Chat Forum
It is currently Wed Aug 21, 2019 5:06 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 6519 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145 ... 163  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 9:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
openclashXX wrote:
Willie Falloon wrote:
openclashXX wrote:
he'll poll at 40% in the next election, I'd imagine - the difference between a hung parliament and him winning outright is how well the Tory vote holds up between now and then

Nah, he is a two faced twat.

Sooner or later he is going to blow a fuse and left himself down.


believe me, I wish he would bugger off

but the past few weeks, with the anti-Semitism stuff, the Skripal stuff and now the Syria strikes, have shown him to basically be impervious to losing support. genuinely haven't found a single person who voted Corbyn last year and has changed their minds now - if anything, they're more dug in now than ever before

hence I see him carrying his 40% from 2017 onto the next election (no less, no more), and the final result being determined by the strength of the Tories



He's dropped 7 points with the survation poll.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 9:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20912
openclashXX wrote:
he'll poll at 40% in the next election, I'd imagine - the difference between a hung parliament and him winning outright is how well the Tory vote holds up between now and then


If the Tories listened to even their own voters and started investing in education, job training, infrastructure and the NHS, they would get a landslide.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 9:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20912
openclashXX wrote:
Willie Falloon wrote:
openclashXX wrote:
he'll poll at 40% in the next election, I'd imagine - the difference between a hung parliament and him winning outright is how well the Tory vote holds up between now and then

Nah, he is a two faced twat.

Sooner or later he is going to blow a fuse and left himself down.


believe me, I wish he would bugger off

but the past few weeks, with the anti-Semitism stuff, the Skripal stuff and now the Syria strikes, have shown him to basically be impervious to losing support. genuinely haven't found a single person who voted Corbyn last year and has changed their minds now - if anything, they're more dug in now than ever before

hence I see him carrying his 40% from 2017 onto the next election (no less, no more), and the final result being determined by the strength of the Tories


The problem is, after 8 years of austerity the public's stamina for ever shitter services declines. Plus there is the issue what do young people have? There aren't huge numbers of quality jobs and those with decent jobs can no longer afford homes. The Tories stupidly let housing become a problem a whole generation can't get on the ladder because of their obsession with private building firms who then build and sell to rich c#nts overseas who don't even live in the places or buy to let landlords. Even so called affordable homes are f**king expensive. It's more potent in London and guess where Labour and Corbyn are surging the most?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
8 years and we still have a deficit.... If we'd had Austerity of course it would have been done and dusted ....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20912
bimboman wrote:
8 years and we still have a deficit.... If we'd had Austerity of course it would have been done and dusted ....


Not exactly true. More austerity and there would be potentially less investment, less money making from business growth, fewer people in jobs returning taxes to government and fewer people spending money to make businesses a success etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
eldanielfire wrote:
bimboman wrote:
8 years and we still have a deficit.... If we'd had Austerity of course it would have been done and dusted ....


Not exactly true. More austerity and there would be potentially less investment, less money making from business growth, fewer people in jobs returning taxes to government and fewer people spending money to make businesses a success etc.



Maybe, it's happened in other country's and they've recovered.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20912
bimboman wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
bimboman wrote:
8 years and we still have a deficit.... If we'd had Austerity of course it would have been done and dusted ....


Not exactly true. More austerity and there would be potentially less investment, less money making from business growth, fewer people in jobs returning taxes to government and fewer people spending money to make businesses a success etc.



Maybe, it's happened in other country's and they've recovered.



Are you claiming Spain, Greece, Italy etc are recovered countries now?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
eldanielfire wrote:
bimboman wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
bimboman wrote:
8 years and we still have a deficit.... If we'd had Austerity of course it would have been done and dusted ....


Not exactly true. More austerity and there would be potentially less investment, less money making from business growth, fewer people in jobs returning taxes to government and fewer people spending money to make businesses a success etc.



Maybe, it's happened in other country's and they've recovered.



Are you claiming Spain, Greece, Italy etc are recovered countries now?



Spain and Italy are terrible examples of countries that had Austerity in Spain's case they've had a leftist governemnt that's hardly cut. What cuts to public spending have Italy carried out.

Ireland have recovered , they to the country's credit in acted serious austerity and quickly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14927
Location: Investigating racism in the NHS
The home ownership thing is bizarre - we spent years complaining that British people were too obsessed with buying homes and should rent more like Europeans, now that we are it's suddenly become a national crisis of not enough home ownership

Home ownership is overrated - it locks people into geographies for generations and hampers economic mobility


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20912
bimboman wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
bimboman wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
bimboman wrote:
8 years and we still have a deficit.... If we'd had Austerity of course it would have been done and dusted ....


