2024 UK politics - now with Labour in charge
Comments
-
If it moves the vibes against your position, then generally not helpful.
0 -
If someone brings up Magna Carta, can I be condescending then?
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
That sounds like you have brought something personal into a spirited discussion.
0 -
And yet here we are 8 years after the Brexit vote discussing what people who voted leave could possibly have meant. It's not even the Brexit thread where such arguments can go round and round in perpetuity.
0 -
I am not interested in what people meant or hoped for at this stage. I am genuinely interested though, in whether those who voted leave feel they have seen a material benefit for themselves or a wider political/social/economic benefit they have seen, one which they can directly link to having left the EU?
0 -
I feel like we are still some way from referring to one another using ancient germanic terminology.
0 -
I occasionally wonder what the Brexit thread is like these days. Not enough to click on it.
1 -
Is mockery justified in, well, mocking a slogan that has no real meaning?
0 -
Yeah, thread 👮♂️🚓🚨 if it's just Brexit. I'm not sure if this is the Labour bashing thread or the Labour bashing thread. Mind you, if Starmer starts playing footsie with von der Leyen, it might end up here.
0 -
This was the thread set up by the former centre leftie messiah after his new party won. On the plus side, it has a finite life based on the thread title 🙂
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Far be it for me to speak ill of the dead, but he wasn't a leftie.
His politics were a blend of residual youthful leftie, mixed with some good old "how much bloody tax am I paying now?" conservatism, some extreme totalitarianism and a serving of potato wedges on each shoulder.
3 -
I did say centre leftie, which is probably where that weird mish mash of views averages out (you're not far wrong btw)
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I'm afraid you've got that wrong. Anyone who disagrees with Stevo's middle-of-the-road pragmatism is, ipso facto, a Starmer-hero-worshipping leftie. Please keep up.
0 -
It’s a common theme on the internet, “My views are centrist.” regardless of the views themselves.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.2 -
It's a frame of reference thing. If you are the centre of your universe.
0 -
Can anyone tell me why this is in the Telegraph (other than that they are screaming hypocrites having given Johnson a pass for just about everything, including actually breaking the law).
"Wes Streeting has become the latest Cabinet minister to admit using Lord Alli’s home after he hosted a fundraising event there attended by Sir Ian McKellen, the actor.
The Health Secretary and fellow Labour MP Kim Leadbeater mingled with 20 to 30 guests at the reception in March 2022, which raised £20,000 in donations.
They declared the value of the event as £4,600, which included the cost of drinks and catering paid for by Lord Alli."
What's the accusation? Labour supporter lets Labour Party MP use his flat to raise money for Labour Party from Labour-supporting donors. Is that against the rules?
0 -
It's all a distraction. They can't attack the policies such as WF cuts as they essentially support them. It is all just mud slinging in a bid to change public perception.
I completely agree with the idea that any MP should not be accepting gifts, even when fully declared. It just looks bad. I do also think the media are deliberately making a huge deal of it as part of their agenda to undermine a Labour govt.
The Sue Gray thing is a complete non story. It was interesting watching Chris Mason when he broke it on BBC. He spent most of the piece trying to justify why it was being reported. If a journalist is having to justify a story, you know they fundamentally don't believe it is important.
0 -
I do understand the thing about donations, but that needs all MPs to bite the bullet and argue that it would be better if their activities were funded by taxpayers... at the moment taxpayers are let off a lot of the costs of running (say) constituency offices by people 'donating' aides.
But in this particular instance, are they saying that a Labour supporter shouldn't lend his house for a Labour MP to raise money from Labour supporters? Maybe the supporters should have paid Alli £4,600, and then he could have donated it back to the party. A bit ljke the time I was checked by VAT, they found one invoice for £32 that I'd not put VAT on, insisted I invoice for the £4.80, despite the fact that the farmer I was invoicing was then going to claim back the £4.80 from HMRC. Thankfully the Telegraph missed that one.
0 -
PS, of course the Tories are really sore that no-one is offering them donations at the moment, as they are a shambles bereft of talent or principles, or prospect of any power for the next five years.
0 -
I don't think the Telegraph's objection is in any way principled. It is simply trying to leave a stain. There is the definite undercurrent with all of this that Labour (the party of working people) is really in thrall to millionaires to fund lavish events/buy them posh clothes etc. whilst forcing pensioners to freeze this winter.
0 -
The use of a flat for a donation raising party is (should be) a non story.
The excessive gifts taken by the likes of Starmer is not a non-story. It shows him to be a hypocrite having made huge issues of things that went on under the previous governments.
As I said this morning, I assume he and the others are not paying tax on the value of the personal gifts they are taking. That is simply wrong given the accumulated value of those gifts.
0 -
Hard to argue with this. The Arsenal directors box is fine but he's got to know it has to be explained.
But clothing? I mean clearly even Boris didn't accept clothing donations. No. Wait. They *were* donated suits. That explains why none of them fit.
0 -
I would agree but it has all been lumped together to create a particular narrative. They would have been far better leaving the non story stuff alone and focussing solely on the gifts/donations etc. as this is where most people on both sides of the political spectrum would agree that it was hypocritical and a mistake on the part of Starmer and other Cabinet Ministers.
0 -
They were donated to a charity shop where he bought them
0 -
Plus the clothes thing is just plain weird, it looks kind of childish, like a kid wanting their parents to buy them nice things and spoil them.
I understand borrowing an expensive suit or dress for an event as most celebs do, but allowing a donor to buy you clothes and glasses is just a bit odd for a grown adult IMO.
0 -
Guess you missed the bit about him being a centre leftie.
Anyhow you're doing a very good impression of being Starmer fanboy. I could almost sense your excitement when you mentioned that Starmer is going to cosy up to Von der Leyen.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Steady on now - Carol? 😉
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
You must have somehow overlooked the bits where I'm disappointed at him ruling out SM & CU, it being not a good look about receiving gifts, the fact that I voted Labour to #gtto because of their dishonesty, incompetence and lurch to the Reform territory, that I voted Tory till I was in my 40s etc. Other than that, you're spot on.
0 -
-
You seem to be confused between opinion and fact.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
