JonnyDBrit
Member
David Cameron Under Fire From Labour As He Says Critics Of His Austerity Pay Cap Are Selfish
Source: http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_595bb0cfe4b0da2c73257b96
Fuck Cameron
Like say... £1.5 billion?
David Cameron Under Fire From Labour As He Says Critics Of His Austerity Pay Cap Are Selfish
Source: http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_595bb0cfe4b0da2c73257b96
Fuck Cameron
Quite an infuriating line just on its own. We need it today, pigfucker."spending money today that you may need tomorrow."
Quite an infuriating line just on its own. We need it today, pigfucker.
Andrea Leadsom is a drooling nitwit, to put it politely.
Also in today's news:
Lib Dems may back government on case-by-case basis, say sources
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-government-on-case-by-case-basis-say-sources
Is this the deficit actually a big problem and are tax revenues too low to fund public services then how is lowering the deficit a solution if you aren't increasing tax revenues to fund public services and infrastructure spending? Surely that's just kicking the can down the road while not focusing on the real problem. If they are going to go down the road of saving money why don't they rework services so they aren't wasteful, stop hiring private firms to fill gaps at many times the price. A good example, why pay someone hundreds of pounds to fix a street light when you had a local public engineer on a decent wage all year round who just buys the replacement for buttons. Better economy, more tax revenue which you reinvest so more workers, better industry, more tax revenue to spend. Why isn't that their plan?
Case by case should be the default position tbh
Case by case should be the default position tbh
"No Deals" indeed
But whats confusing about all this is that if this is how their deal will be there was no need mentioning it in the first place. Labour have said themselves that if the Tories put forward policies they agree with they would work with them.Exactly. If the Tories put forward good legislation that meets with other parties demands, then of course it should be considered and backed if appropriate, especially if changes can be extracted. Obstruction just for obstructions sake would be rather pointless.
Betrayalton! :-O
"No Deals" indeed
Saudi Arabia has 'clear link' to UK extremism, report says
Saudi Arabia is the chief foreign promoter of Islamist extremism in the UK, a new report has claimed.
The Henry Jackson Society said there was a "clear and growing link" between Islamist organisations in receipt of overseas funds, hate preachers and Jihadist groups promoting violence.
The foreign affairs think tank called for a public inquiry into the role of Saudi Arabia and other Gulf nations.
Endorsing the report, Labour MP Dan Jarvis said it shed light on "very worrying" links between Saudi Arabia and the funding of extremism and he called for the government to release its report on foreign funding.
"In the wake of the terrible and tragic terrorist attacks we have seen this year, it is vital that we use every tool at our disposal to protect our communities," he said.
"This includes identifying the networks that promote and support extremism and shutting down the financial networks that fund it."
Ukip councillor calls homeless people 'detritus' who should be removed from streets to 'save the city'
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...eets-save-city-vagrants-council-a7822186.html
Dude needs to be sacked
Case by case should be the default position tbh
I still don't understand why Gove running precluded Boris from running. Felt like a convenient excuse to me.
And yeah Gove only ran for Tory leader to scupper Boris. I think I remember Boris being told at his leadership launch that Gove was running and then deciding (I think it might even have been as bonkers as mid-speech?) to not run.
But why would Boris so clearly need Gove's 'friends'? They amounted to, at most, 48 members, who would all inevitably back whichever of them made it past the first round. Are you trying to tell me that Gove, who came behind Andrea Leadsom, was more popular than Boris in the Conservative party?Because Gove had promised Boris that his friends in the party would back him. If Gove was standing himself then obviously that wasn't happening
... when I read in the Times yesterday that Tim Farron's chief of staff Ben Williams had met with his No 10 counterpart Gavin Barwell last Thursday I took it with a pinch of salt. Not least because I knew that Ben was in Leeds on Thursday.
What actually happened was that on Tuesday in Portcullis House, the large shopping centre-style atrium on the parliamentary estate where MPs, staff, journalists and visitors mingle, get coffee, have informal meetings and things like that, Ben bumped into Mr Barwell, with whom he was previously acquainted. The conversation was polite, friendly even. They made small talk. They went their separate ways.
Reports of that meeting then somehow again found their way to the press – via Number 10 we believe – by which time the casual encounter was transformed into some kind of secretive quasi-negotiation about helping Theresa May's struggling minority government to pass legislation.
It was utter bollocks. Pointless, distracting and annoying bollocks. Are you getting the idea here?
Maybe it is just the heat of the Westminster summer or maybe it is the general uselessness of this minority Conservative Government and the people around it or maybe it is a combination of the two. Frankly I don't really care because it is still bollocks.
So don't believe everything you read in the papers. If you see a story like this then have a look at the Lib Dem Press Office Twitter feed. They are usually pretty sharp off the mark and to the point. On this point they made it pretty clear that the story was untrue.
Tim Farron made clear repeatedly throughout the election campaign that we would form no coalitions and do no deals of any kind to prop up either Theresa May's Conservatives or Jeremy Corbyn's Labour. Every single Lib Dem MP backs him and every single one agrees.
Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg has named his sixth child Sixtus Dominic Boniface Christopher.
The backbencher announced the new arrival on Instagram, where attention focused on the eye-catching name.
The name Sixtus is shared with five popes, most recently in 1590.
"Helena and I announce with great joy that we have a baby Sixtus Dominic Boniface Christopher, a brother for Peter, Mary, Thomas, Anselm and Alfred." Mr Rees-Mogg said.
But that makes no sense in the context of how the Conservative leadership election works. The candidates get eliminated one at a time, so as long as Boris was preferential to Gove overall, Gove being in the race should have meant nothing to Boris. I really think a lot of people have been fed a story here and are taking it as fact without examining it.Gove and Boris were the Brexit brothers and had the same well of support - they didn't need each other's friends; they had the same friends. Gove's decision to run for leader was designed to split that support and ensure that neither of them could be leader. It was basically a murder-suicide. In short:
Poor child....
I still love the fact that its clear he gives absolutely no shits about his daughter who is the only one with a simple, one word name Mary.
It's ok, the child will get 1/6th share of about 80% of Somerset so he can afford to pay for a deed poll change. Although Rees-Mogg does seem the type to stick to inheritance only passing to the eldest boy.
When will Cameron call me greedy for wanting a lil more benefits?
Which do you reckon he follows, Agnatic, Agnatic-Cognatic or Absolute Cognatic law?
Edit -
Actually, its blatantly Gavelkind
The LD chief whip has strong words on these recent "LD secret talks with Tories" stories:
http://www.libdemvoice.org/alistair...ruth-about-those-secret-tory-talks-54814.html