The United Kingdom and the Death of Boris Johnson as we know it.

[saint1977]

2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Yeah, like not prosecuting Jimmy Saville.

Not the first to post this on here, classic Tory social media, but I’ll embarrass everyone who keeps on bringing this up by posting this yet again. And I don’t even like Keir Starmer or the Labour Party FFS.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/revealed-jimmy-savile-s-close-friendship-with-margaret-thatcher-8432351.html

When you’ve dug yourself into a hole by repeating trolling, stopping digging further. Savile was 100% close to the Conservative Party and there’s plenty more evidence of that.

For balance, I’d do exactly the same if people were posting nonsense about Edward Heath and Conservative figures. 

Edited 31 July, 2022 by saint1977

[Weston Super Saint]

 

11 minutes ago, saint1977 said:

Not the first to post this on here, classic Tory social media, but I’ll embarrass everyone who keeps on bringing this up by posting this yet again. And I don’t even like Keir Starmer or the Labour Party FFS.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/revealed-jimmy-savile-s-close-friendship-with-margaret-thatcher-8432351.html

When you’ve dug yourself into a hole by repeating trolling, stopping digging further. Savile was 100% close to the Conservative Party and there’s plenty more evidence of that.

For balance, I’d do exactly the same if people were posting nonsense about Edward Heath and Conservative figures. 

Keep up mate and stop 'digging yourself into a hole' - it was aimed at Walter Soggy Mitty @ the CPS and not SKS 

 

14 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Didn't Walter Soggy Mitty once mansplain to us how he was a super senior manager at the CPS at around the time that Saville wasn't prosecuted?  If that's the case, I'd go with Soggy as the someone who 'got something wrong in their job'.

[saint1977]

33 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

 

Keep up mate and stop 'digging yourself into a hole' - it was aimed at Walter Soggy Mitty @ the CPS and not SKS 

 

That doesn’t make it much better - the man (Savile) was truly a vile predator, a bully with overpowering resources to litigate, and shouldn’t be used to have a pop at other posters or anyone else, however much we don’t like them or their views. There’s plenty of organisations that should have done better at the time - BBC, political parties of all types (Cyril Smith with the Libs as well) yes the CPS, newspapers, charities, NHS. I just hope as a society that his type will never be allowed to flourish again, and we will have the checks and balances to challenge them, but sadly that is probably an erroneous hope. 

[Tamesaint]

2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Didn't Walter Soggy Mitty once mansplain to us how he was a super senior manager at the CPS at around the time that Saville wasn't prosecuted?  If that's the case, I'd go with Soggy as the someone who 'got something wrong in their job'.

I wonder if Weston can turn every thread into an attack on Soggy.

Obsession. 

[sadoldgit]

2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

 

Keep up mate and stop 'digging yourself into a hole' - it was aimed at Walter Soggy Mitty @ the CPS and not SKS 

 

You really are quite stupid aren’t you and it appears that you can’t read and comprehend simple English. I was not a “senior manager” as such, I managed a paralegal team in the Kent area (B2 grade, not that will mean anything to you), many miles away from the team who dealt with the Savile decision. Starmer’s job as DPP had nothing to do with prosecuting people. He managed the CPS. For the last time for stupid people like you, the decision is made by the reviewing lawyer who reports to his boss, an Area Crown Prosecutor who in turns reports to a Chief Crown Prosecutor who is in charge of an area. The DPP does not go around prosecuting (or not prosecuting) people. The decision was made by those whose job it was at the time to look at the case brought by the police. The view was that the evidence provided was not substantial enough to get a conviction (I assume as I had nothing to do with the case, neither did anyone in the Kent area). There are many people who work for the CPS (wow, what a surprise). Would you call of them Walter Mitty? My wife, then girlfriend, got me a job there initially as a temp as I had been out of work for a while and I stayed on and got a permanent job. My wife worked there for 33 years but I guess that is a fantasy too and she is also a Walter Mitty. I stopped reading your posts a while ago as you clearly do not know what you are talking about, not unlike the bloke you follow about. At least he can troll properly. So, you are completely wrong about Starmer and Savile and you are completely wrong about me. Apart from that…😂

[sadoldgit]

5 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

Which CPS reviewing lawyer made that decision, and therefore "got something wrong in their job" ?

