Mantis Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 perhaps he should have thrown an egg at Schofield, or punched him. Just to lighten up things Yeah, although I'd say swearing at him would've been an absolute no-go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smetrov Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 As Tories go - Cameron isn't to bad - and is quite a skilfull politican. My concern is that despite cameron, the party is full of sons of Thatcher and sponsored by the owner of Wonga.com. I don't like the tories and never will - but a return the thatcherite 80's would be disastorous - but Cameron seems to be loosing this battle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted November 9, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted November 9, 2012 Blandy wrote (in locking) the Savile/paedophile thread: Thread may be re-opened if either people start posting more in line with the guidelines or further developments occur. Point of order, your honour: How can we do that if the thread is locked? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 is this cheating ? sounds like all it's doing is moving one debt to a deferred debt that will be larger as a result Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 If i was dave, id have called the gopher botherer a pleb, and stormed outta there (saying id have his job) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 If i was dave, id have called the gopher botherer a pleb, and stormed outta there (saying id have his job) If I were Gordon the Gopher i'd be down the police station saying Schofield used to put his hand inside my arse 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 is this cheating ? sounds like all it's doing is moving one debt to a deferred debt that will be larger as a result Would Osbourne would be looking to do this if the deficit numbers were not looking so out of kilter with forecasts/budgets this year? I'd suggest that he wouldn't and it is therefore simply a ploy to give him an easier ride with the 'Autumn' statement. I can just picture Fallon, Hancock et al in The Daily Politics studio telling us how brilliant the deficit numbers actually are and how on track plan A obviously is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 is this cheating ? sounds like all it's doing is moving one debt to a deferred debt that will be larger as a result Yes, it seems like that, as they say they plan to sell these gilts into the private sector at some point (and pay more interest, because interest rates will be higher). But whether they pay the interest to the BoE or to the private sector, it again raises the whole thing about why they maintain this approach. Snowy's comment is right, they are looking to make this change in order to get closer to the targets they have set themselves, and in that sense it's cooking the books. The Treasury denies this, saying the change won't in itself mean they hit their targets. It seems their words are carefully chosen: the FT notes Aides to the chancellor insist the operation is designed to improve the efficiency of government cash management and do not make the difference between passing and failing the fiscal tests. But Treasury officials admitted the move would improve the government’s position on public-sector net borrowing and public-sector net debt, thereby flattering the official targets for the public finances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted November 9, 2012 Moderator Share Posted November 9, 2012 Blandy wrote (in locking) the Savile/paedophile thread: Point of order, your honour: How can we do that if the thread is locked? You (I say "you, but I mean other people, not specifically you personnally) can behave in the bollitical threads, which is where the problems seem to mostly arise. It's open again now in the hope that people will respect the site's guidelines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Fuel increases voted for by tory and lib dems tonight. Triple dip recession here we come Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Fuel increases voted for by tory and lib dems tonight. Triple dip recession here we come Absolute insanity that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Fuel increases voted for by tory and lib dems tonight. Triple dip recession here we come i may be wrong but I didn't think they were voting to increase fuel by the 3p , more they were voting against the labour motion to freeze it my guess is that Osborne has already told likely rebels that the 3p increase will be cancelled in his Autumn statement .. TBH I suspect that Balls was playing politics here .. fuel duty was postponed in August for 5 months , it's not even an issue until Jan .. however another defeat for the government could have had dire consequences so I suspect that is why the coalition were tipped the wink and the labour motion was defeated , however now the motion is defeated I can see Balls shouting from the rooftops tomorrow about how the Con/dems are out of touch etc etc probably win / win for balls .. and if Osborne does indeed freeze it in Autumn statement I suspect it will be Balls saying it was us wot done it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 i may be wrong but I didn't think they were voting to increase fuel by the 3p , more they were voting against the labour motion to freeze it my guess is that Osborne has already