising punter sets up a roadside bicycle washing service for a fiver a wash we will wonder how we ever managed to wash our own bikes after a bike ride.
rejected the idea of a national licensing scheme for the sector
"Light touch" regulation as cover for exploiting workers isn't just Tory policy, for some it's their religion. The problem is UK government policy deliberately enabling the eroding of the position, conditions, security and pay of workers. Wherever they were born. The workers aren't the problem.
And hate him or hate him, he’s famously quite good at campaigning, then absolutely rubbish at everything else.
Beautifully put Binners.
Can we park the car wash thing and focus on supposedly better governed employment sectors that have had the arse ripped out of them because of the changes to labour markets and the race to the bottom? Care sector, nursing, manufacturing? Whoever went to a car wash thinking it was in any way legit?
Care sector, nursing, manufacturing?
Retail, warehousing and logistics, parcel delivery...
When an enterprising punter sets up a roadside bicycle washing service for a fiver a wash we will wonder how we ever managed to wash our own bikes after a bike ride.
Why would you expect it be that cheap? Dog grooming isn't.
https://washmy.bike/pricing
https://www.rideclean.cc/booking-form-old
https://www.bikleen.com/book-online
The worrying thing is that they've only just started.
They're proposing their latest anti-union 'minimum service' legislation to deliberately be so vague that they can apply it to virtually any sector. Even the few remaining sane members of the Tory party think this is a step too far. Not that they'd actually vote against it, obviously.
Be under no illusions, they want to make striking itself illegal, and you can only imagine what would happen to wages and employees rights from that point onwards
so vague that they can apply it to virtually any sector
And any worker. The employer could name any worker as being exempt from normal strike laws and effectively banned from striking, in law. So, pick out those most likely to stand up for everyone else, and put them (not their role, but their name) on the list of people required to work to ensure a "minimum service" when a strike is on.
The workers aren’t the problem.
So you keep repeating whilst maintaining this ludicrous pretence that anyone has blamed the workers.
I guess it is a measure of how weak your argument is that you have to focus on something which no one has actually said.
The whole thing is empowering employees with all the legislative cover to effectively sack anyone on the spot for pretty much anything, with no comeback.
Their ideal model for future employment law is to enable what P&O did when it sacked everyone, en masse, and then took on replacement workers on much reduced pay and zero employment rights
Anyone who thinks their intentions are any more benevolent than that, now we're 'free' of that pesky EU legislation, needs to wise up pretty sharpish
Be under no illusions, they want to make striking itself illegal, and you can only imagine what would happen to wages and employees rights from that point onwards
Yup. However it is very likely to backfire on them. Firstly it is likely to create an environment of even greater militancy, and feed left-wing movements. And secondly it is likely to make the public more sympathetic towards trade unions and less towards the Tories. Already the latter is very much becoming evident.
Anyone who thinks their intentions are any more benevolent than that, now we’re ‘free’ of that pesky EU legislation, needs to wise up pretty sharpish
It's genius in a way... tell workers that taking control of our borders and keeping out EU migrants is the answer to their problems... oh, turns out that isn't the answer, and in many cases it's made the situation much worse... the problem is now workers rights and collective action taken over pay and conditions... so let's get rid of all that. Now who would have predicted that...?
secondly it is likely to make the public more sympathetic towards trade unions and less towards the Tories. Already the latter is very much becoming evident.
The concerted efforts of the government and the media to portray Mick Lynch as Arthur Scargill and nurses and teachers as a modern day 'enemy within' really aren't going well, are they?
the problems is now workers rights, pay and conditions… so let’s get rid of that.
Perhaps you didn't bother reading the Guardian link? Here it is again for you:
This is today without any changes to existing legislation. The gig economy is alive and well as it was when the UK was an EU member state. Hand car washes are not the result of brexit. In fact brexit has probably been a burden to hand car wash operators, it certainly hasn't helped them.
As far as the right to strike is concerned the Tories have only about 18 months to make it illegal before a Labour government comes to power and reverses it.
No one doubts that a Labour government would fully support the right to strike, do they?
No one doubts that a Labour government would fully support the right to strike, do they?
