Coronavirus Discussion Thread

[Turkish]

So can PL football clubs furlough their players and get the government to foot 80% of the wage bill? Not that I have any idea if footballers count as Paye type employees or something else.

 

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

 

the maximum £2,500 wouldn't cover too much of the average £61k premier league wage. to be blunt if clubs even tried it it'd be a disgrace. For their non football staff then more understandable, surely they should follow Leeds example first though.

[Lighthouse]

the maximum £2,500 wouldn't cover too much of the average £61k premier league wage. to be blunt if clubs even tried it it'd be a disgrace. For their non football staff then more understandable, surely they should follow Leeds example first though.

 

One thing is for sure, we don't need another RB at the moment.

[doddisalegend]

the maximum £2,500 wouldn't cover too much of the average £61k premier league wage. to be blunt if clubs even tried it it'd be a disgrace. For their non football staff then more understandable, surely they should follow Leeds example first though.

It would be kind of amusing watching your average PL footballer try to cope on £2500.

 

I see in rugby the premiership wants a, across the board, 25% pay cut and some players are already threatening legal action mind you I have no idea what your top level rugby player earns but I'm assuming it isn't terrible money.

 

I wonder how footballers will react if something similar is tried in the PL?

 

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[Lord Duckhunter]

Anyone on here actually on the Furlough scheme?

 

We’re having to take A/L, Lieu time or unpaid leave at the moment as the big bosses claim the 80% scheme is more complicated than it looks.

 

Maybe it’s because it’s a European company, or maybe because some people can work at home. There’s also a rumour that as furlough is the alternative to redundancy, they’re worried that people who actually want redundancy are legally entitled to take it, costing the company money they can ill afford.

 

It’s caused quite a bit of bad feeling, but they’ve asked us to bare with them for 2 weeks whilst they look into it. I’m not too bad because I do loads of extra hours for **** all so will make up AL taken with lieu, but some of my guys cant.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Whitey Grandad]

Cheers WG

 

Hmm... that was my fear.... seems a tad unfair for employees who had to be laid off before the scheme was announced who would otherwise have been furloughed had the scheme existed. That said, AFAIK, the cafe owner has only 'informally' laid off the employees so they may not have informed HMRC yet and therefore not techincally off the payroll yet. Who knows. Let's see how it pans out.

Hi Trousers,

 

I have just had an update from HMRC and your daughter can be taken back on the payroll and then furloughed provided she was on the payroll on the 28th February.

 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/claim-for-wage-costs-through-the-coronavirus-job-retention-scheme

[Whitey Grandad]

Can you furlough yourself? I'm a company director and I wasn't sure.

 

Yes you can but the company must have at least one active director. Whilst furloughed any employee cannot do any work for the company, but they can work for another company that has not furloughed anybody.

[hypochondriac]

Anyone on here actually on the Furlough scheme?

 

We’re having to take A/L, Lieu time or unpaid leave at the moment as the big bosses claim the 80% scheme is more complicated than it looks.

 

Maybe it’s because it’s a European company, or maybe because some people can work at home. There’s also a rumour that as furlough is the alternative to redundancy, they’re worried that people who actually want redundancy are legally entitled to take it, costing the company money they can ill afford.

 

It’s caused quite a bit of bad feeling, but they’ve asked us to bare with them for 2 weeks whilst they look into it. I’m not too bad because I do loads of extra hours for **** all so will make up AL taken with lieu, but some of my guys cant.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Tbf it's going to be impossible for all people to take annual leave once we are up and running again.

[bpsaint]

Anyone on here actually on the Furlough scheme?

 

We’re having to take A/L, Lieu time or unpaid leave at the moment as the big bosses claim the 80% scheme is more complicated than it looks.

 

Maybe it’s because it’s a European company, or maybe because some people can work at home. There’s also a rumour that as furlough is the alternative to redundancy, they’re worried that people who actually want redundancy are legally entitled to take it, costing the company money they can ill afford.

 

It’s caused quite a bit of bad feeling, but they’ve asked us to bare with them for 2 weeks whilst they look into it. I’m not too bad because I do loads of extra hours for **** all so will make up AL taken with lieu, but some of my guys cant.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

i work for Travis Perkins (Benchmarx) and am now on the Furlough scheme as of this morning.

