Distinct possibility that the SNP will hold the balance of power after next election, with Labour taking a hammering in Scotland. They won't align with the Conservatives.
I wouldn't bet against there being another election within 18 months of next year's.
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Max777
Over 90 days ago
Straight Male, 70
0 miles · Tyne and Wear
Forum
Let's see if Milliband tackles the Labour council's zero contracts. I suspect he is all hot air. There was a Financial Times article recently that suggested zero hour contracts were more prevalent in the public sector.
I agree with you re the other leaders, not a decent politician amongst them. 3 of the 4 have all followed the same career route: Oxbridge, political researcher, political advisor, member of parliament. Only Farage has had a 'real' job.
As much as Labour constantly trot out their mantra of the Tories being out of touch, the reality is that BOTH front benches are out of touch.
How Labour must rue the fact that the unions voted for the wrong Miliband!
I agree with you re the other leaders, not a decent politician amongst them. 3 of the 4 have all followed the same career route: Oxbridge, political researcher, political advisor, member of parliament. Only Farage has had a 'real' job.
As much as Labour constantly trot out their mantra of the Tories being out of touch, the reality is that BOTH front benches are out of touch.
How Labour must rue the fact that the unions voted for the wrong Miliband!
Quote by HnS
Personally think the Milliband is a pillock, granted have the same opinion of Cameron & Clegg as well.
However with his accusation that Sports Direct are using Victorian practices for hiring thousands of workers on zero-hours contracts.
(Zero-hours contracts, or casual contracts, do not guarantee regular work for employees. Sick pay is often not included although holiday pay should be, in line with working time regulations)
However Sports Direct are not the only ones, just the ones in the news today.
Who are the others ?
If you/we know who they are, at least we can shop or do business with them or not if we wish, after all anything that hits their 'bottom line' such as falling sales, less business, fewer contracts, etc. might make them reconsider
Not only is he a pillock, he's a hypocrite too!
The onus is on the Taxpyer, not the employer, to inform HMRC of any changes that may effect their tax code.
It's only possible to claim overpaid tax for any of the 4 preceding tax years to the current one. That's statutory tax law, nothing to do with them not having your records.
It's amazing how you always manage to misinterpret the 'facts'!
It's only possible to claim overpaid tax for any of the 4 preceding tax years to the current one. That's statutory tax law, nothing to do with them not having your records.
It's amazing how you always manage to misinterpret the 'facts'!
The police were not investigating prior to the announcement of the Serious Fraud Squad, the Financial Conduct Authority were. The FCA is the city regulator.
The senior executives were suspended as soon as the irregularities were discovered and it has nothing to do with tax avoidance. It's to do with Tesco bringing forward rebates from suppliers and therefore overstating their profits, which could mean that they have actually overpaid tax.
The senior executives were suspended as soon as the irregularities were discovered and it has nothing to do with tax avoidance. It's to do with Tesco bringing forward rebates from suppliers and therefore overstating their profits, which could mean that they have actually overpaid tax.
Quote by herts_darlings1
The Newcastle fans continue to watch their club because the vast majority are season ticket holders and have paid their money up front. If they didn't turn up for matches, it would have very little financial impact on the club.
Are followers on Twitter and friends on Facebook fans in the same sense that football fans are?
Don't know, don't do twitter or Facebook. So people paying up front to watch a season of football do so because they get a big discount I presume?
Don't think I would stump up hundreds of pounds when I couldn't verify the quality of what I was getting!
You're the one who made the claim about ASDA and Tesco having 'fans' on Twitter and Facebook.
As Dean has said, any discount season ticket holders receive is minimal.
The Newcastle fans continue to watch their club because the vast majority are season ticket holders and have paid their money up front. If they didn't turn up for matches, it would have very little financial impact on the club.
Are followers on Twitter and friends on Facebook fans in the same sense that football fans are?
Are followers on Twitter and friends on Facebook fans in the same sense that football fans are?
Since when did Tesco and Asda have fans? Companies such as Tesco are ultimately answerable to their shareholders and if shareholders don't like the companies' decision they can hurt them big time. See the recent plunge in the Tesco share price!