Starmer is on the record, repeatedly, saying a labour government would immediately repeal any of these anti-union laws
I know thats not what the forum revolutionaries want to hear, but there you go
really aren’t going well, are they?
No, thank goodness.
But this winter has taught me not to bring up strikes and unions when out socialising, not everyone is getting behind them, to put it mildly. Some indifference is turning to anger or some (even if more people are moving the other way, at least for now). They're still political capital to made from turning people against unions (and the making that stick to Labour as well, even where they aren't connected). Have the Conservatives overestimated the power of that? Or is it about building a motivated base to reduce losses at the next election, and to try and build back from that fast after it?
On the question of the exploitation of migrant workers and the threat of growing militancy - United Voices of the World and the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain are a very new and positive phenomena:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Voices_of_the_World
The openly confrontational attitude of UVW and IWGB distinguishes them from larger unions:
They also take an uncompromising approach to their demands. Both unions are quick to call strike action, often with short work stoppages of several hundred employees that take place alongside protests designed to generate a social media buzz and exert public pressure on an employer ... "We tell workers that they need to take action, serious action, protracted action until they win," says Mr Elia. "The demands we make are non-negotiable. We want everything we ask for."
That's proper fighting talk! And they are growing evermore influential.
Starmer is on the record, repeatedly, saying a labour government would immediately repeal any of these anti-union laws
I know thats not what the forum revolutionaries want to hear, but there you go
That is obviously exactly what "the forum revolutionaries" want to hear. I was of course fully aware of Keir Starmer's pledge to repeal any anti-trade union legislation.
My concern was whether doom-mongers such as Kelvin were aware. The whole argument appears to be based on indefinite and uninterrupted Tory rule. Despite the fact that the Tories will almost certainly be gone in a few months.
Although Kelvin already argues that there will be too much for Labour to do, so he has already set the bar as low as possible and dashed expectations.
In contrast I have more confidence in what the next Labour government will be able to achieve.
Me? A doom-monger? Political events have panned out at least as badly as I was expecting for the UK since the 2015 Tory election win, in many areas much worse. Come the election, 15 years of damage will probably require 15 years of rebuilding to turn around. Anything else is wishful thinking. Will the UK give Labour the time to do that? I doubt it. But I hope we do. Will Labour move further right if left dealing with the realities of government for that long? I expect so. But I hope it does not. As for workers rights... safer under Labour... but undercutting the conditions and pay of other countries will continue to be a political football in UK politics, and I can't predict how that'll turn out longer term. Having joint minimums below which we and bordering countries should not fall was fine by me. The battle ahead in the UK should have been for improving standards, not trying to protect what we have. Of course there's also still the possibility of a big two thumbs up bounce back towards the Tories, another win for them, and another downwardly spiralling decade ahead. I really hope not, but anything could happen before the next General Election. If Sunak stays in till election day... Labour should be able to carry much of their lead into government... but it's only should, or could, not will.
Me? A doom-monger?
Absolutely. You constantly paint a picture where the Tories have unlimited and indefinite power, despite the fact that they will almost certainly only be in power for a few more months. You dismiss any possibility of a Labour government even reversing current Tory policies, let alone providing legislation which dramatically improves on what previously existed.
Come the election, 15 year of damage will probably require 15 years of rebuilding to turn around.
Complete nonsense. And there is every reason to suspect that Labour will win the next two general elections.
To claim "anything else is wishful thinking" is a measure of how little you expect from a Labour government.
It took a Labour government 3 years to create the NHS from scratch.
Come the election, 15 years of damage will probably require 15 years of rebuilding to turn around.
Nah, the tories only really did any stuff in their first term. Since then all they've done is held a vote on EU membership then spent the next 6 years trying to implement it. Labour won't be reversing brexit but they can put a serious dent in the stupid stuff the tories did between 2010 and 2016 and that can easily be done in one term.
I haven’t said those things of course.
What the stuff I copied and pasted?
Or how dire the situation is because of the Tories and how Labour won't have the time to reverse it?
Get a grip and own the things that you have said 💡
So Rasb is rumoured to be falling on his sword pretty soon. How quaint!
Hopefully he'll lay a bit longer though, Sunak tree Weak seems to be sticking.👍
Personally I think he's Sunakered.
