1. Being assigned responsibility for one area does not mean one is ignorant of other areas, or of having no interest in other issues, or political interest in.

 

Hence my 'They can be concerned about other areas on a human level of course, but they are not *responsible* for them.' comment

 

2. They do, and no there aren't checks. The history of politics is one of poiliticians thinking they can do what they like, and trying to get away with it - we saw it over the Parliamentary Brexit procedures, and we see it on a weekly basis how this government has abandoned ALL of it's election promises. Liars. That's why we need to keep them in check, because politicians are not always honest and open.

That's what we have elections for.

 

3. I'm deadly serious. Apathy amongst people is a real danger to their own well-being when faced with liars and self-interested people and organisations. I never under-estimate the will and ability of the rich and powerful to screw the poor. Apparently you do, so that makes you either shruggy-shoulders about it, or else blindly optimistic and gullible. Given your vitriolic attacks on European politicians I'd like to know what you think makes our UK politicians genetically or morally superior to anyone else's - cos I see no evidence for it whatsoever. Feel free to give examples.....

 

Again I find this ironic - from my perspective, the apathy involves naively going along with the EU project, uncaring of whether it's claimed objectives are actually it's real ones. For me, actions speak louder than words - and the ire directed against the UK by some EU officials for 'daring to leave' hardly convinces me I am wrong to be suspicious of it.

Hence my 'They can be concerned about other areas on a human level of course, but they are not *responsible* for them.' comment

 

That's what we have elections for.

Again I find this ironic - from my perspective, the apathy involves naively going along with the EU project, uncaring of whether it's claimed objectives are actually it's real ones. For me, actions speak louder than words - and the ire directed against the UK by some EU officials for 'daring to leave' hardly convinces me I am wrong to be suspicious of it.

 

1. So we agree on my initial point

2. So we agree on my initial point

3. You are just repeating what I said you say. You are giving me no examples of why UK politicians are any different (personally I think they are less trustworthy at present), you are just side-stepping the point entirely.

1. So we agree on my initial point

2. So we agree on my initial point

3. You are just repeating what I said you say. You are giving me no examples of why UK politicians are any different (personally I think they are less trustworthy at present), you are just side-stepping the point entirely.

 

3. It's not that I think UK politicians are any more trustworthy, but at least we have the means to remove them all if we so chose, rather than just around 10% as in the EU parliament.

We have another contender for the "You couldn't make it up" award. According to the Telegraph, Theresa May is considering postponing her intended promotion of Jeremy Hunt to replace Damien Green as her de facto deputy. This is because of the current problems in the NHS. Surely the current problems in the NHS are a reason not to promote him at all rather than just delaying it for a few months.

We have another contender for the "You couldn't make it up" award. According to the Telegraph, Theresa May is considering postponing her intended promotion of Jeremy Hunt to replace Damien Green as her de facto deputy. This is because of the current problems in the NHS. Surely the current problems in the NHS are a reason not to promote him at all rather than just delaying it for a few months.

 

Brexit is sort of grabbing attention away from the key issue in the country, really. Do we want a free NHS, and do we wish to vote for a party that supports it? It's not free of course, it's paid for via taxes which shares the burden between those who cant afford medical care, those who can, and those who have shitloads of money they spend a lot of effort keeping to themselves.

 

It's pretty clear: vote Tory to destroy the NHS (they are doing a pretty good job dismantling it bit by bit over a prolonged period - at no benefit to the tax payer incidentally, quite the reverse, the benefit is to private health companies and politicians on their boards, and profits for investors). Corbyn has a chance to make perfectly clear it will be supported, privatisation ended and reversed, and he will do all he can for the economy (regardless of his personal preferences) to ensure that money is available. This is the issue that will kill the Tories off, Brexit is a diversion which is hopelessly splitting them (and Labour) and the consequences of it may be disastrous for the NHS if the Tories use it as an opportunity to get rid. "We can no longer afford it thanks to the British voter wanting a Hard Brexit, not our fault just doing what you voted for".

 

Very Tory sort of argument I forsee taking hold.....

With no majority, the Tories dare not harm the NHS too much, especially as the main beneficiaries are older people, who are also the main source of Tory votes...

With no majority, the Tories dare not harm the NHS too much, especially as the main beneficiaries are older people, who are also the main source of Tory votes...

 

You weren't in A&E and various emergency wards wards over Christmas and the New Year. I was (with my father). That is EXACTLY what is happening. Why else do you think May made an emergency announcement to limit the damage? Just for jollies? You really do need to pop over to your nearest hospital, visiting someone who's seriously ill is enough, no need make yourself critically ill just to observe.

 

just as an example of the emergency services...

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/woman...d-home-11802607

You weren't in A&E and various emergency wards wards over Christmas and the New Year. I was (with my father). That is EXACTLY what is happening. Why else do you think May made an emergency announcement to limit the damage? Just for jollies? You really do need to pop over to your nearest hospital, visiting someone who's seriously ill is enough, no need make yourself critically ill just to observe.

 

I'm not saying the NHS doesn't have problems, only that the Tories are not solely to blame for it. No matter how much money is pumped into the NHS, it will never be enough to do what people think it *should*. As for the other comment, I am just thankful that it's been 5 years since anyone in my family has been seriously ill enough to need to stay in hospital.

 

I'm not saying the NHS doesn't have problems, only that the Tories are not solely to blame for it. No matter how much money is pumped into the NHS, it will never be enough to do what people think it *should*. As for the other comment, I am just thankful that it's been 5 years since anyone in my family has been seriously ill enough to need to stay in hospital.

 

yes they are to blame. Under Labour (whatever else I can criticise them for) things were better financed and targets met, because they gave it a priority. That's not to say they couldnt have done more to make sure money didnt continue going into private hospitals etc who also made a killing out of the NHS (most of them couldnt survive without bunging difficult patients back into the system on the grounds that they can't handle them, just dont have the breadth of skills, so if I had my way the NHS should charge the insurance companies of private patients to claim the money back and we'll see just how successful they really are. Just as the NHS currently is able to recharge EU nations for their citizens - but the rest of the world get it free)

More than 24,000 bids to access porn websites were made from Parliament's network over five-month period

 

The figure averages out at around 160 requests a day on parliamentary network

There were 24,473 in five months on the network used by MPs, peers and staff

A spokesman said most of the attempts to access the sites were not deliberate

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-52...Parliament.html

URGH HUNT REMAINDS HEALTH SECRETARY

 

THEY ARE REALLY GOING ALL OUT TO PRIVATISE IT

 

He is such a slimeball - they use him to do their dirty business all thr time

How about some upbeat T.May tweets - actually conveniently spun to make it appear she is actually doing something for the UK?

1.

"Wow what a fantastic achievement you are celebrating the slowest recovery in 300 years only the south sea bubble and the Black Death resulted in slower recoveries - Danny Blanchflower added,

 

Theresa May

Verified account

 

@theresa_may

There's more to do, but we should be proud that manufacturing output is at the highest level in 10 years.

4:39 AM - 13 Jan 2018 from Sanibel, FL"

 

2.

"Theresa May‏Verified account

@theresa_may

Follow Follow @theresa_may

More

From today we're banning hidden charges for paying with your credit or debit card - a move that will help millions of people avoid rip-off fees when spending their hard-earned money."

 

This is a hated EU piece of legislation and nothing to do with the Tory Party. No doubt one of those annoying red-tape things they could have removed at a whim if not for that pesky need to go through Parliament that they wanted to avoid.

 

What a sneaky deceitful pathetic human being she is.

Perhaps our resident Daily Mail reader can point us to where that publication makes it clear that this is an EU initiative rather than a government one.

Perhaps our resident Daily Mail reader can point us to where that publication makes it clear that this is an EU initiative rather than a government one.

 

This is the first I've even heard of it.

This is the first I've even heard of it.

 

errr case proven then....

errr case proven then....

 

What exactly do you claim to have proven? :unsure:

What exactly do you claim to have proven? :unsure:

 

That your new sources don't report on facts. They prefer to ignore them entirely if they don't suit the agenda.

That your new sources don't report on facts. They prefer to ignore them entirely if they don't suit the agenda.

 

I don't even know if the Mail reported it, let alone what stance it took on it.

 

I must reiterate though, that *all* news sources are selective about the facts/stories they publish.

I don't even know if the Mail reported it, let alone what stance it took on it.

 

I must reiterate though, that *all* news sources are selective about the facts/stories they publish.

 

If the Prime Minister has tweeted about a new benefit to most people (paying less in CC fees) any newspaper that doesn't report it is being selective - it's actually GOOD news that no-one in their right mind would argue against. They choose to ignore it because it's the EU that has brought it in and that doesn't fit in with their "Hate The EU Red tape" propaganda. Feel free to say you are against the legislation and explain why the UK government should get rid of it and return things to the way they were before (which they may well be free to do in year or so)...

 

That the Prime Minister has misled the entire nation over it, claiming credit for her own party, is pretty newsworthy actually. Again, not to the Tory right, can't show them up to be the liars that they are....

 

PS claiming being "selective" with news items which affect peoples lives as if it were something all reputable newspapers do is incorrect. They may interpret it in different ways, but they do report it. Fox News is the sort of news organisation that just omits actual news that suit it's agenda, and the UK gutter press are no different. That's called propaganda. Not giving it's readership access to facts. Which is why those who don't read elsewhere are myopic about many things.

The Times has an interesting article on Carillion: BBC summary

 

"The ongoing saga of troubled government contractor Carillion makes the front page of the Times, which says ministers are facing questions as to why so much work was awarded to the company despite the red flags in "a string of profit warnings"."

 

Sounds very like Bournemouth Council Tories who were so convinced that the private sector meant savings they ignored professional warnings of bankruptcy and signed up anyway - with the firm going bankrupt within 6 months and the staff who were 100% correct getting fired. To date there has been no public scrutiny of the "confidential financial details" of the deal or the savings achieved, or lack of. Just claims.

 

I think we can expect the same from the government.