General Election

[JamboX2]

So how do you see May being forced into an October election then?

 

My point is about the more honourable side to Northern Ireland politics and in particular the DUP. I say the DUP while happy to accept the extra money for N.Ireland and the general boost for the "poor hard done by unionists", they will choose honour and ditch May as a result a failings in managing the Grenfell fire. Just how I see the future.

 

They can also use that to strengthen own position in N.Ireland. Reality of the power sharing agreement would also tend to them pulling out. Get the money first though.

I think there are three things May will find hard to control to keep her job:

 

1. Her own party: minority from majority in 6 weeks. They'll be furious and I think they are. She's again failing to show leadership (or personable leadership) over Grenfell. She's weak and her negotiations with the DUP seem to be going nowhere fast. The Tory conference in the autumn will determine her future and I can see the party's right knifing her and anointing a new leader - who will then push for a second vote rather than be hamstrung by DUP requests.

 

2. The NI situation. If Brokenshire can't get the parties to form a government then devolution falls and direct rule imposed. Any future election there becomes a referendum on the DUP deal and after that there's no hope of a government being formed. But if direct rule returns she'll be seen to have put party before country and before the crowning achievement of Major and Blair: the Good Friday Agreement. If that happens she's out the door.

 

3. The DUP-Deal. Some Tories can't stomach it. Some for reasons of pride. Some for policy reasons. It's destined to fall apart at some point within the year. If it does there'll end up being a vote of confidence: a budget, a major peice of legislation. She'll be out, a lamer duck leader in and an election the Tories may lose.

 

Her successor is likely to be a toss-up between David Davis, Bojo and Hammond. The talent pool for them has shrunk considerably.

[Mikey1874]

There is certainly a lot of anti May sentiment from normally supportive voices.

 

Might just be too much pressure.

[JamboX2]

Independence was attractive post 2010 election in that it was a genuine alternative.

 

Corbyn is, Imo, a breath of fresh air. I have always liked his politics, but was not sure he had leadership ability. In the GE campaign he played a blinder, Imo.

 

Labour seems to have grasped that and now they have to build on it a progress.

 

The SNP won't disappear... How future Westminster govt approach the constitution could aid that though. Again all Imo.

Tend to agree with you Boris. To me, independence fitted the bill, but events dear boy events have made me think on it all again.

 

Watching Brexit play out for one makes me dread the idea of independence negotiating teams and of wasted time, money and energy.

 

Oh how I'd love to reset the clock and prevent the past few years from happening. If only Brown had called an election in 2008, I doubt we'd be here now.

[Sraman]

Not really-

my working class roots were grafting, self reliance and certainly my gran would rather have been dead than to ask for a handout- too much pride.

Didn't have much, so went without.

Couldn't afford something - saved for it or didn't get it.

Never smoked or drank- as it was expensive

Never been abroad ( apart from with granda the HGV driver on his long distance trips before Newlands went under)

Wife the same- came from single parent family on council estate.

Her mum went out to work. brought the kids up right and they both got degrees.

That is my working class

Not sure what yours is......

I too can look up at the big mansions and Maldives holidays, and I'm aware that if I want them I could get them, but don't want to see them taken off others so I could get more I have not earned

Its not Zimbabwe...

 

 

Good for you. You could say that you had a "strong and stable" upbringing. Others are not as fortunate and, through no fault of their own, find themselves in difficult situations that they just don't know how to handle. You know the sort, they're the ones you seem to look down on as, in your mind, they had the same opportunities you had but failed to make the most of them so you seem to see them as failures that are not worth bothering about. No point in helping them as they have made their beds, they now have to lie in them. All of that, in spite of knowing that they didn't have the same opportunities as you did due to there being no "strong and stable" upbringing for them, but hey, that's their problem not yours.

 

You seem to fail to see that society works a bit like a building, you could imagine that building to be one of the big mansions you look up at if you like but any building will do, if the foundations are strong then society is strong, neglect the foundations they will rot and society will come crashing down, or the neglected will rise up and tear it down if you like. History is littered with examples of this very scenario but, in your wisdom, you seem to fail to see this.

 

For the avoidance of doubt, I had a similar upbringing to you with the work ethic drummed into me from the start and have done well enough out of life to leave me in a comfortable position, at the moment, but I can still see that large sections of society are being left behind, in part due to circumstances in their family unit and in part due to the decision makers having no idea what it's like to be them.