 

All seems to be pretty straightforward so far, we’re getting the 80% from the government and TP are making up the other 20% for the first 4 weeks - if it continues past that we get the 80% from the government and the company are paying 10%.

 

They’re taking 5 days annual leave in the first period and we can take a further 5 if we want should the second 4 weeks come into play. They don’t want everyone to return to work with a whole years annual leave allocation to squeeze into 7 or so months, although the Business Secretary is expected to introduce new rules on that today so companies can carry it over.

[Whitey Grandad]

Anyone on here actually on the Furlough scheme?

 

We’re having to take A/L, Lieu time or unpaid leave at the moment as the big bosses claim the 80% scheme is more complicated than it looks.

 

Maybe it’s because it’s a European company, or maybe because some people can work at home. There’s also a rumour that as furlough is the alternative to redundancy, they’re worried that people who actually want redundancy are legally entitled to take it, costing the company money they can ill afford.

 

It’s caused quite a bit of bad feeling, but they’ve asked us to bare with them for 2 weeks whilst they look into it. I’m not too bad because I do loads of extra hours for **** all so will make up AL taken with lieu, but some of my guys cant.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It won’t cost the company anything to put an employee on 80% salary. All employee costs will eventually be covered including employer’s NI and auto-enrolment pension payments.

 

Any arrangements must be subject to your contract of employment.

[Whitey Grandad]

So can PL football clubs furlough their players and get the government to foot 80% of the wage bill? Not that I have any idea if footballers count as Paye type employees or something else.

 

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

 

A lot of them are paid through limited companies.

[stknowle]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52048213

 

LOL! Corbyn is such a moron.

 

Ahhh so according to Jeremy spending vast amounts we can't afford and that will take us decades to pay off because we are in an unprecedented crisis and have no choice, is justification for spending vast amounts we can't afford and that will take us decades to pay off when we are not in an unprecedented crisis and do have a choice.

 

**** I wish he'd won that election.

[hypochondriac]

Ahhh so according to Jeremy spending vast amounts we can't afford and that will take us decades to pay off because we are in an unprecedented crisis and have no choice, is justification for spending vast amounts we can't afford and that will take us decades to pay off when we are not in an unprecedented crisis and do have a choice.

 

**** I wish he'd won that election.

If anything it proves him completely wrong. This level of spending will damage the country for decades yet he wanted to do similar without a catastrophic once in a generation event. Imagine if Corbyn had got in and this virus had popped up in a year or two. if we had spent on the level he wanted we would be utterly utterly f*cked.

[Batman]

Ahhh so according to Jeremy spending vast amounts we can't afford and that will take us decades to pay off because we are in an unprecedented crisis and have no choice, is justification for spending vast amounts we can't afford and that will take us decades to pay off when we are not in an unprecedented crisis and do have a choice.

 

**** I wish he'd won that election.

 

is this a sarcastic post?

 

various economy commentators are speculating (on the radio) that we will be 'fine' at some point down the line, possibly within a decade.

No one is discussing this as everyone wants a piece from the Govt right now and they (we) will probably push back hard when the realities of this bailout become apparent.

 

That is because we have NOT bought BT and dished out broadband to everyone and nationalised everything else, otherwise, the economy would probably be ruined!

Edited 27 March, 2020 by Batman

[Noodles34]

The problem with furloughing is if you want to open on a reduced hours basis.

if you keep staff on, then technically, unless the contract otherwise says, you can’t just reduce their wages even for less working hours.

obviously paying full wages can damage the financial stability of the company.

Sonwhilst you want to carry on, it is not worth the hassle and money, better just claim the 80% etc.

or, what about staff volunteering their Servcies for free?

they get paid from the government and work for free.

does that get around the rules?

otherwise what is the point of trying to keep going?

[Noodles34]

Apparently you can work and get paid for another job, even if furloughed by your main company.

again, ridiculous.

so maybe I would be better starting another company and taking on staff on an hourly basis then?

[stknowle]

is this a sarcastic post?

 

various economy commentators are speculating (on the radio) that we will be 'fine' at some point down the line, possibly within a decade.