Not exactly true. More austerity and there would be potentially less investment, less money making from business growth, fewer people in jobs returning taxes to government and fewer people spending money to make businesses a success etc.



Maybe, it's happened in other country's and they've recovered.



Are you claiming Spain, Greece, Italy etc are recovered countries now?



Spain and Italy are terrible examples of countries that had Austerity in Spain's case they've had a leftist governemnt that's hardly cut. What cuts to public spending have Italy carried out.

Ireland have recovered , they to the country's credit in acted serious austerity and quickly.


Eh? Italy cut 100 billion in 3 years. Spain cut 27 billion alone in 2012. That is more cuts then any year the UK has impliemented austerity. And either way those cuts aren't responsible for he poor economic growth

But in your mind basically countries which have had massive cuts to public spending didn't really cut because they are in the shitter? :lol: FFS! Stop this idealogical bollocks. Governments should spend wisely, but capital spending and investment in jobs is a way to run countries sensibly and even allowing more scope for sensible spending because they bring in bigger returns in th medium and long terms.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20912
openclashXX wrote:
The home ownership thing is bizarre - we spent years complaining that British people were too obsessed with buying homes and should rent more like Europeans, now that we are it's suddenly become a national crisis of not enough home ownership

Home ownership is overrated - it locks people into geographies for generations and hampers economic mobility



Nah. Stupid pro-EU lefties and the usual anti-tories complained in their Guardian or wherever opinion pieces. The general public have always wanted to own their home.

Also in this day and age I don't think home ownership locks anyone into geographies, people sell or commute. Home ownership in the South East isn't going to hamper any economic mobility.

Also it possible with ever crappier pensions, home ownership is even more essential for old age financial support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14927
Location: Investigating racism in the NHS
eldanielfire wrote:
openclashXX wrote:
The home ownership thing is bizarre - we spent years complaining that British people were too obsessed with buying homes and should rent more like Europeans, now that we are it's suddenly become a national crisis of not enough home ownership

Home ownership is overrated - it locks people into geographies for generations and hampers economic mobility



Nah. Stupid pro-EU lefties and the usual anti-tories complained in their Guardian or wherever opinion pieces. The general public have always wanted to own their home.

Also in this day and age I don't think home ownership locks anyone into geographies, people sell or commute. Home ownership in the South East isn't going to hamper any economic mobility.

Also it possible with ever crappier pensions, home ownership is even more essential for old age financial support.


I've seen numbers done for the US housing market which show that home ownership, once you factor in the various purchasing and registration costs plus annual upkeep costs and any incremental home investments, is not any better financially than sticking the same lump-sum deposit amount into a stock market that (on average) has returned 6-7% a year historically and renting instead


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
Quote:
Eh? Italy cut 100 billion in 3 years. Spain cut 27 billion alone in 2012. That is more cuts then any year the UK has impliemented austerity. And either way those cuts aren't responsible for he poor economic growth

But in your mind basically countries which have had massive cuts to public spending didn't really cut because they are in the shitter? :lol: FFS! Stop this idealogical bollocks. Governments should spend wisely, but capital spending and investment in jobs is a way to run countries sensibly and even allowing more scope for sensible spending because they bring in bigger returns in th medium and long terms.


Sorry I've said none of that, make your own arguments, don't make mine you idiot. As I said the UK hasn't implemented Auserity.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
Quote:
Eh? Italy cut 100 billion in 3 years. Spain cut 27 billion alone in 2012. That is more cuts then any year the UK has impliemented austerity. And either way those cuts aren't responsible for he poor economic growth

But in your mind basically countries which have had massive cuts to public spending didn't really cut because they are in the shitter? :lol: FFS! Stop this idealogical bollocks. Governments should spend wisely, but capital spending and investment in jobs is a way to run countries sensibly and even allowing more scope for sensible spending because they bring in bigger returns in th medium and long terms.


Sorry I've said none of that, make your own arguments, don't make mine you idiot. As I said the UK hasn't implemented Auserity.

Are you sure of the 100 billion cut ?
https://tradingeconomics.com/italy/government-spending


The context of Spain's "cuts"

https://tradingeconomics.com/spain/government-spending


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 11:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20912
bimboman wrote:
Quote:
Eh? Italy cut 100 billion in 3 years. Spain cut 27 billion alone in 2012. That is more cuts then any year the UK has impliemented austerity. And either way those cuts aren't responsible for he poor economic growth

But in your mind basically countries which have had massive cuts to public spending didn't really cut because they are in the shitter? :lol: FFS! Stop this idealogical bollocks. Governments should spend wisely, but capital spending and investment in jobs is a way to run countries sensibly and even allowing more scope for sensible spending because they bring in bigger returns in th medium and long terms.


Sorry I've said none of that, make your own arguments, don't make mine you idiot. As I said the UK hasn't implemented Auserity.



Which is bollocks! As you also said:

Quote:

Spain and Italy are terrible examples of countries that had Austerity in Spain's case they've had a leftist governemnt that's hardly cut.


After pointing out Ireland's recovery during austerity.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 11:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
eldanielfire wrote:
bimboman wrote:
Quote:
Eh? Italy cut 100 billion in 3 years. Spain cut 27 billion alone in 2012. That is more cuts then any year the UK has impliemented austerity. And either way those cuts aren't responsible for he poor economic growth

But in your mind basically countries which have had massive cuts to public spending didn't really cut because they are in the shitter? :lol: FFS! Stop this idealogical bollocks. Governments should spend wisely, but capital spending and investment in jobs is a way to run countries sensibly and even allowing more scope for sensible spending because they bring in bigger returns in th medium and long terms.


Sorry I've said none of that, make your own arguments, don't make mine you idiot. As I said the UK hasn't implemented Auserity.



Which is bollocks! As you also said:

Quote:

Spain and Italy are terrible examples of countries that had Austerity in Spain's case they've had a leftist governemnt that's hardly cut.


After pointing out Ireland's recovery during austerity.



Check my post, check out the 100 "billion" in Italy ? Or the context of 2012 Spanish cuts (as a blip in ever increasing spending).

Don't mosprepresent what I've said about the UK , we haven't had Austerity we have had a slow down in the increase in cash spending. Ireland didnt they had immediate and savage cuts.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 11:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20912
bimboman wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
bimboman wrote:
Quote:
Eh? Italy cut 100 billion in 3 years. Spain cut 27 billion alone in 2012. That is more cuts then any year the UK has impliemented austerity. And either way those cuts aren't responsible for he poor economic growth

But in your mind basically countries which have had massive cuts to public spending didn't really cut because they are in the shitter? :lol: FFS! Stop this idealogical bollocks. Governments should spend wisely, but capital spending and investment in jobs is a way to run countries sensibly and even allowing more scope for sensible spending because they bring in bigger returns in th medium and long terms.


Sorry I've said none of that, make your own arguments, don't make mine you idiot. As I said the UK hasn't implemented Auserity.



Which is bollocks! As you also said:

Quote:

Spain and Italy are terrible examples of countries that had Austerity in Spain's case they've had a leftist governemnt that's hardly cut.


After pointing out Ireland's recovery during austerity.



Check my post, check out the 100 "billion" in Italy ? Or the context of 2012 Spanish cuts (as a blip in ever increasing spending).

Don't mosprepresent what I've said about the UK , we haven't had Austerity we have had a slow down in the increase in cash spending. Ireland didnt they had immediate and savage cuts.


But we have. The UKs finances have specifically been altered to move away from the deficit. That is austerity, there doesn't have to be cuts, however there clearly has been.

As for your "mosrepresent whatI've said" comment, don't be a fool, in the context of the discussion and you opposing my points on the matter your comments had only one meaning, one you've made many times over the years. Don't pretend otherwise or that I'm miss-representing your position.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 11:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
Quote:
But we have. The UKs finances have specifically been altered to move away from the deficit. That is austerity, there doesn't have to be cuts, however there clearly has been.

As for your "mosrepresent whatI've said" comment, don't be a fool, in the context of the discussion and you opposing my points on the matter your comments had only one meaning, one you've made many times over the years. Don't pretend otherwise or that I'm miss-representing your position.




We haven't cut spending in cash terms, we restricted rises , that isn't the same as a 25% cut in spending as per Ireland.

Have you checked the 100 billion of Italian cuts yet ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 11:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20912
bimboman wrote:
Quote:
But we have. The UKs finances have specifically been altered to move away from the deficit. That is austerity, there doesn't have to be cuts, however there clearly has been.

As for your "mosrepresent whatI've said" comment, don't be a fool, in the context of the discussion and you opposing my points on the matter your comments had only one meaning, one you've made many times over the years. Don't pretend otherwise or that I'm miss-representing your position.




We haven't cut spending in cash terms, we restricted rises , that isn't the same as a 25% cut in spending as per Ireland.

Have you checked the 100 billion of Italian cuts yet ?


Lots of spending has been cut. The civil service for one. If you didn't notice. One of Osbourne's tricks was to pass off many of the real cuts to local authorities, hence closure of stuff like sure start centers.

And there is no point debating with you about the Italian cuts given you deny them despite posting a link that shows a graph that when switched to 10 yrs shows a massive cut in Italian government spending between 2010 and 2014.

What the hell am I supposed to debate you when you provide the evidence for me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 12:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
eldanielfire wrote:
bimboman wrote:
Quote:
But we have. The UKs finances have specifically been altered to move away from the deficit. That is austerity, there doesn't have to be cuts, however there clearly has been.

As for your "mosrepresent whatI've said" comment, don't be a fool, in the context of the discussion and you opposing my points on the matter your comments had only one meaning, one you've made many times over the years. Don't pretend otherwise or that I'm miss-representing your position.




We haven't cut spending in cash terms, we restricted rises , that isn't the same as a 25% cut in spending as per Ireland.

Have you checked the 100 billion of Italian cuts yet ?


Lots of spending has been cut. The civil service for one. If you didn't notice. One of Osbourne's tricks was to pass off many of the real cuts to local authorities, hence closure of stuff like sure start centers.

And there is no point debating with you about the Italian cuts given you deny them despite posting a link that shows a graph that when switched to 10 yrs shows a massive cut in Italian government spending between 2010 and 2014.

What the hell am I supposed to debate you when you provide the evidence for me.



What's 795 minus 780 ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 12:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
Steptoe losing the argument and the plot today.

Mad old c unt.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 12:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10985
bimboman wrote:
Steptoe losing the argument and the plot today.

Mad old c unt.

What’s the yoghurt botherer done today?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 1:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 34939
Location: For Wales the Welsh and Leinster
ScarfaceClaw wrote:
bimboman wrote:
Steptoe losing the argument and the plot today.

Mad old c unt.

What’s the yoghurt botherer done today?

If he saved multiple babies from drowning I suggest bimbo would find fault.
:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 1:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10985
c69 wrote:
ScarfaceClaw wrote:
bimboman wrote:
Steptoe losing the argument and the plot today.

Mad old c unt.

What’s the yoghurt botherer done today?

If he saved multiple babies from drowning I suggest bimbo would find fault.
:lol:

They were only drowning becuase of Tory policies.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 1:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 34939
Location: For Wales the Welsh and Leinster
ScarfaceClaw wrote:
c69 wrote:
ScarfaceClaw wrote:
bimboman wrote:
Steptoe losing the argument and the plot today.

Mad old c unt.

What’s the yoghurt botherer done today?

If he saved multiple babies from drowning I suggest bimbo would find fault.
:lol:

They were only drowning becuase of Tory policies.

:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 1:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 7887
eldanielfire wrote:
bimboman wrote:
Quote:
But we have. The UKs finances have specifically been altered to move away from the deficit. That is austerity, there doesn't have to be cuts, however there clearly has been.

As for your "mosrepresent whatI've said" comment, don't be a fool, in the context of the discussion and you opposing my points on the matter your comments had only one meaning, one you've made many times over the years. Don't pretend otherwise or that I'm miss-representing your position.




We haven't cut spending in cash terms, we restricted rises , that isn't the same as a 25% cut in spending as per Ireland.

Have you checked the 100 billion of Italian cuts yet ?


Lots of spending has been cut. The civil service for one. If you didn't notice. One of Osbourne's tricks was to pass off many of the real cuts to local authorities, hence closure of stuff like sure start centers.

And there is no point debating with you about the Italian cuts given you deny them despite posting a link that shows a graph that when switched to 10 yrs shows a massive cut in Italian government spending between 2010 and 2014.

What the hell am I supposed to debate you when you provide the evidence for me.


Correct me if I'm wrong but the measure is total spending not whether one programme or another was cut or had reduced funding. That probably happens every year and is not austerity.

You need to distinguish between cuts (total goes down) and restricted rises (total doesn't go up or only goes up a little). Both may have a negative impact in real terms but they are different processes.

If austerity is

Quote:
a political-economic term referring to policies that aim to reduce government budget deficits through spending cuts, tax increases, or a combination of both


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austerity

then it is explicitly about cuts and not restricted rises.

Is that ballpark?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
https://mobile.twitter.com/daily_politi ... 44/video/1


:lol: @ Steptoe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19903
bimboman wrote:
https://mobile.twitter.com/daily_politics/status/986564215056953344/video/1


:lol: @ Steptoe.

Bit of a weird one that. They were destroyed under labour when they were of no importance, they only became crucial after the 2014 legislation. Don't think anyone wins on that point.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
happyhooker wrote:
bimboman wrote:
https://mobile.twitter.com/daily_politics/status/986564215056953344/video/1


:lol: @ Steptoe.

Bit of a weird one that. They were destroyed under labour when they were of no importance, they only became crucial after the 2014 legislation. Don't think anyone wins on that point.



The direct accusation of Mays evil order to destroy the landing info is of course nonsense.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21519
Location: Gypsy Jack Nowell
Made a right plum of himself there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19903
bimboman wrote:
happyhooker wrote:
bimboman wrote:
https://mobile.twitter.com/daily_politics/status/986564215056953344/video/1


:lol: @ Steptoe.

Bit of a weird one that. They were destroyed under labour when they were of no importance, they only became crucial after the 2014 legislation. Don't think anyone wins on that point.



The direct accusation of Mays evil order to destroy the landing info is of course nonsense.

Oh indeed. Whoever briefed him should be in trouble


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:57 pm
Posts: 10030
happyhooker wrote:
bimboman wrote:
happyhooker wrote:
bimboman wrote:
https://mobile.twitter.com/daily_politics/status/986564215056953344/video/1


:lol: @ Steptoe.

Bit of a weird one that. They were destroyed under labour when they were of no importance, they only became crucial after the 2014 legislation. Don't think anyone wins on that point.



The direct accusation of Mays evil order to destroy the landing info is of course nonsense.

Oh indeed. Whoever briefed him should be in trouble


I wonder if whichever of the Labour Home Secretaries who approved this is a) feeling awful at not having warned their leader or b) laughing their head off?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3430
Quote:
Imp clarification after #PMQs
from No10: destruction of landing cards was an "operational decision" by the UK Border Agency. Ie Not a decision by a Labour Home Secretary or minister.


https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/986576473489334274


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 34939
Location: For Wales the Welsh and Leinster
So which year were the landing cards actually destroyed?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
Mahoney wrote:
Quote:
Imp clarification after #PMQs
from No10: destruction of landing cards was an "operational decision" by the UK Border Agency. Ie Not a decision by a Labour Home Secretary or minister.


https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/986576473489334274



"Under" not "by" , very clear.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19903
Mahoney wrote:
Quote:
Imp clarification after #PMQs
from No10: destruction of landing cards was an "operational decision" by the UK Border Agency. Ie Not a decision by a Labour Home Secretary or minister.


https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/986576473489334274

Ah, we're blaming the servants now. How gauche.

C69, I believe in 2010


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 34939
Location: For Wales the Welsh and Leinster
happyhooker wrote:
Mahoney wrote:
Quote:
Imp clarification after #PMQs
from No10: destruction of landing cards was an "operational decision" by the UK Border Agency. Ie Not a decision by a Labour Home Secretary or minister.


https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/986576473489334274

Ah, we're blaming the servants now. How gauche.

C69, I believe in 2010

When May was at the HO then.
Thanks, terrible series of events all round tbh whatever Party decided upon it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19903
c69 wrote:
happyhooker wrote:
Mahoney wrote:
Quote:
Imp clarification after #PMQs
from No10: destruction of landing cards was an "operational decision" by the UK Border Agency. Ie Not a decision by a Labour Home Secretary or minister.


https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/986576473489334274

Ah, we're blaming the servants now. How gauche.

C69, I believe in 2010

When May was at the HO then.
Thanks, terrible series of events all round tbh whatever Party decided upon it.

June wasn't it when she took over??

Shall we just call it a score draw, it's detracting from the major issue


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
c69 wrote:
happyhooker wrote:
Mahoney wrote:
Quote:
Imp clarification after #PMQs
from No10: destruction of landing cards was an "operational decision" by the UK Border Agency. Ie Not a decision by a Labour Home Secretary or minister.


https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/986576473489334274

Ah, we're blaming the servants now. How gauche.

C69, I believe in 2010

When May was at the HO then.
Thanks, terrible series of events all round tbh whatever Party decided upon it.



When she was HS , and would have known about an operational decision taken at the border agency a year earlier ? Do f uck off.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 3:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51875
happyhooker wrote:
Mahoney wrote:
Quote:
Imp clarification after #PMQs
from No10: destruction of landing cards was an "operational decision" by the UK Border Agency. Ie Not a decision by a Labour Home Secretary or minister.


https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/986576473489334274

Ah, we're blaming the servants now. How gauche.

C69, I believe in 2010



"Blaming" ?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 6519 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145 ... 163  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Armchair_Superstar, backrow, clydecloggie, Cruz, danny_fitz, fatcat, Flyin Ryan, Frodder, Google Adsense [Bot], Google [Bot], IBWT, KnuckleDragger, Lobby, Lord Denning, Mick Mannock, Mog The Almighty, Nolanator, Phredd, Podge, Risteard, RodneyRegis, SaintK, Saturnine and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group