What he fails to grasp, along with everyone trying to deflect from the Tory incompetency, is that it isn’t necessarily about getting a decision wrong. The police bring a case to the CPS along with the evidence and request a charging decision. In the first case, is there a case to answer and then what will the charge(s) be. The CPS then, if they agree to prosecute, take if from there. The reviewing lawyer has to make a decision that it is in the public interest to prosecute and if it is, then what are the chances of a successful prosecution. Many cases don’t get to court because no matter how strongly the police believe they have a guilty suspect, the lawyer feels that the evidence received isn’t strong enough to stand up in court. As I said earlier, this was dealt with in another area and I believe that it involved some selected incidents. What people assume is that everything he has subsequently been accused of doing was on the charge sheet and therefore there was a huge amount of evidence against him. Not so. Johnson knew exactly what he was doing when he made those remarks about Starmer being responsible for not charging Savile. He knew that there are plenty of fools out there who would swallow it hook, line and sinker. The fact Weston still repeats it shows how easy it is to con large sections of the public and how they can continue to believe guff even when it has been shown to be guff. I don’t know if this happened in this particular case, but the Reviewing Lawyer often asks the police to go away and come back with various other pieces of evidence (witness statements etc) in order to provide a stronger case and it doesn’t happen. That is not the Reviewing Lawyers fault. There are incidents where cases are pulled at the last minute because either the police don’t provide some evidence that was promised or a witness or witnesses withdraw their statement(s) and the case collapses. None of this has anything to do with the Director of Public Prosecutions and is not the fault of the CPS. If a case does not meet certain criteria regarding its evidential substance, it does not go to court. 

[Sheaf Saint]

On 29/07/2022 at 23:09, revolution saint said:

I think there’s also a case for including just plain nasty. 

Definitely. She's a spiteful, vindictive moron who simply doesn't have the intelligence or the necessary mental filters to realise when tweeting something is a bad idea...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/31/nadine-dorries-disturbing-tweets-on-rishi-sunak-condemned-by-tory-mps

Conservative MPs have condemned “divisive, disingenuous and disturbing” interventions against Rishi Sunak by the culture secretary, Nadine Dorries, including a tweet showing Sunak wielding a knife at Boris Johnson.

Other Conservative ministers have condemned comments by Dorries, a supporter of Liz Truss, about Sunak’s dress sense, after she compared his Savile Row suit with Truss’ earrings from Claire’s.

One suggested it was deeply provocative for her to tweet the image of Sunak stabbing Johnson, in a parody of Julius Caesar, given two MPs have recently been murdered.

[Turkish]

3 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

What he fails to grasp, along with everyone trying to deflect from the Tory incompetency, is that it isn’t necessarily about getting a decision wrong. The police bring a case to the CPS along with the evidence and request a charging decision. In the first case, is there a case to answer and then what will the charge(s) be. The CPS then, if they agree to prosecute, take if from there. The reviewing lawyer has to make a decision that it is in the public interest to prosecute and if it is, then what are the chances of a successful prosecution. Many cases don’t get to court because no matter how strongly the police believe they have a guilty suspect, the lawyer feels that the evidence received isn’t strong enough to stand up in court. As I said earlier, this was dealt with in another area and I believe that it involved some selected incidents. What people assume is that everything he has subsequently been accused of doing was on the charge sheet and therefore there was a huge amount of evidence against him. Not so. Johnson knew exactly what he was doing when he made those remarks about Starmer being responsible for not charging Savile. He knew that there are plenty of fools out there who would swallow it hook, line and sinker. The fact Weston still repeats it shows how easy it is to con large sections of the public and how they can continue to believe guff even when it has been shown to be guff. I don’t know if this happened in this particular case, but the Reviewing Lawyer often asks the police to go away and come back with various other pieces of evidence (witness statements etc) in order to provide a stronger case and it doesn’t happen. That is not the Reviewing Lawyers fault. There are incidents where cases are pulled at the last minute because either the police don’t provide some evidence that was promised or a witness or witnesses withdraw their statement(s) and the case collapses. None of this has anything to do with the Director of Public Prosecutions and is not the fault of the CPS. If a case does not meet certain criteria regarding its evidential substance, it does not go to court. 

