National News Supreme court ruling

Shropshire U said:
All the opposition parties want an election, it's simply that no one (understandably) trusts Johnson / Cummings. To agree to an election before asking The EU for more time, or before 31st October, would mean No Deal by subterfuge.
Click to expand...
Honestly, don't bother. This is so self-evident, and has been explained so many times, that people pretending the Opposition are still "running scared" at this point are just choosing not to understand. No amount of explaining is going to change their mind.
 
ttg17 said:
Honestly, don't bother. This is so self-evident, and has been explained so many times, that people pretending the Opposition are still "running scared" at this point are just choosing not to understand. No amount of explaining is going to change their mind.
Click to expand...

They have had plenty of time for a vote of NC prior to the last month.

They also had the chance in early September to vote for a GE that would have happened on the 15th October.

Of course those minor details have been "forgotten"..... because the Opposition don`t want to deal with the "problem".

Self-evident? Yep, that they aren`t up to the job..
 
not only does his brother resign, his sister had this to say ... its gonna be 'fun' at the next Johnson family gathering? :oops:

71789175_2600012170060804_8732682868079198208_n.jpg
 
The rich get richer, its happened since the year dot!
No matter what tax regime is in place its a fair bet the folk who "wrote the rules" then jump ship to KPMG/Wealth Management Company`s etc and advise their clients how to avoid them!
 
Essexyellows said:
The rich get richer, its happened since the year dot!
No matter what tax regime is in place its a fair bet the folk who "wrote the rules" then jump ship to KPMG/Wealth Management Company`s etc and advise their clients how to avoid them!
Click to expand...
And that is unfortunate truth. A company I worked at (long since gone) paid significant money to identify credits they could receive for work they were being paid to do by customers, from a tax efficiency company who in their midsts had a large amount of people in their employ from the "tax office".. All felt a bit rotten, but the rules as they were permitted it.
 
As far as I can tell, BoJo is promising to substantially cut taxes for high earners and corporates, whilst at the same time promising 40 new hospitals, 14b for schools, 20,000 new police officers, 10,000 more prison places and that the government will contribute towards full fibre broadband access for all.

This is at the same time as pushing for an exit of the EU - which whilst it may or may not be financially beneficial for us in the long term, is absolutely definitely going to be costly in the short term, as we have to increase the size of the civil service to cover all the administration that's currently done for us by the EU bureaucracy.

It's all just populist bullshit - telling every voter what they want to hear, even though the Tories must know that only a fraction of it is deliverable without sending our deficit into 2009 Greek levels.

I think Corbyn would be a disaster for the economic competitiveness of the country, but at least he's honest enough to tell you who's going to get screwed over to pay for his big social spending programs (it's corporates and the rich). It's wealth redistribution, rather than BoJo's magical money tree.

BoJo just thinks that voters will be dumb enough to buy everything he's selling, and deliver him five more years of power on the back of these empty promises. Sad thing is, there's a good chance he's right.
 
I suspect they know it's all complete BS, but after the last election where the Tories overplayed the Brexit card at the behest of a domestic agenda, perhaps they are just getting in with the cool kids and putting stuff out there to be seen to spend money and be more than Brexit, Brexit, Brexit.
 
I think a Corbyn and Co are hypocritical.
They promise to get rid of private schools and give the money to the public sector...where will the Labour MPs get educated if not privately?
They want to tax the rich more. Can’t see many wealthy Labour MPs swallowing that one.
Nationalise the railways....might work. The reality is the money should be spent on improving the infrastructure before addressing political issues.
Education seriously underfunded at the moment, and has been for fifty years. That is going to cost lots and lots.
Police force needs to be increased dramatically to deal with the endemic crime wave.
Hospitals need radical reform and investment. Corbyn idea is of course lots more money
Labour aren’t honest with how they will tackle the problems in the U.K. short of soaking the rich and redistribute income.
The Conservatives are also making ridiculous promises.
The Liberal Democrat’s are too populist.
None of the politicians is currently interested in resolving issues over here, just quarrelling over brexit and making political points.
The British people are tired of politics and of politicians
 