told likely rebels that the 3p increase will be cancelled in his Autumn statement .. he did cancel the last duty increase as i recall TBH I suspect that Balls was playing politics here another defeat for the government could have dire consequences so I suspect that it why the labour motion was defeated , however now the motion is defeated I can see Balls shouting from the rooftops tomorrow about how the Con/dems are out of touch etc etc probably win / win for balls .. yeah I think that's about right. It might not be the full 3p scrapped, it may be a compromise penny, but I don't see the whole rise going through I think enough people were given the 'stick with us we're sorting it' speach to scupper the stunt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 You have to laugh at the desire to defend the tory party. Basically admitting then if the tory and lib dems voted against the increase because it will be removed in the autumn statement then surely that is nothing but political posing. I remember vividly the indignation shown by tory supporters if fuel prices went up under he last gvmt. Conveniently and showing hypocrisy again, under this gvmt fuel rises plus the impact of the higher rate of vat they have imposed get little in the way of any comment, just a 'ahh but labour ....' Why? Surely under the ruleset this gvmt soundbite about then it should never have been even considered. I suppose also calls from organisations like witch are political? It can also do publicity seeking cameron no good to see his bloated face drinking fine wine eating a banquet and then have his shirt bust open as he laid back after the many course banquet. I am sure that the many millions suffering under higher fuel prices (not just petrol) will appreciate those pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 You have to laugh at the desire to defend the tory party. Basically admitting then if the tory and lib dems voted against the increase because it will be removed in the autumn statement then surely that is nothing but political posing. I remember vividly the indignation shown by tory supporters if fuel prices went up under he last gvmt. Conveniently and showing hypocrisy again, under this gvmt fuel rises plus the impact of the higher rate of vat they have imposed get little in the way of any comment, just a 'ahh but labour ....' Why? Surely under the ruleset this gvmt soundbite about then it should never have been even considered. I suppose also calls from organisations like witch are political? It can also do publicity seeking cameron no good to see his bloated face drinking fine wine eating a banquet and then have his shirt bust open as he laid back after the many course banquet. I am sure that the many millions suffering under higher fuel prices (not just petrol) will appreciate those pictures. That's very well but John Prescott punched somebody once! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 You have to laugh at the desire to defend the tory party. , just a 'ahh but labour ....' Why? Was I defending anyone ? It wasn't an ahhhh but labour post , if it was I would have mentioned that the hike Osborne scrapped last time was in fact one introduced by Darling It was an observation of what is being played out here , the post directly under mine kinda said he agreed ( and I'm fairly sure he's not a Tory ?) If anything whilst not exactly praising Balls , I was commenting on how he can't lose on this one IMO ... Whether he is acting in the interest of the country or the interest of the party is the 3p question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 3.6p you forgot the VAT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 People struggling to make ends meet Inflation rising Suicide rates soaring Government cuts across the board Yet they can afford to waste millions of pounds of tax payers money trying to deport a radical muslim cleric and then stump up 100K per week around the clock surveillance whoever said life is not fair was correct but don't worry were all in this together Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 People struggling to make ends meet Inflation rising Suicide rates soaring Government cuts across the board Yet they can afford to waste millions of pounds of tax payers money trying to deport a radical muslim cleric and then stump up 100K per week around the clock surveillance whoever said life is not fair was correct but don't worry were all in this together He's been in detention for nearly eight years, before the government even got in! FFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 He's been in detention for nearly eight years, before the government even got in! FFS. Labour are to blame i agree But how much longer will it be till the conservatives fix this people's patience are beginning to wear thin he always seems to get off the hook Its about time they grew a spine and got rid of this illegal immigrant the bloke gained asylum back in 1993 using a fake passport FFS The bill of Human Rights should be torn up when it comes to people like this. Terrorists deserve no rights I have no doubt his benefits will not be cut like the rest of those who actually have the rights to live in the UK and genuinely need them In a world where an SAS hero is treated as a criminal and convicted and a bloke like this is given millions in legal aid.... Beggars belief Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts