Anything Political

[Beekay 5,183]

Ben, did you never worry about reprisals from some of these miscreants? The yanks have the best idea, keep a loaded shooter under the counter. Stop the buggers in their tracks.

[benjamin1945 16,185]

NO Comment  Barrie......

[Jill Sparrow 10,319]

1 hour ago, Beekay said:

Ben, did you never worry about reprisals from some of these miscreants?

He goes around disguised as a menu!

[LizzieM 9,514]

@benjamin1945I’ve witnessed several shoplifters brazenly filling their pockets recently, mainly in Co-op stores in Notts and Dorset.   I’ve actually stood and watched them but they don’t care. Once they’ve casually walked out I’ve told one of the shop assistants but they are told not to tackle the thieves in case there’s a weapon involved.  Sad World we’re living in isn’t it.  

[MRS B 533]

Very sad world Lizzie, how’s hubby?

[Brew 5,425]

4 hours ago, benjamin1945 said:

and with the lack of Back-up who can blame them.........Rant Over...for now...

 

The trick to get police to cooperate now days is to tell them a shoplifter is committing a hate crime, they'll soon arrive mob handed..

[DJ360 6,733]

On 7/30/2023 at 2:22 PM, Brew said:

Would you not agree posting a discredited article in support  is not a good idea and can in some ways weaken the the argument?

 

I'd agree with your general point, but I'd characterise the article as 'contentious' rather than 'discredited'.

On 7/30/2023 at 2:22 PM, Brew said:

He states he's more than happy with the "very fast" reaction of the government to the factor 8 scandal. A problem first flagged in 1975 and ignored until 2017.

 

Hunt, the 'Smiling Assassin', thoroughly deserves the slight re-spelling of his surname which is often applied...

 

[DJ360 6,733]

Just a couple of observations relating to various recent comments from Ben.. general issues of discussion.

 

1.'The 'Boats'..

I'm not sure what the answer is.. but I think the utter shambles that the Asylum/Immigration system has become in the last 13 years demonstrates two things very clearly to me:

 

A. The Govt. of the last 13 years have neglected the problem until it has reached near crisis point and still have no clue what to do, other than to use Immigration and Policy 'gimmicks' as a 'Dog Whistle', in a desperate attempt to regain a few votes to replace those they will undoubtedly lose for every other disaster they have presided over.

 

B. The continuing issue of immigration/asylum, beyond just 'The Boats' and including the 100000+ backlog of unprocessed claims, demonstrates not only Govt. incompetence, but also the clear fact that Immigration had little or nothing to do with our EU membership and was therefore not a valid reason for us to leave the EU.

 

2. As for making Brexit work.. I think we'd first need to recognise that it was based almost exclusively on lies. But there are things we could do to improve our trade with the EU, which has suffered since Brexit, and to stop pretending that some obscure trade deal on Coconut Imports with some Pacific Island nation with a population of about twenty people, is actually going to amount to more than 'diddly squat'.

 

3 .Sadiq Khan may be a bit 'awkward', but ultimately he is trying to implement yet another 'contentious'  Govt, policy which has been 'dumped' onto Local Authorities exactly because it is 'contentious'. Starmer didn't mention that ..

 

4.Millionaire people in power..  'Twas ever thus, but I'd like to think that Proportional Representation might go some way to fixing that, as might a change in the rules regarding campaign funds/donations etc.  but mostly it will only change when the electorate wake up to the way they are manipulated by the Press and the Broadcast Media into thinking that wealthy people somehow are better at governing. They just aren't.

 

5. Building for Private Landlords... I'd approach that the other way around and build more Social Housing.  If there was enough 'social housing', there's be less demand for Private Rented at the bottom of the market.  I'd also stop Foreign investors from buying up our country, including housing, and pushing rents/property prices up even further. 

 

 

[Brew 5,425]

52 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

1.'The 'Boats'..

I'm not sure what the answer is..

 

Nor does anyone else as far as I can see, especially those who quickly turn to the courts and continually block every effort the government attempts. Many may not agree with sending them to Rwanda but offer no alternative. They wring their hands and shed crocodile tears at the poor immigrants plight and are all too sanctimoniously willing to thwart the government, providing they are NIMBY..