The German and Spanish leagues demonstrate that it is possible to have both strong domestic leagues and strong national sides. They also respect their fans a damn site more than the Premier League clubs. It is possible to watch Barcelona for less than some Conference League teams!
Please don't call me naive. I'm not agreeing with you at all. Some profit may be made from the fans but the bulk of clubs income is derived from the TV receipts. If that wasn't the case, there would be no need for parachute payments to relegated clubs.
The German and Spanish leagues demonstrate that it is possible to have both strong domestic leagues and strong national sides. They also respect their fans a damn site more than the Premier League clubs. It is possible to watch Barcelona for less than some Conference League teams!
Please don't call me naive. I'm not agreeing with you at all. Some profit may be made from the fans but the bulk of clubs income is derived from the TV receipts. If that wasn't the case, there would be no need for parachute payments to relegated clubs.
The decision to choose club football had nothing to do with the fans. The decision was made by the clubs selling their soul to Sky. Fans may enjoy seeing the worlds best players playing in the Premier League but none of the Premier League's decisions are for the benefit of the fans.
Why are the Bundesliga and La Liga so strong and yet the German and Spanish national sides equally as strong, being the past 2 winners of the World Cup? Despite all the TV monies in those countries, the teams are still made up mainly of German and Spanish players.
In this country, we have allowed our football teams to be bought by foreign owners who have little regard for fans and club traditions and the national side is and will continue to suffer as a result.
Why are the Bundesliga and La Liga so strong and yet the German and Spanish national sides equally as strong, being the past 2 winners of the World Cup? Despite all the TV monies in those countries, the teams are still made up mainly of German and Spanish players.
In this country, we have allowed our football teams to be bought by foreign owners who have little regard for fans and club traditions and the national side is and will continue to suffer as a result.
Quote by Rogue_Trader
its all theatre and a psyop. fear fear the jihadies are here.
all nonsense to cover geostrategic operations.
weapons of mass destruction. hit us in 45 minuets
babies being thrown out of incubators
gadaffi giving out viagra to troops to punish rebels
gadaffi is bombing his own people
assad is gassing his own people in the capital damascus on the very day the u.n. inspectors arrive
mujahadeen
al qaeder
al nursra
boko harem in nigeria ?
is
isil
isis
brilliantly timed beheading videos all in the same format, backround and executioner
korasin next or is it ebola
wake up, open your eyes and stop being played. its all propaganda
Just where does one start with this rubbish?
Conspiracy theories abound on the internet and anything and everything can be associated with global control by the corporate giants.
All insubstantiated and all without facts...
Gulson's doesn't do facts, other than to say 'it's out there!'
Quote by Rogue_Trader
its all theatre and a psyop. fear fear the jihadies are here.
all nonsense to cover geostrategic operations.
weapons of mass destruction. hit us in 45 minuets
babies being thrown out of incubators
gadaffi giving out viagra to troops to punish rebels
gadaffi is bombing his own people
assad is gassing his own people in the capital damascus on the very day the u.n. inspectors arrive
mujahadeen
al qaeder
al nursra
boko harem in nigeria ?
is
isil
isis
brilliantly timed beheading videos all in the same format, backround and executioner
korasin next or is it ebola
wake up, open your eyes and stop being played. its all propaganda
Just where does one start with this rubbish?
Conspiracy theories abound on the internet and anything and everything can be associated with global control by the corporate giants.
All insubstantiated and all without facts...
Gulson's doesn't do facts, other than to say 'it's out there!'
Quote by MidsCouple24
I am saying that as an ambassador for a sport, any sport, such childish behaviour has no place and the FA should uphold the rules they have in all cases, if you can be punished for kissing the badge of your club on the shirt you wear then surely abusing other teams in such a childish way merits equal action.
That in an age when football is trying to make things better, footballers and their clubs should be leading the way, football may be tribalist but no more so than Rugby is.