Amazing what you can learn when you’re filing paperwork isn’t it soggy 

[Weston Super Saint]

4 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

You really are quite stupid aren’t you and it appears that you can’t read and comprehend simple English. I was not a “senior manager” as such, I managed a paralegal team in the Kent area 😂

It's so hard to keep up with your ever changing stories.

So you weren't prosecuting cases either - pretty sure that's a claim you've made previously.

[Weston Super Saint]

42 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Amazing what you can learn when you’re filing paperwork isn’t it soggy 

That's unfair! Head of admin he was.

[Weston Super Saint]

5 hours ago, Tamesaint said:

I wonder if Weston can turn every thread into an attack on Soggy.

Obsession. 

Bless.

[Turkish]

2 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

It's so hard to keep up with your ever changing stories.

So you weren't prosecuting cases either - pretty sure that's a claim you've made previously.

Yes he did, he claimed a while back he prosecuted rape crime. He also said he prosecuted knife crimes and also and domestic violence crimes. Plus he was some sort of top bod at guardian as well. Such an illustrious career so It’s difficult to understand how he believes he’s leading the worldwide charge on racism by “speaking out” against Tommy Robinson on a Southampton football forum

[Weston Super Saint]

8 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Yes he did, he claimed a while back he prosecuted rape crime. He also said he prosecuted knife crimes and also and domestic violence crimes. Plus he was some sort of top bod at guardian as well. Such an illustrious career so It’s difficult to understand how he believes he’s leading the worldwide charge on racism by “speaking out” against Tommy Robinson on a Southampton football forum

But now he says he was head of the typing pool.  No wonder some people claim he's a Walter Mitty character.

[Lord Duckhunter]

5 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

You really are quite stupid aren’t you and it appears that you can’t read and comprehend simple English. I was not a “senior manager” as such, I managed a paralegal team in the Kent area (B2 grade, not that will mean anything to you), many miles away from the team who dealt with the Savile decision. Starmer’s job as DPP had nothing to do with prosecuting people. He managed the CPS. For the last time for stupid people like you, the decision is made by the reviewing lawyer who reports to his boss, an Area Crown Prosecutor who in turns reports to a Chief Crown Prosecutor who is in charge of an area. The DPP does not go around prosecuting (or not prosecuting) people. The decision was made by those whose job it was at the time to look at the case brought by the police. The view was that the evidence provided was not substantial enough to get a conviction (I assume as I had nothing to do with the case, neither did anyone in the Kent area). There are many people who work for the CPS (wow, what a surprise). Would you call of them Walter Mitty? My wife, then girlfriend, got me a job there initially as a temp as I had been out of work for a while and I stayed on and got a permanent job. My wife worked there for 33 years but I guess that is a fantasy too and she is also a Walter Mitty. I stopped reading your posts a while ago as you clearly do not know what you are talking about, not unlike the bloke you follow about. At least he can troll properly. So, you are completely wrong about Starmer and Savile and you are completely wrong about me. Apart from that…😂

 