It won't be the Labour Party I would choose but if they do leave the Tories with 100 seats then history tells us that Labour should get at least two terms and whatever they do will be 100 times better than anything over the last 12 years so I am happy with that knowing the imposed limits the country has (idiots voters, biased media etc,.). Yes I have a low bar after living in the country for 55 years...
So Rasb is rumoured to be falling on his sword pretty soon. How quaint!
If he goes and potentially Braverman as well, Sunak is screwed and there'll have to be a GE. I know Boris is on manoeuvres to make a glowing return but there's surely no way they can reinstate him. Johnson > Truss > Sunak > Johnson in less than a year...?!
If the current situation was a kids book it'd be...
Fishi Sunak and the government of inaction.
like a comic novel only not funny.
*BOFF* watch him fly to Leeds in a jet to talk to medical staff rather than increase their wages and invest to improve working conditions.
*BIFF* Watch him take zero action over blatant fraud from one of his own MPs until the media noise became deafening.
Crazy legs- I get where you are coming from, but with this "conservative*" party I think Boris cooking back is a 50/50 chance!
Who would really get a large amount of money AGAINST it?😐
* It's changed into a shape shifting,power at any cost, malignancy more than a functioning political party imo.
On Monday we had dinner with someone who deemed the only wrong thing Dumbojo did was lie. All the other stuff was an amazing success.
I’m sure he would happily vote for that **** again. Let’s hope the ****er gets locked up.
Why would there have ti be a GE crazylegs?
Just thought I'd leave this here.............
Lol, very good. I wonder if they can be bought on eBay?
Lol, very good. I wonder if they can be bought on eBay?
The Conservatives? Oh yes, I'm sure they can be.
enabled the Tory Hard Brexit.
Would that be the "Hated Deal" the Express and Mail are always bleating on about.
As if it's the fault of the EU and they forced the tories by twisting their arm up their back to accept it. 🙄
https://twitter.com/bankofengland/status/1621140247982784512?t=T3B2NoPFR5E8YxVaqVVK1A&s=19
Imagine an economy where it's operated in the 'interests' of the lower/modest incomes.
Because, we have exactly the opposite.
The sooner this establishment driven economy properly stalls and we rebuild the better. (And I think it's on the cards - just taking time to get there.)
We're all getting shafted at the expense of the perverse glee of clumsy market economies with BoE intervention when it needs fixing only for the asset class.
Inflation as we all know is being used politically by the the UK Government and BoE (ha ha independent) to make it look like they're fixing the economy, so you vote Tory. Note how halving inflation has become a political tool from tools. It actually shouldn't be like that if the BoE is supposed to be independent. But the Tories have weaponised it. (They didn't take the blame on the way up BTW.)
We all knew last year that inflation was looking like being an unstoppable transitory phenomenon.
But now the BoE has squeezed the living shit out the economy and made money more expensive when there is less of it. That adds to inflation (but it won't necessarily show up on CPI but limits spending.)
But later on we will all be celebrating lower CPI when individual inflation will have increased.
Shocking state of affairs.
In other news the BBC has done an investigation into how its journalists present the economy, and have found much reporting to distort the truth about government financing and such. For example always using the term as government debt is a bad thing that needs paying back - when we know it doesn't function like a household. And government debt is not the same as personal debt. This line of reporting has helped reinforce the 'need' for austerity, as it's Tory framing (just letting Rachel Reeves absorb this would be a good thing.)
Certainly progress for those that want a wider adoption of economic understanding.
See here: go deep for the full review.
And Meadway article.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jan/31/bad-economics-bbc-tory-austerity-uk-politics
P.S on Sunak's rubbish poster he both says reduce government debt and grow the economy.
That's impossible.
Government red is private sector black.
Idiot.
I see today that rat boy’s latest wheeze is to make withdrawal from the ECHR a Tory manifesto pledge.
Progressive stuff.
trailmonkey
Full Member
I see today that rat boy’s latest wheeze is to make withdrawal from the ECHR a Tory manifesto pledge.
Progressive stuff.
You have to admire the balls of the Tories and tear your hair out in frustration at the stupidity of a sub set of voters that they see this as a good thing.
Wonder if said voters are sentient enough to realise the ECHR protects them too?