 

1 hour ago, DJ360 said:

The Boats' and including the 100000+ backlog of unprocessed claims,

 

 I have some sympathy with those trying to run the processing of immigrants. The border force has said repeatedly the vast majority ditch passports or other means of identification so they arrive here as absolute unknowns. They could be saints or sinners for all we know, but I can't think of a valid reason for chucking passports etc. in the sea. Surely proof of who and what you are would get you through the system quicker...

 

1 hour ago, DJ360 said:

As for making Brexit work.

 

It's not and it won't - nuff said.

 

1 hour ago, DJ360 said:

I'd like to think that Proportional Representation might go some way to fixing that,

 

It has some attractions but like every other system there are draw backs.

 

Personally I'd demand that elected MP's do the job we pay them for. To me it's a full time job and they can't do that if they have second strings of income from other employment, it's wide open to abuse.

 

1 hour ago, DJ360 said:

Building for Private Landlords...

 

Why not? It's that old saw market forces and they will build whilst there is demand.

I'm at a loss why councils choose not to build, but they do and outsource their existing housing stock, I don't believe  it's government policy to do so.  It rather looks as though running council estates has many problems that councils want to  abrogate their responsibilities for and  attribute blame to someone other than themselves.

 

[benjamin1945 16,185]

On 7/21/2023 at 6:30 PM, benjamin1945 said:

Never ever ever could i vote Conservative.......especially since i bumped into Lee Anderson a few months ago..........who is now a Tory after being Labour.in my area of Ashfield........ex Miner who just goes with anything to stay in the limelight.....he just looks and sounds so False...probably be Lib/Dem after the next election....

My contempt for this man grows..............F... OFF........Coming out of the mouth of the '''Conservative deputy Party leader'''

And no regret from him...........and sad to say most of the country agree that its ok.........

[DJ360 6,733]

Slight change of direction.. but I couldn't resist 'lifting' this from elsewhere...

 

Quote

"If Brexit were suddenly reversed, and you found the UK being part of the EU again, which Brexit benefit that you currently enjoy would you miss most."

 

[letsavagoo 964]

I said I wouldn’t post in this thread again but I just could resist this.

I think we all know that I rarely miss an opportunity to warn against the activities of the Labour lefties.

 

[DJ360 6,733]

Hmmm.. GB News eh?

 

She's one Labour Councillor. whose activities, if the GBN hack is correct, seem distasteful, but even the hack stopped short of accusing her of breaking the Law.

 

So, what could possibly be the motivation, for GB News, in drawing attention to a Muslim Asian Councillor, being a bit 'naughty' over migrants...?  Hmmm.. let me think...

 

I wonder if GB News is equally fervent in it's pursuit of the politicians and their cronies who defrauded us of £billions over Covid, or those in the Oil Lobby who persuaded Sunak to dish out more pointless North Sea exploration licenses?

 

Shouldn't think so... Propaganda Stations aren't subject to the same rules around 'balance' as Bona Fide news channels.

[DJ360 6,733]

On 8/8/2023 at 2:58 PM, Brew said:

Why not? It's that old saw market forces and they will build whilst there is demand.

I'm at a loss why councils choose not to build, but they do and outsource their existing housing stock, I don't believe  it's government policy to do so.  It rather looks as though running council estates has many problems that councils want to  abrogate their responsibilities for and  attribute blame to someone other than themselves.

 

Not really in line with the facts Jim.  As ever, the Tories have conspired to distort the Law, to suit the vested interests that they constitute, or represent.  Until you accept that Toryism since Thatcher has been characterised by a concerted, sustained attack on both Public services AND Local Government, you aren't going to see the pattern.

 

Have  look at this: https://www.local.gov.uk/topics/housing-and-planning/council-housing-100/future-council-housing

 

From which..

 

Quote

During the height of council building, in the 1950s, councils built on average around 147,000 homes a year. In the past 10 years councils have averaged building around 1,400 homes a year. This is due to a number of Government restrictions and lack of funding available.

 

And...

Quote

John Boughton (Municipal Dreams) | Meeting present and future needs

Last year we built 6463 new social rent homes. To meet present and future housing needs, we need to be building around 100,000. That might seem a tall order but, in reality, there’s no mystery in how it’s achieved. We need to look to the models of the past – to an era when we were regularly building 150,000 council homes annually – and to abandon the failed and misguided policies of recent years.

We must, above all, allow councils to build; firstly, by allowing them to borrow. The lifting of borrowing caps in 2018 was a big step in this direction and a large number of local authorities – 94 percent of those with retained housing stock – plan to use this power to borrow to invest in new homes.  The Public Works Loans Board provides, as it did during the great post-war council housing boom, the means by which the capital required can be cheaply accessed.

Secondly, we must provide more generous grant funding to encourage councils to build. The £2 billion additional funding for new social housing announced by the Government last year was a welcome advance but is inadequate to the challenge faced. We must increase this support in the understanding that a small boost from the public purse pays for itself many times over in the savings it generates – in health, wellbeing and community and, in tangible financial terms, in housing benefit and welfare payments. 

Thirdly, we must reform our broken land laws which see councils forced to purchase land at exorbitant sums, based on its maximum potential future development value – a double whammy that increases the cost of those affordable homes which might be built and incentivises the development of high-value luxury homes. There is now broad political support for a reform that would pay landowners a fair price for land based on the value of the housing scheme needed rather than the one imagined by speculative developers.

Fourthly, reform of the Right to Buy which has seen the number of social rent homes reduced by 1.5 million since 1980. Around 40 per cent of homes bought under Right to Buy are now in the private rental sector. It has been abolished by devolved administrations in Scotland and Wales. If that political choice is currently unacceptable in the English context, we must at the very least ensure that councils receive the full receipts from Right to Buy sales and that that money is re-invested in the social rent homes of the future.

Finally, we need not only to empower councils to build but to equip them to do so. Council resources have been enormously depleted by the free market dogmas ruling British politics since the 1980s. We need to revive the expertise and professionalism of the public sector and councils need good in-house architects and planners, clever lawyers and smart accountants to redress a balance of forces which has been so drastically tilted in favour of private enterprise. If public-private partnerships are to persist, we need to ensure they deliver for the public interest.  

All this is cost-effective and it represents far better value for money than the failed experiments in Help to Buy, shared ownership and so-called affordable rent housing which have provided billions in private profit and precious little housing for those in greatest need.

Underlying all this is the need to restore to popular consciousness the progressive belief that once governed public policy in this country: the principle that intelligent state expenditure on housing is an investment in a brighter future benefitting all – spending which represents, in every sense, a value, not a cost.

 

[Brew 5,425]

38 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

Not really in line with the facts Jim.

 

38 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

This is due to a number of Government restrictions and lack of funding available.

Actually, it is, there is no evidence of causality between government cuts to councils and the council's spending decisions. 

Taking Nottingham as an example, do they build social housing to meet demands or build a loss-making prestige project like a tram... Five hundred million pounds, approx. losses, would build a fair number of affordable houses. Are we sure they have tier priorities, right? Then again it is a Labour Council what can we expect?

 

And this week the trams are losing so much they now need to spend a further £150,000 on consultants to advise. Which bit of the cuts does that come under? 

 

[DJ360 6,733]

That's one Council Jim, which even I, as a left of centre, if not presently Labour, thinker am not impressed with. And you also haven't refuted the legal stuff,around land pricing, which is clearly designed to prevent LAs from building Social Housing without a 'cut' for Private interests, before even contracts are issued to builders.

You see, in the Tory mind.. even 'Social Housing', must be privately built and operated and provide a profit for somebody....

[Brew 5,425]

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

We must, above all, allow councils to build; firstly, by allowing them to borrow. The lifting of borrowing caps in 2018 was a big step in this direction and a large number of local authorities – 94 percent of those with retained housing stock – plan to use this power to borrow to invest in new homes.

 

 A little disingenuous here, 94% is accurate and sounds a lot better than 'only 94', also accurate.