 

I mean, I see the terrible, terrible Grenfell flats disaster as a reflection of the society we have become. It's all fur coat and nae knickers, a pretty facade with zero substance which is enough to create the illusion that everything is just dandy in the UK. I suppose you could say that the council, with their refurbishment of the flats, created a massive rug to sweep the unsavoury characters (to them) under, in order to make it more palatable for them to live beside rather than spending the money to make it better for the residents of the flats, which should have been the priority. Which brings me nicely to Zimbabwe. I'm not, and never will be, suggesting removing all wealth from the rich and I'm not for throwing out foreign farmers and taking their land off of them either. There is, we are told, plenty of money in the UK and all I am for is using that money in a better way, for the betterment of society, not to hide large swathes of it to create the illusion that we now live in. I am also for including all sections of society in the decision making process not just the rich and powerful telling us how it's going to be so get on with it. The section of society you seem to look down on (which just so happens to be the section of society the rich and powerful tell us to look down on) doesn't have representation at the moment, if they did we would have MP's that swear a lot more, which may seem unpalatable to the people who have created this facade in the first place but I see it as necessary for society to move forward as a whole.

[maroonlegions]

Seems a lot of the population are asking this question.

 

 

 

[maroonlegions]

Good, i hope they are shoiting it big time.

 

 

The British Ruling Class Is in Full Panic Mode

Paul Mason on Jeremy Corbyn?s triumph in the UK elections.

THENATION.COM

 

 

[SwindonJambo]

How can Labour's showing in the General Election be in any way described as a triumph? They lost! With 56 fewer seats than their rivals. It's all a bit cringey for me.

 

It's only a triumph in as much that they performed far better than expected and forced a hung parliament and a very shoogly looking coalition.. But that doesn't mean they won. They lost. And can in no way form a coalition and govern unless there's another election and they win more seats than the Tories. Which may yet happen but hasn't yet.

 

I still think May will go. She has handled the Grenfell disaster extremely poorly. I'm no Tory but I think Cameron was a far better PM than she is.

[JamboX2]

How can Labour's showing in the General Election be in any way described as a triumph? They lost! With 56 fewer seats than their rivals. It's all a bit cringey for me.

 

It's only a triumph in as much that they performed far better than expected and forced a hung parliament and a very shoogly looking coalition.. But that doesn't mean they won. They lost. And can in no way form a coalition and govern unless there's another election and they win more seats than the Tories. Which may yet happen but hasn't yet.

 

I still think May will go. She has handled the Grenfell disaster extremely poorly. I'm no Tory but I think Cameron was a far better PM than she is.

The achievement is this is the first election since 97 when they've returned with more seats than they left with and the highest vote share since 2001.

 

Yes they lost. But the Tories didn't get a majority. Add to that in, Scotland, SNP and, in England, Tory majorities have been slashed meaning next time out they are closer to winning than before.

 

Imo, that election will be sooner than later.

 

Nothing to celebrate in defeat. But certainly more optimism going forward than before.

[ManorJambo]

The achievement is this is the first election since 97 when they've returned with more seats than they left with and the highest vote share since 2001.

 

Yes they lost. But the Tories didn't get a majority. Add to that in, Scotland, SNP and, in England, Tory majorities have been slashed meaning next time out they are closer to winning than before.

 

Imo, that election will be sooner than later.

 

Nothing to celebrate in defeat. But certainly more optimism going forward than before.

 

After watching  Lesley Laird "Labour's New Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland" car crash interview with Bernard Ponsonby on Thursdays STV News the SNP have nothing to worry about along with Kezia Dugdale both of them are gift to the SNP. 

[Rudy T]

Good for you. You could say that you had a "strong and stable" upbringing. Others are not as fortunate and, through no fault of their own, find themselves in difficult situations that they just don't know how to handle. You know the sort, they're the ones you seem to look down on as, in your mind, they had the same opportunities you had but failed to make the most of them so you seem to see them as failures that are not worth bothering about. No point in helping them as they have made their beds, they now have to lie in them. All of that, in spite of knowing that they didn't have the same opportunities as you did due to there being no "strong and stable" upbringing for them, but hey, that's their problem not yours.