Nah... Got the word europe in so must be bad.
Still none of the westminster lot realise that the ECHR is incorporated into the law that set up Holyrood and the welsh parliament - and this cannot be changed without the consent of those parliaments. so its still going to apply in Scotland and wales
Just the continuation of the Brexit mindset innit?
Offering morons simple solutions to complex issues
Offering morons simple solutions to complex issues
Why this constant need on here to blame voters every time there is disapproval of Tory Party policy? Simple solutions for complex issues indeed!
I haven't seen evidence of overwhelming public opposition to the ECHR. I can't recall anyone telling me that the UK should leave the ECHR. Opinion polls that I have seen don't back up any claims that there is huge public support for leaving the ECHR.
Where they do show support for leaving the ECHR it does not appear to be a majority, nor is it hugely different to those backing staying, the "don't knows" tend to a very large minority, and it invariably involves asking a loaded question to get the desired result.
This is a classic and very recent example specially commissioned by an organisation known for its right-wing bias:
People were asked if they would back leaving the ECHR to have better control over who comes in and out of the country, not simply whether they backed leaving the ECHR.
The inference is very clearly that without leaving the ECHR the UK does not have proper control over who comes in and out of the country.
Yet despite this loaded question only 38% said they backed leaving, which obviously means that 62% didn't.
And you can be absolutely certain that the question asked was the one which they believed would show the largest possible number in support of leaving the ECHR. The article even includes a helpful petition at the end for people to sign.
I know a lot of people on here feel hugely morally and intellectually superior to the average man and woman on the street, but how about occasionally not resorting to knee jerk reactions and always assuming the very worse in voters? 💡
From that link:
When people were asked if they’d back leaving the ECHR to have better control over who comes in and out of the country, 38% said they agreed, and 32% disagreed – a net difference of six points.
That 38% is the subset I referred to and its also the subset the Torys hope to appeal to and grow of possible.
If that 38% don't realise that the ECHR might also benefit themselves, their loved ones or society at large, then I can see why their cognitive abilities are called into question on occasion if I'm brutally honest.
I'm most definitely not morally or intellectually superior (deeply average at best) but some mistruths are pretty easy to spot. When more so when they come from a party that has so spectacularly and clearly lied so much in the very recent past.
Just my take on it and I'll freely admit that part of my position is based on a definite and strong emotional element that is hard to exclude.
but some mistruths are pretty easy to spot. When more so when they come from a party that has so spectacularly and clearly lied so much in the very recent past.
The "mistruth" in this case is being told by a reputable pollster, which is very clearly suggesting that the only way to have better control over who comes in and out of the country is to leave ECHR, not the Tory Party. And yet despite that only 38% back leaving.
But it would be right to claim that the Tory Party controls the narrative where these deliberate lies thrive.
How about opposition parties being a bit more proactive in challenging Tory lies and not just always laying the blame on voters?
I know that opposition parties are scared shitless of speaking up about such matters, and instead prefer to allow the Tories free reign, but ECHR is a good example of where the Tories don't enjoy huge public support. If it seems like they do it is because of the lack of opposition.
Why this constant need on here to blame voters every time there is disapproval of Tory Party
policy?
Maybe because the voters are the people who voted in the Tory party? Quite a few times over the last 12 years.
Morons is harsh but not thinking about stuff, playing to media BS, voting for a party that will actually be worse for them and society (i.e. us) would not put an individual as particularly sensible would it.
I can understand why the 5% that the Tory party benefits votes for them but the other large % of votes is always difficult to explain without blaming the voters in some way.
Many /most of those voters have been conned by relentless propaganda.
"The ideas of the ruling class are, in any age, the ruling ideas". A measure of success of this is if you can get someone who originates from the lower orders to argue your case eg Caulfield, Streeting, Cleverly, Reeves.
Maybe because the voters are the people who voted in the Tory party?
Here we go again. At the 2019 election 28% of eligible voters voted for the tory party. That's less than a third of 'the voters', not all of them or a majority of them as your statement implies.