Only 100 LA's retain housing stock, (there are 317 in total)

The rest follows a similar theme, close to misdirection. and is purely personal opinion.

 

Land value is not the free for all he implies:  https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/land-value-estimates

 

Again, how many of us are so altruistic we would sell land for less than the full market price?

 

 

------------------------

One council true, but that's not the point I'm making. What I'm trying to get across is that government regardless of colour do not dictate how councils spend their money. 

[letsavagoo 964]

On 8/8/2023 at 12:48 PM, DJ360 said:

Just a couple of observations relating to various recent comments from Ben.. general issues of discussion.

 

1.'The 'Boats'..

I'm not sure what the answer is.. but I think the utter shambles that the Asylum/Immigration system has become in the last 13 years demonstrates two things very clearly to me:

But the government are rather hampered by the left who thwart all attempts to do anything about the problem. An example of which is amply demonstrated in the Irim Ali video I posted. 
Just as well she was only being ‘a bit naughty’ I wonder if she was a Tory millionaire you’d be quite so forgiving. 
I’ll concede that the whole situation with the migrants is a total mess and the government have failed miserably. 

[Brew 5,425]

9 hours ago, DJ360 said:

wonder if GB News is equally fervent in it's pursuit of the politicians and their cronies who defrauded us of £billions over Covid

I looked at this and it seems you may have exaggerated just a little Col. A little bit of a smokescreen?...

 

According the the National Audit Office  there are no shadowy Tory MP's queuing to buy a Caribbean island with there ill gotten gains. The billions are living quite nicely in the pockets of benefit claimants, I don't just mean those on universal credit. There is little to no chance of getting it back, presumably because there are/were thousands of chancers who took advantage of an overburdened system to make a false claim during the Covid crisis. Being a Tory or a socialist has nothing to do with it, thieves come in all shades...

 

And I'm quite sure had Madam Ali been Tory her actions would have been rather more than merely 'distasteful'...

She charges £1500, I wonder where the boat people get that sort of money? I cast no aspersions of course,  but find it rather curious that the the loophole in human rights law she uses just happens to qualify for legal aid...

[HSR 286]

On 7/9/2023 at 8:41 PM, Brew said:

HSR: Col is given a 'free rein to spout his opinions' for exactly the reasons you are, only he does so with more civility

 

He has, AKA Col, already been pulled for having a second account and reprimanded, with presumably a narcissist mirror ip, and was pulled by this site..for speaking to Himself!!

 

 

Please don't excuse me of being uncivil and dishonest. 

[Brew 5,425]

I did not accuse you of being dishonest, uncivil you most certainly were.

[HSR 286]

Ask a civil question, to be greeted, by  an unspecified, apparently 'two word' answer..

 

Has to be two word incivility surely..

My best guess was Foxtrot Oscar..hardly civil..

 

Addressing my question would have been a mature approach.

 

 

 

..

 

 

 

 

 

[Oztalgian 3,330]

Admittedly I have not been following the Asylum/Immigration issues in the UK except when it infrequently pops up on our news coverage.

What does puzzle me is how these people can afford designer clothes or even copies and they all seem to have the latest mobile phones and ear buds. How do the telecom companies bill them or collect any monies due?

[Brew 5,425]

Unsure what you're talking about HS but I presume it's about the response to a post from some time ago.

 

I can't be bothered to find the question you asked but from memory it was something about labour finances. 

It was a question that was unanswerable and provocative in the asking.

[DJ360 6,733]

7 hours ago, HSR said:

 

He has, AKA Col, already been pulled for having a second account and reprimanded, with presumably a narcissist mirror ip, and was pulled by this site..for speaking to Himself!!

 

 

Please don't excuse me of being uncivil and dishonest. 

 

You are stuck in the past. Yes, I created a second account. Years ago. My intentions were not malign, but I wouldn'dt expect you to believe that anymore than you believe anything else I post. Yes.. I was reprimanded and Yes, I accepted same without whining.

You haven't been reprimanded as far as I know.. yet still you are whining.

Please give it a rest.