5 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

What he fails to grasp, along with everyone trying to deflect from the Tory incompetency, is that it isn’t necessarily about getting a decision wrong. The police bring a case to the CPS along with the evidence and request a charging decision. In the first case, is there a case to answer and then what will the charge(s) be. The CPS then, if they agree to prosecute, take if from there. The reviewing lawyer has to make a decision that it is in the public interest to prosecute and if it is, then what are the chances of a successful prosecution. Many cases don’t get to court because no matter how strongly the police believe they have a guilty suspect, the lawyer feels that the evidence received isn’t strong enough to stand up in court. As I said earlier, this was dealt with in another area and I believe that it involved some selected incidents. What people assume is that everything he has subsequently been accused of doing was on the charge sheet and therefore there was a huge amount of evidence against him. Not so. Johnson knew exactly what he was doing when he made those remarks about Starmer being responsible for not charging Savile. He knew that there are plenty of fools out there who would swallow it hook, line and sinker. The fact Weston still repeats it shows how easy it is to con large sections of the public and how they can continue to believe guff even when it has been shown to be guff. I don’t know if this happened in this particular case, but the Reviewing Lawyer often asks the police to go away and come back with various other pieces of evidence (witness statements etc) in order to provide a stronger case and it doesn’t happen. That is not the Reviewing Lawyers fault. There are incidents where cases are pulled at the last minute because either the police don’t provide some evidence that was promised or a witness or witnesses withdraw their statement(s) and the case collapses. None of this has anything to do with the Director of Public Prosecutions and is not the fault of the CPS. If a case does not meet certain criteria regarding its evidential substance, it does not go to court. 

Fucking hell, I bet your great fun on a night out. 

[Weston Super Saint]

Just now, Lord Duckhunter said:

 

Fucking hell, I bet your great fun on a night out. 

Tells a good story

[Sheaf Saint]

On 08/07/2022 at 20:39, Sheaf Saint said:

The thing that worries me most is the fact that every day he us still PM, he's free to dish out peerages to whoever he likes. 

Oh, what a surprise...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jul/29/boris-johnson-lords-cronies-legitimising-bribery

A confidential document prepared by CT Group, the influential lobbying firm run by Lynton Crosby which advises Boris Johnson, and which I have seen, makes no bones about the defenestrated prime minister’s aim to pack the House of Lords. The document proposes that Johnson ride roughshod over every convention and standard of propriety in an effort to secure political nominees who will vote for the Tory government, especially its bill to disown the international treaty it has itself signed over Northern Ireland.

This draft plan to add 39 to 50 new Tory peers includes an extraordinary requirement that each new peer sign away their right to make their own judgment on legislation that comes before them. They have to give, the paper says, a written undertaking to attend and vote with the government.

The plan also legitimises straightforward bribery. In a throwback to the Old Corruption that was a feature of 19th-century Tory Britain, compliant lords will be “rewarded” with lucrative special envoy positions, and, while those who fail to attend votes will be placed on a “name and shame” list, CBEs and additional titles will be handed out, responding to what is an apparently insatiable demand for the already ennobled to be showered with additional honours on top of their peerages.

But the cynicism of the Crosby firm’s paper plumbs new depths when outlining what it calls “useful cover from any media backlash”. The perpetrators of this coup will claim, wholly falsely, that their real aim is to redress the balance between the south-east, which has the largest number of peers, and the north of England, Scotland and Wales, which are underrepresented, as though the award of peerages is a genuine form of levelling up.

The paper also suggests that the “perfect excuse” to flood the House of Lords with Johnson’s cronies will be the Lords’ doubts about a hard Brexit, “on the grounds that the ‘People’s Brexit’ can only be delivered by such a wedge of new Tories”. This will, it says, provide an “excellent cover” for railroading the nominations. The report is also useful cover for Crosby, whose firm has had close links with the tobacco industry, when it states that the creation of Tory peers is also justified by the refusal so far of the Lords to vote for a “laissez-faire attitude to tobacco manufacturers and importers”.

The media, according to the Crosby firm’s paper, can be easily blindsided by the appointment of a few controversial figures or well-known celebrities, which will distract journalists away from the real issue, which is the sheer scale of the gerrymandering.

 

 

[saint1977]

5 hours ago, Sheaf Saint said:

Oh, what a surprise...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jul/29/boris-johnson-lords-cronies-legitimising-bribery

A confidential document prepared by CT Group, the influential lobbying firm run by Lynton Crosby which advises Boris Johnson, and which I have seen, makes no bones about the defenestrated prime minister’s aim to pack the House of Lords. The document proposes that Johnson ride roughshod over every convention and standard of propriety in an effort to secure political nominees who will vote for the Tory government, especially its bill to disown the international treaty it has itself signed over Northern Ireland.

This draft plan to add 39 to 50 new Tory peers includes an extraordinary requirement that each new peer sign away their right to make their own judgment on legislation that comes before them. They have to give, the paper says, a written undertaking to attend and vote with the government.

The plan also legitimises straightforward bribery. In a throwback to the Old Corruption that was a feature of 19th-century Tory Britain, compliant lords will be “rewarded” with lucrative special envoy positions, and, while those who fail to attend votes will be placed on a “name and shame” list, CBEs and additional titles will be handed out, responding to what is an apparently insatiable demand for the already ennobled to be showered with additional honours on top of their peerages.

But the cynicism of the Crosby firm’s paper plumbs new depths when outlining what it calls “useful cover from any media backlash”. The perpetrators of this coup will claim, wholly falsely, that their real aim is to redress the balance between the south-east, which has the largest number of peers, and the north of England, Scotland and Wales, which are underrepresented, as though the award of peerages is a genuine form of levelling up.

The paper also suggests that the “perfect excuse” to flood the House of Lords with Johnson’s cronies will be the Lords’ doubts about a hard Brexit, “on the grounds that the ‘People’s Brexit’ can only be delivered by such a wedge of new Tories”. This will, it says, provide an “excellent cover” for railroading the nominations. The report is also useful cover for Crosby, whose firm has had close links with the tobacco industry, when it states that the creation of Tory peers is also justified by the refusal so far of the Lords to vote for a “laissez-faire attitude to tobacco manufacturers and importers”.

The media, according to the Crosby firm’s paper, can be easily blindsided by the appointment of a few controversial figures or well-known celebrities, which will distract journalists away from the real issue, which is the sheer scale of the gerrymandering.

 

 

No doubt that Crosby is a very controversial figure in Australia with links to tobacco and reliant on the dirty money of which the Tory party is a great source of https://www.illawarramercury.com.au/story/3677378/australian-political-wizard-lynton-crosbys-company-made-handsome-money-during-uks-2015-election/?cs=7484

Yet more overseas influence in UK elections and referendums along with Putin and Russia.

He is just trying to grab a last pay day on the Tory account before being shut out by the new leader, likely Truss who has her own strategy networks. She won’t want Crosby’s half baked kite and not enough time for Boris to push it through either.

[Turkish]

18 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

 

Fucking hell, I bet your great fun on a night out. 

Can you imagine the reaction in his local when Soggy walks in. JUst dont ask him if he's alright, you'll never get away.

[badgerx16]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62338308

 

How many of these 16000+ businesses were genuine ?

[Tamesaint]

What a statesman in charge of our country.

[jawillwill]

1 hour ago, Tamesaint said:

What a statesman in charge of our country.

I'm no Boris fan, but in his defence, it's his wedding. Why should anyone expect him to act statesman-like? If he wants to play the buffoon act at these type of events, I couldn't care less.

[Tamesaint]

1 hour ago, jawillwill said:

I'm no Boris fan, but in his defence, it's his wedding. Why should anyone expect him to act statesman-like? If he wants to play the buffoon act at these type of events, I couldn't care less.

Very true. I don't necessarily disagree .... but for him it is not as if his wedding party is something special. He has had 2 already and another one may come along one day.

[whelk]

he is actually making an effort to dance like a twat. Part of his shtick. Oh Boris you are a one.