At the 2019 election 28% of eligible voters voted for the tory party. That’s less than a third of ‘the voters’, not all of them or a majority of them
It's true, but people who do not exercise their voting rights are also making a choice, albeit a passive one, and you could argue that 'voters' are people who are actually motivated to vote. Yes, fewer than a third actively voted blue, but the reasons why the missing % made their choice not to vote are complex, and don't automatically suggest a lack of support for the Tories.
In many cases people do not vote because they believe their votes are not impactful due where they live. I live in a very safe Tory constituency. There really isn't any point in anyone voting Labour here, due to FPTP. And even a Conservative supporter may feel there is no need for them to traipse down to the polling station, as the result (at least in 2019) was nailed on.
It would be interesting for pollsters to seek out this absent part of the electorate, and try to find out which way they would have cast their ballot in a compulsory system. I suspect that the missing votes would end up pretty similarly divided between the parties, and that it would confirm a broad mandate for the Tories in 2019, although perhaps not an absolute majority in terms of the popular vote.
Here are 4 very common reasons why people who could vote don't vote:
https://www.raconteur.net/economy-trends/why-people-dont-vote/
None of them suggest that people who don't vote are committed Tory voters.
General election results are a very good indication of support for the Tories, even if they might not include a small amount of vague lukewarm support.
It’s true, but people who do not exercise their voting rights are also making a choice
Yes, but pointing the finger of blame at 'the voters' for being stupid enough to vote in the tories is a pretty daft thing to say when 72% of them didn't vote for them. The only people who can be blamed for the tory govt are those who voted for them, not the other 72%. If we're going to make generalisations about what 'the voters' want then the only thing we can say with some confidence is that they didn't want the tories.
I don't count people who don't vote as voters so it is actually 44% of voters who voted for the tory party rather than your deliberately skewed 28%. So pretty much close to half.
So like I said, 39% of people who are not voting for their best interests or that of society generally. Quite a lot eh....
Looks like the way is being paved for the return of the shagger after the local elections in May...
https://twitter.com/camillahmturner/status/1622559165452283904?s=20&t=8mV99vpm3meCeOrntSTcbA
Out of interest I thought I'd have a look at odds and he's the favourite at 4/1, with Kemi Badenoch not far behind at 5/1
I don’t count people who don’t vote as voters so it is actually 44% of voters
When the facts don't support your argument, just invent others. 🙄
Former 'master of the universe' fails at running small, post-colonial country; delivers further decline in living standards for population.
Previous employer refuses to re-hire him as...he's now proven himself to be incompetent and useless.
Can we stop referring to the UK as small? I mean I know it's not a world power or global empire, and generally thinks more highly of itself than it should, but it's not really small by any metric.
When the facts don’t support your argument, just invent others.
Nobody has invented any facts.
- 44% of people who voted voted Tory - FACT
- 28% of all people who could vote voted Tory - FACT
No right or wrong here, just different ways of looking at it. What we can't do is say how those that don't vote would have voted but one proposal would be to make an assumption they would vote in a similar spread to those that do vote which would not be a bad assumption based on the numbers.
It looks like the deckchairs on the Titanic are due to be rearranged this morning
Liz back as chancellor of the exchequer maybe?
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1622725880454733831?s=46&t=k9yZfubaNm7AARFwtzy2Ag
Liz back as chancellor of the exchequer maybe?
That would be hilarious. Terrifying but hilarious.
Here you go Liz, try and find that £40bn that you and Kwasi lost just after you came out of your cocaine-fuelled budget overhaul.
one proposal would be to make an assumption they would vote in a similar spread to those that do vote which would not be a bad assumption based on the numbers.
That would be a terrible assumption, and totally ignores the concept of voter disenfranchisement and the reasons that drive it.
Looks like the way is being paved for the return of the shagger after the local elections in May…
A summer of T<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">russ vs Johnson leadership elections would be wildly funny</span>
I think this is my first post on this thread?!?!?!?
I agree with Kerley, those who don't use their vote (for whatever reason) are, by default, 'voting' for status quo as they aren't voting for change. So, other than to point out these people could have an effect on results and dont, cannot be counted in the "X% voted for the tories/labour/free coffee for all" type statements. The only number that matters is the number of those that voted.
That would be a terrible assumption, and totally ignores the concept of <span style="text-decoration: underline;">voter disenfranchisement</span> and the reasons that drive it.