Peterdev said:
They promise to get rid of private schools and give the money to the public sector...where will the Labour MPs get educated if not privately?
Click to expand...
In the current Parliament only 12% of Labour MPs were privately educated.
The figure for the LibDems is 28% and for the Tories it is 45%.
The figures have been falling gradually for all parties over time. The percentage of the whole population who are privately educated is 7%.
There is a misinformation myth that Corbyn himself was privately educated. This is simply not true: I know because we went to secondary school together, in the same class for 6 years, a state grammar school in Newport, Shropshire.
 
Essexyellows said:
Of course there were "political considerations" on BOTH sides, in the same way that BOTH sides are heckling each other.
In the same way BOTH sides of the debate are discussing it on various platforms.
At the end of the day we/they/everyone can scream & shout until we are dead, getting the decision of the electorate delivered MUST happen.
No vote on "This deal" or "Remain".
No removal of "No Deal".

Get it done, 17.4 million people go quiet and the Remainers can start a 40 year campaign to rejoin. (y)
Click to expand...
"Get it done"
Pathetic mantra to appeal to the pathetic voter.You do understand the meaning of the word 'gullible'? You sound like a Cummings sycophant with all of the hollow rhetoric of the ordinary unwashed. Do your homework and stop regurgitating meaningless diatribe
 
gofish2 said:
"Get it done"
Pathetic mantra to appeal to the pathetic voter.You do understand the meaning of the word 'gullible'? You sound like a Cummings sycophant with all of the hollow rhetoric of the ordinary unwashed. Do your homework and stop regurgitating meaningless diatribe
Click to expand...
Blimey. I thought we were being asked to tone it down, but that's par for the course for Remainers eh? Do as I say, not as I do....
 
In the Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy, the computer Deep Thought, having considered the question; 'what is the meaning of life, the universe and everything' gave the answer, 42! His bewildered recipients were disappointed to say the least. 'What kind of answer is that?' they complained. 'The problem is' said Deep Thought, 'did you really understand the question.....'

How many of the 17.4 really understood the question?
 
gofish2 said:
In the Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy, the computer Deep Thought, having considered the question; 'what is the meaning of life, the universe and everything' gave the answer, 42! His bewildered recipients were disappointed to say the least. 'What kind of answer is that?' they complained. 'The problem is' said Deep Thought, 'did you really understand the question.....'

How many of the 17.4 really understood the question?
Click to expand...

It was so difficult.....
1570097581307.png

When we voted to stay in 1975 it was worded differently, because it was a different "beast" then...
1570097666319.png
Note the "announced terms of membership" and The Common Market".
Since then it has become a parasitic tick on many economies, taking wealth, moving it around to those less fortunate (not a bad thing depending how its done!) it produces nothing, is unnecessarily bureaucratic and is looking to expand exponentially .
It is no longer "The Common Market" ( a good thing!!) and that would be one of the primary reasons many voted to Leave.
 
Aside from that, another prorogation on the horizon and Parliament have achieved the sum total of "not a lot" ! Barring the DV Bill that should sweep through unopposed anyway.
 
It was simplistic, not difficult. An entirely contextless question. Further, it relied on the notion that people were sufficiently informed to answer the question, which they of course weren’t.
 
gofish2 said:
It was simplistic, not difficult. An entirely contextless question. Further, it relied on the notion that people were sufficiently informed to answer the question, which they of course weren’t.
Click to expand...

Wrong.The electorate had access to far more information this time around than in 1975.

A referendum question can only be "simplistic" and it was changed from the original Act!

Thats why we have a lot of work happening in the back ground to ensure the question is understandable to all.

www.electoralcommission.org.uk

Testing the EU referendum question

Find out about our testing of the EU referendum question
www.electoralcommission.org.uk www.electoralcommission.org.uk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
National News Govt lose in Court again
4 5 6
Replies
101
Views
9K
Essexyellows
Essexyellows
Back
Top Bottom