Discussion of the UK Government
:sunglasses: 49.5 % ❤ 2.1 % :thumbsup: 11.9 % 😯 5.2 % :grinning: 22 % 🧥 1.2 % 🙏 1.9 % 😟 0.6 % :cry: 5.2 % :shit: 0.4 %
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#635811
Bones McCoy wrote:
Sun Jan 17, 2021 5:37 pm
Meanwhile proper news: First shots in a rollback of devolution.

New UK Shared Prosperity Fund to bypass Holyrood

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-55687977
Woeful tactics, on so many levels.

Doubtless the goal is to make Scots think more about the Union's role in funding things in Scotland, and that's where the SNP might be vulnerable (if they're not already home and dry, which they may well be). But all this will do is stick union flags on a few projects. I can almost hear the SNP now saying "That's the Union then? Bit of dual carriage way and some double-tracked railway? Thanks, Westminster!"

Plus infrastructure stuff can be a slow burner politically. It's nice to see stuff happening if you drive by, and people like us might like the rail bits, but does anybody else really notice it being built? I don't think the Union's got the time to think "Wait till this is open, then you'll see!"

The No side can't win without getting the support of people who believe in devolution as a alternative to independence. This shits all over devolution.

And why play up this money at all? It exists to replace EU funds. Well done, you've just reminded everyone of Brexit again.

And with any spending, there's always going to be an angle for the Scottish Government to say. they'd have spent it better. Send the money to the Scottish Government, and put the boot on the other foot.
 
By youngian
Membership Days Posts
#635814
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Sun Jan 17, 2021 7:54 pm
Bones McCoy wrote:
Sun Jan 17, 2021 5:37 pm
Meanwhile proper news: First shots in a rollback of devolution.

New UK Shared Prosperity Fund to bypass Holyrood

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-55687977
Woeful tactics, on so many levels.

Can’t see the indy bandwagon halting by centralising powers in the hands of Boris Johnson.
Gove and Johnson are also going to struggle with a ‘save the Union’ campaign based on economic empiricism. For obvious reasons.
 
By Kreuzberger
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#635815
They are going to struggle because they are a pair of venal cunts. Running "No" focus groups in Scotland must be a hell of a laugh, albeit, not, i accept, for your maiden aunt.
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#635817
youngian wrote:
Sun Jan 17, 2021 8:16 pm
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Sun Jan 17, 2021 7:54 pm
Bones McCoy wrote:
Sun Jan 17, 2021 5:37 pm
Meanwhile proper news: First shots in a rollback of devolution.

New UK Shared Prosperity Fund to bypass Holyrood

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-55687977
Woeful tactics, on so many levels.

Can’t see the indy bandwagon halting by centralising powers in the hands of Boris Johnson.
Gove and Johnson are also going to struggle with a ‘save the Union’ campaign based on economic empiricism. For obvious reasons.
It's all they've got. And equally the SNP have to explain why leaving the biggest market and sticking up a hard border is a good idea.
 
By Cyclist
Membership Days Posts
#635818
And equally the SNP have to explain why leaving the biggest market and sticking up a hard border is a good idea.

I'm sure they could get Johnson, Gove and Farage to do that for them. The people who sold Brexit to the nation already have the answers. For a fee, of course.
 
By davidjay
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#635832
Bones McCoy wrote:
Sun Jan 17, 2021 5:20 pm
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Sun Jan 17, 2021 4:10 pm
If one of were arrested for a serious offence, maybe some of our friends would want to contact the police and tell them that they didn't think we did it. Doubtless that happens all the time.

I don't think it works in terms of the rights of the accused to say that his friends can't ring up because they happen to be MPs.
Long boring anecdote.

I have a mate from school, booth played in bands at the time.
Like most of us he has a few eccentricities.
We met up for lunch a couple of years back, mostly usual dull catching up stuff.

He let me know about another guy from school.
I didn't know the guy except by name, but my pal used to play risk with him during wet lunchtimes.

This guy had made it big in finance, transferred to the USA, got into tech finance, and then arrested for fraud.
My pal could not believe that a friend of his could possibly be guilty of the charges.
He was so upset by this that he wrote a letter, including a character reference to the chief prosecutor.
This logic seemed to be "Not cheating at Risk = incapable of major corporate fraud".
Conversation moved back to music, and a couple of guys we played with who are still in the business.