 

You seem to fail to see that society works a bit like a building, you could imagine that building to be one of the big mansions you look up at if you like but any building will do, if the foundations are strong then society is strong, neglect the foundations they will rot and society will come crashing down, or the neglected will rise up and tear it down if you like. History is littered with examples of this very scenario but, in your wisdom, you seem to fail to see this.

 

For the avoidance of doubt, I had a similar upbringing to you with the work ethic drummed into me from the start and have done well enough out of life to leave me in a comfortable position, at the moment, but I can still see that large sections of society are being left behind, in part due to circumstances in their family unit and in part due to the decision makers having no idea what it's like to be them.

 

I mean, I see the terrible, terrible Grenfell flats disaster as a reflection of the society we have become. It's all fur coat and nae knickers, a pretty facade with zero substance which is enough to create the illusion that everything is just dandy in the UK. I suppose you could say that the council, with their refurbishment of the flats, created a massive rug to sweep the unsavoury characters (to them) under, in order to make it more palatable for them to live beside rather than spending the money to make it better for the residents of the flats, which should have been the priority. Which brings me nicely to Zimbabwe. I'm not, and never will be, suggesting removing all wealth from the rich and I'm not for throwing out foreign farmers and taking their land off of them either. There is, we are told, plenty of money in the UK and all I am for is using that money in a better way, for the betterment of society, not to hide large swathes of it to create the illusion that we now live in. I am also for including all sections of society in the decision making process not just the rich and powerful telling us how it's going to be so get on with it. The section of society you seem to look down on (which just so happens to be the section of society the rich and powerful tell us to look down on) doesn't have representation at the moment, if they did we would have MP's that swear a lot more, which may seem unpalatable to the people who have created this facade in the first place but I see it as necessary for society to move forward as a whole.

This is all very admirable sentiment but there are sections of our society who contribute the square root of zero and worse they have no intention of ever contributing to society but are more than happy to take every handout going. These people are very good at filling in forms but actual work is a no go for them. I've got no issues helping those in need, those prepared to better themselves and those whose circumstances dictate they need help to get their lives back together that's just plain human decency. I cannot abide the scroungers in our society who feel they are entitled to benefits but have no intention of giving anything back or those who bring their kids up in such an appalling manner it gives them little or no hope of having a future. Why should whose who work their tits off doing a job good or bad have to give to them. If they got nothing they might actually get up of their lazy arses and do something.

[JamboX2]

After watching Lesley Laird "Labour's New Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland" car crash interview with Bernard Ponsonby on Thursdays STV News the SNP have nothing to worry about along with Kezia Dugdale both of them are gift to the SNP.

Have to say I've not seen the new Shadow Sec in action, but the SNP seem a tad rattled at the moment. Kinda get the feeling that people are tiring of them as they did with Labour in 2007. May well be wrong but it's the feeling i get from folk i work with and mates.

 

In fact a few staunch Independence supporters I know view the SNP as a hindrance to the cause now.

[GBJambo]

After watching Lesley Laird "Labour's New Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland" car crash interview with Bernard Ponsonby on Thursdays STV News the SNP have nothing to worry about along with Kezia Dugdale both of them are gift to the SNP.

Yes because the snp have never had car crash interviews before!

[Unknown user]

This is all very admirable sentiment but there are sections of our society who contribute the square root of zero and worse they have no intention of ever contributing to society but are more than happy to take every handout going. These people are very good at filling in forms but actual work is a no go for them. I've got no issues helping those in need, those prepared to better themselves and those whose circumstances dictate they need help to get their lives back together that's just plain human decency. I cannot abide the scroungers in our society who feel they are entitled to benefits but have no intention of giving anything back or those who bring their kids up in such an appalling manner it gives them little or no hope of having a future. Why should whose who work their tits off doing a job good or bad have to give to them. If they got nothing they might actually get up of their lazy arses and do something.

Why is there so much focus on them though? Only 17% of welfare benefits go to unemployment, let alone the small percentage of them that you're actually talking about. Of much bigger concern should be the poor buggers who are working and still need help from the welfare state, they represent your tax money subsidising wealthy business owners who don't want to pay a decent wage.

I have a much bigger problem with those ****ers, not only are they a drain on the exchequer, they're the reason there's little motivation for those on the lowest rung to work - skint if you sit at home, skint if you work, what's the point? I get why it would seem like a pointless effort to some.

[JamboX2]

Yes because the snp have never had car crash interviews before!