Personally I admire and respect footballers who set an example with their behaviour, Gary Linekar, Robbie Fowler and Owen were 3 of the best and the first 3 that spring to mind for that and hey, they were all Liverpool players, but times have changed at that club and now with people like Ballotolli and Suarez they have turned the wrong way especially as the club seems to condone anything they do.
Gary Lineker played for Everton. Robbie Fowler was banned for simulating snorting cocaine as part of a celebration.
Have you ever been to a rugby match? Rugby is no where near as "tribalist" as football and as for Balotelli being punished for that tweet...... Good to see you're still spouting forth nonsense.
Quote by MidsCouple24
Yes that is the historical, geographical and technical meaning but during our history the title has reflected our place in the World, once in control of so much of the world, this small island comprising 3 Nations had an Empire where the sun never set, it still has a large Empire where we enjoy a relationship with our friends in the commonwealth Nations.
My whole point was that while our Commonwealth and control may have diminished, quite rightly in many cases our influence and respect still has a lot of good standing, there are still many things in the UK to be proud of, our National Health Service is a tribute to us, the number of free public libraries and free museums available to our people, our welfare system though under strain is second to none, which is much of the reason why we are constantly discussing the problems and benefits of so many people wanting to migrate here.
It is far from perfect but in many respects it is still Great.
Sadly at the moment the divide between the poor and the rich seems to be returning to the medieval ages of landowners, barons and those that benefit from having peasants running around but at least those peasants have people thinking about their better interests.
Our laws are flaunted, cheap alcohol subsidised by the UK taxpayers and the right to smoke in public places if your lucky enough to be entitled or invited into the House of Commons or the House of Lords, Bernie Eccleston being able to buy his freedom with a £60million legal bribe to the Government so as not to be tried for bribery seems to be a farce and a show that you can break the law if you can afford it. But history has shown that Governments that rule in such ways do get ousted eventually, the day will come when MPs will be brought to task over their abuse of power.
Just as bad as Politicians we have the super business magnates that the Government refuses to tackle when they blatantly break our laws, rules and even taxes, but no nation is perfect and many have even bigger problems than those.
What has Bernie Eccleston's offer of a payment of £60 million got to do with Great Britain. It's a German court and the offer, far from being a bribe to the government was based on an existing provision in German law.
Quote by deancannock
quick goggle and loads came up.....but choose two from The Daily mail....the Tories own newspaper....and even Norman Tebbitt say...in those days it was just the thing to do...the save the establishment !! As we know.....certain files have mysteriously gone missing.....If they are found, lets see what they have to say.....they haven't gone missing just for fun !!!
Dean, read what the articles actually say
I have...Noman Tebbit says Establishment cover up.....no don't try and tell me you don't understand what that means !!! It was Mrs thatcher own personal secretary we talking about here !!!!!
Te bit says there MAY have been an establishment cover up. He also goes on to say'At that time I think most people would have thought that the establishment, the system, was to be protected and if a few things had gone wrong here and there that it was more important to protect the system'
That's not quite the same as Thatcher personally covering up any alleged abuse. Let's wait and see, shall we?
Quote by deancannock
quick goggle and loads came up.....but choose two from The Daily mail....the Tories own newspaper....and even Norman Tebbitt say...in those days it was just the thing to do...the save the establishment !! As we know.....certain files have mysteriously gone missing.....If they are found, lets see what they have to say.....they haven't gone missing just for fun !!!
Dean, read what the articles actually say
Quote by deancannock
Toots.....take a look and read again...I said anyone of any political colour or party that is found guilty of a cover up should be condemned, and face the full action of the law. Yes that includes Blair...yes I have said Blair has a lot to answer for in the Iraq war. I say that because we wait till the papers are released of cabinet meetings, to see what information he was given. At the time I myself and indeed other parties were in favour of the action based on the information we were given !!! Now IF...notice that word IF again....it is found to be true that Blair had other information that would indicate no weapons of mass destruction were there, then he should face the courts and any action that would result from that. However this is once again trying to create a smoke screen and divert attention. Maybe start a new thread if you wish to discuss the Iraq war. However I would ask you to answer my question as posed 3 times to you. If it is shown that Mrs Thatcher did cover up Abuse, by her cabinet members, then will you condemn her, and change your view that she was this all wonderful leader !! Or maybe its you that in denial.