Did the prosecutor read the letter? - maybe.
Was it introduced as evidence in court? - I have no idea.
Verdict: Guilty, currently serving 20 in the federal pen.
Is it really that much different to writing a character reference for someone who's put his hands up and pleaded guilty? He couldn't have done it/he wouldn't usually do it.
 
By davidjay
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#635833
Andy McDandy wrote:
Sun Jan 17, 2021 11:21 am
I grew up in the Black country. Post-industrial society, no factories open any more, resentment at the Pakistani taxi drivers and clever Birmingham folks, get a job as a security guard at Merry Hill, at least you'll be in the warm.

Feigned and exaggerated stupidity and philistinism very popular too. "Wossat? Yow gorra boowk? Yorra swot, man! Anna poof! Less deck 'im!".
Yow an me both. It ay a propa job if y'dow get yer onds dairty.
 
By Malcolm Armsteen
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#635834
@davidjay A character reference would be called for by a court (usually at the request of the defendant) in order to mediate sentencing. It would not be, and could never be, evidence of guilt (there is no such thing as evidence of innocence, just alibis).

The police are solely concerned with evidence, and so a request for them to withdraw from an investigation at the behest of a third party would be completely inappropriate. To do so from the position of a legislator even more so.
 
By Malcolm Armsteen
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#635835
Malcolm Armsteen wrote:
Sun Jan 17, 2021 10:47 pm
@davidjay A character reference would be called for by a court (usually at the request of the defendant) in order to mediate sentencing. It would not be, and could never be, evidence (there is no such thing as evidence of innocence, just alibis).

The police are solely concerned with evidence, and so a request for them to withdraw from an investigation at the behest of a third party would be completely inappropriate. To do so from the position of a legislator even more so.
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#635961
Another of the new intake. "Scaremongering" in the sense that Tory press mates, briefed by the government, are saying this is very much on the cards.

Wouldn't be too sure he'll hold his seat next time. Decent margin in 2019, but lots of "citizens of nowhere" in his constituency, I expect.

 
By KevS
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#635963
Worthless piece of shit.

Those of you with Facebook, have a look at the page for Neil Gray of the SNP, and watch his speech from yesterday in Parliament. He uses the example of a single mother with two young kids, who, through no fault of her own, has to scrabble around to make ends meet. Before the kids were born, she had a career in finance, and afterwards, her husband's salary was enough to keep them comfortable.

Then the marriage broke down, through no fault of hers and she finds herself plunged into this situation. Plus, she is also classed as disabled, due to a rare musko-skeletal condition and so was on legacy benefits. The fear she has of the £20 disappearing is crippling. If that goes, the whole thing falls flat on it's face. To give credit to Neil Gray, he explained this with passion and vigour to the Commons last night. It really is quite a speech.

Now, you might all be scratching your heads and saying "Well, yes Kev, this is a dreadful situation, but why has one particular speech from the SNP spokesman got to you so?"

It's very simple, the person Mr Gray used in his speech, and whose words he quoted verbatim, and now are in Hansard as a matter of record, is my closest, dearest friend of 25 years.

I hear on a daily basis what she has had to contend with, and what was said to the Commons yesterday ain't the half of it. Understandably, she wants to do something about it. She started working with Save The Children, and as a consequence, gave evidence to the All Party Group on Poverty last week, of which Neil Gray is the chair.

She's fighting. Every step of the way. And I couldn't be more proud of her if I tried.
davidjay, Zuriblue, oboogie and 3 others liked this
 
By davidjay
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#635964
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Tue Jan 19, 2021 9:23 pm
Another of the new intake. "Scaremongering" in the sense that Tory press mates, briefed by the government, are saying this is very much on the cards.

Wouldn't be too sure he'll hold his seat next time. Decent margin in 2019, but lots of "citizens of nowhere" in his constituency, I expect.

They really don't like this 'opposition' idea.
  • 1
  • 474
  • 475
  • 476
  • 477
  • 478
  • 488

Next routing, across the seas to Kaliningrad. I he[…]

The Tories, Generally

https://twitter.com/getnorthern/status/13679024715[…]

Meanwhile in America

Chop his bollocks off. That worked with our cat.

Nadine Dorries

Ferrari's a populist, and can smell which way the […]