Especially her first one after just being elected.

[Rudy T]

Why is there so much focus on them though? Only 17% of welfare benefits go to unemployment, let alone the small percentage of them that you're actually talking about. Of much bigger concern should be the poor buggers who are working and still need help from the welfare state, they represent your tax money subsidising wealthy business owners who don't want to pay a decent wage.

I have a much bigger problem with those ****ers, not only are they a drain on the exchequer, they're the reason there's little motivation for those on the lowest rung to work - skint if you sit at home, skint if you work, what's the point? I get why it would seem like a pointless effort to some.

It's not just unemployment benefit it's child and housing benefit they claim. I've witnessed it within my own family and it drives me nuts...unsurprisingly they're all socialist leftie scroungers who have a better life than other family members who fall into the category you describe. That said for 3 days work in a shop a single mum can earn about 2k per month and have a house paid for so I'm still a little sceptical on a lot of this.

[JamboAl]

This is all very admirable sentiment but there are sections of our society who contribute the square root of zero and worse they have no intention of ever contributing to society but are more than happy to take every handout going. These people are very good at filling in forms but actual work is a no go for them. I've got no issues helping those in need, those prepared to better themselves and those whose circumstances dictate they need help to get their lives back together that's just plain human decency. I cannot abide the scroungers in our society who feel they are entitled to benefits but have no intention of giving anything back or those who bring their kids up in such an appalling manner it gives them little or no hope of having a future. Why should whose who work their tits off doing a job good or bad have to give to them. If they got nothing they might actually get up of their lazy arses and do something.

Not many will disagree with your sentiments per se but the fact of the matter is that we give to (some of) them as an insurance policy ie to keep them from blighting our streets, committing crime to feed themselves etc.  There are genuine claimants who through some misfortune genuinely need help and few of us would object to giving it.

Getting back to the root of today's problem.  Dodgy Dave, the opportunist, couldn't control his backbenchers so he took the risk of a referendum which he thought would result in remain and would keep the dissidents quiet for the rest of the 2015/20 Parliament.  Failure.  Resigns and runs away.

 

Enter the strong and stable vicar's daughter who apparently forgot her parental teaching and criticised Corbyn, on a personal basis, publicly across the despatch box most Wednesdays.  She then saw an opportunity to cement her popularity (?) but, like Dodgy Dave, misread the electorate.  Both the referendum and the election were unnecssary and about the Tory party, not the country.

 

Now we are in a situation where the country is limping along and the laughing stock of Europe with the PM being shown up for her lack of a caring personality, or indeed any at all, as compared with Corbyn in the London fire situation.  She is scrambling in an effort to regain lost ground and Corbyn is quietly making mincemeat of her.  And she is going to negotiate on our behalf.....

[Pans Jambo]

It must be exhausting to be so caring and humane.

No its not Trapper. Its really easy. You just need to have a bit decency.

[Pans Jambo]

Is calling people lizards, and telling them to **** off, not showing contempt for your fellow human beings?

 

Ironic. And moronic. In equal measures.

But Tories and their supporters are not human. They cant be. No human would treat the vulnerable people in society like the tories do.

So they must be lizards!

[Unknown user]

Not many will disagree with your sentiments per se but the fact of the matter is that we give to (some of) them as an insurance policy ie to keep them from blighting our streets, committing crime to feed themselves etc. There are genuine claimants who through some misfortune genuinely need help and few of us would object to giving it.

Getting back to the root of today's problem. Dodgy Dave, the opportunist, couldn't control his backbenchers so he took the risk of a referendum which he thought would result in remain and would keep the dissidents quiet for the rest of the 2015/20 Parliament. Failure. Resigns and runs away.

 

Enter the strong and stable vicar's daughter who apparently forgot her parental teaching and criticised Corbyn, on a personal basis, publicly across the despatch box most Wednesdays. She then saw an opportunity to cement her popularity (?) but, like Dodgy Dave, misread the electorate. Both the referendum and the election were unnecssary and about the Tory party, not the country.

 

Now we are in a situation where the country is limping along and the laughing stock of Europe with the PM being shown up for her lack of a caring personality, or indeed any at all, as compared with Corbyn in the London fire situation. She is scrambling in an effort to regain lost ground and Corbyn is quietly making mincemeat of her. And she is going to negotiate on our behalf.....