GNV.....Saville has had his name removed from the honours list that he received. His name will not appear in any official list. Not sure if you consider this stripping him of his title or not...but it does show some action can be taken evn if people are deceased.
Max...Mrs Thatcher can't be taken to court.....but as above neither was Jimmy Saville....but surely you not going to try and defend his innocence !! And the link I gace was from The Mirror....but if you care to google it...every newspaper reported it....as did the BBC and reuters....so not an isolated case....if there wasn't a case to answer, why is Teresa May setting up an enquiry !!
Also you throw up the name of John Peel.....I have no idea about that....but whatever....two wrongs do not make a right.... !!!
Dean, I have have not mentioned Saville, you're the one that keeps referring to him.
I have googled it and can not find the other links you claim there to be. Please provide them. As for the enquiry Teresa May is setting up, it's not into the Thatcher government specifically but why let facts get in the way of your prejudices?
The John Peel reference was aimed at SansSouci, that's why I quoted him!
Quote by SansSouci
Snip.......,
Maybe more importantly......you could always tell us what your view would be if Mrs Thatcher is found guilty.......I answer quite clear with my questions....But it seems others don't want to answer that !!!!
Dean, two things. Thatcher will NEVER be found guilty. She is dead and therefore can never be trialled. Secondly, you are asking people to condemn her on the say so of an article in the Daily Mirror, a rag that hates Thatcher and all she stood for.
You say you have weighed up the evidence and therefore you think it's likely she is guilty of the allegations made in the Red Top. Please enlighten me as to the 'evidence'?
Jimmy Savile was dead and buried before allegations came out into the public eye, yet he's been condemned and vilified, had his honours stripped etc.
Like Thatcher, he cannot be tried and found guilty in a court of law, yet...
Yet?
Just noticed your signature. Weren't there allegations that John Peel had a relationship with an underage girl?
Quote by deancannock
Snip.......,
Maybe more importantly......you could always tell us what your view would be if Mrs Thatcher is found guilty.......I answer quite clear with my questions....But it seems others don't want to answer that !!!!
Dean, two things. Thatcher will NEVER be found guilty. She is dead and therefore can never be trialled. Secondly, you are asking people to condemn her on the say so of an article in the Daily Mirror, a rag that hates Thatcher and all she stood for.
You say you have weighed up the evidence and therefore you think it's likely she is guilty of the allegations made in the Red Top. Please enlighten me as to the 'evidence'?
Quote by deancannock
I admired Jimmy Saville and his dedication to help those less well off than himself and help the children in the hospitals he visited, the marathons he ran for charity, I would have felt honoured to have him come to my home.
Of course I did not know then what I know now, I am sure there are many people who felt the same as me before it became public knowledge about his evil habits, I think anyone who did know and it can be proved they knew but protected him should be charged with aiding and abetting but a lot of people who did not know will be as appalled as the rest of us and regret inviting him to political and social events.
100% mids....we can all admire people....Jim'ill fix it and Rolf Harris on a Saturday was part of my upbringing...I used to love it. I used to love Gary Glitter songs....I used to think Cyril Smith was a fuuny guy !!!
However as the truth has emerged we all see them in a different light. No matter how much money Jimmy Saville raised, there will never be any excuse for his actions and abuse of children and handicapped kids. Cyril Smith may well of been a good MP....but nothing will ever excuse his actions and abuse of young boys. History will see these people for what they were.....evil child abusers. And I think anyone that knew about these things deserves to be dragged up and shamed the same. If they would of spoken out at the time, it may well of stopped the abuse of others. I think there will be many at the BBC that actually knew about the activities of Saville and Rolf Harris and others, but because they were famous decided to turn a blind eye to it all. They deserved to be shamed.
And yes....I think there are many in the corridors of power of Westminster that will know of activities that went on. They to deserve to be names and shamed...no matter how low or high ranking they are...and no matter what political colour they wear. there should be no hiding place for abusers or anyone that assisted by turning a blind eye.........and if that means us all having a total different view of someone....then that is the way it should be !!
Dean, I'm sure that the whole forum will agree with you regarding the sexual abuse of children. Where the difference lies, is that you have admitted that because of your hatred for Thatcher, you want the allegations to be true, whereas more fair minded folk are inclined to wait and see if there is any truth in the allegations before condemning.
Quote by deancannock
max...with respect...Littleton Colliery was on the list of 52 pits drawn up by Mrs Thatcher and Mr McGregor, to be closed. All of those 52 pits were duly closed . Some during and some after her reign....(but as you know as you posted link)....it was the most productive in Europe !!
Please do look back at my posts....the word IF is typed in capitals....so as to emphasise it. I have used this continually. I have said only allegation at this time on 3 occasions in thread. Yes....if you were going to ask me now....do I think it will be proved she covered up sex abuse amongst her cabinet....I would say looking at evidence building up...and her past record of covering up and lieing for her own ends.....I would say more than a 50% chance that it will. However if found to be scanderlous lies...I will gladly say I was wrong . However all I have asked all along is for people to condemn abuse and anyone associated with it, including anyone that would know and hide or cover up the facts. Is that so hard a thing to do. it seems for some on here it is !!!
Dean, with respect, is it not true that the pit was actually reprieved whilst Thatcher was PM but then closed under Major?
You did not use capital letters in your opening post, these are your actual words " If proven as I am sure it will be, will people finally see her for the lying, evil bitch she undoubtedly was" . I look forward to you admitting you were wrong if indeed it is not proven.
Quote by deancannock
max....100% I have a hatred of Mrs Thatcher...as mentioned before I come from a community she smashed ....I have a brother that would be alive today if it wasn't for her ....all well documented before on here. So yes....I have an axe to grind...not exactly ever tried to hide that.
However all the way along from the very first post I have clearly stated an allegation..and keep saying in block letters IF found to have known....At no time have I said she was or wasn't involved. What I have said is IF she was then she deserves to be condemned. Is that such a bad thing to say...!!! I remember being blasted on here when the Jimmy Saville case was breaking and I said all his awards should be removed if found guilty. Not to many would disagree now !!
As for Hillsborough....see link ...she knew and was advised it was the Police fault....but she choose to cover it up as the police had helped her so much in the miners strike !!! As we all know the police sought to blame drunken fans for the problems, and adjusted statements that said otherwise.
Dean, you did not just say IF, you said you were sure it would be proven. If it's not proven, will you publicly apologise in the forum? With regards to your brother, it has also been documented in here that Mrs Thatcher was no longer Prime Minister when the pit at which he worked was closed.
You're really going to have to provide a better link than to a Daily a Mirror article having a bash at Thatcher. Having said that, I can't see where it says that Thatcher withheld information. What it does say is "- Margaret Thatcher - had been advised that the South Yorkshire Police were 'close to deceitful'... but that successive governments had failed the victims and their families" Successive Governments would include the two Labour governments that you voted for.
Quote by deancannock
Once again....you can not answer the question and you do not condemn anyone involved in abuse ????
For your information....it was the whole establishment that was against Baroness Sloss....see the link by the Tories own newspaper The Mail !!
Even that called the appointment a shambles. MP's from all sides, campaigners, all could see that considering her brother was around at the time and maybe involved in a cover up, that she was not the one to conduct the enquiry. She herself has said, she didn't know about it, and the reason for her resignation was now it has come to light, it would be wrong of her to continue. As the paper quite clearly states only person to blame here is Teressa may for not looking into the background.
You also say whats the point of an enquiry ? To establish the truth is the answer to that !!! Maybe you were one of those saying whats the point with an enquiry into Jimmy Saville....maybe you think we should all still think of him as the nice man than ran marathos and raised money ??? Maybe you think the enquiry into Cyril Smith was wrong...and we should all think of him as the nice big cuddly MP ??
Anyone that is shown to have any connection to abuse, should be shown for the evil people they are.
The thing is Dean, it is very evident that because of your hatred for Thatcher, you WANT the allegations to be true. You're not really bothered as to the actual truth.
Could you please also direct me to the published note which supposedly proves that Thatcher withheld information about the Hillsborough disaster in order to blame the Liverpool fans?
Quote by dee_licious
Is being honest a good thing?
E.G:
The person who is honest with their lover but not their partner.
I personally appreciate honesty. That way I can make my own mind up about a person.
dee x
I totally agree about appreciating honesty and how it helps to make up one's mind about a person but being honest with a lover but not a partner is only being honest to a limited degree. Surely the partner is the one deserving of honesty?
Quote by HnS
Dear forum Mods,
Seems the naughty children have failed their remedial reading classes again as once again several have been been unable to read the title/thread.
Furthermore they managed to obtain aerosols and been sniffing them whilst graffiting the nice new wall.
Oh well
Since when has it been a forum rule that a thread has to stay on topic? At least the 'naughty boys' gave your thread some life beyond 3 posts.
In answer to your OP, it's blindingly obvious that Clegg is now a dead man walking and that it is only a matter of time before he jumps or is pushed.
Quote by deancannock
But to be fair Max....you can't have everything as a free vote....hardly any legislation would get through. I do think with MPs expenses scandal and that there is a level of dis-satisfaction, but I would say that 90% of MPs from all sides are generally very hard working people.
I actually think that the main cause of the trouble was the immigration issue. this was stoked up and fuelled high by UKIP. there were a lot of scaremongering going on. the typical example was that a 300,00 Romanians and Bulgarians were coming once the borders were open to them in Jan......when in reality 4000 less here at end of first quarter.
Jobs are still hard to come by, and people assume that all jobs going to low paid immigrant workers !! With minimum wage structure in place, this can't be wholly true.
The parties do need to connect more with the electorate. But equally it makes me laugh really..people always say more police on the streets, more doctors and nurses in hospitals, more prisons, better schools and more teachers with smaller classes.....oh and yes...they want to pay less tax !! they seem to forget everything has to be paid for !!
If the MPs voted with their conscience and in the public interest, we may actually get better legislation.
I believe that the UKIP protest vote is in the main due to the electorates total dissatisfaction with the other parties rather than supposed scaremongering over immigration.
Quote by deancannock
Firstly lets just get the Miners strike out the way....73% voted in favour. That's what was democratic about it.
.
Are you sure of your facts Dean? From memory, I don't believe that Scargill actually balloted the miners before calling for the strike.
yes....there was a ballot...and GNV is quite right to point out its only 73% of those that voted....I am not sure of the actual percentage that did vote ..It was all regional voted for, not national, but this was how it was done.....but if you don't vote then you can't really complain....the whole point I been trying to get over to GNV about the European elections.
There was no national ballot which is how the High Court was able to rule that the NUM had breached its own constitution by calling a strike without first holding a ballot. This led to the NUMs funds being sequestrated.
Quote by deancannock
The word ,,,, correct me if I am wrong here...is....they are elected representatives !!! Now where I come from that means they represent those that elected them.....not rocket science. I would expect my representative to listen to the arguments put forward and vote in a way that he would think is best for me and the country. If I don't like the way he represented me , I can choose to vote for another next time.
C'mon Dean, that's a very naive view of how parliament works. Very, very few MPs get to have a free vote, in the main they have to vote the way they are instructed by the party whips
this very true Max.....but you are aware of that when you vote for them. You can make lobby your local MP to vote a certain way, and you then have the right to vote against him, if you feel he didn't represent you next time around. What I would hate is if I voted my MP in, and he never bothered to vote, and din't bother to attend parliament, but still took his salary !!
You can indeed vote against your MP at the next election but chances are you will get more of the same. They vote for what's best for their party, not for what's best for you. This is why the electorate has become dissatisfied with the main political parties and exactly why there has been a huge protest vote in favour of UKIP.
Let's hope that Cameron, Milliband et al get the message!
