LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!

surrey_commuter

briantrumpet said:

Weird, but I can't find any current Telegraph articles praising Johnson's handling of, well, anything.

Is he still Prime Minister?

don't bother looking in The Times, maybe try Conservative home. don't forget to switch on incognito as you don't want that on your browsing history

kingstongraham

surrey_commuter said:

briantrumpet said:

Weird, but I can't find any current Telegraph articles praising Johnson's handling of, well, anything.

Is he still Prime Minister?

don't bother looking in The Times, maybe try Conservative home. don't forget to switch on incognito as you don't want that on your browsing history

I thought Quentin Letts in The Times would oblige - and near enough.

rjsterry

I think that's called damning with faint praise.

briantrumpet

rjsterry said:

I think that's called damning with faint praise.

Interesting that Letts refers more to the delivery than the content.

rick_chasey

briantrumpet said:

rjsterry said:

I think that's called damning with faint praise.

Interesting that Letts refers more to the delivery than the content.

It’s BoJo. That’s always been his thing

pblakeney

briantrumpet said:

rjsterry said:

I think that's called damning with faint praise.

Interesting that Letts refers more to the delivery than the content.

It was also referred to as an excellent after dinner speech rather than a political one.
Damning with faint praise indeed.

briantrumpet

pblakeney said:

briantrumpet said:

rjsterry said:

I think that's called damning with faint praise.

Interesting that Letts refers more to the delivery than the content.

It was also referred to as an excellent after dinner speech rather than a political one.
Damning with faint praise indeed.

I suspect that's his next career move, and maybe rather sooner than he envisaged. It's almost as if to Prime Minister well is hard.

rjsterry

surrey_commuter said:

briantrumpet said:

Weird, but I can't find any current Telegraph articles praising Johnson's handling of, well, anything.

Is he still Prime Minister?

don't bother looking in The Times, maybe try Conservative home. don't forget to switch on incognito as you don't want that on your browsing history

Why would you be embarrassed at visiting ConservativeHome? Sure there's some tripe on there but look at this place.

briantrumpet

It seems that Theresa May and others aren't happy with planning decisions being turned over to an algorithm. I wonder why?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/08/theresa-may-leads-tory-rebellion-against-planning-reforms

Maybe this is the next tactic of a completely incompetent government - employ algorithms that can be blamed for every screw up you make, but can never try to defend themselves.

rjsterry

Seems the Tories want their party back. Hunt is right on this. For all its many faults, the planning system does at least have local democratic involvement. But then high-handed over-centralisation and over-reliance on poorly understood tech is very on brand for Jummings.

surrey_commuter

rjsterry said:

Seems the Tories want their party back. Hunt is right on this. For all its many faults, the planning system does at least have local democratic involvement. But then high-handed over-centralisation and over-reliance on poorly understood tech is very on brand for Jummings.

It is like he has just discovered algorithms and is now like an infatuated schoolboy frantically beating off over his favourite Little Mix poster.

rick_chasey

https://twitter.com/johnhyde1982/status/1314220824564576261?s=21

briantrumpet

rick_chasey said:

https://twitter.com/johnhyde1982/status/1314220824564576261?s=21

Cosy.

rick_chasey

Really glad the hostile-to-non-whites-government is now passing laws that allow govt to turn a blind eye to war crimes committed by its forces.

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

Really glad the hostile-to-non-whites-government is now passing laws that allow govt to turn a blind eye to war crimes committed by its forces.

in fairness I think it is xenophobia rather than racism.

It does baffle me that they see the Irish as "one of us" and not a problem when it comes to immigration

pblakeney

surrey_commuter said:

It does baffle me that they see the Irish as "one of us" and not a problem when it comes to immigration

They are probably the ones who see the Irish as distant relations that are welcome and will do as they are told.

surrey_commuter

pblakeney said:

surrey_commuter said:

It does baffle me that they see the Irish as "one of us" and not a problem when it comes to immigration

They are probably the ones who see the Irish as distant relations that are welcome and will do as they are told.

Or the ex-wife who will change her mind and come grovelling back

surrey_commuter

@rick_chasey you need to move to Spelthorne, they have taken advantage of the ultra low interest rates to borrow £1bn (yes a billion English pounds) to invest wisely in the west London property market. When this plan comes to fruition (and what could possibly go wrong) your council tax could become an annual rebate.

Maybe OT but Council was Tory controlled when they made the decision

rjsterry

surrey_commuter said:

@rick_chasey you need to move to Spelthorne, they have taken advantage of the ultra low interest rates to borrow £1bn (yes a billion English pounds) to invest wisely in the west London property market. When this plan comes to fruition (and what could possibly go wrong) your council tax could become an annual rebate.

Maybe OT but Council was Tory controlled when they made the decision

I'm sure I don't know what you're suggesting SC.

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

@rick_chasey you need to move to Spelthorne, they have taken advantage of the ultra low interest rates to borrow £1bn (yes a billion English pounds) to invest wisely in the west London property market. When this plan comes to fruition (and what could possibly go wrong) your council tax could become an annual rebate.

Maybe OT but Council was Tory controlled when they made the decision

Haha who advised them on that? They taking that themselves or via an investor?

I mean, seems a no brainier, but not sure about the fiduciary responsibility of councils.

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

@rick_chasey you need to move to Spelthorne, they have taken advantage of the ultra low interest rates to borrow £1bn (yes a billion English pounds) to invest wisely in the west London property market. When this plan comes to fruition (and what could possibly go wrong) your council tax could become an annual rebate.

Maybe OT but Council was Tory controlled when they made the decision

Haha who advised them on that? They taking that themselves or via an investor?

I mean, seems a no brainier, but not sure about the fiduciary responsibility of councils.

KPMG, it's auditor has “material concerns” about the council’s use of its powers to borrow to invest in properties between 2017 and 2018 and “the level of risk” to which the council is exposed from those transactions.

this is the tip of the iceberg, lots of public sector mugs have been providing an escape route out of commercial property for private money. Some have been even been buying shopping centres.

It is all out there as easily available info but as usual nobody cares or can not see the implications.

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

@rick_chasey you need to move to Spelthorne, they have taken advantage of the ultra low interest rates to borrow £1bn (yes a billion English pounds) to invest wisely in the west London property market. When this plan comes to fruition (and what could possibly go wrong) your council tax could become an annual rebate.

Maybe OT but Council was Tory controlled when they made the decision

Haha who advised them on that? They taking that themselves or via an investor?

I mean, seems a no brainier, but not sure about the fiduciary responsibility of councils.

KPMG, it's auditor has “material concerns” about the council’s use of its powers to borrow to invest in properties between 2017 and 2018 and “the level of risk” to which the council is exposed from those transactions.

this is the tip of the iceberg, lots of public sector mugs have been providing an escape route out of commercial property for private money. Some have been even been buying shopping centres.

It is all out there as easily available info but as usual nobody cares or can not see the implications.

Hmmm. Should speak to some of the former employees of intu before they start investing in big retail...

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

@rick_chasey you need to move to Spelthorne, they have taken advantage of the ultra low interest rates to borrow £1bn (yes a billion English pounds) to invest wisely in the west London property market. When this plan comes to fruition (and what could possibly go wrong) your council tax could become an annual rebate.

Maybe OT but Council was Tory controlled when they made the decision

Haha who advised them on that? They taking that themselves or via an investor?

I mean, seems a no brainier, but not sure about the fiduciary responsibility of councils.

KPMG, it's auditor has “material concerns” about the council’s use of its powers to borrow to invest in properties between 2017 and 2018 and “the level of risk” to which the council is exposed from those transactions.

this is the tip of the iceberg, lots of public sector mugs have been providing an escape route out of commercial property for private money. Some have been even been buying shopping centres.

It is all out there as easily available info but as usual nobody cares or can not see the implications.

Hmmm. Should speak to some of the former employees of intu before they start investing in big retail...

On the plus side they may be buying it off your pension fund

john80

rick_chasey said:

Really glad the hostile-to-non-whites-government is now passing laws that allow govt to turn a blind eye to war crimes committed by its forces.

Go and have a look at the countless bullshit cases brought against troops in Afganistan. You would not be happy if someone was able to bring charges against you multiple times in some times decades after the crime with pretty low bar of evidence. By all means maybe this is an argument for jot launching foreign invasions but at least have the decency to protect armed forces in a proportionate manner. This legislation is proportionate in my view.

rjsterry

john80 said:

rick_chasey said:

Really glad the hostile-to-non-whites-government is now passing laws that allow govt to turn a blind eye to war crimes committed by its forces.

Go and have a look at the countless bullshit cases brought against troops in Afganistan. You would not be happy if someone was able to bring charges against you multiple times in some times decades after the crime with pretty low bar of evidence. By all means maybe this is an argument for jot launching foreign invasions but at least have the decency to protect armed forces in a proportionate manner. This legislation is proportionate in my view.

You're muddling up criminal prosecution and civil claims. Individuals don't bring criminal charges, that would be a civil claim against the MOD. This isn't about protecting soldiers, but ministers.

verylonglegs

john80 said:

rick_chasey said:

Really glad the hostile-to-non-whites-government is now passing laws that allow govt to turn a blind eye to war crimes committed by its forces.

Go and have a look at the countless bullshit cases brought against troops in Afganistan. You would not be happy if someone was able to bring charges against you multiple times in some times decades after the crime with pretty low bar of evidence. By all means maybe this is an argument for jot launching foreign invasions but at least have the decency to protect armed forces in a proportionate manner. This legislation is proportionate in my view.

So you think there was a crime then but that it doesn't matter to you? Or did you mean an alleged crime?

rick_chasey

john80 said:

rick_chasey said:

Really glad the hostile-to-non-whites-government is now passing laws that allow govt to turn a blind eye to war crimes committed by its forces.

Go and have a look at the countless bullshit cases brought against troops in Afganistan. You would not be happy if someone was able to bring charges against you multiple times in some times decades after the crime with pretty low bar of evidence. By all means maybe this is an argument for jot launching foreign invasions but at least have the decency to protect armed forces in a proportionate manner. This legislation is proportionate in my view.

Meh. If they didn’t do anything wrong court will find so.

I get the argument to stop spurious cases coming to court but this legislation goes a lot further than that and leaves *a lot* of room for letting troops get away with war crimes - which, for the record did also happen with alarming frequency in the most recent wars.

Soldiers who commit war crimes do not do their nation or their fellow soldiers any favours and deserve to be punished.

rick_chasey

https://twitter.com/bill_esterson/status/1314644083122503680?s=21

More grease

john80

rick_chasey said:

john80 said:

rick_chasey said:

Really glad the hostile-to-non-whites-government is now passing laws that allow govt to turn a blind eye to war crimes committed by its forces.

Go and have a look at the countless bullshit cases brought against troops in Afganistan. You would not be happy if someone was able to bring charges against you multiple times in some times decades after the crime with pretty low bar of evidence. By all means maybe this is an argument for jot launching foreign invasions but at least have the decency to protect armed forces in a proportionate manner. This legislation is proportionate in my view.

Meh. If they didn’t do anything wrong court will find so.

I get the argument to stop spurious cases coming to court but this legislation goes a lot further than that and leaves *a lot* of room for letting troops get away with war crimes - which, for the record did also happen with alarming frequency in the most recent wars.

Soldiers who commit war crimes do not do their nation or their fellow soldiers any favours and deserve to be punished.

This bbc article kind of blows your argument out the water that their is a high level of war crimes being carried out by UK soldiers.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-52885615

john80

It is not stress free or cost free to defend yourself against claims no matter how spurious in either a criminal or civil trial. If you are not going to protect troops through this process then dont send them into combat. This new legislation tips the balance back to reasonable from the previous position of plain dumb.