No one is discussing this as everyone wants a piece from the Govt right now and they (we) will probably push back hard when the realities of this bailout become apparent.

 

That is because we have NOT bought BT and dished out broadband to everyone and nationalised everything else, otherwise, the economy would probably be ruined!

 

The bit about me wishing he had won the election was most definitely sarcasm. He is an utter moonraker.

[Batman]

The bit about me wishing he had won the election was most definitely sarcasm. He is an utter moonraker.

 

[East Kent Saint]

The point is if the NHS and DWP had been given proper funding over the last decade these departments would be in a much better place to deal with the current crisis etc

Don't forget the Tories blaming Labour for the criminal behaviour of the banks worldwide , not just rolling up bad debt that they had encouraged people to buy and turn them into "Financial Instruments" to sell to other Banks but the Libor and other crimes that went largely unpunished. Having sold on these bad debts they were then free to sell even more mortgages at a low rate for the first year , failing to mention that the repayments would rapidly rise in following years , leading to more bad debt.

The UK economy has barely recovered from this before Brexit and now the virus .

[Wurzel]

The point is if the NHS and DWP had been given proper funding over the last decade these departments would be in a much better place to deal with the current crisis etc

Don't forget the Tories blaming Labour for the criminal behaviour of the banks worldwide , not just rolling up bad debt that they had encouraged people to buy and turn them into "Financial Instruments" to sell to other Banks but the Libor and other crimes that went largely unpunished. Having sold on these bad debts they were then free to sell even more mortgages at a low rate for the first year , failing to mention that the repayments would rapidly rise in following years , leading to more bad debt.

The UK economy has barely recovered from this before Brexit and now the virus .

 

Would it though.? What level of funding would be needed to ensure that it could cope with a crisis of this magnitude bearing that may not ever have even happened. Same argument as why doesn't SCC have more gritters and snowploughs. If the NHS had had a bigger budget, likelihood is more would have been spent on cancer research, mental health, reducing A&E waiting times, it still wouldn't have been able to cope with this.

[hypochondriac]

Just been told we can take people off furlough after three weeks if needed. Result.

[East Kent Saint]

Would it though.? What level of funding would be needed to ensure that it could cope with a crisis of this magnitude bearing that may not ever have even happened. Same argument as why doesn't SCC have more gritters and snowploughs. If the NHS had had a bigger budget, likelihood is more would have been spent on cancer research, mental health, reducing A&E waiting times, it still wouldn't have been able to cope with this.

Yes it still would have been a massive problem . The NHS problems are not just funding but the the fact that the Tories from Thatcher onwards wanted to reduce the NHS and push people to towards private health care . Ken Clarke started the ball rolling by starting the internal market , since then we have had numerous reorganisations including one where the health secretary would have had no responsibility for the NHS . This was overturned !! We have had changes to GP contracts and then another filter to reduce hospital referals Comissioning Groups !!! Net result , difficult to get GP appointment in 2 weeks so people went to A&E .... Along the way corporate private health insurance was promoted etc etc . GPs now want out , several practices have closed in our area , remaining practices said they couldn't take any more numbers but the area health authority overruled them so they are struggling. Rural practices used to be given a subsidy to help them stay in place with low numbers but that was cancelled and they have ended up closed with villagers now having to travel to nearest town to see a Dr.

Edited 27 March, 2020 by East Kent Saint

[Lord Duckhunter]

It won’t cost the company anything to put an employee on 80% salary. All employee costs will eventually be covered including employer’s NI and auto-enrolment pension payments.

 

Any arrangements must be subject to your contract of employment.

 

You seem like a bit of an expert, maybe you could help my daughter. She works for a dentist that does private & NHS work. He’s been advised by government to stay open for emergencies only. Therefore his income will be down and he’s only keeping on a skeleton team. He doesn’t want to lay her off, but can’t afford her wages. He thinks that the furlough scheme doesn’t cover him because he does NHS work. Is this correct.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Whitey Grandad]

You seem like a bit of an expert, maybe you could help my daughter. She works for a dentist that does private & NHS work. He’s been advised by government to stay open for emergencies only. Therefore his income will be down and he’s only keeping on a skeleton team. He doesn’t want to lay her off, but can’t afford her wages. He thinks that the furlough scheme doesn’t cover him because he does NHS work. Is this correct.

 

The scheme is open to very employer no matter what work they do so your dentist can ‘furlough’ any of his employees subject to the conditions that are outlined in the links that I gave. There is a question as to whether his activities count as publicly funded.

 

“Where employers receive public funding for staff costs, and that funding is continuing, we expect employers to use that money to continue to pay staff in the usual fashion – and correspondingly not furlough them. This also applies to non-public sector employers who receive public funding for staff costs.”

 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/claim-for-wage-costs-through-the-coronavirus-job-retention-scheme

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/check-if-you-could-be-covered-by-the-coronavirus-job-retention-scheme

 

I’m not a true expert but I have spent the past few days trying to find out more details by speaking to my accountant and sitting through a Sage webinar.

[sandwichsaint]

The point is if the NHS and DWP had been given proper funding over the last decade these departments would be in a much better place to deal with the current crisis etc

Don't forget the Tories blaming Labour for the criminal behaviour of the banks worldwide , not just rolling up bad debt that they had encouraged people to buy and turn them into "Financial Instruments" to sell to other Banks but the Libor and other crimes that went largely unpunished. Having sold on these bad debts they were then free to sell even more mortgages at a low rate for the first year , failing to mention that the repayments would rapidly rise in following years , leading to more bad debt.

The UK economy has barely recovered from this before Brexit and now the virus .

 

Not all bad though, when Labour take over at the next election they will have a ten year pass on clearing up the Tories' mess

[Lord Duckhunter]

The scheme is open to very employer no matter what work they do so your dentist can ‘furlough’ any of his employees subject to the conditions that are outlined in the links that I gave. There is a question as to whether his activities count as publicly funded.

 

“Where employers receive public funding for staff costs, and that funding is continuing, we expect employers to use that money to continue to pay staff in the usual fashion – and correspondingly not furlough them. This also applies to non-public sector employers who receive public funding for staff costs.”

 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/claim-for-wage-costs-through-the-coronavirus-job-retention-scheme

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/check-if-you-could-be-covered-by-the-coronavirus-job-retention-scheme

 

I’m not a true expert but I have spent the past few days trying to find out more details by speaking to my accountant and sitting through a Sage webinar.

 

Thanks

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Jonnyboy]

Ahhh so according to Jeremy spending vast amounts we can't afford and that will take us decades to pay off because we are in an unprecedented crisis and have no choice, is justification for spending vast amounts we can't afford and that will take us decades to pay off when we are not in an unprecedented crisis and do have a choice.

 

**** I wish he'd won that election.

 

Yet somehow all of a sudden we have the magic money tree appear and it's applauded.

 

Why does it appear when it's 5000 vulnerable people dying from a virus and not when it's tens of thousands dying from benefit cuts and sanctions?

 

Because the rich are scared of it too.

[Batman]

Yet somehow all of a sudden we have the magic money tree appear and it's applauded.

 

Why does it appear when it's 5000 vulnerable people dying from a virus and not when it's tens of thousands dying from benefit cuts and sanctions?

 

Because the rich are scared of it too.

You are a bit weird

[Jonnyboy]

You are a bit weird

 

You are very thick.

[Whitey Grandad]

Thanks

 

Always a pleasure

[Lighthouse]

Yet somehow all of a sudden we have the magic money tree appear and it's applauded.

 

Why does it appear when it's 5000 vulnerable people dying from a virus and not when it's tens of thousands dying from benefit cuts and sanctions?

 

Because the rich are scared of it too.

 

5,000?

 

Italy are having the equivalent of a reasonably full passenger jet crash every six hours and it’s not going to stop any time soon. We’re a couple of weeks behind them.

[Jimmy_D]

Yet somehow all of a sudden we have the magic money tree appear and it's applauded.

 

Why does it appear when it's 5000 vulnerable people dying from a virus and not when it's tens of thousands dying from benefit cuts and sanctions?

 

Because the rich are scared of it too.

 

It's not a magic money tree, it's borrowing against the future and tanking our future economy to save hundreds of thousands of lives now.

 

We're going to be worse off for a long time once we get through this, but it's better than the alternative.

[Patrick Bateman]

Yet somehow all of a sudden we have the magic money tree appear and it's applauded.

 

Why does it appear when it's 5000 vulnerable people dying from a virus and not when it's tens of thousands dying from benefit cuts and sanctions?

 

Because the rich are scared of it too.

 

That's the whole point you penis. This country does NOT have the cash to continue this spending long term, it is a "war time spending" pattern which we, as a country, will take a while to recover from. Long term we'd be bankrupt. It is not rocket science.

[CB Fry]

Yet somehow all of a sudden we have the magic money tree appear and it's applauded.

 

Why does it appear when it's 5000 vulnerable people dying from a virus and not when it's tens of thousands dying from benefit cuts and sanctions?

 

Because the rich are scared of it too.

Jesus wept.

[Whitey Grandad]

More info for Trousers about dentists:

 

https://bda.org/advice/Coronavirus/Pages/financial-impact.aspx

 

"The scheme is not expected to be used by employers who are receiving other public funding, including NHS dental practices. We are urgently trying to work out a way of ensuring that mixed practices can get some money from the furloughed workers scheme to cover private work, as well as money from the NHS."

 

And:

Backdating to the 1st March only applies to employees that have already been laid off. Such workers would need to be rehired and then furloughed.

Employees placed on unpaid leave after 28 February 2020 can be furloughed.

[Lord Duckhunter]

More info for Trousers about dentists:

 

https://bda.org/advice/Coronavirus/Pages/financial-impact.aspx

 

"The scheme is not expected to be used by employers who are receiving other public funding, including NHS dental practices. We are urgently trying to work out a way of ensuring that mixed practices can get some money from the furloughed workers scheme to cover private work, as well as money from the NHS."

 

.

 

Thanks again, this was what my daughter was told. Looks like she may fall between the gaps. Her dentist boss can only do emergency work (advised by government) so his income is significantly down, yet at the moment he doesn’t seem to be able to furlough her, so will have to lay her off.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guided Missile]

That's the whole point you penis. This country does NOT have the cash to continue this spending long term, it is a "war time spending" pattern which we, as a country, will take a while to recover from. Long term we'd be bankrupt. It is not rocket science.

Calm down dear, it's only money:

[stknowle]

Yet somehow all of a sudden we have the magic money tree appear and it's applauded.

 

Why does it appear when it's 5000 vulnerable people dying from a virus and not when it's tens of thousands dying from benefit cuts and sanctions?

 

Because the rich are scared of it too.

 

Was going to respond to this by pointing out the blindingly obvious but I see others have already done so.

[Whitey Grandad]

Thanks again, this was what my daughter was told. Looks like she may fall between the gaps. Her dentist boss can only do emergency work (advised by government) so his income is significantly down, yet at the moment he doesn’t seem to be able to furlough her, so will have to lay her off.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The only consolation is that if the BDA is successful then her furlough could be backdated.

 

I hope all goes well for you both, and that goes for all our contributors everywhere.

[northam soul]

There has been a new announcement from Gov.uk

In light of the continuous spread of Covid - 19 the Government can announce it is necessary to completely knock down an area known as Portsmouth and move it 50 miles east to protect the wonderful city of Southampton from unsanitary practices.

[alehouseboys]

There has been a new announcement from Gov.uk

In light of the continuous spread of Covid - 19 the Government can announce it is necessary to completely knock down an area known as Portsmouth and move it 50 miles east to protect the wonderful city of Southampton from unsanitary practices.

 

50 miles south would be preferable.

[mopleysaint]

Clearly no easy answers to this issue. Not sure if it's been flagged before, but might another idea be to cancel the rest of the current season, but to allow every team to carry forward their points tally and goal difference to the start of next season (whenever that can start). I'm starting to think it might be the fairest solution in a bad situation. What do others think ?

[Baird of the land]

Clearly no easy answers to this issue. Not sure if it's been flagged before, but might another idea be to cancel the rest of the current season, but to allow every team to carry forward their points tally and goal difference to the start of next season (whenever that can start). I'm starting to think it might be the fairest solution in a bad situation. What do others think ?

 

Personally I really wouldn’t want that. Ruin possibilities of a fresh season for each team.