I don't know about that, but in my experience people of all nationalities think we're mental - why would you leave a club with favorable trading conditions?

[Captain Sausage]

I don't know about that, but in my experience people of all nationalities think we're mental - why would you leave a club with favorable trading conditions?

Because of them bloody immigrants. Coming here, stealing our jobs while we could be saving ?350m a week for use on the NHS.

 

I got that right, yeh?

[reaths17]

I don't know about that, but in my experience people of all nationalities think we're mental - why would you leave a club with favorable trading conditions?

and stops you from forming even better deals with anyone not in the clique.

 

there was an economist during the week who reckoned the uk would be 150b better off if they just cut all links without an agreement, due to the lifting of subsidies and bureaucratic rules along with the ability of free trade.

 

theres lotsa pros n cons, which one out weighs the other we will soon or maybe a lot longer due to bureaucracy. find out.

[Unknown user]

and stops you from forming even better deals with anyone not in the clique.

 

there was an economist during the week who reckoned the uk would be 150b better off if they just cut all links without an agreement, due to the lifting of subsidies and bureaucratic rules along with the ability of free trade.

 

theres lotsa pros n cons, which one out weighs the other we will soon or maybe a lot longer due to bureaucracy. find out.

You're dreaming if you think the UK will get more favourable deals than being in the EU- if they agreed to that, there would be no point in any of them being in the EU, and they don't want that.

I believe I'm right in saying that individual EU states aren't allowed to make individual trade deals too so there's that door closed.

 

I get it myself, it's the same as the Scottish independence movement in that it's more about the right to self determination - people feel like the eu stops them from having conversations and making decisions about key issues like immigration and don't like to feel disenfranchised. Imo.

[Sraman]

It's not just unemployment benefit it's child and housing benefit they claim. I've witnessed it within my own family and it drives me nuts...unsurprisingly they're all socialist leftie scroungers who have a better life than other family members who fall into the category you describe. That said for 3 days work in a shop a single mum can earn about 2k per month and have a house paid for so I'm still a little sceptical on a lot of this.

 

I have also witnessed it within my own family. They, however, are all right wing racist arseholes. My point though is that you cannot blame the kids for the sins of the parents, if you do you have already condemned them to the only life they know. I don't know the solution but the status quo of beating them with a big stick isn't working.

[JamboAl]

and stops you from forming even better deals with anyone not in the clique.

 

there was an economist during the week who reckoned the uk would be 150b better off if they just cut all links without an agreement, due to the lifting of subsidies and bureaucratic rules along with the ability of free trade.

 

theres lotsa pros n cons, which one out weighs the other we will soon or maybe a lot longer due to bureaucracy. find out.

Whether we are better in or out is a separate argument.  Over the last few days/weeks our PM has shown little evidence that she is a caring human being or that she is capable of proper leadership, yet she is tasked with negotiating on behalf of the country.  She appears to glory in being a "bloody difficult woman" when a little humility wouldn't go amiss.  She simply does not come across well as a person let alone a leader.

[reaths17]

You're dreaming if you think the UK will get more favourable deals than being in the EU- if they agreed to that, there would be no point in any of them being in the EU, and they don't want that.

I believe I'm right in saying that individual EU states aren't allowed to make individual trade deals too so there's that door closed.

 

I get it myself, it's the same as the Scottish independence movement in that it's more about the right to self determination - people feel like the eu stops them from having conversations and making decisions about key issues like immigration and don't like to feel disenfranchised. Imo.

theres more parts of the world than europe, we would still deal with the EU but we would be free to trade with the rest of the world and free from subsidies.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

You're dreaming if you think the UK will get more favourable deals than being in the EU- if they agreed to that, there would be no point in any of them being in the EU, and they don't want that.

I believe I'm right in saying that individual EU states aren't allowed to make individual trade deals too so there's that door closed.

 

I get it myself, it's the same as the Scottish independence movement in that it's more about the right to self determination - people feel like the eu stops them from having conversations and making decisions about key issues like immigration and don't like to feel disenfranchised. Imo.

 

No, I think he means that at present no EU country can do deals Independently of the rest of the EU, which does restrict any particular country's ability to trade with who ever it likes.

Which is what your saying in your second sentence.

 

Once the UK leaves the EU, the UK will then be able to strike trade deals with anybody it chooses and not be constrained by collective EU trade rules, the UK will of course still be able to trade with the EU, in fact I can guarantee the EU will still want to trade with the UK.