I think we all know how this (my underline) could be changed in the future, and we all know exactly why it wont happen. Basic politics, economics and critical thinking must be taught and from a young enough age to ingrain and male it useful. Meaning the electorate would have the tools needed to make informed decisions and help to stop the disenfranchisement of so many.
The deckchairs haven't just been rearranged, Rishi has created more deck chairs
All in a desperate attempt to keep his potential enemies onside; we now have four more government departments than we did yesterday.
Nobody sacked and yet more right wing Brexiteer loons given ministerial limo's, salaries and titles
Exactly what we the country needs.
Nobody sacked and yet more right wing Brexiteer loons given ministerial limo’s, salaries and titles
Oh they don't need to DO anything!
They can quietly piss away the next year in "setting up the department" and "engaging" and "consulting", maybe with a few dramatic announcements of alleged funding to come while not actually doing anything.
They know they'll all be out of a job at the next election, the main thing now is to look busy, rake in as much profit as possible, fire up all those contacts in business and industry ready for them to be parachuted in as a consultant/non-executive director in a few months time and draw up a long list of what they can achieve if given another chance at the polls.
Creating a Department of Energy Security and New Zero is kind of pointless unless you overhaul all the planning regs too - at the moment you can't build onshore wind, substandard housing/industry is being built all over the place and there's no integrated transport and you'll never get close to Net Zero without a complete overhaul of all that.
30p Lee as deputy chair of the Tory party???
Sweet jebus!
30p Lee as deputy chair of the Tory party???
https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/rishi-sunak-to-shake-up-big-bag-of-****s-20230207231334
I occasionally get gobbets from someone close to the action and the most recent was, 'now the culture is very much one of smash and grab.'
Given the total state of the party, the elevation of 30p Lee was surely inevitable and must truly signal the end of days
I agree with Kerley, those who don’t use their vote (for whatever reason) are, by default, ‘voting’ for status quo as they aren’t voting for change.
What if those voters know that nothing will change as a result of their vote and so stay at home? Are they morons as Kerley would have us believe, or are they rational people who can't see the point in doing something that will have no effect?
Everything's relative
We've been here countless times with this ridiculous 'they're all the same' narrative
Unless you're a genuine nihilist (such as yourself), if you can't even be arsed strolling down to a polling station once every 5 years and doing something to make things at least marginally better, than you deserve everything you get
So... in answer to your question... yeah, they're morons
Anyway...
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1622968427164958720?s=20&t=G-eUW6XLSKHVwDS8Xc4COw
Big story to be published tmorn in a national newspaper regarding Greg Hands, with a name like that I’d bet on nominative determination playing a factor in the story.
Big story to be published tmorn in a national newspaper regarding Greg Hands, with a name like that I’d bet on nominative determination playing a factor in the story.
I reckon it will be greed rather than lust in his case
as for 30P Lee, I cannot wait to see the ridiculous mess he gets the party into
I reckon it will be greed rather than lust in his case
Greg Hands ‘in the tilll’?
Big story to be published tmorn in a national newspaper regarding Greg Hands, with a name like that I’d bet on nominative determination playing a factor in the story.
Think that was alluded to on the Whip's list previously aired.
I reckon it will be greed rather than lust in his case
He's a Tory, doesn't need to be a case of either/or.😉
Anyway, I'm guessing well get a slew of new policies being announced?
I mean, none of them will happen or have a meaningful budget, just be announced is all.😁
'Nominative determinism'? Is he big into steak bakes?
What if those voters know that nothing will change as a result of their vote and so stay at home? Are they morons as Kerley would have us believe, or are they rational people who can’t see the point in doing something that will have no effect?
Personally I think the people who didn't vote would have been better off if we hadn't had 13 years of Conservative government; in fact I think nearly everyone would, but you (and they) might be right.
Nice to see that Rishi is as shameless as Boris at getting a Zelensky photo op in when the heat is on
Volodymyr Zelensky is here on an official visit, he will be addressing the UK Parliament later.
What do expect the Rishi Sunak to do - blank him? Not allow press photographers to photograph his meeting with the President of Ukraine? Not be seen endorsing him and his visit?
What exactly is your criticism?