[benjii]

Clearly no easy answers to this issue. Not sure if it's been flagged before, but might another idea be to cancel the rest of the current season, but to allow every team to carry forward their points tally and goal difference to the start of next season (whenever that can start). I'm starting to think it might be the fairest solution in a bad situation. What do others think ?

 

No, what's the point of that? Just makes next season weird.

[whelk]

No, what's the point of that? Just makes next season weird.

 

And league title already over in August.

[SW5 SAINT]

Clearly no easy answers to this issue. Not sure if it's been flagged before, but might another idea be to cancel the rest of the current season, but to allow every team to carry forward their points tally and goal difference to the start of next season (whenever that can start). I'm starting to think it might be the fairest solution in a bad situation. What do others think ?

 

The best thing about a new season is that it is exactly that, everyone starts level. There’s every chance a number of football clubs won’t even make it to a new season. If that’s the case the leagues may well get redrawn anyway......

[Lord Duckhunter]

Clearly no easy answers to this issue. Not sure if it's been flagged before, but might another idea be to cancel the rest of the current season, but to allow every team to carry forward their points tally and goal difference to the start of next season (whenever that can start). I'm starting to think it might be the fairest solution in a bad situation. What do others think ?

 

Nothing is fair until every side plays everybody home & away. Villa have games in hand, we lost 9-0 to Leicester (affecting our goal difference badly) but teams won’t play City or Liverpool twice, which are games they could conceivably lose 5 or 6. Liverpool could win the league but only have the 4th or 5th best record in the new season.

 

There’s only 2 outcomes that are fair, & will keep the lawyers out of it, void or finish.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[StDunko]

I have a solution to this which is fair:

 

Carry over everything from this season, points, goal diff etc. Then play next season in full, with any fixture that was already played "this" season (such as Newcastle at home) is played, the normal 3pts for a win and 1 point for a draw etc. applies.

 

However, when a fixture comes up that had yet to be played "this" season, (such as Arsenal at home), what ever the result, it counts double. So a two nil win, would mean 6 points and a goal difference of +4. So at the end of next season the table would be complete for a double season. Who ever wins the league gets awarded the title for this season and next season. The bottom three go down as usual.

 

There is nothing unfair as no result are expunged.

[Jimmy_D]

I have a solution to this which is fair:

 

Carry over everything from this season, points, goal diff etc. Then play next season in full, with any fixture that was already played "this" season (such as Newcastle at home) is played, the normal 3pts for a win and 1 point for a draw etc. applies.

 

However, when a fixture comes up that had yet to be played "this" season, (such as Arsenal at home), what ever the result, it counts double. So a two nil win, would mean 6 points and a goal difference of +4. So at the end of next season the table would be complete for a double season. Who ever wins the league gets awarded the title for this season and next season. The bottom three go down as usual.

 

There is nothing unfair as no result are expunged.

 

Still doesn’t work due to relegated teams. For example, an unplayed match against Norwich is a very different prospect to an unplayed match against Leeds under Bielsa.

[Charlie Wayman]

I have a solution to this which is fair:

 

Carry over everything from this season, points, goal diff etc. Then play next season in full, with any fixture that was already played "this" season (such as Newcastle at home) is played, the normal 3pts for a win and 1 point for a draw etc. applies.

 

However, when a fixture comes up that had yet to be played "this" season, (such as Arsenal at home), what ever the result, it counts double. So a two nil win, would mean 6 points and a goal difference of +4. So at the end of next season the table would be complete for a double season. Who ever wins the league gets awarded the title for this season and next season. The bottom three go down as usual.

 

There is nothing unfair as no result are expunged.

 

No. Football is a simple game so keep it simple. Abandon this season, start again. No other sensible solution. Will keep the lawyers fully employed at least, working from home of course.

 

Just adding a sobering statistic here, in 2017/18 winter 26,500 people died from flu virus roughly 1000 p wk, yet nobody noticed except the poor families involved. Even though a vaccine was available!

[buctootim]

There has been a new announcement from Gov.uk

In light of the continuous spread of Covid - 19 the Government can announce it is necessary to completely knock down an area known as Portsmouth and move it 50 miles east to protect the wonderful city of Southampton from unsanitary practices.

 

Oi! I live in Brighton thanks very much