 

The EU sells a lot more to the UK than the EU buys from the UK, currently the UK runs on average a ?60bn trade deficit with the EU each and every year.

Indeed there are not many countries within the EU which run a trade surplus with other EU countries, apart from Germany of course, who has the largest trade surplus of any EU country and Germany's trade surplus with the UK is IIRC some ?80bn per year, that's a lot of money and that is why the EU will strike a deal with the UK.

 

Of course that deal will not be on the same terms as at present, tariff free single market access and all that, but a deal will be done nonetheless, that I have no doubts about whatsoever.

 

[Sraman]

No, I think he means that at present no EU country can do deals Independently of the rest of the EU, which does restrict any particular country's ability to trade with who ever it likes.

Which is what your saying in your second sentence.

 

Once the UK leaves the EU, the UK will then be able to strike trade deals with anybody it chooses and not be constrained by collective EU trade rules, the UK will of course still be able to trade with the EU, in fact I can guarantee the EU will still want to trade with the UK.

 

The EU sells a lot more to the UK than the EU buys from the UK, currently the UK runs on average a ?60bn trade deficit with the EU each and every year.

Indeed there are not many countries within the EU which run a trade surplus with other EU countries, apart from Germany of course, who has the largest trade surplus of any EU country and Germany's trade surplus with the UK is IIRC some ?80bn per year, that's a lot of money and that is why the EU will strike a deal with the UK.

 

Of course that deal will not be on the same terms as at present, tariff free single market access and all that, but a deal will be done nonetheless, that I have no doubts about whatsoever.

 

 

You are correct in what you are saying although your overall point is not very good. Instead of one trade deal encompassing a lot of countries we now have to set up individual trade deals with many different countries which will not only cost more due to changing tariffs but will cost more due to the very nature of setting up and running these deals. We lose.

 

 

The trade deficits are the fault of successive Tory governments. We have next to no manufacturing industry left in the UK, due to them, and if we don't make anything what do we use to bring the deficit down, let alone tackle the debt? The current Tory Government are selling off our NHS, Railways, Power, water and prisons to falsify the deficit figures, once these have been sold you cannot sell them a second time. We lose again.

 

The EU is not, and never was, the problem. The problem lies a lot closer to home but it's too late to point that out to those who cannot see.

 

Yes a deal will be done but as we don't have many cards to play, due to having few goods to sell, all the momentum is with the EU. We rely more on their imports than they do on ours. We lose yet again.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Oh look there's Dianne Abbott fit enough and well enough to return to work. What unfortunate timing that illness was.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

You are correct in what you are saying although your overall point is not very good. Instead of one trade deal encompassing a lot of countries we now have to set up individual trade deals with many different countries which will not only cost more due to changing tariffs but will cost more due to the very nature of setting up and running these deals. We lose.

 

 

The trade deficits are the fault of successive Tory governments. We have next to no manufacturing industry left in the UK, due to them, and if we don't make anything what do we use to bring the deficit down, let alone tackle the debt? The current Tory Government are selling off our NHS, Railways, Power, water and prisons to falsify the deficit figures, once these have been sold you cannot sell them a second time. We lose again.

 

The EU is not, and never was, the problem. The problem lies a lot closer to home but it's too late to point that out to those who cannot see.

 

Yes a deal will be done but as we don't have many cards to play, due to having few goods to sell, all the momentum is with the EU. We rely more on their imports than they do on ours. We lose yet again.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you don't like the Tories much?  Don't know what gives me that impression, but I just do.

 

I'm not going to disagree with you as I have no time for them either.

 

[Space Mackerel]

Oh look there's Dianne Abbott fit enough and well enough to return to work. What unfortunate timing that illness was.

Good to hear, how much did she increase her majority by?

[Maroon Sailor]

Good to hear, how much did she increase her majority by?

Don't ask her to give you a figure

[Dawnrazor]

Don't ask her to give you a figure

[Space Mackerel]

11,000.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/diane-abbott-election-result-labour-mp-increase-majority-11000-votes-shadow-home-secretary-hackney-a7781001.html

[Maroon Sailor]

11,000.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/diane-abbott-election-result-labour-mp-increase-majority-11000-votes-shadow-home-secretary-hackney-a7781001.html

Think that says more about the people of Hackney North and Stoke Newington

 

No need for superglue to be placed on that particular seat - she was never going anywhere.