[kyle04]

Amateur. A real card would have been sick down his suit, just before stumbling backwards into the plant pot, and as guests rushed to help him up aimed a wild punch, missing, with the momentum sending him back into the plant pot again, face down.

[whelk]

Imagine the frothing in the Papers if a Labour PM went missing in cost of living crisis? But what do we get? ooooooh doesn’t he look like Maverick.

Tories appear clueless in understanding magnitude and impact to the electorate they hope to vote them back in. What has the fat cunt done since staying on apart from have his Chequers party? And now says won’t do anything for another month until Truss or Sunak is in.

[Whitey Grandad]

26 minutes ago, whelk said:

Imagine the frothing in the Papers if a Labour PM went missing in cost of living crisis? But what do we get? ooooooh doesn’t he look like Maverick.

Tories appear clueless in understanding magnitude and impact to the electorate they hope to vote them back in. What has the fat cunt done since staying on apart from have his Chequers party? And now says won’t do anything for another month until Truss or Sunak is in.

He couldn’t hold it there in the end so Lord Bamford let them use his Braylesford instead. Cronies gotta do what cronies do.

[Weston Super Saint]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

Imagine the frothing in the Papers if a Labour PM went missing in cost of living crisis? But what do we get? ooooooh doesn’t he look like Maverick.

Tories appear clueless in understanding magnitude and impact to the electorate they hope to vote them back in. What has the fat cunt done since staying on apart from have his Chequers party? And now says won’t do anything for another month until Truss or Sunak is in.

Isn't the whole of parliament currently on their summer hols - barring an emergency recall of parliament there isn't a lot that the PM from any party could do even if they did return to their place of work...

https://www.parliament.uk/about/faqs/house-of-commons-faqs/business-faq-page/recess-dates/

[farawaysaint]

49 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Isn't the whole of parliament currently on their summer hols - barring an emergency recall of parliament there isn't a lot that the PM from any party could do even if they did return to their place of work...

https://www.parliament.uk/about/faqs/house-of-commons-faqs/business-faq-page/recess-dates/

Oh sure but I have to work overtime and weekends if something is wrong 😑 Bloody slackers.

[whelk]

12 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Isn't the whole of parliament currently on their summer hols - barring an emergency recall of parliament there isn't a lot that the PM from any party could do even if they did return to their place of work...

https://www.parliament.uk/about/faqs/house-of-commons-faqs/business-faq-page/recess-dates/

Govt continues to function. As I said asleep at the wheel. Still no need to worry about projection of £4k pa energy bills and doing any planning. They have EU rules to shred. And Truss will sort out the poor souls on benefits as they will get the huge trickle down boost from lower corporation tax.

Edited 9 August, 2022 by whelk

[Trout-Tickler]

2 hours ago, whelk said:

Govt continues to function. As I said asleep at the wheel. Still no need to worry about projection of £4k pa energy bills and doing any planning. They have EU rules to shred. And Truss will sort out the poor souls on benefits as they will get the huge trickle down boost from lower corporation tax.

It's anything but functioning at the moment. Let's face it, there are still some ministerial roles unfilled. Take science for example, since George Freeman resigned at the start of July we haven't had a science minister. My other half works at UKRI and the lack of ministerial oversight means that it's impossible to make any new funding calls or announcements. It's also unclear how much money is going to be allocated so it's impossible to begin allocating it to the individual funding bodies as nobody knows how much there is. Remember, this is all coming after the Tories bigged up how important scientific research is and how it's intrinsically linked to national prosperity. Keeping Brexit safe now appears to be the most important thing. Talk about pandering to the lowest common denominator! Absolute shambles is the only way to describe this so-called Government.

[rallyboy]

I can't believe that we are sleepwalking into an energy bills crisis because of profiteering.

Everyone knows it's coming, everyone can see the profit margins, government has to intervene and upset shareholders.

If they don't there will be millions of people freezing or bankrupt.

But, but, it's the war, the war...

Fuck off, the war just opened the door for huge corporations to profiteer - and they are filling their fucking boots at our expense.

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, rallyboy said:

I can't believe that we are sleepwalking into an energy bills crisis because of profiteering.

Everyone knows it's coming, everyone can see the profit margins, government has to intervene and upset shareholders.

If they don't there will be millions of people freezing or bankrupt.

But, but, it's the war, the war...

Fuck off, the war just opened the door for huge corporations to profiteer - and they are filling their fucking boots at our expense.

Some talking head from an energy company the other day claiming the price rises were a good thing as it meant they would be paying more tax into the economy.

The interviewer didn't appear to have the nous to question that and ask whether it was actually the consumers who would be footing the bill for the extra taxes!

[badgerx16]

25 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Some talking head from an energy company the other day claiming the price rises were a good thing as it meant they would be paying more tax into the economy.

The interviewer didn't appear to have the nous to question that and ask whether it was actually the consumers who would be footing the bill for the extra taxes!

Shell have nearly 8Billion ordinary shares, and the first quarter dividend for this year was 20p, so by my arithmetic that payment is in excess of £1.5Bn.

 

Also, https://www.bigissue.com/news/environment/shell-got-a-92m-tax-refund-from-the-uk-government-last-year-despite-making-14-7bn-profit/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-05/u-k-to-get-surge-of-tax-payments-from-shell-and-bp-this-year

[Plastic]

So, torys eh? Fucking mess eh?

I’d assume Liz & Kwazi are LDH’s wet dream come true. So what’s gone wrong? 🤨

[Tamesaint]

Rules are only for little people.

Mind you $150,000 for just over an hour's work is a pretty good rate of pay if you can get it. 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/oct/12/boris-johnson-colorado-speech-questions-rules?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

[Wade Garrett]

What an absolute pair of cockwombles the Tories have put in charge of the country.

[moonraker]

Whilst never having conservative tendencies it is absolutely shocking to see how “Brexit” has effectively destroyed the Tories.  David Cameron lit a very long fuse by calling a totally unnecessary referendum because he was unable to manage the loony ERG, and when calling their bluff failed he ran away and hid. We have as a consequence had to suffer May, Johnson and now Trussfuck.  If ever a political party can be accused of treason the Tory’s, their myopic supporters and the absolute incompetents they vote in are prime candidates.

[Tamesaint]

Just in case anyone has forgotten how this man had no moral compass and under him this country was becoming a banana republic:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/15/nadhim-zahawi-to-pay-millions-in-tax-after-dispute-over-family-finances

Who do you make Chancellor of the Exchequer?  How about a man in dispute with the Treasury over a several million pounds tax bill?

 

 

 

[badgerx16]

29 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

Just in case anyone has forgotten how this man had no moral compass and under him this country was becoming a banana republic:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/15/nadhim-zahawi-to-pay-millions-in-tax-after-dispute-over-family-finances

Who do you make Chancellor of the Exchequer?  How about a man in dispute with the Treasury over a several million pounds tax bill?

 

 

 

That will hardly register in paying off the increased national debt accrued due to his Trussonomics budget.

[rallyboy]

I see your tax-dodger and I raise you a multi-millionaire cabinet minister who tells teachers there's no money around while wearing a £10k Rolex - perhaps a present from her husband after his second job was fortunate enough to win a £24m government contract.

It has to stop.

[badgerx16]

The rail Minister has admitted to a Commons Committee that the cost to the country of the rail strikes is greater than if the pay demands had been settled on day one.

[whelk]

I know someone who works v closely with Steve Barclay, and has also been in similar role with the previous Heath Secretaries Hancock, Javid and Coffey. Absolutely scathing about Barclay and says worst and most incompetent by a country mile over his predecessors. They are absolutely staggered that he has found his way to such a senior job. And this isn’t from someone who bashes Tories as praised Hancock and Javid as bosses.

Barclay seems clueless on resolving the dispute. Don’t know who is advising Sunak to think their approach to these disputes are going to play out well to the electorate. 

[egg]

1 hour ago, badgerx16 said:

The rail Minister has admitted to a Commons Committee that the cost to the country of the rail strikes is greater than if the pay demands had been settled on day one.

Yes, but for context, he also said that conceding would set a precedent for other public sector pay demands and cost us a fortune. 

[badgerx16]

31 minutes ago, egg said:

Yes, but for context, he also said that conceding would set a precedent for other public sector pay demands and cost us a fortune. 

Rail workers are private sector, although the industry is effectively managed by the DFT.

Edited 18 January, 2023 by badgerx16

[egg]

1 minute ago, badgerx16 said:

Rail workers are private sector, ( technically ).

Very technically...the pay rise would largely be picked up by the state. The precedent point is still valid though. 

[saint1977]

The really crazy thing on the table is the Victorian Undertakers’ Brexit Sunset Bill. It will stop basic protections on paid annual leave, TUPE which impact workers in all sectors and a raft of other specialist issues such as movement of animals which shaft SMEs right left and centre. CBI, think tanks (including normally Conservative ones), unions and even growing numbers of the ERG such as David Davis today are saying the UK should take until 2026 to pick and choose which bits of legislation to prioritise. Not a small number of ideologically crazed Brexiteer ministers and their SPADs. The bureaucracy will fuck SMEs royally not to mention the vast burden of implementation on an already crisis stricken civil service where the work will be done. 

Also fur flying within the Tory party about overseas students and dependents - big part of the economy esp in Red Wall areas. Braverman the loon wants them in her arbitrary and mental net migration targets, Hunt, Keegan and others with a brain do not. Thatcher expanded overseas student numbers in the 1980s as a pathway to more of a market system - if this lot claim to love Thatcher and neoliberalism so much why are they going totally against her policies, as well as her Single Market? 

[badgerx16]

8 minutes ago, egg said:

Very technically...the pay rise would largely be picked up by the state. The precedent point is still valid though. 

There is a video from a couple of days ago with Mick Lynch in front of the Commons Transportation Committee. When challenged by a Tory MP over the increase in funding given to the rail operating companies Lynch replied that that did not mean that money went into the industry - a lot went into dividends for the hedge funds investing in the companies and bonuses for senior managers.

He also said that the Government is controlling the rail companies and their actions during the current dispute; any message from one of the 3 unions to an operating company has to go to the DFT, and the DFT then tells the company what the response has to be.

Edited 18 January, 2023 by badgerx16

[rallyboy]

Neutrals could observe that the rail companies are being paid by the government not to negotiate.

If you demonise rail unions you will get public sympathy, as was the case all those years ago with those pesky miners.

But take on nurses and you're digging your own political grave. 

It's a battle the government will definitely lose.

[Tamesaint]

 The good news is that, according to the Daily Telegraph there is still scope for tax cuts before the next election. Falling energy prices gives a little headroom for tax cuts. Who needs ambulances turning up when required if there is a chance of a tax cut??

According to the Guardian, Jeremy Hunt is resisting tax cuts in the spring Budget. He is saving those for the Budget nearer the election. Why pay staff more and fill some of the 130,000 NHS vacancies when you can spend that money on  reduce the rate of Corporation Tax??

No wonder the Government can't resolve the NHS pay issues. If they did, there would be less money for tax cuts. Does the public want better public services or a penny off the income tax ?? I suppose the next General Election will decide that. 

Edited 18 January, 2023 by Tamesaint

[spyinthesky]

It is interesting the comment you make on Corporation Tax.
I was initially in favour of increasing Corporation Tax as a way of ensuring profitable companies paid a fair share of tax to help pay for the  increasing demands on Govt spending.
However it is noticeable that the Irish economy has blossomed since their Govt drastically cut Corporation Tax and attracted a whole raft of new businesses.