[Space Mackerel]

Think that says more about the people of Hackney North and Stoke Newington

 

No need for superglue to be placed on that particular seat - she was never going anywhere.

It actually says more about you and not understanding Hackney North and Stoke Newington.

[TheOak88]

Why is there so much focus on them though? Only 17% of welfare benefits go to unemployment, let alone the small percentage of them that you're actually talking about. Of much bigger concern should be the poor buggers who are working and still need help from the welfare state, they represent your tax money subsidising wealthy business owners who don't want to pay a decent wage.

I have a much bigger problem with those ****ers, not only are they a drain on the exchequer, they're the reason there's little motivation for those on the lowest rung to work - skint if you sit at home, skint if you work, what's the point? I get why it would seem like a pointless effort to some.

I think there is a focus on them as people view it as unfair. I suppose there is always going to be an element of jealously that some people are able to effectively opt out of performing their societal duties to no real detriment.

 

All parties, but especially Labour and SNP bang on about wanting to live in a fair society. People see it as unfair that some don't have to work.

[Maroon Sailor]

It actually says more about you and not understanding Hackney North and Stoke Newington.

Explain ?

[Mikey1874]

Maybe there will be another election if the DUP don't do the deal.

[Trapper John McIntyre]

Maybe there will be another election if the DUP don't do the deal.

 

Great, more SNP MP's being emptied.

 

Bring it on.

[Number28]

German Chancellor Angela Merkel says she could back a eurozone finance minister and eurozone budget "if the circumstances are right".

One finance minister for all 27 euro partners. One budget for all 27 euro partners.

I really worry about German dominance now that we are leaving. Looks like Germany will at last control Europe as has always been their historical quest.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

May is an absolute joke. Needs to resign. Making a balls up of everything.

[Maroon Sailor]

German Chancellor Angela Merkel says she could back a eurozone finance minister and eurozone budget "if the circumstances are right".[/size]

One finance minister for all 27 euro partners. One budget for all 27 euro partners.[/size]

I really worry about German dominance now that we are leaving. Looks like Germany will at last control Europe as has always been their historical quest.[/size]

And Fraulein Sturgeon wants Scotland to be part of that shit !

[Space Mackerel]

And Fraulein Sturgeon wants Scotland to be part of that shit !

Never mind, the UK will be swapping strawberry and raspberry jam for turmeric and coriander powder with no trade barriers. Up up and away!

[maroonlegions]

May is an absolute joke. Needs to resign. Making a balls up of everything.

 

Dont worry, this just in.

 

An interview from Tory central headquarters with the new favourite to be the new Tory leader called Sophia.

 

 

[Boris]

German Chancellor Angela Merkel says she could back a eurozone finance minister and eurozone budget "if the circumstances are right".

One finance minister for all 27 euro partners. One budget for all 27 euro partners.

I really worry about German dominance now that we are leaving. Looks like Germany will at last control Europe as has always been their historical quest.

 

 

And Fraulein Sturgeon wants Scotland to be part of that shit !

 

I think there is a difference between the Eurozone and the EU, so it wouldn't be one finance minister and one budget for the 27 EU member states.  Only for those countries with the Euro i.e. Sweden and Denmark wouldn't be part of that.

[Cade]

I see that lots of people still don't understand that the EU, the Eurozone and the European Convention on Human Rights are all separate entities.

 

 

[Maroon Sailor]

I think there is a difference between the Eurozone and the EU, so it wouldn't be one finance minister and one budget for the 27 EU member states.  Only for those countries with the Euro i.e. Sweden and Denmark wouldn't be part of that.

It's a Nein Danke from me

[Maroon Sailor]

I see that lots of people still don't understand that the EU, the Eurozone and the European Convention on Human Rights are all separate entities.

I see you still don't understand the UK voted for Brexit

[Maroon Sailor]

Crazy how some folk see the untold damage that Westminster is inflicting upon us and still regard it as the lesser of two evils when compared to the EU.

Take it in Brussels boy - your lot will be looking for Belexit soon enough - oh wait a minute they are not powerful enough, so the Germans it is then.

[Boris]

I see you still don't understand the UK voted for Brexit

 

What has that to do with being unable to differentiate between the eurozone, the EU etc?